Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
29 partment has had discussions regarding right-of-way acquisition and that it is âlooking hard at potential set- tlements as opposed to filing a condemnation action. This had been done on a project by project basis and not as training.â358 The Wyoming DOT reported that it has âhad discus- sion with everyone involved in project deliveryâ regard- ing the changes in the law.359 X. CONCLUSION In response to the Kelo decision, 43 states enacted constitutional and legislative changes restricting in varying degrees the use of eminent domain for economic development. In many of the states having such reforms it does not appear that the constitutional or legislative changes have affected state transportation depart- mentsâ use of eminent domain for highway and other transportation projects. Some statesâ post-Kelo reforms specifically or effectively exempt takings for transporta- tion projects. In addition, transportation departments are unaffected by the post-Kelo laws in states that re- quire that any property acquired by eminent domain must be transferred to public ownership or that prohibit the use of eminent domain to acquire private property for transfer to another person or private entity. No state DOT responding to the survey reported that the definition of public use under its stateâs post-Kelo laws has affected the use of eminent domain for a transpor- tation project. No department responding to the survey reported that a prohibition on takings for economic de- velopment or a restriction on the taking of blighted property had affected the departmentâs use of eminent domain. 358 Nevada DOTâs Survey Response, dated Mar. 14, 2011. 359 Wyoming DOTâs Survey Response, dated Mar. 22, 2011.