|
Commissioner proposes "end run" around wishes of people - uses "resolution" instead of ordinance to "save" open spaces by Sue Forde Clallam County, WA – December 16, 2001 – Two county
commissioners plan to circumvent the wishes of the voters of Clallam
County next Tuesday by passing a “resolution” instead of (or
possibly in addition to) an “ordinance” to implement a scheme to buy
up private property and development rights in so-called “open spaces,
farmland and agricultural lands.” In 1995, the voters of the county spoke loud and clear with an
overwhelming “no” vote to the idea (84% against) at the polls,
saying they did not want their tax dollars used to buy up property
development rights from private landowners. On Tuesday, Dec. 11, the commissioner’s boardroom was filled to
overflowing as approximately 200 people came to hear and testify for and
against the proposed ordinance. Commissioner Steve Tharinger had
proposed to increase property taxes across the entire county by 6.25
cents per $1,000 in order to buy up development rights in the
Sequim-Dungeness Valley. Joining
him was Commissioner Mike Doherty.
Standing alone on the side of the people was Commissioner Mike
Chapman. It was, to say the
least, a heated issue, with letters pro and con filling the local weekly
newspaper. After four hours of listening to the people, the decision to pass the
ordinance was postponed until Dec. 18. It must be passed in 2001 in order to gain the federal and
state grants next year to build the fund to buy much more land than the
approximate $250,000. in increased taxes would buy.
In addition, the commissioners could use those taxes to float a
bond, which would place the currently debt-free county into long term
debt. Because Clallam County is a “home rule charter” county, any
ordinance that is passed could be repealed by the people under the right
of referendum. It would appear that Tharinger wants to completely circumvent the
people. Whether or not the
ordinance passes at the next meeting, he has proposed a “Resolution”
to transfer $250,000 of the Capital Facilities Fund of Clallam County to
start up the program. This
would give the county the ability to raise grant money from federal and
state tax dollars over the next year. RIGHT TO BUY UP LAND There are several interesting aspects to the state law which is
referenced in the resolution under which the commissioners will act: RCW 84.34.210 states, in part, that the county may
“acquire by purchase…the fee simple or any less interest…to
protect, preserve…limit the future use of…selected open space
land…for public use or enjoyment.”
This flies in the face of what Tharinger and his friends have
repeatedly told news media – that all they would be buying is
“property development rights.” RCW 84.34.220 stats, in part, that a county “may specifically purchase
or otherwise acquire…rights in perpetuity [forever] to future
development of any open space land, farm and agricultural land…. Such
developmental rights shall be termed ‘conservation futures’….under
the terms of purchase…the county…may forbid or restrict building
thereon, or may require that improvements cannot be made without
county…or nonprofit nature conservancy corporation…permission. RCW 84.34.230 states that “a county may levy an amount not to exceed
6.25 cents per $1,000 of assessed valuation…” RCW 84.34.240 states that “any board of county commissioners may
establish by resolution a special fund which may be termed a
conservation futures fund to which it may credit all taxes levied
pursuant to RCW 84.34.230…Nothing…shall be construed as limiting in
any manner methods and funds otherwise available to a county for
financing the acquisition of such rights and interests in real
property.” ROBBING FROM ONE TO SET UP THE OTHER Questionably, the resolution to be passed will take money from the
county budget that has been allocated to the Capital Facilities Fund and
move it over to form the new Conservation Futures Fund.
The county had a shortage in its budget of $1.2 million, and in
order to balance it, several county employees are taking shorter hours,
and holding the line in an increase in pay.
Much-needed services, like police protection, stand to suffer. Yet, Commissioners Tharinger and Doherty, contrary
to the demands of their constituents, are taking money and moving it to
set up this new fund to buy up more land.
(Clallam County has only approximately 13% of the land available
for private development, and that stands to be reduced greatly as more
land and/or development rights to the land, are removed.) Taxpayers who voted against the idea of paying more in taxes to buy up
land or property development rights will have their taxes increased
anyway. The next
commissioner’s meeting will set the rate for 2002 property taxes –
more than likely a rate that will increase to cover the county deficit.
Instead of taking $250,000 from the Capital Fund and giving it to
the Conservation Futures Fund, if there is that much money lying around
not needed, why not reduce the citizens’ taxes instead of increasing
them? Or, why not take that
money from the Capital Fund and move it to increase the sheriff’s
deputies – that department needs four more officers to patrol for
citizens’ safety. Animal
control is also in need of funding.
These are issues of public safety. WHO GETS THE LAND AND DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS? WHO STANDS TO PROFIT BY THIS “RESOLUTION”? A question arises as to who stands to profit by this ordinance (if
passed) or resolution. One
man I know owns 40 acres of marshland (unusable).
Yet he would qualify to sell “development rights” at a
premium price. The
people’s tax money would be used to benefit one individual, with no
“return” on their “investment”.
It’s no wonder the taxpayers have said “no” to this sham. JUST THE BEGINNING There is a move to buy up more and more land from individuals and place it into “public” ownership. The “advisory board” to be set up will make recommendations for “projects to be funded,” and will “develop strategic, long-term plans for the program.” One of the goals of the Communist Manifesto is: The theory of the Communists may be summed up in a single phrase: Abolition of private property (page 82.) Contact your county commissioners and let them know your thoughts on
this issue. The workshop on
Monday will be discussing this issue, and it stands to be passed on
Tuesday. Show up for both
meetings if you can. Clallam County Proposed 2002 budget comments by County Commissioners
|