2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

The costs of Central Oregon destination resorts have not been adequately quantified, and they are not being weighed against the purported economic benefits of resort development. Here are just a few examples:
How much is being spent on native fish reintroductions like steelhead and salmon that need greater flows in our waterways? And given the voracious water needs of 19 resorts, is that just money wasted?
What is the value of wildlife corridors and winter range for big game?
What is the cost to cities and counties to provide emergency services to far-flung resorts?
How much are taxpayers footing the bill for high-cost improvements and maintenance of roads that serve resorts?

At a time when the environmental, health and infrastructure costs of building exurbs are becoming widely recognized in our country, local governments should be including such concerns in their everyday decisions on how cities and counties grow.

posted 4 years, 7 months ago
view in context