The crowd was enthusiastic and it was standing room only as Douglas County's four commission candidates debated the issues at a forum Wednesday at Minden's CVIC Hall.
In Douglas County, few topics stir more passion than the growth debate, the first question addressed.
Commissioner Dave Brady, who faces Lloyd Higuera in the District 2 race, said he led the charge in determining a growth cap using a grass-roots approach.
"In March, I called for workshops to bring the stakeholders together to work on a resolution," he said. "We're now working from the bottom up rather than the top down. A building allocation system is on its way."
In Douglas County, the growth cap has been the subject of litigation and protracted debate. Limiting growth with a cap is defined as a goal in the master plan, but hasn't been implemented since that document's approval in 1996.
"I'm confident we're moving in that direction," Brady said. "Not everyone will be happy with the result, but using this approach instead of letting the courts tell us is better approach."
Brady's challenger Higuera said he believes in managing growth through the master plan, but that management needs to be balanced with economic concerns.
"It's very important that we get it right the first time," he said. "We need to get the growth issue behind us. There are so many others, like water, facing us in Douglas County."
County officials have been waiting for the results of separate studies concerning water and transportation issues, those to be factored in when determining the growth cap, but those results have been slow in coming.
District 4 commission candidate Greta Hambsch expressed the frustrations of many over the delays, a position attendees welcomed with resounding applause.
"In 2002, the people of Douglas County voted to support the Sustainable Growth Initiative," she said. "Whether that path is right or wrong, or whether we stick to the 280 homes mandated by that initiative or not, it's time for the county to stop stalling on this issue and create an ordinance that puts a cap in place."
The issue is the subject of litigation and if a decision is not made, the matter will go back to the Ninth District Court for a decision.
As chairman of the planning commission, District 4 candidate Nancy McDermid has been in the fore of this debate for weeks.
"I believe it's better for us to hold our destiny in our hands rather than the courts," she said. "That's why I continue to push for a growth management cap based on data. We may get conflicting data, so we need to determine what we want growth to be, where it will be appropriate and how much we will have.
"Those are the questions stakeholders are working on," she said.
Pressure from developers concerning growth on agricultural lands in Carson Valley is an issue and candidates were asked for their views.
"We need to have limits define clearly so developers know what they need to provide and what they will have to pay," Hambsch said. "County officials need to know when the development will be built and make sure developers are held to that commitment."
Higuera, who advocates enforcement of the master plan, said care needs to be taken with respect to master plan amendments.
"Unless an amendment is a major benefit to everyone, it shouldn't be granted," he said.
Brady agreed, saying a commissioners' job is not to placate developers at the expense of the master plan.
"This document is critical to the viability of this community and whether it will move forward," he said.
McDermid lauded the decision to create a chapter in the master plan dealing with the agricultural element.
"We're creating an agricultural overlay and at the same time, an overlay designating prime areas for development," she said. "The agricultural element in this community is highly valued by everyone. That's why we added it."
The event was sponsored by the League of Women Voters and Timken-Sturgis Foundation,
Susie Vasquez can be reached at svasquez@recordcourier.com or 782-5121, ext. 211.
