Pursuant to a regulatory agreement with theDepartment of Housing and Urban Development(“HUD”), Petitioner agreed to maintain and operatean apartment complex as low-income housing for aslong as a government-insured, 40-year mortgage onthe property remained outstanding. The transactiondocuments entered into among Petitioner, HUD, andthe lender provided Petitioner with the express rightto prepay this government-insured mortgage after 20years and thereby regain complete control of theproperty. In response to concerns that owners wouldprepay their government-insured mortgages andcease providing low-income housing, Congressoutlawed prepayment. Against that background, thequestions presented are:1. Whether the Emergency Low Income HousingPreservation Act of 1987 and the Low-IncomeHousing Preservation and Resident Homeownership Act of 1990 effected a taking of Petitioner’s propertywithout just compensation in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution because thelegislation required Petitioner to house qualifyingtenants for a period of years and otherwise unfairlycompelled Petitioner, rather than the public as awhole, to bear the societal cost of low-incomehousing.2. Whether the government breached itscontractual obligations to Petitioner when itoutlawed prepayment because the prepayment rightformed part of the overall agreement amongPetitioner, HUD, and the lender.