Proposed Klickitat County Rezoning would affect 20,000 acres and would make possible hundreds of new homes & hotels & destination resorts lining Hwy 141 from the mouth of the WhiteSalmon River to 3 miles north of BZ Corners.
• on traffic
• of hundreds of new wells and septic tanks
• on fish and wildlife
• on fire danger
• on rafting and recreational use
Please join us for an informational meeting sponsored by the
Concerned Citizens group.
When: NEXT WEDNESDAY, July 25, 7 pm
Where: WHITE SALMON LIBRARY
Questions? Contact Beth McCullough (509) 493-2685
5 comments:
I would like to hear some specific details about this proposed rezoning. For example........is it one group attempting this or several? Who is proposing housing developments and who is applying for subdivisions for a destination resort? Where exactly are each going to be located if approved and how many homes are we talking about at each location? What is the process that has to be followed to have an area rezoned and what entity makes the final decision? I hate fear mongering.....and lumping all these details together doesn't give anyone any facts to form an opinion. I think this is a good opportunity to educate the public about this whole process. Lets talk FACTS not FEELINGS.
Beatledawg
When county or city officials, be it (planning commission, county commissioners, or any paid government or volunteer official), is involved in a decision to expand for additional development; they should recuse themselves from the decision making if they (or any relative)have any ownership in the land and the possiblility to gain monetarily from the selling of land or building of structures when the development is approved. Development for growths sake is not good planning for the whole of the community in the future. Accumlative effects should also be taken into consideration. The public should demand this or it will be business as usual.
The citizens of Klickitat County should demand city and county officials recuse themselves from any decision involving the possibility of monetary gain. This should be standard operating procedures for any reputable government. Anything short of this is unethical and cause for immediate dismissal. Only then can objective costs and benefits to the community be weighed.
BeatleDawg talks about feelings-- my feelings are factual, and when I look at places like Gresham and Beaverton, I see a damn good reason to be worried. I see good reason to be fearful that we as a community might lose our most cherished asset.
Why would some residents who own even a little piece of property, want to divide it if it meant that someone with a lot could do the same and ruin the landscape. It's called greed and selfishness.
KHERMAN said...
"BeatleDawg talks about feelings-- my feelings are factual, and when I look at places like Gresham and Beaverton, I see a damn good reason to be worried."
I never said people's feelings weren't real and I understand yours. But the reality that exists here is real too and worrying about it or getting mad will not make it go away. Some people have worked all their lives in this community and have little to show for it.
It's unrealistic for anyone to think that local person that pulled green chain at the mill for the last 20 years or drives a log truck and barely makes it, because the price of logs is low and fuel is high, is going to pass up big bucks out of principal if this is their chance at some modest wealth. That is not greed.....that is realism.
We don't live in Kansas any more and this area has changed forever. I think you are right to work so it does not look like Gresham.
Beatledawg
Post a Comment