Saturday, May 05, 2007

The "How Dare They" campaign

I listened to a good part of the floor debate on HB 3540-A, which asks voters to completely gut Measure 37.

I won't go into all the ways in which the bill is a radical departure from the intent of M37. Others have done that in a comprehensive fashion, far better than I could.

But the Democrats, who voted unanimously for the bill on the House floor, are claiming that the bill is a "clarification" and a "fix" for M37. What a pantload.

The only thing they are fixing is an artificial problem they caused while trying to torpedo the measure. The Attorney General has decided that, unlike virtually any other development right a landowner has, the M37 rights do not survive transfer of the property. So a landowner who files a M37 claim can't sell the property until the development on the claim is finished.

Why would this be? If a landowner files for and is granted a variance to a land-use rule, it survives transfer. Same with a conditional use permit. Why would a M37 claim be treated any differently?

Duh - because the ruling elite of this state want to do anything they can to stop Measure 37, and if that means cheating, just like they did when Measure 7 was thrown out in court in a conspiracy between the Governer and the AG's office, so be it.

So with great fanfare, the Democrats all talked on the floor of how the bill "fixes" the transferability problem. Gee thanks.

Of course it also exempts Metro rules from M37 claims. You know, the Metro that recently put an environmental overlay on the region that said all treed areas were protected. And the Metro that cooked up the "Healthy Streams Initiative," that restricted what you can do with your property if you live within 200 feet or so of a stream.

Here's the good part of all of this: The Democrats have overreached big time.

There is an article in the Oregonian today that anticipates the campaign for this referral. It says both sides will run a campaign that tries to "tug at voters' heartstrings."

Wrong. The campaign to defeat this measure should not debate the issue - we already had that vote twice and won it both times handily. This campaign should be a referendum on a legislature that will not listen to the voters, and is so arrogant that even after voters tell them they want something TWICE, at an increasing volume, they give voters the middle finger and ask them one more time.

If I was designing this campaign, I would find all sorts of clever ways to make that point, and do it in a way that pits the voters against the legislators who made this happen. My imagination spins with how many clever and pointed ways yo can get this across in radio or TV ads.

Call it the "How Dare They" campaign.

HOW DARE THEY ask you one more time if you really want Oregon's land use system to be fair.
HOW DARE THEY stick their finger in the eyes of 1 million Oregon voters.
HOW DARE THEY tell Oregon voters how stupid we are.


And the good part of it is, there will be a spillover effect on lots of legislative seats with an incumbent democrat whose district voted 65-70% in favor of Measure 37.

This could be the ditch they die in.


Brian said...

Yes, how dare they? A great slogan for fixing the disaster of Measure 37. Consider this "how dare they?" story, a true tale of some neighbors who are trying to sell their house.

It's in rural south Salem. One reason they bought it was because it is adjacent to EFU (exclusive farm use land). They built their home knowing that zoning couldn't be changed without going through a fair process.

Except..How dare they?! A Measure 37 claimant wants to make the farmland into a 43-home subdivision. Complete with 43 wells. In a groundwater limited area that can't support that much additional development.

My wife met a prospective buyer yesterday. She really liked the house. But currently she lives in town. She doesn't want to move to the country and end up living next to another town--the proposed subdivision.

So she's reluctant to buy. Yes, "how dare they?" How does Oregonians in Action dare to elevate the property rights of the few above the property rights of the many?

How do Republicans in the Oregon legislature dare to tell people already living next to a Measure 37 claim, "Too bad if your wells go dry. Or your home value drops. Get over it."

Yes, how dare they?

Omar Cruz said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Rob Kremer said...

Oregonians in Action didn't elevate the property rights of anybody. That was done by more than a million Oregon voters, 61%.

So you want to be able to freeze your neighbor's use of his property, because he wants to use it in a way that you prefer he didn't? Sounds fair to me.

How dare you!

Anonymous said...

Not that it matters, but how many acres is this subdivision?
So what if it proposed to be on EFU land.
The EFU means squat. The EFU label was abused imediately after SB 100 passed to lock up all sorts of land, as much of it as possible and prohibit at building at all.
Your lying cabal of fanatic planning advocates have been milking it ever since to distort and mislead the public.
43 wells? So what. That "groundwater limited" area designation is just anojther bogus and concocted means to obstruct land use.