Chuckanut Ridge: Good Deal, Bad Deal?

Permalink +

Sun, Sep 25, 2011, 11:59 pm  //  Tip Johnson

For thirty years the City has created an expensive problem by adopting and defending inappropriate zoning for Chuckanut Ridge. It was adopted without any of the reviews and notifications that normally precede this exercise of police power. No one except a few realtors, the owners, and maybe a couple attorneys knew about it for years. And it wasn't the only such zoning secret. Such anomalies would gradually prove poisonous to the public trust in City planning that had been painstakingly built during the evolution of the first Comprehensive Plan and it's neighborhood approach.

When a project was proposed fifteen years later, the community first learned the awful fact of the zoning. A property the CIty had recently appraised at slightly over $3M suddenly boasted an asking price of over $20M. Developers taunted, "We bought density." The huge increase was based solely on zoning termed "a mystery at best" by one of the City's lead planners at the time.

CItizens and neighbors rose to the challenge. They passed levies in hopes of acquiring the property, to no avail. A battle of locally epic proportion was waged while the City, inexplicably, advantaged the project at every turn. At great expense to themselves, citizens defeated the project - almost twice - except it finally defeated itself. Environmental review showed it unfeasible and the economy turned. The City finally had an opportunity and took it. They paid a high price - a fitting end for having created the phantom value. Now, how can we learn from it?

Today the City considers selling parts of this property to pay off value that never should have existed. With all due respect, it's a foolhardy aim. Just review the DEIS.  Should the City tread the development quagmire that took down one of Bellingham's most established developers and a bank?

I made the same mistake. I theoretically parceled out 15 acres along Chuckanut Drive to consider for development - development in close proximity to services, in keeping with neighborhood character, not overburdening the bridge, not compromising school safety or emergency access. I considered 20 or so prime southside lots that might fetch nearly $4M, if they could be marketed. Then I overlaid the topography and wetlands. Less than half these units could actually be placed. I looked at how to get the rest. The same tar pit that plagued the owners prevailed. You can't punch roads without compromising wetlands. Wooded hilltops, sensitive slopes, and critical habitat must be compromised - all contrary to existing policies.

Yet, abstractly, the model has merit. The City should be able to buy strategic properties for public purposes, plat some development parcels to pay the freight, and preserve most. It's far better than handing unrealistic entitlements out to developers like candy on credit and scrambling to prevent catastrophies. It's just not going to work here. It's too late. The value is all phony. The City made it's mark and tainted the opportunity. But the model could work if we had good neighborhood-based planning. And therein lies the rub.

Trust has eroded. A comprehensive plan designed, ahead of its time, for neighborhood based planning was stripped of power, neighborhood goals, policies and objectives routinely trammelled. After decades of anticipating the daylighting of Padden Creek to improve fish habitat, we see planners recommend density that will turn it into a storm sewer instead. Wetlands and other critical areas are routinely developed. Time and again development forces stable neighborhoods into transition - around the University, in Birchwood, Happy Valley - everywhere. Look at the base of Alabama Hill. That's bad planning, and costs taxpayers money. Citizens do not trust the City to make good planning decisions.

Let me underscore this point: Bad City planning created the problem at Chuckanut Ridge and today undermines the public's trust in creative solutions to better planning. Today's proposal makes a mockery of the Greenways Levies that featured this acquisition and of citizens' efforts to save the property. It continues the mockery of neighborhood planning, upon which our Comprehensive Plan is supposedly based. Moreover, it is doomed to failure. There's nothing to get. The reason this property has remained undeveloped to this day is because it is essentially not developable.

In any case, if we are looking to cover shortfalls or even leverage gains in Greenways, we would more profitably and more equitably look at all Greenways together.  Let's reasonably assess which might best be developed and assist with funding. Which do not compromise ecosystems, or parkland integrity, require little infrastructure, fit with neighborhood plans? Where is our best bang for the buck? Don't fixate on one property with such well documented development problems and a record of failure. Take a look around. There may be many good options.

But before we even try, let's start by restoring the neighborhood-based planning we agreed to thirty years ago, as the very purpose of our Comprehensive Plan is still expressed, even if not practiced. Let's use our land-use authorities to first help people put down roots and build community. Then help us make it even better. Let's not just build, let's build community.  The cut and run development we have encouraged is the cause of expensive municipal problems - like Chuckanut Ridge.  Good neighborhood-based planning is the cure. 

Give it a try.  Heck, we live here!

Mike Rostron  //  Mon, Sep 26, 2011, 8:18 am

Excellent points Tip!  The same sort of scenario is playing out now at the former D.O.T. site in Sunnyland where the developer feels he has bought high density and the hundreds of hours of time and good faith efforts of neighborhood residents were summarily shoved aside by the machinations of the planning department.

You are right to say this is a general problem, not just site-specific.  It is an unfortunate fact of life that the relationship between developers and neighborhood residents is very often adversarial, and that needs to be acknowledged.  Ideally the city should mediate that conflict with a view of preserving and augmenting neighborhoods, or improving them according to the wishes of those who live there.  The desires of the developers for maximum profits should be secondary.  One has to only look at certain areas of this town (Northwest Ave., Sunset, Telegraph, etc.)  to see what results from allowing developers to do as they wish, unfettered by neighborhood interests and encouraged by “build it and they will come”  city policies. 

I suggest we begin to ask some of the following questions of our candidates for city offices:

*Do you support preserving the character of Bellingham’s various historic neighborhoods?
*Will you stand for the citizens of Bellingham whose homes represent most of their net worth and lifetimes of labor, hopes, and dreams?
*Are you willing to defend residents from the practices of developers out to make a profit regardless of the impact to city neighborhoods and residents?


Larry Horowitz  //  Mon, Sep 26, 2011, 9:27 am

Yes, Tip, it’s true.  The city HAD created the phantom value problem.  But the problem no longer exists, and it’s not necessary for TAXPAYERS to pay for the CITY’s bad deeds.

Every potential buyer of this property already knows:

1) The land is barely developable because - as the Draft EIS clearly states - “Environmentally critical areas cover almost the entire site.  The flattest areas on the site are either wetlands or would need to be set aside as wetland buffers. Most of the remainder of the site contains erosion-prone soils that have slopes of 15 percent slope or more, steep enough to heighten concerns about erosion potential, and some limited areas are considered landslide-prone.” (1)

2) The vesting, which theoretically allows circumvention of the city’s 2005 Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO), is on shaky legal footing and is easily challenged.  Be assured, it will be legally challenged. More importantly, the Dept of Ecology (DOE) which has jurisdiction over the five Category 1 wetlands, has stated in writing it will require best available science, a regulatory requirement that essentially re-establishes key safeguards of the CAO.  In other words, vesting has become essentially meaningless and utterly worthless.

3) The requirement to either build a connector road or widen the bridge still exists; but cannot be satisfied and still pencil out economically.  During the “Special Meeting” of the 1978 Planning Commission which established the connector road prerequisite, Planning Commission Chair Mark Packer asked Planning Director Greg Waddell, “What can go in these areas where you have a prerequisite before the prerequisite goes in?”  Waddell’s answer:  “Nothing.  Nothing could happen.”  Bottom line:  The property is essentially undevelopable as is.

4) The angry mob (which mostly resembles Grateful Dead groupies) is not likely to disappear into thin air.  This group has experienced a very steep learning curve and has established itself as a force to be reckoned with by any developer.  Who wants a piece of that?  Especially when there are so many cheap properties available that are not encumbered by such a passionate opposition, not to mention the physical and logistical encumbrances.

Given that every potential buyer is already aware of these significant flaws, why would anyone - including us taxpayers - pay a premium for this tainted property.  Sure, we want it; but are we willing to pay substantially more than anyone else?  Does Washington Federal really need our money that bad?  I thought WA Fed was the bank that wants to “invest here.”  I guess I was wrong.

In any event, considering this is the most expensive single acquisition of parkland in the city’s history, BEFORE CLOSING ON THIS DEAL, the city would be wise to hire a professional appraiser to critically review the bank’s 2010 appraisal with the above factors in mind.  Perhaps even start from scratch with a new appraisal.  If this were a corporation, it would be legally negligent not to do so.  You cannot perform due diligence without a critical analysis of the property’s value.  The time for ‘government work’ is over. 

Let’s do it right.  Now!

(1) DEIS Section 1.3.2.3 on page 1-7 @

<http://www.cob.org/documents/planning/growth/fairhaven_high/eis info/deis/05_Chapter 1.pdf>


Tip Johnson  //  Mon, Sep 26, 2011, 9:59 am

Larry,
I agree, except the problem does still exist and will until the City does what is supposedly required but was never done - review the zoning for consistency with adopted policies, goals, objectives and regulations.  Wouldn’t an appraisal done before that still be wrong?


Larry Horowitz  //  Mon, Sep 26, 2011, 10:58 am

An appraisal is neither intrinsically ‘right’ or intrinsically ‘wrong’; it is an estimate of value based on a whole host of assumptions.

We know for a fact that the bank’s appraisal is based on assumptions that have proven to be invalid.  A professional appraiser can incorporate valid assumptions into the bank’s appraisal or can create a new appraisal based on valid assumptions.

The city should ask the appraiser, “What would a developer pay for this property?”  The appraiser would then be required to consider the fact that the current zoning could never be permitted based on the fact that it violates a variety of comp plan goals and policies, violates DOE’s best available science requirement, and precludes satisfying the connector road prerequisite.  The appraiser would properly advise any developer that the property is not developable to the extent of the zoning and would reduce the value accordingly. 

Ultimately, the appraisal will have a range of values based on valid assumptions.  It would be appropriate for the city to pay the high end of that range.  But the city should not pay for value based on invalid assumptions, including the one that 739 units can ever be built.


David Camp  //  Mon, Sep 26, 2011, 11:17 am

To discover the value of the land, it should be auctioned off with a minimum bid of say, $3 million. Why should the City pay a premium over this determination of value?

I suspect the City would pick it up for $3 million. WHo would bid more given the current real estate market and the severe limitations to development, physical and political?


Dick Conoboy  //  Mon, Sep 26, 2011, 2:51 pm

Tip,
You said, ?Trust has eroded. A comprehensive plan designed, ahead of its time, for neighborhood based planning was stripped of power, neighborhood goals, policies and objectives routinely trammelled. After decades of anticipating the daylighting of Padden Creek to improve fish habitat, we see planners recommend density that will turn it into a storm sewer instead.?

You bet.  This is the reason for which the Samish Neighborhood Board* is in opposition to the rezone of Padden Trails,  approximately 113   acres (upstream of the daylighting) on the edge of the city, south and east of the park and ride at Connelly and 34th Streets.  Currently zoned single family (just over 200 homes), the developer, Padden Trails LLC, has applied for a rezone to multi-family residential in order to use the Infill Tool Kit to stuff the property with 200 multi-family units AND 292 single family/duplexes.  Of course, we all remember during the Tool Kit discussions that the ?kit? was not for use in single family zoned areas.  The developer?s solution is a rezone to multi-family to skirt the Tool Kit proscription just as opponents of the Tool Kit had predicted when Tim Stewart pushed this infill goat-rope onto the city before slinking off to Mercer Island.  The rezone also goes contrary to the Samish Neighborhood Plan which does accept increased density but in the appropriate areas.  This is not one of those areas.

The Coalition of South Neighborhoods has also come out against the project.  You can read their letter to the City Council and the Planning Commission at:  + Link

The Samish Neighborhood Association letter to the Planning Commission can be read here:  + Link

If the rezone is approved, the Samish Neighborhood will eventually have its own version of Magnolia Hills, that horror show of planned density (adjacent to the Clean Green) with small homes on small lots that turned into rental hell in a very small place.

*[Note:  For disclosure purposes, I am a member of the Samish Neighborhood Board.  In this case, however, I am speaking only for myself, as a Samish resident, and my comment does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Samish Neighborhood Board or any of the members of that Board individually]


John Watts  //  Mon, Sep 26, 2011, 9:17 pm

CR is a good deal because it was available at a price the City could afford -almost. That’s the problem; the City can’t afford it all because there are not sufficient funds available for this purpose.

But, there’s a catch! The property can serve as its own collateral; meaning the $3.2 Million or so the City wants to borrow from the Greenways endowment fund can be borrowed, but must be paid back, with interest as an inter fund loan.

But wait, there’s another catch; there exists no other funding to pay back an inter fund loan -plus interest- except by selling off a portion of the property purchased! That is exactly what the City must do, and commit to doing it now -up front and publicly while the Council members & Mayor who put this deal together are present and accountable.

Everybody wins in such a scenario, the Council, the Mayor, the Greenways program is kept whole & trustworthy, the public at large is happy & faith in local government is not compromised -everyone! Nothing but heroes here. Can’t beat that with a stick, can you?

That’s the best deal possible, although there may be a few who will gripe no doubt.

Should the Council fail to do the right thing and instead make the mistake of letting the $3.2 Million -plus interest- just hang around, then there will be more losers than winners!

Think about it; keep two-thirds by selling off one-third. Seems like an elegant solution to me.
How about you?

So, that’s my answer; a GOOD deal if its done right, but a BAD deal if its not.

We’ll know soon, maybe even tonight. But, if the Council needs more time to agree on a good plan, there are two more Council meetings between now and the closing date on this purchase - October 11, I believe.


Larry Horowitz  //  Mon, Sep 26, 2011, 9:51 pm

Just because something is available at a price you can ‘almost afford’ does not make it a good deal.  If the price you can almost afford is substantially more than the item is worth - and substantially more than anyone else would pay for it - it is NOT a good deal at all. 

The theory that two-thirds would be retained is simply a theory.  In reality, if a developer would only pay $5 million for CR, then only ONE-THIRD will be retained if the city needs to raise $3.2 million and TWO-THIRDS will need to be sold.  Guess which one-third the city will keep?  The one-third comprised of wetlands & buffers and steep slopes - the same one-third that cannot be developed and the city would get for free.  A good deal?  In your dreams!

To claim that’s the best deal possible is ridiculous.  It is far from being the best deal.  Does anyone really believe a shrewd developer would accept that deal?  Why doesn’t the city act like a shrewd developer itself?

And why aren’t future park impact fees (PIF) collected in the five Coalition of Southside Neighborhoods between now and 2017 not available to repay any interfund loan that might be necessary?  Or real estate excise taxes (REET) collected in those same neighborhoods?  Who took those items off the table?

No, everybody does not win in that scenario.  In fact, we all lose.  The public won’t be happy and will not have faith in local government.  Wishful thinking perhaps; but unrealistic as hell.

The key to making this a good deal is to actually get a good deal on the land.  $8.23 million is far from a good deal and is way more than anyone else would be willing to pay.  That price is based on a 739 developable-unit fairly tale - a wet dream not even the dumbest developer would fantasize about.

For heavens sake, hire a professional appraiser and critically evaluate the bank’s appraisal.  Perform due diligence and honor your fiduciary responsibility to the taxpayers you are elected to represent.  Get us a good deal by negotiating one; not by being negligent.


Rick Anderson  //  Mon, Sep 26, 2011, 11:29 pm

The Mayor and Council have come up with a default plan but the majority of the Council doesn’t seem concerned about having a specific repayment plan in place before the fact for the money borrowed from the Greenways Endowment (Maintenance) Fund.  They will work that out sometime in the next 6 years.  It’s really easy to borrow money when you are both the lender and the borrower.


Tip Johnson  //  Tue, Sep 27, 2011, 12:12 am

Larry, I agree the price is too high.  You know my position.  We have a deal.  We deserve to pay more because, 1) We screwed the value up and, 2) The “public” always has to outbid developers to guarantee preservation, and (you offered why and it is true that), 3) It is impossible for a municipality to “act like a shrewd investor”.  OK, so what’s the fair price?  WAFed already ate over $6mm of the CIty’s decades long FU w/ this project. They have a fiduciary duty to the FIDC (and that’s us, too).  How far is it worth testing the kill point of a deal that has already been struck?  Why try to stick someone else with the tab for the City’s philandering? 

John, I respectfully disagree. There is no advantage to pinning the shortfall to this property.  Why insist your pet egg be constrained to one basket?  It’s a loser. Its already been proven the most expensive development option possible.  Ask Greenbriar or the ex-bank.  If you intend to turn Greenways into an enterprise fund, then please consider the benefit of including all of Greenways.  Don’t paint yourself in a corner.  Why name the most problematic parcel as the only “collateral”.  That’s dumb.  Be sensible.  There are far better acres afoot.  If you want to start selling off Greenways, then pick the smartest ones. Ones that will make money, not cost more. That means taking the long view, not making a petty game of it.  Please read the article completely before commenting.  Thank you, John.


Larry Horowitz  //  Tue, Sep 27, 2011, 1:01 am

Tip, I could not disagree more:

1) Taxpayers do not “deserve to pay more” because of the city’s prior misdeeds related to zoning.

2) More than 15% of all real estate transactions never make it to closing.  Every purchase & sale agreement has a clause in the event either party backs out.  It’s very common to re-negotiate when new information becomes available.

3) It is not impossible for the city to act shrewdly - not at all.  Why you think so is a mystery to me.

4) None of us have any idea of the financial impact of CR on WA Fed.  The transaction involved the purchase of Horizon Bank’s Westward Financial subsidiary that had a negative net worth, coupled with the purchase of loans owed by the bank to itself.  To say the least, it’s a complicated mess.  On the other hand, we do know that WA Fed reported a $50 million profit on the purchase of Horizon Bank’s assets in the first quarter after acquisition.  We also know that the FDIC reimbursed WA Fed for 80% of any loss incurred.  Trust me, WA Fed is not hurting.

5) The FDIC is not us.  “The FDIC receives no Congressional appropriations ? it is funded by premiums that banks and thrift institutions pay for deposit insurance coverage and from earnings on investments in U.S. Treasury securities.”  Losses incurred by the FDIC are paid by bank and thrifts through insurance premiums.

6) The real fiduciary responsibility here is the city’s responsibility to its taxpaying citizens.  Wasting taxpayer funds collected for the sole purpose of acquiring park land and facilities is negligence.

7) I believe a fair price is substantially less than $8.23 million.  In order to determine a fair price, the city must hire a professional appraiser as I’ve stated over and over again.  There’s still plenty of time to do that before our sole source of funds to acquire Chuckanut Ridge is pissed away.


Ham Hayes  //  Tue, Sep 27, 2011, 8:10 am

Thanks for the excellent article Tip!

More than likely a bad deal, as other costs have not been considered. When it comes to the discussion of value vs price, there are some additional factors beyond development value that might be considered.  These factors are based on the intended uses of the property and include recreational uses, protection of environmentally critical habitat, and other possible public uses. 

Protecting critical habitat has been accomplished through regulatory means, so any of the land in this category should have zero economic value and the public shouldn’t be asked to pay for it.  Fait accompli.

Other public uses.  It is hard to imagine the property being used for waste water treatment, a transfer station, public safety or health facilities. The property just doesn’t fit with those community infrastructure uses.  No value to the community there.

Which leaves parks and recreation as the only other possible use of value.  The question then is how much more money will be needed to develop the property of that purpose. What is the plan or a plan for that, and how much capital and operating money will be required?  Letting the land lie fallow is probably not a good option as most our citizens would not receive any value and they will know it. 

Our elected officials are on the spot.  Protecting this property by buying it and then selling off part of it without being able to state the value proposition to the community smacks of politics and maybe even incompetence.  At best, the city’s approach is missing a complete think through of what this can mean for the city and what it will really cost us.

An unjustified deal at this point, and therefore an ill omen.


Doug karlberg  //  Wed, Sep 28, 2011, 3:26 pm

Mayor Pike, is no Donald Trump for sure.

To overpay in this real estate market, is a travesty to the tax payers. This property has been on the market for a decade with no tire kickers, until the Mayor showed up with our money in his checkbook.

Clearly the zoning on this property was in question. That was obvious.

The City should have gotten its own appraisal with a price for the current zoning, and one with an appropriate zoning downgrade, and then began his negotiations. Any private real estate professional would have done so.

Exuberance, and lack of real estate inexperience, are a bad combination.

Of course the City could have just waited for the property to sit on the market longer, as there were not other buyers in sight. With no buyers in sight and disputed zoning, this property should have been had cheaper ... and the City Council should have never rubber stamped it either.

There really is no adequate excuse for overpaying by any amount, nevertheless millions.


John Watts  //  Wed, Sep 28, 2011, 4:05 pm

Hey, Tip, et al;
Could’a, should’s, would’a doesn’t cut it.
That is past history that only clever revisionism can touch.
The reality is, what’s done is done.
Now, we have to deal with it.
The best way to balance out this series of dumb moves is to cut our losses, right now, not later!
This property busted its budget and some others as well, so it is the only responsible way to get back on track and not keep kicking this political football down the field.
Read Pooh Bear’s Easter Party all the way through and see what piglet wanted; the big oval rock that looked like an egg, but was too heavy for him to lift and too big to put in his basket!
[Hint: the rock is CR]
You know, we can argue about this until the cows come home, but the basic facts are still there!
Were you or anyone really counting on the City to buy the entire property?
Get serious!
Out.


Larry Horowitz  //  Thu, Sep 29, 2011, 9:51 am

Clueless :-(


Charter Review and District Only Voting

Thu, Apr 17, 2014, 9:40 am  //  Riley Sweeney

A simple explanation of the Charter Review and analysis of District only voting

0 comments

Roosevelt Neighborhood Pleads for Left Turns

Wed, Apr 09, 2014, 8:07 am  //  Riley Sweeney

City pushes for Alabama Street improvements, residents speak out

3 comments; last on Apr 14, 2014

Paper Dreams in Fairhaven

Next door to Village Books

Assault

Sun, Apr 06, 2014, 3:29 pm  //  Guest writer

By Christopher Grannis: Wherein despite every effort and expense, citizens cannot make the City follow the law or work for neighborhoods

2 comments; last on Apr 07, 2014

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

Anatomy of a Development Part XII - Citizens Win Against University Ridge

Wed, Apr 02, 2014, 5:00 am  //  Dick Conoboy

Ambling University Development Group pulls out. University Ridge will not be built.

12 comments; last on Apr 06, 2014

Tell County To Expand Scope of EIS Review for Plants and Animals

Tue, Apr 01, 2014, 12:27 pm  //  Wendy Harris

Please help us protect county wildlife by ensuring that the scope of the EIS review is adequate. A sample scoping letter is included.

0 comments

Public May Comment On EIS Scoping For County Comp. Plan Until April 7th

Mon, Mar 31, 2014, 1:23 am  //  Wendy Harris

The public has a week to comment on the scope of issues reviewed under the EIS.

0 comments

My State of the Lake Report for 2014

Fri, Mar 28, 2014, 12:32 am  //  Wendy Harris

On March 26, 2014 the city and county provided their update and assessment on the status of Lake Whatcom. This is mine.

2 comments; last on Apr 01, 2014

County Considers Purchasing Toxic Property

Wed, Mar 19, 2014, 9:32 am  //  Riley Sweeney

Riley digs into the county's plan to buy the county morgue

3 comments; last on Mar 24, 2014

Propaganda Replaces Public Information:  An Analysis of the Lake Whatcom TDML Process

Sun, Mar 16, 2014, 11:52 pm  //  Wendy Harris

The public is not provided with a proposed plan or adequate information prior to the annual "state of the lake" meeting

4 comments; last on Mar 18, 2014

Mobile Slaughter

Sat, Mar 15, 2014, 12:11 pm  //  Tip Johnson

Wherein there's a crackdown on growing plants, and plans to let slaughter run free

2 comments; last on Mar 16, 2014

Fukushima Radiation Found In Canada

Fri, Mar 14, 2014, 9:47 am  //  John Servais

Fukushima radiation has been found 20 miles from Whatcom County farmland along the Fraser River in British Columbia.

1 comments; last on Mar 17, 2014

Is ALEC Jr. Coming to Whatcom County or Bellingham Soon?

Wed, Mar 12, 2014, 7:28 am  //  Dick Conoboy

The infamous American Legislative Exchange Council plans to send its spawn to cities and counties throughout the U.S.

1 comments; last on Mar 24, 2014

Rep. Vincent Buys Appears to Break State Fundraising Laws

Tue, Mar 11, 2014, 10:24 am  //  Riley Sweeney

Riley catches State Rep. Vincent Buys for soliciting funds during session

0 comments

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

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

Action Alert for Tonight: Waterfront Wildlife and Habitat Not Being Protected as Promised

Mon, Feb 24, 2014, 3:33 pm  //  Wendy Harris

We were led to believe the city would review waterfront wildlife and habitat connectivity. It turns out that the city intends to focus only on nearshore fish.

0 comments

Wendy Harris on Citizen Journalism

Sat, Feb 22, 2014, 12:16 am  //  Wendy Harris

Accepting the Paul deArmond award of citizen journalism on Feb 7, Wendh Harris gave this speech. We think it deserves its own post.

0 comments

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

Do Changing Liquor and Marijuana Laws Affect DUIs

Mon, Feb 17, 2014, 7:26 am  //  Riley Sweeney

Riley digs through court data and discovers the real impact of privatization and legalization

0 comments

Bellingham Seeks “Flexibility” To Sell Wholesale Rural Sewer Services

Sun, Feb 09, 2014, 9:35 pm  //  Wendy Harris

The mayor wants to amend a city law to increase flexibility for a GMA provision that should be used rarely, if ever at all.

3 comments; last on Feb 11, 2014

The Hidden Costs of Costco

Sun, Feb 09, 2014, 2:36 pm  //  Wendy Harris

Costco imposes indirect costs on our community that are as real and tangible as road construction expenses.

1 comments; last on Feb 13, 2014

Reid Boiler Works Burns Down

Sun, Feb 09, 2014, 9:13 am  //  John Servais

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

0 comments

Panem et Circenses - Why I Did Not Watch “The Super Bowl”

Mon, Feb 03, 2014, 5:30 am  //  Dick Conoboy

Professional and even college sports have morphed into a circus of corporate greed and the fleecing of the public.

3 comments; last on Mar 01, 2014

Have You Exceeded Your Right To Information?

Sat, Feb 01, 2014, 12:35 am  //  Wendy Harris

Filing a public record request could land a citizen in jail under a proposal reflected in a Herald opinion article.

2 comments; last on Feb 03, 2014

Wendy Harris Receives deArmond Award for Citizen Journalism

Wed, Jan 29, 2014, 6:18 am  //  Guest writer

Tim Johnson writes about the first recipient of the Paul deArmond Citizen Journalism award, Whatcom County writer Wendy Harris.

3 comments; last on Feb 08, 2014

Anatomy of a Development Part XI - The Doldrums at University Ridge

Mon, Jan 20, 2014, 5:14 am  //  Dick Conoboy

The developers of University Ridge have been silent since shortly after the hearing examiner's decision on 23 October last year. Will they walk?

0 comments

The Marijuana Bowl

Sun, Jan 19, 2014, 8:39 pm  //  John Servais

Super Bowl ... Weed Bowl ... This bud's for you ... Bong Bowl ... Marijuana Bowl ... whatever. It is on!

1 comments; last on Jan 20, 2014

Port’s Alternative Marina Analysis a Scam

Tue, Jan 14, 2014, 2:19 pm  //  Guest writer

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

1 comments; last on Jan 14, 2014

City too Poor for Power Pennies or Discrimination?

Fri, Dec 27, 2013, 4:00 am  //  Guest writer

Guest writer Barbara Perry writes about Bellingham Parks refusal to allow motorized wheel chairs to recharge at public electrical outlets.

6 comments; last on Jan 03, 2014

Port Memo Addresses Marina Fraud Allegations

Fri, Dec 20, 2013, 3:56 pm  //  Wendy Harris

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

5 comments; last on Dec 22, 2013

Lummi Influence Over the Waterfront Planning Process Continues to Grow

Tue, Dec 17, 2013, 12:21 am  //  Wendy Harris

Army Corps advised DOE that it will not issue a waterfront permit without Lummi approval

2 comments; last on Jan 13, 2014

Gary Jensen Not Running for State Senate

Mon, Dec 16, 2013, 12:30 pm  //  John Servais

Ferndale Mayor Gary Jensen has decided not to file for the 42nd state Senate seat currently held by Doug Ericksen.

5 comments; last on Dec 24, 2013

Larrabee School; Its Future

Mon, Dec 09, 2013, 12:24 pm  //  Guest writer

Barbara Perry writes about the closed nature of the Bellingham School Board on the future of the Larrabee School.

1 comments; last on Dec 15, 2013

Steal this Waterfront: Costs without Benefit

Sat, Dec 07, 2013, 8:23 pm  //  Tip Johnson

Wherein the direct, indirect, hidden and lost opportunity costs make this a waterfront boondoggle of billions

3 comments; last on Dec 11, 2013

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

Sat, Dec 07, 2013, 12:33 pm  //  Wendy Harris

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

2 comments; last on Dec 08, 2013

Lecture on County Water Issues Draws Crowd

Fri, Dec 06, 2013, 11:03 pm  //  Wendy Harris

The county will be required to consider water quality and water quantity when planning rural growth.

3 comments; last on Dec 10, 2013

Video Exposes City Council Dysfunction on Waterfront Plan

Thu, Dec 05, 2013, 11:58 am  //  John Servais

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

2 comments; last on Dec 06, 2013

The Bellingham “Riot” - Let’s Expand the Conversation

Thu, Dec 05, 2013, 5:00 am  //  Dick Conoboy

The post "riot" conversation is terribly lacking in several areas. We must expand the discussion or risk learning little from the experience.

3 comments; last on Dec 15, 2013

Cascadia Weekly Blasts Waterfront Plan

Wed, Dec 04, 2013, 10:53 am  //  John Servais

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

4 comments; last on Dec 05, 2013

Waterfront Development Bonus Yet Another Bad Idea

Sat, Nov 30, 2013, 8:11 pm  //  Wendy Harris

The waterfront plan allows a development bonus for payments made to the Lake Whatcom land acquisition fund

1 comments; last on Dec 01, 2013

City and Port Ready To Act on Waterfront Plan

Fri, Nov 29, 2013, 9:43 pm  //  Wendy Harris

A number of important issues need to be resolved before waterfront planning is complete, but the city council and port commission are ready to act.

2 comments; last on Nov 30, 2013

Port Unable To Protect Public Safety

Fri, Nov 22, 2013, 9:01 pm  //  Wendy Harris

If the port can not construct the airport safely, should it be entrusted with dangerous waterfront cleanup work?

0 comments

Walmart and McDonald’s - Partners in Institutionalized Cluelessness

Wed, Nov 20, 2013, 5:03 am  //  Dick Conoboy

The advice coming from Walmart and McDonald's to its low paid employees becomes more and more bizarre and inane.

0 comments

Anatomy of a Development - Part X Appeals of the Hearing Examiner’s Decision

Tue, Nov 19, 2013, 5:35 am  //  Dick Conoboy

Ambling's motion to the hearing examiner for reconsideration was definitively rejected. The developer has not met the deadline for an appeal to the Superior Court

0 comments

Smoking Gun: Fraud and Deception

Mon, Nov 18, 2013, 2:18 pm  //  Guest writer

In which we find the hidden core of the waterfront plan is rotten through and through

7 comments; last on Nov 21, 2013

County Releases EIS, Prepares to Purchase Jail Site

Mon, Nov 18, 2013, 10:59 am  //  Riley Sweeney

The county takes two big steps forward on the new jail, while still missing the point

0 comments

Noballmacare and Setting the False Standard

Thu, Nov 14, 2013, 1:39 am  //  Tip Johnson

Dear Mr. President, There's a sucker born every minute, and two to take him.

7 comments; last on Nov 21, 2013

City Council Misled On Waterfront Planning

Wed, Nov 13, 2013, 3:16 pm  //  Wendy Harris

The city adminstration has been providing misleading/ incorrect information to the city council to avoid waterfront plan revisions.

1 comments; last on Nov 18, 2013

Election Analysis: What Happened with the Port Races?

Tue, Nov 12, 2013, 10:21 am  //  Riley Sweeney

Riley crunches the numbers on Renata and McAuley's races to find answers

2 comments; last on Nov 13, 2013

Puget Neighborhood Likely New Home for 1,300 Students

Tue, Nov 12, 2013, 5:16 am  //  Dick Conoboy

Puget Neighborhood will likely have in the immediate future 1,300 new rental units that will be marketed primarily to the student population.

0 comments

Gloomy Fate For Waterfront Wildlife

Sat, Nov 09, 2013, 9:47 pm  //  Wendy Harris

The COB administration continues in its refusal to analyze waterfront wildlife issues, even though this is a prerequisite step in protecting wildlife from the impacts of development

3 comments; last on Nov 10, 2013

Election Results - November 2013

Tue, Nov 05, 2013, 8:21 pm  //  John Servais

With lots of outside county money flowing in to our local races, this election is weird. But real - and we county residents have spoken.

11 comments; last on Nov 09, 2013

Health Insurance Scams - Washington Not Spared

Mon, Nov 04, 2013, 9:55 am  //  Dick Conoboy

The call of the dollar speaks more loudly to health insurance companies than does the voice and well-being of the consumer, even here in Washington.

8 comments; last on Nov 06, 2013

Anatomy of a Development - Part IX BMC Rule of Three Thwarts Plans

Thu, Oct 31, 2013, 10:19 am  //  Dick Conoboy

Four bedroom dorm rooms have been nixed by the hearing examiner. University Ridge may be in trouble as a cash cow for Ambling Development of Georgia

3 comments; last on Nov 04, 2013

The Slaughterhouse Referendum - Citizens Opposing Widespread Slaughter (COWS)

Mon, Oct 28, 2013, 10:19 pm  //  Tip Johnson

Wherein we discover why we exert our rights - and grab some more petitions before it's too late

3 comments; last on Nov 06, 2013

Dick’s Picks for City Council - Burr and Petree

Mon, Oct 28, 2013, 12:00 am  //  Dick Conoboy

Independent voters are for independent thinkers on the city council. Vote for Burr and Petree.

0 comments

Boulevard Park Reopens

Sat, Oct 26, 2013, 7:36 pm  //  John Servais

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

6 comments; last on Nov 01, 2013

Ken Bell and Renata for Port

Sun, Oct 20, 2013, 7:07 pm  //  John Servais

Ken Bell has my vote over Mike McAuley for port commissioner. And Renata Kowalczyk has it over Dan Robbins.

8 comments; last on Oct 30, 2013

 

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