The issue of potential "takings" periodically arises when
complainants argue that a particular regulation or policy
excessively limits the private use of property. To inform
state and local governments and private landowners of
this issue, we have produced the following brief look at
the takings issue using a Texas case that has received a
fair amount of attention in recent months. And because
there is a value in looking at an issue from various
perspectives, we've chosen to present some of the key
opposing views, and allow you to draw your own
conclusions. It's worthwhile to note that the RBC is not
taking sides on this issue, but simply striving to
illustrate how complex and divisive property issues can
be, and how arguments on opposing sides of the same issue
can often be equally persuasive.
Last year, the Texas Supreme Court held a local
government's requirement that a developer rebuild a
street adjacent to the developer's property constituted a
compensatory taking of property. Because this case could
have a tremendous impact on affordable housing providers,
we secured not only the Court's decision but also briefs
filed with the Court on behalf of those supporting the
City of Flower Mound and those supporting the developer,
Stafford Estates, L.P. The decision can be found at
https://www.huduser.gov/rbc/search/rbcdetails.asp?DocId=902.
The Texas Municipal League's brief supporting the City
can be found at
https://www.huduser.gov/rbc/search/rbcdetails.asp?DocId=899,
while the Pacific Legal Foundation's brief defending the
developer's position can be found at
https://www.huduser.gov/rbc/search/rbcdetails.asp?DocId=900.
We hope this information will prove useful as you attempt
to overcome the effects of regulatory barriers. If you or
your colleagues have identified regulatory barrier
issues, send us an email at mailto:rbcsubmit@huduser.gov
or visit our Web site at http://www.regbarriers.org.
Regulatory Barriers Clearinghouse (RBC) Presents Differing Views on Takings Issue
|
