[truth_seeker]

"Emminent domain has outlived it's purpose, and needs to be terminated; this is a minimum first step toward that goal."

Emminent domain should NOT be terminated. It SHOULD be restricted to what it was originally intended.

Roads, some public facilities would be justified uses, as in history.

What needs to happen is to prevent city council's (acting as Redevelopment districts) from taking your home to put up a big box center.

I have experience with redevelopment, in two cities. My own town stopped short of using ED to take residences. Before Kelo, by several years.

Some urban redevelopment is very beneficial. Some "blight" is really bad.

It is the abuses that need to be stopped. The USSC decision was horrible. But they invited local jurisdictions to make rules.

[editor-surveyor]

"Roads, some public facilities would be justified uses, as in history."

Some roads would be justified, and Some public facilities would also be justified, but at this point, all ventures in this area should require voter approval at a high level, such as 2/3.

[calcowgirl]

Some urban redevelopment is very beneficial. Some "blight" is really bad.

So-called "blight" is in the eye of the beholder. If the property is truly "blight," the property can be condemned without eminent domain. Urban development groups are among the largest abusers of property rights with their creative interpretations and creation of the "economic blight" concept.