Blog

Filter By:
Sort By:

Tag: Nollan v. California Coastal Commission

August 31, 2017

Article: are critical area buffers unconstitutional?

Today, the Seattle Journal of Environmental Law published my article, Are Critical Area Buffers Unconstitutional? Demystifying The Doctrine of Unconstitutional Conditions. Although the article focuses on developments in Washington state law, it contains arguments relevant to property rights practitioners elsewhere. For example, the article explains ...

July 05, 2016

Seattle's Grand Bargain–a bargain for whom?

  The City of Seattle has proposed “The Grand Bargain” to fix its affordable housing crisis. The epic title doesn’t meet expectations. “The Grand Bargain” would force housing developers across the City to set aside a percentage of their developments as rent-restricted affordable housing units. Or developers ca ...

April 11, 2016

The trial court wasn't interested, but maybe you'll be

Last week, the San Diego Superior Court denied PLF’s request to submit an amicus brief on behalf of the San Diego Port Tenants Association in San Diego Unified Port District v. California Coastal Commission.*  The case concerns the Port’s challenge to the Commission’s denial of a proposed amendment to the Port’s master pl ...

May 14, 2015

Fighting to protect San Juan property owners from land grab

On June 2, 2015, Division I of the Washington State Court of Appeals is set to hear oral argument in the first state case seeking to limit government's ability to coerce property from land use applicants since PLF's landmark victory in Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Mgmt. Dist. (2013). The case, Common Sense Alliance ...

March 06, 2015

Fighting to protect San Juan property owners from land grab

Yesterday, PLF attorneys filed an amicus brief in support of San Juan County's shoreline property owners in the case, Common Sense Alliance v. Growth Management Hearings Board. At issue is San Juan County's update to its critical areas ordinance, which, in part, conditions approval of any new development of a shoreline property upon the dedication ...

August 25, 2014

PLF to forest service: stop coveting private water rights

Last Friday Pacific Legal Foundation filed this comment letter with the United States Forest Service, in opposition to a proposed policy that would prevent the owners of private water rights from transferring them under state law from existing uses to other more economical uses. The American West has an interesting history of privately held rights ...

June 24, 2014

Washington trial court fumbles the ball in a post-Koontz case

Since the U.S. Supreme Court decided Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District last year, I have been on a speaking tour with a prominent government attorney, discussing the case's impact on Washington law. One important point on which we both agreed was that Koontz clarified that an unlawful exactions case falls within the ...

May 12, 2014

Heard through the grapevine: Ninth Circuit holds Koontz allows government price controls

Last week, the Ninth Circuit decided the remand of Horne v. USDA, the raisin case that the Supreme Court overturned last term. The case previously drew attention for what it had to say about Williamson County — the case that keeps essentially all takings cases from federal court. The most recent round in this litigation addresses ...

January 17, 2014

Appellate court ruling blesses extortionate land-use practices

Yesterday, the California First District Court of Appeal ruled against us in Powell v. County of Humboldt.  This is the case challenging the County of Humboldt's requirement that our clients, Scott and Lynn Powell, dedicate a public airspace easement above their property in exchange for a building permit.  The County insists they obtain this perm ...

May 16, 2013

Continuing the fight in Humboldt County

  As reported, PLF represents Humboldt County residents Scott and Lynn Powell in their fight against government extortion.  The County of Humboldt demands that the Powells obtain a building permit to bring some covered porches on their mobile home up to code.  (The prior owner never bothered to get a permit).  But the County won't ...