Dear Fellow Oregonian:

I live on a farm in Washington County, amidst some of the best farmland on earth — where perennial tall fescue is grown for grass seed, filberts for Christmas stockings, sweet corn for the farmers market, and alfalfa to feed beef cows.

After Measure 37 passed, the first claims seemed reasonable: One neighbor wanted to divide her property into thirds. Another wanted to build one house on 10 acres.

But then the "other" claims came. Within just 3 miles of my farm, there are 54 Measure 37 claims to build a potential 1761 homes — most in an area designated "ground water restricted."

Imagine moving combines, trailer loads of nursery stock, and large agricultural equipment over our narrow winding roads, amidst the flood of more vehicles commuting to jobs and school. Who will pay for road improvements? How will we provide water to 1761 homes?

This kind of random, intense development will have a devastating impact on highly productive farmland.

And who "benefits?" Not the small property owner. Within Washington County, 88% of the Measure 37 home sites are requested by just 20% of claimants.

Meanwhile, most farm families cannot file Measure 37 claims, though their land has been in the same family for 50 years. Yet their economic livelihood will be severely impacted, if not destroyed.

Nearby elderly widows try to file modest Measure 37 claims, but are denied because they were never on the deed with their husbands.

Other families can’t profit from their Measure 37 claims, because development rights aren’t transferable.

Measure 49 re-balances Measure 37.
It provides relief to those who want to build a home or two on their rural property.
It helps the elderly claimants wanting to provide for their retirement or a place for their children.
And, by limiting the size of development, we keep the impact to the community and reasonable and manageable.

Vote YES on Measure 49

David Papworth