Planning proposition subject of debate

North Idaho residents will hear the pros and cons on what is likely the most controversial initiative on the November ballot during a Thursday evening debate in Coeur d’Alene.

The Kootenai Environmental Alliance and the Coeur d’Alene Area Chamber of Commerce are sponsoring the debate on Proposition 2, which would radically change Idaho’s land-use planning laws by requiring the government to compensate any landowner whose property value is diminished by a new land-use law.

It’s an especially hot topic in resort towns, such as Coeur d’Alene and Sandpoint, with clashes over how to handle increasing populations.

That’s why the conservation and business groups are coordinating the event, where Coeur d’Alene attorney Jerry Mason will debate Proposition 2 field director Trish Oak.

The groups will ask the debaters nine questions and then take questions from the audience.

Mason, who represents many local towns and the Association of Idaho Cities thinks the measure would harm property owners and cost taxpayers millions of dollars. He also opposes out-of-state groups paying to gather the signatures needed to get Proposition 2 on the ballot.

Oak, who didn’t return phone calls, is the North Idaho coordinator for the Proposition 2 group known as This House is My Home. She is known for her former conservative radio broadcast known as the “Trish & Halli Show” on KID-AM 590 in Idaho Falls. The duo got statewide recognition when House Speaker Bruce Newcomb sued, wanting them taken off the air for personal attacks on politicians and others.

Barry Rosenberg of KEA said the debate will help the voters make an informed decision.

“Planning issues are at the forefront in a lot of counties; Kootenai County is a prime example,” Rosenberg said. “This initiative has a potential, if it is passed, to radically change the way planning and zoning is implemented in the future.”

Proposition 2 is pushed by Laird Maxwell, a longtime Boise anti-tax activist, who has financial backing from wealthy Libertarian and conservative advocates.

On the surface, the initiative is touted as a way to reform eminent domain or the government’s power to take private property. Yet some argue the Idaho Legislature already put restrictions on eminent domain this year by unanimously passing House Bill 555.

Proposition 2 is modeled after the controversial Measure 37 in Oregon but goes further. The Oregon law requires a government to pay landowners if a new land-use law or regulation will diminish their property value, or waive the law rather than pay. The Idaho initiative requires payment only, with no option to waive the law or regulation in question. It also applies to new regulations on farming or forest practices.

Maxwell qualified Proposition 2 for the Idaho ballot by spending more than $330,000 from two out-of-state groups, the Fund for Democracy in New York and America At Its Best in Kalispell, Mont.

The Association of Idaho Cities opposes the measure, arguing the state’s cities and counties could never afford to pay landowners just to exercise their lawful authority on land-use planning. According to the state’s Web site, Oregon has received claims under the 2004 law totaling $3.7 billion. Opponents also fear it will erode all land-use regulations.

The initiative is part of a national movement that includes proposed ballot measures in Washington, Montana, Arizona and other states. Laird and the other backers believe that government and land-use regulations are arrogantly reducing property values and that government needs to let up.