Lummi Nation Clarifies Their Latest Offer

Diana Bob, Lummi Nation staff attorney, issued this statement from the Office of the Lummi Nation Chairman, to correct some misinformation about the Lummi Nation’s most recent offer for the Gooseberry Point Lease as described in a  Bellingham Herald article on February 16, 2011.

Update 4:40 PM 2/17. I should have re-read that Herald article! The $22 million alluded to presumably was the sum of the LN ‘ask’ of $10 million over 25 years for improvements plus another $10-12 million if the Lummi hopes for a marina requiring ferry dock relocation occurs, not $22 million  up front. Thanks to John Stark for a quick response, at the Herald politics blog.

7 thoughts on “Lummi Nation Clarifies Their Latest Offer

  1. Well, I don’t really think the “clarification” helps much. Maybe some specifics about the type of “safety/transportation” needs they want the County to address would be helpful, possibly. I know at least a handful of people who solicit daily from the ferry traffic will be upset if the ferry doesn’t come to Gooseberry Pt. anymore.
    Plus, the Federal Stimulus money was used to build the Haxton Way Trail. Which doesn’t seem to be used much – if at all.

  2. 9moved from a previous post)
    Here’s a novel idea, after reading the LIBC response to the Herald story. They say they only want $200,000 per year, plus inflation, plus $1,000,000 per year for 10 years for road improvements to the rez.
    It’s almost a forgone conclusion that the county will propose a 75 cent property tax on Lummi Island to cover a major portion of the $200,000 annual payment.
    However, taxes generated in a district generally go for the benefit of that area. As the Lummi Nation property tax revenues are much greater than Lummi Is., then the rez boundary SHOULD be included in the new taxing district. LIBC property would still be exempt, but there’s a ton of property owners on the rez that do pay taxes, and would directly benefit from better roads. This new, expanded revenue stream could be leveraged for matching state and federal dollars to pay for the road improvements.
    This is something the county council can just pass and ordinance, an ‘git-er-done’

  3. Warning:The $400k number mentioned in this comment is, at this point, an unconfirmed rumor. LIFF editors.

    I have heard that the County gets about $400K per year from the Feds to cover the expenses of serving Lummi Nation. Obviously that is not nearly enough.

    So on the one hand LN is tax-exempt, and on the other hand demanding more and more services. Maybe Uncle Sam should start ponying up the difference? At the very least the uncompensated costs of serving the rez should be on the table with the ferry negotiations.

    More to the point, the claim that ferry traffic is a major safety issue needs to be supported by data: how many incidents, at what cost, and how often can be attributed to ferry traffic? What is the best way of mitigating them? Is there any connection between those realities and the $10 million plan?

    It smells like yet another batch red herring to obfuscate the proceedings. Let’s all start calling our Federal Representatives and begging for help.

    • Very provocative, Rich, but … “I’ve heard that … ” means the $400k is a rumor for the time being. The comment is approved but was flagged as rumor.

      If anyone can obtain and share objective documentation to either confirm or refute the $400k figure, please do ASAP. That would let us all move it from the realm of misty and dangerous rumor to a fact that would be useful in serious considerations of county and ferry finances, per Rich’s excellent suggestion.

  4. The best reasons for demanding a federally mediated comprehensive settlement is that it would put funding of the entire constellation of public services in perspective, would keep all in the proper context of applicable law and policy, and open the entire process to the public.

    It is largely the inaction of our elected officials that has kept these proceedings in the dark. What do they have against open public process?

  5. I don’t know if this is the place for the following comments and suggestions, but here goes.
    I have been studying the Dec. 09 traffic study and noted on page 34 that” there is no clear evidence that the vehicles involved in the crashes were predominately bound for or coming from the ferry.”
    I have been using the ferry since moving here in 1980 and have driven Haxton more than 3000 times since then. During that time I personally know of 3 accidents on Haxton involving Lummi Island residents.In one a large dog ran out in front of the car ahead of me,. The dog was killed and the car went into the ditch . There were two large dogs, one carrying a deer head. Number 2 was c car turning left off Slater onto Haxton that failed to yield to oncoming traffic. The third accident was mine when a car westbound on Kwina ran the stop sign and broadsided me. The driver was a resident of the Lummi nation. No alchol was involved, but the driver was14, unlicensed, the truck was unlicensed, and had n brakes. Fortunately nobody was injured although both vehicles were totaled.

  6. The traffic Safety Study noted that alcohol was a “significant factor in the study area.” Every fatal accident involved alcohol ! Perhaps the Lummi Nation should stop selling alcohol on the reservation.
    Several safety changes could be made at once. Move the 35 mph sign southbound from Smokehouse road to a point 100 yards North. Put a left turn arrow for traffic west bound at Slater & Haxton. Put in Left Turn lanes on Slater at Imhoff and Ferndale roads.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s