Controlled growth is what most of us want

The research study by Peter Walker of the University of Oregon about attitudes toward growth in western Nevada County, which we reported on last week ("We're of 2 minds on growth issue," Feb. 22), resonated with truth. Everyone we've talked to who has read the report - on all sides of the issue - said that's how we are.

When Walker asked residents to respond to the statement "Nevada County needs strong government control of land use on private property," 59 percent said they somewhat or strongly disagreed. But when asked their reaction to "Nevada County needs strong environmental protection," 71 percent somewhat or strongly agreed.

In other words, foothills folks love the environment because that's why we live here, but we're independent cusses who don't like to be strong-armed by government.

We have always thought that to brand points of view as either "no growth" or "pro-growth" is way too simplistic. There are gradations of how people think about the impact of development in their county. There are builders who are concerned that their projects are sensitive to the land. There are environmentalists who recognize that growth is coming and want to work to fashion ways to accommodate it in a sensitive way.

One chart with the report showed that the great majority of us want "controlled growth," rejecting the extreme positions of "no more growth" or "more growth."

We believe that is a lesson for our public officials, who are setting to work after divisive elections, in a time of economic peril. They need to be leaders in bringing together all points of view in our community to find ways to keep Nevada County a natural haven.

Another chart of Dr. Walker's said it all: Asked the feature that most attracted them to Nevada County, more than two-thirds of rural landowners said the scenery and the environment.