South Carolina, showing the other states how to do it!
South Carolina Ping
Posted on 08/03/2005 12:26:42 PM PDT by smoothsailing
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 03, 2005
Needed work on eminent domain
While South Carolina's property rights protections are better than most states', Gov. Mark Sanford and key legislative leaders made it clear Tuesday they recognize there are areas of state law that need work. At the top of the list should be a reduction in the number of public bodies that have the power of eminent domain.
The press conference, which included Speaker of the House Bobby Harrell and Senate President Pro Tempore Glenn McConnell, was designed to assure inquiring citizens that the state's leadership is committed to strong protections in the wake of a shocking U.S. Supreme Court decision earlier this summer. In a Connecticut case, the high court upheld that state's law giving local government a virtually unrestricted right to enhance its tax base by allowing a redeveloper to take private property for private gain.
While legal experts generally agree that the S.C. Constitution and S.C. Supreme Court rulings are good insurance against a repeat of that draconian ruling in this state, the governor's office and a number of lawmakers have expressed concerns that our laws aren't as tough as they could be. According to the governor's statement, he is interested in limiting the number of government entities that can use the power of eminent domain, a more succinct definition of the term "public use" and "tightening the definition of what constitutes a 'blighted area.' "
The latter is one of the oddest portions of the state law. For the most part, local governments can't turn private property over to redevelopers. But several decades ago, six counties were given the power, through constitutional amendments, to do just that if they declare the area in question "blighted." It's unclear how those six got on the ballot, particularly since several are small, rural counties, while the others are more urban. It's definitely an area worth exploring, particularly when it comes to refining the definition of "blighted."
None of the areas mentioned needs a closer look than government or public agencies -- which number well into the hundreds -- that have been given the power of eminent domain over the years. Now, according to a member of the governor's legal staff, all the state's public colleges have that power. So do special purpose districts, airport commissions, redevelopment authorities and public utilities, including those that supply water, sewer and natural gas.
A just-released study by the S.C. Policy Council on private property rights in the state cites among the council's numerous concerns the broad eminent domain authority that's been granted. "The state code of law goes further than the state Constitution in explaining who can use eminent domain powers, and to what end. Any state level department or authority that has responsibility in the realm of waterways, power, land drainage, or more generally in the 'improvement of health' is authorized to employ eminent domain," the study reports. Accountability is the chief problem since many of those who are given that power aren't directly answerable to publicly elected officials. Indeed, some, such as the St. John's Water Co. on Johns Island, aren't even indirectly accountable to public officials.
The Policy Council's researcher sounds one of greatest alarms we've heard to date on the implications of the U.S. Supreme Court decision on this state. The study states:
"Placing our long term faith and hope in South Carolina's State Supreme Court is not enough. It is essential that South Carolina's Constitution clearly articulate stronger protections for property owners, rather than depending on the court to consistently paint them in such a manner. This means clarification of 'blight,' the further reining in of eminent domain powers, a more singular articulation of public 'use' and 'purpose,' as well as a rethinking of just compensation for those cases when it is absolutely necessary to employ eminent domain."
To date, S.C. Supreme Court rulings have been the greatest restraint against the misuse of the power of eminent domain. But the Policy Council report correctly notes that those precedents are subject to change, particularly when, as the governor observes, there are areas of the law that need to be shored up. The U.S. Supreme Court ruling has made the awesome power of eminent domain a renewed area of intense public concern and it's getting the attention it deserves from state leaders.
This article was printed via the web on 8/3/2005 3:14:24 PM . This article appeared in The Post and Courier and updated online at Charleston.net on Wednesday, August 03, 2005.
Ping
I hardly doubt there'd be any mention from lawmakers had a certain Washington Elitist's property not been proposed for eminent domain confiscation.
No. I take the sudden legislative concern as no more than protectionist action in favor of their own as nothing they now do will right the wrong inflicted by that eminemt tribunal upon the folks of New London, Connecticut.
It did not however destroy the right to own property which is a key to all our inalienable rights. The property owners are compensated and can freely purchase other property. The key is however a "just compensation."
I cannot help thinking, the outrage ignores what is loudly proclaimed when jobs are transferred offshore. To wit, it's the economy that benefits, therefore it is good. The Americans can just get other jobs somewhere. Who cares.
There is no right to a job, of course; though, losing a job for any reason can lead to losing property. That's life. Nothing more needs to be said, IMO.
If the benefit to corporations and the economy is everything when it comes to transferring hundreds of thousands of jobs to developing nations why do corporations and the economy take second place to a single piece of property? Assuming "just compensation" for the property owner.
Kelo is a radical revision of common understanding of the individual rights bundled in private property. It strips away lawful individual rights in favor of the government common good.
It attempts to push us and our property into a socialist scheme where the interest of the group trumps the right of the individual. In a collective socialist society, individuals are expected to bow to government and contribute their money, their property and their labor for the goals of the imperial state. Kelo does this.
This, of course, is in direct opposition to American individual freedoms as stated in the Bill of Rights. The founding documents are a written contract to assure that the bundled individual freedoms owned by the citizen are not trampled by any group favored by government. The law is meant to protect people from unjust encroachment by others.
In Kelo, that contract was destroyed when the court held an illegal constitutional convention and rewrote the plain words of the 5th amendment: “...nor shall private property be taken for public use...”
The court deleted the phrase public use and scribbled in “public benefit.” Public benefit can mean anything, to anyone, at any time. Public benefit is simply the American version of the Marxist “common good.” Nothing more.
Public use is building roads and post offices and schools for the public to use. The government taking one’s home or business for a condominium complex, an office building or a factory isn’t public use. The public can’t use a condo or office or factory.
To purposely misread the plain words “public use” shows that these “justices” have pledged allegiance to a foreign and alien political philosophy that demands state control and de facto ownership of private property.
South Carolina, showing the other states how to do it!
SC ping. See comment #9.
I heard today that Alabama is toughening up its eminent domain laws as well. It will be (or already is?) illegal for states to seize private property for residential, commerical or industrial use.
I'd be happy to ping you every time if you'd like! :)
Ok. But please ping SC Swamp Fox and Dixie Sass also. The three of us manage the list.
I don't know if I want a guy redefining things if he is going to use words like "succinct".
BTTT!!!!!!!
As with every issue in the forefront of the news, politicians always appear eager to "attack and solve" the problem, riding the publicity wagon to it's fullest extent.
Constituents, lulled into believing their elected representitives are actually listening to their concerns, let their guard down until it's too late.
As with every politician, it's all about re-election and the illusion of care and concern.
Amen, and Amen -- In North Carolina the politicos from the state to the local level don't even care what the public thinks about this issue -- They've distributed sominex in the form of assurances from state law schools and the NC Bar owned and run state legislature.
The locals either don't understand the issues, WANT the sominex osmosed into their constituents, or believe that speaking up on THIS issue gets them a free ride into the NC Bar owned and run media's political "freak-of-the-week" zone. (At least that's the impression Union County, NC municipal and county leaders give.)
Whatever the case, the NC State and local Bars and Bar Associations and the powerful friends they use like cheap whores, when necessary, for the ultimate benefit of the NC legal industry (that is, when they can't whore themselves, as usual, for their own benefit), prefer the silence. This is especially true in light of the fact that EVERY NC Real Estate document is a creation of the NC Bar, and every Real Estate law and transaction in NC drives money into the NC Legal Industry, which uses the NC judicial system to do its will --
As long as we keep taking the sominex. . . . Wait till you see what's next on the American legal industry's agenda! Don't just blame the politicians and politics -- Blame the lawyer-politicians who have the penultimate control over how politics works itself out locally, and then at the state level, and then nationally in the lawyer-politician run Congress and American Bar owned and operated SCOTUS. County and municipal paid lawyers make law every time a county or municipal board meets, and the lawyers at the state level are nothing but gleeful.
Look at what is happening in Indian Trail, NC and THEIR municipal lawyer's SCOTUS-like legal determinations as a very SIMPLE example!HDR
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.