By Curmudgeon
It is with great sorrow that I bring to your attention this article describing yet another "Developers Dream Bill" that slid through the recently ended legislative session, and that Gov. Huntsman has signed into law. It is a law that was introduced by a Democrat, Sen. Brent Goodfellow, D-West Valley City. It pains me to point out one of the pitifully few Ds in the legislature as a compliant tool of the Developers and Real Estate lobby, but fair's fair.
Here is how the SL Trib headlined the story: "Gov signs law that curbs citizens' power to challenge developers." It is a very accurate headline.
From Cathy McKitrick's story:
A proposal limiting the public's ability to challenge city land-use decisions passed through this year's legislative session with hardly a ripple.Mr. Rees comments above make laughable Mr. Goodfellow's sniveling claim that his bill changed nothing, but merely clarified existing language in the law.
But things might not be quiet for long. Some fear the two-page SB53 - crafted to satisfy developers, Realtors and the Utah League of Cities and Towns - will tie the hands of residents who oppose controversial developments.
The bill's sponsor, Sen. Brent Goodfellow, D-West Valley City, said SB53 was intended to clarify existing law. "You can petition against the ordinance but not against the process - that's what this bill says," Goodfellow said during Senate floor action last month. Salt Lake City land-use attorney says the bill is more than just a clarification - and the public has lost its voice in the process. "It introduces land-use language that was not included anywhere before," said Jeff Owens, a land-use attorney with the Salt Lake City-based firm of Strong and Hanni. "With SB53, voters cannot initiate any referendum to change a land-use ordinance," Owens said. "So zoning laws cannot be taken to the public at this point and time...."
Robert Rees, the legislative research attorney who helped draft SB53, confirmed that a portion of SB53 is fresh. "It is brand-new language in the code," Rees said. "The idea behind it was to codify case law that suggests that land-use initiatives are already somewhat restricted."
The truly disturbing part of all this is that it continues the trend, so painfully apparent in Utah law of late, of diminishing bit by bit the public's role in the governance of their own towns and communities, and in particular, the elimination of the referendum as a way for the public to correct excesses and over-reaching by locally elected officials, just as the public did in the statewide referendum which eliminated school vouchers. This new law gets around that by simply placing whole categories of decisions by local governments involving zoning and development beyond the reach of referendum at all.
Sickening in its own right; doubly so when the perps are aided and abetted by a Utah Democrat. Mr. Goodfellow should be ashamed of himself.
