Kosalka v. Town of Georgetown

Rule of Law:

A municipal zoning ordinance requiring a conditional use permit to meet a standard that is unmeasurable and lacks quantitative criteria, such as to 'conserve natural beauty,' constitutes an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority and violates the due process clause.

Facts:

• Eric and Patricia Kosalka sought to build a nine-trailer recreational vehicle campground on property owned by Eric's mother, Ruth Kosalka, in the town of Georgetown.
• The Georgetown Shoreland Zoning Ordinance textually placed the property in the Resource Protection District, but the official Shoreland Zoning Map placed the same property in the Limited Residential-Recreational District.
• Campgrounds are permitted as a 'conditional use' in the Limited Residential-Recreational District.
• To obtain a conditional use permit, a proposed development had to satisfy nine criteria.
• One of the nine mandatory criteria was that the development must 'conserve natural beauty'.

Procedural Posture:

• Eric and Patricia Kosalka submitted a permit application to the Georgetown Planning Board (GPB).
• The GPB denied the application, finding the property was in a prohibitive district and the proposal did not 'conserve natural beauty.'
• The Kosalkas appealed to the Georgetown Board of Zoning Appeals (ZBA), which reversed on the zoning district issue but affirmed the denial, citing a lack of jurisdiction to rule on the ordinance's constitutionality.
• The Kosalkas filed a complaint in the Superior Court (a state trial court) challenging the constitutionality of the 'natural beauty' requirement, while abutting landowners filed a separate complaint challenging the ZBA's zoning decision.
• The Superior Court consolidated the complaints, affirmed the ZBA's zoning decision, and ruled that the 'natural beauty' requirement was constitutional, remanding the case to the ZBA.
• On remand, the ZBA held new hearings and again denied the permit, concluding the campground would not conserve the area's natural beauty.
• The Kosalkas appealed the ZBA's final denial to the Superior Court, which affirmed the ZBA's decision.
• The Kosalkas (appellants) and the abutting landowners (cross-appellants) appealed the Superior Court's judgment to the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine (the state's highest court).