Spring, 1996
Welcome

The Board of Directors and the Advisory Board are happy have joined us in our effort to protect property owners. This newsletter will attempt to keep you informed on what is happening on the federal, state, and local levels, in regards to legislation affecting property owners. We ask for your input on matters concerning these issues. We want your short stories, news clippings, and other pertinent information to share with our members. Remember, the League is only as strong as its membership.

Who Are We?
By: Matth. Toebben

One year ago, I attended a meeting in Boone County in which a task force appointed by Governor Jones discussed with farmers and property owners their vision of what the future of our land would be. After listening to them and learning that none of these members were farmers and property owners (legislation without representation?) it became clear to me that farmers and property owners needed to organize and get involved in decisions affecting our future. After talking with others I had met at this meeting, the League of Kentucky Property Owners was organized to focus on our mutual problems with legislation and government agencies.

As property owners and farmers, we care about our land; we live on it, we make our livelihoods from it, and we enjoy our environment, perhaps more than others. Without government legislation we have adopted responsible methods of farming, tree harvest, and development.

But just as we believe property owners have the responsibility to practice good stewardship, we believe that government has a responsibility to respect property owners' rights; we pay for our land, we pay taxes, we pay for the upkeep and the use of it. We are guaranteed these rights to our property through the United States our right to use our land without just compensation.

We believe that government and property owners can work together. We believe that we can, through education and cooperation, guarantee a bright future for generations to come. The League of Kentucky Property Owners strives to make this a reality.

Local News

Many Boone County farmers helped to get a Right to Farm Ordinance (1010.16) passed when they filled the courtroom on February 27 to hear the Fiscal Court vote on it. League member Bob Schwenke worked closely with Farm Bureau to guarantee farmers fair treatment in nuisance suits being brought against them by suburbanites and various government agencies. A grievance board, made up of the Boone County Extension designee of the Boone County Judge Executive, will hear all cases and make a recommendation.

Is a Right to Farm Bill necessary in Boone County?
Many local farmers think so. One such farmer is Butch Arlinghaus who was charged with "possession of waste" because of an old farm junk hole located in the middle of his 150-acre farm. In court, the judge declared "possession of waste" to be unconstitutional and when the Disaster Emergency Service could not prove collection, he won the case. If there had been a grievance committee, this problem could have been settled without incurring the attorneys' fees.

Good News for Farm and Forestry Owners

House Bill 335 originated by Woodland Owners Association of Kentucky passed March 13 with a vote of 38-0 in the Senate and a vote of 97-2 in the House; Gov. Patton signed it into law. This Bill amends KRS 413.072 to protect farm and forest land by limiting nuisance suits and local ordinances against them. Congratulations, farmers and forestry owners!

Supreme Court Decision

Last month, March 7, the Supreme Court set the stage for unprecedented taking by ruling, 5-4, that the seizure for property partly owned by innocent people does not violate the owner's due process rights or constitute an unlawful taking. The Court claims this ruling will strengthen prosecutor's attempts to use forfeiture laws to fight crime. The case concerned a lawsuit filed by a Michigan woman over the 1988 seizure of her car, jointly owned by her husband. The husband had pleaded guilty to gross indecency after police caught him with a prostitute in the couple's 1977 Pontiac.

Remember when the confusion first began? We were told such forfeitures would only be made by guilty drug traffickers. Later, the legislation was expanded to include possessions of drugs. Then we were told the "War on Drugs" would be greatly facilitated by allowing these forfeitures to take long before guilt is established in court. There have been numerous instances where entire families have lost homes, cars, and other personal possessions due to some sort of drug abuse by a family member or friend. Now it is legal for Government to confiscate and property jointly owned by someone who has committed any crime. Undoubtedly, we shall now see a much-expanded variety of definitions as to what constitutes a "crime."

Did you know

…those presently in Kentucky 2 ½ trees are replenished for every 1 that is used?
…a tree farmer must pay taxes on his property for 50-70 y ears before any tree can be harvested?

"Nine-Tenths of Wisdom Consists of Being Wise in Time."
Theodore Roosevelt

Editorial

Twin 'takings bills' raise flags for environmentalist was the title to an article in the Kentucky Post on January 15, 1996, which caught the League's interest. "Recently, (Jim) Lacy cut 12 trees on his farm which is on either side of the Red River in Wolf County. The state fined Lacy $12,000, saying he ignored the Wild Rivers Act. Lacy, who is appealing, says the state, in the name of protecting an unspoiled river for the public's benefit, took his right to do what he wants on land he owns. If the public is going to benefit from his land, he says, the public, through government, should pay. "Why should I have to vacation who wanted to canoe the Red River and have bug trees to look at?"

Currently, government feels they have no responsibility to compensate the loss of Lacy's property rights. If the Wild River Act bought Jim Lacy's property or purchased from him a deed restriction, then Lacy (and The League) would have no complaint. The article goes on, "It has long been accepted that the government has the right to take property for public needs such as prisons or highways, but the Constitution requires that the property owner be paid. Regulatory takings are murkier." And it is this murky water The League seeks to clarify.

Biodiversity

The Biodiversity Treaty set off a tidal wave of planning designed to analyze and control every square inch of American real estate…{the treaty} triggered a plan to create a new agency that would map and computerize biodiversity data throughout the country…this new body would compile a national biological inventory to catalogue all life forms and identify sensitive areas…As Congressman Gerry Studds put it, the survey would have an "awesome mission-catalog everything that walks, crawls, swims, or flies around this country." It would, as Secretary Babbitt's science advisor Tom Lovejoy reportedly concurred, "map the whole nation for all biology and determine development for the whole country and regulate it all because that is our obligation under the Endangered Species Act."
-Alton Chase
Environmental author/
Syndicated columnist

Legislative Update
Defeat on H.B. 255

House Bill 225, written and sponsored by Farm Bureau, would require fair compensation to an owner when the rights to is their property was restricted. It was sponsored and co-sponsored by 55 representatives, a majority of the House membership, a sure passage. But the Revenue and Appropriations Committee succeeded in holding it is committee and it never reached the House floor for a vote. The only way a bill can be forced to a vote is to get a discharge petition filed and signed by 25 legislators. If the bill was co-sponsored by 55 representatives, there should have been no problem. At this point Farm Bureau seemed to lose interest. The League went to work trying to get a representative to file the Discharge Petition. But no one would fight the system, not Mark Farrow, the sponsor, nor any of our representatives. It died in committee.

National Legislative Alert

Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole has indicated he will bring up S. 605, The Omnibus Property Rights Act, soon after the Senate returns from their April recess. S.605, which was reported out of the Senate Judiciary Committee earlier this year, contains a provision underscoring just compensation for any diminution of fair market value greater than 33%. Private Property Rights legislation has been before the Congress for over one year, since the House passed H.R. 925, March 3, 1995. Call your Representatives now!

Green Space Committee
Friend or Foe?

The Northern Kentucky City and County Administrators Association (NKCCAA) has announced that the issue of green space must be studied and must be given high priority. The issue, they say, must be addressed now, preferably with a regional approach, so costs can be minimized and human benefits maximized.

What is Green Space?

The NKCCAA's "position document" defines green space as: "any land area that directly enhances both quality of human life and environmental quality." They list the following sites as "worthy of preservation."

City parks that traditionally have included both urban forests and recreational facilities.

Golf courses that traditionally have included some undeveloped "natural" vegetation either as a component of the course or surrounding the course.

Nature preserves that traditionally have included mostly undeveloped land with a few hiking trails…

Undeveloped hillside-lands that have traditionally been used for logging…

Farms that have traditionally been used for commodity production, but which are now fallow. This would include cropland as well as pasture.

Estates that have traditionally been the principal residence of a person or persons. These sites are typically surrounded by gardens or landscaped areas.

According to their position statement, "NKCCAA proposes to examine and develop novel approaches that could be used by cities, counties, or associations of such entities to acquire, enhance or preserve green space. The following action strategies will be pursued:

1. Use available geographic data to map and quantify changes in green space that have occurred in Northern Kentucky during the last 10 years.
2. From historical geographic data, predict that amount of green space that will exist in the year 2000 if no action is taken and assuming that the current trend or green space removal remains unchanged.
3. Develop a ranking system that could be used to prioritize or rate various parcels of land relative to value as green space.
4. Identify lands or sites of high quality that could be preserved or acquired for public benefit.
5. Work with developers, corporations, and other interested parties to explore novel methods of preserving or restoring green space to land that has been developed or land that will be developed.
6. Contact various nature preservation agencies (i.e., The Nature Conservancy) and examine novel approaches for acquiring conservation easements or green space easements." (Emphasis added)
The phrase used by NKCCAA "examine and develop novel approaches" is not expanded on by the committee and this worries property owners. In the past these novel ideas turned out to be zoning laws and legislation and the property owner has been forced to bear the burden.

Should such terminology give property owners cause for alarm? Our League feels there is need for caution and concern. While the preservation of public green space is important to everyone in Northern Kentucky, the rights of private property owners must not be infringed.