SALT LAKE CITY -- Utah was one of the first states to rein in the use of eminent domain to make sure private development couldn't capitalize on laws intended to serve the public good. Now, the state could be one of the first to relax those rules.

A bill before Gov. Jon Huntsman would allow a community to take property deemed blighted from reluctant owners if enough neighboring land owners want the area redeveloped.

Eminent domain technically refers to the right of government to take private property for public use. The big question often is, what constitutes public use?

House Bill 365 could allow Ogden to push forward with plans to condemn land so a Wal-Mart could be built in an effort to generate more tax revenue. It was the city's efforts to attract Wal-Mart by using eminent domain that drew the wrath of lawmakers in 2005, when a moratorium on the use of eminent domain for redevelopment purposes was put into effect.

"Ogden is a perfect example," Sen. Curt Bramble, R-Provo, said at the time. "You have homeowners who have said they don't want to sell their homes. So you have Ogden coming in and condemning their property and selling it to Wal-Mart.

"That's bad public policy. The powers of eminent domain simply should not be used when we're talking about private development," he said.

This year, however, Bramble was the Senate sponsor of the bill which could allow Ogden to do just what he spoke against two years ago.

"I still believe the power of eminent domain should not be used for private development. There are some circumstances, however, where there may be a justification," he said Monday.

While the bill would allow a redevelopment authority to condemn land, it makes it difficult to do so. It requires 80 percent of those who live in a proposed redevelopment project area to sign a petition saying they want the land condemned. It would also require a two-thirds vote of a city's redevelopment authority board to approve the condemnation.

But that doesn't make Rulon Yorgason, an Ogden resident opposed to the use of eminent domain, feel any better.

"It is mob rule," he said. "If people in your neighborhood say you've got to give it up, there's nothing else you can do."

To condemn land, a redevelopment authority has to find that the property meets four of seven conditions outlined in state law.

Steven Anderson, director of the Castle Coalition, a Virginia organization that opposes the use of eminent domain for commercial purposes, said Utah's definitions for what it considers "blight" are too vague and open to abuse.

He points to definitions including "excessive vacancy" that he says are open too open to interpretation.

"No one's home or small business is safe," he said.

Anderson said 34 states have passed laws restricting the use of eminent domain for private redevelopment. Utah was a national leader with its legislation, which was passed before a Supreme Court ruling said cities could use eminent domain to seize homes and businesses for private development, he said.

"Utah was certainly one of the leaders on this front. We'd hate to see them leading in the other direction," he said.

But the bill's sponsor, Rep. Stephen Urquhart, R-St. George, contends the public demands government address blight.

"We want to do our best to respect private property, and that's what our citizens expect. But clearly, there is an expectation that government also help out with some blight situations. I think that is a reality we need to deal with," Urquhart said during legislative debate in February.

However, Dorothy Littrell, an eminent domain opponent who purchased property in an area Ogden wants to redevelop, said that's nonsense. She considers the use of eminent domain for commercial redevelopment theft.

"It's socialist. It's communist. It's taking what I have a right to own and deciding they need it and it is not for the public good," she said.

Bramble, however, said property owners shouldn't worry.

"I don't support condemning grandma's house to build a Wal-Mart," he said. "Should a city abuse the very limited authority granted to them this session, it'll be back and either restricted or we'll reinstitute the prohibition."

Messages left for Huntsman's spokesman, Mike Mower, were not immediately returned Monday.

------

On the Net:

House Bill 365 http://le.utah.gov/ 7/82007/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0365S01.htm