|
By Roger Nichols
The Dalles Chronicle
October 4, 2008
The Big Look task force town hall meeting in
The Dalles
drew a big response Monday. Nearly 120 people showed up for the
event at the
Columbia
Gorge
Discovery
Center,
nearly as many as were at an earlier meeting in
Klamath Falls.
Those who attended were respectful, but not bashful about sharing
their views.
Some felt the task force was a threat to
Oregon’s
existing land use laws; others felt that changes to those laws
were long overdue.
Bob Nickelsen, of
Hood
River,
said his orchard is surrounded on Highway 281 and on three sides
by commercial zoning.
“I’m controlled by the Gorge Commission, the city council, the
county commission, the upper valley council and the state,” he
said, “so how do you solve all those problems?
“I’d like to shrink my farm enough to get it away from all the
urban things that people don’t like. Just the day before
yesterday, the fire department in
Hood
River
went to the shopping center because they had a gas leak smell. Who
caused it? My sprayer putting lime and sulfur with an east wind
down to town.”
Bob Gove, of Mosier, echoed a sentiment clearly popular with some
members of Monday’s crowd.
“I think the public did get involved twice,” he said, “when they
voted on Measure 7 and when they voted on Measure 37. And both
times, the opposition figured out some way to shoot it down. It’s
time for the legislature and the governor to pay attention to what
the voters say.”
Ken Maddox, of
Hood
River,
was convinced that Big Look decisions had already been made.
“If you go to the Web site, you’ll see three principal documents,
one of which is titled ‘preliminary recommendations,’ he said.
“The date on that was May 30, four months ago. That first
recommendation was to turn things over to local government. Local
government, under
Oregon
land use laws, is supposed to encourage participation. What the
local government in
Hood
River
County
did was to designate the planning commission as public
participation and that’s it.”
Jack Mills was one of the original members of 1,000 Friends of
Oregon, and was elected twice as a Hood River County Commissioner.
“This is an example of why we should not turn over the decisions
for land use laws to the local county commissioner,” he said.
“While I was a county commissioner a good friend and I were major
stockholders and directors of a major
Hood
River
business that just recently sold for over $5 million.
“My friend, in an unrelated business, broke the land use laws in
taking out a large orchard as prime ag land. He thought if he got
far enough into the project it would not be challenged.”
The case was challenged, by 1,000 Friends of Oregon and others.
The case went to the county commission, and the commission
approved the golf course.
“It went twice to LUBA [Land Use Board of Appeals] and the Court
of Appeals,” Mills said, “and each time coming back to the county
commission as illegal. Each time as a commission member, I felt I
had to vote against my friend’s illegal project, where he might
have lost over $2 million because of my vote. I lost a third bid
for election as county commissioner because of my votes on that
project. I’m not asking for sympathy, but I want you to know that
county commissioners are too close to these decisions to be able
to give a fair vote.”
Scott Franke of the upper
Hood
River
Valley
added his concern. “I have seen where local control would be very
problematic,” he said. “There are incredible pressures brought. A
lot of commissioners aren’t as able to resist as Jack was able to
do. Even in
Hood
River
County,
where we try our best to do it right, it’s always riding the edge
of what’s legally possible.”
The question of oversight was echoed by Matt Bowen, of
The Dalles.
“I went out and got 400 signatures of people who valued our
small-town lifestyle and brought it to our city council, and we
were ignored,” he said, “How do you police the city council?”
Tom Mack, of
Portland,
a former
Portland
policeman who does land use regulation for
Multnomah
County,
had the same question from a different view.
“I’m hoping that what you can take back to the legislators is to
create a system that a common person can understand and work
through,” he said, “because what I’ve seen is not that. I see an
inflexible system that doesn’t bend, and not even the police
officers in this state enforce the ORS standards the way land use
planners and bureaucrats in the land use division enforce those
laws. There has to be some flexibility to do something about that,
and swiftly.”
He also said Measure 49 had sold the public a bill of goods,
promising an express process to solve their problems.
“Everyone I talk to in Multnomah County is saying it will be 2010
before they’ll hear how their ‘express process’ is going, and that
doesn’t seem acceptable to me and most of the people I talk to.”
The most novel concept of the evening belonged to Jurgen Hess of
Hood
River.
“Every time our cities grow, we take something from the natural
environment,” he said. “I’d like to see a natural area growth
boundary, flip it over. I think we have to respect the other
species that live on this planet with us and think about it from
their viewpoint. We’re not the top of the ladder here, folks.”
Despite the potentially divisive nature of the complex subject,
attendees were polite and respectful.
When Jim Olson, of Dufur, said developers should cover the costs
of added infrastructure, including roads, sewer and water systems,
Mike Kitts, of Hood River, noted that he had built “probably 200
affordable homes” in the past two or three years, and that there
should be exceptions for affordable housing, or costs would drive
construction beyond what people could afford.
But both calmly delivered their thoughts without rancor.
Some expressed strong opinions — one farmer suggested that urban
areas should have to “bear the pain” of increased regulation and
the urban growth boundary should be restricted “until we see lots
of high-rise apartment buildings all over the place,” but the
overall tone was one of giving serious consideration to a serious
topic.
Three more town hall meetings are scheduled, concluding Oct. 2 in
Bend.
There are also “meeting in a box” kits available for other groups
to facilitate additional meetings beyond the 10 the task force
budget allows. They are available from the Web site.
|
