Port decision puzzling, frustrating

by Doug Barker

The Port of Grays Harbor is on something of a roll.

Its latest income projections, released this week, show tremendous growth in shipping operations. They have plans to expand, but fear that the cargo is coming in and going out faster than they can build the facilities they need to handle it.

It's a fortunate problem like the Port hasn't had in a long time and it's not by accident. The Port staff and commission has worked hard to make it happen.

It makes the Port's decision to sell a key piece of land along the Aberdeen waterfront to Walmart even more puzzling and frustrating.

Walmart has purchased the property between its existing store and the Wishkah River, apparently with the intention of expanding to create one of its "superstores."

In small towns, the superstore is the retail equivalent of a black hole, sucking all other business into its mass with such gravitational force that even light can't escape. You know how the city said it turned off the street lights over there to save money? It was Walmart, sucking the light right out of that side of town.

The neighborhood paint store? Sucked in, never to be seen again. The sporting goods store? The crafts store? Pulled in with the force of a thousand tractor beams.

The Port didn't have to sell the property. The sale price was $2 million for a little more than seven acres. The Port was already leasing Walmart five acres and had decades to go on that lease.

The Port is a funny governmental entity. It's a business and governmental entity. A floor wax and a snack food.

It supplements its business operations with tax dollars, and the facilities it owns (more accurately that we own) generate jobs and offer access to industrial facilities that small businesses couldn't afford on their own.

Mostly, it's run like a business. But unlike a private business, it's owned by the taxpayers and it's bound by the open government rules that other government entities have to follow.

I suppose it's a tough balancing act sometimes.

This time, Port officials lost their balance. They went along with Walmart's request and didn't say anything to the public before the sale was tied up with a tidy bow.

If anybody knows what it's like to be the ants at the picnic, it's Walmart. They knew that some people here would oppose their expansion for the predictable effect it will have on the rest of the retail community and for their non-union track record.

Walmart's expansion on the Aberdeen waterfront is of tremendous public interest and should have been subject to debate in the public. No question about it.

Besides the effect on business, there is more interest in the fate of downtown Aberdeen and its waterfront than at any time in years. The people working on those plans never got to be part of the discussion.

To be fair, the Port insisted on Walmart guaranteeing continued public access to the waterfront where the Wishkah meets the Chehalis. But that doesn't mitigate for the backroom nature of the deal.

This time, the Port acted more like a business than a government of the people.

I don't understand why so many people think real estate sales have to be made public at the first sign of interest. Hey I heard Arby's wants to buy property in Grays Harbor, let's chase them down to every lot in town and get a comment.

It isn't necessary to publicize "Interest". The party interested will probably contact the executive and those discussions can be private. When the elected body gets involved, the Open Meetings Act takes effect.

I kind of agree, however - I was at the meeting that met OMA requirements. Prior to that, didn't Executive Sessions fulfill their requirements?

If Arby's were buying public property, it should become a public matter. Remember, it is PUBLIC property being sold so the public should have input.

And the public interest issue, in the case of the WalMart purchase, goes beyond the land deal itself. Is it in the public interest to expand a megalith business that has real capacity to put other local businesses out of business? I think so. Personally, I don't think it's in the public interest for more businesses to close, especially locally-owned businesses. If one or more Swanson's close, this means the loss of family-wage jobs and more property sitting empty. Same if Top Food closes. Although, when a local business profits, more of those dollars filter back into the local economy and it also effects a business that has shown interest in supporting our communities by donating to local charitable organizations, schools, and youth activities. All that dies when a locally-owned business closes. It's closure would have a public impact.

I think the $2million the Port receives is going to be completely off-set by the loss of more than $2million in local paychecks being recirculated in Grays Harbor, taxes no longer being paid to the cities by other businesses that will close, etc.

And it won't stop with Swanson's (again, just an obvious example). If you thought Aberdeen's and Hoquiam's downtowns were ghost towns before, just wait. I see no good from this. The sale was in the Port's best interest but not in the public's best interest.

I don't disagree with you at all funky, my wife works at Swanson's and I would be one of those families affected by a closure. However, isn't that a free market America? If Swanson's had the buying power to put Wal-Mart, or Dennis Company out of business would anyone complain?

I'm not pro wal-mart any more than I'm pro Sears, or JC Penny's. None of which advertise locally, purchase remotes, or buy into contests we do on our (locally owned) radio stations.

However, isn't local government saying "no" to wal-mart, or any other store expansion, a form of Protectionism? IF a "local investor" purchased the public property would anyone complain? What if said investor then sold that property to Wal-Mart?

It isn't "free market" anymore. Too much of the world is effected by Bentonville, Arkansas. I believe Sam Walton would turn over in his grave if he saw the devistating tactics used by Wal~Mart on communities, manufacturers, and employees.



If Swanson's used the same tactics around the nation and around the world... yeah, I think a lot of people would complain.



If the local governments took the time to look at the overall impact, "protection" would be exactly what they would do. As their downtowns become more and more ghost towns and there are fewer and fewer stores in which to do business, the lack of govenment "protectionism" will be on the top 3 reasons. The initial dollar signs are intoxicating. But, the long term effect is as devistating as meth or crack.



Would the Port go out of its way to hide the purchase or would it be cuss and discussed in meetings with the public in attendance?

I agree that Walton's Wal-Mart has evolved into a near-monopoly, but I would argue that we have those in other industries as well. Not as many affect local-anytown like Wal-Mart, but many do.


agreed, and in America they could complain...all they want.


Protectionism has it's own side effects, some equally as devistating as meth or crack.




I think the port would have sold the property the same way either way; through Executive Sessions, then one public meeting to take action on a sale.

Real Estate investors could better explain why it's not a good idea to discuss pending deals, the OMA addresses this in the form of those Executive Sessions.
In a better-staffed-news-industry, an executive session like the one discussing a pending sale of public property to a news-worthy party would not have gone unnoticed (like it did).

It is completely irrelevant if it's a "good idea". The issue is what is the law and the public's right to know. Much about open government is inconvenient, but, that's the law.

Now, the downside as I see it is, the only penalty for violating the open meetings act is a $100 fine (for each elected official who participated in an illegal executive session). If that's not enough, the electorate then has to take matters into their own hands.

Just an FYI - as of the 5th Top Foods Pharmacy closed. I learned of it on the 4th when I went in to get a script filled. There was no notice to the employees other than don't come to work tomorrow. Reason was not enough business.
Now all scripts are at the downtown Rite Aid.

I don't buy into the "Walmart killed downtown" argument at all. Anybody that regularly reads the "World Gone By" columns from 25 years ago can see that this was happening with the mall coming in, 10 years before Walmart showed up. Some businesses are successful, most are not. And for those that are successful, they must evolve or die. That applies to Walmart as well as any other company.

I wouldn't be surprised if we lost a grocery store here in Aberdeen, whether Walmart becomes a Supercenter or not. The fact is, at least one is struggling, but Walmart makes a good excuse. Remember when Photo Lab Express closed? They made sure that everyone knew, through the newspaper, was the reason they were closing was cheaper, (supposedly) inferior developing available at Walmart and Safeway. The transistion to digital was also briefly mentioned, but that was more of an afterthought. 5 years later, and I think only Rite-Aid has 1 hour film developing. Is it because Walmart drove everyone out of the business before ending the service themselves, or because it's got as much demand as buggy whips?

It seems that the driving factor here is the desire to protect an oligopoly. And that rarely works. It isn't the Port's or the city's responsibility to ensure that all businesses are union, or that union businesses only have to compete against other union businesses. It's the union businesses responsibility to make sure that they are doing everything they can to be competitive. Some will, some won't. When this is all said and done, Safeway will be just fine, just like they are in other markets where they compete against Walmart. This location will be even better off than most because it is probably one of the best run Safeways out there. Whether a Swanson's or Top Foods go away depends on how they respond to competition.

I'm curious as to how up in arms people would be if it was a WINCO? Very competitive, really even more so than Walmart, doesn't do a lot of charitible stuff, and is non-union. But it's not as big, only 70 some locations.

Where are the Sons of Anarchy when we need them?

Wal~Mart tactics world-wide are well documented. Yes, there are examples of buggy whip stores who were doomed no matter what. But, there are many, many, more of good honest businesses that couldn't race to the bottom of the wage and benefit ladder they would have to in order compete with an international conglomerate that could lose a million dollars a day until their competition is gone. Benefits and family wage jobs cost money. Products produced by businesses with employee benefits and family wages cost more. In a race to the bottom, only the one who can hold their breath the longest wins. Any single Wal~Mart can hold its breath forever. And, Bentonville's long-term marketing strategy involves deep sea diving equipment.

I agree. Some of the local businesses, union or not, have excellent customer service that totally offsets price-savings. Some could definitely make improvements in their customer service and selection to draw more customers.

But there is more to it.

I think the issue that bugs me the most is that number of union members who shop WalMart instead of shopping local stores, especially locally-owned UNION stores. What's up with that? I have had this discussion multiple times with various union shop stewards and even labor organizers. They agree with me in principle but still shop there. Penny-wise and pound foolish, I guess.

Yes, the mall hurt downtown. But there was a time when the mall, at least, had more shops which gave you a variety of shopping experiences, including a few locally-owned shops. Now WalMart is killing the mall, too.

For me, it's not just the local issues. The reason why we are losing our domestic manufacturing base is also because of the price-cutting. Manufacturers who remain domestic do end up cutting wages and benefits in order to meet WalMart's price points. Google Vlasic pickles for a classic example. All this importing of products also doesn't help our trade deficit.



WalMart drives the market. Winco doesn't. It all reminds me of the scene in "Demolition Man" when Sandra Bullock tell Stallone that Taco Bell won the franchise wars and "all restaurants are Taco Bell". I doubt that will ever happen on a national or regional level but there are some small town areas where it's getting close. Yikes!

But I really don't like any chains and avoid them if I can. You will rarely catch me eating at a chain restaurant, for example. Even when out of town. I don't seek the familiar. I totally hate the way towns are becoming increasingly carbon copies of each other when you enter them, with chains all over the place. But this is a bigger issue than just WalMart.

I prefer any kind of locally-owned establishment, especially if it's a union shop. However, I'm not perfect. I do have a weakness for Ross.

As for local protectionism, I don't see where it hurt Olympia to deny WalMart locating within the city limits.

Didn't the two million dollar price tag seem kind of cheap for prime, waterfront property??

I'm not up on all of this, but I bet Mr Yonich could have made better use of this seven acres...something way more interesting.

maybe that's not the point, I don't know. This just 'feels' wrong.

It may not be all that "prime". Access from Wishkah isn't particularly easy and everything gets cut off when a train goes by. The parcel has been vacant for quite awhile, since United Parcel Service moved out. Is it that no was interested or did Wal Mart tell the Port not to sell it to anyone else?

When I contacted Wal-Mart about the liquor story a year or more ago, their rep said that they planned to upgrade ALL Washington Wal-Marts to superstores, and that the liquor license was just phase 1.
(AT THE TIME) They said then that they were not going to invest in the Olympic Gateway property, due to it's location and restrictions. Make what you will of that but it sounds like the land purchase made a superstore possible, and if all WA stores are destined to be superstores..... maybe a GH superstore would have popped up somewhere else if that hadn't gone through?

We are a union household and I shop at Wal Mart. There are some things there I can't get other places and I can't afford the prices at other stores.
Do I like shopping there, not really but what choice do I have.
Kmart is gone, Micheals is gone - short of driving to Oly or Chehalis, (which has both stores).
I also shop at all three grocery stores, Dennis Co., Ross, Salvation Army, and thrift stores. And try to buy as much as I can from them. But.....
When you only have so much to spend it has to be stretched as far as possible.

This is the death spiral we are all on:

Things are expensive everywhere by Wally World...

So, we shop Wally World and more stores go away and prices get more expensive everywhere but Wally World. Wally World is squeezing more and more manufacturers to sell cheaper and cheaper products by cutting wages, benefits, and UNIONS, so they can be cheaper than the union stores... or just the other stores... ans so we buy the less expensive stuff at Wally World... and more union jobs go away and more business go away... and

... things are less expensive everywhere but Wally World.

I have been known to feed this same frenzy, but I don't like it. I'm driving into downtown Hoquiam for everything I can these days.

One thing that does make me wonder when I see the anti-wal-mart films and websites; Aberdeen has the "Anti-Union Package" ie: video cameras facing their parking lot. They don't install these on all locations - only the "union-troubled" ones... maybe I missed it but did we ever have real protesting going on at the Gateway Plaza?

The assertion that these are "anti-union" cameras seems far from proven. It appears to originate from one anti-Walmart movie which attributes it to one source. I've never seen any picketing at the Aberdeen WalMart.
I suspect the cameras are just part of what a deep-pockets corporation has to do to protect itself from bogus slip-and-fall claims. The video probably comes in handy for sorting out fender benders in the parking lot.

I very seldom set foot in a WalMart. It's probably been three years since I have been in the Aberdeen Store. Of course, I rarely shop in any store -- my better half does enough of that for both of us, and I hate shopping.

As far as how WalMart treats its employess, all I can say is that I have a relative who has worked for WalMart, JC Penney, and RiteAid, and WalMart wasn't any worse than the other two. All chain stores seem to treat their employees about the same. WalMart is no better or worse. Her benefits were not great at any of the three, but WalMart actually offered the best benefits.

If people think that WalMart is so bad for the community, why do they continue to shop there? It's because they think they can save a buck. Pure and simple. If saving small local businesses is that important to people, they should be willing to pay a little more. Personally, I would rather pay a little more for a cheeseburger at Humdinger, than I would at McDonald's (for one thing, it tastes better)

you ought to try the burgers at the lighthouse, wow.

Lighthouse burgers are just dandy. Humdinger burgers tip their hat and say, "Well done, kid. Keep it up and you will be a big leaguer someday, too."

I'm proudly WalMart free for 5 years, 3 months. It's been surprisingly easy. Although I do have to admit that it would be much harder if I still had small children to buy for.

As for the "can't afford to shop elsewhere" argument. Sorry, I don't buy it. I spend far less by not shopping at WalMart. One of the reasons is that I'm not immune to good marketing. Most people aren't. I challenge people to look at their receipts from WalMart and I bet there's a lot of things purchased that weren't on their list because it was cute, cheap, and, well, you just gotta have it. It adds up. I do a heckuva lot less impulse buying which makes the total dollars spent much less. And it's amazing how I don't miss buying all those things I didn't really need anyway.

We used to have a locally owned craft store in downtown Aberdeen. I remember going in there when it was closing and was told it was directly because of loss of sales due to WalMart. Too bad that local crafters didn't continue to support it.

Everything we do has an impact. Spending money in locally-owned stores keeps more money in our community to support other businesses, make charitable contributions, etc. Spending money in union shops helps maintain family-wage jobs which, in turn, help feed our local economy. Buying less "junk" due to impulse buying means less crap that will eventually just end up in a landfill.

While I don't always agree with Icky, I was impressed with her food-shopping habits in another thread. She has obviously done some research and made some conscious decisions. I respect that.

I guess, in a nutshell, I don't understand how people can say that they want our community (this could be our local area and our greater country) to have family-wage jobs so people will have options and be able to thrive but not be willing to make conscious choices that will, in a small way, contribute to making this happen. I just think we should all do our part.

I'm not saying I'm perfect in this regard but I do make more deliberate choices in this regard than not. And it all adds up.

I have my own personal opinions about the WalMart Corporation but those aside I have to ask this question about those who advocate boycotting the Aberdeen WalMart:

Do you also advocate the boycotting of JCPenny (competes with local clothing stores such as Waughs), Home Depot (competes with Dennis Company, various carpet stores, etc), Rite Aid (competes with local drug stores), Safeway(national chain that competes with Swansons) and America's Diner (though a small chain is a chain none the less and competes with locally owned restaurants)?

You can bitch and moan about WalMart's treatment of employees and being anti-union, etc and you would be right BUT I guarantee that FUBAR hit the nail on the head that most other corporations have been guilty of the same things some of which are national stores located in our county. But since it is on a smaller scale you never hear about it.

In the end I understand the point but if your going to complain you need to include all not just one. Most that complain are hypocrites without even realizing it. (BTW not directed at Funky, her's was just the last post so I hit reply on that one)

None of the other chains have any comparison to the tactics used by Wal~Mart. The issue is not "competing with local stores". The issue is the tactics used on employees, unions, competition (preditory pricing), and manufacturers (forcing lower wages and less benefits.

Waughs can and does compete with Penney's just fine. Dennis company competes with Home Depot. No one can compete with Wal~Mart if Wal~Mart want you out.

Well, I'll respond anyway, even if not directed at me.

I said I'm not perfect but I have also said that I try my best to avoid chains, with the exception of Ross as my weakness. While I don't go there often and don't spend much when I do, it is just about the only place I've bought clothes since they opened. If a locally-owned store had clothes I liked, I'd go there first. No offense to any of them but most have selections too matronly or too young. Not much for us in-betweeners.

I do shop locally-owned Ace in Hoquiam or Levee Lumber before Home Depot. We tend to shop Dennis Company more for sporting/camping goods than home repair/household items because we live in Hoquiam and prefer to keep our dollars there. Hoquiam's Harbor Drug is our drug store of choice. If they weren't available, I'd use Crown Drug (I just avoid crossing the bridge, whenever possible...and not just because of the bridge work.) I do buy my hair dye at RiteAid and will enjoy it more when it finally crosses Myrtle Street. I only go into Safeway if I can't find something specific at Hoquiam's Swanson. (I do have to admit going to Grocery Outlet a bit, too.) And I rarely eat at any chain restaurant, except for when my mom would insist on Denny's (a long story I don't need to repeat here). However, I do have to confess to an occasional stop at a fastfood burger joint when in a big hurry and I'm starving and other options aren't easily available or quick enough. Even when traveling out of town, I usually try to find a local diner, for example, over any blah chain.

So, yeah, I try to do a personal boycott of most of those stores when feasible. Not always possible but I make an effort, for the most part.

But, as Stash said, the economic impact, both in what they do to local economies and what they have done to our domestic manufacturing base, among other issues, is not at all in the same league as WalMart. They are as big as the next 15 biggest retailers combined and they drive the market.

no way can Wal Mart compete the reincarnation of the 2nd hand store on B Street, that place has everything and always on sale!!

check it out on a Sunday and/or holiday! you won't be sorry.

I just heard about this a couple days ago. I thought it had closed a long time ago. I'll do that. Thanks!

That does make sense, however they don't have the camera packages at every wal-mart store. I would think cost-related, but they don't even have them at some stores in larger metro areas. Try this; tell a wal-mart rep that you had a fender-bender in their parking lot and ask if they could look over the video

And no, I don't put a lot of faith in the "facts" of that video, I just found it interesting and happened to notice where there were and were not cameras in Wal-Mart parking lots.

and yes! great store that I walked out of with three bikes for three kids for around $25!

Most of the Walmarts have cameras facing the parking lots, I think all of them that I have ever been to. The cameras are there for a variety of reasons, possibly for union activity, but I've never seen that. Of course, like you said, there really haven't been any major protests here that I am aware of. For the most part, they are used for evidence in shoplifting cases, sometimes for accident documentation. As far as it being available when you've had a fender bender in the parking lot, video is generally only released by police request.

I finally got around to Googling Vlasic and found, in addition to the article you were referring, that Vlasic pickles are made in America. I was actually surprised by this because Nalley's is not really a big Walmart brand. You can find a selection of Nalley's pickles in the Supercenters, but not in the regular stores like Aberdeen. And you won't ever see the Nalley's pushed in the stores they are in. People want them, they are available, not priced much differently than in any other store. What does that have to do with Vlasics? Well, where do you think the "Taste of the Great Northwest" is made these days? Not Tacoma...

The reason I was careful to state I was not directing the comment at you was that I'm aware of your effort to remain local.

But people cannot have it both ways. The very vocal and majority reason I have heard about not shopping at WalMart (even stated by both you and Stash) is that we need to support locally owned businesses. Now both of you have brought up the other reasons but for the most part local is the issue.

With a few exceptions the things I'm hearing from those against the expansion of WalMart is strictly regarding the effect on local business. A valid arguement but one that raises my original question regarding how many other non-locally owned businesses are these citizens willing to boycott? This would be my first question to Mark Swanson after his letter to the editor. Simply put how many non-locally owned businesses does he patronize? Of those businesses how many have a local competitor?

Obviously he has a self-interest. How much of what he wrote was strictly because he was gaining a competitor? And, as was stated by some commentor on that letter on TDW website, where was he when the original WalMart arrived sans groceries? Did he speak up then? If so what was his position at that time? I don't blame him for being concerned or looking out for his business but my questions are valid.

One could even take that a step farther and bring up the past rumors and accusations regarding his own families business practices and real estate dealings that supposedly kept their competitors from gaining a foothold near them. Are these true? If so how is that different from WalMart?

In the end I completely understand and agree that the WalMart of today is a predator with a singular search and destroy mission regarding competition. But legally speaking the sale of the acres and building of the store are purely business and not illegal thus cannot be stopped by the city if that was the city's desire.

A final thought. I was in Sequim last week. A WalMart, Costco, Home Depot, QFC, Safeway and various other national chains all existed there. Just blocks away from WalMart a very vibrant downtown existed with......wait for it......CONSTRUCTION. Several buildings along Sequims main street were being built (rebuilt?) in an area that seemed to contain mostly if not all local small businesses. This in an area no bigger than ours. Now admittedly due to the larger retired population not dependant on employment things, economically speaking, may be a little better but the point is WalMart, which has been there for quite a while was doing no damage that was readily visible.

I haven't confirmed it yet but I think Port Angeles ALSO has a WalMart. So if that is the case two WalMarts within 20+ miles of each other and their town is not dead. Something to think about.

Port Angeles does have a Walmart, the Sequim store is newer.

What's that mean? The Port never announced prior to going into any of their executive sessions that they were going to talk about selling something to Walmart. The newspaper staffs every Port meeting. You could have had 100 TV cameras in there and unless someone at the Port wanted to tell you they were talking to Walmart, you weren't going to find out from a public meeting until they were ready to sell the property some nine months later.

The only thing they say prior to going into any executive session is "to consider the sale or lease of real property and discuss with legal counsel potential or actual litigation. No action to be taken during Executive Session." No specifics are ever mentioned on who they will talk about. That would defeat the purpose of going into an Executive Session.

This is true. News media, to an extent, have to depend on the honesty and openess of a government entity. While the general subject of what is to be discussed is mentioned nothing specific is never stated. Additionally, elected officials are prevented from discussing what is said in an executive session.

The subject matter Steven has mentioned is a very normal general term used before going into executive session to announce the subject matter. Very routine. Unless there is some other indicator there is very little chance of the news media finding out this was going on.

One other thing to remember the City of Aberdeen who supposedly has an open line of communication with the Port <cough><hack> found out about this deal one hour before it happened. Not one indicator, whisper or hint of anything happening. Now when the Port is very obviously hiding it from another government entity how easy do you think it would be for a news department, especially one expected to cover at least 9 different cities, the county agencies, Quinaults and various others to be able to come up with the info.

Local is a big issue and should be for anybody who wants to see their community thrive. However, this doesn't negate the importance of the domestic issues, like maintaining domestic manufacturing jobs, the trade imbalance, etc.

I sure can't speak for Swanson.

Folks who live there tell me that Sequim's downtown has blossomed since the highway has re-routed away from the downtown care making it a more walkable, pleasant area. And I'm sure the higher-income retirees that they are attracting due to being in the "rain shadow" probably helps, too.

I think both Sequim and PA have done a better job of capitalizing on their strengths. PA's waterfront area is very nice.

You answered your own question, I see the same legaleeze that you do "to consider the sale or lease of real property and discuss with legal counsel potential or actual litigation. No action to be taken during Executive Session." If I ever see "action will be taken" I go to that meeting.

I have no doubt that prior to action being taken, the subject of those meetings has been newsworthy, but never resulted in any "action" for one reason or another.

If I knew exactly HOW a story like that could have been broken sooner, well then I would have broken it - and I'm sure you would have known too.
By better staffed news industry I didn't mean to riff you, only to point out that I'm sure you have 99 stories on your plate at once and you're not the only one.

Bottom Line: we can't all be Fletch, but we can all WANT to be.

Does anyone else ever drive over the Chehalis River bridge and daydream of docks and businesses spotting the shorelines that now feature deteriorating pilings? Maybe it's just me but I'd love to see the historical seaport get everything from the old Stouffer's property to the old Weyerhaeuser property and cover those dead pilings with docks and themed stores.

Maybe even bring back prostitution in the name of "historic preservation"... ok maybe too far, but I call dibs on "Billy Ghoul's Barber Shop and Union Negotiations Center"

We have, from the first time we crossed that bridge six years ago. Having lived twenty years in a river community on the shores of Lake Michigan (pop. 33,000), and have seen excellent shoreline development including an international draw museum, library, restaurants, shops, park areas where they host an annual river festival, we continually shake our heads at the extreme lack of shoreline vision and planning here in the Harbor.

Of course! Your visions are not new. Many of us have been saying that for years and have been pushing for it. I love the GH Historical Seaport's vision and drawings for that area.

Gosh, over 20 years ago now, I worked on the committee in Hoquiam that created that 8th Street Landing which was to be the first phase of a waterfront that would include shops and restaurants lining that whole stretch. At the time, the Levee Street Restaurant was in business and we hoped for more. When the law firm built their office there, it was disappointing. Nothing against lawyers but we wanted retail, not offices. Anyway, the committee disbanded, I don't recall why, and that was the end of that, as far as I know.

Nothing against bankers but it was similarly sad to have a bank take over the old Chuck's Hideaway location for their offices. That is a prime stretch of riverfront with beautiful views. While Chuck's never had the cuisine to draw people, it sure had the views and it's a shame that space is no longer available to draw people.

Well, both towns have talked about it for years but it's never gotten past talk. I don't know why.

ETA: Also about 20-25 years ago, Tori Kovach started a group called, IIRC, the Hume Street Historical Preservation Society, to push to capitalize on the houses of ill repute so prevalent in that area into the early 60's. It never went anywhere, except maybe Billy's Restaurant, but I thought it was a pretty cool idea. I even bought a t-shirt.

It's always seemed like the shorelines here in Aberdeen were an inconvenience more than anything else. I've never understood how this town went from such a "port" town to a town that's just located near a couple rivers. It's obviously picking up a bit with industrial commerce and such, but it seems like one new revenue just replaces a missing or lost one, and none are all that beautifying.

(mental tourett's syndrome says)
I came off the Chehalis River bridge yesterday and sat at the Heron street light for a minute, with my window down I caught the nasty smell of burning electronics and wondered "Did we get a new 'PC-Recycling' business recently or something?"
It truly made me miss the old days of vanilla-smelling clouds in Hoquiam making it all the way to Aberdeen.

Tori may have had the "Hume Street..." you remember. But, I remember the "Aberdeen Historical Whorehouse Society".

Maybe it was called that but I thought Hume Street was in the name somewhere. It's been awhile and the t-shirt was cut up for the rag bag a long time ago.

Oh, yes, I loved the vanillin plant. I used to do contract work for them and would come home smelling really good. My son used to cuddle me just to smell it on my clothes.

I understand your point but something to remember is the city does not own much shoreline. The shoreline the city does "own" is Morrison Riverfront Park and the trail that it contains.

Nearly all the shoreline within the city of Aberdeen is owned by private individuals, private companies or the Port of Grays Harbor. There is potential for public and/or private purchase of the Weyerhauser property (South Aberdeen) but that is still way up in the air.

A few years ago the city changed the zoning within the shoreline area located south of downtown to eliminate mixed and industrial use in order to encourage other development. My big fear was one of the private owners putting something like a mini-storage or similar type of facility there.

The city has attempted to recruit various developers but a MAJOR hurdle exists in that particular area. The rail line in that area prevents or at least discourages some development (not the company just the existence of the tracks). This has been a point of discussion on many occassions by various potential developers/buyers, etc. Obviously due to the lack of space the tracks really can't be moved so more creative solutions are needed. Several potential ideas have surfaced from time to time but all cost money so the question on what and where should any dollars available be used.

I guess the point in the end is the city is trying.

I know some are trying. And I applaud those who are. The potential is there and not completely out of reach. But I will never forget what a Harbor "generational lifer" said when asking me how I liked it here (about a year after relocation).

I said there were many great things about living in the Harbor, but the sense of oppression and depression one gets when entering Aberdeen wasn't among them (and that's why we bought in Monte.)

He said "Yeah, we like it that way. We don't like change and we don't like outsiders. We don't want to give them reason to stay."

I carefully weighed his tone and demeanor to see if he was joking. He wasn't.

Take "we" with a grain of salt when speaking to anyone.

That said, there are a lot of things I wouldn't want to change either.

Just because he wasn't joking, doesn't mean he was speaking for more than himself.

I like change. I even like newcomers. The only change that bothers me is the increased congestion...and that was before the bridge was closed.

Funny thing is, when I have relayed that story to others, even those who DO speak for more than themselves in the Harbor, they sigh and say "Yeah, that's pretty typical of what we have to deal with."

I don't know...we've always felt welcomed in the Harbor in many different venues, even in "cliquey" Montesano (one well-known generational lifer realtor told us "you don't want to buy there, people are snooty"). Wearing the Green and Gold to a Seahawks game? Not so much, until the Packers kicked bird butt then people actually warmed up and said "good game." This board? Ehhhhhh...LOL!

Anyway, we like it here and have no plans to leave. And we've seen some positive changes in our six years in Grays Harbor. They are encouraging. We are very appreciative of those who continue to give their blood, sweat, tears, and finances to make the Harbor an even better place to live.

I'm thinkin' since you have felt welcomed on the Harbor, that your experience negates what people say and should make you question how accurate it is. I often hear people saying things about this area but I have rarely seen what they say happens, actually happen.

ETA: And I'm wondering who these people are who DO speak for others. I've never given anyone permission to speak for me.

It may just mean that we're extra likable people upon actually meeting.

You can usually break down social resistance by being genuinely interested in others,
and demonstrating a willingness to be helpful and part of solutions.

They would be elected Harbor officials.

I disagree. I have never elected anybody to speak for me on social issues that have nothing to do with policies, budgets, and the other types of things that elected officials are responsible for. This is totally outside their scope.

I can see that this has struck a sensitive nerve in you.
Noted that no one speaks for you concerning social issues in the Harbor, not even elected officials of the generational lifer category, who also happen to prefer the Democratic Party...and the "we" they use in general does not pertain in any way to you. Like I really thought that every single person with roots in the Harbor felt the same identical way about any given issue. And local social issues do drive many local policies. In case you hadn't noticed, there's no shortage of issues in the Harbor.

I think I can speak for all of us when I say no one speaks for any of us.

Funny, but silly.

What are elections all about, if not to appoint people to speak for us?



Do I like, or agree with everything she speaks?
pfft.

Yeah. When she said that we Washingtonians like blight in Aberdeen, I think it was totally fair.

I'd never really thought that, but since Icky says she's speaking for me, I guess I was wrong.

The "generational lifer" in your anecdote doesn't speak for me, and given the effort I've seen among people to change things in the harbor, it would appear that he doesn't speak for a great many of us.

lol. When did she say that?

Actually, not a raw nerve at all. We're just interpreting things differently and I really don't want to waste my time with a semantic argument. I just don't see that electing people to represent me meaning the same as they are speaking for me. I think there's a nuanced difference.

Uhhhh....okay.

This is what I was trying to say earlier in the thread, badly I guess...I lived in San Francisco before Pier 39 was made into the tourist haven it is now. It was a derelict pier, with old autos, dead motor homes, etc. just parked there. Years later, it has shops and unique eateries and it is a destination in that city. Seems our waterfront/s can be the same here, just need the imagination and money, of course.. the area the Port sold is now out of the equation, but don't give up hope.