🔥 Fire Survivors Wait as Gorge Commission Debates Recovery Rules - Dec 2025

🌲 Columbia River Gorge Commission - December 16, 2025

Disaster Recovery Amendments, Tribal Consultation, and Deep Divisions Over Timing

The Gorge Commission met for more than four hours on December 16 to continue deliberations on proposed Management Plan amendments for post-wildfire disaster recovery, following extensive written and oral public comment. The meeting revealed broad agreement on what needs to change, but deep disagreement on when and how those changes can lawfully move forward.

At issue were amendments intended to help residents rebuild after the Rowena and Burdoin fires, including longer timelines for rebuilding, expanded allowances for temporary structures like RVs, and flexibility for replacing homes destroyed by disaster.

---

⏳ Why This Plan Amendment Will Take So Long (And Why That Matters)

If you’re just tuning in, one of the most surprising parts of the current Columbia River Gorge Commission discussion is how long even narrowly focused plan amendments take.

The disaster recovery amendments now under consideration are not quick fixes. Even though they are limited in scope and widely supported by counties and landowners, the formal process is expected to stretch well over a year from start to finish. Here’s why.

1️⃣ This is a Management Plan Amendment, Not a Permit Decision

Under the National Scenic Area Act, the Gorge Commission cannot simply “reinterpret” the plan when problems arise. When staff determine that existing rules no longer work, as they did after repeated wildfires, the Commission must formally amend the Management Plan itself.

That triggers a legislative-style process, not an administrative one.

2️⃣ Multiple Legal Thresholds Must Be Met

Before the Commission can adopt an amendment, it must make findings that:

• Conditions in the Gorge have significantly changed (e.g., repeated catastrophic fires),
• The amendment is consistent with the Scenic Area Act, and
• No more protective, practicable alternative exists.

These findings are written with litigation in mind, because prior plan amendments have been challenged repeatedly in court.

3️⃣ Parallel Jurisdictions Are Involved

Even after the Gorge Commission votes:

• The amendment applies directly only to the General Management Area (GMA).
• The U.S. Forest Service must separately concur for Special Management Areas (SMAs).
• Counties must then ensure their local ordinances align with the amended plan before landowners feel the effects.

In other words: no single body controls the full outcome.

4️⃣ Public Process Is Required at Every Stage

The current timeline includes:

• Initial concept development (summer 2025),
• Draft rule text and staff report,
• A minimum 30-day public comment period,
• A formal public hearing,
• Possible revisions requiring additional comment,
• Final Commission action,
• Federal concurrence and local implementation.

Even moving efficiently, this pushes real-world relief well into late 2026.

5️⃣ Meanwhile, People Are Waiting

Throughout this process, landowners affected by fires remain stuck in:

• Unclear permitting pathways,
• Restrictions on temporary housing,
• Uncertainty about whether “one-for-one” replacements qualify for expedited review.

This disconnect—between the urgency on the ground and the pace of governance—was a recurring undercurrent in public comment and commissioner discussion.

---

⏳ The General Plan Amendment Timeline

Here’s what that process looks like so far:

Step 1: Drafting & Internal Review (Months)

Commission staff must first develop draft language, document why conditions have changed, and explain how the proposal fits within the Scenic Area Act. Even narrow amendments require extensive written findings.

Step 2: County Coordination (Months)

Affected counties (in this case Wasco and Klickitat) review the proposal, submit formal comments, and align their own codes and recovery programs with what’s being proposed.

Step 3: Tribal Consultation (Months)

Because the Scenic Area overlaps treaty lands and cultural landscapes, the Commission must consult with sovereign tribal governments. This process is government-to-government, capacity-limited, and cannot be rushed without legal and ethical risk.

Step 4: Public Hearings & Revisions (Months)

Public comments are collected, hearings are held, and draft language is revised — sometimes multiple times — in response to concerns from residents, counties, tribes, and advocacy groups.

Step 5: Federal Review & Concurrence (Months)

Once adopted locally, the amendment must be reviewed by the U.S. Forest Service and ultimately approved by the Secretary of Agriculture before it becomes law.

📆 The Result: 12-18 Months or More to Adopt Amendments

Even moving as quickly as possible, this process can easily stretch 12-18 months. If any step requires revisions, or if consultation isn’t completed properly, it can take longer.

That’s why the December Gorge Commission meeting mattered so much: residents who lost homes to wildfire are confronting a system designed for slow, careful change at exactly the moment they need speed.

---

🔥 Core Proposal: Disaster Recovery Plan Amendments

Staff presented amendments designed to respond to what they described as material changes in conditions since the Scenic Area Act was adopted, including:

• Longer insurance delays
• Repeated large-scale wildfires
• Loss of entire neighborhoods rather than isolated structures

Key proposed changes included:

• Extending the rebuild application window from 2 years to 10 years
• Allowing temporary structures (including RVs) on burned properties during recovery
• Allowing limited flexibility in replacement homes (e.g., modest size or orientation changes)

Staff emphasized that the amendments were narrowly tailored to disaster recovery, not a general loosening of Scenic Area protections.

---

📝 Tribal Consultation: Central, Unresolved, and Contentious

A dominant theme throughout the meeting was whether the Commission could, or should, vote on the amendments before tribal consultation is complete.

Forest Service Tribal Liaison Donna Mickley repeatedly stressed that:

• Tribal consultation is still ongoing
• Three tribes have formally requested additional time
• Moving forward prematurely could delay or jeopardize federal concurrence by the Secretary of Agriculture

“It will be a much cleaner and quicker process if we give the tribes the additional time they’ve requested… If we move ahead now, I have no guarantee of what that looks like.” - Donna Mickley

Commission legal counsel Jeff Litwack clarified that:

• The Scenic Area Act requires consultation, but does not define timelines or require tribal consent
• The Commission lacks its own formal consultation standards
• Federal consultation rules cited in public comment do not directly apply to the Commission, but do apply to the Forest Service

“We have a requirement to consult with the tribes. I can’t tell you what that means, and I can’t tell you what it doesn’t mean.” - Jeff Litwack

This lack of clarity led several commissioners to call the situation a structural governance gap that has now become unavoidable during an emergency.

---

🗣️ Voices from Tribal Governments

Late in the meeting, Elena Carl of the Yakama Nation provided oral testimony grounding the issue in treaty law and federal trust obligations.

She emphasized that:

• The affected lands are within usual and accustomed areas
• Subsurface cultural resources are non-renewable
• Even small changes in location or footprint can cause irreversible harm

“Land use that disturbs the soil or alters the landscape threatens to erase this history… The duty to meaningfully consult is inherent in the federal trust obligation.”

She cited NHPA Section 106 and federal case law (including Klamath Tribes v. U.S.) as the legal foundation for requiring consultation before land-disturbing activities proceed.

---

🏠 Fire Survivors & Counties: Urgency and Unequal Outcomes

County representatives and commissioners from affected areas painted a stark picture of recovery on the ground.

Wasco and Klickitat Counties reported that:

• Only a handful of rebuild permits have been approved so far
• Those who have rebuilt tend to be residents with financial resources to navigate lengthy reviews
• Many fire survivors lack insurance or are still waiting on claims

Commissioner Nichols criticized advocacy groups for minimizing urgency:

“The difference? These were people with money who could afford to just go ahead… Others are still waiting.”

Multiple commissioners described residents living in limbo, unable to rebuild, unsure whether temporary housing is allowed, and fearful of enforcement for exceeding the current 60-day RV limit.

Staff confirmed there is no legal workaround under current rules to extend RV occupancy beyond 60 days without a plan amendment.

---

⚖️ Motion, Amendments, and an Impasse

A motion was introduced to adopt the amendments immediately, seconded, and then complicated by last-minute draft language from counsel intended to address unresolved cultural resource concerns raised by the Umatilla Tribe.

The draft would:

• Allow expedited rebuilds only if homes are rebuilt exactly as before
• Require additional cultural review if owners seek flexibility on unsurveyed parcels near known or high-probability cultural sites

While some commissioners welcomed the attempt, others objected strongly to voting on unvetted language shown for the first time during the meeting.

“This issue is not ripe. There is no recommendation from staff to proceed today.” - Commissioner Reynolds

Several commissioners argued that acting now could ultimately delay recovery longer if the amendments fail to receive federal concurrence.

---

🧭 Where the Commission Landed

By the end of the meeting:

• No final vote was taken
• Strong divisions remained over whether urgency justified moving forward
• There was broad consensus that:
  • Disaster recovery rules must change
  • Tribal consultation standards need clearer definition
  • The current system is failing fire survivors

Commissioners discussed the possibility of:

• A special meeting once consultation concludes
• Prioritizing temporary housing provisions
• Developing formal consultation policies in the future

---

🧩 Committee Updates - 11/25: What’s Happening Between Meetings

Thanks again to the Documenters for sharing their notes - CC-by-4.0

Several key discussions related to disaster recovery, governance, and future policy direction are unfolding at the committee level, where much of the Gorge Commission’s work is shaped before it reaches a full vote.

🛠 Executive Committee

The Executive Committee met briefly to finalize the agenda and structure for the December 16 Gorge Commission meeting, which will focus on proposed Management Plan amendments for post-disaster rebuilding following the Rowena and Burdoin fires.

Committee members reviewed the draft agenda and discussed how to allocate time for Treaty Tribe comments, with staff proposing approximately 10 minutes per tribe. Commissioner Valerie Fowler questioned whether this allocation was sufficient and suggested clarifying expectations with tribes in advance. She also flagged the need for adequate time for commissioner deliberation and for staff to clearly explain any late changes to the draft amendment.

Staff provided an update on tribal follow-up conducted after the November Commission meeting:

• Nez Perce Tribe: Reviewed the amendment and raised no immediate concerns.
• Umatilla Tribe: Submitted written comments prior to the November meeting; no additional response after follow-up.
• Yakama Nation: Materials were forwarded to tribal legal counsel; review may take up to two weeks before a follow-up meeting.
• Warm Springs Tribes: Requested more time at the November meeting; no further response yet.
  Forest Service staff reported parallel outreach to tribes, including Grande Ronde and Cowlitz, with responses still pending.

The committee also discussed winter pressures facing fire-affected landowners, particularly concerns about how long rebuilding might take and the importance of clarity around temporary housing and RV allowances. Fowler raised worries about landowners feeling stuck in limbo, while staff legal counsel emphasized that some constraints, such as sewer, water, and waste requirements, are governed by state and county law, not the Commission.

Key dates reviewed:

• Tribal comment period ends December 5
• Materials circulated December 9
• Full Commission meeting December 16

---

📣 Communications Committee

The Communications Committee met to review outreach efforts and recent progress, with limited attendance.

Staff shared a legislative update, noting a positive meeting with Senator Paul Harris (District 17), who expressed interest in helping the Commission address its budget challenges. Additional legislative meetings were being sought ahead of the 2026 session.

On wildfire communications, staff reported continued outreach with tribes and confirmed that two rebuilding permits have already been issued in the fire-affected areas.

The committee discussed fencing requirements for vineyards and orchards, identifying confusion among landowners about standards related to wildlife corridors. Members suggested clearer public communications on this issue.

Finally, staff announced the launch of the Gorge Commission’s new Facebook and LinkedIn pages. Early metrics showed stronger engagement on LinkedIn than Facebook, attributed to a more professional audience. Posts will focus on existing Commission materials, recent work, and public education. Public comments on social media are disabled due to public-records compliance constraints, with staff encouraging residents to call the office directly with questions.

---

🗓 Join the Next Gorge Commission Meeting

The Gorge Commission meets monthly, usually via Zoom. Dates, agendas, and links can change and are posted in advance.

Next scheduled date: Tuesday, Jan. 13, 2026 8:30 a.m. PST

Find meeting info & agendas:
https://www.gorgecommission.org/about-crgc/commission-meetings

Public comment: Written comments are typically due the business day before the meeting. Live public comment is usually available during the meeting.