Have Principles Become Too Inconvenient? - The Oregon Catalyst

Re: Have Principles Become Too Inconvenient?  - The Oregon Catalyst:

It is convenient for those that want to limit development without paying for the reduced value to ignore equal protection and to set-up two classes of citizens through a ballot measure. The inconvenient route would be to treat all property owners the same and pay the compensation where preservation is warranted and to allow the development where it is not.

The problem isn't the principles, it is that in today's world they aren't as simplistically easy to apply as he asserts.

After all, Measure 37 gave rights to people who purchased property 36 years ago that don't apply to people who purchased theirs 35 years ago.  Even though the vast majority of property owners purchased in the last 35 years.

So Measure 37 didn't provide “equal protection”.  It gave “special rights” to a favored few while diminishing the value of the majority who bought their property in the last 35 years with different expectations.

Furthermore, as we pretty much all know, the argument about no compensation doesn't hold water anyway.  I live on two 20-acre lots and pay but $55/year for one because of the special  tax treatment as part of the SB100/SB101 land-use package of land-use laws/compensation.  That lot is contributing about 1 hour of teaching for 1 student at our local elementary school, which is pretty much a free tax ride.  Think about it: in the 35 years since, that lot would finally pay for about 1 week of 1 student in school, cumulatively.

Technorati Tags: land_use, Measure_37