 |
| FishTails: Mar.
2000 |
Takings Alert -- House Vote Likely in Next 2 Weeks
Takings Action Alert -- Please send all questions and responses to Glenn Sugameli with NWF at 202-797-6865
or sugameli@nwf.org.
UPDATE: HOUSE JUDICIARY COMM. VOTE WED. MAR. 8, HOUSE FLOOR VOTE LIKELY the following week (week of March
13).
A federal "takings" / "property rights" bill (HR 2372) is moving rapidly through House committee
to the House Floor. A similar bill drafted by the National Assn. of Home Builders passed the House last Congress
(HR 1534). It is designed to cripple the ability of local governments to control land use, and engage in zoning,
planning, and smart growth.
Please read the Alert below, CONTACT YOUR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS and FORWARD the Alert to others.
** High Priority **
URGENT URGENT URGENT URGENT
H.R. 2372, Rep. Canady's [R-FL] "Private Property Rights Implementation Act"(TAKINGS BILL)
will be MARKED-UP and VOTED on by the Full HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE on WEDNESDAY, MARCH 8 and is likely to come
to the Floor of the full House of Representatives the following week.
IT IS IMPORTANT THAT ALL HOUSE MEMBERS, INCLUDING KEY JUDICIARY COMMITTEE MEMBERS, HEAR FROM YOU ABOUT THIS
MEASURE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. PLEASE CONTACT YOUR HOUSE MEMBERS TODAY.
WHAT YOU CAN DO:
WRITE or CALL your Representatives (WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE on the COMMITTEE) and write a letter to
the Editor of your newspaper urging opposition to HR 2372.
PLEASE CALL MEMBERS on the HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE (Capitol Switchboard 202-224-3121) ASAP and Urge them to ATTEND
the MARK-UP and to OPPOSE the BILL.
For a list of House Judiciary Committee members go to:
http://www.house.gov/judiciary/memb106.htm
ALL REPRESENTATIVES SHOULD OPPOSE the TAKINGS BILL BECAUSE:
The bill would harm the property rights of neighbors. It attempts to allow developers and companies to file
premature property rights "takings" federal court lawsuits that bypass state courts and local zoning
and land use dispute resolution procedures.
The bill would empower big developers to use the threat of premature, costly federal court litigation as a club
to coerce small communities into approving projects that will harm neighboring homeowners and the environment.
The bill would apply to a wide variety of threatened and actual federal court lawsuits. For example, state courts
have already rejected unjustifiable "takings" challenges to limits on hazardous waste landfills, corporate
hog farms, liquor licenses and adult businesses.
The impact would be especially severe on the 18,775 (48%) of cities and towns that have less than 1,000 residents
and average annual revenues of $186,664. Source: Latest available US Census Bureau data (1992). The costs of defending
unjustified federal takings litigation would be intimidating: lawsuits would rob funding from essential local fire,
police, and environmental protection services.
This bill would certainly have the exact opposite result from what supporters claim. Inevitably, it would result
in expensive, lengthy procedural litigation that would delay decisions on whether acompensable taking has occurred.
Federal courts would first have to: 1)decide threshold issues of whether the Constitution allows avoiding a final
administrative decision and bypassing state courts, and 2) would have to interpret many undefined terms in the
bill. Recently reaffirmed Supreme Court holdings are clear: the Constitution requires that premature federal claims
filed under the bill against localities would ultimately have to be dismissed or transferred to state court.
Opponents include: national organizations representing the federal courts, Counties, Cities, Mayors, Towns and
Townships, State Governments, State Legislatures, and 41 state Attorneys General; the Clinton Administration; major
religious denominations, including the US Catholic Conference, National Council of Churches of Christ and Jewish
and Evangelical groups, and labor (AFSCME). Conservation and environmental groups also strongly oppose H.R. 2372
because of its impact onsmart growth and other local initiatives to protect neighboring property and the environment. |
|
|
|
