Gary Hayes

I was disappointed by the recent guest column from Watt Childress regarding Cannon Beach’s plan to repurpose its former elementary school into a center of cultural and environmental learning. The writer’s inflammatory words are part of the continuing effort by a faction within the community to undermine the city’s ability to accomplish our much overdue construction projects, including a new City Hall and police station.

His column gets it wrong on many points. First, he describes a “diverse group of villagers” trying to defend the civic right to vote on decisions about government debt and urban growth. A quick review of the Cannon Beach Together group that was formed to push back on these projects by trying to turn the community against them and attempting legal maneuvers, reveals that individual donors are limited to those you can count on one hand, while the vast majority of the more than $20,000 raised has come from our largest corporations in Cannon Beach, mostly the lodging industry. Why?

To finally solve our community’s long overdue need for these projects without increasing taxes on local property owners, the Cannon Beach City Council did raise our lodging taxes. This tax, paid by visitors, fully funds our City Hall and police department projects, along with the portion of the prepared food tax previously passed by voters. The lodging industry opposed this increase, but our City Council unanimously decided that this was an appropriate one-time solution to solve our community’s pressing needs. The increase in our lodging tax rate puts Cannon Beach comparable to other nearby communities.

The question you could ask now that the lodging tax has been raised is, “What does this group have to gain by killing needed projects for our community, including those that will make locals and visitors safer in the event of a major disaster?” Is it just retribution to our city manager and City Council? You must give this group credit, they have organized, strategized and mobilized in an attempt to turn public opinion against these projects for any one of a long list of reasons, some diametrically opposed to each other.

Then, there is the second point of the column’s comment that this group is here to defend: “the civic right to vote on decisions about government debt and urban growth.” Oregon law is pretty clear on the matter. Of course, when local taxpayer dollars are affected, a referendum is appropriate. This is not the case here.

In this latest tactic to deny these construction projects by delay or driving up the cost, the lodging industry has funded a legal challenge, demanding the right of the community to vote on them despite not increasing taxes on local homeowners. This was such an unfounded legal claim that the judge immediately dismissed the case. That didn’t keep this well-funded group from appealing, making it even more clear the action is about delay and an attempt to derail the projects that are fully funded now, but every month of delay will increase the costs by hundreds of thousands of dollars.

If any disgruntled voter was able to throw a wrench in the gears of needed public projects funded within the budget and means of a city, few civic projects would ever be completed. Our state law recognizes this. In Cannon Beach’s case, the City Council was elected to look at such a case in depth, determine the ability of the city to repay the debt, consider all of the potential impacts and make an informed decision. That is what happened.

The lodging industry or a few members of the community should not be able to derail a normal and accepted democratic political process. Instead, the column suggests that this is a conspiracy to “skirt this civic principle” on the part of the city.

The column moves on from there to suggest that “local folks are divided over plans to revamp a cherished grade school.” That is true, in great part due to the organized effort of this group to turn citizens against it. The column seems to ignore the reality of the plan to remodel the school to honor the historic village of the Native people of Cannon Beach who lived on that exact site and to create a center of learning about the environment, teaching stewardship of our natural resources toward a goal of finding a sustainable balance of environment and tourism in Cannon Beach.

The project known as NeCus will include park improvements and restoration to a more natural landscape of native plants and trees that can be enjoyed by all. This is the difference between the writer’s language to turn people against the project and the stated reality of the project.

There are legitimate concerns about these construction projects that have all been considered in depth by city leadership, each of whom are dedicated to preserving what is special about the village of Cannon Beach. What should be more disturbing to the community is the intentional exaggeration, misinformation and fear mongering that has been strategized, organized and spread by this small group with personal grievances who are supported with funding from the lodging industry.

Their divisive rhetoric also includes attempts to vilify city staff and elected leadership who are making tough choices in the best interest for the future of our village. If we are truly concerned about the character of our village, I would suggest we start by rejecting that divisiveness.

These efforts are driving up the cost of these projects with their tactics to delay and threaten projects that have been years in the making. These projects are fully funded now within existing revenues, without increasing taxes on local property owners. Delay will only make the projects more urgently needed and more expensive.

What is the goal we are accomplishing by derailing these projects? You would have to ask the members of the Cannon Beach lodging industry who are funding this effort.