The essay by Rebecca Clarren on Measure 37 strikes a
particular chord with me, because I am an offspring of one of those
rural Oregonians that have sacrificed a lot to allow those fine
“enlightened” city folk from the Willamette Valley to experience
the beauty and serenity of Oregon’s unspoiled countryside
(HCN, 9/22/04: In Oregon, a lesson learned the hard way). I take
exception to the claim by planning advocates that Oregonians
didn’t know what they were voting for on Measure 37. They
darn well do know what they are voting for. When an unbending rule
of law is laid upon the land by those who have no vested interest
in its effects (most of the people in favor of strict land-use laws
own no more than a few hundred square feet of it, if any at all),
you will certainly get an extreme backlash.
I agree with
Clarren that planners and environmentalists did not listen to those
people who were bearing the weight of their wonderful utopian view
of how everyone else should live and view the world. My definition
of an environmentalist is one who thinks the world should revolve
around them, much as the monarchs of the past who looked over the
serfs, scratching out a living, in search of the “perfect” world.
I am really glad Oregon’s land-use system has come
to this extreme end, and I hope that those who become so passionate
about the environment realize there are other people in the world
besides themselves.
Douglas D.
Sparks
Dolores, Colorado
This article appeared in the print edition of the magazine with the headline Good riddance to land-use rules.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
