Measure 7

Phish_on · 11-08-2000, 08:58 AM

this is going to be a mess ... seems to me a whole bunch of land use and local planning laws are going to be unconstitutional now.

What does this do to the Endangered Species Act ?

Who voted for this ? Care to comment ?
Voluntary stream protection, yeah ... sure thing ...

It's going to be "interesting"

garyk · 11-08-2000, 10:56 AM

phish-on --

It's not a question of constitutionality.
And it will not impact the Federal Endangered Species Act, for the reasons that Federal Law cannot be abridged by state law and the measure's language was directed at state laws, rules, and administrative actions.

What it will mean is that any state laws, rules, or administrative actions that anyone feels impacts there property value negatively, can file a claim for compensation. And I believe, not once but every year.

For a listing of ORegon rules impacted by this, check out my prior post on Measure 7, which has scrolled off the list - but I believe you can still access.

For fisherman, this puts an end to any significant new habitat protection rules enacted by a state or local agency.

And I believe, it will kill the Steelheaders attempt to clarify and codify the public's right to wade and fish the majority of rivers that have not been adjudicated as 'navigable'.

It is a very sad day for ORegon's environment and wildlife. I believe the public will be stunned when they see the claims for compensation submitted.
gk

Clamman · 11-08-2000, 12:43 PM

It is very unfortunate that this measure passed, for it will surely impact zoning laws of many cities and counties. The one scary aspect of the measure is that it contains a part related to retroactive compensation. For what time period, I think is a little ambiguous.

As in regards to Salmon recovery efforts, it takes the state of Oregon out of the mix and puts the control into the Federal government and it's laws. In other words, if you are one of those people who believe that the states should have more control or that there should be less government involved in your backyard, guess what? If you voted for this measure you just compromised your beliefs.

ISG

HOGTIDE · 11-08-2000, 07:08 PM

Garyk, you are right about that one. Article 6 of the Constitution (The Suprmacy Clause)insures that Federal Law always supercedes State Law. However, it is a shame if this initiative does away with some of the environment friendly legislation that this state has worked on for years.

That is the problem with a lot of our inititives. On the surface, they frquently look like good logical ideas. But, it is not until we see the far reaching implications, afterwards, that we truly understand what we have voted in. I think the electorate even made strong efforts to research and educate themselves on many of these issues this year. But,unfortunately, only legal experts or deceptive initiators understand the real life applications and consequence of some of these initiatives.

happybrew · 11-09-2000, 01:32 PM

I agree with you Phish On. I don't think the voters realize what a nightmare this is going to be. But hey, anything to keep the lawyers employed! I guess no one likes the fact that any investment carries risk, including the risk that zoning and use regulations may change for real estate investments.

happybrew

Carpe Cerevisae!

garyk · 11-09-2000, 03:06 PM

I'm afraid what we'll see now is greed-heads buying sensitive areas for speculative purposes --

"Say, I think the mouth of the Wilson would be a dandy place for a zillion room hotel."

Then they'll be extorting the public to pay them not to build. This has already happened in some western wilderness areas that had private in-holdings.

HOGTIDE · 11-09-2000, 04:36 PM

Gosh... Don't even put dark thoughts like that into the air, Garyk. By the way;I really like your "Greedhead". I'm going to steal your term and use it at every open opportunity!....greedhead...that's good.

Trick · 11-09-2000, 06:36 PM

Just wait to the big corporations begin making multi-million dollar claims that there land has been devalued because they cannot build a smelter, toxic dump, landfill, etc... and want reimbursement from us smaller fry. This measure has loopholes that you could run your jet-sled through.....The uninformed have spoken at the poles once again.

Phish_on · 11-09-2000, 11:57 PM

I'm trying to figure out an initiative that says "Sizemore and Mabon will now shut the #*$% up and go away"

It would be a constitutional amendment, of course.

Fishbulb · 11-11-2000, 06:35 AM

ISP said it all. This state has just given away a huge chunk of its sovereignty to the Feds. Since Oregon will not be able to afford to make habitat improvements, via local regulations in regards to the ESA, all the authority will rest with the Feds (I am sure land owners will love to have their cheerful Fed friends back as the sole enforcers and decision makers). Many localities have voiced the opinion that they want these decisions made at their level. It is true we were not to the point of having all the decisions made at the local level but I think we were on our way. This has just moved us back to the stone ages. This also leads me to believe all the proactive progress the state has been making will now turn into solely reactive initiatives taken by the Feds. All of us have just lost.