Comments on: Democratic Governor of Oregon Undermines Democratic Process http://www.anwyn.com/2007/02/06/democratic-governor-of-oregon-undermines-democratic-process/ Sometime editor, all-the-time mother, delivering facts, reviews, commentary, and rants. Occasionally in that order. Fri, 05 Dec 2008 04:19:15 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4 by: Anwyn http://www.anwyn.com/2007/02/06/democratic-governor-of-oregon-undermines-democratic-process/#comment-15961 Wed, 07 Feb 2007 17:57:07 +0000 http://www.anwyn.com/2007/02/06/democratic-governor-of-oregon-undermines-democratic-process/#comment-15961 I have no trouble believing that M.37 wasn't well thought through. I suspect that a lot of ballot measures, here and elsewhere, aren't. But blanket policies like the "urban growth boundary" that we have up here are also not well thought through and absolutely ensure that people will continue to speculate in all the land they can possibly get their hands on and that housing is artificially inflated in price and artificially crowded in placement. Most of these M.37 claims they're putting aside are not coming from out-of-staters who try to build junk on a sandbar; they're coming from average owners of farmland in the valley who want to make money off their land in ways other than farming. And the blanket-policy folks do want as much land as possible to remain farmland or completely undeveloped. I have no trouble believing that M.37 wasn’t well thought through. I suspect that a lot of ballot measures, here and elsewhere, aren’t. But blanket policies like the “urban growth boundary” that we have up here are also not well thought through and absolutely ensure that people will continue to speculate in all the land they can possibly get their hands on and that housing is artificially inflated in price and artificially crowded in placement. Most of these M.37 claims they’re putting aside are not coming from out-of-staters who try to build junk on a sandbar; they’re coming from average owners of farmland in the valley who want to make money off their land in ways other than farming. And the blanket-policy folks do want as much land as possible to remain farmland or completely undeveloped.

]]> by: wg http://www.anwyn.com/2007/02/06/democratic-governor-of-oregon-undermines-democratic-process/#comment-15960 Wed, 07 Feb 2007 17:03:11 +0000 http://www.anwyn.com/2007/02/06/democratic-governor-of-oregon-undermines-democratic-process/#comment-15960 Actually, it's a bit more complicated than that. Land-use laws in Oregon date back to before the Forest Practices Act in the late 70's, which guaranteed several things; appropriate use of land-development so as to preserve necessary tree boundaries, fish-bearing streams, and prevent one of the really big hazards out here, which is erosion/mudslides. Some of the restrictions were really onerous - having to take appropriate precautions against befouling streambeds housing endangered wildlife, or leaving enough plant-life on a landscape to prevent it from sliding away in the next big rain storm, just to name a couple of examples. Measure 37 was largely backed by people that wanted to sell zoned farm or timber land in close proximity to urban areas for development; urban-development subdivisions are worth way more than an equivalent area of farmland, and the idea was that if you can't subdivide your land and parcel it off, then somebody ought to compensate you for your loss. Or at least that was the idea. It's not that simple, though. In practical terms, what it means is that as urban areas get bigger, communities are forced with the decision of zoning into urban areas places that might not be suited for somebody's building(s), or pay millions of dollars to people who are trying to make a quick buck by getting paid <i>not</i> to develop their property. It gets even worse when you're talking about idiots who buy up areas that should never be zoned for housing, use out-of-state architects and land surveyors that know nothing of local conditions, contractors from outside the local area that don't understand how to put up buildings in this area (and no, that's not as simple as you might think), and then whine when their multimillion dollar subdivision that they built on a sandbar goes sliding away when the tides and rivers shift it out from underneath their buildings. Oregon has laws against development on parts of the coast and in parts of the mountainous areas of this state for a reason - it's stupid to build there. All in all, Measure 37 wasn't thought through far enough for potential effects. Like Measure 5 in the 80's, it's got a far-reaching effect, and a lot of it wasn't what they saw coming. Actually, it’s a bit more complicated than that.

Land-use laws in Oregon date back to before the Forest Practices Act in the late 70’s, which guaranteed several things; appropriate use of land-development so as to preserve necessary tree boundaries, fish-bearing streams, and prevent one of the really big hazards out here, which is erosion/mudslides. Some of the restrictions were really onerous - having to take appropriate precautions against befouling streambeds housing endangered wildlife, or leaving enough plant-life on a landscape to prevent it from sliding away in the next big rain storm, just to name a couple of examples.

Measure 37 was largely backed by people that wanted to sell zoned farm or timber land in close proximity to urban areas for development; urban-development subdivisions are worth way more than an equivalent area of farmland, and the idea was that if you can’t subdivide your land and parcel it off, then somebody ought to compensate you for your loss. Or at least that was the idea.

It’s not that simple, though. In practical terms, what it means is that as urban areas get bigger, communities are forced with the decision of zoning into urban areas places that might not be suited for somebody’s building(s), or pay millions of dollars to people who are trying to make a quick buck by getting paid not to develop their property. It gets even worse when you’re talking about idiots who buy up areas that should never be zoned for housing, use out-of-state architects and land surveyors that know nothing of local conditions, contractors from outside the local area that don’t understand how to put up buildings in this area (and no, that’s not as simple as you might think), and then whine when their multimillion dollar subdivision that they built on a sandbar goes sliding away when the tides and rivers shift it out from underneath their buildings. Oregon has laws against development on parts of the coast and in parts of the mountainous areas of this state for a reason - it’s stupid to build there.

All in all, Measure 37 wasn’t thought through far enough for potential effects. Like Measure 5 in the 80’s, it’s got a far-reaching effect, and a lot of it wasn’t what they saw coming.

]]>