Citing local control worries, municipalities oppose bill aimed to limit ‘NIMBYism’

Support Journalism

(Update: SB 647 described below advanced 52-39 from the House floor on Wednesday, May 7. Owing to its title being struck in February, the bill is headed for further consideration before the end of session. The following article remains in its original form.)

As Oklahoma communities seek solutions to the ongoing national housing crisis — exemplified locally by the fact only one apartment complex has been completed since 2012 in the city of Edmond, where the average home price has ballooned above $430,000 — some municipalities are opposing legislation aimed at combating “NIMBYism” to support housing needs.

Senate Bill 647, which has passed out of the Oklahoma Senate and must be heard on the House floor by Thursday’s deadline, would limit municipal governments’ ability to deny proposed developments, assuming those plats adhere to the city’s established zoning regulations and other codes.

SB 647 would:

• Require city governing boards and planning commissions to approve plats for any project that meets zoning and code standards;
• Require city governing boards and planning commissions to base refusal of plats on “objective and relevant” reasons, such as specific code violations, and publicly articulate reasons for denial;
• Stipulate city governing boards and planning commissions must not deny plats “solely based on the presence, numbers or magnitude” of public opposition to the project;
• Codify all municipal zoning decisions as valid unless a legal challenge proves the ordinance lacks “a substantial relation to public health, safety or general welfare” or is ruled as an “arbitrary” use of power; and
• Specify that all decisions within the board of adjustment’s purview are final “subject to judicial review” or subsequent appeal to the governing board, or alternatively, specify the board’s decisions are “advisory” to the governing board. This section of the law would not apply to cities where the governing board serves as the board of adjustment.

“If the planning commission and governing body determine the proposed plat is in compliance with the adopted subdivision code, and meets all applicable ordinances, and the governing body and planning commission accept any proposed dedications, if applicable, the plat shall be approved,” the bill reads.

Ryan Martinez, president and CEO of the Oklahoma Home Builders Association, said his organization supports SB 647 because it promotes greater transparency on why developments might be denied.

“What you’re finding in a lot of municipalities is you have a developer who has been approved, because something’s been zoned and platted for residential (development). They’re approved to build, they start making the investment to build infrastructure, follow all the rules that are within the municipality, and then the actual vote comes up to the city council, and it’s denied,” Martinez said. “A lot of times, the developers aren’t given a reason why it’s denied. It’s not very transparent.”

Sen. Avery Frix (R-Muskogee) has authored the legislation. He said his goal is to address Oklahoma’s housing needs by removing barriers to residential development, particularly “NIMBY” — or “not in my backyard” — sentiments from homeowners who oppose further development near their property. The bill also seeks to establish clear and “objective” standards for approval of new developments, he argued.

“We routinely see the last person to move to an area or build a home want to stop development, and that’s just not right. Absent an objective or relevant reason — of which there are many — government should not interfere with what a property owner is doing,” Frix said. “The individual property owner should be allowed to build a home, unless it causes some objective or relevant damage to the greater good, regardless of what activists might desire. While community input is vital to good planning, opposition based solely on the desire to preserve the status quo — without regard for broader housing, infrastructure or economic development needs — can prevent cities from growing in a sustainable way.”

As the drastically increased cost of living exacerbates a nationwide homelessness crisis, metro cities are seeking solutions to both issues. In Oklahoma City, accessory dwelling units — smaller structures built onto existing houses or property — are being considered as a way to deliver cheaper housing stock. Meanwhile, Norman Mayor Stephen Tyler Holman has criticized another piece of proposed legislation that would stop cities from building homeless shelters within 3,000 feet of a school, park, library or day care. Critics of that bill, Senate Bill 484, associate it with the “NIMBY” movement as well and say the restrictions would eliminate construction of homeless shelters essentially anywhere in most cities. (SB 484 did not receive a House hearing this session, but it will remain property of the House for the 2026 session.)

Frix argued his bill would allow more efficient development of housing stock to catch up to the state’s need.

“[NIMBYism] is especially relevant when new housing, mixed-use developments, or infrastructure projects are proposed near low-density areas,” Frix said. “Senate Bill 647 attempts to strike a balance by still allowing for public input and transparency but refocusing decisions on objective standards.”

Frix said “vocal opposition” can put pressure on local officials to deny potentially controversial developments. Edmond, like many American suburbs, is no stranger to such community pushback. Earlier this year, substantial outcry against a proposed 10-story apartment complex near the Interstate 35 Frontage Road resulted in the developers withdrawing their plan days before it was set to appear before the Edmond Planning Commission. Edmond residents turned down other multifamily housing proposals in 2022, 2021 and 2017.

SB 647 looks to reduce the potential impact of community outcry by specifying that “decisions on land use applications shall not be based solely upon the presence, numbers, or magnitude of opposition or protests in the absence of objective and relevant facts.”

At the April 28 Edmond City Council meeting, during tense talks on the long-delayed downtown Festival Marketplace brewery project, councilmembers and members of the public acknowledged Edmond has garnered a public reputation as being difficult for developers.

“There is a narrative out there, that I’ve done nothing but defend the inaccuracy of it, that Edmond is difficult to work with,” said Todd McKinnis, an attorney that regularly represents developers in Edmond and across the OKC metro. “I’m just telling you, that’s the reality. (…) For some reason, that narrative’s out there.”

Martinez, who formerly represented Edmond as the House District 39 representative, noted Edmond city leadership has been “one of the strongest opposition groups” to SB 647. However, he argued the bill would ultimately benefit a city where much of its workforce struggles to afford homes within the community and become residents, rather than commuters.

“People that are not necessarily on the higher end of the socioeconomic scale are working and doing everything that they can for Edmond, but they can’t live there,” Martinez said. “So I think that this would be something that’s very positive for Edmond, to help make it more affordable to build a house that’s obtainable, because at the end of the day, it just makes it more expensive to develop a neighborhood, if it ever gets developed, and the expenses go through the roof, and that expense gets passed on to the eventual homebuyer.”

For those campaigning against SB 647, including the City of Edmond, stripping cities of decision making power on individual developments is the primary point of contention.

“The City Council feel strongly about this first bullet point on their adopted legislative agenda: ‘Maintain local control over local issues,'” City of Edmond spokesman Bill Begley said. “[We] oppose legislation that takes away the authority of local elected officials to govern their jurisdiction.”

Edmond leaders hope to preserve local control over zoning, development

When asked the city’s stance on SB 647, interim City Manager Randy Entz also said the city opposes “anything that would limit local control.”

SB 647 would specify that all platting decisions are “quasi-judicial in nature,” requiring strict adherence to the city’s outlined codes and ordinances. Quasi-judicial decisions are different than legislative decisions, which can be made more generally and are not dictated by specific ordinances. Zoning would still be considered a “legislative” decision under the bill, Frix said, and cities would retain broad power to make zoning decisions as they wish.

The bill would also require a municipality’s city attorney to identify specific reasons for denial during public meetings, if requested by the applicant.

Under the bill’s “quasi-judicial” interpretation of the nature of platting decisions, the Edmond Planning Commission would not have been able to reject plans for the Arcadia Peake housing development that the commission denied in 2018, since it met city code.

The developer in that case, SACC Investments-Moyer 10, LLC, ultimately took the city to court and did not win its appeal. Oklahoma County District Judge Richard Ogden ruled that the Edmond Planning Commission did not act “in an arbitrary or capricious manner” and did, in fact, have legislative authority to deny the plat even if it met city code.

Leslie Blair, director of communications and legislative affairs for the Oklahoma Municipal League, said Ogden’s ruling is just one example of established case law of which SB 647 runs afoul. She said the bill’s requirement that cities only consider “objective and relevant” facts during the platting process would prohibit municipalities from considering important elements of development outside of what construction codes require. The Oklahoma Municipal League has been another vocal opponent of SB 647.

“If ‘objective and relevant’ is adopted, municipalities will no longer be able to consider factors such as potential harm to property values, impacts on traffic flows, water pressure and sewer flows, potential flooding, or any number of future impacts,” Blair said. “This bill erodes local control and would change existing case law in relation to planning and zoning. Municipalities have the responsibility to protect the community and citizens through well-thought-out zoning ordinances. If approved, this bill would allow homebuilders to circumvent elected officials.”

Factors the Edmond Planning Commission considered when denying the 2018 Arcadia Peake plat that may fall outside of “objective and relevant” as defined in SB 647 included “compatibility with the surrounding area.” Frix argued that such subjective criteria create undue obstacles for developers and can leave questions as to what is required for projects to be approved if meeting city code is not enough.

“Most important, more homes would be built at a lower cost. If passed, Senate Bill 647 could create a more consistent and legally defensible framework for zoning and platting decisions across the state,” Frix said. “By requiring objective justification for decisions, the bill promotes transparency and fairness in the land use process.”

SB 647’s title was struck during early stages of its consideration in the Senate, meaning the Senate would vote again on the bill if it advances from the House by Thursday. If ultimately approved by the governor, the bill would take effect Nov. 1

Support Journalism