Question 1:
Both the cultural center and the private college would meet the standards set in Kelo vs. City of New London and Kaur vs. New York State Urban Development Corp (NYSUDC). The overall conclusion that both of these cases arrived at was that if there is a stretch of land that is considered to be blighted, then the government can use its eminent domain powers to improve upon it. If an area of land is not considered blighted, but the land can be used to improve civic purpose, then the land can also be taken. The government can give this land to either private or public institutions as long as the new development is for a public purpose.
The first aspect of this case that must be addressed is whether or not the city can actually take…show more content… Implementing the first idea that was presented – a constitutional amendment similar to the State of Florida – would bring the benefit of forcing representatives of the cities to think about all possible outcomes in a takings and also have all of the people of the city represented. This discussion may help avoid the situation that occurred in the City of New London after the Kelo case where the takings were never fully implemented and essentially a failure for the city because the legislature would have a debate and discussion over the proposals. Their vote would also be attached to the ultimate outcome and success of the takings, putting their personal reputation on the line. Both of these aspects of introducing the Florida legislation to Gallatin would help Albert avoid making mistakes in their…show more content… They would both allow takings in stringent conditions that would hamper economic redevelopment. The goal of takings is to improve an area of a city so that the whole city benefits. If laws limit what is considered improvement of a city or if laws are too stringent on what areas can be considered for improvements, then policymakers would not be able to implement all possible methods to improve the city. These limits may also end the economic redevelopment projects outside of the area that was specifically described as blighted. Extremes measures such as this one is not good for the city because it hampers policymakers’ ability to solve problems such as drug abuse and unemployment; both of which are plaguing
