Keith Cyrus and his family have made no bones about their desire to develop a new destination resort on their property near Sisters, yet getting there has proved extraordinarily difficult. Changes to state law that would allow them to do so have yet to make it through the Oregon Legislature.

Most recently, Rep. John Huffman, R-The Dalles, introduced legislation giving the Cyrus family development rights; the measure failed to gain approval from the 2013 Legislature.

Now, Huffman has a new approach, one that makes more sense. Rather than give one family the right to do something no other family can, he’s planning to introduce legislation that would put both Deschutes and Jefferson counties on the list of places where development originally proposed for the Metolius River basin could go.

The 2009 Legislature was the first to get into specialized land-use lawmaking in a serious way. It declared much of the Metolius basin off limits to resort development, no matter how conservatively and carefully done. The decision was made in part because state Sen. Betsy Johnson, D-Scappoose, owns the land on which the headwaters of the river sit and she opposed nearby development.

It wasn’t the last such change.

The 2011 Legislature created a special measure to allow for resort development in Grant County, while earlier this year lawmakers told county commissions in Wasco and Jefferson counties how they should respond to Young Life camp’s expansion plans.

To compensate for the ban in the Metolius River basin, meanwhile, lawmakers gave two developers the right to go elsewhere — a right that should be extended before it expires in 2015. One developer, Shane Lund-gren, might be interested in joining forces with the Cyrus family if Huffman’s changes become law.

There’s a valuable difference between what Huffman now proposes and the three earlier changes. Huffman would not order Deschutes and Jefferson counties to allow — or forbid — Cyrus’s resort. Rather, he would give the counties the right to approve it or any competing resort, for that matter.

We still don’t like the idea of carving out exceptions to laws that supposedly apply to all Oregonians. That said, this proposal is a better approach.