the use of private property without due process of law
and that no private property be taken or damaged by
governmental action through regulatory authority.
Any regulations that could infringe upon private
property rights should not be implemented without
thorough public review and an opportunity for appeal.
Landowners should be fully compensated for direct
takings of their property by a government entity and
for the loss of use of their property as a result of
government-invoked regulations.
We urge a review of all state and local regulations
that encroach on the rights of property owners.
Farm Bureau supports a legislative reevaluation
of the tax increment finance law and accompanying
regulations to ensure that individual private property
rights are not violated.
Acquisitions of easements on private lands, other
than by willing negotiation or by eminent domain, are
in direct violation of the fifth amendment of the United
States Constitution.
Regulatory Taking
The acquisition of partial interests and control
of lands, through rules and regulations deprives the
present and future owners of traditional and inherent
rights of land ownership - being able to utilize private
land for its highest and best use. When the taking
of land or land use becomes necessary for public
purposes, long-term leases or eminent domain should
be utilized.
Public Utility Companies
Public Utility Companies should be limited in
exercise of the right of eminent domain to cases in
which the necessity of taking of private property must
be shown with notice and right of hearing within the
affected area by any property owner affected before
the Public Service Commission. Eminent domain
should not be exercised when a more direct and
economical route could be used through public lands
or along borders of crop fields.
We recommend that the utility companies be
required to negotiate with the landowner regarding
pole and line, especially high voltage line placement
and/or relocation, and provide just compensation for
damages, tax relief, restricted use, inconvenience, and
on-going liability due to their presence. The recording
of a plat by a private landowner showing rightsof-way for ingress and egress shall not constitute
the dedication of rights-of-way for public utility
companies.
Utility companies should notify landowners prior to
entering upon an executed agreement, other than in a
case of an emergency, for clearing rights-of-ways and
other work. Any brush or other vegetation cut away
and any land-disturbing activities must be reclaimed
in such a way that is acceptable to the landowner and
is in accordance with best management practices. The
discontinuance or abandonment of utility services and
discontinuance of utility lines, wire, rails, or pipes,
shall constitute abandonment and forfeiture of such
rights-of-way encumbrance on fee owner should
be removed. If the parcel of land is not used for the
purpose intended after two years, it shall be deemed
excess and the encumbrance shall be dissolved within
one year.
Satellite and Drone Surveillance
WVFB opposes satellite and drone surveillance
without written permission from the landowner.
115. EMINENT DOMAIN
When the taking of land becomes necessary for
public use, the landowner should receive more than
adequate compensation based on the current market
value, which should afford an opportunity to acquire
replacement property of equal value.
Eminent domain should not be permitted as a
substitute for good faith negotiations for easements or
long-term lease agreements for structures that create
servient estate easements subordinate to support
overhead electrical transmission lines, to avoid
compensation for restricted use of land, property taxes
and ongoing liabilities associated with farming land
burdened by such easements.
The power of eminent domain should not be used
for economic development projects, state or national
parks, wildlife refuges, recreational trails or other
recreational projects, and should be used with restraint
in other cases.
We support legislation to prohibit the use of
eminent domain in all cases similar to that sanctioned
by the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Kelo
vs. New London, Connecticut.
The appraised value, legal description, and plat
of any property proposed for acquisition by a public
agency should be made available to the property
owner during the initial phase of negotiations.
Individuals whose land is involved in federal
condemnation proceedings often find their efforts
to seek relief i