Post by Poor Richard on Oct 31, 2023 9:12:22 GMT -7
County Planning Board Responds to Petitions
Ann Hallowell presented a synopsis of the latest Park County Planning Board meeting to the Forum. She wrote "The October County planning board meeting was a crash back to earth after the brief euphoria of getting our referendums on the ballot next June.
For the bulk of the meeting, board members asked the county attorney, who was present, how the board could circumvent or nullify the two Resolutions we just qualified for the ballot. (1. A vote to Repeal the Growth Policy and 2. A vote to require a vote of the people to adopt a Growth Policy.)
Only one board member asked, maybe they should ask the people what they don’t like about the existing growth policy. It fell on deaf ears.
Every scheme was presented, examined and re-examined. The county attorney stated (via the number-two planner) that as the petition 1. Repeal Growth Policy, states a specific resolution number of adoption to be repealed, the board could re-write the Growth Policy and have it approved by a commission vote before the June election. This new Growth Policy would then have a different resolution of adoption number than the one in the petition language. They think this would nullify the Repeal Growth Policy petition that was just placed on the ballot by our signature collection. And, it would let them have a new Growth Policy with commissioner approval---no citizen vote necessary.
The attorney had no ideas on how to get rid of the second petition: to require a vote to adopt all future growth policies. If their first scheme worked, a new growth policy requiring a public vote would not come around again for 5 years.
The county planning board has spent the last 10 months writing and presenting their new public engagement plan to the commissioners. In that single October meeting, they laid bare their disdain for the voices of the people. It was all about how do we stop the people from voting.
Every pretense of what was in the growth policy being the desire of the entire county was set aside for the raw truth that they don’t want the people to vote. They were particularly upset that the city will not be allowed to vote on the petitions as well.
The planning board needs the permission of the commissioners to start re-writing the Growth Policy. Whether they have to wait for their November meeting to make a motion to ask the commissioners or, could they have the answer sooner, went unanswered.
Writing their own version of a Growth Policy with their cronies and selected public will doubly prove our point. We will press on.
Enjoy the wonders of winter."
For the bulk of the meeting, board members asked the county attorney, who was present, how the board could circumvent or nullify the two Resolutions we just qualified for the ballot. (1. A vote to Repeal the Growth Policy and 2. A vote to require a vote of the people to adopt a Growth Policy.)
Only one board member asked, maybe they should ask the people what they don’t like about the existing growth policy. It fell on deaf ears.
Every scheme was presented, examined and re-examined. The county attorney stated (via the number-two planner) that as the petition 1. Repeal Growth Policy, states a specific resolution number of adoption to be repealed, the board could re-write the Growth Policy and have it approved by a commission vote before the June election. This new Growth Policy would then have a different resolution of adoption number than the one in the petition language. They think this would nullify the Repeal Growth Policy petition that was just placed on the ballot by our signature collection. And, it would let them have a new Growth Policy with commissioner approval---no citizen vote necessary.
The attorney had no ideas on how to get rid of the second petition: to require a vote to adopt all future growth policies. If their first scheme worked, a new growth policy requiring a public vote would not come around again for 5 years.
The county planning board has spent the last 10 months writing and presenting their new public engagement plan to the commissioners. In that single October meeting, they laid bare their disdain for the voices of the people. It was all about how do we stop the people from voting.
Every pretense of what was in the growth policy being the desire of the entire county was set aside for the raw truth that they don’t want the people to vote. They were particularly upset that the city will not be allowed to vote on the petitions as well.
The planning board needs the permission of the commissioners to start re-writing the Growth Policy. Whether they have to wait for their November meeting to make a motion to ask the commissioners or, could they have the answer sooner, went unanswered.
Writing their own version of a Growth Policy with their cronies and selected public will doubly prove our point. We will press on.
Enjoy the wonders of winter."