Eminent Domain Blog : Pennsylvania Eminent Domain Lawyer & Attorney : Fox Rothschild Law Firm : Condemnation, Real Estate Valuation : Philadelphia, Bucks County, Pennsylvania

Congress is considering a bill that would prohibit a state or local government from exercising its power of eminent domain over property to be used for economic development or over property that is used for economic development within seven years after that exercise. The bill would establish a private cause of action for any private property owner or tenant who suffers injury as a result of a violation of this Act. The bill would also prohibit a state or local government from exercising its power of eminent domain over property of a religious or other nonprofit organization because of the organization's nonprofit or tax-exempt status or any related quality.
The bill is currently pending in the House Judiciary Committee’s Constitution Subcommittee.
 

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In a move that sent tremors throughout the appraisal community, the Appraisal Institute withdrew its sponsorship of The Appraisal Foundation on September 7. (See my September 16, 2010 entry).

The Appraisal Foundation has now posted a “Q&A” on its website regarding this important issue. That post can be found at: www.graphicmail.com/new/viewnewsletter2.aspx

According to the Appraisal Foundation,

“the Appraisal Institute once again failed to communicate with the Foundation regarding a matter directly related to our organization. In this case, without the Foundation’s knowledge or approval, the Appraisal Institute approached three other organizations with the following proposed revision to the federal law (FIRREA) which grants authority to The Appraisal Foundation:

“to maintain the independence of the Appraisal Standards and Appraiser Qualifications Boards and to avoid potential conflicts of interest, The Appraisal Foundation shall not directly or indirectly offer or sponsor any qualifying or continuing education courses for certified or licensed real estate appraisers beyond the National Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice course specifically required for licensure and certification.”

According, to the Appraisal Foundation, this was not the first time the Appraisal Institute allegedly violated similar Foundation rules.

The Foundation also stated that “under the right circumstances, there will always be a door open for the Appraisal Institute to return to The Appraisal Foundation.” However, the Foundation expressly stated, “we are always willing to talk with their representatives. We hope and believe the opportunities associated with a change in their leadership in a few months may be constructive.”

Once again, I truly hope these important organizations resolve their differences.
 

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In a move that sent tremors throughout the appraisal community, the Appraisal Institute withdrew its sponsorship of The Appraisal Foundation on September 7.

The Appraisal Institute is the most prestigious real estate organization and has more than 25,000 members and 91 chapters throughout the world. I am an affiliate member of AI (the designation for non-appraiser real estate professionals). The Appraisal Foundation was founded in 1987 by eight major appraisal organizations to help regulate the appraisal profession within the US. It is perhaps best known for its promulgation of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (“USPAP”) which contains the generally accepted standards for professional appraisal practice in North America.

AI and the Appraisal Foundation have been fighting throughout this year regarding AI actions relating to proposed legislation. The Appraisal Foundation claimed that AI improperly sought to influence other Appraisal Foundation members to support legislation that may have been contrary to the Foundation’s interests. The Foundation ultimately sanctioned AI for its alleged actions.

The AI Board of Directors’ letter to the Foundation stated: “The Appraisal Institute must be able to discuss freely issues of concern to, and advance the interests of, its members, the profession and the public, which The Appraisal Foundation has made clear, is inconsistent with Foundation sponsorship. Moreover, the Foundation has decided to punish the Appraisal Institute for actions that it did not commit. That decision is grossly unfair, unacceptable, and attacks the very integrity of the Appraisal Institute.”

AI’s statement regarding its withdrawal can be found at appraisalinstitute.org/newsadvocacy/news/2010/090710_AI_WithdrawalFromTAF.aspx

It is truly sad that these two important organizations cannot work together. Hopefully, cooler heads will prevail and will close this rift.
 

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The City Commissioners of Ventnor, New Jersey, have passed a law limiting that City’s ability to condemn properties. On July, 17, 2008, the City Commissioners voted to prohibit Ventnor's use of eminent domain for redevelopment projects that involve private developers. According to press accounts of the meeting, there was overwhelming support for the law and no contrary opinions.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

A New Jersey Senate Committee has passed a statute that is designed to deal with alleged eminent domain abuses. This statute has been discussed for two years and is purportedly designed to protect homeowners from developers seeking the land for private development. Senator Ronald Rice, the sponsor, said that the bill would limit the use of eminent domain for redevelopment. It also adds new requirements regarding pre-condemnation negotiations between the condemning authority and the property owner. The bill was passed by the Senate Committee and Urban Affairs Committee and can be found at  www.njleg.state.nj.us/2008/Bills/S1000/757_I1.HTM.  The bill now moves to consideration by the full Senate.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Superior Court of New Jersey has ruled that a property owner that withdraws the “estimated just compensation” deposited into court waives its right to challenge the condemnation.

In Township of Piscataway v. South Washington Ave., LLC., the Township of Piscataway condemned a 75 acre farm to preserve it for open space. In New Jersey, condemnors initiate a condemnation action by filing a complaint and also file a “declaration of taking” either at the time the complaint is filed or some time thereafter. In this case, the property owners challenged the condemnation when the Township filed its complaint. While that challenge was pending, the Township filed its declaration of taking and deposited its estimate of the fair market value of the property – known as “estimated just compensation” or “EJC” – into court. The property owners withdrew the money but continued the challenge to the condemnation.

The New Jersey Superior Court held that a condemnee who withdraws the EJC funds is barred from asserting any other than those relating to the amount of compensation owed to the condemnee. The Court explained that “having accepted the benefit” of the funds, the condemnee cannot now challenge the taking.

• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link