Recently the City Council voted to evict our neighbors in the harbor and to end history. The formal process called on them to select one of three options designed by the city’s Harbor Commission and presented to the council by the Land Use Committee.

The council chose option two, which would “allow four residential buoys.” We currently have about 16 people living in the harbor.

This issue has been going on for a very long time and is complex with various state agencies asserting jurisdiction and posing restrictions on the use of the harbor. With that being said, don’t believe for a moment that it was ever about finding a solution that would work for all parties.

For years a few people have been working tirelessly to get rid of the anchored-out residential community and they finally found the supporters they needed at City Hall and in the DNR. The process was designed to end up exactly where we are today with people being forced out of our community.

You will be told that this decision was based on the fact that the city has no money and that the council went with the cheapest option. It is true that Bainbridge Island is a financial disaster, but the council never considered all the options and neither did the Land Use Committee.

Had the Land Use Committee bothered to listen carefully to the experts, namely those who live closest to the water and those who are not on the Harbor Commission, they would have gained some knowledge about boating, mooring and sensible management. Maybe they would have even learned a thing or two about real community.

So here we are in the worst recession ever and our city government decides to force people with the least resources into homelessness. In spite of the fact that this same City Council voted for the Comprehensive Plan that said that the anchored-out residential community provided an important component of our low-income housing options. The council also amended the shoreline Master Plan, which included that same commitment and proclaimed that it supports sustainable practices. Yet it destroys the only community that lives in a truly sustainable fashion.

The liveaboard community has expressed continuously that they do not want any handouts and do not want the city to spend a lot of money on unnecessary construction. Instead they have offered to spend money, time and effort to develop and implement a real plan that meets the needs of people.

So far that offer has fallen on deaf ears.

Please contact your council members if you are concerned about evicting your neighbors on the water.

Charlotte Rovelstad

Winslow