Happily, I am pleasantly surprised by the AIA Sustainable Design Assessment Report for Coos County. Walking away from the SDAT presentation last June, I was concerned the team was overly influenced by a small faction of the county but it seems they did a lot of homework and recognized some of the bottleneck for future economic success.

The dialogue around economic reinvention and environmental conservation leads one to the inevitable assessment of what sustainability means for Coos County. The team found that some local groups have attempted to hijack the mantle of sustainability in order to pursue narrower agendas, interpreting it as a zero-sum choice between environmental health and economic growth, or an economic imperative bearable at any cost. The team identified a valid community perspective that was quite different. As Nancy Steele states, “It is not surprising that the people of Coos County question how they can reconcile environmental protection with the need for jobs, as environmental protection has caused jobs loss in the past. But this is the wrong question; the issue is not jobs versus environment, but rather how Coos County can become a sustainable economy, reaping the benefits of the jobs that will come with such a change.”

[emphasis mine]

Several times the report promotes the importance of outreach and including the entire community in the early design and later implementation of civic projects. One of the common complaints in Coos County is the average citizen feels disenfranchised from the development process and because local news coverage is often limited by space, have to play ‘catch up’ in order to actively participate. According to the report, “…Many indicated they had never been invited to sit around a table to talk with such a diverse mix of people with such wide-ranging interests…”

It has also become clear that there is not a lot of good communication between the different communities. In a county this small, it is extremely important to pool all available resources to promote the county effectively to the rest of the world. This doesn’t mean that every community has to share financial resources, it simply means they have to communicate with one another and coordinate activities and information. Many individual towns/cities participate in a program or access resources that could benefit the remaining towns in the county. And the other towns are often unaware these resources even exist. For example, Bandon has an officially designated Main Street organization; North Bend is an officially designated Certified Local Government; and Empire has developed a set of good architectural design guidelines. The others need to learn what aspects of these programs could benefit their communities. There are also a number of well developed and comprehensive plans that have already been completed in several of the communities.

[emphasis mine]

Communication is not helped when a local paper’s editorial policy allows it and its contributors to engage in labeling and name calling. (NIMBY, CAVE, anti-development, etc…) The paper essentially sets up a ‘them or us’ atmosphere which is detrimental to the entire population. The report doesn’t openly criticize local media or the community leaders using it to this purpose but does dance around the schism it has created.

Wayne Feiden echoed this sentiment: “Some residents see a divide between sustainability and maintaining and expanding the traditional natural resource based economy of Coos County. This is a false choice and the community leaders and media needs to show it for what it is. The laissez-faire approach to natural resource extraction from forty years ago, which was so damaging to the environment, is gone and never coming back, but a sustainable approach to natural resource extraction, with a focus on keeping some pristine resources pristine, is completely compatible with sustainability, and certainly a better model than importing resources from third world economies with few environmental regulations. The Coos County region needs to do more to help build this understanding.” In summary, the choice is not between economic growth and sustainability – it is the challenge of integrating these mutual needs in a cohesive strategy for future community strength and vitality that lies at the center of the county’s future health.

[emphasis mine]

This is one of the reasons I often get so frustrated with local media and it appears I am not alone in my opinion.

Participants cited difficulty in getting people to talk about environmental issues; there is a perception expressed that important decisions are not being made in a transparent manner. A call for trusted scientific data on which to base decisions indicates that collaborative, transparent planning has been missing.

Participants felt they do not have enough information – trusted, scientific data – to make the correct decisions. Some suggested that the processes used to make decisions were flawed.

[emphasis mine]

It isn’t just environmental decisions that lack data. Look at the recent brouhaha over enterprise zone tax abatement as another example of fact free policy and decision making by our elected leaders.

Also, Coos County has an odd history of punishing those in positions of influence for wanting more data. Consider what happened to Jon Barton of FONSI when he was on the port commission and questioning the viability of a new cargo dock…

Barton, who has served on the commission since January 2001, said the port paid approximately $200,000 for two independent analyses that show a modern dock likely would face an uphill battle. In addition to facing stiff competition from ports in more prominent locations, a modern facility would need a dedicated cargo source to ensure success.

Before moving ahead with the expensive proposition, which Barton said would require a local bond of at least $30 million, the commissioner said he needs more assurances that a facility would be economically feasible.

“My position has been, continues to be and will be whether or not I’m on the port commission that before we make a public expenditure of $50 million or $60 million … there needs to be some reasonable financial justification for it,” he said…

Nominated to serve his first full term by Gov. Ted Kulongoski when his tenure expired June 30, Barton’s confirmation was delayed after opposition began to reach legislators. Barton’s critics found an ally in Sen. Vicki Walker…
… Walker said she initially asked for Barton’s confirmation to be halted while issues with his appointment were being debated.

…General Manager Allan Rumbaugh said he believes opposition to Barton has come due to the commissioner’s resistance to making quick decisions.

“It’s not my job to choose my boss but I think Jon’s done a great job,” Rumbaugh said. “The mistake he made was to say he wanted to gather facts before he formed a position.”

Rumbaugh called the opposition to Barton’s appointment a first.

“It’s the first time I’ve ever seen it with an appointed commission, ever in the 15 years that I’ve ever seen any negative campaigning against a person,” Rumbaugh said.

Barton, whom I generally disagree with but acted correctly in this case, was not reappointed.

Notably, the team were keenly aware that natural resource extraction is not necessarily sustainable or a good way to build a long term healthy local economy. Nature, if you cut timber too quickly, cannot renew supplies at a volume great enough to satisfy a company like Weyco. ( This despite all the chemical fertilization they spray that enters the streams and watershed). Oregon Resources Corporation will stay until it has exhausted the chromite ore, or sooner, if yields don’t match their business model.

Continued over-reliance on extractive uses of natural resources
Numerous studies have shown a link between abundant natural resources accompanied by lower economic growth. Companies that extract natural resources for export, rather than developing a sustainable local economy do not provide the kind of jobs growth needed by the region.

[emphasis mine]

The report appears to rely to some degree on studies prepared by ECONorthwest. At least two studies prepared by this firm have fallen under ridicule and may not be wholly reliable, however, the SDAT references are nonspecific.