Sen. Gallegos: University officials " said they're OK with it but I'm not OK with it.”
Filibuster stalls passage of eminent domain bill
Lisa Sandberg/Austin Bureau
San Antonio Express-News
Copyright 2005
AUSTIN — Plans for the Senate to consider a bill to restrict government's power of eminent domain were put on hold this morning when an opponent of the bill, Sen. Mario Gallegos Jr., D-Houston, began a two-hour filibuster.
“As long as I can stand, I'm going to filibuster this bill,” Gallegos informed his colleagues. Shortly after, at 10:25 a.m., he began reading from a document.
Sen. Kyle Janek, R-Houston, authored the bill, which would bar government from seizing land strictly for commercial purposes.
The filibuster ended two hours later when Gallegos paused, conferred with Senate leaders, then relinquished the floor.
Gallegos later said he stopped when it became clear the Senate lacked a quorum for a vote.
“It's easier for me to walk off the floor and kill the bill than to continue the filibuster,” he said.
But Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst rescheduled debate for 4 p.m. this afternoon, and Senate tradition doesn't allow a filibuster to resume, once broken.
Gallegos said he feared that the bill could “handcuff” downtown universities that want to expand their campuses. An amendment to the bill, added by the House, specifically restricts universities from seizing property to build hotels.
He acknowledged that his concern about the amendment regarding hotels for universities was not shared by officials at the University of Houston, which falls within his district.
University officials “said they're OK with it but I'm not OK with it,” he said.
Janek's legislation was prompted by a U.S. Supreme Court decision in June that broadened the eminent domain powers of government entities but left the door open for states to set the rules. Specifically, the ruling said the city of New London, Conn., was within its rights to seize private homes so a private developer could build a biomedical research facility.
The ruling triggered a backlash in several states and in Congress. Delaware and Alabama have already passed laws limiting eminent domain powers.
In Texas, while Janek's Senate Bill 7 has enjoyed broad support — the House passed it last week by a vote of 140 to1 — it has not been without critics.
Rep. Will Hartnett, R-Dallas, who cast the sole House vote against it, said he was concerned that the bill would be costly to taxpayers. He said most eminent domain proceedings involve owners of commercial properties and many of them might be encouraged to go to court to demand unjust compensation.
Under the bill, governments could still seize property for “public use,” though what constitutes “public use” is left undefined. The bill specifically mentions railroads, airports, ports, waste disposal projects, libraries and museums as legitimate uses of eminent domain.
The bill calls for an interim study to help lawmakers identify ways to improve upon the legislation in the next regular session that begins in 2007.
lsandberg@express-news.net
San Antonio Express-News: www.mysanantonio.com
Lisa Sandberg/Austin Bureau
San Antonio Express-News
Copyright 2005
AUSTIN — Plans for the Senate to consider a bill to restrict government's power of eminent domain were put on hold this morning when an opponent of the bill, Sen. Mario Gallegos Jr., D-Houston, began a two-hour filibuster.
“As long as I can stand, I'm going to filibuster this bill,” Gallegos informed his colleagues. Shortly after, at 10:25 a.m., he began reading from a document.
Sen. Kyle Janek, R-Houston, authored the bill, which would bar government from seizing land strictly for commercial purposes.
The filibuster ended two hours later when Gallegos paused, conferred with Senate leaders, then relinquished the floor.
Gallegos later said he stopped when it became clear the Senate lacked a quorum for a vote.
“It's easier for me to walk off the floor and kill the bill than to continue the filibuster,” he said.
But Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst rescheduled debate for 4 p.m. this afternoon, and Senate tradition doesn't allow a filibuster to resume, once broken.
Gallegos said he feared that the bill could “handcuff” downtown universities that want to expand their campuses. An amendment to the bill, added by the House, specifically restricts universities from seizing property to build hotels.
He acknowledged that his concern about the amendment regarding hotels for universities was not shared by officials at the University of Houston, which falls within his district.
University officials “said they're OK with it but I'm not OK with it,” he said.
Janek's legislation was prompted by a U.S. Supreme Court decision in June that broadened the eminent domain powers of government entities but left the door open for states to set the rules. Specifically, the ruling said the city of New London, Conn., was within its rights to seize private homes so a private developer could build a biomedical research facility.
The ruling triggered a backlash in several states and in Congress. Delaware and Alabama have already passed laws limiting eminent domain powers.
In Texas, while Janek's Senate Bill 7 has enjoyed broad support — the House passed it last week by a vote of 140 to1 — it has not been without critics.
Rep. Will Hartnett, R-Dallas, who cast the sole House vote against it, said he was concerned that the bill would be costly to taxpayers. He said most eminent domain proceedings involve owners of commercial properties and many of them might be encouraged to go to court to demand unjust compensation.
Under the bill, governments could still seize property for “public use,” though what constitutes “public use” is left undefined. The bill specifically mentions railroads, airports, ports, waste disposal projects, libraries and museums as legitimate uses of eminent domain.
The bill calls for an interim study to help lawmakers identify ways to improve upon the legislation in the next regular session that begins in 2007.
lsandberg@express-news.net
San Antonio Express-News:
posted by Porkus Maximus Tex: at Tuesday, August 16, 2005
<< Home