Initiative 933 will undo local land-use control

People who cherish life in any of Washington's "most livable" communities will see two decades of hard work go down the drain if Initiative 933 passes in November.

I-933 is the badly mislabeled "fairness in property" act, which threatens to undo land-use decisions that have made these communities attractive and prevented chaotic sprawl. In every case, citizens from neighborhood groups, planning commissions and city or county councils have made the decisions. I-933 would erase this local control.

It is perhaps the most radical initiative ever faced by Washington voters, as well as the most complicated. It should not be compared with Measure 37, Oregon's land-use initiative passed in 2004 — I-933 is much more drastic.

Oregon Measure 37 has produced more than 3,000 cases, 75 percent of which involved farmlands; nearly all would be converted to residential use if plans are completed. More than 30 court cases have been filed; the major similarity to I-933 is that both initiatives are a boon for lawyers.

Oregon's initiative has not been a disaster for the state's land-use laws, but long-range effects may be serious as people are encouraged to build housing beyond service areas for sewer, water, fire protection and roads. There have been no "horror stories" of junkyards in subdivisions, etc., and nearly all of the cases are outside city boundaries.

Washington would be different in many important ways:

Oregon law requires that those who claim their property was damaged by land-use decisions must have owned their land (personally, or by family) prior to 1976. But in Washington, if you buy land tomorrow you can claim damages from land-use decisions, a developer's dream.

Oregon landowners cannot transfer their development rights; as a result, development schemes have been small, mostly residential. There's no prohibition on selling directly to a developer in Washington.

Most important financially is the so-called "pay or waive" provision in Oregon's initiative, which may not apply in Washington. An Oregon county facing a claim for damages has a choice: 1) pay the claimant the loss of value caused by the land-use action, or 2) waive the law and allow the original use. In every completed case thus far in Oregon, local governments have waived the rules rather than pay; the claims amount to more than $5 billion.

Washington's I-933 may not allow such a waiver for some of the more expensive claims. If local governments are forced to pay claimants, the costs will be in the billions of dollars, enough to bankrupt smaller governments and seriously threaten even the most prosperous community.

It will almost certainly take a court ruling to determine if "pay or waive" can be applied here. The initiative is not clearly written, and local officials are interpreting it as a "pay only" requirement. Courts could rule that some laws may be waived and others will trigger a payout. Among the latter are federal and state laws dealing with shoreline management, stream setbacks and wetlands.

Perhaps local governments will be able to "waive" or not enforce zoning laws, building-height restrictions and parking requirements. While this would avoid some costly payouts, it could also trigger high-rise condominiums in residential areas, commercial enterprises in single-family neighborhoods and parking congestion on city streets.

Either way — pay or waive — the costs are serious and damages to livability would be irreversible.

Every community in the state is threatened by this Draconian measure, but the greatest danger will be in the high-growth, high-livability communities that are drawing so many immigrants and so much development pressure.

My hometown, Bellingham, is a prime example, but so are Anacortes, Walla Walla, Issaquah, Port Townsend, and (your town's name here): communities feeling the press of development. The more carefully a community has done its planning, the more vulnerable it is under I-933.

In all these communities, every two years when city or county officers are elected, developer and Realtor money flows into these races. Then the battle shifts to neighborhood meetings, planning commission hearings and, ultimately, city or county councils. At every step of the way, developers, realtors and their lawyers push to open up more farmland and ease restrictions on building.

The stakes differ by community. New condominiums erase views of longtime residents; a burgeoning wine industry is threatened by Mac-Houses in the vineyards; subdivision spillover erases prime farmland; strip malls clog traffic.

Some Washington communities surrendered years ago to sprawl, strip malls and chaos. Those that resist are constantly pulled by profiteers who couldn't care less about livability. I-933 is their latest weapon.

Floyd J. McKay, a journalism professor emeritus at Western Washington University, is a regular contributor to Times editorial pages. E-mail him at floydmckay@yahoo.com