Why this farm kid's voting "no" on I-933

If I had followed in the footsteps of my father, grandfather and great-grandfather, I, too, would have been a farmer. Instead, I became a minister, so I can understand both the tension farmers feel between their right to use their property as they see fit and the responsibility we all have to protect the land for future generations.

I can see why some farmers are supporting the land-use Initiative 933. But I can also see why other farmers oppose it. It is a bad deal for most people in Washington, including farmers, particularly in fast-growing Snohomish County, where I live. Initiative 933 would require paying property owners when regulations lower the value of their property, or, if a city, county or other agency can't pay, suspending the regulations.

To see the downside of this calculus, we only need to look south to Oregon, where a similar measure now has major land-use decisions tied up in the financially uncertain world of the courts.

Or we can look here, where two independent studies predict I-933 will create both an uncertain business environment and a cost to taxpayers of close to $8 billion in its early years. That's more than $1,000 a resident. So what might seem fair to a small group of people will be extremely unfair to the state as a whole.

We might also think of I-933 in terms of our neighborhoods and communities.

Snohomish County is an attractive place to live, with a vibrant mix of jobs, pleasant homes and both urban and rural life. It is also one of the fastest-growing counties in the state. Our population will grow by nearly half in the next two decades.

I-933 will effectively dismantle the means by which we make sure growth in the county is balanced and measured, that it's done in a way that protects our streams and forests, retains our community's character, and ensures our health and safety. We need to have balanced and measured growth if we are to see that all our property values are protected while our communities continue to be decent places to live.

Appropriate development helps farmers, too. I know of several farmers here in Snohomish County who fear I-933 will put their farms at risk. Real-estate developers are looking for more and more land to develop, and farmland is disappearing across the county. Some farmers feel I-933 will increase the pressure to give in to development, leaving less land for others to farm.

I-933 will also hurt many of our less-fortunate neighbors who don't have the means to own a home or their own property. The high cost of administering and making payments under the initiative will mean fewer resources for affordable housing and other human resources.

In the end, I-933 fails by viewing the world in the narrowest of terms. Yes, some property owners have been hurt by regulations and we need to address their concerns. But I-933 only looks at one side of the property owner's balance sheet and ignores how a wide range of community and land-use protections help everyone's property values, our overall well-being and the welfare of future generations.

We need to take a broad view of how our county is going to grow in the coming years, a view that looks out for the benefit of the whole community, which is why this farm kid is going to vote against I-933. I hope you, too, will vote no.

The Rev. Paul Benz of Everett is the director of the Lutheran Public Policy Office of Washington State and policy director for the Washington Association of Churches.