[Grovenet] Measure 37 map

[Ron D'Eau Claire]

The article I saw on-line says:

"Stimson Lumber, one of Oregon's oldest timber companies, wants to divide
1,110 acres of the company's land in the Iowa Hill area into 57 lots and put
a house on each....

"The commissioners' approval won't let Stimson break ground any time soon.
Like any Measure 37 claimant, the company would have to go through a
permitting process that could limit, or even nix, its plans...."

Stimson's claim appears to be in serious trouble. Opponents say they can
show that Stimson bought the land in question in 1986, which makes it
ineligible for development. The current laws were in force when it was
purchased, so there was no loss to Stimson. The hearing has been continued
until Jan 24, so nothing's settled.

It seems to me the law is working. The article goes on...

"In Washington County, for example, 874 claims have been filed but only 18
property owners applied for building permits. 
The lack of a housing boom so far, in part, stems from a legal ruling that
Measure 37 claims can't be transferred to anyone else, including
developers." 

There is a problem that seems to be emerging, though. According to the
article, the county is inclined to approve even claims like Stimsons that
seem clearly troubled. They are doing it, the article notes, to avoided
having to defend a rejection in court. Instead they are leaving it up to
citizens to challenge the approval after the fact.

I'm inclined to challenge the Commissioners with dereliction if that's
what's happening. If our own government won't enforce the laws we need new
government. 

Ron D'Eau Claire 





-----Original Message-----
From: grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com [mailto:grovenet-bounces at rdrop.com] On
Behalf Of David Morelli
Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2007 12:16 AM
To: grovenet
Subject: [Grovenet] Measure 37 map


Today's News-Times had an article and map about the Measure 37 claims.

Did you notice that the land intended for development is larger than  
the current land area of Forest Grove?

"Intended for development"?  Sure.  What else would qualify for a  
Measure 37 claim?

And did you see who the big winners in this lottery are?  Large land  
owning corporations.  Oh, that sure was a surprise!

They are not fools, they knew what the ballot measure stood for.

With a little luck, the addition of that much developable land to the  
inventory will kick the bottom out of selling prices for rural houses  
and acreage and cost land owners some serious lost equity.  Maybe it  
will even drop the prices on housing within the UGB, and everyone can  
see the benefit of measure 37 as they lose equity in their homes.  Of  
course, I have no idea what is the money source to pay for bussing  
children from all that rural land or providing emergency services,  
but who cares?

David
_______________________________________________
GroveNet mailing list
GroveNet at rdrop.com http://www.rdrop.com/mailman/listinfo/grovenet