LBI and Ballotpedia are hiring.
Check out available positions HERE!




North Dakota Taking of Private Property, Measure 2 (2006)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Voting on Property
Property.jpg
Ballot Measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot

Contents

North Dakota Measure 2, pertaining to the Taking of Private Property, was on the November 7, 2006 ballot in North Dakota as an initiated constitutional amendment, where it was approved.[1]

Measure 2 amended Section 16 of Article I of the North Dakota Constitution to provide that the taking of private property for public use or purpose does not include public economic development benefits and that private property could not be taken for private benefit unless necessary for conducting a common carrier or utility business.

The proposal was one of 12 eminent domain-related ballot measures throughout the country on the 2006 ballot.

Election results

Measure 2
ResultVotesPercentage
Approveda Yes 137,660 67.49%
No66,30232.51%

Supporters

A group called "Citizens to Restrict Eminent Domain" raised $13,325 for their campaign.

"This is great news for property owners and great news for what we believe to be the American way," Heitkamp said of the measure's success Tuesday.

"The eminent domain issue was a no-brainer," said Bob Hellekson, 72, of Bismarck. "Yes, all the way." [2]

Opponents

Jerald Hjelmstad, assistant director of the North Dakota League of Cities, said the eminent domain vote was "disappointing, but not surprising." He said his group opposed the eminent domain measure because it would hurt cities in efforts to clean up blighted areas.

"It was an uphill battle," he said. "Local governments will just have to adjust accordingly and try to keep the negative consequences to a minimum."[3]

Don Dabbert, Association of Builders President against Measure 2.

"I encourage the people of North Dakota to look closely at Measure No. 2, which would restrict the use of eminent domain. If passed, this law would negatively affect citizens in our state. It reaches far beyond the question of using eminent domain for economic development purposes. It would discourage urban renewal projects and hamper community efforts to improve our neighborhoods." [4]

See also

External links

BallotpediaAvatar bigger.png
Suggest a link

References

Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Encyclopedia
Calendars
Get Involved
Donate
Toolbox