• Ed Thomas posted an update in the group Group logo of Coastal Legal Issues and TopicsCoastal Legal Issues and Topics 7 years, 5 months ago

    Rob Thomas posted a favorable review of an Article Lynsey Johnson and I wrote for the Environmental Law Institute on his very influential property rights blog, “inverse condemnation.” I think this posting is a huge step forward in an effort to reach out to the development community, an important part of the “Whole Community” we need to approach, so as to transform the way we do development in the United States from its current unsafe and unsustainable, un-resilient model into a safer more resilient model.
    Rob writes:
    New Article Of Note: Turning Koontz Into an Opportunity for More Resilient Communities
    Posted: 06 May 2014 05:44 AM PDT

    Here’s an article worth reading, co-authored by our colleague Edward Thomas (no relation, although we often kid that Ed is our brother-in-the-law), President of the Natural Hazard Mitigation Association, and a fellow who is concerned both with anticipating natural hazards such as sea level rise, hurricanes, and the like, as well as property rights.

    Thanks to permission from the Environmental Law Institute, which has has graciously allowed us to reproduce Ed’s latest from the National Wetlands Newsletter, we’re able to bring you “Turning Koontz Into an Opportunity for More Resilient Communities,” which posits that the sky is not falling because of the Supreme Court’s decision in that case:

    Many did not see the positive side of Koontz when the decision was released. Almost immediately, many commentators viewed the case as a victory for property owners and a defeat for government regulation. Many alarmist articles were written quoting attorneys and well-recognized scholars in the legal community who predicted that the sky was falling as a result of the ruling. They claimed that the practice of subjecting monetary exactions to the Nollan/Dolan takings analysis would devastate land use planning and detract from the ability of local governments to negotiate for conditions that mitigate the impacts of proposed development.

    Not quite, say Ed and his co-author:

    In the past, agencies have enjoyed a deferential approach to their decisionmaking process. It is now vital for agencies to articulate the benefits, costs, and justifications for hazard mitigation. While agencies may view this extra work as a burden, providing this information can lead to increased community support for such projects. Communities will be able to witness firsthand the cost of development and the benefit of mitigation. In turn, this can lead to an increase in support for mitigation projects.

    Read the entire article here, or below.

    Edward Thomas & Lynsey Johnson, Turning Koontz Into an Opportunity for More Resilient Communities, Nati…
    Related articles
    Brief For The Respondent In Koontz: “Mere Obligation To Spend Money Is Not A Taking”
    More Amicus Briefs In Koontz: Nollan/Dolan Apply To All Exactions
    New Article On Nollan-Dolan-Koontz
    Government Can’t Make Developers “Show Them the Money”
    Koontz: 5-4 Supreme Court Sides with Landowner in Takings Case
    Koontz and the Future of Local Government Finance
    Exactions: Supreme Court Right On The Money
    Surprise! Environmental Lawprof Dislikes Koontz
    This posting includes an audio/video/photo media file: Download Now

    Ed Thomas uploaded new file(s): thomas_johnson-eli-permission.pdf to Coastal Legal Issues and Topics

CONTACT US

We're not around right now. But you can send us an email and we'll get back to you, asap.

Sending

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

Create Account