|
|
||
Property rights protection, again in the General Assembly Date published: 2/25/2010
PROPERTY OWNERS in Virginia,
take heart: The House of Delegates is looking out for you. Del. Ward Armstrong, D–Martinsville, introduced a bill that would force condemning authorities to compensate property owners when access to their land is changed or inhibited by an eminent-domain seizure.
The issue is one of fairness: If, for example, a road is widened and the change limits or obstructs access to one’s property, the owner has experienced a loss and should be compensated. But most states prohibit claims of this nature as long as access remains “reasonable.” In January, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a case highlighting this issue. In Kimco of Evansville Inc. v. State of Indiana, a shopping-center owner cited a diminution of his property’s value following a change in access caused by a state road project. A jury awarded the complainant $2.3 million, but the judgment was overturned by the Indiana Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the case is yet another post-Kelo slap at property rights. Mr. Armstrong’s bill is a correction—and protection for all Virginians. VDOT testified that the measure would cost the state $50 million over six years—which is tantamount, some delegates say, to admitting the department has been underpaying property owners by, oh, $50 million. The cost estimate also rests on the state’s Six-Year Improvement Plan—a transportation wish list outlining projects that may or may not come to fruition. With bipartisan support, Mr. Armstrong’s bill passed 98–1. That’s a testimony to the House’s commitment to constitutional property rights, even in a tough budget year. What’s more, the House designated the bill an “emergency measure,” meaning it would take effect immediately upon final passage. Now the bill is in the Senate. That chamber should pass it swiftly.
|
|
||||||||||||
