 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
Home Resource Center Press Releases Home Press Release |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
|
Press ReleaseJune 7, 2006 Contact: Napa Residents Vote to Uphold Land Protections Extreme Private Property Initiative Measure A Resoundingly Rejected By Napa County Voters Voters in Napa County rejected an extreme attempt by a small group of private property advocates to freeze land use controls and require the County to pay property owners for any changes in land use laws."Napa voters are smart," said Nicole Arnold, Solano-Napa Field Representative for Greenbelt Alliance, the Bay Area land conservation and urban planning non-profit organization. "They saw through this irresponsible attempt to dismantle community protections, and voted it down." Under Measure A, if a landowner claimed that a decision made by County supervisors decreased his or her property value, the County would have had three options: either 1) pay the claim, 2) waive the law just for that landowner, or 3) get sued. Because no revenue was set aside for paying for administering the law or paying the claims, the estimated millions in annual costs would have come from taxpayer dollars that currently fund police, fire, and social services. Measure A in Napa County was modeled on Oregon's Measure 37, which passed in 2004 and has so far racked up over $3 billion in claims by landowners. The effect of Measure 37 has been to throw the entire state into chaos and freeze local governments' ability to enact new laws, as they cannot pay for the claims that would be filed. Opponents of Measure A said it would do the same, tying the hands of Napa County to respond to changing circumstances. "Over the years, Napa County residents and their elected leaders have made good decisions about growth, making Napa nationally famous for its productive vineyards and high quality of life," said Arnold. "Measure A would have destroyed the ability to do that thoughtful planning." California voters will decide on a similar ballot measure this November, the Anderson initiative. "These extreme measures are a bad idea for California," said Tom Steinbach, Greenbelt Alliance's Executive Director. "California residents care deeply about the spectacular landscapes that define our state. Napa's Measure A and the Anderson initiative are attempts by wealthy developers and landowners to gut the land protections local residents have worked hard to achieve." ### For 50 years, Greenbelt Alliance has been the San Francisco Bay Area's advocate for open spaces and vibrant places, with offices in San Francisco, San Jose, Walnut Creek, Fairfield, and Santa Rosa. www.greenbelt.org
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
