Full Speed Ahead

Planning Commission notes from Sept 25

Quoted from my notes of the Board of Supervisors meeting on September 18:

“The contract for the consultant to do the Land Use Map was shown. Kevin Henry wanted them to approve the money ($43,000) and the contract (pure time and travel, no specified deliverables, just send the money based on timecards) but Tommy LaFrance said something on the order of (paraphrased and caricaturized) “why do we need to pay a consultant to borrow our watch and tell us what time it is?” And Gerald Cubbage said why do we need some outsider to tell us where to put the bubbles on the bubble map, and Carol Lee said, well, maybe we could just get a little bit of help, not this much, and Charlie Hoke said, why don’t we go talk to the Planning Commission about this again and John Rust was absent. So they tabled it, pending talking to the Planning Commission about it some more. Tommy and Gerald thought Kevin Henry was up to the job, and the job really entails input from the towns and the citizens, so what does that have to do with a consultant. Kevin said, but there’s only one of me, so it’s going to take a long time.”

I thought that meant they didn’t want to spend the consultant money on the easy part, the part which just entails facilitating meetings to find out how the citizens want the county to look. That would mean the money would still be there after the Land Use Map was developed, when they might need real expertise to develop zoning ordinances. The danger in spending the money now, on the meeting facilitation, at $43,000 for 266 hours of time, is that then, when the money is all gone, and there still is no Land Use Map because the consultants held the meetings, but citizens didn’t attend, and so consensus was not built, the Land Use Map we spent $43,000 for will still not be accepted by the community, and the money will have been spent for no good reason. Building consensus within the community is time consuming and long. You can’t just hold a meeting, to which nobody comes, and then declare that you’ve fulfilled your obligation to hold a meeting, and proceed without consensus or community understanding.

The thing about our citizens is that they won’t figure out what’s going on until this is way down the road, and somebody tells them their land is being condemned because maybe a sinkhole is under it, and now it has to be a park. THEN they want to come out with picket signs, even though this has been brewing for years, under the radar, where nobody’s paying attention to it. So the point of not hiring the consultant for the Land Use Map is just that it’s a Time and Materials contract, with no deliverables, except the Timecards. Nothing to showing up for a meeting, conducting it whether anybody attends or not, and sending a bill. So the consensus building will be particularly hard, especially because there was no citizen involvement in developing the Comprehensive Plan that was just approved, so you are not starting with agreement that the goals stated there are in the community’s best interest in the first place. You won't even be able to get the bubbles placed on the bubble map without that.

The consultants part in building that consensus, at between $150 and $300 an hour, could maybe be cut down to just a little advice, rather than to spending all that was budgeted on this part. Perhaps the consultant could just spend a week with Mr. Henry, getting him ready to run these consensus building meetings, instead of paying the consultant to run them, because in Page County, these meetings aren't going to "take" the first time. They'll need a rerun. Or maybe three or four reruns.


At the Planning Commission meeting September 25, though, nobody from the Board was there to talk about the reasons why they wanted to proceed on the Land Use Map without a consultant. Nobody from the Planning Commission had been briefed on their reasons. So the Planning Commission just had a short discussion about it, and then re-requested or reaffirmed that they wanted to hire a consultant. They didn’t have anyone to explain to them why this contract was not immediately approved. When the Board, ie Charlie Hoke, is about to turn something down, but then Charlie pipes up with, "Let's talk to the Planning Commission about it first," we, as citizens, think that means they are actually going to talk to the Planning Commission, not just let the Planning Commission go off and vote again without any discussion.

Meanwhile, the Water Quality Advisory committee has issued a report on cleaning up the river. It says there is fecal cloriform (from warm blooded mammals) in 22% of our wells. And some other kind of bacteria in 44%.

I haven’t read that report yet, but I hope it says that comes from the cows in the river instead of saying it comes from people. All the people I know have health department approved septic systems. I wonder if there are people living on the river who don’t have septic systems. I will get a copy of the report and tell you.
Or, you can call 743-4142 and get your own copy, and tell me what you think.

Also, there was more talk about Karst and how the runoff endangers wells and causes sinkholes.

I haven’t seen any news reports about sinkholes, people falling in them or cars and houses being swallowed up. I guess that’s something that would happen if we got development here. If anybody wants to post any reports about sinkholes in the county, I’d be happy to post it. Or just hit the comments button.

There was also talk about a consultant who is in the process of writing a proffer model for if developers come here. One part of the proffer model is if you allow “age-restricted” communities. Apparently, with the Baby Boomers retiring, that is a popular model, because when you get to be a grandparent, you like everybody who lives around you to just have their grandchildren visit, not live next door to you. The problem with these “55 and over only” communities is that the developer doesn’t have to pay any “proffers” for schools, and that’s why developers like them. But they potentially strain the hospitals and ambulances, if you get too many of them. Also, they can be a problem for a person who buys a house in one of these communities, and then later, events overtake them and maybe a grandchild needs to come to live with grandpa and grandma because of some problem, and then guess what? Grandpa and Grandma either have to move, or they have to refuse to take the child in. Of course, this is planning ahead, for that sunshiny day when a developer decides it would be worth his while to build houses here. That’s what the whole Planning Commission is about. Planning ahead for the future.

To quote Commissioner Charles Newton, “We don’t want to do something now that causes a problem that is very expensive to fix in fifty years.”

So this is big, long range planning. With amazing foresight.

Wish you’d been there.

Alice

I know everybody’s too busy gossiping about the various Sheriff candidates to bother paying attention to this, but I think someday you’ll be sorry you didn’t watch what’s going on here.

Water Quality Meeting

The following is a condensed version of a notice published in the Page News & Courier last week. Sorry for the late notice. I just spotted it this morning. The issue of water quality in the county is an important one. If anyone can make it to this event, please report back on any issues addressed.

<>The Page County Water Quality Advisory folks are having a Water Gathering accompanied by a fish fry on Sunday, Sept 30 at Compton Rapids. (I assume access from 340.) People knowledgeable in water resource matters will be there to answer any questions or concerns you might have. The event is free to Page County residents but reservations are required by 24 September, call 540-244-8366 or 743-4808.

Regarding any other county meetings or issues like this, if you would like your event posted here, email a notice to Research@PageCountyWatch.org and i will post it. If anyone attends and would like to post information about it, email me and I will post it.