Here are items we’re reading today, in no particular order:
- Bill Ward’s thoughts on Klumpp v. City of Avalon, the recent New Jersey Supreme Court case about inverse condemnation and beach restoration. Our take here.
- From Honolulu Civil Beat comes Michael Levine’s recent three-part series on the multi-billion dollar Honolulu rail project. Start with Honolulu Rail Heading Right at Them (which includes some of our thoughts on the condemnation issues (“‘At the end of the day, at least the way it’s shaping up now, the taking of property for public transportation purposes is generally seen as one of those classic uses for eminent domain, provided there’s no pretext for private business,’ Thomas said.”), then continue with Rail Could Force Out Church, Homes After 50 Years in Pearl City, then finish up with Aiea Businesses Unknowingly in the Path of the Train. Note that much of the content is behind a paywall, but that there are several levels of “membership.”
- Continuing with this week’s apparent theme “adult-oriented” land use issues (e.g., the porn dorm postings here and here), see Madain v. City of Stanton, No. G042218 (Cal. Ct. App. June 23, 2010). In that case, the City denied an application to operate an “adult-oriented cabaret,” because it was near a “planned church.” More from the Orange County Register here.