Posted on 01/28/2005 4:34:10 AM PST by beaureguard
A state Capitol imbroglio has erupted over a proposal critics say would permit governments to hand over private property to developers with too little oversight.
Senate Bill 5 would permit private developers to build public projects such as fire stations, parks, office buildings and roads for local governments without competitive bids. The governments could form public-private partnerships with developers to finance the projects, condemning any private property needed under eminent domain — the legal right to seize land.
The process of selecting projects also would be secretive, with no details released until the government essentially approves the project. The companies would operate and build the facilities for a profit, in some cases leasing them to local governments or charging fees for their use.
"You're taking from one private party and transferring to another private party," environmental lobbyist Neill Herring said. "It's a tyrannical, dictatorial use of power."
But state Sen. Dan Moody (R-Alpharetta), the bill's main sponsor, said the proposal allows governments to build infrastructure sooner than they would be able to under traditional financing arrangements. He said the involvement of the private sector would provide alternative financing not available to governments and not dependent on tax collections.
Moody said the proposal, which died in a House committee two years ago, has been miscast by its detractors.
"It has nothing to do with allowing someone to take advantage of someone else," Moody said. "The paragraph on eminent domain could be extracted from the bill in its entirety and nothing else would change."
Opposition mounts
The proposal has struck a nerve. Environmentalists, property rights advocates and others are lining up to bash the bill.
A recent editorial in the Bainbridge newspaper compared the proposal to the 1795 Yazoo Land Fraud in which the state's lawmakers took bribes to sell the state's western land claims. The Savannah Morning News also criticized the proposal in an editorial.
Radio talkmeister Neal Boortz alleged during his Thursday morning show that the proposal gives developers the ability to "to rape private property owners." Telephone lines were soon jammed at the Capitol offices of the bill's sponsors. "They're threatening our college interns who are answering the phones," said state Senate President Pro Tem Eric Johnson (R-Savannah), a co-sponsor of the bill. Johnson posted a defense of the plan on his Web site, contending that it would allow communities to tap private sectors' resources for projects of public interest, without raising taxes.
Moody stressed the bill, which has not yet been debated in committee, is at the very beginning of the legislative process. "I'm open for suggestions as to how we can perfect this bill to eliminate anybody's concern about anything in it," he said.
The Virginia-based law firm of Hunton & Williams was a primary force behind the proposed law. The firm consults for governments using such statutes to build projects with private help.
Mark Grantham, one of the firm's Atlanta-based attorneys, said fears about the abuse of eminent domain are unfounded. Local governments still would have to go through a legal process — just as before — to condemn private property.
"As a practical matter, a privately built project is not going to succeed if the public opposition is there to the ball field or sewer treatment plant," Grantham said.
He said the law has been used successfully in Virginia and Texas, other states where growth has outstripped the government's ability to keep up with new infrastructure.
Case considered
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to consider a New London, Conn., case that could clarify when localities can take private property for use in economic development. The city decided to develop a 90-acre site including a waterfront hotel and new residences. The city argued the improvements would revitalize the area, and used eminent domain to seize property from owners who wouldn't sell voluntarily.
The proposed Georgia law concerns even some of those who generally favor public-private partnerships as a way to assist government.
Georgia Public Policy Foundation spokeswoman Benita Dodd said the organization is concerned about the secretive way the proposals can be considered by governments and the lack of competitive bidding. "Competitive bidding has got to be part of the process. That's a way to protect the public," Dodd said.
• A contractor may propose building a new school, park, sewer plant or any public facility, and submits a conceptual design, schedule, financing plan and location. Or a government may invite a company to make a proposal. Financing can include bonds, grants, leases back to the government or the charging of fees for use.
• The government has 30 days to review the proposal without public input. The details are kept secret until the government approves the deal.
• If it approves, the government can publish a notice that it is considering the project with a general description. Other companies can send a notice saying they will submit a bid within 90 days. The government does not have to submit a project for competing bids.
• The company can request the government condemn or buy land it has chosen for the project.
• The government works out details of financing and length of leases or payments. Fees and tolls are not subject to regulation by key state agencies. Prices can be renegotiated during the term of the agreement.
• The company would build the project, with the right to own and operate it. It would deed the property back to the government after a certain time.
Sorry, link didn't come thru:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1329662/posts
I can't believe this. Of course I do. What about the 'ownership' society? Doesn't that include private property?
This is really pretty sorry. Sounds like politics and money getting in to bed with each other...it never ends.
Here's the good Mr. Johnson's contact information:
email: ejohnson@legis.state.ga.us
Capitol Phone: (404) 656-5109
District Phone: (912) 354-4626
This bill should be titled "The Government Theft and Piracy Statute."
And it figures that a lying, thieving pack of jackal lawyers is behind it.
Does Georgia have a recall process?
BTTT!!!!!!
I propose a bill to seize shopping malls for the construction of low-income single family starter homes. Of course, for the houses to be affordable requires that the owner of said mall be paid $40 an acre.
I wonder what Mr. Johnson would say about that?
Truth be told, as a Georgia native, I never had much use for the State-level Republicans. Frankly, most of the now-gone Southern Democrats were more conservative, and more skeptical about giving government more powers.
But state Sen. Dan Moody (R-Alpharetta), the bill's main sponsor, said the proposal allows governments to STEAL infrastructure sooner than they would be able to under traditional financing arrangements.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.