The
Seattle Times
www.seattletimes.com
New movement wants
to do more than slow growth
by
Eric
Pryne
Seattle Times staff reporter
Monday,
August 14, 2000
PORTLAND
- On the ninth floor of a downtown office building, in
a suite it moved into so recently that the walls are still
bare, a new nonprofit is working to change the course
of Western civilization.
That's
how founder and president Andy Kerr, in a typically provocative
remark, describes the mission of Alternatives to Growth
Oregon (AGO).
Its
goal: to end growth in Oregon.
Not
manage it. Not shape it. Not slow it down.
Stop
it.
"This
is a very radical concept," Kerr concedes. "The
only thing that's more radical is continuing to grow."
Growth
is something that Oregon, like Washington, has plenty
of experience with. A hot economy and a spectacular setting
combined to draw hundreds of thousands of newcomers to
the state in the 1990s, pushing its population up 17 percent.
Oregon
has a national reputation for managing its growth more
gracefully than most - limiting sprawl, saving forests
and farmland. The state's pioneering 1973 land-use-planning
law provided the model for Washington's 1990 Growth Management
Act.
But
AGO contends that managing growth isn't enough, that traffic
congestion and disappearing green places provide ample
evidence that Oregon's vaunted quality of life is slipping
away. Planning is fine, says Kerr, "but if all we
do is plan, Oregon will just be a better-planned California."
So
AGO is calling for dozens of changes in laws and personal
behavior aimed at curbing not just population growth but
the lifestyle choices - larger lots, bigger houses, more
cars, more driving - that intensify its effects.
The
group's proposals include making new development pay upfront
the full cost of schools, roads and other public services
it requires, cutting immigration 80 percent and changing
tax laws to reward families that have just one child.
Most
people assume growth is good or inevitable, or both. Public
policy reflects those assumptions. In that context, a
group such as AGO might seem as relevant as the Flat Earth
Society.
But
AGO is challenging those assumptions. It has already inspired
a similar group to organize in Washington state. And it's
being taken seriously in Oregon, largely because of Andy
Kerr.
'Kiss
my ax, Andy'
Kerr
is probably the best-known environmental activist in the
state, and the most controversial. He spent 20 years with
the Oregon Natural Resources Council, emerging as one
of the generals in the environmental movement's long and
largely successful campaign to stop logging in federal
old-growth forests. It was his organization that first
recognized the spotted owl's value as a legal tool to
achieve that goal.
Kerr,
now 45, fought his war in the style of Patton or MacArthur:
high-profile, confrontational, a lightning rod. He discovered
and honed a gift for pithy one-liners, delighting supporters
and the media, and infuriating foes.
A
newspaper labeled him the most hated man in Oregon. He
was burned in effigy at a property-rights rally in 1994.
Loggers' trucks sported bumper stickers urging Kerr to
"Kiss my ax, Andy." Rush Limbaugh cackled when
Kerr moved to rural northeastern Oregon - and into a log
house.
But
no one accused Kerr of ineffectiveness.
Population
isn't a new issue
Kerr
says his move from the spotted-owl wars to the growth
game reflects no epiphany. Overpopulation was one of the
environmental movement's big concerns when he first got
involved in high school in Creswell, Ore., in the early
1970s, he says. The first group he joined was Zero Population
Growth.
After
that, "the environmental movement dropped the ball
and stopped talking about population," Kerr says.
"Meanwhile, the forests needed to be saved . . .
but I started out in high school thinking population was
the ultimate environmental issue.
"What
environmental problem couldn't be helped by addressing
population and consumption?"
In
the year since its founding, AGO has attracted about 1,000
members and more than $115,000 from foundations. Portland's
city attorney chairs its board of directors.
AGO
is looking ahead to the next session of the Oregon Legislature,
when it intends to push a bill that would allow counties
and cities to charge developers upfront the full cost
of the new schools, roads and other public facilities
their projects require. Not charging such fees effectively
subsidizes growth, AGO reasons - and if growth weren't
subsidized, there might be less of it.
Also
on the group's legislative agenda: a bill permitting communities
to stop growing if they choose, perhaps by changing the
requirement in Oregon's growth-management law that all
cities and counties maintain a 20-year supply of land
open for development.
Kerr
doesn't expect the Legislature will approve either bill.
But if it fails, he says, AGO may take the measures directly
to voters as initiatives.
But
more than any legislation, Kerr says, AGO's priority for
now is simply to raise the issue, "to give people
permission to talk about the end of growth."
That
may be happening. Later this month, for instance, Kerr
will be a featured speaker in Coos Bay, Ore., along with
Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber and former U.S. Sen. Mark Hatfield,
at a conference Hatfield is sponsoring on Oregon's future
and the tension between economic growth and quality of
life.
"It's
very much on everybody's mind," says Gerry Frank,
the conference organizer and a former Hatfield aide.
This
spring Salem Mayor Mike Swaim ran for re-election saying
many of the same disparaging things about growth that
AGO is saying. He won easily.
"It's
not about me - it's about the issue," Swaim says.
"It's a very, very potent issue here in our community,
and AGO is a critical voice in the dialogue we're having."
Its
influence already is extending into other states. An Alternatives
to Growth Washington group has incorporated and expects
to become more active this fall, says organizer Bill Elder,
an Issaquah environmentalist and no-growth advocate.
The
economic disconnect
Kerr
is convinced a majority of Oregonians want growth to stop:
It's simply a matter of convincing them it's possible,
then mobilizing them. He points to polls that indicate
most Oregonians think the state already has enough people,
if not too many.
But
Russ Dondero, a political-science professor at Pacific
University in Forest Grove, Ore., thinks Kerr may be miscalculating.
Growth
is a potent issue, Dondero agrees, but much of Oregon's
population growth has been fueled by job growth.
"Oregonians
are of two minds," he says. "They want to preserve
the quality of life, but they also want to see the economy
continue to grow. If you ever put those two issues head
to head, to a test vote, I'm not sure how it would come
out. . . ."
"Oregonians
want it both ways, which is typical of Americans."
Robert
Liberty, executive director of 1,000 Friends of Oregon,
which monitors growth management in the state, questions
the efficacy of some of AGO's proposals for stopping growth.
For instance, he says, charging developers for schools
and roads may drive up housing prices but may not curb
growth: "People are still moving to San Jose, where
it costs $450,000 for a tract home."
Liberty
agrees with Kerr that growth management in Oregon hasn't
lived up to its promise. The solution, he says, is to
plan better, to enforce the law more rigorously.
"We've
been doing land-use planning in Oregon for 25 years,"
Kerr answers, "and I'm very glad we've done it .
. . but why should we now presume that we will do a better
job when we have 25 years of experience that suggests
we won't?"
Growth
itself is the problem, he says, not how it's managed:
"If growth is so good, who's benefiting from it?
Are you happier now?"
|