Flyboy
Member
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/w...853.story?page=1&coll=ny-region-apconnecticut
'course, this comes after the Democrats (protecting the little guy from Big Business) voted to kill a bill that would have forbidden such takings statewide:
I wonder how many phone lines they had to install to deal with the complaints....
HARTFORD, Conn. -- Democratic leaders of the General Assembly on Monday urged municipal leaders not to use their eminent domain powers until the legislature has time to consider changing the state's laws on seizing property.
The state lawmakers said they want time to thoroughly examine the issue in the wake of last month's U.S. Supreme Court ruling that found New London had the authority to takes homes in the Fort Trumbull neighborhood for a private development project.
In its ruling, the high court pointed out that states could ban that practice.
"Now that the Supreme Court has spoken, it makes sense to take a full comprehensive look of where we want to go as a state on eminent domain," said House Speaker James Amann, D-Milford.
Two legislative committees plan to hold a public hearing as early as this month, inviting national experts and state and local government officials to testify. Lawmakers would then decide whether to hold a special session, or wait to address the issue during next year's General Assembly.
Democratic legislators said they expect to make some changes in Connecticut law. Eminent domain powers are referenced in 80 state statutes, according to the nonpartisan Office of Legislative Research.
The Democratic leaders of the General Assembly have sent a letter to mayors and first selectmen across the state urging them wait for legislative guidance before seizing any property.
"It's putting the word out there to the municipalities that we're going to act," said House Majority Leader Christopher Donovan, D-Meriden.
House Minority Leader Robert Ward, R-North Branford, is pushing for a special session this summer to consider a one-year moratorium on the use of eminent domain powers. Ward said he has been contacted by property owners from across the nation, concerned about the high court's ruling.
"This is a very simple issue: you're either with the big developer and big government, and against the little guy, or you're for the little guy," Ward said. "I'm for the little guy and that's why we need to change our law now."
Senate Minority Leader Louis DeLuca, R-Woodbury, called the Democrats' plan to study the issue a "toothless moratorium," and an attempt to save political face.
"It's clear that the Democrats are more interested in authorship than in protecting people from having their homes seized," he said in a written statement.
Bill Von Winkle, one of the New London residents whose home is being seized, said he supports the idea of a one-year moratorium.
"Then, after a year, they'll be the ones deciding whether to put us in street, not the Supreme Court," he said.
...
(Story continues; follow the link)
'course, this comes after the Democrats (protecting the little guy from Big Business) voted to kill a bill that would have forbidden such takings statewide:
HARTFORD, Conn. -- Republican leaders in the state Senate have called for another special session to consider legislation limiting Connecticut's eminent domain laws following its defeat in the General Assembly on Tuesday.
The proposal, offered in response to last week's U.S. Supreme Court ruling allowing New London to take homes for a private development project, was killed on a mostly 22-11 party-line vote in the Democratic-controlled Senate.
The House of Representatives, which also is run by Democrats, defeated a similar proposal 82-50.
I wonder how many phone lines they had to install to deal with the complaints....
