|
Argument in Opposition
<br />In 1973, I voted for Senate Bill 100, the bill that created our
<br />statewide, centralized land use system.
<br />I knew that SB 100 could allow state and local governments to
<br />take people’s homes and property. I hoped that would not
<br />happen, but was persuaded to vote yes because of Section 24
<br />in SB 100. This section directed the legislature to find a way
<br />to compensate property owners for any property that could be
<br />taken.
<br />If you want to see for yourself, look at Section 24(4) of
<br />Senate Bill 100 (1973). Without that section, I would never
<br />have voted for Senate Bill 100.
<br />In short, the legislature made a promise to Oregonians.
<br />If Measure 49 passes, that promise will be broken.
<br />Measure 49 is an extreme response to your vote on
<br />Measure 37. If Measure 49 is approved, what we tried to
<br />prevent in Senate Bill 100 will occur – homes and property
<br />will be taken by state and local governments without just
<br />compensation.
<br />Measure 49 supporters will tell you that Measure 49 will
<br />restore Oregon’s land use planning laws. But these people
<br />weren’t in the legislature in 1973, and apparently have never
<br />read Senate Bill 100, or choose to ignore what it says.
<br />If Measure 49 passes, we are destroying the very balance that
<br />we tried to make when we created Senate Bill 100. That would
<br />be a terrible shame.
<br />Vote NO on Measure 49.
<br />Roger Martin
<br />Former State Representative
<br />(This information furnished by Roger Martin.)
<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 HURTS NEIGHBORHOODS
<br />Between 2000-2025, one million new people are expected to
<br />come to Oregon. In some parts of the state, we’re already
<br />noticing the impacts:
<br />- Long established residential neighborhoods are being
<br />dramatically changed, with skinny houses, condos, and
<br />rowhouses stacked into places that used to be open
<br />spaces or backyards;
<br />- Traffic congestion on main roads is becoming unbearable,
<br />and parking spaces near home are impossible to find;
<br />- New subdivisions are being built with big homes on small
<br />lots with no yards for kids and no privacy;
<br />- Urban streets, water, and sewer infrastructure, designed
<br />for fewer residents, is being torn up and replaced (at
<br />taxpayer expense) to handle the new apartments placed
<br />in existing neighborhoods;
<br />- Neighborhoods are being gentrified, as people on modest
<br />incomes can no longer afford the costs of living in areas
<br />where they grew up;
<br />- Schools in suburbs are becoming overcrowded, as people
<br />look desperately for places where home prices are lower,
<br />there’s a little more space, and traffic isn’t as bad.
<br />These impacts are partly the result of our existing land use
<br />system. If Measure 49 passes, you can expect that these
<br />problems will only get worse.
<br />Measure 49 allows Metro, state government, and cities to
<br />take your home and property without just compensation.
<br />If Measure 49 passes, it will be nearly impossible to find a new
<br />home with a large yard, a home in the country, or something
<br />affordable for the working family.
<br />If you live in town, look at the new developments being built.
<br />Do you see any that have a yard, or a place to play? Are you
<br />really being given a choice? Is there any balance? The people
<br />that brought you the current system that forces these
<br />developments are trying to get you to support Measure 49.
<br />Don’t be fooled.
<br />Protect your neighborhood, your property, and your choices.
<br />Vote No on Measure 49.
<br />(This information furnished by James Karlock.)
<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 />Please vote NO on Measure 49
<br />Here we go again
<br />I live in Medford, in your typical suburban neighborhood. I am
<br />now retired, but for decades I served as a city and county
<br />employee. There are several property owners in my area whose
<br />property rights have been restored by Measure 37.
<br />I am asking that you join me in voting NO on Measure 49
<br />for several reasons. First, Measure 49 is a radical change from
<br />the current law. My neighbors simply ask that their property
<br />rights be restored, and I don’t think that is asking too much.
<br />Measure 49 will take away those rights, which just isn’t fair.
<br />Second, Measure 49 is completely unworkable. It was written
<br />behind closed doors, without any public input. I am concerned
<br />that Oregon’s dedicated public servants will not be able to
<br />apply Measure 49 because the measure is so poorly written.
<br />When that happens, city, county and state employees often
<br />bear the brunt of the public’s frustration for the mistakes of
<br />politicians. Given how poorly written Measure 49 is, I am afraid
<br />there will be many frustrated Oregonians.
<br />Third, Oregon has a proud tradition of open and transparent
<br />government. But the process used to draft Measure 49 was
<br />anything but open or transparent. In fact, the public was never
<br />allowed to testify on Measure 49! If Measure 49 passes, I can
<br />guarantee that in the future the public will be excluded from the
<br />process. Oregonians cannot let that happen.
<br />Finally, Oregonians have already spoken with one loud and
<br />clear voice on this issue. How many times are the politicians
<br />going to try to override the will of the people, and how many
<br />times are we – the people – going to have to reaffirm our vote
<br />before the politicians finally get the message?
<br />Please join me in voting NO on Measure 49.
<br />Ken Marshall, Medford
<br />(This information furnished by Ken Marshall.)
<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 />Measure 49 Arguments
<br />Official 2007 November Special Election Voters’ Pamphlet
<br />54 | State Measures
<br />continued September 24, 2018, Meeting - Item 3
|