This just in: our Pacific Legal Foundation colleagues have informed us that the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review another takings case.
The questions presented are:
1. Whether the government can be held liable for a taking when it refuses to issue a land-use permit on the sole basis that the permit applicant did not accede to a permit condition that, if applied, would violate the essential nexus and rough proportionality tests set out in Nollan v. California Coastal Commission, 483 U.S. 825 (1987), and Dolan v. City of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994); and2. Whether the nexus and proportionality tests set out in Nollan and Dolan apply to a land-use exaction that takes the form of a government demand that a permit applicant dedicate money, services, labor, or any other type of personal property to a public use.
The case is Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management Dist., No. 11-1447 (cert. granted Oct. 5, 2012). The Florida Supreme Court opinion holding that the nexus and proportionality tests of Nollan/Dolan do not apply to government demands for cash is here. PLF's cert petition is here. The water district's BIO is here.
We're on the road at an ABA conference, so will post more details later.
