Comp Plan Update (March 2026)
In our last newsletter update, the Clark County Agricultural Lands Study and the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) had been published and the development interests were gearing up to promote sprawl. In case you missed it, you can read our previous Comprehensive Plan Update December 2025 here.
The Ag Study clearly determined that existing Ag land, including the lands that Ridgefield and La Center want to de-designate and annex, is viable agricultural land that should not be de-designated, and that additional rural land in the county should be designated as Ag. For more details on the Ag Study’s findings, you can review our Call to Action on the 2025 Clark County Agricultural Lands Study. The conclusion of the Ag Study creates a problem for those cities’ desire to expand into agricultural land.
There have been several work sessions and public hearings since the start of the year with the Clark County Council and Planning Commission (PC) to start deciding on their Preferred Alternatives for the Comp Plan Update. A lot of public comment was received, verbally and in writing.
At the January 29th PC meeting, the PC voted on their Preferred Alternative. This wasn’t as simple as just picking Alternative 1, 2, or 3, as commissioners could choose from a spectrum of options. Staff provided a document listing each element of each alternative, and the PC went through and voted line by line. A link to the PC’s recommendations can be found here: 2026-0108 Preferred alternative selection table. Unsurprisingly, the PC’s voting leaned pro-development. Of note, at the bottom of the Preferred Alternative selection table, you will notice a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program recommendation. You can find FOCC board member, Mo McKenna’s, article on TDR’s in the current newsletter. Links to the PC meetings and materials can be found here: Planning Commission Hearings and Meeting Notes | Clark County
At the PC public hearing, public comment was heard from a lot of interests. The Development and Engineering Advisory Board (DEAB) was given 10 minutes to testify, during which Eric Golemo asserted, “Furthermore, we’ll attract what we plan for. While Clark County used to attract the best and the brightest from the Metro Area, we’ll now be at risk of becoming a hub for low income and subsidized housing.” This is not the first time a concerning statement has been heard at a Planning Commission meeting. Derogatory comments along the lines of “you get what you plan for” in the context of low income/affordable housing (required by the Growth Management Act) have been made by Planning Commissioners in the past. Obvious bias against a large part of the community by groups that advise the County Council on land use and development is disturbing and concerning. You can read our full statement to the Clark County Council concerning comments from the DEAB here.
What’s Next? The Clark County Council had a work session on the PC’s Preferred Alternative recommendation on February 18th. A public hearing on the Preferred Alternative is scheduled for March 3rd at 10:00 am, but based on the comments at the February 18th meeting, staff expects that date to change. Additional meetings will likely be scheduled. Staff will then work on the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and other final Comp Plan deliverables. Here is a link to the current County Comp Plan timeline: 2025 Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) Update Schedule We expect that timeline to change, as the whole TDR conversation came up after it was published.
Useful links: