It has been a half-dozen years since voters answered the direct question about how fast they wanted their Valley to grow.
Five of those years were spent fighting over the Sustainable Growth Initiative approved 8,823-7,755 in 2002.
In the intervening years, the county added 10,000 new voters, though the number of new residents has been disputed.
It has experienced both boom and bust with years where the number of residential building permits varied from 450 to 45.
On Nov. 4, the sustainable growth ordinance returns to the ballot in a very different economic climate than the one in which it was approved.
Douglas has a growth ordinance in place that limits residential building permits to a 2 percent compounded increase. The question asks voters if it should be continued.
All six of the candidates running for Douglas County commission have said they supported the ordinance.
However, at least three pointed out that its enforcement might need some adjustment to adapt to the chillier economic climate.
District 1 Republican candidate Greg Lynn, who participated in creating the ordinance, said he had no appetite to rekindle the growth fight.
"My question is why are we managing no growth," he said. "People are going down to get permits and being told that they missed the allocation period and will have to wait. I think we should manage growth, but there's no point in managing no growth."
Lynn said every permit now is valuable to the economy.
"Every permit is a drop of blood in an anemic economy," he said. "We need to suspend the allocation provisions until the building permits reach 80 or 90 percent of those available."
Lynn's opponent, Anje de Knijf, agreed.
"I think we do need a growth management component when we have growth to manage," she said. "We need to not discourage, or up roadblocks to those who want to build."
According to de Knijf, so many building permits are in the pool right now, that the effect of the growth ordinance might not be felt for some time.
"Even if we started to boom, there would be plenty to go around," she said. "The consequences of what's happening now will affect us 50-100 years in the future."
Douglas County commission incumbent Doug Johnson is the only candidate on the ballot who has already voted for the growth ordinance.
"I support this," he said. "This has been a divisive issue for more than six years. The commissioners spent a lot of time working on it."
Johnson said the ordinance is based on a compromise developed by those affected.
"We don't want to step backwards and start fighting over growth when it starts happening again," he said.
Johnson said he felt another question on the ballot, State Question 2 on eminent domain, would undermine the growth ordinance.
"In the fine print, having a growth management ordinance could be considered a taking," he said.
Johnson said he investigated the complaint about enforcement of the ordinance, but did not find out any more information.
Johnson's District 3 opponent, Eric Rieman, said he was for the ordinance.
"We need to manage growth. We cannot outbuild our infrastructure, or we'll be having Sani-huts and bottled water."
District 5 Republican commission candidate Mike Olson said he would probably vote for the ordinance, but expressed some reservations.
Olson was on the Planning Commission when commissioners bypassed the panel to approve the growth ordinance.
"That's part of my frustration with it," he said. "The ordinance hasn't been tried, we haven't even got close to it. I think it should be tried. What if it goes into play and we have an economic hardship. I just don't want to handcuff ourselves if the economy drops."
Olson's opponent, Democrat Nancy Epstein, echoed his concerns.
"I'm in support of the ordinance," she said. "It's the compromise that allows our community to move forward."
She said there are some issues that builders have run into during the allocation process.
"We need to look at how the permits are distributed," she said. "But I don't think it makes us a closed community. The 2 percent cumulative is a good guide."
