To the editor:

The governing bodies have adopted the environmental chapter of the Comprehensive Plan for Lawrence and Douglas County after much consternation.

Opponents claimed the document was rushed through without adequate participation by those most affected. While that may be true, the greater issue is the quality of the document. It is very poorly written, and very difficult to read with understanding. The contents of its 37 pages could be easily accomplished in 20 or fewer, resulting in better understanding.

Most of it is written in the passive voice assigning no entity the responsibility for implementation of the policies. It simply states that actions should be taken. The style of the chapter and the complex lengthy sentences and paragraphs obfuscate the true intent. The authors have employed artificial attempts to make the document sound highly technical, which have served to make it sound affected.

Trite buzzwords proliferate. “Sustainable” and “sustainability” appear nine times on the first two pages, and so many times in the remainder of the document as to render them meaningless. “Viewshed” does not appear in my dictionary. Moreover, it will be impossible to establish objective criteria to identify “viewsheds.”

The environmental chapter needs to be rewritten so that it represents more than just dead trees.