l9n/ Connecticut

2006 Regular Session

Senate Bill 665

AN ACT RESTRICTING THE USE OF EMINENT DOMAIN AND AUTHORIZING MUNICIPALITIES TO ESTABLISH SEPARATE RATES OF TAXATION FOR REAL ESTATE.

Did not become law. It stopped in the Senate's Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee on April 28, 2006. The 2006 session has ended.

What it does

The synopsis the General Assembly published with the bill.

To (1) allow certain property owners to repurchase property taken from them by eminent domain if the land is not used for a public use and is subsequently resold, (2) prohibit persons from misrepresenting that they are authorized to acquire property by eminent domain by making such misrepresentation an unfair trade practice, (3) require appraisals in eminent domain proceedings to be conducted by state-licensed real estate appraisers in accordance with uniform standards, (4) require the consent of the parties before a court may appoint a judge trial referee to review a statement of compensation in an eminent domain proceeding, (5) increase the maximum payments for relocation assistance, and (6) revise the standards used by local legislative bodies prior to authorizing the use of eminent domain pursuant to a development plan under chapter 132 of the general statutes.

Sponsors

Who carried the bill in each chamber, and who signed on. Each name leads to the member's page.

In the Senate

Its course

March 10 to April 28, 2006, on one scale. In the top row each mark is a day something happened; taller marks are busier days.

Each committee stop sits inside its chamber.

Every action20 actions on 11 days

In the SenateMar 10 to Apr 28 · stopped49 days

Judiciary CommitteeMar 10 to Mar 2414 days

Finance, Revenue and Bonding CommitteeApr 28 to Apr 28 · stopped0 days

Text

Each version as the General Assembly printed it.

l9n doesn't hold this bill's text yet.

What happened

In l9n's words, one line for each step. Every action as the General Assembly published it is below.

In the Senate Mar 10 – Apr 28

  1. Introduced and sent to Judiciary Committee
  2. Heard in Judiciary Committee
  3. Judiciary Committee recommended it
  4. Sent to Planning and Development Committee
  5. Planning and Development Committee recommended a substitute for it
  6. Sent to Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee
All 20 actions, as published