Eminent Domain Odds and Ends
Posted in Redevelopment

A few odds and ends for our readers:

  • New Federal Eminent Domain Legislation:  According to the Eminent Domain Law Blog, two Senators have introduced a new bill, Protection of Homes, Small Businesses, and Private Property Act of 2012.  This, again, you may ask?  What ever happened with HR 1433, the Private Property Rights Protection Act of 2011?  HR 1433 appears to be dying a slow death, but the new 2012 bill seeks to pick up the slack.  In particular, it is targeted at the same issue:  preventing the federal government from using its eminent domain power and state and local governments from using federal funds to fund the use of eminent domain for economic development.  One problem:  HR 1433 had some teeth, providing for penalties and allowing owners to proceed with a private right of action to enforce non-compliance.  The 2012 version apparently lacks the enforcement and penalty mechanisms, but perhaps that's what is needed to get legislative support.
  • Battle for Brooklyn:  A Lawyer's Perspective:  We've written in the past about the documentary Battle for Brooklyn, which involved a property owner's fight against the use of eminent domain for the new Brooklyn Nets basketball arena.  If you're interested in a lawyer's perspective, you'll need to read Michael Rikon's article "I Represented the Devil of Brooklyn," which was recently published in the Practical Real Estate Lawyer.  For a great synopsis, visit our colleague Robert Thomas' blog, inversecondemnation.com
  • Hi-Ho Silverado:  According to an article in the Napa Valley Register, "City plans Saratoga Drive extension," the City of Napa may use eminent domain to temporarily acquire portions of properties along the Silverado Trail to construct a new road linking the highway with homes to the east.  The acquisition of temporary construction easements are common for public projects, but just because they are temporary does not mean there will not be impacts.  One impacted business, for example, will be required to vacate its property for 30 days in order to install an underground drainage system.

 

California Eminent Domain Report is a one-stop resource for everything new and noteworthy in eminent domain. We cover all aspects of eminent domain, including condemnation, inverse condemnation and regulatory takings. We also keep track of current cases, project announcements, budget issues, legislative reform efforts and report on all major eminent domain conferences and seminars in the Western United States.

Stay Connected

RSS RSS Feed

Categories

Archives

View All Nossaman Blogs
Jump to Page

We use cookies on this website to improve functionality, enhance performance, analyze website traffic and to enable social media features. To learn more, please see our Privacy Policy and our Terms & Conditions for additional detail.