|
farmers and ranchers and traditional agriculture.
<br />Those that support Measure 49 may think that we can be
<br />replaced with mega-corporate farms, but we believe that
<br />small-scale, family-based agriculture is best for our state, our
<br />natural resources, and our environment.
<br />Please reject the misleading campaign and help us protect
<br />Oregon agriculture for future generations. Vote No on
<br />Measure 49.
<br />www.orcattle.com
<br />(This information furnished by Kay Teisl, Oregon Cattlemen’s
<br />Association.)
<br />This space purchased for $500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.
<br />The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by the
<br />State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any
<br />statement made in the argument.
<br />Argument in Opposition
<br />The Hood River Agriculture, Forestry, and Landowner’s
<br />Association Asks You to Vote NO on Measure 49
<br />We are all long time agricultural and forest property owners.
<br />Together we represent the vast majority of EFU land in Hood
<br />River County. We own orchards, vineyards, hay fields, and
<br />forest acreage. We raise kids and pears and apples and grapes
<br />and cherries and fir trees and cows. We are all farmers with
<br />“family farms.” The next time you read in the newspaper about
<br />agriculture in the Hood River Valley, they are talking about us.
<br />We are also unanimously opposed to Measure 49.Why?
<br />Because Measure 49 strips us of our most valuable commodity
<br />– the right to control how we operate our farms and use our
<br />land.
<br />Today, foreign competition along with state and federal laws
<br />are slowly combining to put us out of business. In order for us
<br />to compete, we must be able to make changes to the way we
<br />use our land based on economics, not how pretty the view is or
<br />the soil type.
<br />But Oregon’s statewide, centralized land use laws, the only
<br />ones of their kind in the nation, prevent us from making
<br />changes based on economics.
<br />To them, it is all about protecting “farmland.” But no one cares
<br />about protecting the “farmer.”
<br />Measure 49 strips us of our property rights. It is a cruel blow to
<br />an industry that is already struggling to stay alive. If Measure 49
<br />passes, we will be unable to diversify our operations, and to
<br />use our unproductive areas for higher economic uses, which
<br />allow us to keep farming on the productive parts of our farms.
<br />We are proud to be Americans working in the natural resource
<br />industry. It is our hope that our children and grandchildren will
<br />continue our heritage. But Measure 49 and Oregon’s ridiculous
<br />land use laws make that unlikely.
<br />Please vote NO on Measure 49.
<br />(This information furnished by John M. Benton, Sr., Hood River
<br />Agriculture, Forestry and Landowner’s Association.)
<br />This space purchased for $500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.
<br />The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by the
<br />State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any
<br />statement made in the argument.
<br />Argument in Opposition
<br />Legislators ignored Oregon Voters too long and Measure 37
<br />passed. A hidden agenda begins. First a “head fake” saying its
<br />finally past time to rework our land use laws and SB 82 in the
<br />2005 session authorizes a volunteer task force of 10, “The Big
<br />Look Task Force”. With questionable support by the state, the
<br />hard working task force appears wandering. In the process
<br />Department of Land Use Conservation, (DLCD) Governor’s
<br />Office, Metro, and the Task Force are receiving facts indicating
<br />that the planning function is far more suspect than ever
<br />imagined. Extreme errors were cited in Metro Government
<br />Planning. Metro which governs 40% of Oregon’s Population
<br />had apparently frivolously extended the Urban Growth
<br />Boundaries (UBG) especially along Mt. Hood Highway east of
<br />Gresham also Damascus to be important sources of tens of
<br />thousand of industrial and high technology jobs. (Metro’s Title 4
<br />map of Significant Industrial Lands). Then Oregon’s DLCD
<br />“acknowledges” their plans to officially meet state goals.
<br />ODOT even jumps in and starts spending Federal Funding to
<br />pursue transportation studies for Metro’s exuberance. This sets
<br />the stage for damage control. Promptly at the legislature Metro
<br />gets the legislature to delay its 5 year cycle requirement to
<br />review the urban growth boundary by adding another 2 years.
<br />I say no wonder they are clueless on how to fix their last
<br />mistakes let alone update the UGB. Then curiously the potential
<br />‘whistle blowing’ Big Look Committee gets the axe. The weak
<br />excuse is that Oregon voters are not “sophisticated enough”
<br />to think about more than just M-37 (i.e. Task Force puts our
<br />intelligence on overload). Lastly, damage control makes sure
<br />that the land use committees in the House and Senate avoid
<br />even the routine land use problems normally addressed. Then,
<br />finally, in the late hours with problems swept under the rug,
<br />and under false pretenses of “clarifying”, M-37 gets a ‘hatchet’
<br />job renamed M-49.
<br />Robert Butler, President, Butler Brokers Inc., Commercial
<br />Realtors
<br />(This information furnished by Robert Butler, Butler Brokers Inc.,
<br />Commercial Realtors.)
<br />This space purchased for $500 in accordance with ORS 251.255.
<br />The printing of this argument does not constitute an endorsement by the
<br />State of Oregon, nor does the state warrant the accuracy or truth of any
<br />statement made in the argument.
<br />Argument in Opposition
<br />Measure 49 has never had a public hearing.
<br />Measure 49 is so bad, legislatures would only vote for it if it
<br />was referred back to the voters.
<br />Measure 49 is 24 pages of tricks and errors, including:
<br />-If you are inside the UGB, you are guaranteed 0 lots
<br />(Section 9(2) “… may not exceed the lessor of…”)
<br />(Section 9(6) “The reduction in fair market value..”)
<br />(see financial formula!)
<br />-If you are outside the UGB, you are guaranteed 1 lot
<br />(per application, not lots owned!) Section 6(2)(c)
<br />-If your “highest and best use” is not residential, you will
<br />get 0 lots; for residential or otherwise. Section 7(8)
<br />-If you try to use the financial formula, you will fail- it was
<br />designed that way! A CPA firm was hired to run many
<br />examples; highest value was 1 lot, usually 0 lots.
<br />Section 7(6) Out UGB Section 9(6) In UGB
<br />-You can’t use the financial formula if you are in “high
<br />value” farm or forest (90% of buildable Clackamas,
<br />Washington, Yamhill, etc) - OR if you are:
<br />Section 2(c)(A) “….water irrigation”
<br />Measure 49 Arguments
<br />Official 2007 November Special Election Voters’ Pamphlet
<br />49 | State Measures
<br />continued September 24, 2018, Meeting - Item 3
|