Coos Bay's Storage Ban Reveals Economic Tyranny
Another ordinance restricting private property owners. More government manipulation of the market.
That was the immediate reaction when news broke about Coos Bay's proposed permanent ban on new self-storage facilities.
The city aims to make permanent a temporary moratorium that was introduced in August 2025. Community Development Executive Director Chelsea Schnabel is spearheading this initiative, with a public hearing scheduled for October 14, 2025.
THE CITY OF COOS BAY HAS PROPOSED A CHANGE TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE!
www.coosbayor.gov/government/projects#storage_unit
Storage Unit Moratorium (187-25-000115-PLNG) Development Code Text Amendment
On August 19, 2025, the Coos Bay City Council imposed a moratorium on new self-storage facilities in Coos Bay. Refer to Resolution 25-29. This proposal is to amend the text of the Coos Bay Development Code as follows:
Add a new definition “mini storage” to CBDC 17.150.020.
Expressly prohibit mini storage in the following zone districts: MDR, C, I-C, W-H, W-I, HP, UP, and MP.
Planning Commission Public Hearing,tentativelyscheduled to take place on Tuesday, October 14, 2025, at 6:00 p.m. in the Coos Bay City Hall Council Chambers
Their justification? "Highest and best use" of limited buildable land to maximize property tax revenue.
Here's the problem: The government has no magic ball to predict future market trends.
They have no way of knowing what the future brings. There are no storage facility experts working for the city. Even if there were, they could not predict future demand any better than anyone else.
And Coos Bay is not alone. Storage bans have been implemented in at least 15 states over the last six years. Once one city institutes a moratorium, others take notice. The dominoes begin to fall.
The market knows what the government does not.
Market demands are the best indicators to determine what supplies are needed. If people oversaturate the market with storage facilities, the market responds. Businesses go out of business because nobody is demanding space for their valuables.
The government has no way of knowing those indicators. But the market does, and it corrects itself much faster than the government ever could.
Look at ride-sharing services in Portland and Seattle. The market became oversaturated with drivers. The result? Lower earnings, longer wait times, and drivers exiting the industry. The market corrected itself without city councils banning Uber.
Economic Tyranny in Action
When city officials claim authority to determine "highest and best use," they are giving themselves the power to decide who can and cannot conduct business.
That's economic tyranny.
Cities justify these bans by saying they want to preserve land for higher-revenue developments—housing, retail, and industrial uses that generate more jobs and sales revenue beyond basic property taxes.
However, what they are really doing is using the law to create development policies that artificially inflate property costs. All to feed the insatiable needs of government.
When they force "higher-value" development, it creates a domino effect. Property values rise. Adjacent land values rise. Property taxes increase across the board.
The process also exposes how easily the property tax system can be manipulated. It provides benefits to one industry over another.
The ability to tax property is a government authority that allows it to forcefully collect money from property owners with the permission of the voters. It is, therefore, a collective theft. A tax should be a one-time charge, not a continuing charge for the entire time someone owns property.
Interestingly, when zoning laws were first introduced, General P. Lincoln Mitchell referred to them as "an advanced form of communism." Others believed the power of zoning would be corrupted in the hands of bureaucrats.
They were right.
Scholars and economists have debated the value of zoning laws. In an article published at the Foundation for Economic Education titled “The Impracticability of Zoning,” it details how zoning is used to destroy private property.
The Precedent Problem
Once this precedent is established, there is no limit to the actions the government may take.
Once officials are endowed with power, it's nearly impossible to take that power away.
If they don't like your politics, your industry might end up with a moratorium because of the "highest and best use" policy. How can anyone predict the future actions of a power-hungry bureaucrat with authority to decide who does business and who does not?
The government passes laws every day without fully understanding their unintended consequences. That is precisely why they should not be picking winners and losers in the market.
It's not the city's job to determine this. It limits the freedom of opportunity for people who want to purchase property for whatever they choose.
What's At Stake
This October 14th public hearing matters beyond storage facilities.
People need to let the city know their thoughts on the government's artificial manipulation of the market. They need to show up and speak out.
The core argument is simple: It is NOT the business of the City of Coos Bay to tell people what to do with their private property.
Stay out of commerce and get back to governing.
