HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West > Portland > Business, the Economy & Politics


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2007, 3:38 AM
MitchE's Avatar
MitchE MitchE is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 487
The Measure 37 Thread

Considering there's an election coming up, I'm starting a M37 thread so we can keep tabs on news and related discussion.

I haven't seen this article posted yet so we can start with this.

---------------------------------------------------
Study: Land-use laws have no impact on property values

Portland Business Journal - 11:03 AM PDT Tuesday, June 5, 2007

A study of land values in Oregon by Oregon State University economists finds no evidence that the state's land-use regulations have caused a generalized reduction in property values.

The study, published this week by economists William Jaeger and Andrew Plantinga, examines the ways in which land-use regulations and Oregon's land-use planning system may affect property values.

Jaeger and Plantinga examined the levels and trends of land values in parts of Oregon over the past 40 years, beginning before Oregon's land-use planning system was in place. They compared land value patterns for restricted and developable lands, and compared patterns in Oregon with patterns for similar areas in Washington state, where land-use planning has only recently been enforced.

The researchers found that:
  • Land values (adjusted for inflation) have generally risen since the introduction of Oregon's land-use planning system in 1973, both for rural lands zoned for farm and forest use and for developable lands inside and outside of urban growth boundaries.
  • Since 1973, when Oregon's land-use planning system was adopted, the rate of change in land values in Oregon has been about the same as for similar lands in Washington.
  • Lands with the most stringent development limits (such as those with exclusive farm or forest use zoning) have increased in value at about the same rate as lands without such restrictions.
  • In the Lane County sample, the value of lands outside the Eugene urban growth boundary grew slightly faster than properties inside the urban growth bound
  • There is no evidence of slower rates of increase overall for the Oregon lands studied compared with lands in the Washington counties studied.

To view the complete report online, go to http://extension.oregonstate.edu/cat.../sr/sr1077.pdf

Last edited by MitchE; Jun 12, 2007 at 3:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2007, 3:43 AM
mhays mhays is offline
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,802
Many thanks for M-37, Oregon. It helped a similar package get attempted here, and it helped that package die a very public, emphatic death.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2007, 3:37 PM
MarkDaMan's Avatar
MarkDaMan MarkDaMan is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Portland
Posts: 7,517
Oregon, prepare for a land-use fight, again
Measure 37 - A party-line vote by lawmakers sends a plan to change the law back to the people
Monday, June 11, 2007
LAURA OPPENHEIMER
The Oregonian

If you think 2007 is just the buildup for next year's presidential election, think again.

Oregonians will vote this November -- for the third time in seven years -- on one of the state's most politically divisive issues: property rights.

The Legislature is sending voters a plan to scale back Measure 37, the three-year-old law that opened the door to rural development. Judging from last week's scrappy finish to negotiations in Salem, the campaign will start quickly.

"It's going to be quite a fight," predicts Ray Wilkeson of the Oregon Forest Industries Council, "just like land-use issues always are in Oregon."

Democrats and environmentalists are promoting the rewrite, which would limit many rural landowners to three homes and make it nearly impossible to build more than 10. Republicans have teamed up with property rights advocates to fight the ballot referral, saying it's an insult to voters who passed Measure 37.

Sound like a scene from the movie "Groundhog Day"? It's just the latest chapter in the battle over Oregon's land-use laws, which are meant to separate city and country.

Courts tossed out a 2000 ballot measure that required governments to pay landowners who have lost the right to develop. In 2004, 61 percent of voters supported the next incarnation: Measure 37. Now, governments must let people use their land however they could have when they bought it -- or pay for lost value.

More than 7,500 applications have been filed, mostly in the countryside surrounding growth hot spots, such as the Portland suburbs, Hood River and Medford. Only a smattering of small developments are under way, but larger projects are a possibility.

Campaigns are sure to put different spins on how much development will materialize and how it would be affected by the Measure 37 rewrite.

Most people haven't followed the details, says public opinion researcher Mike Riley. He polled likely voters this spring on a possible replacement for Measure 37. But he never released the data: Results were inconclusive because so many Oregonians appear to be confused by the issue, Riley says.

Each campaign needs a populist message that connects with everyday Oregonians while cutting through complicated details, Riley says.

"Not much has happened under Measure 37 that they could point to and say 'It's been great' or 'It's been a disaster,' " he says.

Not that people haven't tried. Legislators got an earful of superlatives from hundreds of Oregonians who testified this spring.

Measure 37 claimants pleaded with them to make the law work smoothly, saying they wanted to build homes for relatives or retirement income. But some of their neighbors called for reform, predicting development would snuff out farming or ruin their rural lifestyle.

Legislators came close to a bipartisan compromise. Then talks disintegrated, with each side blaming the other. In the end, Democrats -- who control both houses of the Legislature -- sent their rewrite to voters in a party-line decision. An election date still has to be set, but Nov. 6 is almost a sure thing, says Sen. Floyd Prozanski, D-Eugene, who led the negotiations.

Adversaries have been strategizing for weeks.

Eric Stachon of 1000 Friends of Oregon, a group that promotes land-use planning, says a coalition is in place to campaign for the rewrite. He expects farmers, environmentalists and some politicians to be involved. The message, Stachon says, is simple: "This implements the will of the voters."

The Oregon Farm Bureau, which remained neutral during the last campaign, supports the rewrite, says Don Schellenberg, the bureau's lobbyist.

It's unclear whether timber companies, which provided most of the money to pass Measure 37, will campaign against the ballot referral. Wilkeson, of the forest owners' group, says members opposed the rewrite in "a close call" -- but mostly they want to prevent additional regulations.

David Hunnicutt of Oregonians in Action, the group that wrote Measure 37, says he's not giving away campaign secrets. As he sees it, the pressure is on the other side to prove their rewrite is a good idea.

"Once we remind voters that legislators think they're stupid and are trying to take away their vote," he says, "I think they'll be upset."

Laura Oppenheimer: 503-294-7669; loppenheimer@news.oregonian.com
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/orego...280.xml&coll=7
__________________
make paradise, tear up a parking lot
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2007, 4:36 PM
zilfondel zilfondel is offline
Submarine de Nucléar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays View Post
Many thanks for M-37, Oregon. It helped a similar package get attempted here, and it helped that package die a very public, emphatic death.
always glad to be the guinea pigs!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2007, 4:24 PM
MitchE's Avatar
MitchE MitchE is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 487
Measure 49 doing well early; Measure 50 battle close

Portland Business Journal - 1:09 PM PDT Friday, August 17, 2007

Portland-based Riley Research Associates says early results indicate a strong showing for the land-use initiative Measure 49 and less-than-conclusive results for Measure 50.

Mike Riley, the group's research director, plans to release specific figures on Monday. Those polled were read the measures' title language. Based on the thumbnail description, the efforts to change components of Measure 37, which gave landowners more reign to develop their properties, could occur this November.

"It looks to be a pretty effective measure that's popular with voters," Riley said. "(Measure opponent) Oregonians in Action stands to lose if they don't mount an aggressive campaign to change the impression about what the ballot measure will entail."

Measure 50, which would levy an 84.5-cent-per-pack tobacco tax, then steer the extra money toward children's health care, is harder to call, he said.

"Voters seem to favor it, but not as much as the Measure 37 fix," he said. "It's not as popular as one might expect."

The measures could spur millions of dollars worth of campaign spending this election season. Opponents of a similar initiative to Measure 50 in California spent some $70 million to defeat the notion.

http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/...3/daily37.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Aug 19, 2007, 3:33 AM
zilfondel zilfondel is offline
Submarine de Nucléar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4,477
I am going to post the link to an excellent Oregon land-use blog:

http://www.landusewatch.com/
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Pacific West > Portland > Business, the Economy & Politics
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:25 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.