Why to vote NO on proposed Park District

Permalink +

Sat, Jan 26, 2013, 9:18 pm  //  Guest writer

By guest writer Phyllis McKee.  She owns commercial property within the district and has been involed in Fairhaven affairs for almost 40 years.

Why vote NO on Proposition #1, the Metropolitan Park District proposed for South Bellingham?

In one move, how could only those people owning property in south Bellingham (I-5 to the bay & city limits to South Hill) find themselves obligated to pick up the tab for a City-wide loan not due until 2017 and create an entity with the authority to, amongst other things, condemn property (and the property does not even need to be within the area being taxed), pay a wide-range of expenses, including paying its commissioners, and tax those same property owners forever, yet remain separate from and independent of City oversight or citizen vote?  Simple … by those Southside voters failing to recognize the Trojan Horse being pushed up to their doors and thereby failing to vote NO on Metropolitan Parks Proposition 1 on 2/12.  (Ballots are being delivered today and Monday.)

The two flawed assumptions are that it is the right and responsibility of Southside property owners to pay a debt that belongs to the entire City, and secondly, that the Metro-Park model is the best and only method to save the 100 acre/Chuckanut woods.  Neither is correct and both should be questioned.  Look behind the curtain before approving such action as getting that genie back in the bottle would be impossible.  As well-meaning as the Proponents may appear to be, to expect future commissioners to be bound by promises being made now is neither binding nor realistic.   The threat to develop all/part of the woods is a blatant scare-tactic and if proposed at all would be challenged by the citizenry.

Proponents insist that the taxation will be limited to $0.28 per $1000 valuation, for only 10 years, and then disband, but, but the one-size-fits-all tool they are using to create the Metropolitan Park District is a legal entity (like a corporation or LLC), a junior taxing district that has broad built-in authority including the ability to tax at $0.75/$1000 forever to support future goals.  Yes, future goals that could have little or nothing to do with woods, and what of the unresolved, over-lapping or conflicting authority with the existing City Parks branch of government?  None of this has even been addressed.  (Google Metropolitan Park District for some interesting, hair-raising reading.)

Furthermore, voting yes does not save the 100 acre woods … the biggest battle cry of the Proponents.  The 100 Acre Woods is already saved; it is already owned by the City.  All this fuss is over some internal loan the City Council made to purchase the property in the first place.  An internal loan that does not need to be paid back until December of 2017 … giving plenty of time to come up with more creative solutions than sticking a limited group of property owners with the bill.  Some contend that this is just a financial or economic vehicle/move, or some such thing.  Let me see.  Well, I guess it could be seen that way, just as me stepping up out of the blue to pay off your maxed out credit card might be seen as a financial or economic move.  By voting YES (or as importantly, failing to vote NO), those Southsiders are saying to Council, ‘here, let us take care of that for you so you do not have to worry about it’ when they should be saying ‘you created it,  fix it’, and then keeping an eye on the solutions proposed. 

Please understand that failure to vote at all just means fewer yes votes needed to pass.  Furthermore, please know that with (I believe) only three exceptions, those five Commissioners who will run the show, for all practical purposes the majority of those running and impossible to avoid, have been hand-picked by the Pro-side and will appear on the same ballot with the proposition.

Christopher Grannis  //  Sun, Jan 27, 2013, 9:47 am

Two more public meetings were held last Wednesday and Thursday to provide information to folks who wanted to learn more or discuss the proposed Chuckanut Community Forest District. On Thursday Five of the Candidates for Commissioner were among the group as were a few people who are opposed to the formation of the Park District. It was a cordial respectful meeting where everyone had a chance to say their piece. The Candidates all affirmed that if the district is formed the taxation will be limited to $0.28 per $1000 valuation, for only 10 years, and then disband. One person kept repeating that the taxation would be the maximum allowed and that taxes would be collected for ever. She said they, referring to the candidates who will be elected, wanted to annex all of the Chuckanuts, clear down to Bow. There was frustration because one person kept insisting the Commissioners would do what they had just said they would not do. John Brown pointed out that this is face to face democracy,  people discussing a way to preserve the ecological treasure that is a unique asset to our City and a part of why Bellingham is such a great place to live, and that democracy only works where there is trust. I trust the folks who have been part of the struggle to preserve the woods.
The proponents of the CCFD have all been involved for years. We were there a year ago at the City Council Finance Committee meetings when Council made it clear that they oppose using any portion of a future Greenways IV levy to repay to loan. We have done our home work. We have examined all of the possible ways to raise three plus million dollars and there are none except the Park District or sell part of the Park for high density development.
The reason this land was not developed decades ago like the land around it is that it is not easily developed. Because of the terrain and problems with access the infrastructure would be very expensive. To make it pencil out there would need to be a very high number of units. One number out there is 350 units on 25 acres. If you think this a scare tactic you need to do your home work.
The choice is clear, preservation or destruction by development. The proponents of the Park District are asking this community to vote to for preservation. This is democracy in action. Please vote for:
Cathy McKenzie Position 1
Dan Remsen or John Hymas Position 2
Susan Kaun Position 3
Vince Biciunas Position 4
John Brown Position 5
Please vote yes for the forest, vote yes for parks and healthy recreation, vote yes for wetlands and the salmon they support. Please Vote Yes for the Chuckanut Community Forest District.


Frank James  //  Sun, Jan 27, 2013, 10:29 am

What the developers like Phyllis, who does not even live in the district, do not want you to know is that voting NO for the District WILL increase your taxes. The infrastructure needed for this project would be millions of dollars. The very real costs that we pay for the utility infrastructure, schools, fire protection and other costs all add up for a development like this to more than the costs of buying the park! A detailed study was done by the nationally renowned urban planner of this specific site an our specific laws and tax structure that showed exactly that.

Don’t believe they hype of Bill and Phyllis, just follow the money and vote for the community and not special interests. If you want to see the Fodor study go to the Responsible Development website (RDnow.org) and search for Eben Fodor. Some of the details have changed since the study was completed but the basic facts are still the same. Allowing development on this property will cost us all more than preserving it as a park.


Delaine Clizbe  //  Sun, Jan 27, 2013, 11:14 am

Mr. James,
I keep hearing this argument from proponents that we will pay infrastructure costs if this land is built on.  Please tell what infrastructure costs have been accounted for in the development of a park on this land?  What proponents fail to realize is that the addition of this park to Fairhaven IS increasing traffic and congestion.  One major access point will likely be Fairhaven park and will necessitate folks traveling over the 12th street bridge to get to it.  Another access point, at several spots on 24th street will show increasing traffic.  As one poster on the Herald noted, “I go south for recreation and I go north for groceries”. 

What folks do not seem to realize is that the South Side of Bellingham is pretty much recreation central for all of Bellingham.  We sold a perfectly good home on Samish Way because of the huge increase in traffic due to folks heading to Lake Padden and Galbraith.  If anyone has driven by Lake Padden on a hot summer day you will see the huge issue it has become.  On opening day of fishing season or during an event like the Padden Triathlon you will even see cars parked up the side streets.

So it is a simplistic argument that “The folks on the south side should pay for the park that is benefiting them”.  We very much will be paying for a park that benefits the entire City.

Tell me, will the .28/1000 levy cover?:  Increased traffic on the 12th street bridge from folks accessing this park.  Parking lots on 24th street or traffic mitigation in that area. Wetland mitigation from increased traffic and parking on 24th street.  Bathroom facilities on the 24th street side of the property.(not everyone will be able to hold it until they get all the way over to Fairhaven Park) 

Where will the money come from to cover these costs?



Dan Pike  //  Sun, Jan 27, 2013, 11:51 am

Ms. Clizbe,
The costs of running the park will be part of the ongoing parks budget.  This was a purchase envisioned in the Greenways III levy, with the City Council envisioning up to $8 million of that levy being available for this purchase.  For background on that, since you allege I ‘overspent’ the Greenways allocation by gaining Council approval for the use of $4.5 million on this, please read this past NWCitizen article:

+ Link

Regarding why the Southside should bear this short-term, modest increase in property tax levies, more benefit accrues to those of us living here.  While it is of city-wide benefit, too, having the MPD kick in a bit more is a small price for preservation.  In the long run, we will all benefit, and not just from the preservation of an urban forest, with its ecological richness, but also because it makes Bellingham an even more attractive location for people who could choose to live anywhere, and plant their businesses anywhere. 

I’ve had conversations in the past with a prominent local businessman who is adamantly for lower taxes.  He complained when I was Mayor that he wished we would emulate Burlington, WA, which has a lower tax rate than Bellingham.  I asked if he’d prefer to live in Burlington, and he admitted he would not.  His business is here because of the kind of community we are, rich with natural, recreational, and cultural amenities.  To have all those, we tax ourselves more than many communities do. 

I am not blindly for more taxes; in fact the only veto I ever used was to veto a property tax increase in 2008.  However, to have the kind of community most living here vote for repeatedly, some taxes are required.  The supplemental taxes, such as the Greeways levies, public school funding, and this Park District levy are examples of where we, as citizens, get to make that choice.  It is not driven by those in office, but rather by how we colectively want to develop as a community.  i’m proud to live in a community that values the broader public benefit over a small personal financial savings.


Delaine Clizbe  //  Sun, Jan 27, 2013, 12:18 pm

Mr. Pike,
I am a bit of a blonde so please explain to me how it is that I am about to taxed to pay back a loan when you sir did not overspend!

If that money is available in the Greenways III levy why am I being asked to pay more?


Delaine Clizbe  //  Sun, Jan 27, 2013, 12:27 pm

Mr. Pike,
Will the on going parks budget cover the cost of traffic mitigation in the area as a result of this park?


Dan Pike  //  Sun, Jan 27, 2013, 1:19 pm

Ms. Clizbe,
Regarding being taxed for something on which I did not overspend, I would ask how I am controlling a majority of votes in this election, when I am not in office, and can only vote once?  Voters will choose whether or not to enact a new tax for the remainder of the loan.  Other alternatives include selling enough of the property to repay the balance.  Do you think allowing a vote is a bad idea?  Or perhaps you don’t trust your fellow citizens to vote appropriately?

As the link shows, a majority of the City Council that approved the Greenways III levy believed their vote was to authorize up to $8 million in Greenways funds to make this purchase; the overall price was less than the property was valued at in the early 1990’s.  A strong majority of voters approved said levy.  The City—at my urging—spent $4.5 million in Greenways III funds on this purchase.  Maybe I’ve got a bit of blonde in me, too—please explain, in simple terms, how spending $4.5 million of an allowed $8 million is overspending?  Thanks.

Regarding traffic mitigation, your comparison of Lake Padden with Chuckanut Ridge is an apples-to-oranges comparison.  As an undeveloped park, Chuckanut Ridge would generate about 2.5 trips/acre per day, according to standard ITE trip generation models, or about 200 additional trips per day.  Since these are distributed prety widely throughout the day, the overall impacts would be fairly minor.  In contrast, the proposed development at the property would have generated about 7,000 trips per day, with aggregations around the peak am and pm commute trip times, exacerbating already congested conditions.  Preserving this as a park will preclude that kind of trip loading on the neighborhood, and ensure the community does not get stuck with a huge burden for upgrading and widening the 12th Street bridge, which would cost millions of dollars.  Lake Padden is a developed park, with a golf course, ball fields, a robust trail system, and a popular swimming area.  That type of facility generates about 5 - 7 trips/acre/day, exclusive of the golf course.  Since Lake Padden is 160 acres, it generates around 1000 trips/day.  The golf course likely generates that much again, and because of its proximity to the rest of the park, it likely generates significant complementary use—golfers drop their familes off at the picnic area, etc—that is not going to occur at Chuckanut Ridge.  In addition, many of the users of Chuckanut Ridge are neighborhood residents who already use the park by walking to it, so there are no traffic impacts from that component.

Hope that clears up your questions.


Donald Duck  //  Sun, Jan 27, 2013, 5:11 pm

Without voting YES on Proposition 1, the city will ultimately need to pay off the loan by selling a portion of the property. A minimum of 250 units, more likely 350 units, would be built. The south end impacts and loss of parks legacy for future generations are worth the cost of a bowl of soup per month at the Colophon, and I like the citizen initiative. As a south end homeowner I am voting YES.


Delaine Clizbe  //  Sun, Jan 27, 2013, 7:26 pm

Mr. Pike,

I never said YOU were taxing me.  However, there is a lot that goes on behind the scenes in this town so who is to say who all the players are in this saga.

So I think I am starting to understand.  You and/or the City Council thought the Greenway III levy authorized 8 million on this purchase.  Ok.  So how is it you only had 4.5 million to spend on it?  You needed an additional 3.2 million.  I really don’t give a hoot what you “promised” to pay for the land.  For whatever reason you did not have the money, hence the loan from the Endowment.  And therefore, an over expenditure occurred. 

Your numbers for traffic patterns make sense.  However, I still think an extra 200 cars a day on the 12th street bridge would be an issue.  But hey, I’m all for some of the Padden traffic staying down in the lowlands because ultimately that makes MY neighborhood nicer:)

Can you please define for me what an “undeveloped park” is?  I would also be very interested to see an actual “park plan” for this land.


Delaine Clizbe  //  Sun, Jan 27, 2013, 9:11 pm

Mr, Hegedus,

I just happened to be visiting the Fairhaven Park Apartments/Padden Creek Apartments today.  I have always looked at those apartments as I run by on the interurban trail and think what a beautiful setting for folks to live.  A quick search of their website tells me that their complex is nestled on 14 acres and has 253 units.  Now, Mayor Linville suggested selling what? 20 something acres?  Folks should check out the Padden Creek Apartment complex for a little perspective on how much “development” we are talking about here.

Personally, I’m for putting in some nice multi-family dwellings, on the very small portion of land the Mayor Linville suggested,  so families can raise their children in a beautiful setting with trees and trails and the Fairhaven Park splash park in close proximity.  Now THAT would leave a legacy for the future!


Dan Pike  //  Sun, Jan 27, 2013, 11:14 pm

A correction to my earlier post:  Lake Padden Park is over 800 acres; Lake Padden the body of water is 160 acres at the surface.  That means the traffic generation of Lake Padden is about 5,000 trips per day, versus about 200 at Chuckanut Ridge.  I apologize for the error.

Ms. Clizbe,
Regarding your questions and responses to my earlier posts, I’m not sure what is unclear, nor do I understand why you think I overpaid.  Maybe we’ll simply need to accept that we have different perspectives on this issue, which is fine.  To try and restate what happened in buying the park, there were still I believe about $6.5 million in Greenways funds still unspent, and designated for southside parks acquisition.  As an aside, there is a myth that the north end was short-changed during my tenure regarding parks acquisition; in fact, including this purchase, we spent over twice as much acquiring north end parks as south end ones during my term—consistent with the Greenways III plan.

The Chuckanut Ridge purchase was limited, at my recommendation, to $4.5 million of Greenways funds to try and find a solution that worked for everyone in the community.  There was a great deal of divisiveness within both the Council and the greater community over whether it was $8 million, or $6 million, or a little over $4 million targeted for this purchase.  Three Councilmembers felt adamantly it was $8 million, two were at the middle figure, and two were at the $4 million and change amount.  By going with the lower end figure, using some available funds for parks acquisition that had to be spent in the south end and taking the balance as a $3.2 million loan, I hoped to settle the discord, and that we could have a community conversation about how to address the balance.  Among the methods to address this balance, we specifically discussed a temporary tax increase, and also the alternative of potentially selling some of the property.  This vote allows a community conversation, which I appreciate your participation in, of whether we want to tax ourselves to preserve the entire parcel.

As to what an ‘undeveloped’ park is, generally it means a park without features such as ball fields, defined swimming areas, basketball courts, or other amenities such as picnic areas, splash pools, etcetera.  The City of Bellingham’s Parks website has a spreadsheet listing the features of each park here: + Link

Of the five types of features listed (Sports fields, trails, play/picnic areas, water access, and other amenities), undeveloped parks would have only trails and/or water access.  By contrast, Lake Padden has all five boxes checked.  I am not certain what the status of the planning for this park is at this point.  To some degree, I expect it’s hinging on the current vote.  If you want something more specific, I’d suggest you contact the Parks department; staff are very knowledgeable and helpful, and will let you know what the status currently is, and how you can stay informed as things move forward.


Delaine Clizbe  //  Tue, Jan 29, 2013, 5:45 pm

Mr. Pike,
You know I have thought about it for a couple days now, running it over and over in my little head, but I still just can’t fathom how we ended up with a loan but you did not “overspend”

So I’m not even going to agree to disagree with you on this one!


Dan Pike  //  Tue, Jan 29, 2013, 6:50 pm

No worries, Ms. Clizbe.  Unless you paid full cash for every house and car you bought, either you overpaid, or you can figure out what I meant.  I’m simply trying to explain what went into my thinking, in a manner meant to foster civil dialog, something which is growing all too scarce at every level of our society.  However, I can only address my side of the conversation.  For what it’s worth, I’m glad to see you engaged, even while I disagree with your conclusions.

In any case, we can disagree to disagree, if you prefer.  I’ll leave you to figure out what that means.


Election Recommendations

Thu, Oct 30, 2014, 2:18 am  //  John Servais

A link to Riley's Political Junkie for excellent recommendations - and a few thoughts of my own.

1 comments; last on Oct 30, 2014

Something Gristly to Chew On: The rest of the story -

Thu, Oct 23, 2014, 11:01 am  //  Tip Johnson

It's just how things roll in Whatcom County

5 comments; last on Oct 26, 2014

Johns Repair

Specializing in German vehicles...

Point Roberts vs. the FCC:  Modern David and Goliath

Wed, Oct 22, 2014, 2:44 pm  //  John Lesow

Update Oct 22: John Lesow has posted a comment with considerable more information on this issue.

1 comments; last on Oct 22, 2014

Tune in TONIGHT for Political Comedy

Tue, Oct 14, 2014, 6:36 am  //  Riley Sweeney

Riley does a local political comedy show

1 comments; last on Oct 15, 2014

Bham Planning Director - Rick Sepler Chosen

Wed, Oct 08, 2014, 6:24 pm  //  John Servais

Three final candidates for Bellingham Planning Director spoke today at a cozy 'meet and greet' of government employees and developers.

6 comments; last on Oct 11, 2014

The Business of Government

Sat, Oct 04, 2014, 12:23 pm  //  Tip Johnson

Wherein we see that sometimes government can do what business can't.

9 comments; last on Oct 07, 2014

Rental Conditions -  A Real Estate Inspector’s View

Fri, Oct 03, 2014, 10:26 am  //  Dick Conoboy

An experienced real estate inspector provides a window to the dangeroous conditions found in rentals in Bellingham

3 comments; last on Oct 05, 2014

Few Surprises at the Tea Party Debate

Thu, Oct 02, 2014, 2:33 pm  //  Riley Sweeney

Riley files a full report of the Tea Party debate for State Leg candidates

1 comments; last on Oct 04, 2014

Satpal Sidhu, Candidate for State Representative, 42nd District

Tue, Sep 30, 2014, 8:00 am  //  Guest writer

Wherein a Fulbright scholar, professional engineer and successful business owner files for public office

4 comments; last on Oct 02, 2014

Hickory, Dickory, Docketing…Yet Another Spot Rezone

Mon, Sep 22, 2014, 5:07 am  //  Dick Conoboy

Last Thursday, the Planning Commission voted to recommend the docketing of the spot rezone of 801 Samish from Residential Single to Commerical Planned (non-retail)

6 comments; last on Oct 03, 2014

Samish Way Experience - Drug Dealing Dangers?

Wed, Sep 17, 2014, 10:26 am  //  John Servais

We post a disturbing report of a personal encounter along Samish Way, with the permission of John Stark, who experienced it.

2 comments; last on Sep 17, 2014

Who Will Be Appointed to Lehman’s City Council Seat?

Tue, Sep 09, 2014, 8:21 am  //  Riley Sweeney

Riley and John share the short list of who might replace Cathy Lehman on the Bellingham city council on January 5.

8 comments; last on Sep 10, 2014

An Imminent Threat:  The State Plans for CBR Disaster While Counties Punt

Mon, Aug 25, 2014, 11:48 am  //  Terry Wechsler

While the state spends hundreds of thousands of dollars defining risks of crude by rail, Skagit County finds no significant adverse impacts of a crude-by-rail proposal.

1 comments; last on Aug 28, 2014

You can’t fight city hall: city hall doesn’t fight fair

Fri, Aug 22, 2014, 2:06 pm  //  Guest writer

Patrick McKee of the Sunnyland Neighborhood guest-writes about the August 11 City Council slap-dash zoning changes.

2 comments; last on Aug 23, 2014

Good Friends and Neighbors:  What $54 Million Doesn’t Buy, Part 2

Wed, Aug 20, 2014, 4:54 pm  //  Terry Wechsler

Not content with causing massive inconvenience, BNSF is now literally dumping on county residents.

10 comments; last on Aug 26, 2014

Devil In the Details

Sat, Aug 16, 2014, 3:48 pm  //  Guest writer

Judith Green of the Sunnyland Neighborhood guest writes this brief summary of what went wrong with the planning last week.

1 comments; last on Aug 22, 2014

Good Friends and Neighbors:  What $54 Million Doesn’t Buy

Fri, Aug 15, 2014, 7:12 am  //  Terry Wechsler

A massive upgrade of the Cascade [rail] Corridor has left residents stranded and the sheriff asking Washington, DC, to intervene.

7 comments; last on Sep 02, 2014

Reliable Prosperity

Thu, Aug 14, 2014, 3:13 pm  //  Guest writer

Sandy Robson guest writes of the need for real prosperity at Cherry Point, not a destructive short term coal port that destroys the fishing grounds.

5 comments; last on Oct 02, 2014

Fleetwood versus Ericksen: What Happened in Round One?

Tue, Aug 12, 2014, 10:52 am  //  Riley Sweeney

Some Context for the Primary Results

0 comments

The Rule of Law - Bellingham Style

Mon, Aug 11, 2014, 11:31 pm  //  John Servais

Bellingham City Council abruptly changes zoning codes to force Planning Department plan on Sunnyland residents.

7 comments; last on Aug 14, 2014

Final Updated Election Results

Fri, Aug 08, 2014, 10:10 am  //  John Servais

Updated Wed evening. The Tuesday evening 8:20 pm Auditor report on the election is in.

5 comments; last on Aug 08, 2014

Councilmember Murphy’s Proposed Rental Ordinance Is Deeply Flawed

Fri, Aug 01, 2014, 8:00 am  //  Dick Conoboy

Councilmember Murphy's proposal is based on a complaint-based rental ordinance from Tacoma, demonstrated to do little for the health and safety of tenants.

14 comments; last on Oct 01, 2014

Trial by Fire:  A Rising Tide of Civil Disobedience

Fri, Aug 01, 2014, 4:47 am  //  Terry Wechsler

Carefully planned actions are rolling across the state to make the point that it's not OK to expose us to risks associated with CBR.

7 comments; last on Aug 04, 2014

Northwest Citizen Releases Polling of Whatcom Voters

Thu, Jul 24, 2014, 11:40 am  //  Riley Sweeney

Northwest Citizen has conducted a phone poll of likely voters, with some surprising results!

9 comments; last on Jul 29, 2014

Plan Commission & Samish Neighbors Bypassed on Rezone Docketing

Thu, Jul 24, 2014, 7:52 am  //  Dick Conoboy

In contravention of the Bellingham Municipal Code, the City Council will consider on 4 August a last minute docketing request that ignores the Planning Commission and Samish Neighborhood.

1 comments; last on Jul 30, 2014

Sunnyland Planning Process Explained - Partially

Wed, Jul 23, 2014, 10:47 pm  //  Guest writer

Guest writer Mike Rostron explains how Bellingham city planners played loose and illegal with planning processes.

0 comments

City Council Approves Resident’s Sunnyland Plan

Tue, Jul 22, 2014, 7:22 pm  //  John Servais

Sunnlyland residents win one - after a seven year effort. Planning Department failed them and all of us.

2 comments; last on Jul 23, 2014

What Landlords Need to Know about Rental Registration

Mon, Jul 21, 2014, 5:30 am  //  Guest writer

Landlords are so caught up opposing a licensing and inspection ordinance, they cannot see the upside for them in ridding the city of bad rentals.

19 comments; last on Aug 01, 2014

Sunnyland Deja Vu

Fri, Jul 18, 2014, 1:24 pm  //  Guest writer

Judith Green explains how the Bellingham Planning Department is trying to cram their plan onto a neighborhood.

5 comments; last on Jul 21, 2014

Trial by Fire:  Call to Action to Comment on the BP Pier Expansion

Sun, Jul 13, 2014, 2:26 pm  //  Terry Wechsler

Years after BP completed its north dock, the Army Corps of Engineers released a draft EIS and it's really really stupid.

0 comments

Intrado Not to Intrude in Bellingham

Tue, Jul 08, 2014, 8:20 am  //  Dick Conoboy

The city council "persuades" the city administration to withdraw a request for an intrusive police threat warning system

2 comments; last on Jul 08, 2014

Power to the Permit! (or Closely Hold This!)

Mon, Jul 07, 2014, 6:54 am  //  Terry Wechsler

It is time we stop allowing corporations to externalize the costs associated with their risky business practices, and demand more from our regulators who hold the keys to…

3 comments; last on Jul 13, 2014

Manifest Clandestine-y

Mon, Jul 07, 2014, 5:04 am  //  Guest writer

Guest writer Sandy Robson breaks the story of officials from Washington treated to a coal-promoting junket to Wyoming.

2 comments; last on Jul 13, 2014

A Question of Freedom

Fri, Jul 04, 2014, 5:00 am  //  Guest writer

Ferndale's most famous landmark is frequently commented on and is often in the news. Here is their side of the story.

4 comments; last on Jul 07, 2014

Trial by Fire: Lessons Not Learned One Year after Lac-Megantic

Wed, Jul 02, 2014, 5:14 pm  //  Terry Wechsler

On the anniversary of the Lac-Megantic disaster, communities throughout North America rally in solidarity to remember and protest wholly inadequate government response to crude-by-rail's risks.

4 comments; last on Jul 12, 2014

Sins of Omission

Fri, Jun 27, 2014, 9:01 pm  //  Guest writer

In the Weekly, Tim Johnson left out three words in quoting Craig Cole - and his story misleads readers. Guest article by Sandy Robson.

11 comments; last on Jul 01, 2014

DOJ Grant Brings Confusion and Anger to City Council Meeting

Tue, Jun 24, 2014, 10:24 am  //  Dick Conoboy

The Bellingham Police Department wants to purchase "threat assessment" software with federal monies. Citizen comments were vehement and negative. City Council confused.

5 comments; last on Jul 03, 2014

Widespread Slaughter Won’t Work

Tue, Jun 17, 2014, 10:18 pm  //  Tip Johnson

Wherein the failings of a bad policy framework are revealed

1 comments; last on Jun 19, 2014

Fireworks Ban in Bellingham in Effect as of 18 June

Tue, Jun 17, 2014, 7:53 am  //  Dick Conoboy

The possession and use of consumer fireworks are no longer permitted within the city limits.

1 comments; last on Jun 19, 2014

Herald and Weekly Withhold the News

Wed, Jun 11, 2014, 11:39 am  //  John Servais

Wyoming Senators and coal honchos were in Whatcom County June 10 - to hold a news conference with select reporters.

7 comments; last on Jun 20, 2014

Dawn Sturwold Retiring End of Month

Tue, Jun 10, 2014, 11:20 am  //  John Servais

Bellingham Hearing Examiner, Dawn Sturwold, retires in three weeks. Successor selection is hidden from all of us.

3 comments; last on Jun 11, 2014

Stay the Frack Out of Our Forearc Redux

Fri, Jun 06, 2014, 2:07 pm  //  Terry Wechsler

Part 2: Following Ken Oplinger to California, and Home Again

4 comments; last on Jun 19, 2014

The Road to Perdition

Sun, Jun 01, 2014, 12:39 am  //  Guest writer

A Venn diagram where coal, the Endangered Species Act, Republicans, and Wyoming’s Board of Education collide.

2 comments; last on Jun 02, 2014

Feint, Calumny, Solidarity

Wed, May 28, 2014, 3:15 pm  //  Guest writer

A perspective by guest writer Ellen Murphy reflects on the Whatcom Watch and the threatened law suit by Craig Cole.

22 comments; last on Jun 01, 2014

Extracting Profit and Destroying Experience: The Waterfront Plan

Tue, May 27, 2014, 1:23 am  //  Wendy Harris

Why was so little consideration given to the concept of developing the waterfront for eco-tourism?

5 comments; last on Jun 11, 2014

How Park Improvements Generate Heat

Mon, May 26, 2014, 7:51 pm  //  Wendy Harris

City park improvements have implications on the local and global scale.

2 comments; last on May 29, 2014

Montana & Wyoming to WA: Permit Coal Export Terminals… Or Else

Thu, May 22, 2014, 12:10 am  //  Guest writer

Wyoming is ready to try and legally force us to limit our environmental scoping for the Cherry Point coal terminal

4 comments; last on Jun 17, 2014

The Trojan Slaughterhouse and the Scrivener’s Errors

Sun, May 18, 2014, 11:57 pm  //  Wendy Harris

Reckless rezones and far-fetched explanations result in more slaughterhouses and meat packing plants

3 comments; last on May 20, 2014

Who Filed for Charter Review Commission?

Sat, May 17, 2014, 2:34 pm  //  Riley Sweeney

Riley takes a closer look at the Charter Review Commission candidates

2 comments; last on May 21, 2014

Bellingham’s 2013 Water Quality Report: The Facts But Not the Truth

Tue, May 13, 2014, 5:04 pm  //  Wendy Harris

Bellingham's annual water quality report indicates that city hall's propoganda machine is going strong

1 comments; last on May 14, 2014

Stay the Frack Out of Our Forearc

Sun, May 11, 2014, 2:20 pm  //  Terry Wechsler

Part 1: Introduction to the Bellingham Basin’s Potential for Fracking, Earthquakes, and Earthquakes Due to Fracking

3 comments; last on May 14, 2014

Riley scoops Herald - again

Fri, May 09, 2014, 10:02 am  //  John Servais

The Political Junkie for Whatcom County - that would be Riley Sweeney - has Overstreet not running for reelection in the 42nd.

1 comments; last on May 13, 2014

An Imminent Threat

Fri, May 09, 2014, 6:10 am  //  Terry Wechsler

Why Washington must step in and assume lead agency status in Skagit County for the Shell crude by rail proposal.

6 comments; last on Jun 21, 2014

The Whatcom Republicans’ Huge PCO Advantage

Tue, May 06, 2014, 5:52 pm  //  Riley Sweeney

The value of a Precinct Committee Officer . . .

1 comments; last on May 07, 2014

‘Legislative Sausage” or “Slaughter this Ordinance”

Mon, May 05, 2014, 3:34 pm  //  Tip Johnson

Wherein the gyrations of the bid for widespread county slaughter are exposed.

2 comments; last on May 07, 2014

Move To Amend - Persons vs Corporations

Thu, May 01, 2014, 10:21 pm  //  Guest writer

Move to Amend is a national movement to amend the U.S. Constitution and define persons as people and speech as not money.

7 comments; last on Jun 02, 2014

SweenyPolitics:  Fleetwood files against Ericksen

Wed, Apr 30, 2014, 8:20 am  //  John Servais

Riley posted this morning that Seth Fleetwood has decided to challenge Doug Ericksen for state senate in the 42nd District.

1 comments; last on Apr 30, 2014

Planning or Development Commission?

Mon, Apr 28, 2014, 6:28 am  //  Dick Conoboy

Every Bellingham Planning Commission member has ties to development or development-related businesses.

4 comments; last on Apr 30, 2014

“Friends and Neighbors”?

Mon, Apr 21, 2014, 1:59 pm  //  Terry Wechsler

A closer look at Whatcom County's industrial "stewards of the environment."

4 comments; last on Aug 28, 2014

Action Alert for Tonight: Waterfront Wildlife and Habitat Threatened

Mon, Apr 21, 2014, 11:43 am  //  Wendy Harris

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

0 comments

 

Election Info

Candidate Filings

Primary election results

Whatcom Auditor

Coal, Oil & Trains

Community Wise Bellingham

Powder River Basin R. C.

Local Blogs & News

Bellingham Herald

Bham Herald Politics Blog
Bham Politics & Economics
Cascadia Weekly
Ferndale Record
Friends of Whatcom
Get Whatcom Planning
KGMI
Latte Republic
League of Women Voters
Lynden Tribune
MikeatthePort
Northern Light

Twilight Zoning
Western Front - WWU
Whatcom Watch

Local Causes

Chuckanut Community Forest

City Club of Bellingham
Conservation NW
Futurewise - Whatcom
Lake Whatcom
Lummi Island Quarry
N. Cascades Audubon
NW Holocaust Center
RE Sources
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 Auditor
Whatcom County

Weather & Climate

Cliff Mass Weather Blog

Climate Audit
Nat Hurricane Center
NW Radar
Two day forecast
Watts Up With That? - climate

Leisure

Adventures NW

Edge of Sports
Entertainment NNW
Famous Internet Skiers
Recreation Northwest
Sailing Anarchy

Good Web Sites

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
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

NwCitizen 1995 - 2007

Early Northwest Citizen

Quiet, Offline or Dead

Bellingham Police Activity

Bellingham Register
Bob Sanders
Carl Weimer
Chuckanut Mountains
Citizen Ted
Citizens of Bellingham
Cordata & Meridian
David Hackworth
Facebook Port Reform
HamsterTalk
Jack Petree
N. Sound Conservancy
No Leaky Buckets
Northwest Review
Orcinus
Post-Oklahoman Confessions
Protect Bellingham Parks
The American Telegraph
Wally Wonders