August 2003

The Statehouse

By James Lawlor

Massachusetts: Zoning Law Reform. The legislature's Joint Committee on Natural Resources and Agriculture held a hearing on the Land Use Reform Act July 24. Jeff Lacy, AICP, a member of the Zoning Reform Working Group, the organization that spearheaded the reform proposal, reported the hearing was heavily attended. About 75 percent of those testifying favored the legislation. Ten to 15 percent offered qualified support, and 10 percent were against the proposal.

Some of the opposition, Lacy says, appeared to stem from lack of knowledge about the proposed legislation, which had undergone some last-minute revision before the hearing. Disability advocates, for example, appeared not to be aware that the revised legislation contains a provision allowing community residential programs. Another testifier seemed not to be aware that the reform act contains provisions addressing affordable housing. Other major revisions include a rewrite of the provisions covering use of land or structures for religious and educational purposes and the substitution of a provision for alternate dispute settlement procedures for one providing for negotiated special permits.

The zoning law reform legislation has been filed in two forms: as part of other planning law reform legislation and as stand-alone bills. The July 24 hearing addressed the legislation as an integrated part of other bills. The Joint Committee on Local Affairs will have a hearing on the stand-alone bills this fall.

For more background on this legislation, see the January 2003 Statehouse report. Contact Jeff Lacy, jeff.lacy@state.ma.us, or Don Keeran, dkeeran@apcc.org.

Wisconsin: Whither Smart Growth? In mid-July, a group of mostly rural legislators introduced a bill to repeal a law that requires all communities in the state to develop comprehensive plans by 2010. They complain that small towns cannot afford the cost of drafting plans and that the planning requirement is a type of top-down land-use control by the state and counties.

State Rep. Carol Owens points to the 1,400-population town of Nekemi, where she lives, as an example of the cost problem. The town spent between $10,000 and $20,000 in consultant fees to develop a comprehensive plan, she said. Rep. Cheryl Albers, chair of the Assembly's Committee on Property Rights and Land Management, retorted that some of the people backing the bill think that if comprehensive planning can be scuttled, zoning will follow, "and it just ain't so." So far, Albers has blocked the bill from consideration by her committee.

Opponents of the comprehensive planning requirement, enacted as part of the 1999 state budget, have complained about it from the beginning. Typical was the remark of a town supervisor from Cross Plains in Dane County, complaining that the planning requirement was "basically a blueprint for socialism." The supervisor, Bob Bowman, said government should not be interfering with the free-market economy by directing where houses, businesses, or industry should be built.

Backers of the planning requirement, including the Wisconsin Realtors Association, say they would accept exceptions for some rural communities that are not in fast-growing areas and have cost problems. So far, only 94 of Wisconsin's 1,600 local governments have completed land use plans, but about 600 are working on plans according to the state's Office of Land Information Services.

Contact Michael Christopher, 608-255-8891.

Oregon: Land-Use Reform? A bill, H.B. 2912, introduced in the Oregon house at the request of the Oregon Building Industry Association, would establish an 11-member commission on land use reform. The stated purpose of the commission is to study the strengths and weaknesses of the Oregon land use system and recommend changes. Chapter President Mitch Rohse, AICP, noted the task of the commission was remarkably similar to that of a blue ribbon committee set up by the chapter in 2000 to examine the state of land use planning in Oregon. The chapter released the committee's report in February 2002, and distributed copies to the governor, the Land Conservation and Development Commission, other interest groups and the media.

If the commission is established, it could provide a forum for citizens to reach a consensus on why and how the state should plan for the future, Rohse commented. Much will depend on how the task force is staffed and how much money is allocated to complete its work, he said. Currently, the bill has received a positive recommendation from the house Environment and Land Use Committee and is now before the Committee on Rules and Public Affairs.

The legislature is also considering a bill, H.B. 2909, that would reduce the number of cities required to periodically review their comprehensive plan as well as the number of statewide planning goals that must be reviewed. The bill passed the house but has apparently stalled in the senate.

Contact Mitch Rohse, 503-559-6558.

Florida: Growth Management Changes. The chapter's executive committee has asked immediate past president Marie York, AICP, to head a study group charged with developing creative reforms and improvements to the state's growth management system. The chapter is expecting a number of reform proposals in the next legislative session, and wants to position itself as having a positive program to offer. The study group's work product will be considered during the chapter's annual conference in September.

Contact Sheri L.R. Coven, fapa@floridaplanning.org.