|        by Nick   Dranias         The City of Scottsdale wants to   pass a new zoning law that prohibits   check-cashing stores from being located near each other or near   "sensitive uses." But this is not just a minor zoning   issue. It is most fundamentally a deprivation of property rights-and an   illustration of why the fight for property rights in Arizona did not end with the passage of   Proposition 207 in 2006.     Proposition   207 requires governments to compensate property owners if a   regulation reduces the value of their property. But very little legal   protection exists against regulations that nibble away at the number of legal   ways owners can use their property, without an immediate or quantifiable   impact on land value. Seemingly innocuous land use restrictions are free to   multiply, eventually having a significant cumulative impact on land values.       Property rights in Arizona   still run the risk of "death by a thousand cuts."  The   bleeding can only be stopped by demanding rigor in the creation of property   regulations. Advocates of regulation at every level of government should be   required to marshal evidence demonstrating that public health, safety, or   welfare will be protected by any new land use regulation they propose. This   is even more important when they target legal, but politically disfavored,   businesses.        Requiring this kind of scrutiny before a law is passed is often referred to   as a "sunrise review" provision. No restriction or deprivation of   peaceful property uses should be enforceable absent a sunrise review.     |   
No comments:
Post a Comment