Richland Creek has much to offer
I read Ken Whitehouse's article on relocation of Richland Creek. If it was a deliberate attempt to make the Richland Creek Watershed Alliance look like a bunch of half-wits, it was successful. Congratulations. If you are trying to be journalists, I suggest that you talk to both sides before printing disinformation. There are some real issues here you should investigate and print.
RCWA wants optimal stream protection and repair
We are pleased your paper has taken interest in this issue which includes stream channel relocation and floodway fill, but we (Richland Creek Watershed Alliance) would like to set the record straight and have been working very hard on this project proposal to better the outcome for stream protection and enhancement of its natural characteristics.
I am the executive director for the RCWA and was surprised today when I read your article (July 12, 2010), “Richland Creek relocation brings new flood,” since your paper never contacted us for comment.
At the onset, to us was a rushed proposal without full review and deliberation with the public. RCWA was very grateful our county leaders negotiated to set up a public meeting and that Rogers Group agreed and the regulators would be present. The article in your paper misses the point — we are indeed interested in a progressive solution to this project, which could include maintaining the natural stream as much as possible and using a constructive wetland as flood control.
It took several RCWA volunteers many hours and days to obtain information and evaluate the situation more clearly and we have been working hard to present ideas that would make the situation optimal for Richland Creek.
We have actually met on two occasions with the officials of the state and Rogers group discussing the project. We had a mutually benefiting conversation about working together to make the restoration of Richland Creek the best it could be. That was our take away from the encounter.
As a result of the widespread public interest in this project the local representatives have helped facilitate a public meeting. The public comment had only a 15-day fast track with very little time for the public to comment and to develop alternatives. As an update to your story, the RCWA volunteer committee has been working tirelessly on finding the best alternatives possible for the project to present at the July 14 meeting, set for 6:30 pm at the Cohn School library room on Park Avenue.
Executive director, Richland Creek Watershed Alliance