Exactions and Takings after Nollan

Abstract

Communities caught in the cross fire between sprawling urban growth and vanishing infrastructure funds attempt escape with land regulations that “exact” concessions from developers. The practice is widespread and spreading, involves a variety of exaction strategies such as requiring dedications of land or fees for low-income family housing, and is one of the most active tensions between developers and community growth managers in the country. Substantial political and personal energy and money are devoted to avoiding or opposing impact fees,¹ or securing legislative relief from local exactions.² This tension arises, not only from the natural resistance of the development community to additional costs being imposed on their projects, but also from the lack of definitive legal precedents from many state courts or from the United States Supreme Court itself.