Dear Editor:

Some have expressed interest with letters to the editor in the local papers to move the comprehensive plan forward.

That expresses personal opinions that are aligned with the Envision plan and the draft of the comprehensive plan to date. However, there are different opinions and a huge vacuum with all the public meetings when the hired consultants never first offered a comprehensive map of what property is still available or would qualify for development based on access, terrain, water and with or without utilities.

I have had a county map prepared at my personal expense that shows what little property is available after identifying the various government lands, subdivisions, fishing and conservation easements in place, and the remainder of that may or may not be available depending on deed restrictions and other issues.

And “no,” a rancher won’t be able to give just a few acres away if they wanted to or needed a sale, because if the comp plan goes forward in its present proposal, it will be 10 acres or more instead of the 2 acres or “just a few” a person could chip off.

Nor have other properties that have deed restrictions (and there are a number of those) been considered but are not shown as subdivisions or lots already created. A person would have to do a thorough research of every title to determine that number.

Then there is the blue line – is water available for augmentation on all of those lots that are supposedly available? Do any of you or did the consultants display where the blue line is and if properties are not within the blue line to allow for water augmentation? Did the consultants factor in all the acreage that has gone to or proposed to go for conservation easements including fishing easements?

Do any of you think you have the right to steal or change the value of a person’s property unless it is a health or safety issue? Is that even constitutional? What about vested property rights?

Why is it that everyone gets to say what is acceptable or not for us living in the county when we cannot vote or have anything to say about what goes on in the town unless we live there? Is that equitable or even honest?

Karin Adams,