Why the Fairhaven Highlands Draft EIS violates SEPA law
Permalink +Sun, Oct 18, 2009, 8:58 am // Larry Horowitz
To add a comment, login or register.
Chuckanut Ridge wetlandAnd it’s not for the obvious reasons. Sure, all draft environmental impact statements are bound to have errors and omissions. Certainly, the long-awaited Fairhaven Highlands DEIS has its share.
But for the authors to violate an essential and fundamental principle of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) is not a simple error or omission. Did the authors fail to grasp the purpose of SEPA? Or did they intentionally violate SEPA and knowingly understate the actual environmental impacts of this project? Either way, how can anyone have confidence in this process now?
A primary purpose of SEPA is “to promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere.” A key element of SEPA is the environmental impact statement, or EIS, which must disclose significant environmental impacts of the proposed project.
SEPA is potent law. “The policies and goals of SEPA supplement the existing authority of all government agencies and give officials the discretion to deny projects based on negative environmental impacts disclosed by an EIS… Our courts have repeatedly stated that SEPA is not a substitute for local zoning ordinances, but overlays local ordinances and must be enforced even where a particular use is allowed by local law or policy." [Victoria Tower Partnership v. City of Seattle (59Wn. App.592)] (Emphasis added)
SEPA is not limited by the State’s vested rights doctrine. When disclosing the environmental impacts of a particular project, the EIS must disclose adverse impacts using current scientific information, regardless of whether a project may be “vested” under obsolete laws that reflect outdated science.
The Fairhaven Highlands draft EIS fails to comply with SEPA in this regard. The EIS confuses legal impacts with environmental impacts, and, by doing so, fails to adequately disclose the true adverse impacts to the 16 wetlands that cover the 82-acre Chuckanut Ridge site.
The importance of wetlands has long been established. According to the Environmental Law Institute’s Guide to Wetland Buffers, “wetlands help control flooding and reduce damage from storm surges. They trap sediments and pollutants that otherwise might enter waterways. They help to recharge groundwater in some areas, and in tidal zones they provide nurseries for shellfish and fish. They also serve as habitat for birds, amphibians, and other wildlife and provide scarce natural areas in urban and suburban environments…
“Attention to these functions is essential to governance of the community’s land uses, public health, safety, and welfare. But these functions cannot be sustained without care for the uplands adjacent to wetlands - wetland buffers.” (Emphasis added)
Yes… wetland buffers!
The significance of wetland buffers is highlighted in Table 1-1 of the draft EIS, which presents a “Summary of Development Alternatives” for Fairhaven Highlands. This executive summary indicates the extent to which wetlands are filled and buffers are developed upon. For example, the DEIS claims that Alternative 1C will fill 3/4 acre (34,000 square feet) of wetlands and directly impact 6 acres (263,000 square feet) of wetland buffers.
We can all agree that permanently destroying 6 acres of wetland buffers will be devastating to the long-term health of these wetlands; however, what if the real impact is the destruction of 10 acres or more?
In other words, the 6-acre calculation is bogus and violates SEPA’s requirement to adequately disclose the true environmental impact of the proposal. This calculation is based on the obsolete wetland rating system and obsolete wetland buffer requirements under a law that was deleted from the Bellingham Municipal Code four years ago when the city adopted its Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO).
The draft EIS violates SEPA because it confuses legal impacts with environmental impacts. While the EIS discloses the legal impact based on the law in effect when the application was submitted in 2005, it fails to disclose the actual environmental impacts - based on best available science - of building adjacent to wetlands.
So, what are the actual environmental impacts? I admit that I don’t know. In order to determine the actual area of wetland buffers that will be destroyed, you need a GIS system that can draw the true, scientifically-based buffers and calculate the acreage impacted.
The problem with the DEIS is that nobody knows the true impacts because the DEIS fails to disclose them, and by failing to disclose them, violates a key tenet of SEPA. The true environmental impacts have not been disclosed to any of the 17 public agencies currently reviewing the DEIS, including the Dept of Ecology. Nor have the true environmental impacts been disclosed to the hundreds of local residents who are in the process of preparing comments on the DEIS.
That’s why I have no confidence in the DEIS. If the authors have failed to disclose the true impacts on wetlands and wetland buffers, what else have they failed to disclose?
Related Links:
-> Table 1-1 (Summary): See footnote 2: BMC 16.50 was deleted from the municipal code four years ago and is obsolete.-> Excerpt from "Planner's Guide to Wetland Buffers for Local Governments"
Comments (4)
To add a comment, click here to login or register.
Tip Johnson // Sun, Oct 18, 2009, 3:46 pm
The on-site impacts are just the tip of the iceberg. The stormwater plan in the DEIS shows that another 7 acres of publicly owned wetlands, Hoag’s Creek, the lower reach of Chuckanut Creek and Chuckanut Bay tidelands will be used as the project’s private storm sewer.
O.K., the DEIS does admit that “significant adverse environmental impacts” are likely to occur if the project’s water quality systems don’t work as advertised. But the study is silent on the specifics. So what does it mean?
Well, King County went back and reviewed 100 existing bio-swale filtration systems, such as are proposed for this project, and found that half of them didn’t work at all. The other half didn’t work nearly as well as expected. That means we will get all the water quality theory the Department of Ecology can define as Best Management Practices (BMPs), but there is no guarantee that publicly owned natural resources won’t be irreparably damaged.
Cutthroat and steelhead trout have been observed poking around these public wetlands that eventually drain to Chuckanut Creek, a salmon bearing stream. Why would anadromous species battle their way up the tiny, obstructed Hoag’s Creek to find these wetlands? Because the are teeming with tiny freshwater shrimp. Tiny, tasty shrimp!
This population of shrimp also supports juvenile salmonids in the downstream system. However, these shrimp are extremely sensitive to pollution. What are the consequences if they do not survive? We can presume that many other populations dependent upon them will also suffer. What accountability is there for cascading damages to public resources?
None! At least, not as planned. The proponents suggest a 5 - 10 year post-construction monitoring program for nutrients, metals and other indicators of pollution, such as turbidity and conductivity. They also suggest a “limited” pre-construction baseline. However, monitoring will occur only periodically and can often be done at times chosen to provide the most supportive results. Like blind men describing an elephant, monitoring will provide limited snapshots of the stormwater systems’ performance, but won’t detail actual impacts or cumulative effects.
If an inventory of the populations of species in the public wetlands were required in the baseline data, we would be able to empirically determine if the BMPs actually work. Why is this important?
Because Horizon Bank can’t develop this project. As Horowitz has already detailed the FDIC has enjoined the bank from developing multiple family housing and the bank is already over its mandated Tier 1 capital commitment for all speculative development investment. In today’s capital and housing markets, this development would break the already teetering bank. That means Horizon will likely sell the project once entitlements are secured. Some bargain-hunting developer is going to think, as the proponents have repeatedly emphasized, that they are “buying density” and take every cost-saving measure possible to turn a profit. That bodes ill for the health of downstream systems.
The importance of including an actual populations inventory in the baseline data is three-fold. First, to better assess system performance. Second, to allow the public to assess actual damages and assign liability in the event of failure. Third, to give prospective buyers doing their due diligence an honest picture of the long-term liabilities.
The proponent is rightly concerned about their private property rights. Citizens and officials empowered to condition the project should be equally concerned about their public property rights. This is especially true given the peculiar nature of this project’s origin and tenacity.
Please ask officials to require the project to assemble baseline data that includes an inventory of species populations in our publicly owned wetlands.
O.K., the DEIS does admit that “significant adverse environmental impacts” are likely to occur if the project’s water quality systems don’t work as advertised. But the study is silent on the specifics. So what does it mean?
Well, King County went back and reviewed 100 existing bio-swale filtration systems, such as are proposed for this project, and found that half of them didn’t work at all. The other half didn’t work nearly as well as expected. That means we will get all the water quality theory the Department of Ecology can define as Best Management Practices (BMPs), but there is no guarantee that publicly owned natural resources won’t be irreparably damaged.
Cutthroat and steelhead trout have been observed poking around these public wetlands that eventually drain to Chuckanut Creek, a salmon bearing stream. Why would anadromous species battle their way up the tiny, obstructed Hoag’s Creek to find these wetlands? Because the are teeming with tiny freshwater shrimp. Tiny, tasty shrimp!
This population of shrimp also supports juvenile salmonids in the downstream system. However, these shrimp are extremely sensitive to pollution. What are the consequences if they do not survive? We can presume that many other populations dependent upon them will also suffer. What accountability is there for cascading damages to public resources?
None! At least, not as planned. The proponents suggest a 5 - 10 year post-construction monitoring program for nutrients, metals and other indicators of pollution, such as turbidity and conductivity. They also suggest a “limited” pre-construction baseline. However, monitoring will occur only periodically and can often be done at times chosen to provide the most supportive results. Like blind men describing an elephant, monitoring will provide limited snapshots of the stormwater systems’ performance, but won’t detail actual impacts or cumulative effects.
If an inventory of the populations of species in the public wetlands were required in the baseline data, we would be able to empirically determine if the BMPs actually work. Why is this important?
Because Horizon Bank can’t develop this project. As Horowitz has already detailed the FDIC has enjoined the bank from developing multiple family housing and the bank is already over its mandated Tier 1 capital commitment for all speculative development investment. In today’s capital and housing markets, this development would break the already teetering bank. That means Horizon will likely sell the project once entitlements are secured. Some bargain-hunting developer is going to think, as the proponents have repeatedly emphasized, that they are “buying density” and take every cost-saving measure possible to turn a profit. That bodes ill for the health of downstream systems.
The importance of including an actual populations inventory in the baseline data is three-fold. First, to better assess system performance. Second, to allow the public to assess actual damages and assign liability in the event of failure. Third, to give prospective buyers doing their due diligence an honest picture of the long-term liabilities.
The proponent is rightly concerned about their private property rights. Citizens and officials empowered to condition the project should be equally concerned about their public property rights. This is especially true given the peculiar nature of this project’s origin and tenacity.
Please ask officials to require the project to assemble baseline data that includes an inventory of species populations in our publicly owned wetlands.
Bob Aegerter // Sun, Oct 18, 2009, 9:50 pm
This is a Draft EIS and individuals may comment on the adequacy of the document as well as the content.
The more specific and well documented comments will carry the most weight.
The more specific and well documented comments will carry the most weight.
Larry Horowitz // Sun, Oct 18, 2009, 10:28 pm
Bob,
Thanks for your comment. It?s true that this is a draft EIS and individuals may comment on its adequacy and content, there is a flaw in that logic.
When a draft EIS is published, there is a presumption that it generally complies with SEPA and that the environmental impacts are disclosed based on best available science.
There is only one opportunity to comment on a DEIS. Once the DEIS comment period is over, the public does not have the opportunity to comment again. The impacts to the wetlands and wetland buffers disclosed in this draft do not comply with SEPA; however, none of us will have the opportunity to comment on the actual environmental impacts if and when they are ever disclosed. Not having the opportunity to comment on the actual impacts is a failure of this process.
Here?s a question for you: City officials received the Preliminary Draft EIS more than four months ago and had ample time to review the PDEIS and comment on it. How is it possible that no one in the city, including the city?s SEPA official, knew that SEPA is not subject to the State?s vested rights doctrine and that the EIS must disclose environmental impacts based on current scientific knowledge rather than outdated laws?
Thanks for your comment. It?s true that this is a draft EIS and individuals may comment on its adequacy and content, there is a flaw in that logic.
When a draft EIS is published, there is a presumption that it generally complies with SEPA and that the environmental impacts are disclosed based on best available science.
There is only one opportunity to comment on a DEIS. Once the DEIS comment period is over, the public does not have the opportunity to comment again. The impacts to the wetlands and wetland buffers disclosed in this draft do not comply with SEPA; however, none of us will have the opportunity to comment on the actual environmental impacts if and when they are ever disclosed. Not having the opportunity to comment on the actual impacts is a failure of this process.
Here?s a question for you: City officials received the Preliminary Draft EIS more than four months ago and had ample time to review the PDEIS and comment on it. How is it possible that no one in the city, including the city?s SEPA official, knew that SEPA is not subject to the State?s vested rights doctrine and that the EIS must disclose environmental impacts based on current scientific knowledge rather than outdated laws?
Christopher Grannis // Sun, Oct 18, 2009, 10:38 pm
I asked for a baseline study when the Planning Department held the Scoping hearing nearly two years ago. The following are part of my comments that were copied into the public record;
How many animals and plants on site and off site will be lost due to destruction of their habitat? Please prepare a baseline study so we know how many species exist now. How many are threatened or endangered?
What percent of bio diversity will be lost in the Hundred Acre Wood, and in the rest of SW Bellingham? What percentage of existing species will die due to the disruption of the natural flow of water into and out of the wetlands? How many will not survive the pollution from roads and landscaping chemicals? Will the development turn the wetlands into a chain of sterile ponds? What will be the effect on the Interurban wetland downstream to the east? How badly will the polluted runoff damage Paden creek and Chuckanut creek? What will be the effect on salmon and other fish? How much will this development contribute to the degradation of the Puget Sound?
This is the SEPA law:
WAC 197?11?400 Purpose of EIS.
(2) An EIS shall provide impartial discussion of significant environmental impacts and shall inform decision makers and the public of reasonable alternatives, including mitigation measures, that would avoid or minimize adverse impacts or enhance environmental quality.
There is no sign of a baseline study in the DEIS. How could anyone know what the impact might be if they don’t know what is there now? Instead the DEIS is an attempt to justify the Fairhaven Highlands Development without disclosing the environmental impacts. The DEIS is a sham, and it is clear that the Planning Director has no intention to require the consultant to obey the SEPA law.
How many animals and plants on site and off site will be lost due to destruction of their habitat? Please prepare a baseline study so we know how many species exist now. How many are threatened or endangered?
What percent of bio diversity will be lost in the Hundred Acre Wood, and in the rest of SW Bellingham? What percentage of existing species will die due to the disruption of the natural flow of water into and out of the wetlands? How many will not survive the pollution from roads and landscaping chemicals? Will the development turn the wetlands into a chain of sterile ponds? What will be the effect on the Interurban wetland downstream to the east? How badly will the polluted runoff damage Paden creek and Chuckanut creek? What will be the effect on salmon and other fish? How much will this development contribute to the degradation of the Puget Sound?
This is the SEPA law:
WAC 197?11?400 Purpose of EIS.
(2) An EIS shall provide impartial discussion of significant environmental impacts and shall inform decision makers and the public of reasonable alternatives, including mitigation measures, that would avoid or minimize adverse impacts or enhance environmental quality.
There is no sign of a baseline study in the DEIS. How could anyone know what the impact might be if they don’t know what is there now? Instead the DEIS is an attempt to justify the Fairhaven Highlands Development without disclosing the environmental impacts. The DEIS is a sham, and it is clear that the Planning Director has no intention to require the consultant to obey the SEPA law.
UPDATE: City of Bham Moonlighting Issue - More Documents
Mon, Jan 30, 2012, 10:58 pm // Riley Sweeney
Riley updates us on the latest facts coming to light about City of Bellingham employee moonlighting2 comments; last on Feb 01, 2012
Compliance, Noncompliance and Invalidity in Whatcom County
Sun, Jan 29, 2012, 10:16 pm // Wendy Harris
The County's rural planning actions have not just failed to comply with the GMA...they have contradicted the goals of the GMA.2 comments; last on Feb 01, 2012
A Worm’s Eye View of our local WorkSource Center
Wed, Jan 25, 2012, 9:42 am // Riley Sweeney
Riley visits the local WorkSource center and interviews the regional director
0 comments
Watch out for basement flooding
Thu, Jan 19, 2012, 9:03 pm // Paul de Armond
Stormwater surge may back up sewers
5 comments; last on Jan 21, 2012
The Political Junkie interviews Kathy Kershner
Thu, Jan 19, 2012, 4:29 pm // Riley Sweeney
Riley discusses the Jail, Jack Louws, and an impartial council with our new Council Chair
1 comments; last on Jan 20, 2012
SOPA - A Step in Destroying Democracy
Thu, Jan 19, 2012, 12:17 am // John Servais
NWCitizen.com went black for Wednesday, Jan 18, 2012, as a protest against proposed legislation, SOPA and PIPA. Here is what was posted.1 comments; last on Jan 19, 2012
Why SOPA is so terrible
Tue, Jan 17, 2012, 6:28 pm // John Servais
On Wednesday, thousands of websites will go dark to show opposition to SOPA. I will be posting a single article explaining who SOPA is so bad.0 comments
Planning Commissioner Mocks Environmental Concern For Coal Terminal
Sat, Jan 14, 2012, 11:06 pm // Wendy Harris
Planning Commissioner Onkels should recuse himself from review of environmental impacts at GPT.2 comments; last on Jan 16, 2012
Jack Petree, Olympia, the Whatcom Council and Obama’s Inner Circle
Wed, Jan 11, 2012, 8:04 am // Riley Sweeney
Latest from the Political Junkie on a variety of subjects
7 comments; last on Jan 15, 2012
Commmunity Governance at its Best
Mon, Jan 09, 2012, 8:27 pm // Tip Johnson
We have a new mayor!
4 comments; last on Jan 10, 2012
Property Rights Protected Under Lake Whatcom Stormwater Proposal
Sun, Jan 08, 2012, 11:02 pm // Wendy Harris
The County's proposed stormwater regulations for Lake Whatcom will increase development without improving water quality2 comments; last on Jan 20, 2012
Riley Rouses Row Over Domestic Violence
Sun, Jan 08, 2012, 1:21 am // John Servais
Issue is County Council member Kathy Kershner and how our social service programs are funded.3 comments; last on Jan 08, 2012
Some thoughts on the Occupy Bellingham issue
Sun, Jan 01, 2012, 12:05 am // John Servais
A third note on Jan 1 about the Herald photos with links. And previous thoughts on the trivia around the militarized evictions.9 comments; last on Jan 10, 2012
Kelli Linville has taken oath as mayor
Fri, Dec 30, 2011, 2:07 pm // John Servais
Kelli assumes office of mayor at midnight Dec 316 comments; last on Jan 02, 2012
Bellingham Herald removes comments
Fri, Dec 30, 2011, 11:59 am // Wendy Harris
Decide for yourself if this blog comment, posted under my own name, should have been flagged and removed from the Bellingham Herald Online Edition.1 comments; last on Dec 30, 2011
Herald Permits Censorship of Pro-Occupy Bellingham Comments
Fri, Dec 30, 2011, 11:14 am // Wendy Harris
Anyone can "flag" a blog posting, resulting in immediate removal of your comment, regardless of merit. This is occuring for comments supporting OB.1 comments; last on Dec 30, 2011
City Exceeds Scope of Occupy Bellingham Eviction
Wed, Dec 28, 2011, 8:26 pm // Wendy Harris
The City infringed on the public’s right to peaceful assembly in a public park by enforcing an inappropriate public safety law2 comments; last on Dec 30, 2011
Dan Pike Issues Order to Evict Occupy Bellingham
Tue, Dec 27, 2011, 11:55 am // Riley Sweeney
Riley questions Pike's timing, and Occupy's choice of tactics2 comments; last on Dec 28, 2011
Updates from The Political Junkie
Tue, Dec 20, 2011, 2:19 pm // Riley Sweeney
Where Riley provides more info on the City of Bellingham employees moonlighting issue and Crawford's ethical troubles
0 comments
Dock Increases Risk of Invasive Species on Lake Whatcom
Sun, Dec 18, 2011, 8:43 pm // Wendy Harris
Relocation of a dock to Bloedel Donovan Park underscores failure to protect Lake Whatcom from invasive species0 comments
Sam Crawford Faces Ethical Concerns . . . AGAIN
Thu, Dec 15, 2011, 12:44 pm // Riley Sweeney
Local blogger Shane Roth files ethical complaint over Crawford's sweetheart deals
3 comments; last on Dec 16, 2011
Planning Commission Fails to Remove Cherry Point From Birch Bay Mitigation Plan
Wed, Dec 14, 2011, 7:05 am // Wendy Harris
Claiming it is unfair to treat large property owners different than small property owners, the Commission refuses to remove industrial areas from buffer mitigation proposal.0 comments
Rick Perry, Can We Talk?
Tue, Dec 13, 2011, 9:58 am // Riley Sweeney
Riley has a conversation with Rick Perry
2 comments; last on Dec 16, 2011
For Gift Ideas, Think Beyond Parker Brothers
Sat, Dec 10, 2011, 9:32 am // Riley Sweeney
Riley discusses his love of board games and some good gift ideas
2 comments; last on Dec 11, 2011
The Political Junkie needs your input
Thu, Dec 08, 2011, 12:47 pm // Riley Sweeney
Please take my reader's survey, I'm planning 2012
0 comments
Loophole Benefits SSA and Undermines Birch Bay Mitigation Proposal
Wed, Dec 07, 2011, 7:00 am // Wendy Harris
Tell the Planning Commission to eliminate this loophole2 comments; last on Dec 14, 2011
Washington United for Marriage: It’s Time!
Tue, Dec 06, 2011, 11:12 am // Riley Sweeney
Riley attends a public meeting on equality
0 comments
The Cole Train: Loads of BS
Sun, Dec 04, 2011, 4:53 pm // Tip Johnson
Wherein the sooty prospect of economic necessity rears its ugly head
2 comments; last on Dec 04, 2011
Update on Cherry Point Buffer Mitigation Proposal
Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 1:08 pm // Wendy Harris
Planning Staff's recommended revision will not prevent SSA from reducing wetland buffers.0 comments
UPDATE: City’s response focused on favoritism, not lost revenue
Wed, Nov 30, 2011, 5:51 pm // Riley Sweeney
More on the city employee moonlighting issue0 comments
TPJ Exclusive: Little Documented Oversight for City Employee Moonlighting
Mon, Nov 28, 2011, 4:29 pm // Riley Sweeney
The Political Junkie breaks a story of employee moonlighting within city of Bellingham
7 comments; last on Nov 30, 2011
Deer me!
Sat, Nov 26, 2011, 3:30 pm // Tip Johnson
O.K. Who's in charge of all these ungulates?14 comments; last on Dec 01, 2011
County Proposal Includes New Cherry Point Buffer Mitigation Requirements
Tue, Nov 22, 2011, 9:29 pm // Wendy Harris
The County's new mitigation proposal is unlikely to be adequate for Cherry Point's industrial impacts to habitat buffers3 comments; last on Nov 24, 2011
CameraGate: Red-light safety or city revenue?
Mon, Nov 21, 2011, 1:00 am // Guest writer
With budget woes, Bellingham passes on safety in favor of cash. Starting in 2008, Bellingham officials were coached by ATS on how to get Red Light cameras through…
26 comments; last on Nov 29, 2011
Cameras, not coal, decided the election
Sat, Nov 19, 2011, 8:24 pm // Paul de Armond
Looking at the numbers for the Bellingham elections
11 comments; last on Nov 22, 2011
Election Analysis: What does it take to win a county seat?
Fri, Nov 18, 2011, 12:28 pm // Riley Sweeney
Riley examines Maginnis/Crawford and Kremen/Larson
0 comments
Election Analysis: Dropoff, Lynden Suburbs and the “Buys Bounce”
Thu, Nov 17, 2011, 5:20 pm // Riley Sweeney
Riley looks at Lynden and coins some new phrases.
0 comments
Political Junkie Election Analysis: Louws/Ericksen
Wed, Nov 16, 2011, 12:31 pm // Riley Sweeney
Riley takes a look at Louws/Ericksen in the search for moderate Republicans
1 comments; last on Nov 17, 2011
Kelli Linville is elected Mayor of Bellingham
Tue, Nov 15, 2011, 5:21 pm // John Servais
Results are posted as of 5:21 pm. Use links at top of right side column.2 comments; last on Nov 15, 2011
Padden Trails Rezone – You Should Be Worried
Tue, Nov 15, 2011, 9:43 am // Dick Conoboy
The Padden Trails rezone effort is a misuse of the Infill Tool Kit on the outskirts of Bellingham.
8 comments; last on Nov 16, 2011
Still over 6,000 ballots to count
Mon, Nov 14, 2011, 4:52 pm // John Servais
Kelli Linville takes safe lead for mayor of Bellingham. Sam Crawford is leading for county council.1 comments; last on Nov 14, 2011
New links
Colbert Super PacCurrent Interest
Bham Camera ScamColbert Super Pac
Local Blogs & News
Bellingham HeraldBham Politics & Economics
Bhm Herald Politics Blog
Bob Sanders
Cascadia Weekly
Citizen Ted
Ferndale Record
Foothills Gazette
Get Whatcom Planning
HamsterTalk
KGMI
Latte Republic
Lynden Tribune
MikeatthePort
Northern Light
Northwest Review
Sweeney Politics
Twilight Zoning
Wally Wonders
Western Front - WWU
Whatcom Watch
Local causes
Bham Camera ScamBham CofC political blog
Chuckanut Mountains
Citizens of Bellingham
City Club of Bham
Community Wise Bellingham
Conservation NW
Cordata & Meridian
Futurewise - Whatcom
Jail - local mega plans
Lake Whatcom
N. Cascades Audubon
N. Sound Conservancy
Neighborhood Schools Coalition
No Leaky Buckets
NW Holocaust Center
RE Sources
Transition Whatcom
WA Conservation Voters
Publisher recommended
Americans Elect 2012Bham Politics & Economics
Community Wise Bellingham
Guardian Unlimited
Paul Krugman - economics
Redistricting WA state
Sweeney Politics
Watts Up With That? - climate
WikiLeaks.ch
NwCitizen 1995 to 2008
Early Northwest CitizenWeather & Climate
Cliff Mass Weather BlogClimate Audit
NW Radar
Two day forecast
Watts Up With That? - climate
Cascadia
Crosscut SeattleJoel Connelly
Orcinus
Portland Indy Media
Seattle Indy Media
Washington Votes
Leisure
Adventures NWEdge of Sports
Entertainment NNW
Famous Internet Skiers
Sailing Anarchy
Worth checking out
Al-Jazeera onlineAlaska Dispatch
AlterNet.org
Americans Elect 2012
Antiwar.com
Arab News
Asia Times
Atlantic, The
Buzz Flash
Common Dreams
counterpunch
Daily Beast, The
Daily Kos
Daily Mirror
Drudge Report
FiveThirtyEight
Foreign Policy in Focus
Guardian Unlimited
Gulf News
Haaretz
Huffington Post
Innocence Project, The
Intrnational Herald Tribune
James Fallows
Jerusalem Post
Juan Cole
Le Diplo
Media Matters
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
Politico
Progressive Review
Project Vote Smart
Reuters
Sea Shepherd
Slate
Talking Points Memo
The Onion
Tom Paine.com
truthout
War and Piece
WikiLeaks.ch
ynetnews.com
Governments
Auditor election pageBellingham
Bham - PFD
Candidate Filings
Election Results
Redistricting WA state
Skagit County
The White House
WA State Access
WA State Elections
WA State Legislature
Whatcom Auditor
Whatcom County
Other - for whatever
Ban Red Light CamsBushFlash.com
Chickehhawks
Coal quandary
Doonesbury
George Bush
Info Clearing House
Mainstreampolitics
Michael Moore
Nat Geo on Coal Trains
Reality News
The Crisis Papers
Third World Traveler
Unity08
Washington Outsiders
Less active
Bellingham RegisterCarl Weimer
Eye on Whatcom
John Watts
Post-Oklahoman Confessions
The American Telegraph
Quiet, offline or dead
David HackworthGitmo prisoner 345
Mega Awesome
Not in my county
Parkenfarker
Pro-Whatcom