Throughout the Atlanta region, homeowners overwhelmed by out-of-control growth are registering their displeasure at the ballot box. In July, controversial Cobb County Commissioner Gordon Wysong was defeated in the Republican primary partly because of the perception that he was too close to developers. And in fast-growing Cherokee, two commissioners were tossed out in the primary because they, too, were perceived as the lackeys of greedy developers. But homeowners frustrated by crowded schools, traffic gridlock and overused parks may be surprised to learn that their interests are being betrayed at a higher level than the county courthouse. Republican Sen. Paul Coverdell has become the handmaiden of well-heeled developers, sponsoring legislation that would allow builders to bypass the zoning process when they don’t get their way at the local level. If Coverdell’s legislation becomes law, it will become even easier for developers to turn a little patch of green space into a strip mail or amphitheater. Voters’ protests to their county commissioners or zoning board members won’t matter much, since the issues will be decided in federal court. Officially titled the Property Owners Access to Justice Act of 1997, Coverdell’s bill has little to do with "justice” for the average property owner. Most of us own only one piece of property the family home. Coverdell’s legislation -- along with a nearly identical bill that passed the House easily in March -- is a big favor to the National Association of Home Builders, which has surreptitiously lobbied Congress for months. Under current law, developers whose proposals are turned down must exhaust the local appeal process, which usually includes the state court system, before they can appeal to federal court. As in any civil dispute, the process can take years. But should developers be afforded special treatment not available to most of us trying to appeal a legal ruling? Coverdell wants to give them special rights. His bill would allow developers to bypass a local directive and move to federal court. Many local jurisdictions lack the resources to fight a federal court case and would rather just cave in to developers. Coverdell’s bill is curious for a couple of reasons. First, no one has ever mistaken Georgia for a state where politicians give developers a hard time by frequently turning down their proposals for mega-malls and gargantuan office plazas. In fact, local politicians often cite their fear of a court reversal as a reason for approving developers’ requests. Second, Coverdell, like most conservative Republicans, is an avowed proponent of local control, favoring states’ rights in every issue from control of welfare dollars to deciding school curricula. But, oddly, Coverdell would take one of the most contentious local issues -- and one of the most jealously guarded -- from the state and put it into federal court. Even some Republicans have noted the discrepancy. The legislation is opposed by the National League of Cities, the National Governors’ Association, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, and the attorneys general of 37 states, who protest the “significant infringement on state and local sovereignty.” But Coverdell’s theory of property rights has become an article of faith among a slice of the right-wing fringe who believe it is the God-given right of any landowner to do whatever he or she pleases with a piece of property. And it probably doesn’t hurt that cause to be allied with big developers, who give a lot more money to campaigns than average citizens do. E-mail: cynthia@ajc.com |
