Document text
Land-use backers flunk most lawmakers From wire and staff reports SALEM -- Despite growing public concern about population increases and urban sprawl, the 1999 Legislature was "exceptionally hostile" toward Oregon's vaunted land-use planning system, land-use activists say. A report card issued by the activists gave most members of the Republican-controlled Legislature failing grades for their votes on land-use bills. "At a time when there is a lot of anxiety about growth, the performance of the 1999 Legislature was dismal," said Robert Liberty, head of 1000 Friends Action Fund, which is affiliated with the watchdog group 1000 Friends of Oregon. Republican Senate President Brady Adams denied that GOP lawmakers are anti-land-use and said they want only to bring a better balance to the 1973 program aimed at limiting unbridled development in prime farm and forest land. "Philosophically, I have a problem with their attacking private property rights," the Grants Pass lawmaker said. Most Southern Oregon Republicans in both chambers were near the bottom of the ratings by 1000 Friends Action Fund. The exception was Sen. Lenn Hannon, R-Ashland, whose 29 percent put him third among 17 GOP senators. Of the handful of Democrats outside the Willamette Valley, Rep. Judy Uherbelau ranked second highest with 71 percent and Rep. Mike Lehman of Coos Bay third with 69 percent. "It is somewhat distressing to find the Southern Oregon delegation out of step with the popular sentiment of Oregonians for the state land-use goals and laws," said Gene Martin of Medford, a board member of 1000 Friends Action Fund. "Luckily, a lot of these bills died in committee, passed one house but not the other, or were vetoed by the governor." One of the bills would have ended the requirement that a landowner make gross income of at least $80,000 from farming before a home can be built on high-quality agricultural land. The measure passed in the Senate but was watered down in the House after environmentalists raised concerns that the original bill would cause a proliferation of so-called hobby farms. The Senate also passed a bill to require local governments to set aside a 20-year supply of land for commercial and industrial use. The House rejected the bill after critics said it would force expansion of urban growth boundaries. Though on opposite sides of the scorecard, two Rogue Valley lawmakers said they agreed that legislators should not be judged solely on ratings from any interest group. Rep. Rob Patridge, R-Medford, scored just 7 percent. "You always are interested in other people's perceptions of who you are and what you stand for," he said. "But scorecards are a poor way to look at the performance of a legislator. "I worked on some issues on which I was not fully happy with the results, but they were reasonable compromises. None of that effort is factored in these ratings." Uherbelau said she has been burned by other groups' ratings. "They look at these ratings in terms of what bills they supported and how you voted on them, period," she said. "They do not take into consideration whether you have an open-door policy, are willing to listen and work with them -- but legislators do." Today's Edition : News | Sports | Business | Weather | Tempo | Classifieds Mail Tribune Copyright � The Mail Tribune 2000, Medford, Oregon USA