In Focus: No on Pasco’s Prop. 1

October 25, 2013 

The anti-annexation group would have you believe that living in the city of Pasco is a horrible experience and that de-annexing will somehow make all of their problems disappear.

One of the complaints seems to be that the city of Pasco requires them to comply with building and zoning codes that are put in place to insure quality of life. Safely constructed buildings that fit in with the neighborhood benefits everyone and assists to maintain property values. Since the building code requirements are the same in Pasco and Franklin County the issue seems mute.

Congested roads are another complaint. When population increases, as it has nearly trippled in fewer than 20 years, we should expect that the roads will be more congested. Since the roads that would be de-annexed are in the “Riverview” area, those roads would have been Franklin County’s responsibility, making it somewhat difficult for Pasco to require new or improved roads in what was then Franklin County.

The additional complaint about “high density” seems to be an attempt to scare the residents with visions of high rise, high density apartments; also a nonissue because low-density zoning requirements by the city of Pasco call for single family lots of 20,000 square feet or larger and 12,000 square feet or larger. These are the same lot sizes that the county has zoned for the Riverview area.

Another aspect of their complaint seems to be that the city of Pasco is annexing to aid developers in building more houses. Considering the city impact fee of $5,000, this hardly seems like an incentive to build, when the home will cost the purchaser an additional $5000 or the developer will lose $5,000 in profit! Whether it is within city or county boundaries, all development must be approved through a planning commission comprised of residents; it will be the citizens that determine growth.

Leash laws seem to be another concern. The requirement that dogs be controlled is a benefit to dog owners and those who choose not to own dogs. Dog owners are benefiting as their dog is kept under control when away from home, and hence is protected from random accidents. Dog bites are painful for the person who is bitten, and the lawsuits that result can be painful for the owner of the dog. This is part of the give and take of living in our society. You have the freedom to own a dog and others have the freedom to not be bothered, bitten or have to cleanup after your dog.

A no vote against Proposition No. 1 is a vote that will maintain lower water and sewer rates for all city residents and continue with established leash laws for dog, and enforcement of dangerous dog requirements.

A no vote will preserve improved garbage service, providing all citizens of Pasco with unlimited collection.

A no vote will also maintain full-time, professional fire and ambulance response 24/7.

The population of Pasco has grown to 65,000 because Pasco is a great place to live with a high quality of life, and they have stayed for the same reason. None of these people were forced to move here.

Jeff Hendler, Len Harms and Curt Rabideau serve on the Con-Committee for Pasco’s Proposition 1.

Bellingham Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service