OREGON PROPERTY RIGHTS

Judge razes Measure 37 land law

A judge obliterated Oregon's voter-approved property rights law Friday, uprooting the way the state plans its communities for the second time in a year. Marion County Circuit Judge Mary James ruled that Measure 37 violates the Oregon Constitution by favoring longtime property owners over those who have purchased land more recently. She also said the measure prohibits the Oregon Legislature from exercising its authority. The ruling was so sweeping, it will not only halt thousands of acres of rural development, but also may force property rights advocates to try a different approach if they want to weaken Oregon's land-use laws. State attorneys, who must defend voter-approved initiatives, will appeal Friday's ruling. Invalidating Measure 37 raises as many questions as it answers, Gov. Ted Kulongoski said in a statement, promising to ask key officials for advice on moving forward. Members of Oregonians In Action, which authored Measure 37 and had a similar ballot measure knocked down in court four years ago, said they were furious. Group leaders plan to attack what they consider rigid planning rules again on 2006 ballots, director David Hunnicutt said. "If this means a Measure 38, we'll be back with a Measure 38," he said. "At some point, the courts will understand that people deserve the right to have their property protected."....

Land-use ruling puts issue back at square one

A judge's ruling throwing out Measure 37 reopens the question of whether Oregon will resolve its struggle over land-use laws in the Legislature or force the fight back to the ballot box. A growing population has strained the nation's strictest zoning laws, creating more conflicts for property owners. Voters, in sympathy, twice since 2000 gave them more rights to develop their land, only to see courts strike down the measures. The first was dismissed on technical grounds. On Friday, Marion County Circuit Judge Mary James said Measure 37 violated the state and federal constitutions. Oregonians in Action, which authored both measures, says it will try again with voters in 2006. If the group succeeds, its opponents will bring the issue, once again, to the courts. Although the 2005 Legislature's attempt at compromises to Measure 37 disintegrated, lawmakers may have provided one glimmer of hope. They created a 10-member commission, known as the Big Look, charged with holding public meetings and bringing to the Legislature proposals for reformatting the entire land-use system. It would be the first comprehensive examination since voters approved the laws in 1973. That could allow for new rules that address the state's variety of geography and growth patterns, rather than a one-size-fits-all ballot measure....

REACTION TO MEASURE 37

Phone calls snaked across Oregon with the news: A judge just threw out Measure 37. Almost a year after voters approved the property rights law, Marion County Circuit Judge Mary James said it violated the Oregon Constitution. For more than 2,500 claimants statewide, questions abounded: Does the decision invalidate their requests for money or new development opportunities? Can they recoup their application fees? Does this doom their building plans? At the same time, neighbors concerned about the possibility of Measure 37 development celebrated. And professionals involved in the debate -- from lawyers to planning directors -- wondered how they would negotiate the aftermath. A sampling of what's being said: "For better or worse, we forged ahead. I always said, 'You never know when some jerk is going to jerk the rug out from under us.' Then, lo and behold, look what happened." -- John "Bard" Abrams, whose family recently filed a subdivision plan for a successful Measure 37 claim in Yamhill County "I am completely blown away, it's so great. People are going to actually stop, slow down and figure out how to make it right for the people who have incredible restrictions on them. And the people who just want to make a fast buck are out of the picture." -- Heather McCurdy, Hood River County farmer who was concerned about nearby Measure 37 claims "They've taken it away twice. I wonder, does it do any good for me to go down and vote? They just do whatever they want anyway. I could retire if I could sell my property. I sat on it for 34 years, thinking it was my retirement fund." -- Patricia Lawrence, who was considering filing a Measure 37 claim so she could divide her 8-acre property in Damascus....

===