Committee strips resort ban from bill

The controversial and hotly debated Senate Bill 30 left committee last week with an amendment that shocked some, delighted others and left observers scratching their heads.

The amendment stripped the bill of language forbidding destination resorts in or within three miles of the Metolius basin.

The revised bill now requires that resorts not have any "significant adverse impact" on natural resources of the area, opening a door for the two proposed developments which would have been prohibited under the original language of SB 30 (See "Bill would ban resorts near Metolius," The Nugget, April 4, page 1).

"We are of course cautiously optimistic about the result," said Shane Lundgren, president of Dutch Pacific Resources whose proposed low impact development now has a green light to proceed.

"However, this is only a part of the process, and there could be other changes before this is all finished. There is still a lot of work to do, and we have been waiting before we continued with our plans to see what the outcome of this (SB30) would be. Depending upon what happens in the House, the earliest that we might be able to commence anything on the ground is at least a year and a half away."

Acknowledging that there will still be an uphill battle to win the hearts and minds of opponents, Lundgren said: "We really want to spend some time working with our neighbors in the area so that they understand what we are attempting to accomplish and how it can benefit the area economically yet be good for the environment."

The amendment was a surprising twist in the drama over the bill.

"We were surprised when the amended bill came out of committee," said Gregory McClarren, President of Friends of the Metolius. "The amendment was nothing that was discussed in any of the work groups, and we found it puzzling. However, we are going to continue to work to preserve the Metolius basin and use the remaining avenues that are available to us."

Under the amendments of the revised SB 30, Jefferson County, whose planning process originally permitted the construction of the two resorts, will have the ability to permit other resorts in the area and be in compliance with state land use laws. However, there are a number of appeals on file with the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeal (LUBA), and these could still derail the development process.

Jefferson County felt that SB 30 usurped its authority to implement its newly adopted comprehensive plan, zoning ordinances and destination resort mapping which will aid in the economic development of the county.

"If the county were to be bankrupt 10 years from now and we hadn't followed what was happening in Deschutes and Crook Country, people would look back to us and say that we were irresponsible," said Bill Bellamy, a Jefferson County Commissioner.

Significant time and effort went into the development of the new Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan. The commissioners are cautiously optimistic about the amended SB 30 but still have the hurdles of the numerous LUBA appeals to cross.

Ponderosa Land and Cattle Company now has a cautionary green light to continue its development process without the tentatively agreed restrictions and concessions that had previously been negotiated with the Friends of the Metolius (See "'Friends' weigh in on Metolius bill in Senate," The Nugget, April 25, page 1.)

The developer owns approximately 30,000 acres in the impacted area; however, only 10,000 are currently zoned for a destination resort, an area which is just under eight times the size of Black Butte Ranch and which will use nearly as much water as the city of Redmond. The development would be "the largest destination resort ever proposed in the State of Oregon," said Democratic Senator Ben Westlund.

"We were not the only people that were shocked with the outcome," said Rick Allen, former mayor of Madras and currently registered as a lobbyist representing Ponderosa Land and Cattle Company. "We were certainly pleased, but there still could be a lot of changes when it goes to the House floor, so we are waiting to see what happens."

As the bill winds it way through the Senate and House, there will be extensive input from all interested parties as they attempt to either preserve or modify the amended SB 30. One thing appears sure: the amendment is far from a slam dunk from any position on the controversy. Last Thursday's battle was merely a skirmish in the greater war over the future of the Metolius Basin.