Camas Washougal Watch

One thing that the 2009 election for Camas Washougal Port Commissioner has accomplished, is that it has spurred some lively debate among candidates, port staff, media, and the public. Port officials are taking a defensive position as they scramble to justify their existence to the taxpayers, maybe for the first time in the Ports existence. Incumbents have finally awakened, realizing their re-election isn’t guaranteed as four new contenders seek their positions.

As we watched the Riverwalk fiasco come to a head, earlier this year, many taxpayers wondered what on earth the port was doing hiring an outside, part time Public Relations guru? In a short time it was obvious that he was hired to spin the best light possible on the Port. Maybe it was in fear that they might actually lose the Riverwalk arbitration. Maybe it was in fear of an upset in the commissioners’ race this year and someone would actually get elected who wants to make some distinctive changes to the Port. Maybe they feared the CCIA’s continued pressure of transparency. Maybe they just knew the taxpayers are angered and aren’t going to sit around watching the continued mismanagement of the public’s trust. We may never know the real reason. But one this is certain, the Port has continued to be thrust into the arena of public debate, which will continue long after the primaries are over. As we look closer at the Port, we start to realize that the Riverwalk issues were only the tip of the iceberg.

I threw my hat in the ring for Port Commissioner because the port refused to be forthcoming with vital information. Over the past year, the more I have dug into information, the more vagueness, contradictions, and outright disinformation I found. The more that I dug into the financial performance the more dismayed I became. Despite hundreds of hours of work, I still am unable to get the port to tell me approximately how many tens of millions of dollars we have trusted to them, and what our ROI is. The only thing that I am certain of is that they do not know the value. I’ll bet that every person that is reading this communication knows roughly what their home is worth. Can’t we expect the same from our paid professionals and elected official?

The more I’ve investigated, the more spin the port publishes.

I want to point out to you some of the Ports attempts to make you believe that you are actually receiving a good return on your investment of your tax contributions. As you read this and the Ports’ impotent justifications for its existence, you may find yourself asking that famous question Clara Peller once asked “ Where’s the beef?” Read this information carefully. I think you’ll come to the same conclusions.

According to recent postings by port staff on their blog (blog postings are anonymous so readers don’t know for sure who actually wrote it – but we would guess the PR guru), they begin:

“Since it may be confusing for some Port District residents to understand the purpose and value of their investment in Port assets, I thought it would be a useful opportunity to begin a dialogue on this subject, starting with the subject of the funding of port operations and an explanation of the investment of public money from property taxes andleasehold taxes.

Property tax vs. Lease-Hold Tax

Watch this example closely as the Port draws your attention away from business taxes and focuses on what YOU pay in personal property taxes verses what a business pays in Leaseholder tax. Also notice they didn’t include what a business pays in property tax if they OWN the business. They spun this in such a way as to make you think you are  “partnering” with business to help the local economy.

The Port explains: “Camas and Washougal homeowners are assessed a property tax twice a year. For one tax district in Washougal, the property tax rate is $9.89 per $1,000 of assessed property value. If you own a home valued at $200,000, then your annual property tax is $1,978. Approximately 1/3 of this amount, $672, funds Washougal Schools….

In 2009, the property tax assessment portion for the Port of Camas-Washougal is 36 cents per $1000 of assessed property value. In simple terms, if your home is valued at $200,000, $72 of your property tax assessment is invested in the Port.

The Washington Leasehold Tax (LET) was created in 1976, as a way to provide a uniform method of taxation for users of publicly owned property. The LET is limited to 12.84 percent of the rent paid on public property. Most of this revenue goes to the state general fund—54 percent—the remainder is divided between the County-27 percent and the City-19 percent. A business that pays $50,000 for an annual lease pays $6,420 in LET tax and $1,414 of this amount funds K-12 schools across the state. So, both homeowners and business owners contribute to Port operations.”

Whoa….mid paragraph they switch from personal property taxes to business Lease taxes within the Port. There is a veil here that needs to be uncovered. Here, the Port wants you to focus on your personal property taxes which pay a big chunk to the school district yet they divert your focus from how little a business pays in taxes under a lease hold tax and completely ignore the revenue generated from the sale of port land to the local economy as well as the annual revenue generated from business property taxes – that would support schools and the city. When it comes to business taxes, the Ports policy is to LEASE land (a) Not sell land – which must be the reason the writer doesn’t give you any examples of how much a business would pay in local taxes if the Port actually SOLD the property. But don’t worry, I’ll give you those examples below so you can compare for yourself.

By leasing land to businesses, only $3.96 is invested in each local school. Using the above example of $6,420 that a business would pay in Leasehold taxes, 54% of that goes to the state coffers, of which 40.8% is distributed to State school districts ($3402.60). Divide that by 350+ schools in Washington state = $3.96 will trickle down to each Washougal school.

How is it fair when you invest $672 in local schools, yet a local business in the port only invests $27.70 to the entire school district? The Port wants you to think Leasehold is a good thing and the Port is working for your best interests by leasing land to the businesses rather than selling it. Unfortunately, it is to the selfish interests of the Port to collect and keep as much money as they can, ignoring the needs of the local economy and the local schools. (b) “The port will sell property only when it is overwhelmingly advantageous to the community to do so” .

Let’s look at a comparison to see what is overwhelmingly advantageous to the community:

As a comparison, let’s say the Port SOLD a piece of property – land and building for $1 million.

The annual tax revenue generated from that million dollar sale to a business would go directly to the city and the schools. Only 29% would go to the State coffers.

For a business located within the Port that is valued at $1Million, annual property taxes would be distributed as shown below:

Property Sold by the Port: Property Leased by the Port:

$1,000,000 property value Sold=                                $1,000,000 property value =

$10,730 annual property taxes $12,840.00 annual LeaseHold taxes

3111.70 To city of Washougal                                          $3466.80 to city of Washougal

3648.20 To Washougal School District                         $    27.72 to Washougal school Dist.

3111.70 To the state of WA. General fund                              $6933.60 To State of WA.

1921.40 to Clark county and libraries                            $2311.20 to Clark Co. & Ft. Vanc. Library

PLUS revenue on the sale:  (g)

17800.00 (Real Estate Excise Tax) .0178

4913.00 to Clark Co./Local public works

89.00 (.50%) to City of Washougal

12798.00 (71.9%) to the state of WA

-11,812 of the 12798 goes to General fund

=$4,973 (28%) of the REET = K-12 education

=99.45 additional to Washougal schools

Summary:                                                                                           Summary:

Property sold by the port:                                                               Property leased by the Port:

City of Washougal receives……..  3,737.20                              City of Washougal receives……….   3466.80

Wash. Schools receives……………  3,747.65                              Wash. Schools receives (7 x3.96)…. 27.72

As you can see, it is clear that by leasing land to businesses in the Port, the school district and city lose a tremendous amount of revenue at the greed of the Port. You are being hoodwinked by the Port.

The Ports practices are not in the best interest of the local community.

The Port continues in their blog to justify their existence by posting “benefits” to the public. According to the Port

“Here’s another way to understand a few of the benefits of your Port investment…

• “Public access to and maintenance of the largest public recreational marina on the Washington side of the Columbia River. Fisherman and boat owners know the value and benefit of all of the amenities at the riverfront including a 356-slip marina, gas dock, 4-lane launch ramp, floating restaurant and commercial boat service/repair facility directly adjacent to launch ramps.” – Can the city of Washougal give this same service and access? Currently local tax payers PAY the same amount for boat parking and ramp use as the many non-locals that use the marina each week, yet our tax dollars subsidize this activity.
• “Public access, improvement, and maintenance of the Marina Park for sightseeing, picnics and our popular summer concerts.”  - Can the city of Washougal give this same service and access? Are two free summer concerts per year a good return on your tax investment?
• “Public access, improvement and maintenance of Grove Field – a general aviation airport with private hangars, airplane maintenance, inspection & repair and an important local venue that provides opportunities for private instruction to earn pilot licenses.” Can the city of Camas, the county, or private enterprise offer the same services at Grove?
• “Public access to and upkeep of Captain William Clark Park (formerly Cottonwood Beach). A five-mile long sandy stretch of beach along the Columbia River. This 85-acre park is popular with beach lovers, walkers, and joggers.” – I love this area. Walks on the dike, watching the fireworks. Can the city of Washougal give this same service and access?
• “Maintenance and upkeep of the dike trail. Popular for wildlife viewing, walking, and jogging, the dike is also maintained by the Port to Army Corps of Engineers standards, to ensure there is no flooding by the Columbia River.” – again, City of Washougal can’t maintain this?
• “Development and maintenance of the industrial park, that includes creating the necessary infrastructure of roads, utilities that attract businesses and bring jobs to the area.” – Can the city of Washougal give this same service and access?
• “Public access and upkeep of the Parkersville National Historical site. Located adjacent to the riverside marina, this is an important historical landmark and a popular site for historians, visitors, and park lovers.” – Can the city of Washougal give this same service and access?

I agree, the port does a good job of providing recreational access for the community to enjoy. But it’s nothing more than a glorified Parks and Recreation Department that the city can manage just as well. Unfortunately, the Port is responsible for so much more than parks and recreation. This is where the Port of Camas Washougal drops the ball.

The Port stated: “Some critics argue that selling all Port property to private developers and giving the money to schools is the best approach. We beg to differ”.

This is another poorly executed spin attempt. I’ve been a critic of the port and the only candidate that has even mentioned the school in their campaign, thus this comment must be directed towards me. I have argued that the Port property ought to be sold to private industry. I didn’t say sell to private developers. Selling land to private industry generates more tax revenues to the local city and schools. (See above example)

A separate idea (not mixed together like the port stated above) rather than the Port sitting on $5.5 million of tax revenue, in my opinion, a portion should re-invest,  up to $1Million to each school district for the express purposes of saving teaching jobs. This coincides with their real mission statement.

The Port continues by asking a few questions:

• “How fast could the property really be developed?” My answer: With an aggressive business development person on staff, it could be developed a lot faster than currently being developed or has been developed over the past decade. Just like the Ports comprehensive plan states. (f)
• “How would it be managed?” My answer: by the property owners, just as in real life.
• “What control/input would the public have over prime waterfront real estate with private developers?” Every control afforded them by law. Input would be allowed from the beginning. “No comment” answers from port commissioners should not be allowed.
• “Who would properly manage the maintenance of the Columbia Riverdike:” my answer: the Corp of engineers/City of Washougal
• “rail line, storm-water runoff, the airport, the marina and existing industrial park areas?” my answer: the Corp of engineers/the city.

The Port rhetorically answers their own questions with “the Port of Camas-Washougal”. The staff writer goes on by re-writing the Port mission statement; “ Its mission is to responsibility develop and maintain all of these assets while encouraging citizen input and discourse for the best usage and increase opportunities for local job growth and recreation. Ultimately, this stewardship also contributes to preserving the historical significance of this region through public education.”

I beg to differ, the port’s actual mission, according to their publicized mission statement is:

“It is the Port’s mission to strengthen and diversify the existing economic and industrial base of the district; enhance employment and recreational opportunities for benefit of the residents of the Port district and surrounding region”.

But I guess if you are failing at your core mission and responsibilities to the taxpayers, it is best to re-write your core mission and see if the public buys off on it. Creating 137 jobs in 5 years (BEFORE the recession hit) is an unacceptable Return on Investment. As a matter of fact, in their justification rhetoric, they avoid even discussing the topic of strengthening the economic base, and enhancing employment opportunities, why? Because they have failed miserable at it.

How does the port strengthen and diversify the existing economic and industrial base…to benefit the residents of the district by cheating those residents of tax revenues that could be gained by the sale of port land rather than promoting leasing the land?

More examples the Port uses to justify themselves:

“For many people, making their dreams a reality is made possible through the use of Port facilities. Consider the following:

Business owners and Entrepreneurs

You’re a local business owner who wants to grow your business with office space. Should you lease or buy? If you choose to lease office space and later consider purchasing land or office space as your business grows, the Port has both options available. In fact, the Port already has the infrastructure available in its industrial park. Roads, electricity, sewer, water, even prefabricated buildings or build-outs are available at competitive rates.

One good example of this success on Port property is Foods in Season.http://www.foodsinseason.com/ This small business started out in 1982 by leasing building space with a handful of family members to sell fresh foods. Today, [25 years later] it is an $8 million dollar international business with nearly two-dozen employees and has purchased its own property and constructed a building in the Port industrial park. It all began with an entrepreneur with a business passion and Port facilities to help realize the dream.” – Port of CW

As though an entrepreneur can’t move into the Hickey building or any other building in the area? As though they can’t grow to be successful expanding their business in other buildings in Washougal? Here you have a landlord trying to take credit for a business success because the landlord rented the business space. Does this make any logical sense to you?

The City of Camas created 350+ jobs in the last 5 years, just within their light industrial park. We’ve seen new companies such as nLight, Lightfleet, Abacus, Plexsys, Reality Engineering, CID, and Samson; several of which started as entrepreneurs in the Camas area. Then there are another 1000 jobs Fisher investments committed to the area – all without the Port of Camas Washougal’s help.

So is the port necessary or even capable of enhancing employment in our community? Not according to their track record of enhancing/creating 137 jobs in 5 years.

“Fishing enthusiasts & boat owners

As a boating enthusiast, you regularly enjoy fishing trips and sightseeing trips from your boat moored at the marina. You have 24-hour access to a secure marina that protects your boat from the water hazards and debris flowing down river. You park your car in the lot and enjoy a day on the river. As a fisherman, you pay a modest fee to launch your boat, spend a day cruising the river splitting your time trolling for salmon and watching the grandkids learn how to wakeboard. RVr’s can even spend the night in the parking lot. It all begins with a day on the water.”

So what if you aren’t a boater or fisherman? Why should your tax dollars go to subsidize boaters and fishermen?

“Aviation enthusiasts & airplane owners

As a father of a son who loves airplanes, you enroll you son in aviation classes at Grove Field and part of his participation is funded by a scholarship earned through the local Camas Washougal Airport Association (CWAA). He goes off to college to study aviation and returns during the summer to complete his instrument rating with the goal of becoming a commercial pilot with a major airline. It all begins at Grove Field airport.”

I love the example the Port uses, because it’s exactly what my son did. Unfortunately, the Port didn’t financial fund a scholarship, the Aviation club did ($200). The port didn’t teach my son to fly or offer him any flight instruction discounts or subsidies. My son could have easily went to Evergreen or Troutdale to learn to fly too. “The port” had nothing to do with my son learning to fly that the aviation club, and wonderful private instructors couldn’t offer without the port. Again, so what if you aren’t an aviation enthusiast as the majority of local citizens aren’t? Here again, the Port takes credit for a great aviation club and great individual instructors.

“History Buff and Park Lovers

The Marina Park offers picnics along the river, free summer concerts, and some of the most panoramic views of Mt. Hood. The adjacent Historical Park showcases memorabilia that honors the original usage of the site as a transportation hub from the ferry service operated by David C. Parker. And don’t forget the historical visit by Lewis & Clark who camped at Captain William Clark Park (formerly Cottonwood Beach) and were hosted by the Chinook Indians who lived here for years prior to the visit of the Corps of Discovery. It all begins along the banks of the Columbia River – freelyaccessible to the public”.

Inferring that if the city of Washougal took over the parks and recreation aspects, that it would be closed to the public?

During my campaign for Port Commissioner, a few people have asked, “Why throw out the baby with the bathwater”?

Although it’s a cute idiom that translates to “Do not discard something valuable in your eagerness to get rid of some useless thing associated with it.”

The questions remain which we should all be asking our Port Commissioners:

• Where is the value that the Port provides for our tax dollars?
• Where’s the Beef?

• Why has the port been apathetic and passive in their own mission to strengthen and diversify the existing economic and industrial base of the district; enhance employment opportunities for benefit of the residents of the Port district and surrounding region? (Can’t blame the economy, this started over a decade ago)
• Why does the Port lack a current, updated compressive vision plan with measurable goals?
• Why is the port cheating our local economy out of needed tax revenues by setting policy to lease (detrimental to the local economy) rather than sell (advantageous to the local economy)?”

Hopefully this discussion has opened your eyes to some of the mismanagement and dereliction that has been going on at the Port – at the expense of taxpayers and the local economy. Mismanagement starts at the top with the commissioners. They set the direction, policy, and plans of the port. Given the past 15 years when the comprehensive plan was updates, it is obvious the Port has failed in it core responsibilities to the public.

I threw my hat in the ring because the port refused to be forthcoming with vital information. The more I’ve researched, the more amazed I become at the attitudes and lack of performance of our port.  Despite hundreds of hours of work, I still am unable to get the port to tell me approximately how many tens of millions of dollars we have trusted to them, and what our ROI is. The only thing that I am certain of is that they do not know the value.

How can you make a difference?

• Question the actions of Port Staff and Commissioners
• If an explanation doesn’t sound right – research it, question it, discuss it, debate it.
• Request and read public documents.
• Become a squeaky wheel of the Port delays information
• Make Port Staff explain issues, then, get a second opinion from other professionals
• I would say attend Port meetings – but they are held during business hours and if you discuss a controversial issue, you most likely will not be allowed to speak or the answer you receive will be “no comment”.
• Vote for candidates that will enact change. Who will no longer accept “business as usual” at the cost of hurting the local economy, and local schools.

-Gary Perman

gary@garyperman.com

References:

(a) “the port will lease (preferred) or sell (if necessary) port property, both land and buildings to the private sector” – page 3 Comprehensive plan in Commissioners Handbook

(b) The port will sell property only when it is clearly deemed surplus or is overwhelmingly advantageous to the community to do so” – page 3 Comprehensive plan in Commissioners Handbook

(c) “provide a reasonable return on investment to the Port District” p.4

(d) “..that will substantially increase employment opportunities and property tax base in the community” p.4

(e) “The port will work toward eliminating the need to levy taxes to finance Port operating expenses” p3

(f) “Adopt an aggressive business and industry recruitment program” p.2

(g) figures provided by Barney Denstra, REET supervisor, WA. Dept. of Revenue, Olympia.