Letter: Langley shouldn’t subsidize merchants’ employees


In Saturday’s opinion piece, you suggested that it was elitist for Langley residents to expect their government to be concerned about growth. This is both remarkable and disconcerting. A government that responds to its residents’ desires is not elitist; it is democratic. It is far more elitist to have a government, and local newspaper, that is captured by local economic elites and ignores the preferences of its constituents.

There are two issues here: growth, and government capture. With regard to the first, there are real limits to growth on any island. Our future growth is limited by at least two scarce resources: fresh water and ferry capacity. Encouraging additional growth without considering its effect on these scarce resources prioritizes short-term economic interests at the expense of long-term sustainability.

The second issue, government capture, is related to the first. I, for one, am tired of subsidizing the Langley retail core, which has captured our city’s government. For over a decade, the city has thrown piles of money to help Langley’s store owners. Our taxes paid for the costly remodeling of downtown streets and sidewalks, and the city’s mismanagement of these projects has drained our infrastructure funds to pay for the resulting cost-overruns.

Consequently, we are told that Langley has no money left for necessary infrastructure updates and repair, necessitating the recent $4-million bond measure. Now the city and your newspaper want local residents to subsidize the wage bill of Langley business owners, by underwriting the cost of their employees’ housing. Give us a break! The appropriate response to insufficient wages in Langley is to get business owners to pay greater wages — not ask the rest of the community to bail them out again.

If the city is serious about affordable housing, it needs to work harder to attract better paying jobs. This should be job number one. In addition, the city might consider buying a slice of property, building our own public housing facility, and managing it in a way that is fiscally sustainable. This means limiting, not expanding, the tax burden and utility fees associated with living in Langley.

Remarkably, neither option seems to be a subject of discussion. The current effort to generate affordable housing by taxing residents and increasing utility rates, in an effort to stimulate new housing construction, is unsustainable, costly, and elitist. Worse, it will not help the underpaid workers in downtown Langley.

Jonathon Moses


More in Letters to the Editor

Letter: Price Johnson has earned the trust of 10th District residents

Editor, As an Army veteran and retired businessman still active in my… Continue reading

Letter: If you need a reason to dump Trump, this is it

Editor, Trump will defend a Confederate statue but not our American soldiers.… Continue reading

Letter: True civility is not about shutting up

Editor, Independence. We pride ourselves as Americans that our country was established… Continue reading

Letter: Proud to support Homola for House of Representatives

Editor, In today’s world of so many unknowns, it’s good to have… Continue reading

Letter: Ken’s Korner management has bent over backwards for tenants

Editor, I am writing in response to the Whidbey News-Times article on… Continue reading

Letter: South Whidbey fundraiser raises $20,000 for schools

Editor, The South Whidbey Schools Foundation thanks our generous community in supporting… Continue reading

Letters: Kudos to Johnson for ensuring CARES funds fairly disbursed

Editor, I would like to thank Island County Commissioner Jill Johnson for… Continue reading

Letter: Voting for Damian Greene would be a smart move

Editor, I was very encouraged to see Damian Greene enter the race… Continue reading

Letter: Fixating on Trump’s defeat is detrimental to the country

Editor, In response to Cheri Filion’s letter to the editor in the… Continue reading

Most Read