Dee DuMont's opinion about Strawberry Park/Cannery Cove

I asked Dee what she thought about the Strawberry Park/Cannery Cove debate. Below is her answer.
(The picture is by Judie Elfendahl -thanks Judie- and came from a different email). What are the other candidates and elected officials thinking?

  My first concern about the Cannery Cove issue is how one city employee, with no apparent public input and no apparent permission from the council to seek a grant, could spend 2 years working on a proposal, secure a grant, and THEN present it to the public as a fait accompli.

Apparently, the grant money is once again being used as a weapon against the public...'how dare we turn this down, it's being paid for by someone else?'

This is not the first time this has happened during my 22 years as a resident...the same annoying thing happened when we on Grow Avenue wanted to prevent the high school kids from parking on both sides of the street and making it difficult to walk on Grow Avenue.

We asked for...and eventually got....the cheapest of all solutions, "no parking" signs.

But before that happened, we found ourselves looking at 40' of overhead shots of our street onto which had been drawn a 9' wide hiking and biking trail. Hours of labor had gone in to the project by city employees, and once again, they had gone out and secured a grant to fund a portion of the expense.

When one of my neighbors polled those of us living here and found that none of us wanted this plan, we got organized and were able to stop the project, although we had to endure a spate of nasty letters-to-the-editor regarding how stupid we were to send money back.

    If elected, I will like to look into the possibility of making a regulation that says no grant application can be made by a city employee without the approval of the city council.

    I have not attended any of the meetings on the Cove issue. However, it is my understanding that there was NEVER a salt-water wetland area at the Cannery Cove site.

Thus in my mind, this is not a "restoration" this is an "invention" by Peter Best. The plan seems much more concerned with pleasing fish than with providing for an increased and centrally-located access to the water for those of us who do not have waterfront property.

My understanding of the project is that humans will be kept away from the water line. I think that fish and other aquatic life can successfully coexist with humans, and I think humans need the relaxation provided by being close to the water.

    I rather liked the idea of having a boat haul-out area for local owners to make repairs, and for an area to launch kayaks or canoes. I think that there should be some historic markers, like those found on Blakely Harbor and at the Crystal Springs dock, that tell the public about the past use of the area they are viewing. I think that having a few picnic tables would be a pleasant addition.

    This issue is actually about shoreline management, which is an extremely divisive issue on our Island. I live inland, but I have been appalled by what my waterfront friends have endured at the over-reaching hands of the city.

While I absolutely support the protection of Puget Sound, I believe that our city has regularly overstepped its bounds when it comes to they way they treat waterfront property owners. A huge issue looming ahead for the new council will be to craft a plan that is fair to property owners while still providing for environmental protection.

 I'm always interested in what others on the Island are thinking about these issues.

Feel free to contact me with any comments you have.

   
Thanks again,   Dee