Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm trying to discover more research about the topic, but it would seem that the city planners didn't want another Seattle or San Francisco with endless skyscrapers and urban sprawl. If you disincentivize business growth (a la high taxes), your likely going to end up with a more livable city. This would explain why just driving around downtown, you see much more residential buildings than office parks.
I'm trying to discover more research about the topic, but it would seem that the city planners didn't want another Seattle or San Francisco with endless skyscrapers and urban sprawl. If you disincentivize business growth (a la high taxes), your likely going to end up with a more livable city. This would explain why just driving around downtown, you see much more residential buildings than office parks.
That is because of Senate Bill 100 which is the land conservation and development act. It was passed in the mid-1970's and influences everything here.
I'm trying to discover more research about the topic, but it would seem that the city planners didn't want another Seattle or San Francisco with endless skyscrapers and urban sprawl. If you disincentivize business growth (a la high taxes), your likely going to end up with a more livable city. This would explain why just driving around downtown, you see much more residential buildings than office parks.
I would argue that life long Oregonians are too colloquial and overemphasize the impact of the state government's role in dictating Oregon's development. Some folks like to claim Portland city and Oregon State government's role in hyper-regulating land use has somehow protected Oregon's landscape.
There were other factors that have played more significant role Oregon's development than Government policies.
1. Location - Oregon's location on the planet limited it's ability to develop. It's in the middle of nowhere and far from population centers. This will become less of an issue over time due to technology.
2. Low population - There are just not a lot of people here and even if there was higher than national average growth, it will be a low population state for decades.
3. No significant ocean port. Portland will never have the skyscrapers and urban sprawl of a Seattle or San Francisco. The demand will never be there. City planning has little to do with that reality.
Oregon tax rates and over regulation do not make the this state more livable. They just make it more expensive.
To prove this point, there are plenty of "livable" cities located in more tax friendly states. (Kansas City, Nashville, Charlotte come to mind).
Nothing lasts forever. The Oregon you see today is a gift from The Greatest Generation. Their vision of Oregon's future was enacted when conservative and conservationist still went together. In their time, the state only had a population of 2 million, mostly rural people. When they came back from WWII, Oregon looked like a patch of heaven to them, and they were in no hurry to see it paved.
In the intervening 50 years, the population has become urbanized. When you step on the sidewalk, one city looks pretty much like another. It will be up to the next generations to reap the rewards and suffer the consequences of their choices. How much of our state is developed and how much conserved is a question for the future. People will make those choices depending on what they see and value.
The Oregon you see today is a gift from The Greatest Generation. Their vision of Oregon's future was enacted when conservative and conservationist still went together.
I wanted to give your post positive feedback, Larry Caldwell, but this site wouldn't let me.
It would be one thing if you paid all these taxes and got a lot of nice stuff for it (best schools, roads, services, parks, etc...). But I noticed for example when I moved from CA to WA (no longer live in either), that WA actually had better everything, yet had much lower taxes. How does that work? CA has bad public schools, tons of homelessness, high poverty rate and high rates of welfare. High taxes don't seem to solve any of that.
That tells me that in many large bureaucracies, no matter how much money they take in, it will be largely squandered. That is just how it always has worked and always will. There is just some law of the universe that large bureaucracies no matter how much money is thrown at them, and how large they get, just more and more wasteful, less efficient, etc...
New York is another example of a super high tax state that brags about how it spends 2X more on schools then average. Yet the public schools are still bad and test scores no better then states that spend a lot less. So I think one would question why they are paying all this money when it does nothing? Vermont borders NH, NH is a no income tax state like WA, and VT has very high taxes. But the schools in VT are no better than NH, it has a higher violent crime rate (though both states have really low crime rates...just VT a bit higher than NH), lower median income, higher poverty rates, lower population growth, etc... Where are the benefits for society of all these massive taxes?
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
34,690 posts, read 58,004,579 times
Reputation: 46171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Caldwell
Nothing lasts forever. The Oregon you see today is a gift from The Greatest Generation. Their vision of Oregon's future was enacted when conservative and conservationist still went together. In their time, the state only had a population of 2 million, mostly rural people. When they came back from WWII, Oregon looked like a patch of heaven to them, and they were in no hurry to see it paved.
...How much of our state is developed and how much conserved is a question for the future. People will make those choices depending on what they see and value.
more so the Oregon you saw in 1980 was the one formed by Greatest Generation, the place has gone considerably south since the crash of 1980's and Spotted Owl 'economic reset'.
There are still a few places with the community values intended to benefit the whole community, but most have morphed to "My Way" / "dictated" values for the benefit of the few.
Oregon Growth Management / reduced urban sprawl is somewhat similar to the playbook of Boulder Colorado in 1960s +/-. Nice for the few who can afford it and the few who GET to find a piece of property / home within the allotment (and willing to lives by the very strict rules and pay dearly for doing so). (Kinda like living in the CGNSA in OR / WA). The 'policy police' (special interest groups, usually NON-RESIDENTS) are all about telling you how YOU must obey to live there... , build, plant, harvest, host, sell, paint, roof, signage, land / crops, livestock use...
Fine for some, but not as 'pretty' as it seems.
Would not work for someone who demands (their) property rights.
Many, many urban dwellers move rural and act that way. (they don't make great neighbors)
No shortage of jerks (anywhere). Except maybe MN and WI (tho they can have them too, but... you have to HUNT for them there). I think of all the times we 'borrowed' produce from neighbor's gardens (no privacy fences in MN WI on those days), just step into their garden and grab the goods (as they would be expected to use your garden produce too.) You have too much company? some can stay next door, even (especially) if your neighbors are out-of town. Your house / yard / garden (and leaves and SNOW!) are same as mine. Feel free to use a little or a lot. Get sick, one of you has to go to hospital, have to help with eldercare, kids home alone? Meals? no problem. Your 20 Cubic Ft freezer will be overflowing in the first week! Neighbors and friends made be SURE of that ! (That would be most of the midwest, especially MN and WI, Oregon... don't count on it. You may not even SEE your neighbors for years, much less speak, wave, share a meal with them.
I actually do not believe that the future growth planning / urbanization will be similar to previous. People are far more selfish / NIMBY / self serving and withdrawn. So... the don't even need (or certainly do not desire) a community! Just give them connectivity! so their 'imaginary' friends can stroke their ego / meet their needs, and if they disagree... IGNORE or 'un-friend' them. There are millions of other imaginary users longing to be your 'friend' . Go for it, no risk, no pain, no sacrifice, no concessions. It is PERFECT!.
Oregon really messed up and promised what it could not afford. I have a sister-in-law that benefits from that boondoggle and it is a very sweet retirement deal for her. Almost a death blow to the state of Oregon financially though and I am one of many still paying for it.
They'll eventually phase out. The last cohorts of tier-1 PERS beneficiaries are just about retirement age. The question is, can the state survive the next 2 decades waiting for them to die? I don't know.
I do like schools, roads and bridges AND am willing to pay for them.
Yet, according to it's own data, Oregon does none of these things very well.
This gov't seems to have no issue taking a high level of money from it's populace but does not deliver the appropriate level of service for these high costs. High cost/mediocre service - Not cool
As to your point about soaking the rich. To OP - Here is the answer to your original question.
There are lot's of Larry's in Oregon and they vote for the high taxation.
That is the most basic and simple answer to your question.
I'm not sure why they can't figure out the bridges or roads.
The schools, however, could be improved with stricter truancy laws and a more school days added to the calendar. Oregon has one of the shortest school years in the country and no teeth behind truancy laws. To add to that, the culture of "where young people go to retire" has some truth. I know parents whose high schoolers were going to Starbucks instead of class for weeks.
Our kids get 2-3 weeks less school than a lot of the country, and they skip a lot of that. That's why our education numbers are so bad. We also don't pay our teachers particularly well. Not the worst, but even some southern states do better.
As for the land use policies... I agree with Larry; I like them. California's fires have proven what happens when you build out sprawl into the forest indiscriminately for short term profit. It'll burn down. Imagine what would have happened in 2017 if the Gorge area was developed the way California develops its (formerly) beautiful areas.
more so the Oregon you saw in 1980 was the one formed by Greatest Generation, the place has gone considerably south since the crash of 1980's and Spotted Owl 'economic reset'.
[snip snip]
I grew up in OR and my family goes back 5 generations so lots of history and family lore here.
I think Oregon, like the rest of the country, has really shifted from a mainly middle class and more roughly egalitarian sort of place post WW2 to a place with MUCH more economic inequality. It is becoming a 3rd world country in many ways with the divergence of fortunes between the wealthy and everyone else. Oregon wasn't some sort of socialist wonderland in the 60s but it was less unequal. A place like Lake Oswego has always been far more affluent than a place like Roseburg or Coos Bay. But the opportunities and outcomes have diverged dramatically in the past several decades, especially for things like schools.
Lots of reasons for that from the decline of the farm/timber/fishing resource economies in rural areas to the decline of the labor movement and globalization. To the increasing polarization of national politics. Most of it was national and global trends, outside the direct control of Oregonians. But there is also tremendous complacency in Oregon. Just an utter lack of urgency to deal with things like poor public education that would not be tolerated in other states like MN or MA.
These days I would tell young people to move to WA or some other more forward-looking state than OR to make their start. Unless you are independently wealthy or carrying your job with you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
