TBD - Eminent Domain

[NOTE: Nevada law requires that a constitutional amendment be passed in two consecutive general elections before it becomes effective. Therefore, because this amendment passed in November 2006, it must appear on the ballot again for approval in November 2008 before it takes effect.] The proposed amendment, if passed, would create a new section within Article 1 of the Nevada Constitution. The amendment provides that the transfer of property taken in an eminent domain action from one private party to another private party would not be considered taken for a public use. The State or its political subdivisions or agencies would not be allowed to occupy property taken in an eminent domain action until the government provides a property owner with all government property appraisals. The government would have the burden to prove that any property taken was taken for a public use. If property is taken by the State or its political subdivisions or agencies for a public use, the property must be valued at its highest and best use. In an eminent domain action, just compensation would be considered a sum of money that puts a property owner in the same position as if the property had not been taken, and includes compounded interest and reasonable costs and expenses. Fair market value, for eminent domain purposes, would be defined as the "highest price the property would bring on the open market." If property taken in an eminent domain proceeding is not used for the purpose the property was taken for within five years, the original property owner would be able to reclaim the property upon repayment of the original purchase price. FISCAL NOTE FINANCIAL IMPACT - CANNOT BE DETERMINED Question 2 proposes to amend Article 1 of Nevada's Constitution regarding the determination of public use of property, payment for private property taken under eminent domain actions, and the rights of property owners in eminent domain actions. The provisions of Question 2 cannot become effective until after the 200