Category Archives: pipelines/common carriers

County Stops Pipeline. Private Company Crossing Private Lands Causes Concern.

A County in rural Pennsylvania is intervening to stop a pipeline that is proposed to cross private property. Amish are a strong stock. You don’t want to mess with them. 

20 of 26 townships also seek to stop the pipeline project after hearing tales about the impact of eminent domain proceedings against century old farms & decreasing property values. 

Stan…

Most Popular Texas Eminent Domain Bill

One eminent domain bill is becoming a media darling: HB 565 by Burkett. The bill revokes eminent domain authority from a private toll company.

Here’s why Burkett says it is important: 

  • The problem is a private company overseeing a project with eminent domain authority (hello, pipelines, are you listening?)
  • If property is taken for public needs, it should be “fair and transparent”
  • Toll roads are wearing out their welcome

Posted byadminPosted in2015 legislation, activism, fairness, infrastructure building, pipelines/common carriers, private company, private property rights

Lege Trend: Royalties to Landowner for Pipeline Easement

Massachusetts State Rep. Stephen Kulik, D-Worthington filed HD 3168 would require:

  • a 12.5% royalty on natural gas transported on a pipeline through the state; IF
  • the natural gas is later sold to a foreign country

Supporters Say:  “The idea is to reimburse people for the taking, because eminent domain is for the public good, not private profit. It’s one thing if it’s for domestic use, and another…

Legal Trend Meets LegislativeTrend: Land Owners Challenge Constitutionality. Later Challenge Eminent Domain.

Providing great material for 2015 bills in Texas, The Nebraska Supreme Court, making reference to Denbury, issued an opinion on the constitutionality of a pipeline certification.  Read More: Information Intelligence 

The Court said we don’t like it, but that pesky super majority threshold to declare the statute unconstitutional isn’t …

Legal Trend: NE SCT Clears Way for Pipeline. Mentions Landowners Success in Denbury.

The landowners trying to stop Keystone XL in Nebraska were dealt a blow in the Friday, January 9th, ruling of the Nebraska Supreme Court. Landowners won a majority of the Court, but not  super majority. Highlights:

  • Pg. 38: the NE Court cites Denbury.
    • Writing: ” The Texas Supreme Court has addressed this issue in the context of pipeline carriers.150 It reversed a court of appeals’ decision that a property owner could not challenge a common carrier certification by a pu…

TPPF: Eminent Domain Recommendations 2015

TPPF’s legislative recommendations for eminent domain include:

  • Grant property owners the right to repurchase their property if the initial use of a property acquired from them through eminent domain is not the public use for which the property was acquired.
  • Ban the initial use of property acquired through eminent domain for any use other than the use for which it was acquired. 
  • Change all references to in…

Landowners Displeased by Being Labeled Willing Sellers

Landowners in the path of the Keystone XL pipeline, including those who have entered into easements, raise concerns about how landowners are labeled by condemning entities. The list of what not to say about landowners is:

  • Calling landowners “willing” misrepresents the facts 
  • Just because they entered into an easement doesn’t equal support for the project
  • Landowner fears of dangers related to pieplines increase over time 

Unhappy landowners publ…

VT Governor Opposes Pipeline Use of Eminent Domain

In the perennial battle of how to simultaneously support landowners and economic prosperity, VT Governor supports a pipeline but goes to bat for landowners. The Governor asked the pipeline company to pause eminent domain legal proceedings and allow for negotiations.

Landowners want to be reimbursed for legal expenses they have incurred. The pipeline company initially said no, but now it says it is “definitely willing to consider reimbursement for legal expenses.”     Posted byadminPosted ineasement, pipelines/common carriers, private company, private property rights