Free Republic

The U.S. Supreme Court's notorious 2005 decision in Kelo v. New London allowed state and local governments to condemn private land and transfer it to developers to construct shopping centers or other private development. The ruling led to a nationwide outcry, and last week voters in nine states adopted new restrictions on eminent domain to prevent such abuses. In September, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed five bills that he claimed would rein in abuses of eminent domain in California. Unfortunately, these laws accomplish little -- they simply tinker with procedural details while leaving the state's abusive redevelopment industry intact. For example,...

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has signed two bills that tighten use and oversight of eminent domain in California. These bills make Proposition 90 unnecessary. They also should make clear to Californians the real agenda of the well-financed outside groups promoting Proposition 90: They want to redefine "takings" in the United States. --snip-- These people want California voters to believe that Proposition 90 is about "fixing" eminent domain abuses. But don't be fooled. The California Legislature held hearings in August, October and November of last year to assess the eminent domain situation in California after the Kelo v. City of New London...

09/29/2006   GAAS:706:06   FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE   Gov. Schwarzenegger Signs Legislation to Protect Private Property Rights Gov. Schwarzenegger signed legislation today that protects the rights of private property owners.   “Government must respect the private property rights of our citizens,” said Gov. Schwarzenegger. “I am proud to sign legislation to further enhance the protection of property rights of Californians.”   Specifically, Gov. Schwarzenegger signed the following five bills:   SB 53 by Senator Christine Kehoe (D-San Diego) requires an agency to make additional findings of blight if the agency wishes to extend the time limits on its authorization for eminent-domain actions. This bill would...

In June, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled government has the right to seize homes to make way for private redevelopment, it set off fear in the hearts of homeowners and lawmakers alike. A flurry of bills and state ballot initiatives have been introduced in response to concern that the court's decision can put anyone's property up for grabs through eminent domain. That case, Kelo v. City of New London, Conn., involved seizure of waterfront homes to allow the nonprofit New London Development Group to develop a hotel and health club near a new research center. It wasn't a blighted...