MACo Legal and Policy Counsel Les Knapp was joined by a panel of county and municipal officials to oppose legislation (HB 243) that would alter standing requirements for comprehensive zoning, planning, and “land use actions” during the House Environment and Transportation Committee hearing on February 9, 2016. Delegate Stephen Lafferty introduced the bill.
Standing is the legal right to bring and maintain a lawsuit. Knapp and the panel testified that the bill would: (1) increase plaintiffs and litigation; (2) slow or stop comprehensive zoning; (3) put redevelopment and revitalization projects at risk; (4) open up comprehensive plans additional litigation; (5) potentially allow a single comprehensive zoning challenge to hold all the zoning reclassifications invalid; and (6) force property owners not challenging the comprehensive zoning into the litigation to protect their own property rights. From the MACo testimony:
The bill is allegedly trying to “fix” a recent Maryland Court of Appeals decision, Anne Arundel County, Maryland v. Steve Bell, No. 29, September Term, 2014. However, MACo believes that the Bell decision properly held that taxpayer standing is the appropriate standing requirement for comprehensive rezoning cases and that HB 243 would detrimentally alter how standing works in land use decisions. …
In the Bell decision, the Court correctly concluded from previous decisions that taxpayer standing should apply to primarily legislative land use actions (such as comprehensive zoning), while property owner standing should apply to administrative, executive, or quasi-judicial land use action (such as piecemeal rezonings, special exceptions, and nonconforming uses). …
The result [of HB 243] would upend local comprehensive planning efforts, disrupt and potentially significantly delay the comprehensive rezoning process, and imperil Smart Growth-friendly redevelopment and revitalization projects.
