Wash. Rev. Code » Title 36 · Chapter 36.70A

Wash. Rev. Code § 36.70A.370

Protection of private property

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) The state attorney general shall establish by October 1, 1991, an orderly, consistent process, including a checklist if appropriate, that better enables state agencies and local governments to evaluate proposed regulatory or administrative actions to assure that such actions do not result in an unconstitutional taking of private property. It is not the purpose of this section to expand or reduce the scope of private property protections provided in the state and federal Constitutions. The attorney general shall review and update the process at least on an annual basis to maintain consistency with changes in case law.
(2) Local governments that are required or choose to plan under RCW 36.70A.040 and state agencies shall utilize the process established by subsection (1) of this section to assure that proposed regulatory or administrative actions do not result in an unconstitutional taking of private property.
(3) The attorney general, in consultation with the Washington state bar association, shall develop a continuing education course to implement this section.
(4) The process used by government agencies shall be protected by attorney client privilege. Nothing in this section grants a private party the right to seek judicial relief requiring compliance with the provisions of this section.
[ 1991 sp.s. c 32 s 18.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2011–2012 · leading case: Olympic Stewardship v. Wash. Growth Mgmt.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Olympic Stewardship v. Wash. Growth Mgmt. (2012) washctapp · cites it 3× “172(1) and RCW 36.70A.370, [5] and fail to consider and balance planning goal 6 (RCW 36.”
Olympic Stewardship Foundation v. Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board (2012) washctapp · cites it 2× “172(1) and RCW 36.70A.370,[ 5 ] and fail to consider and balance planning goal 6 (RCW 36.”
Olympic Stewardship v. Western Wash. Growth (2011) washctapp · cites it 3× “172(1) and RCW 36.70A.370, [5] and fail to consider and balance planning goal 6 (RCW 36.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 36.70A.370(1) — 3 cases
Olympic Stewardship Foundation v. Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board (2012) washctapp “172(1) and RCW 36.70A.370,[ 5 ] and fail to consider and balance planning goal 6 (RCW 36.”
Olympic Stewardship v. Wash. Growth Mgmt. (2012) washctapp “172(1) and RCW 36.70A.370, [5] and fail to consider and balance planning goal 6 (RCW 36.”
Olympic Stewardship v. Western Wash. Growth (2011) washctapp “172(1) and RCW 36.70A.370, [5] and fail to consider and balance planning goal 6 (RCW 36.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 36.70A.370(2) — 2 cases
Olympic Stewardship v. Wash. Growth Mgmt. (2012) washctapp “172(1) and RCW 36.70A.370, [5] and fail to consider and balance planning goal 6 (RCW 36.”
Olympic Stewardship v. Western Wash. Growth (2011) washctapp “172(1) and RCW 36.70A.370, [5] and fail to consider and balance planning goal 6 (RCW 36.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.