{"title":"Too Clever for Words: The Demise of Oregon's Measure 7","authors":"E. Sullivan","doi":"10.1080/00947598.2002.10394788","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00947598.2002.10394788","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract On October 4 2002, the Oregon Supreme Court upheld invalidation of a voter-approved measure that would have required government payment for most regulations that had the effect of devaluing property. The court held that the measure, is presented, violated those provisions for amending the Oregon Constitution requiring separate votes on each state constitutional provision amended unless the amendments were “closely related.” By excepting certain disfavored uses—such as bars, casinos, and strip clubs—from the payment scheme, the court ruled that the drafters of the measure impermissibly implicated other rights protected by the state constitution. Thus ended a journey that had begun with an effort to gain government payments for regulation and ended with a determination that negating that payment for uses that involved expressive conduct undermined the measure.","PeriodicalId":154411,"journal":{"name":"Land Use Law & Zoning Digest","volume":"2493 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131202811","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Index","authors":"","doi":"10.1080/00947598.2002.10394791","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00947598.2002.10394791","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":154411,"journal":{"name":"Land Use Law & Zoning Digest","volume":"184 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121300234","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Judicial Decisions","authors":"","doi":"10.1080/00947598.2002.10394786","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00947598.2002.10394786","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract “Judicial Decisions” are abstracts of federal and state court decisions addressing issues of importance to the land use lawyer and planner, such as zoning, inverse condemnation, growth management, signs and billboards, vested rights, and many more.","PeriodicalId":154411,"journal":{"name":"Land Use Law & Zoning Digest","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122027941","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency: About More Than Moratoria","authors":"J. Kayden","doi":"10.1080/00947598.2002.10394784","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00947598.2002.10394784","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In the June 2002 issue, we were pleased to feature commentaries from nine distinguished land-use attorneys on the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Tahoe-Sierra Preservation Council v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (122 S. Ct. 1465). The opinion has already had a swift and substantial impact, providing grist for continuing education programs, conferences, law review articles and, as of late September, cited in five federal district courts, in four federal courts of appeals, the federal claims court, the Supreme Courts of Alaska, Idaho, Kansas, Pennsylvania, and South Dakota, as well as the Courts of Appeals in Ohio, Texas, and Washington. [See, eg., Barefoot v. City of Wilmington, 37 Fed. Appx. 626 (U.S. App., 4th Cir.) (Decided June 10, 2002); Ken Leahy Constr. v. City of Gladstone, 36 Fed. Appx. 311 (U.S. App., 9th Cir.) (Decided June 4, 2002); Boise Cascade Corp. v. United States, 296 F.3d 1339 (U.S. App., Fed. Cir.) (Decided July 19, 2002); Conti v. United States, 291 F.3d 1334 (U.S. App., Fed. Cir.) (Decided May 29, 2002); Machipongo Land & Coal Co. v. Dep't of Envtl. Protection, 799 A.2d 751 (Pa. 2002)]","PeriodicalId":154411,"journal":{"name":"Land Use Law & Zoning Digest","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114542413","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Index","authors":"","doi":"10.1080/00947598.2002.10394787","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00947598.2002.10394787","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":154411,"journal":{"name":"Land Use Law & Zoning Digest","volume":"2012 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127408770","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Amicus Committee","authors":"","doi":"10.1080/00947598.2002.10394785","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00947598.2002.10394785","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":154411,"journal":{"name":"Land Use Law & Zoning Digest","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131280701","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"And the Walls Came Tumbling Down","authors":"N. Stroud","doi":"10.1080/00947598.2002.10394780","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00947598.2002.10394780","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Karen Shidel believed that the Martin County Commission had it wrong when it approved an apartment development on property adjacent to her single-family neighborhood. The county comprehensive plan requires that new residential development have “comparable density and compatible dwelling unit types” to its neighbors. After a long fight through the courts, Shidel won her case, and in a startling decision, the courts required the developer to demolish the apartments he built during the litigation. The decision, Pinecrest Lakes, Inc. v. Shidel, 795 So. 2d 191 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001)(54 ZD 60), sent a shock wave across Florida. Although not unprecedented, it reaffirms the power of the comprehensive plan and citizen advocacy, and creates land-use lessons for attorneys and planners representing developers, local governments, and homeowners.","PeriodicalId":154411,"journal":{"name":"Land Use Law & Zoning Digest","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130502757","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Index","authors":"","doi":"10.1080/00947598.2002.10394783","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00947598.2002.10394783","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":154411,"journal":{"name":"Land Use Law & Zoning Digest","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128433641","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"New Legislation","authors":"","doi":"10.1080/00947598.2002.10394782","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00947598.2002.10394782","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract “New Legislation” are abstracts of legislation enacted by the states addressing issues of importance to the land use lawyer and planner, such as energy and environmental measures, subdivision and lot regulations, and powers of the planning commission.","PeriodicalId":154411,"journal":{"name":"Land Use Law & Zoning Digest","volume":"69 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126094827","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Judicial Decisions","authors":"","doi":"10.1080/00947598.2002.10394781","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00947598.2002.10394781","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract “Judicial Decisions” are abstracts of federal and state court decisions addressing issues of importance to the land use lawyer and planner, such as zoning, inverse condemnation, growth management, signs and billboards, vested rights, and many more.","PeriodicalId":154411,"journal":{"name":"Land Use Law & Zoning Digest","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130323154","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
