Say Anything Blog

How would you like it if you were told by your local government that you could only develop up to 10% of any piece of property you own? Sounds kind of ridiculous right? Well they're considering doing just that in King County, Washington (via The Agitator).

KING COUNTY, Wash. -- Residents of King County, Wash., will only be able to build on 10 percent of their land, according to a new law being considered by the county government, which, if enacted, will be the most restrictive land use law in the nation.

Known as the 65-10 Rule (search), it calls for landowners to set aside 65 percent of their property and keep it in its natural, vegetative state. According to the rule, nothing can be built on this land, and if a tree is cut down, for example, it must be replanted. Building anything is out of the question.

Most of the residents who will be directly affected by the regulations -- those who own property in the rural areas of the country -- are fuming. They see the new regulations as a land grab and a violation of their property rights.

"My take is it's stealing -- out and out stealing," said county resident Marshall Brenden. "They're taking 65 percent of your land that you fought for years to pay for, paid mortgages on and now you can't use it."

If my county passed a law like this I'd immediately stop mowing my lawn so that it could return to its "natural, vegetative state" and see how long it takes before I get a visit from county officials.

Seriously though, since when was it ok for any level of government in this country to tell us what we could do with our private property? It would seem as though private property is exactly that: private. Yet for a long time property owners have been limited in numerous ways from the number of buildings they could have on a particular piece of property to what they can even use the property for.

Its a joke. I don't know if there are any farmers in King County, Washington, but what if they are? How are they supposed to effectively farm a piece of land when they can't disturb the vegetation on 90% of it?

And what about businesses? What if a corporation wanted to put a call center or something in a small community, something that would bring in a lot of jobs and help the economy there. Is the county expecting them to buy 90% more land then they need so that they can put in the proper size complex?

This has got to be one of the worst ideas I've heard in a while.