Kagi bill would force Snohomish County to talk with Shoreline, Woodway on Point Wells
Friday, January 21, 2011
By Evan Smith
ShorelineAreaNews Politics Writer
 |
| Rep. Ruth Kagi D-32 |
Jerry Cornfield of The Everett Herald reported Tuesday that the bill would require the County to develop a memorandum of understanding with each of the nearby cities.
The bill doesn’t mention Point Wells, Shoreline, Woodway or Snohomish County.
Instead, it says, “The maximum residential density of an unincorporated portion of an urban growth area may not exceed that of the immediately adjacent areas of the abutting city or cities.”
The bill says that it applies to “unincorporated portions of urban growth areas that:
(i) border the Puget Sound;
(ii) are surrounded on the landward side entirely by one or more cities;
(iii) are one or more miles from any other portion of an urban growth area that is in unincorporated territory; and
(iv) are 50 or more acres in size.”
Democratic Rep. Cindy Ryu of the 32nd Legislative District is a co-sponsor as are Reps. Marko Liias and Mary Helen Roberts of the 21st District, which includes Edmonds, Lynnwood a Mukilteo.
Posts
7 comments:
This was reported in other news venues as a KAGI-RYU bill, but Evan Smith is biased and doesn't deserve to be called a journalist, so the headline leaves out Ryu's name.
Oh good grief...always the sour grapes~
Great bill Ruth (and whomever else authored it)
@8:30 am - professional journalists are unbiased, balanced, accurate, and complete in their reporting.
To demand that Evan Smith, who also is a writer for the Enterprise Newspapers, adhere to these standards, is not sour grapes.
Obviously you did not read the article in its entirety, otherwise you would have noticed that Evan buried the lede in which for the 32nd District Kagi AND Ryu were the co-sponsors and for the 44th District Liias AND Roberts were the co-sponsors. Sour grapes indeed, your lack of a complete, critical analysis shows your bias as well.
LOL! I have no bias here-- just tired of the same old sour grapes from the same old contingent of negative critics.
My "complete lack of critical analysis"???
Really?
Your knee-jerk attempt to characterize me as biased based on my opinion of your sniping negative comments is laughable.
I notice that in your 1st comment (criticism) that YOU didn't not include the names of all of the sponsors either.
I referred to this as a "Kagi bill" because Everett Herald reporter Jerry Cornfield, who writers from Olympia used that phase in reporting that Kagi had written the bill and brought Ryu and six others along as co-sponsors. The only references I've seen to a Kagi-Ryu bill was in a Democratic Party press release, Ryu, herself, said that Kagi had been
"gracious" in consulting with her and that she was happy to support it, something I reported in and later post.
I referred to this as a "Kagi bill" because Everett Herald reporter Jerry Cornfield, who writers from Olympia, used that phase in reporting that Kagi had written the bill and brought Ryu and six others along as co-sponsors. The only references I've seen to a Kagi-Ryu bill was in a Democratic Party press release, Ryu, herself, said that Kagi had been
"gracious" in consulting with her and that she was happy to support it, something I reported in and later post
The State House of Representatives web site lists Kagi as "prime sponsor" of this bill and lists Ryu and six others as" secondary sponsors."
Post a Comment