Municipal & Local Govt law

Subscribe to Municipal & Local Govt law via RSS

Rice-cookerCheck out this complaint, filed last week in federal court in Honolulu by a Kauai councilmember against the County of Kauai, a Planning Department Official, and the Kauai prosecutor. The councilmember claims the defendants maliciously prosecuted him for a zoning violation.

And just what was the alleged zoning violation?

While the Planning official was conducting a warrantless search of the councilmember’s home supposedly to respond to a complaint about an alleged zoning violation, she “allegedly observed a rice cooker and a refrigerator in the addition/family room in the family home.” Complaint para 44. 

The addition/family room was a permitted structure in which no kitchen was allowed. The Planning official apparently concluded that the presence of the rice cooker and the fridge turned this room into a kitchen, and the councilmember received a Zoning Notice Violation.

The complaint goes on to explain how the case was dismissed by a State…

Continue Reading Allegations Of Zoning Enforcement Outrages On Kauai (Part II) – A Rice Cooker Is A Kitchen?

Here’s a follow up to our earlier brief post about the opinion in Lavan v. City of Los Angeles, No.11-56253 (Sep. 5, 2012), in which a 2-1 Ninth Circuit panel held that the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments protect the homeless against the City of L.A.’s seizure and destruction of their “momentarily unattended” property. The city undertook these efforts to clean up the “skid row” section of downtown.

Honolulu has an ordinance that has a similar purpose and design (to prevent the homeless from clogging up the parks and sidewalks with their “stuff”), but it is constructed quite differently. Instead of prohibiting property from being left unattended, it prohibits the “storage” of property in public spaces, with “storage” being defined as being left somewhere for more than 24 hours. Leave it unattended for more than that time, the city will scoop it up and store it at the owner’s…

Continue Reading More On The Ninth Circuit’s Ruling That Homeless Have Property Rights, Too

Here are links to worthwhile reads, all with a takings flavor:

  • A

…
Continue Reading Takings Tuesday

In or near Sacramento this week? You may want to attend this free program, sponsored by the American Action Forum:

The American Action Forum will host a panel discussion at the Hyatt Regency in Sacramento on the devastating downturn of the housing market and painful recovery currently facing our nation. There’s no question California’s housing markets and greater economy have been among the hardest hit, yet a comeback seems to be underway. What can California’s story teach the rest of us? Is using eminent domain really a solution to our housing woes?

Join us for a complimentary breakfast as we hear from an exciting group of experts including Douglas Holtz-Eakin, former Director of the Congressional Budget Office, Daren Blomquist, Vice President of RealtyTrac, Richard Green, Director and Chair of the USC Lusk Center for Real Estate, Jed Kolko, Chief Economist at Trulia, Paul Herrera, Government Affairs and Communications Director, Inland…

Continue Reading Upcoming Program – The U.S. Housing Recovery: Lessons From California

In the op-ed piece “Eminently reasonable,” Brooklyn lawprof David Reiss writes that “using the power of eminent domain to restructure underwater mortgages is constitutional, beneficial and administratively feasible.”

Local governments across the country are considering an innovative use of eminent domain. They propose to condemn underwater mortgages (those that exceed the fair-market value of the home) in their communities and restructure them so that home­owners can afford their payments and so that the new mortgage is for less than the fair market value of the property. If this proposal is implemented, the local government will pay the owner of mortgages of “underwater” homes the fair market value for the mortgages. The local government will then restructure each mortgage by reducing the principal amount owed to be in line with a mortgage that would be appropriate for the fair market value of the home. This will result in lower…

Continue Reading “Eminently Reasonable,” Or Desperate Times Breed Desperate Measures?

In Moore v. City of Middletown, No 2012-1363 (Aug. 30, 2012), the Ohio Supreme Court held that a property owner did not have standing to bring a regulatory takings claim when a “foreign municipality” (the neighboring city) rezoned an adjacent parcel, because the municipality did not have jurisdiction to exercise eminent domain over his property. However, the court held the property owner could seek a declaratory judgment “to challenge the constitutionality of the ordinances.”

Under Ohio law, a “regulatory takings” action gives the plaintiff a right to bring a mandamus action to compel a municipality to institute condemnation proceedings, and the court held that since Middletown could not have exercised eminent domain authority outside of its jurisdiction, it could not be compelled to do so by the property owner. Our Ohio colleague Matt Fellerhoff discussed this aspect of Ohio law in his analysis of Clifton v. Blanchester, 964…

Continue Reading Ohio: No Such Thing As Extraterritorial Inverse Condemnation

Here’s a few reports worth reading:

  • Lt Gov. Gavin Newsom alleges ‘threats’ against mortgage plan – the LA Times reports on California’s Lieutenant Governor (who just happens to have “some ties to Mortgage Resolution Partners” — the private investment group that promulgated the idea of using eminent domain to seize underwater mortgages), who is calling for an investigation of whether those objecting to the plan are “threatening” local governments. “Newsom’s complaint comes after several groups, including the influential Securities Industry and Financial Markets Assn., objected to the eminent domain plan and warned that mortgages could become more expensive for future homeowners living in regions that adopt the plan. The Federal Housing Finance

…
Continue Reading Thursday’s Worth Reading List

Thanks to Municipal Minute for pointing out a new blog that should be of interest to our readers. Our friend and colleague Dwight Merriam and his firm are publishing RLUIPA Defense a “one-stop comprehensive site stocked with cases, trial materials, briefs and scholarly articles all about avoiding and defending against claims taken under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA).”

Our biggest question: how do you pronounce “RLUIPA?” (Practice tip: get the Judge to say it first, then pronounce it the way s/he does.)

If Dwight and his blogmates can resolve that one, we’d be grateful.

Check it out here. Continue Reading New Land-Usey Blog: RLUIPA Defense

It’s the right of homeless folks in L.A.’s “Skid Row” area to not have their personal belongings seized if they leave them unattended for a while, but we will take what we can get.

In Lavan v. City of Los Angeles, No.11-56253 (Sep. 5, 2012), the Ninth Circuit held:

We conclude that the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments protect homeless persons from government seizure and summary destruction of their unabandoned, but momentarily unattended, personal property.

Read more below. More on the takings angle to the case from the Volokh Conspiracy.

Lavan v. City of Los Angeles, No. 11-56253 (9th Cir. Sep. 5, 2012)Continue Reading 9th Circuit Recognizes Property Rights

An interesting new complaint filed in U.S. District Court in Hawaii, asserting claims for substantive due process, violation of the zoning enabling act, and the Kauai County Charter.

A owner of property that has been designated for resort development for 35 years is asserting that the adoption by the County’s voters of a charter amendment severely limiting the number of visitor accommodation units (no more than one new unit, and other restrictions), was an attempt to restrict the number of visitors and part-time residents. The complaint asserts that the County has no legitimate interest in restricting tourists or part time residents, and that the charter amendment is a zoning regulation that cannot be adopted by the voters (recall that in Hawaii, zoning ordinances may not be adopted by initiative – thanks to a case we argued many years ago – see here and here).

We’ll keep track of this…

Continue Reading New Complaint Challenging Kauai’s Limit On Visitor Units