Plan boosts local input on land use

Task force will present ideas to 2009 Legislature

By Peter Wong
Statesman Journal

November 22, 2008

ALBANY — A state land-use task force is proposing to allow more local say in determining which rural lands are suited for farming and forestry.

But the recommendations, which are still being finalized, are unlikely to settle Oregon's long-running dispute about how to protect farms, forests and natural areas from houses and other development.

The task force met for the next-to-last time Friday in Albany.

"We're trying to make something that would fit more of the diversity of this state, and we have received criticism from all sides," said Gretchen Palmer, a task force member and a Bend home builder. "One side said we cannot do this and the other side said it was too generalized."

She referred to criticism by 1000 Friends of Oregon, a watchdog group that supports state planning requirements, and Oregonians in Action, a group that supports private-property rights.

Jill Gelineau, a Portland land-use lawyer and another task force member, said she has heard a lot of criticism of the system in the past three years.

"But when I ask how we should fix it, I hear a lot less conversation," she said.

Richard Whitman, director of the state land-use agency, said legislative leaders have been made aware of the controversy.

"They understand some people are not comfortable with it," said Whitman, who leads the state Department of Land Conservation and Development. "My sense is that I think you have done a pretty good job."

The task force will present its recommendations to the 2009 Legislature, which opens its session Jan. 12. Among the other recommendations are to refine the state role in planning and improve public participation early in the process.

Lawmakers and Gov. Ted Kulongoski created it in 2005 to take a "big look" at the system, which was created 35 years ago to protect most rural lands for farming and forestry and confine most development within urban growth boundaries.

Although Oregon voters rejected three attempts to weaken or repeal those planning requirements, they also approved two ballot measures in recent years to require governments to compensate landowners for losses in property values resulting from regulations.

But a year ago, voters approved Measure 49 to cut back on development rights that some landowners received from government, which under a 2004 measure could waive regulations instead of paying claims. A federal judge has ruled that such development rights constitute contracts, but appeals courts are likely to settle the issue.

The task force is recommending regional planning and "regional problem-solving," carried out by counties or groups of counties, to determine what rural lands are not suited for farming and forestry under state guidelines.

Public opinion surveys conducted by the task force indicate no consensus on whether to retain the current restrictions, give that authority to counties, or let counties determine the issue but under state guidelines or other limitations.

"I'm not sure what the task force is trying to accomplish," said Don Schellenberg, associate director of the Oregon Farm Bureau Federation, which proposed an alternative of regional land-use panels in 2005. "The issue that the public has with our land-use system is that one size does not fit all — and you do not resolve that through regional problem-solving."

The process has been going on for a decade in the Rogue Valley, where Jackson County and six cities have negotiated future urban growth boundaries as part of a plan that also aims to protect the region's orchards and vineyards.

"A lot of the rewrite of regional problem-solving is drawn from our experience in Medford and the difficulties we had there," Whitman said. "A lot of the changes we propose are to make that process work better."

The League of Women Voters of Oregon said it supports such a process, but that changes can be made without legislative action.

Peggy Lynch, the group's natural-resources coordinator, said the league is concerned about opening rural lands to development.

Oregon cannot support "development scattered around the landscape," she said. "Our successful agricultural industry needs continued support. Our forest industry must have large blocks of land protected for forest practices that allow for the health of our trees without the intrusion of residential development."

Lynch and Whitman acknowledge that lawmakers are more likely to focus on budget issues next year.

"But I think we can start on some of this," Whitman said. "Realistically, it's going to be a long-term effort. With rural lands, we're looking at an effort that is going to take between two and 10 years, depending on what part of the state we're talking about."

pwong@StatesmanJournal.com or (503) 399-6745