Community leaders should stop out-of-control growth - By Steve Kirchhoff

Found here. My comments in bold.

Steve Kirchoff teaches writing at MSU, he is an author, and he was mayor of Bozeman for a couple of years. As such, one would expect a certain level of competency and considered thought process in matters that are part of his expertise, like writing and government.

Or maybe not...
----------------------

The following resolution is offered to Gallatin County leaders for their consideration. Bozeman and Gallatin County’s out-of-control growth rate can only be managed by a unified effort from all leaders, elected and un-elected. (Here we have his premises, that the growth rate is out of control, and that this can only be solved by, well, everyone. In unity, or something.

Mr. Kirchoff makes no effort to establish the veracity of these premises. Indeed, it's fairly easy to demonstrate their falseness. First, "out-of-control," which suggests that there is nothing at all in operation that guides, restricts, or dictates growth. This of course is not even close to the truth. We remind Mr. Kirchoff that there are building codes, zoning, affordable housing guidelines, density requirements, open space requirements, infrastructure requirements, impact fees, and subdivision approval processes. This in no way can be regarded as "out-of-control."

His second premise follows from the first. And since the first is false, the second necessarily is imperiled. But assuming for a moment that it is the truth that growth is out-of-control, then we would do well to ask, does it follow that it "...only be managed by a unified effort from all leaders, elected and un-elected."? 

There's a lot of mumble-speak in this short phrase. We don't know what "managed" is, especially since government is already deeply inserted into managing growth. We don't know what "unified" means, or why that's important. We can only speculate why Mr. Kirchoff expects the unified [which interpreted means "agree with government"] co-operation of non-elected leaders [i.e., crony capitalism.]

So upon this shaky platform he builds his series of "whereas" statements.)

A Resolution of the Bozeman City and Gallatin County Commissions in Coordination with Montana State University, Bozeman Health, and the Bozeman Area Chamber of Commerce, Endorsing the “No Growth But Good Growth” Principle: (A principle I could not locate in a google search. And it begs a question, who decides what's "good" growth?)

Whereas, we, the below signed government officials and business and education leaders have the responsibility to preserve if not to improve the quality of natural and built environments for the benefit of current residents of Gallatin County; and (Hmm. Only for "current residents?" It sounds like he wants to shut out outsiders. I wonder if he has a similar opinion about Trump's border wall? And isn't it interesting, and maybe racist, that he wants to keep out vibrancy?)

Whereas, the current growth rate in Gallatin County far exceeds a sustainable rate, ("Sustainable" is undefined.) 

imperiling the quality of both the natural environment and the human community; (A community that apparently should not be added to, because environment. However, those people will be living somewhere and impacting the environment somewhere. And unless Mr. Kirchoff wants to actually eliminate those people, they're going to pollute somewhere.) and

Whereas, rapid growth is proven to increase the cost of living to current residents with demands for expanded services and infrastructure ("Proven?" By whom? And what about the high cost of living already in place due to government, like high property taxes, inflated home prices, and onerous impact fees? Mr. Kirchoff is warning about something that is already happening!) 

while simultaneously adding to air, water and soil pollution and eroding the historical character of our communities; (Sir, everyone pollutes. Our very existence pollutes. Stopping growth will mean the existing population's presence will still pollute. Legal walls at the county line will not stop pollution, which means that Mr. Kirchoff is comfortable with some level of pollution.) and,

Whereas, rapid growth rewards the few in the finance and land development industries, (Frankly, and idiot statement. An influx of people brings an influx of everything, including purchasing. Everyone benefits by people spending money.) while burdening the majority of current residents with additional debt, (Whaa? How?) 

crowding, (Um, government-mandated high density housing, and prevention of sprawl?) noise, and pollution; and

Whereas, rapid growth obliterates community memory (A fiction.) 

and identity by favoring corporatist culture of consumerism (He's starting to spew socialist rhetoric.) while ignoring local, homegrown enterprises;

(Whose responsibility is it to not ignore homegrown enterprises? Government? Consumers? Big business? And would Rightnow Technologies, a home grown business recently sold to Oracle for billions qualify under the author's criteria?) and

Whereas, rapid growth offers false promises of increased housing and employment opportunities to current residents (Another nonsense statement. The economy isn't an entity making promises. Clearly Mr. Kirchoff would rather supply us with socialist agitprop than actually engage the topic.) 

while favoring deep-pocketed newcomers from out of state; ("Favoring?" Again I say whaa? People who have money buy things. People who don't, don't. These are tautologies.

This is like saying someone has an advantage in buying a house because they actually have money to buy a house. No one is being favored when there is a willing buyer and a willing seller engaging in uncoerced, legal exchange.)

Now, therefore, be is resolved that we the undersigned pledge to put a halt to new development projects until such time as the projects can be proven, through a verifiable cost-benefit analysis conducted by reliable third party, to provide net environmental, social, and economic benefits to current residents of Gallatin County. (Can you imagine having to prove to some government entity that you should be allowed into the county because you can demonstrate an acceptable cost-benefit result? I'm sure it warms Mr. Kirchoff's socialist heart to contemplate the idea of a veritable wall of government vetting at the county boundaries. 

At some point, it will no doubt keep people in instead of out.)

Duly and regularly adopted this day.