|
|
||
Land-use decisions have prompted lawsuits in Stafford Date published: 3/15/2009
BY JONAS BEALS
New land-use ordinances have inspired a lawsuit binge by landowners and developers in Stafford County. In 2006 and 2007, there were a total of 10 land-use-related lawsuits filed against Stafford. In 2008, there were 43. Depending on who's talking, the lawsuits could be a sign of progress or the beginning of a legal hangover from which Stafford might suffer for years to come. It is difficult to look at the legal situation without peering through a political prism. Most officials explained the sharp uptick in litigation as a result of party politics. The increase in the number of suits coincides with the change in the Board of Supervisors in 2008, when Republicans lost their majority. Democrats on the board, who sometimes gain the support of Independent Joe Brito, have pursued legislation designed to right what they see as the environmental and economic wrongs of the past. To that end, their target is usually residential growth resulting in sprawl, and their actions have sparked familiar debates about the costs of development, both economic and environmental. "These lawsuits against the county are an indication of the change from the old power base to a new view of land preservation for Stafford's citizens," board Chairman George Schwartz said. The old power base, in Schwartz's opinion, favored the development industry. "The lawsuits were inevitable," he added. "They [developers] had their way for decades." CHOOSING SIDES In simple terms, the line is drawn between developers and growth-control advocates. In the real world, it's not that simple. Thirty-one of the lawsuits are the result of three ordinances--on drain-field requirements, establishing the Potomac River Resource Overlay District and setting a minimum buildable area for lots--and a resolution shrinking the boundary of the Urban Services Area, where public water and sewer are available. While the measures don't address sprawl directly, they all have the effect of lowering the density of residential development, particularly in rural areas. Only two of the ordinances passed 4-3 along party lines. There are actually three separate drain-field ordinances. Two passed 6-1 and one passed 7-0. The USA boundary was altered by a 6-1 vote.
The article was disappointing as it focused only on politics, not on the issues raised by the law suits. For example, if there is a valid health concern for creation of an overlay district around a reservoir there is little chance to win a lawsuit against the policy as long as this is a Comprehensive Plan goal and the remedy is reasonable, ie it protects the water supply from contamination. But information like this is missing from the article.
If the County Attorney and staff cannot adequately defend the county (read us taxpayers) from lawsuits then maybe its time for a new county attorney and staff!!
of Jack Cavelier as supervisor? Pull-lease! Now I know you're all off your crock.
Too many good ole boys from the old stafford county are in a tizzy because their free ride has ended. Remember the days when developments where created willy nilly with very little oversight only to be rubber stamped by the REPUBLICAN LED good ole boy supervisors we used to have? They're the ones who screwed over this county. The new bunch is trying to correct the errors of sloppy political back slapping of their predecessors. Those crying about it now want to see a return to the bad ole days!
this county was MUCH BETTER off before George Scwartz ever moved here, much less got involved in POLITICS. He and the other 3 democrats have done nothing but OBSTRUCT the well being of the residents of STAFFORD- these are nothing more than the FAILED- just say no politics of former David Beiler and Pete Fields. ALSO does anyone care that CLARK LEMING and school board chair PATRCIA HEALY and married and law firm partners?? Doesnt she make decisions that effect her clients when they build and open schools?
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
