Hungry for literary adventure on a rainy winter afternoon, a bookish Portlander paused in the lobby of the Vancouver Community Library to take in the spectacle. “You have an amazing library here,” she gasped. “Who knew?”
Hey, we knew. We’ve been watching the city rebuild and revitalize its downtown since the mid-1990s. It hasn’t been easy and it hasn’t been quick — after a strong start the Great Recession certainly stalled things for awhile — downtown Vancouver is continuing its transformation from a tired and trashy mishmash of leftovers into an inviting node of residences, recreation, food and culture.
Vancouver has long labored under a reputation as laughably uncool — unattractive, unimaginative, unlovable — alongside its smart-yet-mellow, vital-yet-chillin’ neighbor to the south.
Meanwhile, alas! We can’t even wholeheartedly enjoy our rather cool name because it gets confused with some larger, shinier Canadian city. Thus the periodic suggestion that we become “Fort Vancouver,” which would be arguably more historically accurate and would underline our biggest tourist draw.
That argument has come and gone many times. Maybe now it’s gone for good, as “Vantucky” has evolved into “The Couve” — the home of a different kind of cool. Smaller and more sincere. More personal and more participatory. Perhaps leveraging our collectively chipped shoulder into some extra team spirit?
A resolution under consideration by the Vancouver City Council urges decision-makers to reject a proposal to build the Northwest’s largest oil-handling facility at the Port of Vancouver.
The council will vote on the resolution June 16, said City Manager Eric Holmes.
Drafted by Councilors Jack Burkman, Larry Smith and Bart Hansen, the resolution expresses “deep concern” about the “threat to life, safety and the environment due to accidents, potential spills and explosions posed by the oil terminal proposed to be located adjacent to downtown Vancouver.”
The resolution calls on the Port of Vancouver to terminate its lease with Tesoro Corp. and Savage Companies, urges the state Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council to recommend against siting the terminal and, as a last resort, urges Gov. Jay Inslee to not approve a site certification agreement.
The resolution also calls on Congress, the state Legislature and regulators “to adopt laws and regulations to increase the safety of transportation of crude oil.”
A majority of the seven-member city council has expressed opposition to the oil terminal, and a resolution would formalize that opposition. The city council doesn’t have authority to change the lease with Tesoro-Savage, as that was signed with Port of Vancouver officials.
Scott Sheffield of Camas has been paying the premiums for his health plan since December. But a week ago, Sheffield learned his insurance company has received only two of those payments.
As a result, his insurance company, LifeWise Health Plan of Washington, said it won’t be covering any of his services until he’s up-to-date on his premiums. Sheffield enrolled in the plan through the state-based insurance exchange, Washington Healthplanfinder, and pays his $420 monthly premiums through the exchange, as well.
“I was never notified by the state or LifeWise, but basically, I haven’t had any insurance for months, and I didn’t know it,” Sheffield said.
Sheffield appears to be one of the thousands of exchange plan customers impacted by system defects and data issues plaguing the site for the last three months.
The exchange determined Sheffield’s payment files were not being generated for LifeWise, so the company was unaware he was paying his premiums, said Caitlin Steffen, an exchange spokeswoman. The exchange and LifeWise are working to correct the problem, she said.
It’s question-and-answer time for the candidates looking to fill the vacant Clark County commissioner seat, ahead of an appointment scheduled for May 27.
The three Democratic nominees — former Commissioner Craig Pridemore, former labor leader Ed Barnes and Greater Vancouver Chamber of Commerce Executive Director Kelly Love Parker — responded in writing to 12 questions, written by the two current commissioners.
The written questions and answers are the first real glimpse at the tone and tenor of the line of inquiry Republican commissioners Tom Mielke and David Madore will make toward the candidates. But of that line of inquiry, candidates say they’re struck by the wording, which they believe places a positive spin on recent commission decisions.
“I understand the need to put a good face forward,” Love Parker said. “But the questions asked are based on a premise. … There’s a lot of spin.”
At issue, candidates say, is that aside from the boilerplate inquests about the candidates’ qualifications and views on specific issues, the questionnaire also occasionally reads like an editorial for the accomplishments of the board, with statements about the commissioners’ achievements prefacing questions about whether the candidates would support or repeal them.
In part, a question about the parking fees at county parks, which commissioners scuttled last April, reads: “Park staff is now giving service to those coming to the parks instead of taking money away from them. Do you support those changes, or should they be repealed?”
