The Wahkiakum County Eagle - Established as The Skamokawa Eagle in 1891

The Lower Columbia Economic Development Council’s (LCEDC) plan for a new incubator business park in Wahkiakum County is on hold.

During his report to county commissioners last Tuesday LCEDC Director David Goodroe said Port District No. 1 had informed him they were no longer going to act as the sponsoring agency involved in developing a business park.

“Port 1 identified the business park plan as one of its development goals in 2006,” said Goodroe. He went on to say the Town of Cathlamet and the county also had identified the LCEDC’s business park plan as one of their goals in their 2007 comp plans. The county also considered the development of a business park as one of its regional development goals.

“It had a lot of support and that’s why the LCEDC moved forward with the business park idea,” said Goodroe.

In 2008 Port 1 accepted the business park as a part of its Comprehensive Plan. Goodroe said that at the time EDC also applied for a feasibility study grant and received funding for the study in 2008.

The study surveyed local agencies, businesses and schools to learn what would make the county more economically attractive to business. “The final recommendation was for an incubator business park somewhere in or near Cathlamet," said Goodroe.”

The study found Wahkiakum wasn’t attractive to outside business investment because the county is a resource extraction-based economy. The county has a small workforce, in decline. Its land values are too high and the county has costly transportation issues.

“What the study found is companies are looking for space close to rail, the interstate and the airport,” said Goodroe,” so in that area we have a lot of obstacles to overcome.”

With the feasibility study complete, Goodroe said the next step was finding grant money to build the business park.

“The amount we were talking about is a million and a half dollars,” he said, “that’s enough to buy the land and build the first building, which will act as ‘seed investment’ to encourage other investors.”

Goodroe said the LCEDC submitted its feasibility study to the U.S. Economic Development Administration (EDA). After review the Administration encouraged the EDC to move forward and apply for a $1.2 million grant from them. “The grant required a 20 percent match,” said Goodroe, “so we had to come up with $300,000 to make it happen.”

Goodroe said the state recognizes port authorities as economic drivers. “It was also around this time I approached Port 1 to become the lead agency in the EDC’s attempt to help fund the business park,” said Goodroe.

Goodroe said the port’s pledge to support the business park allowed the EDC to move to the next level of funding approval which qualified the EDC for conditional funding in the amount of $250,000 from the Community Economic Revitalization Board (CERB). The CERB funding included a $40,000 grant and a $210,000 zero-interest loan (the first three years differed) over 20 years.

Goodroe said that in 2010 Port 1 accepted CERB’s repayment loan terms and committed the needed $50,000. The EDC moved forward with its grant application to the EDA for the rest of the $1,200,000 to build the business park.

“The EDA told both myself and the state’s representatives from CERB that our business park plan is a funding priority for them,” said Goodroe.

One of the first requirements of the grant required Goodroe to locate a site to build the business park. He said he was negotiating with Hancock Timber to buy their sorting yard, when Hancock withdrew. “We were in negotiations for the yard when the price of lumber went up and Hancock decided not to sell,” said Goodroe.

That was the EDC’s first setback. On May 13 the minutes from Port 1’s meeting show commissioners questioned Goodroe about the debt the EDC was asking the port to take as the lead agency in the business park scheme.

The minutes from the May 13 meeting show Commissioner Larry Bonds was concerned that eventually the Port would be responsible for not only their $50,000 contribution, but the entire $260,000 CERB loan. Goodroe told the board the Port would only be responsible if it officially accepted CERB funds.

The Port’s minutes also show the discussion ended with no decision as to whether the port would continue to support the EDC’s business park proposal.

Then on June 11, during his report to the county commissioners, Goodroe said he had received a call from the Port 1’s attorney Tim Hanigan, informing him the port was officially withdrawing as lead agency in the EDC’s plans to build a business park.

“In an interview with The Eagle on June 18, Port 1 Commissioner Bonds said, “We’ve decided not to proceed with our involvement in development of a business park at this time.”

Bonds said the port’s commissioners felt the economic climate has changed since it agreed to back the EDC’s business park scheme and they felt the scheme was too risky at this time.

Bonds also said another problem was that the EDC had not yet sited the land for the proposed business park. “At this point,” said Bonds, “we wouldn’t participate even if the EDC found some land.”