We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: A Property Owners Bill of Rights
Details
Submitted by[?]: Paranational League
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: October 2913
Description[?]:
Chief Sponsor Party Chairman Augustus Caesarius, of the Paranational League. I.Preamble Whereas we of the Paranational League do hereby object to the reserved right of the Hobrazian State to arbitrarily confiscate property do we hereby move to propose the following legislation; Whereas the Paranational League does object to any type of central planning do we herein resolve to establish a system of local intiative to exclusivley adress the needs of individual localities; to set up a means of just compensation in cases of eminenet domain; give individual municipalities the right to plan and set policy in the building of vital infastructure; therefore be it resolved to add Article I Article 1 Whereas the directives of the current central planning system are inadequate to adress the needs of individual localities; Whereas eminent domain is determined irrespective of local zoning laws; and that by this current policy eminent domain threatens the rights of municipalities and allows for the construction of inadequate infastructure regardless of the needs of specific localities; Be it resolved, that immediate restriction be applied to the state in the siezure of local lands; and for localities to employ their land in the ways that the municipal council deems adequate; Be it further resolved that a system be established that allows the state to supersede, in the case of vital infrastructure, provided that they pay a fair market price; Be it further resolved to add Article 2 2. Article 2 Whereas the neutrality of any body is subject to interpretation; and could be compromised in the future by coercion, opression and any assorted manpulation to lower the value of land siezed by the state; whereas were it is also reserved as the governments right to lower any value established by such body; Be it resolved that the owner alone can place a price on any lands siezed by the central government; in keeping within no greater than a margin 10 percent of their original investment; Be it resolved that the second party ( the state) be allowed to appeal any cost they consider to great; the state may place a price in terms of a civil suit against any owner attempting to defraud the state; Be it further resolved that such an action by the property owner to artifically raise the price of their propertybe hereafter deemed tax fraud and either subject to a term of 5 years imprisonment, or a fine the amount ruled by the judge; Be it further resolved that any price be paid in terms of intervals agreed to by both parties |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Eminent Domain.
Old value:: The government may seize private property for vital government works.
Current: The government may seize private property for vital government works.
Proposed: The policy regarding eminent domain is left to local governments.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Eminent domain compensation (if eminent domain is legal).
Old value:: A neutral body appointed by the courts determines the compensation, either party may appeal.
Current: A neutral body appointed by the courts determines the compensation, either party may appeal.
Proposed: The victim of eminent domain sets compensation, government can appeal to the courts if they deem the cost too high.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 07:52:01, March 24, 2010 CET | From | National Imperial Hobrazian Front | To | Debating the A Property Owners Bill of Rights |
Message | Support. |
Date | 18:56:33, March 24, 2010 CET | From | We Say So! Party | To | Debating the A Property Owners Bill of Rights |
Message | Against. Article 1 places increased difficulties in creating national projects, not least the construction of cross-country motorways and rail networks, whilst article 2 creates a ridiculous precedent of large scale projects being ground to a halt for individual want. Currently an independent body determines compensation, a body with no interest in either party. In this case it provides the fairest compensation for not only those individuals involved in receiving compensation but also the tax payer. |
Date | 20:02:01, March 24, 2010 CET | From | Hobrazian Imperium Party | To | Debating the A Property Owners Bill of Rights |
Message | no |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | |||
yes | Total Seats: 285 | |||
no |
Total Seats: 115 | |||
abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
Random fact: There is a phpBB forum dedicated to Particracy. Please click the Forum link in the top game menu. Additions to the game, suggestions and discussion is held there so get involved. http://forum.particracy.net/ |
Random quote: "The most certain test by which we judge whether a country is really free is the amount of security enjoyed by minorities." - John Dalberg-Acton |