TASK FORCE PROPOSAL #1

 Proposal: Identify farm land, forest land, and natural areas of statewide importance, and apply market-based tools to complement regulation as a means to maintain farm and forest uses, and to protect natural areas. Local and regional governments should determine the appropriate uses of lands that are not of statewide importance, consistent with the long-term carrying capacity of the lands and considering impacts to neighboring uses.

 OIA Response:  OIA is very supportive of a return to local control for most planning and zoning decisions.  LCDC erred in 1975 when it adopted its definitions of “agricultural land” in Goal 3 and “forest land” in Goal 4.  The result is that 97% of all private rural land is zoned as agricultural land or forest land, regardless of productivity of the land, economic conditions, property rights, or whether those uses are appropriate for the property.  Separating highly productive agricultural land and forest land from other rural lands is critical and is a matter of fundamental fairness.  If an area is not absolutely critical for statewide significance, then the state should not play a role in how it is planned – it should be a local government issue, as it is in the other 49 states.

TASK FORCE PROPOSAL #2

Proposal: Use land use planning tools in coordination with strategic investment of transportation and infrastructure funding to improve the quality of life in Oregon’s urban places, while making it possible for cities to absorb the significant population growth expected to occur.

OIA Response:  Planning in urban areas is done across the country, and coordinating growth with infrastructure makes sense.  In order to maintain a quality of life in urban areas, however, land must be available for industrial, commercial, and residential uses of all types, so that people and businesses have choices of where to live and where to locate their company.  Urban planners should respond to the desires of the community, not force their vision upon the local residents.  Zoning laws that mandate housing densities, or that prohibit the creation of larger residential lots or small acreage homesites should be changed to give citizens choices.

TASK FORCE PROPOSAL #3

Proposal: Realign the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission to carry out long-range land use planning for the state, and give the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development the resources to facilitate and assist regional collaboration and local planning efforts.

OIA Response:  OIA supports this proposal, provided that it reflects a shift in LCDC’s tasks away from detailed regulations about specific zones and uses in those zones (which really belong in local zoning ordinances, not LCDC administrative rules), and toward broader, less defined goals that can be implemented in different ways by cities and counties across the state to suit local needs and desires.  LCDC goals and rules should be more aspirational and less detailed, and provide more flexibility to local governments and property owners.

TASK FORCE PROPOSAL #4

Proposal: Plan for and anticipate economic growth (e.g., increased trade-sectors, green industries, and high-tech clusters) using both already available tools for economic development and a new “rapid response” process to respond to new economic opportunities.

OIA Response:  OIA supports the use of zoning to increase opportunities for economic growth and job creation across all industries, not just those that fit the political flavor of the time.  A “rapid response” process to respond to new economic opportunities is fine, but becomes unnecessary if property owners are given more freedom and flexibility to use their property for multiple uses.

TASK FORCE PROPOSAL #5

Proposal: Establish expectations for how community design and transportation affects reduction of greenhouse gases from all sources, including transportation sources. As part of this, the state should set targets for how land use planning can reduce greenhouse gas emissions resulting from transportation.

OIA Response:  Given the uncertainty among the scientific community concerning both the existence of global warming and its causes, coupled with the global nature of this issue, OIA cannot support the use of global warming as a rationale to make planning decisions or to impose new regulations on rural property owners.  If it turns out that global warming is a real phenomenon, and that the burning of fossil fuels contributes to the problem, and if the countries of the world each step up to do their share to combat the problem, then it may be time for the federal government to address the issue.  It is not appropriate, however, to do so at the state level.