|
Time
and time again, opinion pages in the Commonwealth
have called for serious spending reform. Slowing
the rate of growth of government is necessary to
prevent the need for future tax increases—a
serious and important goal indeed.
Now
the need for serious spending reform is more
urgent than either. There’s a new beast on the
horizon. A critical Supreme Court ruling now puts
our property--our homes--at risk from rampaging
government.
Your
home is your castle, right? It was until June
23rd. That’s the day the Supreme Court, ruling
in effect that your home is merely on loan from
your friendly local government, granted broad
powers for eminent domain for “economic
development.”
New
London, Conn., officials had condemned homes and
businesses to make way for an office building,
swanky retail shops, and luxury condos and
apartments. Their argument; The development would
generate more tax revenue than the existing
buildings. The new buildings would generate a
larger tax base, and thus more tax revenue…
which, the Supreme Court ruled, constituted a
“public use.”
So,
next time your local government is strapped for
cash, rather than fight a nasty tax battle it has
another option: Taking your home or business for
“economic development.”
Thanks
to the Supreme Court this now means simply
“raising additional tax revenues.” Soon,
anyone’s house could be in jeopardy to pay for
new and expanding services.
Particularly
disturbing is that the Virginia Supreme Court has
the same issue before it now, and may, out of
necessity, bow to the Supreme Court decision—l
eaving us all in serious jeopardy.
A
great Virginian warned us, "Government big
enough to supply everything you need is big enough
to take everything you have. ... The course of
history shows that as a government grows, liberty
decreases." It's time we heed Thomas
Jefferson’s words and take immediate action.
We
need to rethink just how our various levels of
government interact with citizens, taxpayers, and
property owners. Government has "sprawled"
into new areas—creating agencies and new
services at every turn. Over the years a number of
“vital” programs have been expanded or added
to the list of “core” services provided by
government.
I
don’t want to sound cold blooded, but if it’s
between my house and a new government program,
I’m going to pick my house every day of the
week.
Just
look at the state’s budget. Flush with cash
after a largely unneeded tax increase, the state
budget has mushroomed over the last 10 years.
Policy makers need to show restraint on the
spending side, or the bulldozer could come to your
community to “improve” the ’s tax base and
give government more money to pay for increasing
programs and services.
While
every local government may not be in the same
position as the Commonwealth, the General Assembly
needs to act immediately and set the ground rules
for appropriate eminent domain use to prevent
abuse. Strict standards need to be erected
with appropriate safeguards for property owners.
One
possible disincentive for abuse would require
compensation to be based on the appraised value of
the land after rezoning i.e., commercial real
estate is almost always more valuable then
residential. Another option would require
localities to pay a premium if eminent domain is
used—say 150 percent of assessed value.
Simultaneously,
every local government should re-evaluate its
structure and the services it currently provides.
Every program and activity should be scrutinized
for effectiveness, efficiency, and relevancy:
i.e., is it a proper role for government to do
this program? If we don’t demand this, if we
don't significantly limit the rate of growth of
our governments, eminent domain will inevitably
play a larger and larger role in future economic
development plans.
In
her stinging dissent, Justice Sandra Day
O’Connor validated the danger when she wrote,
“The specter of condemnation hangs over all
property. Nothing is to prevent the state from
replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carleton, any
home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a
factory.”
Action
is needed, now. Our homes and businesses depend on
it. In this election year, our voters should
demand that those they vote for support
legislation to strictly limit the use of eminent
domain here in the birthplace of individual
freedom.
--
July 11, 2005
|
