URBAN REDEVELOPMENT STATUTES
35 P.S. § 1701 Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
This act shall be known and may be cited as the "Urban Redevelopment Law."
CREDIT(S) 1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 1. HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES 2003 Main Volume Title of Act: An Act to promote elimination of blighted areas and supply sanitary housing in areas throughout the Commonwealth; by declaring acquisition, sound replanning and redevelopment of such areas to be for the promotion of health, safety, convenience and welfare; creating public bodies corporate and politic to be known as Redevelopment Authorities; authorizing them to engage in the elimination of blighted areas and to plan and contract with private, corporate or governmental redevelopers for their redevelopment; providing for the organization of such authorities; defining and providing for the exercise of their powers and duties, including the acquisition of property by purchase, gift or eminent domain; the leasing and selling of property, including borrowing money, issuing bonds and other obligations, and giving security therefor; restricting the interest of members and employes of authorities; providing for notice and hearing; supplying certain mandatory provisions to be inserted in contracts with redevelopers; prescribing the remedies of obligees of redevelopment authorities; conferring certain duties upon local planning commissions, the governing bodies of cities and counties, and on certain State officers, boards and departments. 1945, May 24, P.L. 991. CROSS REFERENCES
Tax Increment Financing Act, see 53 P.S. § 6930.1 et seq.
RESEARCH REFERENCES 2006 Electronic Pocket Part Update Encyclopedias Summary Pa. Jur. 2d Property § 11:27, Urban Redevelopment.
Treatises and Practice Aids Standard Pennsylvania Practice § 166:1163, Board Authority to Permit License and Permit Transfers. NOTES OF DECISIONS
Validity 1
1. Validity
The Urban Redevelopment Law does not violate Const. Art. 2, § 1 on ground that insufficient standards are set up in the law to guide the authority in exercising powers with which it is vested. Belovsky v. Redevelopment Authority of City of Philadelphia, 54 A.2d 277, 357 Pa. 329, Sup.1947. The Urban Redevelopment Law is not invalid because of any deficiency in its title, even though there is no mention of fact that properties acquired by the authorities pursuant to the law may be sold to private individuals after the redevelopment has been accomplished, where title does state that authorities have the power of leasing and selling of property, and also that they may contract with private redevelopers. Belovsky v. Redevelopment Authority of City of Philadelphia, 54 A.2d 277, 357 Pa. 329, Sup.1947. 35 P.S. § 1701, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1701 Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1702
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness§ 1702. Findings and declaration of policy
(h) That there exists within the Commonwealth, both within and outside certified redevelopment areas, an inadequate supply of residential owner-occupied and rental housing due, in part, to the deterioration of older dwellings, the elimination of substandard dwellings by governmental action, the increased cost of construction and the unavailability of affordable financing from the private sector. (i) That there exists within the Commonwealth, both within and outside certified redevelopment areas, deteriorating commercial and industrial areas and/or individual structures, due, in part, to the fact that there are no private funds available to finance the purchase, construction, rehabilitation, demolition or equipping of the commercial and industrial properties at interest rates that would make the commercial or industrial project economically feasible. Such commercial or industrial projects are needed for the social and economic well-being of communities within the field of operation of authorities. Therefore, it is hereby declared to be the policy of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to promote the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants thereof by the creation of bodies corporate and politic to be known as Redevelopment Authorities, which shall exist and operate for the public purposes of the elimination of blighted areas through economically and socially sound redevelopment of such areas, as provided by this act, in conformity with the comprehensive general plan of their respective municipalities for residential, recreational, commercial, industrial or other purposes, and otherwise encouraging the provision of healthful homes, a decent living environment and adequate places of employment of the people of this Commonwealth. Such purposes are hereby declared to be public uses for which public money may be spent and private property may be acquired by the exercise of the power of eminent domain. criminal purposes; constitute unreasonable interferences with the reasonable and lawful use and enjoyment of other premises in the neighborhood; are harmful to the social and economic well-being of any municipality; depreciate property values; and, generally jeopardize the health, safety and welfare of the public. (g) That there exists a serious shortage of decent, safe or sanitary housing accommodations and for related usages, and that the acquisition of blighted properties for residential and related uses, by eminent domain is a proper public purpose which will promote public health, safety and welfare.
CREDIT(S) 1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 2. Amended 1957, May 27, P.L. 197, § 1; 1968, June 26, P.L. 263, No. 125, § 1; 1978, June 23, P.L. 556, No. 94, § 1, effective in 60 days; 1988, March 30, P.L. 304, No. 39, § 1, imd. effective. HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES 2003 Main Volume Act 1988-39 legislation The 1988 amendment added subsecs. (h) and (i). LAW REVIEW AND JOURNAL COMMENTARIES
through eminent domain. Rachel A. Lewis, 50 Vill. L. Rev. 341 (2005). LIBRARY REFERENCES 2003 Main Volume
Municipal Corporations 267.
Westlaw Topic No. 268.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations § 957.
RESEARCH REFERENCES 2006 Electronic Pocket Part Update Encyclopedias Summary Pa. Jur. 2d Property § 11:22, Public Purpose or Use--Elimination of Urban Blight. Summary Pa. Jur. 2d Property § 11:54, Certification of Blight. UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT
Takings clause, eminent domain, public use, economic development, taking property from one private party for transfer to another, see Kelo v. City of New London, Conn., 2005, 125 S.Ct. 2655.
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Blighted areas 4
Construction and application 2
Jurisdiction 5
Purpose 3
Validity 1
1. Validity
Under statutory declaration of policy of Urban Redevelopment Law, exclusion of warehouse from redevelopment area was not shown to be discriminatory. In re Franklin Town Project Philadelphia, 339 A.2d 885, 19 Pa.Cmwlth. 272, Cmwlth.1975, certiorari dismissed 96 S.Ct. 409, 423 U.S. 992, 46 L.Ed.2d 312, certiorari denied 96 S.Ct. 453, 423 U.S. 1018, 46 L.Ed.2d 389. Municipal Corporations 267 The provision of Urban Redevelopment Law declaring purposes of the law to be public uses for which public money may be spent and private property acquired by exercise of power of eminent domain, although subject to judicial review, was entitled to a prima facie acceptance of its correctness. Belovsky v. Redevelopment Authority of City of Philadelphia, 54 A.2d 277, 357 Pa. 329, Sup.1947. Eminent Domain 67
2. Construction and application
Urban Redevelopment Law used by urban redevelopment authority (URA) to take adult
theater was a law of general applicability, and, thus, the URA's use of eminent domain to combat blight did not transform the taking into a "time, place and manner" restriction on free speech; despite claim that the URA's motive was to change the use to a venue for performing arts and cultural and community activities with a ban on pornographic uses, the theater could not claim special protection by virtue of its free speech activities. In re Condemnation by Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh, 823 A.2d 1086, Cmwlth.2003, appeal granted 847 A.2d 59, 577 Pa. 703. Constitutional Law 90.4(4); Eminent Domain 55 Urban redevelopment law grants enormous powers and must carefully be examined under facts in each case, in light of constitutional guaranties which relate to right of private property. Redevelopment Authority of City of Erie v. Owners or Parties in Interest, 274 A.2d 244, 1 Pa.Cmwlth. 378, Cmwlth.1971. Municipal Corporations 57 The Urban Redevelopment Law is to be sharply distinguished from the Housing Authorities Law (§ 1541 et seq. of this title), in that the latter aims principally at the elimination of undesirable dwelling houses, whereas the former is intended to give wide scope to municipalities in redesigning and rebuilding such areas within their limits as no longer meet the economic and social needs of modern city life and progress. Oliver v. City of Clairton, 98 A.2d 47, 374 Pa. 333, Sup.1953. Municipal Corporations 267
3. Purpose
The fundamental purpose of both the Urban Redevelopment Law and the Housing Authorities Law (§ 1541 et seq. of this title) is the same, namely the clearance of slum areas, although the Housing Authorities Law is aimed more particularly at elimination of undesirable dwelling houses, whereas the Urban Redevelopment Law is not so restricted. Schenck v. City of Pittsburgh, 70 A.2d 612, 364 Pa. 31, Sup.1950. Municipal Corporations 267 The Urban Redevelopment Law is intended to give wide scope to municipalities in redesigning and rebuilding such areas within their limits as, by reason of passage of years and enormous changes in traffic conditions and types of building constructions, no longer meet economic and social needs of modern city life and progress. Schenck v. City of Pittsburgh, 70 A.2d 612, 364 Pa. 31, Sup.1950. Municipal Corporations 267
4. Blighted areas
City planning commission's certification of blight is not "adjudication" under section of Local Agency Law providing that no adjudication of local agency shall be valid as to any party unless he has been afforded reasonable notice of hearing and opportunity to be heard; certification of blight does not, in and of itself, have legal effect on property rights, as it does not necessarily lead to taking of all, or even any, of property in certified area by eminent domain, and certification merely sets stage for redevelopment of area. Matter of Condemnation by Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh, 594 A.2d 1375, 527 Pa. 550, Sup.1991, certiorari denied 112 S.Ct. 638, 502 U.S. 1004, 116 L.Ed.2d 656. Eminent Domain 55 A planning commission and redevelopment authority are presumed to act in good faith in declaring an area blighted; burden of proving fraud or abuse of discretion is a heavy one. In re Condemnation of Premises 130 Court St., in City of Reading, Berks County, 388 A.2d 1108, 36 Pa.Cmwlth. 394, Cmwlth.1978. Eminent Domain 196
Fact that condemnee's buildings may themselves be structurally sound is not sufficient to prevent their condemnation when they are located in area properly determined to be blighted and designated for redevelopment. In re City of Harrisburg, 373 A.2d 774, 30 Pa.Cmwlth. 273, Cmwlth.1977. Eminent Domain 56 Court's determination of factual issue of blight in proceeding challenging condemnation of land for redevelopment is limited to a review of certification to that effect by the planning commission and to see that the authority has not acted in good faith or arbitrarily. Simco Stores, Inc. v. Redevelopment Authority of City of Philadelphia, 302 A.2d 907, 8 Pa.Cmwlth. 374, Cmwlth.1973, affirmed 317 A.2d 610, 455 Pa. 438. Eminent Domain 68 Power of discretion over what areas are to be considered blighted is solely within power of redevelopment authority. Crawford v. Redevelopment Authority of Fayette County, 211 A.2d 866, 418 Pa. 549, Sup.1965. Municipal Corporations 267 Determination of urban renewal board that whole area has taken on character of blight was not arbitrary merely because one small part was free from blight. Crawford v. Redevelopment Authority of Fayette County, 211 A.2d 866, 418 Pa. 549, Sup.1965. Municipal Corporations 267 In order that city planning commission may certify an area as blighted, it is not necessary that each and every one of the conditions which cause areas to become blighted, as specified in this section, should exist, but existence of any one of such conditions is sufficient to warrant certification and adoption of a redevelopment project. Oliver v. City of Clairton, 98 A.2d 47, 374 Pa. 333, Sup.1953. Municipal Corporations 267 The term "blight" in the Urban Redevelopment Law signifies a condition characterized as urban obsolescence beyond salvage by private rehabilitation and denotes more than physical destruction resulting from a natural disaster for which there is no power of condemnation under the statute. Condemnation of Elsesser, 12 Pa. D. & C.3d 25 (1979). Eminent Domain 45
5. Jurisdiction
Public service commission did not have jurisdiction under the Urban Redevelopment Law over action by city and department of transportation to compel utility to relocate its utility lines and poles along city street for highway-widening project. Com., Dept. of Transp. v. Pennsylvania Power & Light Co., 383 A.2d 1314, 34 Pa.Cmwlth. 594, Cmwlth.1978. Municipal Corporations 688 35 P.S. § 1702, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1702 Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
It is hereby determined and declared as a matter of legislative finding-- (a) That there exist in urban communities in this Commonwealth areas which have become blighted because of the unsafe, unsanitary, inadequate or over-crowded condition of the dwellings therein, or because of inadequate planning of the area, or excessive land coverage by the buildings thereon, or the lack of proper light and air and open space, or because of the defective design and arrangement of the buildings thereon, or faulty street or lot layout, or economically or socially undesirable land uses. (b) That such conditions or a combination of some or all of them have and will continue to result in making such areas economic or social liabilities, harmful to the social and economic well-being of the entire communities in which they exist, depreciating values therein, reducing tax revenues, and thereby depreciating further the general community-wide values. (c) That the foregoing conditions are beyond remedy or control by regulatory processes in certain blighted areas, or portions thereof, and cannot be effectively dealt with by private enterprise under existing law without the additional aids herein granted, and that such conditions exist chiefly in areas which are so subdivided into small parcels and in divided ownerships that their assembly for purposes of clearance, replanning and redevelopment is difficult and impossible without the effective public power of eminent domain. (c.1) That certain blighted areas, or portions thereof, may require total acquisition, clearance and disposition, subject to continuing controls as provided in this act, since the prevailing condition of decay may make impracticable the reclamation of the area by rehabilitation or conservation, and that other blighted areas, or portion thereof, through the means provided in this act, may be susceptible to rehabilitation or conservation or a combination of clearance and disposition and rehabilitation or conservation in such manner that the conditions and evils hereinbefore enumerated may be eliminated or remedied. (d) That the replanning and redevelopment of such areas in accordance with sound and approved plans for their redevelopment will promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare. (e) That there exist within the Commonwealth both within and outside of certified redevelopment areas, properties which have become derelict, abandoned or unfit for human habitation or other use by reasons of age, obsolescence, prolonged vacancy, dilapidation, deterioration, lack of maintenance and care or general neglect. (f) That such derelict properties individually and collectively constitute a blight and nuisance in the neighborhood; create fire and health hazards; are used for immoral and County of Wayne v. Hathcock: Michigan redefines implementing economic development35 P.S. § 1703
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness§ 1703. Definitions
The following terms where used in this act, [FN1] shall have the following meanings, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning. (a)
primary or general election in the municipality in which said parcels are situated. (f)
planning commission may find to be blighted because of the existence of the conditions enumerated in section two of this act [FN3] so as to require redevelopment under the provisions of this act. (o)
[FN1] 35 P.S. § 1701 et seq.
[FN2] 53 P.S. § 35201.
[FN3] 35 P.S. § 1702.
[FN4] 35 P.S. § 1710.
HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES
2006 Electronic Pocket Part Update Act 2004-16 legislation Act 2004-16, § 1, rewrote par. (c), which prior thereto read: "(c)
Tax exemption for improvements to deteriorated dwellings, see 72 P.S. § 4711-101 et seq.
RESEARCH REFERENCES 2006 Electronic Pocket Part Update Encyclopedias Summary Pa. Jur. 2d Property § 11:16, Other Departments and Agencies. NOTES OF DECISIONS
Redevelopment projects 1
1. Redevelopment projects
Comprehensive plans of area certified by planning commission as blighted may, at the discretion of the redevelopment authority, be undertaken in stages, called projects. Golden Dawn Shops, Inc. v. Redevelopment Authority of City of Philadelphia, 282 A.2d 395, 3 Pa.Cmwlth. 314, Cmwlth.1971. Municipal Corporations 282(1) 35 P.S. § 1703, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1703 Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
"Authority" or "Redevelopment Authority."--A public body and a body corporate and politic created and organized in accordance with the provisions of this act. (b) "Bonds."--Any bonds, interim certificates, notes, debentures or other obligations of an Authority issued pursuant to this act. (c) "City."--Any city of the first, second, second class A or third class. The term shall also include any borough with a population large enough for the borough to qualify for a charter as a city, separately from any town, township or other borough, under section 201 of the act of June 23, 1931 (P.L. 932, No. 317), [FN2] known as "The Third Class City Code," for all purposes of this act. "The city" shall mean the particular city or such qualified borough for which a particular Authority is created. (c.1) "Commercial and Industrial Redevelopment Program."--The financing of the purchase, construction, rehabilitation, demolition or equipping of a commercial or an industrial project as part of the redevelopment of an area designated in the program as needing such assistance by the Authority and in accordance with the program. (c.2) "Commercial or Industrial Project."--A commercial or industrial facility, as those terms are used in the zoning ordinances of the municipality for the Authority's field of operation, within an area designated in the Commercial and Industrial Redevelopment Program which by its nature and location has or offers reasonable likelihood of preventing, slowing or reversing the deterioration of the designated area. (c.3) "Conservation."--The process of preserving or restoring existing buildings, public facilities or other improvements to an economically and socially sound condition. (d) "County."--Any county of this Commonwealth, other than a county of the first class. "The county" shall mean the particular county for which a particular Authority is created. (e) "Field of Operation."--The area within the territorial boundaries of the city or county for which a particular authority is created: Provided, however, That the field of operation of any county authority shall not include a city having a redevelopment authority but may "Governing Body."--In the case of a city, the city council or other legislative body thereof, and in the case of a county, the board of county commissioners or other legislative body thereof. (g) "Government."--Includes the State and Federal Governments or any subdivision, agency or instrumentality corporate or otherwise of either of them. (h) "Municipality."--Any county, city, borough or township. (i) "Obligee of the Authority" or "Obligee."--Any bondholder, trustee or trustees for any bondholders, any lessor demising property to an Authority used in connection with a redevelopment project, or any assignee or assignees of such lessor's interest, or any part thereof, and the Federal Government, when it is a party to any contract with an Authority. (j) "Planning Commission."--Any planning commission established by law for a municipality of this Commonwealth. "The Planning Commission" shall mean the particular planning commission of the city or county in which a particular Authority operates. Redevelopment authorities shall be substituted for planning commission in any city or county in which a planning commission does not exist. (k) "Real Property."--Lands, lands under water, structures and any and all easements, air rights, franchises and incorporeal hereditaments and every estate and right therein, legal and equitable, including terms for years and liens by way of judgment, mortgage or otherwise. (l) "Redeveloper."--Any individual, government, partnership or public or private corporation that shall enter or propose to enter into a contract with an Authority for the redevelopment of an area, or any portion thereof, or any building or structure thereon, under the provisions of this act. (m) "Redevelopment."--Undertakings and activities for the elimination of blighted areas. Such undertakings and activities may include the planning, replanning, acquisition, rehabilitation, conservation, renewal, improvement, clearance, sale, lease or other include, with the consent of any such city, parcels of land within the city limits which are necessary to the corporate purposes of the county authority or necessary to its successful redevelopment of a redevelopment area: And, provided further, That the field of operation of any authority may include parcels of land outside the territorial boundaries of the city or county, as the case may be, which are necessary to the corporate purposes of the authority or necessary to the successful redevelopment of a redevelopment area, with the consent of the governing body of the city or county and the municipality in which the said parcels are situated, as the case may be: Provided, however, That the field of operation of any Authority shall not include parcels of land outside the territorial boundaries of a county unless acquisition thereof has been approved by a majority of the electors voting in a "Redevelopment Area Plan."--A plan for the redevelopment of all or a part of a redevelopment area made by a planning commission in accordance with the provisions of section ten of this act. [FN4] (p) "Redevelopment Contract."--A contract between an Authority and a redeveloper for the redevelopment of an area under the provisions of this act. (q) "Redevelopment Project" or "Project."--A project undertaken by a redeveloper under a contract with an Authority in accordance with the provisions of this act. (r) "Redevelopment Proposal."--A proposal, including a copy of the redevelopment area plan and supporting data submitted for approval to the governing body by an Authority, for the redevelopment of all or any part of a redevelopment area. (s) "Residential Housing Redevelopment Program."--The financing of the purchase, construction, rehabilitation, demolition or equipping of a residential housing project as part of the development of an area designated in the program as needing such assistance by the Authority and in accordance with the program. (t) "Residential Housing Project."--A facility within an area designated in the residential housing redevelopment program which provides residential housing. CREDIT(S) 1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 3. Amended 1955, May 31, P.L. 107, § 1; 1957, May 27, P.L. 197, § 1; 1959, Dec. 1, P.L. 1637, No. 603, § 1; 1965, Aug. 17, P.L. 351, § 1; 1968, June 26, P.L. 263, No. 125, §§ 2 to 7; 1988, March 30, P.L. 304, No. 39, § 2, imd. effective; 2004, March 24, P.L. 152, No. 16, § 1, effective May 24, 2004. disposition of real property, buildings or other improvements in blighted areas, or portions thereof, the relocation of businesses and families affected thereby into or outside of a redevelopment area, or any combination of such undertakings and activities, the installation, construction or reconstruction of streets, utilities, parks, playgrounds and other improvements necessary for carrying out in the blighted area the objectives of this act in accordance with the redevelopment area plan, and carrying out plans for a program of voluntary repair, rehabilitation, and conservation of real property, buildings or other improvements in accordance with the redevelopment area plan. (n) "Redevelopment Area."--Any area, whether improved or unimproved, which a 'City.'--Any city of the first, second, second class A or third class. 'The city' shall mean the particular city for which a particular Authority is created." 2003 Main Volume Act 1988-39 legislation The 1988 amendment redesignated former (c.1) defining "conservation" as (c.3), and added definitions of "commercial and industrial redevelopment program", "commercial or industrial project", "residential housing redevelopment program", and "residential housing project". CROSS REFERENCES35 P.S. § 1704
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness§ 1704. Formation of Authorities
(a) There are hereby created separate and distinct bodies corporate and politic, one for each city and one for each county of the Commonwealth, as herein defined. Each such body shall be known as the Redevelopment Authority of the city or the county, as the case may be, but shall in no way be deemed to be an instrumentality of such city or county, or engaged in the performance of a municipal function. Each such Authority shall transact no business or otherwise become operative until and unless a finding is made as hereinafter provided in this section. (b) At any time after passage of this act the governing body of any city or county may find and declare by proper ordinance or resolution that there is need for an Authority to function within the territorial limits of said city or county, as the case may be. (c) The governing body shall cause a certified copy of such ordinance or resolution to be filed with the Department of State and a duplicate thereof with the Department of Community Affairs; upon receipt of the said certificate the Secretary of the Commonwealth shall issue a certificate of incorporation. (d) In any suit, action or proceeding involving or relating to the validity or enforcement of any contract or act of an Authority, a copy of the certificate of incorporation duly certified by the Department of State shall be admissible in evidence and shall be conclusive proof of the legal establishment of the Authority.
CREDIT(S) 1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 4. Amended 1949, May 20, P.L. 1621, § 1; 1968, June 26, P.L. 263, No. 125, § 8. HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES 2003 Main Volume Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1966 Under Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1966, certain functions of the State Planning Board, transferred to the Department of Commerce by Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1955, including those created by subsection (c) of this section, are transferred from the Department of Commerce to the Department of Community Affairs and shall be administered by the Secretary of the Department of Community Affairs. See 71 P.S. § 751-10(1)(b). Act 1968-125 legislation The 1968 amendment in subsec. (c) substituted "Department of Community Affairs" for
"State Planning Board". Section 14 of the act of 1968 provided: "Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1955, adopted by the House of Representatives June 7, 1955 and by the Senate on May 23, 1955 [71 P.S. § 751-1], is suspended in so far as it is inconsistent with the provisions of this act." LIBRARY REFERENCES 2003 Main Volume
Municipal Corporations 3, 5.
Westlaw Topic No. 268.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 10 to 12.
RESEARCH REFERENCES 2006 Electronic Pocket Part Update Encyclopedias Summary Pa. Jur. 2d Municipal Law § 21:195, Urban Redevelopment Authorities. NOTES OF DECISIONS
Antitrust actions 4
Immunity 3
Municipalities 2
Nature and scope of authority 1
1. Nature and scope of authority
Under Pennsylvania law, condemnation of parking garage by city's redevelopment authority triggered a clear and unambiguous lease provision that allowed city to terminate lease upon condemnation of garage by "any governmental authority," and thus, city's termination of the garage lease did not constitute breach of the lease agreement. Adams Parking Garage, Inc. v. City of Scranton, C.A.3 (Pa.)2002, 33 Fed.Appx. 28, 2002 WL 465992, Unreported. Municipal Corporations 253 Mayor was authorized to unilaterally appoint members of redevelopment authority; section of urban redevelopment law vested sole appointment power to authority with mayor. Serapiglia v. City of Clairton, 809 A.2d 1079, Cmwlth.2002. Municipal Corporations 131 Redevelopment authority is an agency of Commonwealth and not of local government body. Herriman v. Carducci, 380 A.2d 761, 475 Pa. 359, Sup.1977. Municipal Corporations 1.1 Redevelopment authority is completely separate entity from city. Herriman v. Carducci,
380 A.2d 761, 475 Pa. 359, Sup.1977. Municipal Corporations 1.1 A redevelopment authority created under the Urban Redevelopment Law for purpose of eliminating and rehabilitating blighted sections of the municipality is not a "municipal commission" within provision of Const. Art. 15, § 2, relating to debt limits for a municipal commission. Belovsky v. Redevelopment Authority of City of Philadelphia, 54 A.2d 277, 357 Pa. 329, Sup.1947. Municipal Corporations 863
2. Municipalities
Redevelopment authority remained in existence during time of dispute over mayor's authority to appoint members to redevelopment authority; even though city argued certificate indicated that effective date of authority's termination was almost 20 years prior to proceeding, record lacked evidence that certificate was properly filed with the Department of State, and contrary to city's assertions, evidence of record indicated that authority had remained duly incorporated. Serapiglia v. City of Clairton, 809 A.2d 1079, Cmwlth.2002. Municipal Corporations 131 Optional Third Class City Charter Law (53 P.S. § 41101 et seq.) which gives third class cities ability to organize and regulate their own internal affairs, does not empower city council to circumvent general assembly statutory scheme for creation of redevelopment authorities by investing cities with powers denied to them by the Urban Redevelopment Law. Herriman v. Carducci, 380 A.2d 761, 475 Pa. 359, Sup.1977. Municipal Corporations 78 Mayor of a third-class city lacked power to remove from office at his pleasure appointed members of an authority created under Urban Redevelopment Law. Com. ex rel. Hanson v. Reitz, 170 A.2d 111, 403 Pa. 434, Sup.1961. Municipal Corporations 155
3. Immunity
Although city redevelopment authority was agent of Commonwealth and not of local governmental body, such authority, which had localized nature in that its powers were subject to city approval, was not cloaked in Commonwealth's sovereign immunity and thus was required to defend in action brought by plaintiff against authority for injuries and permanent disability resulting from accident which occurred while plaintiff was working on property owned by authority when fire escape collapsed. Greer v. Metropolitan Hospital, 341 A.2d 520, 235 Pa.Super. 266, Super.1975. States 84
4. Antitrust actions
City redevelopment authority was not part of Commonwealth and thus could not be considered sovereign when supervising actions of private development corporation, in order to afford corporation immunity from antitrust liability pursuant to state action doctrine, where under statutory scheme, redevelopment authority had fiscal autonomy from city, possessed great degree of autonomy over operations, and commissioners were appointed by local officials rather than by Commonwealth, despite fact that redevelopment authority was designated as "public body, corporate and politic, exercising public powers of Commonwealth." Vartan v. Harristown Development Corp., M.D.Pa.1987, 661 F.Supp. 596, affirmed 838 F.2d 1206, affirmed 838 F.2d 1208. Monopolies 12(15.6) Grocery wholesaler's antitrust claims against local redevelopment authority were not barred
by state action exception since municipal rather than state action was challenged. Jetro Cash and Carry Enterprises, Inc. v. Food Distribution Center, E.D.Pa.1983, 569 F.Supp. 1404. Monopolies 12(15.6) State action immunity was controlling, in suit under the Sherman Act with respect to conduct of city, mayor's development council, and redevelopment authority and their members with respect to purchase of property which plaintiff allegedly sought to acquire for construction of a hotel, despite contention that state action immunity is inapplicable where private enterprise might undertake a project. Jonnet Development Corp. v. Caliguiri, W.D.Pa.1983, 558 F.Supp. 962. Monopolies 12(15.6) 35 P.S. § 1704, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1704 Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1704.1
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness§ 1704.1. Dissolution of city authorities
[FN1] Enrolled bill read "admissable".
HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES 2003 Main Volume Act 1967-243 legislation Section 2 of the act of Nov. 16, 1967, provided: "Dissolutions of any authority heretofore made in substantial compliance with the terms of this act are hereby validated." LIBRARY REFERENCES 2003 Main Volume
Municipal Corporations 51.
Westlaw Topic No. 268.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 99 to 103.
RESEARCH REFERENCES
2006 Electronic Pocket Part Update
Encyclopedias Summary Pa. Jur. 2d Municipal Law § 21:195, Urban Redevelopment Authorities. NOTES OF DECISIONS
Construction and application 1
1. Construction and application
Redevelopment authority remained in existence during time of dispute over mayor's authority to appoint members to redevelopment authority; even though city argued certificate indicated that effective date of authority's termination was almost 20 years prior to proceeding, record lacked evidence that certificate was properly filed with the Department of State, and contrary to city's assertions, evidence of record indicated that authority had remained duly incorporated. Serapiglia v. City of Clairton, 809 A.2d 1079, Cmwlth.2002. Municipal Corporations 131 City could not dissolve municipal redevelopment authority by passing resolution to dissolve authority and sending certificate reciting resolution to Department of State and Department of Community Affairs; statute establishing procedures for dissolving redevelopment authorities permits governing body to declare dissolution only if the authority has paid and has been released from and discharged of all debts and obligations. City of Chester v. Chester Redevelopment Authority, 686 A.2d 30, Cmwlth.1996, reargument denied, appeal denied 695 A.2d 787, 548 Pa. 650. Municipal Corporations 51 35 P.S. § 1704.1, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1704.1 Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
If a city authority has never issued any bonds, or incurred any other debts or contractual obligations, or has paid and has been released from and discharged of all debts and bonded, contractual and other obligations, the governing body of the city may, after three years from the date of the certificate described in subsection (c) of section 4, or earlier if a proper resolution of the authority requests the action hereinafter described, find and declare by proper resolution that its functions can be more properly carried out by a county authority and that there is no longer any need for the authority created for such city to function. In such case the governing body shall issue a certificate reciting the adoption of such resolution, and shall cause such certificate to be filed with the Department of State and two duplicates thereof with the Department of Community Affairs. Upon such filing the city authority shall cease to function, and title to any assets held by the authority at that time shall pass to the city. A copy of the certificate described in this section shall be admissible [FN1] in any suit, action or proceeding and shall be conclusive proof that the authority has ceased to be in existence. CREDIT(S) 1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 4.1, added 1967, Nov. 16, P.L. 498, No. 243, § 1.35 P.S. § 1704.2
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness§ 1704.2. Dissolution of county authorities
Section 2 of the act of Nov. 16, 1967, provided: "Dissolutions of any authority heretofore made in substantial compliance with the terms of this act are hereby validated." LIBRARY REFERENCES 2003 Main Volume
Municipal Corporations 51.
Westlaw Topic No. 268.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 99 to 103.
RESEARCH REFERENCES 2006 Electronic Pocket Part Update Encyclopedias Summary Pa. Jur. 2d Municipal Law § 21:195, Urban Redevelopment Authorities. 35 P.S. § 1704.2, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1704.2 Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
If a county authority has never issued any bonds, or incurred any other debts or contractual obligations, or has paid and has been released from and discharged of all debts and bonded, contractual and other obligations, the governing body of the county may, after three years from the date of the certificate described in subsection (c) of section 4, or earlier if a proper resolution of the authority requests the action hereinafter described, find and declare by proper resolution that there is no longer any need for the authority created for such county to function. In such case the governing body shall issue a certificate reciting the adoption of such resolution, and shall cause such certificate to be filed with the Department of State and two duplicates thereof with the Department of Community Affairs. Upon such filing the county authority shall cease to function, and title to any assets held by the authority at that time shall pass to the county. A copy of the certificate described in this section shall be admissible in any suit, action or proceeding and shall be conclusive proof that the authority has ceased to be in existence. CREDIT(S) 1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 4.2, added 1967, Nov. 16, P.L. 498, No. 243, § 1. HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES 2003 Main Volume Act 1967-243 legislation35 P.S. § 1705
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness§ 1705. Appointment and qualifications of members of Authority
Upon certification of a resolution declaring the need for an Authority to operate in a city or county, the mayor or board of county commissioners thereof, respectively, shall appoint, as members of the Authority, five citizens who, except in the case of cities of the third class, shall be residents of the city or county in which the Authority is to operate. In the case of a city of the third class, a majority of the members of the Authority shall be residents of the city, and the remainder may be nonresidents who own and operate businesses in the city in which the Authority is to operate.
CREDIT(S) 1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 5. Amended 2004, Nov. 23, P.L. 943, No. 137, § 1, effective Jan. 24, 2005. HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES 2006 Electronic Pocket Part Update Act 2004-137 legislation Act 2004-137, § 1, rewrote the section which prior thereto read: "Upon certification of a resolution declaring the need for an Authority to operate in a city or county, the mayor or board of county commissioners thereof, respectively, shall appoint, as members of the Authority, five citizens who shall be residents of the city or county in which the Authority is to operate."
LIBRARY REFERENCES 2003 Main Volume
Municipal Corporations 129.
Westlaw Topic No. 268.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 350, 353 to 354, 367.
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Failure to appoint 1
Municipalities, generally 3
Removal of members 2
1. Failure to appoint
Failure of a mayor to appoint successors to the redevelopment authority when terms of office expired does not forfeit the mayor's appointing power. Com. ex rel. Sortino v. Singley, 392 A.2d 1337, 481 Pa. 367, Sup.1978. Municipal Corporations 131
2. Removal of members
Mayor was authorized to unilaterally appoint members of redevelopment authority; section of urban redevelopment law vested sole appointment power to authority with mayor. Serapiglia v. City of Clairton, 809 A.2d 1079, Cmwlth.2002. Municipal Corporations 131 Newly elected mayor could not remove two persons from the redevelopment authority who had been appointed by his predecessor; mayor does not have the right to remove members of the redevelopment authority at his pleasure. Com. ex rel. Sortino v. Singley, 392 A.2d 1337, 481 Pa. 367, Sup.1978. Municipal Corporations 155 Fact that two persons appointed to the redevelopment authority by the mayor were inexperienced did not provide cause for their removal on the theory that the Redevelopment Law, by specifying staggered terms of office, contemplated that members of a redevelopment authority would have varying degrees of experience in the office. Com. ex rel. Sortino v. Singley, 392 A.2d 1337, 481 Pa. 367, Sup.1978. Municipal Corporations 156 Mayor of a third-class city lacked power to remove from office at his pleasure appointed members of an authority created under Urban Redevelopment Law. Com. ex rel. Hanson v. Reitz, 170 A.2d 111, 403 Pa. 434, Sup.1961. Municipal Corporations 155
3. Municipalities, generally
Optional Third Class City Charter Law (53 P.S. § 41101 et seq.) which gives third class cities ability to organize and regulate their own internal affairs, does not empower city council to circumvent general assembly statutory scheme for creation of redevelopment authorities by investing cities with powers denied to them by the Urban Redevelopment Law. Herriman v. Carducci, 380 A.2d 761, 475 Pa. 359, Sup.1977. Municipal Corporations 78 Fact that mayor was authorized to appoint members of redevelopment authority did not make appointment a matter concerning "internal affairs" of city, within charter empowering city to organize and regulate its internal affairs, but even if it had, in view of 53 P.S. § 41305 precluding city from exercising power contrary to act of General Assembly if act applies to all cities, city could not nullify this section which requires mayors to appoint members of authorities, by ordinance providing that where appointment is vested in city by statute, appointment shall be with consent of council; thus mayor's appointment of successor member on authority was valid without consent of council. Herriman v. Carducci, 380 A.2d 761, 475 Pa. 359, Sup.1977. Municipal Corporations 131 35 P.S. § 1705, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1705 Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1706
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness§ 1706. Tenure and compensation of members of Authority
CREDIT(S) 1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 6. LIBRARY REFERENCES 2003 Main Volume
Municipal Corporations 149, 163.
Suicide 162.
Westlaw Topic Nos. 268, 368.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 361, 382 to 383.
C.J.S. Suicide §§ 6 to 7.
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Removal 2
Tenure, generally 1
1. Tenure, generally
Where the term of a member of the board of a redevelopment authority expires, but he holds over for several months because of the failure of the appointing authority to appoint his successor, the successor, when appointed, holds office only for five years from the date of expiration of his predecessor's term, and not for five years from the date he actually takes office. Com. v. Volpe, 69 Pa. D. & C.2d 107 (1975). Municipal Corporations 149(4)
2. Removal
Under Pennsylvania law, director of real estate department of city redevelopment authority did not have any property interest in his employment nor did Pennsylvania Urban Redevelopment Law (§ 1701 et seq. of this title), creating redevelopment authority, confer any power upon authority to create such a property right, and thus former director of real
estate department was not entitled to due process protection and his alleged discharge by forced resignation without hearing and without cause did not constitute denial of due process. Rosenberg v. Redevelopment Authority of City of Philadelphia, E.D.Pa.1977, 428 F.Supp. 498. Constitutional Law 277(2) Fact that two persons appointed to the redevelopment authority by the mayor were inexperienced did not provide cause for their removal on the theory that the Redevelopment Law, by specifying staggered terms of office, contemplated that members of a redevelopment authority would have varying degrees or experience in the office. Com. ex rel. Sortino v. Singley, 392 A.2d 1337, 481 Pa. 367, Sup.1978. Municipal Corporations 156 Mayor of a third-class city lacked power to remove from office at his pleasure appointed members of an authority created under Urban Redevelopment Law. Com. ex rel. Hanson v. Reitz, 170 A.2d 111, 403 Pa. 434, Sup.1961. Municipal Corporations 155 35 P.S. § 1706, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1706 Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
The members who are first appointed shall serve for terms of one, two, three, four and five years, respectively, from the date of their appointment as shall be specified at the time of their appointment. Thereafter, the term of office shall be five years. A member shall hold office until his successor has been appointed. Vacancies for unexpired terms shall be promptly filled by the appointing power. A member shall receive no compensation for his services, but shall be entitled to the necessary expenses, including traveling expenses, incurred in the discharge of his duties.35 P.S. § 1707
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness§ 1707. Organization of Authority
Municipal Corporations 83.
Westlaw Topic No. 268.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations § 212.
RESEARCH REFERENCES 2006 Electronic Pocket Part Update Encyclopedias Summary Pa. Jur. 2d Municipal Law § 10:13, Generally. 35 P.S. § 1707, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1707 Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
The members of an Authority shall select from among themselves a chairman, a vice-chairman, and such other officers as the Authority may determine. An Authority may employ a secretary, an executive director, its own counsel and legal staff, and such technical experts, and such other agents and employes, permanent or temporary, as it may require, and may determine the qualifications and fix the compensation of such persons. Three members of an Authority shall constitute a quorum for its meetings. Members of an Authority shall not be liable personally on the bonds or other obligations of the Authority, and the rights of creditors shall be solely against such Authority. An Authority may delegate to one or more of its agents or employes such of its powers as it shall deem necessary to carry out the purposes of this act, subject always to the supervision and control of the Authority. CREDIT(S) 1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 7. LIBRARY REFERENCES 2003 Main Volume35 P.S. § 1708
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness§ 1708. Interest of members or employes
No member or employe of an Authority shall acquire any interest, direct or indirect, in any redevelopment project or in any property included or planned to be included in any redevelopment area, or in any area which he may have reason to believe may be certified to be a redevelopment area, nor shall he have any interest, direct or indirect, in any contract or proposed contract for materials or services to be furnished or used by an Authority, or in any contract with a redeveloper or prospective redeveloper relating, directly or indirectly, to any redevelopment project. The acquisition of any such interest in a redevelopment project or in any such property or contract shall constitute misconduct in office. If any member or employe of an Authority shall already own or control any interest, direct or indirect, in any property later included or planned to be included in any redevelopment project under the jurisdiction of the Authority, or has any such interest in any contract for material or services to be furnished or used in connection with any redevelopment project, he shall disclose the same in writing to the Authority and to the Department of Community Affairs and the local governing body, and such disclosure shall be entered in writing upon the minute books of the Authority. Failure to make such disclosure shall constitute misconduct in office. CREDIT(S) 1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 8. Amended 1949, May 20, P.L. 1621, § 1; 1968, June 26, P.L. 263, No. 125, § 8. HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES 2003 Main Volume Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1966 Under Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1966, certain functions of the State Planning Board, transferred to the Department of Commerce by Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1955, including those created by this section, are transferred from the Department of Commerce to the Department of Community Affairs and shall be administered by the Secretary of the Department of Community Affairs. See 71 P.S. § 751-10(1)(b). Act 1968-125 legislation The 1968 amendment in the penultimate sentence substituted "Department of Community Affairs" for "State Planning Board". Section 14 of the act of 1968 provided: "Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1955, adopted by the House of Representatives June 7, 1955 and by the Senate on May 23, 1955 [71 P.S. § 751-1], is suspended in so far as it is
inconsistent with the provisions of this act." LIBRARY REFERENCES 2003 Main Volume
Municipal Corporations 231.
Westlaw Topic No. 268.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations § 906.
NOTES OF DECISIONS
Acts of authority 1
1. Acts of authority
Vote of member of redevelopment authority on resolutions would not be rendered void or nullified merely because of an undisclosed conflict of interest. In re Certain Parcels of Real Estate in Lehigh-Washington St. Development Project, in Fifth Ward of City of Easton, 216 A.2d 774, 420 Pa. 289, Sup.1966. Municipal Corporations 95 Inasmuch as final and controlling declaration of taking was authorized and filed by vote taken by redevelopment authority when certain person was no longer a member or had any vote, fact that such person at time of his appointment as member of redevelopment authority and while he was member was under contract to furnish services to redeveloper selected by authority did not render declaration of taking invalid. In re Certain Parcels of Real Estate in Lehigh-Washington St. Development Project, in Fifth Ward of City of Easton, 216 A.2d 774, 420 Pa. 289, Sup.1966. Eminent Domain 169 35 P.S. § 1708, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1708 Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1709
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness§ 1709. Powers of an Authority
An Authority shall con