Agenda Packet 9-24-18 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

deed since the beginning of ownership cannot proceed with a Measure 37 claim. Measure 49 allows transferability of development rights for kids and surviving spouses. Measure 49: Makes the rules consistent for everybody. Strengthens rights of small individual property owners. Protects farmland, forests water and our quality of life from the abuses of Measure 37. Clean up the mess! Vote YES on 49 (This information furnished by Elizabeth Kaufman, Yes on 49 Campaign.) This space purchased for $500 in accordance with ORS 251.255. The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. Argument in Favor How does Measure 49 work? It’s really pretty simple. Measure 37 – passed in 2004 – has created chaos for Oregon’s unique natural beauty and for landowners who thought they could do what they want with their own property. There are different rules for every property, different interpretations of its vague language in every county, and the flaws of Measure 37 allow massive subdivisions, commercial and industrial development in places they simply don’t belong. Measure 49 takes this chaos and makes things straightforward, consistent and balanced for property owners and all of Oregon. Here is how it works: • Measure 49 protects the property rights of small individual landowners by immediately allowing them up to 3 houses on their property, if the law allowed it when they bought their land.And it will pass those rights on to a surviving spouse or to someone who purchases the property from the current owner– something that Measure 37 left out and needs to be fixed. • Additionally, property owners can build up to 10 houses if they can document a decrease in property value equal to the value of the additional houses – just as Measure 37 originally promised. (Three homesites – clustered on one portion of large properties-- is the limit for high-value farmland, and forests or places with limited water supplies.) • Measure 49 limits large development – in order to protect Oregon’s farmland, forests and water. That means stopping the abuse of Measure to develop huge housing subdivisions, strip malls, big-box stores, and mining operations where they are not allowed by zoning. The development interests who stand to make huge profits from Measure 37 are the ones opposing Measure 49. They will try their best to confuse the issue, claiming that Measure 49 is complicated. But as you can see, it is quite straightforward. For more information, go to www.yeson49.com and read the entire ballot measure. Vote Yes on 49 (This information furnished by Emily Jackson, Yes on 49 Campaign.) This space purchased for $500 in accordance with ORS 251.255. The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. Measure 49 Arguments Official 2007 November Special Election Voters’ Pamphlet 21 | State Measures continued •Majestic forests that offer beauty, recreation and a livelihood for many communities. •Irreplaceable farmland that supports a rich and varied agricultural economy; and •A balance that protects Oregon’s unique assets and the property rights of Oregonians. That is why we come together to ask you to vote Yes on Measure 49. Measure 49 will fix the flaws in Measure 37 – flaws that threaten the Oregon we love. Measure 37, passed in 2004, has opened the door to massive development that will destroy the farmland, forestland and water resources we have today. Measure 49 will deliver what Oregonians had in minds when they voted on Measure 37: a balance that protects Oregon’s farms, forests, and water and allows individual property owners to build more than one home on their property. Measure 49 will also deliver something bigger: a workable land use policy that will allow us to keep our precious Oregon assets – the things that make Oregon special – and be fair to property owners. Please join us in voting Yes on Measure 49. Governor Vic Atiyeh (1979 – 1987) Governor Barbara Roberts (1991 – 1995) Governor John Kitzhaber MD (1995 – 2003) Governor Ted Kulongoski (2003 – present) (This information furnished by Theodore Kulongoski.) This space purchased for $500 in accordance with ORS 251.255. The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by the State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any statement made in the argument. Argument in Favor Measure 37 is a Mess. Measure 49 Will Clean It Up. Measure 37 was sold as a way to allow a landowner to build a few homes to their property – for their kids or to fund their retirement – if they could do so when they bought the land. Since its passage, over 7,500 claims for development have been filed covering about 730,000 acres of the state. Most of the claims are for 10 or fewer houses. (Up to that amount is allowed under Measure 49). But most of the acreage covered by M37 claims is for enormous development: huge housing subdivisions, strip malls and big box stores. Almost all of this large- scale development is on Oregon’s prime farmland, in forests and along water – where it just doesn’t belong. Measure 37 has also created incredible confusion and unfairness in every corner of the state. Rules should be the same for everyone. But that’s not how Measure 37 is working. Nobody has been able to figure out Measure 37’s flawed language, so it is interpreted differently, county by county, property by property. Measure 49 clarifies the rules and makes them consistent throughout the state. Measure 37 also destroys the rights of some, while giving a bonanza to others. For example, M37 left out the right of “transferability.” That means some people who want to build a few homes on their land – for their kids or to fund their retirement – cannot transfer the rights to own those homes to their children or a new owner. Even a surviving spouse whose name doesn’t appear on the September 24, 2018, Meeting - Item 3