Density map should be retained
Hey savvy news reader! Thanks for choosing local.
You are now reading
1 of 3 free articles.
Lake County Commissioner Decker has made it clear for months that his mind is made up. He wants the density map and regulations gone. Issues of this magnitude cannot be fairly evaluated without a willingness to examine new evidence and ideas.
His objections continue to be the same as before public comment. The public comments at the hearing in January were overwhelmingly in favor of keeping the map and regulations and many contained convincing arguments. What Mr. Decker has said and written since, leads me to believe that he may not be listening to the concerns of the citizens of Lake County.
In a more prudent fashion, the other two commissioners seem to have been listening and to be inclined to keep the map and regulations in place, knowing they will be revised soon after the growth policy rewrite is finished this year and that those revisions are expected to reflect the changes that process produces.
Mr. Decker has three objections. He personally spent a lot of time and money and suffered a good deal of frustration in his ultimately successful effort to change the designation of his families’ property on the density map. Even though he got what he wanted, he felt it was too hard. He was the first (and only) person to go through that process. He was no doubt subjected to some confusion among those people who were attempting to administer and interpret new rules and who were understandably unsure of the process. This is to be expected soon after a new program is implemented. The U.S. Constitution needed 10 amendments almost immediately. It took 200 years to get less than 20 more.
Although the tribes have been purposely and voluntarily complying with the map and regulations, Mr. Decker is concerned. He would like to see a more formal declaration of their intention to comply. Because so much support for the density map is based upon the wildlife habitat, clean water, open space, etc., which the tribes have made clear are values they strongly share, I am optimistic that a reasonable agreement between the two governments is possible.
Mr. Decker says there is no need for a density map because Lake County will not grow over the next 45 years. Unfortunately, his figures are outdated and new data will soon be published to replace the tables he used last year. I spoke with the state demographer and senior economist. I learned that the new growth statistics are more optimistic. The figures for the next ten years are now projected to be 3.7 percent compared to the now outdated 1.1 percent upon which Mr. Decker is relying. The next 15 years are now projected to be 5.1 percent compared to the now outdated 1.8 percent. Both state professionals made it clear that as the projections attempt to predict population growth further into the future, they become more suspect and should be used with increasing caution.
I also learned that big business relies on more sophisticated and much more expensive data collection when considering expanding to locations like Polson. The manager of one Polson chain outlet stated that his company relies on their own research and they believe Lake County will grow by 2 percent to 5 percent over the next three to five years. The senior economist for the state pointed out that, although not identical, both models indicate an expectation of growth. That helps explain the dramatic increase in commercial development in Polson.
I hope that this new information will help Mr. Decker to see a way to allow the citizens of Lake County to retain a density map and regulations they worked so hard to produce and for which they have expressed such overwhelming support. If the obstacle standing in his way is his memory of a difficult and frustrating encounter with a newly formed plan and process, I am confident that he will work with those of us now engaged in rewriting the growth policy to streamline that procedure.
