Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Exactions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate advances bill tightening rules on sale of land taken for open space; amendment shortens proposed hold period
Summary
Senate debate centered on SB177, which would lengthen the period municipalities must retain land acquired by exaction before selling it. Sponsors and opponents reached agreement to amend an initial 25-year proposal down to 15 years; the bill was ordered read for a third time.
Senators debated Senate Bill 177, a bill that seeks to strengthen protections for property taken by exaction and held for public uses such as open space. Sponsor Senator Niederhauser said the change responds to instances where land dedicated for public use was later sold and developed, arguing the statute should keep exaction land in its intended use for a longer period. "If we are going to exact property, we need to leave it in that use," Niederhauser said.
Opponents raised concerns about administrative burden and unintended consequences. Senator Bell described long record-keeping obligations as “extremely burdensome” and urged a shorter limit than the 25 years adopted in committee. Senator Butters argued in favor of a longer protection because developers surrender property under duress and should not see it quickly reoffered by municipalities. Senators also discussed the possibility of placing a deed restriction rather than a fixed statutory period.
After debate, Senator Bell moved to amend the bill to change the 25-year period in the committee amendment to 15 years; Niederhauser said he would accept leaving the final decision to the Senate and indicated he was "okay with 15 years." The motion to amend was put and passed following a division call. The Senate then voted to read SB177 for the third time, with the clerk recording 25 yes votes, 0 nays and 4 absent. The bill will proceed to further action under the Senate calendar.
The questions raised during debate focused on enforcement and whether interlocal transfers could be used to circumvent the statute. Senators suggested several technical fixes (including deed-based restrictions and clarifications on conveyances to affiliated entities) for the bill’s next reading. The bill text and the precise line changes (lines cited during floor debate included 14, 37 and 55) will be reviewed on third reading and before any final passage vote.
