The controversy over government taking houses and businesses for economic development or urban renewal returned to the Senate Tuesday in a hearing over competing proposals from Democrats and Republicans.
The U.S. Supreme Court?s 2005 decision in Kelo v. New London ignited the controversy when it allowed a house to be taken to build a private business development.
Democrats again this year have proposed legislation that still permits a local or state government to condemn a property to revitalize an area. But the bill by Sen. James Ed DeGrange and 13 Democrats is designed to make the condemnation proceeding operate in a fair manner and to increase the compensation that home and business owners would get if their property is taken.
“The bill has been made almost exclusively a compensation bill for small businesses, residential property owners and renters,” DeGrange told the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee. Amendments have stripped the measure of all references to economic development, he said. Republican senators still have a problem with the bill. “We still don?t have constitutional protection,” testified Sen. Andrew Harris, R-Baltimore-Harford. He and his GOP colleagues have introduced three constitutional amendments. One is a statewide ban on condemning property for economic development or any purposes than the traditional ones ? roads, schools and public facilities.
