ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Real Estate & Property Law Blogs -> inversecondemnation

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Real Estate & Property Law

: inversecondemnation

Cal. Supreme Court Won't Review San Francisco Redevelopment Initiative

By Robert Thomas (inversecondemnation.com)

ADVERTISEMENTS

According to this report from the San Francisco Chronicle, the California Supreme Court has denied review of Defend Bayview Hunters Point Committee v. City and County of San Francisco, 167 Cal. App. 4th, 84 Cal. Rptr. 3d 486 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008), the decision held:

The Defend Bayview Hunters Point Committee (DBHPC) gathered the required number of signatures on a petition to force a citywide referendum on an ordinance adopting a redevelopment plan for the Bayview Hunters Point community. The City and County of San Francisco (the City) rejected the petition because it failed to include a copy of the 57-page redevelopment plan that had been incorporated by reference in the ordinance when the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco voted to approve it. DBHPC's ensuing petition for a writ of mandate compelling the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors (Clerk) to accept the referendum petition was denied by the trial court, and this appeal followed. We affirm the judgment denying DBHPC relief.

According to the report:

The Board of Supervisors voted in May 2006 to place nearly 1,400 acres, more than half of Bayview-Hunters Point, under control of the city Redevelopment Agency.

Backers said the plan would reduce blight, promote affordable housing and provide startup money for businesses from new tax revenue.

Opponents, the Committee to Defend Bayview Hunters Point, said property seizure and gentrification would displace residents and businesses.

In other words, the redevelopment plan will not be put to a vote of the people, and it is full steam ahead for the project.  The critical part of the report is the last paragraph:

When Hunters Point underwent redevelopment in the 1970s, the city said it would replace housing for residents who were forced to leave, but most of the promised housing was never built. The city is now offering the former residents or their descendants top priority for any available affordable housing if they live in San Francisco and meet income standards.

Any bets on whether it will be diffferent this time around?

Full post as published by inversecondemnation on January 29, 2009 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0021 secs (from cache 10/31/26 17:42:20)