State of Washington land grab.


PDA






ravinraven
July 1, 2004, 10:03 AM
The gun relativity of this is in the fact that it is a rights grab.

I heard on FOX that in Washington in at least one county the Watermelons [green on the outside and red on the inside] have managed to get an unconstitutional law thru to keep you from using your own land. You are supposed to leave 65% of it untouched and can only use 10% of it.

Anyone from the area have anything more specific on this?

If you buy land with prior restrictions that's one thing. If land grabs are introduced after you buy it it is a good reason to ... well, never mind. Y'all know what I'm gonna say anyway.

But you can easily see the gun relevance.

rr

If you enjoyed reading about "State of Washington land grab." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Carlos
July 1, 2004, 10:47 AM
Doesn't surprise me. There's an old fellow here in Oregon, when hearing about new restrictions about to be placed on his land, who mowed down most every tree on his property, just to show he had the right to do with his property as he pleased.

This is popping up all over Oregon.

priv8ter
July 1, 2004, 10:56 AM
Found this on Fox News:

Private Property May Become Preserved
Thursday, July 01, 2004

PHOTOS VIDEO


KING COUNTY, Wash. — Residents of King County, Wash., will only be able to build on 10 percent of their land, according to a new law being considered by the county government, which, if enacted, will be the most restrictive land use law in the nation.

Known as the 65-10 Rule (search), it calls for landowners to set aside 65 percent of their property and keep it in its natural, vegetative state. According to the rule, nothing can be built on this land, and if a tree is cut down, for example, it must be replanted. Building anything is out of the question.

Most of the residents who will be directly affected by the regulations — those who own property in the rural areas of the country — are fuming. They see the new regulations as a land grab and a violation of their property rights.

"My take is it's stealing — out and out stealing," said county resident Marshall Brenden. "They're taking 65 percent of your land that you fought for years to pay for, paid mortgages on and now you can't use it."

But supporters and environmentalists say personal property rights do not trump the rights of a larger community to save the eco-system (search).

"We're trying to keep the rural area a place that isn't just McMansions and ball courts, but instead has those natural processes," said Tim Trohimovich of the group 1000 Friends of Washington (search), which aims to promote healthy communities and cities while protecting farmland and forests.

:fire: :cuss:

Well, I live in Kitsap County, so this doesn't bother me!

And, this only applies to 'rural areas' with no deffinition of 'rural areas' :banghead: :cuss: :fire:

Just...OOOOOOOOOO

And, with 95% of King COunty living in Seattle, you know the way this would go if it was put to a vote!

If land grabs are introduced after you buy it it is a good reason to ... well, never mind. Y'all know what I'm gonna say anyway.

I agree, ravinraven...there is no need to say it.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,124358,00.html This is link to the story on fox...has some interesting links to the group behind this...the 1000 Friends of Washington.

greg

HankB
July 1, 2004, 02:46 PM
Residents of King County, Wash., will only be able to build on 10 percent of their land, according to a new law being considered by the county government Hmmm . . .

1. Build on your 10% of the land.

2. Work with a lawyer to "split" off the 90% of your land that you can't build on into a separate parcel.

3. Stop paying taxes on the parcel you can't build on. (Hmmm . . . can you now build on 10% of the 90% that's a new parcel?)

So many bureaucrats . . . so little tar . . . so few feathers . . .

Henry Bowman
July 1, 2004, 02:49 PM
The counties in Washington are geographicly HUGE compared to counties in states east of the Mississippi. This means that King County, in which , as stated, 95% of the population is in Seattle, extend east all the way to the Cascade mountains and includes huge farm and forrests. Afew years ago, there was a seroius movement for the eastern half of the county to secede (they would call it Freedom County or Liberty County). That insurection was quashed in Olympia by refusing to act on the vote of the people according to the state constitution. The urbanites flex their power (of popular vote) and enslave the productive population and their land. Ayn Rand would have a field day in and around Seattle.

I lived there for 11 years and returned to Cincinnati 6 years ago. I love the natural beauty of the northwest, but I like the attitude (and driving skills) of the people here better. Most people here and there don't understand what I mean by this. In Seattle, they think that they are normal because they are in the majority (statists). Here, they can't believe that people act (and feel, not think) the way I describe.

c_yeager
July 1, 2004, 03:28 PM
But supporters and environmentalists say personal property rights do not trump the rights of a larger community to save the eco-system (search).

What is sad is that these "supporters" and "environmentalists" all live in the concrete jungle and consider the rural portions of the state to be a neat place to visit. Why should they even worry about this, they will NEVER be in a position to own or develop land, they couldnt bear to live that far from a Starbucks.

Ironbarr
July 1, 2004, 03:43 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,124358,00.html...But supporters and environmentalists say personal property rights do not trump the rights of a larger community to save the eco-system.Sounds like a communist (land) manifesto. Whatever happened to zoning?

BTW - community and commune... same thing?

And this guy wants to be Governor? Hmmm...

Azrael256
July 1, 2004, 04:14 PM
Frankly, I think this is a step in the right direction. Some years ago, there was an effort to declare the habitat of the Golden Cheeked Warbler as some sort of protected environment. That would have knocked out a solid half of the farmland in Texas. I REALLY wanted the bill to pass. I would have loved to see the .gov try to enforce it. Alas, I never heard about the bill again. I say go for it. I'd vote for the bill if I could. It's going to happen, might as well get it over with quickly.

Matt1911
July 1, 2004, 06:08 PM
Azreal,
Could you please expand on just how this "is a step in the right direction"?
Maybe i can see restrictions prior to buying lands,but on established lands? Do you own land?

Henry Bowman
July 1, 2004, 06:12 PM
I believe he means that it is a step toward knowing for sure that it is time to feed the hogs.

crucible
July 1, 2004, 06:21 PM
.....or a a step in the right direction of the people 'refreshing the tree of liberty'.

This is a defacto governmental land grab and a gross violation. I hope the people of Washington state sue this out of existance.

Cruc

Standing Wolf
July 1, 2004, 10:36 PM
My take is it's stealing — out and out stealing...

Has been for decades. Where were the hurt feelings then?

ravinraven
July 2, 2004, 09:29 AM
".....or a a step in the right direction of the people 'refreshing the tree of liberty'."

AMEN

rr

Bruce H
July 2, 2004, 10:53 AM
Anybody want to do a records check? I'll bet neither of the named owns property.

If you enjoyed reading about "State of Washington land grab." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!