Docstoc

URBAN REDEVELOPMENT STATUTES

Document Sample
URBAN REDEVELOPMENT STATUTES Powered By Docstoc
					                         URBAN REDEVELOPMENT STATUTES


35 P.S. § 1701
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1701. Short title

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
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness

Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1702. Findings and declaration of policy

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
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.

(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.

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

County of Wayne v. Hathcock: Michigan redefines implementing economic development
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)
35 P.S. § 1703
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 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) "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
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
primary or general election in the municipality in which said parcels are situated.


(f) "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
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
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) "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.

[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) '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 REFERENCES

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)
35 P.S. § 1704
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 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
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1704.1. Dissolution of city authorities

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.
[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)
35 P.S. § 1704.2
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1704.2. Dissolution of county authorities

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 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.

35 P.S. § 1704.2, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1704.2

Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1705
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness

Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 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
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1706. Tenure and compensation of members of Authority

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.

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)
35 P.S. § 1707
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1707. Organization of Authority

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 Volume
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)
35 P.S. § 1708
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 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
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1709. Powers of an Authority

An Authority shall constitute a public body, corporate and politic, exercising public powers of
the Commonwealth as an agency thereof, which powers shall include all powers necessary
or appropriate to carry out and effectuate the purposes and provisions of this act, including
the following powers in addition to those herein otherwise granted:

(a) To procure from the planning commission the designation of areas in need of
redevelopment and its recommendations for such redevelopment;

(b) To study the recommendations of the planning commission for redevelopment of any
area and to make its own additional investigations and recommendations thereon; to initiate
preliminary studies of possible redevelopment areas to make and assist in implementing (1)
plans for carrying out a program of voluntary repair, rehabilitation and conservation of real
property, buildings and improvements, (2) plans for the enforcement of laws, codes and
regulations relating to the use of land and the use and occupancy of buildings and
improvements, (3) plans for the relocation of persons (including families, business concerns
and others) displaced by any other Government activities related to the purposes of this act
or any activities of the Authority, (4) preliminary plans outlining redevelopment activities for
neighborhoods to embrace two or more redevelopment areas, and (5) preliminary surveys
to determine if the undertaking and carrying out of a redevelopment project are feasible;

(c) To cooperate with any government, school district or municipality;

(d) To act as agent of the State or Federal Government or any of its instrumentalities or
agencies for the public purposes set out in this act;

(e) To arrange or contract with any municipality located, in whole or in part, within the
Authority's field of operation, or with the State or Federal Government for the furnishing
planning, replanning, constructing, installing, opening or closing of streets, roads,
roadways, alleys, sidewalks or other places or facilities, or for the acquisition by such
municipality, or State or Federal Government of property options or property rights or for
the furnishing of property or services in connection with a redevelopment area;

(f) To arrange or contract with the Commonwealth, its agencies, and any municipality to the
extent that it is within the scope of their respective functions--(1) to cause the services
customarily provided by each of them to be rendered for the benefits of such Authority or
the occupants of any redevelopment area; and (2) to provide and maintain parks,
recreational centers, schools, sewerage, transportation, water and other municipal facilities
adjacent to or in connection with redevelopment areas; and (3) to plan, replan, zone or
rezone any part of the municipality in connection with any redevelopment proposal of the
Authority;

(g) To enter upon any building or property in order to make surveys or soundings;
(h) To assemble, purchase, obtain options upon, acquire by gift, grant, bequest, devise or
otherwise any real or personal property or any interest therein from any person, firm,
corporation, municipality or government: Provided, That no real property, located outside of
a redevelopment area, which is not necessary to the corporate purposes of the Authority
nor necessary to the successful redevelopment of a redevelopment area, shall be purchased
by the Authority;


(i) To acquire by eminent domain any real property, including improvements and fixtures for
the public purposes set forth in this act, in the manner hereinafter provided, except real
property located outside a redevelopment area;


(j) To own, hold, clear, improve and manage real property;


(k) To sell, lease or otherwise transfer any real property located outside of a redevelopment
area and, subject to approval by the local governing body, any real property in a
redevelopment area: Provided, That with respect to a redevelopment area the Authority
finds that the sale, lease or other transfer of any part will not be prejudicial to the sale or
lease of other parts of the redevelopment area, nor be in any other way prejudicial to the
realization of the redevelopment proposal approved by the governing body;


(l) To reimburse for their reasonable expenses of removal, any persons (including families,
business concerns and others), who have been displaced as a result of any other
Government activities related to the purposes of this act or any activities of the Authority;


(m) To insure or provide for the insurance of any property or operations of the Authority
against any risks or hazards;


(n) To procure or agree to the procural of insurance or guarantees from the State or Federal
Government of the payments of any debts or parts thereof incurred by the Authority, and to
pay premiums in connection therewith;


(o) To borrow from private lenders or from the State or Federal Government funds, as may
be necessary, for the operation and work of the Authority;


(p) To invest any funds held in reserves or sinking funds or any funds not required for
immediate disbursement, in such investments as may be lawful for executors,
administrators, guardians, trustees and other fiduciaries under the laws of this
Commonwealth;


(q) To sue and be sued;


(r) To adopt a seal and to alter the same at pleasure;
(s) To have perpetual succession;

(t) To make and execute contracts and other instruments necessary or convenient to the
exercise of the powers of the Authority; and any contract or instrument when signed by the
chairman or vice-chairman of the Authority, or by an authorized use of their facsimile
signatures, and by the secretary or assistant secretary, or, treasurer or assistant treasurer
of the Authority, or by an authorized use of their facsimile signatures, shall be held to have
been properly executed for and on its behalf;

(u) To make and from time to time to amend and repeal by-laws, rules, regulations and
resolutions;

(v) To conduct examinations and investigations and to hear testimony and take proof, under
oath or affirmation, at public or private hearings, on any matter material for its information;


(w) To authorize any member or members of the Authority to conduct hearings and to
administer oaths, take affidavits and issue subpoenas;


(x) To issue subpoenas requiring the attendance of witnesses and the production of books
and papers pertinent to any hearing before the Authority, or before one or more members
of the Authority appointed by it to conduct such hearing;


(y) To apply to any court having territorial jurisdiction of the offense to have punished for
contempt any witness, who refuses to obey a subpoena, or who refuses to be sworn or
affirmed, or to testify, or, who is guilty of any contempt after summons to appear;


(z) To make available to the government or municipality or any appropriate agency, board
or commission, the recommendations of the Authority affecting any area in its field of
operation or property therein, which it may deem likely to promote the public health,
morals, safety or welfare;


(aa) To make, directly or indirectly, secured or unsecured loans to any purchaser or owner
of a residential housing or a commercial or an industrial project for the purpose of financing
the purchase, construction, rehabilitation, demolition or equipping of a residential housing
or a commercial and industrial redevelopment program;

(bb) To make loans to or deposits with, at the option of the Authority, without requiring
collateral security therefor, any financial institution, in order to enable that financial
institution to finance the acquisition, construction, rehabilitation or equipping of a residential
housing or a commercial and industrial redevelopment program. For such purposes, an
Authority may make such loans as the Authority may determine; receive interest on such
deposits as may be agreed to with the financial institution; purchase and hold notes or other
obligations secured by mortgages, deeds of trust or security interests in residential housing,
commercial or industrial projects or property used as additional security, notwithstanding
anything to the contrary elsewhere contained in this act; sell, assign, pledge or encumber
any security, including mortgages or other security agreements, held by or granted to the
Authority or received in connection with the financing of residential housing or commercial
or industrial projects and grant to any trustee, in addition to any other rights or remedies
contained therein or in any documents granting such security, such other rights and
remedies as may be approved by the Authority.


CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 9. Amended 1951, Sept. 29, P.L. 1650, § 1; 1953, July 27, P.L.
622, No. 179, § 1; 1957, May 27, P.L. 197, § 2; 1959, Dec. 1, P.L. 1637, No. 603, § 2;
1963, June 6, P.L. 79, § 1; 1968, June 26, P.L. 263, No. 125, §§ 9 to 12; 1988, March 30,
P.L. 304, No. 39, § 3, imd. effective.

HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES

2003 Main Volume

Act 1953-179 legislation

Section 2 of the act of 1953 read as follows:

"All proceedings heretofore had and held by any Redevelopment Authority to sell, lease or
otherwise transfer any of its real property located outside of a redevelopment area under
the provisions of the act to which this is an amendment and the acts amendatory thereof
and supplementary thereto be and the same are hereby ratified, confirmed and made valid.

"All of the deeds, leases or other conveyances issued, executed or made or to be issued,
executed or made in pursuance of such proceedings be and the same are hereby ratified,
confirmed and made valid; and the title to such interest as may be thereby conveyed to
any grantee, lessee or other transferee be and the same is hereby ratified, confirmed and
made valid in such grantee, lessee or other transferee."

Act 1988-39 legislation

The 1988 amendment added subsecs. (aa) and (bb).


CROSS REFERENCES

Counties of the second class, authority to sell or lease real property, see 16 P.S. § 5505.

LAW REVIEW AND JOURNAL COMMENTARIES

County of Wayne v. Hathcock: Michigan redefines implementing economic development
through eminent domain. Rachel A. Lewis, 50 Vill. L. Rev. 341 (2005).


LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

Eminent Domain      17.
Municipal Corporations    57, 221.
Westlaw Topic Nos. 148, 268.
C.J.S. Eminent Domain §§ 52, 55.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 104, 106, 108, 110 to 115, 117 to 118, 122, 137 to 138,
143, 145 to 146, 873 to 876, 878 to 879.

RESEARCH REFERENCES


2006 Electronic Pocket Part Update
Treatises and Practice Aids

Standard Pennsylvania Practice 2d § 114:53, Generally.


NOTES OF DECISIONS

In general 2
Blighted areas, eminent domain 4
Contracts 7
Eminent domain 3-5
Eminent domain - In general 3
Eminent domain - Blighted areas 4
Eminent domain - Public purposes 5
Judicial review 9
Public purposes, eminent domain 5
Sell, lease, transfer 6
Suits, generally 8
Validity 1

1. Validity

Redevelopment authorities created under Urban Redevelopment Law are purely
administrative bodies and are not "special commissions" or "private corporations" within
provision of Const. Art. 3, § 20 (see, now, Const. Art. 3, § 31) prohibiting legislature from
delegating to any special commission or private corporation any power to make, supervise
or interfere with municipal improvement or perform any municipal functions. Belovsky v.
Redevelopment Authority of City of Philadelphia, 54 A.2d 277, 357 Pa. 329, Sup.1947.
Constitutional Law    63(1); Constitutional Law    64; Municipal Corporations      4

The provision of Redevelopment Cooperation Law (§ 1741 et seq. of this title) that any
city, borough, etc., may contract with a redevelopment authority with respect to any sums
which the authority may agree to pay for special improvements, services, and facilities to
be provided by such city, etc., for the benefit of the redevelopment does not have any
bearing on the subject of tax exemption of property within the redevelopment area, so as
to be violative of provision of Const. Art. 9, §§ 1 and 3 (see, now, Const. Art. 8, §§ 1, 2,
and 6) requiring all taxes to be uniform and listing only certain prescribed property which
may be exempted from taxation. Belovsky v. Redevelopment Authority of City of
Philadelphia, 54 A.2d 277, 357 Pa. 329, Sup.1947. Taxation        2289
2. In general

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 Authority of Pittsburgh is a public body exercising public powers
of Commonwealth as an agency thereof, and stands in fiduciary relationship to the public
and to taxpayers, and its conduct must always be guided by rule of good faith, fidelity and
integrity. Schwartz v. Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh, 192 A.2d 371, 411 Pa.
530, Sup.1963. Municipal Corporations    2

Under the Urban Redevelopment Law, the responsibility of the planning commission to
make a study of a purportedly blighted area may be discharged by the joint effort of the
commission and the redevelopment authority. Condemnation of Elsesser, 12 Pa. D. & C.3d
25 (1979). Municipal Corporations    267

In compliance with federal laws and regulations, local housing authorities and
redevelopment authorities are eligible under state law, § 1541 et seq. of this title and §
1701 et seq., to be sponsors for below-market interest rate mortgages for rental housing.
1968 Op.Atty.Gen. No. 278.

3. Eminent domain--In general

City urban redevelopment authority's condemnation of condemnees' property was proper,
and since the property was being taken for a proper public purpose, it could be permitted
to revert to private ownership when the public purpose was discharged; the property would
be used to eliminate blight and to create a tract of land that could be further development
for residential use, evidence of record supported the conclusion that the designated area
was blighted, and all parties agreed that the property was within the perimeter of the
blighted area. In re Condemnation by Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh, 822
A.2d 135, Cmwlth.2003, appeal denied 843 A.2d 1239, 577 Pa. 681. Eminent Domain
   196; Eminent Domain      325

In the absence of statutory authority under the Urban Redevelopment Law (URL), county
redevelopment authority could not impair its ability to exercise its power of eminent
domain, through contract or agreement with a redeveloper requiring private-party
redeveloper's prior written consent to commence a condemnation. In re Condemnation of
110 Washington Street, Borough of Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, by Redevelopment
Authority of County of Montgomery, for Urban Renewal Purposes, 767 A.2d 1154,
Cmwlth.2001, appeal denied 788 A.2d 379, 567 Pa. 748. Eminent Domain           10(1)

Redeveloper's surety agreement with county redevelopment authority, to pay
condemnation costs that were not funded by grants from Commonwealth, was an improper
delegation of authority to redeveloper, where the surety agreement also required
redeveloper's prior written consent before the authority could exercise its eminent domain
powers. In re Condemnation of 110 Washington Street, Borough of Conshohocken,
Pennsylvania, by Redevelopment Authority of County of Montgomery, for Urban Renewal
Purposes, 767 A.2d 1154, Cmwlth.2001, appeal denied 788 A.2d 379, 567 Pa. 748.
Eminent Domain      10(1)
Injunctive relief sought by property owners based on malicious interference with beneficial
property rights and contracts on continuing basis based on allegedly improper
condemnation proceedings was precluded until it was determined in Eminent Domain Code
proceedings whether city urban redevelopment authority had power and right to condemn
plaintiffs' properties. Cass Plumbing & Heating Co., Inc. v. PPG Industries, Inc., 416 A.2d
1142, 52 Pa.Cmwlth. 600, Cmwlth.1980. Eminent Domain           274(1)

In condemnation by political subdivision, full fee simple is taken unless condemnor
expressly states that it is taking less. Curtis v. Redevelopment Authority of City of
Philadelphia, 367 A.2d 401, 27 Pa.Cmwlth. 360, Cmwlth.1976, reversed 393 A.2d 377, 482
Pa. 58. Eminent Domain        317(2)

Failure of a redevelopment authority to comply with the Urban Housing Act of 1949, 42
U.S.C.A. § 1450 et seq., or regulations adopted pursuant to it has no effect on the power
of the authority, under state law, to condemn real estate. In re Taking in Eminent Domain
of Certain Parcels of Real Estate in Northside Urban Renewal Area No. 1, Project Penna. R-
389 in City of Bethlehem, Northampton County, 349 A.2d 781, 22 Pa.Cmwlth. 487,
Cmwlth.1976. Eminent Domain         9

Redevelopment authority's filing of a bond provided sufficient security for redevelopment
project, even though the authority was without power of taxation and the bond was filed
without surety. In re Taking in Eminent Domain of Certain Parcels of Real Estate in
Northside Urban Renewal Area No. 1, Project Penna. R-389 in City of Bethlehem,
Northampton County, 349 A.2d 781, 22 Pa.Cmwlth. 487, Cmwlth.1976. Municipal
Corporations    333

Landowner's averment, by way of preliminary objections to taking, that bond furnished by
redevelopment authority on filing of declaration of taking of properties for purpose of urban
renewal was inadequate, insufficient and valueless was, coupled with undisputable facts
that authority has no taxing power and that bond was without surety, was sufficient to
command evidentiary hearing on merits. Golden Dawn Shops, Inc. v. Redevelopment
Authority of City of Philadelphia, 282 A.2d 395, 3 Pa.Cmwlth. 314, Cmwlth.1971. Eminent
Domain     198(1)

Fact that urban renewal project was of great magnitude and public importance and that
cost would be increased because of litigation brought by owner of one parcel of property in
affected area did not mandate affirmance of dismissal of landowner's preliminary objections
to taking. Golden Dawn Shops, Inc. v. Redevelopment Authority of City of Philadelphia, 282
A.2d 395, 3 Pa.Cmwlth. 314, Cmwlth.1971. Eminent Domain        263

Although declaration of taking failed to state eo nomine that purpose of condemnation was
elimination of blighted area, inasmuch as it averred purpose of taking was to effectuate
approved proposal and plan of redeveloping a certified blighted area and repeatedly used
term "redevelopment," averment was sufficient to meet statutory requirements as to
description of the purpose of the condemnation. In re Certain Parcels of Land in First Ward
of City of Lancaster, 216 A.2d 769, 420 Pa. 295, Sup.1966. Eminent Domain        191(3)

Resolution of redevelopment authority condemning realty divested owners of all interest in
realty, and subsequent agreements by owners to confirm condemnation proceedings did
not result in "transfers" within borough ordinance and school district resolution imposing
tax on "transfer" of realty. Borough of Braddock v. Bartoletta, 186 A.2d 243, 409 Pa. 281,
Sup.1962. Schools      102
It is for the redevelopment authority and not for the courts to determine whether eminent
domain power should be exercised in the particular instance. Oliver v. City of Clairton, 98
A.2d 47, 374 Pa. 333, Sup.1953.

Redeveloper is not required to make instant use of all land taken, and to exclude from
redevelopment area patches of ground here and there would violate one of the purposes of
the act, which is to assemble parcels of land into a unified whole and thereby to make area
available for redevelopment purposes. Oliver v. City of Clairton, 98 A.2d 47, 374 Pa. 333,
Sup.1953.

Third class county is liable for the compensation of viewers for services in connection with
views of properties condemned under this act (§ 1701 et seq. of this title). Cassol v. Keck,
39 Pa. D. & C.2d 614, 48 Wes.C.L.J. 77 (1966).

A writ of possession may properly be granted to a redevelopment authority to occupy real
property acquired under this section, before the amount of damages is finally determined.
Theofilos v. Redevelopment Authority of City of Sharon, 31 Pa. D. & C.2d 457 (1963).
Eminent Domain      187

Although § 1701 et seq. of this title empowers a redevelopment authority to reimburse a
landowner for reasonable expenses of removal, nothing in act empowers a board of view to
make award for relocation or removal costs in eminent domain proceedings instituted by
such an authority. Delaware County Redevelopment Authority v. Carminatti, 18 Pa. D. &
C.2d 704 (1959), motion denied 21 Pa. D. & C.2d 85.

4. ---- Blighted areas, eminent domain

City urban redevelopment authority's exercise of discretion as to which areas were blighted
and should be condemned would not be disturbed in the absence of fraud or palpable bad
faith. In re Condemnation by Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh, 822 A.2d 135,
Cmwlth.2003, appeal denied 843 A.2d 1239, 577 Pa. 681. Eminent Domain         68

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

Declaration of taking filed by city redevelopment authority stating that landowner's
properties were located in area which had been certified as blighted and that they were
being condemned in order to redevelop them in accordance with duly approved
redevelopment plan adequately set forth purpose of condemnation. In re City of
Harrisburg, 373 A.2d 774, 30 Pa.Cmwlth. 273, Cmwlth.1977. Eminent Domain          187

In eminent domain proceeding instituted by city redevelopment authority, issue as to
whether the area in question was in fact blighted was properly raised by preliminary
objections to the declaration of taking, and the burden of proof in respect to that issue was
on the authority. Nixon Hotel, Inc. v. Redevelopment Authority of City of Butler, 315 A.2d
366, 11 Pa.Cmwlth. 519, Cmwlth.1974, certiorari denied 95 S.Ct. 74, 419 U.S. 842, 42
L.Ed.2d 70. Eminent Domain      193; Eminent Domain      196

Where blighted area to be redeveloped formed a single large tract bounded on three sides
by major streets and on the remaining side by a railroad, such fact, alone, would justify
taking of whole area, notwithstanding redevelopment plan did not contemplate immediate
use of all such area. Oliver v. City of Clairton, 98 A.2d 47, 374 Pa. 333, Sup.1953. Eminent
Domain      58

Certification of blighted areas is not limited to improved property, but redevelopment
authorities have power, where conditions prescribed in act are found to exist, to exercise
right of eminent domain pursuant to a redevelopment proposal, even though
redevelopment area may be predominantly open, vacant or unimproved. Oliver v. City of
Clairton, 98 A.2d 47, 374 Pa. 333, Sup.1953.

Under provision of Urban Redevelopment Law granting power to redevelopment authorities
to exercise right of eminent domain for purpose of eliminating and rehabilitating blighted
sections of municipalities, it was for redevelopment authority and not for courts to
determine whether the power should be exercised in particular instance. Schenck v. City of
Pittsburgh, 70 A.2d 612, 364 Pa. 31, Sup.1950. Eminent Domain        68

Under Urban Redevelopment Law, it is necessary that areas considered for redevelopment
be blighted areas, and if such condition does not exist there is no substantial need for a
taking. Crawford v. Redevelopment Authority, 25 Fay.L.J. 28 (1962). Eminent Domain
  56

5. ---- Public purposes, eminent domain

City redevelopment authority could properly condemn property in blighted area and
designate it for private residential development as part of redevelopment plan. In re City of
Harrisburg, 373 A.2d 774, 30 Pa.Cmwlth. 273, Cmwlth.1977. Eminent Domain          318

Owners of property in redevelopment area failed to prove that their properties were being
condemned for other than the public purposes described by planning commission director,
who, while stating that an objective of the project was the achievement of a higher level of
commercial business activity in the downtown area, also stated that the reestablishment of
institutional, recreational and residential uses was another objective of the program;
indeed, the owners failed to identify either the private use or the private user allegedly
intended to be benefitted by the project. In re Taking in Eminent Domain of Certain Parcels
of Real Estate in Northside Urban Renewal Area No. 1, Project Penna. R-389 in City of
Bethlehem, Northampton County, 349 A.2d 781, 22 Pa.Cmwlth. 487, Cmwlth.1976.
Eminent Domain       196

On record, taking of private property by city redevelopment authority was for public
purpose, notwithstanding incidental private gain. 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.
Eminent Domain     13

Redevelopment authority has no power to condemn property, under guise of urban
renewal, for a private, not public purpose. Golden Dawn Shops, Inc. v. Redevelopment
Authority of City of Philadelphia, 282 A.2d 395, 3 Pa.Cmwlth. 314, Cmwlth.1971. Eminent
Domain     13
Landowner, which by way of preliminary objections to taking asserted that condemnation
of its land under guise of urban renewal was undertaken not for purpose of replanning of
blighted area but in order to acquire prime commercial land for private development, was
entitled to an evidentiary hearing on question. Golden Dawn Shops, Inc. v. Redevelopment
Authority of City of Philadelphia, 282 A.2d 395, 3 Pa.Cmwlth. 314, Cmwlth.1971. Eminent
Domain      198(1)

Policy of authority under urban redevelopment law to accord preferential treatment in land
disposition must be applied only to disposition of land which authority has in fact acquired
for public purpose, and only when land is no longer needed because public purpose has
been fulfilled, and such policy does not provide authority with any power to acquire one
man's land by condemnation in order to satisfy another man's needs. Redevelopment
Authority of City of Erie v. Owners or Parties in Interest, 274 A.2d 244, 1 Pa.Cmwlth. 378,
Cmwlth.1971. Eminent Domain        13; Municipal Corporations      225(1)

Where there was pressure exerted on redeveloper under urban redevelopment law, as
result of which redevelopment plan was modified to prejudice of plan and defendants were
refused permission to eradicate blighted condition of their property and, on contrary, there
was understanding with other owner that latter would receive defendants' property, prior to
filing declaration of taking, so that, in effect, real reason for condemning defendant's
property was to provide new home for such other owner and not to remove substandard
building, there was "palpable bad faith," and taking was beyond power conferred upon
authority by law. Redevelopment Authority of City of Erie v. Owners or Parties in Interest,
274 A.2d 244, 1 Pa.Cmwlth. 378, Cmwlth.1971. Eminent Domain             17; Eminent Domain
    18.5

Courts have responsibility to see that an authority has not acted in bad faith, and that
property be taken by eminent domain only to extent reasonably required for purpose for
which power is exercised. Redevelopment Authority of City of Erie v. Owners or Parties in
Interest, 274 A.2d 244, 1 Pa.Cmwlth. 378, Cmwlth.1971. Eminent Domain           68

The commercial redevelopment of an existing commercial district in city was a "public
purpose" for which private property could be required by redevelopment authority by
exercise of power of eminent domain under Urban Redevelopment Law. Schenck v. City of
Pittsburgh, 70 A.2d 612, 364 Pa. 31, Sup.1950. Eminent Domain      17

6. Sell, lease, transfer

Power of authority under urban redevelopment law to sell any real property in
redevelopment area does not exist when prejudice will result. Redevelopment Authority of
City of Erie v. Owners or Parties in Interest, 274 A.2d 244, 1 Pa.Cmwlth. 378,
Cmwlth.1971. Municipal Corporations       225(1)

Action of The Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh in rejecting proposal of bidder
to purchase parcel of realty in redevelopment area for the erection of a motor hotel was
not unconstitutional application of Urban Redevelopment Law. Schwartz v. Urban
Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh, 206 A.2d 789, 416 Pa. 503, Sup.1965. Municipal
Corporations    225(1)

Under 35 P.S. § 1709 to effect that redevelopment authority shall constitute a public body
exercising public powers of commonwealth with authority to sell any redevelopment area to
a single redeveloper or in parts to several redevelopers, redevelopment authority was
authorized to sell tract given to it by city to one company for industrial development.
Starkey v. City of Philadelphia, 156 A.2d 101, 397 Pa. 512, Sup.1959. Municipal
Corporations    225(3)

Since the assignment of a ground lease by a municipality's redevelopment authority to a
developer is not a transfer of real estate under section 9(k) of the Urban Development Law,
35 P.S. § 1709(k), the approval of the municipality's city council is not required. Tenants
Ass'n v. Redevelopment Authority, 33 Pa. D. & C.3d 410 (1984). Municipal Corporations
  267

Where, after the specified time for completion of rehabilitation of property conveyed by the
redevelopment authority had expired, the authority encouraged performance under the
agreement without specifically waiving completion date and attempted unsuccessfully to
obtain an estimated completion date from the purchasers, and at the time of trial the
purchaser finally stated that he believed restoration could be completed within a year and a
half from the hearing date, one year from the hearing date was a reasonable period within
which to complete performance which had originally been scheduled for almost seven years
earlier. Redevelopment Authority of the City of Philadelphia v. Calesnick, 62 Pa. D. & C.2d
305 (1973). Municipal Corporations      225(1)

7. Contracts

Redevelopment authority's counsel lacked proper authorization to enter into agreement to
reinstate contractor to authority's list of approved contractors in return for contractor's
completion of certain repairs and modification of a home. Vona v. Redevelopment Authority
of Delaware County, 530 A.2d 1018, 109 Pa.Cmwlth. 156, Cmwlth.1987, appeal denied
548 A.2d 258, 519 Pa. 670. Attorney And Client       81

8. Suits, generally

The Housing Act of 1949, either prior or subsequent to 1959 amendment, gave hotel
association and hotel owners and operators no standing to sue Urban Redevelopment
Authority, city, motor hotel company and others, to enjoin erection by such company of
motor hotel on parcel of land in redevelopment area until city had caused survey of need
for transient housing to be made. Pittsburgh Hotels Ass'n v. Urban Redevelopment
Authority of Pittsburgh, C.A.3 (Pa.)1962, 309 F.2d 186, certiorari denied 83 S.Ct. 730, 372
U.S. 916, 9 L.Ed.2d 723. Injunction    114(2)

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

The Urban Redevelopment Law of 1945 giving a municipal redevelopment authority the
power, inter alia, "to sue and be sued" does not constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity
from vicarious liability in ex delicto actions but applies only to those actions necessary to
carry out its ordinary business and functions. Miller v. Urban Redevelopment Authority of
Pgh., 64 Pa. D. & C.2d 262 (1973). Municipal Corporations         723.5

Absent any interest independent from that of the public at large, a citizens' association has
no standing to maintain an action in mandamus against a city redevelopment authority and
the city to compel the authority to file an audit of its financial transactions, nor in such case
does any duty rest upon defendants to make such an audit. Greater Williamsport
Association of Concerned Citizens, Inc. v. Redevelopment Authority of City of Williamsport,
49 Pa. D. & C.2d 589 (1970). Mandamus         148

In the absence of express Statutory Authority, a Redevelopment Authority or a Public
Parking Authority is not subject to attachment execution as garnishee. Richter v. George
Doherty Lumber Co., 50 Mun.L.R. 177, 16 Pa. D. & C.2d 181, 106 Pitts.L.J. 313 (1959).
Garnishment     17

9. Judicial review

The power of discretion over what areas were to be considered blighted and condemned by
city's urban redevelopment authority was solely within the power of the city's
redevelopment authority, and the only function of the courts with respect to condemnees'
appeal from trial court order overruling their preliminary objections to a declaration of
taking filed by authority was to see that the authority had not acted in bad faith or
arbitrarily, to see that the authority had followed the statutory procedures in making its
determination, and to see that the actions of the authority did not violate any constitutional
safeguards. In re Condemnation by Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh, 822 A.2d
135, Cmwlth.2003, appeal denied 843 A.2d 1239, 577 Pa. 681. Eminent Domain            57;
Eminent Domain        68

Commonwealth Court's review of urban redevelopment law condemnation cases is to see
that Redevelopment Authority has not acted in bad faith or arbitrarily, that it has followed
mandated statutory procedures in preparing redevelopment plan, and that there are no
constitutional violations. In re City of Scranton, 572 A.2d 250, 132 Pa.Cmwlth. 175,
Cmwlth.1990, appeal denied 589 A.2d 204, 527 Pa. 131, appeal denied 590 A.2d 760, 527
Pa. 619. Eminent Domain        262(1)

Finding that city redevelopment authority acted in good faith in issuing declaration of taking
of blighted property precluded Commonwealth Court from scrutinizing the wisdom of the
redevelopment authority's decision to exercise its power. Nixon Hotel, Inc. v.
Redevelopment Authority of City of Butler, 315 A.2d 366, 11 Pa.Cmwlth. 519, Cmwlth.1974,
certiorari denied 95 S.Ct. 74, 419 U.S. 842, 42 L.Ed.2d 70. Eminent Domain       68

Judicial interference with an urban redevelopment authority's performance of its
discretionary duties can only be sustained where it is clearly shown that the authority acted
outside the scope of its authority, or in improper exercise of its discretion. Sherman v.
Haddington Leadership Organization, Inc., 302 A.2d 919, 8 Pa.Cmwlth. 309, Cmwlth.1973.
Municipal Corporations     63.15(2)

Court had jurisdiction to inquire into whether discretionary action of redevelopment
authority not to commence eviction proceedings against condemnee was or was not in
accord with powers and duties given to Authority by Urban Redevelopment Law. Sherman v.
Haddington Leadership Organization, Inc., 302 A.2d 919, 8 Pa.Cmwlth. 309, Cmwlth.1973.
Municipal Corporations     717

Courts have no right to substitute their discretion in place of legislatively granted discretion
of redevelopment housing authority. Crawford v. Redevelopment Authority of Fayette
County, 211 A.2d 866, 418 Pa. 549, Sup.1965. Municipal Corporations           267
Equity has inherent power to examine constitutionality of actions of a redevelopment
authority. Crawford v. Redevelopment Authority of Fayette County, 211 A.2d 866, 418 Pa.
549, Sup.1965. Equity    29

Only function of courts with respect to what areas are to be considered blighted is to see
that redevelopment authority has not acted in bad faith, arbitrarily, or unconstitutionally
and that it has followed statutory procedures. Crawford v. Redevelopment Authority of
Fayette County, 211 A.2d 866, 418 Pa. 549, Sup.1965. Municipal Corporations         267

Attack in equity of redevelopment authority certification that area is blighted is proper when
it is alleged and proved that authority, in making its certification, acted in bad faith,
arbitrarily, or failed to follow a statutory requirement. Crawford v. Redevelopment Authority
of Fayette County, 211 A.2d 866, 418 Pa. 549, Sup.1965. Eminent Domain            273

Issue as to whether Redevelopment Plan was unconstitutional on ground that it permitted
parochial schools but excluded public schools did not go to propriety of certification of blight
and dealt with questions not proper subject matter for appeal from decree forbidding taking
of plaintiff's property on ground that area in which her property was located was not
blighted. Crawford v. Redevelopment Authority of Fayette County, 211 A.2d 866, 418 Pa.
549, Sup.1965. Appeal And Error       863

Court will not and cannot substitute its judgment as to what is sound economic and social
redevelopment of project for that of The Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh,
where the Authority's judgment was based on proper exercise of discretion vested by law.
Schwartz v. Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh, 206 A.2d 789, 416 Pa. 503,
Sup.1965. Municipal Corporations      63.15(2)

35 P.S. § 1709, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1709


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1710
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1710. Preparation and adoption of redevelopment proposal

(a) An Authority shall prepare a redevelopment proposal for all or part of any area certified
by the planning commission to be a redevelopment area and for which the planning
commission has made a redevelopment area plan.

(b) The planning commission's certification of a redevelopment area shall be made in
conformance with its comprehensive general plan (which may include, inter alia, a plan of
major traffic arteries and terminals and a land use plan and projected population densities)
for the territory under its jurisdiction or for any greater area for which the field of operation
of the Authority has been extended under clause (e) of section 3 of this act. [FN1]

(c) The planning commission's redevelopment area plan shall include, without being limited
to, the following:

(1) The boundaries of the area, with a map showing the existing uses of the real property
therein;

(2) A land use plan of the area showing proposed uses following redevelopment;

(3) Standards of population densities, land coverage and building intensities in the proposed
redevelopment;

(4) A preliminary site plan of the area;

(5) A statement of the proposed changes, if any, in zoning ordinances or maps;

(6) A statement of any proposed changes in street layouts, street levels, and proposed
traffic regulation, including the separation or excluding of vehicular traffic partially or totally
from pedestrian traffic;

(7) A statement of the extent and effect of the rehousing of families which may be made
necessary from the redevelopment area plan, and the manner in which such rehousing may
be accomplished;

(8) A statement of the estimated cost of acquisition of the redevelopment area, and of all
other costs necessary to prepare the area for redevelopment;

(9) A statement of such continuing controls as may be deemed necessary to effectuate the
purposes of this act.

(d) In conformity with such redevelopment area plan, the Authority shall prepare a proposal
for the redevelopment of all or part of such area. The Authority may, if it deems it desirable,
hold public hearings prior to its final determination of the redevelopment proposal.
(e) The Authority shall submit the redevelopment proposal to the planning commission for
review. The planning commission shall, within forty-five days, certify to the governing body
its recommendation on the redevelopment proposal, either of approval, rejection or
modification, and in the latter event, specify the changes recommended.


(f) Upon receipt of the planning commission's recommendation, or at the expiration of forty-
five days, if no recommendation is made by the planning commission, the Authority shall
submit to the governing body the redevelopment proposal with the recommendation, if any,
of the planning commission thereon.


(g) The governing body upon receipt of the redevelopment proposal and the
recommendation, if any, of the planning commission shall hold a public hearing upon said
proposal. Notice of the time, place and purpose of such hearing shall be published at least
once each week for three consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the
field of operation of the Authority, the time of the hearing to be at least ten days from the
last publication of notice. The notice shall describe that portion of the redevelopment area
affected by the proposal by boundaries and by city block, street and house number. The
redevelopment proposal with such maps, plans, contracts or other documents as form part
of said proposal, together with the recommendation, if any, of the planning commission and
supporting data shall be available for public inspection for at least ten days prior to the
hearing.


At the hearing the governing body shall afford an opportunity to all persons or agencies
interested to be heard and shall receive, make known and consider recommendations in
writing with reference to the redevelopment proposal.


(h) The governing body shall approve or reject the redevelopment proposal as submitted.
The governing body shall not approve a redevelopment proposal unless it is satisfied that
adequate provisions will be made to rehouse displaced families, if any, without undue
hardship, or if the municipality in which the project is to be located has filed its objections
thereto.

(i) Upon approval by the governing body of the redevelopment proposal, as submitted by
the Authority, the Authority is authorized to take such action as may be necessary to carry
it out.

(j) The redevelopment proposal may contain the form of the redevelopment contract with
the redeveloper selected and upon approval by the governing body of the proposal, as
hereinbefore provided, the Authority is authorized to execute the said redevelopment
contract. If the proposal does not contain the form of the redevelopment contract with the
redeveloper selected, the Authority shall not execute a redevelopment contract with a
redeveloper thereafter selected, until the said redevelopment contract shall have been
approved by the governing body and found to be in substantial conformity with the proposal
theretofore approved by the governing body. No additional public hearing notice or
publication shall be required with respect to such approval.
CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 10. Amended 1955, May 31, P.L. 107, §§ 1-3; 1968, June 26,
P.L. 263, No. 125, § 12.

[FN1] 35 P.S. § 1703.

HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES

2003 Main Volume

Act 1968-125 legislation

The 1968 amendment in subsec. (a) inserted "all or part of", in subsec. (b) added "or for
any ... of this act" and in subsec. (c), clause (6), added "and proposed ... pedestrian
traffic".

LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

Municipal Corporations    267, 282(1).
Westlaw Topic No. 268.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations § 957.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

2006 Electronic Pocket Part Update
Encyclopedias

Summary Pa. Jur. 2d Municipal Law § 21:195, Urban Redevelopment Authorities.

NOTES OF DECISIONS

In general 1
Approval of contract 7
Carrying out proposal 8
Certification of area 3
Condemnation 9
Inspection of proposal 6
Judicial review 10
Notice 5
Redeveloper 2
Rehousing displaced families 4

1. In general

Under Urban Redevelopment Law providing that city redevelopment authority shall prepare
a redevelopment proposal for any area certified by planning commission, and for which the
latter has made a redevelopment area plan, the order in which such transactions occurred
was of no real importance, and where certification was made by planning commission after
full consideration, and redevelopment proposal was adopted by authority and approved by
planning commission, requirements of the law were fulfilled, notwithstanding fact that the
authority prepared and adopted redevelopment proposal and submitted it to planning
commission for review before the commission had certified the area as blighted. Oliver v.
City of Clairton, 98 A.2d 47, 374 Pa. 333, Sup.1953. Municipal Corporations    314(1)

Where city planning commission approved redevelopment proposal which complied strictly
with requirements of Urban Redevelopment Law in regard to a redevelopment area plan,
fact that planning commission failed to prepare the redevelopment area plan containing all
information specified in the statute did not constitute a serious irregularity. Oliver v. City of
Clairton, 98 A.2d 47, 374 Pa. 333, Sup.1953. Municipal Corporations        314(1)

2. Redeveloper

A redevelopment authority was not precluded by this section from appointing as the
redeveloper the tenant of a building marked for redevelopment. Friedman v.
Redevelopment Auth. of County of Chester, 24 Pa. D. & C.3d 377 (1982). Municipal
Corporations   283

3. Certification of area

Certification of blight under urban redevelopment law (URL) does not in and of itself give
condemnor authority to condemn all property within the area. Redevelopment Authority of
City of Scranton v. Kameroski, 616 A.2d 1102, 151 Pa.Cmwlth. 345, Cmwlth.1992.
Eminent Domain        18.5

Under urban redevelopment law (URL), certification of blight is merely internal finding that
certain physical conditions exist in project area that make the area "blighted."
Redevelopment Authority of City of Scranton v. Kameroski, 616 A.2d 1102, 151
Pa.Cmwlth. 345, Cmwlth.1992. Eminent Domain           18.5

Certification of area as blighted under urban redevelopment law (URL) does not itself affect
property rights but only sets date for redevelopment. Redevelopment Authority of City of
Scranton v. Kameroski, 616 A.2d 1102, 151 Pa.Cmwlth. 345, Cmwlth.1992. Eminent
Domain      18.5

Procedures set out in Redevelopment Law, Eminent Domain Code, and case law are
adequate to protect property interests at initial stage of redevelopment process where area
is certified as redevelopment area, and thus, planning commissions are not required to
hold public hearings to consider whether to certify area for redevelopment; requirement
that governing body hold public hearings and give notice of those hearings by publication,
prior to formal adoption of proposal for redevelopment, is sufficient to satisfy due process
requirement that those affected have opportunity to voice their objections. 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.
Constitutional Law     278.2(2); Eminent Domain       55

Mere certification of blight is not local agency law adjudication, as no rights of property
owner at time of certification of blight are affected; thus, notice, record hearing, and
written findings of fact and conclusions of law are not required. In re City of Scranton, 572
A.2d 250, 132 Pa.Cmwlth. 175, Cmwlth.1990, appeal denied 589 A.2d 204, 527 Pa. 131,
appeal denied 590 A.2d 760, 527 Pa. 619. Eminent Domain          169

Blight certification, rendered almost ten years before filing of declaration of taking for
property in regard to redevelopment project, was not stale, and new blight certification was
not required; urban redevelopment authority had continually engaged in redevelopment
activities throughout postcertification period. Matter of Condemnation by Urban
Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh, 544 A.2d 87, 117 Pa.Cmwlth. 475, Cmwlth.1988,
appeal granted in part 558 A.2d 529, 521 Pa. 539, affirmed 594 A.2d 1375, 527 Pa. 550,
certiorari denied 112 S.Ct. 638, 502 U.S. 1004, 116 L.Ed.2d 656. Eminent Domain            169

City planning commission's certificate of blight, made preliminary to declaration of taking in
regard to urban renewal project, was not void for vagueness due to absence of specific and
detailed findings; no statute or regulation required such findings. Matter of Condemnation
by Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh, 544 A.2d 87, 117 Pa.Cmwlth. 475,
Cmwlth.1988, appeal granted in part 558 A.2d 529, 521 Pa. 539, affirmed 594 A.2d 1375,
527 Pa. 550, certiorari denied 112 S.Ct. 638, 502 U.S. 1004, 116 L.Ed.2d 656. Eminent
Domain      169

Period of almost ten years between blight certification and declaration of taking by urban
redevelopment authority did not deprive condemnees of due process; condemnees made
only bare assertions that time lapse resulted in loss of critical witnesses, and had 11
months subsequent to declaration of taking to obtain discovery. Matter of Condemnation by
Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh, 544 A.2d 87, 117 Pa.Cmwlth. 475,
Cmwlth.1988, appeal granted in part 558 A.2d 529, 521 Pa. 539, affirmed 594 A.2d 1375,
527 Pa. 550, certiorari denied 112 S.Ct. 638, 502 U.S. 1004, 116 L.Ed.2d 656.
Constitutional Law    281; Eminent Domain       174

City redevelopment authority could properly produce redevelopment plan which involved
only portion of area originally certified as blighted. In re City of Harrisburg, 373 A.2d 774,
30 Pa.Cmwlth. 273, Cmwlth.1977. Municipal Corporations            282(1)

There was no evidence before court in proceeding challenging taking of property for
redevelopment area that would indicate that the planning commission acted in a capricious
or fraudulent manner in certifying area as blighted or that its actions were based on private
motives contrary to the public interest. 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       196

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 § 1702(a) of this title, 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

4. Rehousing displaced families

Redevelopment proposal, which stated that redevelopment authority would assist in
rehousing and that those needing rehousing would be relocated into private housing and
low-rent public housing, and which, by reference to maps attached to proposal, gave
sufficient notice to public as to who would be required to relocate, gave adequate
statement of extent and effect of necessary rehousing of families and manner of such
rehousing despite fact that there was not a breakdown of exact number of persons to be
relocated into various types of housing. Feagley v. Huntingdon County Planning
Commission, 330 A.2d 281, 16 Pa.Cmwlth. 520, Cmwlth.1974. Eminent Domain              169

5. Notice

Trial court did not err in finding that redevelopment plan did not include property where the
property was not specifically listed as property to be condemned in redevelopment plan,
even though it may have been connected to property properly listed to be condemned in
the plan. Redevelopment Authority of City of Scranton v. Kameroski, 616 A.2d 1102, 151
Pa.Cmwlth. 345, Cmwlth.1992. Eminent Domain          18.5

While urban redevelopment law (URL) allows taking of property to effectuate
redevelopment plan, plan must be specific enough to notify potential condemnees of their
future. Redevelopment Authority of City of Scranton v. Kameroski, 616 A.2d 1102, 151
Pa.Cmwlth. 345, Cmwlth.1992. Eminent Domain        18.5

Amended complaint, which alleged that urban redevelopment law denied plaintiff property
owners due process because it did not require, and they were not provided, notice or
hearing before area in which their properties were located was certified as blighted, and
which spoke as of time before city had, or was obliged to conduct public hearing, stated
cause of action. Cass Plumbing & Heating Co., Inc. v. PPG Industries, Inc., 416 A.2d 1142,
52 Pa.Cmwlth. 600, Cmwlth.1980. Constitutional Law       278.2(2)

Advertising of public hearing on redevelopment proposal complied with requirement that
notice of hearing "shall be published at least once each week for three consecutive weeks,"
though first two advertisements were only three days apart. Feagley v. Huntingdon County
Planning Commission, 330 A.2d 281, 16 Pa.Cmwlth. 520, Cmwlth.1974. Eminent Domain
   169

6. Inspection of proposal

Under paragraph (g) of this section, fact that lease agreement between redevelopment
authority and redeveloper was not available for public inspection during ten day period
prior to hearing, did not render proceedings void, where contract itself was on file for public
inspection for the required period and terms of lease were discussed at public hearing, and
where lease, although not before council when redevelopment proposal was approved, was
approved by it within a month thereafter. Oliver v. City of Clairton, 98 A.2d 47, 374 Pa.
333, Sup.1953.

7. Approval of contract

A provision of this section that if redevelopment proposal does not contain form of
redevelopment contract with redeveloper selected, authority shall not execute a
redevelopment contract with a redeveloper thereafter selected until said contract shall
have been approved by governing body and found to be in substantial conformity with
proposal theretofore approved by it did not require contract to be submitted to city council
for its approval, since District Court's order specifically provided that town houses were to
be constructed in accordance with plans which had previously been approved by city
council; in any event, District Court, for purpose of remedying city's constitutional
violations involving racial discrimination, had power to suspend such section's operation.
Resident Advisory Bd. v. Rizzo, E.D.Pa.1979, 463 F.Supp. 694, affirmed 595 F.2d 1211,
affirmed 595 F.2d 1214, certiorari denied 99 S.Ct. 2895, 442 U.S. 947, 61 L.Ed.2d 319.
Municipal Corporations   342

8. Carrying out proposal

Although certain area was part of project No. 13 of comprehensive plan for redevelopment,
election to begin that project before projects 7 through 12 were undertaken was within
discretionary power of urban redevelopment board. Crawford v. Redevelopment Authority
of Fayette County, 211 A.2d 866, 418 Pa. 549, Sup.1965. Municipal Corporations     283

Choice of priority of any project over any other is well within discretion and power of urban
redevelopment board. Crawford v. Redevelopment Authority of Fayette County, 211 A.2d
866, 418 Pa. 549, Sup.1965. Municipal Corporations        283

In carrying out a redevelopment contract under Urban Redevelopment Law, title of
property to be redeveloped must either be transferred to the redeveloper pending process
of redevelopment, with redevelopment authority relying meanwhile upon redeveloper's
covenants for performance of its obligations under the contract, or the title must remain
during that interim in the authority, with redeveloper relying meanwhile upon obligation of
authority to convey title after redevelopment shall have been performed, and whether the
one or the other of such alternatives should be adopted is an administrative matter for
contracting parties. Schenck v. City of Pittsburgh, 70 A.2d 612, 364 Pa. 31, Sup.1950.
Municipal Corporations     352

9. Condemnation

Where Redevelopment Authority announced its intention to pay all property owners in
redevelopment project area 150% of appraised value as determined by Redevelopment
Authority's real estate broker, property owners' equal protection rights were not violated
by fact that several property owners settled for substantially in excess of 150% of value
set forth by Redevelopment Authority; each property is unique, and to increase offer for
one property and not other may simply be result of normal negotiation that takes place
between condemnor and condemnee as to whose appraiser's value is correct. In re City of
Scranton, 572 A.2d 250, 132 Pa.Cmwlth. 175, Cmwlth.1990, appeal denied 589 A.2d 204,
527 Pa. 131, appeal denied 590 A.2d 760, 527 Pa. 619. Constitutional Law       228.1;
Eminent Domain       150

Redevelopment Authority's taking of property did not violate property owner's state or
federal constitutional rights, despite argument that, because property was subsequently
conveyed to private party to build mall, there was no public purpose advanced; there was
more than substantial evidence in record that area was certified as blighted, and that
purpose of redevelopment plan was to eliminate that blight. In re City of Scranton, 572
A.2d 250, 132 Pa.Cmwlth. 175, Cmwlth.1990, appeal denied 589 A.2d 204, 527 Pa. 131,
appeal denied 590 A.2d 760, 527 Pa. 619. Eminent Domain        196

The redevelopment of a blighted commercial district was a proper public purpose for which
public funds could be expended and private property acquired by the exercise of the power
of eminent domain under this section. Friedman v. Redevelopment Auth. of County of
Chester, 24 Pa. D. & C.3d 377 (1982). Eminent Domain     18.5
10. Judicial review

United States district court had no jurisdiction under Civil Rights Act over landowners' action
to enjoin city and city redevelopment authority from taking steps to condemn landowners'
property where state procedures were adequate to preserve fully all constitutional rights
due landowners in anticipated condemnation proceedings. Kadash v. City of Williamsport,
M.D.Pa.1973, 362 F.Supp. 1343. Federal Courts        223

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

Parties challenging municipal housing authority's rejection of proposal to purchase certain
land were required to show that authority had acted capriciously, arbitrarily or in bad faith.
Schwartz v. Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh, 192 A.2d 371, 411 Pa. 530,
Sup.1963. Municipal Corporations    225(1)

Purpose of Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh is to deal with an area rather than
with individual properties, and unless bad faith, arbitrary action, or failure to follow a
statutory requirement are shown, the certification by the authorities that an area is blighted
and the plan for improving it are not subject to judicial review. St. Peter's Roman Catholic
Parish v. Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh, 146 A.2d 724, 394 Pa. 194,
Sup.1958, appeal dismissed, certiorari denied 79 S.Ct. 940, 359 U.S. 435, 3 L.Ed.2d 931.
Municipal Corporations     267; Municipal Corporations     321(1.1)

In absence of any indication that city planning commission did not act in good faith or was
wholly arbitrary in certifying area designated by it as blighted within meaning of Urban
Redevelopment Law, its certification to that effect was not subject to judicial review. Oliver
v. City of Clairton, 98 A.2d 47, 374 Pa. 333, Sup.1953. Municipal Corporations       63.15(2)

In absence of any indication that city planning commission did not act in good faith or was
wholly arbitrary in certifying the area designated by it as blighted within meaning of Urban
Redevelopment Law, its certification to that effect was not subject to judicial review.
Schenck v. City of Pittsburgh, 70 A.2d 612, 364 Pa. 31, Sup.1950. Municipal Corporations
  63.15(2)

35 P.S. § 1710, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1710


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1711
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1711. Provisions of the redevelopment contract


(a) The contract between the Authority and a redeveloper shall contain, without being
limited to, the following provisions:

(1) A legal description of the redevelopment area covered by the contract, and a covenant
running with land to the effect that no person shall be deprived of the right to live in the
redevelopment project, or to use any of the facilities therein by reason of race, creed, color
or national origin, and such other easements, or other rights as are to be reserved therein
by the Authority;

(2) Plans and such other documents as may be required to show the type, material,
structure and general character of the redevelopment project;

(3) A statement of the use intended for each part of the project;

(4) A guaranty of completion of the redevelopment project within specified time limits,
which guaranty shall include provisions for the forfeiture of title, in such form and manner
as the Authority may prescribe, in the event that the project is not completed timely;

(4-1) A requirement that every prime contract for construction, installation, alteration,
repair of, or addition to, the redevelopment project, where the estimated cost shall exceed
$10,000.00, shall contain a provision obligating the prime contractor to the prompt
payment of all material furnished, labor supplied or performed, rental for equipment
employed, and services rendered by public utilities in or in connection with the prosecution
of the work, whether or not, the said material, labor, equipment and services enter into
and become component parts of the work or improvement contemplated. Such provision
shall be deemed to be included for the benefit of every person, co-partnership, association
or corporation, who as subcontractor, or otherwise, has furnished material, supplied or
performed labor, rented equipment, or supplied services in or in connection with the
prosecution of the work as aforesaid, and the inclusion thereof in any contract shall
preclude the filing by any such person, co-partnership, association or corporation of any
mechanics' lien claim for such material, labor or rental of equipment, and further requiring
that the redeveloper shall provide to the Authority evidence of financial security for the
prompt payment by the prime contractor for materials, supplies, labor, services and
equipment. Such financial security shall equal 100% of the contract amount, shall be in
such form as the Authority may prescribe and may include, but not be limited to, any one
or a combination of the following:


(i) an appropriate bond from a surety company authorized to do business in this
Commonwealth;
(ii) an irrevocable letter of credit from a Federal or Commonwealth- chartered lending
institution; or

(iii) a restrictive or escrow account;

(5) A provision that the redeveloper shall be without power to sell, lease or otherwise
transfer the redevelopment area, or project, or any part thereof, without the prior written
consent of the Authority, until the Authority shall have certified in writing that the
redevelopment project has been completed;

(5-1) For all projects in which the estimated construction costs exceed $1,000,000.00, a
requirement that the redeveloper shall provide to the Authority, and shall cause each prime
contractor to provide or submit to, a project cost certification performed by one or more
independent, third-party certified public accountants establishing the actual total
construction costs incurred and paid by the redeveloper and each prime contractor in
connection with the redevelopment project. The receipt of the construction cost
certification shall be a condition for receiving a certificate of completion;

(6) The amount of the consideration to be paid by the redeveloper to the Authority;

(7) Adequate safeguards for proper maintenance of all parts of the project;

(8) Prohibition against discrimination in the use, sale or lease of any part of the project
against any person because of race, color, religion or national origin;

(9) Such other continuing controls as may be deemed necessary to effectuate the purposes
of this act;

(b) Any deed or lease to a redeveloper in furtherance of a redevelopment contract shall be
executed in the name of the Authority, by its proper officers, and shall contain in addition
to all other provisions, such provisions as the Authority may deem desirable to run with the
land in order to effectuate the purposes of this act;

(c) Any lease to a redeveloper may provide that all improvements shall become the
property of the Authority. The execution of such a lease shall not in itself impose upon the
Authority any liability for or by reason of the financing, construction, management or
operation of any redevelopment project.

CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 11. Amended 2002, Oct. 2, P.L. 796, No. 113, § 1, effective in
60 days; 2004, Jan. 12, P.L. 1, No. 1, § 1, imd. effective.

HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES

2006 Electronic Pocket Part Update
Act 2004-1 legislation

Act 2004-1, § 1, in subsec. (a)(4), added ", which guaranty shall include provisions for the
forfeiture of title, in such form and manner as the Authority may prescribe, in the event
that the project is not completed timely"; rewrote subsec. (a)(4-1), which prior thereto
read:
"(4-1) A requirement that every contract for construction, installation, alteration, repair of,
or addition to, the redevelopment project, where the estimated cost shall exceed
$10,000.00, shall contain a provision obligating the contractor to the prompt payment of all
material furnished, labor supplied or performed, rental for equipment employed, and
services rendered by public utilities in or in connection with the prosecution of the work,
whether or not, the said material, labor, equipment and services enter into and become
component parts of the work or improvement contemplated. Such provision shall be
deemed to be included for the benefit of every person, co-partnership, association or
corporation, who as subcontractor, or otherwise, has furnished material, supplied or
performed labor, rented equipment, or supplied services in or in connection with the
prosecution of the work as aforesaid, and the inclusion thereof in any contract shall
preclude the filing by any such person, co-partnership, association or corporation of any
mechanics' lien claim for such material, labor or rental of equipment, and further requiring
that the contractor shall give to the redeveloper an appropriate bond for the prompt
payment by the contractor for materials, supplies, labor, services and equipment in such
form as the Authority may prescribe;"

; and added subsec. (a)(5-1).

Section 2 of 2004, Jan. 12, P.L. 1, No. 1, imd. effective, provides that "[a]ll rights, duties
and obligations arising under any redevelopment contract awarded by an Authority prior to
the effective date of this act shall continue to be governed by the provisions of the law in
effect at the time of such award."

2003 Main Volume

Act 2002-113 legislation

Act 2002-113, § 1, in subsec. (a)(4-1), substituted "$10,000.00" for "$500.00".

Section 4 of 2002, Oct. 2, P.L. 796, No. 113, effective in 60 days, provides:

"The amendment of section 11 of the act shall apply to contracts entered into after the
effective date of this act."


LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

Municipal Corporations    338, 339(1).
Westlaw Topic No. 268.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 1044 to 1045, 1047 to 1050.

NOTES OF DECISIONS

In general 1
Approval of contract 4
Leases 3
Statutory provisions 2
1. In general

Fact that offer contemplated execution and delivery of an agreement which was not in fact
executed or delivered did not preclude existence of contract based on authority's resolution
approving offeror's proposed use and designating offeror as sole developer. Hatalowich v.
Redevelopment Authority of City of Monessen, 312 A.2d 22, 454 Pa. 481, Sup.1973.
Municipal Corporations    335

Under Urban Redevelopment Law, it is for the redevelopment authority and the
redeveloper to decide upon terms of redevelopment contract and for city council to approve
or reject them, and if contract contains provisions stipulated in the law, it is not for the
courts to pass upon merits of suggestions as to how contract might be strengthened by
amendments the desirability and effectiveness of which are for consideration solely of the
agencies and governing body to which the Urban Redevelopment Law has committed that
responsibility. Schenck v. City of Pittsburgh, 70 A.2d 612, 364 Pa. 31, Sup.1950. Municipal
Corporations     63.15(2)

2. Statutory provisions

Contract for redevelopment of a blighted area, in which the redeveloper agreed to abide by
all provisions of the redevelopment contract set forth in the Urban Redevelopment Law,
was not an unfair, inequitable and unreasonable agreement. Oliver v. City of Clairton, 98
A.2d 47, 374 Pa. 333, Sup.1953. Municipal Corporations       339(1)

3. Leases

Under Urban Redevelopment Law, a lease to redeveloper made in furtherance of
redevelopment contract need merely contain such provisions as redevelopment authority
may deem desirable to run with the land in order to effectuate purposes of the act. Oliver
v. City of Clairton, 98 A.2d 47, 374 Pa. 333, Sup.1953. Municipal Corporations   339(1)

4. Approval of contract

Fact that city redevelopment authority executed contract with the redeveloper, for
redevelopment of a blighted area, before city council had approved such contract, did not
render redevelopment proceedings void, in view of fact that the contract itself provided that
it was to be binding upon the parties when approved by the council, and that the council
subsequently approved it, giving right to authority to execute it. Oliver v. City of Clairton,
98 A.2d 47, 374 Pa. 333, Sup.1953. Municipal Corporations       351

35 P.S. § 1711, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1711


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1711.1
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1711.1. Preparation and provisions of a residential housing redevelopment
program and commercial and industrial redevelopment program


(a) The Authority may develop a residential housing redevelopment program or a
commercial and industrial redevelopment program for all or part of its field of operation.


(b) The Authority shall submit the redevelopment program to the planning commission for
review and approval.


(c) The planning commission, within forty-five days, shall either approve, reject or modify
the program as satisfying the public purpose of this act. If the planning commission takes
no action within forty-five days, the program shall be deemed approved on the forty-sixth
day.


(d) Upon approval by the planning commission, or at the expiration of forty-five days, if no
recommendation is made by the planning commission, the Authority is authorized to take
such action as may be necessary to carry out the redevelopment program.

CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 11.1, added 1988, March 30, P.L. 304, No. 39, § 4, imd.
effective.

LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

Municipal Corporations    282(1), 293.
Westlaw Topic No. 268.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations § 977.

35 P.S. § 1711.1, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1711.1


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1712
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1712. Eminent domain

Title to any property acquired by an Authority through eminent domain shall be an absolute
or fee simple title, unless a lesser title shall be designated in the eminent domain
proceedings. The Authority may exercise the right of eminent domain in the manner
provided by law for the exercise of such right by cities or counties, as the case may be, of
the same class as the city or county in which such Authority is organized to operate. If any
of the real property in the redevelopment area which is to be acquired has, prior to such
acquisition, been devoted to another public use, it may, nevertheless, be acquired by
condemnation: Provided, That no real property belonging to a city, county or to the
Commonwealth may be acquired without its consent. No real property belonging to a public
utility corporation may be acquired without the approval of the Public Utility Commission.


CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 12.

CROSS REFERENCES

Counties of the second class, authority to sell or lease real property, see 16 P.S. § 5505.

LAW REVIEW AND JOURNAL COMMENTARIES

County of Wayne v. Hathcock: Michigan redefines implementing economic development
through eminent domain. Rachel A. Lewis, 50 Vill. L. Rev. 341 (2005).

LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

Eminent Domain    18.5, 45.
Westlaw Topic No. 148.
C.J.S. Eminent Domain §§ 24, 53, 56.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

2006 Electronic Pocket Part Update
Encyclopedias

Summary Pa. Jur. 2d Property § 11:30, Property Already Devoted to Public Use.

NOTES OF DECISIONS

Blighted areas 5
Consent 2
Costs 12
Damages 6
Evidence 10
Interest acquired 7
Prerequisites to taking 3
Procedure, generally 9
Public purposes 4
Rehabilitation of property 8
Review 13
Validity 1
Validity of taking 11

1. Validity

The taking of property by redevelopment authorities under this section for purpose of
eliminating and rehabilitating blighted sections of municipalities is a taking for a "public
use" within constitutional provision respecting eminent domain. Belovsky v. Redevelopment
Authority of City of Philadelphia, 54 A.2d 277, 357 Pa. 329, Sup.1947. Eminent Domain
   17

This section is not unconstitutional because it provides that land be retransferred to private
ownership when need for public ownership has terminated, subject only to such restrictions
as are necessary to effectuate purposes of the act, on ground that it takes property from
one or more individuals and gives it to another or others. Belovsky v. Redevelopment
Authority of City of Philadelphia, 54 A.2d 277, 357 Pa. 329, Sup.1947.

2. Consent

City's failure to object after receiving partially erroneous notice of declaration of taking of
city property by urban redevelopment authority did not constitute implied consent to such
taking within meaning of statute, 35 P.S. § 1712, prohibiting authority from acquiring real
property belonging to city without its consent; declaration of taking erroneously listed prior
owner, rather than city, as owner of property purportedly taken. Urban Redevelopment
Authority of Pittsburgh v. Hackaday, 501 A.2d 349, 93 Pa.Cmwlth. 378, Cmwlth.1985.
Eminent Domain        184

3. Prerequisites to taking

Under redevelopment act, choosing of redeveloper or entering into contract with
redeveloper for re-use of land are not prerequisites to condemnation. In re Certain Parcels
of Land in First Ward of City of Lancaster, 216 A.2d 769, 420 Pa. 295, Sup.1966. Eminent
Domain     169

Lack of redevelopment contract was not fatal to power of redevelopment authority of city
to condemn land, in absence of showing of any fraud, abuse of discretion or bad faith. In re
Certain Parcels of Land in First Ward of City of Lancaster, 216 A.2d 769, 420 Pa. 295,
Sup.1966. Eminent Domain        169
4. Public purposes

City redevelopment authority could properly condemn property in blighted area and
designate it for private residential development as part of redevelopment plan. In re City of
Harrisburg, 373 A.2d 774, 30 Pa.Cmwlth. 273, Cmwlth.1977. Eminent Domain          318

Owners of property in redevelopment area failed to prove that their properties were being
condemned for other than the public purposes described by planning commission director,
who, while stating that an objective of the project was the achievement of a higher level of
commercial business activity in the downtown area, also stated that the reestablishment of
institutional, recreational and residential uses was another objective of the program;
indeed, the owners failed to identify either the private use or the private user allegedly
intended to be benefitted by the project. In re Taking in Eminent Domain of Certain Parcels
of Real Estate in Northside Urban Renewal Area No. 1, Project Penna. R-389 in City of
Bethlehem, Northampton County, 349 A.2d 781, 22 Pa.Cmwlth. 487, Cmwlth.1976.
Eminent Domain       196

Property cannot be taken by government without owner's consent for mere purpose of
devoting it to private use of another, even though there be involved in the transaction an
incidental benefit to the public. Belovsky v. Redevelopment Authority of City of
Philadelphia, 54 A.2d 277, 357 Pa. 329, Sup.1947. Eminent Domain        14

The taking of property by redevelopment authorities under this section does not lose its
public character because there may exist in the operations some feature of private gain.
Belovsky v. Redevelopment Authority of City of Philadelphia, 54 A.2d 277, 357 Pa. 329,
Sup.1947.

5. Blighted areas

In order for county redevelopment authority to acquire any property by eminent domain
pursuant to urban redevelopment law, area in question must first be certified as blighted.
Matter of Condemnation of Surface of Certain Tract of Land Located in Borough of
Centralia, Columbia County, Pa., 658 A.2d 481, Cmwlth.1995, appeal denied 666 A.2d
1059, 542 Pa. 651, certiorari denied 116 S.Ct. 1351, 517 U.S. 1119, 134 L.Ed.2d 520.
Eminent Domain      18.5

Certification of blight under urban redevelopment law (URL) does not in and of itself give
condemnor authority to condemn all property within the area. Redevelopment Authority of
City of Scranton v. Kameroski, 616 A.2d 1102, 151 Pa.Cmwlth. 345, Cmwlth.1992.
Eminent Domain        18.5

Under urban redevelopment law (URL), certification of blight is merely internal finding that
certain physical conditions exist in project area that make the area "blighted."
Redevelopment Authority of City of Scranton v. Kameroski, 616 A.2d 1102, 151
Pa.Cmwlth. 345, Cmwlth.1992. Eminent Domain           18.5

Certification of area as blighted under urban redevelopment law (URL) does not itself affect
property rights but only sets date for redevelopment. Redevelopment Authority of City of
Scranton v. Kameroski, 616 A.2d 1102, 151 Pa.Cmwlth. 345, Cmwlth.1992. Eminent
Domain      18.5

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

In eminent domain proceeding instituted by city redevelopment authority, issue as to
whether the area in question was in fact blighted was properly raised by preliminary
objections to the declaration of taking, and the burden of proof in respect to that issue was
on the authority. Nixon Hotel, Inc. v. Redevelopment Authority of City of Butler, 315 A.2d
366, 11 Pa.Cmwlth. 519, Cmwlth.1974, certiorari denied 95 S.Ct. 74, 419 U.S. 842, 42
L.Ed.2d 70. Eminent Domain       193; Eminent Domain     196

A finding that an urban area, declared to be a federal disaster area, was in need of
redevelopment did not constitute a finding of blight as required under the Urban
Redevelopment Law to support a condemnation of premises in such area. Condemnation of
Elsesser, 12 Pa. D. & C.3d 25 (1979). Eminent Domain       45

6. Damages

Pennsylvania law does not authorize payment of relocation expenses as part of eminent
domain proceedings. Merge v. Sharott, C.A.3 (Pa.)1965, 341 F.2d 989. Eminent Domain
  95

Where verdict in condemnation case fell well within the range of testimony on value, it was
reversible error to grant new trial on ground of inadequacy of the verdict. Lorenzo v.
Redevelopment Authority of City of Philadelphia, 358 A.2d 130, 24 Pa.Cmwlth. 593,
Cmwlth.1976. Eminent Domain         224; Eminent Domain     262(5)

Where redevelopment authority was fully aware that one of the homeowners also operated
a business on the premises, authority would not have been prejudiced by the assertion, at
trial, of homeowner's claims for compensable losses relating to the business. Cohen v.
Redevelopment Authority of City of Philadelphia, 315 A.2d 372, 12 Pa.Cmwlth. 125,
Cmwlth.1974. Eminent Domain        262(5)

Condemnee, who both lived on the premises and operated a business on the premises,
should have been permitted to introduce testimony relating to all compensable damages,
including equipment and fixtures required to be removed and business dislocation
damages. Cohen v. Redevelopment Authority of City of Philadelphia, 315 A.2d 372, 12
Pa.Cmwlth. 125, Cmwlth.1974. Eminent Domain        203(1); Eminent Domain     203(7)

Although § 1701 et seq. of this title empowers a redevelopment authority to reimburse a
landowner for reasonable expenses of removal, nothing in act empowers a board of view to
make award for relocation or removal costs in eminent domain proceedings instituted by
such an authority. Delaware County Redevelopment Authority v. Carminatti, 18 Pa. D. &
C.2d 704 (1959), motion denied 21 Pa. D. & C.2d 85.

7. Interest acquired

In condemnation by political subdivision, full fee simple is taken unless condemnor
expressly states that it is taking less. Curtis v. Redevelopment Authority of City of
Philadelphia, 367 A.2d 401, 27 Pa.Cmwlth. 360, Cmwlth.1976, reversed 393 A.2d 377, 482
Pa. 58. Eminent Domain        317(2)
Where city redevelopment authority condemned tract, such condemnation extinguished
easement in favor of adjoining property owner and redevelopment authority acquired title
to condemned tract in absolute fee simple. Curtis v. Redevelopment Authority of City of
Philadelphia, 367 A.2d 401, 27 Pa.Cmwlth. 360, Cmwlth.1976, reversed 393 A.2d 377, 482
Pa. 58. Eminent Domain     317(2)

8. Rehabilitation of property

Condemnee was not entitled to one-year period to eliminate blight to defeat declaration of
taking by redevelopment authority, as condemnee took no action within thirty days to
eradicate blight by acquiring building permit, to provide rehabilitation plan to complete
work within year period, and to post cash deposit. In re Condemnation by Redevelopment
Authority of City of Lancaster of Real Estate in City of Lancaster, 682 A.2d 1369,
Cmwlth.1996, appeal denied 692 A.2d 567, 547 Pa. 758. Eminent Domain            174

Urban redevelopment authority is not required to offer self-rehabilitation in every case
before issuing declaration of taking of property in regard to urban renewal project. Matter
of Condemnation by Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh, 544 A.2d 87, 117
Pa.Cmwlth. 475, Cmwlth.1988, appeal granted in part 558 A.2d 529, 521 Pa. 539, affirmed
594 A.2d 1375, 527 Pa. 550, certiorari denied 112 S.Ct. 638, 502 U.S. 1004, 116 L.Ed.2d
656. Eminent Domain      18.5

A city redevelopment authority, which intends to condemn a blighted area, is not obliged to
offer self-rehabilitation in every case. Nixon Hotel, Inc. v. Redevelopment Authority of City
of Butler, 315 A.2d 366, 11 Pa.Cmwlth. 519, Cmwlth.1974, certiorari denied 95 S.Ct. 74,
419 U.S. 842, 42 L.Ed.2d 70. Eminent Domain         169

9. Procedure, generally

In a case under the Urban Redevelopment Law, the Commonwealth Court must see that
the redevelopment authority has not acted in bad faith or arbitrarily, that it has followed
statutory procedures in preparing a plan, and that there are no constitutional violations. In
re Condemnation by Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh, 823 A.2d 1086,
Cmwlth.2003, appeal granted 847 A.2d 59, 577 Pa. 703. Eminent Domain            68

By not properly following urban redevelopment law (URL) and by failing to include property
in the plan, redevelopment authority's condemnation actions were premature.
Redevelopment Authority of City of Scranton v. Kameroski, 616 A.2d 1102, 151
Pa.Cmwlth. 345, Cmwlth.1992. Eminent Domain       18.5; Eminent Domain      169

Where trial court elaborated on portion of charge at request of parties and parties
thereafter, in response to court's question, indicated that there was nothing further, and no
exceptions were filed to charge, any alleged inadequacy of charge could not be asserted as
reason for new trial in condemnation case. Lorenzo v. Redevelopment Authority of City of
Philadelphia, 358 A.2d 130, 24 Pa.Cmwlth. 593, Cmwlth.1976. Eminent Domain           224

Redevelopment authority's filing of a bond provided sufficient security for redevelopment
project, even though the authority was without power of taxation and the bond was filed
without surety. In re Taking in Eminent Domain of Certain Parcels of Real Estate in
Northside Urban Renewal Area No. 1, Project Penna. R-389 in City of Bethlehem,
Northampton County, 349 A.2d 781, 22 Pa.Cmwlth. 487, Cmwlth.1976. Municipal
Corporations    333
Failure of a redevelopment authority to comply with the Urban Housing Act of 1949, 42
U.S.C.A. § 1450 et seq., or regulations adopted pursuant to it has no effect on the power
of the authority, under state law, to condemn real estate. In re Taking in Eminent Domain
of Certain Parcels of Real Estate in Northside Urban Renewal Area No. 1, Project Penna. R-
389 in City of Bethlehem, Northampton County, 349 A.2d 781, 22 Pa.Cmwlth. 487,
Cmwlth.1976. Eminent Domain         9

Declaration of taking is actual condemnation which becomes binding and effective only
after authorized by final vote of redevelopment authority and filing of the declaration. 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         187

Where preliminary objections to a declaration of taking challenge the finding of blight,
consideration of the adequacy of inspections of the condemned premises appears very
relevant. Condemnation of Elsesser, 12 Pa. D. & C.3d 25 (1979). Eminent Domain         65.1

The contention that a certification of blight was not made by the proper planning
commission may be raised by preliminary objections to the declaration of taking.
Condemnation of Elsesser, 12 Pa. D. & C.3d 25 (1979). Eminent Domain        65.1

Under the Eminent Domain Code of June 22, 1964, P.L. 84 (26 P.S. § 1-101 et seq.) where
a redevelopment authority condemned by a declaration of taking the property of
petitioners, following which petitioners tendered possession of their property to the
authority and demanded that it pay to them its estimate of just compensation, and where
the authority then sent petitioners agreements to be executed and delivered to the
authority upon payment of its estimate of just compensation, the authority will be ordered
to file its estimate of just compensation forthwith, or in default thereof, the court will
appoint an appraiser, since the authority's demand upon petitioners to execute the
agreements is arbitrary and unreasonable. In re Condemnation of Certain Lands, 40 Pa. D.
& C.2d 554, 114 Pitts.L.J. 459 (1966). Eminent Domain        207

10. Evidence

Written offer from condemnor prior to condemnation to purchase at $7,700 was
inadmissible to contradict condemnor's testimony at trial of a value of $5,000. Lorenzo v.
Redevelopment Authority of City of Philadelphia, 358 A.2d 130, 24 Pa.Cmwlth. 593,
Cmwlth.1976. Witnesses      406

Condemnee may testify on the same basis as a qualified expert in regard to valuation and
the elements considered in arriving at a figure and comment by condemnor on failure of
condemnee to produce an expert witness was an improper attempt to depict the
condemnee as being unqualified to testify. Cohen v. Redevelopment Authority of City of
Philadelphia, 315 A.2d 372, 12 Pa.Cmwlth. 125, Cmwlth.1974. Eminent Domain        219;
Evidence    474(18)

In eminent domain proceeding, trial judge did not abuse his discretion in refusing to permit
condemnee's alleged "expert witnesses" to express their opinions on issue of whether the
area in question was, in fact, blighted, where the first witness, an engineer, stated he was
familiar with the area but admitted he had never studied or investigated it, where the
second witness, an architect, admitted that the last project he worked on in the area was
in 1960, where the third witness, who owned hotel being condemned, testified that the last
renovation of the hotel was in 1958, and where none of the witnesses had made a current
evaluation of the area for the purpose of determining blight. Nixon Hotel, Inc. v.
Redevelopment Authority of City of Butler, 315 A.2d 366, 11 Pa.Cmwlth. 519,
Cmwlth.1974, certiorari denied 95 S.Ct. 74, 419 U.S. 842, 42 L.Ed.2d 70. Evidence       546

Condemnee had the heavy burden of proving its allegation that city redevelopment
authority was acting in bad faith. Nixon Hotel, Inc. v. Redevelopment Authority of City of
Butler, 315 A.2d 366, 11 Pa.Cmwlth. 519, Cmwlth.1974, certiorari denied 95 S.Ct. 74, 419
U.S. 842, 42 L.Ed.2d 70. Eminent Domain       196

11. Validity of taking

County redevelopment authority was not acting ultra vires of its powers and authority
vested in it pursuant to urban redevelopment law when it acted as agent of Department of
Community Affairs (DCA) and sought to acquire condemnees' property pursuant to state
planning code section giving DCA power, in name of Commonwealth, to exercise right of
eminent domain; no provision in state planning code or urban redevelopment law was
shown to prohibit DCA, as agency of Commonwealth, from contracting with another agency
of Commonwealth to act as DCA's agent, to assist DCA in carrying out its statutory duties
and obligations, nor was there any prohibition in urban redevelopment law precluding
redevelopment authority from acting as DCA's agent. Matter of Condemnation of Surface of
Certain Tract of Land Located in Borough of Centralia, Columbia County, Pa., 658 A.2d 481,
Cmwlth.1995, appeal denied 666 A.2d 1059, 542 Pa. 651, certiorari denied 116 S.Ct.
1351, 517 U.S. 1119, 134 L.Ed.2d 520. Eminent Domain        9

Failure to include condemnees' property in redevelopment proposal did not render urban
redevelopment authority's declaration of taking in regard to property invalid; condemnees'
property had been contemplated for acquisition since inception of redevelopment project,
and only purpose of listing properties in proposal was to reflect properties to be acquired in
that given year. Matter of Condemnation by Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh,
544 A.2d 87, 117 Pa.Cmwlth. 475, Cmwlth.1988, appeal granted in part 558 A.2d 529, 521
Pa. 539, affirmed 594 A.2d 1375, 527 Pa. 550, certiorari denied 112 S.Ct. 638, 502 U.S.
1004, 116 L.Ed.2d 656. Eminent Domain        169

Where city redevelopment authority filed declaration of taking, in full compliance with
terms of its authority, condemnation was effective and valid as of such date, and
subsequent legal or factual objections could not render such taking invalid so long as land
was taken for authorized purpose. Simco Stores v. Redevelopment Authority of City of
Philadelphia, 317 A.2d 610, 455 Pa. 438, Sup.1974. Eminent Domain         187

Where city redevelopment authority filed declaration of taking in full compliance with terms
of its authority, taking land for authorized purpose, property owners could not raise, by
preliminary objections to the taking, grievances that authority failed to comply with city
ordinance requiring authority to enter into redevelopment contract within one year
thereafter, that authority had harassed them by demands for possession subsequent to
condemnation but prior to one-year removal period set by city council, or that authority
erred in not offering the condemned land back to owners for redevelopment. Simco Stores
v. Redevelopment Authority of City of Philadelphia, 317 A.2d 610, 455 Pa. 438, Sup.1974.
Eminent Domain        193

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

12. Costs

Condemnees, who did not obtain larger amount on their appeal to Common Pleas Court
after condemnation by redevelopment authority authorized to operate in county of second
class, were not entitled to witness fees. Kelly v. Redevelopment Authority of Allegheny
County, 191 A.2d 393, 411 Pa. 210, Sup.1963. Eminent Domain         265(4)

13. Review

Appellate review of Urban Redevelopment Law (URL) condemnation cases is to see that the
redevelopment authority has not acted in bad faith or arbitrarily, that it has followed the
mandated statutory procedures in preparing a redevelopment plan, and that there are no
constitutional violations. In re Condemnation of 110 Washington Street, Borough of
Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, by Redevelopment Authority of County of Montgomery, for
Urban Renewal Purposes, 767 A.2d 1154, Cmwlth.2001, appeal denied 788 A.2d 379, 567
Pa. 748. Eminent Domain        262(1)

On review, in condemnation proceeding by redevelopment authority, condemnee should be
given opportunity to prove that certification of blight is arbitrary or capricious, but it is not
required that lower court substitute its discretion for that of legislatively granted discretion
of the city planning commission. Simco Stores v. Redevelopment Authority of City of
Philadelphia, 317 A.2d 610, 455 Pa. 438, Sup.1974. Eminent Domain             68; Eminent
Domain      198(1)

Finding that city redevelopment authority acted in good faith in issuing declaration of taking
of blighted property precluded Commonwealth Court from scrutinizing the wisdom of the
redevelopment authority's decision to exercise its power. Nixon Hotel, Inc. v.
Redevelopment Authority of City of Butler, 315 A.2d 366, 11 Pa.Cmwlth. 519, Cmwlth.1974,
certiorari denied 95 S.Ct. 74, 419 U.S. 842, 42 L.Ed.2d 70. Eminent Domain       68

35 P.S. § 1712, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1712


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1712.1
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1712.1. Blighted property removal


(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this act, any Redevelopment Authority shall have
the power to acquire by purchase, gift, bequest, eminent domain or otherwise, any blighted
property as defined in this section, either within or outside of a certified redevelopment area
and, further, shall have the power to hold, clear, manage and/or dispose of said property
for residential and related reuse and commercial or industrial reuse. This power shall be
exercised in accord with the procedures set forth in this section.

(b) Such power on the part of any Redevelopment Authority shall be conditioned upon the
creation or existence of a blighted property review committee by ordinance of the governing
body of the municipality. The committee shall be made up of members as determined in the
said ordinance, but shall include at least one member of the governing body, a
representative of the Redevelopment Authority, a representative of the appropriate planning
commission, and a representative to be designated by the chief executive officer or officers
from the executive branch of the government of the municipality.

(c) Blighted property shall include:

(1) Any premises which because of physical condition or use is regarded as a public
nuisance at common law or has been declared a public nuisance in accordance with the local
housing, building, plumbing, fire and related codes.

(2) Any premises which because of physical condition, use or occupancy is considered an
attractive nuisance to children, including but not limited to abandoned wells, shafts,
basements, excavations, and unsafe fences or structures.

(3) Any dwelling which because it is dilapidated, unsanitary, unsafe, vermin-infested or
lacking in the facilities and equipment required by the housing code of the municipality, has
been designated by the department responsible for enforcement of the code as unfit for
human habitation.

(4) Any structure which is a fire hazard, or is otherwise dangerous to the safety of persons
or property.

(5) Any structure from which the utilities, plumbing, heating, sewerage or other facilities
have been disconnected, destroyed, removed, or rendered ineffective so that the property is
unfit for its intended use.

(6) Any vacant or unimproved lot or parcel of ground in a predominantly built-up-
neighborhood, which by reason of neglect or lack of maintenance has become a place for
accumulation of trash and debris, or a haven for rodents or other vermin.
(7) Any unoccupied property which has been tax delinquent for a period of two years prior
to the effective date of this act, and those in the future having a two year tax delinquency.

(8) Any property which is vacant but not tax delinquent, which has not been rehabilitated
within one year of the receipt of notice to rehabilitate from the appropriate code
enforcement agency.

(9) Any abandoned property. A property shall be considered abandoned if:

(i) it is a vacant or unimproved lot or parcel of ground on which a municipal lien for the cost
of demolition of any structure located on the property remains unpaid for a period of six
months;

(ii) it is a vacant property or vacant or unimproved lot or parcel of ground on which the total
of municipal liens on the property for tax or any other type of claim of the municipality are
in excess of 150% of the fair market value of the property as established by the Board of
Revisions of Taxes or other body with legal authority to determine the taxable value of the
property; or

(iii) the property has been declared abandoned by the owner, including an estate that is in
possession of the property.

(d) Residential and related use shall include residential property for sale or rental and
related uses, including, but not limited to, park and recreation areas, neighborhood
community service, and neighborhood parking lots.

(e) The blighted property review committee and the appropriate planning commission, upon
making a determination that any property is blighted within the terms of this section, must
certify said blighted property to the Redevelopment Authority, except that:

(1) No property shall be certified to the Redevelopment Authority unless it is vacant. A
property shall be considered vacant if:

(i) the property is unoccupied or its occupancy has not been authorized by the owner of the
property;

(ii) in the case of an unimproved lot or parcel of ground, a lien for the cost of demolition of
any structure located on the property remains unpaid for a period of six months; or

(iii) in the case of an unimproved lot or parcel of ground, the property has remained in
violation of any provision of local building, property maintenance or related codes applicable
to such lots or parcels, including licensing requirements, for a period of six months.

(2) No property shall be certified to the Redevelopment Authority unless the owner of the
property or an agent designated by him for receipt of service of notices within the
municipality has been served with notice of the determination that the property is blighted,
together with an appropriate order to eliminate the conditions causing the blight and
notification that failure to do so may render the property subject to condemnation under
this act. The notice shall be served upon the owner or his agent in accord with the
provisions of a local ordinance pertaining to service of notice of determination of a public
nuisance. The owner or his agent shall have the right of appeal from the determination in
the same manner as an appeal from the determination of public nuisance.
(3) No blighted property shall be certified to the Redevelopment Authority until the time
period for appeal has expired and no appeal has been taken, or, if taken, the appeal has
been disposed of, and the owner or his agent has failed to comply with the order of the
responsible department or other officer or agency.

(f) Acquisition and disposition of blighted property under this section shall not require
preparation, adoption or approval of a redevelopment area plan or redevelopment proposal
as set forth in section 10, [FN1] but at least thirty days prior to acquisition of any property
under this section, the Redevelopment Authority shall transmit identification of the property
to the planning commission of the municipality and shall request a recommendation as to
the appropriate reuse of the property. The Redevelopment Authority shall not acquire the
property where the planning commission certifies that disposition for residential or related
use would not be in accord with the comprehensive plan of the municipality.

(g) Power of eminent domain shall be exercised pursuant to a resolution of the
Redevelopment Authority and the procedure set forth in the act of June 22, 1964 (Sp.Sess.,
P.L. 84, No. 6), [FN2] known as the "Eminent Domain Code," as amended.

(h) Property disposed of within a redevelopment area shall be disposed of under a
redevelopment contract in accordance with the provisions of this act.

Property disposed of outside an urban renewal project area shall be disposed of by deed in
accordance with the provisions set forth in applicable law.


CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 12.1, added 1978, June 23, P.L. 556, No. 94, § 2, effective in 60
days. Amended 1988, March 30, P.L. 304, No. 39, § 5, imd. effective; 2002, Oct. 2, P.L.
796, No. 113, § 2, effective in 60 days.

[FN1] 35 P.S. § 1710.

[FN2] 26 P.S. § 1-101 et seq.


HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES

2003 Main Volume

Act 2002-113 legislation

Act 2002-113, § 2, in subsec. (b), substituted "blighted" for "vacant"; added subsec.
(c)(9); and rewrote subsec. (e)(1), which prior thereto read:

"(1) No property shall be certified to the Redevelopment Authority unless it is vacant."

LAW REVIEW AND JOURNAL COMMENTARIES

County of Wayne v. Hathcock: Michigan redefines implementing economic development
through eminent domain. Rachel A. Lewis, 50 Vill. L. Rev. 341 (2005).
LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

Eminent Domain k18.5.
Municipal Corporations    221, 267.
Westlaw Topic Nos. 148, 268.
C.J.S. Eminent Domain § 53.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 873 to 876, 878 to 879, 957.

NOTES OF DECISIONS

Review 1

1. Review

Condemnee could not appeal certification of blight by city planning commission, as appeal
could only be taken within thirty days from notice of blight. In re Condemnation by
Redevelopment Authority of City of Lancaster of Real Estate in City of Lancaster, 682 A.2d
1369, Cmwlth.1996, appeal denied 692 A.2d 567, 547 Pa. 758. Eminent Domain          257

35 P.S. § 1712.1, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1712.1


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1713
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1713. Bonds of an Authority

An Authority shall have power to issue bonds for any of its corporate purposes, the
principal and interest of which are payable from its revenues generally. Any of such bonds
may be secured by a pledge of any revenues, including grants or contributions from the
Federal or State Government, or any agency, and instrumentality thereof, or by a
mortgage of any property of the Authority.

The bonds issued by an Authority are hereby declared to have all the qualities of negotiable
instruments under the law merchant and the negotiable instruments law of the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

The bonds of an Authority created under the provisions of this act and the income
therefrom shall at all times be free from taxation for State or local purposes under any law
of this Commonwealth.

Neither the members of an Authority nor any person executing the bonds shall be liable
personally on any such bonds by reason of the issuance thereof. Such bonds or other
obligations of an Authority shall not be a debt of any municipality or of the Commonwealth,
and shall so state on their face, nor shall any municipality or the Commonwealth nor any
revenues or any property of any municipality or of the Commonwealth be liable therefor.

CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 13.

LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

Municipal Corporations    906, 911.
Westlaw Topic No. 268.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 1645 to 1646, 1649, 1702.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

2006 Electronic Pocket Part Update
Encyclopedias

Summary Pa. Jur. 2d Municipal Law § 21:195, Urban Redevelopment Authorities.


NOTES OF DECISIONS

Validity 1
1. Validity

The Urban Redevelopment Law creating redevelopment authorities for purpose of
eliminating and rehabilitating blighted sections of municipalities, and specifically providing
that bonds or any other obligations of an authority created under the law shall not be debts
nor liabilities of any municipality, is not violative of provisions of Const. Arts. 9, § 8
(repealed; see, now, Const. Art. 9, §§ 10, 12) and 15, § 2 (repealed), relating to debt limits
for counties, cities and other municipalities and incorporated districts. Belovsky v.
Redevelopment Authority of City of Philadelphia, 54 A.2d 277, 357 Pa. 329, Sup.1947.
Municipal Corporations     864(3)

Provision in Urban Redevelopment Law exempting bonds issued by redevelopment authority
from taxation for state or local purposes is not unconstitutional as violative of constitutional
prohibition against exemption of any property from taxation other than that specified in the
Constitution, since bonds issued by such a governmental instrumentality are not the kind of
property contemplated by the constitutional prohibition. Belovsky v. Redevelopment
Authority of City of Philadelphia, 54 A.2d 277, 357 Pa. 329, Sup.1947. Taxation       2288

35 P.S. § 1713, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1713

Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1713.1
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1713.1. Repealed by 1988, March 30, P.L. 304, No. 39, § 6, imd. Effective

HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES

2003 Main Volume

The repealed § 1713.1 which related to term bonds was derived from act 1945, May 24 P.L.
991, § 13.1, added 1970, July 17, P.L. 496, No. 173, § 1.

35 P.S. § 1713.1, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1713.1


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1714
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1714. Form and sale of bonds


The bonds of an Authority shall be authorized by its resolution; shall be issued in one or
more series; and shall bear such date, mature at such time, and bear interest at such rate
as shall be determined by the Authority as necessary to issue and sell such bonds, payable
semi-annually, be in such denominations, be in such form, either coupon or registered, be
executed in such manner, be payable in such medium of payment, at such place, and be
subject to such terms of redemption and carry such registration privileges as may be
provided in such resolution, or in any trust, indenture or mortgage properly made in
pursuance thereof.

The bonds of an Authority may be sold at public or private sale at not less than par and
accrued interest. In case any of the officers of an Authority whose signatures appear on any
bonds or coupons shall cease to be officers before the delivery of such bonds their
signatures shall, nevertheless, be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if such
officers had remained in office until such delivery.

The Authority shall have the power out of any funds available therefor to purchase any
bonds issued by it at a price not more than the par value thereof plus accrued interest. All
bonds so purchased shall be cancelled. This paragraph shall not apply to the redemption of
bonds.

Any bond reciting in substance that it has been issued by an Authority to accomplish the
public purposes of this act shall be conclusively deemed in any suit, action or proceeding
involving the validity or enforceability of such bond or security therefor to have been issued
for such purpose.

CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 14. Amended 1955, May 31, P.L. 107, § 3; 1970, July 17, P.L.
496, No. 173, § 2; 1988, March 30, P.L. 304, No. 39, § 7, imd. effective.

INTEREST RATES

<Act 1970, July 14, P.L. 485, No. 165, § 1, as amended (72 P.S. § 4051), provides that
the limits heretofore imposed by this section upon the rates of interest and interest costs
permitted to be paid upon bonds, obligations and indebtedness issued by the
Commonwealth or its agencies or instrumentalities or authorities, and by local political
subdivisions or their agencies or authorities, are hereby removed for such bonds,
obligations or indebtedness so issued.>

HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES

2003 Main Volume
Act 1988-39 legislation

The 1988 amendment, in the first paragraph following "interest at such rate", deleted ",
not exceeding six per centum (6%) per annum, except that for a period ending on October
10, 1970 the rate or rates of interest may exceed six per centum (6%) per annum but shall
not exceed seven per centum (7%) per annum," and deleted the final paragraph, which
prior thereto read:

"The interest on bonds issued with an interest rate exceeding six per centum (6%) per
annum shall be paid during the term for which the bonds were issued and shall not be
limited to the specified period during which the rates in excess of six per centum (6%) per
annum could be determined."


LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume
Municipal Corporations    917(1), 919, 922, 926.
Westlaw Topic No. 268.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 1658 to 1661, 1689.

35 P.S. § 1714, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1714


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1715
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1715. Provisions of bonds, trust, indentures and mortgages

In connection with the issuance of bonds or the incurring of obligations under leases, and
in order to secure the payment of such bonds or obligations, an Authority in addition to its
other powers shall have power:

(a) To pledge all or any part of its gross or net revenues to which its right then exists or
may thereafter come into existence;

(b) To mortgage all or any part of its real or personal property then owned or thereafter
acquired;

(c) To covenant against pledging all or any part of its revenues, or, against mortgaging all
or any part of its real or personal property to which its right or title exists or may
thereafter come into existence, or against permitting or suffering any lien on such
revenues or property to covenant with respect to limitations on its right to sell, lease or
otherwise dispose of any of its real property, and to covenant as to what other or additional
debts or obligations may be incurred by it;

(d) To covenant as to the bonds to be issued and as to the issuance of such bonds, in
escrow, or otherwise, and as to the use and disposition of the proceeds thereof, to provide
for the replacement of lost, destroyed or mutilated bonds, to covenant against extending
the time for the payment of its bonds or interest thereon, and to redeem the bonds, and to
covenant for their redemption, and to provide the terms and conditions thereof;

(e) To covenant, subject to the limitations contained in this act, as to the amount of
revenues to be raised each year, or other period of time, as well as to the use and
disposition to be made thereof, to create or to authorize the creation of special funds for
debt, service or other purposes, and to covenant as to the use and disposition of the
moneys held in such funds;

(f) To prescribe the procedure, if any, by which the terms of any contract with bondholders
may be amended or abrogated, the amount of bonds, the holders of which must consent
thereto, and the manner in which such consent may be given;

(g) To covenant as to the use of any or all of its real or personal property, to warrant its
title, and to covenant as to the maintenance of its real and personal property, the
replacement thereof, the insurance to be carried thereon, and the use and disposition of
insurance moneys;

(h) To covenant as to the rights, liabilities, powers and duties arising upon the breach by it
of any covenant, condition or obligation, and to covenant and prescribe, in the event [FN1]
of default, as to [FN2] terms and conditions upon which any or all of its bonds or
obligations shall become or may be declared due before maturity, and as to the terms and
conditions upon which such declaration and its consequences may be waived;
(i) To vest in a trustee, or the holders of bonds, or any proportion of them, the right to
enforce the payment of the bonds or any covenants securing or relating to the bonds, to
vest in a trustee the right, in the event of a default by the Authority, to take possession
and use, operate and manage any real property and to collect the rents and revenues
arising therefrom and to dispose of such moneys in accordance with the agreement of the
Authority with said trustee, to provide for the powers and duties of a trustee and to limit
liabilities thereof, and, to provide the terms and conditions upon which the trustee or the
holders of bonds or any proportion of them may enforce any covenant or rights securing or
relating to the bonds;

(j) To exercise all or any part or combination of the powers herein granted, to make
covenants other than and in addition to the covenants herein expressly authorized, to
make such covenants and to do any and all such acts and things as may be necessary or
convenient or desirable in order to secure its bonds, or in the absolute discretion of the
Authority, as will tend to accomplish the purposes of this act, by making the bonds more
marketable notwithstanding that such covenants, acts or things may not be enumerated
herein.

CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 15.

[FN1] Enrolled bill reads "as to events".
[FN2] Enrolled bill reads "and".

CROSS REFERENCES

Counties of the second class, authority to sell or lease real property, see 16 P.S. § 5505.

LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

Municipal Corporations    906, 923.
Westlaw Topic No. 268.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 1645 to 1646, 1684 to 1685, 1697 to 1698, 1702.

35 P.S. § 1715, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1715


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1716
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1716. Remedies of an obligee of Authority

An obligee of an Authority shall have the right, in addition to all other rights which may be
conferred on such obligee, subject only to any contractual [FN1] restrictions binding upon
such obligee:

(a) By mandamus, suit, action or proceeding at law or in equity to compel the Authority
and the members, officers, agents or employes thereof to perform each and every term,
provision and covenant contained in any contract of the Authority with or for the benefit of
such obligee, and to require the carrying out of any or all such covenants and agreements
of the Authority, and the fulfillment of all duties imposed upon the Authority by this act;

(b) By proceeding in equity to obtain an injunction against any acts or things which may be
unlawful, or the violation of any of the rights of such obligee of the Authority.

CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 16.

[FN1] Enrolled bill reads "contractural".

LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

Municipal Corporations    937, 939.
Westlaw Topic No. 268.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 1707, 1711.

35 P.S. § 1716, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1716


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1717
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1717. Additional remedies conferrable by Authority

An Authority shall have power by its resolution, trust, indenture, mortgage, lease or other
contract to confer upon any obligees holding or representing a specified percentage in
bonds, or holding a lease, the right, in addition to all rights that may otherwise be
conferred, upon the happening of an event of default as defined in such resolution or
instrument, by suit, action or proceeding in any court of competent jurisdiction.--

(a) To obtain the appointment of a receiver of any real property of the Authority and of the
rents and profits therefrom. If such receiver be appointed, he may enter and take
possession of such real property, operate the same and collect and receive all revenues or
other income thereafter arising therefrom, and shall keep such moneys in a separate
account and apply the same in accordance with the obligations of the Authority as the court
shall direct;

(b) To require the Authority, and the members thereof, to account as if it and they were
the trustees of an express trust.

CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 17.

LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

Municipal Corporations    937, 939.
Westlaw Topic No. 268.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 1707, 1711.

RESEARCH REFERENCES

2006 Electronic Pocket Part Update
Encyclopedias

Summary Pa. Jur. 2d Municipal Law § 21:195, Urban Redevelopment Authorities.

35 P.S. § 1717, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1717


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1718
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness

Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1718. Aid from Government

In addition to the powers conferred upon an Authority by other provisions of this act, an
Authority is empowered to borrow money or accept grants or other financial assistance
from the Government, for or in aid of any of its operations. It is the purpose and intent of
this act to authorize every Authority to do any and all things necessary or desirable to
secure the financial aid or cooperation of the Government in any of its operations.

CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 18. Amended 1968, June 26, P.L. 263, No. 125, § 12.

HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES

2003 Main Volume

Act 1968-125 legislation

The 1968 amendment deleted "Federal" before "Government" in two places.

LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

Municipal Corporations    858.
United States    82(3.2).
Westlaw Topic Nos. 268, 393.
C.J.S. United States § 155.

NOTES OF DECISIONS

In general 1

1. In general

Redevelopment authorities are eligible for 100% federal funding of relocation assistance
under provisions of federal uniform relocation assistance and real property acquisition
policies act of 1970, 42 U.S.C.A. § 4601 et seq. 1971 Op.Atty.Gen. No. 72.

35 P.S. § 1718, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1718

Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1719
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness

Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1719. Records and reports

(a) The books and records of an Authority shall at all times be open and subject to
inspection by the Department of Community Affairs;

(b) An Authority may file with the Department of Community Affairs such information and
reports as it may from time to time deem desirable, and shall file with them;

(1) A copy of all by-laws and rules and regulations and amendments thereto, adopted by it,
from time to time.

(2) Copies of all redevelopment proposals and redevelopment contracts, as well as of any
changes, which may be made therein.

(3) At least once each year a report of its activities for the preceding year, and such other
reports as said department may require. Copies of such reports shall be filed with the
mayor and governing body of the city or with the county board of commissioners, as the
case may be.

CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 19. Amended 1949, May 20, P.L. 1621, § 1; 1968, June 26, P.L.
263, No. 125, § 13.

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 two places substituted "Department of Community Affairs" for
"State Planning Board" and substituted "department" for "board" in clause (3).

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    100.
Westlaw Topic No. 268.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 244 to 245, 281.

35 P.S. § 1719, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1719


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1719.1
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1719.1. Notice to displaced persons

(a) A redevelopment authority in a city of the first class intending to alter or demolish
property in furtherance of authority projects or programs shall give timely notice to all
occupants required by such alteration or demolition to vacate the property.

(b) Notice shall be given at the earliest practicable time prior to the dislocation of person
affected, but no later than 30 days prior to the commencement of the alteration or
demolition of the property.

(c) The form of notice shall include, but not be limited to, posters or other graphic
materials of sufficient size and design as will reasonably draw attention and which will
reasonably inform the occupants of the property of the impending alteration or demolition
and the date by which the occupants must vacate the property. Posters or other graphic
materials shall be posted on and about the property in sufficient numbers as to reasonably
draw the attention of all occupants of the property.

(d) This section shall not be construed to relieve any authority of any duty to occupants of
property as provided by law or regulation, including, but not limited to, the relocation
assistance provisions of the act of June 22, 1964 (Sp.Sess., P.L. 84, No. 6), known as the
"Eminent Domain Code," [FN1] and regulations promulgated thereunder.

CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 19.1, added 1978, April 18, P.L. 39, No. 21, § 1, imd. effective.
[FN1] 26 P.S. § 1-101 et seq.

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 § 11:27, Urban Redevelopment.

35 P.S. § 1719.1, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1719.1

Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1719.2
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness

Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Authorities (Refs & Annos)
  § 1719.2. Statute of limitations


Notwithstanding the provisions of 42 Pa.C.S. § 5526(4) (relating to five year limitation) or
any other provision of law to the contrary, a proceeding to challenge just compensation or
other damages if a redevelopment authority has exercised powers of condemnation
pursuant to this act and made payment in accordance with section 407(a) or (b) of the act
of June 22, 1964 (Sp.Sess., P.L. 84, No. 6), [FN1] known as the "Eminent Domain Code,"
is subject to a one-year statute of limitations.


CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 991, § 19.2, added 2002, Oct. 2, P.L. 796, No. 113, § 3, effective in 60
days.

[FN1] 26 P.S. § 1-407.


35 P.S. § 1719.2, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1719.2


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1741
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Cooperation Law (Refs & Annos)
  § 1741. Short title


This act shall be known and may be referred to as the "Redevelopment Cooperation Law."


CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 982, § 1.

HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES

2003 Main Volume

Title of Act:

An Act to authorize the Commonwealth or State public bodies, as defined, to aid
redevelopment authorities in the elimination of blighted areas and their redevelopment by
dedicating, selling, conveying or leasing any of its property, by entering into contracts to
furnish and by furnishing to said authorities and to any Federal governmental agency,
parks, playgrounds, streets and other improvements and facilities; and by donating or
lending money and making appropriations therefor; by accepting payments and exercising
certain other powers and duties. 1945, May 24, P.L. 982, § 1. As amended 1951, May 24,
P.L. 359.


RESEARCH REFERENCES


2006 Electronic Pocket Part Update
Encyclopedias

Summary Pa. Jur. 2d Municipal Law § 21:195, Urban Redevelopment Authorities.

35 P.S. § 1741, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1741


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1742
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Cooperation Law (Refs & Annos)
  § 1742. Finding and declaration of necessity

It has been found and declared in the Urban Redevelopment Law [FN1] that there exist in
urban communities in this Commonwealth, areas which have become blighted; that such
conditions are beyond remedy or control by regulatory processes and that the public
interest requires the remedying of these conditions. It is hereby found and declared that
the assistance herein provided for the remedying of the conditions set forth in the Urban
Redevelopment Law constitutes a public use and purpose, and an essential governmental
function for which public moneys may be spent, and that the provisions hereinafter enacted
are necessary in the public interest.


CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 982, § 2.

[FN1] 35 P.S. § 1701 et seq.


LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

Counties    22
Municipal Corporations    265, 267, 860.
States    83, 114.
Westlaw Topic Nos. 104, 268, 360.
C.J.S. Counties §§ 41 to 42.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 957 to 958, 1573 to 1574, 1576, 1578 to 1579, 1581.
C.J.S. States §§ 148, 203, 205.

35 P.S. § 1742, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1742


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1743
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Cooperation Law (Refs & Annos)
  § 1743. Definitions

The following terms, whenever used or referred to in this act, shall have the following
respective meanings unless a different meaning clearly appears from the context:


(a) "Federal Government" shall mean the United States of America or any agency or
instrumentality, corporate or otherwise, thereof.


(b) "Redevelopment Authority" or "Authority" shall mean any redevelopment
authority created pursuant to the Urban Redevelopment Law [FN1] of this Commonwealth.


(c) "Redevelopment" shall mean any work or undertaking of a redevelopment authority
pursuant to the Urban Redevelopment Law.


(d) "State Public Body" shall mean any city, borough, town, township, county, municipal
corporation, school district and any other political subdivision, board, commission, housing
authority or public body of this Commonwealth.


(e) "Governing Body" shall mean, in the case of a city, the city council or other
legislative body thereof, and in the case of a county, shall mean the board of county
commissioners or other legislative body thereof.


CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 982, § 3. Amended 1959, Dec. 1, P.L. 1639, § 1; 1968, Jan. 19, P.L.
(1967) 987, No. 439, § 1.
[FN1] 35 P.S. § 1701 et seq.

HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES

2003 Main Volume

Act 1967(68)-439 legislation

The 1968 amendment added the definition of "governing body".

35 P.S. § 1743, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1743
Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1744
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Cooperation Law (Refs & Annos)
  § 1744. Cooperation in redevelopment


For the purpose of aiding and cooperating in the operation of an authority, and in the
planning, acquisition, clearance, replanning, relocation and redevelopment activities of an
authority, the Commonwealth or any State public body may, upon such terms, with or
without consideration as it may determine--


(a) Dedicate, sell, convey or lease any of its property to a redevelopment authority;


(b) Cause parks, playgrounds, recreational or community facilities, or any other works,
which it is otherwise empowered to undertake, to be furnished in or adjacent to any area
selected for redevelopment;


(c) Furnish, dedicate, close, pave, install, grade, regrade, plan or replan streets, roads,
roadways, alleys, sidewalks or other places which it is otherwise empowered to undertake;


(d) Enter into agreements, extending over any period, with a redevelopment authority or
with the Federal Government respecting action to be taken by the Commonwealth or such
State public body pursuant to any of the powers granted by this act; and


(e) Do any and all things necessary or convenient to aid and cooperate in the
redevelopment undertaken by a redevelopment authority;


(f) In connection with any public improvements made by the Commonwealth or a State
public body in exercising the powers herein granted, the Commonwealth or such State
public body, may incur the entire expense thereof.


(g) The Secretary of Property and Supplies is authorized with the approval of the Governor
and the Attorney General, to execute and deliver on behalf of the Commonwealth,
conveyances, deeds and leases authorized under the provisions of subsection (a) of this
section.


CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 982, § 4. Amended 1949, May 20, P.L. 1628, § 1; 1951, May 24, P.L.
359, No. 78, § 2; 1959, Dec. 1, P.L. 1639, No. 604, § 2.
HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES

2003 Main Volume

Act 1951-78 legislation

Section 3 of the act of 1951 provided:

"Every dedication, sale, conveyance and lease of any of its property heretofore made by
the Commonwealth or any State public body to any redevelopment authority for any
purpose authorized by this act and the titles transferred thereby, if valid in other respects,
is hereby made valid notwithstanding any defect in the title of the act amended hereby."

Act 1959-604 legislation

The 1959 amendment in the first paragraph inserted "relocation".

Act 1975-45 legislation

Section 21 of Act 1975, July 22, P.L. 75, No. 45, creating the Department of General
Services, provides as follows:

"(a) Whenever in any law, reference is made to the Department of Property and Supplies,
such reference shall be deemed to refer to and include the Department of General
Services.

"(b) Whenever in any law, reference is made to the Secretary of Property and Supplies,
such reference shall be deemed to refer to the Secretary of General services."


LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

Counties    22
Municipal Corporations    265, 267.
States    83.
Westlaw Topic Nos. 104, 268, 360.
C.J.S. Counties §§ 41 to 42.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 957 to 958.
C.J.S. States § 148.

NOTES OF DECISIONS

In general 1

1. In general

Court did not abuse its discretion in approving the tax sale of 210 vacant lots, which had
been acquired by three taxing bodies, to the redevelopment authority for $1 on petition of
city, acting as trustee for all the taxing bodies, rather than sale of such lots to private
individual who had offered $53,000. Grimm v. City of Pittsburgh, 279 A.2d 379, 2
Pa.Cmwlth. 600, Cmwlth.1971. Taxation          2975(1)

Questions concerning original determination of city planning commission that area was
blighted and thus proper for redevelopment, a determination which was not challenged in
the other proceedings under redevelopment law, were not relevant in proceeding
challenging court approval of sale of tax delinquent vacant lots by city to redevelopment
authority. Grimm v. City of Pittsburgh, 279 A.2d 379, 2 Pa.Cmwlth. 600, Cmwlth.1971.
Taxation    2975(1)

City as state public body was entitled to give property it had condemned to redevelopment
authority for redevelopment purposes. Starkey v. City of Philadelphia, 156 A.2d 101, 397
Pa. 512, Sup.1959.

35 P.S. § 1744, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1744


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1745
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Cooperation Law (Refs & Annos)
  § 1745. Contracts for payments to city, borough, town, township or county

In connection with any redevelopment located, wholly or partly, within the area in which it
is authorized to act, any city, borough, town, township or county may contract with a
redevelopment authority or the Federal Government with respect to any sums which the
redevelopment authority or the Federal Government may agree to pay during any year or
period of years to such city, borough, town, township or county for the improvements,
services and facilities to be provided by it for the benefit of said redevelopment or the
persons occupying such area: Provided, however, That the absence of a contract for such
payments shall in no way relieve cities, boroughs, towns, townships and counties from the
duty to furnish for the benefit of said redevelopment and the persons occupying said area,
customary improvements and such services and facilities as cities, boroughs, towns,
townships and counties respectively usually furnish without a service fee.


CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 982, § 5.

LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume
Counties   111(1).
Municipal Corporations    286, 328.
Westlaw Topic Nos. 104, 268.
C.J.S. Counties § 150.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 969, 1027 to 1029.

35 P.S. § 1745, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1745


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1746
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Cooperation Law (Refs & Annos)
  § 1746. Advances to redevelopment authority

When any redevelopment authority, which is created to operate within any city or county,
becomes authorized to transact business and exercise its powers, the city council or the
county commissioners, as the case may be, may make such appropriations to an authority
out of any moneys in such city or county treasury not appropriated to some other purposes
as is deemed necessary to assist an authority in carrying out its public purposes. Any State
public body located in whole or in part within the field of operation of a redevelopment
authority shall have the power from time to time to lend or donate money to the authority.
Said State public body may issue general obligation bonds for the purpose of obtaining
funds for local contributions required by any Federal law pertaining to redevelopment.


CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 982, § 6. Amended 1949, May 20, P.L. 1628, No. 490, § 1.

HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES

2003 Main Volume

Act 1949-490 legislation

The 1949 amendment authorized the issuance of general obligation bonds.


LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

Counties    162.
Municipal Corporations k889.1.
Westlaw Topic Nos. 104, 268.
C.J.S. Counties §§ 199 to 201.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 1628, 1630.

35 P.S. § 1746, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1746


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1746.1
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Cooperation Law (Refs & Annos)
  § 1746.1. Designation of redevelopment authorities as agents; purpose

The Commonwealth, any State public body or private entity by written agreement
approved by the governing body of the city or county, as the case may be, may designate
a redevelopment authority as its agent within the authority's field of operation to perform
any specified activity or to administer any specified program which the Commonwealth,
such State public body or private entity is authorized by law to do: Provided, however,
That any such activities or programs shall be in furtherance of the public purposes specified
in the Urban Redevelopment Law of this Commonwealth. Such activities may include,
without being limited to, redevelopment, renewal, rehabilitation, housing, conservation,
urban beautification or comprehensive programs for the development of entire sections or
neighborhoods. It is the purpose and intent of this section of the act to authorize the
Commonwealth, any State public body or authority to do any and all things necessary or
desirable to secure the financial aid or cooperation of the Federal government in any of
their operations.


CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 982, § 6.1, added 1968, Jan. 19, P.L. (1967) 987, § 2.

LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

Municipal Corporations    265, 278(5).
Westlaw Topic No. 268.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 958, 962.

NOTES OF DECISIONS

In general 1

1. In general

Municipalities may authorize redevelopment authorities to act as their agents in
implementing programs of rehabilitation of low to middle income housing. 1975
Op.Atty.Gen. No. 75-23.

35 P.S. § 1746.1, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1746.1


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1747
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness

Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18A. Urban Redevelopment
  Redevelopment Cooperation Law (Refs & Annos)
  § 1747. Supplemental nature of act


The powers conferred by this act shall be in addition and supplemental to the powers
conferred by any other law.


CREDIT(S)

1945, May 24, P.L. 982, § 7.

RESEARCH REFERENCES


2006 Electronic Pocket Part Update
Encyclopedias

Summary Pa. Jur. 2d Municipal Law § 21:195, Urban Redevelopment Authorities.

35 P.S. § 1747, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1747


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1751
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18B. Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Program for Nonurban
Counties and Certain Other Municipalities
  § 1751. Declaration of purpose

The purpose of this act is to establish an annual Community Development Block Grant
Entitlement for certain cities, boroughs, towns and townships and for 54 counties to be
used by said counties principally in boroughs, towns and townships which are not allocated
annual entitlements. Assured annual funding will permit meaningful programs to be
developed and local staff capacity to be created and maintained. Boroughs, towns and
townships will also have the opportunity to obtain annually discretionary funding for
projects for community development activities which are eligible under the Housing and
Community Development Act. [FN1] Initially, it will put 54 counties and certain
municipalities on a comparable basis with the 12 urban counties and 28 cities, boroughs
and townships which receive direct annual community development block grant
entitlements from the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development.


CREDIT(S)

1984, Oct. 11, P.L. 906, No. 179, § 1, imd. effective.
[FN1] 42 U.S.C.A. § 5301 et seq.

HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES

2003 Main Volume

Title of Act:

An Act providing for the administration and allocation of certain Federal Block Grants.
1984, Oct. 11, P.L. 906, No. 179.


LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

Municipal Corporations    267, 724.
States    123.
Westlaw Topic Nos. 268, 360.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 664, 957.
C.J.S. States § 226.

35 P.S. § 1751, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1751

Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1752
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness

Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18B. Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Program for Nonurban
Counties and Certain Other Municipalities
  § 1752. Short title


This act shall be known and may be cited as the Community Development Block Grant
Entitlement Program for Nonurban Counties and Certain Other Municipalities.


CREDIT(S)

1984, Oct. 11, P.L. 906, No. 179, § 2, imd. effective.

35 P.S. § 1752, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1752


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1753
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18B. Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Program for Nonurban
Counties and Certain Other Municipalities
  § 1753. Definitions

The following words and phrases when used in this act shall have the meanings given to
them in this section unless the context clearly indicates otherwise:

"County's net population." The balance remaining after subtracting the populations of all
metropolitan cities and eligible cities, boroughs, incorporated towns and townships situate
within the county from its total population.

"Department." The Department of Community Affairs.

"Eligible city, borough, incorporated town and township." All cities, boroughs,
incorporated towns and townships which are eligible to receive and which apply directly or
through a county or a designated local public agency for funds which are available to the
Commonwealth pursuant to the Housing and Community Development Act and which are
not eligible as a metropolitan city and which were not considered in Federal fiscal year
1984 as part of an urban county's federally-funded community development block grant
program. In addition, a borough, incorporated town and township to be eligible must have
a population according to the latest Decennial Census of 4,000 or more and at the time of
filing for the annual entitlement grant must also meet the current minimum standards of
physical and economic distress for the Federal Urban Development Action Grant Program
as determined by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development pursuant to section
119 of the Housing and Community Development Act. [FN1] All eligible entitlement
municipalities must also meet the general qualifications criteria of this section.

"Eligible county." Those counties which are eligible to receive and which apply for funds
available to the Commonwealth pursuant to the Housing and Community Development Act
and which are not eligible as an urban county. All eligible entitlement counties must also
meet the general qualifications criteria of this section.

"Eligible entitlement entity." Any eligible county or any eligible city, borough,
incorporated town and township.

"General qualifications criteria."
(1) An eligible entitlement entity must have the legal capacity to undertake assisted
housing programs and community development activities. The designation of a housing or
redevelopment authority to undertake assisted housing programs in the entitlement
entity's jurisdiction shall be considered prima facie evidence of capacity to undertake
assisted housing programs. Every eligible entitlement entity shall adopt a three-year
community development plan, which shall be reviewed and approved by the department,
and identify the activities to be undertaken and the projected use of funds for the year for
which funding is applied. The entitlement entity shall also certify that it has the legal
capacity to carry out the community development program either directly, or through the
designation of a local public agency.
(2) However, in the case of an eligible borough, incorporated town or township which is
under 10,000 in population, it shall be deemed to have met the general qualifications
criteria, if the county in which it is located and which receives the annual grant on behalf of
the eligible entitlement entity meets the criteria. Further, any borough, incorporated town
or township with a population of 10,000 or more and which by resolution designates the
eligible county to receive its grant on its behalf shall also be deemed to have met the
general qualifications criteria if said county meets the criteria.
(3) The department shall review and approve the three-year community development plan
and the projected use of funds, in whole or in part, within 45 days of receipt. An activity or
use of funds may be disapproved if ineligible or if the department deems the scope of the
project to be inadequate to meet the municipality's community development needs. To the
extent an activity or use of funds is deemed ineligible or inadequate, the community shall
be eligible to submit an amended proposal for review and approval within 45 days of
receipt.

"Housing and Community Development Act." Title I of the Federal Housing and
Community Development Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-383), as amended. [FN2]

"Local public agency." A redevelopment authority under the act of May 24, 1945 (P.L.
991, No. 385), known as the Urban Redevelopment Law, [FN3] or a housing authority
under the act of May 28, 1937 (P.L. 955, No. 265), known as the Housing Authorities Law.
[FN4]

"Metropolitan city." A metropolitan city as defined in section 102(a)(4) of the Housing
and Community Development Act. [FN5]

"Population." The number of inhabitants as reflected in the latest decennial census.

"Urban county." An urban county as defined in section 102(a)(6) of the Housing and
Community Development Act.

CREDIT(S)

1984, Oct. 11, P.L. 906, No. 179, § 3, imd. effective.

[FN1]   42   U.S.C.A. § 5318.
[FN2]   42   U.S.C.A. § 5301 et seq.
[FN3]   35   P.S. § 1701 et seq.
[FN4]   35   P.S. § 1541 et seq.
[FN5]   42   U.S.C.A. § 5302(a)(4).

HISTORICAL AND STATUTORY NOTES

2003 Main Volume

Act 1996-58 legislation

Section 301 of Act 1996, June 27, P.L. 403, No. 58, 71 P.S. § 1709.301, provides that the
following function of the Department of Community Affairs is transferred to the Department
of Community and Economic Development: the Community Development Block Grant
Program under the act of October 11, 1984 (P.L. 906, No. 179), known as the Community
Development Block Grant Entitlement Program for Nonurban Counties and Certain Other
Municipalities (35 P.S. § 1751 et seq.).

35 P.S. § 1753, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1753

Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1754
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18B. Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Program for Nonurban
Counties and Certain Other Municipalities
  § 1754. Allocation of funds for 1985 and thereafter

The funds which the Commonwealth receives pursuant to the Housing and Community
Development Act [FN1] shall be allocated by the department in accordance with the
following formula:

(1) An amount of 2% of the funds shall be used by the department for administrative
costs.
(2) An additional amount of 13% of the funds may be used by the department for
discretionary projects in boroughs, towns and townships which are not eligible entitlement
entities, for urgent need projects, planning projects, economic development projects and
other projects eligible under the Housing and Community Development Act; or in eligible
entitlement entities with a population less than 10,000, for urgent need projects or to
complete planning projects, economic development projects and other projects eligible
under the Housing and Community Development Act undertaken by the eligible entitlement
entity with its entitlement.
(3) The balance of the funds which remain after subtracting the administrative costs of the
department and the amount reserved by the department for discretionary projects shall be
allocated as follows:
(i) Thirty-eight percent to eligible counties.
(ii) Thirty-eight percent to eligible boroughs, incorporated towns and townships.
(iii) Twenty-four percent to eligible cities.
(iv) The amount of funds allocated to an entitlement entity and which are not awarded to
the entitlement entity whether due to failure to timely apply for the funds or due to a
failure to meet the general qualifications criteria shall, for that funding year, be added to
the funds available to the class of which the entity is a part and allocated to other
members of the class in accordance with the provisions for additional grants pursuant to
section 6 or 7 [FN2] unless provisions of section 7(c) are operative.

CREDIT(S)

1984, Oct. 11, P.L. 906, No. 179, § 4, imd. effective.

[FN1] 42 U.S.C.A. § 5301 et seq.

[FN2] 35 P.S. § 1756 or 1757.

LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

States  123.
Westlaw Topic No. 360.
C.J.S. States § 226.

35 P.S. § 1754, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1754

Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1755
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18B. Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Program for Nonurban
Counties and Certain Other Municipalities
  § 1755. Minimum grants for 1985 and thereafter


(a) Amounts.--Each eligible entitlement entity shall receive a minimum annual grant of
$200,000 if a county; $300,000 if a city; and $50,000 if a borough, incorporated town or
township.


(b) Division of insufficient funds.--In any year in which the amount of Federal funds
which are available to the Commonwealth pursuant to the Housing and Community
Development Act are insufficient to provide in full all of the minimum grants provided for
by subsection (a), each eligible entitlement entity shall receive an annual grant which shall
be equal to the sum which is obtained by multiplying the minimum grant it is authorized
pursuant to subsection (a) times a fraction, the numerator of which shall be the amount of
Federal money available to the class of which it is a part and the denominator of which
shall be the total amount of funds which would be necessary to provide each eligible
entitlement entity of the class of which it is a part with a grant in an amount in accordance
with subsection (a).

CREDIT(S)

1984, Oct. 11, P.L. 906, No. 179, § 5, imd. effective.

LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

States    123.
Westlaw Topic No. 360.
C.J.S. States § 226.

35 P.S. § 1755, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1755


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1756
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18B. Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Program for Nonurban
Counties and Certain Other Municipalities
  § 1756. Additional grants for counties for 1985 and thereafter


(a) Basic grant.--Each eligible county shall receive an annual grant, in addition to the
minimum annual grant provided under section 5, [FN1] which shall be equal to the sum
which is obtained by multiplying the balance of funds available to eligible counties by a
fraction, the numerator of which shall be each eligible county's net population and the
denominator of which shall be the total net population for all eligible counties.


(b) Inclusions.--To the total annual grant to the county determined by section 5 and
subsection (a) shall be added the annual grants of each borough, incorporated town and
township located in the eligible county whose population is less than 10,000. There shall
also be added to the annual grants of the county, the annual grants of each borough,
incorporated town and township with a population of 10,000 or more provided such eligible
entitlement entity specifically designates the county to administer the grant on its behalf.
These add-on grants pursuant to this subsection must be expended by the county on
behalf of the eligible borough, incorporated town or township for eligible activities
designated by said eligible entity. The county shall, however, have the right to subtract
from such add-on grant the proportionate share of environmental compliance,
administration, monitoring and audit costs incurred by the county up to the amount
allowed under Federal law.


CREDIT(S)

1984, Oct. 11, P.L. 906, No. 179, § 6, imd. effective.

[FN1] 35 P.S. § 1755.


LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

States    123.
Westlaw Topic No. 360.
C.J.S. States § 226.

35 P.S. § 1756, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1756


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1757
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18B. Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Program for Nonurban
Counties and Certain Other Municipalities
  § 1757. Additional grants for cities, boroughs, incorporated towns and
townships for 1985 and thereafter

(a) Amount.--Each eligible city, borough, incorporated town and township shall receive an
annual grant, in addition to the minimum annual grant provided by section 5, [FN1] which
shall be equal to the sum which is obtained by multiplying the balance of funds available to
eligible cities, in the case of cities and the balance of funds available to eligible boroughs,
incorporated towns and townships in the case of such eligible entities, by a fraction, the
numerator of which shall be each eligible city's, borough's, incorporated town's and
township's population and the denominator of which shall be the total population in the
case of a city, for all eligible cities; and in the case of a borough, incorporated town or
township, the net population of all eligible boroughs, incorporated towns and townships.

(b) Discretionary projects.--A nonentitlement borough, town or township may apply to
the department annually for funds reserved by the department under section 4 [FN2] for
discretionary projects. Each eligible municipality may authorize an eligible entitlement
entity or its designated local public agency to contract with the department for such funds
and administer the project on its behalf.

(c) Unused grants.--
(1) If an eligible county fails to apply for an annual grant of any eligible entitlement
borough, incorporated town or township within said county, subject to section 6(b), [FN3]
the eligible entitlement entity may apply for its own grant.
(2) If an eligible county fails to apply for its annual grant determined by sections 5 and
6(a), [FN4] the department shall distribute the county grant to one or more boroughs or
townships within such county which are not entitlement entities pursuant to this act and
are not considered a metropolitan city.

CREDIT(S)
1984, Oct. 11, P.L. 906, No. 179, § 7, imd. effective.

[FN1]   35   P.S.   § 1755.
[FN2]   35   P.S.   § 1754.
[FN3]   35   P.S.   § 1756(b).
[FN4]   35   P.S.   §§ 1755 and 1756(a).

LIBRARY REFERENCES
2003 Main Volume
States  123.
Westlaw Topic No. 360.

C.J.S. States § 226.
35 P.S. § 1757, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1757
Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1758
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18B. Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Program for Nonurban
Counties and Certain Other Municipalities
  § 1758. Use of funds for 1985 and thereafter

(a) Eligible activities.--The funds which are allocated to eligible entitlement entities by
the department in accordance with this act shall be used only for eligible activities which
are permitted in accordance with the Housing and Community Development Act.

(b) Use.--Those funds which are allocated to counties pursuant to sections 5 and 6(a)
[FN1] must be used by the county to benefit boroughs and townships, which are not
entitlement entities pursuant to this act nor considered a metropolitan city.

(c) Countywide projects.--If a countywide or an areawide project benefits an eligible
entitlement entity or metropolitan city, the proportional cost of the project benefiting the
eligible entitlement entity or metropolitan city shall be met by funds not allocated to the
county under sections 5 and 6.

(d) Authority.--
(1) Funds allocated to an eligible entitlement borough, incorporated town or township, and
which are added on to the county's annual grant pursuant to section 6(b), shall be spent,
less the county's proportionate share of environmental, administrative, monitoring and
audit costs, solely for eligible projects specifically designated by resolution by the eligible
borough, incorporated town or township.
(2) Further, if an eligible borough, incorporated town or township wishes to undertake an
eligible project at a cost which exceeds the amount of the annual allocation grant, or if the
department determines that the scope of the proposed project exceeds the amount of the
annual allocation grant, the eligible borough, incorporated town or township may
temporarily waive, in whole or in part, its annual allocation in order to aggregate a larger
amount by combining the amount of the temporarily waived grant with a grant anticipated
for receipt in the second and/or third year of any three-year cycle. Temporary waiver of an
annual allocation grant shall be accomplished by resolution by the eligible borough,
incorporated town or township.
(3) In the event of a temporary waiver the amount of the waived grant shall be considered
a county grant for said year or years and expended by the county in accordance with
subsections (b) and (c).
(4) The county in the subsequent year or years shall first use the funds allocated to it for
nonentitlement entities to reimburse the temporarily waived grant or grants of the eligible
borough, incorporated town or township to be used for the purposes designated by said
eligible entity.
(5) If the total amount of the temporarily waived grants in any year is adequate to fund
any of the anticipated projects, then the county shall immediately fund those projects for
which sufficient funding is available. Any eligible borough, incorporated town or township
which receives a grant pursuant to this paragraph shall forego future funding, in whole or
in part, until the amount of the advanced grant, in excess of the community's entitlement,
is returned to the county.
CREDIT(S)

1984, Oct. 11, P.L. 906, No. 179, § 8, imd. effective.

[FN1] 35 P.S. §§ 1755 and 1756(a).


LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

Municipal Corporations    267, 724, 883.
States    123.
Westlaw Topic Nos. 268, 360.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations §§ 664, 957, 1626, 1635.
C.J.S. States § 226.

35 P.S. § 1758, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1758


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1759
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18B. Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Program for Nonurban
Counties and Certain Other Municipalities
  § 1759. Allocation of funds for 1984

(a) Broad allocation.--The funds which the Commonwealth receives pursuant to the
Housing and Community Development Act for Federal fiscal year 1984 shall be allocated by
the department as follows:

(1) An amount of 2% shall be used by the department for administrative costs.
(2) The balance of funds shall be distributed on a competitive basis in accordance with
sections 10, 11 and 12. [FN1]

(b) Specific allocation and distribution.--It shall be assumed that had an entitlement
program been in place for 1984, the funds available under subsection (a)(2) would have
been allocated as follows:

(1) Thirty-eight percent to eligible counties to be distributed pursuant to sections 5 and 6.
[FN2]
(2) Thirty-eight percent to eligible boroughs, incorporated towns or townships to be
distributed pursuant to sections 5 and 7. [FN3]
(3) Twenty-four percent to eligible cities to be distributed pursuant to sections 5 and 7.

CREDIT(S)

1984, Oct. 11, P.L. 906, No. 179, § 9, imd. effective.

[FN1] 35 P.S. §§ 1760, 1761 and 1762.

[FN2] 35 P.S. §§ 1755 and 1756.

[FN3] 35 P.S. §§ 1755 and 1757.


LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

States    123.
Westlaw Topic No. 360.
C.J.S. States § 226.

35 P.S. § 1759, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1759


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1760
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness

Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18B. Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Program for Nonurban
Counties and Certain Other Municipalities
  § 1760. Grants to cities for 1984

(a) Funding limit.--Total grants to all cities which will be entitlement entities in 1985 and
thereafter according to sections 4, 5, 7 and 8 [FN1] shall be equal to the total amount all
such cities would have received had the entitlement program been in place for 1984, plus
or minus 15% of the sum of all such grants.

(b) Repayment of excess.--Cities receiving a grant under the 1984 program which is in
excess of what they would have received had the entitlement program been in place shall
repay that excess, in thirds, in the form of a reduced entitlement during the following three
years.

(c) Additional amount for underpayment.--Entitlement cities not receiving a grant
under the 1984 program or receiving a grant which is less than they would have received
had the entitlement program been in place shall receive the amount necessary to match
the amount they would have received had the entitlement program been in place, in thirds,
in the form of an increased entitlement during the following three years.

(d) Limitation.--No grant to any city shall exceed four times the amount that such city
would have received had the entitlement program been in place.


CREDIT(S)

1984, Oct. 11, P.L. 906, No. 179, § 10, imd. effective.

[FN1] 35 P.S. §§ 1754, 1755, 1757 and 1758.

LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

States    123.
Westlaw Topic No. 360.
C.J.S. States § 226.

35 P.S. § 1760, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1760


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1761
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18B. Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Program for Nonurban
Counties and Certain Other Municipalities
  § 1761. Grants to boroughs, incorporated towns and townships for 1984

(a) Funding limit.--The sum of the grants to boroughs, incorporated towns and townships
which will be entitlement entities in 1985 and thereafter according to sections 4, 5, 7 and 8
shall be equal to the total amount all such municipalities would have received had the
entitlement program been in place for 1984, plus or minus 15% of the sum of all such
grants.

(b) Repayment of excess.--Municipalities receiving a grant under the 1984 program
which is in excess of what they would have received had the entitlement program been in
place shall repay that excess, in thirds, in the form of a reduced entitlement during the
following three years.

(c) Additional amount for underpayment.--Entitlement municipalities not receiving a
grant under the 1984 program or receiving a grant which is less than they would have
received had the entitlement program been in place shall receive the amount necessary to
match the amount they would have received had the entitlement program been in place, in
thirds, in the form of an increased entitlement during the following three years.

(d) Limitation.--No grant to any municipality shall exceed four times the amount that
such municipality would have received had the entitlement program been in place.


CREDIT(S)

1984, Oct. 11, P.L. 906, No. 179, § 11, imd. effective.

LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

States    123.
Westlaw Topic No. 360.
C.J.S. States § 226.

35 P.S. § 1761, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1761


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1762
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18B. Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Program for Nonurban
Counties and Certain Other Municipalities
  § 1762. Grants to nonentitlement communities for 1984

(a) Funding limit.--Total grants to municipalities which will not be entitlement entities in
1985 and thereafter according to sections 4, 5, 7 and 8 [FN1] in each county shall be equal
to the amount that county would have received to make grants to such municipalities had
the entitlement program been in place for 1984, plus or minus 15% of the amount each
county would receive under the entitlement program.

(b) Repayment of excess.--If total grants under this section are in excess of the sum of
the grants counties would have received had the entitlement program been in place, such
excess shall be repaid, in thirds, in the form of a reduction in the administrative and
discretionary pool provided in section 4 during the following three years.


CREDIT(S)

1984, Oct. 11, P.L. 906, No. 179, § 12, imd. effective.

[FN1] 35 P.S. §§ 1754, 1755, 1757 and 1758.


LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

States    123.
Westlaw Topic No. 360.
C.J.S. States § 226.

35 P.S. § 1762, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1762


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1763
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18B. Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Program for Nonurban
Counties and Certain Other Municipalities
  § 1763. Use of local public agencies

Any entitlement entity, which is eligible to receive an annual grant directly and which has
not designated a county to apply for a grant on its behalf, and those municipalities under
sections 10, 11 and 12, [FN1] may designate any local public agency to administer any
program or project on its behalf and may authorize the agency to apply to the department
and contract with the department for its annual entitlement. Further, in the case of an
eligible entitlement borough or township which is located in an urban county, it may apply
and administer its grant in its own name or it may designate a county local public agency.


CREDIT(S)

1984, Oct. 11, P.L. 906, No. 179, § 13, imd. effective.

[FN1] 35 P.S. §§ 1760, 1761, and 1762.


LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

Municipal Corporations    724.
Westlaw Topic No. 268.
C.J.S. Municipal Corporations § 664.

35 P.S. § 1763, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1763


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1764
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18B. Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Program for Nonurban
Counties and Certain Other Municipalities
  § 1764. Regulations

(a) Authority.--The department shall adopt regulations to carry out the provisions of this
act and to provide for projects whose scope is adequate to meet the community
development needs of the municipalities covered by this act. Such regulations, unless
specifically required by Federal or State law, shall not be more restrictive or more
burdensome than the Federal regulations which are applicable to urban counties and
metropolitan cities which receive funding directly from the Federal Government under the
Housing and Community Development Act. [FN1] The department shall make prompt
review of applications for funds and amendments thereto and rely on local certifications
unless independent evidence is available which tends to challenge in a substantial manner
the certifications.

(b) Time.--

(1) The department shall, within 45 days of the effective date of this act, submit for review
pursuant to section 5(e) of the act of June 25, 1982 (P.L. 633, No. 181), known as the
Regulatory Review Act, [FN2] regulations for the allocation of funds to eligible entities
under sections 10, 11 and 12 of this act, [FN3] with notice of proposed rulemaking omitted
pursuant to section 204 of the act of July 31, 1968 (P.L. 769, No. 240), referred to as the
Commonwealth Documents Law. [FN4]
(2) The department shall, within 90 days of the effective date of this act, submit for review
pursuant to section 5(a) of the Regulatory Review Act, notice of proposed rulemaking for
regulations to govern the allocation of funds to eligible entities for Federal fiscal year 1985
and thereafter. If, for any reason the department fails to issue such regulations within the
30 days, an eligible entitlement entity shall follow the presubmission and submission
requirements of the Federal regulations contained in Subpart D--Entitlement Grants of Title
24 Part 570, Community Development Block Grants. However, where "HUD" is contained in
said regulations, the department shall be substituted in its place; and the requirements of
24 CFR § 570.306 for Housing Assistance Plan shall not be applicable.

CREDIT(S)

1984, Oct. 11, P.L. 906, No. 179, § 14, imd. effective.

[FN1] 42 U.S.C.A. § 5301 et seq.

[FN2] 71 P.S. § 745.5(e).

[FN3] 35 P.S. §§ 1760, 1761 and 1762.

[FN4] 45 P.S. § 1204.
LIBRARY REFERENCES

2003 Main Volume

Administrative Law and Procedure     389.
Westlaw Topic No. 15A.
C.J.S. Public Administrative Law And Procedure § 91.

35 P.S. § 1764, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1764


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)
35 P.S. § 1765
Purdon's Pennsylvania Statutes and Consolidated Statutes Annotated Currentness
Title 35 P.S. Health and Safety (Refs & Annos)
  Chapter 18B. Community Development Block Grant Entitlement Program for Nonurban
Counties and Certain Other Municipalities
  § 1765. Applicability


This act shall apply to the distribution of Federal Community Development Block Grant funds
which are available to the Commonwealth beginning with the Federal fiscal year 1984 and
thereafter pursuant to the Housing and Community Development Act and any amendments
thereto. The State shall not be liable for any commitment or for completion of any partially
completed or partially funded project which cannot be completed due to the unavailability of
Federal funds or future Federal appropriations.


CREDIT(S)

1984, Oct. 11, P.L. 906, No. 179, § 15, imd. effective.

35 P.S. § 1765, PA ST 35 P.S. § 1765


Current through Act 2005-96 (End)

				
DOCUMENT INFO