[hiho hiho]

“How am I supposed to restore the land if you take all my money?”

[Sloth]

However, due to statue of limitations, only six months worth of violations count.

Journalism majors are *so* smart.

[crusty old prospector]

a sensitive water resources area...

I thought it rained every other day in Portland?

[LucianOfSamasota]

Bad values result in bad laws.
Bad laws result in bad judgements.

This is why Christian values have been such an historical advantage for the US.

And why the ‘progress’ we have made away from those principles over the past 50 years has caused so much distress in our nation.

[VeniVidiVici]

If the city has such an easement on “his” property, it’s not really his property. Legally it is, unfortunately.

[Red Badger]

The pool — along with a patio, tiki torches, footbridges and a brick wall — was installed without a permit in a sensitive water resources area.

Your private property is not yours. The king only lets you live on it for as long as it pleases him. Now you must pay for damaging the king's property......

[Wurlitzer]

“Wetlands” one of the major reasons the EPA is looking to hire only people with Pistol permits.

My former facilities engineer (who handled all the EPA and DEC crappola) was looking to the EPA for a job and they had over 200 positions available but she needed a pistol permit to qualify.

[GeronL]

Troy Bundy, an attorney represented his wife and himself, filed a motion to dismiss the case, alleging fraud on the court.

So Troy, $65,000 in attorney's fees... your charging yourself a pretty hefty fee there.

[struggle]

“If the Bundys do not agree to removal the pool...”

Someone in Portland needs to stop smoking pot and proofread her article.

[Theoria]

'Since 2001 — two years before the Bundys moved in — the city has had a conservation easement on the property that also limits its use.'

I would fault him in purchasing a property with a easement on it. Never do that. It will only lead to a headache. Let this be a lesson for all.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Just implementing Plank #1 of Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto.

The Ten Planks of Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto
(and How Statists Implement Them)

1. Abolition of private property rights (via high property taxes, restrictive zoning laws, "fair housing" edicts, environmental and "wetlands" regulations, UN Agenda 21, etc.)

2. Institution of a heavily graduated income tax (by calling it "taxing the rich")

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance (through a confiscatory estate tax on "the rich")

4. Confiscation of the property of enemies of the state (through lawless application of asset forfeiture and eminent domain)

5. Centralization of credit into the hands of the state (Federal Reserve, Federal Trade Commission, TARP, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, federal takeover of student loans, etc.)

6. Centralization of the means of communication and transportation into the hands of the state (FCC, DOT, FEMA, NTSB, FAA, etc.).

7. Consolidation and subjugation of all major industries to central government control (FDA, EPA, OSHA, ICC, HUD, NLRB, EEOC, DOE, TSA etc.)

8. Mandatory labor union membership (teachers and other public-sector unions, planned unionization of 21-million Obamacare health care workers, automatic withholding of forced union dues, "card check," etc.)

9. Equitable redistribution of all wealth (TANF, SSI, EITC, SNAP, etc.)

10. Free public education (and food and health care and cell phones and Internet access, etc.)

[JesusIsLord]

"was installed without a permit in a sensitive water resources area."

Rule #1 - get approval in writing from local government before building pools or structures on your land. I.e., get appropriate permits and authorizations. This is not a new concept in how local governments govern.

[Labyrinthos]

The couple have been battling over the pool with the city of West Linn for several years. The pool and a patio were installed without a permit in a sensitive water resource area. Their house, located at 1215 Ninth St., is sandwiched between two wetland areas. Since 2001 — two years before the Bundys moved in — the city has had a conservation easement on the property that also limits its use.

I have no sympathy for these people whatsoever. Regardless of what I think of "wet-land" laws, the restrictions and permit requirements are a matter of public record and therefore, they knew or should have known about the restrictions and limitations upon the real property and the requirements for installing a pool before they brought the place. A standard title search should have disclosed the information and if they didn't understand the title report, then I'm willing to bet that they closed on the propery without an attorney.

The Bundys admitted in court that they installed the pool and the patio on their property before receiving the proper permits. After an application was submitted, city staff members denied the permit. The Bundys then took the appeal to the city council and then to Oregon’s Land Use Board of Appeals. The denial was upheld each time.

They took a chance and lost and now they are whining about the consequences. I have been practicing land use litigation for almost thirty years and municipalities often hire me to prosecute code violations. I deal with these type of people all the time: They think the law doesn't apply to them; they do what they want when they want without concern for the law, their neighbors, public safety, or anyone but themselves; and they refuse to negotiate in good faith; and when the municipality finally decidesd to enfoce the law, they cry and whine and complain about how they are being unfairly targeted. Cry me a river.

[longtermmemmory]

this is like DC bureacracy.

One department approves designs—pay the fee

One department approves the permit —pay the fee

One department issues the fines — pay the fee

One department approves the inspections — pay the fee

AND then you have to repeat the process again because the inspector found out the others recieved a higher bribe so the whole process starts again.

oh and these are not taxes, they are user fees.

[Wally_Kalbacken]

[muir_redwoods]

I suppose it’s unreasonable for the city to be asked to demonstrate actual damaged actually caused by this pool and patio.

[factoryrat]

There’s no such thing as private property rights, as this couple have found out the hard way. Once you move on to a parcel of land, you are at the mercy of the local governing body, and you have little or no recourse under the law (as specified by the governing body of course). You, and you alone are responsible for complying with the local ordinances, paying your tax bill, and following what the local governing body suggests is best for the municipality. This concludes your lesson in socialism 101. Have a nice day.

[MaxMax]

when they believe a family of five’s backyard is more problematic than an individual
who takes lives in his own hands by getting behind the wheel drunk and getting caught doing so not once, but three times.

Laws are meant to entrap law abiding citizens. Real criminals don't have money silly.

So they went to trial but did they decide on a jury or is a judge only trial the only way to fight this?
Some courts will not allow jury trials because of the absurdity of many charges and laws,
and courts know this but make other excuses. And no sane taxpayer would allow this kind
of system. Accept maybe on the left coast.

Anybody have a map of how much they deem to be wetlands in Oregon? Mud puddle heaven.

[fella]

[Wuli]

I believe the proper constitutional interpretation of all “conservation easements” should be that they are a “taking”, and as a taking it requires the government to purchase ALL the property along the “easement”.

If “the people” actually want an area of land “protected” they are in effect declaring they want the land for “public use” and to deny the full and unobstructed private use of the land.

That constitutes a “taking” for “public use” and if that’s what the people demand of government then government is obligated to buy the land, and to buy it at fair market value, not fire sale value.

I think that if voters realized that it should be their tax dollars that pay for the full cost of “conservation easements”, they would authorize fewer of them and would restrict them to undeveloped lots not in demand by developers; reducing the costs they would incur in any “eminent domain” proceeding.

[Missouri gal]

Zoning regulations are one of the most successful examples of the communist agenda to take down America.