BTW, as usual, I am glad we are "exiting" another insane election.

I'm actually somewhat surprised (and pleased) by the voting results on your website, Jack, as I assumed your readership veered slightly more towards the libertarian side of things.

I assumed your readership

I have learned not to assume who the readership of this blog may be.

Many lurkers who would never leave a comment are happy to click on a poll.

The readership is largely Portland-centric, however, and so these results don't say much about what is happening statewide. Given that fact, I'm worried about Measure 50, which is clearly not as popular as 49 among those responding here. If it turns out to be close around Portland, it may lose.

Interesting to note that the returns for Multnomah County (36%) are slightly lower than those statewide (38%). As far as I can tell this info is through saturday 11/3/07. Get it here: http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/

It would be interesting to keep track of these JackBog polls over a few years and see how closely they reflect the Portland metro area. I'd guess the readership represents a pretty wide cross-section of the public.

I mean, I read it every morning for about the same reason I used to read Herb Caen when I lived in San Francisco: politics asie, there's always something funny, quirky, poignant or otherwise interesting here about our fair city.

I'm not, by the way, saying you're as good as Herb Caen, Jack. Nobody is.

Inferior is better than equally dead.

Thanks for the nice words.

Currently, there is a 45% ballot return in Multnomah County as of 11 am. Hope this gets up to 50%. As another, former San Francisco resident, I would hate to see Oregon become another bloated, developer's dream, with little or no farmland left in the Bay Area.

JB,
Go to the Multomah County Elections Division page on this election http://www.mcelections.org/2007-11/turnout.shtml for turnout it is updated more frequently than the Sec. of State site. As of 12:30 Multnomah County turnout is at 47%.

Thanks for the poll, I've been nagging Blue O to do one but to no avail.

Actually, I am shocked that (at least on this extremely non-scientific poll) M 50 isn't doing nearly as well as M 49. I fully expected an overwhelming majority to vote to "stick it" to "evil big tobacco."

Well, a few hours to go and all the polls are moot...

Dyann,
Do you actually live in farmland area, or do you just like to dictate what others that do live there can do with their land?

Travis,

Do you like sprawl, or do you just think that actions on your land don't affect everyone?

Bob,
That's just it...it's my land. I bought it. You didn't. Just like I wouldn't come to your place and tell you what you can do with your house, and your lawn.

I understand that if people build homes on their land that it affects others. If you don't want sprawl that's fine, buy the land and keep it for yourself.

gullyborg -- my distaste for the measure has nothing to do with big evil tobacco or healthy kids. It has to do with our government needing more money and who they are taking it from. Wonder how much taxes wal mart, ikea, etc pay?

*******That's just it...it's my land. I bought it. You didn't. Just like I wouldn't come to your place and tell you what you can do with your house, and your lawn.*******

It amazes me when I read this argument from people. The fact is the governemnt, which means the voters acting the electeds, tells me what to do with my house and lawn all the time. And have been since the country started. (Yes there were land use rules in colonial Amrerica as well.)

Can I build any size house I want on my land. No. Can I build it right on the property line, right next to my neighbors house. No. Can I run a pig farm in my back yard. No. Can I run a scrap yard in my back yard. No.

Look if you don't like the restrictions placed on your land complain about it. Tell me in some sort of cogent argumant why the restrictions should be lifted. But don't tell me, "You can't tell me what I can do with MY LAND cause I paid for it." I paid for mine too it's just I realize that just because I paid for it I'm not automatically exempted from societys rules.

Greg C

Greg,
I would be happy to tell you why they should be lifted. I own 51.5 acres of EFU property, which really isn't farmland since the soil type couldn't produce anything and I have no irrigation rights. According to my county, I can build one house, which I have done, and use less than an acre of property. So now I have over 50 acres of non-farm land that I can't farm, that I can't sell into 5 acre lots. I'm not looking to put a house every 1/4 of an acre, but a house every 5 acres would be nice.

well I am guessing Wal-Mart and Ikea pay more in taxes than any of us do.

Travis,

Do the roads and other infrastructure support you putting up 10 houses plus all the houses your neighbors might also put up without negatively affecting those neighbors who thought they were buying farm or country living? With no irrigation rights, water might be iffy. You don't live in a vacuum.

Bob,
It's a private road, we maintain it. As for water, there are wells, and there are holding tanks, that you can have water brought to if need be. We are surrounded on 3 sides of our property by BLM so don't think that would affect the 'neighbors.' Plus living on 5 acres is country living. I realize that I don't live in a vacuum, but what is surprising is that your decision on this ballot affects me much more than it probably does you, and yet you think I live in a vacuum.

Travis,

I lived in Houston and Atlanta, poster children for ugly sprawl. Atlanta barely has enough water now due to sprawl. They just had to negotiate with Florida, Alabama, and the federal government to get the rights to take more water from the Chattahoocie and that is just a temporary fix. Trust me, measure 49 affects everyone just as much as you.

Bob,
Way to use the extreme cases! You're comparing apples and oranges when you say a home on 5 acres, and homes in Atlanta and Houston. Nice try but you can't compare the two.

Travis,

It is a slippery slope and it doesn't take long. Over 2000 acres of land within 10 miles of my Houston home went from farm land to subdivisions in less than 5 years. Under measure 37 we were in danger of getting the subdivisions. Now (with 47 passing) folks like you can do three houses automatically or up to ten if you prove your value was lowered. A lot smarter than willy nilly development.

Bob,
I agree it is a slippery slope, but nowhere have I seen a measure 37 claim going to 1/4 acre lots. I have family who have a measure 37 claim, and they could have went for 5 acre parcels, but chose to do 10 acre parcels, and I think most Oregonians would do the same.
I still can't develop anything on my remaining 50 acres, because our county will only let me build one house on my parcel. I would be happy with just being able to build two more houses on it, so I could pay off my existing home, but under the county's laws I am stuck, and that property is worthless to me.

Please. I'm always amazed by those who believe that everyone should be able to do whatever they want on their own land, no matter how incompatible that activity might be with the neighborhood. Sure, place smelters and strip clubs next to grade schools, what the hell! And hey, let's pave over the best farmland in the state, that won't affect the future welfare of just about everyone much! Wake up people!

Scott,
If you are referring to my comments, you haven't really read the comments. I have stated several times that the designation of farm land is a joke, the soil couldn't produce anything. And of course nobody is really asking to put strip clubs up next to grade schools...

But where would you draw the line? You feel you should have the right to develop your land in order to get value from it. The guy next door to you might feel that he should be able to develop a shopping center adjacent to your house for the same reason. Or a five hundred acre subdivision next to your farm. Shouldn't there be checks on this type of development?