Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Woodburn Ugb Expansion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Heated hearing on Woodburn UGB expansion: supporters stress urgency, opponents warn of precedent
Summary
Supporters including local leaders, nonprofits and developers urged a one-time 120-acre urban growth boundary expansion for Woodburn to produce roughly 600 homes (30% affordable), while opponents (1000 Friends of Oregon, farm and farmland advocates) warned the supersiting approach sets a poor precedent and risks farmland loss; committee took testimony and left the record open.
The committee opened a public hearing on Senate Bill 15 64, a proposal to add a 120-acre tract to the City of Woodburn's urban growth boundary and zone the land residential under the city's comprehensive plan. Kya read the measure's summary: the project would accommodate at least 600 residential units, with 30% subject to affordability restrictions for at least 60 years; a -1 amendment corrects a clerical tax-lot reference.
Sen. Kim Thatcher (SD 11) and Rep. Leslie Munoz introduced the measure and emphasized urgency: Woodburn is one of the fastest-growing communities in the state and could run out of buildable residential land within 18 to 24 months. They described the measure as a one-time, 120-acre expansion intended to preserve growth and support the local employment base.
Local officials and advocates testified at length. Frank Lonergan, Woodburn's mayor, and city staff described the parcel as shovel-ready and said Meadowview LLC is the property owner; the project partners with nonprofits and would provide roughly 600 homes with a guarantee of 200 affordable units. Marie Elena Guerra and other housing advocates presented data showing very low vacancy rates for affordable housing in Marion County and urged approval to address overcrowding and long waits for housing.
Opposition testimony came from 1000 Friends of Oregon and agricultural advocates who argued the bill supersites a specific UGB expansion for one parcel, creating a poor policy precedent. They pointed to an ongoing House bill (HB 4035) that supporters say provides a policy-driven pathway for cities meeting certain criteria and argued the House process is a better, more replicable approach. Farm and farmland witnesses warned of permanent loss of productive agricultural land, impacts on water and infrastructure, and speculative pressure on farmland values.
Proponents repeatedly said the site is ready to build, that local decision-making (annexation and development approvals) would remain intact and appealable to LUBA where applicable, and that delay could jeopardize developer and investor commitments. The committee heard broad community testimony — municipal leaders, county officials, nonprofits, union and farmworker representatives, and local residents — and closed the hearing after reminding the public that written testimony will remain open for 48 hours on OLIS.
Next steps: The committee did not take a final vote on SB 15 64; the record remained open for written testimony through the posted deadline.
