Land Use and The Constitution

Blaesser, Brian W.; Forrest, Clyde W.; Kmiec, Douglas W.; Mandelker, Daniel R.; Weinstein, Alan C.; Williams, Norman

doi:10.4324/9781351179027

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Here the constraints lay largely in the absence of mandates and other authorities to do more to address the issues. American constitutional property rights long furnished a basis for challenges to any regulation at local or supralocal levels that pursue those ends (Blaesser and Weinstein 1989). At the same time, the United States lacked the national or even state-level legislative mandates of organized systems like Germany to regulate and control land use for environmental or social ends.…”

Section: United States: Consequences From a Market-centered Infrastructurementioning

confidence: 99%

The Nation-State and Urban Governance

Sellers

2002

Urban Affairs Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent international comparative studies of urban governance, the nation-state has usually figured as a direct influence on local government and politics. This article, drawing on case studies of a similar U.S. city and German city, demonstrates the need for a new, more sophisticated conception of the effects from national institutions. In the German city, a pro-business coalition carried out extensive social and environmental policies. In the U.S. city, a progressive coalition subordinated social and to a lesser degree environmental objectives to developmental aims. To account for these results, the author proposes and applies a typology of national institutional contexts. These contexts influenced urban governance not only through direct effects on the choices of local elites and activists but through indirect effects on translocal economies, urban economies, and local culture.

show abstract

Section: United States: Consequences From a Market-centered Infrastructurementioning

confidence: 99%

The Nation-State and Urban Governance

Sellers

2002

Urban Affairs Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many state constitutions prohibit the damaging of private property as well. Blaessler and Weinstein (1989) note that the requirements of the federal constitution are a floor, not a ceiling. In other words, "state provi-sions may extend (and frequently do extend) more generous protection to property, not less" (1989,86).…”

Section: Differentiation Between Takings Case Law and Statutory Lawmentioning

confidence: 99%

The New “Takings” Proposals in State Legislation: Private Property Rights Protection or a New Entitlement?

Wood¹

1997

State and Local Government Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In other words, there must be an "essential nexus," or necessary connection, between the governmental mandate to the property owner and the public interest in order for the regulation not to amount to a taking. In the Nollan case, however, the Court found that there was an insufficient connection between the required extraction and the impact of the proposed development, suggesting that its real purpose was an attempt to obtain a public easement without providing compensation (Symons 1988;Blaesser et al 1989).…”

Section: Judicial Resolvementioning

confidence: 99%

Protecting property rights in America

Olivetti¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To date, no federal takings legislation has been passed to protect individuals from government regulations that 'take' one's property without providing just compensation. However, since 1991, twenty states have passed some type of takings legislation. This study examines the following questions: What has been happening in Congress concerning the property rights issue and why has it failed to pass substantive federal takings legislation? Why did the proponents of takings legislation seek to move the issue to a larger venue beyond Congressional committees? And, what tactics did the proponents of takings legislation use to capture the political agenda regarding this issue at the state level? I test theories of agenda setting, particulary Baumgartner and Jones's (1993) dual mobilization theory, venue shifting, and issue expansion to describe the battle for control over the political agenda regarding the property rights issue in America. I employ data gathered from Congressional committee hearings concerning property matters, including property rights and regulatory takings, from 1959-1995 and interviews with people closely involved with the issue to explain the political circumstances of the property rights issue. I use the hearings' data to study for the tone, the participants, jurisdictional control, and the use of nonlegislative hearings to come to some determinations regarding the agenda battle over the property rights issue. Also, I use interview data and previous research to try to explain the issue's vertical shift of venues and why some states enact takings legislation and other do not. This study provides evidence that the property rights community has mobilized and successfully challenged for control of the political agenda in Congress regarding the property rights issue. Also, it suggests that the jurisdictional control over property matters in Congress by committees that are traditionally unfavorable to property rights interests have prevented the passing of any substantive federal takings legislation. I find that committee chairs used nonlegislative hearings as a forum accessible to rival interests to express their views. And, venue shifting was not a strategy employed by the property rights community to gain agenda control in the states. This is the first comprehensive political analysis of the property rights issue in America. My findings contribute to the contemporary knowledge regarding agenda setting and venue shifting, as well as set the stage for a deeper analysis of state level action concerning the property rights issue.

show abstract

Land Use and The Constitution

Cited by 8 publications

References 0 publications

The Nation-State and Urban Governance

The Nation-State and Urban Governance

The New “Takings” Proposals in State Legislation: Private Property Rights Protection or a New Entitlement?

Protecting property rights in America

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About