2012/12/18 Council Agenda Packet

Mary Cunningham From: Allan Giffen Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 10:21 AM To: Dave Koenig; Mary Cunningham; Jim Hanson Subject: FW: The Evett City Council's Choice About What To Do With The Kimberly Clark Plant Isn't Difficult. From: Charli McGourty On Behalf Of Mayor Stephanson Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 8:26 AM To: DL-Council; Allan Giffen Subject: FW: The Evett City Council's Choice About What To Do With The Kimberly Clark Plant Isn't Difficult. FYI from mayor's correspondence. From: Hap Wertheimer [mailto:hapwert@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 11:41 PM To: Mayor Stephanson Subject: The Evett City Council's Choice About What To Do With The Kimberly Clark Plant Isn't Difficult. Dear Ray: The Everett City Council's choice about what to do with the Kimberly Clark plant isn't difficult. The site is polluted from years of heavy industrial use. The polluters should be responsible for the clean up, not the taxpayer. If the City Council decides to sell the old plant to the Port Commission, the Port of Everett will assume the liability of the clean up from Kimberly Clark. The Port will qualify for(and undoubtably use) Washington State funds to get rid of the mess. Kimberly Clark will be off the hook and us taxpayers will foot the bill. The Kimberly Clark site should not only be rid of its pollution but it should also be transformed to replace as many of the mill's family wage jobs as possible. Experts contracted by the City Planning Department demonstrated that a business park for non-water dependent light industry and high-tech manufacturing would generate more high paying jobs and city tax revenues than continuing the site's previous heavy industrial, water- based use. A business park for light industry would provide the kind of employment that would strengthen our regional economy well into the future. Another obvious benefit from a light industrial, non-water based use of the Kimberly Clark site is that it would allow some safe public access to the waterfront. This access would be impossible if another heavy industry moved in. During the City of Everett's well-advised moratorium on the Kimberly Clark site's development, hundreds of concerned citizens testified at hearings and through questionnaires that public access to the old mill's shoreline was a priority. The Everett City Council's decision should be a "no-brainier"! The Port Commission, however, wants to wall off the site from the public, continue to use it for for water-based heavy industry and get the tax payers to foot the clean up bill. Denying the Port Commission' s vision for the old mill site may be difficult after all, particularly when one of our City Councilors is employed by a Port Commissioner. We hope that the City 1