vision2020@moscow.com: Re: Takings bill (fwd)

Re: Takings bill (fwd)

Neil Meyer (NMEYER@novell.uidaho.edu)
Mon, 26 Jan 1998 09:38:13 PST

It seems to me that if it is appropriate to pay people for value lost
because of government decisions, then it would also be appropriate
for those who benefit from a change in value because of a government
decision to pay that to government. Are these points not two sides
of the same coin? Please comment

> Date: Sun, 25 Jan 1998 12:19:32 -0800
> To: vision2020@moscow.com
> From: Bill London <london@wsu.edu>
> Subject: Re: Takings bill (fwd)

> HB 487--
> also, it sounds to me like one way to kill community, the sense that lives
> and properties are interwoven and sacrifices are made for the common good.
> when individual claims reign supreme, when greed and self-serving choices
> can not be challenged by the "us" in our community, the door is open for
> more pig farms and gravel pits in residential neighborhoods (not a
> joke--those two uses of land in residential neighborhoods in Asotin County
> which has no planning or zoning is a sad, but true, reality).
> This is a serious issue. I would appreciate more comment and debate on
> this legislation--especially more info from the ever-helpful Tom Trail.
> BL
>
>
> >
> >from David Peckham
> >On thursday Jan 21, in the Idaho House, HB 487 was introduced, which if
> >enacted "provides a claims and arbitration process when local government
> >actions affect the value of real property in certain instances" according
> >to the summary.
> >
> >This sounds to me like an attempt to throw out all land use planning,
> >zoning and environmental controls on private property. Read the entire
> >bill at www.idwr.state.id.us/legislat/track98.html
> >
> >dp
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>


This archive courtesy of:
First Step Internet