County Commission Growth Act Top Issue For Four Candidates
In a year when Republicans and Democrats in many races are accused of blending their views, the candidates for Spokane County commissioner offer clear distinctions.
Never is that more visible than when the topic is growth management, perhaps the most divisive issue of the campaign.
The election outcome will determine whether the county embraces the Growth Management Act or complies with it grudgingly. It will affect where development is allowed and whether contractors pay fees to help build parks and roads.
Republican Kate McCaslin faces Democrat Ron Hormann to determine who will replace Commissioner Steve Hasson. In a second race, Republican Lila Howe is challenging incumbent Commissioner John Roskelley, a Democrat.
Team either of the Republican candidates with incumbent Commissioner Phil Harris, and the county likely will take the most conservative approach to growth management allowed under the law.
That would please many builders, Realtors and people who contend government levies too much control over private land.
If Roskelley and Hormann are elected, Harris likely will find himself on the short end of many votes on development issues. He opposes impact fees on developments, for instance, while the two Democrats support them in some cases.
A Roskelley-Hormann majority would please environmentalists and people who feel the county suffers from urban sprawl.
The candidates’ backgrounds are as varied as their views.
A mountaineer, Roskelley is a former member of the county planning commission and parks board. He describes himself as a liberal on environmental issues but a fiscal conservative.
Howe, a mother of four and grandmother of 10 helped spearhead sewer construction at Deer Lake in Stevens County, where her family had a lakeside home. But she opposed requiring a strip of undeveloped land between new houses and the lake.
McCaslin, who was raised in the Spokane Valley, once told a reporter that she admired the austere furnishings in the capitol in her native Wyoming. It showed the state wasn’t wasting money on fine furniture.
Reducing the county budget would be her top priority, she said, although she doesn’t yet know where she’d cut.
Hormann was a Spokane County employee for 26 years and its engineer for eight. He retired last year rather than take a demotion during a reorganization of the engineer’s department.
Hormann said land-use planning would be his top priority. Of the four candidates, he is the most accepting of the Growth Management Act.
, DataTimes ILLUSTRATION: 4 Photos
MEMO: See individual profiles by name of candidate
This sidebar appeared with the story: WHERE THEY STAND … Here are the positions on selected issues for the four candidates for two Spokane County Commission seats.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT LILA HOWE The act erodes property rights and gives the state too much control over local development. It should be abolished by the state Legislature. What planners call urban sprawl is really just people deciding where and how they want to live, and is not a problem. Opposed setbacks for shoreline construction as a planning commissioner in Stevens County.
JOHN ROSKELLEY Feels the act needs only minor changes and is a good tool for combating urban sprawl, a problem in Spokane. Wanted buffer zones between streams and new homes to be larger than the 200-foot setbacks adopted by commissioners as part of the act.
RON HORMANN Supports the act and calls growth planning “one of my main concerns.” Urban growth must be contained to areas where services can be provided. Concerns about state control are “scare tactics” used by the act’s opponents.
KATE McCASLIN Sees the act as an opportunity to rewrite the county’s outdated comprehensive plan. Would comply with law “in a way that is not extreme.” Worries growth management will force urban development in suburbs. Predicts act will cause cause decline in property values in rural areas, while causing tax increases in urban areas. Buffers required between development and streams are too restrictive.
IMPACT FEES HOWE Says fees are “double taxation,” added to home costs and may be illegal. Would support them if “equitable and beneficial,” but cannot think of an instance when that would be the case. As a Stevens County planning commissioner voted against $750 impact fees on new houses to help pay for school classrooms.
ROSKELLEY Supports impact fees to help offset the strain new development puts on parks and roads. Would only use the money in neighborhoods where it is collected.
HORMANN Supports impact fees in concept for improving roads, parks and schools, but says laws regulating their use must be made simpler by the Legislature. For instance, it’s not always possible to use the money within six years, as required by law.
McCASLIN Opposes impact fees. Suggests collecting several years of property taxes in advance to help pay for improvements made necessary by new development. Homeowners would get credit on later tax bills. Proposal may require amending state constitution.
BUDGET HOWE Calls for “zero-based budgeting,” in which managers each year must justify each expense as if it had never before occurred. Does not include salaries and benefits. Spare money should go into reserve fund.
ROSKELLEY Supports establishing a reserve fund but says setting money aside is more difficult than most candidates realize. Says it will be necessary to spend money updating technology to save money later.
HORMANN Commissioners have little flexibility over spending since most money goes to law enforcement, a necessity. Calls for more thorough review of each department’s budget on a regular basis, with comparisons to other counties and the private sector. County should ask public to set priorities. Cannot promise tax cuts.
McCASLIN Calls for easy-to-read “citizens’ budget,” monthly or quarterly reviews of each department’s spending and creation of large reserve fund. Says spending cuts would be her top priority, but doesn’t yet know where budget could be reduced.
PARKS HOWE Put neighborhood parks taxing districts to vote and encourage developers to give land or money. Consider selling some undeveloped land to help fund remaining parks. Doesn’t yet know which parcels should be sold. Would put conservation futures tax to vote but worries undeveloped land obtained with the tax poses liability to the county and reduces tax rolls.
ROSKELLEY Supports conservation futures tax, which is earmarked for buying parks lands and sunsets this year. Wants public to vote on reinstating the tax. Wants to put parks taxing district to vote and possibly use real-estate excise tax for improvements.
HORMANN Wants to reinstate conservation futures tax without a vote unless public demands one. Saving money in other departments would mean more for parks maintenance. Wants to put parks taxing districts on ballot.
McCASLIN Wants to put parks taxing districts to a vote and look for other funding sources, including public-private partnerships. Says conservation futures tax “has done some good things” and should be put to public vote.
TRANSPORTATION HOWE Replace STA buses with smaller, more efficient versions. Use existing arterials to route trucks away from downtown. North-South Freeway is “out of the question” because of cost.
ROSKELLEY Build east-west couplet in Valley instead of South Valley Arterial. Use existing roads to create arterial system for north-south traffic. Growth management will help solve future problems because it requires transportation planning as new land is developed.
HORMANN Build South Valley Arterial or alternative couplet. Preserve vacant land from Valley to Downtown as a corridor for future light-rail system. Despite past support of North-South freeway, now considers the project cost-prohibitive. Use existing arterials and some new roads to build beltway around city.
McCASLIN Stop diverting money from county road fund for other uses. Lobby Legislature to earmark motor vehicle excise tax for transportation only. Build east-west couplet in Valley and consider lengthening Division-Ruby couplet. Set aside land for future light-rail system.
This sidebar appeared with the story: WHERE THEY STAND … Here are the positions on selected issues for the four candidates for two Spokane County Commission seats.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT LILA HOWE The act erodes property rights and gives the state too much control over local development. It should be abolished by the state Legislature. What planners call urban sprawl is really just people deciding where and how they want to live, and is not a problem. Opposed setbacks for shoreline construction as a planning commissioner in Stevens County.
JOHN ROSKELLEY Feels the act needs only minor changes and is a good tool for combating urban sprawl, a problem in Spokane. Wanted buffer zones between streams and new homes to be larger than the 200-foot setbacks adopted by commissioners as part of the act.
RON HORMANN Supports the act and calls growth planning “one of my main concerns.” Urban growth must be contained to areas where services can be provided. Concerns about state control are “scare tactics” used by the act’s opponents.
KATE McCASLIN Sees the act as an opportunity to rewrite the county’s outdated comprehensive plan. Would comply with law “in a way that is not extreme.” Worries growth management will force urban development in suburbs. Predicts act will cause cause decline in property values in rural areas, while causing tax increases in urban areas. Buffers required between development and streams are too restrictive.
IMPACT FEES HOWE Says fees are “double taxation,” added to home costs and may be illegal. Would support them if “equitable and beneficial,” but cannot think of an instance when that would be the case. As a Stevens County planning commissioner voted against $750 impact fees on new houses to help pay for school classrooms.
ROSKELLEY Supports impact fees to help offset the strain new development puts on parks and roads. Would only use the money in neighborhoods where it is collected.
HORMANN Supports impact fees in concept for improving roads, parks and schools, but says laws regulating their use must be made simpler by the Legislature. For instance, it’s not always possible to use the money within six years, as required by law.
McCASLIN Opposes impact fees. Suggests collecting several years of property taxes in advance to help pay for improvements made necessary by new development. Homeowners would get credit on later tax bills. Proposal may require amending state constitution.
BUDGET HOWE Calls for “zero-based budgeting,” in which managers each year must justify each expense as if it had never before occurred. Does not include salaries and benefits. Spare money should go into reserve fund.
ROSKELLEY Supports establishing a reserve fund but says setting money aside is more difficult than most candidates realize. Says it will be necessary to spend money updating technology to save money later.
HORMANN Commissioners have little flexibility over spending since most money goes to law enforcement, a necessity. Calls for more thorough review of each department’s budget on a regular basis, with comparisons to other counties and the private sector. County should ask public to set priorities. Cannot promise tax cuts.
McCASLIN Calls for easy-to-read “citizens’ budget,” monthly or quarterly reviews of each department’s spending and creation of large reserve fund. Says spending cuts would be her top priority, but doesn’t yet know where budget could be reduced.
PARKS HOWE Put neighborhood parks taxing districts to vote and encourage developers to give land or money. Consider selling some undeveloped land to help fund remaining parks. Doesn’t yet know which parcels should be sold. Would put conservation futures tax to vote but worries undeveloped land obtained with the tax poses liability to the county and reduces tax rolls.
ROSKELLEY Supports conservation futures tax, which is earmarked for buying parks lands and sunsets this year. Wants public to vote on reinstating the tax. Wants to put parks taxing district to vote and possibly use real-estate excise tax for improvements.
HORMANN Wants to reinstate conservation futures tax without a vote unless public demands one. Saving money in other departments would mean more for parks maintenance. Wants to put parks taxing districts on ballot.
McCASLIN Wants to put parks taxing districts to a vote and look for other funding sources, including public-private partnerships. Says conservation futures tax “has done some good things” and should be put to public vote.
TRANSPORTATION HOWE Replace STA buses with smaller, more efficient versions. Use existing arterials to route trucks away from downtown. North-South Freeway is “out of the question” because of cost.
ROSKELLEY Build east-west couplet in Valley instead of South Valley Arterial. Use existing roads to create arterial system for north-south traffic. Growth management will help solve future problems because it requires transportation planning as new land is developed.
HORMANN Build South Valley Arterial or alternative couplet. Preserve vacant land from Valley to Downtown as a corridor for future light-rail system. Despite past support of North-South freeway, now considers the project cost-prohibitive. Use existing arterials and some new roads to build beltway around city.
McCASLIN Stop diverting money from county road fund for other uses. Lobby Legislature to earmark motor vehicle excise tax for transportation only. Build east-west couplet in Valley and consider lengthening Division-Ruby couplet. Set aside land for future light-rail system.