The Oct. 2 edition of this paper had an interesting front page article that was very difficult to decipher. It discussed the Linn County commissioners' decision to amend code text to clarify land use rules within the urban growth boundary. Yet, it was very hard to figure out exactly what text was changed and how this would in fact affect county development. I hope it is not to allow development of far-away county land into housing tracts, where residents have to drive long distances to access city services.
The fact that the Willamette Association of Realtors supported the proposed changes caused me concern, as this organization supports anything concerning development for obvious financial gain. The real estate industry cites "housing crisis" as a backdrop to "development at all costs." Yet development is costly, to me as a taxpayer, and to cities whose services are accessed by those who need them yet live outside the city and pay no city tax — and let's remember that excess development historically has not caused housing prices to drop.
The supposed housing crisis is an invented term to benefit those in real estate and development. Why, in discussions about housing costs, has nothing been brought up about the real estate industry and its unregulated pricing of housing? Why don't we have regulations stating that a percentage of housing needs to be affordable and within the median income of those living in a certain city? Should all housing fall under the supply and demand theory?
You have free articles remaining.
Albany (Oct. 28)