Nerditorial: Open Letter to Whatcom County on Re-delay-ance

Hello, Members of Council...

Hello, Executive Louws...

I see that the decision recommended by the Executive to postpone the Reconveyance for 4 to 6 months has been well taken by the Council and acted upon.

I have read the Executive's letter on the matter of the Reconveyance, and have mulled over his recommendations.

So, you have decided after five years that you need more time, and you need a clear plan.

Alright.

Take whatever time you need. Draw up whatever plans you see fit.

Unlike the opponents of the Reconveyance, I don't see this matter in shrill and apocalyptic terms. If the Reconveyance is delayed, or doesn't even happen, it will not be the End of Days. It won't be great, but I will somehow soldier on.

In the meantime, I present here a few pointed observations.

On the matter of having a plan before purchasing land, I ask... where is your officially adopted plan for the new County Jail?

The County is prepared to spend literally millions of dollars on land to site a new jail, and is prepared to do so before any specific plan or blueprint has been adopted on that jail. It is my understanding that the only reason the County hasn't already purchased land for the future County Jail is because the owner of that land sold it to the Lummi Nation first.

You have no idea what the new Jail is going to cost right now. You don't even have an artist's rendering of what the jail might look like, because you haven't even decided how many stories it will have right now. But you are in the market for land... right now.

It looks like you are holding decisions on the Reconveyance to a substantially and arbitrarily higher standard than decisions regarding the County Jail.

I find this concern about a lack of a plan for the Reconveyance to ring hollow for that reason alone.

I trust that this decision on the Reconveyance will not delay action on the County Jail, and require no further reassurances on that matter.

I believe that the Reconveyance will have a beneficial impact on the quality of my drinking water, as well as a beneficial impact on managing the cost associated with treating that drinking water. And for those reasons alone, I support the Reconveyance.

On the other hand, the majority of citizens who don't agree with my belief seem to be citizens who don't rely on Lake Whatcom for their drinking water.

The County has demonstrated a willingness to give the "affected community" every benefit that comes with doubt when making decisions, except now.

You are willing to give owners of property with septic systems the benefit of the doubt when it comes to inspections.

You are willing to give the Ag community the benefit of the doubt when it comes to slaughterhouses.

But when it is time to give Bellingham residents the benefit of the doubt when it comes to our drinking water quality, your seem more interested in giving the benefit of the doubt to those who are profoundly concerned about avoiding a scenario which leaves us burdened with some nightmarish excess of park land.

As the Reconveyance opponents tell it, this is the most catastrophic error the Council could make. As if it were the opening act of a Michael Bay movie or some such nonsense.

What kind of a park do they think we are going to have there? Jurassic Park?

If taking steps to protect my water supply carries the risk that we will have a surplus of park land, that is a chance I am willing to take. Particularly if that park land is acquired at a cost of less than $40 per acre.

(For the record, I am unwilling to assume the risk associated with a park populated with animatronic dinosaurs. I will vigorously oppose any park plan which allows for them.)

Seriously, if too much park land is your biggest problem, then you and I need to trade lives.

"Don't go to that county, they have too much park land," said... no one. Ever.

"I booked you a fabulous vacation where you can tour some of our nation's finest commercial forestry land," said... no travel agent. Ever.

The opponents of the Reconveyance are clearly not going to be satisfied with anything less than getting everything they want, which is for you to drop the Reconveyance like a hot rock. You can convince yourselves that this is about something else, but I am under no such illusion.

Give the rock another four to six months to cool if you like, but the opponents of the Reconveyance are still going to demand that the rock be dropped. Plans be damned.

The Reconveyance has not been handled in haste, or out of the public eye. The matter has been handled in a careful and deliberate manner, and in full view of any citizen who bothered to take the time to notice. Asking for more time under these circumstances gives the appearance of a delaying tactic, even if that isn't the intent.

Even if you disagree with the Reconveyance... do you honestly hold the view that going through with the Reconveyance will be some sort of catastrophe?

The Council's 5 to 2 vote this Spring in support of the Reconveyance suggests that you don't.

As I said before the Council at the Reconveyance hearing, the process of restoring the Lake Whatcom Watershed is not going to be easy, politically expedient, or free.

Looming on the horizon are acts of political heavy lifting regarding Lake Whatcom which make the Reconveyance pale in comparison. If your knees are buckling when faced with the Reconveyance on the grounds that it is too controversial or too expensive... I have no reason to believe you have the wherewithal to take any other of the actions that must be taken to restore the watershed.

In closing, this reluctance to take any action at all about Lake Whatcom is precisely what I have come to expect from the County after watching you sit on your collective hands for literally years. In regards to Lake Whatcom, you couldn't disappoint me now if you tried.

Patiently,



Shane Roth