Committee debates removing eminent domain language from Home Rule Charter

A Home Rule Charter committee discussed whether to remove language that authorizes the county to acquire, hold, operate and dispose of property — wording the transcript renders as "exercise the right of intimate domain" — because members worried it would create the perception that the charter enables taking private land.

A committee member reported that "Brad Macley called in, and he had a concern with article 2 subcategory 1, acquiring, holding, operating, and dispose of property within or without the county limits and exercise the right of intimate domain for these purposes." The member said callers read that wording as the purpose of the charter and that it could cause voters to reject the measure.

Committee members said they reviewed four other counties' home rule charters and found varying language: some include explicit property-acquisition wording and some do not. One participant urged rewording the provision and more public education to avoid misperception. "Can we word it better?" one member asked, adding that multiple calls had urged removing the language to improve the charter's chances of passage.

Patrick, identified in the discussion, told the committee the legal authority for property acquisition "still remains. It's a power given to the county through statute. And so, regardless of whether it's in the Home Rule Charter...that power still remains. But, yeah, you can remove it. It's fine." His comments framed removal as an option that would not eliminate the county's statutory authority while potentially addressing public concern.

The transcript provided ends before any motion or vote; committee members raised attorney opinion as a deciding factor and discussed follow-up steps, including rewording and public education. No formal action was recorded in the available segments.