2005-05-16 Special Called Regular Meeting of La Porte City Council

Browse Search

. MAY-17-05 TUE 11:08 AM TEX~MUNICIPAL LEAGUE FAX NO, 5122317490 p, 04 Texas Municipal League Legislalive April 22, 2005 Number 16 . ~ SOME REPORTS MISS THE MARK ON NEGATIVE LAND USE BILL Uast week's LegiSlaliv: Update reported on H.B. 2833 by R. Cook, a devastating land use bill that was voted out of lhe House Land and Resource Management Committee Oil April 7. H.B 2833 would make cities subject to the Texas Private Real Property Preservation Act (Act), drastically altering the way in which cities exercise their authority to regulate land use. The bill would arguably require a "takings impact assessment" for almost every action a city takes. That requirement is unduly burdensome and runs counter to effective public policy. The bilJ excepts certain types of zoning, but most city regulations that might reduce the value of property by more than twenty-five percent would require a takings impact assessment and require a city to compensate an owner for the reduction in value. Such requirements would severely hamper the ability of cities to regulate the use of land for the common good. Since last week, various organizations have attempted to frame the bill as a rural properly rights issue. They claim that cities and other governmental entities are destroying their rural way of life. In fact, several landowners spoke at the committee hearing on the bill about wanting to preserve their "besutifulland in the Texas hill country." The truth is that nothing in current law prohibits them from doing so. By definition, a city does not regulate "rural" land. One commenter in the San Antonio Express-News wrote: "1! such regulations are for the betterment of the general public, then the landowner who pays a dear price in loss of value should. under both state and federal constitutions, be compensated fairly. " That blanket statement is not supported by the regulatory takings jurisprudence of either the Texas or United Stat.es Supreme Court. The courts apply a much more reasonable definition of a "taking" to cities. The same comrnenter also stated that Texans have the right of "owning and enjoying private property." City officials undoubtedly agree with that statement. Howover, no reasonable person believes that any Texan has the right to develop property in a way that is detrimental to fellow city residents. . Note: When you receive this TML Legislalive Update, please make copics of it and distribute them 10 members (l[lhe govel'lling body and to depart. ment heads as appropriate. TML sends only one copy to each city, and we rely on those who receive it to dislribulc it. Thanks for your help.