Filed: April 11, 2002

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON

JUSTIN BOOSE,
EVAN MANVEL, MARY-KAY MICHELSEN
and IAN SIMPSON,

Petitioners,

v.

HARDY MYERS,
Attorney General,
State of Oregon,

Respondent,

and

SCOTT CHAPMAN,

Intervenor.

(SC S49219)

En Banc

On petition to review ballot title.

Submitted on the record March 8, 2002.

Ralph O. Bloemers, Cascade Resources Advocacy Group, Portland, filed the petition for petitioners.

Janet A. Metcalf, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, filed the answering memorandum for respondent. With her on the answering memorandum were Hardy Myers, Attorney General, and Michael D. Reynolds, Solicitor General.

Scott Chapman, Portland, filed the memorandum in opposition to certified ballot title for himself as intervenor.

PER CURIAM

Ballot title certified.

PER CURIAM

In this ballot title review proceeding, petitioners challenge all parts of the Attorney General's certified ballot title for a proposed initiative measure, which the Secretary of State has denominated as Initiative Petition 157 (2002). We review the Attorney General's certified ballot title to determine whether it substantially complies with the requirements of ORS 250.035(2)(a) to (d). See ORS 250.085(5) (setting out standard of review).

We have considered petitioners' arguments and conclude that they are not well taken. Accordingly, we certify to the Secretary of State the following ballot title for the proposed measure:

PROHIBITS LAND USE REGULATIONS THAT REDUCE VALUE MORE THAN 10% WITHOUT AFFECTED LANDOWNERS' APPROVAL

RESULT OF "YES" VOTE: "Yes" vote requires approval by majority of affected landowners before adopting or amending land use regulation, if reduction in landowners' property value exceeds 10%.

RESULT OF "NO" VOTE: "No" vote retains current land use system; does not require obtaining affected landowners' approval before adopting or amending land use regulation reducing value of property.

SUMMARY: Under current law, no landowner approval is required before governments adopt or amend land use goals, plans, regulations. Before 2000, compensation was generally not required when land use regulation only partly reduced property value. In 2000, voters adopted measure that, with some exceptions, required compensation for any reduction in value. The 2000 measure was challenged in court; at the time this summary was written, result of that challenge was unknown. Current measure requires approval of majority of affected landowners if Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission or local land use planning body adopts or amends a goal, plan, or regulation that reduces property value more than 10%. Does not affect power to condemn property for public use with payment of just compensation. Other provisions.

Ballot title certified.


Top of page Go home