By RAELYNN RICARTE
News staff writer
April 18, 2007

A flurry of e-mail action alerts flew to both supporters and opponents of Measure 37 over the weekend.

Both sides were urged to attend a legislative hearing on Tuesday evening and let their voices be heard. However, no one knew exactly what they would be testifying about.

The Joint Land Use Fairness Committee was not unveiling a series of amendments to four bills until the hearing began. (The hearing was scheduled to take place after the Hood River News’ press deadline.)

“Our understanding is that the committee is seeking comment on the framework for the bills proposed at the April 12 meeting,” said Eric Stachon, communications director for 1000 Friends of Oregon, a conservation group.

He was hopeful the amendments would correct “unfairness” created by the passage of Measure 37. He said the law enacted in 2004 granted some landowners rights that are denied to their neighbors.

“We’re concerned the framework doesn’t go far enough in what we see as needed reform to protect valuable farm and forest land,” he said. “But the devil’s in the details, so to speak. We really need to see some of the specifics before we can make an assessment.”

Oregonians in Action, the property rights advocacy group that authored the law, believed Senate and House Democrats, which hold the majority of committee positions, were intent on “gutting” Measure 37. And that move would disrespect the will of the 61 percent of voters that approved the law.

“Do they think that Measure 37 is going to go away? Do they think that more than 1,000,000 voters are going to say it’s okay, once again, to take away their property rights?” asked Ross Day, OIA legal affairs director.

“The fundamental question they can’t answer is why ‘fixing’ Measure 37 means paring it back. I think the reason they can’t answer that is obvious. This is about trying to repeal it as much as possible.”

Rep. Patti Smith, R-Corbett, a member of the committee and Hood River County’s representative, is incensed about the way two House bills and two from the Senate were brought forward. She said the “framework” negotiated by the committee was altered “behind closed doors” and now should more appropriately be called “a framed work.”

“If these bills go through, Measure 37 will not protect any Oregon property owners. We will be back to the days when they were at the mercy of government planners and the Land Conservation and Development Commission,” said Smith.

1000 Friends and OIA have asked landowners affected by Measure 37 to speak out at the April 17 hearing. Smith expected an overflow crowd — along with plenty of passionate testimony.

Meanwhile, Hood River County officials remain concerned that the state could take over the processing of most Measure 37 development applications. House Bill 3153 eliminates local control for any proposal on property outside of the Urban Growth Boundary.

“We believe that more local control and discretion in regard to the land use system is needed,” said Dave Meriwether, county administrator.

He said county planners were more aware of soil conditions and topography that could negatively affect an agricultural use of property. He said the uniformity of centralized planning might be a more convenient way to do business, but it took away the potential for flexibility.

“I think it’s become clear that the one-size-fits-all approach to land use hasn’t really worked,” he said.

Measure 37 allows landowners to seek compensation when a government agency imposes a regulation that reduces the value of property. In lieu of making that payment, the agency can remove the restriction and restore the use allowed at the time of acquisition.

Stachon contends the law could grant the 7,562 claimants statewide an ability to use their land in a way denied to other property owners. He said government agencies have also not verified compensation requests to determine if property has actually been devalued. For example, he said farm and forest lands are taxed at a much lower rate to offset development limitations.

He said 1000 Friends has agreed that some changes need to be made in state land-use planning. And the organization could support granting Measure 37 landowners one additional residence if resources are adequately protected.

“There is such polarization on this issue and we so need to fix this thing and move forward,” said Stachon. “I hope we can do that and recognize that what unites us is greater than what divides us.”

Day said if the committee bills are pushed through the House and Senate, OIA will help citizens bring forward another initiative. He said that would be the only avenue left to restore “fairness” and the property rights stripped away, once again, by the state government.