Next up with the live blogging, an issues forum about eminent domain. This is the least attended forum that I've seen here so far. Every other forum was absolutely packed to nearly overflowing. This forum has only about 30 people.

Scheduled to speak are Thomas Smith, VP of the Civitas Institute (current member of the Durham city council); Daren Bakst, Legal and Regulatory Policy Analyst for the John Locke Foundataion; Scott Bullock, Senior Attorney at the Institute for Justice (one who argued in Kelo v. New London); and Chris Sinclair, President of the Triangle Community Coalition.

More and more people have been arriving late, perhaps because lunch went a little long...the room is about full now -- about 40-45 people.
Up first is Thomas Stith, Vice-President of the Civitas Institute. John Adams "Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist." The 5th amendment addresses this clear and basic right.

Kelo v. New London changed the law. The "public use" clause in the 5th amendment really meant "public purpose." Public purpose includes taking property for no other reason than increasing a tax base.

"Any property may be taken for the benefit of another private party." -- so says Justice Sandra Day O'Conner. This is what effectively deletes the words, "for public use" from the takings clause of the fifth amendment.

Supporters of taking claim that NC is protected via NC Law chapter 40A. However, that law says that property can be taken for "public benefit" -- which is up to local governments to determine and define. Charlotte added that ability in 2000.

Over 80% of voters in NC support the Constitution and oppose government taking private property for public use. 66% do not care what reason the government might give, even for schools and roads. Their information campaign is "Keep My Private Property Private."

Second to address the group is Scott Bullock, an attorney that argued the Kelo v. New London case in front of the Supreme Court. Many people in the country suddenly started paying attention with the Kelo case. He considers it an "ugly and unAmerican practice.:

Kelo left few, if any, protections for citizens under the 5th amendment. It's happening all over the country where cities and counties are taking homes and small businesses to build larger companies and businesses to increase the tax base: it is a very real problem that can only get worse unless state governments are reined in.

The Supreme Court claimed that since the city had a "plan," and therefore that was a valid "check" on eminent domain abuse. Of course, the Supreme Court is quite out of step with reality because anyone who's ever been to one of those city council meetings knows that they are dog and pony shows.

It does not matter what condition is of the land -- as long as the new users of the property can make "more productive use" of the land, then it is valid to take the land. That is a version of eminent domain without limits -- and that is incredibly dangerous to freedom: ANY home would produce less than a business.

Even Maxine Waters thought that the Kelo decision was absolutely wrong. About the only people who defend the Kelo decision are those who will benefit from it: city officials, planners, and developers. Citizens are almost universally opposed to that decision.

Eminent domain was NOT designed to be used to raise tax income or create jobs.

Next to speak is Daren Bakst, Legal and Regulatory Policy Analyst for the John Locke Foundation. North Carolina has no protection for private property rights. The NC Constitution simply says that whatever the federal government determines are the laws, North Carolina will follow. Since the Supreme Court has shown there are no protections, we have none.

Those who support taking, such as the League of Municipalities, claim that the state is covered because we have a law. Of course, there's nothing stopping the government from changing the law -- as they do quite often. We need to redefine, in this state, what public use means.

Usually this means use by the public, for utilities, and other such items. North Carolina should expressly prohibit taking for ANY private use. We need to redefine "just compensation." Fair market value does not reflect relocation costs for property owners, the loss of business goodwill, and attorney fees.

North Carolina NEEDS a Constitutional Amendment to protect it's citizens from the government. The fact that it is difficult to change the Constitution is WHY we need an amendment. Those committees discussion the issue are first consider to "do no harm" -- to the government's ability to use eminent domain, NOT to do no harm to the citizens.

Last up is Chris Sinclair, President of the Triangle Community Coalition. His perspective is protecting property rights from the very local level. Property rights are being lost in the name of "public purpose." Local governments are chipping away at these rights at an alarming rate.

When the League of Municipalities says that there's nothing to worry about, that's the fox guarding the henhouse. He sees comprehensive planning, "buffer zones," and "smart growth" being used to destroy property rights a little bit at a time.

Cary: "Public Purpose" given to take property from citizens was "to protect our natural habitats" -- without paying fair market value or even having any science to back up their claims.

Johnson/Wake county: dwarf wedge mussel case: Fish and Wildlife found some "endangered" mussels. Federal government demanded "protection" of thousands of acres for this mussel. Is this a "public purpose?" Chris suggested to the council that the county pay the citizens for this land -- he was laughed out of the room.

Raleigh is proposing to change "greenway buffer zones." Public Purpose: "to protect critical habitat in the city of Raleigh" -- again without any science to even suggest that this expansion would help any of the animals or plants in the area. And the city will pay a few cents on the dollar, not close to fair market value.

When cities and counties go through approvals of changes, parks, and zoning, you never hear the words "property rights" mentioned once. Owning property is one of the most fundamental rights the Americans have that the rest of the world does not. We cannot let this right be eroded.

THE NORTH CAROLINA LEAGUE OF MUNICIPALITIES IS THE BIGGEST ENEMY OF PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THE STATE.

This league is the strongest lobby in North Carolina, and their lobbyists are paid for with tax money -- half a million dollars of tax money each year is used to lobby for removing your property rights.

Posted by: Ogre at 06:44 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 1116 words, total size 7 kb.