Does the government violate the Takings Clause when it confiscates property for payment of a tax debt without allowing the property owner any means of recovering the value of the property in excess of the debt?

Questions Presented Under Rhode Island’s statutory scheme for collecting delinquent fire district fees and ad valorem real property taxes, a municipality took and conveyed to private investors the full value of two properties worth over $450,000.00 in exchange for back taxes, penalties, and interest of only $6,618.59. The Rhode Island Supreme Court summarily rejected Petitioner’s argument that Tyler v. Hennepin County prohibited Rhode Island’s method of tax sale under the Takings Clause because the local government gave the excess value in the property to private investors, rather than the state retaining it as happened in T’yler. The questions presented in this Joint Petition are: 1. Does the government violate the Takings Clause when it confiscates property for payment of a tax debt without allowing the property owner any means of recovering the value of the property in excess of the debt? 2. Is an _ otherwise unconstitutional taking insulated from the Constitution’s reach just because the confiscating municipality delivers the excess equity to private investors rather than to local governments?