« More reasons why I love my Mac more than my PC | Main | Surprise! Republicans make sense...on auto bailout »

November 14, 2008


Good points. I was not happy when I saw that either. I wish we could get this resolved. I can't how many times I have driven home since Measure 49 passed and enjoyed the farms and productive land that was protected at least for awhile. Now what happens to it? Just disappointing and I guess it will go to a higher court and more costs involved.

It shows again why a president who values the environment and land use controls is so important to us on the left. If you want helter-skelter development and money is all you value, then you see it the opposite. For now, it will go to protecting and not exploiting. It's an issue that is never settled though-- until land has been torn up, paved and forever taken from timber or farm use.

Do you suppose that the 62% of Oregon voters that voted in Measure 49 were all Ultra- Ultra- Ultra- Ultra- Ultra- lefties?

How about the majority that voted against gay marriage in CA? All Ultra- Ultra- Ultra-Ultra- Ultra right wingers?

Of course not!
For example, If Barry would have voted in CA he would have voted AGAINST gay marriage.
That is; if he didn't lie to the American public in the debates where he clearly looked into the camera and stated a position that he knew would garner the most votes; no on gay marriage!

I just don't see the value of trying to alienate Ultra- Ultra- Ultra- Ultra- Ultra right wingers, right wingers, republicans, moderate republicans, & democrats from our land use positions and efforts by protraying the battle as leftist!??????

Maybe you DIDN'T KNOW any of the republican farmers that testified at the land use fairness hearings, but they came out in force. And some of them BIG LAND OWNERS!

I'm on the side of land use fairness, regardless of how some of my knucklehead friends vote on the other stuff.

Harry, I didn't mean to imply that all Republicans are against good land use planning. My jibe about activist judges was directed at those people, mostly conservatives, who usually decry court decisions that overturn a vote of the people.

Except when the vote being overturned is something they're opposed to. Then it's all right, apparently. Either judicial review is fine, or it isn't -- no matter what the issue is. I'm calling for an end to hypocrisy. Don't complain about a court overturning a gay marriage ban if you didn't complain about a court ruling in favor of something you like.

I read Judge Panner's decision and the main point of his opinion was that 37 waivers were a quasi judcial order. To quote The Judge in the last sentence of the Opinino "Our system of separation of powers does not allow legislation to set aside a judicial decision." Of course as you say the State Supreme Court has ruled differently...what I see is all the $$$ that the legal profession will realize with the possibility of law suits that will sprout in the near future.
In your opinion Brian, do you think a judgment rendered before 49 effective date is reversed by 49? I am thinking about the English case that is coming before the Appeals Court this month.

Yes, if Measure 49 holds up (as I suspect it will, after all is said and done), the only way a Measure 37 development could continue as planned is if the claim is vested under common law. And that's a pretty high hurdle, since significant on the ground building needs to have occurred.

I do not buy the host's premise that 49 in any way ameliorates what is termed as land use for a privileged class. 49 piggy backs on measure 37, just read the final approvals that are comming in and you will see that having persued a M37 is one of the major components of a successful M49 claim.

as for "activist" judges, is the host going to demonstrate anger that individuals within each county's developement departments are currently allowed to make decisions on whether many soil types are high value instead of low value when it happens that the USDA soil survey map is ambiguos without utilizing any scientific protocal? Don't believe it? call each county and ask how they are going to determine high value land vs low value land when data does not exist for a property. you will get a new answer for each county. 2 county heads have gone on record saying no one is going to be able to create 5 acre lots in their counties. I guess they don't care about the law. at least one can argue an activist judge is interpreting the law where it may be vauge (that is what judges do) rather than making declarative decisions DESPITE the law, that is what ideologs do.

What I have read about the English Case, The issue in the Appeals court this month is not about what is "vested in common law" but a final judgment that was rendered while 37 was in effect. I agree that a 37 claim is moot under 49 but there is no clear language in 49 that reverses a judgment. Any way that is my understanding and was curious of what your opinion was. It seems like the Enlish case has been going for a very long time.

Hi Brian,

I haven't popped by in a long time. We chatted off and on when 49 haddn't been voted on yet. When it passed your comment was 'wait and see' how great 49 would be. The fast track was going to be wonderful for those that 37 was intended to help.

If you remember I'm one of 'those'. Here it is December, 49's been in place now for nearly the past year. I have a fast track for one home on land in my family since the 60's.

I had to hurry and get my papers into the State in order to be included in the 49 process. Which I did. Here we are coming on to the end of the year and I'm still waiting to hear about my 'fast' claim. Meanwhile, the farmer next door to my land continues to farm that full tennis court.

I told you I believed 49 to be another tactic from the uber left of stall...delay...so we can figure out how to deny... This is hardly a fast track. I think slugs move faster than the 49 fast track.

Debbie, I agree with you. The "fast track" is too slow. I'm also surprised by how slowly DLCD is moving on the so-called express lane.

I understand they want to do this right -- review each claim carefully. But I too thought it would be more of a fast slam dunk to get the three home sites, if a Measure 37 claim already had been approved by a county and the state.

Your frustration is justified. I wish DLCD would explain more clearly why it is taking so long. I'm a Measure 49 supporter, as you know, but the slow motion express approvals aren't helping on the Measure 49 public relations front.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Strange Up Salem

Welcome to HinesSight

  • Salem Political Snark
    My local political rants are now made on this badass blog. Check it out. Dirty politics, outrageous actions, sleaze, backroom deals — we’re on it. 

  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
  • Church of the Churchless
    Visit my other weblog, Church of the Churchless, where the gospel of spiritual independence is preached.

  • Welcome to HinesSight. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.