Letters to the Editor

To the editor

We are urging you to continue your support of Dayton schools and students by voting “YES” for the upcoming Capital Projects and Educational Programs and Operations (EP&O) Levies. Continuing these existing levies will help maintain programs not funded under “Basic Education” in the State of Washington. These programs are important to our students and community and continuing them will not increase taxes. In fact, taxpayers will find themselves paying LESS than they have been the past 4 years.

Watch your mailbox for a flyer with details. Thank you for helping keep our local schools and community healthy.

Dallas Dickinson & Mike McQuary

Dayton

To the editor

“So, what is this ‘No Trail’ stuff all about?” “Why are you against the trail?” These are the most common questions we are asked when we are out gathering signatures for our petition. While many are eager to sign right away, and others after a brief conversation, there are some holdouts who want a more detailed explanation of our opposition before scribbling their name, address, phone number and signature down on an official petition. And rightfully so! This is a heavy, contentious topic that should be weighed out carefully and thoughtfully before deciding where one stands on the issue. We feel that with a decision of this magnitude that will significantly affect so many in our county, it is important to discuss the truths of the matter rather than rely on the bias and rumors that are so prevalent in our community.

So, lets unpack this. Let’s put it on the table. Why do we oppose the Touchet Valley Trail, when on the surface is the pretty picture of a young family, blissfully whisking along on their bicycles, with Fido in tow, Susie splashing through a puddle, and Grandma watching from the park bench. All along a tree lined path next to a babbling river on a warm, spring day. How could anyone be against such delightful, wholesome activity? Are we opposed to bicyclists? Do we dislike children or dogs? Is there some harbored contempt for the elderly? Of course not! While it may be a delightful scene at face value, there is so much more just below the surface. And while our pooch-loving family may be enjoying their carefree afternoon, it is coming at a steep cost to our property owners and farmers; the life blood and backbone of our community.

That brings us to the first, and probably most important issue: Property Rights. The proposed route for this trail runs the length of the railroad tracks between Dayton and Waitsburg, either along, in front of, or through approximately 27 different properties. These are residences, as well as businesses. These are agricultural properties and multi-generational family farms. These are people’s livelihoods and people’s life savings. These folks have been working and living on this land for generations. While there may be a railroad Right-of-Way through these properties, it is just that: a right-of-way for railroad use, and the property owners believe they retain ownership. The Port of Columbia has stated otherwise, and is proceeding as though they own the land. While the Port is conducting a title search to determine ownership, the cost of that falls on all of us, under the guise of grants that can only be used for the purpose of trails. These grants are funds that are applied for and received from Olympia, which were collected as excess tax dollars.

All along this active rail line, many of our farmers have been working the land right up to the tracks. They are now being told that they may no longer be able to use that land, as a 140-foot setback is being discussed. That is a lot of property that would no longer be farmable, when considering the length of the trail! Columbia County is a right-to-farm county, and this setback would be a major infringement on these rights!

That brings us to the next major concern: Safety. Farming and agriculture involve a myriad of hazardous activities that should never be performed next to the recreating public. Large tractors, combines, trucks and other very large industrial and agricultural equipment regularly crosses over and works directly alongside the railroad and trail route. These equipment operators and drivers work very long, strenuous hours and should not have to add the stresses of watching for daydreaming parents, smartphone-faced teenagers, unsupervised children, or pets.

There is also the safety concern of pesticide/herbicide spraying next to the trail when people are using it. The seasonal demands and schedule of farming is hectic enough without having to work that schedule around bicycle traffic and scheduled “trail closures” that would be subject to Port operating hours. Try telling the crop duster to hold off for a few minutes while little Susie continues dilly-dallying in a mud puddle or Grandma’s wheelchair battery died.

The trail would be in the immediate proximity of two chemical facilities, an active air strip, a helicopter pad, two large grain elevators, along a busy highway, and right next to a working railroad. We are a farming community first and foremost, and we must prioritize safety.

Next, the concerns of an increasing homeless population and the absence of leash laws in Columbia County have also been brought to our attention. The trail would be a direct path, or ‘vagrant highway’ so to speak, providing the growing homeless and stray dog populations access to residences and businesses along the trail and in town. There would likely be a subsequent problem with trash, feces (both canine and human), hypodermic syringes and other wastes discarded carelessly. The accessibility and public infrastructure provided by the trail would likely increase the homeless population, creating more strain on our community. An example of what could happen is found in the case of Martin et al v. City of Boise in which the City was forced to build more homeless shelters, or allow the homeless to camp in public areas. We simply cannot allow that to happen here.

Finally, there is the issue of cost to the taxpayers. This entire process, from concept through design, to construction and completion, then perpetually continuing through maintenance and law enforcement, lands on the backs of every hard-working citizen in the county. And when we fall short, we beg Olympia to ‘grant’ us more magic money, costing every taxpayer in the state whether they know it or not.

So far, we have heard numbers all over the board, but some conservative estimates exceed $7M-$20M in design and construction costs. Considering the Touchet River will need to be crossed at least twice, meaning two pedestrian/bicycle bridges, these estimates seem extremely low. There is also the need for, and expense of multiple parking areas, lighting, trash containers and pickup, weed control, law enforcement and patrol, and ongoing maintenance. Do we really want our Sheriff and Deputies tied up with the litany of complaints that will likely arise, when they are already overworked, underpaid and shorthanded? They have a lot on their plate as it is without having to deal with nearly 8 miles of limited access trail way.

So, let’s get back to our little family with Susie and Fido, mindlessly enjoying their day along the Touchet. Do you think they are aware of what this carefree day has cost the rest of us? Do you think they even care? After all, it didn’t cost them anything, did it? But it cost somebody something. It cost a lot of people something. And that struggling farmer that lost his right to till that ground along the tracks that his family has worked for generations...he lost everything. And as a flustered Dad is distracted pushing Grandma and her defunct wheelchair across one more driveway, and little Susie pedals as fast as she can to catch up, Mom looks up just as a tanker truck hauling Anhydrous Ammonia turns off the highway. But there’s Susie.

That is why we do this. Some of us do care.

Seth Bryan

Dayton, Wash.