Compensation
provided by the State of Texas for Property Taken Through Eminent Domain
Over the past several legislative sessions there have
be several attempts to rectify the broken Texas eminent domain laws. These
changes were approved through legislation with a Constitutional Amendment in
2009 and SB18 in 2011. Those who have and utilize the power of eminent domain
make claims that the system is fixed and is now fair and just for the property
owner.
The Texas Attorney General's (AG) office provides legal
support for state agencies utilizing the governmental power of eminent domain.
The primary agency that uses this power is the Texas Department of
Transportation (TxDOT), which primarily uses this authority to obtain property
for right of ways for road construction and expansion across the state.
Through public information requests, the last 23
condemnation cases from across the State of Texas that were processed through the
Texas AG's office show that previous attempts to provide adequate compensation
for victims of eminent domain have failed. The initial offer of each of these
condemnation cases was compared against the final settlement. (See chart
below.) In several of these cases, there appeared to be a settlement where the
victim accepted the State's offer for the property, thus avoiding a hearing. (In
these instances the final settlement mirrored the initial offer, which would be
extremely unlikely if a hearing before the commissioners' court had actually been
held.) Even including the cases that settled, the initial offer averaged only
61% of the final offer, well below what those who use this power suggest is
common.
A more realistic number is found by using those
eminent domain cases that were clearly disputed and went to commissioners'
court for a hearing to determine value. If you factor out the cases where the
initial offers were accepted, the initial offer was 40% of the final
settlement. Clearly those entities utilizing
the power of eminent domain must give a fair offer to the victim for the property
being taken and that is not currently happening in most instances. Note: This
study only addresses land taken by the State of Texas for roadway construction;
the numbers for private entities that utilize the power of eminent domain are
not publicly available. It is suspected that figures for those offers would be
much lower than those of the public entities.
Presently victims of eminent domain in Texas must pay
their own legal expenses and any other fees associated with attempting to get
fair market value for their property. To dispute the offer of a condemning
entity can easily amount to thousands of dollars. Texas Senate Bill 740 and
House Bill 2684 proposes that if the condemner's final offer is 20% greater or
more than the amount of the initial offer, the condemning entity must pay
certain expenses, including the victim’s legal fees.
Texas eminent domain laws have obviously not gone far
enough to protect private property rights. Additional measures must be completed to bring
Texas up to the standards that Texans expect and deserve. If you believe in protecting private property
rights, you must support Texas Senate Bill 740 mentioned above as well as 741
and 742. Passing them would be a good
start for protecting the property of hard-working Texans.
Following is a document outlining the 23 cases
including initial offer the victim received from the state and the final
payment. All of this information was received from the Texas Attorney General's
Office, and therefore should be considered accurate.
Contact information –
Calvin Tillman – 940.453.3640
Larry Beard – 512.461.9666
Initial
Offers and Final Settlements for Takings by the State of Texas for Roadways
Name
|
Initial
Offer
|
Final
Offer/Settlement
|
Percentage
Initial Offer is of Final Settlement
|
Difference
Between Initial and Final
|
Percent
Final/Initial
|
Mueschke
|
$68,612.00
|
$185,656.00
|
37%
|
$117,044.00
|
171%
|
Detering
|
$1,361,432.00
|
$3,708,074.50
|
37%
|
$2,346,642.50
|
172%
|
Greyhawkesdene
|
$23,152.00
|
$36,058.00
|
64%
|
$12,906.00
|
56%
|
Cochrum
|
$22,620.00
|
$33,930.00
|
67%
|
$11,310.00
|
50%
|
Arellano
|
$11,312.00
|
$14,312.00
|
79%
|
$3,000.00
|
27%
|
Bouhoutos
Brown
|
$74,042.00
|
$74,042.00
|
Settled
|
$0.00
|
0%
|
FBC
Oak Cliff
|
$3,125.00
|
$3,594.00
|
87%
|
$469.00
|
15%
|
Strata
Holding
|
$98.00
|
$98.00
|
Settled
|
$0.00
|
0%
|
Dickey
|
$130,142.00
|
$130,142.00
|
Settled
|
$0.00
|
0%
|
Waggoner
|
$1,211,629.00
|
$1,785,000.00
|
68%
|
$573,371.00
|
47%
|
Art
Environmental
|
$87,402.00
|
$290,000.00
|
30%
|
$202,598.00
|
232%
|
Lubbock
National Bank
|
$284,582.00
|
$1,075,000.00
|
26%
|
$790,418.00
|
278%
|
Downstream
973
|
$24,469.00
|
$94,000.00
|
26%
|
$69,531.00
|
284%
|
Downstream
973
|
$15,605.00
|
$73,618.00
|
21%
|
$58,013.00
|
372%
|
Lipcomb
|
$6,081.00
|
$16,000.00
|
38%
|
$9,919.00
|
163%
|
Lipcomb
|
$19,427.00
|
$134,000.00
|
14%
|
$114,573.00
|
590%
|
Branch
Banking
|
$126,628.00
|
$126,628.00
|
Settled
|
$0.00
|
0%
|
JP
Morgan Chase
|
$105,216.00
|
$107,277.00
|
Settled
|
$2,061.00
|
2%
|
Bank
of America
|
$32,853.00
|
$34,314.00
|
Settled
|
$1,461.00
|
4%
|
Rahmati
|
$231,016.00
|
$384,000.00
|
60%
|
$152,984.00
|
66%
|
Advantage
|
$44,531.00
|
$112,643.00
|
40%
|
$68,112.00
|
153%
|
Jarmillo
Revis
|
$5,209.00
|
$5,940.00
|
88%
|
$731.00
|
14%
|
Metro
Joint Venture
|
$64,919.00
|
$189,152.00
|
34%
|
$124,233.00
|
191%
|
Average
|
41%
|
$202,581.59
|
126%
|
