Locals react to Measure 37 Supreme Court ruling

The Sisters area couple whose land-use problems sparked the Measure 37 drive are satisfied with last week’s outcome in the Oregon Supreme Court.

Opponents of the measure, however, warn of the effects of poorly planned development on Oregon’s quality of life.

“We are very happy with the decision of the Oregon Supreme Court,” said Eugene Prete, local property owner and the chief petitioner of the appeal to the Supreme Court. “That decision gives us faith in the system, particularly when it was a unanimous decision of the court.”

The Pretes purchased a 20-acre property at 67955 Cloverdale Rd. east of Sisters in 1990, looking ahead to retirement in 1999. Plans were to build a retirement home there and raise horses. In 2000, Prete retired and the couple moved to Oregon in 2000 only to discover that Oregon law and county ordinances had changed in 1993, preventing a dwelling from being constructed on their property. Only their horses could live on their property.

Initially, the county denied their request for a building permit. At that time, the county stated that approval of the Prete’s building would lead to approval of additional dwellings in the area and “destabilize” the agricultural use of some of the county’s most productive farmland.

In December 2004, Eugene and Barbara Prete filed their claim under Measure 37 approved by Oregon voters that fall. They were seeking either approval to build a dwelling on their property or to be compensated in the amount of $383,000 for the loss in property value. In August of 2005, Deschutes County commissioners approved the waiver and the Prete’s plans to sell their existing home and plan for a new home were back on track.

Six weeks later, 1000 Friends of Oregon and others challenged Measure 37 with a lawsuit. That put everything on hold again. Last October, a Marion County judge ruled that the measure was unconstitutional. That ruling was appealed by the Pretes and others supported by Oregonians in Action who had authored the original ballot measure.

“I don’t know if there are any other shoes to drop,” Prete said. “We can only move ahead again cautiously. The sad thing is that the last state legislative session did nothing to address this issue.”

Opponents of Measure 37 state that up to now, the issue has been a policy issue.

“Now, Oregonians will start to see the on-the-ground impacts of poorly planned development,” said Daniel Eisenbeis of 1000 Friends of Oregon.

Gov. Ted Kulongoski believes that the legislature has the power to come up with a solution fair to everyone. He has created a 10-member task force to review Oregon’s land use law and to address other questions raised by the court’s decision.

One big question raised by Crook County commissioners concerns the transfer of waivers as property is sold, something not currently allowed. The county has passed an ordinance allowing this transfer and then sued itself in Circuit Court to test the legality of their ordinance.

Two things seem certain: large-scale development of rural areas following the Supreme Court’s ruling and a continuous legal struggle between opponents and proponents of rural housing in the months and years ahead.