Opinion Vote "No" On Measure 37

If you love and live in Oregon for our quality of life, land and water, vote NO on Measure 37.

Three decades ago conservationist Republican Governor Tom McCall led the effort to enact local laws to protect our natural resources, fiscal commitments and the livability of our state.

This unique Oregon approach to guiding land use hasn't always worked perfectly, but we have avoided the kind of financially unserviceable development that other states have suffered. Oregon has been nationally acclaimed for its exceptional livability, reasonable public service costs and strong property values.

Our current city and county land use laws protect farmland, wildlife habitat, open space, land for growth, public services and facilities, and natural landscapes.

Without our land use protections, Highway 101 along the Oregon Coast would be strip development from Astoria to Brookings. Throughout Central Oregon more unserviceable developments like La Pine could have developed without consideration of the county's future or any public say-so, including along Highway 20 between Sisters and Bend.

Measure 37 eliminates the land use protections enacted after an owner purchased a property if the protections resulted in lower market values, unless the owner is paid for alleged losses.

This could siphon public money for a few developers and land speculators, but the real purpose is to tear apart Oregon's carefully woven land use fabric.

Under M37, a neighbor's property could develop without any notice to you and lower your livability and property value.

The city or county could only prevent this by paying the neighbor -- with taxpayer money -- the reduction in the neighbor's property value caused by the existing land use protection.

The amount would be determined through lawsuits or agreed to by local politicians, creating numerous opportunities for court cases and questionable political deals.

Measure 37 contains some obscure exceptions. These exceptions, added to the hundreds of dates that the various city and county land use protections were enacted and the thousands of dates that purchases were made, will create complex time and geographic puzzles and open a Pandora's Box of costly legal challenges.

Measure 37 will flood local governments and the court system with litigation and claims while destroying our land use laws. It will put us on the same disastrous land use course that other states nationwide have been on for decades. We don't need M37 because the U.S. Constitution provides compensation for true takings of private property for public uses.

If the public should pay some theoretical loss of land sale value because land use is protected, then why shouldn't documented increases in property values because of such actions as up-zoning be paid to the public? Of course, the M37 proponents only want it one way!

The measure acknowledges that it can't overturn federal law. So we would have to depend more on the feds and courts to protect our property and environmental resources.

This is simply "doublespeak" by the self-described defenders of local control and states' rights.

Additional septic tank threats to groundwater quality, runoff threats to water quality and fisheries, and losses of visual quality will be unavoidable.

Expect public utility and services costs to increase and more traffic.

Greed drives M37. Its passage would reward land speculators at the expense of Oregon livability and public money.

It disregards community values and environmental quality.

Thirteen Oregon County Farm Bureaus oppose M37 ­ but not Deschutes.

This is probably because of the land sales for development anticipated if the measure passes.

The sponsors of M37 have attacked our land use laws three times in the last five years, and weakened our fish, wildlife and environmental programs.

No one benefits from M37 but attorneys and speculators. The rest of us lose big time.

Linda Davis is a retired Oregon land use planner and Tom Davis is a retired engineer. They live in Sisters.