I feel the need to explain the eminent domain legislation that passed the Legislature in 2006 because I am very much responsible for the final product. The effort was intended to protect property owners from having their property taken by the government and given to another private entity for economic development.
House Bill 4048 originated in the House Judiciary Committee. But after it was churned through three Senate committees, the bill became worse for property owners than taking no action would have been. That is why Speaker of the House Bob Kiss gave me the responsibility of continuing my work finding consensus among stakeholders and with the Senate, in order to create a piece of legislation that would protect property owners from eminent domain takings similar to the Kelo vs. New London case in Connecticut.
Protecting property owners from eminent domain for utility companies was never the goal with this bill. I learned the hard way during Gov. Joe Manchin's January 2005 special session that the Legislature did not have the political will to limit takings for utilities. I was the only legislator to oppose allowing private power plants to benefit from eminent domain takings by the Public Energy Authority.
The Public Energy Authority was revived by Manchin in a bill that expanded and consolidated his power as governor. In committee, for several days, I asked the governor's representatives why they needed to restore the PEA. They always responded that they did not know why.
I believe that the PEA had initially been phased out because of the public outcry that originated in Morgantown years earlier due to the PEA involvement in the Beechurst power plant. Our local delegation knew this bill would restore the PEA and allow private power plants the ability to benefit from taking people's property. Despite this, they voted for the governor's bill. I was the only "no" vote.
Clearly, in 2005, the Legislature condoned broad authority for eminent domain takings for utilities! A year later, I was in charge of creating a final draft of HB 4048 that was acceptable to the Senate, House of Delegates, and opposing stakeholders. Addressing utilities in that bill would have meant sudden death for the legislation intended to protect private property from being taken for economic development. It was miraculous to find consensus among the remaining powerful opponents.
I helped create a final piece of legislation, though not the perfection I wished for, was worth voting for passage. I could have gotten greater political mileage out of the issue if the bill had failed or was a bad piece of legislation and I opposed it. I chose doing the right thing for West Virginia property owners.
Cindy Frich
Morgantown