Many factors complicate fixing the Hirst Decision, ideology chief among the complicating factors!
Recently, CAPR’s Skagit chapter invited Elaine Willman, nationally renowned author and public speaker, to hold a workshop on water and property rights, specifically in the context of conflicts with tribal governments. Ms Willman, who has written two popular books on that subject, is an expert on federal government and tribal decisions and how they impact land use inside and outside Indian reservations. She also is vocal about threats to constitutional rights for both tribal members and other American citizens.
House Democrat Leadership has produced an alternative Hirst Fix Bill, HB 2239, http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2017-18/Pdf/Bills/House%20Bills/2239.pdf This bill could only be considered a compromise by those not able and willing to do so.
Representative Jim Walsh of Aberdeen provides an insightful editorial in The Daily News. He wants the legislature to seize the opportunity to make sense of Hirst by passing SSB 5239! Thank you Representative Walsh for your clear look at the facts and your article!
Clear and honest article in Washington Wire by Senator Sheldon. Basically what he is asking is will urban based democrats, heedless of the destruction wrought by their ideology throw rural democrats under the bus and themselves as well as the urban democrat fidelity to the environmental cartel finally costs too much for their urban constituents? The takings and cost of Hirst has been a step too far; it is time for democrats to save themselves, the property rights of rural citizens, and the pocketbooks of city citizens with a yes vote on a clean (no amendments) SSB 5239.
SSB 5239 passed the Senate and now must also pass the House of Representatives and the Governor's desk to become law.
Dear CAPR members, friends,supporters!
Washington Water War The 8th Day of the Special Session will begin on Monday May 1. This will leave 22 days of the special session to fight for water rights for every citizen in the state. Senator Jim Honeyford ([email protected]) rightly stated no budget will pass until after a Hirst fix bill has passed! The prior session ended with no bill passing but the legislature is still looking at SSB 5239 to provide a solution for the thousands of families who have had their water rights taken. Senator Honeyford's open and strong support of families damaged by the Hirst Decision is appreciated! The damaging amendments from Democrats Stanford and Springer must not again prevent the passage of a bill to fix the Hirst Decision.
By Glen Morgan and Cindy Alia
On October 6, 2016, Futurewise, with the assistance of six Washington State Supreme Court Justices, managed to win the lawsuit lottery. The Supreme Court ruled in Hirst v. W. Washington Growth Management Hearings Board (decision linked here) on a 6-3 vote in favor of Futurewise and against the people. This ruling invented new land use rules approved by no legislature or elected official. This litigious and aggressive environmental NGO funded by wealthy Seattle donors was able to end the historic private well exemption.
5239 is most likely going to be heard in the house before the March 29 deadline to hear bills in the opposite house. Those who understand the devastating loss of property and water rights, loss of the use of their land, and extreme devaluation, often up to 90% of their value, for thousands of families of many counties are working to improve this bill. Those who do not understand this kind of loss are likewise involved. The Hirst decision has also impacted counties and the state in terms of loss of productivity and commerce in their communities along with a drop in tax revenue.
House bill 1692 would allow for marijuana grow operations the status of agricultural activities, this would include the growing and production including products of grow operations the legal protections of any other farm production. The argument for this status is framed as a property right. The problem with that argument is that agricultural status recognizes special needs of the property rights of agricultural activities in terms of methods and means of agriculture and not simply on the basis an agricultural product is something that is grown. Agricultural business is protected from the use of nuisance law if the operation is consistent with good practices and was established prior to surrounding non-agricultural uses unless the activity constitutes a substantial adverse effect on public health and safety. Tradit