Opinion ID: 2521667
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: the taking was for a valid public purpose.

Text: ¶ 27 The landowner argues that the taking was not for a proper public purpose as required by the Oklahoma Const. art 2, §§ 23-24 [61] because the land was to be used as an athletic village instead of some use which would further the academic goals of the University. The Regents argue that the proposed use is a public use/public purpose. The question of whether a proposed taking is for a public use is a judicial question. [62] Nevertheless, here, the Legislature has already expressly declared such use a public use by its enactment of 70 O.S. 2001 § 4001, [63] in which the Regents are authorized to take land for the construction of, among other things, field houses, stadiums, and other revenue-producing buildings. The proposed athletic village fits squarely within this stated purpose and a review of the record reveals no other evidence which would convince us that the proposed use does not qualify for a public use/purpose.