Pay If You Want to Play
One of the most interesting results of yesterday's voting has gotten almost no attention outside Oregon. Voters there passed an initiative that would require governments to compensate property owners when new regulations reduce the value of their land, or to waive those land use rules. Here's the Oregonian's decidedly anti-initiative report
Critics say Measure 37 abandons land-use policies that have defined Oregon as a place that puts a premium on its farms, forests and quality of life.
The measure's approval may reflect a seductive ballot title more than it reflects a movement against land-use planning, said Tim Raphael, spokesman for the no-on-37 campaign.
"When we have to choose between paying landowners or overturning community protections, that's going to be a tough decision for Oregonians," Raphael said. "It will cause us to revisit the question about what our values are and what our approach is."
The measure's passage marks a significant victory for activists who have long opposed Oregon's land-use planning system, one of the most far-reaching in the nation.
They'll have just 30 days to wait until cities, counties and the state are required to start evaluating property owners' claims.
"People understood we can have planning and treat people fairly at the same time," said David Hunnicutt, director of Oregonians in Action. "That's been what's missing."
The law will allow property owners affected by land-use rules to apply for a waiver or compensation for any drop in value. Evaluating landowners' claims -- not counting any payouts -- is expected to cost state and local governments from $54 million to $344 million a year.
We could use a law like that in Dallas, where the local paper's editorial board literallly sees playing with other people's property as a game. Even from the DMN, the cavalier tone of this editorial shocked me. You know, I have a lot of good ideas about how to run a newspaper. Maybe the city should empower me to apply them.