Bill Clears the Way for Builders

According to a recently unearthed, unexpurgated “Ye Olde GOP Handbook,” Republicans are supposed to favor reducing bloated bureaucracy via delegating all but constitutionally guaranteed powers to the states.

So what is Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-Simi Valley) doing sponsoring a bill permitting peeved property owners to proceed directly to federal court prior to exhausting all state and local remedies?

Flashing his private sector, planning process and elected official credentials to evidence belief in local autonomy and states rights, Gallegly bemoans the seemingly “endless series of hoops that have only one objective: to deny the individual use of his private property.”

He introduced the Private Property Rights and Implementation Act on May 6 without the usual press office fanfare. Fast forward five months: HR 1534 has currently garnered 236 co-sponsors, 40 of whom are registered Democrats. Supporting legislation redressing deprivation of “rights and privileges secured by the United States Constitution” apparently appeared a no-brainer.

Rest assured, with or without the passage of Gallegly’s bill, the 5th Amendment prohibits “takings,” i.e., regional regulatory agencies’ impelling property owners to suffer devaluation or loss of potential revenue without just compensation. If so, Gallegly, why sprint to the summit so soon?

The Supreme Court has established a “ripeness” standard, which keeps federal noses from prematurely intruding into what amounts to state and local business. HR 1534, however, “simplifies and expedites access to the Federal courts for injured parties” (read: disgruntled developers) “who have been deprived by final actions of . . . other government officials” (read: city councils/boards of supervisors).

The real impetus for this legislation lingers between lines of legalese.

The status quo, in essence, empowers localities with limited yet essential leverage in determining land use. Deep-pocketed developers “voluntarily” pony up for parks, pools and/or payments (a.k.a. “impact fees”) in order to gain permission for their projects. Municipalities, still hampered by Proposition 13 strictures, clutch any edge they can get.

HR 1534 forfeits process for progress. While Gallegly seems to be championing the little guy grabbing the American dream, it’s the development growth machine that will ultimately profit from this legislation. Up the ante to the federal level after only one appeal and guess who is going to be able to afford the barristers who bag the big bucks: municipalities (financed by your tax dollars) or big land owners?

Furthermore, anything that deters no-growth and pro-growth squabblers from bee-lining to court should be sustained if not sanctified. This bill preempts less litigious approaches to property conflict resolution. Fellow Ventura County Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Sherman Oaks) says, “There is often a disconnect between environmentalists and land developers. This legislation recognizes that more work needs to be done so that the objectives of one also become the goals of the other.”

Former Sen. Bob Dole used to drag a slightly tattered copy of the 10th Amendment out of his wallet and read it aloud during the ’96 presidential campaign. Perhaps, in light of this bill, he might wish to provide a photocopy to Gallegly.