Quantcast
Home manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed

sponsored by
News


RTC joins PISTOL lawsuit

The Regional Transportation Commission has joined a lawsuit to halt a state constitutional amendment designed to restrict the government's use of eminent domain laws to take private lands.

Transportation officials are concerned the amendment might interfere with future transportation projects.


Most Popular Stories
  • Traffic accident claims life of longtime, successful lawyer
  • NORM: Buchanan called 'larger than life'
  • Study urges Nevada and nine other states to take care in handling economy
  • Police serve search warrant at Hell's Angels clubhouse
  • Police serve search warrant at Hell's Angels clubhouse
  • THE FACES OF JOBLESSNESS: Family had to get help for first time
  • Second person dies after being restrained by police
  • Cada wins World Series of Poker championship
  • Cada wins World Series of Poker championship
  • NORM: Agassi reveals bad vibes with Shields
  • North Las Vegas motorcyclist killed in collision while racing, police say
  • Las Vegas police make arrest in 2008 slaying




  • PISTOL, or the People's Initiative to Stop the Taking of Our Land, passed for the second time on Nov. 4, receiving almost 61 percent approval from voters and making it an official amendment to the state constitution.

    But the passage of PISTOL conflicts with state legislation passed during the 2007 session after a compromise was reached between transportation officials and PISTOL advocates. The Legislature must pass the compromise version again during the 2009 session and voters must approve the initiative in 2010 for it to become a constitutional amendment and supersede PISTOL.

    State and local government officials are concerned that PISTOL could hurt their ability to pursue transportation and public works projects.

    Transportation Commissioner Bruce Woodbury said legal confusion would ensue if the PISTOL amendment goes into effect while state legislators are still working to pass the compromise version a second time.

    Woodbury said the lawsuit would put PISTOL on hold until the alternative version becomes a constitutional amendment.

    The compromise legislation adds definitions for legitimate public uses and allows the use of eminent domain in private projects being done for a public good, such as a utility or road. Property owners would be entitled to a court case to decide whether the use is legal and legitimate.

    It also sets guidelines on how to define just compensation to property owners whose land is taken by governments.

    The compromise legislation extends the PISTOL requirement that any seized land be used for the intended purpose from within five to 15 years.

    The transportation commission unanimously approved the lawsuit at Thursday's meeting.

    Meanwhile, PISTOL backer and eminent domain attorney Kermitt Waters said he will fight the lawsuit. "To me, it doesn't make sense; there's nothing wrong with PISTOL," he said.

    Waters said he believes the Legislature won't move forward with the compromise legislation if PISTOL isn't implemented.

    Contact reporter Francis McCabe at fmccabe@reviewjournal.com or 702-387-2904.

    Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

    Leave Your Comment 5 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

    Report abuse

    paul wrote on November 18, 2008 08:37 PM: Of course there is a whole community of corrupt officials, backed by corrupt judges, corrupt prosecutors, and we are defended by a public defenders office, that if not corrupt, is borderline, all backed by corrupt politicians that want money, and will take your land for their friends, so they can get "donations" for their pensions.

    This is Las Vegas, and possibly every major city in the US. Its about time that people start paying attention to the corrupt people that we allow in any office.


    Report abuse

    the constitution is the highest law of the land wrote on November 18, 2008 05:45 PM: we finally got rid of woodbury and now suddenly he is in authority to strip the constitution from the citizens of nevada, so the leavitts and other private companies can take personal property away from folks, so we can end up with toll roads ,and pay to use public lands wake up people !! .........
    this stinks like a mormon financial move of catastrophic magnitude
    why would any voter pick this scam over their constitutional rights ??????
    this is so beyond double tax it seems like warrens jeffs came up with the package


    Report abuse

    Dennis#1 wrote on November 18, 2008 01:55 PM: ths-

    Do you ever have it wrong on this one bucko! When it comes to "masses of the ignorance" and you find eminent domain as part of the subject matter, the private citizens will get screwed almost every time.

    Are those elected officials of the same caliber that dismantled the banking laws in the mid 1990's? Perhaps the same as those who recently gave away $300 billion for those loosers who bought homes they couldnt afford on income the didnt have? Or worse yet, the same pols who gave away $700B to a bureaucrat to give to his buddies on wall street without controls, guidelines or restrictions?

    I spent too many years inside watching private citizens without friends at City Hall get the royal whammy to not have this go into effect.

    The opponents lied on their position in 2006 so I sure dont expect them to tell the truth in 2008.

    If the public agencies can't do their planning before stealing property and then not get started on a project in 5 years after they started stealing property, fire them all and get someone who can. Those bozos would not last in private business where responsibility is a key job performance element.


    Report abuse

    ths wrote on November 18, 2008 07:44 AM: While people say we should have the right to add laws we need to remember that we elect people to attempt to make the best choices for us.

    Otherwise 'Masses of the Ignorance' often wins out as it did in this instance.

    While I believe restraints need to be put onto eminent domain that Waters wrote a law that was wrongly balanced the other way now. I believe if Waters wants to do what is right he should run for a government position instead of attempting to write laws to add to the constitution. Remember he is a lawyer and often many of his ballot initiatives lean towards the law practice advantage and not for the citizens. Often people don't fully read the entire law and even if they do don't fully understand how they might be interpreted.

    This is often why people need to look at electing officials that don't just have good sound bites, but a backbone to make the tough but correct choices to better everyone.


    Report abuse

    0u812 wrote on November 18, 2008 06:32 AM: Wow, We the People of the United States of America have no right to vote a law in, yet a corrupt system can throw out all rights voted by the people. Accept the facts that the corruption is no longer tolerable. We the People Have a voice and that is the Vote, accept it. 61% have voted yes adjust your plans around our voice of vote.