Municipal management districts' eminent domain power:

Senate Bill 224 (79R) by Wentworth

Sponsor - Wong

• Senate Bill 224 protected private property rights by removing the eminent domain power of municipal management districts in the Greater Houston area.

Eminent Domain Reform:

Senate Bill 7 (79S2) by Janek

Sponsor - Woolley et al.

In response to the U.S. Supreme Court's Kelo decision-which grossly expanded the circumstances under which eminent domain powers could be exercised by government entities-Senate Bill 7 provided necessary protections for property owners in Texas. The bill established four specific instances in which eminent domain may not be exercised by government:

• if the taking confers a private benefit on a particular private party;
• if the taking is a based on an alleged public use that is merely a pretext to confer a private benefit on a particular private party;
• if the taking is for the purposes of economic development, unless the economic development is a secondary purpose arising from clearance of blighted areas; or
• if the taking is to raise revenue for a public project.





• The bill did not apply to transportation projects, including railroads, ports, airports, or public roads or highways; the provision of utility services; or a sports and community venue project. The landowner protections provided by SB 7 (79S2) were a vital first step toward securing private property rights in Texas in the light of the Kelo decision.

Eminent Domain Reform:

House Bill 2006 (80R) by Woolley*

Sponsor - Janek

• Eminent domain authority and private property rights are essential prerequisites for a thriving economy and for economic and social development. House Bill 2006 strikes a balanced compromise that addresses the natural tensions that exist between these two competing interests.
• HB 2006 defines what constitutes a "public use" for which eminent domain proceedings may be initiated, and defines the factors that must be taken into account in the calculation of "adequate compensation" for an eminent domain taking. The bill also establishes that a
  condemning entity must make a "bona fide effort" to acquire a property through voluntary purchase.

*NOTE: Vetoed by Governor Perry.

Landowners' Bill of Rights:

House Bill 1495 (80R) by Callegari

Sponsor - Nichols

• House Bill 1495 helps to inform landowners of their rights and options when confronted with a condemnation.
• The bill requires the Attorney General to draft a statement of rights for property owners facing eminent domain condemnation that explains their right to notice, fair negotiation, damages, a hearing on damages, and to appeal a condemnation judgment, including an appeal of the assessment of damages.
• The written statement required by HB 1495 must also describe the condemnation process, the condemning entity's obligations throughout the condemnation process, and the property owner's options.

Repurchase of Condemned Property:

House Joint Resolution 30 (80R) by Jackson, J.

Sponsor - Janek

• House Joint Resolution 30 proposes an amendment to the Texas Constitution to allow the former owners of condemned property to repurchase that property for the same amount they were awarded in adequate compensation at the time of the taking.