Whose Hand to Hold? How Administrators Understand Eminent Domain and Where They Turn for Guidance

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorOlejarski, Amanda Marieen
dc.contributor.committeechairDudley, Larkin S.en
dc.contributor.committeememberRichardson, Jesse J.en
dc.contributor.committeememberWamsley, Gary L.en
dc.contributor.committeememberRohr, John A.en
dc.contributor.departmentPublic Administration and Public Affairsen
dc.date.accessioned2014-03-14T20:20:52Zen
dc.date.adate2010-01-07en
dc.date.available2014-03-14T20:20:52Zen
dc.date.issued2009-12-04en
dc.date.rdate2010-01-07en
dc.date.sdate2009-12-18en
dc.description.abstractControversies surrounding issues related to eminent domain remain in the forefront of academic and public debate, largely attributed to the United States Supreme Court's landmark 2005 ruling on the subject. Much of the academic discourse on eminent domain centers on constitutional dimensions of public use and just compensation or procedural components of transaction costs and regulation v. flexibility. Noticeably absent from the scholarly conversation, however, is the study of how public administrators actually involved in the process of eminent domain understand relevant issues. This silence has resulted in significant gaps between the study of the purpose and mechanics of eminent domain. How these public administrators understand eminent domain and where they search for guidance are significant questions that may inform and extend existing research on eminent domain. Particularly important to this research are the ways in which administrators' professionalism affects their administrative discretion in the implementation of a legal case, Kelo. Relying on survey and elite interview analysis with public administrators in the state of Connecticut, the birthplace of the Kelo case, this research seeks to answer the following four questions: How do administrators understand eminent domain, where do they turn for guidance, how do they interpret and understand takings law post-Kelo, and how do they understand "public" post-Kelo? This study finds support that administrators are generally unaccepting of eminent domain when used under the Kelo conditions, that they favor a notion of public use incorporating some degree of use by the public, and that they are most likely to turn to statutory and constitutional resources for eminent domain guidance. Further, the interviews were particularly useful in developing a four-part typology of administrators' understanding of eminent domain.en
dc.description.degreePh. D.en
dc.identifier.otheretd-12182009-080440en
dc.identifier.sourceurlhttp://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-12182009-080440/en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/30157en
dc.publisherVirginia Techen
dc.relation.haspartOlejarski_AM_D_2009_Copyright.pdfen
dc.relation.haspartOlejarski_AM_D_2009_IRB.pdfen
dc.relation.haspartOlejarski_AM_D_2009.pdfen
dc.rightsIn Copyrighten
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/en
dc.subjecteminent domainen
dc.subjectadministrative discretionen
dc.subjectprofessionalismen
dc.subjectimplementation of a legal caseen
dc.titleWhose Hand to Hold? How Administrators Understand Eminent Domain and Where They Turn for Guidanceen
dc.typeDissertationen
thesis.degree.disciplinePublic Administration and Public Affairsen
thesis.degree.grantorVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State Universityen
thesis.degree.leveldoctoralen
thesis.degree.namePh. D.en

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Olejarski_AM_D_2009.pdf
Size:
1.59 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Olejarski_AM_D_2009_Copyright.pdf
Size:
736.19 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Olejarski_AM_D_2009_IRB.pdf
Size:
292.17 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download

Collections

Doctoral Dissertations