There is an inherent weakness in monetary penalties as a deterrent to government, regulatory takings. The supply of money is endless. Both to pay for the taking and to finance an aggressive legal defense of the taking.
There is also the scepter of insider trading if compensation for regulatory taking becomes common law. Properties1, included in unpublished, future takings, will be acquired by those in the know and properties2, without significance, will be the subject of trivial takings simply to enhance connected owners from the public trough.
1 - For example: Property already excluded from development by local regs in a proposed conservancy.
2 - For example: Property contiguous to a new transportation corridor in Orange County being subject to state imposed migratory flyway protections of caribou migration protections.
A Freudian slip?
We agree. I can just see the conservancies using this for a funding tool now. The best way to manage regulation is to eliminate the need through a better understanding of pooled risk.
I didn't think of that. But, corruption in CA goverment is inevitable, and stuff like that already happens in other ways. For instance, shortly before the recall of Gray Davis, we (California) acquired Ahmanson Ranch, north of US-101 near the border between Ventura and LA counties, for a large amount of money. If we had not bought the land, it could have been developed (subject to the obstruction of the environmentalists), or it might have been a huge investment loss if it could not be developed. CA guaranteed a profit to the former owners.