APB agenda 122000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Page 6 Nov. - Dec. 2000 farmland preservation report OREGON SEEKS TAKINGS CLAIMS Vote may wreck nation's most renowned land use law PORTLAND, OR — Oregon voters went against the grain Nov. 7 and approved what will likely be the nation's most far - reaching property rights compen- sation measure, with effects to be felt throughout this state's historic, nationally renowned growth management regulations. Experts say approval of Measure 7 will have extensive implications for environmental protec- tions in plac since passage of Senate Bill 100 in 1973, Oregon's long- touted land use planning law. Measure 7, which amends the state constitution, requires state and local governments to pay land- owners when a law or regulation reduces property value by any amount. Because some of the lan- guage of the new law is vague, no one knows which regulations or rules long administered under SB 100 will be affected. That will likely be deter- mined by the state's landowners as lawsuits are filed. Planners and conservationists are stunned by passage of Measure 7, said land use consultant Local ballots, continued from page 5 a fund that would include money for agricultural lands and open space. According to the Land Trust Alliance, last year voters passed 90 percent of 102 local measures au -. thorizing $1.8 billion in local taxing authority and bond issues for land preservation. The year before, voters passed 84 percent of 148 referenda totaling $8.3 billion in spending authority. The success of these measures prompted consideration of spend- ing bills in Congress to supplement local initiatives, most notably through the Conservation and Rein- vestment Act (CARA) which failed to move through Congress and was supplanted by a Depart- ment of Interior appropriations package that in- cluded no funds for farmland preservation. No additional funds have been forthcoming in other appropriations bills before Congress. Mitch Rohse, former communications director for the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development and an expert on Oregon land use law. "The reasons for passage were pretty murky. I think the measure was widely misunderstood," Rohse said. "The legislature convenes in January. It might be able to adopt legislation that would flesh out some of the details in how it would be admini- stered ... but it's a conservative legislature." A study commissioned by 1000 Friends of Oregon identified 90 state and local regulations that could be tested, including comprehensive plans and zoning and subdivision ordinances. Included in that study was an opinion that the law "is clearly intended to include regulations adopted in the past but enforced in the future ... although new laws are generally applied prospec- tively, a new law will be applied retrospectively if such intent is clearly stated," and the law is clear on that point, the opinion said. The study, conducted by ECONorthwest, the region's largest economics consulting firm, said the impact of Measure 7, "would extend beyond tradi- tional land -use restrictions because the initiative specifically defines property to include structures, minerals, forest products, and other crops. Conse- quently, building codes, safety regulations, and a variety of environmental regulations are also covered by the measure." These would include urban growth boundaries and recent restrictions on rural land divisions. Because urban growth boundaries bolster property values for landowners inside the bound- ary and could be seen to reduce values outside it, landowners outside could request payment for lost development opportunities, the study said. According to Rohse, the Oregon Land Conser- vation and Development Commission, following Measure 7's passage, "had a conference call and decided to suspend rulemaking on UGBs and development in areas with natural hazards, to see how Measure 7 will work." please continue to page 7