|
LAND USE/PROPERTY RIGHTS CONCERNS OF THE
OREGONIANS IN ACTION ORGANIZATIONS
The basic concerns of Oregonians In Action and
the separate OIA organizations (OIA Education Center, OIA Legal Center, and OIA
Political Action Committee) are excessive land use regulations that "take"
private property without compensation. Under court decisions, regulations can
take up to 95% of the use and value of private property without compensation to
the property owner.
Such over-regulation violates our most basic civil
rights -- the rights of individuals to own and use their property without undue
interference from government. Over-regulation also causes adverse impacts that
hurt everyone else, including loss of use and mis-use of land and resources, job
losses, artificial scarcity of land, and reduction of tax revenues needed for
schools and public services.
Obviously, some land use regulations are
needed, such as those that protect the public interest in air, water and safety.
But, the power to regulate is being misused. Regulations are being used to limit
land uses and acquire interests in private land to provide public benefits, as a
substitute for buying such interests.
Here are some examples
of misuse of regulatory power:
*
Mis-zoning of millions of acres of rural land. Instead of
zoning the "prime" farm land as intended, LCDC, the state land use agency, zoned
97% of all private rural land into highly restrictive farm and forest zones,
with little or no regard to productivity of the land. Millions of acres of
nonproductive and marginal land have been miszoned, denying owners and the
public the benefits of alternative uses, such as rural
living.
* Denying farmers the right to live on
their own land. LCDC imposed excessive gross farm income requirements
to qualify for a farm dwelling, denying many farmers the right to live on their
own land and make it productive.
* Forcing high
density living in urban areas. Over-regulation needlessly forces people
into cities, mandates higher densities, blocks needed street and highway
additions and improvements, and prohibits orderly expansion of urban areas --
thereby increasing traffic congestion and gridlock, making housing unaffordable
and impairing quality of life.
* Taking private
land to provide public benefits. Cities and counties (and state and
federal agencies) are imposing all sorts of land use restrictions on private
land to provide public benefits, such as habitat for wildlife, open space,
wetlands, and riparian areas -- without compensating landowners for the loss of
use and value. The Endangered Species Act poses grave threats; it is being used
to impose land use controls without proof species are endangered, or that the
controls are needed.
* Using permitting
authority for "extortion" purposes. Cities and counties are unfairly
requiring applicants for building permits to give up land, pay fees or make
other concessions as a "condition" to granting the permit. Even though OIA Legal
Center has secured a U.S. Supreme Court decision (the Dolan case) outlawing
conditions that are not roughly proportional to the impact of the development,
some cities and counties still engage in extortion
practices.
* Oregon’s land use regulatory system
is too top-down, too complex, too inflexible, and too costly. There are
too many state-imposed, one-size-fits-all, inflexible regulations. The system
was intended to simplify and expedite land use decisions, but it has become too
complex, time-consuming and costly. Fees are excessive. Procedures are too
cumbersome and too easily used to stop land uses of all kinds.
|