Unyielding opinions endanger future plans

The Times, Feb 4, 2010

ADVERTISEMENTS

It is increasingly likely that more than two years of effort to better plan for the Portland area’s regional land needs for the next 40 to 50 years will break down over special interests and unwillingness to compromise.

In January, Metro President David Bragdon and Metro Councilor Carl Hosticka attempted to build agreement by suggesting that as much as 31,564 acres outside the region’s present urban growth boundary be designated as future urban reserves. In doing so, they called for almost 230,000 acres outside the boundary to be protected as exclusive rural reserves. That plan would accommodate a 66 percent to 88 percent growth in population and jobs with only a 9 percent expansion of the urban growth boundary. In fact, their plan would institute a much harder line on future urban growth than is presently the case here or anywhere in the state.

A good idea, you might think?

A majority of Washington County commissioners, including Tom Brian, Andy Duyck and Roy Rogers, are reluctantly willing to agree. But many leaders do not. Metro Councilors Robert Liberty, Rod Park and Rex Burkholder want less growth. Several Clackamas County commissioners, including Charlotte Lehan, don’t want as much growth in Washington County. Members of 1000 Friends and the Oregon Farm Bureau want even less growth allowed on farmland. And Portland Mayor Sam Adams, a Johnny-come-lately to any of this long-term planning, is saying that there is enough land already within the region’s existing urban growth boundary.

Last week, Bragdon implored regional leaders to further compromise; think big picture and reach agreement. But unfortunately, his efforts have been rebuffed.

So, what is left is an unsatisfactory outcome: a failure to plan.

And as such, an unwillingness by some to compromise will have risked (irresponsibly) the region’s one-time commitment to plan for a more predictable future for housing, jobs, agricultural, forestry and environmental needs.