Editor,
Why are our local politicians voting to use taxpayer funds to supplement costs of private citizens, marinas and a yacht club?
This should not even be a question, should it? A couple of weeks ago, I submitted a letter outlining how taxpayers were being double and triple taxed for the dredging cost in the West Bay of Budd Inlet should the Deschutes Estuary Interlocal Agreement (ILA) be approved by their respective elected officials and the money would primarily be used to dredge areas to provide access to the private marinas and yacht club in West Bay.
Since then, all but the Thurston County Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) have signed the ILA and approved the use of taxpayer funds to do that. The BoCC postponed voting on the ILA to obtain legal and budget opinions regarding the source of the funds they intend to use — not that they felt it was wrong to use taxpayer funds to basically reduce dredging costs for hundreds of private citizens and three private marinas and a yacht club and saddle the taxpayers with that cost ($66 million+). The BoCC will revisit approval of the ILA on Oct. 29. At least two of the commissioners have publicly stated their support for the ILA. Will they do that now that they know what the funds will be used for — to reduce the dredging costs to private individuals and businesses?
I am sorry, but since when is it acceptable to use taxpayer funds to do this? One could argue that our elected officials did not know what the money was being used for. I want to believe that is the case since the wording is hidden not in the ILA itself, but the attachment and exhibits. Because I wanted to be sure of the intended purpose of these funds, I sent the Department of Enterprise Services (DES) a copy of a letter I was preparing for the BoCC and asked them to comment. Using track changes, they provided the following response to the question of who pays for the dredging of the port vessel berths, marinas and marina access area:
“Funding provided by the Port would fully cover the dredging within the Port vessel berths. So, technically, the other jurisdictions are NOT paying for dredging in Port vessel berths. Rather, the Port is paying for their dredging and providing additional funding for dredging elsewhere (within marinas and marina access areas). Money from the other jurisdictions will demonstrate broad support for the project and its benefits and will fund dredging in other navigational areas of West Bay.”
This statement by DES is misleading, particularly when you read page 2 of Attachment 3 to the ILA, which says, “Maintenance dredging equivalent to the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) No Action Alternative in impacted areas of the Port’s vessel berths will continue to be the responsibility of the Port; additional dredging requirements resulting from the Project (above the No Action Alternative), will be the shared responsibility of the ILA Parties (including the Port).” This ILA specifically deals with dredging costs above the no action alternative, so in fact, a portion of the funds paid into the ILA will be used to assist in payment of dredging port vessel berths.
Exhibit 2a (Representative Annual Coordination Process & Marina Dredging Coordination) of the ILA specifically says that the costs to dredge the marinas, yacht club and marina access area would be shared by all parties. “Payment by invoice from State with Proportional Contributions from: State, local & marina funds.”
Exhibit 2b (Representative Coordination Process for Port Vessel Berth Dredging) of the ILA specifically says that the costs to dredge the port vessel berths would be paid by “Payment by Invoice with Proportionate Contributions from: State & local funds, also including baseline funding from Port.” In other words, the port would contribute funds up to the baseline funding and the remaining cost to dredge the port vessel berths would be proportionately shared by state and local funds.
This is what is in writing and what the leaders of the jurisdictions agree to.
I have shined a light on the specifically intended use of the funds collected by signing this ILA. What will our elected leaders do now? It is not too late to stop this ILA — then gather all the elected leaders that thought they were doing the right thing and work with the DES to restructure the ILA and funding mechanism. Will any of our elected leaders step up and do the right thing?
Barry Halverson
Unincorporated Thurston County
