By Dora Totoian • Of The News-Register • 

After years of challenges, McMinnville City Council to vote on expansion of urban growth boundary

Only online subscribers may access this article.

One-day subscriptions available for just $2. Click here for one-day access.

For all other subscription offers, click here.

Already a subscriber, please .

Comments

Joel

I'm excited about all of this and can't wait for the builders that lined our Mayors campaign pockets to start a rippin' out the tree's and diggin' the foundations! Fill them roads up with even more cars too.
Mayberry was so over rated. Beaverton here we come.

Oregonian

Who cares about the lack of parks when the lack of roads will make life miserable?

McMinnville Planning Department

Thanks for the great article Dora. UGB amendments are complicated projects with many different nuances.

One correction for the record: Property owners do not elect to come into the UGB or not. The City Council will make that decision as an elected body. Property owners then decide if they want to annex into the city limits or not. Being added to a city's urban growth boundary does not really change the existing function of a property. The property is still governed by county zoning, county regulations and pays county taxes. However, a property cannot annex into the city unless it is within an urban growth boundary. Therefore once a property is within a UGB, the property owner has the opportunity to decide if it wants to annex into the city. To do so, the property would need to be contiguous to the city limits, and the property owner would need to enter into an annexation agreement with the city regarding how it will develop its property, etc.

David S. Wall

In my opinion, the UGB expansion is a "done deal." The protracted solicitation of "public hearings" is disingenuous as it is intentionally deceptive.

Note the following statement;

"The city council will hold public hearings on the topic December 1, 2 and 3, with a goal of voting on the plan before the end of the year."

This is an "old governmental trick." City Councils, County Commissioners, State Legislators all too often load up their end of the year calendar (right after Thanksgiving and before Christmas holidays) with politically tough and sensitive issues knowing only a few people in the crowd have actually paid attention to the issues at bar.

This gambit is designed to minimize the amount "political heat" to their respective backsides when the elected representatives have already determined the outcome of an unpopular issue but, must give the appearance to the public their last minute input will change the predetermined outcome.

Then add Covid-19 to the mix.

Out of one corner of their mouth, Government officials will remind everyone how many "community meetings" have already been held and how much taxpayer money has been spent on "engineering and traffic studies" to bolster their case the UGB must be expanded to comply with burdensome, oppressive and unfunded state law mandates.

Out of the other corner of their mouth, the same Government officials will squeal like stuck pigs about a looming budget deficit and UGB expansion is the answer to our budgetary woes.

Sadly, the "old governmental trick" usually works.

But, someone might give input to retain legal standing to pursue the matter further.

Sure, that someone could face the Yamhill County Board of Commissioners, appeal their rubber stamp to LUBA and possibly go to the State of Oregon's Appellate Division for remedy unless...out of this quagmire, a Federal Question arises providing an alternative change of venue.

David S. Wall

David S. Wall

In my opinion,

Dateline County Desk [Thursday: (12.03.20)] Amending the UGB should be deferred to...?

A few points from tonight's "Zoom UGB meeting."

Mayor Hill ran a smooth, issue packed meeting allowing everyone who was willing to give feed back to the proposed UGB Amendment. Good job Mayor Hill!

There were several people who complained as to, "Not" receiving "Notice" of the UGB meeting(s).

*A citizen, "Zoom" testified on Non-point Source and Water Pollution Control Issues. The citizen asked if written testimony would be allowed following the meeting. The citizen was told "No" written testimony would be allowed.

Beware McMinnville -High Density low income housing is coming into your residential neighborhoods. When it arrives, kiss the equity in your residential property "Good-bye!"

Beware adjacent farm owners to the "Amended UGB." You may be in jeopardy of losing any crops and or agricultural practices requiring spraying and or has any offensive odors to "new residents." Don't be swayed by any accommodation concerning the "rural/agriculture buffer" arising from the Planning Department. Farmers need to start retaining competent "high-end" Plaintiff-Attorney(s).

*Councilmember Peralta later made a motion to include written testimony. After a brief discussion and "vote," written testimony is to be allowed up to [Friday: (12.04.20)@ 12 O'clock Noon].

Good Job Councilmember Peralta!

What if some viewers turned off the "Zoom" meeting (or didn't attend due to COVID issues)and never-ever knew written testimony could be tendered by the extended aforementioned time and date?

When it comes to "Amending and or expanding a UGB"... the reader may fill in the blank _____________.

2nd Reading of the "Done-Deal UGB Amendment"...[Tuesday, (12.08.20) @ 7:00.m.] City Hall.

David S. Wall

Bufordthe1st

Maybe they should concentrate on getting more funding for fire and rescue personnel and equipment before they start expanding the boundaries and adding more population to our city. Our fired department is strapped and response times will only get longer if we don't give them the support financially that they need.

Bufordthe1st

That should be FIRE Dept not FIRED. Ugh!!

Web Design and Web Development by Buildable