1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Property Rights?? Not in Washington!

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Evil_Ed, Jul 7, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Evil_Ed

    Evil_Ed Member

    Jan 14, 2004
    Looks like our rights are taking a hit in yet another area, guess it's not just the RKBA that the libs despise.


    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.

    The plan is being pushed by King County Executive Ron Sims, who is currently running for governor.
  2. Das Pferd

    Das Pferd Member

    Jun 22, 2004
    I think its a good idea. Its a fact that people cannot be trusted to take care of the land.
  3. priv8ter

    priv8ter Member

    Dec 25, 2002
    Poulsbo, Wa

    This was already being talked about here:


    But, this whole thing makes me so mad, I'm more than okay with it comming up again.

    As an update, my mom is a King County resident, and when I tried to tell her about this, she at first didn't believe me, and then felt that it would be a waste of time to write/call the King County Council, because:

    'There is no chance something that silly could pass'

    :what: :banghead: :cuss: :fire:

    But, she's my mom, and I have to lover her anyway.

  4. Bobarino

    Bobarino member

    Mar 12, 2003
    western Washington
    from none other than Ron Simms himslef. i've heard some talk about trying to pass a law that goes along with this that will only require property owners to pay 10% of their property taxes since thats all the land they can use. sounds fair to me. i hope someone takes it and runs with it.

  5. Jeeper

    Jeeper Member

    Dec 28, 2002
    Mesa, AZ
    The "1000 Friends" already have a famous case under there belt about an issue like this. I believe it was at SCOTUS about redevelopment of unincorperated land.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page