SB 7 – Eminent Domain Passes Senate

Filed in Delaware by on January 28, 2009

SB7 – AN ACT TO AMEND TITLES 10 AND 29 OF THE DELAWARE CODE RELATING TO REAL PROPERTY ACQUISITION AND EMINENT DOMAIN passed the Delaware State Senate yesterday with a 19 voting yes, 1 not voting and 1 voting absent. The two amendments passed 20 yes, 1 absent.

According to The News Journal, Wilmington City Economic Director Joe Di Pinto is a little pissed, but Senator Venables said it best when trying to work out a compromise, “I tried to talk with business representatives about compromise amendments, but we always came back to [the impression] that the government was taking your property for public use.”

WDEL reports that a city attorney said that eminent domain was only a lever in the process and won’t be used. Well, the attorney got that right because now the city can’t use eminent domain to further the ends of developers on the Christina River Waterfront in Wilmington. (Note, there was a video at the WDEL site, but I couldn’t get it to work on my Mac).

Gov. Markell is reported to say that he will sign the bill if it gets to his desk.

Tags:

About the Author ()

A Dad, a husband and a data guru

Comments (13)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. jason330 says:

    Good.

  2. I wonder if Matt Denn feels a little foolish now?

  3. Unstable Isotope says:

    Interesting twists and turns on this bill.

  4. jason330 says:

    Mike,

    Why would he?

    As far as Senate Bill 7 is concerned, if it comes up for a vote as currently written and there is a 10-10 tie, I’ll vote for it.

    Are we really at the point where Democrats can’t say ANYTHING that allows for the fact that some issues have many facets without it being twisted into a wingnut talking point?

  5. Jason,

    It’s my belief that this bill was going to pass with minimal obstruction (at least as the Senators were concerned…not so much the awful developers), which means Matt Denn’s comments yesterday are now totally irrelevant. Denn essentially added an asterisk to the whole ED debate by saying property rights are great — except when we’re in a shitty economy and we need more development to create more jobs.

    My point was that seeing how this bill passed so easily with no resistance (aside from, I hear, a huffy Harris McDowell not voting), why did Denn feel the comment was needed at all? If anything, it’s just a bit of egg on his face, IMO.

  6. anonone says:

    Are we really at the point where Democrats can’t say ANYTHING that allows for the fact that some issues have many facets without it being twisted into a wingnut talking point?

    Uh, we passed that point at least 10 years ago.

  7. Eminent Domain = ED = Erectyle Dysfunction

    The dysfunction in not being able to erect the buildings they want to generate revenue…

    Ha ha, I kill me. Carry on.

  8. I see it as Denn was just “keeping it real” so to speak, showing us what the problem is. He didn’t come right out and say this was what he wanted to happen, he said that this is what is happening.

    Don’t shoot the messenger.

  9. Susan Regis Collins says:

    Hold your horses!

    It still has to get out of the House w/o some yahoo(s) trying to pin amendments to it. You don’t think the city is going to take this w/o a fight, do you? They want to continue blowing money on the White Elephant the Riverfront Development Corp. built(city residents saw this coming years ago). Those boys at RDC must be really good talkers to scam Buccini-Pollen Group to invest so heavily down there.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again:

    It is time to get rid of Mike Purzycki…..he has had years and multi-millions and nothing to show for it. Just like Bill Wier (lower Market dev.) he is over rated and over paid.

    This bill needs serious tending till it gets to the governor’s desk and is signed.

  10. Geezer says:

    Oh, well, you’ve said it, that finishes it. Too bad your own contention — that BPG was sold a pig in a poke — actually undermines your point.

    I’d like to know how all those office buildings amount to “nothing to show for it.” I don’t like the RDC, but at least make cogent criticisms, not nonsensical ones.

    Just for the sake of accuracy, Buccini-Pollin first entered the city developing property far less advantageous than the Riverfront.

  11. PI says:

    Jason,

    “Why would he?

    As far as Senate Bill 7 is concerned, if it comes up for a vote as currently written and there is a 10-10 tie, I’ll vote for it. ”

    According to Ed Osborne, that would not have mattered…the vote needed 14 in favor…not a simple majority. I don’t know why it needed a super majority though.

  12. nemski says:

    PI, Denn corrected himself which you can read here, http://delawareliberal.net//2009/01/27/letter-to-the-lt-gov/

  13. whinging says:

    BPG should be encouraged to continue their triangle development but one that is trimmed to find room for the Osbourne’s shop and other productive business to stay put. It is a city of mixed uses afterall.