The National Academies Press

Currently Skimming:

Pages 24-28

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.

From page 24... ... he new post-Kelo laws statutorily redefined the concept of ‘fair market value' in a manner that will increase property acquisition costs."296 Nevada reported that its post-Kelo laws have made the department "consider potential settlements that we may have rejected in the past, thereby increasing acquisition cost. We are also experiencing several inverse condemnation cases…."297 The full effect of the changes in Nevada are not known because the amendments were added recently and because the downward trend in real property prices has reduced right-of-way program costs.298 Wyoming also cited higher costs as an effect of postKelo reforms because of increased steps and time needed for an acquisition, including more attorney time by staff and consultant attorneys.299 291 Id. Read the entire page →
From page 25... ... be paid only if a property owner received a jury verdict higher than ‘the highest written offer' made by a condemnor prior to filing for condemnation. This highest written offer prior to filing is now incorporated into the Department's negotiation process and is routinely used in situations where it is likely that we will be forced to file for condemnation.303 As discussed in Section V.D.6, even if post-Kelo reforms result in payments exceeding fair market value, FHWA's policy, as long as the costs are "appropriately documented," is to reimburse for the increased costs. Read the entire page →
From page 26... ... lind acceptance of an appraiser's testimony…would permit the condemning authority to provide landowners with ‘slipshod or incompetent appraisals,' the precise evil the legislature sought to avoid" by the amendments."322 In a Minnesota case, a condemning authority failed to comply strictly with the state's appraisal and negotiation requirements in Minnesota Statute Section 117.036.323 The statutory provision was amended postKelo in 2006 "to govern all condemnation petitions filed under chapter 117."324 The court held that the state's failure did not deprive the district court of subject matter jurisdiction because substantial compliance was sufficient.325 Moreover, notwithstanding the intended transfer after the taking, the taking was held to serve a public purpose, the latter determination being a judicial issue in Minnesota.326 2. Land Acquisition Twenty-two departments reported that their state's post-Kelo reforms have had no effect on land acquisition, but the DOTs in four states, California, Missouri, Nevada, and Wyoming, said that there has been an effect with one state reporting that one of the state's postKelo reforms actually benefited the department. Read the entire page →
From page 27... ... is hard to measure the impact."335 If the department acquires property by eminent domain, the department "must use it within 5 years of the acquisition. Therefore, we must keep track of these acquisitions…."336 In contrast, in 2006, Pennsylvania enacted the Property Rights Protection Act337 as part of a reenactment of Pennsylvania's Eminent Domain Code.338 Because the post-Kelo changes apply mostly to redevelopment, PennDOT reported that the changes have not affected any PennDOT projects.339 "In fact, the only provision directly impacting PennDOT bolsters PennDOT's ability to condemn private lands to lessen the impacts of 327 Caltrans' Survey Response, dated Mar. Read the entire page →
From page 28... ... See also Eaton & Locher, supra note 347, at 25. 350 MHTC's Survey Response, dated Mar. Read the entire page →

From page 24...

... he new post-Kelo laws statutorily redefined the concept of ‘fair market value' in a manner that will increase property acquisition costs."296 Nevada reported that its post-Kelo laws have made the department "consider potential settlements that we may have rejected in the past, thereby increasing acquisition cost. We are also experiencing several inverse condemnation cases…."297 The full effect of the changes in Nevada are not known because the amendments were added recently and because the downward trend in real property prices has reduced right-of-way program costs.298 Wyoming also cited higher costs as an effect of postKelo reforms because of increased steps and time needed for an acquisition, including more attorney time by staff and consultant attorneys.299 291 Id.

Read the entire page →

From page 25...

... be paid only if a property owner received a jury verdict higher than ‘the highest written offer' made by a condemnor prior to filing for condemnation. This highest written offer prior to filing is now incorporated into the Department's negotiation process and is routinely used in situations where it is likely that we will be forced to file for condemnation.303 As discussed in Section V.D.6, even if post-Kelo reforms result in payments exceeding fair market value, FHWA's policy, as long as the costs are "appropriately documented," is to reimburse for the increased costs.

Read the entire page →

From page 26...

... lind acceptance of an appraiser's testimony…would permit the condemning authority to provide landowners with ‘slipshod or incompetent appraisals,' the precise evil the legislature sought to avoid" by the amendments."322 In a Minnesota case, a condemning authority failed to comply strictly with the state's appraisal and negotiation requirements in Minnesota Statute Section 117.036.323 The statutory provision was amended postKelo in 2006 "to govern all condemnation petitions filed under chapter 117."324 The court held that the state's failure did not deprive the district court of subject matter jurisdiction because substantial compliance was sufficient.325 Moreover, notwithstanding the intended transfer after the taking, the taking was held to serve a public purpose, the latter determination being a judicial issue in Minnesota.326 2. Land Acquisition Twenty-two departments reported that their state's post-Kelo reforms have had no effect on land acquisition, but the DOTs in four states, California, Missouri, Nevada, and Wyoming, said that there has been an effect with one state reporting that one of the state's postKelo reforms actually benefited the department.

Read the entire page →

From page 27...

... is hard to measure the impact."335 If the department acquires property by eminent domain, the department "must use it within 5 years of the acquisition. Therefore, we must keep track of these acquisitions…."336 In contrast, in 2006, Pennsylvania enacted the Property Rights Protection Act337 as part of a reenactment of Pennsylvania's Eminent Domain Code.338 Because the post-Kelo changes apply mostly to redevelopment, PennDOT reported that the changes have not affected any PennDOT projects.339 "In fact, the only provision directly impacting PennDOT bolsters PennDOT's ability to condemn private lands to lessen the impacts of 327 Caltrans' Survey Response, dated Mar.

Read the entire page →

From page 28...

... See also Eaton & Locher, supra note 347, at 25. 350 MHTC's Survey Response, dated Mar.

Read the entire page →

← Previous Chapter Skim

Next Chapter Skim →

This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.