Opinions vary on national heritage area

Sponsors of a feasibility study on a proposal to form a regional national heritage area received full spectrum of opinion at a public hearing Tuesday evening in Cathlamet.

Some speakers said they felt the proposal would benefit the area's economy; others claimed it was an unconstitutional land grab.

The impetus to form a national heritage area came out of the region's efforts to observe the 200th anniversary of the Lewis and Clark Journey of Discovery. Proponents felt the national heritage program would make the region known for its particular heritage and help businesses and property owners capitalize on or preserve historic business activities.

David Symanski of the US National Park Service, which is handling the feasibility study, said formation of a national heritage area is done by Congress, which has authorized the feasibility study. Limited funds, approximately $350,000 per year, would be available for promotional or other activities. The proposed area includes northwest Clatsop County, southwest Pacific County, and all of Wahkiakum County. There are over 100 national heritage areas across the country, he said; the state of Tennessee is a single national heritage area commemorating the Civil War.

ShoreBank Enterprise Cascadia, a nonprofit set up to help entrepreneurs in coastal communities to build viable businesses that also have a social and environmental benefit, would administer the national heritage area. An advisory board of persons from throughout the area would make recommendations to the ShoreBank board of directors for funding activities.

A copy of the feasibility study may be found on the Internet at http://www.nps.gov/lewi, or columbiapacificnha.org.

Both Symanski and ShoreBank representative Mike Dickerson denied claims that the national heritage would lead to controls over private property.

Symanski said a national scenic area, such as that in the Columbia Gorge, can have land use controls, but federal law prohibits a national heritage area from any action that would require land use controls. He added that it would be "naïve" to think that individuals or groups won't try to use national heritage areas to promote their particular agendas.

Dickerson said comments from the public meetings on the feasibility plan would be posted on the their website. People may submit written comments till May 3.

Several people spoke against the proposal.

One woman feared administrators could change the rules and pressure local officials to write plans or other land use codes that would restrict property owners' rights. "I can't vote you out of office," she said.

Phil Zerr, Grays River, said he feared the group would channel money to nonprofit organizations that would buy land along rivers, such as the Grays, and conduct activities, such as breaching dikes, that would have adverse impacts on other properties. Symanski commented that federal legislation prohibits using national heritage area funds to purchase land.

Paul Vik, Puget Island, commented that the national heritage area program, as well as federal agencies such as the Forest Service and National Park Service, lack constitutional authority. The federal government has enough land to control and doesn't need more, he said.

Gerry Miller, Puget Island, predicted that as time passes, restrictions will arise of the national heritage area program. He suggested there be elected members on the board of directors; Dickerson responded that it would be good to have a wide range of persons on the advisory board.

Sue Patillo, Raymond, warned that there were ways around laws that would allow national heritage area groups to use funds from other organizations to acquire land. "You're gambling on the future," she said. "You're putting your property in the hands of ShoreBank and the National Park Service."

R.J. Rose, South Bend, said the national heritage area would become a land use plan. "When this feasibility study is done, it will go to Congress and come back a land management plan, and that has consequences for us," she said. Other speakers echoed this fear.

In a neutral comment, Dick Swart, Cathlamet, suggested that program sponsors should allow more time for people to become acquainted with the plan so concerns can be addressed.

Others spoke in favor of the proposal.

Kitty Speranza, Skamokawa, said the Friends of Skamokawa board of directors is "very much in favor of the national heritage area."

George Exum, Puget Island, said he represented the Columbia River Business Alliance, which is supporting the national heritage area because it would promote "sustainable economic development compatible with the resources of the lower river."

Sunrise Fletcher, a bed and breakfast owner from Skamokawa, supported the proposal, saying creation of a regional "brand" is a good idea that will support business.

Thea Pyle, Grays River, added her support, saying it would be good for Wahkiakum to be tied in with the rest of the region.

Carol Carver, Puget Island, felt that the program would allow energetic counties to prosper. She added that the plan needed to have more material about Wahkiakum County.

Sandi Benbrook-Rieder, Cathalmet said the Wahkiakum Chamber of Commerce supports the program and was one of the original supporters. The program will help the community take care of traditional businesses, such as fishing, and boost the economies of the area.