Editor,
The shock and disbelief of Marshall Bronson’s and John Carr’s action at the July 8 Port of Coupeville meeting has not worn off.
Many have written well thought out letters to the editor, and I now feel compelled to add my voice.
My husband, myself and a committee were involved at the Greenbank Farm planning events in the past, including this year’s new Renaissance at the Farm.
We worked closely with the management group, a well-organized, dedicated team. The event was a huge success and we looked forward to being a part of many more events, to make the farm more sustaining.
In the interest of the future of the farm we regularly attended port meetings. We had great concern about the long delay in renewing the management group’s contract and signing leases for the retailers.
Marshall Bronson’s most recent letter to the editor was contradictory to some of the events which were presented in the meetings.
1. Point of “impasse.” Webster’s, definitions, “an argument where no agreement is possible.” On June 10, the port’s minutes state that Bronson motioned to accept the current draft of the GFMG proposal for submission to the port attorney’s for review. It was seconded and passed unanimously.
On July 8, David Day and Michael Stansberry stated that the proposal was at both parties’ attorneys for review with no problems anticipated.
Moments later, despite months of work, a motion was made by Carr, seconded by Bronson, to cease all further negotiations. If so, fiscally responsible, why the sudden change of mind, when billable hours were already being incurred, and no plan in place to run the farm?
2. Rent issue: Yes, retail rents have gone to the farm. What Bronson fails to clarify is that the management group, a nonprofit, secured a grant to build the buildings that provide the rental income. In the negotiations, the management group agreed that rent would go directly to the port.
This was in the proposal that the attorneys were reviewing.
3. The management group agreed to decrease monies from the port to manage the farm. The management group and retailers are dedicated to the farm and have demonstrated willingness to make sacrifices in every area.
4. The management group “lost” the Loganberry Festival. This decision was made when the county fair dates were changed, creating event competition, and the Sunday Market — multiple competing markets had sprung up by then.
The commissioners knew that we were planning a Renaissance event to replace Loganberry. However the two hijackers didn’t even wait to see if it would generate money for the farm — which it did.
5. “The farm needs to look like a farm, fields mowed” — Audubon asks that mowing be delayed until hatchlings can fly — “some crops growing” — hello, has he not seen the CSA, crops? — “and activities” involving 4H, Boy Scouts — competition with the fairgrounds — and other community groups, Do the Back Country Horsemen, Audubon, Slow Food, community dances and jazz festivals not count?
Come on commissioners, do the right thing. Reverse your vote.
Connie Lloyd
Greenbank
