Date: 02/19/2009

Final
BILL SUMMARY for HB09-1258

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON STATE, VETERANS, & MILITARY AFFAIRS

Votes: View--> Action Taken:
Moved to Postpone Indefinitely House Bill 09-1258.
Moved to refer House Bill 09-1258 to the Committee		PASS
FAIL



10:23 AM -- House Bill 09-1258

Representative B. Gardner, prime sponsor, presented House Bill 09-1258, concerning limitations on the ability of a home rule municipality to acquire real property outside its territorial boundaries by means of condemnation. Representative B. Gardner explained his reasons for sponsoring the bill, and provided background on certain exercises of eminent domain in Colorado, including its use in Telluride. Committee members received an editorial from the Denver Post criticizing a Colorado Supreme Court ruling on eminent domain (Attachment B), and a Rocky Mountain News article on the use of eminent domain by the town of Telluride (Attachment C). Representative B. Gardner also explained how local governments can exercise eminent domain under the bill, and discussed certain restrictions in the bill.

090219AttachB.pdf 090219AttachC.pdf


10:33 AM

Representative B. Gardner continued to provide background on the use of eminent domain in Colorado, and discussed the importance of balancing property rights and local control. Representative B. Gardner responded to questions regarding the impact of the bill on Denver, considering that its eminent domain capabilities are restricted by a constitutional provision known as the "Poundstone Amendment." Representative B. Gardner responded to further questions regarding the ability to restrict eminent domain to certain uses, such as infrastructure. Discussion ensued regarding the reach of the Poundstone Amendment, and the ability of the legislature to determine what constitutes an abuse of the exercise of eminent domain.


10:44 AM

Discussion continued regarding the legislature's prerogative pertaining to eminent domain, and the number of municipalities that are home rule.


10:46 AM

The following persons testified regarding House Bill 09-1258:


10:47 AM -- Mr. Malcolm Murray, representing the Colorado Municipal League, testified in opposition to the bill. Mr. Murray provided his professional background as it pertains to eminent domain, and discussed the use of eminent domain in Colorado to acquire open space and land for parks, both past and future. Mr. Murray then objected to specific portions of House Bill 09-1258, including required compensation to landowners under the bill. Mr. Murray also addressed the bill's treatment of the "highest and best use" of a particular property, and a landowner's ability to recoup attorney fees if an eminent domain issue goes to trial.


10:57 AM

Mr. Murray explained how circumstances often require the use of eminent domain by home rule municipalities.


10:58 AM -- Ms. Jen Boulton, representing the Audubon Society, testified in opposition to House Bill 09-1258. Ms. Boulton discussed the impact of the bill on the use of tax dollars to acquire land through the exercise of eminent domain as a result of the redefinition of "just compensation."


11:02 AM -- Ms. Erin Goff, representing the Colorado Municipal League, testified in opposition to the bill. Ms. Goff explained the right of home rule municipalities to acquire extra-territorial property through eminent domain, and the impact of the bill on costs associated with exercising eminent domain.


11:03 AM

No amendments were offered to the bill. Representative B. Gardner provided closing remarks in favor of House Bill 09-1258, and addressed issues raised during testimony. Discussion ensued regarding how eminent domain is used by municipalities, and the history of eminent domain's use in Colorado and throughout the United States. Discussion followed regarding balancing property rights and the ability of municipalities to decide land use policies, and the need to further explore the issues addressed by the bill.


BILL:HB09-1258
TIME: 11:13:56 AM
MOVED:Nikkel
MOTION:Moved to refer House Bill 09-1258 to the Committee of the Whole with favorable recommendation. The motion failed on a 4-7 roll call vote.
SECONDED:Murray
VOTE
Casso
No
Court
No
Hullinghorst
No
Lambert
Yes
Massey
Yes
McCann
No
Miklosi
No
Murray
Yes
Nikkel
Yes
Labuda
No
Todd
No
Not Final YES: 4 NO: 7 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: FAIL


BILL:HB09-1258
TIME: 11:14:41 AM
MOVED:Hullinghorst
MOTION:Moved to Postpone Indefinitely House Bill 09-1258. The motion passed on a 7-4 roll call vote.
SECONDED:Labuda
VOTE
Casso
Yes
Court
Yes
Hullinghorst
Yes
Lambert
No
Massey
No
McCann
Yes
Miklosi
Yes
Murray
No
Nikkel
No
Labuda
Yes
Todd
Yes
Final YES: 7 NO: 4 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS