"My concern," Jones tells GlobeSt.com, "is that absence of action by the Legislature can be interpreted as an agreement with the expansion of eminent domain powers by government. That is not something we wish to embrace."
In the Kelo decision, the justices said states could impose restrictions on eminent domain powers through their constitution or legislative action. Although Jones says he has heard from constituents and other legislators who support the measure, he concedes the bill is likely to draw strong opposition from local officials and agencies who view it as a restriction on efforts to rejuvenate deteriorating neighborhoods. In Massachusetts, state law allows municipalities to take private property to promote private development only if it can be shown that the project will benefit the public through new jobs or an expanded tax base.
A spokeswoman for the Boston Redevelopment Authority, which oversees redevelopment efforts in Boston, tells GlobeSt.com that the agency is wary of any legislation designed to further restrict eminent domain powers. "We don't think any further restrictions on eminent domain powers are necessary," the spokesperson says, noting the BRA currently abides by state law that requires it to prove an area is blighted before it can be seized under eminent domain.
But Jones says the only thing his measure will do is uphold that law, not impose further eminent domain restrictions. "It would make sure in Massachusetts that we work with the same standards that are already in place."
© Arc, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to TMSalesOperations@arc-network.com. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.