TOO BAD SHE HAD TO DIE BEFORE THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF PORTLAND WAS FORCED TO PAYUP.

Oregon Supreme Court rules in favor of late property rights "poster girl" Dorothy English

Published: Thursday, June 17, 2010, 9:26 AM Updated: Thursday, June 17, 2010, 9:32 AM

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2010/06/oregon_supreme_cou...

The Oregon Supreme Court has ruled in favor of the late property rights pioneer Dorothy English, whose land-use dispute with Multnomah County touched off the debate that led to passage of Measure 37, which rolled back development restrictions, and the reactionary Measure 49, which restored some of them.

In a decision issued this morning, the court upheld an earlier decision by the Oregon Court of Appeals, and ordered Multnomah County to pay English's estate $1.15 million.

The Supreme Court ruled that English had obtained a valid final judgment in the case and that the Multnomah County circuit judge who heard the original case should have issued a writ of mandamus ordering the county to pay.

English's case has long been held up by property rights advocates as an example of heavy-handed government interference.

English, who died in April 2008 at age 95, wanted to develop her 20 acres off Northwest Skyline Boulevard outside of Portland. She and her late husband bought the property in 1953, and she wanted to divide it into eight home sites for her extended family.

But Multnomah County had changed the property's zoning in the intervening years and wouldn't grant English a development permit. Property rights lawyers intervened, and the outspoken English became the willing spokesperson for 2004's Measure 37, which gave property owners the right to develop their land in the way that was permitted when they bought it.

When it passed, English filed the state's first Measure 37 claim, and was joined by 6,500 Oregonians who demanded either compensation for diminished property values or for the right to build, in many cases, extensive subdivisions.

Voters later scaled back development rights by passing Measure 49 in 2007, and most of the original claimants settled for a process that would allow them to build one to three homes.

But English was still battling in the courts. In December 2006 she won a compensation judgment for $1.15 million, and the county then agreed to let her develop eight lots in lieu of paying the compensation. But the approval contained conditions that English and her attorney found unacceptable, so the fight continued even as Measure 49 settled the issue for most of the state.

English won a final judgment for compensation, but the county would not pay, arguing that it still retained the option of paying the money or waiving development restrictions. The county had appealed the judgment, then dismissed its own appeal and waived additional restrictions. English's side argued that the waivers weren't sufficient and sought a writ of mandamus.

English's side won an emphatic victory in 2009 when the Oregon Court of Appeals ruled in her favor. The appeals court later scolded Multnomah County for engaging in what it called a "war of attrition" against the elderly woman, who had died the year before.

--Eric Mortenson

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Court orders Multnomah County to pay $1.15 million to Dorothy English estate

http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2009/04/court_rever...

Property rights advocates called it a bittersweet win. The Oregon Court of Appeals ordered Multnomah County to pay a $1.15 million judgment to the estate of Dorothy English, but the "poster girl" of the state's land-use argument isn't around to enjoy it.

English, who died in 2008 at age 95, fought the county in court for four years in an attempt to develop her property off Northwest Skyline Boulevard outside of Portland. She ultimately won a judgment for compensation, but the county maintained it had discretion whether to pay or not. A Circuit Court judge sided with the county, but the appeals court emphatically reversed that decision and ordered the county to pay.

Still to come is a separate decision on more than $440,000 in legal fees, which are not included in $1.15 million. The Court of Appeals is expected to rule soon.

"I'm very relieved, and yet like everybody else I'm saddened she wasn't here to see this," said English's attorney, Joe Willis. "This is the result that should have happened. The next step is what the county will do. I suspect strongly they will petition the (appeals) court to rehear it or ask the Oregon Supreme Court to review it."

Multnomah County Counsel Agnes Sowle said her office is reviewing the ruling. She declined to evaluate the legal reasoning applied by the appeals court.

Others weren't so reticent.

"It's a great ruling," said Dave Hunnicutt, president of the property rights group Oregonians in Action. "The Court of Appeals was very clear. Final means final, is what they were saying."

Oregonians in Action sponsored Measure 37 in 2004 and portrayed English as a victim of unfair land-use rules: an elderly widow and longtime property owner not allowed to develop her land.

Voters approved the measure, which gave property owners the right to develop their land in a way that was permitted when they bought it. English, alternately wry and profane, endorsed Measure 37 in campaign ads.

About 6,500 property owners filed development claims after Measure 37 passed, many with the stated intent to build large rural subdivisions. The prospect of such development was a major factor in voters passing Measure 49 in 2007. It rolled back development rights, and most of the claimants settled for a process that will allow them to build one to three homes.

But English was not among them. She wanted to split her 20 acres into eight homesites for her family. But that wasn't permitted because the county had rezoned the property after English and her late husband bought it in 1953.

English filed a Measure 37 claim, and the county agreed to let her develop eight lots in lieu of paying compensation. But the county loaded its approval with conditions. English's attorney responded that such standards and procedural rules didn't exist when English bought the property.

That touched off a rolling legal fight that English and her attorney thought ended when she won a judgment in 2007. The county argued it didn't have to pay, a position that confounded attorney Willis.

"If a case is fully litigated, you don't get to go back and try something else," he said. "It's nonsense to argue a judgment doesn't mean anything."

-- Eric Mortenson; ericmortenson@news.oregonian.com