Item 3: Wiper Inc. Measure 37 Claim

Home Browse Search

true reduction in value, if any, as the result of regulations that actually meet all of Measure 37’s requirements is not discernable from either the claim or the appraisal. 5. Exemptions Although the wording of this section is confusing, Claimant seems to be asserting that even if some of the challenged regulations do fall into Measure 37’s exemptions (prohibition of public nuisances, protection of health and safety, compliance with federal law, etc.) the remainder of the claim is valid. Claimant fails to analyze the regulations included within its claim to determine or explain how the regulations avoid those exemptions. Claimant also fails to explain why the CUP, even assuming that it would meet the definition of a “land use regulation”, would not be exempt given the language in the CUP that states that development in strict compliance with the CUP “is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare.”