By BOB LAMB
For the Independent
I read with interest the March 20 column written by Bob Meadows (“Another port, another plan for growth”) about possible expansion plans and taxation for the Port of Manchester.
The point of his column was to stress the importance of planning, the costs of expansion and method of payment — presumably taxes.
His column is clear and concise and should spark the interest of all Port of Manchester residents.
Meadows points out that currently the port has the IDD tax authority, similar to the one used by the Port of Bremerton to stick it to the voter without first getting a vote of approval.
While technically this is true, I personally feel this is not a problem for those of us who live within the port district.
During the most recent election for port commissioners, meetings were held to introduce the candidates and because of backlash to the recent Port of Bremerton’s use of an IDD, it was a hot topic and many asked, “Would the Port of Manchester ever do the same or similar thing to its voters?”
The answer from all candidates and incumbents who also were there was no.
We have the word of all three port commissioners that they would not pull such a trick because they only want to respond to what the majority wants and not bow to the whims or desires of a few.
I personally know and respect all three commissioners and therefore believe their word is good.
In the March 27 issue, Ron Rada, a Manchester resident and businessman, discussed the need for the Manchester library to expand and for a community center (“The Manchester community needs the levy revenue”).
While the library cannot expect the voters of the Port of Manchester to foot the bill for a community center that would be combined with the library, the library could expand without moving if a community center were established.
The community center would become the new meeting center for the Manchester area with all revenues going to the Port for operations and maintenance.
The library could them expand into the space currently used for meetings.
The downside would be the library’s loss of revenue from renting the small conference room.
The library could, however, expand its hours of operation beyond the current 35 hours to accommodate its customers.
An economic analysis would be mandatory to determine whether a community center would be self-supporting.
Such a study is not a job for a few local volunteers but must be done by trained professionals.
A signed list of organizations willing to use the center and hopefully a keystone organization to provide constant income is a must.
To obtain this a cost estimate of the building and land, plus an estimated annual cost of operations and maintenance, is mandatory.
Such a study could also reveal the impact such a location would have on other sites mentioned by Mr. Rada, such as the Long Lake Community Center.
Would it possibly take enough from the current locations to cause failure to some or all?
Again a job for trained professionals.
Mr. Rada mentions that the Manchester Water District might consider moving its administrative offices to the proposed community center and thus provide a year-round paying customer.
Great care, however, needs to be taken here, since two of the three commissioners at the Port of Manchester are commissioners on the Manchester Water District.
Total openness must be maintained to keep such action from being construed as a move by those two to use your water rates as a way of subsidizing this new adventure.
This is another good reason why the commissioners would feel a vote is mandatory and why they signed up to guarantee it.
While the official part of any port’s mission is economic development, the amount — if any — should be the will of the people.
Seattle needs a massive port to provide water, air and land services, which mean jobs. Small ports such as Manchester need little.
It is a bedroom community and many live there because they wanted to exchange the noise and commotion of business and industry for the sound of the barking sea lions.
Jim Strode, president of the Port of Manchester board of commissioners, in his letter in the March 27 issue (“Port facing some tough challenges”), explained part of the problems facing the commissioners, including those who would have them break their word to the voters by imposing a tax without a vote.
I applaud them for standing their ground and keeping their word.
The three commissioners have worked well in serving the port, and the should be commended for their efforts on our behalf.
We have a new ramp extension, which is a great improvement, the port has secured property to provide long-needed additional parking, and the commissioners are currently considering paid overnight parking as a source of both income and a needed facility for our overnight boaters.
All within current funding.
Mr. Strode hit the nail on the head when he said, “The real hurdle is how to engage the public, tap into their thoughts and move forward with community support.”
He invites all to contact the commissioners, attend the meetings, get the information to make a decision and get involved.
I could not agree with him more.
Bob Lamb is a Manchester resident.
