Town council and containing communities

Concerned letter writers are again sharing both frustrations and hopes for involvement and for influencing decision making in the La Conner community. Are residents adequately informed by government staff and elected officials? Are citizens brought into discussions, with information shared? Is there a robust give and take and a chance to shape plans or are projects presented as done deals with all the heavy lifting, or not, done by their elected council representatives?

A huge opportunity was missed last year to have a community conversation over the configuration and use of the Maple Avenue ballfield property. Bob Raymond writes today “many who care deeply about the community and its future were, admittedly, ‘asleep.’”

This is a questioning of process on the local level over less than two acres and a 10 home subdivision. La Conner and county residents need to focus and learn about the Skagit County commissioners coming decision to change the county’s comprehensive plan to allow “Fully Contained Communities,” large scale housing developments, designed and constructed by private developers. A possible proposal is for 3,500 people,so perhaps 1,500 to 1,800 homes. The latter is twice the size of Shelter Bay, with shopping districts in it.

The county comprehensive plan is the policy document determining the kinds of land uses allowed. The state provides for counties to amend these plans once a year. In May, commissioners “docketed,” choosing specific proposals to examine. Commissioners decided to discuss urban growth in unincorporated areas, starting the process to approve growth in areas beyond the boundaries of the counties seven municipalities.

Besides that odd and misleading name, it is not true that such a community will be fully contained. It will not have a local government, a school district, a library or a fire department. Those will all come from county resources. Such a community cannot evolve into a La Conner or an Edison or an Anacortes.

Who will represent them and advocate for their residents? Think super-sized Shelter Bays, twice as large, also with only their association board of directors to make decisions for their many multi-million dollar infrastructure and capital investments.

Will they be sterile communities without souls, commuter homes for people driving to work in Bellingham or Seattle? Perhaps worse, will people work from home and, being fully contained, have no connection with any Skagit community except to use our roads, our schools, our fire departments? Will they be permanent visitors and strangers and never integrate into the lifeblood of the actual communities or the county?

When we discuss a community, what do we mean? It is people living together, but more, meeting for coffee, a beer, pizza, walking to the library or to school or to the drug store. Oh wait, no libraries or schools unless existing library and school districts take on expansion into these obviously not fully contained communities.

Community is a keystone term, one that most embrace at every level. We want La Conner to be a close knit community, and our school district staff, parents and kids to be a community. Indeed, we want each class of students to be a community.

Picture carving massive Shelter Bays out of farm fields conveniently located near interstate exit ramps. That is not the Genuine Skagit Valley with our produce, grains, bread and beer being promoted here or in Seattle.

Now the county’s planning commission, citizen volunteers, are discussing the issue. There will be a public hearing this summer or fall. Better to petition, yes, La Conner’s mayor and councilmembers. They are named as “Stakeholders and Public Participants.” They represent La Conner’s residents. Council can pass a resolution opposing amending the county’s comprehensive plan to include Fully Contained Communities. Do residents want them to?

Choose to pay attention, learn about this issue and call and email La Conner’s mayor and five councilmembers with your informed opinion. Town Hall phone: 360-466-3125. Ask them to post your letter: [email protected].

This is corrected from the print edition, which mistakenly wrote a possible proposal is for 3,500 homes.