FAIL (the browser should render some flash content, not this).

Archive for the ‘PLIC Blog’ Category

Text of Public Comment by Mike Skehan to LIFAC on Jun 13, 2018

Wednesday, June 13, 2018 @ 03:06 PM
posted by mike

June 13th, 2018

From:  Protect Lummi Island Community (501c3)

To:  Lummi Island Ferry Advisory Committee

Subject: Text of Public Comment by Mike Skehan, Secretary on this date

 

PLIC has been working hand in hand with LIFAC and our community over the course of this Ferry System Improvement Project and would like to share our final thoughts with you prior to your making a final recommendation to the Whatcom County Council.

It’s clear that the Whatcom Chief and trestles on both sides of Hales Passage are in need of replacement and/or repair in the near future.  There are 280 ferries operating in the US.  Only 35 vessels are older than the Chief.  Terminal facilities, trestles and the like are part of our bridge to the mainland.  Last year there were over 56,000 structurally deficient/obsolete bridges in the US.  Of the 8,120 bridges in Washington State, 2,193 were deemed deficient or obsolete, and in Whatcom County, of 350 bridges, 90 were deemed deficient/obsolete.  These numbers have not improved over the last 10 years, so there is a significant backlog of infrastructure projects in the wings, both locally and nationally.

Kpff has identified a capital need of over $102m over the next 28 years (Financial Forecast) for vessel and terminal improvements, but stops short of laying out a financial plan due to the uncertainties of future funding options.  We understand that.

Therefore, PLIC strongly urges LIFAC to not make a recommendation to the County Council that does not acknowledge the realities of future needs and future resources to pay for that.  We do however support a statement in your recommendations that says: “These findings and recommendations to you should not preclude taking advantage of future opportunities that may arise to acquire a replacement vessel and/or future terminal improvements”.

Respectfully Submitted, PLIC Board of Directors

Source of data FHWA (Federal Highway Admin) & BTS (Bureau of Transportation Statistics)

off

      By Stuart Rich, President

                   

  • Whatcom Chief’s deferred maintenance costs will increase future costs.
  • In the European Union, people drive smaller cars. We could likely get 34 small  cars on the Whatcom Chief.  What  kind of vehicles we drive in the future will change.
  • Lummi Island water studies have determined the island’s growth limits and the consultant’s project growth estimates need to be linked to these water studies
  • The ferry consultants’ studied growth rates from ten years ago, but they need to go back 40 years for a more comprehensive growth picture.
  • Unless there is a zoning change, the water study indicates a maximum growth population of 3,000 people on Lummi Island.
  • It is difficult to develop a reasonable growth rate projection for the long-term future.
  • For the sake of the future, we should not removed the all electric propulsion option from consideration along with other green alternatives.

              RIDERSHIP PROJECTION QUESTION

  • We are losing revenue due to the ferry’s lack of capacity.

 

FERRY SERVICES & COSTS QUESTIONS

  • Since we are a small rural ferry service, our costs are higher, but I would like costs to be contained similar to today’s fares and costs.
  • contained as possible and similar to today.
  • Costs is always a significant point and should be kept in mind through every step of the process.
  • The cost of fares the level of ridership is related and elastic; when one goes up the other may go down.
  • In the hotel industry, the saying is ” the most expensive bed is the empty bed”, the same can be said about the ferry.
  • Leveling out ridership with webcams and other tools would provide people with choice to keep the ferry full but to avoid waits times by changing their ferry departure times.
  • I think that a $9000 increased operating cost to have a hybrid diesel electric vessel is too costly.
  • We need to clarify the difference between a diesel electric and a diesel hybrid propulsion system.
  • A diesel-electric is an old and widely used propulsion system with proven capabilities.
  • In choosing a propulsion system we should stay consistent with what the WA State Ferries are doing to take advantage of a trained labor pool, ability to convert to electric etc.
  • If we used the Whatcom Chief as a back-up could Skagit County be a partner for the emergency dry dock vessel?
  • It is not cost effective to pay for a second boat to be used as a backup.
  • We need to stay focused on the new boat and doing work on the terminals and look to other possible improvement down the road
  • Living on an island and not having a way off the island is scary. I don’t want to be stranded

 

FUNDING & TAX QUESTIONS

 

  • It is undetermined whether a Ferry Taxing District to qualify for regional funding would be a Lummi Island only or a county-wide district.
  • Whatcom County may be able to form a ferry taxing district but the citizens would have to vote on the levy.
  • It’s unrealistic that we would not have to show support for the ferry project by not having a ferry district (skin in the game).
  • It is not clear how a ferry district would work.
  • The Public Works representative said that LI would not have to pay for capital improvements for the new ferry system just their share of operations and management.
  • We have to continue to work at keeping up the level of commuters as they are the backbone of ridership.
  • The 45% of ferry operation cost paid for by the County does not coming out of the cities (only the unincorporated County areas) even though cities do benefit from the ferry system.
  • Lummi Islanders paid much more taxes than the rest of the County and we are only 1/2% of the total county population.

 

VESSEL SIZE QUESTIONS

 

  • A larger ferry will change the island with more cars, longer lines, and more development on Lummi Island.
  • A larger ferry would not mean larger lines.
  • If you are running the ferry every 20 minutes, that’s a failure
  • A 34 car ferry is safer
  • A 34 car ferry provides for alternative scheduling based on supply and demand.
  • Does this flexibility justify the cost?
  • Given the capital and similar operation and maintenance costs, it is more important to have a boat.
  • Having a small boat hurts the commuters the most as visitors care less about the wait time
  • The ferry wait time issues faced by commuters is also an issue for those with medical needs that need to keep their medical appointments.
  • We are told that the efficiencies and costs are comparable for a 28 and 33 car ferry; by that statement are we being slanted towards choosing the larger boat?
  • Remember we aren’t buying the boat, the County is lines
  • Hybrid diesel electric is convertible to electric and is ” greener”
  • The diesel propulsion option is cheapest to build and to maintain.

 

GOOSEBERRY TERMINAL QUESTIONS

 

  • Presently, there are 2-3 houses for sale in Gooseberry. The County should pursue buying these properties.
  • Can the County government buy property without having an approved plan?
  • Gooseberry Options 2 and 3 use the same dock area; the difference between the two is the uplands development.
  • Parking is a huge issue so the property purchases are important to consider
  • How will queuing work on Option 2 if Lummi Drive is closed and redirected?
  • There is no clear information about the possibility of no future tidal or upland leases with the Lummi Nation and the trading of the county right- of-way for Lummi Nation right of way.
  • If a passenger floating dock were built, would it be available for community good Samaritan use when the passenger boat was not there yet?
  • A passenger-only dock is different from a “passenger loading dock/walkway which is an alternative for the Gooseberry relocation dock in the future.
  • Due to winter weather conditions there would be a concern for leaving the passenger-only dock in operational use year-round.
  • If the County is to acquire Gooseberry private property, you need to have a willing seller.
  • Does anybody know what the Gooseberry trestle deficiency rating is?
  • It is inspected three times more often than any bridge in the County.
  • The 90 K estimate for the cost of the webcam is the capital cost; the operating cost would be an ongoing expense.
  • There has been some concern about people’s privacy with the use of a webcam which can be addressed by blurring the resolution of the camera.
  • There would be only electronic ticketing on the ferry. A ticket vending machine would be located on Gooseberry.
  • It is clear that a two phase development plan is necessary to defer the costs over time and to allow the County and Lummi Nation time to work out the details for the Gooseberry relocation dock.

 

June 10th is the deadline for the LIFAC online ferry questionnaire which can be accessed at:

https://goo.gl/forms/aGdTALqd0ddju7d12

or paper copies are available at The Islander. On June 13th at 6:30 p.m. at the Fire Station  LIFAC will meet to discuss the questionnaire results.

LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD

off

 PLIC Town Hall Community Comments by Participants- May 29th

Wednesday, June 6, 2018 @ 03:06 PM
posted by mike

      By Stuart Rich, President

                   

  • Whatcom Chief’s deferred maintenance costs will increase future costs.
  • In the European Union, people drive smaller cars. We could likely get 34 small  cars on the Whatcom Chief.  What  kind of vehicles we drive in the future will change.
  • Lummi Island water studies have determined the island’s growth limits and the consultant’s project growth estimates need to be linked to these water studies
  • The ferry consultants’ studied growth rates from ten years ago, but they need to go back 40 years for a more comprehensive growth picture.
  • Unless there is a zoning change, the water study indicates a maximum growth population of 3,000 people on Lummi Island.
  • It is difficult to develop a reasonable growth rate projection for the long-term future.
  • For the sake of the future, we should not removed the all electric propulsion option from consideration along with other green alternatives.

              RIDERSHIP PROJECTION QUESTION

  • We are losing revenue due to the ferry’s lack of capacity.

 

FERRY SERVICES & COSTS QUESTIONS

  • Since we are a small rural ferry service, our costs are higher, but I would like costs to be contained similar to today’s fares and costs.
  • contained as possible and similar to today.
  • Costs is always a significant point and should be kept in mind through every step of the process.
  • The cost of fares the level of ridership is related and elastic; when one goes up the other may go down.
  • In the hotel industry, the saying is ” the most expensive bed is the empty bed”, the same can be said about the ferry.
  • Leveling out ridership with webcams and other tools would provide people with choice to keep the ferry full but to avoid waits times by changing their ferry departure times.
  • I think that a $9000 increased operating cost to have a hybrid diesel electric vessel is too costly.
  • We need to clarify the difference between a diesel electric and a diesel hybrid propulsion system.
  • A diesel-electric is an old and widely used propulsion system with proven capabilities.
  • In choosing a propulsion system we should stay consistent with what the WA State Ferries are doing to take advantage of a trained labor pool, ability to convert to electric etc.
  • If we used the Whatcom Chief as a back-up could Skagit County be a partner for the emergency dry dock vessel?
  • It is not cost effective to pay for a second boat to be used as a backup.
  • We need to stay focused on the new boat and doing work on the terminals and look to other possible improvement down the road
  • Living on an island and not having a way off the island is scary. I don’t want to be stranded

 

FUNDING & TAX QUESTIONS

 

  • It is undetermined whether a Ferry Taxing District to qualify for regional funding would be a Lummi Island only or a county-wide district.
  • Whatcom County may be able to form a ferry taxing district but the citizens would have to vote on the levy.
  • It’s unrealistic that we would not have to show support for the ferry project by not having a ferry district (skin in the game).
  • It is not clear how a ferry district would work.
  • The Public Works representative said that LI would not have to pay for capital improvements for the new ferry system just their share of operations and management.
  • We have to continue to work at keeping up the level of commuters as they are the backbone of ridership.
  • The 45% of ferry operation cost paid for by the County does not coming out of the cities (only the unincorporated County areas) even though cities do benefit from the ferry system.
  • Lummi Islanders paid much more taxes than the rest of the County and we are only 1/2% of the total county population.

 

VESSEL SIZE QUESTIONS

 

  • A larger ferry will change the island with more cars, longer lines, and more development on Lummi Island.
  • A larger ferry would not mean larger lines.
  • If you are running the ferry every 20 minutes, that’s a failure
  • A 34 car ferry is safer
  • A 34 car ferry provides for alternative scheduling based on supply and demand.
  • Does this flexibility justify the cost?
  • Given the capital and similar operation and maintenance costs, it is more important to have a boat.
  • Having a small boat hurts the commuters the most as visitors care less about the wait time
  • The ferry wait time issues faced by commuters is also an issue for those with medical needs that need to keep their medical appointments.
  • We are told that the efficiencies and costs are comparable for a 28 and 33 car ferry; by that statement are we being slanted towards choosing the larger boat?
  • Remember we aren’t buying the boat, the County is lines
  • Hybrid diesel electric is convertible to electric and is ” greener”
  • The diesel propulsion option is cheapest to build and to maintain.

 

GOOSEBERRY TERMINAL QUESTIONS

 

  • Presently, there are 2-3 houses for sale in Gooseberry. The County should pursue buying these properties.
  • Can the County government buy property without having an approved plan?
  • Gooseberry Options 2 and 3 use the same dock area; the difference between the two is the uplands development.
  • Parking is a huge issue so the property purchases are important to consider
  • How will queuing work on Option 2 if Lummi Drive is closed and redirected?
  • There is no clear information about the possibility of no future tidal or upland leases with the Lummi Nation and the trading of the county right- of-way for Lummi Nation right of way.
  • If a passenger floating dock were built, would it be available for community good Samaritan use when the passenger boat was not there yet?
  • A passenger-only dock is different from a “passenger loading dock/walkway which is an alternative for the Gooseberry relocation dock in the future.
  • Due to winter weather conditions there would be a concern for leaving the passenger-only dock in operational use year-round.
  • If the County is to acquire Gooseberry private property, you need to have a willing seller.
  • Does anybody know what the Gooseberry trestle deficiency rating is?
  • It is inspected three times more often than any bridge in the County.
  • The 90 K estimate for the cost of the webcam is the capital cost; the operating cost would be an ongoing expense.
  • There has been some concern about people’s privacy with the use of a webcam which can be addressed by blurring the resolution of the camera.
  • There would be only electronic ticketing on the ferry. A ticket vending machine would be located on Gooseberry.
  • It is clear that a two phase development plan is necessary to defer the costs over time and to allow the County and Lummi Nation time to work out the details for the Gooseberry relocation dock.

 

June 10th is the deadline for the LIFAC online ferry questionnaire which can be accessed at:

https://goo.gl/forms/aGdTALqd0ddju7d12

or paper copies are available at The Islander. On June 13th at 6:30 p.m. at the Fire Station  LIFAC will meet to discuss the questionnaire results.

LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD

off
LIFAC’s Ferry Questionnaire Is Now Available Online, KPFF’s Final Reports Due June 5th
by Stuart Rich- PLIC President
At KPFF’s final public meeting on May 22nd, the ferry consultants recommended a two phased development beginning (2020 to 2028) with a 34 car diesel hybrid ferry with necessary improvements and repairs to the two docks , and a long-term project (2028 to 2040) for the Gooseberry terminal relocation, upland expansion, and improvements to the Lummi Island dock.  The estimated capital costs for the three ferry size options and dock work ranges from 17 to 65 million dollars over the two phase development time period.
On May 23rd, LIFAC released an online comprehensive questionnaire which is the community’s best opportunity to weigh in on what recommendations LIFAC should make to the County Council in July.  LIFAC’s questionnaire includes background information and should take 20 to 40 minutes to complete.  It is well worth your time and effort.  The deadline for the LIFAC questionnaire is June 10thTo access the questionnaire go to:
KPFF has still not released to LIFAC its final reports and recommendations on costs, revenue, financial forecasts, and final service alternatives which is expected to be delivered to LIFAC on June 5th.  At the KPFF public meeting Roland Middleton (Whatcom County Public Works Department) assured the audience that the capital improvement costs for the phased projects will be the financial responsibility of Whatcom County not the community.  Ultimately, the capitalization and allocation of capital costs between the County and the public is a County Council determination.
PLIC would urge LIFAC to release KPFF’s final reports to the public immediately upon receipt so that citizens have the benefit of knowing the complete financial picture.  In order for the community to make informed decisions, KPFF’s reports should be released prior to the LIFAC questionnaire June 10th deadline and LIFAC’s June 26th public meeting to determine their final recommendations to the County Council.
We are now closing in on completing the important first step towards obtaining a much needed replacement boat for the Whatcom Chief.  Now is the time for Lummi Islanders and others to analyze the proposed KPFF recommendations and to strive for building community consensus on how to best provide for our critical transportation link.
On May 29th at 6:30 p.m. at the Beach School, PLIC will host a Town Hall Meeting to discuss LIFAC’s  ferry questionnaire and to hear, scribe, and make your comments and any concerns known to LIFAC, Public Works, and County Council.
Let Your Voice Be Heard
off

 

KPFF  Drops 28  Car Ferry Size,  LIFAC Dumps All Electric Ferry,  

PW: 2026 Completion Deadline is Not Viable

At the May 9th LIFAC meeting,  KPFF dropped their plans for a 28- car ferry to a  20- car ferry size (as the mid-size of the three options) citing the marginal differences in ridership capacity and costs between a 28- car and 34-car ferry. The ferry size options are now at 16, 20, and 34 car boats.

LIFAC voted unanimously on Patricia Dunn’s  motion to remove the all electric propulsion system option from further consideration. LIFAC Chairperson Nancy Ging cited high  capital improvement costs, expensive battery replacements, and power charging issues as the reasons for dropping the all electric option.

Roland Middleton, Special Programs Manager for Whatcom County Public Works advised the audience that the Gooseberry Dock relocation  was a big funding item for the County which would be helped by phased projects that spreads the cost impact to the County beyond the County Council’s adopted completion deadline of 2026.

KPFF’s  representative Mike Anderson also recommended  phased in  short-term and long-term projects by prioritizing work that needs to be done first.   “Based on useful life and funding constraints,”  KPFF’s first phase short-term project (2020 to 2028)  would give priority for the construction of a new boat, repairs to the  Gooseberry trestle , and Lummi Island dock modifications for the replacement boat.  The second phase long-term project (2020 to 2040)  would be comprised of the Gooseberry terminal relocation, upland expansion, and Lummi Island dock improvements.

Chairperson Nancy Ging stated that LIFAC’s  scheduled July 24th  deadline for County Council’s  approval  of the ferry system alternatives  is necessary in order to  meet the next four-year funding cycle deadline for CRAB (a regional government transportation agency) which grants up to 10 million dollars for projects in yearly increments of $500,000  for twenty years.

 

No date was given at the LIFAC meeting for the production and delivery of KPFF’s final three critical reports to LIFAC members. The final KPFF reports are: Task 6 Funding/Finance, Task 7 Service Alternatives (an evaluation and summary of all the reports), and KPFF’s  Draft and Final recommendations.  Mike Anderson stated that the information in the upcoming consultant’s reports regarding  finance, funding, and service alternatives would be ready for KPFF’s final public hearing on May 22nd at 6:30 pm at the Beach School.

In a PLIC letter to LIFAC dated May 8th, the PLIC Board stated:  “The delay in distributing KPFF’s remaining reports to LIFAC Board members raises questions about LIFAC having sufficient time for board review, public distribution of KPFF’s remaining reports, and then affording enough time for community review and input.”

PLIC has recommended to LIFAC that the County should immediately release KPFF’s final reports to PLIC and the public upon their receipt.  These reports should be viewed as essential to everyone’s understanding of the financial costs and funding for the ferry system alternative options.  PLIC will publish a fifth white paper based on what is currently  known regarding KPFF’s  project costs and funding information as outlined in KPFF’s  Lummi Island LOS Analysis Update dated 5/9/18.

Mr. Middleton  further stated that a Ferry District Tax and surcharge would be necessary regardless of boat size in order to qualify for funding opportunities.   Mr. Andersen argued that a surcharge should not be considered a fare increase but rather a recapitalization for “our grandchildren’s boat” separate from the replacement boat which will be funded differently.   Mr. Anderson suggested a peak season surcharge to LIFAC which would target summer tourists and exclude punch card users.  Patricia Dunn requested that Pubic Works prepare a spreadsheet showing the project’s overall costs to both the  County and Lummi Islanders over an extended period of time.

Chairperson Ging distributed an outline for LIFAC’s electronic questionnaire to LIFAC members for their approval which now moves forward for public release on May 23rd  without timely access to KPFF’s  final pending reports.  Patricia Dunn reported that approximately 564  off- island property owners will receive reminder questionnaire postcards.  PLIC will reimburse LIFAC for all mailing costs.

PLIC will host a TOWN HALL MEETING on a May 29th at 6:30 pm at the Beach School  to discuss your questions and comments on KPFF’s May 22nd  public hearing and LIFAC’s May 23rd  online questionnaire which must be submitted by the June 10th deadline.

LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD

off

Two Informational Reports Released at June 7, 2016 LIFAC Meeting

Friday, June 24, 2016 @ 12:06 PM
posted by mike

 “Ferry Service Lummi Island to Fairhaven:  Some Observations,” dated April 30, 2016 by Chuck Anholt. This paper proposes an illustrative scenario on the feasibility of docking in Fairhaven.  First presented at the May 3, 2016 LIFAC meeting, it was circulated for comments and discussed at the June 7, 2016 meeting.  It makes two assumptions:  use of the Whatcom Chief and unrestricted docking at Fairhaven and shows that a round trip would take approximately 3 hours and result in a much lower quality of service.  In addition, and perhaps more importantly, because of Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railroad plans for increased rail service, the Port of Bellingham would limit Lummi Island Ferry Service to once a day calling into question the practicality of assuming unrestricted docking access in Fairhaven.  The paper concludes that the increased trip length along with severely restricted access effectively eliminates the Fairhaven option from further consideration. DRAFT–Ferry Service Lummi Island to Fairhaven, April 30, 2016

Whatcom County 2015 Ferry Operations Report.  The Ferry Ops Report 2015 was presented to LIFAC at their June 7, 2016 meeting by County staff and includes information about costs, revenue, how the 45/55 split is working, Lummi Island Road tax collections vs Island Road expenses for ferry and roads, Ferry Fund growth etc.

off

A presentation of the task force findings on ferry financials is followed by a lively discussion where citizen input was invited on issues such as Gooseberry Point parking, potential personnel savings, needs-based fares, the possible creation of a taxing district, and the introduction of an interactive fare simulator model.   Task Force Observations 5-2-11

off

PLIC Plain Talk: support the ferry lease

Saturday, September 10, 2011 @ 02:09 PM
posted by mike

PLIC PLAIN TALK on APPROVING THE FERRY LEASE

Greetings, Friends, on this gorgeous 9-10-11.

We have reached the end game. You are needed. Tuesday night, Sept. 13—just 3 days out— Whatcom County Council will hold a public hearing on the proposed lease agreement with Lummi Indian Business Council (LIBC) for ferry service at Gooseberry Point. The Council might vote to approve or reject the proposal that night. And their vote is hanging in the balance.

We need to get this deal done now. No more delays. No more uncertainty. Now is the time. Please participate in getting it signed.

Two calls to action are extremely urgent:

1.       Write now. Right now. Write a short, to-the-point email or letter to County Council asking for their ‘yes’ vote  to approve the lease. Councilman Ken Mann has requested this in writing, so the Council will know that it is the consensus position of Lummi Island stakeholders. There is no other viable option. Send your email to: [email protected] (it will be distributed to each Council member).

2.       Attend the County Council meeting Tuesday night. PLIC Board of Directors is organizing car pools and renting a bus. PLIC Board also is preparing speakers for the public hearing, to stress that this lease agreement is the ONLY and best assurance for reliable access to the mainland and to prevent further major delays, disruptions, and costs.

Approval of this lease agreement is best for Whatcom County as a whole, for many reasons tied to costs and economic impact, and obviously it is best for its Lummi Island constituents for safety and stability.

Our Ferry Task Force ran the numbers for us.  We can afford the lease if the County Council acts on their final report. The lease and the Ferry Task Force recommendations provide the best options for Whatcom County.

When the County Council last met, August 9, and discussed the lease proposal in a Committee of the Whole, PLIC Board had, through personal contact and discussion, assurances that the Council favored the proposal, 5-2.

As of Friday, Sept. 9, again through person-to-person conversations and email exchanges, we know that some circumstances have caused some Council members to reconsider their approval. The result is that our ferry transportation once again could continue unresolved and leave the County and us in further, protracted, extremely costly turmoil – with no immediate resolution available.

The reasons that the proposed lease agreement is the best choice for the County and for Lummi Island:

  • It is the least costly of other possibilities (e.g., litigation, ferry to Fairhaven, newer ferry, economic impact, and more).
  • There is no Plan B in place. The only other possibility discussed has been Fairhaven, and thorough studies have shown clearly this would be dangerous, more expensive, and not provide adequate service.
  • By rejecting the proposal, the County becomes vulnerable to legal action – either or both through individual or public law suits and through brinksmanship if the ferry kept running to Gooseberry without a lease.

PLIC membership and the PLIC Board have spent countless hours and tens of thousands of dollars researching what would be in the best interest of Whatcom County as a whole, and Lummi Island within that framework.

Through two years of public meetings, on island and at County Council, of face-to-face meetings with County government, and of seeking research and the best advice from some of the best legal resources in the country, the conclusion comes back to the No. 1 mission of PLIC since its formation:

Long-term ferry service at Gooseberry Point.

PLIC’s legal team concurs. Our Congressional delegation concurs. We need County Council to concur.

Voices have been raised to County government about rejecting the proposal and pursuing legal entitlements involving the federally-mandated Right of Way (ROW) and the consent decree attached to the last lease, which expired in February 2010. PLIC neither disputes nor discount these issues, and we respect the right to all opinions.

The PLIC Board, on behalf of its membership of about 500, vigorously pursued those avenues. The feedback, after exhaustive research and discovery, was clear: going to court with no assurance of a favorable ruling is a terrible option. It would cost the County and the public millions, and take many years. Those attorneys worked hand-in-hand with County government attorneys throughout the negotiation process to arrive at the best possible resolution through negotiation.

Heeding the best legal advice available, with deep experience in tribal law and work with the Dept. of Interior and the BIA, the County’s best and only financially-viable resolution to transportation for Lummi Island is a negotiated lease for continued, long-term service to Gooseberry Point.

PLIC’s legal team concurs. Our Congressional delegation concurs. We need County Council to concur.

Please make your voice heard on this.

  • Write now.
  • Attend Tuesday.

Let us know by email if you have special needs requirements to get to the public hearing Tuesday.

Each of you who lives off the island, please arrange to join us Tuesday night at County Council.

Thank you for your continued interest and support.

Sincerely,

The PLIC Board of Directors:
Stuart Rich, President
Mark Sexton, Vice President
Joan Moye, Treasurer
Rhayma Blake, Secretary
Michael McKenzie
David Wing

off

Lease Agreement up for consideration this month

Thursday, July 7, 2011 @ 08:07 AM
posted by mike

PLIC urges you to mark your calendars for attendance at County Council sessions July 12 and 26. Council will introduce the proposed lease agreement for our ferry service at Gooseberry Point next Tuesday, and probably will schedule a public hearing for the 26th.

You can read the complete version of the lease agreement here. Ferry Lease Agreement

off

Protocol for Dinner w/ Lummi Nation

Wednesday, March 23, 2011 @ 11:03 PM
posted by mike

The PLIC Board learned from sources some helpful tips about the dinner invitation from  Lummi Nation scheduled at its community center on Monday, March 28, and was told the following helpful tips:

1. Do not take food. This is not pot luck, it is a dinner hosted by Lummi Nation. (See note below from an Islander about taking pies.)

2. Do not take gifts.

3. Please RSVP at [email protected]

4. Questions will be accepted, written on a note card, upon arrival.

5. Please car pool as much as possible.

* * *

PLIC Board member Rhayma Blake reported on one source:

I talked with A.J. Barse, director of communications for Lummi Nation. He said the event will be much like the event at Beach School in February 2010.  “It’s very much like you heard…Y’all come,” he said. “We’re cooking.  Don’t bring anything.  It’s a neighborhood sit-down.  No press is invited.  The ferry will be discussed.  Our Ferry Task Force will do a presentation explaining the time line you saw in the Bellingham Herald and what to expect after the drop-dead date.  We’ll invite comments and questions on note cards that evening, nothing scripted beforehand like at the Beach School.”

When I asked if it would be appropriate to bring my 13-year-old, he hesitated a little, then said yes.  But it sounded like this is more political than social in nature.
* * *
Islander Terry Terry, at a Lummi Island Community Association (LICA) meeting Wednesday night (3/23), reiterated the same points — take nothing except “an appetite and questions” — and said that she was asked to serve as a point of accepting RSVPs so the hosts can determine how much food to prepare. If you plan to attend, please email her: [email protected]
* * *
Islander Colleen Berg sent the following message: I have contacted the Lummi Council office to ask if we could bring pie to the dinner. There was a warm “that would be very nice” response. So I would like to extend the invitation to everyone who will be attending the dinner and discussion to help “set the table.” I will be bringing two berry pies, and I understand that we can take them to the kitchen upon arrival. Also, the invitation says the gathering would be from 7-9. I let the council office know that the ferry arrives on Gooseberry Point at 6:40 and 7:20 so that islanders may be either early or late. Thank you.
off