Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Mgmt.Dist

摘要

Florida court must reconsider whether property owner who refused to pay for offsite wetlands mitigation is entitled under Florida law to damages for denial of its land use and wetlands development permits, because: (1) under doctrine of unconstitutional conditions, discretionary government benefits cannot be conditioned on requirements that would burden owner's rights under U.S. Constitution; (2) property demand conditions of land use permits that lack nexus to permitted property and rough proportionality to impacts of development on permitted property unduly burden rights under Fifth Amendment of U.S. Constitution not to have property taken without just compensation; (3) doctrine applies to denials of permits based on applicants' refusal to turn over property; (4) nexus and rough proportionality requirements apply to land use permit exactions of money; and (5) Florida Supreme Court erroneously ruled that nexus and rough proportionality requirements cannot apply to denials of permits or to exactions of money.