ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Real Estate & Property Law Blogs -> National Eminent Domain Blog

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Real Estate & Property Law

: National Eminent Domain Blog

Will Iowa Restrict the Use of Eminent Domain?

By Alan Ackerman

ADVERTISEMENTS

Iowa officials have always had a penchant for building large reservoirs. Containment and utilization of waters are a key part of state economic activity and farming. A reform bill  proposes to heighten the burden on condemning agencies from a preponderance of the evidence to clear and convincing proof. This will make it much more difficult to acquire land for reservoirs and other purposes. Further, the historical sites limitation could create havoc and inhibit long-term economic development. While reform is needed, there should be a balance.

American Independent

House File 64 stipulates that the property acquisition phase of a project cannot begin without signed authorization of the governor. It also changes the standard of proof in eminent domain cases from a 'preponderance of the evidence' to 'clear and convincing evidence.'

Debate over eminent domain has raged in Iowa for several years. In 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that it was permissible for state and local governments to take private property for private business development. That inspired legislation in Iowa to counter the ruling and require governments to prove beyond a certain threshold that taking the property would be for the public good, not simply for economic development.

Flash forward to today, and officials in Clark County say a new reservoir is a critical public need because the area's current water supply is being used nearly to capacity. Neighbors of the rural area where the reservoir would be constructed have alleged that the water need has been drastically overestimated, and that the underlying goal of the project is to increase recreation and tourism.

Also included in the bill would be a prohibition on the condemnation of property on the National Register of Historic Places. It would also prohibit any project that receives state funding or assistance through specified economic development, tourism or community betterment programs to be defined as 'public use.'

 

 

Full post as published by National Eminent Domain Blog on February 24, 2011 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0021 secs (from cache 11/01/26 00:33:44)