Bruce Woodbury, Clark County commissioner, right, and Jacob Snow, with the Clark County Regional Transportation Commission, appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday in Carson City. Woodbury testified in favor of a compromise plan to protect property owners from eminent domain proceedings. Forty of 42 Assembly members signed on to the compromise resolution. Photo by Cathleen Allison/Special to the Review-Journal

CARSON CITY -- A compromise on eminent domain restrictions -- reached between government officials and property rights activists -- is embodied in an Assembly resolution, according to testimony before a panel of lawmakers Wednesday.

The Senate Judiciary Committee learned that Assembly Joint Resolution 3 is the result of an agreement between supporters of PISTOL, which received strong support from voters in November, and Clark County Commissioner Bruce Woodbury, who represented local government concerns on the proposal.

The Assembly resolution would have to be passed by the Legislature twice, this year and again in 2009, and then go to voters in 2010, before it could take effect.

PISTOL, or the People's Initiative to Stop the Taking of Our Land, would have to pass a second time in 2008 before it could take effect.

Woodbury and Las Vegas eminent domain attorney Kermitt Waters, one of the backers of PISTOL, which was Question 2 on the November ballot, announced last month an agreement to support a new, alternative constitutional amendment. Both Woodbury and Waters endorsed the compromise to the Senate panel.

The compromise measure adds definitions for legitimate public uses and allows eminent domain's use 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 if the use is legal and legitimate.

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

The Assembly resolution would trump a PISTOL requirement that any seized land be used for the intended purpose within five years. The amendment allows 15 years.

Forty of 42 Assembly members have signed on to the compromise in the Assembly resolution.

Regional planners and road officials were worried that without the alternative compromise to PISTOL, the measure would drive up the cost of road work and cripple such projects throughout the state.

Assemblyman Joe Hardy, R-Boulder City, the main sponsor of Assembly Joint Resolution 3, said the plan is to make changes to state law this session to duplicate provisions of the constitutional amendment. That would immediately provide protections to property owners, he said.

The joint resolution, if approved by voters in 2010, would put the same protections in the state constitution, Hardy said.

"Compromise is the key word. We recognize there were issues on different sides and we came together."

Assembly Joint Resolution 3 is a refinement of the PISTOL proposal, he said. It has not yet been scheduled for a hearing.

The Senate Judiciary Committee heard testimony on three separate Senate bills dealing with eminent domain reform, as well as background on the decision that prompted PISTOL: the 2005 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Kelo v. New London.

The government in New London, Conn., was allowed to force out 15 homeowners who had refused to sell their lots to allow for construction of office buildings and housing by a pharmaceutical company.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Raggio, R-Reno, told the committee that his measure, Senate Bill 85, is intended only to foster a discussion and bring about a compromise. It is backed by every senator.

State and local government officials are concerned PISTOL could hurt their ability to pursue important public works and transportation projects, he said.

Raggio said he supports the primary intent of PISTOL, which is to prohibit the taking of private land for economic development for the benefit of another private entity.

But he suggested a couple of changes to the Assembly Joint Resolution 3 compromise, such as letting airports and university systems that acquire private property to allow for some commercial leases within future building projects.

Local governments should also be able to deal with issues of blight, Raggio said.

Waters said he will support putting the Assembly resolution on the ballot in 2010 to supersede PISTOL, but he will push for voter approval of PISTOL in 2008 to keep pressure on for the compromise. There is nothing wrong with PISTOL but government bureaucrats overreacted, he said.

"PISTOL is not going to slow down development one iota," Waters said.

Even so, Waters said, he has agreed to the compromise in the Assembly resolution. But the compromise is delicate and will not likely withstand much change by lawmakers, he said.

Woodbury said he is hopeful the compromise will be carried out by the Legislature, where he said there is strong support.

"We have to be careful that we don't let it fall apart," Woodbury said.