The voluntary preservation of agricultural lands is a noble goal.
Forcing landowners into government-run conservation efforts against
their will, however, is something else entirely. And a desire to
conserve pastoral farmland doesn’t excuse government from following the
laws and constitutions of California and the United States. For several
years, PLF has been closely watching Marin County’s attempts to adopt
amendments to their
Local Coastal Program.
PLF attorneys have submitted several comment letters highlighting
provisions of the proposed amendments and the Implementing Program that
both substantially interfere with the property rights of Marin County
landowners and raise significant constitutional concerns. Last Friday,
PLF submitted
this letter
to the Marin County Planning Commission, and I appeared before the
Commission Monday to remind them that property rights can’t be taken at
will by government bureaucrats. Current zoning in Marin County allows for the development of
additional residential units beyond the primary dwelling, up to one
house per 60 acres. The new Implementing Program no longer permits any
residential use and restricts development to three “agricultural
dwellings” per farm tract. It further limits agricultural dwellings—just
27 will be allowed in the entire county. A farm tract is defined as
“all contiguous legal lots under common ownership.” Together, these
provisions substantially downzone larger farms and ranches within the
agricultural zone. As the
California Court of Appeal
has recognized, large reductions in development rights through
downzoning can constitute a compensable taking. The merger of legally
distinct lots into “farm tracts” also injects Marin County directly into
the “parcel as a whole” debate that is currently docketed before the
United States Supreme Court in PLF’s case
Murr v. Wisconsin. A victory in
Murr could render the farm tract provisions of Marin County’s Implementing Program unconstitutional before they even take effect...
more
No comments:
Post a Comment