Sometimes I HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE this state..

[dmp]

Dumbass liberals...wow. I'm spitting mad. Please God...deliver me from Washington State...

(sigh)

By KOMO Staff & News Services

SEATTLE - Hoping to better protect streams and wildlife, the Metropolitan King County Council has passed three ordinances that significantly limit what rural landowners can do with their property.

The 7-6 votes along party lines late Monday and early Tuesday create wider no-development buffers - up to 100 yards - along streams and wetlands; tighten regulations on how much water can run off newly developed sites; and bar landowners from clearing more than 35 percent to 50 percent of their land, depending on lot size.

Republicans on the council protested, saying the regulations are draconian, not based in science and will entangle the county in lawsuits. Existing land-use regulations have done enough to curb sprawling development, they said.

"I feel very much like the rural part of the county has been disenfranchised over and over again," said Councilwoman Kathy Lambert, R-Woodinville.

But Democrats and environmentalists backed the measures, which passed a week after the Pierce County Council became the first in the state to adopt a tough clearing rule that requires rural residential landowners to keep 65 percent of their land in native vegetation.

The clearing restriction is intended to protect streams and species such as threatened chinook salmon by preserving forests throughout watersheds. Advocates cited scientific research that suggests deforestation significantly alters the runoff of rainwater, damaging streams.

Democrats said urban residents have shouldered their share of the burden of growth management.

Julia Patterson of SeaTac said city dwellers have accepted jails, airports, sex-offender housing, traffic and pollution, largely in order to prevent sprawling development across the countryside.

Dow Constantine, the Seattle Democrat who chairs the growth-management committee and shaped much of the package, said it represents "a very good package of regulations that responds to our legal and our moral obligations."

"For generations to come, this legislation will help prevent flooding and erosion and protect our drinking water, streams and wetlands from being degraded by new development," she said.

King County Executive Ron Sims proposed the regulations in March; they were passed with minor revisions.

The supporters of the regulations unveiled proposals Monday to help property owners deal with the new rules. They include legislation that would allow property tax breaks for landowners who follow stewardship plans that protect streams, wetlands and wildlife more than required by law.

 

[Merlin1047]

Dumbass liberals...wow. I'm spitting mad. Please God...deliver me from Washington State...

(sigh)

Is it safe to conclude that you do not agree with these measures?
:halo:

 

[dmp]

Is it safe to conclude that you do not agree with these measures?
:halo:

I dunno about safe, but it'd be an accurate interpretation of my thoughts.

 

[KarlMarx]

It is safe to say that the price of housing in the Seattle area will quickly become unaffordable to most people living there. Also there will be a huge downturn in the building of new homes (except of course for millionaires), since only few will be able to afford the cost of these new regulations.

Similar measures were passed in the Palo Alto area (now called Silicon Valley) about 30 years ago, presumably to protect the environment. The same thing happened...the price of houses went through the roof, people who worked in the city were forced to live far away and make long commutes. In the meantime, none or few new houses have been built in the area.

 

[Working Man]

Inland wetlands rules are pretty similar all over. Where I live, you cant backfill within so many feet of a wetland, river, stream, etc. Development is restricted in these zones.

It is true, ,the environmentalists want to protect the fish, birds, etc. And somebody with a brain has to be worried about teh water we drink and the air we breath. For the most part, I can agree with them.

Even Bill Gates needs clean air and water to survive, cause we all know it isn't the great software his company hawks that allows us to get up in the morning.

As far as running out of land,, that is a myth. There is enough land for those who deserve to have it. The problem is that we are expanding our numbers, humans, without regard for the environment, or the other living critters on this earth. Why think we are the sole choice to inhabit the planet?


Bob Barker, the old hoser who pitches the wheel of fortune, or whatever lame show he hosts,, always closes his show with "Don't forget to have your pet spayed, or neutered."

How about, "Don't forget to take your birth control pill mom, and dad don't misslay that box of Trojans. What we don't need is more unwanted, unplanned, unloved kids being brought into this world folks and only you edumacated types can help." (who else is home at that time of day watching GD TV????) I would love to have him, or one of the othe lame talking heads say "Don't forget to get your skank ho daugher fixed today, and bring that little crack head too cause his gene pool needs to be drained!"
((Please be informed, I mean all kids of all people who believe welfare is a career path. Regardless of skin color))

Which brings me back to my other argument, tell Hillary Clinton to shut the F up. Only a GD socialist believes in "it takes a village to raise a kid".. My parents didn't need a village, but we did know who both sides of the family were and each side babysat my miserable little butt at one time or another. I think what Hillary is touting is that the working class have to keep on shucking out hard earned dollars so the dregs of society can sit on their lazy butts while resting from flatbacking for brat money.

 

[theim]

I'm a conservative Republican who lives in Madison Freakn' Wisconsin. Cry me a river.

 

[fubar]

Washington? I thought he must be taliking about Massachusetts when I saw the title....

Stories like this remind me of Dennis Miller on drilling in Alaska :
" Well, it's only my opinion but : Fuck the caribou. I want cheap gas."

Oh, Working man ? great rant. More.......

 

[Working Man]

I want cheap gas too. But turning my back on Alaska is out. I have never been there, but would love to go before I get too f'n old and turn into a drooling old democrat.. (shoot me before this happens please)

In General
I don't care if you, or someone else owns a 4000 sq ft mansion, or a nice expensive sports car. I applaud honestly earned wealth. I would not try to tax anyone out of their earnings as a guise for the socialist form of wealth redistribution. Nor would I deprive a successful business person from attaining the good life (like the liberals do) but, I want the high roller to remember that he/she needs to have clean water and air to survive. AND,,,DON'T MESS UP MY CHANCE OF SURVIVAL. We all are on this big boat (earth) together. There is no such thing of sinking half of the boat, and staying safe and dry in the other half.

 

[fubar]

Let me know when they start passing out mansions, I'll try to get the day off from work. I realize and agree that we can't poison our world.

But I don't believe oil drilling in Alaska would harm it. the Alaskans are all for it as far as I know. When the Alaskan Pipeline was being discussed there was a similar panicky argument about the caribou and Polar bear being harmed. But much to the dismay of the Sierra Club and Greenpeace, after the pipeline was built, the caribou herds not only thrived they expanded. And the Polar bears use the pipe itself as a spotting tower for hunting, and are also fat and happy. Bear in mind, the footage we saw in the Bush/gore era regarding ANWR was actually filmed elswhere. Not the same place at all.

We NEED to drill in Alaska, mexico ( with permission) and Venizuala. Screw OPEC.

Then we need to figure out how to produce synthetic gas.

Then we need to switch over to whatever Al Gore invents for us to replace the internal combustine engine.

 

[White knight]

I would support any legislation that would drive out the rift raft, and raise the cost of survival for all.
I think Bill Gates would support it too, I bet he would like to have half of the state as his private retreat.

Who would have thought that people would pay $100, for a landscaping rock, or have to have a license to hunt and fish?

There are too many people having a impact on the planet, we are either going to have to start asking for volunteers to start taking one for the team and not have families, or raise the cost of living so they can’t afford to, or start WW III and reduce the population the old fashioned way.

 

[onedomino]

I'm a conservative Republican who lives in Madison Freakn' Wisconsin. Cry me a river.

Yikes! You must be lonely. I remember reading that Madison actually had a socialist party mayor in the 70's or early 80's.

 

[Flying Duck]

Locally this is being referred to as a "land grab" which, in effect, it is.

By saying the those who own more than 5 acres must keep 65% of their land as native vegetation, they have preclude the owner of that property from ever using that land freely.

Now, put in yourself in the shoes of a person who purchased a five acre rural lot - you can now only use 65% of it so your ownership rights of that property have essentially been taken away. Not to mention that the five acre lot you invested in has now lost quite a bit of it's market value as a result of this fiat from the King Co. Council.

Protecting streams is one thing but the land grab part of this deal is complete BS.

What a load of crap from our local communist government.

Wanna take bets on whether the ACLU gives a damn about this one?

 

[dmp]

The ACLU won't lift a finger unless a gay blind black woman becomes affected.

 

[acludem]

This isn't really an ACLU issue. It's an issue of property rights vs. governmental responsibility for protecting the environment. Personally, I agree with this decision. I have seen first hand what greedy developers can do to the rural and natural beauty of an area. I have seen the destruction of hundreds of acres of beautiful forest land so that cheap housing could be slapped on the land and sold at massive profits.

acludem

 

[onedomino]

Let me know when they start passing out mansions, I'll try to get the day off from work. I realize and agree that we can't poison our world.

But I don't believe oil drilling in Alaska would harm it. the Alaskans are all for it as far as I know. When the Alaskan Pipeline was being discussed there was a similar panicky argument about the caribou and Polar bear being harmed. But much to the dismay of the Sierra Club and Greenpeace, after the pipeline was built, the caribou herds not only thrived they expanded. And the Polar bears use the pipe itself as a spotting tower for hunting, and are also fat and happy. Bear in mind, the footage we saw in the Bush/gore era regarding ANWR was actually filmed elswhere. Not the same place at all.

We NEED to drill in Alaska, mexico ( with permission) and Venizuala. Screw OPEC.

Then we need to figure out how to produce synthetic gas.

Then we need to switch over to whatever Al Gore invents for us to replace the internal combustine engine.

Then we need to figure out how to produce synthetic gas.

We already know how to do this. The Great Plains Coal Gasification Project in central North Dakota demonstrated $45 per barrel oil in the mid-1980s. The Project was a large open pit coal mine, next to a coal gasification plant, next to an electrical power generating plant. The Feds burned $3 billion demonstrating the economic viability of the technology. OPEC oil was then selling for a lot less than $45 per barrel, so the project never produced oil, but it still produces gas. The power plant was abandoned. http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/minimize/gasdom.htm

Germany turned coal into oil during WW2. The technology is at least 60 years old. What we lack is enough public political and technical awareness to use the world's largest supply of coal to release us from the grip of OPEC. Think of how the Kyoto advocates would flip if we really did use our coal!

The oil money paid to the Saudis floats their economy and totalitarian government. Some of the oil money that filters through their economy bankrolls terrorist murderers in Iraq.

 

[Avatar4321]

This isn't really an ACLU issue. It's an issue of property rights vs. governmental responsibility for protecting the environment. Personally, I agree with this decision. I have seen first hand what greedy developers can do to the rural and natural beauty of an area. I have seen the destruction of hundreds of acres of beautiful forest land so that cheap housing could be slapped on the land and sold at massive profits.

acludem

Translation: Its not an ACLU issue because the ACLU has been attacking private property rights since about the time of its inception. Because Private Property just doesnt work with the marxist doctrines.

 

[NATO AIR]

can't you guys get this overturned by fielding some good GOP candidates in the upcoming elections? i'm sure if the GOP takes control, this would go away. it can't be forever right?

 

[-Cp]

It's always folks who aren't land-owners that agree with dumb-ass rulings like this..

And Working Man.. .God says that Man has rulership over all the Earth - if you don't like that and think Cats and Dogs should be in rule take it up with him...

 

[dmp]

can't you guys get this overturned by fielding some good GOP candidates in the upcoming elections? i'm sure if the GOP takes control, this would go away. it can't be forever right?

Frankly, it'd doubtfull - NONE of the democrats represent areas affected by the changes. It'd take the 'city-folk' (Primarily democrats) to vote their own people out of office.

 

[acludem]

My sister and brother-in-law own land in the Seattle area. There's is a rural setting, they have an acre or so and there is a small stream that runs on their land. They and their neighbors have small livestock and lots of pets. They had to jump through a lot of hoops to get their house built, but they never complained because they understood why the hoops were there.

acludem