Hood River County bottled water measure passes

Bottles on ballot

Bottles on ballot

A measure banning large scale bottled water operations in Hood River County passed with nearly 70 percent support from Hood River County voters Tuesday evening.

The measure, filed in response to a proposed Nestle water bottling plant in Cascade Locks, was passing 68 percent (3,967 votes) to 32 percent (1,870 votes).

According to Hood River County Elections data, the measure passed overwhelmingly in 12 of 13 voting precincts in the county. The only precinct where it did not pass was precinct 12, which includes the town of Cascade Locks and western Hood River County. In that precinct, 58 percent (261 votes) voted no on the measure to 42 percent (190 votes) yes votes.

Hood River County voters also approved a facilities bond measure for Hood River County Schools 71.61 percent {4,161 votes) to 28.39 percent (1,648 votes).

Full election results.

For additional election results and full coverage, see the May 21 edition of the Hood River News.

News and information from our partners


Comments are subject to moderator review and may not appear immediately on the site. A user's first several comments must be manually approved by a moderator.

Please read our commenting policy before posting.

Bess 2 years, 6 months ago

So where did the "yes" votes come from? What part of the County voted "no"? Did the rest of the County cram this down Cascade Lock's throat? What does that say about local control? If the "yes" camp feels that its OK to override local control in Cascade Locks, where the City and Port Commissioners that have advocated for the Nestle' deal have gotten re-elected for a decade, how can they be intellectually consistent if they object to a lawsuit by Nestle', The Port, and/or Cascade Locks asserting that state laws may override local initiatives on the subject by the County?

More reporting by HRV is required.


Bess 2 years, 6 months ago

Did people in Cascade Locks overwhelmingly vote "no"? Did the rest of the County overwhelmingly vote "yes"? If that is the case, how do the proponents justify overriding local control? If they do justify that, how will they be consistent if they object to lawsuits that assert state law, overrides county control of this issue?

More complete reporting by the HRV please.


Sign in to comment


Information from the News and our advertisers (Want to add your business to this to this feed?)