My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2006.03.20 EDA Packet
Hugo
>
Community Development
>
EDA
>
EDA Agenda/Packets
>
2006 EDA Packets
>
2006.03.20 EDA Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2017 1:16:45 PM
Creation date
8/24/2017 1:16:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commissions
Meeting Date
3/20/2006
Document Type
Agenda/Packets
Commission Name
EDA
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
102
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
t <br /> SAMPLE LETTER TO LEGISLATORS <br /> Date: <br /> The Honorable <br /> Minnesota House of Representatives/Minnesota Senate <br /> Address <br /> City, State, Zip <br /> Dear Representative/Senator <br /> As you know, eminent domain has been a lively topic since the recent Kelo vs. New London <br /> Supreme Court decision upheld local government eminent domain authority to acquire property <br /> for a private use. While the Kelo decision did not expand Minnesota's eminent domain <br /> authority in any way, several bills will be introduced in the upcoming session to restrict local <br /> government eminent domain authority. <br /> Although these bills are the result of perceived abuses, cities use eminent domain sparingly and <br /> responsibly. Some facts from a League of Minnesota Cities survey: <br /> • 535 cities (84% of respondents) did not use eminent domain for any purpose from <br /> January 1999 through June 2005. <br /> • 100 cities (16% of respondents) used eminent domain in that period. Of those: <br /> ➢ 66 used eminent domain exclusively for public retention and use such as roads, <br /> utilities, and parks. <br /> ➢ 34 used eminent domain for blight or contamination removal or economic <br /> development (27 were in the core cities, inner ring suburbs or older metro area, and <br /> seven were in Greater Minnesota). <br /> The Twin Cities area enjoys a reputation as one of the most livable metro areas in the nation. <br /> This is not by accident. Civic and business leaders have devoted significant resources to <br /> support the revitalization of our metropolitan area. The beneficiaries are not only people <br /> employed in the new businesses and people who live in the new housing. They are neighboring <br /> businesses and residents. These individuals and businesses have invested in their properties and <br /> trust their municipal government to do what it can to protect that investment. <br /> When considering eminent domain legislation, we encourage you to consider the importance of <br /> redevelopment to the long-term economic and social viability of our metro area. Serious <br /> restrictions of eminent domain will very likely have serious negative consequences for these <br /> efforts. Many eminent domain actions are non-controversial and initiated to arrive at an <br /> agreeable price or tax break for a seller. It is always used as a last resort. Nevertheless, <br /> eminent domain is an important component of a city's redevelopment toolbox. <br /> We strongly encourage you to give careful review to all proposed anti-eminent domain bills this <br /> session. We would be happy to discuss this important issue with you at your convenience. <br /> Sincerely, <br /> Name <br /> City of <br /> Association of Metropolitan Municipalities and the League of Minnesota Cities <br /> 145 University Avenue West, St. Paul, MN 55103-2044 <br /> AMM: (651)215-4000 LMC: (651)281-1200 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.