I mentioned in an earlier post that reports were coming in that the Vice President of the Board of the Friends of the San Juans, San Olson, had been involved in a shoreline armoring project on Lopez, via the Mackaye Harbor Water Company. Allegedly, that armoring project had occurred just around the corner and at the same time as a well publicized shoreline restoration event by the Friends.
A concerned citizen thought she would find out more about this armoring project by the Mackaye Harbor Water Company, so she filed an official Public Records Act request with the County for the:
Application(s) for permit/approval of the shoreline armoring performed by Mackaye Harbor Water Co. at Agate Beach on Lopez in 2011-2012.
And the County (Stan Matthews) replied:
There has been no application for permit on [that item], therefore no documents are available.
Well, some type of armoring apparently did occur (pictures to follow in a later post), so how come there are no permit-related documents? Based on her stance in the Charles Dalton case and her deeply held beliefs, you don't suppose Stephanie Buffum might be interested launching her own investigation, do you?
Mr. ECK, should I presume that ECK might stand for Edward Christopher Kilduff?
ReplyDeleteI became aware of your post when a resident of Orcas Island sent an email to the Friends, asking questions that your blog suggested needed to be investigated: Did Olson do any work on the shoreline, did he do the work without a permit, and aren’t the Friends of the San Juans against shoreline armoring?
At least you placed a question mark on the title of the piece; that, however, does not absolve you of an obvious attempt to personally discredit me and the Friends of the San Juans in a matter that initially involved neither of us. You obviously went to some effort to discover that I am a shareholder and customer of the MacKaye Harbor Water Company, but it would have taken very little additional effort to contact the company President, Helen Cosgrove, a person known to you, to ascertain who made the decision to armor the shoreline at Agate Beach. Or, you could have been courteous and neighborly and asked me about the matter first before posting erroneous public innuendos.
The truth is I was unaware of the work until a concerned citizen made an inquiry to the County and copied the Friends. Once aware of the armoring, the staff of Friends followed up with an inquiry to the County Enforcement Officer. The matter of the legality of the armoring is between the Water Company and the County
I am disappointed that to advance a political agenda, you would imply that I am guilty of duplicity in a matter of personal and organizational concern about hard shoreline armoring. I expect a retraction to be published on the blog and a personal apology to be forthcoming. You should do no less for libel masquerading as news.
San Olson, Vice President Friends of the San Juans
Ms. Cosgrove’s statement follows:
To Whom It May Concern:
Mr. Olson asked that I confirm his statement. He was never consulted nor advised about the rock placed at Agate Beach.
Helen Cosgrove
President
MacKaye Harbor Water Co.
468 4116
Thank you for your comments and clarification, and I very much appreciate your advice about courtesy and neighborliness. The wonderful aspect of social media is that it is interactive and honest, allowing participants to add facts and perspectives, as you have. We're continuing to collect information about this story, and I hope you will comment in future posts as well. You help us to understand your point of view and the issues that concern the Friends.
DeleteI note that your comments appear to lack any particular concern for whether you believe the shoreline armoring to be "right" in an environmental and moral sense. Your answer is detailed, but it doesn't address who speaks for the environment in this case? Is armoring shorelines "right" even if it may be legal? As a stockholder of the water company and Board member of the Friends, I would think you might have particularly poignant and conflicted feelings in that regard, but your explanation does not mention anything about the environment. Not one word.
And that goes to a primary question raised by this blog. Do the Friends really care about the environment or does something else motivate the Friends? What makes the Friends persecute a working class guy who wants to grow blueberries when there are more serious ecological issues out there? From the perspective of many, when the Friends want to target someone, legality, facts, and even the environment, hardly seem to matter. As recently as Tuesday, the Friends Executive Director stated on KOMO radio that Charles Dalton had put a well in a stream. Leaving aside the dubious nature of the "stream" for now, the fact of the matter is that it was an EXISTING well whose casing needed to be replaced for health and safety reasons. Does that stop the Friends from incessantly spinning their "facts" at every opportunity? Sadly, no.
So whenever it suits the Friends, you appeal to a higher power. Where is that higher power in the armoring case and where is your concern for it? You seem to be concerned about yourself, but who speaks for the sand lances in this instance? What about the salmon? What about sea level rise or the hundreds of other issues that the Friends bury hapless homeowners in when they want to? Or are sand lances and the planet being killed just by working stiffs living next to big donors? Do the Friends have compassion, neighborliness, or indignation for anyone other than themselves, or are the Friends concerns for the environment as phony as the trumped up charges against Charles.
Thank you for your comments, San.
For the record: As the County's public records officer I provide the records citizens request. Had you requested documents from the individual you cited alerting the County to the work at Agate Beach, you would have received documents. You did not make that request.
ReplyDeleteI do not want there to be any implication that my response to the inquiry concerning the Agate Beach issue endorsed or validated your criticism of Ms. Buffum.
-Stan Matthews
Not sure I'm following your comment entirely, Stan, but it seems as if you are suggesting that previous public records requests were not worded precisely enough to obtain all relevant information, which is somewhat reminiscent of the game of battleship. Obviously, if there are public records pertinent to this situation that have not been disclosed yet, it would be helpful to see them. I suppose we'll just keep trying to "make that request." Thank you for your assistance in conveying that there are more requests to be made.
DeleteEd,
DeleteI asked that a retraction of your post and an apology be offered. I have received neither. To leave accusations in place simply invites the reader to continue to conclude there is merit to the charges. That is unfair given my refutation corroborated by the President of the MacKaye Harbor Water Company. Please at least remove all postings pertaining to me and the shoreline armoring at Agate Beach if no apology will be forthcoming.
I did not invite a discussion on the Friends positions on shoreline armoring nor did I indicate that I was interested in discussing the Charles Dalton code violations. My reply was intended to inform you of the facts, request a retraction, and receive an apology. Removal of your untrue and unfair suggestions of duplicity on my part is my preference now.
If you wish to discuss shoreline armoring, code violations, or wetland regulations please join me and Stephanie at the Friends office some time when we can all arrange the time.
San Olson
Ed I hope you will keep my latest comment up until you decide to take down the entire thread. San
DeleteEd,
DeleteI asked that a retraction of your post and an apology be offered. I have received neither. To leave accusations in place simply invites the reader to continue to conclude there is merit to the charges. That is unfair given my refutation corroborated by the President of the MacKaye Harbor Water Company. Please at least remove all postings pertaining to me and the shoreline armoring at Agate Beach if no apology will be forthcoming.
I did not invite a discussion on the Friends positions on shoreline armoring nor did I indicate that I was interested in discussing the Charles Dalton code violations. My reply was intended to inform you of the facts, request a retraction, and receive an apology. Removal of your untrue and unfair suggestions of duplicity on my part is my preference now.
If you wish to discuss shoreline armoring, code violations, or wetland regulations please join me and Stephanie at the Friends office some time when we can all arrange the time.
San Olson
Ed,
ReplyDeleteI asked that a retraction of your post and an apology be offered. I have received neither. To leave accusations in place simply invites the reader to continue to conclude there is merit to the charges. That is unfair given my refutation corroborated by the President of the MacKaye Harbor Water Company. Please at least remove all postings pertaining to me and the shoreline armoring at Agate Beach if no apology will be forthcoming.
I did not invite a discussion on the Friends positions on shoreline armoring nor did I indicate that I was interested in discussing the Charles Dalton code violations. My reply was intended to inform you of the facts, request a retraction, and receive an apology. Removal of your untrue and unfair suggestions of duplicity on my part, is my preference now.
If you wish to discuss shoreline armoring, code violations, or wetland regulations please join me and Stephanie at the Friends office some time when we can all arrange the time.
San Olson
Ed,
ReplyDeleteI asked that a retraction of your post and an apology be offered. I have received neither. To leave accusations in place simply invites the reader to continue to conclude there is merit to the charges. That is unfair given my refutation corroborated by the President of the MacKaye Harbor Water Company. Please at least remove all postings pertaining to me and the shoreline armoring at Agate Beach if no apology will be forthcoming.
I did not invite a discussion on the Friends positions on shoreline armoring nor did I indicate that I was interested in discussing the Charles Dalton code violations. My reply was intended to inform you of the facts, request a retraction, and receive an apology. Removal of your untrue and unfair suggestions of duplicity on my part is my preference now.
If you wish to discuss shoreline armoring, code violations, or wetland regulations please join me and Stephanie at the Friends office some time when we can all arrange the time.
San Olson
Ed,
ReplyDeleteI asked that a retraction of your post and an apology be offered. I have received neither. To leave accusations in place simply invites the reader to continue to conclude there is merit to the charges. That is unfair given my refutation corroborated by the President of the MacKaye Harbor Water Company. Please at least remove all postings pertaining to me and the shoreline armoring at Agate Beach if no apology will be forthcoming.
I did not invite a discussion on the Friends positions on shoreline armoring nor did I indicate that I was interested in discussing the Charles Dalton code violations. My reply was intended to inform you of the facts, request a retraction, and receive an apology. Removal of your untrue and unfair suggestions of duplicity on my part is my preference now.
If you wish to discuss shoreline armoring, code violations, or wetland regulations please join me and Stephanie at the Friends office some time when we can all arrange the time.
San Olson