"a bi-monthly journal of environmental news and commentary..."

The Port of Olympia and NorthPoint: Room for the Public?

By Krag Unsoeld

In 1911, Washington State approved legislation allowing the establishment of public port districts. This act was seen as a triumph for the progressive and populist reform efforts that were strong at the time. It essentially broke the stranglehold that private interests had over urban harbors. Seattle established the first district followed by Grays Harbor the year the legislation was approved. The Port of Olympia was founded in 1922. Port districts, with their democratically elected commissioners, provided a means for the public to exert greater control over harbors and ensure public access.

Public Access to NorthPoint

When it comes to public access to our shrinking waterfront, there is a big issue facing citizens in Olympia and Thurston County. The issue is access to the last stretch of relatively undeveloped waterfront under the control of the Port of Olympia. The site, known as NorthPoint, is located at the northern end of the peninsula on which the port's marine division is located. The port commission has been working with MJR Development on this property. Last year the commission instructed staff to draft an exclusive redevelopment agreement with MJR. The most recent proposal by MJR is a "boutique hotel." For a description of the site and some of its history see the companion article in this issue.

During recent public hearings before the commissioners, some citizens have raised concerns about this agreement. They have testified that a valid public process starts with the full range of options for the site and occurs before the decisions have been made. They have expressed their belief that there has been no comprehensive planning effort to ensure that the full potential of NorthPoint is not lost to our community. They have argued that there is not enough public access to this stretch of public waterfront considering the large public investment in toxic waste cleanup.

Who Pilots the Port?

The NorthPoint issue has raised some concerns about the way the Port of Olympia commissioners conduct their business. Some of the difficulties for them are the result of the open public meetings law. Whenever a quorum (the number necessary to conduct official business) is together there has to be public notice. This means that two commissioners cannot get together to discuss official business before them without advertising it and making it accessible to the public. Ed Galligan, the executive director of the Port of Olympia, says that this presents a challenge to the commissioners and clearly inhibits dialogue between them.

The commissioners are very dependent upon the port staff to provide them with information about the issues that are before them. Yet it is not always clear whether or not what staff is providing is accurate.

Back and Forth

At the November 23, 2009 port commission meeting, port staff told the commissioners that the Department of Ecology required a redevelopment plan to move ahead with the remaining toxic waste cleanup and without this, the Port risked losing $400,000 in cleanup money from Ecology. But during subsequent discussion and e-mail exchanges, Ecology staff clearly stated that no redevelopment plan was needed; they stated that the cleanup of the facility was being done to the highest standard and that whatever the port decided to do would be okay.

Port staff and commissioners also contended that Ecology said that it was necessary to cap the contaminated soil site with asphalt. This would be used as a parking lot for the hotel proposed by MJR Development. It was this information, coupled with the prospect of losing Ecology cleanup funds, that prompted the commissioners to direct staff to develop an exclusive redevelopment agreement for the NorthPoint property.

The chief engineer for cleanup with Ecology informed citizens that a two foot soil covering was also a possibility for capping the site. But this information was countered by the port staff who said that if soil were used there would also have to be some sort of low permeability liner similar to that used for landfills. If you compared the cost of soil vs. asphalt, port staff said, the soil would be $100,000 more expensive.

At the February 22 commission meeting, a citizen activist who has devoted a lot of time to this issue, presented her findings from researching the relative costs of a liner and soil combination compared to asphalt. She solicited costs from local business and found that the port appeared to have overstated the cost of the sand by about $25,000. The cost of a low permeable liner could have been overstated by as much as $80,000 to $100,000. "Rather than grass being $100,000 more expensive than asphalt," she testified, "it appears that it may be less expensive."

What Now?

At press time, the Port of Olympia Commission has not yet entered into an agreement with MJR Development but they seem poised to do so.

Meanwhile, the City of Olympia, which is responsible for land use planning on the Port Peninsula, is starting work on amending its comprehensive plan and in updating its shoreline master plan. Both of these projects could impact NorthPoint. Both also offer an opportunity for people to make their voices heard about what happens to our public shorelines.

For more information, visit www.ci.olympia.wa.us/imagine-olympia.aspx, www.ci.olympia.wa.us/imagine-olympia/shoreline-planning.aspx, and www.portolympia.com to learn how you can assist in these efforts.

Krag Unsoeld is a teacher, local citizen activist, and recently rejoined the SPEECH Board of Directors.


Back to Home page.


Copyright © 2024 - All Rights Reserved
Updated 2015/01/07 21:14:22