January 16, 2006
Check out www.LimitEminentDomain.org
The CRR board and many of its members are feverishly working on getting The People's Initiative on the November 2006 ballot.
This site will not be updated regularly in the next few months since all of our resources and energy are being spent on getting this Initiative on the ballot.
Want to know what we are up to? Visit www.LimitEminentDomain.org
November 30, 2005
Imminently concerned: A local view of eminent domain
Blue Grass Institute for Public Policy Solutions
JIm Waters
Introduction
Eminent domain is becoming an abusive power that should be restrained to perpetuate a civil society founded on voluntary exchange.
Our nation’s founding fathers believed not only in limiting the taking of private property for “public use,” but also in the vigorous protection of private-property rights, which they considered sacred. John Adams said: “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the law of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.”
A firm belief in the sacredness of property rights makes our society different than virtually all others. Frederick Bastiat wrote: “Life, liberty and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.”
Continue reading "Imminently concerned: A local view of eminent domain"Cupertino's land use shot heard far and wide
Sharon Simonson
Published: November 21, 2005
------------------------------------------------------------
Cupertino may have only 50,000 residents in a metropolitan county with
nearly 1.7 million people, but an attempt there to wrest land-planning
power away from local elected leaders induced laser focus from a broad
range of land-use interests, many of whom could be described as
outsiders to the tiny town.
Eminent Domain Project at Standstill Despite Ruling
New York Times - November 21st
By WILLIAM YARDLEY
NEW LONDON, Conn. - They have still not moved out. Not Susette Kelo. Not the Derys. Not Byron Athenian or Bill Von Winkle or the others.
Five months after the United States Supreme Court set off a national debate by ruling that the City of New London could seize their property through eminent domain to make way for new private development, no one has been forced to leave.
No bulldozers have arrived to level the last houses still standing, and none are expected soon.
Even though the holdouts lost their case, and the development that would displace them finally seems free to go forward, construction has not begun, and some elements of the project have been effectively paralyzed since the court ruling prompted a political outcry.
November 11, 2005
Blight Makes Right: October 26, San Diego
“Blight Makes Right” could be the title of the 50-year story of redevelopment agency abuse in California. Under the guise of ending blight, billions in tax revenues have been bled from public services and a permanent cloud of eminent domain hangs over millions of Californians.
Did this blight really ever exist? If so, has redevelopment ended any of it? And, if so, why does continue to grow, now covering over 1 million acres, or 25% of all urbanized land in California? These are the questions we face today.