HARTFORD, Conn. — The state at the center of a national property-rights battle moved to limit the use of eminent domain, two years after the Supreme Court ruled that governments may seize property for private development projects.

Unlike other states, however, the Connecticut measure does not expressly ban using eminent domain for economic development. Instead, it prohibits property from being taken solely to boost property taxes.

The state House of Representatives approved the bill by a 132–7 vote Saturday night. The legislation, which the Senate approved 33–3 on Thursday, now goes to Governor Rell, a Republican. She is expected to sign it because much of the legislation was recommended by her office, lawmakers said.

“I think at the end of the day it will ensure that property, especially homeowners’, will not be unnecessarily threatened by this extraordinary power,” Rep. Michael Lawlor, a Democrat, said.

Some lawmakers complained the bill would not have stopped the seizure of Susette Kelo’s pink cottage in the Fort Trumbull neighborhood of New London. Ms. Kelo was the main plaintiff in the landmark Supreme Court case, in which justices ruled 5–4 in June 2005 in favor of the city of New London. As a result, the majority of state legislatures nationwide tried to set limits on the seizure of private property.

Thirty-eight states have enacted legislation or passed ballot measures that place some limits or qualifications on when eminent domain can be used, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Four of those states — North Dakota, Utah, Virginia, and Wyoming — passed legislation this year.

Besides prohibiting the taking of property for projects to increase local tax revenues, Connecticut’s bill requires a public hearing and certain findings before taking a property. It also requires the municipal legislative body to approve takings by a two-thirds vote, and creates a 10-year deadline for completing a taking.

It also allows the homeowners to appeal in state court; gives former owners the right of first refusal to buy back property if projects are not fulfilled, and requires homeowners be compensated for 125% of the average value of two independent property appraisals.

Rep. Ernest Hewett, a Democrat, who voted against the bill, said he doesn’t believe changes to the existing eminent domain laws are needed.

“Every court, from the trial court to the Connecticut Supreme Court and the U.S Supreme Court, found that the city did it right and that Connecticut’s law is constitutional,” Mr. Hewett said.

Michael Cristofaro, whose family home was among those taken by eminent domain, said the bill does not do enough to protect homeowners.

“There’s nothing in here. No one’s rights are saved yet,” Mr. Cristofaro said Saturday night after watching the House debate on television.