Veto override Iowa's first in 43 years
By Dan Gearino and Charlotte Eby, Journal Des Moines B ureau | Posted: Saturday, July 15, 2006
DES MOINES -- For the first time in 43 years, the Iowa Legislature has passed an override of a governor's veto, approving a bill Friday that limits local governments' power to seize private property.
The House and Senate easily got the two-thirds vote needed to make the bill become law. The override resolution passed 90-8 in the House and 41-8 in the Senate as lawmakers met in a one-day special session.
"I'm glad to see that those representatives that voted for it the first time voted for it again. And I think that indicates this isn't about politics, this is about doing the right thing and protecting people's private property rights and that's what the constituents want them to do," said House Speaker Christopher Rants, R-Sioux City.
Vilsack issued a statement calling the vote "unfortunate." He said he opposes the bill because it is so restrictive that it would harm the economy.
"I understand legislators need to do what they feel is in the best interest of their district," the governor said, "just as I must do what I feel is in the best interest of the state."
Local government and business had been hoping to override attempt would fail. The bill says local governments' are barred from seizing property for economic development, unless the project area is at least 75 percent blighted. This would complicate efforts to redevelop run-down neighborhoods.
The Siouxland Chamber of Commerce is on record opposing the bill.
The next battle may be in court. Opponents of the bill argue that it is unconstitutional for the Legislature to override a bill in a special session if the bill didn't originate in the same session.
Vilsack cites a 1998 opinion from Attorney General Tom Miller on the subject.
Sen. Bill Dotzler, D-Waterloo, who voted against the override, said backers of the bill have won a "hollow victory" because the courts will have the final say.
Republican leaders conceded that a lawsuit is likely, though they said they expect to win.
"We believe on our side, firmly, that we have the ability to do this. And if it's going to take a court case to draw those lines down theroad that's O.K.," said Senate Co-president Jeff Lamberti, R-Ankeny.
Speaking at a news conference before the vote, Vilsack said he would look at his options for fighting the override in court. A city or county government could also file suit.
For Vilsack, this rebuke from the Legislature comes at a time when he is increasing his national profile and considering a run for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination. The last override was in 1963 on a bill that dealt with the procedure for appointing members of state boards.
"Some people see this as a great political opportunity to embarrass the governor," said Senate Democratic Leader Mike Gronstal.
But most Democrats, including Gronstal, voted for the override.
Republicans hold a 51-49 edge in the House, while the Senate is tied 25-25.
"I believe that the governor's opinions on this bill are in error," said Keith Kreiman, D-Bloomfield, in one of the most pointed comments about Vilsack by a fellow Democrat during the debate.
Hundreds of backers of the bill rallied at the Statehouse early Friday and sat in the audience during debate.
Lori Kirk, a Madison County resident, said she is worried that she could lose her property to make way for a proposed recreational lake. The bill places limits on taking property for lake projects.
"We're here today as property owners, not radicals, just simple people scared of losing our property to a proposed 2,500-acre lake," Kirk said.
Dan Gearino and Charlotte Eby can be reached at 515-243-0138 anddan.gearino@lee.net.
The House and Senate easily got the two-thirds vote needed to make the bill become law. The override resolution passed 90-8 in the House and 41-8 in the Senate as lawmakers met in a one-day special session.
"I'm glad to see that those representatives that voted for it the first time voted for it again. And I think that indicates this isn't about politics, this is about doing the right thing and protecting people's private property rights and that's what the constituents want them to do," said House Speaker Christopher Rants, R-Sioux City.
Vilsack issued a statement calling the vote "unfortunate." He said he opposes the bill because it is so restrictive that it would harm the economy.
"I understand legislators need to do what they feel is in the best interest of their district," the governor said, "just as I must do what I feel is in the best interest of the state."
Local government and business had been hoping to override attempt would fail. The bill says local governments' are barred from seizing property for economic development, unless the project area is at least 75 percent blighted. This would complicate efforts to redevelop run-down neighborhoods.
The Siouxland Chamber of Commerce is on record opposing the bill.
The next battle may be in court. Opponents of the bill argue that it is unconstitutional for the Legislature to override a bill in a special session if the bill didn't originate in the same session.
Vilsack cites a 1998 opinion from Attorney General Tom Miller on the subject.
Sen. Bill Dotzler, D-Waterloo, who voted against the override, said backers of the bill have won a "hollow victory" because the courts will have the final say.
Republican leaders conceded that a lawsuit is likely, though they said they expect to win.
"We believe on our side, firmly, that we have the ability to do this. And if it's going to take a court case to draw those lines down theroad that's O.K.," said Senate Co-president Jeff Lamberti, R-Ankeny.
Speaking at a news conference before the vote, Vilsack said he would look at his options for fighting the override in court. A city or county government could also file suit.
For Vilsack, this rebuke from the Legislature comes at a time when he is increasing his national profile and considering a run for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination. The last override was in 1963 on a bill that dealt with the procedure for appointing members of state boards.
"Some people see this as a great political opportunity to embarrass the governor," said Senate Democratic Leader Mike Gronstal.
But most Democrats, including Gronstal, voted for the override.
Republicans hold a 51-49 edge in the House, while the Senate is tied 25-25.
"I believe that the governor's opinions on this bill are in error," said Keith Kreiman, D-Bloomfield, in one of the most pointed comments about Vilsack by a fellow Democrat during the debate.
Hundreds of backers of the bill rallied at the Statehouse early Friday and sat in the audience during debate.
Lori Kirk, a Madison County resident, said she is worried that she could lose her property to make way for a proposed recreational lake. The bill places limits on taking property for lake projects.
"We're here today as property owners, not radicals, just simple people scared of losing our property to a proposed 2,500-acre lake," Kirk said.
Dan Gearino and Charlotte Eby can be reached at 515-243-0138 anddan.gearino@lee.net.
Story Comments
Read More and Post Comments 2 comment(s)
Please note: The following are comments from readers. In no way do they represent the views of The Sioux City Journal or Lee Enterprises. We will not edit or alter your comments, but we do reserve the right to not post or to remove comments that violate our code of conduct. No comment may contain potentially libelous statements; obscene, explicit or racist language; personal attacks, insults or threats. Terms of Service
Carol LaGrasse, Pres., Property Rights Foundation of America wrote on Jul 23, 2006 5:03 PM:
J.D.DONAHUE wrote on Jul 18, 2006 12:24 AM: