🏡 Gorge Commission Debates "Cheater ADUs" & Looks Ahead on Tribal Consultation - Dec 2025 Committee Meetings Round-up

🏗 Economic Vitality Committee - December 2, 2025

This meeting focused heavily on accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and whether the Gorge Commission should pursue a mid-cycle plan amendment to allow them in certain zones, ahead of the next full Management Plan review (scheduled for 2027).

Staff explained the NSA’s longstanding “one parcel, one house” rule, but acknowledged a widespread pattern of unpermitted or workaround second dwellings that raise enforcement and equity concerns.

Key takeaways:

• Staff and commissioners agree that housing affordability and agricultural viability have both worsened significantly since 2020.
• However, initiating a plan amendment now would require proving a “substantial change in conditions” under NSA rules.
• The committee agreed to continue gathering background before deciding in early 2026 whether to elevate ADU legalization as a stand-alone plan amendment or save it for the next full review cycle.

“I think we have a duty to get that prohibition [on ADUs] out of the way if it’s hurting one of our two mandates: economic vitality.” - Commissioner Litwer

“It’s gotten a lot harder to be a farmer in the Gorge. That too is economic change.” - Commissioner Johnson

Also discussed:

• Reviewing the agricultural income test to determine if it realistically reflects today’s farming economy
• Potentially creating a public working group to help shape ADU-related policies

---

⚠️ Editorial note: During the meeting, one Gorge Commission staff member referred to informal second homes as “cheater ADUs.” While we understand the regulatory challenges, we believe this kind of framing risks casting residents as bad actors rather than acknowledging that systemic policy misalignments are likely driving workarounds, especially in a region with growing housing pressures and limited options for multigenerational living.

As stated in the Federal National Scenic Area Act itself, one of its two central purposes is to:

“protect and support the economy of the Columbia River Gorge area by encouraging growth to occur in existing urban areas and by allowing economic development consistent with resource protection.”
(Public Law 99‑663, Section 2(b))

The federal law explicitly recognizes the economic and community life of the Gorge, and not just its scenic qualities, as a pillar of the region’s future. Legally, linguistically, and philosophically, “the economy” refers to people, not just abstract goods, services, or capital flows. In fact, this framing is increasingly reflected in case law, public policy, and statutory interpretation, especially when equity, rural life, or environmental justice are at stake.

And so, the Gorge Commission has a legal obligation to serve National Scenic Area residents as a core constituency, and not as an obstacle to a public good.

---

🏠 Can We Build ADUs in the National Scenic Area?

Not yet, but that could change.

At the December 2 meeting of the Gorge Commission’s Economic Vitality Committee, commissioners debated whether to push for a mid-cycle amendment to allow Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), small second homes like in-law units or backyard cottages on properties in the National Scenic Area (NSA), not located in an urban-exception zone.

While ADUs are not explicitly prohibited by the Federal National Scenic Area Act, current Gorge Management Plan (GMP) rules, which are rewritten on set cycles, effectively restrict housing to “one dwelling per parcel” in most zones. Commissioners acknowledged that this rule is widely misunderstood, and often circumvented, leading to a rise in unpermitted or workaround second homes.

Staff emphasized that while the GMP doesn’t allow ADUs today, that decision can be changed either through a mid-cycle amendment (if substantial economic or housing changes can be proven), or in the next full plan update for 2030, the initiation of which begins this year.

The Commission is continuing background work now, including exploring:

• Whether new ADU policies could support multigenerational farming, caregiving, or rural housing
• How to ensure ADUs don’t undermine scenic protections or parcel-size minimums
• Ways to bring unpermitted second dwellings into legal compliance through a regularization pathway

---

📌 Local Reports - Housing Needs Context

WAGAP Community Needs Assessment (2024) - WAGAP identifies housing as one of the top unmet needs in Skamania and Klickitat Counties. The report highlights barriers for low-income, rural, and senior residents.

Mid- Columbia Community Health Assessment (2024) - identified housing as a primary driver of avoidable health conditions, including mental distress, unmanaged chronic illness, and increased emergency-room use.

Skamania County Housing Needs Analysis (2020) - This commissioned report shows a deficit of 1,949 housing units over the next 20 years, far more than current zoning or infrastructure can support.

These reports reveal that many residents live in housing precarity, and many lucky enough to own homes lack a legal path to build or share modest second dwellings due to outdated zoning rules. That’s why the upcoming Gorge Management Plan review (and potential reform of ADU restrictions) matters so much.

---

⚖️ Rules Committee - December 8, 2025

What’s Changing Behind the Scenes?

Even without a full video, we reviewed the draft rules and staff reports from the Rules Committee’s December 8 discussion. The committee is working to finalize updates to how the Gorge Commission handles:

• Public records and meeting access (Divisions 11 & 12)
• Conflicts of interest and ethics (Division 14)
• Administrative hearings and appeals (Division 16)

These rules don’t usually get much public attention, but they shape how transparent, fair, and accountable the Commission is. One notable change: the Commission is formalizing that it follows the most restrictive state law (WA or OR) in many areas, unless it conflicts with the National Scenic Area Act.

Here’s what’s changing, and which state’s standards they’re following when WA and OR differ:

• Public Meetings (Div. 11):
  Adopts Oregon’s hybrid meetings allowance, letting commissioners join remotely. Adds required public comment at regular meetings.
• Public Records (Div. 12):
  Uses Washington’s fee model (no charges for redaction). Keeps Oregon’s record classifications (conditionally/unconditionally exempt).
• Conflicts of Interest (Div. 14):
  Adopts Oregon’s stricter $50 gift limit (vs. WA’s $100). Requires early disclosure of ex parte contacts.
• Administrative Procedures (Div. 16):
  Aligns with NEPA and NSA, not state court rules. Adds 20-day hearing notice, interpreter access, and special protections for tribal cultural info.

📝 Note: This summary is based on written materials. No video or transcript of the December 8 meeting is currently available.
See: Draft Rule Updates | Staff Report

We’ll continue tracking these updates, especially as they influence how rule changes (like for housing or ADUs) are proposed, debated, and adopted in the upcoming Gorge Management Plan review cycle.

---

📅 Executive Committee – December 23, 2025

The Executive Committee met briefly to finalize the agenda for the January 13, 2026 full Commission meeting, which will feature:

• A long-anticipated vote on a key plan amendment, after months of delay
• A revised update on DEI/cultural training, now referred to as the “Parna report” to avoid politicization of the DEI acronym
• An update on tribal consultation progress

Commissioners expressed frustration about the slow pace of consultation with treaty tribes, balanced by concern that moving forward prematurely could damage relationships. Staff confirmed updated cultural resource language had been shared with tribal chairs and legal staff, and further conversations were ongoing.

“We’re doing everything we can think of to address [tribal cultural concerns]. Absent any surprises, I think it’s time to move forward with a vote.” — Commissioner Fowler

Some commissioners asked for clearer thresholds for when the consultation process is “complete enough” to act, while others emphasized preserving hard-earned trust with tribal partners even under political pressure from counties and residents.

Under the National Scenic Area Act, the Gorge Commission has a statutory obligation to engage in meaningful, good-faith consultation with treaty tribes. This is not a formality, but a core legal and ethical responsibility that recognizes tribal sovereignty, cultural resources, and reserved rights in the Gorge.

As a parallel example: for the Hood River-White Salmon Bridge replacement, tribal consultation has involved over 130 meetings across four years, as the Bridge Authority works to address potential impacts to treaty fishing access, cultural resources, and ancestral lands. This process is a legal and ethical obligation that ensures tribal nations have a real voice in shaping a project that directly affects their rights, history, and future.