Error during command authentication.

City's proposed Mandatory Subsidized Housing risks running afoul of US Constitution’s Takings Clause: “Nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

 

The very fact that is mandatory, a stick not a carrot, make a strong argument that the (often unwanted) density clause is not ‘just compensation’. If it were sufficient , it would be a voluntary incentive.

 

Interesting, The Supreme Court just ruled Friday/yesterday 9-0 in SHEETZ v. COUNTY OF EL DORADO in support of the Takings Clause. While not directly on point (was re excessive traffic impact fee on single family home); a unanimous decision does give guidance re the current courts likely stance.