Fallout from Supreme Court case on is still unclear, but there's no question that cities and counties will have to make "individualized determinations" more often, bulletproof their nexus studies, and allow more appeals.
The U.S. Supreme Court's exactions ruling left a lot of things up in the air. Most important: Does California's typical "fair share" methodology for general plan-level exactions meet the court's "rough proportionality" rule?
U.S. Supreme Court rules unanimously that California's unique exactions rule is unconstitutional. But will it really require California cities and counties to scale back on exactions?
They could simply box in California cities on nexus and proportionality. Or, led by Thomas and Alito, they could throw the bomb and say development is a right and not a privilege
By taking a development fee case from El Dorado County, the U.S. Supreme Court may have the chance to narrow current limitations on exactions -- or get rid of them altogether.
Court also concludes the requirement calling for all roads to be built before any private development is constructed runs afoul of the Nollan/Dolan doctrine.
In a blow to the Pacific Legal Foundation, the California Supreme Court rules that Encinitas landowners can't simultaneously sue and build. >>read more
The U.S. Supreme Court has tightened the screws on exactions, ruling in a case from Florida that government agencies must follow the Nollan/Dolan doctrine – even when a permit is denied and when the exaction involves money as well as property.
