A constitutional amendment to strengthen private property rights in Colorado passed its first major hurdle Tuesday, clearing a House committee after ill-fated attempts to make changes.

The measure, which will be on the November ballot if it passes both houses of the General Assembly by two-thirds votes, specifically rules out "economic development" as a reason for the government to condemn private property.

The amendment passed the House State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee on an 11-0 vote.

The proposal, sponsored by Rep. Al White, R-Winter Park, grew out of public concerns over condemnation power some private companies have, including a developer who wants to build a 210-mile toll road through the Plains.

The toll-road issue is addressed in a different bill that passed the House unanimously Tuesday, with one member absent. That proposal eliminates condemnation power by private toll-road companies. The bill is on its way to Gov. Bill Owens, who said he will sign it.

The constitutional amendment also is in response to last year's ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in a case from New London, Conn., that allows governments to take private property and turn it over to redevelopers if the "public purpose" is to increase the tax base.

White's amendment makes it clear: not in Colorado.

"It's not our intent to do away with urban renewal," White said. But he argued against an amendment offered by Rep. Paul Weissmann, chairman of the State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee, to retain elimination of slums and blight as a legitimate use of the power of eminent domain.

White warned that a citizens initiative is identical to his original bill and would move forward if the legislature watered down his proposal.

Organizers of the initiative petition, Colorado Citizens for Property Rights, attended the committee meeting and said they would drop their effort if lawmakers put White's measure on the ballot substantially as it is.

If voters approve it, the government would be able to condemn property only after proving by "clear and convincing evidence" it is needed for a public use. One of the changes the committee allowed was to exempt utility companies, both public and private.

Weissmann, a Louisville Democrat, fought to keep utility companies a part of the requirement, arguing they should have little trouble meeting the new threshold if new utility lines and projects are truly necessary. A bipartisan vote rejected him.

"I'm really getting rolled tonight," Weissmann said after losing on that and on his effort to keep elimination of slum and blight as a public use.

He voted to send the measure to the full House but warned he's not yet among the two-thirds needed to approve it.

Source: Rocky Mountain News