The World Edition - Government - Measuring Property Rights in Oregon

Measuring Property Rights in Oregon

By Alexander H. Johnstone
SEPTEMBER 4, 2007

At a point in every American's life, there has been a classic showdown between the rights of property owners against the right of the government to enforce and regulate those rights. There almost always seems to be at least one case of this nature in a court at any given time in the United States. There are different people and different cities, but the principles behind these battles are rather cliché. Perhaps one of the more well known and controversial contemporary land use laws is that of the Oregon Ballot Measure 37, which was passed in 2004.

Since Senate Bill 100 and Portland's 1972 Downtown Plan, Oregon has become internationally known for its land use planning. Measure 37, however, is proof that private property owners have reached a new extreme and have little regard for a city's greater good. The measure states that if the government fails to compensate a property owner who has experienced a government induced property value reduction within two years, the owner is granted the right to follow the regulations present at the time the property was purchased. It is a mystery as to how this system could possibly benefit the development of a city. It hardly makes sense that simply because the government does not respond to a claim, the property owner is suddenly exempt from the law. This has become quite a complex issue, considering Timber companies and real estate developers have been among the most prominent supporters of the measure.

Although many of the issues are on a large scale, many of the problems have grown right out of residents' backyards -- and front yards too. Hundreds of Oregonians have begun flirting with the legal boundaries of their residential properties. Large billboards are increasingly appearing in front yards and along many roads where such a display never would have appeared before. At this point, there's no telling what we might expect to see. The result of this sudden surge of private property rights is now a ballot initiative called Measure 49. This law is aimed toward limiting commercial uses associated with Measure 37. This seems to be only the beginning of the solution to a complex issue. Similar initiatives have sprung up in the Western U.S. in such states as Washington, Arizona, Idaho, California, Nevada and Montana. As long as people own private property and the government continues to regulate that land, there will be legal disputes. It might make one wonder if Measure 37 was truly a solution or did it simply make an issue much more complex.