This is Floyd Wynne with THE VIEW FROM HERE (12-02-04)

I think that the recently passed Measure 37 is coming home to haunt most of the cities, counties, as well as the Oregon state government.
On every hand we find these governmental groups struggling to understand and trying to determine how to deal with the fact that the measure protects property rights from being overrun by government regulations.
Our own City Council is holding hearings and meetings to try to spell out an ordinance that would dictate how events would be handled. No one knows for certain how many, if any, cases will be tossed into their laps come tomorrow when the new law is effective.
What it basically does as if government orders or regulations have lessened the value of a person’s property in some way....by requiring it not be developed....or limiting its use...or other means....then that property owner can require the governmental entity to either pay for the property....or rescind the order.
Such cases will bring into question....the date of ownership....the reason the value of the property is less. It will require that the property owner must present a claim of ownership...date of ownership....a current appraisal value of the property...as well as an appraisal of what it’s value was before the regulation....or what it would be if the regulation is lifted.
In the Multnomah County area....they are requiring the property owner to first put up $2,000 to cover government costs of determining some of the facts I’ve stated. Undoubtedly there will be other fees assessed, and there already are claims that government entities are determined to make it difficult and costly for any property owner to try to file claims.
There will continue to be question marks. For instance....what does zoning do?
It limits the use of that parcel of property.....right? And...therefore....changes its value.
Farmlands, for instance, are valued at special rates that seek to preserve the land in agriculture. If the owner wants to change the designation to permit residential development....that obviously increases the value.....so...does the owner have to pay the difference created?
That’s just one instance. Another could be....if the government entity licenses the construction of an objectional industry....say a smoke-curling power plant....and that lowers the value of your adjacent or nearby land....is that a cause for filing a request for either purchase of your property..,.and refusing the permit for the plant.
Obviously as the days go by.....we will know more how the measure works. In our book...another issue might be.....if an area contains animals or plants that are declared endangered and limits use of the area....in the case of the spotted owl...the eagle...even the suckers in Upper Klamath Lake....and that curtails usage and value of the area....does that

constitute a case under Measure 37? If so think what a blow that would be to the environmentalists in this state.
At any rate....there is one exemption clause in the legislation that will certainly come into prominent play by governmental entities. That exemption clause excludes actions taken by governments in the realm of public health and safety, sanitation issues and pollution control issues.
You can look for those three areas which are exempted from the act....to become prominent tools of defense among the governmental agencies.
Also...look for the measure 37 to also become the issue for courts to decide in many cases. There is one provision that an injured property owner may take his or her case directly to the Circuit Court where, if successful, they could also collect attorney fees from the governmental entity.
It remains to be seen how the new law is implemented around the state.

            This is Floyd Wynne and that’s THE VIEW FROM HERE.