Relating to golf courses on exclusive farm use lands in Coos County.
SB 877 creates a temporary, county-specific exception to Oregon’s exclusive farm use land-use rules for golf courses in Coos County. The bill allows a golf course otherwise permitted under ORS 215.213 and 215.283 to be sited on certain EFU lands in Coos County if the land meets one of several new criteria, including land that is not high-value farmland, certain high-value farmland parcels west of U.S. Highway 101 that are surrounded by an approved golf course, and certain parcels in Coos County west of U.S. Highway 101 that meet specified historical crop and land-status conditions. The measure is expressly limited to Coos County and sunsets on January 1, 2028.
The bill also amends ORS 215.213 and 215.283 to incorporate the new golf-course siting rules into the list of allowed uses on exclusive farm use land. In practical terms, it narrows and clarifies when a golf course may be approved on agricultural land, while preserving the requirement that county approval and other siting standards still apply. The operative amendments to the new section are delayed until January 1, 2028, which suggests a phased or transitional implementation.
Because the bill is highly targeted to Coos County and tied to specific geographic and farmland classifications, its legal impact is limited but significant for local land-use planning. It would modify the state’s farm-use zoning framework by carving out a special statutory pathway for golf course approval on EFU land in one county, potentially affecting county land-use decisions, agricultural land protection, and development opportunities west of Highway 101 in Coos County.
There is little direct evidence of public debate in the materials provided: there are no committee transcripts, no recorded votes, and no stated legislative action history. As a result, the overall sentiment cannot be measured from discussion records, but the bill’s structure indicates a narrowly tailored, pragmatic approach rather than a broad policy shift. The absence of recorded opposition or support in the provided context means sentiment is best characterized as unknown from the available materials.
The main point of contention likely concerns the balance between agricultural land preservation and allowing recreational/commercial development on exclusive farm use land. Potentially affected parties include Coos County officials, farmland owners, golf course developers, farmers, and land-use advocates concerned about precedent for exceptions to EFU zoning. The bill’s special treatment of land west of U.S. Highway 101 and its use of farmland classifications suggest that the key debate is whether the local economic or land-use benefits justify a carveout from Oregon’s general farm-protection rules.
SB 877 would amend ORS 215.213 and ORS 215.283 to add a Coos County-specific authorization for golf courses on certain exclusive farm use lands, creating a temporary statutory exception to Oregon’s general agricultural zoning restrictions. It would affect county land-use approval standards by allowing golf courses on specified non-high-value farmland and on limited categories of land west of U.S. Highway 101 in Coos County, while still requiring compliance with ORS 215.296 and other county siting standards. The measure sunsets on January 1, 2028, and the amended version of the new section becomes operative on that date.
The available record shows no committee transcripts, no votes, and no formal action history, so there is no documented public sentiment to summarize from debate or roll calls. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to be a narrowly tailored local land-use accommodation rather than a controversial statewide policy change, but the actual level of support or opposition is not shown in the provided materials.
The likely contention is between preserving exclusive farm use land for agriculture and allowing a golf course on land that would otherwise be protected from nonfarm development. Supporters would likely emphasize local flexibility and economic development in Coos County, while opponents would likely focus on precedent, farmland conversion, and whether recreational uses should be permitted on agricultural land. The bill’s geographic limits, farmland-classification tests, and Highway 101 boundary suggest the legislature is trying to confine the exception, which itself indicates sensitivity to concerns about broader erosion of farm-use protections.