<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
--></style><title>Statesman's Popkey on Prop 2</title></head><body>
<div><font color="#000000">Popkey: Prop 2 will move local planning
issues to the courts<br>
Dan Popkey</font></div>
<div><font color="#000000">The Idaho Statesman | Edition Date:
10-08-2006</font></div>
<div><font color="#000000"><br></font></div>
<div><font color="#000000"><br>
If you're confused by the hype suggesting government's about to seize
your home and church, take a look at the people behind the Proposition
2 campaign.<br>
<br>
This, dear reader, is a case where the company one keeps is more
telling than claims made in scary radio spots.<br>
<br>
Opponents of Prop 2 are mainstream: small and big business,
conservationists, cities and counties, and leading officials including
Gov. Jim Risch, former Gov. Phil Batt, House Speaker Bruce Newcomb and
Senate GOP Caucus Chairman Brad Little.<br>
<br>
"We support private property rights," said Alex LeBeau,
president of the Idaho Association of Commerce and Industry. "But
the devil's in the details, and there are a lot of devils in this
thing. I hope people vote no."<br>
<br>
Proponents are led by Laird Maxwell, a government hater who makes his
living attacking solid citizens like Supreme Court Justice Linda
Copple Trout and former Transportation Board Chairman Chuck Winder. In
his spare time, Maxwell opposes school bonds, fights measures like the
Boise Foothills levy and purges moderates from the GOP.<br>
<br>
He got Prop 2 on the ballot for one reason: New York real estate mogul
Howie Rich spent $330,000. Paid signature gatherers said government
could take citizens' homes if they didn't sign; more than 47,000
signatures were swiftly collected, putting the legislation to voters.
Rich-backed measures in five other states have been pulled from
ballots for various reasons, including signature-gathering fraud.<br>
<br>
But on Nov. 7, Idahoans will pass judgment on Prop 2, the misnamed
eminent domain initiative that many smart people believe could gut
local planning and zoning. Prop 2 would require taxpayers to pay
property owners when land-use regulations place limits on development,
including type of use, height, density, bulk, design and other
restrictions that make our neighborhoods nice.<br>
<br>
"This initiative threatens to unravel the good efforts of
citizen-driven committees and local governments to shape the fabric of
their communities," said Paul Kimmell, chairman of the anti-Prop
2 group, Neighbors Protecting Idaho. Kimmell also runs the Moscow
Chamber of Commerce and is a Latah County commissioner.<br>
<br>
Nampa Mayor Tom Dale is treasurer of the anti-Prop 2 effort.
"There are no churches being seized in the state of Idaho, and
there never will be because the Legislature has taken care of it. This
is a sham. Voters will figure that out."<br>
<br>
I wish I shared Dale's optimism that this well-heeled out-of-state
assault on local control will fail. Prop 2 backers have hitched their
wagon to the infamous 2005 Kelo case, in which the Supreme Court case
found a Connecticut city could take private land and turn it over to
redevelopers.<br>
<br>
What Maxwell doesn't say is that our Legislature headed off any such
action here, unanimously passing H.B. 555 in March and banning
governments from claiming private property for commercial use.<br>
<br>
"We took care of it," said Speaker Newcomb, who points out
that parts of Prop 2's section on eminent domain were taken verbatim
from the new law. "If this initiative passes, I'm not sure you
could prevent somebody from putting a pig sty across the property line
from your house in Boise without going to court to seek a
cease-and-desist order."<br>
<br>
Lawyers on both sides advance mind-numbing arguments about what the
measure means. They'll have ample work should Prop 2 pass. On Friday,
proponent Heather Cunningham debated opponent Jerry Mason. I found
Mason persuasive, including his assessment that Prop 2 creates a
system for claims to government funds unmatched in any of the 50
states.<br>
<br>
Attorney General Lawrence Wasden warns of legal confusion. "This
has a strong likelihood of resulting in a significant amount of
litigation to fully define the boundaries of this proposed statute,"
says Wasden's review of Prop 2.<br>
<br>
Gov. Risch agrees. "It's going to take considerable and very
expensive litigation to figure out what it says. The bottom line is
we've got state laws already that say the government can't take your
property."</font></div>
<div><font color="#000000"><br>
Under Prop 2, issues now settled in our neighborhoods, city councils
and county commissions will shift to a new venue - the courts.
"You're pitching out your city council and planning and zoning
commission and replacing 'em with trial lawyers," said Sen.
Little.<br>
<br>
The campaign against Prop 2 organized just three weeks ago and faces a
decided disadvantage against Maxwell's inflammatory and expensive
radio campaign. Frustrated by the uncertain interpretations of Prop 2,
I turn to people I trust.<br>
<br>
People like George Iliff, chairman of the Boise Metro Chamber of
Commerce. "It's morally and ethically irresponsible for them to
scare people about losing their homes."<br>
<br>
Or Ron Whitney, a homebuilder and president of the Building
Contractors of Southwestern Idaho. Some builders would see short-term
gains under Prop 2, But Whitney's invested for the long haul.
"Quality growth is what we need; otherwise, people aren't going
to want to live here."<br>
<br>
Unlike Howie Rich, folks fighting Prop 2 have a stake in Idaho. Here's
hoping we don't let Rich's riches wreck our
neighborhoods.</font></div>
</body>
</html>