Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Waterfront Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ridgefield residents press council for transparency on Port waterfront plans
Summary
Dozens of residents told the Ridgefield City Council they feel excluded from the Port’s waterfront planning, urging the council to demand documentation, slow decision‑making and prioritize trails, habitat and public access over permanent housing.
Dozens of Ridgefield residents used the council’s public‑comment periods on June 18 to press elected officials to push the Port for more transparency and to reconsider housing‑heavy elements of a proposed waterfront plan.
Speakers including Nancy Fagan, Jan Hague, Troy McKay and Hillary Wheeler described a Port presentation they said presented phase one as “non‑negotiable” and criticized the Port’s outreach as PR‑focused rather than substantive. “Their lack of transparency is causing feelings of distrust of our elected officials,” Nancy Fagan said, urging the council to “question them at every turn.”
Residents detailed specific concerns. Jan Hague warned that locating permanent residential units at the waterfront could add traffic at Main and Pioneer, saying an estimate of 500 residents could translate into about 1,000 daily vehicle trips. Troy McKay said the Port’s meeting felt like “a PR group … instead of actually getting to talk to our four commissioners.”
Several commenters asked the city to insist on environmental review and stronger community engagement. Robin Knight summarized an independent survey of 220 respondents she said showed 81% prioritized walking trails and nature access, 86% wanted minimal development, and 88% opposed permanent residential units at the waterfront. Knight and others also urged the city and Port to incorporate visible recognition of the Chinook Nation’s historical presence near the site.
Council members acknowledged residents’ concerns but did not take immediate formal action on the Port’s plan during the June 18 meeting. Mayor Matt Cole and other councilors heard requests that the city press the Port for documents and that council seek joint planning or clear criteria for proposals that affect city infrastructure and wildlife habitat.
The council is not the Port authority and, as several residents acknowledged, the Port controls its own permitting and economic‑development obligations. Several speakers urged the council to use its influence where it can — through permitting, code changes and partnership — to protect open space and ensure meaningful public engagement as the process continues.
The council did not vote on any waterfront agreements at the June 18 meeting. Residents said they will continue to press for a citizen advisory committee and more time before any final agreements are approved.
