The page you requested has moved and you've automatically been taken to its new location.
Please update your link or bookmark after closing this notice.
Acquisition is one of the most sensitive aspects of an agency's activities because it involves direct personal contact with the people affected by a project. Yet it is imperative that agencies acquire property interests expeditiously to facilitate public improvement construction projects.
In obtaining needed properties, your primary goal should be to acquire through negotiation rather than through the use of condemnation authority. Acting as an acquisition agent or negotiator, you play an important role in achieving this goal. Negotiations should be conducted by a qualified member of the agency's staff. In cases where you have insufficient staff to perform negotiations, fee negotiators may be hired by contract (see Chapter IV, Administrative Matters, for information on FHWA contracting requirements).
The following is a list of the basic acquisition requirements for agencies receiving Federal financial assistance. These list items, as well as others, are discussed in this chapter.
Note: FHWA recommends you contact your SDOT with any questions regarding the acquisition process.
Each owner is to be provided a written notice of the agencies intent to acquire. The acquiring agency should make all reasonable efforts to personally contact each real property owner or the owner's designated representative and schedule an appointment at a convenient time and place. The purpose of this contact is to explain the negotiation process to the property owner as well as the responsibilities of both the acquiring agency and the property owner. One way to accomplish this is to provide the property owner with an acquisition brochure. The FHWA’s Acquisition brochure (Figure 3) is available from either your SDOT or our website at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/real_estate/
This kind of personal contact can be of great importance as the negotiator strives to attain rapport with the property owner, which can help inspire confidence in the acquisition process and the fairness of the offer being made.If all reasonable efforts to make personal contact with an owner fail, or if personal contact is impracticable, for example, such as when an owner lives in another State, the owner may be contacted by certified mail or other means appropriate to the situation. These alternative procedures (see following section), may be utilized under certain conditions. Some States may have additional statutory requirements regarding alternative processes.
This is an alternative approach to contacting property owners in person. In this approach the initial offer to the property owner is made by mail. The mailing package consists of the offer letter, the summary statement of just compensation, a deed or option form, and a property plat or sketch showing the effect of the acquisition.
Note: If the offer is based on a waiver valuation and exceeds $10,000, the owner must be advised of his/her right to request the agency prepare an appraisal.
Within a reasonable period after the mailing, you should follow up by telephone. A telephone conversation provides the property owner with a mechanism to obtain answers to questions or an opportunity to exercise the option of setting up an appointment for personal contact. All requests for personal contact by property owners should be honored.
When personal contact does occur, the property owner should be able to discuss substantive issues, having had the offer in hand for several weeks. From this point on negotiations should follow the normal sequence.
Generally, the mail offer approach has resulted in positive experiences. It saves both administrative costs and time on minor claims in which no dispute has arisen over the amount of the offer. The owner signs the deed or deed option form in a timely manner which enables the agency to focus negotiation efforts on other parcels.
Note: The use of mail offers may not be used on parcels where relocation is involved.
Once the amount of just compensation has been established (see Chapter V, Valuation), a prompt written offer must be made to the property owner. The offer must include a description of the real property or real property interests being acquired and the specific purchase price being offered. Along with the offer, the acquiring agency must provide the property owner a Summary Statement of Just Compensation which explains the basis for the offer and provides information necessary for the owner to make a reasonable judgment concerning the amount of the offer. In addition to the offer amount and the property location, the statement should include an identification of buildings, structures, and other improvements to be acquired, including removable building equipment and trade fixtures (see Owner Retention of Improvements, p. 43) appraised as part of the real property and those considered to be personal property. The statement should identify any separately held ownership interest in the property, e.g., a tenant-owned improvement (see Tenant-Owned Improvements, p. 43), and indicate, if appropriate, that such interest is not covered by the offer.
The agency may include additional information that it deems appropriate.
You must give the property owner a reasonable opportunity to consider the offer. This not only provides the owner a chance to thoroughly review and evaluate the offer (including the opportunity to obtain professional advice or assistance), it eliminates any appearance of coercion (see following paragraph). It also provides a chance for the owner to present material he or she believes is relevant to determining the property's value, and to suggest modifications to the proposed terms and conditions of the purchase. You must consider the owner's presentation.
Negotiations must be conducted free of any attempt to coerce the property owner into reaching an agreement. For example, the negotiator should be careful not to imply that the negotiation, and in particular the offer, is a "take it or leave it" proposition. Similarly, the use of condemnation as a threat must be avoided. Other examples of actions the acquiring agency must avoid include advancing the time of condemnation, deferring negotiations, or delaying the deposit of funds with the court to coerce an agreement with the property owner.
One of the basic protections provided by the Uniform Act is that no displaced person may be required to move without at least 90 days' written notice of the date by which such move is required. We discuss this requirement as it relates to relocation in Chapter VII, Relocation Assistance, but it also has an acquisition aspect. Simply put, this statutory requirement places limits on the scheduling of construction. An agency must schedule project construction so that no displaced person will have to move without being afforded the 90 days' notice described above.
Experienced negotiators tell us that a log of conversations and other contacts or interactions between themselves and property owners or their representatives is an essential tool and resource in acquiring real property. As a minimum, it provides the negotiator with an accurate record of communications, thus helping to avoid misunderstandings, hazy recollections, and unnecessary repetition.
One of the functions of a negotiator's log is to document that negotiations have been conducted in an appropriate manner. Beyond the negotiating arena, acquiring agencies increasingly are being required by courts to demonstrate such compliance. Properly completed, the negotiator's log offers key documentation in these cases.
Sometimes the initial negotiator may not complete the negotiations for a particular parcel. Without a complete record of preceding efforts, subsequent negotiations by a new negotiator will be more difficult and probably more time-consuming. In addition, the record contained in the log may assist in determining the prospects for a successful administrative or legal settlement. This supports the Uniform Act's goals of encouraging and expediting agreements with owners, avoiding litigation, relieving congestion in the courts, assuring consistent treatment for owners in public improvement programs, and promoting public confidence in government's land acquisition practices.
The negotiator should maintain adequate records of negotiations or other contacts for every parcel. The negotiator's log or record should be written in permanent form and completed within a reasonable time after each contact with the property owner. Information for each contact should include the date and place of contact, parties of interest contacted, offers made (dollar amounts), counteroffers, list of reasons settlement could not be reached, and any other pertinent data. The log or report should be signed and dated by the assigned negotiator. Upon completion of negotiations, the above records become part of the project parcel file.
When negotiations are unsuccessful and further attempts to negotiate are considered futile, the negotiator's record should include documentation of the negotiator's recommendations for appropriate future action.
In discussing acquisition, we have stated repeatedly that your agency's prime goal in obtaining real property should be to acquire through negotiations rather than condemnation and litigation. This approach reflects the Uniform Act requirement to "... make every reasonable effort to acquire expeditiously real property by negotiation." The administrative cost and time expended by acquiring property through litigation is significant and places additional burdens on a court system that is already overloaded.
However, it is necessary to recognize the limitations of the appraisal process. This process, while structured and professional, is by nature not scientifically precise. Moreover, in many cases property owners are suspicious of governmental acquisitions and may believe that just compensation offers are biased. Recognizing these factors, it may be both useful and appropriate to consider different acquisition strategies if an agreement with a property owner cannot be reached through the normal negotiation process.
One of these strategies, the administrative settlement, has long been incorporated into FHWA's regulations. An administrative settlement may provide the flexibility needed to resolve differences of opinion as to the amount of compensation. Another approach, Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR), may be helpful in removing communication or other barriers to agreement. Mediation, one of the many ADR techniques, has often been used to facilitate the acquisition of right-of-way by public agencies. Another option is the Legal Settlement, involving a resolution of the dispute after condemnation has been filed but prior to court award.
We discuss these approaches in greater detail below. FHWA recommends that, in appropriate situations, both administrative settlements and ADR be considered prior to an agency initiating a legal settlement or condemnation.
An administrative settlement is a settlement which occurs prior to the invoking of the agency's condemnation authority. It typically is more than the agency's approved offer of just compensation but not excessively so, considering the expected cost of litigation and the potential cost of project delays. An administrative settlement should be considered when reasonable efforts to negotiate an agreed acquisition price have failed but there appears to be the potential for agreement.
An administrative settlement goes beyond the appraisal and appraisal review process. Your agency designates an official who has the authority to approve administrative settlements. The designated official should give full consideration to all pertinent information. He or she prepares a written justification which indicates that available information (e.g., appraisals, including the owner's appraisal if one is available, recent court awards, estimated trial costs, and valuation problems) supports such a settlement, and that he or she approves it as being reasonable, prudent, and in the public interest. The extent of the written explanation is a judgmental determination and should be consistent with the circumstances and the amount of money involved. You should maintain appropriate documentation in the parcel file to support this action.
Often contesting parties, unable to reach an agreement, turn to third parties for resolution of their disagreement. One such possibility, under the broad umbrella of ADR, is mediation. Mediation may not be appropriate in every contested case, yet acquiring agencies should give consideration to its potential use when confronted with an acquisition dispute. A decision to employ mediation should be made on a case-by-case basis. Some of the factors to consider include the property owner's acceptance of mediation, the uniqueness and/or complexity of the acquisition, the specific technical issues in dispute, the agency's historic success in condemnation (or lack thereof), and the potential time and administrative cost savings. For example, because of difficult appraisal and other technical issues involved, mediation may be a particularly worthwhile tool in attaining settlement on parcels encumbered with hazardous waste.
Note: The expense of employing a professional mediator or other ADR specialist is considered to be a legitimate project cost.
Under the Uniform Act, no owner may be required to surrender possession of real property before payment is made available. If an amicable settlement between the property owner and theacquiring agency is reached prior to the need to initiate condemnation, the agency will pay the owner the agreed-upon purchase price. Only in exceptional circumstances, with the property owner's voluntary consent, can the agency obtain a right-of-entry for construction purposes before making payment available to the owner.
If the owner and the agency cannot reach agreement with the owner the agency may have to institute condemnation proceedings.
When all attempts to negotiate an agreement, including the use of administrative settlement or ADR procedures, have failed it may be necessary for your agency to acquire the property by exercising its power of eminent domain. At this point, the acquisition should be turned over to legal counsel to institute condemnation proceedings.
Successful condemnation is dependent on effective coordination. Careful attention to eminent domain considerations is vital to any acquisition program. Legal counsel should be an integral part of the acquisition team from the beginning of the project. During the planning and design stages, legal personnel may be able to detect complex title or valuation pitfalls which can be avoided or minimized during the appraisal process. They should be called upon for advice on such matters as the law on benefits, before and after appraisals, distinguishing whether an item is personalty or realty, and the compensability of particular items.
Counsel should be given an opportunity to offer advice prior to the determination to condemn. Once a case is referred for condemnation, counsel must have all pertinent information relative to the case, including facts on construction of the project and its effect on the property, information gathered by negotiators, sound appraisals, and competent witnesses. Counsel should know the weak points as well as the strong points of each case. In addition, counsel should be furnished with and kept current on Federal and State requirements concerning documentation to ensure that there is appropriate justification for the actions taken.
Condemnation proceedings take place in a State or county court and, as we have noted previously, are governed by State law. This means that State law will determine not only the condemnation process but also the various items for which compensation must (or may not) be paid by the acquiring agency.
In some jurisdictions, the condemner may be required to prove necessity for the acquisition or appropriation of the condemned property. This may only be required if a property owner challenges the proposed acquisition of his or her real property. Necessity is usually proved by offering engineering and/or design plans to substantiate the need to acquire.
In many States, prior to a trial before a judge or jury, the law provides the property owner a hearing before a board of commissioners or "viewers" who have been appointed by the court. Both the property owner and the agency are permitted to present information to the board, which forms the basis of the board's eventual award of just compensation. Once the board makes its determination, the property owner and the acquiring agency each may accept or reject it. If either party rejects the award, the court will schedule a trial.
When filing condemnation in most States the agency requests possession. In these instances the full amount of the State’s offer will be deposited with the court. This amount may be withdrawn by the owner without jeopardizing his or her rights in the condemnation proceedings.
In preparing a case, the agency trial attorney will discuss the taking with the acquisition team, the appraiser, the review appraiser, and other potential expert and lay witnesses to decide whether to recommend a legal settlement or go to trial. To familiarize themselves with the facts of the case, counsel should carefully analyze the appraisal of the property with the appraiser. This analysis should include an inspection of the property as well as any other comparable properties that may be used during the trial. The appraisal must conform to the date of valuation specified under State and local eminent domain law and be based on a consideration of all compensable elements of damage under applicable law. Counsel should attempt to have the appraisers reconcile any factual or legal differences without influencing their independent exercise of judgment in any way. On the whole, careful attention should be given to any element which counsel concludes is relevant to the case.
As noted above, legal settlements are a negotiation option available following a condemnation. The negotiations are between the acquiring agency's legal staff and the property owner and/or his or her attorney. These types of settlements may result in stipulated settlements approved by the court in which the condemnation action has been filed. The appropriate agency file must be documented whenever a legal settlement is made, and the rationale for the settlement set forth in writing. Legal settlements based on new or revised appraisal data as the principal justification must be coordinated with and approved by the responsible official of the acquiring agency. All pertinent data should be reviewed by the agency's real estate office to ensure that adequate documentation for Federal-aid funding is provided.
If no settlement is reached, a court trial will be required. Each side will present arguments in support of its position on the value of the property. The court will set an amount it determines to be just compensation and order the agency to pay that amount.
In previous sections of this chapter we have discussed acquiring property through negotiation or condemnation, each ending with the payment of just compensation. While every property owner is entitled to receive just compensation, there may be instances where property is acquired through donation, donation in exchange for construction features, or dedication. We will discuss each of these topics below.
Most of the time when an agency needs to acquire real property for a Federal or federally assisted project, it will acquire that property through negotiations with the owner or through the exercise of its power of eminent domain (condemnation). The preceding portions of this chapter have been concerned with those situations. Sometimes, however, and for various reasons, the owner is willing to give all or a portion of the needed property to the acquiring agency for less than what constitutes just compensation. Such an acquisition is referred to as a donation.
When an owner is willing to make a donation, that individual or entity retains specific rights that must be respected. For example, you must provide the owner an explanation of the acquisition process, including the right of having your agency appraise the property and to receive an offer of just compensation. Only after receiving such an explanation may the property owner waive these rights and the agency accept the donation. The explanation should be given in a manner that is non-technical and easily understood.
In most cases appraisal of the real property is advantageous both to the agency and the property owner. For example, on a federally funded project, an agency may need an appraisal to determine the donation's value as a credit against the agency's matching share of project cost (see Cost-Sharing/Credit section of Chapter IV, Administrative Matters, for more detail on credits). As with all acquisitions, valuation of real property donations should be done in accordance with applicable Federal regulations and approved agency policy. For properties with a low estimated fair market value where the valuation problem is uncomplicated, the acquiring agency may waive the appraisal in accordance with the SDOT's approved procedures (for further information see the Appraisal Waiver and Waiver Valuations section of Chapter V, Valuation).
Similarly, the property owner may need to know the value of the donated property for tax purposes. The Internal Revenue Service requires that an appraisal be prepared by a disinterested, unbiased third party when an owner is claiming a donation on his or her tax forms. While the acquiring agency is not obligated to use appraisers other than its own staff, the agency may find it prudent to advise the property owner to select a fee appraiser and offer to pay the appraisal fee. Paying the cost of the appraisal may help to facilitate the donation.
Note: Acquiring agencies should be aware that donations of real property must be considered during the environmental coordination process discussed in Chapter III. Additionally, before accepting a donation, acquiring agencies should have a process for determining whether or not the property is contaminated or has hazardous wastes present. Your SDOT should be contacted for assistance and advice.
An acquiring agency may accept a property owner's offer to donate a whole or part of a property in exchange for services or facilities that will benefit that owner.
For instance, an agency may require a narrow strip of land for a street-widening project. The property owner and the agency may negotiate an agreement that would require the agency to provide an additional driveway, entrance, or other features in lieu of cash compensation. The agency should compare the donated property's value and the cost of additional construction features to ensure that construction costs do not exceed the value of the donated real property.
Dedication is the process of reserving a parcel of land for a future public use. A dedication is usually made as part of the subdivision or zoning approval process.
An acquiring agency may accept, as part of a Federal or federally assisted project, a parcel that a developer has dedicated or proposes to dedicate. The agency also may accept land dedicated pursuant to the local planning process or at the request of the property owner for land use concessions that are consistent with applicable local and Federal project and environmental regulations.
Real property obtained through normal zoning or through subdivision procedures requiring dedication of strips of land in the normal exercise of police power, is not considered to be a taking in the constitutional sense and does not call for payment of just compensation or compliance with the Uniform Act. Land acquired in this manner may be incorporated into a federally assisted project without jeopardizing participation in other project costs and may be eligible for obtaining the cost sharing/credit described in Chapter 4.
Note: Any dedication undertaken to circumvent Federal requirements is not acceptable and could jeopardize project funding.
The following represent a number of additional areas which impact the negotiation/acquisition process.
An assessment is a tax or fee levied on properties that will benefit directly from a public construction project.
When Federal funds participate in a project, an acquiring agency (you) may not levy a special assessment solely against those properties experiencing acquisitions for the public improvement for the primary purpose of recovering the compensation paid for the real property. This recapture of compensation would constitute a form of forced donation, which is coercive and thus not permitted under the Uniform Act.
However, an acquiring agency may levy an assessment to recapture funds expended for a public improvement, provided the assessment is levied against all properties in the taxation area or in the district being improved and provided it is consistent with applicable local ordinances.
Sometimes the real property to be acquired for a highway project includes a public facility such as a school or a police or fire station, the loss of which would have an adverse impact on essential public services for the affected community. FHWA recognizes that in such circumstances an alternative method of acquisition, functional replacement, may be needed to serve the public interest. As the term implies, functional replacement provides for the replacement of the public facility in question, and its use is limited to publicly owned, public use facilities.
In the typical acquisition, the offer to acquire represents an estimate of just compensation determined through the appraisal of fair market value. Under functional replacement, the facility, including land and improvements, may be replaced by another facility with FHWA participating in the cost of a facility of equivalent utility. For example, if a community fire station with two bays will be acquired for a project, FHWA may participate in the cost of a new fire station of equivalent utility. Should the community choose to build a four-bay facility or add functions or services not present at the acquired site, FHWA participation generally will be limited to the level of function provided by the original facility.
The use of the functional replacement approach is at the option of your agency, with the concurrence of your SDOT, and must be permissible under State law. FHWA must concur that the functional replacement is a public necessity or in the public interest.Due to the complexities usually encountered in the construction of a replacement facility, early and frequent consultation among the community, the State, and FHWA is essential. The parties should develop an agreement setting forth appropriate conditions and respective responsibilities well before FHWA concurrence in the construction award, with appropriate FHWA review and approval of the Project Specifications and Estimates (PS&E).
Inverse Condemnation is the legal process by which a property owner may claim and receive compensation for the acquisition of or damages to his property as the result of public improvement. This may occur when an agency, either actually or allegedly, acquires a property or property interest without either an offer to acquire through negotiations or the institution of condemnation proceedings. For example, the design and construction of a road inadvertently results in a property owner losing access to his property. The access to the property can be denied in a number of ways including the fencing of property, denial of access across easements, or the denial of access to land caused by regrading of public right-of-way. The property owner in this scenario is not contacted or compensated because the loss of access was not planned or anticipated by your agency. The Uniform Act prohibits an agency from intentionally making it necessary for the property owner to begin legal proceedings to prove an acquisition occurred. Planning and project development activities normally do not constitute acquisition without some other action that substantially deprives the owner of the use of and enjoyment of the property.
Inadvertent action or unreasonable delay in beginning a project may result in making the property owner think an acquisition has occurred, even without physical taking of the property. Timely project planning and communication with property owners should prevent this situation from occurring.
An uneconomic remnant is a portion of a larger property determined by an acquiring agency to have little or no utility or value to its owner because of a partial acquisition of the larger portion. If the acquisition of only part of a property would leave the owner with an uneconomic remnant, the head of your agency must offer to acquire the remnant.
An uneconomic remnant may still have some utility or value. The ultimate test is whether it has utility or value to the present owner. The acquiring agency must make this determination. The agency is obligated only to offer to purchase the uneconomic remnant; the owner may decline the offer. The offer to purchase an uneconomic remnant may be included in the formal written offer for the portion of the property needed for the public project or, at the acquiring agency's discretion; it may be made in a separate offer.
For highway projects, Federal funds may be used to acquire uneconomic remnants regardless of whether the remnants are incorporated into the highway right-of-way. Uneconomic remnants incorporated within right-of-way limits lose their separate identity and become part of right-of-way. Should it no longer be needed for highway purposes, the uneconomic remnant would be disposed of in the same manner as other portions of highway right-of-way.
While the preceding describes Uniform Act requirements, State laws on eminent domain vary in their treatment of uneconomic remnants and must be consulted before an acquiring agency makes an offer.
When you acquire a property that is occupied by a tenant, you must consider the tenant's real property interests as well as those of the property owner. This is most often relevant in the displacement of tenant-operated businesses which have erected a structure or installed other real property improvements. The Uniform Act requires that such tenants receive just compensation for those improvements if they will be removed or otherwise adversely affected by the proposed acquisition.
An improvement located on the property to be acquired should be treated as real property regardless of ownership. Acquisition from the tenant should follow the same procedures as those for acquiring real property from the owner.
Just compensation for a tenant-owned improvement should be based on the amount that the improvement contributes to the fair market value of the whole property, or its removal value, whichever is greater. Removal value is considered to be the same as salvage value.
No payment should be made to a tenant-owner for improvements unless:
The compensation payable for tenant-owned improvements varies from State to State and may be affected by terms of the tenant's lease. Once again, we recommend that you consult with your SDOT concerning payment for tenant-owned improvements.
The owner of improvements located on real property being acquired for a public project may be offered the option of retaining those improvements at a value determined by the acquiring agency. The agency's retention value determination should be available at the initiation of negotiations or within a reasonable period of time after the owner expresses an interest in retention.
Retention value should be established by property management personnel through comparative analysis of improvements sold at public sale or another valuation method. Just compensation paid to the owner should be no less than the difference between the amount determined as just compensation for the owner's entire interest and the retention value of the improvement.
The owner is responsible for removing his or her improvement prior to the initiation of construction.
Ordinarily, the acquisition of properties for a federally assisted project does not begin before the completion of the environmental review process. However, in extraordinary cases or emergency situations, an acquiring agency may request that FHWA approve Federal participation in acquiring a particular parcel or a limited number of particular parcels within the limits of a proposed highway corridor prior to such completion. The reasons for such requests include the following:
As noted above, this procedure is to be used only in unusual circumstances, and additional requirements must be met for it to be used. Such requests may be submitted and approved only if:
Note: Hardship acquisition and protective buying procedures may not be used in connection with properties subject to the provisions of 49 U.S.C. 303, commonly referred to as Section 4(f) [parks] or 16 U.S.C. 470(f) [historic properties], until the required Section 4(f) determinations and the procedures of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation