NW City Council Ballot Proposition: Eminent Domain for Pipelines, Check Yes or No.

Do you support “elected officials work[ing] to prevent and limit the use of eminent domain to take property rights from private landowners for use in oil and gas pipelines?”

That’s the question Whatcom County Council in Washington State wants to ask its residents in November.

KAFE 104.1 | Private property won’t get extra protection from eminent domain

3 Reasons TPPF Supports Tree Ordinance Bills: (1) Abba (2) Espresso (3) Lunch.

TPPF position is that tree ordinances are:

  • Money, Money, Money. Condemnations that require just compensation (see the A.G. Opinion) & they impact the investment and economic opportunities of land owners.
  • Espresso sipping elitism. the arguments cities made to the A.G. when he reviewed the matter were supported by an east coast liberal law professor
  • Free Lunch. Can’t let cities get away with getting trees for free. Tree ordinances allow cities to get conservation easements for free. 

TPPF | TWO VIEWS: TEXAS TREE ORDINANCES ARE EMINENT DOMAIN IN ALL BUT NAME

Legislature's 1 year Ban on Eminent Domain replaced with Stricter Eminent Domain Laws

In 2016, Georgia, the state and not the country, placed a 1 year moratorium on pipeline use of eminent domain. 

The restrictions that replaced the moratorium include:

  • requires greater disclosures from pipelines including evidence of financial responsibility
  • all parties can appeal administrative decisions, previously only companies could appeal

Georgia’s Community Holdings Inc | New pipeline rules limit eminent domain

Property Rights Reform Brewing in Wisconsin after US Supreme Court Ruling.

Wisconsin legislators are working to bolster the state’s Landowner Bill of Rights by:

  • Grandfathering substandard lots to prevent a Murr v. Wis. like ruking again
  • Prohibit the deemed merger of land
  • Ensure property owners can repair and maintain existing structures
  • Allow property owners to utilize inverse condemnation

The goals of the bill are prevent another Murr situation by ensuring that:

  • people in situations such as the Murrs’ can sell or develop land adjacent to land that they already own
  • prohibit local governments from considering lots merged with the owners’ consent

LaCrosse Tribune | Adam Jarchow and Tom Tiffany: Bill would protect property rights

AP | Wisconsin GOP moves to relax property regulations

LOCAL TREND. Cities Invoke Land Use Ordinances to Support Urban Farming

City: New York City

Ordinances: Councilman Rafael Espinal & Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams are calling for comprehensive urban agriculture plan, updated zoning and building codes, and an office of urban agriculture

Why is it necessary: Commerical Urban Farmers have a hard time getting permitted, being insured, and atracting investors. 

Is there more land to use for urban gardening in NYC? Yes,  14,000 acres of unused rooftop space that could feed millions

Wall Street Journal | Urban Farming Gets New York City Council Attention

Lege Trend. Clarifying Eminent Domain for Charter Schools. 3 Issues Western State Tackles

Utah is working on legislation to make clear that charter schools can exercise eminent domain. Here’s what the bill author wants to accomplish:

  • Statutorily state that Charter Schools are public schools. Public Schools have eminent domain authority so do charter schools.
  • Clarify which charter school entity has eminent domain power. Is it:
    • state charter board?
    • state board of education?
    • the charter school itself?
  • Clarify that charter schools do not need city approval to use eminent domain, because city approval complicates the process

What do opponents say?

  • Charter schools themselves do not and should not have eminent domain authority
  • Charter schools are operated by private entities
  • There is no mechanism to stop a future property transfer by the private entity

Desert News Utah | Lawmakers seek recommendations on eminent domain policy for charter schools

A.G. Opinion. Tree Ordinances are Likely a Taking. 2 Reasons Why.

KP-0155 sets forth the rational as to why tree ordinances are takings of private property. Here’s the 3 step argument:

  • If a tree ordinance denies “a property owner all economically beneficial or productive use of land;” it is a taking that requires compensation.
  • If a tree ordinances unreasonably intereferes with use and enjoyment of the property it can also be a taking that requires compensation. You get to this point by looking at 3 issues:
    • Is there significant economic impact to the property owner? 
    • Was the ordinance in place at the time the owner bought the land? It helps the landowner if it wasn’t
    • Is this a case of government intrusion on land and is that greater than the common good government uses to support the ordinance?

Private Property Rights Trend. Limit Game Wardens Access to Private Land.

Wisconsin Legislature is looking at a Republican backed bill to limit game warden access to private lands.

Game Wardens would only be granted access to private land if there is reasonable suspicion that a violation had occurred.

Game Wardens are concerned that AB 411 prevents them from conducting compliance checks on more than 80% of the Wisconsin landscape.

Wisconsin Assembly Bill 411 (2017-2018 Legislature)

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel | Assembly Bill 411 would reduce warden authority on private land

3 Reasons Supporters Push Annexation Reform

A former aid to VP Cheney makes the case for annexation reform with these 3 arguments:

  • The current system doesn’t support a person’s ability to choose where they live
    • If you shoose to live outside the city, you should be able to stay outside of the city
  • Its undemocratic not to allow a vote by the owners who are being annexed
    • And this is unTexan
  • Reform should apply for all Texans, not just Texans in big cities

Commentary: Why Texas should push back against involuntary annexations | Statesman

Commentary: No annexation without representation | Dallas Morning News