To all Bend City Council Members,

As a homeowner in the city of Bend I am very thankful that the [Land Conservation Development Commission] was watching out for our best interest with respect to this ridiculous UGB plan.

Maybe you folks on the City Council will put aside your egos long enough to finally do what both the state and the residents of this city have asked you to do all along. We need an UGB proposal that is based on current economic and population data that truly reflects the crisis we now find ourselves in.

Let go of this ridiculous plan so we can move this city forward in a direction that makes sense for our future. Haven’t you punished all of us enough by wasting over $4 million of our hard-earned money?

– Jeff Walton, Bend

$
$
$

We're stronger together! Become a Source member and help us empower the community through impactful, local news. Your support makes a difference!

Creative Commons License

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.

Trending

Join the Conversation

1 Comment

  1. To the Bend city council members … (metaphorically) …

    Full disclosure, I am not an Oregon resident …

    There are millions of us in larger metros in the Western US who would love to move to a place like Bend. However, due to LCDC Commissioner John VanLandingham’s Election Day non-negotiable 150 page Final Order against your great plan for Bend’s UGB over the next 20 years, we are afraid to move … fearing increasing unemployment, land banking by speculators, and huge rents, with only 10 years left if a new UGB is not formulated…

    Perhaps (as suggested in the Bend Bulletin on Oct. 6, 2010), you may decide to Sue DLCD, John VanLandingham, Richard Whitman, and Greg McPherson (et. al., the LCDC) in the Oregon Court of Appeals, to defend your 5 years of tremendous work (and, the work of your talented planners, 4 millions dollars total).

    If I was a resident, I would write you (The City Council and City Manager) a letter suggesting this.

    Since I am not a resident, I hope that citizens will see the light, that a smaller UGB with high density Smart Growth (versus low density Smart Growth like at NW Crossing) will mean higher rents, less economic growth, less productivity, less salary growth, and less population growth. Same thing happened in Portland: http://www.examiner.com/real-estate-in-portland/did-city-planning-and-defining-of-urban-growth-boundaries-create-the-housing-bubble

    Bend is unique among Western US tourist towns, in supporting entrepreneurs, new businesses, and 48% population growth, from 2000-2009, along with high tech industry (also in Redmond), and plans for Juniper Ridge with more high tech businesses. Bend could play an ever increasing role in the Intermountain West mixed economy of tourism, education, and small high tech startups, with increased ties to Boise, Reno, Salt Lake City, and Spokane.

    Juniper Ridge and a new University, perhaps with grad degrees, would certainly make the market competitive with these other markets.

    Bend is a high energy place of intelligent, creative people, compared to ANTI-growth towns with crime and drug problems, such as Eugene, Medford-Ashland, Santa Cruz, and Flagstaff. All these places have special interest groups similar to COLW and 1,000 Friends.

    People come to Cities to meet people, and these places have stopped new people from moving in. Bend is a more socially interesting place than these other “gentrifying” places, because it is growing. Since growth controls, the Creative Class (Richard Florida) prefers growing cities (i.e. Austin, Denver, Seattle, Raleigh-Durham, etc.). Small cities like Medford-Ashland, Eugene, Santa Fe (NM), and Flagstaff (Arizona) with their growth controls do not attract as many highly talented entrepreneurs. Artists? Writers? Organic farmers? Acupuncturists? Yes, they do … but they do not drive economic growth or create patents.

    If Bend unemployment remains at 15%, and growth continues to remain on hold, then Bend will fall to the level of these cities, who all rank very low on the Policom Index for Economic Vitality (whereas Bend still holds on with a moderately high ranking, but this could change): http://www.policom.com/metro.htm

    From Harvard University, this paper explains how the “urban health” of a city is based on 1) population growth 2) rising productivity 3) rising incomes From Harvard’s Josh Gottleib and Ed Glaeser: http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~jdgottl/papers/UrbanResurgenceConsumerCity2006HIER.pdf

    Anyway … with a few references to prove my point (please write back with your side of the story) it’s up to Bend residents to discuss these issues with their City Council members know.

    Meanwhile, Bend is the poster child for State Controlled Growth Bureaucrats like Whitman, McPherson, and VanLandingham, versus Cities who have highly talented and creative local planners with better ideas than the State. Indeed, planning issues are best left to local city and county officials. That’s the way it is in most U.S. states…

    Finally…as an outdoors enthusiast myself, if there is any city who should be allowed to grow like it wants to, it’s Bend … given the City’s commitment to green amenities … the riverwalk, bike paths, parks, preservation of native trees, etc. etc.

    It took me 5 years of living in 6 Western states to figure this out, and the difference between places like Bend versus the others. All the best to you. Good luck to the City and residents of Bend as they work on these conflicts….
    Tom Lane @ http://smartgrowthusa.wordpress.com

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *