Posted on 01/27/2005 8:27:41 PM PST by Seattle Conservative
Oregon's successful Measure 37 property rights salvo is boosting support just across the Columbia River in Washington state's Clark County for a similar statewide rural property owners revolt, as The Oregonian reports (quick, 3-step reg. req.). And - closer to Seattle - in eastern King County.
Now, in addition, Washington State Rep. Toby Nixon (R-45) is seeking a committee hearing in the Democrat-controlled House on HB 1500.
It has to do with how a new county can be established, and that's no academic question. King County, even apart from it's egregious bungling of votes in the 2004 gubernatorial election, continues to alienate rural residents with heavy-handed regulation, imperious decision-making and declining services. A small taste here, from the second-linked (Seattle Times) story above:
Myra Lemson, who lives and grows roses on an acre-plus east of Redmond, says her complaints go back years: She had to pay for a private road to get access to her home; she says she pays the same taxes, yet gets a lower quality of public services (such as slower police-response times) than those in more urban areas. Under the new rules, she could have to pay for a permit to remove the blackberries that plague her property and house rats. "I am a Democrat, and this has been a struggle for me," Lemson said. "The only members of the council who have even responded to my concerns are Republicans."
A 1998 Washington state Supreme Court ruling indicated half of registered voters in a proposed new county must sign petitions to force further consideration of the issue. Among other things, HB 1500 lowers the threshold to 25 percent.
A root concern in Eastern King County, discussed here at Sound Politics before, is the county's dictatorial Critical Areas Ordinance. It restricts use of up to 65 percent of their land for property owners in unincorporated parts of the county. Even if they bought before the new rules were imposed - with nest eggs in mind, having hoped to subdivide their parcel and sell some for home construction - there is no compensation for the government-effected hit to their investments.
As a Seattle resident who looks favorably on high-density development in the city and expanded public transit in the city and suburbs (go ahead readers, flog me, I'm used to it by now), I nonetheless cannot stomach the arrogance of King County in imposing the CAO on rural property owners with no compensatory framework. Similar regulations are what fueled Measure 37 in Oregon, and that train is riding right into Washington within the next few election cycles.
And while it's all too easy for my fellow Seattleites, most of them sneering, dismissive liberal clones, to belittle and mock the re-nascent eastern King County secession movement, I believe that, ah, excuse me for framing it this way, "choice" is the operative word here.
Unreasonable obstacles to a public vote on secession should be removed. That will likely not occur with Democrats in control of the legislature, but it is never to soon to begin agitating. Toby Nixon is on the right track.
Geographically, King County is absurdly huge: the boundaries to the east go far beyond any reasonable distance. It makes no sense whatever for folk who live in the largely rural and far-flung unincorporated parts of King County to NOT be able to decide for themselves whether to have their own county government.
Yet, once again, the political establishment's response is to subvert the will of the people to decide their own affairs. Make that, the Democrats' response.
Posted by Matt Rosenberg at 07:02 PM
Maybe we can get some of our Prop Rights back, but I woun't hold my beath that this bill will get rhrough and signed.
That is because they know they can treat you badly and still get your vote, you useful idiot.
What we see in Washington is just another example of the ugly result of the Midas Touch of Liberalism. Taxation, regulation, driving businesses out, driving individuals out, etc. etc...all to maintain the status quo for the "useful idiots" that keep voting for them, in their state of total stupidity.
I'm so glad I moved out of unincorporated K.C.... even if it was to Tacoma. :) Working with Seattle lib's, I see all too clear that their concern ends at the tips of their noses!
BTT!!!!
Actually, it might be more accurate to say that their concerns end at the bank. Most of these liberals that want to limit the rights of landowners do so because they want to encourage developers, who will bring in more 'high value' (read: higher tax generating) property improvements.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.