Editor,

As an Oak Harbor resident and taxpayer, I am increasingly concerned that decisions made by our city’s leadership no longer reflect the best interests of the people who live here.

For years, citizens have voiced frustration about the growing homelessness and drug issues in our community. Yet meaningful action seemed nonexistent—until a council member purchased a business near SPiN Café. Suddenly, the City acted swiftly to “clean up” the area. Whether intentional or not, the optics are troubling: when everyday residents ask for help, nothing happens; when an elected official stands to benefit, the response is immediate.

This same theme of misplaced priorities appears in other decisions. Our mayor requested—and received—a raise of more than 100% just weeks into his term. The salary commission that approved it included multiple personal acquaintances, and their comparison cities overlooked key structural differences, including the fact that Oak Harbor employs a City Administrator—something many of those comparison cities do not. That role exists precisely so our mayor does less, not more. Yet we are now burdened with a bloated salary that does not reflect the responsibilities of the job.

And then there is the issue of staffing costs. The city is paying more than $100,000 per year for a Communications Officer position in a community of roughly 25,000 residents. According to the city’s own 2025 salary schedule, this is a six-figure role that produces roughly two press releases per month—publications that only a handful of residents even read. For comparison, similar work in many cities is handled by entry-level staff or outsourced for a fraction of the cost. An intern and AI could replace her tomorrow and no one would notice.

Taxpayers deserve to know: Is this role truly essential? If so, why is it priced far above what comparable cities pay for the same work? At a time when Oak Harbor faces real challenges—homelessness, housing affordability, public safety—every dollar should be spent wisely. We cannot afford unnecessary six-figure positions simply because no one wants to question them.

We may be stuck with the mayor’s salary hike for now, but we are not stuck with wasteful spending elsewhere. The council owes citizens a clear explanation and an honest review of whether this communications role is needed and whether the compensation is reasonable.

Trust in local government erodes when decisions appear self-beneficial, unexamined, or detached from the realities our residents face. Oak Harbor deserves leadership that remembers who they work for — and who pays the bills.

Bill Snyder

Oak Harbor

Editor,

I wanted to share some concerns and observations I have regarding the fuel prices in Washington State. While the national average for fuel prices has significantly decreased, Washington residents have not seen such a drastic reduction. In November 2025, the national average was around $3.08 per gallon, but due to state taxes and the unique adjustable carbon tax, Washington remains one of the top three most expensive states for fuel, along with Hawaii and California.

Interestingly, during the same period, the average regular fuel costs were generally highest in “blue states” (historically Democratic-voting states), with state averages ranging from approximately $3.82 to $4.65 per gallon. In contrast, “red states” (historically Republican-voting states) had lower average regular fuel costs, around $2.70 to $2.80 per gallon.

Fuel costs have a significant impact on the manufacturing and delivery of goods, especially here on Whidbey Island, where everything is trucked in daily. It’s curious to note that the fuel cost on Whidbey Island is almost 50 cents less than in Everett. Additionally, due to the inadequate availability of housing, many of our local military members live off-island, further adding to their fuel expenses.

The high fuel prices are a considerable driver of our cost of living, affecting low-income families and those on fixed incomes, such as retirees. While blue states often claim to support the common person, it seems they either lack an understanding of basic economics or do not fully consider the impact of these high fuel prices on their residents’ lives.

I believe it’s essential to address these concerns and work towards a solution that benefits all, especially those most affected by these high costs.

Terry Sparks

Oak Harbor

Editor,

Thank you for reprinting Jerry Cornfield’s article from the Washington State Standard on our state’s failure to keep up with basic road maintenance.

As Jerry reported, we’re on former Transportation Secretary Roger Millar’s “glidepath to failure” thanks in part to a strong tradition of neglect and his successor’s “constrained approach” in funding road maintenance. This strategy ensures that we’ll repair about 8% of our state’s 7,900 miles of road in 2026, and repair less than 10% of Washington’s 3,400 bridges by my 102nd birthday in 2060. I want to adopt Secretary Meredith’s “constrained approach” to taxes I donate to Olympia. If I had that option, I’d prioritize K-5 schools, our ferry service (since I live on Whidbey Island), emergency services and programs for low-income families. I’d then put the secretary’s budget near the top of my list, followed by public safety, those pesky (but necessary) tax breaks for millionaires who create jobs and subsidies for corporations who earn $1 million in net profit.

If you need to fill space, why not regularly feature attention-getting photos of roads and bridges most in need of the secretary’s attention?

Eric Steiner

Freeland