|
|
|
October 11, 2007 Opinions |
|
Guest Opinion
Thanks Boss, I Never Expected This!
By Sen. Ted Ferrioli Thanks Boss, I Never Expected This — Those words likely echoed around the offices of several state managers last week, as Governor Kulongoski handed out raises as high as $30,000 a year to some of his top appointees. Oregon taxpayers were undoubtedly just as surprised by the generous increases.
These raises might be understandable if they were simply across the board cost of living increases, but they are not. Worse, they are not based on merit or amount of money the agency directors or managers have been able to save through efficiencies. Rather, these raises were just across the board slaps on the back.
The price tag of Kulongoski’s liberal use of your tax dollars topped $12 million. The news comes just months following a bitter legislative battle to fund 24/7 state police coverage on Oregon highways. Legislators were told time and again that there wasn’t enough money to put the necessary troopers on the road, despite the fact that Oregon had more money to spend than ever before. The supposedly missing amount needed to fully fund state police? Only $4.2 million.
It is becoming easier to account for the breathtaking 20% increase in state spending this year. Kulongoski hired 1,700 new state workers, the largest increase in state employees in over a decade. He granted across the board 6% pay increases for the union lunch-bucket crowd to the tune of $125 million. Now the upper echelons of Kulongoski’s administration received $12 million for a 20% pay increase. It is no wonder the state is spending money at break-neck speeds.
Unchecked spending like this doesn’t go without consequences. You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to plot out a trend line and see that within a few years what we are spending will be greater than what we are bringing in. There is no way to grow at the rate government is growing without reaching a breaking point. Economists use the word “unsustainable,” but whatever you call it, that day when our outgo exceeds our income is not far away.
Politicians so often forget that even in times of plenty, the state needs to act as a constant watchdog on spending. We need to be rooting out inefficiencies and only spend money on what is absolutely necessary.
I like what President Ronald Reagan said, “The problem is not that people are taxed too little, the problem is that government spends too much.” This administration is spending the state into a corner, and taxpayers will be the ones who have to come to the rescue.
Guest Opinion
Thousands Of Oregonians Fight For Drinking Water
By Shelly Strom, Yes on 49Thousands of Oregonians are working endless hours and spending countless dollars to protect their drinking water. Their efforts are part of the new reality in Oregon following Measure 37, which has opened the door to large-scale development that stands to drain aquifers and harm neighboring property owners.
"I voted for Measure 37, although I never wanted to open the door to the large scale development now under way that threatens to ruin Oregon's groundwater," says Don Dean, who lives next to a 212-acre claim in Marion County where dozers already are clearing farmland for 42 houses, even though it is in a groundwater sensitive area.
Measure 37 was advertised to voters in 2004 as a way to protect property rights of individuals who wanted to build a few houses on their land, if the law allowed them to when they purchased the property. The truth about Measure 37, however, has become apparent—it is poorly written and full of unintended consequences.
One of the most important and least understood impacts of Measure 37 is its effect on our groundwater resources. Most of Oregon's rural residents rely on groundwater and many are bracing for the thousands of homes proposed via Measure 37 claims that pose foreseen demand on the resource.
The wells that will be drilled to support these new subdivisions— approximately 4,973 claims propose housing subdivisions that range between four homes and 17,000 homes on approximately 680,000 acres —are exempt from permitting and regulatory requirements.
As a result, water conflicts are heightening as thousands of unregulated wells are drilled to service new development, even in areas where groundwater supplies are limited.
County planners charged with overseeing development under Measure 37 don't take the impact of new wells on existing users into account when they decide whether a subdivision can go forward.
As hundreds and possibly thousands of subdivisions begin to materialize in places where they largely were not contemplated prior to 2005, neighboring property owners are fighting to continue to have access to drinking water and to protect what for many of them is their biggest investment—the value of their homes.
Residents rightfully are concerned that all of this new development will drain their wells and reduce their property value.
"Because of Measure 37, we and our neighbors are at risk of losing something most homeowners take for granted—access to reliable water supplies," says Marion County resident Brian Hines. Hines and his neighbors could lose their wells because of the new demand for water that a 42-lot subdivision being built via Measure 37 will bring.
Hydrogeologists have told officials that information on groundwater is inadequate to demonstrate that the proposed development would not adversely affect the availability of groundwater for existing users.
Yet, existing residents say they already take showers in shifts in their homes and others watched their wells run dry. Their experience tells them that coexisting with 42 more homes may prove impossible.
"Because Oregon agencies don't have comprehensive analyses of groundwater, they in most cases are powerless to stop development based on a lack of available water," says Judy Messner, who lives in an area designated as "groundwater limited." A 41-lot subdivision with special rights from Measure 37 is under construction on 62 acres near Messner's home in Marion County.
"When wells are drilled to serve an unanticipated number of new homes, it puts everyone at risk of losing both their water supply and property values," says Messner.
Farmers also stand to lose as water upon which they depend for irrigation if diverted by new domestic wells. The vast majority of acreage pegged for development in Measure 37 claims is zoned for exclusive farm use—roughly 518,000 acres of the more than 750,000 total acres tied up in Measure 37 claims.
The situation is complicated because these lands proposed for development are surrounded by similarly zoned farmland that presumably will continue to be operated as such.
"Agricultural producers who rely on water have rights that are 'certificated' and officially have priority over new users, but water available via these rights can be severely impacted by the drilling of domestic wells," says Kathy Freeborn, whose family farm has water rights granted in 1859, 1890 and 1900.
"In order for our rights to be enforced in the face of such competition, we have to do battle with the state agency in charge of water resources. The Water Resources Department won't be eager to shut off water to homes in the middle of the summer when our supplies run low," Freeborn says.
"We are just trying to keep our farming business in operation—we should not continually have to fight to retain the right to use water," she says.
The full impacts of Measure 37's random development on farming in Oregon are expected to be significant but the extent remains unknown. What is known is that as more houses get built on farmland, conflict over water only will heighten.
Development proposed in Measure 37 claims, however, is progressing regardless of whether it can be supported by groundwater. Because domestic wells are exempt from permitting, the Water Resources Department has very little information on how aquifers are impacted with each new domestic well.
Land use zoning, therefore, effectively has guided management of water resources. Restrictions on development on farmland and forests and in areas where the groundwater was limited have contained demand for domestic wells.
But all of that changed when Measure 37 came along. Vast amounts of land are being brought out from under farming and forestry zoning in order to be developed because of special rights Measure 37 grants a select few land owners. People who have owned their land prior the implementation of zoning that restricts development are granted the ability, via Measure 37, to ignore such restrictions.
Restrictions on large-scale residential subdivisions and commercial and industrial development were put in place because those uses are incompatible with farming and forestry. Under Measure 37, land owners who qualify can cast off development limitations imposed to promote farming and forestry in order develop their land almost any way they choose—including ignoring water limitations.
By exchanging the framework afforded with zoning that favors farming and forestry for random development in places where it never was envisioned, Oregon has lost much ability to manage its water resources.
Government agencies have been slow in responding. Benton County , in an emergency move this month, however, enacted rules that put on developers the burden of mapping, measuring and ensuring that sufficient water exists to supply new development. Facing Measure 37 claims that could boost by 50 percent the acreage available for development in the county, Benton County recognized an urgent need for these new rules.
By-and-large, though, developers are not compelled to prove adequate water supplies. So the burden for water protection, essentially, is on neighbors. Neighbors of Measure 37 development have had to step forward to bear the burden of hiring experts to study and opine on the status of groundwater and the impact of additional wells.
In case after case, however, governing agencies have given a green light for these subdivisions to proceed regardless the opinions of water experts.
Without their own water experts backed by comprehensive plans, counties are hard-pressed to deny development. And Oregon doesn't have laws that compel developers to prove adequate water can be provided to new users or that new demand won't deplete existing wells.
Measure 49 is a beacon of hope for many concerned with limited water supplies. One of the ways in which Measure 49 fixes the flaws of Measure 37 is by limiting development in water restricted areas to a maximum of three additional home sites.
Opponents of 49 either say 'there's plenty of water,' knowing that they'll never have to prove such an assertion or insist that 'development won't go forward in areas where water is limited.'
"What they don't want to admit is, what one property owner does with their land, affects the greater community—in ways as basic as adequate and clean water," says Don Dean.
Following passage of Measure 37, upwards of 7,500 claims proposing development on approximately 750,000 acres throughout the state have been filed.
The claims would bring an inundation of giant housing subdivisions, as well as numerous strip malls, rock blasting operations and other commercial and industrial projects to farmland and forests.
Voting "YES" on Ballot Measure 49 streamlines the development process under Measure 37 for landowners who just want to build a few homes on their property and it closes loopholes in Measure 37 that allow commercial and industrial development.
For more information from official sources, go to: http://www.eweb.org/about/commis sioners/meetings/2007/070220/WS3.pdf.For more information from the campaign for Yes on 49, go to www.yeson49.com.
Letter
Hunting and Peta, Urban and Rural Grow Farther Apart
To The Record-Courier:The Sunday Oregonian (Oct. 7) ran a story, front page, “A Hunting She Will Go,” about a grandfather taking his young granddaughter on her first grouse hunt. She shot one out of a tree. Grandpa was real proud and so was the girl. I read the article as I was having coffee and told the other guys that the Oregonian was about to get bombarded by the PETA people. Tuesday’s paper is full of the downtown Portland crowd letting us rednecks know just what a bunch of barbarians we are.
What this episode illustrates to me is the fact that urban and rural grow farther apart every year. Those who haven’t smelled gun powder in five generations think you hunt food at the supermarket then go have a latte.
Out here we like to do it different. My 4-year-old grandson knows about hunting and he likes it outdoors. I showed him off to a friend Sunday. I pointed out north for him and he could then show me the other directions. I get him out and try to give him something urban America wants to take away from him. My son called from the rim of Hells Canyon a few hours later and gave a Chukar report. It’s not as good as last year, but he and his friends are doing what we taught them to do . He is 32 this year and was about 10 when he got his first one. The boy got his first elk bull this year with a bow, a real big six-point. He has a garage full of elk rifle bulls. I hunted the first weekend of buck season with him and he passed up 16 bucks looking for a bigger one. Finally he settled for a three-point.
I fear that my kid and grandson will be an endangered species in a generation or two. Political power is centered in the cities and The Oregonian senses that Oregon is going blue and it might be time to advance land use planning, gun control and the end of hunting. I think that was their motivation for running the hunting story. You know damned well they aren’t exactly pro-hunting.
I have my own motivation so welcome their story. I think we need to start thinking about real political boundaries between red and blue. It’s been a long time since a state divided up, West Virginia might be the last one, but hopefully not the last. The Oregonian will help with that goal.
Now it’s time to chow down on Bambi. I’m 60 and have been climbing mountains for 50 years. I’m a meat hunter now.
Steve CulleyBaker City, Ore. |
|
|
