Volume XXI, Number 2

Wednesday, August 10, 2005

by Steve Hall, Allen Slagell and Bill Swendsen, Co-Chairmen Florence Coalition Against Aspen Springs

As long-time residents of the Florence and northern Bitterroot Valley areas, we have tried to comprehend, and then cope, with a proposal made by two Missoula firms ­ WGM and Westmont Builders ­ to create a 650-unit subdivision on the foothills of the Sapphire Mountains flanking Florence to its northeast. In the process, we have uncovered several fundamental truths about it ­ first, that it's the most massive development of its kind ever proposed in Ravalli County, and second, solid information on which to project and analyze resulting impacts on a variety of concerns is neither easy to come by nor something the developers are able to answer at this point. And another of our major concerns is that they're willing to risk our quality of life for their financial gain fully realizing that we'll have to pick up the pieces, and the financial tab, for problems that follow in the wake of the project.

Concerns center not only on the massive size of the development ­ which in essence would create a "new" settlement larger than either Stevensville or Florence ­ but such key issues as public safety, particularly in regard to traffic on an already-overstressed road system, impacts on water quality, impacts on the school (a projected 300 more students in an already-crowded school system with 950 students currently), potential law enforcement problems of major proportions in an area where such enforcement now is inadequate, sewage disposal into an area whose hydrologic patterns would direct the waste toward the Bitterroot River, crowding of nearby recreational sites, and concerns for which the developers have no solid answers. And guess who would end up being both the victims and the financial underwriters of coping with all these problems ­ you and the rest of us now living in Ravalli County. Us.

Consequently, a group of residents whose homes are immediately to the south of the proposed Aspen Springs development have spearheaded the establishment of an organization called FCAAS ­ Florence Coalition Against Aspen Springs (www.FCAAS.com). We have been meeting every Tuesday evening at the Florence School and we invite both your participation and your membership in our group. We will strive to gather good information, to communicate to those directly concerned and to the general public what we learn about the impacts on this proposed development ­ and so far what we've learned isn't good.

Preliminary information from the developer of Aspen Springs indicates that much of their presentation regarding potential impacts of the project, too, is only conjecture at this point ­ and we note that they've done their best to put the project in a positive light. But they, and we, need to have a lot of questions answered before this project moves ahead. Our immediate analysis is that there's plenty to be concerned about. In fact, we believe that so massive a proposal, a major undertaking in a county already unable to cope with growth is, in and of itself, that we should do in Ravalli County what has been done in Powell County ­ establish, immediately, a moratorium on growth until we know that our county can cope with the developments already approved.

We are a group of people not opposed to sound, considered development in our county. But we are opposed to moving ahead with the Aspen Springs project. There are too many unanswered questions, too many uncertainties, too many easy-to-project negative impacts like costs to schools, roads, public safety and other concerns for any reasonable person to take any other position at this time. We ask you to join us in opposing the Aspen Springs development. The well being of all of us, in terms of these concerns we've raised and the general quality of our lifestyle here is threatened by this massive project. There's no way that Aspen Springs can be labeled a "good development." No analysis can show that it serves either public need or the public interest in any way and it should not be allowed to happen ­ and your personal involvement in stopping it might be the crucial bit of support we need to get this terrible proposal killed.

Response to Williams letter

I am responding to Gene Williams' August 3 letter in which writes: "Marty, on the other hand, called me a loser. He felt the need to personally insult me by claiming that I try to make my words elegant."

Since Mr. Williams was responding to something I wrote two months ago, in a different newspaper, and he failed to provide a direct quote, here is exactly what I wrote:

"My mother taught me that the first person to resort to name calling in a disagreement is the loser. No matter how elegant you try to make your words, Gene, you lost!"

I wrote the above in response to a Valley Viewpoint Mr. Williams had in the Ravalli Republic. In that piece he used classic Rush Limbaugh-type innuendo to paint my friend, Corrine Gantt, in the same light as a Socialist or a Marxist.

While I will always stand by my friends, I do apologize if Mr. Williams took my saying he used elegant words as a personal insult. Though most people would consider being told they write elegantly a compliment, in light of his August 3 letter, I now see my error. Elegant was definitely an inappropriate word to use when describing his writing.

My letter of two months ago was about the importance of not calling people names. Mr. Williams has attempted to make it sound as if I did the opposite. Admittedly, the inflammatory and inaccurate content of his letters has tempted me to do the very thing he accuses me of. Nevertheless, I still believe the high road is the way to go.

Marty Essen
Victor

Attorney sets record straight

Dear Editor,

Re: "Homeowners protest Creekside lighting district" (Star, August 3). Over the years I have provided services to the town of Stevensville. I have noted your careful listening to discussion at town meetings and your efforts to be accurate in reports. Therefore, l want to point out an error, or perhaps misleading statement, in your article of August 3, 2005. In the second column of the article, you refer to me as "City attorney." I am not the Town Attorney. Mr. Bob Brown, with his many years of experience as a public and private attorney, remains the Town Attorney.

I am employed from time to time to provide services in certain situations as they arise.

Bob Brown is the Town Attorney. Your attention to this relationship is appreciated.

W. Arthur Graham
Missoula

Response to Williams letter

Dear Editor,

In reference to Gene Williams' recent letter referring to me as a "well-known leftist":

To rephrase the obvious, we are living in a time when Americans are giving up their freedoms and rights whole cloth (as well as the freedoms and rights of us "well known leftists") largely because they are allowing themselves to become extremely misinformed about history, among many other things. They've allowed themselves to be convinced that history is for winners, not losers, and that the winners can do with history and with facts exactly what our ethically challenged leaders and corporate media are doing now: making them up as it suits them and then questioning the patriotism of anyone who disagrees with them, including veterans and descendants of pioneers such as myself and other "well-known leftists."

I don't think anyone who falls on the same side of the fence as disseminators such as Rush Limbaugh ­ Gene Williams included ­ is convincing anyone who disagrees with them that their view is the right one, or that history and fact are merely manufactured products to meet a demand. I do think that someday, when people who care about what went so wrong in these troubling times begin to pore over the mountains of documentation available to them, a clear pattern will emerge, as indeed it has already, and that the blame will fall not only upon the Reactionary Right but also on all of us who knew better yet didn't speak up.

So if it happens that anyone with an interest in truth and fairness, in the future or today, ever does happen across our local letter-to-the-editor archives (my condolences if they do), I'll paraphrase for them again what Gene Williams seems to be taking issue with me about now - that I'll match the words of my fellow "well-known leftists’" over those of his anytime, any century.

Bill LaCroix
Hamilton