Post Reply  Post Thread 
Take Back YOUR Constitution and Property
Author Message

Post: #1
Take Back YOUR Constitution and Property

[Image: space.jpg][Image: home.jpg][Image: attorneys.jpg][Image: contact.jpg]
[Image: taking01.jpg]

Act Now >
Enough is enough, and this time The Man (the largest county government in America that governs over 10 million people) is taking too much! The early 1900s were called the “Wild West” because there were no laws regulating how individuals used their land for residential or commercial use. Now federal, state and local laws regulate everything from zoning, housing and building codes to historic preservation and natural resource protection. On November 12, 2014, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted and unanimously indicated its intent to approve the Town & Country - Antelope Valley Area Plan Update, and more generally, the General Area Plan Update for the entire Los Angeles County.

Property owners in the Antelope Valley (the last remnants of the Wild West in Los Angeles county) should ask questions now to see if the changes in the Land Use regulations (RL10, RL20, overlays, etc.) affect their property or whether they have standing as a class plaintiff against the County for violations of the Takings Clause of the federal and state Constitutions. In many areas of the Antelope Valley, the new land use regulations will require at least 10 acres per dwelling unit. Act Now to avoid losing legal rights and property values.

Video of public hearing on the Town & Country Area Plan Update from September 27, 2014 (attorney comments 02:26):

General Information - Regulatory Takings (Wikipedia)
takings clause - The Constitution >

Los Angeles County Takings
Click contact to sign up or ask Questions >

"No person shall be . . . deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." U.S. Constitution, Amendment V

"Private property may be taken or damaged for public use only when just compensation ... has first been paid to, or into the court for, the owner."

Cal. Const., art. I, § 19

u.S. Supreme Court >
"Government hardly could go on if to some extent values incident to property could not be diminished without paying for every such change in the general law. As long recognized some values are enjoyed under an implied limitation and must yield to the police power. But obviously the implied limitation must have its limits or the contract and due process clauses are gone. One fact for consideration in determining such limits is the extent of the diminution. When it reaches a certain magnitude, in most if not in all cases there must be an exercise of eminent domain and compensation to sustain the act. So the question depends upon the particular facts. The greatest weight is given to the judgment of the legislature but it always is open to interested parties to contend that the legislature has gone beyond its constitutional power." Pennsylvania Coal Co v. Mahon, 260 U.S. 393, 413 (1922). "The general rule at least is that while property may be regulated to a certain extent, if regulation goes too far it will be recognized as a taking." Id. at 415. "We are in danger of forgetting that a strong public desire to improve the public condition is not enough to warrant achieving the desire by a shorter cut than the constitutional way of paying for the change." Id. at 416.

13-12-2014 06:32 PM
Quote this message in a reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
Post Reply  Post Thread 

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
hot new Land use designations will devalue your AV property Smiley 0 1,101 20-09-2014 10:10 AM
Last Post: Smiley

View a Printable Version
Send this Thread to a Friend
Subscribe to this thread |