Appearance of Fairness

On March 23 I requested information from the Town regarding any rezone discussion of the property proposed for the Center Street development.

On March 28 I received an answer from the town administrator saying that he had the right to take five days to answer me. And he was legally correct.

On March 28 he also informed me that he would need another 10 days to get it and review it. Again he was legally correct.

But being legally right and doing the right thing are not always the same, are they? I received the documents two days after the record for submission to the hearing examiner closed. How convenient for the Town.

Why does it matter?

One of the documents from 1986 was a contract rezone requested by Donna and Gerald Blades to change the project property from residential to commercial Historical Preservation Distirct. That is what the front of the property was. The condition of the contract was that it would be considered for all purposes to be in the Historical Preservation District and that the town would agree to have it revert to residential if they did not abide by the condition. It also stated that this be filed with the county auditor and be encumbered with the property. The contract is still valid.

I will file for reconsideration of the hearing examiner’s decision to allow the conditional use permit, though it will cost me. The town administrator claims that I cannot add new information to the record but has provided no legal reference as to why. The three other attorneys I spoke with said that I can add more. Two of them specialize in land use.

So I will file – though once again I am disappointed in this appearance of unfairness which never favors the residents.

Respectfully,

Linda Talman

La Conner

Sent to town council, too.