Over at the Portland Architecture blog, Brian Libby is talking about yesterday's Oregonian op-ed by John Wallace -- which proposes taxing the windfalls that are created by land use changes, and using those funds to pay off Measure 37 claimants who claim losses from land use changes.
I think this idea is very intriguing, but I'm curious what the rest of you think. It sounds like a simple, logical, rational way to solve a big, big problem. But can it be made to work? What are the barriers, and can they be solved? Or is there some massive Achilles' heel I'm not thinking of?
What has seemed so frustrating about Measure 37 is that pass or fail, it didn't solve the issue. ... We need to find a way to compensate M37 claimants without handing over a get-out-of-land-use-free card. And Wallace's simple plan is the only viable one I've heard so far.
Head on over to Portland Architecture to discuss.
April 28, 2006 | | elsewhere.Posted in