Oregon Legislature Funds "The Big Look Task Force"

The Big Look Task Force on Oregon Land Use Planning recently received funding to continue with their findings. In 2007 The Take Force's charge was to develop long-term, permanent recommendations for updating the state land use program for consideration in the 2009 Legislature.

The mission of the Big Look Task Force is to make recommendations to ensure that the state's land use system sustains the quality of our environment and the beauty of our landscape while building an economy that assures the prosperity of Oregon's citizens and communities. The Task Force believes these outcomes will be achieved by investing in future as well as present generations and by insisting upon timely, adaptable and reasonable programs and policies that recognize regional differences and emphasize partnerships between our people and businesses and state, regional and local governments to provide the best public service.

In their July, 2007 report the Big Look Task Force developed the following preliminary conclusions:

Conclusion 1: Oregon's land use system has protected agricultural and forest lands.

Conclusion 2: Oregon has contained urban sprawl and managed growth better than most other states.

Conclusion 3: Oregonians generally support land use planning to accommodate future growth, but they also believe strongly in private property rights.

Conclusion 4: Oregon's land use program is more often viewed as a regulatory program than as a resource for jurisdictions trying to comply with state mandates. Many of the requirements of the land use program are fixed, and the program itself is not outcome oriented.

Finally, there is a lack of coordination and strategic alignment between Oregon's land use agency (LCDC), and state agencies and local governments.

Conclusion 5: The land use program has become a complex mix of statue, case law, amendments, administrative rules and specific exceptions. The system does not have the flexibility needed to respond to a changing Oregon. The perceived "one size fits all" approach to the land use program does not adequately recognise our state's diverse landscapes, economies and values.

Conclusion 6: Most future population and employment growth is forecast to occur in a few major high growth regions of the state. Growth in other regions - encompassing about three- fourths of the actual land area within UGBs- is not expected to place significant burdens on resource lands. Our land system should adapt to distinct differences between the high growth and low growth areas of the state.

Conclusion 7: Approximately one-quarter to one-third of Oregon's land outside UGBs has been designated exclusive farm use (EFU), and can only be amended by an act of the state legislature.

Conclusion 8: Oregon will be challenged t finance and maintain the infrastructure-and the corresponding services of transportation, water supply, and preservation of critical environmental resources-that will accommodate the growth of 2 million more Oregonians projected by the year 2035.

Conclusion 9: There are lessons to be learned from land use planning approaches in other states and countries. Oregon should be a leader in adopting best practices such as providing more incentives, more flexibility, and higher recognition of the role that market forces play in shaping development patterns.

Conclusion 10: The State of Oregon does not have a strategic method for understanding the values of Oregonians, particularly as those values shift or change over time.

Conclusion 11: Most Oregonians share a few basic goals that, when properly balanced inn the state planning system, will help create a sustainable Oregon (e.g., a healthy environment, a prosperous economy, a high quality life, and equity and fairness). Many of the state's existing 19 goals are tools or techniques, and there are many inconsistencies among the goals that need to be resolved.

The Task Force firmly believes that Oregon should undergo a thorough review of it's land use planning system if our way of life-and our very livability-are to continue and thrive. Whether that system changes in ways that are large or small, it really is up to the people of Oregon to make these key decisions. Without a through and systematic review as the Task Force recommends, the system will continue to be threatened by single-issue, temporary solutions that create unnecessary complexity and foster inequity.

I applaud the Legislature for appropriating funds to continue this study and urge my fellow Oregonians to pay attention to this important issue and get involved.