Fixing Measure 37

Maybe 5

I'm a day or two late on this, but there's promising news from Oregon on Measure 37. Governor Kulongoski has proposed legislation that essentially puts a temporary moratorium on the most obnoxious results of the law. (See here and here [pdf] for the details.)

Kulongoski's bill will still allow rural landowners to continue with small-scale claims. In fact, it should actually speed up the processing of these claims. So legitimate claimants who want to build a single family house on their property -- or subdivide to build a new house -- will be allowed to.

Seems like smart politics to me.

When Oregon voters passed the measure in 2004, it was partly out of concern for small-time property owners. Kulongoski's proposal honors that concern and yet gives the state a chance to grapple with the worst features of the increasingly unpopular law.

And for those who haven't been following the blow-by-blow, Measure 37's consequences have been reaching new heights of absurdity.

In November 2006 -- just when Oregon's neighbors were rejecting Measure 37 copycat initiatives (in part because of Oregon's experience) -- Measure 37 took a turn for the worse. In the span of about two weeks, the number of claims more than doubled.

The barrage of claims also included Oregon's biggest. An out-of-state logging corporation, Plum Creek Timber, filed more than 100 applications to allow development on 32,000 acres of coastal forest. Plum Creek is demanding $94.8 million in compensation from taxpayers unless it is allowed to build on the land, most of which is zoned for forestry.

Another out-of-state company, RY Timber, is demanding $8 million unless it is allowed to develop its holdings above Wallowa Lake. And Stimson Lumber Company filed 135 separate claims to allow development on its forestlands.

Gosh, it almost seems like no accident that timber companies contributed the lion's share of the money, $1.2 million, to get Measure 37 passed back in 2004.

It would be laughable if it weren't such a real danger to Oregon.

Eric de Place is a senior research at Sightline Institute, a Seattle-based sustainability think tank, working on promoting smart policy decisions for the Pacific Northwest. Visit http://daily.sightline.org/daily_score to read more on Sightline’s blog.

Advertisement
Advertisement

  1. d41295 Posted 6:28 am
    08 Feb 2007

    Of the PeopleMeasure 37 was passed by initiative by a majority of the people of Oregon. They WANT Measure 37. They WANT to accomplish what it accomplishes. Kulongowski or liberal environmentalists have no right to ignore the people's will just because they find the measure inconvenient.
    If necessary, the people will pass the initiative AGAIN. It should not have to come to that.

    Permalink

  2. Eric de Place's avatar

    Eric de Place Posted 7:18 am
    08 Feb 2007

    And now hated by the peopleBrand new poll results just released today say otherwise. 52% of registered voters in Oregon say they'd vote against it if they had a chance; only 37% would vote for it. You'll read about it in the papers tomorrow.
    And this poll was conducted by Moore Information, a Republican-aligned polling firm. More here: http://www.sightline.org/daily_score/archive/2007/02/08/v ...

    Permalink

  3. Heidi Posted 11:03 am
    08 Feb 2007

    Perhaps...d41295 is a member of this group:

    Oregonians in Action?

    http://groxie.com

    DIY Environmentalism

    Permalink

  4. d41295 Posted 2:24 am
    09 Feb 2007

    InitiativeThen the new people who are against Measure 37 can plan and run an initiative to overturn it, and it can be voted on like any democratic measure. Until then it is the law. Property owners are making plans and spending money based on this law, and the governor does not have the right to overturn it by fiat. http://www.oregonlive.com/oregonian/stories/index.ssf?/ba ...
    Heidi, I am not a member of Oregonians in Action, as a matter of fact. But citizens are still allowed to organize in this country, in case you didn't notice, and that is what Oregonians in Action have done. Typical liberal snobbery.

    Permalink

  5. Eric de Place's avatar

    Eric de Place Posted 6:53 am
    09 Feb 2007

    You must be confusedThe governor has neither the right nor power to overturn it by "fiat." He can, however, overturn it or modify it by approving legislation -- and that's precisely what he's doing. That, my friend, is how life works in a representative democracy. Thankfully for our democracy (and economy and environment and sanity), ballot initiatives are not the only method of governing.

    Permalink

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Viewed
More
Commented
More
Advertisement