Florida Lawmakers Aim to Restrict
Property Seizures in New Bill

House lawmakers besieged by Floridians worried about losing their homes voted Thursday to make it harder for local governments to condemn buildings and other private property to make way for development.

The move was in response to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that allowed condemned property to be reused by private developers. Rep. Dwight Stansel, a Democrat, said he had to assure a woman who came to him in tears because she was worried about losing her farm due to the high court's decision.

"From the barbershops to the courthouse, all I've heard was "Please don't let them take our property. .. I would like to know that I could sleep without fear of government intrusion,'" said Rep. Arthenia Joyner, a Tampa Democrat.

The House voted 116-0 for an eminent domain bill that in most cases would prohibit cities, counties and community redevelopment agencies from condemning slums and blighted or other property for economic development purposes such as hotels, office buildings, condominiums and shopping centers. It would not affect the use of eminent domain for traditional public purposes such as roads and utilities.

A proposed constitutional amendment that includes the same restrictions as the bill passed 92-23. All dissenting votes were by Democrats, who hold 35 House seats.

Both measures are in response to the Supreme Court decision that approved condemning homes in New London, Conn., for economic development. Nearly all states have passed or are considering measures to limit or eliminate the taking of property for private redevelopment.

"I think there ought to be a constitutional amendment," said Gov. Jeb Bush. "I don't think people's property should be taken for private use, period."

Rep. Jack Seiler argued that putting the restrictions in the Florida Constitution would make changing them difficult if they result in unexpected consequences.

Passing a constitutional amendment is a time-consuming process. They must be passed by a three-fifths vote of each house and then go on the ballot for approval by voters. Amendments also can be put on the ballot through a petition process, but that takes even longer.

Putting the restrictions into state law first would protect property owners until the Nov. 7 election, when the amendment could be voted on, said Carol Saviak, executive director of the Coalition for Property Rights.

The House bill and amendment include an exception that allows condemnation if reasonably necessary to eliminate an existing threat to public health and safety. The measures also would let governments sell condemned property for private use if they wait at least five years after acquiring it.

Email your comments to rjeditor@dowjones.com.