Editorial: Hopefully door isn’t fully closed on crucial agreement

Navy officials had the daunting task of negotiating with a string of agencies, groups and elected officials in determining how best to mitigate the effect more practice at Outlying Field Coupeville by EA-18G Growler aircraft will have on the historic area of Ebey’s Landing National Historical Reserve.

It didn’t work out. The Navy abruptly announced Friday that it was terminating consultation with the interested parties after determining that negotiators were at an impasse.

People on both sides are pointing fingers about who is to blame.

Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, the Navy was obliged to consult with interested parties about possible mitigation after it notified the public that the proposed increase in Growler flights would have an impact on the historic area.

The negotiations brought together people and groups who agreed that the Navy’s plans will have a significant impact on the historic area of Central Whidbey. Among them were a congressman, the governor, the state preservation officer, local elected officials, tribal leaders and others.

Their message was about the importance of the national treasure called Ebey’s Landing National Historical Reserve.

The Navy went from offering very little in the way of mitigation to at least $1 million to restore the Coupeville Wharf.

The negotiations were not supposed to be a referendum on increased Growler flights to Central Whidbey. That decision is being made in a different and much more in-depth process that is nearing an end. The sole purpose under Section 106 was to determine how the Navy can make up for the detrimental effect aircraft noise will have on the historic area.

Putting a price tag on it is a subjective task.

The Navy claims that the negotiating partners were unable to separate the very narrow issue at hand from the larger community concerns about increased jet noise, which is unfortunate.

Hopefully, the latest action by the Navy won’t shut down communication altogether and an agreement can still be reached to help preserve the vital area, whatever the final decision is on the Growler flights.

More in Opinion

Editor’s notes: Still pursuing the facts in the age of coronavirus

While I’m normally not a big fan of Facebook, candy or long… Continue reading

Extraordinary measures during extraordinary times

With each day — with each passing hour, in fact — we’re… Continue reading

In our opinion: Common sense is a good defense against coronavirus

Nobody can say if or when the coronavirus will spread to Whidbey… Continue reading

Guest commentary: The process of choosing presidential delegates is changing

By John Amell The way in which political parties nominate presidential candidates… Continue reading

Opinion: Lawmakers seeks to claw back secrecy on records

By The Herald Editorial Board The state Supreme Court ruleth; and the… Continue reading

Sound Off: Built to last and well worth a million bucks

Living in Central Whidbey, I have always thought that having all those… Continue reading

In our opinion: On Whidbey, best to stay home when it snows

There are a lot of people on Whidbey Island from the Midwest… Continue reading

Letter: Paper should provide list of votes

Editor, In Patrick Grubb’s Jan. 4 Sound Off opinion piece, Mr. Grubb,… Continue reading

It was a year of tragic events, celebrity sightings and animal hijinks

It was an interesting year on Whidbey Island, as it it every… Continue reading

In our opinion: Justices’ rebuke of lawmakers is democracy in action

The framers of the Constitution would be proud to see that the… Continue reading

In our opinion: Shop locally for better gifts, stronger communities

Christmas is a week away, but there’s still plenty of time for… Continue reading