A recent LNG terminal building boom has, in turn, produced a natural gas pipeline building boom.  Terminals bring in shipments of liquefied natural gas (LNG).  Through a regasification process, the LNG is changed back into gaseous natural gas.  Pipelines transmit the natural gas (in gas, not liquid, form) from terminals to end users and to other pipelines.

In some places, property owners and other stakeholders have expressed concern that a proposed pipeline would reduce the values of nearby properties.  Pipeline operators note that natural gas pipelines typically do not change the general use of the land. Certain building structures and landscaping, however, cannot be built on the pipeline right of way.  Some argue that a pipeline introduces a safety or environment risk, and that such risks reduce property values.  On the other hand, a pipeline can provide a positive amenity, such as a greenbelt or buffer that may increase property values.

Eric Fruits recently completed an econometric study of the relationship between residential property values and proximity to a natural gas pipeline.  The analysis indicates that neither the announcement of a proposed pipeline nor the completion of the pipeline had any measurable effect on property values.

Eric Fruits was invited by Oregon’s Revenue Restructuring Task Force to compare Oregon’s state and local government expenditures with other states. In his presentation, Dr. Fruits reported that:

• Oregon’s per capita state and local expenditures almost doubled between the 1998-99 fiscal year and the 2004-05 fiscal year.  The most recent data from the Census shows expenditures of $8,060 per person.
• Oregon has the 11th highest state and local expenditures in the U.S. as a share of personal income.
• Oregon’s state and local expenditures are $2.8 billion higher than statistically predicted by its income and demographics.  That amounts to $776 per person.
• Oregon’s public employee pension system and insurance payments contribute to the higher spending.  Oregon’s spending on these items accounts for 12.5 percent of total state and local expenditures.  The average among all states is 8.3 percent.  Oregon’s spending on these items would be approximately $1 billion lower if it was “in line” with other states.

The most recent study, co-authored with Randall Pozdena and published by Cascade Policy Institute, is a follow-up to earlier studies published in 2002 and 2004.