Tuesday, February 21, 2006

Oregon Supreme Court Upholds Measure 37

The Oregon Supreme Court today reversed a lower court judgment that had invalidated Measure 37, the ballot initiative that requires compensation to be paid to landowners when land-use regulations reduce property values.  The opinion is available here.  The Oregonian also has a story on the opinion.

I've linked to recent essays on Measure 37 here and here.  I've noted before that although I tend to be relatively pro-property rights on takings issues, I think Measure 37 is overbroad and a really bad idea.  But the voter anger behind Measure 37 is real, and combined with the post-Kelo backlash should cause land-use planners to question whether consistently sticking it to property owners is a good long-term strategy.  Oregon land-use planners probably wouldn't be facing potential disaster if they had made some modest accommodations to property owners' interests from the outset.

Ben Barros

UPDATE:  Todd Zywicki has a short post on the decision here.

[Comments are held for approval, so there will be some delay in posting]


Takings | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:


Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Oregon Supreme Court Upholds Measure 37:


What will likely be seen is "counter Measure 37" claims. If a neighbor can now subdivide her property, than my property values are diminished due to the excercise (or more correctly, non-excercise) of a land use regulation. As I recall, each of the counties had different strategies for paying these secondary claims, and the state legislature never agreed on a consistent policy.

Posted by: Kurt Paulsen | Feb 21, 2006 8:07:46 PM

Post a comment