House bill targets eminent domain

“I’ve never had to use it (eminent domain),” said Greg Cummings, director of Robeson County Industrial Economic Development Commission. “But I think it needs to be left open for its use to be considered on a case-by-case basis. There needs to be consideration to the magnitude of the project.”

Cummings said that he does not advocate a government going in and condemning property where individuals have built homes. He said that he sees the use of eminent domain as sometimes being the best way to go if the land to be acquired for fostering a region’s economic growth is farmland or other undeveloped property.

The state House resumed its effort Wednesday to get a constitutional amendment on the ballot that makes clear governments can’t condemn someone’s land solely for private economic development.

A House judiciary committee voted Wednesday in favor of the legislation, which would let voters statewide decide in November 2014 whether or not to add stronger landowner protections against eminent domain — the act of a government condemning private property — to the state constitution. The measure now goes to the House floor.

“The bill will mean that a public use does not mean the taking of property in order to convey an interest in that property for economic development,” said Rep. Chuck McGrady, R-Henderson, one of the bill’s primary sponsors. Public use means for projects such as highways and government buildings.

“As I looked back on some that language, it would have been bad,” Stam told the committee. This year’s version, he added, is “clean, it’s short, as a constitutional amendment should be.”

The amendment also has been tinkered with over the years to address criticisms by Democrats. There was no public opposition to the bill during Wednesday’s committee meeting.