The land use system in Oregon is based on urban growth areas and is not working. It is not keeping up with our growth and real estate prices keep climbing. Can you afford to buy a house where you work?

Many building restrictions have resulted and people who own land have had their intended uses stripped away without compensation. Have you ever met a state, county or city planner that was humble and hasn’t lusted for power? Measure 37 resulted to address these problems. Today some people claim 37 has gone too far. Measure 49 was drafted, in a very heavy-handed way, by a one-sided legislature that lacked the backbone to tackle the problem directly, to stop possible abuses of over-development that possibly might occur via Measure 37 claims.

Over-development generally has not occurred and cannot occur because of real constraints such as water, waste disposal, roads, topography, etc. The majority of Measure 49 hoopla is hot air. Some is not.

The real problem with Measure 49 is insidious vague language that can be interpreted broadly giving city, county and state planners and regulators broad latitude. That is scary.

Gorham Blaine (Hood River News, Oct. 20) said it well, “Measure 49 is hardly perfect …” and he is a proponent of M49. If approved, 49 will result in badly flawed law and a hopeless loop of ongoing restrictions and spiraling real estate prices.

The answer is simple. Vote no on 49 and send it back to the legislature to redraft it in an open, honest process that results in easily understood, straightforward language.

•

Passage of Measure 49 is needed to keep Oregon looking like Oregon. Measure 49 is what Measure 37 advertised. Measure 49 delivers up to three new homes on any approved claim. Voters are challenged to understand this measure amid wild claims from all quarters.

We must remember Measure 37 claimants achieve a place outside of our zoning laws. Our valley is unique. Fruit farming has been so successful that many farm ownerships, especially in the best soils areas of Pine Grove, date back before any land use existed.

Without the limits of zoning, commercial and industrial uses and residential subdivisions are all real options for these Measure 37 claimants.The Hood River News is right that little damage has been done so far. But they and the “no on 49” crowd are ignoring the fact that over time all these uses will proliferate, making the remaining farms ever more difficult to sustain. This valley will then truly become unrecognizable.

Measure 37 says, in effect, if the county cannot reimburse property owners for loss in value (1.2 billion dollars in claims so far), then residential, commercial or industrial uses may be proposed subject only to health and safety limitations.

Health and safety issues concern adequate sewage disposal, water, safe roads, etc. These are engineering issues. Our world-famous American ingenuity either has solved or will eventually solve any health and safety problems that currently block development.

Measure 37 is lopsided. Consideration of the “common good” our founding fathers fought for is forgotten. Jefferson, Franklin and others saw property rights balanced between all owners, not the Measure 37 situation where one owner can do whatever while his neighbor remained restricted from the same right. That is a lottery, not a balance.

It’s not fair to Oregonians who bought appropriately zoned lands. It’s not fair to future generations that will need this food-producing land when the petroleum orgy is over. It’s not fair to all other property owners who have paid higher property taxes for 30 years to support farmers’ and forest owners’ very low property taxes. It’s not fair for the landfall profits that will accrue to the seven large landholders on our valley floor and surrounding forests who currently have claims totaling 2,236 building lots.

Measure 49 is the only road at this point back to a fair balanced future for all Oregonians. Vote for your best future; vote for Measure 49.

You know, I’m getting REAL tired of folks coming ‘round here and saying, “Oh well. Let George do it.” Well, I just talked to George, and he told me he’s beyond being tired, that he’s going to take a break and go on vacation like a bunch of others like to do. Which fact precipitated the following meditation. I think folks have dis-remembered the nitty gritties of what it means to live under a representative form of democratic government. Because I hear/interpolate much too often, “Let government do it.” Or “Let government pay for that.”

Guess what, folks? I take those remarks REAL personal, because I am the government. And my neighbor is. And you are. We ALL are the government. So, what you really mean to say is “Let’s all of us dumbos chip in a little and pay for this extravagant/irresponsible thing here that I’ve dreamed up.” Put in those terms, my polite response is, “Well, no thank you. There probably are some kernels of wisdom in what you just proposed, but I need time to think about them.”

Now, with regard to Measure 49: It seems there’s a big bunch of folk who maintain that “the government” (that’s you and me, AND them) conspired to remove inalienable rights they possessed regarding a hunk of land in their possession. I’m not gonna say that a fair number of these folk have NOT been led on a nightmare merry-go-round ride of bureaucratic mumbling/fumbling. Hey, that’s the nature of this thing we call a representative and democratic form of government.

Mistakes are made. Despite their titles, those we elect-to-select to make decisions for us are STILL human beings, and by definition, they are prone to error. The good thing about this method of governing is that corrections and amendments to the way things get done can be made. You just sling the bad reps out next go-round and elect yourself a new one, with better instructions for performance.

Or, you pound on your rep’s door till he listens up. And/or you threaten him with removal/impeachment. That’s government folks: A system of rules/regs to modify behaviors. It is NOT some fancy Sugar Daddy with deep pockets to pay for all the idiot things you and I can dream up for someone else to pay for.

If they’re honest, I think the proponents of Measure 37 of awhile back will tell you it had some serious flaws which need correction. They just don’t like the correction embodied in the present Measure 49. I don’t ‘specially like Measure 49 either, but I’m gonna vote for it because Measure 37 can’t work. Maybe next go-round somebody will dream up a reasonable way to correct the flaws in Measure 49.

This is democracy, folks. There’s no God up there writing irrefutable laws on a stone tablet that the rest of us get to follow or be damned. A democracy posits that we ALL are gods in the sense that word had among the Greeks long ago. Such gods duked it out all the time, pounding each other into sense and insensibility. While those living below just shuddered ‘neath the colossal battles. That’s democracy for you. It ain’t always pretty, but somehow it works.

So, carry on. Maybe when George gets back from his R-and-R he’ll be up for “doing it” for us again. But don’t bank on it. Sign me just another dumb-as-dirt farmer.

•

The glossy brochure I received in my mailbox yesterday shows pictures of “poor farm families” who say they just want to build one or two homes on their property and continue to farm. With a little research (just call their county planning departments), I discovered that every single one of those families have filed a Measure 37 claim, some for subdivisions of up to 144 homes.

One family says in the brochure that they just want homes for their kids and grandkids , but their claim is for 110 homes. That’s a lot of grandkids. These are farmers who are done with farming and are getting into the development business. But what about those farmers who want to continue farming? What about those farmers who have invested their lives and all their money the last 30 years into their farms, assuming that Oregon agricultural lands were always going to be protected as the land use laws promised?

Talk to your local farmers in Wasco County and Hood River County — and there are MANY of them — who want to continue to farm but will have to sell out if Measure 49 doesn’t pass. Ask THEM why they support Measure 49. Farming brings in millions of dollars of revenue a year to our counties. Development sucks money out of our communities. This is it, our one chance to keep Oregon from becoming just another California-style mess of development.

Please vote for Measure 49.

Tax tobacco

Tobacco lobbyists would have us believe that it’s unfair for the non-smoking majority to impose additional taxes on adult smokers. That argument is undermined by the simple fact that smoking-induced illnesses are expense borne by all taxpayers.

Oregonians’ state and federal tax burden from smoking-caused government expenditures is $587 per household. The tobacco industry wants us to believe that tobacco tax increases do not provide a reliable source of future state revenues.

The truth is that after an increase, state cigarette tax revenues sharply increase and then slowly decline because of a reduction in state smoking rates, but those declines are gradual and predictable. There will be no surprises and the state can easily adapt as it experiences $657.9 million in long-term health care savings due to the decline in smoking rates.

RJ Reynolds’ own internal documents disclosed in the tobacco lawsuits recognizes this predictability, “If prices were 10 percent higher, 12-17 incidence (the percentage of kids who smoke) would be 11.9 percent lower.” Phillip Morris’ internal documents also recognize the “win-win” situation created by raising the cigarette tax, “It is clear that price has a pronounced effect on smoking prevalence of teenagers, and that the goals of reducing teenage smoking and balancing the budget would both be served by increasing the excise tax on cigarettes.”

Take a stand against the tobacco industry manipulation of citizens and vote YES on Measure 50! Then join the Alcohol, Tobacco and Other Drug (ATOD) Prevention Coalition of Hood River County for our annual prevention planning retreat.

The retreat is on Nov. 15, from 3:30 to 6:30 p.m. at the Best Western Hood River Inn’s River View Conference Room.

Yes on 50

As stated in your Oct. 24 article, “(Carol) York said no one in opposition to Measure 50 disagrees that all children should have health care coverage. She said those costs should be shouldered by all taxpayers and not borne only by smokers.”

She wants to support the private tobacco lobby by reducing efforts to curb smoking which generates costs to everyone’s health insurance, and socialize (make everyone pay for) children’s health insurance.

Why is she so inconsistent? By her logic, only the children who need health care should pay for it. Heck, everyone who is insured shares the medical costs of those who choose to breathe smoke. Since we all pay into the medical insurance pools, anything that reduces costs as well as covers other needs is welcomed by us all. The argument about the Constitution not being the right place to codify such a law is simply tobacco industry parlance for “We want the measure to fail so we can have money.”

Change in wind

Let’s change Gorge wind turbine power projects from corporate wind power projects to community wind power projects. We could achieve this vision by requiring all large wind power projects to do two things:

1. Require wind power project operators to donate as private individuals 7 percent of all wind energy revenue including tax credits to the local schools of the affected communities.

2. Require wind power projects operators to offer ownership investment shares to local affected people in increments of $5,000 so the local people, if they wish, can invest and share the profits in the wind. This way instead when we look up at the spinning wind turbines that I think in time will ultimately be visible here in the Gorge, almost all of us will smile and see support of our schools and local ownership benefits blowing in the wind instead of corporate greed that I think many people see now.

Specifically for the SDS proposed 44-turbine Underwood project, this would mean that additional school revenue of maybe $400,000 per year split between Klickitat and Hood River counties (the two affected areas) and the option for locals in Klickitat and Hood River counties to buy into the wind farm with returns probably in the 5 percent to 10 percent range.

I will add that the above benefits would be in addition to the existing benefits of an increased tax base and increased revenues and the creation of jobs.

Saddleback skeptic

My community had its first opportunity to hear about the SDS Lumber plan for a large-scale wind farm. The value statements included: additional tax revenues, road upgrades (and repair) along construction routes, and help doing our state’s part by supporting “green” energy.

The permit process begins later this year. The project would be located west of Underwood Mountain, currently consisting of 44 wind turbines (400 feet tall), along the top of a north-south ridge, with the southernmost turbine located 60 feet outside the scenic boundary.

Day and night, the turbines will be seen from Hood River, White Salmon, Bingen, Underwood, Mill A, Willard and other surrounding communities. The towers are visible from all the designated scenic roads in the Gorge. Although in favor of “green” energy, the majority of residents were negative on this project.

Concerns included: reduction in property values, 450 extra-large trucks coming through the community, health concerns medically labeled Wind Farm Syndrome, operating noise, closeness to residential properties, fear of additional development projects to follow, visibility from the scenic area, and short notice/lack of data for an impartial evaluation.

The concerns were met with no empathy from SDS and most surprisingly, District Commissioner Jamie Tolfree. Jamie declared that the project was “way cool.” Jamie does see it as important to get more tax dollars into the community, but needs to perform a count of the concerned voters. Many hope that she’s capable of assessing the costs (soft and hard) versus potential tax revenue, independent from the SDS projections.

Most concerns were related to the location of the southernmost group of turbines. SDS stated that if they were not sited on the scenic boundary, then the whole project would not be economically feasible.

Since economic feasibility is not an exact number (and neither are the wind power or tax assessments), it seems possible that a group of smart people can find a compromise. If compromise is not possible, all parties involved should realize that they are being held hostage by pure business profiteering and need to be extremely concerned about moving forward.

Home tour succeeds

Wow! The Earth Center’s Enviro-House Tour (sixth annual) gets better every year.

In addition to the many unique energy-efficient, healthy homes we generally feature (straw bale, recycled polystyrene, and now aerated cement), we were able to provide rare access to several truly inspiring buildings this year: a retreat center in Trout Lake made of cob construction; a historic house relocated from the Columbia Gorge Community College; a remarkable middle school in The Dalles with state-of-the-art lighting (day lighting and automated lighting features); and a craftsman cottage in Mosier essentially made from re-claimed materials.

New this year also, New Buildings Institute from White Salmon was kind to perform comprehensive energy audits on two “typical” houses, thus providing good ideas for retrofitting existing houses.

A sincere thank you to all of the many volunteers, to our dedicated tour coordinator Tara Johnston Kearnes, and a special thanks to the homeowners who graciously let us trod upon their privacy in the best interest of sharing their wisdom. Our organization aspires to provide practical information that helps local folks live more sustainably. For more info, www.cgec.org (541)-387-0063.

For fairer cable

Television has gone too far. Day after day and night after night, families are assaulted by graphic violence and murder, explicit sexual situations, depictions of brutal rape, incest, and pedophilia. The kicker is we get to pay for it.

Why can’t I pay for only the channels I wish to receive — just as I do for every other good and service I buy? The cable industry claims that giving families choices would increase costs. This from an industry whose product is outstripping inflation by a 3-to-1 margin. Does anyone trust their calculations?

The FCC says that consumers would save money under a cable choice model. Groups like the Parents Television Council agree. The television industry says that giving families choices would eliminate so-called “niche” networks. This doesn’t seem to be the case with magazines.

Hollywood says it wants to “empower” parents and give them “complete control” over their televisions. If the entertainment industry really means what it says about parental control, it would give parents the ability to pick and choose channels so they wouldn’t be forced to subsidize graphic, explicit and just plain filthy programs.

The industry believes that parents are wholly responsible for guarding their children against the very product it produces, while accepting no responsibility themselves. When there is a pothole in the road, you don’t just put up warning signs about the pothole and leave it, you fix the pothole and don’t force people to drive through it.

Undo the debt

There are more than 75 million American citizens under the age of 18 whose share of the U.S. federal debt is over $27,000 each. When they marry, their share of debt will double to over $54,000 and exceed $81,000 when they become a family of three.

This liability was forced upon them without their approval or consent and is a burden that will weigh heavily upon them as long as they live. It is time that our Supreme Court determined if is constitutional to impose a debt of this magnitude upon our children without their approval or consent.

There is nothing to indicate our Congress is making an effective effort to reduce this debt. In fact, Congress has just agreed to raise the ceiling $850 billion dollars to over $9.815 trillion. If it is found to be constitutional to impose our debts upon our future generations, it is time that the entire world realize what kind of people we Americans have become.

If it is found to be unconstitutional to impose our debts upon our children, perhaps we adult citizens will find the courage to govern with sufficient responsibility to keep our nation solvent, and our children will at least have a chance to handle the responsibilities we failed to resolve on our own.