Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 13 of 13

Full-Text Articles in Law

The State Of Exactions, Timothy M. Mulvaney Oct 2019

The State Of Exactions, Timothy M. Mulvaney

Faculty Scholarship

In Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District, the Supreme Court slightly expanded the range of circumstances involving conditional land use permits in which heightened judicial scrutiny is appropriate in a constitutional “exaction” takings case. In crafting a vision of regulators as strategic extortionists of private property interests, though, Koontz prompted many takings observers to predict that the case would provide momentum for a more significant expansion of such scrutiny in takings cases involving land use permit conditions moving forward, and perhaps even an extension into other regulatory contexts, as well.

Five years on, this Article evaluates the extent …


Martin V. United States, Mitch L. Werbell V Dec 2018

Martin V. United States, Mitch L. Werbell V

Public Land & Resources Law Review

In Martin v. United States, the Federal Circuit Court dismissed a Fifth Amendment regulatory takings and exaction claim for want of ripeness when the claimant failed to apply for a permit, which would have allowed for an assessment of the cost of compliance with governmentally imposed requirements. By finding the claim unripe, the court stood firm on the historical view that federal courts may only adjudicate land-use regulatory takings and inverse condemnation claims on the merits after a regulating entity has made a final decision. However, jurisprudential evolution of the ripeness doctrine and judicial review of takings claims may …


On Bargaining For Development, Timothy M. Mulvaney Jul 2018

On Bargaining For Development, Timothy M. Mulvaney

Timothy M. Mulvaney

In his recent article, Bargaining for Development Post-Koontz, Professor Sean Nolon concludes that the Supreme Court’s recent ill-defined expansion of the circumstances in which land use permit conditions might give rise to takings liability in Koontz v. St. John’s River Water Management District will chill the state’s willingness to communicate with permit applicants about mitigation measures. He sets out five courses that government entities might take in this confusing and chilling post-Koontz world, each of which leaves something to be desired from the perspective of both developers and the public more generally.

This responsive essay proceeds in two parts. First, …


Legislative Exactions And Progressive Property, Timothy M. Mulvaney Jul 2018

Legislative Exactions And Progressive Property, Timothy M. Mulvaney

Timothy M. Mulvaney

Exactions — a term used to describe certain conditions that are attached to land-use permits issued at the government’s discretion — ostensibly oblige property owners to internalize the costs of the expected infrastructural, environmental, and social harms resulting from development. This Article explores how proponents of progressive conceptions of property might respond to the open question of whether legislative exactions should be subject to the same level of judicial scrutiny to which administrative exactions are subject in constitutional takings cases. It identifies several first-order reasons to support the idea of immunizing legislative exactions from heightened takings scrutiny. However, it suggests …


Are Critical Area Buffers Unconstitutional? Demystifying The Doctrine Of Unconstitutional Conditions, Brian T. Hodges Aug 2017

Are Critical Area Buffers Unconstitutional? Demystifying The Doctrine Of Unconstitutional Conditions, Brian T. Hodges

Seattle Journal of Environmental Law

Washington’s cities and counties are increasingly demanding that owners of residential shoreline properties dedicate large, predetermined critical area buffers as a mandatory condition of any new development. Such demands, when imposed without regard to the specifics of the land use proposal, would appear to violate the essential nexus and rough proportionality tests established by the U.S. Supreme Court in Nollan v. California Coastal Commission, 483 U.S. 825 (1987), and Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994). Early decisions from Washington courts faithfully applied these tests, invalidating open space and buffer dedications. But in a series of …


Legislative Exactions And Progressive Property, Timothy M. Mulvaney Dec 2016

Legislative Exactions And Progressive Property, Timothy M. Mulvaney

Faculty Scholarship

Exactions — a term used to describe certain conditions that are attached to land-use permits issued at the government’s discretion — ostensibly oblige property owners to internalize the costs of the expected infrastructural, environmental, and social harms resulting from development. This Article explores how proponents of progressive conceptions of property might respond to the open question of whether legislative exactions should be subject to the same level of judicial scrutiny to which administrative exactions are subject in constitutional takings cases. It identifies several first-order reasons to support the idea of immunizing legislative exactions from heightened takings scrutiny. However, it suggests …


Proposed Exactions, Timothy M. Mulvaney Jul 2015

Proposed Exactions, Timothy M. Mulvaney

Timothy M. Mulvaney

In the abstract, the site-specific ability to issue conditional approvals offers local governments the flexible option of permitting a development proposal while simultaneously requiring the applicant to offset the project’s external impacts. However, the U.S. Supreme Court curtailed the exercise of this option in Nollan and Dolan by establishing a constitutional takings framework unique to exaction disputes. This exaction takings construct has challenged legal scholars on several fronts for the better part of the past two decades. For one, Nollan and Dolan place a far greater burden on the government in justifying exactions it attaches to a development approval than …


On Bargaining For Development, Timothy M. Mulvaney Jan 2015

On Bargaining For Development, Timothy M. Mulvaney

Faculty Scholarship

In his recent article, Bargaining for Development Post-Koontz, Professor Sean Nolon concludes that the Supreme Court’s recent ill-defined expansion of the circumstances in which land use permit conditions might give rise to takings liability in Koontz v. St. John’s River Water Management District will chill the state’s willingness to communicate with permit applicants about mitigation measures. He sets out five courses that government entities might take in this confusing and chilling post-Koontz world, each of which leaves something to be desired from the perspective of both developers and the public more generally.

This responsive essay proceeds in two parts. First, …


The Big Chill? - The Likely Impact Of Koontz On The Local Governments/Developer Relationship, Julie A. Tappendorf, Matthew T. Dicanni Jun 2014

The Big Chill? - The Likely Impact Of Koontz On The Local Governments/Developer Relationship, Julie A. Tappendorf, Matthew T. Dicanni

Touro Law Review

This article will explore the doctrine of unconstitutional conditions, showing how it has evolved in the context of land use and come to be the logical underpinning of controversial Supreme Court decisions regarding exactions. Part I will explain the doctrine of unconstitutional conditions, providing a brief overview of its development over the course of the past century. Part II will then discuss how this doctrine has come to be the logical foundation on which the Supreme Court’s exactions jurisprudence rests. Part III will discuss the Koontz decision and its impact on the doctrine of unconstitutional conditions. In Part IV, we …


Substantive Due Process By Another Name: Koontz, Exactions, And The Regulatory Takings Doctrine, Mark Fenster Jun 2014

Substantive Due Process By Another Name: Koontz, Exactions, And The Regulatory Takings Doctrine, Mark Fenster

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


Koontz V. St. Johns River Water Management District, Ross Keogh Sep 2013

Koontz V. St. Johns River Water Management District, Ross Keogh

Public Land & Resources Law Review

Koontz extends the application of Nollan and Dolan, which require exactions of real property for land-use permits to share a “nexus” and be “roughly proportional” to the regulation to be constitutional. A divided United States Supreme Court held that “monetary exactions,” potentially including building permit fees or impact fees, must satisfy the Nollan and Dolan requirements even if the government denies the permit.[1] The Court did not reach the merits of the petitioner’s appeal.

[1](Kagan, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor, JJ., dissenting).


Something Rich And Strange: Progressive Land Use Regulation And The Takings Doctrine, Philip C. Dales May 2013

Something Rich And Strange: Progressive Land Use Regulation And The Takings Doctrine, Philip C. Dales

Philip C. Dales

ABSTRACT:

Something Rich and Strange: Progressive Zoning and the Takings Doctrine.

Philip Carter Dales

May, 2013

University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law

The list of municipalities adopting form-based codes continues to grow, with one study putting the number at over 250, including Miami, Denver, Cincinnati and other major cities around the United States. These codes represent land use regulation that is fundamentally different from traditional Euclidean zoning. Rather than prescribing allowable uses, FBCs focus on the governance of form, with the goal of ensuring predictable outcomes for the built environment and simplifying complex use-based zoning ordinances.

In …


Proposed Exactions, Timothy M. Mulvaney Mar 2011

Proposed Exactions, Timothy M. Mulvaney

Faculty Scholarship

In the abstract, the site-specific ability to issue conditional approvals offers local governments the flexible option of permitting a development proposal while simultaneously requiring the applicant to offset the project’s external impacts. However, the U.S. Supreme Court curtailed the exercise of this option in Nollan and Dolan by establishing a constitutional takings framework unique to exaction disputes. This exaction takings construct has challenged legal scholars on several fronts for the better part of the past two decades. For one, Nollan and Dolan place a far greater burden on the government in justifying exactions it attaches to a development approval than …