From the President...

"...bind men down from mischief with the chains of the Constitution."
Thomas Jefferson

Elsewhere you will hear the history of our activities during the just ended 2000 legislative session. Some "warm-ups" and some extreme success. I call the non-passage of our H.B. 446/S.B. 239, warmups, in that we will not give up hope that these constitutional protections will one day become law. Support this session was beyond any we had experienced on two other tries. It is reasonable to expect passage in 2002.

Late in the session it became quite apparent that Governor Patton was terrified that our legislation would temper growth of his favorite bureaucracies, and he made enough tradeoffs to prevent its passage. Many of our members devoted considerable time and personal costs to the success we achieved. We especially should acknowledge Matth. Toebben, Jay Weber and Bernie Kunkel for their intensity in pursuing the bill's passage.

Our League Members' opposition to Boone County's Goals 2000 led to the adoption by the county or wording that is fair and understandable, preserving the property rights of all Boone Countians. We extend our gratitude to Butch Arlinghaus, Bernie Kunkel and Rick Brueggemann for their considerable insight in guiding our objectives through the Boone County Fiscal Court.

I ask two things of our members during the remainder of the year:

1: Continue your vigilance in protecting ALL our
Constitutional rights.

2: Ask one friend if they will join you in this endeavor-
then hand them a membership form.

Sincerely,
william h. adkisson,
President, League of Kentucky Property Owners

H.B. 446/S.B. 239 Update Property Rights Protection Act

The 'Property Rights Protection Act' was, by far, one of Kentucky's finest pieces of legislation being considered by the General Assembly this session.

Endorsed by The League of Kentucky Property Owners, Kentucky Farm Bureau, Take Back Kentucky, Kentucky Cattlemen's Association, Kentucky Homebuilders' Association, Kentucky Taxpayers' United and dozens of other local, state and national organizations, the 'Property Rights Protection Act' represents the combined concerns of the approximate 500,000 Kentucky citizens who make up the membership of these varied organizations. An interesting combination of bedfellows, these organizations have united behind this single issue due to its far-reaching effects on individual property owners, farmers, home-buyers and taxpayers. It is the civil rights issue of the new millennium!

Contrary to the claims of certain state agencies and advocacy groups, the 'Property Rights Protection Act' has nothing to do with preventing the due course of law, but has everything to do with preserving civil and constitutional property rights as granted in the Bill of Rights under the 5th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. It would be dangerous to assume that this bill is anything but a quality management tool for state agencies.

By reaffirming current civil and judicial authority, the 'Property Rights Protection Act' would require state agencies to evaluate the constitutional impacts of proposed regulatory actions pertaining to private property - a quality management practice state agencies should already be using.

The lack of state agencies currently employing this practice has cost taxpayers billions, yes billions of dollars in unnecessary legal battles and settlements with private property owners due to over-zealous regulatory actions. More importantly, however, it has left individual landowners and farmers with little place to turn for help.

Here are just a few examples of actual state agency regulatory actions affecting property owners:

1. Fines of $25,000 per day for merely maintaining creeks on private property. Have you ever cleared out debris in your creek?

2. Fines of $1,000 per tree for land owners who cut down certain trees on their own property. Have you ever considered cutting down a tree on your property?

3. Forbidding use of a farmer's land because beavers had dammed up the creek. As a result of flooding caused from the beaver dam, the state agency declared the farmer's flooded property a wetland and forbad any removal of the dam or further use of the property. The farmer still must pay taxes on the unusable property, however. Do you have a creek or pond on your land that may be declared a state or federally protected wetland?

4. While 1/4 of Jefferson County, Kentucky is in a floodplain or floodway, current law requires property owners to "elevate or vacate" after flood repair costs have reached 50% of the property's value over its lifetime. Do you know how much of Kentucky is in a floodplain or floodway?

In thousands of cases just like these the outcome for property owners has been devastating. While in some circumstances the property owner has had the resources to take such an unjust action to court, in many more instances the individual private property owner or farmer were forced from living on - or deriving an income from - their own land simply because they didn't have the resources to challenge over-zealous government agencies.

While some state agencies contend the legislation would put a roadblock in front of proposed regulatory actions, State Representative Perry Clark (Dem.) of Louisville, the bill's sponsor in the House, says that the legislation "wouldn't go as far as preventing regulatory actions, but that it would be a major speed-bump."

Kentucky Taxpayers' United has called the proposed 'Property Rights Protection Act' a "long-awaited tax relief measure that could save taxpayers millions of dollars in unnecessary legal fees and lost revenues by establishing an oversight mechanism designed to encourage state regulatory agencies to consider the legality of their actions."

The League of Kentucky Property Owners contends that the bill "would serve as a valuable tool for private property owners, who already have the right to take state agencies to court, when engaged in a legal battle with the inexhaustible taxpayer-funded resources of state agencies."

Although the 'Property Rights Protection Act' passed through House Judiciary Committee by a vote of 10-0 on Friday, March 10, 2000, it did so only with a great deal of hard work and tactical manuevering. The bill was never supposed to make it through this "stacked" committee and when Governor Patton discovered that our hard work paid off, he immediately saw to it that the 'Property Rights Protection Act' never reached the House floor for a vote by recommiting House Bill 446 to another committee.

A companion bill in the Senate, filed by Senator Ernie Harris (Rep.) of Crestwood, easily sailed through Senate Committee and was approved by the full Senate on Wednesday, March 15, 2000 by a vote of 29-8. House Speaker Jody Richards, in conjunction with Governor Patton, however, insured the demise of this legislation as well when it was assigned to another "stacked" House Committee. As a result of the Governor's actions, property rights in Kentucky remain unprotected!

On a brighter note, however, the League's efforts in promoting the 'Private Property Implementation Act' (H.R.2372) at the national level, which aids landowners by offering them a more rapid appeal during the court process, has passed the House and awaits action in the Senate. Immediate contact should be made to Senators Jim Bunning and Mitch McConnell to support this legislation.

Submitted by:
Brett Gaspard

Boone County Comprehensive Plan Update

During the past few years, members of the League have involved themselves in numerous issues ranging from planning and zoning to advocating property rights bills in Congress. This year, the Board of Directors has focused its attention on protecting property rights by participating in the '2000 Update' of the 'Boone County Comprehensive Plan Goals & Objectives' as well as having a 'property rights' bill filed in the Kentucky Legislature. These two issues have been an uphill battle for the League as our efforts have been met with strong opposition. But through perseverance, we maintain hope that our mission to defend constitutional property rights shall be vindicated through undeniable fact and reason.

At the December Boone County Planning & Zoning Public Hearing several property rights supporters, many of whom were non-League members, appeared before Commission members to advocate the importance of property rights in a free society and urged them to eliminate subversive text that would have left the flood gates wide open for socialist control of private property and the total annihilation of traditional farming practices.

With a shoulder-to-shoulder crowd spilling out of the courtroom doors, more than 250 people packed the public hearing to express their concern regarding a number of issues affecting Boone Countians. And unlike the October public hearing - where either misinformed or selfish 'anti-sprawl' supporters outnumbered property rights advocates by more than 2 to 1 - this time it was constitutional property rights advocates who were in the majority by at least the same margin.

The closure of the December public hearing appeared to result in back-to-back victories for property rights advocates (although outnumbered, the League prevailed in October by convincing Planning & Zoning Commissioners to strike text that would have called for an 'urban services boundary'), but the victory was only marginal. After the votes were tallied by the Boone County Planning & Zoning Commission in January, the final draft of the '2000 Goals & Objectives' contained only about half of the League's suggested revisions.

As a result, the League took steps to help insure that the quality of life in Boone County was not disrupted by fascist-type property controls as dictated by unelected bureaucrats. The League accomplished this by urging the Boone County Fiscal Court to adopt a more constitutional version of the 'Comprehensive Plan Goals & Objectives.' After much deliberations with Fiscal Court members, the League achieved its initiatives on March 27, when Commissioners Rob Arnold and Cathy Flaig, along with Judge Gary Moore, voted to approve the League's recommended changes to the '2000 Update' of the 'Boone County Comprehensive Plan Goals & Objectives.' Commissioner Robert Hay voted AGAINST property rights!

Commissioner Rob Arnold Resigns

Effective March 31, 2000, Rob Arnold resigned as Boone County Commissioner. The decision was made after much consideration and prayer. Rob's job has taken him out of town to Fredericksburg, Virginia. He has been commuting since December, attempting to fulfill his commitment to both his full time job and to the voters of Boone County.

Rob stated in his resignation speech, "I have attempted to put an emphasis on protecting one of the basic rights families enjoy. That is, owning our own property. Government has no place dictating what a person should do with their property. We live in the greatest land in the world. We enjoy an element many countries do not…freedom. Government should not interfere with that freedom. People and families should make decisions without fear and that includes being allowed to hold onto what they have labored for and earned. I encourage this court to honor that freedom and do not meddle with someone else's property." Rob added, " Boone County is very fortunate to have Fiscal Court members that perform to the level that our citizens demand and deserve. I pray that God continues to bless this staff, its elected officials and citizens of our great county. We are living in a very special time and very special place."

The League would like to thank Commissioner Arnold for his service to Boone County and wish him the best in his future endeavors.