.

Virginians Say 'Yes' to Questions 1 and 2

Changes to eminent domain and veto session scheduling pass by wide margins.

Virginia residents voted to pass two amendments to the Virginia Constitution when they went out to the polls Tuesday.

About 75 percent of voters, more than 2.3 million people, voted "yes" to amending the state's eminent domain policies. The measure will prohibit local governments from using eminent domain for economic development and job creation. 

The measure was a bit less popular in localities such as Fairfax County, where 62 percent of voters decided to pass the amendment.

Question 2, which will allow the General Assembly to postpone its veto session in the event of scheduling conflicts of religious holidays, was much more popular. About 82 percent of voters, or 2.6 million people, said yes to the amendment.

Update (12:05 a.m. Nov. 7, 2012) Fairfax County residents also voted "yes" to both Questions 1 and 2 by a wide margin on Tuesday.

Approximately 63 percent of Fairfax County voters approved of the eminent domain amendment and more than 80 percent approved of allowing the General Assembly to delay its veto session.

---

Update (9:25 p.m.) Fredericksburg City handily voted "yes" to both Questions 1 and 2. 

Approximately 67 percent of voters approved of the eminent domain amendment and more than 80 percent of voters approved of allowing the General Assembly to delay its veto session.

---

Update: Sen. Barbara Favola told Patch today that if  the eminent domain amendment passes, the government will have to pay property owners the fair market value for their land plus anticipated lost profits on the property and that taxpayers will have to shoulder the burden of those costs.

"The cost would be exorbitant," Favola said. "It was the kind of thing people pushed because it looked good on a political brochure. It was something they wanted to wrap themselves around. ...We had people who got on a bandwagon."

She called the proposed amendment "bad public policy" but predicts that voters will pass it.

Original: When Virginians go out to the polls Tuesday, they’ll vote on two Virginia constitutional amendments.

The first amendment, known as Question 1, would prohibit local governments from using eminent domain for economic development and job creation. Instead, the seizure of private land would be strictly for public use, such as parks and school buildings. The amendment also requires full compensation of the owner.

The second amendment, or Question 2, would allow the General Assembly to delay its veto session by up to one week in order for the session to avoid interfering with events such as religious holidays.

Patch will update how residents are voting on each question in the table below. Check back at the end of the night to see if the amendments passed or failed, and how your area voted.

These are final, unofficial results from the State Board of Elections; absentee and provisional ballots had not been counted as of 1 a.m. Wednesday, Nov. 7. Additionally, in Manassas Park City, the Precinct One had not reported results by 1 a.m. Wednesday, Nov. 7.

Statewide Results

Amendments Yes Percent No Percent Question 1 2,368,845 74.73 800,895 25.27 Question 2 2,610,911 82.03 571,867 17.97

Results by Locality

Question 1: Eminent Domain

Locality Yes Percent No
Percent Alexandria 30,571 56.82 23,230 43.18 Arlington 44,789 55.27 36,242 44.73 Fairfax 252,847 62.77 149,956 37.23 Fredericksburg 7,076 67.16 3,460 32.84 Loudoun 103,910 69.61 45,366 30.39 Prince William 106,852 79.98 26,750 20.02 Manassas City 11,027 76.77 3,337 23.23 Manassas Park  1,680 75.27 552 24.73

Question 2: Veto Session

Locality Yes Percent No
Percent Alexandria 45,425 85.57 7,661 14.43 Arlington 67,242 84.74 12,111 15.26 Fairfax 319,520 80.45 77,660 19.55 Fredericksburg 8,524 80.40 2,078 19.60 Loudoun 119,032 81.20 27,568 18.80 Prince William 122,756 84.47 22,561 15.53 Manassas City 10,585 76.64 3,227 23.36 Manassas Park  1,777 79.44 460 20.56
T Ailshire November 09, 2012 at 07:47 PM
But Mario, recall the Kelo decision took private property and delivered it to another private entity. The "public use" excuse was that the community as a whole would benefit from redevelopment, even though the developer never obtained financing and the project never materialized. Thus, our Constitution needs to ensure such a bastardization of "public benefit" cannot happen in Virginia.
Harlan Wahlert November 20, 2012 at 12:36 AM
The person in office has old money, and LAND so now when WE the people tell the elected officials (person in. office) (i.e.,In 1979 my 1/4 Acre 5000 but now tax bill has it at 100,000. So if the tax payer was to get my land from the courts. They pay not the 5000 but 100,000 plus what future value. and what that means is if your in the elected officials pocket or it there land tax pay buying is by the check be unlimited,but if it the tax pay Joe schmoe getting the funds it be limited to the future that made up to be way less of the funds like 150,000, not the 1.2 mil the elected officials.) I hope you get my point. You get my point that the tax pay just payed more that you voted in.
Harlan Wahlert November 20, 2012 at 12:38 AM
send it tome please Harlan.Wahlert@aol.com
Harlan Wahlert November 20, 2012 at 12:41 AM
The person in office has old money, and LAND so now when WE the people tell the elected officials (person in. office) (i.e.,In 1979 my 1/4 Acre 5000 but now tax bill has it at 100,000. So if the tax payer was to get my land from the courts. They pay not the 5000 but 100,000 plus what future value. and what that means is if your in the elected officials pocket or it there land tax pay buying is by the check be unlimited,but if it the tax pay Joe schmoe getting the funds it be limited to the future that made up to be way less of the funds like 150,000, not the 1.2 mil the elected officials.) I hope you get my point. You get my point that the tax pay just payed more that you voted in.
Harlan Wahlert November 20, 2012 at 12:44 AM
The person in office has old money, and LAND so now when WE the people tell the elected officials (person in. office) (i.e.,In 1979 my 1/4 Acre 5000 but now tax bill has it at 100,000. So if the tax payer was to get my land from the courts. They pay not the 5000 but 100,000 plus what future value. and what that means is if your in the elected officials pocket or it there land tax pay buying is by the check be unlimited,but if it the tax pay Joe schmoe getting the funds it be limited to the future that made up to be way less of the funds like 150,000, not the 1.2 mil the elected officials.) I hope you get my point. You get my point that the tax pay just payed more that you voted in.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something