Item B - Res. on Measure 37 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ATTACHMENT A Excerpt from City of Eugene 2003 Legislative Policy Document (pp 33-34) C. LAND USE PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT 1. BALLOT MEASURE 7 / JUST COMPENSATION On November 7, 2000, Measure 7 was passed by the Oregon voters. Although approved statewide, Ballot Measure 7 failed in the City of Eugene by a margin of 62% to 38%. Ballot Measure 7 also failed in Lane County as a whole. As a result of the Eugene vote, the City of Eugene joined a lawsuit filed by the League of Oregon Cities and various other cities and counties challenging Ballot Measure 7. The State defended the measure, and proponents of Measure 7 intervened on the State's side. On December 6, 2000, a circuit court judge issued a preliminary injunction preventing Measure 7 from taking effect. In October 2002, the Oregon Supreme Court upheld a 2001 ruling stating Measure 7 was unconstitutional because the measure contained multiple constitutional changes that should have been voted on separately. The City of Eugene has had a legislative policy on just compensation for over a decade. That policy opposes legislation that would require compensation if a land use decision deprives a property owner of only some, but not all or nearly all, reasonable economic use of the property. The City's opposition has been based on the importance of regulations in implementing comprehensive planning and other policy decisions of the council and on the innumerable benefits of these regulations in providing certainty and protection for property owners, developers and neighbors. While some argue that the most basic land use regulations are "takings," others argue that they are "givings" and that the emphasis on reduction in value is both one-sided and short-sighted. The City has always supported -- and continues to support -- the constitutional requirement that property owners who have been deprived of all reasonable economic use of their property by government action should be compensated. The City believes that the current state and federal constitutional protections for private property rights are sufficient to achieve that purpose. Recommendation: 1. Continue to oppose legislation that requires compensation for local government actions which may deprive property owners of the use or value of any portion of their property.