agnerd said:Texarkana isn't supposed to condemn any land without a "public use" for it. Cities are allowed to take land outside of the city limits because you may own water in a lake outside of city limits, and need to be able to connect to it. Or you may need to drain to a river outside city limits. Or a city wants to expand the road that connects them to the interstate, but its unincorporated. Laws go back to railroad times when a landowner could own a mountain pass and hold the railroads hostage for hundreds of millions of (today's) dollars since it's much more expensive to go around. Yes, even private companies like the railroads can be given eminent domain powers by our elected officials. Federal officials can condemn city property to build a border wall. States can condemn city property to build or expand a state highway. The Texas high speed railroad can force you to sell your land to them so they can build a train. Centerpoint can take ranch land to build power transmission lines or a gas pipeline. Only way to change that is to revise eminent domain laws at the state level. Good luck with that.Sarvab said:
Can someone explain to me how it can possibly be legal for officials in political jurisdiction A to exercise eminent domain against those in political jurisdiction B? Those residents don't get any say in the electoral process of A and don't get to participate in government.
If Texarkana wanted to condemn some land in College Station (like the new city hall, for example) can they just do that?
It's extremely unusual for a city to take land within another city. I've never actually seen it happen. Preferred method is for City of CS to have an agreement with Bryan to where Bryan condemns the land, purchases it, builds the sewer line, and then charges CS the construction costs plus all maintenance costs.
So... again....what prevents Texarkana from cooking up a public use reason to take land in College Station? I understand the "how" of a political subdivision (federal, state, city, etc) taking land from within their own jurisdiction, but it seems grossly against the principles of our government, for a government actor to take land outside of their elected "sphere of influence". Because if this stands, what's to prevent Bryan from just taking land from College Station for whatever "public use" reason they have?