States and Localities Used Eminent Domain for Various Purposes and to Varying Degrees, but the Extent of Eminent Domain Use Is Unknown Due to Limited Data

Officials from national organizations, states, and cities with whom we  spoke cited various common public purposes for which eminent domain  can be or has been used, but the lack of data precludes a determination of  the extent to which eminent domain has been used across the nation. Purposes for which we received examples include the building or  expansion of roads and other transportation-related projects; construction  of state and municipal facilities; and the elimination and prevention of  blight. In addition, officials from some of the national organizations we  contacted, which represent state and local governments, property rights  groups, urban planning, and home builders, also cited remediation of  environmental contamination and economic development. No Aggregate Data Exist on the Number of Instances and Purposes for which Eminent Domain Was Used

The lack of state or national data precluded objective statewide or  national assessments on the use of eminent domain, including (1) how  frequently eminent domain is used, (2) how often private-to-public or  private-to-private transfer of property occurs, or (3) the purposes for  which eminent domain has been used by state and local governments. Federal and State Governments Set Compensation and Relocation Benefits, but Concerns Exist That Some Payment Limits Are Too Low

Land acquisition laws generally require compensation be paid to the  owner of a property that a public authority has acquired, including  acquisitions by eminent domain. The land acquisition process often includes relocation of either the  property owner or residents and businesses located in the property  acquired by the authority; federal and state laws also address the costs  involved in relocation. The project planning stage may begin by identifying the need for a project. This planning process often ends with the approval of a project plan by a  public body. If the  owner does not agree with an authority’s initial offer, then some  authorities may provide additional offers above the appraised value. Property rights groups told us about the negative  effects that the use of eminent domain could have on property owners,  community residents, and businesses, such as the loss of small businesses  or the dispersal of residents who relied upon each other in informal  networks. However, in some cases that we reviewed,  authorities acquired occupied residences and operating businesses to  redevelop an area. Authorities  counter that, under certain circumstances, there is money available to  owners to fight eminent domain. Slightly More Than Half of All State Legislatures Modified Their Eminent Domain Laws

After the Supreme Court’s Kelo decision, 29 states enacted at least one of  three general types of changes to their eminent domain laws from June 23,  2005, through July 31, 2006. The  Department of Transportation provided technical comments, which have  been incorporated where appropriate. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope and Methodology

Congress, in the Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban  Development, the Judiciary, the District of Columbia, and Independent  Agencies Appropriations Act, 2006, mandated that we conduct a  nationwide study on the use of eminent domain. Our objectives were to  provide information on (1) the purposes and extent for which eminent  domain can be and has been used; (2) the process states and select  localities across the country use to acquire land, including by eminent  domain; (3) how the use of eminent domain has affected individuals and  communities in select localities; and (4) the changes state legislatures  made to laws governing the use of eminent domain from June 2005  through July 2006. In addition, we interviewed multiple national  associations of local and state government officials and planning  professionals, national public interest groups, national property rights  groups, and the National Academy of Public Administration to gain their  perspective on past, current, and potential uses of eminent domain. The three categories were: (1)  states that placed restrictions on the use of eminent domain, such as  prohibiting its use to increase property tax revenues, transfer condemned  property to a private entity, or to assemble land for projects that are solely  for economic development; (2) states that established additional  procedural requirements, such as providing further public notice prior to  condemnation; and (3) states that modified definitions for terms related to  eminent domain use, such as blight or blighted property, public use, and  economic development.
Why GAO Did This Study

In the Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary, the District of Columbia, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 2006, Congress mandated that GAO conduct a nationwide study on the use of eminent domain by state and local governments. This report provides information on (1) the purposes for and extent to which eminent domain can be and has been used; (2) the process states and select localities across the country use to acquire land, including by eminent domain; (3) how the use of eminent domain has affected individuals and communities in select localities; and (4) the changes state legislatures made to laws governing the use of eminent domain from June 2005 through July 2006. To address these objectives, GAO reviewed relevant provisions in federal, state, and local laws; conducted site visits to various redevelopment projects where eminent domain was used; and interviewed multiple national associations of local and state government officials and planning professionals, national public interest groups, and national property rights groups to gain their perspectives on the use of eminent domain and its effect on communities and property owners. The Department of Transportation provided technical comments on a draft of this report, which have been incorporated where appropriate.

What GAO Found

Officials from national organizations and state and local governments cited various purposes for which eminent domain can be or has been used, including the building or expansion of transportation-related projects; the elimination and prevention of conditions that are detrimental to the physical, social, and economic well-being of an area; remediation of environmental contamination; and economic development. However, no centralized or aggregate national or state data exist on the use of eminent domain, thereby precluding GAO from any national or statewide assessments of, among other things, how frequently eminent domain is used for private-to-public or private-to-private transfer of property and purposes of these transfers. Multiple laws promulgated from federal, state, and local governments set forth how authorities can acquire land--including by eminent domain--and how compensation for property owners is determined. Some believe payment limits are too low. The initial step in a project that involves land acquisition is the public review and approval by a public body of a project plan, which is followed by a land valuation process during which title studies and appraisals are completed. During the land acquisition stage, authorities often make a formal offer to the owner and attempt to negotiate the purchase of the property. If the authority cannot locate the owner or the parties cannot agree to a price, among other circumstances, the authorities then begin the formal legal proceedings to acquire the property by eminent domain. Finally, once the property is acquired, authorities may provide relocation assistance that may include monetary payments to cover moving expenses. Redevelopment projects for which eminent domain is used affect individuals and communities in a range of ways that cannot be quantified due to a lack of measures and aggregate data. According to authorities, areas selected for redevelopment could have been vacant and abandoned land or those that included residents and operating businesses. Local officials both described and showed us community benefits resulting from redevelopment projects, including additional employment opportunities and housing in an area. Also, property rights groups told us some of the negative effects of eminent domain, such as the dispersal of long-standing communities. Finally, these groups expressed concerns about how authorities implement procedures for using eminent domain, particularly the provision of public notice to owners about the risk of condemnation, and the process for designating an area as blighted. From June 23, 2005, through July 31, 2006, 29 states enacted at least one of the following three general types of changes to their eminent domain laws: (1) restrictions on the use of eminent domain under certain circumstances, (2) additional procedural requirements, and (3) changes that defined or redefined key terms related to eminent domain including public use.