The following are some of the ways to get in touch with us Sheetz v. County of El DoradoThe Supreme Court ruled today unanimously that the Takings Clause does not have a “legislative exemption”. In previous cases, such Nollan v. California Coastal Commission You can also find out more about the following: Dolan v. City of Tigard, The Court ruled that local and state governments can violate the Takings Clause by imposing “exactions” on property owners as a requirement to develop land. Some state courts—including the California Court of Appeal in this case—have held there is no Takings Clause liability for land-use exactions in cases where the requirement was imposed by legislation instead of by regulatory agencies. In this instance, a landowner had been barred by El Dorado County from building a new home on his property unless he first paid a $23,420 “traffic impact mitigation” fee.
During oral argument, it was evident that the justices rejected the notion that such a legislative exception exists in a “radical consensus” (as Justice Elena Kagan described it). Counsel for the County also seemed to have given up on the idea of a legislative exception. The unanimous decision today to that effect is not surprising.
