This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on June 14, 2007 10:43 AM.
The previous post in this blog was Street illegal.
The next post in this blog is Weeded out.
Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.
The condos weren't enough. Now we'll take taxpayers' money and hand it over to developers so that they can pave over farmland.
I thought "urban renewal" was supposed to be about bringing dying sections of older cities back to life. But now it's about subsidizing sprawl into rural areas. Californication will gobble up every public nickel it can get, I guess.
They also have a financing idea: Define the rolling farmland of the 800-acre soon-to-be urban area as "blighted" and create an urban renewal district to help pay for new infrastructure.
"dear citizens: your farmland is blighted."
Now they have about three months to refine both the concept and financing plans before sending them to the Washington County Board of Commissioners for approval.
"dear citizens: your famland is really, really blighted."
Jack, you probably also made the connection that the Betsy Johnson issue, about having surrounding property adjacent to country airports using taxpayer funds, is also another form of "urban renewal".
Public money is being used by TIF moneys being used to pay for improvements to the surrounding airport properties as well as airport improvements. This will be taking tax dollars away from schools, fire/police departments, roads, etc. as designated by the bill Johnson sponsored. This rural urban renewal might be more insidious than urban-urban renewal. We are certainly being attacked by the misuse of the intent of urban renewal as defined by state statutes.
Hmmmmmm.... so if Dorothy English can get her acreage designated as blighted, then she can redevelop it? Surely it's every bit as blighted as the North Bethany area... and it's also in the UGB, yes?
Ya gotta love the sweet irony - "Danger! M37 will demolish all farmland!" followed by "Your farmland is blighted - develop it!"
"Ya gotta love the sweet irony - "Danger! M37 will demolish all farmland!" followed by "Your farmland is blighted - develop it!"
Worse yet is the hypocricy. A M37 claimant simply wants to use their land and pay for it themselves. Subdivision or less.
Here is the government planning on spending over $300 million in tax dollars to help do the worst of any M37 claims.
High density vanquishing of farmland.
once again--the point of the UGB is to develop inside it. Understanding that first makes it much easier to figure out why there's no actual problem here.
This 800 acres of farmland was outside the UGB until it was targeted for expansion and heavily tax subsidized development. Understanding the hypocrisy involved here makes it much easier to figure out why there's a huge problem.
There is abundant land and development that growth demands which needs no massive Urban Renewal subsidy.
As demonstrated by the many M37 claims in Washington County.
It is absolute balderdash that this costly high density smart growth scheme is preferable to any equal M37 private development.
With real costs and debt service included this Urban Renewal scheme on farmland will result in at least a 1/2 BILLION in property taxes diverted away from basic services over decades.
And never has will there be more a debunking of the notion that "development would not happen without this UR" than with this scheme.
The powers that be have and continue to block development all around the county
while at the same time insisting this massive spending is necessary.
And even more hypocrisy as the clammor for System Development Charges to help pay for new schools which new development supposedly requires.
Sure, with goverment needlessly skimming half a billion, (along with countless other millions in other UR)from a schools and other basic services back filling the losses have to come from somewhere.
As I've said many times before, Metro is the real destroyer of habitats and green areas. Their density requirements have paved over more natural areas than any development outside the UGB.
The somewhat low density neighborhood I live in (houses with 8,000+ sq ft lots) is rife with coyotes, raccoons, red tail hawks and screech owls -- as well as about 30 different species of birds.
It's unbelievably hypocritical of M37 opponents to declare development outside the UGB will destroy habitat, and also be a proponent of the UGB and "density."
Of course there are problems here - You have public officials bastardizing the original intent of declaring something "blighted" in order to use a mechanism that ultimately removes tax dollars from the general fund, thus defunding essential services.
Do you really think North Bethany wouldn't be developed if it weren't for the urban renewal giveaway?
And we still have my original point - If development is the best use of North Bethany farmland, than why isn't it also the best use of Dorothy's property? (I'm assuming for the sake of argument that her property is within the UGB, not that I'm sure it really matters...) Why must she be forced to keep her property undeveloped, when 5 miles away from her, we'll be giving money away to have these 800 acres developed?
There is a lot of hypocrisy concerning Metro's UGB. It is okay to develop the Damascus area which will require a massive expenditure for urban services and the four land Sunrise Rd. It is okay to seriously consider Wanker Corners and Stafford that is far from the actual urban edge. It is okay to develop "Duberville" over several miles from even the actual edge of Wilsonville-and with urban renewal dollars to help it work (Wilsonville City Council just voted to extend an additional $35M of credit because they misjudged the costs of Duberville).
If government finds an expansion of urbanization is "justified", they seem to find a way. But Dorothy English who is even closer to urbanization than North Bethany, now that is wrong. Only government and the urban planners of Metro know what is appropriate for expansion. M37 claimants and all others are just dumb.
Charamba, Douro 2008
Horse Heaven Hills, Cabernet 2010
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills Pinot Grigio 2011
Avignonesi, Montepulciano 2004
Lorelle, Willamette Valley Pinot Noir 2011
Villa Antinori, Toscana 2007
Mercedes Eguren, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Lorelle, Columbia Valley Cabernet 2011
Purple Moon, Merlot 2011
Purple Moon, Chardonnnay 2011
Abacela, Vintner's Blend No. 12
Opula Red Blend 2010
Liberte, Pinot Noir 2010
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Indian Wells Red Blend 2010
Woodbridge, Chardonnay 2011
King Estate, Pinot Noir 2011
Famille Perrin, Cotes du Rhone Villages 2010
Columbia Crest, Les Chevaux Red 2010
14 Hands, Hot to Trot White Blend
Familia Bianchi, Malbec 2009
Terrapin Cellars, Pinot Gris 2011
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2009
Campo Viejo, Rioja, Termpranillo 2010
Ravenswood, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Quinta das Amoras, Vinho Tinto 2010
Waterbrook, Reserve Merlot 2009
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills, Pinot Grigio 2011
Tarantas, Rose
Chateau Lajarre, Bordeaux 2009
La Vielle Ferme, Rose 2011
Benvolio, Pinot Grigio 2011
Nobilo Icon, Pinot Noir 2009
Lello, Douro Tinto 2009
Quinson Fils, Cotes de Provence Rose 2011
Anindor, Pinot Gris 2010
Buenas Ondas, Syrah Rose 2010
Les Fiefs d'Anglars, Malbec 2009
14 Hands, Pinot Gris 2011
Conundrum 2012
Condes de Albarei, Albariño 2011
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2007
Penelope Sanchez, Garnacha Syrah 2010
Canoe Ridge, Merlot 2007
Atalaya do Mar, Godello 2010
Vega Montan, Mencia
Benvolio, Pinot Grigio
Nobilo Icon, Pinot Noir, Marlborough 2009
Portuga, Rose 2011
Revelation, Chardonnay, Pays d'Oc 2010
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 2005
Monte Alto, Tinto Reserva 2005
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Cabernet, Indian Wells 2009
Espiral, Vinho Rose
Vin-Koru, Pinot Gris 2011
14 Hands, Hot to Trot Red 2009
Rodney Strong, Cabernet, Sonoma 2009
Abacela, Vintner's Blend #11
Portuga, White 2010
La Bourgeoisie, Red 2009
Januik, Red 2009
Three Rivers, River's Red 2008
Kirkland, Alexander Valley Merlot 2008
Muga, Rioja Rose 2010
Quinta das Amoras, Vinho Tinto 2009
Mauro Molino, Barbera d'Alba 2009
Garda Chiaretto Rose
Columbia Crest, Two Vines Vineyard 10 White
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Pinot Gris, Columbia Valley 2009
L'Hortus, Rose de Saignee 2010
Maculan, Pino & Toi 2008
McKinley Springs, Bombing Range Red 2008
Trader Joe's Pinot Gris 2009
Montes Alpha, Cabernet 2007
Gran Sasso, Sangiovese, Terre di Chieti 2009
Garda, Classico Chiaretto Rose
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 1999
Picos del Montgo, Tempranillo 2008
Chateau de Montmirail, Vacqueyras 2008
La Granja 360, Syrah 2009
Montgras, Carmenere Reserva 2009
Lange, Pinot Gris 2009
Columbia Crest, Horse Heaven Hills Cabernet 2008
Kirkland, Pinot Grigio 2010
Trader Joe's Coastal Syrah 2009
Columbia Crest, Horse Heaven Hills Merlot 2008
Trader Joe's Coastal Chardonnay 2009
Vieux Papes Red
Domaine de l'Aujardiere, Chardonnay 2009
Santa Rita, Cabernet, Medalla Real 2007
Penfold's, Koonunga Hill Shiraz Cabernet 2008
Guild, Red, Lot #02 2008
Dievole, Dievolino Sangiovese 2008
Laforet, Burgogne Chardonnay 2009
Columbia Winery, Merlot 2007
Bonterra, Cabernet 2008
Elk Cove, Pinot Gris 2009
Maquis Lien 2006
Scott Paul, Pinot Noir, Le Paulee 2007
The Occasional Book
Neil Young - Waging Heavy Peace
Mark Bego - Aretha Franklin, the Queen of Soul (2012 ed.)
Jenny Lawson - Let's Pretend This Never Happened
J.D. Salinger - Franny and Zooey
Charles Dickens - A Christmas Carol
Timothy Egan - The Big Burn
Deborah Eisenberg - Transactions in a Foreign Currency
Kurt Vonnegut Jr. - Slaughterhouse Five
Kathryn Lance - Pandora's Genes
Cheryl Strayed - Wild
Fyodor Dostoyevsky - The Brothers Karamazov
Jack London - The House of Pride, and Other Tales of Hawaii
Jack Walker - The Extraordinary Rendition of Vincent Dellamaria
Colum McCann - Let the Great World Spin
Niccolò Machiavelli - The Prince
Harper Lee - To Kill a Mockingbird
Emma McLaughlin & Nicola Kraus - The Nanny Diaries
Brian Selznick - The Invention of Hugo Cabret
Sharon Creech - Walk Two Moons
Keith Richards - Life
F. Sionil Jose - Dusk
Natalie Babbitt - Tuck Everlasting
Justin Halpern - S#*t My Dad Says
Mark Herrmann - The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law
Barry Glassner - The Gospel of Food
Phil Stanford - The Peyton-Allan Files
Jesse Katz - The Opposite Field
Evelyn Waugh - Brideshead Revisited
J.K. Rowling - Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
David Sedaris - Holidays on Ice
Donald Miller - A Million Miles in a Thousand Years
Mitch Albom - Have a Little Faith
C.S. Lewis - The Magician's Nephew
F. Scott Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby
William Shakespeare - A Midsummer Night's Dream
Ivan Doig - Bucking the Sun
Penda Diakité - I Lost My Tooth in Africa
Grace Lin - The Year of the Rat
Oscar Hijuelos - Mr. Ives' Christmas
Madeline L'Engle - A Wrinkle in Time
Steven Hart - The Last Three Miles
David Sedaris - Me Talk Pretty One Day
Karen Armstrong - The Spiral Staircase
Charles Larson - The Portland Murders
Adrian Wojnarowski - The Miracle of St. Anthony
William H. Colby - Long Goodbye
Steven D. Stark - Meet the Beatles
Phil Stanford - Portland Confidential
Rick Moody - Garden State
Jonathan Schwartz - All in Good Time
David Sedaris - Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim
Anthony Holden - Big Deal
Robert J. Spitzer - The Spirit of Leadership
James McManus - Positively Fifth Street
Jeff Noon - Vurt
Road Work
Miles run year to date: 21
At this date last year: 52
Total run in 2012: 129
In 2011: 113
In 2010: 125
In 2009: 67
In 2008: 28
In 2007: 113
In 2006: 100
In 2005: 149
In 2004: 204
In 2003: 269
Comments (15)
For another perspective, go to: http://www.ti.org/antiplanner/
top post: "planning and growth".
UR should have nothing to do with North Bethany development. Likewise tax abatement.
The real "blight" in this case are the Metro and Washco planners.
Posted by veiledorchid | June 14, 2007 2:41 PM
They also have a financing idea: Define the rolling farmland of the 800-acre soon-to-be urban area as "blighted" and create an urban renewal district to help pay for new infrastructure.
"dear citizens: your farmland is blighted."
Now they have about three months to refine both the concept and financing plans before sending them to the Washington County Board of Commissioners for approval.
"dear citizens: your famland is really, really blighted."
Posted by ecohuman.com | June 14, 2007 2:53 PM
How can it be sprawl when it's inside the UGB?
Posted by torridjoe | June 14, 2007 3:40 PM
Funny, I thought M37 was the evil that was going to allow development on farmland. Turns out Metro can do it too...who knew?
Posted by Jon | June 14, 2007 10:03 PM
Jack, you probably also made the connection that the Betsy Johnson issue, about having surrounding property adjacent to country airports using taxpayer funds, is also another form of "urban renewal".
Public money is being used by TIF moneys being used to pay for improvements to the surrounding airport properties as well as airport improvements. This will be taking tax dollars away from schools, fire/police departments, roads, etc. as designated by the bill Johnson sponsored. This rural urban renewal might be more insidious than urban-urban renewal. We are certainly being attacked by the misuse of the intent of urban renewal as defined by state statutes.
Posted by Jerry | June 14, 2007 11:47 PM
Hmmmmmm.... so if Dorothy English can get her acreage designated as blighted, then she can redevelop it? Surely it's every bit as blighted as the North Bethany area... and it's also in the UGB, yes?
Ya gotta love the sweet irony - "Danger! M37 will demolish all farmland!" followed by "Your farmland is blighted - develop it!"
Posted by Larry K | June 15, 2007 8:13 AM
"Ya gotta love the sweet irony - "Danger! M37 will demolish all farmland!" followed by "Your farmland is blighted - develop it!"
Worse yet is the hypocricy. A M37 claimant simply wants to use their land and pay for it themselves. Subdivision or less.
Here is the government planning on spending over $300 million in tax dollars to help do the worst of any M37 claims.
High density vanquishing of farmland.
And not a peep from the anti-M37 pandamoniumists.
Posted by Don Ameche | June 15, 2007 8:17 AM
once again--the point of the UGB is to develop inside it. Understanding that first makes it much easier to figure out why there's no actual problem here.
Posted by torridjoe | June 15, 2007 9:21 AM
This 800 acres of farmland was outside the UGB until it was targeted for expansion and heavily tax subsidized development. Understanding the hypocrisy involved here makes it much easier to figure out why there's a huge problem.
There is abundant land and development that growth demands which needs no massive Urban Renewal subsidy.
As demonstrated by the many M37 claims in Washington County.
It is absolute balderdash that this costly high density smart growth scheme is preferable to any equal M37 private development.
With real costs and debt service included this Urban Renewal scheme on farmland will result in at least a 1/2 BILLION in property taxes diverted away from basic services over decades.
And never has will there be more a debunking of the notion that "development would not happen without this UR" than with this scheme.
The powers that be have and continue to block development all around the county
while at the same time insisting this massive spending is necessary.
Posted by Don Ameche | June 15, 2007 9:58 AM
And even more hypocrisy as the clammor for System Development Charges to help pay for new schools which new development supposedly requires.
Sure, with goverment needlessly skimming half a billion, (along with countless other millions in other UR)from a schools and other basic services back filling the losses have to come from somewhere.
Posted by Don Ameche | June 15, 2007 10:09 AM
As I've said many times before, Metro is the real destroyer of habitats and green areas. Their density requirements have paved over more natural areas than any development outside the UGB.
The somewhat low density neighborhood I live in (houses with 8,000+ sq ft lots) is rife with coyotes, raccoons, red tail hawks and screech owls -- as well as about 30 different species of birds.
It's unbelievably hypocritical of M37 opponents to declare development outside the UGB will destroy habitat, and also be a proponent of the UGB and "density."
Posted by Chris McMullen | June 15, 2007 11:17 AM
Torridjoe -
Of course there are problems here - You have public officials bastardizing the original intent of declaring something "blighted" in order to use a mechanism that ultimately removes tax dollars from the general fund, thus defunding essential services.
Do you really think North Bethany wouldn't be developed if it weren't for the urban renewal giveaway?
And we still have my original point - If development is the best use of North Bethany farmland, than why isn't it also the best use of Dorothy's property? (I'm assuming for the sake of argument that her property is within the UGB, not that I'm sure it really matters...) Why must she be forced to keep her property undeveloped, when 5 miles away from her, we'll be giving money away to have these 800 acres developed?
Posted by Larry K | June 15, 2007 2:08 PM
So I just looked it up, and her property is about a mile outside the UGB, for what it's worth. Doesn't change the hypocrisy of it all, however...
Posted by Larry K | June 15, 2007 2:54 PM
There is a lot of hypocrisy concerning Metro's UGB. It is okay to develop the Damascus area which will require a massive expenditure for urban services and the four land Sunrise Rd. It is okay to seriously consider Wanker Corners and Stafford that is far from the actual urban edge. It is okay to develop "Duberville" over several miles from even the actual edge of Wilsonville-and with urban renewal dollars to help it work (Wilsonville City Council just voted to extend an additional $35M of credit because they misjudged the costs of Duberville).
If government finds an expansion of urbanization is "justified", they seem to find a way. But Dorothy English who is even closer to urbanization than North Bethany, now that is wrong. Only government and the urban planners of Metro know what is appropriate for expansion. M37 claimants and all others are just dumb.
Posted by Lee | June 15, 2007 7:07 PM
"the point of the UGB is to develop inside it"
You miss the point, the UGB gets stretched to fit developer's desires. So it looks like sprawl to me anyways.
Two posts from torridjoe, slow day at the CoP job?
Posted by Steve | June 26, 2007 2:29 PM