| Eminent Domain Reforms Passed 1999 through 2007 |
Virginia's Eminent Domain reform movement began in 1999 with passage of SJ 271 which established
a joint bi-partisan committee to study "the fairness of compensation when land is taken by eminent
domain and make recommendations to the General Assembly." Initially the committee was restricted to
examining eminent domain's use by electric utilities but because of great interest and concern by
legislators and the public, the parameters were expanded to include an examination of Virginia's
Eminent Domain Code.
The Committee brought in nationally recognized experts to examine Virginia's Law and held public
hearings throughout the state which were attended by over 700 people. For several days property
owners testified about abuses they had suffered under Virginia's system. They urged the committee to
recommend legislation to correct specific abuses they had suffered and were deeply concerned that
there was no remedy under the law which assured fair market value, even if they challenged the
condemning authority in court and proved the offer they had received was unfair. The experts who
examined Virginia's Law also found this to be a primary weakness in Virginia's Law.
Over the course of two years the committee recommended and the General Assembly passed 4 bills
which resulted in 19 changes to Virginia's eminent domain law creating a fairer process for property
owners. Two of the bills were particularly important. The first required condemning authorities to provide
property owners with a copy of the appraisal they used to determine the amount they offered to purchase
the property. The second applied provisions of the 1972 Federal Uniform Relocation Act to eminent
domain takings in Virginia. However, because of well funded, relentless lobbying for the condemning
authorities the committee never recommended the two changes identified by both Virginia property
owners and national experts as necessary to assure fair treatment and "just compensation."
Legisltion, Still Needed
Condemnor Funded Initial Appraisal Property owners who find themselves in the path of an eminent
domain project must know the value of their property before they begin negotiations with the condemning
authority. But this is a non-compensable expense incurred by every property owner facing eminent
domain. These appraisals can run into the thousands of dollars, yet at minimum, they are essential
before a property owner has adequate information to negotiate with an experienced, knowledgeable
representative for the condemning authority who does this on a regular basis. Though property owners
who challenge a condemning authority in court can be reimbursed for their appraisal if they win, the vast
majority of property owners who have done nothing wrong except happen to live in an area government
wants, must pay this out of their own pocket. There are states that allow the property owner to hire an
appraiser of their choice and require the condemning authority to reimburse the reasonable costs of this
appraisal.
Reimbursement of Property Owner Litigation Expenses Today when property owners receive a low
offer from a condemning authority they have 2 options, neither of which is fair. They can accept the low
offer or they can challenge the condemning authority in court. However, even if they win in court, proving
the condemning authority was wrong, and are awarded fair market value or "just compensation" they still
lose because court costs, which include their attorney fees of 33% and other miscellaneous cost, can
take up to 50% of any benefit they gained by going to court. So under current Virginia Law, even if they
win they lose. When property owners realize that they can not win even by enduring a lengthy, stress
filled court battle, many just accept the low offer. This is of course a real advantage of the condemnors.
In 2005 the General Assembly passed legislation giving the judge discretion to order condemning
authorities to reimburse the property owners for the testimony of three experts 's. Attorney fees and other
costs are still not included. Until they are, property owners will be lucky to keep 50% of any benefit
gained by going to court. This is unfair and does not meet the Constitutional requirement of "just
compensation."
In 17 other states when a property owner proves the condemning authority's offer was low and unfair,
the condemning authority is automatically required or can be ordered by the court to reimburse all of the
property owner's litigation expenses, including attorney fees. More than any other change, this reform
would create a fairer system because it would encourage condemning authority to offer a fair price
initially and it would assure "just compensation" to those who receive a low offer, are forced into court
and prove the condemnor wrong.
Virginia's Law will not be fair until reimbursement is for the full amount of court costs and all property
owners are reimbursed for their initial appraisal.
a joint bi-partisan committee to study "the fairness of compensation when land is taken by eminent
domain and make recommendations to the General Assembly." Initially the committee was restricted to
examining eminent domain's use by electric utilities but because of great interest and concern by
legislators and the public, the parameters were expanded to include an examination of Virginia's
Eminent Domain Code.
The Committee brought in nationally recognized experts to examine Virginia's Law and held public
hearings throughout the state which were attended by over 700 people. For several days property
owners testified about abuses they had suffered under Virginia's system. They urged the committee to
recommend legislation to correct specific abuses they had suffered and were deeply concerned that
there was no remedy under the law which assured fair market value, even if they challenged the
condemning authority in court and proved the offer they had received was unfair. The experts who
examined Virginia's Law also found this to be a primary weakness in Virginia's Law.
Over the course of two years the committee recommended and the General Assembly passed 4 bills
which resulted in 19 changes to Virginia's eminent domain law creating a fairer process for property
owners. Two of the bills were particularly important. The first required condemning authorities to provide
property owners with a copy of the appraisal they used to determine the amount they offered to purchase
the property. The second applied provisions of the 1972 Federal Uniform Relocation Act to eminent
domain takings in Virginia. However, because of well funded, relentless lobbying for the condemning
authorities the committee never recommended the two changes identified by both Virginia property
owners and national experts as necessary to assure fair treatment and "just compensation."
Legisltion, Still Needed
Condemnor Funded Initial Appraisal Property owners who find themselves in the path of an eminent
domain project must know the value of their property before they begin negotiations with the condemning
authority. But this is a non-compensable expense incurred by every property owner facing eminent
domain. These appraisals can run into the thousands of dollars, yet at minimum, they are essential
before a property owner has adequate information to negotiate with an experienced, knowledgeable
representative for the condemning authority who does this on a regular basis. Though property owners
who challenge a condemning authority in court can be reimbursed for their appraisal if they win, the vast
majority of property owners who have done nothing wrong except happen to live in an area government
wants, must pay this out of their own pocket. There are states that allow the property owner to hire an
appraiser of their choice and require the condemning authority to reimburse the reasonable costs of this
appraisal.
Reimbursement of Property Owner Litigation Expenses Today when property owners receive a low
offer from a condemning authority they have 2 options, neither of which is fair. They can accept the low
offer or they can challenge the condemning authority in court. However, even if they win in court, proving
the condemning authority was wrong, and are awarded fair market value or "just compensation" they still
lose because court costs, which include their attorney fees of 33% and other miscellaneous cost, can
take up to 50% of any benefit they gained by going to court. So under current Virginia Law, even if they
win they lose. When property owners realize that they can not win even by enduring a lengthy, stress
filled court battle, many just accept the low offer. This is of course a real advantage of the condemnors.
In 2005 the General Assembly passed legislation giving the judge discretion to order condemning
authorities to reimburse the property owners for the testimony of three experts 's. Attorney fees and other
costs are still not included. Until they are, property owners will be lucky to keep 50% of any benefit
gained by going to court. This is unfair and does not meet the Constitutional requirement of "just
compensation."
In 17 other states when a property owner proves the condemning authority's offer was low and unfair,
the condemning authority is automatically required or can be ordered by the court to reimburse all of the
property owner's litigation expenses, including attorney fees. More than any other change, this reform
would create a fairer system because it would encourage condemning authority to offer a fair price
initially and it would assure "just compensation" to those who receive a low offer, are forced into court
and prove the condemnor wrong.
Virginia's Law will not be fair until reimbursement is for the full amount of court costs and all property
owners are reimbursed for their initial appraisal.
| Review Reforms Passed Between 2000 & 2007 Click Links below |
| 2007 Legislation Enacted: Impacts Title 25: Eminent Domain |
| 2006 Legislation Enacted: Impacts Title 25: Eminent Domain |
| 2005 Legislation Enacted Impacts Title 25: Eminent Domain |
| 2004 Legislation Enacted Impacts Title 25: Eminent Domain Governing Localities, VDOT |
| 2003 Legislation Enacted Impacts Title 25: Eminent Domain |
| 2002 Legislation Enacted Impacts Title 25: Eminent Domain |
| 2001 Legislation Enacted Impacts Redevelopment Housing Authorities and Public Utilities |
| 2000 Legislation Enacted Impacts Title 25: Eminent Domain |
| The Virginia Property Rights Coalition Dedicated to Reform of Virginia's Eminent Domain Law |
| Web Master Click here to report issues involving the site |
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
| One of the principal purposes of the Takings Clause is to bar government from forcing some people to bare public burdens, which in all fairness and justice, should be borne by the public as a whole. A desire to improve the public condition does not justify circumventing the "constitutional way " of paying for what the government wants. If a government wants property for the public good, the public must pay for the property. Chief Justice W. Rehnquist |