Sentences with phrase «eminent domain only»

Shall Section 11 of Article I (Bill of Rights) of the Constitution of Virginia be amended (i) to require that eminent domain only be exercised where the property taken or damaged is for public use and, except for utilities or the elimination of a public nuisance, not where the primary use is for private gain, private benefit, private enterprise, increasing jobs, increasing tax revenue, or economic development; (ii) to define what is included in just compensation for such taking or damaging of property; and (iii) to prohibit the taking or damaging of more private property than is necessary for the public use?

It used to be that eminent domain only meant the government could seize your property for the public good.

Not exact matches

To be fair, city officials and reps from the quasi-public Albany Local Development Corporation (ALDC) repeatedly reassured everyone that eminent domain would be used only sparingly — if at all.

Eminent domain is one of the only areas where the owner has done nothing wrong but can be sued.

Our eminent domain attorneys strictly work on a contingency - fee basis, which means you pay us no hourly fees, and we only receive a fee if we win your lawsuit.

Likewise, when a government entity exercises its eminent domain power to condemn private property for public use, the government should provide - as required by the 5th Amendment - «just» compensation to affected property owners that covers not only the value of the property condemned but also all other reasonable and necessary costs generated by the condemnation action including, but not limited to, hiring legal counsel, obtaining temporary housing, lost business revenue, severance damages.

Furthermore, when a government entity exercises its eminent domain authority, it should do so only when necessary to materially advance a real public use.

«Eminent domain authority should be exercised only in special circumstances,» Julie Sullivan, assistant director of governmental affairs for the Illinois Association of REALTORS ®, testified before the Illinois Senate State Government Committee in July.

Ohio's highest court has considered whether it was permissible for a city to use its eminent domain powers to seize private property when the only public purpose identified in support of the taking was the economic benefits to be gained by the property seizure.

Supports eminent domain authority only for a public use (e.g., ownership by a public entity), as well as a broad interpretation of «just» compensation, to include all reasonable and necessary costs which result from exercise of such authority, not just the value of the property condemned.