Property Case Scheduled for Today

February 26, 2001

The American Farm Bureau Federation and the Rhode Island Farm Bureau have filed a brief in what they consider a pivotal U.S. Supreme Court property case that will be heard today. In the lawsuit, "Palazzolo vs. Rhode Island," Farm Bureau filed a friend-of-the-court brief supporting Rhode Island landowner Anthony Palazzolo who is seeking compensation for a substantial loss of property value due to a state wetlands law.

The case could help set legal rules that extend compensation, under the Constitution, to landowners who lose less-than-full value of their property due to regulations. Farm Bureau argues that owners of land that has been devalued by regulation are entitled to fair compensation, even if that land retains some relatively small value.

"Otherwise, regulators will be free to take property from individuals to benefit the public at large, free of any obligation to compensate," Farm Bureau states. "If (Palazzolo's) land has not been taken, merely because a small part of it supposedly retains some economic use, no farmer or rancher is safe from huge, uncompensated regulatory burdens in the name of the public good. That is not what the framers of the Bill of Rights contemplated."

America's farmers and ranchers have much at stake in this case, says AFBF. That's especially true in Rhode Island, where farmland often is in or adjacent to areas regulated by the state. According to Farm Bureau, when permission to use private land is denied, "farmers need protection (as provided in the Constitution)...if they are to find economically feasible ways to use their land and remain in the agricultural business."

Farm Bureau also contends that any involuntary transfer of property short of an outright sale – such as a bequest – should not limit a property holder's right to compensation, even if regulations that lower the property's value were in place at the time of transfer.

Farm Bureau also argues that landowners should not be forced to meet constantly changing demands of regulators when a parcel of land is in question. Regulators often use such tactics to "delay or avoid a takings claim by dragging out the administrative process."

"Such rules especially threaten the rights of farmers and ranchers, who generally lack the financial resources to engage in extended administrative proceedings," Farm Bureau stated.

Farm Bureau is urging the Supreme Court to reverse an earlier ruling by the Rhode Island Supreme Court and grant Palazzolo's request for fair compensation under terms of the Constitution's Takings Clause. A decision is not likely before June.