Property Rights Law Goes Way Too Far

It wasn’t the general public that Washington’s Legislature was representing when it enacted Initiative 164 this spring. It was the bulldozer boys, the developers and timber companies who’ve shown they would hurt your neighborhood or fill your favorite fishing holes with silt if public agencies weren’t there to demand responsibility in the pursuit of corporate profits.

The people of Washington can ill afford to let this law stand. They need to take a stand of their own: for the protection of their quality of life. They need to reassert the average Joe’s voice in today’s corporate-oriented political climate. They need to sign petitions for Referendum 48, being circulated by good-government groups such as the League of Women Voters. That measure would give voters a chance this November to repeal Initiative 164.

We do agree that the initiative’s backers had a valid gripe. A few regulations of recent years were indeed trampling private property rights. In particular, wetlands rules made some lands unusable but didn’t pay the affected property owners a dime. But the vast majority of property rules protect the value of everyone’s land. They keep communities livable, forests renewable and fish and wildlife populations sustainable.

The initiative simply goes too far. It requires that government pay property owners for any reduction in value that regulations may cause.

This will deter government regulatory action. And when government does attempt to regulate, it will incur lawsuits seeking compensation. Government may have to raise taxes to produce the millions that thwarted property owners will demand.

Suppose a developer wants to build a tavern, strip mall or apartment tower in your neighborhood. Before Initiative 164, zoning protected you. But now, if zoning rules stop a project, government may have to pay the developer for the lost earnings potential.

Why should the public pay corporations for not damaging neighborhoods, not clearcutting to the edge of fishing streams, not building high-volume stores on streets too small to carry the traffic? Corporations don’t pay the public for property value depreciated when a damaging project goes through.

There’s a better solution to the complaints that led to the initiative - and that action already has been taken: Elect conservative legislators who can correct specific instances of regulatory excess.

But in enacting Initiative 164, Washington’s new legislators committed an excess more threatening to the general public than any recent regulation. Voters should repeal it, and lawmakers should get on with making regulations reasonable, one by one.

, DataTimes The following fields overflowed: CREDIT = John Webster/For the editorial board