By Peter Rimbos

King County, especially south King County, is blessed with large swaths of rural and forested lands spreading to the Cascades. Spectacular scenery, wide open spaces, clean air and water: these are the hallmarks that make Washington State a wonderful place to live, work, and raise a family. Yet special interests such as the Farm Bureau, Tim Eyman, and the Building Industry Association of Washington are rumored to be pushing an initiative for November 2006 that would risk all that. It takes aim at our successful system of protections for land, air, and water at a time when Washington and King County, in particular, are growing rapidly. If approved, this developers' initiative (aka "takings" initiative) would create a loophole for developers and other special interests to get around land-use laws that safeguard the health, safety, and quality of life of all Washingtonians. Wisely, Washington voters soundly rejected a similar initiative, Referendum 48, back in 1995.

Oregon wasn't so lucky. Backed by timber companies and developers, Oregon's Measure 37 was approved by voters in 2004. Measure 37 requires the government to either pay landowners for claims of diminished property value due to land use laws or not enforce those laws at all. More than 2,500 claims have been made so far. Over and over, Oregon's cash-strapped government has had to let reasonable, common-sense protections for public health and safety fall by the wayside when they have been unable to pay property owners. Oregonians are now experiencing extreme "sticker shock." Is this what we want for Washington State? In rural Polk County the Board of Commissioners approved a Measure 37 demand for one million feet of commercial space (the size of a large shopping center) on farm and forest land. "This is every farmer's nightmare," said Penny Cox, whose family farm is near the proposed shopping center. "Our lifetime investment can be wiped out overnight. Measure 37's backers never told us it would lead to this kind of unplanned mega-development."

Fortunately, Measure 37 was struck down in a county court in October 2005. The judge ruled the measure is unconstitutional because governments cannot be forced to choose between protecting the health and safety of citizens and paying private parties to comply with the law. Not surprisingly, the special interests that sponsored the measure are aggressively challenging this ruling. The ultimate outcome in Oregon remains unclear. Unfortunately, Measure 37 has created an unnecessary and expensive legal mess, generating confusion and frustration in communities across the state.

The initiative planned for Washington will be worded differently than Measure 37, but the intent will be the same -- creating a loophole for developers who don't want to be slowed down by neighborhood or community concerns. And the effect will be the same -- more sprawl, more snarled traffic, more neighborh-to-neighbor conflict, erosion of our outstanding quality of life, elimination of what few protections we have against irresponsible development, and increased taxes to pay off developers for not being bad citizens!

Washington must say "No" to this unconstitutional, unfair, and taxpayer-robbing developers' initiative. You can learn more by contacting Dan Stonington of the Community Protection Coalition at dan@protectcommunities.org or (206) 323-0520 or Peter Rimbos at primbos@comcast.net. The Sierra Club, Washington Conservation Voters, Washington Environmental Council, Futurewise, Washington AFL-CIO, Washington Blue-Green Alliance, and a growing number of other groups are joining the effort to say "No" to this developers' initiative in Washington.