WA's Initiative 933: Bad news for the environment
Thu Oct 12, 2006 at 10:04:28 AM PDT
Initiative 933 uses the bait of eminent domain to "meat ax" (per The Olympian) ALL safeguards for clean water, habitat, wetlands, traffic, and pollution. Far worse than Oregon's Measure 37 (which has resulted in developments in the middle of national monuments and forests), Initiative 933 can roll back all regulations on all property by years. (Not surprisingly, it's far-right zeal is revealed when it turns out that it also undermines food safety, professional licensing, and more.)
You may think that I-933 is the result of local farmers and local concerns. Wrong. I-933 is a series of far-right TABOR-like and land-use initiatives promoted and funded by New York real estate developer Howie Rich (learn more, and more, and more, and more).
It's so important for Washingtonians to Vote No on I-933.
Here's Washington's editorials slamming I-933:
The Yakima Herald:
About the most positive thing we can say about Initiative 933 is that it is a good example of why it's bad public policy to write complex state laws by initiative -- absent the give-and-take of debate and compromise in the legislative arena.
We strongly urge voters to fill the "no" box on their ballots on this proposal; it is a nightmare waiting to happen. There are so many legal questions surrounding this measure it could easily be nicknamed "The Lawyer Relief Act of 2006."
The Seattle Times:
I-933 is the badly mislabeled "fairness in property" act, which threatens to undo land-use decisions that have made these communities attractive and prevented chaotic sprawl. In every case, citizens from neighborhood groups, planning commissions and city or county councils have made the decisions. I-933 would erase this local control.
The Olympian:
Under I-933, government officials would have two choices: Let development occur or pay the landowner for loss of property value. It's an awful choice, estimated in two separate studies to cost Washington taxpayers $8 billion.
The Herald:
I-933 is anything but simple. In its stated effort to protect private property rights, it would put taxpayers and property owners alike in a complicated legal tangle, with land-use lawyers the only sure winners and taxpayers the only sure losers.
The News Tribune:
These initiatives purport to protect property rights but would actually have the opposite effect. By unraveling state and local land-use regulations that control growth, protect the environment and enforce neighborliness, the measures would eventually diminish property values. Developers like Rich might snag some sweet deals.
Seattle Post Intelligencer:
In order for essential urban services, traffic flow and overall property value to be preserved, land-use regulation, including zoning, density targets, dedications to the public and other regulation have become an essential part of our law.
The Columbian:
State and local fishing organizations warned Wednesday that Initiative 933, the property rights initiative, would roll back a decade of stream protection rules and threaten habitat restoration efforts on waterways statewide, including the East Fork of the Lewis River.
No on I-933!
[Cross-posted on
Daily Kos Environmentalists.]
Permalink | 10 comments