As reported here, If voters pass the land-use measure Initiative 933 in November, it will cost taxpayers almost $8 billion during the next five years, a University of Washington study released Tuesday contends.
"The future of land use will change forever if the initiative passes," said Keith Dearborn, an environmental law and land-use lawyer who provided legal analysis for the study, which was conducted by a group of researchers at the UW's Northwest Center of Livable Communities.
But proponents of I-933 blasted as off-base the conclusions of the UW study, as well as the findings of a state report released last week that made similar dire predictions if the measure passes. Those in favor of the measure also said the UW study was biased because it was partially paid for by groups with ties to the opposition camp.
Initiative 933 had it's genesis in the Kelo decision by the Supreme Court, and by the Critical Areas Ordinance passed by King County, both actions limiting what a private property owner can do with their property. Simply put, I-933 is about fairness, as it seeks - if passed - to force local governments to compensate land owners for putting restrictions on the use of their property, or waive those restrictions.
If local governments don't want to pay compensation to private property owners for restrictions placed on the use of said private property, then they shouldn't pass laws and ordinances restricting the use of the land by the property owner, right?
Unfortunately, the simple logic in that is lost on those who only listen to the extremist conservationists, who would rather see us all living in Soviet-era style concrete block house apartments, instead of being able to use and enjoy our privately owned property.
No comments:
Post a Comment