http://www.capitalpress.info/main.asp?SectionID=67&SubSectionID=792&ArticleID=33835

7/20/2007 6:00:00
AM

Email this article • Print this article

Comment
on this article

Eminent domain used for farm's
water

Farmers win first round in Washington state; case still open

Cookson Beecher

Capital Press

Can a city use eminent domain to nab a farm's water rights because it needs
the water for an industrial park that will provide jobs and opportunities for
its young people and therefore benefit the entire community?

To add a twist to this question: What if the owners of the farm requested
that their land be rezoned "light industrial" so that it could be
developed - a request that was granted by a state growth management hearings
board.

In a situation like that, how does the definition of "public good,"
which is a requirement for condemnation through eminent domain, fit into the
picture? Would an industrial park designed to benefit the city trump the
farmers' plans to have their land developed if "public good" is the
deciding factor?

These are the questions before the court as it weighs a request to reconsider
an earlier decision that came out in the farmers' favor in the City of
Winlock's case against Mickelsen Dairy.

Although the Mickelsens have moved the dairy to Moses Lake, the water rights
attached to the land are being used to irrigate hay and a vegetable crop.

In a May 21, 2007, letter to the city's attorneys explaining his decision in
favor of the Mickelsens, Cowlitz Superior Court Judge James Stonier said that
while "the declaration of public necessity by the City of Winlock is
valid, Mickelsen's agricultural use is superior."

The issue at hand, said the judge, was whether the state's prior
appropriation water-rights policy - "first in time; first in right"
- holds enough weight to withstand the city's attempt to condemn the water
rights.

In his opinion, it does.

But he also said that the court does not find that any future proposed use by
the Mickelsens, other than the current agricultural use, to be superior to
the city's intended use of the water rights.

Because the city has asked the court to reconsider the decision, it is still
an open case.

While pleased that the judge ruled in favor of the farm, Clinton Mickelsen
warns that this legal battle could have serious statewide implications.

"I'm not exaggerating when I say that this is a huge issue - that it's a
lot bigger than any of us," he said. "If we lose, it will affect
farms and businesses across the state that have water rights, especially
those near urban growth areas. Any growing city will think that all it has to
do to get the water it needs is to condemn the water rights of a nearby
farm."

Mickelsen said that under state law, anyone can use eminent domain to go
after water rights.

"Eminent domain has more leverage in water rights than in real
estate," he said. "The law allows it, but we're hoping that prior
appropriation (first in time, first in right) will take precedence over other
water laws."

Jay Gordon, executive director of the state's Dairy Federation, said the case
is particularly worrisome to some of the farmers in the area.

"There's a concern in the valley that if the city wants to have enough
water for an industrial park, it would need to go up the valley and 'dewater'
six farms," he said.

But Winlock Mayor Cy Meyers said the city can't go outside its urban growth
area to condemn water rights.

"Nor do I have any intentions to do that," he said. "I'm not
interested in creating urban sprawl."

He said the 260 acre feet of water the city wants from the Mickelsens
"would supply the industrial park nicely" and would also serve
industrial or commercial development on the Mickelsen property.

The Mickelsens had intended to sell the water rights to a buyer who wanted to
develop the land. Under that arrangement, the city would have managed the
water attached to the water rights and supplied the industrial park, as well
as any projects on the Mickelsen property, with water.

But the deal with the buyer fell through, leaving the Mickelsens with the
water rights and the city determined to get them.

Mickelsen said that through the 55 years the farm has had the water rights,
their value had pretty much stayed the same.

"But now people have figured out how scarce water rights are, and that
makes them more valuable," he said. "Their market value is moving
up significantly."

If the city should win the case, a judge will set the value on the water rights.

If the court decides not to reconsider the case, then the city has the right
to appeal the decision that ruled in favor of the Mickelsens.

But Winlock Mayor Meyers is optimistic that the city and the Mickelsens can
come to an agreement in 30 to 60 days.

"They're good people," he said, referring to the Mickelsens.
"We're all trying to do what's right for Winlock."

Staff writer Cookson Beecher is based in Sedro-Woolley, Wash. E-mail:
[email-masked].

__._,_.___

Messages
in this topic (1) Reply
(via web post) | Start
a new topic

Messages
| Files
| Photos
| Links
| Database
| Polls
| Members
| Calendar

Change
settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)

Change settings via email: Switch
delivery to Daily Digest | Switch
format to Traditional

Visit
Your Group | Yahoo! Groups
Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

Visit
Your Group

SPONSORED
LINKS

·       King
county property

·       King
county

·       King
county recorder

·       King
county property search

·       King
county property tax

Yahoo!
News

Sexual
Health

Get important

sex health news

Yahoo!
TV

Want
the scoop?

Check out today's

news and gossip.

Yahoo!
Groups

Real
Food Group

Share recipes

and favorite meals.

.

__,_._,___