Killer Industrial Jobs or Long-term Job Killers?

Permalink +

Sun, Apr 06, 2014, 11:52 am  //  Terry Wechsler

Carl Weimer recently posted a comment on facebook comparing the Comp Plan revision process (intended to keep us in compliance with the Growth Management Act) to watching paint dry. Sam Crawford saw Carl’s analogy and raised him one. Crawford likened public engagement on “GMA stuff” to watching a 10-hour You Tube video of the Hitler character in Inglorious Bastards continuously saying, “Nein.” Local activist planning wonks have probably already submitted their comments on the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Comprehensive Plan 2016 revisions.  For the general public, our opportunity to ask for an EIS at Cherry Point is now. The state had a chance to conduct that EIS when DNR developed the Aquatic Reserve Plan, but did not do it. Now, the county has the opportunity. Please submit a comment urging the county to conduct an area-wide EIS for the Cherry Point UGA. Comments must be received by 5:00 p.m. Monday, April 7, to pds@co.whatcom.wa.us

A major element of the Comp Plan is the Cherry Point UGA. Currently, the Preliminary Growth Allocation Proposal states:

"Cherry Point shall be designated as an unincorporated industrial urban growth area in recognition of existing large scale industrial land uses. Additional large scale development shall be encouraged consistent with the ability to provide needed services and consistent with protecting critical areas along with other environmental protection considerations. The Cherry Point industrial area is an important and appropriate area for industry due to its access to deep water shipping, rail, all-weather roads, its location near the Canadian border, and its contribution to the County’s goal of providing family wage jobs."

In other words, planning at Cherry Point is driven by the underlying assumption that “large scale development shall be encouraged … [because] Cherry Point … is an … appropriate area for industry….”  But what has never occurred over the past 60 years is a full-blown study of whether industrial activity is actually consistent with a sensitive aquatic environment

The history of Cherry Point, beginning with construction of the first pier in 1954 by Mobile Oil (then Tosco), has been remarkable. Starting with the passage of the Coastal Zone Management Act by the federal government in 1972, to development of the Cherry Point Environmental Aquatic Reserve Management Plan in 2010 – none of these policies has ever resulted in actual protection for the environment. Even the Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) states in the Aquatic Reserve Management Plan, “existing industrial uses at Cherry Point are not incompatible with goals for the long-term protection of the aquatic resources within and adjacent to the aquatic reserve.” The statement was made without benefit of any coordinated environmental analysis that considers all environmental elements including impacts on declining species of flora and fauna or historic and cultural tribal resources. DNR’s compatibility finding is at odds with their conclusion that “[a]ddressing uncertainties related to species decline [at Cherry Point] is a priority.” The Aquatic Reserve Plan is replete with descriptions of studies documenting those declines, most of which identify no causes and call for additional study.

What should be occurring is a joint effort by the federal, state, and local governments, in consultation with the tribes, to consider whether any industrial activity at Cherry Point is appropriate or compatible with protecting that area. Sixty years ago, it may have been appropriate to place all emphasis on geographic uniqueness, proximity to Canada, and ability to “contribut[e] to the County’s goal of providing family wage jobs.” But today, with Cherry Point supporting less than 10% of the county’s industrial jobs, the impacts and permanent implications probably must replace economic benefit as chief priority.

We can’t depend on Gateway Pacific Terminal’s EIS alone to give us the information necessary to test the assumption that industrial activity is compatible with maintaining biological functions of the aquatic environment at Cherry Point, because it will almost certainly focus as narrowly as possible on that proposal’s contribution in spite of the fact that the EIS should consider the cumulative effect of all past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future impacts. Project-specific EIS’s, further, are discouraged as “piecemealing” because what results more often than full-blown EIS’s are threshold determinations of nonsignificance, as occurred for both the BP Cherry Point and Conoco Phillips crude-by-rail infrastructure proposals.

Any effort to address the need for an area-wide EIS at Cherry Point would certainly meet with resistance and the current county council probably lacks the political will to demand such a study of PDS if the recent firestorm that erupted in response to the Lummi position on GPT is any indication. The Lummi Nation announced a strong position in opposition to the proposed coal terminal at Cherry Point in a letter  to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, citing impacts to usual and accustomed fishing rights. Public messaging by their Sovereignty and Treaty Protection Office, however,  has focused on sacred grounds, and it was that issue which drew support from the faith community and resulted in a July 2013 resolution of the Whatcom Democrats which stated, in part, "We propose and support the rejection of all industrial, commercial and residential uses of the remaining natural lands and waters on and adjacent to Cherry Point."

Those 26 words became one of two major themes of the 2013 county council elections (the other being outside money), with “Pro Jobs”/”No Jobs” defining messaging against the Whatcom Wins slate of candidates. Not surprising were the letters to the editor of the Bellingham Herald, one of which described the resolution as “job killing.” Delaine Clizbe, a co-founder of Save Whatcom, the conservative PAC organized to support Tea Party-endorsed candidates, went so far in her LTE as to claim the democratic candidates had endorsed it, which they had not. In fact, it passed with less than 40 votes, which when compared to the 44,000 county residents who voted for Barack Obama in the last presidential election, meant that their claims “the party” had passed the resolution strained credulity.

Ferndale Mayor Gary Jensen, a Democrat but one of the earliest public supporters of GPT (he is currently featured prominently on the terminal’s main page), wrote an op ed before the election mischaracterizing the resolution as “opposing any and all business development at Cherry Point. After the election, representatives of developers and labor wrote an op ed bemoaning the amount of outside money donated to the Whatcom Wins campaign and insinuating any eventual “no” votes on GPT permits would be inconsistent with the science and prove the lie to the rejection of the resolution by democratic council candidates during campaign season. The Bellingham Herald  ultimately gave the matter honorable mention as a “top story” of 2013, presumably because political writer Ralph Schwartz had mentioned it so many times, including here and here and here and here. The issue became such a hot potato, the Democratic party hid the resolution on their website, and old links to it lead to the slate instead.(A request was made to the party for active links but as of publication, they have not responded.)

Labor, of course, had “an extremely hard time swallowing what Mark Lowry described as a categorical rejection of absolutely every type of proposal at Cherry Point, which only makes sense in the context of the county’s current Comp Plan estimate of employment growth capacity on remaining undeveloped land, which is 951 jobs according to the Preliminary Growth Allocation Proposal. That number, however, is based on outdated information in the Land Use chapter of the Comp Plan, which states the Cherry Point UGA, in addition to the proposed terminal, could support two additional industrial facilities comparable to Intalco and BP.

In actuality today, all remaining undeveloped land at Cherry Point is owned by Pacific International Terminals (PIT), the GPT proponent.  PIT’s permit application does not describe anything other than a terminal on their land because undeveloped land beyond the terminal footprint – or the trees on that land, to be precise – is supposedly an integral part of their dust suppression “system” designed to prevent fugitive coal dust from the proposed 6-story high/80-acre coal pile from reaching waters of the Salish Sea. The employment projections for GPT, further, are vastly less than 951.  According to Table 4-3 of the permit application, there will be 201 jobs in seven years with full operational capacity of the coal terminal, and 213 jobs 5 years after that if the second other-commodities terminal were built.

Property rights proponents have long argued that limiting PIT’s ability to develop the land they own at Cherry Point would constitute a taking, which is not true. Takings require loss of all economic benefit in the land, not mere diminution. Further, takings are legal. They simply require the public to reimburse the property owner the fair market value of the land. The Growth Management Hearings Board has already held, in Ostram v. Whatcom County, WWGMHB 05-2-0017, that economic development goals in the GMA, RCW 36.70A.020(5), do not mean project proponents may not be economically impacted.  The Ostram Board said, “regulating the location of a specific business or business activity” in compliance with the GMA is not inconsistent with the economic development goals of the GMA merely because it “places [a project proponent] at an economically difficult, if not untenable, position. … [T]he economic development goal of the GMA is designed to promote the overall economic health of the state rather than the specific interests of an individual business.”  [Emphasis added.]

DNR has already stated in the Aquatic Reserve Plan that granting of a lease for a fourth pier at Cherry Point is not a given, nor is renewal of existing leases. Those determinations will be made on a case-by-case basis weighing impacts on the environment. Those determinations, however, must be fully informed by a comprehensive EIS. The county now has the opportunity to perform that EIS. Please ask the County Council to conduct an area-wide EIS for the Cherry Point UGA. And remember, comments must be submitted by 5 p.m. Monday, April 7, to pds@co.whatcom.wa.us.

Wendy Harris  //  Sun, Apr 06, 2014, 9:33 pm

Terry, I know time is tight.. one day, but could you draft a short sample letter for the public that contains talking points?

Another crucial issue has to do with the scope of the review for a nonproject proposal, such as a comprehensive plan amendment.  The county’s position, which is supported by SEPA, is that only a large scale and general review is required at this point because the detailed review will occur on a site specific basis during the permitting stage.  That is the problem.. SEPA and the County fail to recognize that certain issues, such as wildlife and habitat or water supply, can ONLY be reviewed at a landscape scale, and therefore, more detailed analysis is needed for this kind of information as part of the project EIS review.


Terry Wechsler  //  Mon, Apr 07, 2014, 8:33 am

Wendy, I don’t harbor any illusions the county will do more than they are absolutely required to do, in spite of the fact that they could if they had the political will.

The key issue is that the underlying assumption of the Comp Plan—that industrial activity in the Cherry Point UGA is “appropriate”—was made without benefit of an EIS. Given the decline in environmental functioning (which is impacting tribal fishing rights) and impacts on sacred and historic areas, it is time, once and for all, to do an area-wide EIS because piecemealing with project-specific EIS’s is resulting in MDNS’s (as with BP and Conoco Phillips’ rail infrastructure projects) without benefit of the type of cumulative impacts analysis necessary to get the studies required to determine why the herring and other species are declining so drastically there.

The employment projections for the UGA are likewise based on an underlying assumption it is “appropriate” for Cherry Point to absorb two additional industries of similar scale to Intalco and BP. That assumption is not based on science, and the GMA requires that planning not impair the benefits of an area to the state. Every act that has been passed relating to the shorelines of the state and/or to Cherry Point specifically refers to its importance for wildlife functions, yet the Comp Plan is driven by a 50-year-old assumption that exploiting it for economic benefit should drive zoning and permitting decisions.

If we would get an adequate review from, say, the GPT EIS, that studies WHY species are declining and what the relative contribution of existing industries is, and how the proposal would contribute to that decline, it would be one thing. But the reality is that we won’t. I actually believe the county should put into abeyance revisions of the comp plan land use chapter and Planning Policy E-3 until we have the final EIS for the GPT proposal. If it provides all the information necessary to support the assumption industrial activity at Cherry Point is appropriate, then the county can go about establishing employment projections based on information about how much industrial expansion in the Cherry Point UGA is appropriate for the environment.


Tip Johnson  //  Mon, Apr 07, 2014, 8:02 pm

Three industrial permits written for Cherry Point by our trusted environmental regulators destroyed MORE THAN HALF THE HERRING PRODUCTION OF ALL OF PUGET SOUND!!!!!

That’s unacceptable.

Restore the herring BEFORE PERMITTING ANY MORE POLLUTION AT CHERRY POINT!!

It’s not rocket science.  It’s the food chain.  Duh.


Terry Wechsler  //  Sun, Apr 13, 2014, 3:17 pm

In the wake of the Kansas City tragedy, it is worth adding the link to Sam’s favorite You Tube image analogizing “growth management stuff,” since, if there is a god in heaven, it will be the image that describes our position on his re-election and we will be seeing it quite a bit more in coming elections:  + Link

His post on the relevant thread: 
Sam Crawford Carl, when it comes to GMA stuff, I think this 10-hour video would be more fitting:
+ Link

10 Hours of Hilter saying NEIN!
Tis an excellent forum tool More 10 Hour Videos on my channel, I own nothing at all
April 1 at 5:36pm ยท Like


Killer Industrial Jobs or Long-term Job Killers?

Sun, Apr 06, 2014, 11:52 am  //  Terry Wechsler

Why commenting on the EIS in Comp Plan revisions for Cherry Point means demanding an EIS in the first place.

4 comments; last on Apr 13, 2014

County Hires GPT Permit Lead as Senior Planner

Mon, Mar 10, 2014, 9:51 am  //  Riley Sweeney

Riley digs into an unusual hiring decision at the County Planning Dept

1 comments; last on Mar 10, 2014

Johns Repair

Specializing in German vehicles...

Whatcom Watch Editor Resigns

Sun, Mar 02, 2014, 2:22 pm  //  John Servais

The editor of the Whatcom Watch, Richard Jehn, has resigned effective today. Chalk up a victory for Craig Cole and Pacific International Terminals.

8 comments; last on Mar 05, 2014

Relevant Documents to Libel Threat

Tue, Feb 25, 2014, 8:29 pm  //  John Servais

The full text of Craig Cole's threatening letter of libel against the Whatcom Watch. And the emptiness of the threat.

16 comments; last on Mar 20, 2014

Craig Cole Threatens Libel Suit

Wed, Feb 19, 2014, 4:48 pm  //  John Servais

Craig Cole, the local contact for the proposed Cherry Point coal port has threatened the Whatcom Watch with a libel lawsuit.

6 comments; last on Mar 20, 2014

How the Coal Industry Funneled $40,000 into Whatcom

Wed, Oct 02, 2013, 5:40 am  //  Riley Sweeney

Riley uncovers how the Coal Industry is funding conservative candidates in Whatcom County

11 comments; last on Oct 03, 2013

Safeguard the Southfork

Thu, May 30, 2013, 11:01 pm  //  Guest writer

Jeffrey Margolis urges us to request the Nooksack South Fork Valley be included in the Coal Port environmental study.

3 comments; last on Jun 02, 2013

Coal Trains and Unhealthy Air - Any Connection?

Sun, May 05, 2013, 2:45 pm  //  John Servais

Help fund a scientific study looking for links between diesel locomotives, coal trains and unhealthy air.

0 comments

EIS Scoping Period for GPT is Closed

Tue, Jan 22, 2013, 6:19 pm  //  Wendy Harris

Links to a few noteworthy GPT scoping comments .

1 comments; last on Jan 22, 2013

Video of Mudslide Derailing Train Monday

Wed, Dec 19, 2012, 11:12 am  //  John Servais

A dramatic video of yet another mudslide near Everett - and what will be coming down on coal trains. Amtrak service to Bellingham is shut down.

4 comments; last on Dec 20, 2012

Coal Ship Wrecks Vancouver Terminal

Sat, Dec 08, 2012, 1:43 pm  //  John Servais

A giant coal freighter went right through the long dock early Friday morning. Nothing in print edition of Herald

3 comments; last on Dec 11, 2012

Lummi Nation Opposes Coal Terminal

Fri, Sep 21, 2012, 8:53 am  //  John Servais

Bellingham Business Journal breaking story - Lummi's to hold meeting today at noon to speak against the Cherry Point project.

7 comments; last on Nov 04, 2012

The Political Junkie interviews “Power Past Coal”

Mon, Aug 20, 2012, 8:00 am  //  Riley Sweeney

Riley sits down with Matt Petryni with Power Past Coal to get the latest scoop

0 comments

Coal Free Bellingham: Point Proven?

Thu, Aug 09, 2012, 8:30 pm  //  Larry Horowitz

Questions raised by the Superior Court's barring of the Bellingham Community Bill of Rights initiative from being placed on the ballot.

21 comments; last on Aug 17, 2012

BNSF Shoreline Improvements for the Proposed Gateway Pacific Coal Port

Sun, Jul 15, 2012, 12:54 am  //  Tip Johnson

Wherein we see the Railroad walking it's walk while we get ready to talk our talk.

1 comments; last on Jul 16, 2012

Planning Commissioner Mocks Environmental Concern For Coal Terminal

Sun, Jan 15, 2012, 12:06 am  //  Wendy Harris

Planning Commissioner Onkels should recuse himself from review of environmental impacts at GPT.

3 comments; last on Feb 08, 2012

The Cole Train: Loads of BS

Sun, Dec 04, 2011, 5:53 pm  //  Tip Johnson

Wherein the sooty prospect of economic necessity rears its ugly head

2 comments; last on Dec 05, 2011

Update on Cherry Point Buffer Mitigation Proposal

Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 2:08 pm  //  Wendy Harris

Planning Staff's recommended revision will not prevent SSA from reducing wetland buffers.

0 comments

County Proposal Includes New Cherry Point Buffer Mitigation Requirements

Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 10:29 pm  //  Wendy Harris

The County's new mitigation proposal is unlikely to be adequate for Cherry Point's industrial impacts to habitat buffers

3 comments; last on Nov 24, 2011

Cameras, not coal, decided the election

Sat, Nov 19, 2011, 9:24 pm  //  Paul deArmond

Looking at the numbers for the Bellingham elections

11 comments; last on Nov 22, 2011

Bad Idea, Wrong Place, and Wrong Time

Mon, Oct 31, 2011, 3:07 pm  //  Guest writer

Bob Ferris of Re-Sources takes a values based perspective on our community and a possible coal port.

9 comments; last on Nov 02, 2011

From the Political Junkie: Why is Dan Pike talking about Coal Trains?

Thu, Sep 08, 2011, 9:37 am  //  Riley Sweeney

Look at the title, it spells it out.

6 comments; last on Sep 12, 2011

“Coal on a Roll” - in depth from onearth.org

Thu, Sep 01, 2011, 2:46 pm  //  John Servais

George Black is comprehensive on the Powder River coal basin, BNSF, and the shipping of coal from Cherry Point and Longview.

6 comments; last on Sep 07, 2011

SSA already started construction at Cherry Point

Fri, Jul 29, 2011, 10:11 am  //  John Servais

The Gateway Pacific coal port appears to be under construction now - secretly and w/o permits.

36 comments; last on Aug 05, 2011

The Cole Train: Tell it to the Herring

Mon, Jun 20, 2011, 10:42 am  //  Tip Johnson

Wherein something smells a bit fishy

2 comments; last on Jul 29, 2011

On the Take - Coal Port advocates

Wed, Jun 08, 2011, 1:09 pm  //  John Servais

Who all is on the take? Who all has not been up front about being on the take for the Coal Port?

4 comments; last on Jun 12, 2011

Running blog on Coal Port

Fri, Jun 03, 2011, 11:56 am  //  John Servais

A running update of links and info on the Coal Port and Trains of proposed Gateway Pacific at Cherry Point.

15 comments; last on Jun 29, 2011

Dave Warren plays the martyr

Thu, Jun 02, 2011, 6:45 pm  //  John Servais

The public meeting to hear opinions about the coal port last night saw local union leader Dave Warren playing games.

3 comments; last on Jun 05, 2011

Flash mob for coal meeting

Wed, Jun 01, 2011, 4:32 pm  //  Guest writer

Guest writer Mark Flanders' call to action for June 1 flash mob at coal port meeting

7 comments; last on Jun 09, 2011

The Cole Train: First Salvo

Mon, May 30, 2011, 10:40 pm  //  Tip Johnson

Wherein blackened hearts and minds are initially examined

6 comments; last on Jun 02, 2011

Cross-County Coal Train is Coming

Fri, Mar 25, 2011, 4:00 am  //  John Servais

Coal trains will probably pass Lynden on their way from Sumas to Cherry Point, after coming across on the Canadian rail roads.

16 comments; last on Aug 14, 2011

 

New Links

Julia Ioffe/New Republic
the Oatmeal

Current Interest

Community Wise Bellingham
counterpunch
Friends of Whatcom
Guardian Unlimited
Lummi Island Quarry
Reconveyance Challenge
Whatcom Elections

Publisher Recommended

counterpunch
GlobalPost
Guardian Unlimited
League of Women Voters
Paul Krugman - economics
Sweeney Politics

Local Blogs & News

Bellingham Herald
Bham Herald Politics Blog
Bham Politics & Economics
Bob Sanders
Cascadia Weekly
Citizen Ted
Ferndale Record
Friends of Whatcom
Get Whatcom Planning
HamsterTalk
Jack Petree
KGMI
Latte Republic
League of Women Voters
Lynden Tribune
MikeatthePort
Northern Light
Sweeney Politics
Twilight Zoning
Wally Wonders
Western Front - WWU
Whatcom Watch

Local Causes

Bellingham Police Activity
Chuckanut Community Forest
Chuckanut Mountains
Citizens of Bellingham
City Club of Bellingham
Community Wise Bellingham
Conservation NW
Cordata & Meridian
Facebook Port Reform
Futurewise - Whatcom
Lake Whatcom
Lummi Island Quarry
N. Cascades Audubon
NW Holocaust Center
RE Sources
Reconveyance Challenge
Reduce Jet Noise
Salish Sea Org.
Save the Granary Building
Transition Whatcom
WA Conservation Voters

Governments

Bellingham
Port of Bellingham
Skagit County
US - The White House
WA State Access
WA State Elections
WA State Legislature
Whatcom Auditor
Whatcom County
Whatcom Elections

Weather & Climate

Cliff Mass Weather Blog
Climate Audit
NW Radar
Two day forecast
Watts Up With That? - climate

Leisure

Adventures NW
Edge of Sports
Entertainment NNW
Famous Internet Skiers
Sailing Anarchy

Good Links

Al-Jazeera online
Alaska Dispatch
AlterNet.org
Antiwar.com
Arab News
Asia Times
Atlantic, The
Common Dreams
counterpunch
Crosscut Seattle
Daily Kos
Daily Mirror
Doonesbury
Drudge Report
FiveThirtyEight
Foreign Policy in Focus
GlobalPost
Guardian Unlimited
Gulf News
Haaretz
Huffington Post
Innocence Project, The
Intrnational Herald Tribune
James Fallows
Jerusalem Post
Joel Connelly
Juan Cole
Julia Ioffe/New Republic
Le Diplo
Media Matters
Michael Moore
Middle East Times
MoveOn.org
Nation, The
New American Century
News Trust
NMFA
numbers
Online Journal
Palestine Daily
Palestine News
Paul Krugman - economics
Personal bio info
Portland Indy Media
Progressive Review
Project Vote Smart
Reuters
Sea Shepherd
Slate
Talking Points Memo
the Oatmeal
Tom Paine.com
truthout
War and Piece
Washington Votes
WikiLeaks.ch
ynetnews.com

NwCitizen 1995 - 2007

Early Northwest Citizen

Internet At Its Best

TED

Quiet, Offline or Dead

Bellingham Register
Carl Weimer
David Hackworth
N. Sound Conservancy
No Leaky Buckets
Northwest Review
Orcinus
Post-Oklahoman Confessions
Protect Bellingham Parks
The American Telegraph
The Crisis Papers