Pro-farm councilors rail against new Metro reserve map

By MITCH LIES
Capital Press

The latest plan to manage growth in the Portland metro area falls short of protecting farmland, farm proponents say.

The map Metro Council forwarded Thursday, Dec. 17, places nearly 29,000 acres in urban reserves, nearly 10,000 acres more than a more farm-friendly map that previously was rejected.

And it places approximately 12,000 acres of prime farm land -- called foundation ag land -- into urban reserves.

Slightly more than 7,000 acres of prime farm land was designated urban reserve in the more farm-friendly proposal advanced by councilors Rod Park and Robert Liberty.

Park, a Gresham farmer, said he believes Metro Council's current urban and rural reserves proposal will not pass muster with the council if it returns in its current shape.

The proposal was released this week for public comment.

"I couldn't vote for it," Park said. "Not under what I see at this particularly time. There is way too much foundation ag land (designated urban reserve)."

Park said three other councilors on the seven-member panel have similar sentiments.

Under the urban and rural reserves process, Metro councilors coordinate with commissioners from the three Portland Metro area counties to designate lands for urban and rural uses for the next 40 to 50 years.

Designating land an urban reserve doesn't bring the land into a city's urban growth boundary, but it puts it first in line for consideration.

The process was adopted by the 2007 Legislature to provide clarity and stability for city and county planners and farmers who operate near cities.

Under the 2007 law, all parties must agree on the reserves, or land-use planning reverts to the current system, where government planners adjust urban growth boundaries every five years. Foundation ag lands are the last to be brought into urban growth boundaries under the current system.

Park said several areas under consideration for urban reserves in the map advanced Dec. 17 are contentious, including land in the Stafford area and land north of Hillsboro.

The proposed map calls for rural reserves of approximately 240,000 acres -- about 14,000 acres less than the rejected Park-Liberty proposal.

"The question in front of agriculture is are we better off under this process or under the old process," Park said. "Unless people get reasonable in their expectations, I think agriculture would be better off under the old system.

"Under the old hierarchy, some of the lands being considered would not be on that list," Park said.

Staff writer Mitch Lies is based in Salem. E-mail: mlies@capitalpress.com.