House to gut Measure 37 today

On the House floor today is when HB3540 will be heard to refer to voters a measure to gut Measure 37. Here is the Taxpayer Association response:

Respect the will of the voters!
Voters want landowner compensation, not claim termination!

Voters twice affirmed landowner compensation (Measure 37 and Measure 7). Their vote has been clear and convincing as they desire to see their rights enforced not compromised and re-regulated out of existence.

HB 3540 delays helping aggrieved landowners
Many victimized landowners have waited decades for just compensation while others have spent thousands of dollars and hours working their existing claim, yet HB 3540 forced them to re-file and others to lose their claim altogether. There is also no time limit for LCDC to resolve claims, which not only delays justice but it adds more cost and burdens to the victimized landowner.

HB 3540 unfairly punishes landowners who have been victimized the most. Larger landowner claims (commercial, industrial, etc.) are terminated under HB 3540. This means that the more government has taken from landowners the more likely you will not be compensated.

HB 3540 exempts the largest & most populous residential region in Oregon. This bill exempts future Metro-area regulations which cover most of the population of the state. Why do landowners’ civil rights end when you cross from one street to another? It makes no sense, other than to limit any financial obligation the State has to aggrieved landowners by removing a large pool of claims.


    Good! We’ll vote on it! My prediction is that the people will rightly reject the liberals and special insterest groups attempt to thwart the will of the people, again! After that , hopefully we won’t have the hear about this again!

  • Captain_Anon

    I agree with crawdude. this will let people vote on it and voice if they want to fix it, as the legislatures have defined ‘fix’, or keep it as it is. Personally, as it is, it’s a mess and won’t be resolved for years since many of the big issues are going the court route. I have a feeling this will pass with the winds changing on M37 and what people thought it was and has turned out to be.

    • Chris McMullen

      “this will let people vote on it and voice if they want to fix it..”

      It’s already been voted on and M37 was approved. Furthermore, who’s to say if these reforms don’t pass, legislators won’t once again try to refer yet another vote on M37.

      Nice to know ya’ll defend denying the will of the voting public. How democratic of you.

      • dartagnan

        “It’s already been voted on and M37 was approved.”

        Just because a law was approved once doesn’t mean it has to stay on the books forever. If that was the case, Prohibition would still be in force.

        BTW how many times did the social conservatives try to repeal Oregon’s Death With Dignity Act?

        • anonymous

          “Just because a law was approved once doesn’t mean it has to stay on the books forever. If that was the case, Prohibition would still be in force”

          The difference being that prohibition was repealed by Constitutional amendment, meaning supermajority support in both chambers AND popular vote victories in 3/4 of the states.

          In other words, repealing prohibition was THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE.

      • Captain_Anon

        a crappy measure can be approved and then fixed. nothing wrong with that, and it happens all the time. History has shown that this measure, as written, is more problems and legal pitfalls than expected. people who would have valid claims and get homes under the proposed bill won’t under current M37 rulings by the courts. those are the people thie measure was supposed to be for. instead, as it has been abundantly shown, the measure is actually for big ass developments and companies – something voters really didn’t think it was for, nor intend for it to be. the will of the people? if it passes the populace, then yeah, it’s the will of the people. is there a problem with taking it to the voters? how many times have you cried about the legislation doing things without a vote of the people? well, here is your chance to support taking something the legislature has done to the people. and here is a chance for those land owners whom the measure was for, to actuallly get what was promised.


    Sorry Chris, I’m voting to keep it the way it is when the Initiative comes out (even though it was overwhelmingly voted for twice). I’m more than incensed that the will of the people is being trampled on by the liberals and their special interest masters. Unfortunately the people of this state voted them in and there is nothing we can do about it except to change their changes through the Initiative process.

    I’m hoping their unpopular and elitist bills show the people of this state exactly who they are and that the conservatives highlite their corruption in the next election.

    Maybe the people will be ready to rectify their mistake in the last election!

    My prediction is that this bill fails when put in front of the people!

  • Tom

    I am not sure anyone will know if they should vote for this bill or against it. This bill kills the original M37 so will the people who are against M37 know they should vote for this? Everyone will not read this bill, they will not know what it really says. If you vote for this new Bill you will NOT be voting for M37. Please read the bill. Under this bill every one, even the ones who have been approved and have spent all their money will have to start over.

    This is not a revised M37, it is a way to stop any current or future claims. The people who revised this bill did not allow for any money to process any claims and they admit that if they do not come up with funds, no claims will be done.

    On top of it all, they admitted on the House floor today that there is rumor that once this bill passes the senate as it did in the house today, the bill may amended it to not go to the voters at all, it will just pass as is. How does that make all you voters feel. Maybe you should all be scared that if this could happen this way, making your votes not count, then why vote at all.

  • eagle eye

    Interesting phenomenon. The people of Oregon vote for one thing (Measure 37, Measure 5) then vote for politicians (Democratic legislature and governor) to oppose their expressed will. I don’t get it. I think the people want to have it both ways. No wonder nobody trusts the political process.


    I’ve always wondered that myself, it really doesn’t make sense but it’s how they vote.

    They want PERS fixed but vote in the people whom the public unions control…they want good highways but vote in people who throw hundreds of millions of doallars away on Light Rail instead…etc…

    Go Figure!

    • eagle eye

      Like I say, I really don’t get it, but here’s a hunch or two. Besides speaking with forked tongues — people really do think they can have their cake and eat it too — they really don’t like the Republicans and conservatives. They think they are nasty and perhaps somewhat stupid too. So, they vote for some of the conservative stuff, then vote for liberals to administer what they’ve wrought.

      That’s the best I can come up with, but look at Bill Sizemore. He did as much as anyone to get the tax limitations passed, but when it came to voting for him for governor, people just held their noses and voted the other way. Same to a lesser extent with Saxton.

      If anyone has a better explanation, I’d be interested. The whole think really doesn’t make too much sense logically.

      • Anonymous

        Honestly, I think many Democrats are just not very bright of posessed of much common sense. I mean, if you vote for a “conservative” ballot measure and then vote for liberal politicians, what do you expect?

        Look at the two D presidential front runners. Obama is an empty suit. Whoever it was that got in hot water for calling him articulate was right. He’s articulate, that’s it. Hillary Clinton is a truly wretched human being. Both these people have legions of devoted followers. Not just supporters, devoted followers who worship them like unto a god. The third place D, John Edwards, is an anbulance chasing narcicist with one term in the Senate.

        Meanwhile, D’s with the intellect, experience and temperment to hold the presidency (Bill Richardson is, unfortunately, the only example that comes to mind) are way behind in the polls. It’s like if the front running Republican cntenders for 2008 were Jerry Fallwell and David Duke.

  • djranch

    I am so disgusted it brings tears to my eyes. Ignoble democrats. They say one thing and there action are another No wonder Oregon is all over the bourd. I would like to think the ignominy would not follow in the senate; but I have my doubts, for it not to at least; go to the voters. I will fight to the bitter end to recouver property rights. I feel this just inflames the voters. I know I am fired up.
    Thank you for all the comments, I am going to need all insight I can gain

    • Captain_Anon

      It’s not just democrats. it’s also the authors of the measure itself. they purposely chose not to put any specifics in the measure what we have seen is a result.

      • Jason Williams

        Come to think of it, the Bill of Rights are not very detailed either. Let’s revoke them too Mr. Anon.

        Since this bill aims to diminish and dismantle Measure 37 rights for most of Oregonians, the politicians have shown that they have the magic missing specific of Measure 37 which is to make the measure mostly useless. No good will there. No good policy either.

        • Captain_Anon

          Jason, you’re a smart guy. so i’m surprised you threw out this argument. I’m sure you’re aware that the Bill of Rights has been litigated over the course of over 200 years, giving us the specific rights we have today. From Miranda, to search and seizure all the way to Dolan which discusses land use and property rights (I assume you’ve heard of them since they are from Tigard).

          Measure 37 was a terribly written measure that is so vague, ir REQUIRES fights and litigation to get meaning from it. it REQUIRES the courts to interpret it since the legislature has been too weak to tackle it. So, if it’s something easy people want, that defines what it means, and can be instantly applied, than Measure 37 is not the right measure. The legislature could have left it alone, and the Courts would take anywhere from 3 to 10 years to hear all the cases resulting from it and make interpretations (here it is more than 2 years after and we still don’t have diffinitive answers to the most important questions), some you like, some you don’t. and then, and only then, will it be workable (or not if you and OIA don’t like the rulings).

          OR, you can have the legistlature fix it. defining the rights it gives, and to whom it gives, so that jurisdictions can immediately implement it. Which would you rather have? and with the political winds as they are, the population is leaning against M37 because of all the legal pitfalls it has attached to it and the costs to tax payers in its implementation – (such as the nearly $500,000 award for “attorney’s Fees” given to Dorothy Englishes attorneys even though thier work didn’t cost near that. when the County settled with her, the judge screwed the taxpayers with that award. She got 1.5 million and they get 1/3rd in fees? with no reasoning to the amount? wow, tax payers are really on the hook if judges can just aribitrarily award attorney fees with no rationale. supposedly you defend tax payers. why aren’t you defending us from court cases that could lead to us paying out millions?). Seems to me that since this will go to the public for a vote (don’t you think they should have the right to vote on it?) they will be the final judge on if this is what they want or not.

        • Captain_Anon

          since you’re in the legislature and are privy to information we are not, Jason, can you tell us exactly how many of the current claims would be eliminated as a result of this bill? How many claimants would get relief under this measure? i’m sure the vast majority would get the relief they seek. since you’re saying this will gut the measure and prevent what it was meant for, please tell us in actual numbers how this plays out.


    Oh yeah, I agree! I think this will definitely fire up the voters and they will reject this so called fix, unfortunately it’ll be the 3rd time we’ve had to vote on this 🙁 How many more times are they going to “fix” what the people don’t want fixed? (because it doesn’t need fixing!)

    Remember next time we vote for state legislators who voted to thwart the will of the people and don’t send them back! Otherwise we’ll be voting on this again and again.

    • djranch

      I am sure I won’t be the only one who is going to make a note about this matter in regards to re-electing. My vote has been flused, for long time I must be doing something wrong, what the heck? New stategy those politician who want to gut M37 blindly vote not to put them back in no matter what they claim they are going to do for you. Nail in there campaign coffin that will haunt them for ever.
      Oh yeah, FIX we will see when I go B-4 the commissioners this month for my hearing on my M37 claim. I’m 3rd generation business just want to continue on instead of being financialy gutted by restictions.

  • Jason Williams

    Sure the Bill of Rights has been litigated and legislated. But how often do the politicians regulate the constitution to the point of invaildating its principle. It would be like saying we have freedom of speech, but the lawmakers passed a law saying it only applies to people over 50 years of age, enjoy “due process”? lawmakers could say it only applies to people living when the rule was enacted, and so on. The House Bill adds specifics in order to undue most of the positive effect it is going to have on people in protecting their property rights.

    • Captain_Anon

      Those who currently have invalid claims under the measure’s rules due to a change in ownership to LLC’s or to irrevocable trusts, or family companies, or because thier husbands didn’t put them on the deed, or had thier property taken in a foreclosure but then reacquired it would certainly disagree. they all lose out. and the measure was meant for them – especially those who put the family land into a business but later wanted to grant thier kids lots to build on. THEY are the ones whom the measure was for. NOT the timber companies who only wanted the land to harvest timber. NOT for the small town pop who bought a small store on the main drag for his antique store but because of the law decided he wanted to build an 11 story apartment building then sell.

      Let’s be honest. the fixes help more people than the original bill. the fixes get people what they planned on getting back when they bought the property. are you telling me that everyone of the claimants filing the huge land divisions actually had the foresight to get the land so they could plat a 200 lot subdivision? please. let’s use common sense. this bill brings it. and gets people what they wanted. you never answered the question i posed before… do you have a break down of who the new bill hurts? what data do you have to back up your assertion that it guts the measure and prevents it’s purpose?

  • Jason Williams

    The bill removes Measure 37 protections for people…

    (1) People wanting to build more than 3 homes
    (2) People wanting to build their fourth home on the property
    (3) Landowners of commercial property
    (4) landowners of industrial property
    (5) landowners within Metro boundries for whatever Metro may do.

    Add all those people up and you are stripping an entire population away from their measure 37 protections. So this bill could hurt someone like the next Dorothy English or a small landowner living within Metro, or a small business man trying to set up a country store, basically it hurts every type of landowner.

  • We won!

    Congratulations! The Senate Passed the bill extending the timelines on the glut of M37 cases that were handed in at the last second saving us tax payers millions in damages because the state couldn’t process them in time!