Proposed over-water walkway is dead

Permalink +

Sat, May 21, 2016, 4:32 pm  //  John Servais

View from north end of Boulevard Park and looking north to the Cornwall landfill. The white on the landfill is a huge plastic blanket covering the toxic dump. The walkway would extend from this dock to there.

It can now be reliably reported that the long planned over-water walkway, running from the north end of Boulevard Park to the Cornwall Avenue landfill, has been cancelled by the Bellingham Parks Department. Almost since the completion of the Taylor Dock, the city has planned this second concrete walkway which would be nearly double the length of the Taylor Dock. Cancelling this project will free up $4 million in Greenways funds for actual green ways as opposed to a concrete bridge. 

There has not been much public support for the project but the city has been quietly pushing it since 2010. The city applied for, and received, federal grants of over $2 million. They planned to add $4 million of Greenways funds for a total of $6 million of the estimated $8 million needed for the project, with the rest from city impact fees and excise taxes. But the federal funds were granted based on questionable claims. The grants were available for transportation projects and this dock didn't seem to serve that purpose at all.  Further, the city's application indicated the concrete walkway "...will significantly improve public shoreline access along Bellingham’s waterfront by providing a continuous shoreline trail between Fairhaven and the former Cornwall Avenue Landfill site,..."  It fails to mention we already have a wonderful South Bay Trail along the shoreline from Boulevard Park connecting to the north and downtown Bellingham. 

In 2010, the city reached out to the Lummi Nation for approval of the project, per their authority by the 1855 Point Elliot Treaty, as the waters along Bellingham Bay where the walkway would have been built is in salmon fishing grounds. In season, gillnet fishing boats can be seen along the Bellingham waterfront. The Taylor Dock was grandfathered as it was originally a railroad track built on pilings 100 years ago.

Documents between the city and Lummi Nation show that from the beginning the Lummi were reluctant to even study the new proposed walkway project. According to a reliable source inside city hall, the city offered the Lummi $50,000 for their permission. This offer apparently offended Lummi leaders and sealed their refusal to study the project.  

See PDF file with this letter plus Lummi Nation documents relating to walkway. ( temp note:  prior to 7:45 pm this evening, the wrong document was linked.  The correct one is now in place.)

A week ago, the city wrote the Washington Department of Transportation to request that state grants for the walkway be transferred to road projects near the Granary on the old Georgia Pacific site. In part, the request said, "The [walkway] Project is unbuildable, at this time, and we hereby request a waiver to payback of the funds." This pretty well says the project is dead, but also opens questions regarding the hundreds of thousands of dollars the city has already spent planning this now-defunct bridge. 

Over the past six years, the city has spent over $800 thousand of state administered federal grant money planning this walkway, leaving only about $1.6 million for use near the Granary.  Of the original $8 million, the $4 million in Greenways money remains available to us.  The city addresses the issue of state funds already spent on this project in the attached pdf file, linked from earlier paragraph.

I have been watching for documents indicating this project was dead ever since a senior level source in city hall told me weeks ago that the bridge was dead in the water. Two weeks ago, I attended a Greenways Advisory Committee meeting where they spent some time discussing possible projects for the newly available $4 million dollars. But still no official word.

Based on the Greenways committee discussion, I contacted the city to learn what might become of the newly-released walkway funds. The administrator I spoke with was emphatic that the $4 million was earmarked for waterfront transportation needs and would not be available for land acquisition or trail development anywhere away from the downtown redevelopment area. This conflicts with my understanding that the Greenways Advisory Committee is authorized to recommend uses of the Greenways fund to the City Council, and it is the council that decides how the funds are used. The administration's reaction to my question suggests the mayor and parks department are trying to gain control of that $4 million -  perhaps to solve budget shortfalls and aid other non-green projects?

The return of an unencumbered $4 million into our Greenways Fund opens a variety of opportunities. I will follow up later this weekend with a suggestion; perhaps other citizens also have suggestions.  A few years ago, the city spent half a million dollars of Greenways funds to install plastic grass at civic field - outraging many citizens who voted for the last Greenways levy.  Hopefully, these returned funds from the cancelled walkway will be used for land acquisition and more trails as we were promised when we voted for the levy in 2006.

As a reminder: Another Greenways levy (#4) will be on the ballot in November. Last Monday, the City Council unanimously agreed to send it to the public for a vote.  Greenways 4 will run for seven years. The rate will be reduced from the current Greenways 3 levy of 59 cents per thousand dollars of property value to 50 cents. However, as written now, it allocates only 33% of funds for land acquisition - the lowest percentage ever. The mayor complained to the council that even 33% is too much. Further, 25% would supplement the regular parks department maintenance on all parks - not just Greenways-acquired land.  Mayor Linville doesn't seem to understand why we have agreed to tax ourselves for the Greenways levies for the past 26 years.  

A special thanks to Wendy Harris for managing to get the attached documents showing how the Lummi Nation has again saved us from ourselves in our efforts to wreck our waterfronts - whether from detrimental coal terminals or unsightly, unnecessary and un-green concrete walking bridges.

The plan for the now cancelled dock. It would be half a mile long and be set with almost 100 pilings in what are salmon fishing grounds. Notice South Bay Trail is not shown on the land along the shoreline.

David Camp  //  Sun, May 22, 2016, 3:19 am

The railway line is the issue - the walkway allowed bike and foot traffic from the South side to downtown without crossing the tracks at the level crossing at the north end of Boulevard Park. And if I remember correctly, BNSF could still close off that crossing. You saw what happened in Ferndale where BNSF applied for, and was granted, the right to close the level crossing at Brown Rd. All it would tale is some vindictiveness at BNSF over the dang nimby hippies in b’ham for killing the coal dump. Does it seem to you that the train drivers are riding their horns louder and longer through town at night than required?


Tim Paxton  //  Sun, May 22, 2016, 9:17 am

Great News!  Good report and big thanks also to Wendy Harris for being on top of this subject for years.  This trail idea was an insult to Greenways supporters and Lummis alike.  The City was forced to abandon this plan.

There already IS a trail along the shore line and opening this overwater one would have made it easier for the City to Vacate the Boulevard trail in favor of condo developers.  It was not a land acquisition.

This all White person designed trail was racist in its gross presumption that the Lummi Nation would simply give up its historic fishing and shell fishing grounds forever.  The final insult was the destination mound of toxic waste.  Who would even take a dog to visit a pile of mercury or dioxin?

I understand the new proposed Greenways fund is already targeted to pay for clean up cost of these mountains of toxic waste made by GP.  I certainly won’t vote for that type of new and abused Greenways fund.


John Servais  //  Sun, May 22, 2016, 11:07 am

David,

Actually, BNSF cannot close the crossings in Bellingham because those crossings - rights of way - existed before the railroads came to Bellingham.  In most towns in the American west, the railroad was first and the towns grew up around the railroad - leaving the railroads able to dictate crossing terms.  Not so in Bellingham.

About 12 years ago, the railroad tried to close the crossing and was quickly made aware that they could not.  That pedestrian crossing is now there forever.  It is not a detriment to using the South Bay Trail.

This crossing is also now much safer than in the past.  When the RR tried to close this it was because they said it was unsafe for pedestrians crossing.  The mayor promised to make the crossing safe - and then did not.  And just a few years later Maya was tragically killed riding her bike and being hit by an Amtrak train.  Since then the city and BNSF have greatly improved the safety of the crossing and think they are done.  But it is still unsafe.  It can easily be made quite safe - and it is a job for us citizens to pressure our elected city government to make it so.

That said, making this crossing totally safe is 1/100th the cost of the over the water walkway.  And does not violate fishing rights.


Scott Wicklund  //  Sun, May 22, 2016, 12:05 pm

The pdf documents John posted are imho a must read to grasp the arrogance of those involved at COB.  Has Wharf Street already been vacated to BNSF?  That was my impression.  Thanks for this post!


Tip Johnson  //  Sun, May 22, 2016, 5:37 pm

I recall the RR used the trail closure to negotiate an increased speed limit through town.  Then mayor Asmundson readily granted it in their franchise renewal.  Remarkably, The Bellingham franchise didn’t cover the route through the former City of Fairhaven, never having been corrected upon that city’s consolidation with Bellingham.  In other words, we probably had the leverage to negotiate a much better long term relationship with the RR, but caved and gave them the speed increase which necessitates longer horn blasts.


George Dyson  //  Mon, May 23, 2016, 1:21 pm

I suppose it is commendable to hear COB declare this project to be “unbuildable, at this time.” The B-side to this sad, expensive tale is that the State surface transportation funding is being shifted to the Granary Avenue project, in support of a bankrupt plan for waterfront redevelopment which is also unbuildable, at this time. The pie-in-the-sky waterfront redevelopment plan which was the basis for giving G-P / Koch Industries a free pass out of town was also the basis of a disastrously one-sided Interlocal Agreement, which, instead of keeping COB afloat, appears to be sucking the life out of everything in town.


Alex McLean  //  Mon, May 23, 2016, 4:03 pm

A few points:

Greenway funds—at least for the current levy that is about to expire—have two devoted tranches, or dividers. These are defined by “Acquisition” dollars and “Development” dollars.

The “$4 million” that was pegged to the Overwater Walkway, since it very clearly is a construction project, always has been and likely always will be allocated to Development projects—it is money for building and forming completed parks and trails, making the purchased lands useable for the public by installing parking lots, benches, toilets, etc.—and likely will not be made available to make new Acquisitions.
 
While it is true that City Council could muscle these dollars around into different areas (as they have ultimate authority to sausage these dollars any way they want) I doubt that will happen. At least not easily.

I will continue to maintain that the existence of the South Bay Trail, while clearly a “duplicate” of the route defined by the Overwater Walkway, is not now and likely never will be an adequate route of access to our future waterfront and the new, someday, Cornwall Beach Park.

If we concede that railway crossings are an issue (they totally are) then please add the complication of Warf Street—that queer dogleg of asphalt that shunts cars up the hill and onto Boulevard and its vehicle route to Fairhaven.

Warf Street, due partly to the street-level railroad crossing, will either be closed or need a ramp in later phases of Waterfront District development.
While we could wait for that day and, presumably, install sidewalks and trail access to the already absurdly expensive endeavor ... that day will likely come decades after Cornwall Beach Park is completed, long after it is ready for use and public enjoyment.

As it stands, Warf Street has no sidewalks, no bike lane, no guardrails to skip over in a panic when some imbecile flies up the dark and twisty route and nudges families and bikes into the ferns. It has, at best, a steep hill on one side and a painted line—with a foot of wiggle room next to the muddy walls—on the other.

We’ll need public non-motorized access to this park and to the Waterfront District someday: that, in my mind, is an absolute fact. The existing Taylor Street dock, our current overwater walkway, gets over 900,000 users per year—by far the most popular “trail” in the County and, whatever your opinion of its aesthetics and environmental impact, a massive asset to both non-motorized transportation and to the tourism, health, recreation, and overall enjoyment of our (awesome) park system.

My proposition, and I think a cursory look at past pages here would confirm this, is that a devoted ramp shooting off the bluff, over the tracks, and into the southernmost end of our future Cornwall Beach Park is an ideal alternative to the (admittedly) long and expensive design proposed for the canceled Overwater Walkway. It could still be a really cool, flashy, addition to our most popular trail and parks—an asset on many levels—but it would cancel the awkwardness, inefficiency, and possible danger of needing to use Warf Street and having to loop into Cornwall Beach Park rather than through it.

It seems a minor point, I know.
But connectivity should be a priority for linking these two massively popular public assets, these biggest of our waterfront parks. I don’t think Warf Street—with its various existing and future design headaches—will ever fit the bill.

We deserve something better, something worthy of nearly a million users per-year, and something carefully designed and thought out.

We should, therefore, endeavor to plant the seed within the City of Bellingham mindhive that a devoted bridge from the S. Bay Trail into Cornwall Beach Park be seriously explored as a goal. Some of these dangling development funds, from Greenways III, could be pinned to that effort.


Tim Paxton  //  Mon, May 23, 2016, 7:28 pm

I am pretty sure that the Lummi Nation already said no, and they meant it.  The over water walkway idea is contingent on the Lummis giving up their traditional fishing and shell fishing rights.  Not likely.  Some people apparently seem to have a hard time wrapping their brains around this concept of Native American treaty or historical rights. 


Geoff Middaugh  //  Tue, May 24, 2016, 6:29 am

First, what Alex said. 

Second, this project had full public support once, and was fully permitted in regards to land use, SEPA, etc. by the State and the City of Bellingham, except for the final building permits.  The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, and earlier members of Greenways where in support of the project.  Citizen’s voted to support it in Greenways votes. 

It died a slow death because of local politics, and bureaucratic ineptness.  In early negotiations, the Lummi demanded what the COB wouldn’t give, and whether there was $50,000 involved, I don’t know.  That sounds like post hoc rationalization, and is different from what I heard after 10 years involved with the project and six years on the PRAB supporting it.   

WSDOT originally told the COB they had to get a COE permit, but then later in the process, changed their minds and said they need a Coast Guard bridge permit.  The coast guard was working towards approval, but the Lummi pushed back, within the tribal rights issues of Cherry Point playing in the background.  There were numerous types of mitigation offered, but the COB would not agree with what the Lummi demanded.  I don’t blame the Lummi, because they have a vested right.  I don’t blame the COB, because what was demanded was beyond tribal fishing rights.  But, I do blame WSDOT for their malfeasance, and disingenuous negotiations with the City.  They let the political support for this project erode.  Transportation projects always get approved, or they ignore the tribes position, but recreation projects do not.  Double standards.

In public interest theory, those who support something have broad and shallow difused interests, while those opposed have narrow and deep focus.  We know who prevailed on this one.

For minimally distorted facts on the topic, read the 17 page detailed 2010 Hearing Examiner decision, and the litany of letters by the COE, Coast Guard and numerous contractors.  It’s posted on the COB website. 

But now its time to move on.  I think that the citizens of Bellingham need to get behind the new Greenways Initiative, and make it work for all of Bellingham.  It’s an amazing opportunity, and something too great to lose by fighting over projects and selective rewriting of history. 


John Watts  //  Tue, May 24, 2016, 6:49 pm

It’s been a while since I’ve commented here. My wife’s passing has distracted me. Note June 4 at 2PM her memorial at Bellingham Unitarian Fellowship. All come!
————————-
But, this issue really does qualify as an ‘issue’. Some of the earlier comments seem to have become ‘issues’ in their own right; issues of ‘truthiness’, credibility and in-grained, permanently unbalanced, political mind-sets.

I am inclined to agree much more with Mssrs Middaugh and McLean, who seem to actually know what they are talking about, not speculating on pet peeves or prejudices.

This IS an issue that matters, as is the future of the Greenways levy itself. Whether GW-4 becomes a voting matter also matters, as does the Mayor’s alternate idea of a Metropolitan Parks District to create a permanent funding mechanism to insure Bellingham Parks, Trails & Open Space can be maintained, even under inevitable General Fund inadequacies.

Both are important, but taking care of what Bellingham already has, takes precedence.

City Council DOES have the last word on discretionary funds, like Greenways, but ought to listen attentively to PRAB and Greenways Advisory Board to allocate GW $ fairly. They seriously abrogated this responsibility in the purchase of ‘Chuckanut Ridge’. Fortunately, this mis-step has now been mitigated!

The Metro Parks District idea would likely diminish similar susceptibility to political agendas and act more like a dedicated Enterprise Fund Utility. Both funding mechanisms are valuable, and both are probably needed.

My 2 cents…


Tim Paxton  //  Thu, May 26, 2016, 8:10 am

$4 million dollars now freed up for Greenways Land Acquisition!  That is great news.  Start with saving the last Heron Colony.  That topic has already been approved by Greenways advisory committee earlier this month.

Since 2003, people thought the Post Point Heron Colony was saved but the money was never released.  There is a deadline to take action, alas, apparently Mayor Kelli and Parks is blocking protection.  They claim the Greenways money for their secret non land acquisition schemes.

Time to call / write City Council to insist they use the Greenways money for what the voters want, which is land acquisition.  Protect the Herons.

 


Proposed over-water walkway is dead

The planned concrete walkway from Boulevard Park to the Cornwall landfill, using millions in Greenway funds, has been abandoned by Bellingham. We again thank the Lummi.

John Servais
Sat, May 21, 2016, 4:32 pm
11 comments; last on May 26, 2016

BNSF: A casual approach to railroad safety

At Clayton Beach, we have tracked increasing erosion under railroad tracks and written to the railroads and federal inspectors. To no avail.

John Servais
Mon, Apr 04, 2016, 8:17 pm
2 comments; last on Apr 05, 2016


Anchor-chain activists face hefty fines

The Coast Guard has levied $30,000 in fines on two Bellingham climate activists. They will fight to have the fines dropped.

Ralph Schwartz
Thu, Feb 18, 2016, 5:01 am
16 comments; last on Feb 22, 2016

Bye Bye

Shell Polar Pioneer floating oil drill rig left the Pacific Northwest for Norway today. Nice holiday gift for all of us.

John Servais
Fri, Dec 25, 2015, 11:31 am
2 comments; last on Dec 25, 2015

A Learning Moment - Hopefully

Beware walking RR tracks on the Fairhaven waterfront in the event of unexpected encounter with a high speed train

John Servais
Sun, Sep 13, 2015, 9:42 am
2 comments; last on Sep 18, 2015

Chiara D’Angelo comes down from anchor chain

Young Chiara spent 3 nights hanging from the anchor chain of Shell Oil's Arctic Challenger as a protest to arctic oil drilling.

John Servais
Mon, May 25, 2015, 8:17 pm
0 comments

A Perspective on Port Politics

The port's latest bone-headed deal calls for the good citizens of Whatcom County to consider the options...unless we're enjoying our Groundhog Day.

John Servais
Sat, Apr 04, 2015, 1:15 pm
3 comments; last on Apr 07, 2015

Port Gives Away Our Bellingham Waterfront

Port of Bellingham today sold out our public waterfront to a foreign shell company formed 6 days ago. Sold it cheap and with a screwy arrangement.

John Servais
Wed, Apr 01, 2015, 12:20 am
32 comments; last on Apr 05, 2015

Robyn du Pre` Has Passed On

Add your thoughts and remembrances. Robyn du Pre` was a stalwart and true environmental advocate for Bellingham and Whatcom County. She died this week.

John Servais
Thu, Mar 12, 2015, 1:06 pm
9 comments; last on Mar 23, 2015

Action Alert for Tonight: Waterfront Wildlife and Habitat Threatened

The public needs to support city council and request that a waterfront habitat assessment include terrestrial species and habitat connectivity.

Wendy Harris
Mon, Apr 21, 2014, 11:43 am
0 comments

Reid Boiler Works Burns Down

The old empty Reid Boiler Works industrial building in Fairhaven burned to the ground Saturday night.

John Servais
Sun, Feb 09, 2014, 10:13 am
0 comments

Port’s Alternative Marina Analysis a Scam

Do we actually need to say that we, as citizens, want accurate information from government officials?

Guest writer
Tue, Jan 14, 2014, 3:19 pm
1 comments; last on Jan 14, 2014

Port Memo Addresses Marina Fraud Allegations

A Port of Bellingham internal memo tries, but fails, to justify changes in cost estimates for alternative marina sites.

Wendy Harris
Fri, Dec 20, 2013, 4:56 pm
5 comments; last on Dec 22, 2013

On Monday, City Council Votes “third and final” Approval of Waterfront Plan

Local activist calls on Bellingham City Council to table the unpopular waterfront plans and engage in meaningful public process

Wendy Harris
Sat, Dec 07, 2013, 1:33 pm
2 comments; last on Dec 08, 2013

Video Exposes City Council Dysfunction on Waterfront Plan

The Political Junkie has posted a 3 minute video showing Bellingham City Council members explaining their idiocy for all of us to watch.

John Servais
Thu, Dec 05, 2013, 12:58 pm
2 comments; last on Dec 06, 2013

Cascadia Weekly Blasts Waterfront Plan

Bellingham City Council and Port of Bellingham finalize the waterfront plan. In his weekly Gristle, Tim Johnson blasts the corrupt public process.

John Servais
Wed, Dec 04, 2013, 11:53 am
4 comments; last on Dec 05, 2013

Boulevard Park Reopens

Beach reconstruction is done at Boulevard Park on the Bellingham waterfront. Paths along shore are again open - and it looks good.

John Servais
Sat, Oct 26, 2013, 8:36 pm
6 comments; last on Nov 02, 2013

Treaty Rights and Public Rights Ignored In Overwater Walkway

The city staff considers the overwater walkway a done deal before official approval or resolution of treaty right conflicts

Wendy Harris
Tue, Oct 08, 2013, 3:22 pm
4 comments; last on Oct 16, 2013

Wildlife Impacts Missing In COB Waterfront District EIS

The city and port have not addressed wildlife impacts from waterfront development and this should be done before a waterfront plan is enacted.

Wendy Harris
Sat, Sep 28, 2013, 6:05 pm
0 comments

Sen. Doug Ericksen Co-opts rather than Cooperate

Riley Sweeney examines Sen. Ericksen's legislative methods

Riley Sweeney
Fri, Jun 28, 2013, 7:29 am
0 comments

Waterfront “Planned Action Ordinance” Limits Restoration and Public Input

The City Planning Department has included a technical document in the waterfront proposal without disclosing important impacts.

Wendy Harris
Tue, Mar 26, 2013, 9:59 pm
1 comments; last on Mar 30, 2013

Valuable Article in the Whatcom Watch

Wendy Harris writes about the proposed $8 million concrete bridge along the Bellingham waterfront - using Greenways funds to build.

John Servais
Sun, Mar 17, 2013, 9:42 pm
3 comments; last on Mar 20, 2013

Waterfront EIS Revised Without Public Process

An "Updated Preferred Alternative" reduces the number of waterfront jobs and expands the boundary of the waterfront district.

Wendy Harris
Tue, Feb 19, 2013, 10:40 pm
0 comments

Efforts to save the Granary building

Graphics projected on building each night in effort to bring attention to threatened building

John Servais
Sat, Aug 04, 2012, 12:18 am
3 comments; last on Aug 11, 2012

Motivated Reasoning Yields Useless Planning

Where a planning staff desire for view corridors in the Fairhaven plan yields a view corridor that does nothing for views.

John Servais
Mon, Jul 23, 2012, 7:05 pm
1 comments; last on Jul 25, 2012

Scott Walker asks for Charlie Sheldon’s resignation

Bellingham Port Commissioner Scott Walker motioned for the port to ask Executive Director Charlie Sheldon to resign.

John Servais
Wed, Oct 19, 2011, 1:13 am
5 comments; last on Oct 20, 2011

From the Political Junkie: A Petree-Eye View of Downtown

Riley interviews Clayton Petree about his view of Downtown Bellingham

Riley Sweeney
Tue, Aug 09, 2011, 5:44 pm
6 comments; last on Aug 12, 2011

Problems with SEPA review of Cornwall Landfill

Time is running out for public comment on the Port's proposal to use toxic waste as a cap at waterfront re-development site.

Wendy Harris
Thu, Jun 23, 2011, 8:30 am
5 comments; last on Jul 02, 2011

Port punts on commercial moorage rates

Guest writer Doug Karlberg follows up with report from Tuesday's Port Commission meeting

Guest writer
Thu, Feb 17, 2011, 7:30 pm
7 comments; last on Feb 20, 2011

Showdown at the Port of Bellingham

Why the price of moorage matters to all Whatcom County. A guest article by Doug Karlberg.

Guest writer
Mon, Feb 14, 2011, 7:35 pm
5 comments; last on Jun 30, 2011

Is Boulevard Park/Cornwall Landfill Overwater Walkway A Toxic Trail?

Wendy Harris writes about a multi million dollar planned city of Bellingham project.

Guest writer
Wed, Dec 15, 2010, 10:07 pm
9 comments; last on Dec 18, 2010

Bellingham! It’s The Mercury!

Maybe NOAA knows the truth about our waterfront. Our Port of Bellingham pretends it is not toxic. But it is criminally toxic.

Kamalla Rose Kaur
Wed, Mar 10, 2010, 9:42 pm
2 comments; last on Mar 16, 2010

The Way I See It - Los Angeles Resurrected


I’ve been to Los Angeles many times. I even remember the Red and Yellow electric street cars that served the city from after World War II until…

Ham Hayes
Wed, Nov 25, 2009, 9:00 am
0 comments

The Port of Chmelik

Seems like the offices of Frank Chmelik, the attorney for the Port of Bellingham, are becoming our defacto Port offices. Instead of conferences and meetings at the Port,…

John Servais
Tue, Nov 24, 2009, 6:12 am
2 comments; last on Nov 25, 2009

The Mayor’s Statement in the Herald

Dan Pike's guest editorial in Sunday's Herald is a direct result of an article on NwCitizen earlier this week. Indeed, on Wednesday, after the article had only been…

John Servais
Sun, Apr 26, 2009, 12:19 pm
3 comments; last on May 21, 2009

Port of Bellingham gave millions to AIG

We local taxpayers have contributed $20 million of our own tax dollars to AIG's executives. Remember? A couple years ago the Port bought an insurance policy from AIG…

John Servais
Sat, Mar 21, 2009, 10:19 am
3 comments; last on Mar 23, 2009

Fairhaven Shipyard to gain larger drydock

Coming to our Fairhaven waterfront - this magnificent floating drydock. The above aerial photo is of the Fairhaven Shipyard with the new drydock placed as a computer image…

John Servais
Fri, Jan 02, 2009, 7:23 pm
1 comments; last on Jan 03, 2009

New Library ideas

Tired of looking at a photo of geese when you check here? So am I. We have nine writers for this site but it has been rather slack…

John Servais
Wed, Jun 25, 2008, 5:20 pm
10 comments; last on Aug 04, 2008

What you can’t see, won’t kill ya - a lesson in TBL

TBL, or Triple Bottom Line, is a nifty concept that says we want to be evaluating and measuring projects on the basis not only of economic, but environmental…

Ham Hayes
Fri, Feb 22, 2008, 1:24 pm
5 comments; last on Feb 25, 2008

When Is Less More?

When Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) are prepared, more than one development model might be evaluated. But a no-action alternative is always required as a baseline reference. Convention

Tip Johnson
Sat, Feb 02, 2008, 4:55 pm
0 comments

Public hearing started well after 9 pm

It is not bad enough that the city council schedules the public hearing on our future Shoreline Master Plan for the middle of July - a plan many…

Site Management
Tue, Jul 17, 2007, 5:33 pm
0 comments

Forums and blogging and pits, oh my!

The Herald does not even follow its own mandates. On Sunday, the editorial said the candidates "...must address 6 big issues." Must. Then they sent out their own…

Site Management
Thu, Jul 12, 2007, 5:59 pm
0 comments

Only a government agency would do this.

The Herald ran an ad for the State Department of Ecology informing us of the web site where we could find the Draft Consent Decree for our waterfront…

Site Management
Mon, Jul 09, 2007, 6:17 pm
0 comments

Last Chance - Steal this Waterfront!

In a Bellingham Herald article dated May 4, Interim Mayor Tim Douglas "said it's

Tip Johnson
Thu, May 10, 2007, 4:51 pm
0 comments

The Port’s Plan to Poison

Why the Log Pond cap won't work

An article in a recent Bellingham Business Journal detailed the debate over whether the toxic muck in the Whatcom Waterway ought to…

Tip Johnson
Thu, Apr 26, 2007, 12:02 pm
0 comments

The So-called News

Independent media? Freedom of the press? Peoples friend, tyrants foe? It was a good idea while it lasted, educating the electorate and forming a mainstay of our democracy.…

Tip Johnson
Mon, Apr 23, 2007, 4:24 pm
0 comments

Poisoning the Public - A treacherous legacy

According to the Bellingham Herald, the Washington State Department of Natural Resources has recently approved leaving tons of mercury buried in Bellingham Bay. The documents are not yet…

Tip Johnson
Wed, Apr 18, 2007, 4:49 pm
0 comments

Your Waterfront - Up for grabs

New Whatcom Redevelopment Project - The City and Port of Bellingham will hold public information a meeting. Bellingham Cruise Terminal. 355 Harris Ave., Bellingham. WA Times: 6:00 PM.

Also,…

Tip Johnson
Wed, Apr 18, 2007, 4:34 pm
0 comments

Response to Bellingham Herald editorial

Today's Bellingham Herald editorial invites an answer. The editorial is good in that it reflects on past bad practices, like allowing GP to dump mercury into Bellingham Bay,…

John Servais
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 6:18 pm
0 comments

Moving Target

One of the more momentous public hearings in Bellingham's history appears to be ready to pass with more than the ordinary confusion. We wrote about some of the…

Tip Johnson
Mon, Dec 11, 2006, 3:32 pm
0 comments

Public meeting & hearing rescheduled

Notice:

Relative to the last post:

Ecology has rescheduled the public meeting for:
December 7th, 6:30 p.m. ñ 8:30 p.m., Bellingham Cruise Terminal, 355 Harris Avenue, Bell

John Servais
Thu, Nov 30, 2006, 2:56 pm
0 comments

Public Process - Lots of it (kind of),

or I lied (sort of!)

In the previous post I complained that the biggest rip-off in Whatcom County history was happening without even being discussed or making it into…

Tip Johnson
Mon, Nov 27, 2006, 6:15 pm
0 comments

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

The good? We are no longer spewing forty+ pounds of mercury vapor every day into the local atmosphere. We are no longer dumping 20 to 40 tons of…

Tip Johnson
Sun, Nov 26, 2006, 5:21 pm
0 comments

Traffic and Western Washington University

If WWU gets their way, $20 million in state taxes will be spent on jack-hammering out good roads and building new ones a hundred yards away. No increase…

John Servais
Mon, Mar 01, 2004, 8:20 pm
0 comments

The Port Commissioner campaign is getting hot

Ginny Benton, seeking her third term as commissioner, stated this evening at the Rome Grange that she will not respond to the "mud slinging" being done against her.…

John Servais
Wed, Aug 27, 2003, 4:57 pm
0 comments

Web site to check out

Waterfront Futures for Bellingham - nothing here. This is one of those processes t

John Servais
Mon, May 12, 2003, 7:08 pm
0 comments

Tis time to focus on local issues

Elections this fall could bring positive change to Whatcom County and Bellingham. In particular, we need a new Mayor and we need a new Port Commissioner. The challenge…

John Servais
Thu, May 01, 2003, 7:40 pm
0 comments

 

About NWCitizen

Donations maintain site

Our writers
Thru the years

Election Links

Jeff Strung / WA Auditor

Mike LaPointe / US Congress

League of Women Voters

Calendar of Events

Home page
Videos of Districting Committee

Local Online News

Bellingham Herald

Bham Business Journal
Bham Politics & Econ
Cascadia Weekly
Coal Stop
Ferndale Record
KGMI
KPLU fm radio
Latte Republic
Lynden Tribune
Noisy Waters
Northern Light
Seattle Times
Twilight Zoning
Western Front - WWU
Whatcom Watch

Local Causes

Chuckanut C. Forest

City Club of Bellingham
Community Wise Bham
Conservation NW
Futurewise - Whatcom
Lake Whatcom
Lummi Island Quarry
N. Cascades Audubon
NW Holocaust Center
Powder River Basin R. C.
RE Sources
Salish Sea Org.
Save the Granary
Transition Whatcom
WA Conservation Voters
Whatcom Peace & Justice

Our Governments

- Whatcom County

Bellingham
Port of Bellingham
Skagit County
US House
US Senate
US Supreme Court
US The White House
WA State
Whatcom COG

NWCitizen 1995-2007

Early Northwest Citizen

Weather & Climate

Cliff Mass Weather Blog

Climate Audit
EPIC World Photos
Nat Hurricane Center
NW Radar
Two day forecast
Watts Up With That?

Local Leisure

Adventures NW

Bellingham Wins
Entertainment NNW
Recreation Northwest

Good Web Sites

Al-Jazeera online

Alaska Dispatch
AlterNet.org
Antiwar.com
Arab News
Asia Times
Atlantic, The
Change The Mascot
Common Dreams
counterpunch
Crosscut Seattle
Daily Kos
Daily Mirror
Doonesbury
Drudge Report
Edge of Sports
FiveThirtyEight
Foreign Policy in Focus
GlobalPost
Guardian
Gulf News
Haaretz
Huffington Post
Innocence Project
Irish Times
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
Personal bio info
Portland Indy Media
Progressive Review
Project Vote Smart
Reuters
Sea Shepherd
Slate
Stand for the Troops
Ta-Nehisi Coates
Talking Points Memo
TED
The Crisis Papers
The Intercept
the Oatmeal
Tom Paine.com
truthout
Vox
War and Piece
Washington Votes
WikiLeaks.ch
ynetnews.com

Quiet, Offline or Dead

Bellingham Register

Bhm Herald Politics Blog
Bob Sanders
Carl Weimer
Chuckanut Mountains
Citizen Ted
Citizens of Bellingham
Cordata & Meridian
David Hackworth
Facebook Port Reform
Friends of Whatcom
Get Whatcom Planning
HamsterTalk
Intrnational Herald Tribune
Jack Petree
MikeatthePort
N. Sound Conservancy
No Leaky Buckets
Northwest Review
Orcinus
Post-Oklahoman
Protect Bellingham Parks
Sweeney Politics
The American Telegraph
Wally Wonders