At the well-attended public meeting last week in Winslow, residents gathered to discuss the city’s draft of the general plan, which had been available for review for 60 days on the city website and at City Hall. Planning and Zoning Officer Jason Sanks commenced the meeting by addressing the audience. He aimed to set the stage for the evening’s discussions by outlining what the general plan represents and, importantly, what it does not. Sanks explained that the plan is a high-level, strategic guide for the city’s development, likening it to a view from “30,000 feet above the city.” He stressed that it is not a detailed policy document, nor is it intended to limit future actions but rather to provide a flexible framework for growth and development.
In the subsequent portion of the meeting, the discussion shifted to a contentious issue the disbandment of the Winslow Planning and Zoning Commission. Numerous residents voiced their dissatisfaction with this decision, highlighting concerns over the shift of certain powers from the commission to the planning and zoning officer. They proposed amending the general plan to restore these powers to a commission.
However, as Jason Sanks explained, the general plan, in its current form, could not allocate powers to a non-existent body. He emphasized that the plan does not limit the city council’s authority to reinstate or dissolve commissions in the future and he informed the public that it is completely out of his hands and they would have to address the council to get the commission reinstated, but the General Plan must be written to reflect the way the city currently is.
This insight led to a broader discussion about the purpose and limitations of the general plan. Sanks pointed out that the document is not meant to be a rigid framework that dictates the distribution of powers within the city’s governance. Instead, its primary role is to guide long-term investments and justify spending on specific projects and initiatives. He reassured residents that the plan could be amended as needed to accommodate changes decided by the council.
Concerns were also raised about the loss of citizen input in planning and zoning matters. Residents valued the citizen-run nature of the former commission, believing it provided essential insights into the city’s culture and democratic process. Sanks responded by emphasizing his commitment to public engagement. He noted that all his decisions are subject to public discussion and that he actively incorporates citizen feedback into revisions of the general plan. He similarly had to tell the public that he is not in control of whether or not the city has a commission but he can only make recommendations to the council not make decisions for the town and he still holds public meetings available for citizen input with every issue he’s presented with, just like a commission would.
Another topic that sparked debate during the meeting was the inclusion of equestrian activities in the general plan. Sanks responded to the mixed reactions from the community regarding this aspect. Some residents questioned the relevance of emphasizing equestrian activities, pointing out that Winslow currently does not have a significant equestrian scene. They felt that this focus did not align with their vision for the city’s future.
In response, Sanks said many residents have spoken to him about including these activities in the general plan so it could serve as an incentive for developing the necessary infrastructure and facilities. This inclusion, according to him, was about exploring potential growth areas and diversifying the city’s cultural and recreational offerings.
The meeting also touched upon the description of Winslow as part of the Four Corners region in the draft of the general plan. This characterization had been a point of contention for some residents. Sanks explained that this reference was intended to provide geographical context for those unfamiliar with the area. However, acknowledging the feedback and recognizing that the specific regional association was not crucial to the plan’s objectives, he agreed to remove this reference from the document.
Concerns about water usage and its management were also raised by the citizens of Winslow, particularly in the context of the proposed mega site by Atlas Global, which could potentially involve heavy industrial use. Residents expressed concern about the impact such development might have on the city’s water resources. Addressing these concerns, Sanks reminded the audience that the general plan is not a policy document and does not set specific limits on water usage by developers.
Instead, he explained, the plan can guide the city’s approach to ensuring that industrial activities do not adversely affect the water supply for city residents. He emphasized that while the plan can include general statements about protecting the environment and conserving resources, it cannot stipulate quantitative restrictions.
During the meeting, concerns were voiced about potential biases in the general plan, specifically regarding its perceived favoritism towards Atlas Global. Addressing this issue, Sanks firmly denied these allegations, stating that the plan was not crafted to cater to the interests of any specific developer. He reassured the public that Atlas Global had not influenced the plan, as they had not submitted any feedback or comments on it. He stressed that the primary goal of the general plan was to secure a future for Winslow that serves the best interests of its residents, not external entities. His assurance aimed to dispel fears that commercial interests would take precedence over the needs and well-being of the people of Winslow.
The discussion also turned to the absence of a traditional community survey in the planning process. Sanks explained that the city had opted for a more cost-effective and accessible approach by digitalizing the survey and promoting it on the city website and social media platforms. He distributed a 17-page document summarizing public comments received on the plan, not only from citizens but also from relevant organizations. These comments spanned a wide array of topics within the general plan and the long document could be looked at as evidence that many people are still able to make their comments heard. Any people looking to add comments to the general plan can do so directly on the city’s website or they could email winslowzho@gmail.com.
Sanks concluded by addressing the timeline for the general plan’s completion. He acknowledged that the original target of passing the plan in January is unlikely and expressed his willingness to extend the timeline. His primary goal was to ensure the creation of a plan that best serves the citizens of Winslow, even if it requires additional time for thorough consideration and further incorporation of public input. Currently, it remains uncertain if another formal public meeting will be held to discuss the general plan. Even if there is not one, there will still be a city council meeting to adopt the plan where the public can urge the council not to pass the general plan if they feel inclined to do so.
