Date: 02/07/2006

Final
BILL SUMMARY for HB06-1099

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON STATE, VETERANS, & MILITARY AFFAIRS

Votes: View--> Action Taken:
Moved prepared amendment L.004 (Attachment C). ThPass Without Objection



03:31 PM -- House Bill 06-1099

Representative Gardner presented House Bill 06-1099, concerning a limitation on the exercise of the power of eminent domain by public entities. Representative Gardner provided background regarding the subject of eminent domain usage and the recent United States Supreme Court decision on eminent domain, Kelo vs. City of New London. A discussion ensued regarding moving forward with eminent domain-related legislation in light of a provision in the Colorado constitution. Further discussion ensued regarding differences between Colorado and Connecticut eminent domain statutes as they pertain to the Kelo decision. Representative Gardner responded to a question pertaining to what constitutes "public use" in the exercise of eminent domain powers. A discussion followed regarding the process by which property is condemned under eminent domain. Representative Gardner responded to questions regarding certain court cases listed in the legislative declaration of House Bill 06-1099, and provided an example of the proper exercise of eminent domain under the bill.

The following people testified regarding House Bill 06-1099:


03:55 PM -- Mr. Bob Hoban, attorney, testified in favor of House Bill 06-1099. Mr. Hoban discussed the use of the power of eminent domain in the context of urban renewal. Mr. Hoban also briefly revisited the subject of the eminent domain process.


04:03 PM -- Ms. Joanne Herlihy, representing the Colorado Water Congress, testified in opposition to House Bill 06-1099. Ms. Herlihy explained that her organization may withdraw this opposition if the bill is amended as contemplated by Representative Gardner. Ms. Herlihy explained that this amendment would limit the bill so as to not affect water conveyance systems, and Representative Gardner commented on the amendment. The committee had no questions for Ms. Herlihy.


04:07 PM -- Ms. Pat Ratliff, representing Colorado Counties Incorporated, testified in favor of the bill. Ms. Ratliff explained that the bill would not affect the mission of her organization.


04:09 PM -- Mr. Gene Hohensee, representing the Denver Urban Renewal Authority and the Colorado Municipal League, testified in opposition to House Bill 06-1099. Mr. Hohensee explained that the type of eminent domain proceeding contemplated in the Kelo vs. City of New London decision would not be allowed under Colorado law. Mr. Hohensee also explained the use of eminent domain for urban renewal, and provided background regarding certain eminent domain proceedings in Colorado. Mr. Hohensee provided an update regarding one of these proceedings. Representative Gardner commented briefly on Mr. Hohensee's testimony, and Mr. Hohensee responded.


04:21 PM -- Mr. Carl Filler, representing himself and his family, testified in favor of the bill.


04:22 PM -- Jerry Sonnenberg, representing the Colorado Farm Bureau, testified in favor of House Bill 06-1099. Mr. Sonnenberg discussed the Kelo vs. New London decision and the effect of eminent domain proceedings on the owners of agricultural property. The committee had no questions for Mr. Sonnenberg.


04:25 PM -- Ms. Cynthia French, representing Colorado Dairy Farmers Association, testified in favor of the bill.

04:26 PM

Representative Gardner explained prepared amendment L.004 (Attachment C).
BILL:HB06-1099
TIME: 04:27:29 PM
MOVED:Weissmann
MOTION:Moved prepared amendment L.004 (Attachment C). The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:Carroll T.
VOTE
Cadman
Carroll T.
Coleman
Crane
Gallegos
Liston
Lundberg
Schultheis
Todd
Ragsdale
Weissmann
Not Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection



House Bill 06-1099 was taken off the table.