Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation News Release�June 23, 2005

CONTACT:� KarenHenry, WyFB president, 307.782.6559, Ken Hamilton, WyFB executive vicepresident, 307.721.7712, or khamilton@wyfb.orgor Kerin Clark, WyFB media director, 307.532.2002 or kclark@wyfb.org

Farm Bureau Disappointedwith Supreme Court Ruling on Kelo Property Rights

����������� June 23, 2005 �The AmericanFarm Bureau Federation (AFBF) and the Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation (WyFB) areoutraged by today�s 5-4 ruling by the Supreme Court regarding private propertyrights.� The Supreme Court ruled thatlocal governments may seize people�s homes and businesses for private economicdevelopment projects.

����������� �Protectionof private property rights is one of the cornerstones of Farm Bureau policy,�Karen Henry, WyFB President, said.� �Weare concerned this decision will lead to the deterioration of private propertyprotection from government entities using the taxpayers� checkbook.�

����������� ��The American Farm Bureau Federation isoutraged that the Supreme Court ruled government bodies can use eminent domainauthority to take private property for economic development by privatebusinesses. The ruling in favor of the city in Kelo v. City of New Londoncould have serious negative consequences to farmers and ranchers,� BobStallman, AFBF President, said.� �Apparentlyno one�s home, or farm and ranch land, is safe from government seizure becauseof this ruling.�

����������� In thisspecific case, a private home owner had refused to sell her property to thecity of New London, Conn.,for destruction to make way for a hotel, shopping and housing complex to bebuilt by a private developer. The Supreme Court, in a case with hugeimplications across the country, ruled that the city had the right to seize theproperty against the home owner�s will, even though the area was not blighted.

����������� �Farmersand ranchers are having problems maintaining their fields and pastures for foodand fiber production. They are contending with urban sprawl and need protectionagainst government bodies having free reign to take land,� Stallmancontinued.� �That is why AFBF filed afriend-of-the-court brief in this case at the end of 2004.�

����������� Judges inthe majority ruling were John Paul Stevens, Anthony Kennedy, David H. Souter,Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer.�Justice Sandra Day O�Connor vigorously dissented from the majoritydecision. She wrote, �Any property may now be taken for the benefit of anotherprivate party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random. Thebeneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influenceand power in the political process, including large corporations anddevelopment firms.�

����������� Farm Bureaumembers and staff will assess the full impact of this ruling to localcommunities and work in the legislative arena to determine what can be done tolimit the effect of the ruling.

-FB END-