week of 1/8/03
 
 
 

Jackson’s abrupt changes lead to many questions
SMN
Jackson County may be headed in the right direction by disbanding its planning board and saying it will rely on ad hoc committees to deal with problems like sedimentation and issues like smart growth. Until we see evidence that this is indeed the case, though, we will maintain a healthy dose of skepticism about the recent actions.

Perhaps the first step in presenting this evidence would be the hiring of a professionally trained planner who can help commissioners develop a vision for the future. Having such a staff person, it seems, would be the best way for commissioners to make sure they get plenty of information as they try to develop long-range planning goals for the county. The plan presented by County Board Chairman Stacy Buchanan to develop a vision and then hire a planner seems a backward way to approach this important problem.

On Dec. 17 the county board of commissioners voted unanimously to dissolve its planning board. Buchanan urged and supported the action, and afterward laid out his plan — ad hoc committees to deal with pressing problems, a Jan. 16 smart growth meeting to begin formulating a “clear vision” for Jackson County.

That goal sounds admirable, but it also leaves a lot to the imagination. When land-use ordinances dealing with issues like sediment, noise, cell towers and helicopters are debated, there is never a “clear” and unified vision. These issues are among the most divisive at the local level, and every time they are raised mountain residents splinter into volatile camps where there seems to be little room for compromise. And by disbanding the planning board before public hearings, before getting input from the public, commissioners have left themselves open for a barrage of questions.

Jackson County has already had a long series of smart growth meetings while Buchanan and Roberta Crawford — the only holdovers from the previous board — were sitting through their first terms. That led to a series of general recommendations and further proved that the development of a meaningful, long-term land-use plan remains a monumental task. More recently, Planning Board Chairman Jack Debnam’s development and sediment problems have called into question the county’s credibility on this entire issue.

The debate over the possible construction of a Lowes in Cashiers goes straight to the heart of the county’s planning dilemma. Commissioners and citizens deserve research on their options that are unbiased, thorough and professional. Commissioners may want to weigh in on the issue individually or collectively, but as it is this project with potentially wide-ranging ramifications for the county’s tax base and a community’s future is moving forward with little official input.

Perhaps these recent changes in the county’s approach to planning and land use will lead to good things for Jackson County’s residents. Buchanan seems confident that his plan for dealing with the county’s planning issues will work. For now we’ll just have to wait and see what transpires over the next few months.