Opinion ID: 2607223
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: validity of exercise of police powers

Text: SGA claims the rezoning action was an invalid exercise of police powers to protect downtown merchants from retail competition. SGA contends the City Council members had protectionist motives, and sought to regulate competition. One Council member stated at the hearing that allowing business zones in the periphery of our city pulls the rug out from under those businesses who have invested their hearts and their wallets in our downtown. SGA contends that a desire to prevent competition for the benefit of Hailey's downtown merchants is not a proper application of zoning law and police power principles. The zoning power is not unlimited; the power to zone derives from the police power of the state, and zoning ordinances must therefore bear a reasonable relation to goals properly pursued by the state through its police power. City of Lewiston v. Knieriem, 107 Idaho at 83, 685 P.2d at 824. Assuming arguendo, as SGA contends, that protecting downtown merchants from competition is not a goal that may be properly pursued by the City through its police power, the record indicates other legitimate purposes supporting the rezoning. In its findings of fact and conclusions of law entered August 9, 1993, the City Council articulated various reasons for its decision to rezone the property. Finding of fact number 6 cites to the Hailey Comprehensive Plan, which states that the Business and Limited Business Districts are to be expanded around the existing business core. Likewise, finding number 12 states that the Hailey Comprehensive Plan requires the City Council to encourage a central business core that will be conducive to economic growth and will contain a concentration of community services, shopping, entertainment and cultural facilities so as to optimize the use of the existing infrastructure and decrease dependency on automobiles. Finding number 14 refers to a statement by the Hailey Police Chief that the Hailey Police Department does not currently have the law enforcement personnel necessary to patrol two business districts within the City of Hailey. Finding of fact number 15 says the overwhelming weight of public comment was that the existence of a large business zone located nearly two miles from the central core of the City was extremely detrimental to the welfare of the public and the integrity of the community. The Council's Conclusions of Law state that the existence of a large retail commercial property outside the Hailey Business Core ... is not in accordance with the current Hailey Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 1983, and ... will create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities and services. The district court found the rezoning action was also based on a mistake in the original zoning classification, and changed circumstances. Determining where particular business uses shall be allowed to expand in a community is normally an appropriate exercise of the police power. Preserving aesthetic values and the economic viability of a community's downtown business core can be a proper zoning purpose. Moreover, SGA's protection from competition argument is defective because nothing in the rezoning ordinance prevents new retail, restaurant, and entertainment businesses from locating in or around the City's downtown core and competing with existing businesses. On this record, we cannot agree with SGA that the only reason for the rezoning was to protect downtown merchants from competition. Where there is a basis for a reasonable difference of opinion, or if the validity of legislative classification for zoning purposes is debatable, a court may not substitute its judgment for that of the local zoning authority. City of Lewiston v. Knieriem, 107 Idaho at 83, 685 P.2d at 824. We hold that the rezoning ordinance bears a reasonable relation to goals properly pursued by the City through its police power.