Growth Plan Key Issue In Commission Races Topic Ignored By Campaigns, But Seen As Leading Priority

Other issues may fit more easily on a campaign sign, but none is more important than land-use planning in the twin races for Spokane County commissioner, some government watchers contend.

“It ought to be high on the list of priorities” for voters, said Spokane Mayor Jack Geraghty. “I’m not sure it is, because I don’t think it’s been positioned that way by either the media or the candidates.”

The re-election campaigns for Commissioners John Roskelley and Steve Hasson come just as a local steering committee is reaching a milestone in planning for the crowds expected to move here in the next 20 years. Regional planning is required under the Growth Management Act, which the Legislature passed in 1991.

The committee is drawing lines to separate land where urban growth is encouraged from places where it will not be allowed.

County commissioners have the final say on the boundaries.

“The assumption is that it will be done by late December (before any new commissioners are sworn in). But who knows?” said Bart Haggin, a steering committee member. He noted that the county already has missed several growth management deadlines.

Once the boundaries are set, opponents could appeal to Eastern Washington’s growth management hearings board to expand or shrink them. The makeup of the commission would decide how hard the county fights an appeal.

Commissioners also must oversee rewriting the county’s comprehensive plan. Work hasn’t begun on that time-consuming project, which will go even further in regulating land use.

In recent months, the commission has reached a precarious balance on land-use issues.

Hasson, who blasted the act in the past, says he is resigned to living with it.

He often acts as a moderator between Roskelley, an environmentalist who favors strict land-use requirements, and Harris, who staunchly opposes the GMA.

None of Hasson’s and Roskelley’s five challengers would likely go the route of commissioners in Chelan County, which is losing state money by ignoring the act. But four of the five are likely allies for Harris.

Democrat Cliff Cameron and Republican Lila Howe, who are campaigning against Roskelley, say the act infringes on property rights.

Don Manning, one of the candidates challenging Hasson in the Republican primary, calls the act unconstitutional and says the county should lobby the Legislature to repeal it.

Kate McCaslin, Hasson’s second primary challenger, said she would “implement the law in such a way that is not extreme.”

A recent compromise over shoreline buffers falls under McCaslin’s definition of extreme. Harris wanted 50-foot buffers between shorelines and new construction; Roskelley wanted 250-foot buffers. Hasson negotiated the compromise, at 200 feet.

McCaslin said that if she’s elected, she’ll try to get the buffers reduced.

Ron Hormann, the Democratic candidate for Hasson’s seat, is the only candidate likely to consistently side with Roskelley on land-use issues.

“I don’t have any conflict with growth management,” he said.

Haggin said he and other conservationists, who often find Hasson hostile to their causes, are rooting for Hasson in the primary election, even though they’ll vote for Hormann in the general election. A more conservative commissioner would “be a disaster,” he said.

Land-use attorney Stan Schultz said people who fret about the election’s effect are overestimating the latitude given commissioners under the Growth Management Act.

Any decision too extreme in either direction likely would be challenged to the Eastern Washington Growth Planning Hearings Board, Schultz added. That panel likely would seek a compromise.

The existence of the regional hearing board is one provision of the law that Hasson said he will continue to fight. Disputes should be settled inside the county by Superior Court judges, he said.

, DataTimes