Although I have been a Nebraska State Senator for the past six years, I had never introduced a bill that was referenced to the Judiciary Committee until this year. This year I introduced LB 394 which had a public hearing last week before the Judiciary Committee, so today I would like to tell you about that bill.

LB 394 is a bill that changes our laws about eminent domain. Eminent domain is the law which allows governmental entities to seize private lands for public use. Currently, Nebraska’s laws for eminent domain favor those governmental entities which use eminent domain and discriminate against those landowners who do not want the government to take their lands away from them. My bill institutes fairness in the way that eminent domain is used for taking private property in our state.

Agricultural lands differ from residential properties in that agricultural lands are used to generate income for the landowner. Because agricultural lands represent the bread-and-butter income for those who own them, the future loss of income to the farmer or the rancher needs to be taken into consideration when valuing these properties for eminent domain. Current law says that properties seized by eminent domain are required to reimburse the landowner at the fair market value of the land, but the fair market value does not take into consideration the future loss of income to the farmer or the rancher.

In order to better compensate for the future loss of incomes to farmers and ranchers for properties taken by eminent domain, my bill would require that such properties be reimbursed to the landowners at twice the fair market value of the agricultural land. To be fair, it could be further argued that twice the fair market value does not adequately compensate farmers and ranchers for the long-term loss of their agricultural lands, but raising the rate to twice the fair market value at least gets us closer to what is fair.

In order to help the members of the Judiciary Committee better understand and appreciate the future loss of income to farmers and ranchers when their lands are taken by eminent domain, I showed them areal pictures of a parcel of irrigated agricultural land where the Nebraska Department of Transportation would seize a 100 feet strip along one side. Shortening the pivot by 100 feet would reduce the acreage of farmable land from 121 acres down to 103 acres and realigning the sprinklers would cost several thousands of dollars to retrofit the pivot and the loss of production would amount to experiencing a total crop failure once every 6.6 years.

LB 394 also requires governmental entities to reimburse landowners for the replacement costs of any permanent structures on the land which have to be condemned. A new barn is a huge expense to a landowner which is not currently covered by the law. My bill would require these governmental entities to reimburse landowners for the replacement costs of all dwellings, garages, sheds, barns, wells, septic systems, and fences lost due to the use of eminent domain.

It is interesting to note that paid lobbyists representing several governmental agencies showed up to testify against my bill at the public hearing. Each of these testifiers represented a different governmental agency or entity, but none of them represented the people of Nebraska. I believe I did. Moreover, not one private citizen showed up to testify against the bill. That did not surprise me. The fact of the matter is that our current eminent domain laws favor these governmental entities, but leave our property owners worse off than they were before their lands were ever taken.

Finally, the Nebraska Department of Transportation informed the Judicial Committee in the fiscal note that accompanied the bill that the bill would cost them $7,500,000 annually. So, in my closing remarks I pointed out how this figure proves my point. If the Legislature does not pass LB 394 this year, the cost to Nebraska landowners will be $7,500,000 per year!