Requires the preparation of a comprehensive economic development plan for the use of eminent domain when the primary purpose is economic development and certain residential premises are to be acquired; requires municipal approval of the exercise of eminent domain power in such cases; enacts the "eminent domain reform act".
NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION submitted in accordance with Assembly Rule III, Sec 1(f)
BILL NUMBER: A3973
SPONSOR: Pretlow TITLE OF BILL: An act to amend the public authorities law, the not-
for-profit corporation law, the general municipal law and the eminent
domain procedure law, in relation to eminent domain reform
PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA: To reform the eminent domain process in
relation to economic development projects by expanding judicial reform,
providing more local control over eminent domain decisions, requiring a
comprehensive economic development plan, and requiring a home owner
impact statement
SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS:
Section 1. Short Title. The act shall be referred to as the "Eminent
Domain Reform Act"
Section 2. Add a new § 1831-b to the public authorities law to give
local governments the power to approve or disapprove any public authori-
ty's use of eminent domain.
Section 3. Amends § 1411 of the not-for-profit corporation law to give
local governments the power to approve or disapprove local development
corporation's use of eminent domain.
Section 4. Adds a new § 858-c to the general municipal law to give local
governments the power to approve or disapprove industrial development
agency's use of eminent domain.
Section 5. Amends § 103 of the EDPL to include new Definitions.
Section 6. Amends the § 204 of the EDPL to include a new section (4) to
the determinations and findings requirements by including a new section
on economic development.
Section 7. Adds a new § 204-a to the EDPL.
A. Requires a comprehensive economic development plan in cases where
eminent domain is used for economic development. Economic development
plans must be approved by the local government.
B. Requires that a homeowner impact assessment statement be completed to
assess the actual harm to affected condemnees, how the project would
benefit the community and justification for the condemnation.
C. Increases compensation to condemnees whose home or dwelling is
acquired for an economic development project. The compensation, in addi-
tion to the compensation already required by law, would be 150% of total
fair market value.
Section 8. Amends § 207 of the EDPL to expand judicial review in cases
where a condemnor substantially alters the scope of the project, or the
determinations and findings, to allow citizens a fair process.
JUSTIFICATION: The use of eminent domain is important power for
government to move forward on important public projects. However, inves-
tigations by the Assembly Corporations, Authorities and Commissions
Committee, as well as the recent United States Supreme Court decision,
KELO et al, v. CITY OF NEW LONDON et al, underscore the need for further
eminent domain reform.
Several issues emerge from the Committee's investigations and the
Supreme Court decision. First, is the meaning of public use under the
5th Amendment of the United States Constitution (New York has a similar
constitutional provision. See: Article I, section 7 of the State Consti-
tution). The New London decision centers on condemnation where one
private interest is favored over another for the public purpose of
economic development. The Court held that the economic development plan
of the city did constitute a public use. Specifically, however, the
decision focused on the appropriate legal standard of review. The
Supreme Court gives wide latitude to governments to determine public
use.
The second issue that emerges is who is using the power of eminent
domain. In New York, like the New London case, these decisions are often
done through quasi-public development agencies or authorities. In New
York quasi-public entities such as industrial development agencies,
local development corporations and public authorities have the power of
eminent domain to fulfill their public mission. Often these quasi-public
entities can condemn homes for economic development projects. Authori-
ties and other development agencies are shielded from traditional public
scrutiny.
This legislation specifically focuses on condemnation in which private
property is taken for economic development purposes and transferred to
other private entities. In these cases, government must be extremely
cautious in using its power of eminent domain and must do everything in
its power to protect citizens. The Eminent Domain Reform Act will
include three major provisions: increasing the timeframe citizens can
appeal decisions to condemn, enacting significant protections for home-
owners and other displaced residents where their property was condemned
for economic development, and empowering local governments to have deci-
sion making power of the use of eminent domain by public authorities and
IDAs.
This bill would strike the right balance between the needs of society
and individual liberties.
PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: A1568 2009/2010 referred to Judiciary
A9043-a (2005-06); relates to Chapter 450 of 2004 (Brodsky/Leibell).
A1264 (2007-2008).
FISCAL IMPLICATION FOR STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: Not known.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This act shall take effect on the one hundred twenti-
eth day after it shall have become law.
