Eminent domain. The author of a Letter to the Editor in the May 19th Knoxville News-Sentinel hits the nail on the head. See my previous posts of May 10 and May 17 for background information.
--------------------------------------------------------
Eminent domain bill won't protect owners
Dear Editor:
According to an Associated Press article of April 28, the 104th General Assembly has prepared two versions of a bill to protect the public from eminent domain abuse.
Here is what the story says. One provision of the Tennessee legislation would require that the local government wishing to buy property or invoke eminent domain would certify the public purpose and necessity for seizing the property.
It went on to say that the government may sell or lease the seized property to a government entity or a private person.
Where is the public use when the property is sold to a private person?
What in this legislation will prevent abuse of eminent domain?
This legislation does not protect us - it is a rubber stamp of the of the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that allowed the city of New London, Conn., to take a lower tax revenue producing property and convert it to a commercial high tax revenue producing property.
I have been watching politics for some time now and suspect that we have magicians for legislators; they distract with one hand and pick our pockets with the other.
RICHARD DOWNING
Dandridge
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment