Clerk denies citizen plan

Measure to protect private property fails

September 5, 2006

By Michael Rovito/Frontiersman

Mat-Su Borough Clerk Michelle McGehee denied a petition Friday that would have placed a private-property protection act on the November 2007 ballot aimed at providing compensation to landowners whose property value is decreased by borough regulations.

McGehee, in a letter to the bill's sponsor, Penny Nixon, said 412 signatures were deemed either not registered or were from people who signed more than once on the petition. The decision put the number of valid signatures on the petition below the required 2,013.

Nixon, a member of the Mat-Su Taxpayers Association, has been working for more than a year to get the initiative in front of the public in an effort to protect the private property of Mat-Su Borough residents.

Nixon said previously his motivation for getting the measure on the ballot next year is the borough assembly's apparent disregard for public opinion, and what he calls the assembly's attempt at total control of the Mat-Su's economy.

&#8220It was apparent that the public process appeared to be designed to limit the public's input,” Nixon said last week.

The proposal, if passed, would guarantee compensation for land regulations from the borough that decrease the value of a property owner's land.

One example Nixon provided was the case of landowners who want to subdivide their property. The borough, he said, can deny a permit for subdividing citing a need for open spaces or preservation of views, putting the property owner in line to lose a lot of money. Not only that, but during the application process, the borough tax assessor sees the proposal and, following state law, assesses the property at 100 percent of the fair market value, Nixon said.

The private-property protection proposal would attempt to solve this problem by requiring the borough to provide fair compensation for such regulation of a property. Regulations imposed for public safety, nuisance or health regulations will be exempt, Nixon said.

This isn't the first time Nixon has been at the forefront of an initiative. He was also behind a tax cap initiative in 2005, which ended up in court after the borough clerk rejected it. The court decided in favor of Nixon and the initiative was placed on the ballot. The borough assembly, however, adopted it anyway before it could be voted on by the

public.

The borough clerk, in her letter, gave Nixon until Sept. 12 to provide the additional signatures required to place the initiative on the ballot.

A message left for Nixon was not returned.

Contact Michael Rovito at 352-2252 or michael.rovito@ frontiersman.com