NHA isn't LNG; let's get on with it

I don't know about you, but I'm ready to make up my mind on the proposal to form the Columbia-Pacific National Heritage Area and include Wahkiakum County in it.

Business organizations throughout the region requested the formation of the NHA as a means of creating an internationally recognized brand for the area that could be used in marketing. The idea came out of the coalition formed in the Lewis and Clark bicentennial. Over the years, The Eagle has had occasional stories about the movement, but they've been few and far between because developments have been slow and the topic is not really of general interest.

Wahkiakum economic development folk discovered last year or so that in the current configuration, a non-profit bank, ShoreBank Enterprise Cascadia of Ilwaco, was spearheading the effort to form the NHA, and Wahkiakum wasn't included. As I remember, there were a couple of meetings, one in Cathlamet with the board of county commissioners, and ShoreBank agreed to include Wahkiakum in the proposed NHA. I'm pretty sure I reported on that, but not in great detail; it seemed to be a benign story of limited interest.

Not so. There is widespread opposition to the proposal from people fearing administrators of the NHA will be able to force or coerce local officials into enacting strict land use controls which will prevent them from using their land as they see fit.

Unfortunately, there are enough examples of governmental regulations and endangered species protections that limit land use in some areas so that it isn't out of the realm of logical thought that restrictions could happen with an NHA.

However, ShoreBank Enterprise Cascadia, is proposing language in the legislation that would create the NHA that would strictly prevent the NHA from being involved in land use regulation and also would allow persons to formally opt out of the NHA. As the proposed NHA would essentially be a revolving loan fund for individuals and businesses who wouldn't qualify for a commercial loan; one wouldn't have to participate unless one wanted a loan.

The provisions mean little to the opponents. One commented that ShoreBank could easily change the rules after they're adopted.

And so it goes.

Before the start of the county commission's meeting Tuesday, one of Commissioner Dan Cothren's friends, who later spoke against the proposed NHA, joked about shooting him.

Another opponent, Len Lindsley, evoked the American Revolution.

"We're pretty upset about this whole deal . . . No place is too small to start a revolution. If we need to start a revolution in this county, we will," he said.

Will the commissioners be scared into a decision?

We'll have to wait and see. Commissioner Lisa Marsyla has proposed having a town hall meeting to gather more public input on the proposal, so nothing is going to happen soon.

When it first appeared, the proposal's goal was to provide a tool which local businesses could use to market themselves. From a strictly business survival standpoint, we at The Eagle aren't opposed to that.

I haven't seen or heard anything from the opponents that have led me to change my mind about the proposal. It seemed like a good enough idea when it surfaced, and it still seems so, especially with ShoreBank including language to stay away from land use controls and to allow people to opt out.

I have a feeling that there won't be much effect on us either way. Most people won't notice if it's enacted with us included, and we won't notice if we're out of it. I just don't see this as a big deal.

But others do, so we sure are spending a lot of time debating whether or not that's true.