Specifies that no more than twenty percent of land within a county may be collectively owned by the state, a county, and municipalities
Impact
If enacted, this bill could significantly affect land ownership dynamics in third or fourth classification counties across Missouri. It promotes the idea of limiting government expansion into real estate, thus preserving opportunities for individuals and private enterprises to acquire property without high levels of governmental ownership affecting the market. However, by imposing these restrictions, it may also limit the government’s ability to acquire real estate for public uses, which could impact future community planning and development initiatives.
Summary
House Bill 57 aims to establish new restrictions on the acquisition of real property within certain classifications of counties in Missouri. Specifically, the bill prohibits any governmental entity, including the state, county, and municipalities from purchasing or receiving additional real property if these entities collectively own 20% or more of the land in that county. This regulation is set to ensure that the proportion of government-owned land does not exceed this threshold, thereby influencing land use and availability for private ownership and development.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding HB 57 appears mixed. Proponents of the bill might view it as a necessary measure for preventing excessive government control over real estate, thereby promoting private property rights and encouraging local businesses. Conversely, opponents could argue that such restrictions may hinder the government's capacity to undertake necessary public projects, potentially leading to challenges in community development and infrastructure improvements.
Contention
Key points of contention revolve around the balance between private property rights and governmental authority. Critics may express concerns that the bill could restrict local government's ability to respond effectively to community needs for land, particularly for infrastructure development or public services. Additionally, the definition of 'collectively owned' land raises questions about transparency and the criteria for determining ownership, potentially leading to disputes among county authorities on how to comply with this new regulation.
Provides for the sharing of thirty percent of revenue from gaming devices located within the county of Oneida; provides for the sharing of twenty-five percent of revenue from gaming devices located within the county of Madison.
Provides for the sharing of thirty percent of revenue from gaming devices located within the county of Oneida; provides for the sharing of twenty-five percent of revenue from gaming devices located within the county of Madison.