HomeMy WebLinkAbout95-036Resolution No. 95-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORT
TOWNSEND OPPOSING INITIATIVE 164 AND HOUSE BILL 1026, THE
"PRIVATE PROPERTY REGULATORY FAIRNESS ACT"
The CRy Council of the City of Port Townsend, Washington, finds and resolves as
follows:
A. FINDINGS AND RECITALS
1. Initiative 164 and House Bill 1026 propose to restrict the ability of municipalities
to regulate all aspects of construction and land use permitting, development, and planning; and
2. Initiative 164 and House Bill 1026 have been packaged as protecting property
owners from the unlawful "taking" of private property without just compensation, when in fact
the proposed initiative and legislation go far beyond any judicial interpretation of the
constitutional protections of private property; and
3. The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, and Article I, Sections
3 and 16 of the Washington State Constitution contain language prohibiting the taking of
property without just compensation; and
4. The courts stand prepared to require compensation in those few instances when
regulations do, in fact, go too far and abridge individual constitutional rights; and
5. Initiative 164 and House Bill 1026 are vague and ambiguous, and propose
stripping from the courts the traditional ability to evaluate the value of the property owner's
entire property, as opposed to just the portion directly affected by regulation, the rules and
restrictions in effect at the time of purchase, to determine the owner's reasonable expectation,
and the public interests and values served by the regulation in determining whether compensation
is due for any particular regulatory actions; and
6. The very reason for the existence of municipal government is to protect the health,
welfare and safety of the public; and
7. This protection of health, welfare and safety involves City government on a dally
and continuing basis in a myriad of regulation of private property including such actions as
zoning, planning, and licensing; and
8. The City Council finds that Initiative 164 and House Bill 1026 propose to write
into law the dubious principle that the government must pay polluters not to pollute, pay
property owners not to harm their neighbors or the public, and pay companies not to damage
the health, safety, or welfare of others; and
9. The requirement proposed by Initiative 164 and House Bill 1026 that an
"economic impact study" be prepared for any regulation or restraint on private property use will
impose significant delays and staggering costs on the review of even routine building and
development applications, slowing building permit and development review substantially; and
10. The cost of preparing economic impact statements will need to be passed on either
to project applicants or to the public, resulting in a steep increase in application fees and/or steep
increases in municipal'charges and taxes; and
11. The imposition of the costs inherent .in Initiative 164 and House Bill 1026,
imposed upon the City of Port Townsend will amount to an enormous unfunded mandate,
wherein the City of Port Townsend will look to the State of Washington for reimbursement for
these costs; and
12. Initiative 164 and House Bill 1026 will impose upon the City of Port Townsend
an unacceptable decision of whether to reject the financial burden associated with compliance
with numerous statewide and federal regulations, including the State Environmental Policy Act,
the State Shoreline Management Act, the Growth Management Act, as well as a myriad of other
federal and state legislative requirements necessary for the protection of the health, welfare and
safety of the public, and the protection and preservation of the natural and built environment;
and
13. Section 6 of Initiative 164 and House Bill 1026 prohibits imposing upon building
and development permit applicants the requirement to provide studies, maps, plans, or reports
used in determining appropriate restrictions on use of the property as a consequence of a
particular application, requiring City ratepayers and taxpayers to finance these studies in order
to meet state and federal regulatory requirements, thereby resulting in probable steep increases
in rates, user fees, and local taxes; and
14. Initiative 164 and House Bill 1026 will eliminate predictability in the acquisition
and development of property within the City of Port Townsend and materially restrict the ability
of the City to regulate property uses which are detrimental to the public health, welfare and
safety and damaging to Port Townsend's fragile historic character and marine environment.
B. RESOLUTION
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council for the City of Port
Townsend as follows:
1.' The City of Port Townsend opposes Initiative 164 and House Bill 1026, which
place restrictions on local government actions regulating private property and requiring
compensation beyond the continually evolving judicial interpretations of the state and federal
constitutions; and
2. The City 'of Port Townsend opposes the inherent increases in permit application
fees, user rates, taxes and other fees and charges which will be required in the event Initiative
164 and House Bill 1026 become law; and
3. The City of Port Townsend opposes the enormous unfunded mandate inherent in
Initiative 164 and House Bill 1026; and
4. The City of Port Townsend opposes the intrusion of Initiative 164 and House Bill
1026 upon the ability and duty of the municipal government of Port Townsend to protect the
public health, safety and welfare and the natural and built environment from negative impacts
of unregulated building construction and land use development.
on this
ADOPTED by the City Council of the
jY U---~day of '/~/~
/
/
/
Townsend and signed by the Mayor
M. Mayor
Attest:
~dt, ctmg City C er
as to Form:
City Attorney
03/10/95 CA§Res\Init164.doe}