And we'll all be watching now as Crook County slides into genteel decreptitude.

This is huge. Its great to see 'red' Oregon embracing common sense land use that protects quality of life and rural values from unsustainable over-development.

I understand this fight was led by local ranchers and farmers, concerned about encroaching resorts and gated communities drying up scarce water supplies and eating up land. What a strong statement - now if more 'liberal' Deschutes County could organize to do the same.....

Having watched over a couple of decades as the water table in Western Sonoma County CA sank because ag land was converted to housing and tourism and forest land was converted to water-consuming ag use, I have nothing but praise for the ranchers and farmers who convinced the Crook County citizenry at large to vote their values at the cost of more minimum wage service sector jobs.

Having watched over a couple of decades as the water table in Western Sonoma County CA sank because ag land was converted to housing and tourism and forest land was converted to water-consuming ag use, I have nothing but praise for the ranchers and farmers who convinced the Crook County citizenry at large to vote their values at the cost of more minimum wage service sector jobs.

Urban Planning Overlord writes, "And we'll all be watching now as Crook County slides into genteel decreptitude."

Really! Wow, if the urban tourists don't throw us minimum wage jobs, converting our economy to servant class, we slide into "decrepitude"? Wow!

As I had noted before, with a population of about 26,000, the addition of more than 4,000 houses containing 8,000 people who live in gated communities around golf courses puts things somewhat out of balance. And that is what is already approved. That number could easily double.

What if in the Portland area, say east of Troutdale, up to Corbett, and down towards Sandy, a community of 335,000 was built behind walls around golf course links – with plans to expand to 670,000 people (to put it into Portland metro scale)? How would the Portland metro area react? The Bull Run water source goes right through that area – do you give water to what would become Oregon’s second largest town from Bull Run? These people will need minimum wage grounds keepers, house cleaners, food servers and cooks, guards, etc. Do you convert the entire Portland metro economy to serve this group? -- Put it into your scale, and compute it.

Urban Planner indeed! Urban ghetto creator in reality!

You are right rural voter, this is a pretty big deal. I think Oregonians west of the cascades could learn a thing or three from the group backing this measure, Concerned Citizens of Crook County

This editorial even went so far as to claim (falsely) that local property taxes would increase if voters approved this measure.

Growth as it is presently structured does not pay for itself. Growth creates a need for new infrastructure components that are only partially paid for by system development charges (SDCs). The difference is made up in property taxes paid in part people who did not contribute to that growth and need. Until recently there were no SDCs for schools. Fees can now be charged, but if Redmond is any example they will not be invoked. Redmond just passed a deeply flawed school bond with a chicken@#$% donation of 300 dollars per house from the builders instead of the school district collecting a dollar per square foot on each house. Consequently, taxes will increase by at $12.50 per month on the average house, some of which are occupied by people who can ill afford this increase. A few years ago the cost per student for a new school was around $17,000. No doubt the cost is now higher so that $300 donation won't be of much help.

- now if more 'liberal' Deschutes County could organize to do the same.....

There is a pocket of "liberals" in Bend, but the preponderance of people in Deschutes County suffer from a "Kansas" mentality voting for what the establishment wants even though the "establishment" keeps sticking it to them.

And we'll all be watching now as Crook County slides into genteel decreptitude.

Bend, which has promoted growth like a bunch of snake-oil salesmen, is having financial troubles in great part because growth never paid for itself, proving some things are worse than "genteel decreptitude."

Steve knows my feelings on this but I'll make my congratulations publicly. Both of us are in industries that benefit from what we opposed. Urbanheadinbutt piles onto these things whether he knows anything about it or not. Urban, ever been east of the Cascades? Did you notice it is kind of dry-ish? Got any clue where the water comes from? Got any kind of a clue whatever about much of anything? Pissant kneejerk ideologues kinda get me going... Thanks Steve

For the record I have heard statements from reliable sources that say an 18-hole golf course consumes from half a million to a million gallons of water a day. What does that say about creating golf courses in high desert country?

What a turn-around. Crook County approved Measure 37 by 6749-2935. By last fall, the tide changed and barely passed Measure 49. Now, by a 2-1 margin they have made a sea change.

Sorry, wrong url

Much of the west traditionally had a three-prong resource-based economy - agriculture, mining, and forestry (read the first chapters of Jared Diamond's excellent book COLLAPSE regarding the Bitterroot Valley in Montana).

I don't know much about mining in Crook County (if it ever existed), but forestry is almost gone as an industry and agriculture relies on federal subsidies and nature-killing irrigation water to survive anywhere in the Arid West.

So the choice in Crook County is tourism or nothing.

It appears that Mr. Bucknum and Mr. Butcher prefer "nothing."

There are two groups of people who prefer "nothing" for Crook County. First are those already there who say "I'm here now, close the gates." Their victory in Crook County in this election shows that they are a significant number already (many living in the type of communities they don't want any more of around them) I suspect that these people organized this ballot measure, and convinced the "oldtimers" in Crook County to vote with them because those oldtimers are under the mistaken impression (certainly not discounted by the ballot measure organizers) that a return to prodigious mining, forestry, and agriculture is imminent.

The second group of people who like what has happened in Crook County are those who don't live there. Perhaps they have an idealized vision of "nature triumphant once again" and don't mind the impoverishment of Crook County because it will lead to depopulation. Or perhaps they are "nature tourists," interested in untrammeled hunting across public and abandoned private lands, or rock climbing, or backpacking through areas unsullied by the "human cancer."

Sorry to be so cynical, but I've seen this type of "movement" again and again, and in its own way it can be just as odious, self-serving, and destructive as any rapacious timber company or mining outfit.

One more technical note and a general one as well:

First, it's hard to argue that destination resorts will result in increased school taxes. Second homes don't produce school kids, and even year-round communities in such areas don't have a lot of school children living in them. So such communities will in effect be subsidizing area public schools with their property taxes.

Second, I'm not advocating blanketing Crook County with destination resorts. There are certainly areas where they are not appropriate, perhaps most of the County. But a blanket ban, properly enforced, does indeed condemn Crook County to genteel decreptitude.

2 long paragraphs of several paragraphs each & still no word about where the water is to come from! okeee.

congrats to crook county. this is a smart move. good on all of you for forging an alliance between environmentalists and ranchers/farmers to protect your most precious resource, your water.

see, the thing UPO doesn't seem to get is that for most of the land west of the 100th meridian*, land use planning is not the best way to frame the issue so much as water use planning.

wallace stegner wrote about this extensively back in the 1940's and 1950's. it's a good read for anyone interested in the economic/environmental issues of the western united states.

*it should be noted that the thin sliver of coastal land in the PNW, from san francisco north, aka ecotopia, is not included in this. we have plenty of water here, and the issues are different. but from the ridge of the cascades east, it is all western climate.

Yes, Trishka, water is an important issue. Tell that to would-be Crook County agriculturalists, who use prodigious amounts of it (at an unsustainable rate) to raise subsidized crops.

Not every destination resort has to have a golf course. And golf courses can be designed to used reclaimed water (i.e. treated sewage, as most in the dry climates of Arizona and Southern California are now doing.

And, once again, not every square mile of Crook County has to have a destination resort. They should be limited in number and area. But they should not be outright banned and proclaimed a cancer and a pox on humanity.

Now if the residents of adjacent Jefferson County would come to their senses and vote to undo the resort planning their county commissioners dropped onto the Metolius. Folks seem to have forgotten that issue.

Remember, it's the one that Gov. Ted said would be handled by the land-use laws, and then later - whoopsie - we discovered the land use laws don't protect water flows.

We have not forgotten the Metolius, neither have others.

The Oregon Water Resources Department and Commission are now preparing a five year review of the groundwater mitigation program in the Deschutes Basin. Groundwater use and mitigation (or lack thereof) for the streamflow impacts of that use is a key issue involved in the two proposed destination resorts near the Metolius.

There have been no groundwater mitigation projects on the Metolius yet. However, two new destination resorts are proposed in or near the sub basin. Both would rely on groundwater. Studies have demonstrated that impacts from this new development will likely affect the Metolius headwater springs. However, under the current mitigation program, mitigation water could be provided to the bottom of the river system and the current rules would “call it good”.

Moreover, in a recent letter to the Governor, Phil Ward, the Director of the OWRD, acknowledged that groundwater withdrawal outside of the Metolius sub-basin (by, for example a proposed destination resort) could have an impact on Metolius streamflows and that the mitigation program would not require mitigation of this impact.

Impacts to the Metolius are, to put it simply, not acceptable.

Stay tuned.

Trishcka -

That thin sliver of ecotopia you reference does not have enough water - especially if you are a salmon. Witness the 2002 Klamath River fish kill. Take a look at the Chetco River - where municipal demands are putting the prized run of fall chinook at risk. There are examples up and down the coast where we've so altered the water budget in coastal streams that there is not enough water, especially in the dry season.

I fully agree that we need to begin to implement water use planning - both instream and out of stream. For many interests, water use planning simply means "build more sources of supply for out of stream use." Any rational planning must include instream uses and true restoration of our waterways.

I just love this guy -

Urban Planning Overlord writes, "I don't know much about mining in Crook County (if it ever existed), but forestry is almost gone as an industry and agriculture relies on federal subsidies and nature-killing irrigation water to survive anywhere in the Arid West.

So the choice in Crook County is tourism or nothing."

The operative part of that statement is, "I don't know much ..."

Historically, Overlord is just wrong. There was, if he'd have bothered to look it up, mining in Crook County. We had silver, gold, and mercury. We still have mining. We are one of the nations largest sources of cat litter (benotinite). We have some of the best rock for making roads, and there are several large rock quarries. -- But that is only a small thing.

Prineville was the first town in this several thousand square mile region, and remains the only incorporated city in Crook County. We have always been inventive and creative. When the rail line went north/south through the Madras/Redmond/Bend area, we built our own City Rail line to connect to that, and that rail line still runs 90 years later. We built our own irrigation systems, more than tripling the amount of land that could be farmed. We have built businesses that supply not only our area but the region.

Ever hear of Les Schwab tires? We have in Prineville the nation's largest plant making retreated truck tires. I can see the back corner of it from my front window across the valley - and it never makes smoke or dust. A clean industry if there ever was one. Anyway, while the corporate office will soon move to Bend, all the production and distribution stuff is still here in Crook County - employing upwards of 500 people.

We make more fire equipment than most places. We have several niche businesses. Few will know what a Workman truck bed is, but they are made here. And even though the traditional lumber mills are gone, there are a number of secondary wood processing plants that make laminated and veneer wood products for cabinets, floors, etc.

Thank you very much, but there is a lot more than "tourism or nothing" that we do. Somehow, outside of the tourism business, we employ thousands here.

Urban Planning Overlord - you might try a little research sometime ... Really, try it, you might find out a thing or two.

First, it's hard to argue that destination resorts will result in increased school taxes. Second homes don't produce school kids, and even year-round communities in such areas don't have a lot of school children living in them. So such communities will in effect be subsidizing area public schools with their property taxes.

This makes a good argument to consider switching from property taxes to income taxes to pay for schools. The weakness of arguing that some homes do not add children to the school population is that those childless homes do not necessarily remain so in perpetuity but could change to homes with kids needing schools.

A couple of years ago the Redmond Fire Department required a road be built to provide a destination resort (Pronghorn) with emergency services. I challenged the city to explain who would pay for that road. Because I never received a reply, I presume the taxpayers paid for it and not the vacationers at Pronghorn who created that need.

What local voters are doing is what local voters do: react against progress! What local politicians are doing is avoiding responsibility for well controlled progress.

The first sentence is too categorical. Some local voters may vote against "progress" but other voters vote against growth on many occasions because growth doesn't pay for itself and passes the burden of paying for new infrastructure to people who had nothing to do with creating that need. In many cases, taxes are increased for people who can ill afford such increases - very often something pro-growth and pro-"progress" people don't give a damn about.

The second sentence is one way of describing the problem with local politicians. Another way is to be more blunt and say that they are more concerned with the interests of developers than they are with the people they supposedly represent. In many cases the interest of developers is synonymous with the interests of politicians.

As for "progress," how would you define that? Here in Deschutes County growth has brought an expansion of services at the area hospitals. Most people will consider that progress. Growth has also brought more crime. That's progress?

Lee Coleman and I have some history - not bad - working with the ROP in its early days. So, overall I respect Lee's opinions - But ....

Lee writes, "Last but not least, please take notice of the fact that "destination resort" is NOT "permanent housing development" or urban sprawl. A destination resort is a place for visitation by tourists en route to and from. Most of the knee jerk reaction seen above ignores this salient fact. Hopefully, the county fathers, including Steve, will use the concept in constructing progressive controls."

Lee - I wish it were true that a destination resort is not permanent, but a place for visitation.

Sunriver started out as a destination resort, and now has thousands of full time residents. Eagle Crest started out as a destination resort, but now the "visitation" part is less than 25% of the area, with the vast majority of homes being either full time or mostly full time residents. The first destination resort in Crook County was Ochoco West, first known as the Golden Horseshoe Resort. There are now only a few summer homes there, and the vast majority of the homes are full time residents. -- Lee I do appraisal work in these places and see it first hand. You're just wrong on this point.

Your other key point is that the vote was a reaction against progress. Again, sorry to say Lee, you're wrong.

There is not anyone in Crook County that minds getting some destination resort money via property tax into the system. What the reaction is about is the scale of these developments, the concept of balance, and the use of water.

Already approved in about 4 years were 4,000 homes in a County with a population of 26,000. Eventually, those 4,000 homes around golf courses will house 8,000 + people. Those golf courses and those people will use one heck of a lot of water. Their locations are not some backwoods area full of rocks that has no better use - they are located on fairly good land, and have purchased/are in the process of purchasing, farm irrigation rights for the golf courses.

Somewhere up the pile of comments, I made a "scale" comparison to what this would be like in the Portland metro area - a city of nearly 335,000 likely to expand to 670,000 in some nice country.

Crook County has always been a step ahead of things. I have already noted that we built our own railroad. We built our own irrigation dam. We built local industry to employ local people. This is an amazing little place.

So, Lee, no you've got it wrong. This is not an anti-progress vote. This is a sensible vote to conserve water that we will need in the future, and to keep our community in balance. We have already approved 4,000 houses in destination resorts that when built out and occupied will equal a population that will be a fourth of our County-wide population. Anymore than that is just too much.

Even if all that was left was tourism (which couldn't be further from the truth) like any "resource" tourism needs to be managed towards long-term success. Letting resorts sell as many lots as they want in a mad rush and approving every application that comes in could be a problem in the not too distant future. It could very well be that 10-20-30 years down the road (or much sooner?) the region realizes the stark reality that it overcommitted itself to an unstable and easily exhaustible resource that isn't guaranteed to be around in the long-term. With baby boomer demographics, an expected long-term decline in the housing market, and the price of fuel skyrocketing, there could be serious problems on the horizon.

That's one of the primary reasons we need to dramatically improve planning for destination resorts. And when that fails to happen, and leaders carelessly approve resort after resort in their eagerness to bring more resorts to an area - and especially when those resorts don't pay for their impacts, and threaten rural and natural resources - you get votes like the one in Crook County. Which to me is indicative of a far broader discontent over these developments.