National Eminent Domain Blog

Airport pays for delay

aackerman@sbcglobal.net (Alan Ackerman) — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 15:12:27 -0600

The authority that runs Lehigh Valley International Airport now owes more than $24 million for 632 acres it took more than a decade ago from a developer that planned to build homes and a golf course, a Lehigh County judge has ruled.

A jury in March decided that the Lehigh-Northampton Airport Authority owed WBF Associates $10.4 million for gobbling up the land in 1996. The airport has made only one payment to the company -- $3.15 million on Nov. 2, 2000, according to court records.

So, Judge Carol K. McGinley this month ordered the authority to pay additional delay damages and mortgage interest totaling $16.3 million.

It doesn't stop there. Interest continues to accrue on the award each day until it's paid off. According to McGinley's order, the interest on the money owed for the mortgage is $1,463 per day...

It is amazing that the owner has the fortitude to wait over a decade to get paid. The process of delay can be utilized by a governmental agency to 'wear the owner down', a process completely compromising the constitutional requirement that Just Compensation is to be paid upon the taking of property.

Kentucky American Pipeline

aackerman@sbcglobal.net (Alan Ackerman) — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 15:33:29 -0600

State Journal

Four landowners opposed to the Kentucky American Water pipeline under construction in Franklin County are questioning the company's right to acquire an easement through condemnation.

They're claiming that KAW "a private for-profit water company, does not, under Kentucky law, have the power of eminent domain to condemn easements on private property in Franklin County."

They live along the pipeline route and filed a civil action Friday in Franklin Circuit Court.

The "petition for declaration of rights" " filed by attorney Tom FitzGerald " says the plaintiffs are uncertain as to their right to freely decline KAW's request for an easement and are unsure if KAW has the right to condemn an easement on their property should they decline KAW's request.

FitzGerald said in his search of Kentucky laws, he did not find one that gives KAW the right of eminent domain for the construction project underway.
Kentucky American has said it has the right to condemn property but seldom uses it.

… The pipeline will run one-tenth of a mile in Owen County, 15.3 miles in Franklin County, 10.7 miles in Scott County and 3.8 miles in Fayette County.
The entire project is scheduled for completion in early summer of 2010.

Kentucky American could simply supply the statutory basis for its right to use eminent domain and be done with it. If a statute allows the taking of private property for water transport purposes, Kentucky American Water will have the right to condemn.

Rails Condemnation

aackerman@sbcglobal.net (Alan Ackerman) — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 14:16:46 -0600

KCAU-TV

Former South Dakota Supreme Court Chief Justice Robert Miller is questioning the legality of a 2008 state law aimed at speeding up the eminent domain process.

At a hearing this week, Miller agreed with landowners who want more time to prepare for a hearing on the Dakota, Minnesota and Eastern Railroad's application to condemn land for its proposed $6 billion coal train and rail renovation project...

Since the initiation of the process, the statute granting DM&E the authority to condemn has been attacked and challenged. The taking is for a corporation ostensibly regulated, allowing for the activity even under Michigan’s Hathcock case. However, the limitation on the court to a ninety day resolution raises issues of Due Process not only for the owners, but also the condemnor.

Michigan allows the court only thirty days to come to a finding. Many courts therefore start the process and extend the hearings out until all parties are fairly heard.

Tenants' Rights

aackerman@sbcglobal.net (Alan Ackerman) — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 11:39:51 -0600

South Town Star

With negotiations over the Orland Plaza at an apparent standstill, Orland Park has begun condemnation proceedings against the owners of the village's oldest shopping center.

Orland Plaza owners and the mall's tenants were notified Tuesday after the village board approved an ordinance Monday and filed court paperwork to begin eminent domain proceedings Tuesday.

But both village officials and the property owner say they're happy to return to the bargaining table to negotiate a deal for the land the village wants near 143rd and LaGrange Road. Orland Park wants to extend Jefferson Avenue, Ravinia Avenue and a third street into the new Metra parking lot and development as part of its $100 million Main Street Triangle project.

"It's definitely our intention to keep talking to the property owners," Orland Park's assistant manager Ellen Baer said. "That's our intention to keep moving with the property owner. At some point we have to get the (legal) process going. We would certainly prefer to come to an agreed-upon price with the property owner. They have not countered our offer. They rejected our offer. I couldn't even tell you how far apart we are."

Eminent domain is a government power to seize private property for the public good, with the government having to fairly compensate the property owner. To begin the process both the village and the property owner were to get appraisals of the property to begin negotiating a fair price. George Gee, one of the property owners, said his attorney asked the village for a copy of its appraisal, but didn't receive one. As a result the negotiations stalled.

…While the village is offering relocation packages for the businesses it is leaving negotiations over the leases up to the property owners. Some of the leases including options for renewal extend to 2020. She said each tenant's relocation package would be different. The tenants would receive 90 days notice before they had to move.

All too often, tenants are left with little relief when they and their landlords are condemned. However, many states do have statutes, which at least partially protect tenants. The Uniform Relocation Act is losing its potency, minor as it was, in many states because a project not utilizing Federal funds does not have to follow the Federal act.

Bridge Delays

aackerman@sbcglobal.net (Alan Ackerman) — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 15:27:05 -0600

Detroit News

A legislative impasse continued Tuesday morning over the location and ownership of a proposed second bridge across the Detroit River between Detroit and Windsor, threatening to derail the 2009 state transportation budget and funding for road projects already under construction.

The transportation budget must be approved by the House and Senate before Oct. 1 to avoid a shutdown of Michigan's Department of Transportation and all state highway projects.

Senate Republicans want to add a stipulation to the budget bill that prohibits MDOT from continuing preparations for a public bridge across the Detroit River without legislative approval.

They favor letting the owner of the Ambassador Bridge build a second, privately owned span next to the exiting bridge, using his own money, before deciding whether a publicly owned span also is needed.

When the six-member House-Senate conference committee deadlocked on the bridge issue Tuesday morning, their session was recessed. The conference committee must approve MDOT's proposed $3.6-billion budget before the full House and Senate get a chance to vote on it.

…Because of the stalemate, Transportation Director Kirk Steudle notified contractors that his department may suspend operations on Oct. 1 -- when the current budget expires -- and shut down road projects across the state.

…If lawmakers can resolve their differences, the House-Senate committee could reconvene later Tuesday to approve the transportation budget. It then would have to be passed by both legislative chambers.

The second bridge is needed to continue growth of Michigan and Ontario. Without it, Michigan will become second tier in one more area of commerce. Is that what the citizens of Michigan want? Forget about whether Windsor got the better of the deal, instead move on for increased prosperity.

The Michigan Department of Transportation is not a perfect bureaucracy. But what it does not need is legislators nit picking at its basic decisional inclinations. After all they’re a Transportation Commission which is supposed to act as a watchdog.

Casino Taking

aackerman@sbcglobal.net (Alan Ackerman) — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 10:18:00 -0600

The News Dispatch

"I believe the end is near," Mike Bergerson, attorney for the Michigan City Redevelopment Commission, told commissioners Monday.

He was talking about an end to legal wrangling between the city and the owners of Trail Creek property at the corner of Michigan Boulevard and Eighth Street. The city wants to obtain the property through eminent domain while the owners have said the city should purchase the property at current market values.

Bergerson said both sides will meet with a mediator on Sept. 22 to resolve differences. If an agreement isn't reached, an Oct. 9 hearing date has been set, at which time an appraiser would be appointed, Bergerson said.

"Ultimately, if the parties can't come to a resolution through mediation or other discussion, the court has set a trial on Jan. 8," he said.

Bergerson told commissioners that negotiations are proceeding for the property purchase and relocation of Blocksom, now located on Trail Creek property targeted for redevelopment. He said an Oct. 6 negotiation session could be the last one.

In other business, John Pugh, director of city planning, said results of a market analysis of the Lohan Anderson plan for the city's North End and Trail Creek corridor will be presented at the Oct. 6 Redevelopment Commission meeting. Tracy Cross, a national residential market analysis firm in Schaumburg, Ill., was selected to conduct the analysis.

Eminent domain use to expand casinos seems to be the mode of expansion on the cheap in more than just New Jersey. The Blocksom take is for a casino expansion, be it for a parking building or just accessory amenities to the casino.

Waterfront Taking

aackerman@sbcglobal.net (Alan Ackerman) — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 15:49:26 -0600

WAVY TV 10

On Thursday, there was a rally pitting homeowners against government.

The Johnson's Crab House is in the cross-hairs of Portsmouth City Council, which has voted twice to condemn the property in order to turn it into a public park.

Three generations of Johnsons own and operate the Johnson's Crab House - a place where you pick up live or steamed crabs and go.

For 14 years, the Johnsons have owned this business on Scotts Creek - one that's been on the property through other owners since 1913.

Their Attorney, Joe Waldo, is an eminent domain expert, "It's the old adage. The new guy comes in, and the old guy has to go. That's not right in America."

Eminent domain laws empower the state to take private property for public use.

…The problem now, there's so much bad blood between the two sides, a middle ground may not be reachable.

Again, we have the individual suffering at the unfettered power of eminent domain retained by the local government. The worst thing about owning waterfront property which is allegedly "underutilized" is that the government will show up at the door to place the property to another use via the eminent domain process.

Acquiring Property to Stop Development

aackerman@sbcglobal.net (Alan Ackerman) — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 15:13:58 -0600

Sherwood Voice

Task force member Mary Peyton was interrupted several times by members asking whether she didn’t have a vested interest in the project because she was doing real estate work for another of developer Charles Hinson’s subdivisions.

The civil attitude Maumelle has promoted over the years seemed to go by the wayside for the sharply divided panel. At most city functions, speakers have been discouraged from speaking directly to individual members or audience members, bantering with them and especially from interrupting them.

Apparently opponents to the peninsula development have created a new plan for thwarting its development — condemning the property under eminent domain.

Jeff Van Patten, a Maumelle resident and task force member who led his Manitou Drive neighbors in opposing the plan earlier this year, first proposed the purchase of the peninsula by the city.

With a flip chart to explain his proposal, the North Little Rock developer said he was still opposed to the watered down plan and told task force members he believed that if his neighbors went on record that they won’t give up, the city should condemn the land and buy it…

…Davis said the law allows a city the option to obtain property for a public function and ensures that the owner is paid the fair market value. She said the City Council would have to vote for condemnation of the property and the city would have to file condemnation proceedings in court…

…Van Patten said his idea was to pay the developer a fair market value for the land. Audience members suggested it could be turned into a park, one of the original uses for part of the land. Van Patten’s group opposed this, suggesting it would bring too much traffic through their neighborhood and bring in the wrong kind of people at all hours of the night…

…Peyton said the issue about building in a flood plain would be up to the federal government to determine whether the buildings could withstand a flood. She said she and Maumelle engineer Bob Holloway had seen a lot of developments opposed by residents citing traffic, such as the Osage development. She said Osage opponents suggested the new residents would kidnap babies, sell drugs and do things behind trees…

Nothing is more dangerous than attempting to acquire property on the cusp of development in order to stop the development. The profit is effectively built in by the time the developer has the project plans, much less the approval. Jumping into take the development away, especially to benefit other developers, is not Public Use as generally contemplated by the Constitution.

Pennichuck

aackerman@sbcglobal.net (Alan Ackerman) — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 09:44:17 -0600

Nashua Telegraph

Pennichuck Corp. has named Roland E. Olivier, a longtime corporate attorney, to a new position of general counsel to guide the company in its eminent domain fight with the city of Nashua.

The company said Monday that Olivier also will direct Southwood Corp., a land holding company.

Olivier also said that he looked forward to working again with Pennichuck chief executive Duane Montopoli, who also once worked at Hitchiner.

At the end of July, the state Public Utilities Commission ruled that Nashua could acquire Pennichuck's waterworks for $203 million plus a $40 million mitigation reserve. While the city considers whether it wants the utility at that price, Pennichuck plans to appeal the ruling.

Thus far, Pennichuck has relied on outside counsel. That would still continue, but Olivier said he would provide some in-house guidance as the company makes decisions on the matter down the road.

Olivier said that most activity at Southwood has been put on hold while legal battle with Pennichuck continues but that the subsidiary "would continue to act as an excellent steward for the watershed for the towns that we serve."

Condemnations of utilities need a full time participant outside of the normal corporate governance structure in order to properly defend the business from an aggressive eminent domain action. Forced acquisitions require a full time special assistant to guide and protect the corporation. The guidance of the defense takes a full time employee to guide the work with outside counsel. The issues run the gamut of trial preparation, leadership and protection of the institution. Pennichuck is following the required route in defense of the its perpetuation.One has to wonder why this case was not removed to the federal court.

Asking Judge to Reconsider

aackerman@sbcglobal.net (Alan Ackerman) — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 16:20:48 -0600

Indy Star

Hamilton County officials have decided they want a judge to reconsider his ruling in an eminent domain lawsuit that would provide additional parking in downtown Noblesville.

Superior Court 1 Judge Steve Nation ruled against the county in July in its attempt to obtain land through condemnation of McMillan's Auto Care in the 500 block of Conner Street.

The judge said the county's case was flawed because it failed to show how the property would be used or even why it was needed.

County commissioners filed a legal motion Friday to correct errors in Hughes' ruling. Chuck McMillan, the property's owner, has until Sept. 30 to respond to the motion.

In his initial ruling, Nation noted the county had access to 344 parking spaces leased from Riverview Hospital and said their availability made it less crucial for the county to take over the McMillan property.

-Governmental agencies all too frequently prevail in these uncertain cases of unknown or unjustifiable desire to take property.

Some day, the courts will really review whether the finding of a taking is indeed an error of law or abuse of discretion, a standard that all too often leads to a result where the government is perceived to make no mistake even though there is clearly a mistake.

Clear Fork Valley Storage Field

aackerman@sbcglobal.net (Alan Ackerman) — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 12:29:32 -0600

WMFD TV- Click to see video

A citizens' group formed in the Clear Fork Valley is ready to do battle with a corporate giant.

Representatives of Ohioans Protecting Our Resources and Rights, called on the Richland County Commissioners to outline their disagreement with the Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation.

Butler resident Van Ross Wade says the company has notified residents it wants to enlarge its wheeler gas storage field from the eastern edge of Butler and Millersburg.

No compensation has been offered, citing eminent domain. The grassroots group meets from 7 to 9 p.m. each Thursday at the Clear Fork Adult Center in Butler. The public is welcome to become involved.

-The individuals involved in this newscast apparently are not being fully informed by Columbia Gas as to their rights. Has the utility authority approved this project? Did the owners give up their storage rights? Is a fair attempt to resolve premised upon the principals of just compensation being made? Valuable interests are being taken. The owners should be fairly compensated as part of the process

Detroit Bridge

aackerman@sbcglobal.net (Alan Ackerman) — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:31:51 -0600

Detroit News

The Michigan Court of Appeals on Wednesday confirmed an earlier Wayne County Circuit Court ruling that the owners of the Ambassador Bridge don't have the power to condemn property for access improvements being undertaken through an agreement with the state.

The higher court also cited a rarely heard legal principal, "the Absurd Results Rule," to reverse part of the lower court's ruling, ordering the Detroit International Bridge Company to pay the cost of a decade long legal fight with the owners of a former duty-free store.

Appeals Court panel of judges Patrick Meter, Michael Talbot and Deborah Servitto wrote that the government never intended to extend its powers of condemnation to a private company so the expense the landowner had to bear to fight this unjust action should be born by the bridge company. To force the landowner to pay "would be patently absurd and unthinkable," the judges ruled in citing the Absurd Results Rule, which is applied to avoid results like this that are "manifestly inconsistent with legislative intent."

The bridge company had appealed the Wayne County Circuit Court ruling that threw out a condemnation lawsuit the company brought against the Commodities Export Company to obtain land the bridge owner claimed was needed for access improvements under agreement with the Michigan Department of Transportation. The company claimed the state's powers to condemn property came with the state agreement. Both courts said the power belongs solely to the government.

-The power to take property requires a specific legislative authorization empowering the entity with condemnation authority. Here is a situation in which the court found that there was no statutory language allowing the private Detroit International Bridge Company to acquire by an eminent domain case.

Roundabouts

aackerman@sbcglobal.net (Alan Ackerman) — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 08:17:45 -0600

Hutchinson News

By passage of a resolution, the Reno County Commission took the first step this week toward acquiring land by eminent domain for the future roundabout at 56th Avenue and Plum Street.

Three parcels - on the northwest corner, southwest corner and east of the intersection - are involved. The owners are Reno Western Corporation, Andrew and Elizabeth Klamm, and Robert and LeslyeDill.

Concern about the amount of money offered for the land and the loss of the land figured into owners' reluctance to sell, according to county officials.

The roundabout will be built next year. The heart of the intersection will be shifted west of the current intersection. Without that realignment, a residence on the northeast corner would have been directly affected by the enlarged intersection.

District Court would appoint appraisers to evaluate property values. Either the county or the property owners can appeal the value that emerges.

-Road commissions think taking land for a roundabout is a simple deal. The roundabouts can seriously diminish the remaining value after the partial taking in States, which maintain a section line (mile road) road system, because the four ninety degree corners are already built.

Pinion Canyon

aackerman@sbcglobal.net (Alan Ackerman) — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 08:27:25 -0600

The Pueblo Chieftain

Rep. Mark Udall, D-Colo., is asking Defense Secretary Robert Gates for official assurances that the Army will not use condemnation in trying to acquire another 100,000 acres for the Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site northeast of Trinidad.

Udall sent the letter Friday, just two days after an emotional confrontation between ranchers opposed to the expansion and Army Assistant Secretary Keith Eastin in Trinidad. Eastin hosted the meeting to tell ranchers the Army wanted to deal with "willing sellers only" and would not condemn land in trying to add another 100,000 acres directly south of the current training area.

The ranchers, who have fought the Army's expansion plan for more than two years, walked out of the meeting. They told Eastin that Congress had specifically approved a ban prohibiting the Army from any work on the Pinon Canyon expansion in 2008. A week ago, the House approved legislation that would extend the ban through 2009 as well.

Udall had taken part in an earlier meeting between Eastin and the Las Animas County commissioners and afterward said it was encouraging that the Army was promising to abandon the expansion if they could not find a willing seller to provide another 100,000 acres.

Ranchers fighting the expansion are concerned that if the Army can find a willing seller for some acreage, it could isolate other private land - giving the Army even more reason to use eminent domain to consolidate its holdings. While Eastin repeatedly told the ranchers the Army is not interested in condemning any property, those assurances were met with deep skepticism. One of the long-festering issues in the bitter dispute is the Army's past assurances that it would not seek additional land around Pinon Canyon, some of which was acquired by condemnation in the 1980s.

-The “willing buyer\willing seller” purchase, as the only way the government will purchase property, is a system that assures the inevitable; i.e., the military will be the only purchase in the area. This will be because everyone assumes that the moment there is an emergency, the government will simply acquire the property interests that remain in the area after all the 'voluntary' purchases are made.

Pipeline In Pennsylvania

aackerman@sbcglobal.net (Alan Ackerman) — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 13:30:17 -0600

Altoona Mirror

Spectra has begun work on a proposed natural gas storage field and pipeline system after being approved by the FERC last month.

Shortly thereafter, however, residents who will be affected by the project contacted FERC with concerns, forcing the commission to order a rehearing and consider the issues they brought up.

In the letter, the landowners, who fear a premature use of eminent domain by Spectra, asked for the FERC to use its power to give them information that could be helpful in negotiations with the Texas-based company.

…The landowner letter asked for a response from the FERC before today.

…One of the landowners' largest concerns is that of possible natural gas and oil reserves in a formation known as the Marcellus Shale, which runs through most of the area in question.

If a storage field to hold products from across the nation or other countries is put into place, drilling for reserves that already may be there can not be done because of a possibility of explosion or other dangers to the properties.

Spectra, however, insists that no test wells have been drilled to prove that the Marcellus Shale holds reserves.

-The situation in this article is very similar to the Washington Ten and South Romeo gas storage condemnations in Michigan. The owners are probably too late in the process to stop the taking. Further, FERC is less than totally responsive to objections by individual owners being taken by eminent domain, seeing their decision as a Federal policy rather than local action. However, FERC is not seeking to limit the owners' rights to just compensation. The storage rights do have substantial value, which clearly is not being paid in this particular Pennsylvania case.

Clearville Storage Rights

aackerman@sbcglobal.net (Alan Ackerman) — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 15:06:31 -0600

We Are Central PA

A Texas-based company wants to put natural gas wells in Clearville, Bedford County, and they're trying to use eminent domain to do it. Some property owners there say they're being treated unfairly.

Paul Stup and other several landowners had a lease agreement with a company PG&E. That company drilled on their property and the people got royalty checks from the natural gas produced. In their contract, they had a clause that it would be just drilling and removing not storage.

In storage a company brings in natural gas from outside the area and puts it into the ground like a storage tank.

A couple years ago the PG&E sold the lease agreements to Spectra, a Texas-based natural gas company, and Spectra wants to store natural gas in Bedford County…

Most states will utilize their gas fields for storage and resale. This is extremely profitable for the utility company 'subsidiaries'; which receive hefty stipends for storage and resale during high need months. The owners can be paid fairly when eminent domain dispossess their ownership rights, but only when if the just compensation process is fairly utilized.

Owner's Gas Storage Rights

aackerman@sbcglobal.net (Alan Ackerman) — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 09:04:14 -0600

Mirror Takes

A Texas-based private natural gas company says it is filing for control of several Clearville properties after more than a year of unsuccessful communication and outreach with landowners who do not support its proposed project.

Meanwhile, a major federal regulatory agency is concerned about the landowners' complaints and has filed for additional time and a rehearing addressing the potential project.

Spectra Energy's Steckman Ridge natural gas storage facility was approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in early June.

…One of the major concerns of local residents is the possibility of losing out on royalties from the Marcellus Shale, a long section of sedimentary rock along the East Coast believed to harbor large amounts of untapped natural gas reserves.

If the storage facility is in place, designed to hold imported reserves from across the country or other nations, drilling for local reserves would be impossible.

…Spectra expects the 12-billion cubic foot facility to be completed and in service in April.

The Texas firm attempting to privatize the owner's gas and gas storage rights should carefully assess the economic (acquisition) costs of the project. The owners have clear and succinct rights to compensation. A close reading of the article verifies that such did not apply in this situation.

DTW plans on hold

aackerman@sbcglobal.net (Alan Ackerman) — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 12:45:11 -0600

Detroit News

Detroit Metropolitan Airport is expected to end a bitter battle with Romulus leaders by shelving plans for a controversial fifth parallel runway the city claimed would displace 3,500 residents, close two elementary schools and wipe out nearly 50 businesses.

Both sides expect the agreement to shift the multimillion-dollar runway concept from the airport's original master plan to one they can revisit if growth warrants. The agreement will be voted on Thursday when the Airport Authority Board is expected to meet, according to Taylor Mayor Cameron Priebe, one of five city leaders involved in the project. ...

-This should not come as a surprise. Airport traffic is down dramatically. A fifth runway at Detroit Wayne County Metro Airport would have put the airport a step ahead. However, what would it be a 'step ahead' of? The demand for flights has dwindled, so why threaten condemnation with a proposed eminent domain project?

Fairness in the Judicial Process

aackerman@sbcglobal.net (Alan Ackerman) — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 11:58:39 -0600

STL Today

A St. Louis jury awarded $2.8 million on Friday to the former owner of two acres just north of the Edwards Jones Dome downtown in a fight over eminent domain.

The city's Land Clearance for Redevelopment Agency condemned the two-acre tract after the owner refused sell it in 2005 for $523,000.

The property, a city block bordered by Sixth, Seventh, Carr and Biddle Streets, was included in the "Bottle District" redevelopment plan for a $226 million entertainment destination including a restaurant, concert venue and bowling alley. It has not yet come through.

A commission of three attorneys set the value of the property at $1.2 million. The city's agency paid that price and took control of the land. But the owner, McTayd L.C.C., appealed to a St. Louis jury, which heard evidence last week and reached a unanimous verdict for more than twice as much.

-The decision of the jury on this parcel, bordering on the downtown development is a great example that there can be fairness in the judicial process. This action was tried brilliantly by land owner attorney Robert Denlow of Clayton, Mo.

Pipeline Takings

aackerman@sbcglobal.net (Alan Ackerman) — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 12:34:45 -0600

Star Telegram

When a gas drilling company wants a piece of land for a pipeline, its representative usually shows up at the owner’s door with a letter from the Texas Railroad Commission, stating that the company has a right to take the land.

Pipeline companies can condemn land because they’re considered either utility companies, which serve the public the same as Atmos or TXU, or "common carriers," a legal term that means they carry oil or gas for anyone.

Major gas companies have formed their own pipeline divisions as they seek routes for gathering pipelines to serve the Barnett Shale. These divisions have the power to condemn land. ...

This is an article worth reading. Consider the following questions when reading this article. When is a take effectively a private take? Is there statutory relief needed? What is the constitutional and statutory authority designed to limit “public use” \ pipeline takings?