Letter to Editor | Durland, Watson Bring Imaginative Minds to Governance

Mr. Carver seems perplexed that the people of San Juan County tend to vote on the “progressive” side in state and national elections but “mutate conservative” (whatever that means) in local elections. I disagree that any of the candidates for County Council could be accurately described as politically “conservative,” but there are two reasons voters might take a different approach in local elections.

The first is that these elections are NONPARTISAN. We don’t have the same knee-jerk labels and sound bites to deal with here as we are freed from political parties.

The second is that County voters tend, naturally, to have far more intimate knowledge of local folks and concern for local issues than they do with respect to state or national ones.

I have never considered either Rick Hughes or Bob Jarman to be “Republicans” or “pro-growth.” I am fairly certain that neither has ever worked in partisan politics. I think of them as having moderate views on issues affecting our islands, and working with and for people of all political stripes and persuasions.

The question of growth is an interesting and challenging one. We have rigid rules imposed by state law that require most growth to be squeezed into “urban growth areas.” We also have lots of undeveloped land owned by people who paid to buy it and continue to pay taxes for it. We also have a relatively small growth rate. How to accommodate all of these interests while keeping the community that we have come to love is a difficult task, one that requires open minds and a willingness to work with all of our neighbors.

The suggestion that the re-election of Hughes and Jarman will suddenly rain down “noise, traffic, bigger bridges, wider roads, stoplights, big Box stores, more development and the consequent impact on the environment, more crime, poverty, homelessness, sexual assault, domestic abuse, alcohol and drug abuse, more of the disproportionate influence of the business sector on public policy and law enforcement’s perennial [problems]” is just plain silly–as silly as seeking to associate them with Donald Trump. And it represents, in my view, the distorted view and inflexible ideology that we have encountered from the Friends of the San Juans in their dealings with local folks over the past several decades. Mr. Watson is a former long-time Friends Board member, and Mr. Carver is a current Friends Board member.

I suggest that County voters exercise their traditional pragmatism in evaluating our candidates for Council. It may disappoint the partisan politicians, but it likely will produce the kind of even-handed, practical decision making that our future requires.

An opportunity for an exchange of views is always welcome and I would like to respond to the comments of Mr. Jarman, Ms Manning, and Mr. Jung.

First, Mr. Jarman I do not know full well that you Or Mr. Hughes have not been endorsed by the SJC Republican Party. If I am in error I apologize. I am not entirely sure what portion of my comments you are referring to by your characterization of ‘hate speak”. I don’t hate you Mr. Jarman, I just don’t think you are suited for the job and you exposed your character early in your tenure when you requested or demanded that the county supervisor cancel the contract of the very qualified Lovell Pratt, whom he had just hired. What was it, a $5,000.00 contract? It was hard to conclude that it was any more than an act of pettiness or vengefulness. But If by “hate speak” you are suggesting I have difficulty with the politics of the Republican Party your are correct. For some peculiar reason I take offense at a party that cries freedom and democracy and is openly attempting to suppress the vote, deny rights to peoples of color or with different sexual orientation, that seems to think democracy can best be served by creating Super corporate ‘citizens’ and more recently is obstructing the restoration of The U.S Supreme Court to it’s full function and will not vote for any appointee nominated by any one other than their own party, to name a few grievances.
I can’t respond to your “ridiculous accusations’ comment at all because it was unqualified. That you have lived here for 40 years might suggest you have some sense of the islands but obviously but I was referring to a broader sense of the world in which these islands sit, so you missed the point. I conclude by saying. Thou doest protest too much.

To Ms. Manning I want to point out that you are in error when you declare I am a current board member of the Friends of the San Juans. I am not. Due to a number of commitments elsewhere I unfortunately felt I had to step down from the board last year. I am however pleased to report I remain a member at large. But thank you for vindicating my reluctance to write a letter to the editor. I was certain one of our more vocal property rights advocates would not miss an opportunity to express a ‘distorted and inflexible view’ of the Friends of the San Juans. It’s difficult I am sure when FSJ is so effective as an organization and your associates lost every one of their appeals of the CAO at 3 levels of legal review, even with a hired gun from Seattle. Apparently a lot of people in the judicial and regulator system don’t agree with your open minded, “common sense” approach to land use issues and your characterization of state regulations as “rigid”.

I would have to disagree with you that we are non partisan in the islands. The absence of a requirement for a candidate to declare their party affiliation does not make our elections non partisan. We may aspire to that but people, and I don’t mean to suggest all of them, pay attention to party affiliation because it often indicates some differences in fundamental values. In some cases to say island residents have more intimate knowledge of local candidates may be correct but as a blanket statement it is not even remotely true (It is however good salesmanship on your part). And the consequences of growth, are as I have described them. The impacts of growth are accumulative. I am sure you have been to the mainland and are likely aware that San Juan County is one of the fastest growing counties in the state… but the point was what do we want for our islands. If you stand for growth as Mr. Hughes and Mr. Jarman have indicated you have to acknowledge what comes with it and decide where we want to draw the line.. Mr. Hughes wants Friday Harbor to become an International airport. First, why, and do we want more overhead air traffic? I hear a No from everyone I have spoken to especially when the Navy is already increasing jet flights overhead. And Ms. Manning I agree that these are difficult issues and we need to wrk together on them. I just don’t think Mr. Hughes and Jarmin are the best people to facilitate that conversation. Perhaps we can have an open minded agreement to disagree on that?

I appreciate Mr. Jung’s advocacy of Mr. Hughes for his effectiveness on Senior Center projects. That does not however suggest to me he will be effective at other tasks challenging our community. I have read his public comments during his tenure and found myself shaking my head in dismay (really I should have written them down so I could repeat them here). “Growth and ecology can coexist”? It’s an interesting idea Mr. Jung. My question would be: When do we start? And obviously we would have a lot to define before we embark on that conversation. But Mr. Jung, biologists are saying their data suggests we are in the middle of the greatest extinction in the history of the planet, we dump millions of toxins into the environment everyday which are overwhelming the biological processes of the planet. Many ecological systems are collapsing and the population of the planet is forecast to double in the next 50 years with the consequent increased demands on resources which we can only provide with further exploitation and degradation of the natural world. That is growth! While I agree we can mitigate our impact, growth assures we will overwhelm every mitigation. But let’s keep the conversation alive. Thank you all for your comments.

Charles Carver
Orcas

Mr. Carver, if you’re so worried about “the greatest extinction in the history of the planet”, you should realize that bicycle riding can help solve the problem of high carbon content of the atmosphere. Your negative view of wider roads is short-sighted, but not unusual on Orcas; a lot of people here like the “quaint”, but antiquated and dangerous roads that are left here from a bygone era. Bicyclists try to avoid them, though. Would you want our kids riding on them? And who can say that Mt. Baker Road is not a big improvement over the old narrow road with no shoulder, where bicyclists, joggers, walkers (some with baby strollers) competed with big truck traffic?