The distinction between legislative and adjudicative decisions in Dolan v.City of Tigard

In Dolan v. City of Tigard, the Supreme Court announced a new heightened sc rutiny standard for exactions, holding that the exaction must be roughly pr oportional to the harm the development causes. The Court proceeded to limit the application of the "rough proportionality" standard to adjudicative, a nd not legislative, land use decisions, reasoning that the risk of municipa l "extortion" is much greater in the adjudicative context. In this Note, In na Reznik surveys the lower courts applying Dolan and finds that there is m uch confusion over the legislative/adjudicative distinction. She argues tha t it is difficult to draw a line between legislative and adjudicative land use decisions, and that the distinction does not solve the extortion proble m, which is just as likely to occur in the legislative context. Looking to the scholarship of Carol Rose and Vicki Been, the Note concludes that the C ourt should develop a new exactions standard that identifies those situatio ns with the potential for government overreaching, specifically those in wh ich the landowner has nor had the opportunity of voice or exit.