||| FROM RON WHALEN |||
Summary of process for Land Bank (LB) acquisition of property:
A. LB staff identifies prospective acquisitions for county council review and public comment.
B. County code 2.120.050 requirement for appraisal and approved purchase plan.
C. Prospective acquisition is presented to the County Council for a resolution of approval.
D. County Council votes on proposal for acquisition permitting the acquisition to proceed.
In April of 2018 Lincoln Bormann (Director of the Land Bank) makes an acquisition proposal presentation to San Juan county council for acquisition of property identified as the Lester property ID 13481. Missing from the presentation is the fact Director of the LB owns property approximately 255 yards from the proposed acquisition. Resolution is passed for the acquisition. Mr. Bormann’s property is identified as ID 18237. Roll value history illustrates from 2013 to 2018 the assessed land value increases from $120,880 to $126,640 over 5 years. Less than 1%/yr. Then in 2019 (1 year after the Lester property acquisition) the Bormann property assessed land value increases to $151,970. A 20% increase in one year! That just happens to be the same increase in value the LB web quotes in their web site:
Being near conservation land boosts property values by up to 20% according to multiple analyses.
RCW 43.160.040 Conflicts of interest—Code of ethics.
In addition to other applicable provisions of law pertaining to conflicts of interest of public officials, no board member, appointive or otherwise, may participate in any decision on any board contract in which the board member has any interests, direct or indirect, with any firm, partnership, corporation, or association which would be the recipient of any aid under this chapter. In any instance where the participation occurs, the board shall void the transaction, and the involved member shall be subject to whatever further sanctions may be provided by law. The board shall frame and adopt a code of ethics for its members, which shall be designed to protect the state and its citizens from any unethical conduct by the board.
RCW 9A.76.175 Making a false or misleading statement to a public servant.
I argue the above information constitutes a conflict of interest voters should know.
VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION 1-EXTENDING CONSERVATION AREA EXCISE TAX
**If you are reading theOrcasonian for free, thank your fellow islanders. If you would like to support theOrcasonian CLICK HERE to set your modestly-priced, voluntary subscription. Otherwise, no worries; we’re happy to share with you.**
Does anyone else see the hypocrisy in Whalen’ s letter above. In it he criticizes Lincoln Bormann for a supposed conflict of interest, which actually doesn’t exist, by claiming that he benefited from an increase in the appraised value of his property in the vicinity of the Lester property. Yet in several previous letters to the editor and social media posts over the last several months, Whalen has consistently argued that property owners such as himself are harmed because the appraised value of properties near Land Bank acquisitions increase, with emphasis on his own property that experienced an increase in its appraised value as a result of the Land Bank’s acquisition of the Zystra Lake property adjacent to his. Which is it, Ron? Good or bad? You can’t have it both ways!
Whalen’s letter is a perfect example of the continuing distorted and failed attempts at logic by the opponents of the Land Bank. Don’t be fooled. Vote for its renewal, and that of the included affordable housing REET, on your November 5 ballot.
In response to the innuendo that the Land Bank purchased property because it was near my house, it’s important to note actual facts: 1) It is the volunteer Land Bank Commission who selects projects which are then put into a budget for County Council approval; 2) The Commission makes these recommendations based on how well the project fits within its mandate. The Lester parcel has extensive ecological value with old growth, and high quality wetlands, and borders on the original Cady Mountain Preserve. It also bisects a public road creating the opportunity for public access which had been sought for 20 years. People are now able to walk from Three Corner Lake Road all the way to Roche Harbor on a trail; 3) Of all the Land Bank Preserves not one is adjacent to any current or former staff member’s properties; 4) Yes, properties next to a Park or Preserve can have increased value, just as a water view might, but the 20% figure comes from urban settings where open space is quite scarce. In the islands, that effect is much less in general.
What a ridiculous argument from Ron Whalen. I wonder why The Orcasonian would even provide a platform to such an absurd claim.