Measure 37

It's good to see the people of Oregon standing up for their rights. By restricting growth, either by zoning or the
creation of a new environmental concerns, they just continually push the cost of housing higher. They can do nothing to slow the actual population growth so restricting the amount of buildable acreage is just a stop-gap measure.

Traffic, economic and environmental impact are the costs most often associated with unmanaged growth. The economic cost is strongly tied to traffic. That guy in the delievry van, stuck in traffic, is being paid hourly and the truck is burning gas
sitting at the new traffic light. Intstead of arbitrary restrictions on growth why not charge builders a per lot fee for
pending improvements to the roads in the area? Instead of growth restrictions why can't they get their head out of the sand and actually manage it?

As far as environmental impact goes, I think some of the wetland restrictions placed on construction (at least in the Seattle
area) are just an example of PC thinking gone awry. They will allow you to fill in native wetlands if you purchase another
piece of property and "construct" a wetland there.

Also wetlands are not public goods, in most cases they are privately held goods from which the public derives certain
benefits like flood control - for free. IMO, concerns for a suburban ecosystem are misguided at best.

Besides, proctecting wetlands was part of the clean water act. If you have seepage due to an exposed water table, what better way to protect it than several feet of clean fill dirt...;)