Jackson County Land Use Charter Amendments, 2 (May 2012)

From Ballotpedia
Revision as of 15:17, 20 October 2012 by JWilliams (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search
Two Jackson County Land Use Charter Amendment measures were on the May 15, 2012 ballot in Jackson County.

Both measures were defeated

The first measure sought to make it that the county would go against the state laws on land-use planning.

  • YES 14,604 (41.52%)
  • NO 20,581 (58.49%)Defeatedd

The second measure sought to implement a new land-use policy for the county which would limit regulation and establish a compensation process.[1]

  • YES 13,982 (39.6%)
  • NO 21,324 (60.4%)Defeatedd[2]

These two measures were in response to the 2007 state wide measure, Measure 49, which repealed a 2004 property rights measure Measure 37. These two measures would have reinstated rights which had been given under Measure 37, but lost later with Measure 49. County officials though had noted that these go against state laws and will likely be over turned in court if they had been approved. Measure 49 made it that the state controlled what could be developed on personal properties and residents want the right to develop their own land as they see fit.[3]


Those opposed to the measures had noted that both were just a waste of time for residents because the first would not guarantee any change and the second was unconstitutional and therefore would never be enacted. If the measures had been approved the county would then likely have ended up in court costing residents more money as they would have had to pay for prolonged legal fees. Opponents also noted that those in favor were giving residents false hopes that there would be actual change created by approving these measures. The point of the wording being vague and poorly written was also addressed, leaving the proposed measures open to wide debate.[4]

The Mail Tribune had noted its opposition to these measures, stating that these measures would not accomplish what supports are seeking and that the county would end up in court if they are approved. The county cannot just decide to go against state laws without having some issues follow.[5]

The Ashland Daily Tidings had also shown its opposition to the measures, noting that the two measures would not accomplish anything in truth and would not be for the benefit of county residents. They also stated similarly that if the measures are approved nothing would likely come of them though they could lead the county into further debt.[6]

Text of measure

The question on the ballot:

Measure 15-110: Should County Charter Be Amended to Declare a County Policy in General Opposition to Statewide Land-Use Planning?

Measure 15-111: Should County Charter Be Amended to Implement New Policy Limiting Local Land-Use Regulations and Establishing Compensation Process?[7]

Additional reading