From Stark
UPDATE: Whatcom County Council member Sam Crawford is proposing modifications to the proposed reconveyance of Lake Whatcom watershed forest lands from the Washington Department of Natural Resources to Whatcom County.
Crawford’s proposal would subtract 1,755 acres from the 8,844 acres of state forest lands that have been proposed for transfer to the county–a transfer that has been touted as a lake protection measure that will also create a potential new park. But opponents site a potential loss of both timber revenues to governments and timber-related jobs. As they see it, existing environmental regulations on logging in the watershed are already highly protective of the lake’s water, which provides drinking water to Bellingham and some other areas.
Crawford says the 1,755 acres he proposes to keep under state control are “areas that are still harvestable with little impact.”
He also said he wants the council to take some time to study his proposal, and not vote tonight.
The Lake Whatcom reconveyance is on the Whatcom County Council agenda tonight (Tuesday, Sept. 11) for a public hearing and possible vote.
Both opponents and supporters are mobilizing for a big turnout on the question of whether 8,844 acres of state forest lands should be turned over to Whatcom County for park use.
It started as a cluster of policy questions, and reasonable people could disagree: What is the best way to protect Lake Whatcom? Is logging of state lands in the watershed a real threat to the lake? What about the public logging revenues that would be lost to local governments? What would it cost the c9unty to manage the property for recreation, and what impact would recreation activities have on the lake?
But now, the whole issue seems to have become another symbolic battleground for some people–part of the struggle against big government, liberal environmentalism and perhaps something even more sinister.
Here’s part of an email that County Council member Ken Mann shared on Facebook:
“”We urge you to vote against the reconveyance proposition. It is an iniquity about to be perpetrated on Whatcom residents with not one iota of benefit, only additional cost and deprivation. You are being a party to the machinations of Agenda 21. One can only wish you had the Whatcom residents interests at heart instead of the progressive/communist world government ruthlessness. I urge to take action to refute the Growth Management Act, take a stand for the people instead – the people whom you are representing.”
Agenda 21–not to be confused with Area 51– is a United Nations environmental plan that is viewed in some quarters as part of a plan to subvert property rights.
In the Lake Whatcom reconveyance, land would be transferred from state government to county government, so it’s hard to see what private property rights are at stake.
In another recent development, the Whatcom Excavator anonymous blog has uncorked some email records obtained via a public records request, in which backers of the reconveyance discuss the public revenue that could be derived from cell tower leases or wind power turbines on the property. As the Excavator sees it, the local timber industry and related businesses lose revenue so that the county can gain some.
Almost 100 years ago due to tax forfeitures, large tracts of land ended up in county hands(all over the state), counties had the lands turned over to the state which in-kind returned revenues to the county.
Here in Whatcom county that revenue supported our library, two school districts, the port, and even other state funds.
My understanding that amounted to over 800k a year with the addition of other taxes like B & O that comes from logging.
There has not been demonstrated to date how these funds are being replaced for eternity, there have been some funding replacements demonstrated for the short term but not eternity which is a long time IMHO, that to me is the bigger issue not Agenda 21 nor area 51 or whether we need a new park for our elf’s and unicorns to play (or who gonna pay for that, don’t ya know)!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
Here’s my letter:
Subject: DNR Re-conveyance
The old saying “if it ain’t broke , don’t fix it” applies itself full force to the re-conveyance fiasco being very aggressively pursued by the Conservation NW/ Whatcom Land Trust consortium and their support cast, namely the Crawford / Kremen Irrational Park group.
Of all the fiscal disasters perpetrated by this council the re-conveyance reigns supreme. This is not a revenue neutral project but a revenue sucking dream. The very obvious end result will be a boondoggle that will create the greatest white elephant in county history.
An appropriate use of this arena can be negotiated and developed with the DNR to the satisfaction of all and remain under the jurisdiction of the DNR. All maintenance and any liability will be the responsibility of the DNR. They continue to improve on their stewardship of lands under their control and this could well be their showpiece property.
The end result of re-conveyance:
Totally restricts use by the elderly and handicapped!
Burdens the great majority of county taxpayers who will never set foot on the territory!
And five years from now, the answer to the question “are your County recreation facilities better than they were five years ago” will certainly be answered in the negative—NO WAY!! Ted Wood
Sam, I want to commend you on proposing an alternative and being open to discussion as some of your comrades seem not to be.
Tonight all action should be postponed for further discussions and in consideration of discussion if we are making decisions for all eternity why not let all of the voters get a shot at the debate too, thru a public vote, don’t ya know!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
“…he also wants the council to take some time to study his proposal” and note vote on it tonight.
When some of us requested that the Agreement with CH2M Hill (a corporation of questionable ethics and other practices) for a contract to create a scoping document for the GPT project (a project also created by corporations of questionable ethics and other practices) be tabled before a “railroaded” vote was taken, the council went right ahead and voted on it.
Now, if the council can rush in where angels fear to tread and vote almost overnight on an agreement with far reaching consequences, they certainly can summon up the courage to take a vote tonight on reconveyance, an idea of which the pros and cons have been discussed for a long, long time.
Re: Update
And now we have Sam Crawford, the biggest RINO (Republican In Name Only) around trying to peddle himself to the taxpayer as a responsible legistator when in reality he and Kremen lead the list of FCINO’s (Fiscal Conservatives In Name Only).
Insight; making illegitimate charges of bad ethics is really a reflection (bad) of the ethics of those doing the charging, don’t ya know!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!
At least the Canadians are happy, more softwood imports their favorite, after you politicians also steal the State School Trust Lands, funding education since 1853!
Camilla Sutton, head of currency strategy at Bank of Nova Scotia (BNS) in Toronto, said in a phone interview. “The loonie has a bias today to be higher and it’s a hard trend to fight.”
I swear that many of those who spoke against the reconveyance sounded like they were following a script. It was almost funny to hear talk of some county folks as being informed, active and concerned in the same breath as allegations that they had only recently heard of the issue and that they don’t read the Bellingham Herald very often. These were the same folks who spoke of conspiracies and sinister emails. Go figure! Tin foil hats is an appropriate term.
Talking about scripts, I heard there was talking points being handed out to the peasants by those in support, don’t ya know.
They were the ones with the green foil hats!
AFY!!theheelotsheepdog!!!