Historical buildings are undeniably important to the United States and its people. The law of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, or NHPA, was enacted specifically to protect such buildings. Many citizens appreciate the value of these buildings and take strong stances for their preservation. Such citizens include those of California, which will be the state on that this paper will be focusing on. The issue at hand is who takes the side of the private owners of such buildings when their private property is at the mercy of special interest groups and judicial proceedings? Specifically, owners are at risk of holding an economically defunct asset due to the ambiguous rulings on the matter of designating buildings as historically significant. This paper proposes to rid of that ambiguity and recommends that the Constitution of California be amended to ensure that loss of economic use of real property due to historic designation constitutes a taking and requires just compensation. The Current State of the Law The section of the California Constitution being proposed for amendment is Article I, Section 19, which states: “Private property may be taken or damaged for public use only when just compensation, ascertained by jury unless waived, has first been paid to, or into the court for, the owner." This clause usually covers condemnation of real property, also known as eminent domain. Eminent domain is generally understood to provide for compensation if the claim is for public use. To take this one step further is the relevant topic of a regulatory taking. This results when the police power of the governing body is applies regulations that deprive all reasonable use of the private owner’s use of the land. To reiterate, this pape... ... middle of paper ... ...to Article I, Section 19, in order to reduce future litigation issues and injustices regarding regulatory takings that have already manifested in various court rulings in the United States. This paper has exemplified such ambiguity and inconsistencies regarding application of legal precedent for unconstitutional takings. This amendment will ensure a level playing field between anti-developmental interest groups and private owners. In summary, the overall goal of this proposed change is that when private properties are given historical designation, the owner bears a burden that is akin to managing publically owned properties and so the owner should be compensated for such takings. Works Cited National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 California Constitution Article I, Section 19 Penn Central v. New York City United Artists Theatre Circuit v. City of Philadelphia
...udicial branch of the American government must be checked by the legislatures of states. To prevent instances like this from reoccurring, it is essential for state legislatures to take preventative steps and draft bills that would further limit the ability of the government to appropriate private property while still protecting private property owners. At the federal level, since it is abundantly clear from the case of Midkiff that the Supreme Court will defer to the Congress to define “public use,” a constitutional remedy needs to take place in the form of an amendment to the Constitution. It would be essential that an amendment to the Public Use Clause would specify the guidelines and standards of a “public use” to preserve the original intent of the legislative authors and provide the necessary private property protection to which all all Americans have a right.
In 1975, the United State Supreme Court held that state law could provide students a property interest in their education, but forty years later and courts remain uncertain of when such an interest exists. In Goss v. Lopez, the United States Supreme Court extended due process protections to a group of high school students in Ohio. The Court determined that Ohio state law provided the high school students a property interest in their continued enrollment at the school, and that such an interest was protected under the due process clause. The Goss decision came during a time when a due process revolution was happening in the United States. During this revolution, the Supreme Court recognized many new property interests in government benefits as the basis
to tear this law down I believe that California can not afford to do without
Property rights can be found in the oldest laws written, and equate the expectation of use or profit to some payment from the very beginning. Modern property rights can be said to begin with the transition from ownership by entities as being the primary form of property right, to the theory that property rights are to promote th... ... middle of paper ... ... operty’ in the case of Goldberg v. Kelly to be protected. This shows the state evolving in order to protect the citizen’s rights.
by forbidding the sale of any land within the reserve unless it was turned over to the
The evolution of power gained by the Federal government can be seen in the McCuloch versus Maryland (1819) case. This case des...
Development impact fees, or exactions, are an essential tool for local governments to mitigate the impacts caused by new development on public services, infrastructure, and facilities. California Proposition 13, enacted in 1978, increased local government’s reliance on exactions. Proposition 13 limits the tax rate and assessment increase for homes, businesses and farms, and thus dramatically reduced local government property tax revenue. To compensate for lost local revenue, many jurisdictions increased the amount of concessions exacted from developers in order to pay for the public facilities and services associated with the new development. This was the beginning of excessive exactions that became burdensome for many property owners and developers.
In the case study, CEO Eisner have idea of American history theme park within area of battlefield in Prince William County, Virginia. Eisner’s idea of building historical theme over property that already made its mark within American would be redundant. Disney’s conceptual plan was to use 650 million and authorized $130 million in local roads to serve it (Argenti, 2013, p.234). The first vulnerable would be the public opinion for and against the proposal land usage. When news first come out of a theme park being place near DC there was fifty anti-Disney rallied in protest while several hundred children was dressed to simulate as 101 Dalmatians in ...
One of the main aims of repealing the LRA 1925 was to transform the Land Register into an entirely electronic registry system which ‘should be a complete and accurate reflection of the state of the title of the land at any given time, so that it is possible to investigate title to lan...
First, we as citizens have rights, so if a person uses their money they earn and buys a piece of property, how would it be fair if the government without asking can just take part of your land you worked hard to get and turn it into a parking lot or national park etc. Now you have worked many hours to buy that land and the government just decides oh well we need more land and they take yours. How is that fair if you're supposed to have equal rights. It not you should be able to tell them no when it comes down to your property.
The state has one of the pioneering bans on the possession of semi-automatic rifles enacted in 1989. More restrictive measures have been added after that. Unlike many other states, California does not have provisions that guarantee private persons the right to possess, purchase, or carry firearms. This has led to many challenges of the provisions in federal courts, especially since the Supreme Court determined that the provision in the Second Amendment is applicable across all states (McDonald, 2010).
The act of protecting architecture involves maintaining the integrity of the place through restoring the buildings with both old and new materials. In Canada, historic objects can be granted special designation by the government at any of these three levels: the federal, the provincial, or the municipal. Historic preservation can include both short-term and long-term measures to protect, even stabilize the place or prevent from further damage occurring so there is no need for full construction and/or renovation. We have to ask ourselves what are the true questions on this topic of preserving and protecting. Should we be protecting everything and what is actually worth saving with preserving? Are they the beautiful buildings, the greater historical
In California, we are often times seen as separate from the Nation, “given its huge population, its breathtaking diversity, its historical independence, and its immensely powerful economy” (Michaels and Walters). Our legislature is extremely powerful, in not only state, but also national and international affairs. However, the power of the state isn’t being used to its greatest advantage. It’s being used by the elite, by the politicians, and the lobbyist. Money is the main concern of the Capital, what is gained, and what is lost by interest groups pursuing their goals, and the money that they donate to politicians to secure access and favorable votes. Being that CA has the 5th most powerful economy on the planet, I think it’s time that some of this power is used to reshape our policy process to better represent the people, not the interests.
One of the special concepts in land law is of overriding interests. The standard practice in the English land law is all the interest and rights affecting or is binding over particular a land should be registered in the Register. However, the concept of overriding interest denotes that there are interests which are binding on the owner (the registered proprietor) regardless of not being formally registered. It was introduced because in that era it was though that it would be unreasonable and unjust to overlook such rights and interest enjoyed. Overriding interests need not be registration to bind the legal owner of the land. Therefore, if the land is sold to another person the interests and rights would not be lost. It can be said that overriding by nature are unregistered if they are registered they will cease to be an overriding interest.