Landowners Association of Wyoming: Newsroom

Newsroom

Jonah Natural Gas Field, Pinedale

News Releases

Cheyenne, WY – April 13, 2006 The Wyoming Legislature’s Joint Agriculture Committee will meet at 8:30 a.m. on Wednesday, April 19 in Torrington in the Tibbett Building at the Eastern Wyoming College to take public comment on issues involving eminent domain. ...more >>

News Articles & Opinion

Pinedale Roundup July 13, 2006: Landowners fight for eminent domain reform. With the 2006 election season approaching, the Landowners Association of Wyoming is trying to reform the state’s eminent domain laws to allow private landowners to bargain with government and industry authorities who want to seize their property for development. LAW described incidences in both urban and rural areas in which property owners were unjustly treated by government and industry. Goodman condemned current government policy of paying only appraisal value for property they condemned under eminent domain, rather than replacement prices. She argued that homeowners with lowly appraised houses would be virtually incapable of buying new homes with the compensation they receive. [this article is unavailable online]

Casper Star Tribune July 12, 2006 Wyoming maps energy routes, Leaving out landowners?
In their haste to draw maps and broker power deals that would link Wyoming to electrical markets throughout the West, state energy officials so far have failed to bring private landowners to the table, according to a private property advocate. On Tuesday, the Wyoming Infrastructure Authority released maps of strategic electrical transmission corridors in Wyoming. Laurie Goodman of the Landowners Association of Wyoming, a political action committee, noted that the maps do not depict private lands. She said the mapping was done without asking for input from the private landowners who will likely host the facilities. "We own 47 percent of the land in this state. Our land is an integral part of how many of your projects will go forward, and we're not even treated as being a part of that," Goodman said.

Casper Star Tribune July 7, 2006 Some push eminent domain reform
Gillette – A landowner advocacy group says private property rights – particularly for rural landowners – will diminish if lawmakers don’t reform Wyoming’s eminent domain laws. “Most landowners recognize the need to develop. What they don’t get is why they, as private landowners, don’t have the same rights as states and the federal government, and why they have so little negotiating power,” Goodman said.

Casper Star Tribune July 7, 2006 Extend state rights to landowners, group says
Rural landowners should have the same rights enjoyed by state government under eminent domain laws, an advocacy group contents. In pushing for reform of state laws concerning the authority of government and industry to force access to private land, LAW notes that private landowners have fewer rights than does state government on the issue. When the federal government or industry seek to cross state land with pipelines or power lines, the state enjoys the right to: A requirement for prior notice; initial and annual fees, and a 30-year limit on all contracts, rather than in perpetuity. “It seems to us there’s a greater appetite by both public and private parties to use eminent domain, and yet it’s supposed to be a last resort,” said Goodman

Sublette Examiner July 6, 2006 Bush enacts Property Rights Order
Last week, President George W. Bush issued an executive order designed to protect the property rights of the American people. ABSTRACT: The order institutes an official policy for the national government: “It is the policy of the United States to protect the rights of Americans to their private property, including by limiting the taking of private property by the federal government to situations to which the taking is for public use, with just compensation, and for the purpose of benefiting the general public and not merely for the purpose of advancing the economic interest of private parties to be given ownership or use of the property taken.” (The article is not available on-line)

The Sheridan Press June 28, 2006 Trustees back off condemnation action
Big Horn – Confronted by a strong anti-condemnation sentiment – and amid charges of potential illegality and a flawed survey – Sheridan County School District I trustees Tuesday night backed off a proposal to take property through eminent domain for a new campus. A crowed of 50 to 60 people attended the hearing at the district’s central office in Ranchester, most of them to protest the district’s proposal to initiate condemnation proceedings against 40 acres of the ranch owned by the Connell family in Big Horn. (Article not available online)

Wyoming Livestock Roundup May 27, 2006 Landowners continue to fight condemnation
Casper – Legislators, particularly in the Joint Ag Committee, are working feverously to drft legislation for the next session in hopes of reforming state eminent domain laws. In the meantime, some ranchers are fed up. With no leverage when public or private companies condemn their land, ranchers are fighting back, demanding more compensation, more respect and above all to be treated fairly. In southeast Wyoming, northwest of Laramie and along I-80, the Day family has recently be served with a summons by Williams & Company pipeline. “I’m sick and tired of being told ‘this is what you have to do,’” says Norma Day.

Sublette Examiner February 23, 2006 Senate Votes to Review Eminent Domain Laws
The Wyoming Senate voted to introduce Senate File 103 as introduced by Senators Schiffer and Hanes and Representative Landon. The bill would amend Wyoming’s eminent domain laws to provide greater protection for private property rights when threatened with condemnation actions for the benefit of another private entity’s economic gain. The bill would allow a jury trial to decide on many factors, including whether good faith negotiations actually took place prior to the taking, whether the taking was actually in the greatest public good and caused the least private injury; whether there was a valid need for the taking, and a provision to provide that the condemner would have to pay the attorney fees of the landowner who’s property was taken. The bill would also amend Wyoming’s eminent domain laws to only allow a taking private property as a “last resort” and would prohibit a taking that would minimize the developer’s costs, simplify permitting, or improve ease and convenience for the developer.

The Rawlins Daily Times July 14, 2005 Wallop finds ‘takings’ ruling to be ominous
Saratoga -- A U.S. Supreme Court decision on Kelo regarding the power of government to take private property for another use should be of great concern to those who care about Wyoming agriculture and protection of the state’s open spaces, retired U.S. Senator Malcolm Wallop told the annual gathering of the Wyoming Stock Growers Agricultural Land Trust. Wallop said…the split June 23 decision “has got to be scary to all of us…”

Letters to Editor

Wyoming Livestock Roundup October 17, 2006 Cattlemen Ready to Defend Property Rights
…”America was built on the principles of free enterprise and individual rights. Fighting for these principles requires much time and energy, but it is critically important. If you are concerned about the erosion of private property rights… make it a point to speak with your members of Congress and state representatives to let your voice be heard. Paul Hitch, Chairman of the Policy Division of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association

DM&E Expansion, July 16, 2006 Rochester, Minnesota
By: Kenneth Brown, Olmstead County Board
Reid Jensen's letter, claiming that 55 of the 56 towns along the DM&E Railroad's proposed coal route support the project, is both misleading and flat out wrong. It's misleading because one town - Rochester - is home to 40 percent of all the people who live along the tracks. It's fine that towns like Cottonwood (population 6), Hetland (43), Quinn (44) and Cobden (61) support the project, but a large number of towns that signed agreements with the railroad do not even have high schools or hospitals or clinics. In Rochester, the DM&E's tracks run about a block from the Mayo Clinic, and hundreds of its patients could not be evacuated in the event of a hazardous materials spill. According to public records kept by the Federal Railroad Administration, the DM&E has one of the worst safety records of any railroad in America.

Wyoming Livestock Journal April 24, 2006
By: Leland (LJ) Turner, Gillette
Schiffer Bill Should Be Considered
EXCERPT: …Legislature in at least 43 states, including Wyoming, took up some form of eminent domain reform this year – and it’s not hard to see why. In poll after poll, Americans come down strongly in favor of property rights. The American Farm Bureau Federation reported that 83% of the respondents to its poll oppose “the use of eminent domain to further private development initiatives”. The Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll found that “Americans overall cite “private property rights” as the current legal issue they care the most about”. Please join me in calling on your legislator to stand up for private property rights. This is a fundamental, constitutional right. And it’s too important to let it just melt away in the hands of greedy, out-of-control corporations.

Other States

New York Times July 30, 2006 Case Won on Appeal (To Public)
In an eminent domain case, the Supreme Court certainly has not had the last word.

New York Times July 27, 2006 Ohio Supreme Court Rejects Taking of Homes for Project

Columbus, Ohio: AP – July 19, 2006 Pipeline to snake to Ohio from West
EXCERPT: Two energy companies have begun a federal approval process for the $4 billion, 1, 663 mile pipeline that would cross eith states and bring natural gas from the Rocky Mountains to the Midwest. Private property owners in the path of the Rockies Express Pipeline will be paid a one-time fee for the use of their land…” If owner object or can’t agree on a price for the use of their land, the companies could try to access their property through eminent domain.” Utility companies’ eminent domain rights are well-established in the courts, said Jonathan Adler, a law professor at Case Western University. Litigation in these cases is more often about compensation, not land use. “I would expect there to be a large number of landowners who feel the check they get is not worth what they give up.”

Des Moines Register July 15, 2006 Iowa Legislature overrode Governor’s Veto in order to provide greater protection to private property owners in the State.
“This goes beyond eminent domain. This goes beyond government procedure. This is about the people speaking in an overwhelming voice, and this is about us listening to those people,” said Rep. Jeff Kaufmann, a Wilton Republican.

Eminent domain initiative makes Idaho ballot AP, June 30, 2006
An initiative that would require government to pay any Idaho landowner whose property value is reduced by land-use laws has qualified for the November ballot. “The question is, do you have more faith in the marketplace, or do you have more faith in the finest government planner?”, Laird Maxwell told The Spokesman Review. The measure is somewhat similar to an Oregon law that requires government to pay a landowner if a new land-use law or regulation will reduce property value. (The Oregon law was upheld by the state’s Supreme Court in March.)

Wall Street Journal May 31, 2006 Wall Street heats Up Over Pipeline Assets
EXCERPT: Wall Street investment opportunities are sky-rocketing for the interstate pipeline assets because of the profitability of owning the actual pipeline, not only the financial benefit of transporting the product.

Casper Star Tribune February 22, 2006 Oregon upholds property rights law
Salem, Oregon – The Oregon Supreme Court upheld a voter-approved property rights law Tuesday that requires governments to pay landowners for property value losses caused by regulations, or to waive the regulation and let the owner develop the property. Circuit Judge James ruled that the Measure strips the legislature of its power, gives long-time landowners an unfair advantage and fails to give their neighbors a voice in the process. The Supreme Court justices said, however, “we find non of these arguments persuasive.”

New York Times February 21, 2006 States Curbing Right to Seize Private Homes by John M. Broder
In a rare display of unanimity that cuts across partisan and geographic lines, lawmakers in virtually every statehouse across the country are advancing bills and constitutional amendments to limit use of the government’s power of eminent domain to seize private property for economic development purposes. The measures are in direct response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision last June in a landmark property rights case from Connecticut…

Chicago Tribune July 16, 2006
“The pregnant question is why the DM&E should be an island of socialism in a sea of railroad capitalism,” said Frank Wilner, former chief of staff to the vice chairman of the U.S. Surface Transportation Board and now editor of the Journal of Transportation Law, Logistics & Policy.

Denver Post, January 9, 2006 Petition targets eminent domain by Ann Schrader
A petition drive for a state constitutional amendment to limit governments from taking private property kicked off Sunday at the National Western Stock Show booth. Colorado Citizens for Property Rights aim to collect 100,000 signatures to get the issue on the November ballot.