Ever since last year’s Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. City of New London, the American public has been talking about eminent domain, or the taking of private property by a government entity in exchange for “just compensation.” As a land use attorney, formerly practicing in New Jersey, I applauded the decision, but not for the proposition for which it stood. Although I agreed with the Court’s reasoning, which allows municipalities to take property for the “public purpose” of economic development, I cheered more so because the case brought land use law to the forefront of the national debate, crowding out talk of Brangelina and Iraq, at least for a few minutes. The outrage with which property rights proponents responded, and their sheer numbers, got me to thinking about the power and sometimes ridiculous results of land use decisions.
For the moment, I’ve taken a step away from practicing law. However, I still enjoy keeping watch over the wonderful world of land use law. The beauty of it is that decisions on where to locate what, and how big, is a highly democratic affair, even greater than voting or serving on a jury. For each site plan or subdivision application, anybody can stand up and voice their opinion by simply showing up to a land use board meeting. The decision makers are members of the community, who may or may not have some expertise on the subject. Of course there are lawyers and politicians to keep a watchful eye, but in the end, it is truly “the people” that decide what to allow within their burg. And yet, many people who enter the process without a formal introduction find it foreign, and, in the end, a highly unsatisfying experience.
With this blog, I set out to open up a forum to allow people to vent their frustrations with this system that determines our built-up environment. It shall strive for neutrality and communal support. For this introductory message, I ask for input from those out there who have been shortchanged by the process, just like Suzanne Kelo claims to have been. (In the end, the plaintiff in the Supreme Court case was able to keep her house). Have you ever seen an unwanted use go up near your house? Have you ever had to battle a neighbor over home improvements which required board approval? Have you ever had to fight the local government for a seemingly trivial request? For that matter, are there any of you on the municipal side who have something to gripe about regarding applicants? I invite your comments, from any and all perspectives. Ultimately, the objective is to demystify the process, and allow us all to understand the highly complex dynamics involved in a dispute. Land use is an inherently local affair, but behind the specifics of each locality’s process is the universal search for the “right decision.”
A recent Los Angeles Times op-ed piece, reflecting on the passing of the 300 million mark in American population, argued that there’s plenty of room to grow, so there’s no need to worry. Like most media produced in Southern California, the article is wholly out of touch with reality. Is there really somewhere left where someone wouldn’t notice a 200-home subdivision being built, not to mention have something to say about it? The land use process provides a forum to vent. I offer this forum as a place to vent when the process goes horribly wrong.
For the moment, I’ve taken a step away from practicing law. However, I still enjoy keeping watch over the wonderful world of land use law. The beauty of it is that decisions on where to locate what, and how big, is a highly democratic affair, even greater than voting or serving on a jury. For each site plan or subdivision application, anybody can stand up and voice their opinion by simply showing up to a land use board meeting. The decision makers are members of the community, who may or may not have some expertise on the subject. Of course there are lawyers and politicians to keep a watchful eye, but in the end, it is truly “the people” that decide what to allow within their burg. And yet, many people who enter the process without a formal introduction find it foreign, and, in the end, a highly unsatisfying experience.
With this blog, I set out to open up a forum to allow people to vent their frustrations with this system that determines our built-up environment. It shall strive for neutrality and communal support. For this introductory message, I ask for input from those out there who have been shortchanged by the process, just like Suzanne Kelo claims to have been. (In the end, the plaintiff in the Supreme Court case was able to keep her house). Have you ever seen an unwanted use go up near your house? Have you ever had to battle a neighbor over home improvements which required board approval? Have you ever had to fight the local government for a seemingly trivial request? For that matter, are there any of you on the municipal side who have something to gripe about regarding applicants? I invite your comments, from any and all perspectives. Ultimately, the objective is to demystify the process, and allow us all to understand the highly complex dynamics involved in a dispute. Land use is an inherently local affair, but behind the specifics of each locality’s process is the universal search for the “right decision.”
A recent Los Angeles Times op-ed piece, reflecting on the passing of the 300 million mark in American population, argued that there’s plenty of room to grow, so there’s no need to worry. Like most media produced in Southern California, the article is wholly out of touch with reality. Is there really somewhere left where someone wouldn’t notice a 200-home subdivision being built, not to mention have something to say about it? The land use process provides a forum to vent. I offer this forum as a place to vent when the process goes horribly wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment