By JON THORSON and RANDY HALL
Here's a concept for you: Give people the freedom to govern themselves and they will do a better job than kings, dictators, sheiks or tsars. Our nation's form of elective government was the first of its kind on Earth and is still working 200 years later.
Here's another concept for you: In governing themselves, free people establish sets of laws that serve to create a sense of order and protect their physical and economic security. Our democratic form of government seeks to protect its people against attack from economic, ideological or individual self-interests.
Proposition 2, an initiative borne from individual self-interest, is such an attack on our government and on us. It seeks to discard 30 years of land-use planning ordinances—ordinances established by self-governing people who considered the social, economic, energy and environmental needs of the community—for the exclusive benefit of greedy individuals.
Our quality of life is exceptional. Our clean water and clean air are protected. Our hillsides and open wild lands are undeveloped. Recreational opportunities provide our children and us with healthy activities. This is due, in large part, to the wise land-use planning laws established over a 30-year period and refined as growth occurred, to manage activities that could take place on neighbors' lands. To ensure community benefit, these laws and regulations were passed using due process and consideration of public testimony.
Take a good look at our Wood River Valley community today: Developed under the wise stewardship of early settlers, it has been converted from sage-covered grazing land into real estate worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Armed with a set of publicly approved ordinances, there is reasonable surety that current real property valuations will remain steady.
Because we have governed ourselves well, and because we continue to exercise constant, vigilant attention, we can have a sustainable future.
The price we pay for this assurance: First, certain land-use laws that restrict unfettered development; second, sharing in the responsibility to seek the highest benefit for the public good; third, taxes that maintain public services; and, last, ongoing active participation in the planning process.
If Proposition 2 passes, it will interfere with the goal of citizen involvement and public testimony in land-use planning issues. In a "takings" claim, if the landowner views the land-use laws as damaging to his or her personal interests, public officials will be faced with only two options: rescind the regulations (i.e., permit all similar development) or deny the development and pay compensation. Public testimony will not be considered, even when a development application is inconsistent with the will of the community.
If Proposition 2 passes, speculators will make sure every dime is wrung out of the land by demanding that development be maximized or by a "takings" claim of compensation for the lost value. In Oregon, a similar proposition, called Measure 37, was approved in 2005. Soon after passage, "takings" claims began to hit the courts. The total cost of these actions exceeds $5.6 billion. However, none of the 2,400 claims have been paid because local governments, lacking the funds to cover the claims, have simply waived the zoning rules and permitted development. The hard lesson Oregon is learning is that attempts to restrict or constrain development in order to protect a neighbor, who based his or her investment decision on the protections offered by the land-use system, will be very costly.
If Proposition 2 passes, real estate prices will become destabilized, and property values will decline. Why would a rational buyer purchase a home when anything can be built next to their property? What mortgage lender or bank will secure a home loan without reasonable assurance of the property's future? What planning and zoning commission will have the time or the funding to approve remodel applications if their governments are under siege with takings claims? If takings claims exceed public budgets, are you willing to pay for them?
If you want to protect and preserve your voice in determining your future, vote "no" on Proposition 2. If you want to stop greedy self-interest, vote "no" on Proposition 2. If you want to protect your real estate values, vote "no" on Proposition 2. If you want to assure your community's economic stability, vote "no" on Proposition 2.
Jon Thorson is the mayor of Sun Valley. Randy Hall is the mayor of Ketchum.
