Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Reverse Exactions, Gregory M. Stein
Reverse Exactions, Gregory M. Stein
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
When an owner applies for a permit to use property in a certain way, the government body with jurisdiction can either deny the permit, grant the permit outright, or grant the permit subject to conditions. These conditions—known as “exactions”—must meet two constitutional thresholds. First, there must be a close linkage between a problem the owner’s project will create or exacerbate, such as increased traffic caused by a proposed new shopping mall, and the exaction the government proposes, such as the dedication of land for a new right-turn lane. Second, the condition the government suggests must be proportional in magnitude to …
What We Have Here Is A Failure To Compensate: The Case For A Federal Damages Remedy In Koontz "Failed Exactions", Christopher M. Kieser
What We Have Here Is A Failure To Compensate: The Case For A Federal Damages Remedy In Koontz "Failed Exactions", Christopher M. Kieser
William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review
In Nollan v. California Coastal Commission, 483 U.S. 825 (1987), and Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994), the Supreme Court held that an agency could not, consistent with the Takings Clause, condition a permit on a land exaction unless the exaction bears an “essential nexus” and “rough proportionality” to the harms the government seeks to mitigate. Then, in Koontz v. St. Johns Water Management District, 133 S. Ct. 2586 (2013), the Court extended Nollan and Dolan to exactions that were never completed because the property owner refused to acquiesce to the demand. Nevertheless, the Court held that …
Exactions And Burden Distribution In Takings Law, Carlos A. Ball, Laurie Reynolds
Exactions And Burden Distribution In Takings Law, Carlos A. Ball, Laurie Reynolds
William & Mary Law Review
In the last several decades, there has been a marked shift in local government financing away from the use of general revenue taxes and toward nontax revenue-raising devices such as exactions. This Article argues that the Supreme Court, in its exaction cases, missed a golden opportunity to slow this troubling trend toward the greater privatization of local government financing. In addition, it explains how the Court's exaction cases are inconsistent with the goal of burden distribution as reflected in the Court's takings jurisprudence. The Article proposes that the constitutional standard applied to exactions be reformulated to account explicitly for burden …
Negotiated Development Denial Meets People's Court: Del Monte Dunes Brings New Wildcards To Exactions Law, Jonathan M. Davidson, Ronald H. Rosenberg, Michael C. Spata
Negotiated Development Denial Meets People's Court: Del Monte Dunes Brings New Wildcards To Exactions Law, Jonathan M. Davidson, Ronald H. Rosenberg, Michael C. Spata
Faculty Publications
The United States Supreme Court Answered "YES" to the $1.45 million over exaction question for 1999. In City of Monterey v. Del Monte Dunes at Monterey Ltd., a unanimous court extended the scope of compensatory takings review beyond land dedication conditions into the realm of regulatory denial. Justice Kennedy's opinion vitalized the "legitimate state interests" test from Agins v. City of Tiburon to sustain an inverse condemnation conclusion and damage award to the frustrated developer. A majority of the court also concurred that the trial court may delegate this takings conclusion to the jury under federal civil rights law. The …
Where's Dolan? Exactions Law In 1998, Jonathan M. Davidson, Ronald H. Rosenberg, Michael C. Spata
Where's Dolan? Exactions Law In 1998, Jonathan M. Davidson, Ronald H. Rosenberg, Michael C. Spata
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.