A4
BAKER CITY
Opinion
WRITE A LETTER
news@bakercityherald.com
Tuesday, August 9, 2022 • Baker City, Oregon
EDITORIAL
State right to slow
fire risk map project
O
regon’s goal of helping to protect rural homes from
wildfires is admirable. Unimpeachable, really.
We all want to avoid a repeat of the terrible Labor Day week-
end of 2020, when blazes devastated several towns in Western
and Southern Oregon.
And there’s no doubt that the danger is growing.
More people are living in and near forests and rangelands,
and those lands are more prone to burning as climate change
leads to longer and more severe fire seasons.
Senate Bill 762, approved by the Legislature in 2021 and
signed into law by Gov. Kate Brown, was prompted in part by
the 2020 catastrophes. The legislation, among other things, re-
quired the Oregon Department of Forestry to compile a map
showing the wildfire risks — no risk, low, medium, high or ex-
treme — for each of the state’s 1.8 million tax lots. In addition,
other state agencies were directed to write regulations mandat-
ing that some property owners, whose land is within the wild-
land-urban interface (WUI — the zone where homes are in or
near forests or other areas where wildfires are more common)
and deemed at high or extreme risk, will have to take steps to
reduce their fire risk. The basic idea is to create a “defensible
space” — a zone, usually within 50 to 100 feet of a home, where
there is little or no combustible material that could ignite if a
fire comes close and lead to the destruction of the home.
Although the legislation called for requiring such work, add-
ing a potential expense for landowners, the cost is small com-
pared with the value of a home and its irreplaceable contents.
Indeed, many people who live in the WUI, including some in
Baker County, have already taken steps to protect their proper-
ties. In a few areas neighbors have worked together to create a
“Firewise” community.
Little wonder, then, that Senate Bill 762 easily passed, 22-7
in the Senate and 49-6 in the House. Both of Baker County’s
legislators, Sen. Lynn Findley, R-Vale, and Sen. Mark Owens,
R-Crane, voted for the bill.
But the effects of the bill, and the reaction to it, have been
quite different from the intent.
On June 30 the state published the risk level map put together
by the Forestry Department and Oregon State University. The
state also sent letters to the owners of about 80,000 tax lots that
are both within the WUI and designated as high or extreme
risk.
Findley said he believed the map would assign a risk level
only to tax lots in the WUI, which constitute less than 1% of the
state’s total tax lots.
That’s one reason Findley and Owens, along with some other
lawmakers, on Aug. 3 called on state officials to withdraw the
map and cancel the notices sent to property owners in the WUI.
The next day, State Forester Cal Mukumoto did so.
The process was flawed in multiple ways. For one, Senate Bill
762 required the Forestry Department to finish the risk level
map by June 30, 2022. That didn’t give the state sufficient time
to meet with property owners, fire protection district officials
and others whose knowledge could have helped produce a
more accurate map.
Mukumoto acknowledged as much, saying there “wasn’t
enough time to allow for the type of local outreach and engage-
ment that people wanted, needed and deserved.”
But although the legislation has yet to mandate anything for
property owners, it appears to have already had expensive rami-
fications for some. The issue is homeowner’s insurance.
Kevin Cassidy, who lives along Rock Creek west of Haines,
said his longtime insurance provider declined to extend his pol-
icy recently, citing as a reason that his property is at high risk.
Cassidy said he found another insurer, but his new policy is
twice as expensive — $2,400 per year — as the previous one.
Cassidy said his former insurer didn’t cite the new, since with-
drawn, state risk level map as the reason. But he said the issue of
fire risk had never been mentioned before, in about 20 years of
coverage.
Legislators have also cited canceled insurance policies, or
more expensive coverage, as a reason for asking the state to re-
vise the map.
Others are skeptical of the link between the new map and
changes in insurance coverage or cost. Michael Wara of Stan-
ford University’s Woods Institute for the Environment, told The
Associated Press that “insurers have way better maps. They’re
not going to just take the state’s word on the maps.”
Perhaps not. But the timing, in Cassidy’s case, is curious.
Regardless, the state, as State Forester Mukumoto conceded,
needs to spend more time collecting information about the
efforts many property owners already made to protect their
homes.
That will yield maps that not only are more accurate, which
will help target the areas most in need of improvement, but also
reduce the unintended but potentially expensive effects of this
otherwise worthwhile endeavor.
— Jayson Jacoby, Baker City Herald editor
YOUR VIEWS
Story about
Republican Party
meeting left out
background
Oh, come on! I know
your paper leans left, but
let’s get the facts right.
Your recent article about
the Baker County Republi-
can party missed so many
opportunities to get the
facts right. Well, I realize
that maybe your cub re-
porter is new to Baker City
and has no background on
how bylaws or party poli-
tics work, but he should’ve
spent a little bit more time
getting background infor-
mation. He took the time,
although inaccurately, to
portray Judge Vance Day
in a negative light as well
as Chair, Suzan Ellis Jones
(going to be investigated!!!
OMG! WRONG!), but
he didn’t look into the al-
leged Oath Keeper back-
ground of Jacob Brown,
the pending felony trial of
ringleader Ken Hackett,
or that Daniel Crowe, the
“attorney” for the extrem-
ists who is only licensed
to provide pro bono (free)
services to indigent clients
(according to the Oregon
State Bar website).
I was at the meeting.
I am a voting precinct
committee person on that
committee. That small
group of radicals fooled a
whole bunch of my good
neighbors into violating
the bylaws so they could
change the bylaws, then
take over. That side of the
story was not covered.
What about the chaos cre-
ated by those who took
over and they didn’t even
know how to make a mo-
tion or count the votes.
Several of the votes they
took had more ballots
cast than voting members
present. Isn’t that a fact
that should be part of the
story?
Most folks in Baker
County are center/right.
They believe in liberty and
self government, but don’t
like extremists telling them
what to do. I am hopeful
the State party will take ac-
tion to enforce the bylaws
and rebuke the extremists
who tried to take over the
Baker County GOP. IF that
happens will you report
that fact?
Tisha Bass
Baker City
Herald’s headline left
out the rest of the
story
Nice headline on last
Saturday’s (July 30) article.
I was at that meeting and
“the rest of the story” was
oddly missing. Kind of re-
minds me of the following
story:
A biker is passing the
zoo when he sees a little
girl leaning into the lion’s
cage.
Suddenly, the lion grabs
her by the cuff of her jacket
and tries to pull her inside
to slaughter her under the
eyes of her screaming par-
ents.
The biker jumps off his
bike, runs to the cage and
hits the lion square on
the nose with a powerful
punch. Whimpering from
the pain the lion jumps
back, letting go of the girl,
and the biker brings her to
her terrified parents, who
thank him endlessly.
A New York Times re-
porter has watched the
whole event. The reporter
says, “Sir, this was the most
gallant and brave thing I
saw a man do in my whole
life.” The biker replies,
“Why, it was nothing, re-
ally, the lion was behind
bars. I just saw this little
kid in danger, and acted as
I felt right.”
The reporter says, “Well,
I’m a journalist from the
New York Times, and to-
morrow’s paper will have
this story on the front page.
... so, what do you do for a
living and what political af-
filiation do you have?”
The biker replies, “I’m a
U.S. Marine and a Repub-
lican.”
The following morning
the biker buys The New
York Times to see if it in-
deed brings news of his
actions, and reads, on the
front page:
“U.S. MARINE AS-
SAULTS AFRICAN IM-
MIGRANT AND STEALS
HIS LUNCH.”
Duane B. Morris Jr.
Baker City
COLUMN
Who’s to blame for the
record housing prices?
BY JOEL GRIFFITH
W
ith so much attention fixed
on soaring prices for gaso-
line and groceries, one can
almost overlook the fact that we’re
also enduring an affordable housing
crisis. The question is, why?
Spanning the pandemic era from
February 2020 through May 2022,
home prices soared 43.5%. Over the
past 12 months, home prices are up
19.7%, while residential property
prices in the United States, adjusted
for inflation, are now 6.7% above
the prior all-time record levels of the
2006 bubble.
Home prices are increasing far
greater than family income growth is.
The home-price-to-median-income
ratio now stands at more than 8.1,
significantly higher than the levels
of well under 5.0 experienced from
1980 to 2000. The mortgage-pay-
ment-to-income ratio hit 42% in
May — tied for the highest level since
the creation of the index in 2006.
The mortgage payment on a medi-
an-priced home with a 20% down
payment jumped from under $1,300
to more than $2,000 in just the past
year as interest rates and home prices
surged — a whopping 56% increase.
Median apartment rental costs,
meanwhile, have jumped 12% this
past year. Because leases often roll
over annually, the Consumer Price
Index data from the Bureau of Labor
Statistics does not yet fully reflect this
surge. Since March 2020, numerous
cities experienced rent increases well
over 30%.
So what’s to blame for these surg-
ing prices? Politicians are scapegoat-
ing “institutional owners” and other
investors in rental properties. But the
evidence doesn’t support this. Accord-
ing to mortgage giant Freddie Mac,
“Overall investor share of home sales
stands at 27.6% in December 2021,
which is only slightly higher than
26.7% in 2019.”
Large investors (10+ homes) ac-
count for only 6% of all home pur-
chases. The proportion of home sales
to investors is actually smaller today
than in 2006. CoreLogic reports that
from 1999-2018, “mom and pop” in-
vestors actually accounted for grow-
ing portion of the homes purchased
relative to private equity investors.
Although the share of sales to insti-
tutional investors (pension funds,
insurance companies, banks) and
iBuyers (large corporate buyers that
often remodel and flip) rose from
under 2% in 2018 to 4% of home
sales since 2021 — this is still only
a small portion of all rental homes
purchased.
Institutional investors own just
two out of every 1,000 (0.21%) of all
residential real estate, and just 1% of
all single-family rental homes (SFR)
nationwide. Over the past five years,
rental housing as a share of total hous-
ing declined.
Far from leading the surge in home
prices, both institutional and smaller
investors are alleviating the affordable
housing shortage. And by often pay-
ing below list price — 29.4% less, ac-
cording to a recent RealtyTrac report
— institutional investors may actually
be a counterweight to home price ap-
preciation.
So who are the main culprits? Gov-
ernment mortgage subsidies, the Fed-
eral Reserve and local regulations.
Government-sponsored enter-
prises (GSEs) — namely, Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac — continue
to dominate the mortgage market.
Investors who purchase GSE bonds
and mortgage-backed securities
(MBSs) ultimately provide funds for
people to finance homes, and these
bondholders and MBS investors en-
joy implicit government backing.
Approximately 90% of GSE volume
is currently devoted to refinances,
investor purchases, lower loan-to-
value loans and pricier homes pur-
chased by higher-income earners.
Government-subsidized GSEs enable
borrowers to take on bigger loans
and spur housing demand, leading
to higher home prices and increased
taxpayer risk.
Since March 2020, the Federal Re-
serve has driven down mortgage in-
terest rates and fueled a rise in hous-
ing costs by purchasing $1.3 trillion
of MBSs from Fannie Mae, Freddie
Mac and Ginnie Mae. The $2.7 tril-
lion the Federal Reserve now owns
is nearly double the levels of March
2020. Artificially increasing the
amount of capital available for the
residential home mortgage market
and distorting interest rates has exac-
erbated home unaffordability.
On the local level, stringent zon-
ing restrictions, density limitations
and aggressive environmental reg-
ulation limit the supply of housing
while increasing the costs of con-
struction. Regulations often account
for more than 30% of the costs of
rental housing construction. Rent
control further compounds the
problem by deterring new construc-
tion, giving landlords fewer incen-
tives to spend on upkeep and re-
modeling, and reducing the future
supply of housing. New construction
the past decade remains far lower
than in the decade preceding the
prior housing price bubble in part
because of these restrictions.
Blaming real estate investors for
the resulting misery may score po-
litical points. But demagoguery does
nothing to alleviate it. Lawmakers
can start to restore this bedrock of
the American dream by removing
federal subsidies from the housing
market, restricting the Federal Re-
serve’s power to purchase a limitless
quantity of mortgages, and eliminat-
ing the artificial barriers to housing
supply erected by local leaders. It’s
time to stop home prices from going
through the roof.

Joel Griffith is a research fellow in The
Heritage Foundation’s Roe Institute for
Economic Policy Studies.