As the state builds a new U.S. 17, you can't blame Chesapeake property owners for being suspicious of VDOT's offers to compensate them for taking their land.

No one has ever accused the Virginia Department of Transportation of squandering taxpayers' money when it comes to fair remuneration.

In fact, property owners might be considered foolish if they took VDOT's first proposal. The agency often has low-balled tenders to property owners, only to lose when the case reaches judgment. For instance, when Kempsville Road was widened a few years ago, VDOT lost dozens of court challenges by property owners.

Yet, many property owners throw their hands up in the air and accept VDOT's lower bid. They figure the time and expense in court will be a net loss — even if they win the case. The system seems rigged against landowners.

It shouldn't be. The General Assembly should examine whether the public should be on the hook for court costs if VDOT loses in these cases.

The new U.S. 17 curves east out of the existing road to North Carolina . The northbound and southbound lanes will be separated. Planners hope the new road will be much safer for motorists than the existing one.

VDOT has taken strips of land and easements on 40 properties to build the new route.

Owners of 18 properties accepted the agency's compensation bids; owners of the other 22 contested the property owners, however, say they could fetch much more money.

Yet, as one landowner says: "If you win the award that you're going for, you don't really win." That's because, in condemnation cases with VDOT, the winning property owners can't ask VDOT to also pay legal expenses or costs for expert witnesses and appraisers.

That's wrong. Property owners who successfully defend their rights should be made whole.

If VDOT had to pay some of those costs if it lost the case, it might well reassess the amount it's willing to hand over in condemnation disputes.