Kelo v New London: Stopping Government Abuse.

Reprinted from Gibbs Legislative Report September 2005

 Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, ruled in favor of eminent domain takings for private sector development and provides a wide rage of discretion to state and local governments to decide how eminent domain powers should be employed in their jurisdictions. Believing this decision opens the floodgates for eminent domain abuse, Representative Gibbs, and other members of the General Assembly realized early on it was imperative that legislative action be taken immediately to ensure fair and uniform enforcement of eminent domain powers and protect private property rights in our state.

 Eminent domain has been a necessary tool to provide public infrastructure projects for the public good. However, the Kelo decision allows for eminent domain proceedings for private sector development that ultimately enhances the tax base, making the argument it is for the public good because of increased tax revenues. This argument is appalling; essentially, the government is saying revenues to a taxing jurisdiction are paramount to private property rights. This contradicts the founding principles this nation was founded upon. Currently, Ohio law provides for eminent domain authority to be used to eliminate slums and blighted neighborhoods. A strong case can be made that with this provision, a Kelo-type provision is not necessary, but only opens the door for eminent domain abuse.  Already, in the short time since the Kelo decision was handed down, my office has received emails from citizens in northeast Ohio, stating that a large insurance company in northeast Ohio made an offer to private property owners to buy their land for their office complex expansion. The landowners refused the offer and now the corporate giant is pursuing the local jurisdiction to use eminent domain.

 Under current law, the judicial system by a jury will determine compensation. This makes sense when property is being developed for roads and utilities that serve a greater public purpose and no private entity will be the sole beneficiary. When the property remains in the private sector, what basis should be used for compensation under Kelo type takings? Prior to Kelo our free and open competitive market determined what the property is worth and protected the rights of the landowners.

 Since the Kelo decision was handed down in June, Representative Gibbs has been working closely with other members of the Ohio General Assembly, including State Senators Tim Grendell (R- Chesterland) and Kim Zurz (D- Green) to enact legislation which will prohibit this gross expansion of government on private property. Already, a series of work group meeting have been held, with representatives from a variety of backgrounds, including agriculture, commercial and residential development, government and members of the public meeting to discuss solutions to the Kelo dilemma. From this work group, Senator Grendell and Representative Gibbs have introduced companion legislation in both chambers of the General Assembly with bipartisan support that enacts a moratorium on Kelo-type eminent domain and “urban blight” takings until December 31, 2006. In addition, this legislation would create a Legislative Study Committee, comprising members of the General Assembly, representatives of the executive branch, in addition representatives from the agriculture community, commercial and residential developers, and others, to study permanent solutions to this matter.

 Ultimately, the solution to the problem will most likely have to be corrected with the implementation of an amendment to the Ohio Constitution. It already states in the constitution, that in Ohio private property shall be held inviolate of the government. The Kelo decision clearly indicates the opinion of a slight majority of the U.S. Supreme Court believe that private property is no longer inviolate to the government. Senator Grendell and Representative Gibbs’ legislation will make it clear that Court believe that private property is no longer inviolate to the government. Senator Grendell and Representative Gibbs’ legislation will make it clear that the State of Ohio continues to support property rights.

Wednesday, October 26, 2005                                                                                 

 Eminent Domain Not Immanent

COLUMBUS – State lawmakers approved legislation today placing a moratorium on eminent domain takings by government entities in Ohio and establishing a study committee to examine the issue more thoroughly.

 Citing concerns with a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling, state Representative Bob Gibbs (R-Lakeville) outlined the terms of the bill to House members before the chamber voted unanimously to pass Senate Bill 167, sponsored by state Senator Timothy Grendell (R-Chesterland).

 Gibbs, sponsor of companion legislation in the House, said the bill was offered in response to the Kelo v. New London decision, in which the court ruled that government entities were entitled to seize private property to benefit private businesses. Traditionally, eminent domain takings have been limited to property that would serve the public good.

 “The Kelo decision allows for eminent domain proceedings for private sector development that ultimately enhances the tax base, making the argument it is for the public good because of increased tax revenues,” Gibbs said. “This contradicts the founding principles this nation was founded upon and this was not what our founding fathers had in mind when they fought in the revolution and drafted the Bill of Rights.”

 Senate Bill 167 prohibits until December 31, 2006, any government entity in Ohio from using eminent domain proceedings when the property in question will be transferred to a different private person. The moratorium will buy additional time needed for the newly created Legislative Task Force to Study Eminent Domain and Its Use and Application in the State to consider permanent solutions to “Kelo-type” eminent domain takings.

 “It is imperative that legislative action be taken immediately to ensure fair and uniform enforcement of eminent domain powers and protect private property rights in our state,” Gibbs said. “After the Kelo decision, officials in Freeport, Texas began eminent domain proceedings to seize two family owned seafood companies to make way for a more upscale business: an $8 million private boat marina.”

 The Legislative Task Force created by the bill will be comprised of members of the Ohio General Assembly, representatives of the executive branch of Ohio government, and representatives of the agriculture community, commercial and residential developers and various other stakeholders from around the state. The Task Force will have until August 1, 2006 to make recommendations to the Ohio Legislature regarding state law governing eminent domain.

 Senate Bill 167 was returned to the Ohio Senate for concurrence and was again approved unanimously. Because the legislation contains an emergency clause, the law will take effect immediately upon the governor’s signature.