Several bills and one legislative session later, Colorado still has no comprehensive growth-management plan despite public opinion polls showing the state’s rapid growth is a major concern.

That’s what the Associated Press says about the Colorado Legislature’s failure this session to pass any bills that would actually govern growth.

59th Dist. Rep. Mark Larson says it a little differently, but he says the same thing.

"I was saddened to watch the many growth bills be defeated one by one." Now those who want some comprehensive planning throughout the state will take their proposals to the voters in the form of ballot issues, and Larson isn’t convinced that’s the best way to handle it. "What we get may not be what we wanted. Everyone has an opinion on growth and that is what stymied the General Assembly."

Everyone does have an opinion. Some of them are quite reasonable. Growth is not only inevitable but desirable in many ways; we just need to make certain that it doesn’t spread as quickly, as randomly and as destructively as a computer virus.

And some of those controls have to be enacted on a large scale. Perhaps one of the most important would be protection of agricultural lands. Measures that will help keep agriculture an affordable profession when subdivisions drive up the value of land would have to be enacted by the legislature. Controls on such topics as smog need to be addressed regionally, as do transportation issues.

Even the problems that don’t affect us directly — yet — belong to us because we send tax dollars to Denver. Money spent dealing with infrastructure improvements on the Front Range won’t flow to the Western Slope. Traffic through metropolitan Denver absolutely must be addressed, and because that problem is so vast in scope, it will draw attention and, inevitably, funding from highway projects here.

Controls enacted around Denver seem to have nothing to do with us, and yet they will have the effect of exporting problems. Strict subdivision regulations and building codes that make development along the Front Range more expensive will make Montezuma County seem more attractive. That’s not a bad thing, if we can manage the demands of growth here. We must provide roads and fire protection, and that’s a lot more difficult to do on a piecemeal basis than with comprehensive regulations in place. More development means more demand for water and more need to treat wastewater. It means that more "urban" services are required, because rural residents are funneled into communities to attend school, buy groceries, visit the library or the pool, eat dinner at a restaurant.