My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC_Minutes_2005_0822
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
200x
>
2005
>
CC_Minutes_2005_0822
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 9:27:41 AM
Creation date
9/13/2005 11:14:12 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Rules/Appointments
Meeting Date
8/22/2005
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
46
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />HAMLINE <br />UNIVERSITY <br /> <br /> <br />Graduate School <br />ol Puhlic Administration <br />and Management <br />Roseville Eminent Domain Talk on Ke/o v. City of New London <br /> <br />August 22, 2005 <br />David Schultz, Professor <br />hamiine University <br />651.523.2858 <br />dschultz(a1hamline.edu <br /> <br />I. Introduction <br />A. What is eminent domain? <br />I. 5" Amendment stipulation <br />a. Public use <br />b. Just compensation <br />B. Public use doctrine <br />I. Must fmd a public use <br />2. Public use primary over incidental private benefit <br />3. What are traditional public uses <br /> <br />B. <br /> <br />Oy of New London <br />Basic facts <br />I. Taking of private house for parking lot to support new facility for Pfizer Pharmaceutical <br />2. Comp plan and hearings in place <br />3. Challenged as not a valid public use <br />Central legal qnestion: Is the taking of private property from one individual and transferring it to <br />another for the pnrposes of economic development a valid public use? Supreme Court says yes. <br />Permitted under 5" Amendment <br />Reasoning: <br />I. Long held that economic development is valid public use <br />2. No bright line rule <br />3. Role of comprehensive plan and hearings <br /> <br />II. <br /> <br />Keto v. <br />A. <br /> <br />C. <br />D. <br /> <br />III. Ke/o's Significance <br />A. Ok to economic development <br />B. Board judicial deference but not surren(ier <br />C. Role of comp plan <br />D. State and local governments canbe more restrictive <br /> <br />IV. Reaction to Keto <br />A. The government can take my house!! ! ! <br /> <br />V. Options <br />A. Do nothing and rely upon wisdom of local officials <br />B. Bright line at economic development or private homes <br />C. Eminent domain impact statement <br />1. Factors to assess <br />2. Who bares burden and benefits <br />3. Impact on those whose property is taken <br />4. Impact on neighborhood <br />D. Redefme public use <br />I. Declare what is a valid public use and when <br /> <br />VI. Conclusions <br /> <br />MS-A1740 - 1536 Hewitt Avenue, Saint Paul, MN 55104-1284 <br />651-523-2284 - 651-523-3098 fax - gradprog@hamline.edll - www.hamline.edll/gpam <br />ilJinneso!a ;i' FinI <<ff#,-j 7hulition Since <br /> <br />._u"' <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.