Monday, March 26, 2012

Columbia River RV park center of firestorm

A picturesque RV park along Washington's Columbia River is at the center of a firestorm between a local industrial firm suing port officials. Columbia Riverfront RV Park in Woodland, Washington touts its "900 feet of sandy beach," along the river, while an area mineral buying firm says the port sold that river access to the park for pennies on the dollar.

In a story carried by The Daily News Online, Columbia River Carbonates (CRC) claims the Port of Woodland failed to stand up for the public when it sold a 1.35 acre strip of river frontage to the park, allegedly at a quarter of its real market value. The company's complaint is not 100% altruistic, as CRC says in the suit that it had asked the Port to be notified when the property came up for bid. The outfit's attorney says no notification was ever made, and that the Port simply sold it outright to the RV park.

CRC's attorney, Charles Klinge told the newspaper, "As most of the public knows, you do that [sell public property] by holding a public bidding process, advertising the property for sale or listing the property with a real estate broker — you market the property to get the highest price to protect the taxpayers." None of this, alleges Klinge, was done. A port official told the news outlet that the port acted in good faith under the direction of its attorney. RV park representatives had no comment.

If the suit goes through as CRC hopes it will, the deal on those 900 sandy feet would be rescinded. The port has two weeks to respond to the lawsuit. A person answering the phone at Columbia Riverfront RV Park told an editor that only the park's owners could comment on the issue; they won't be available until the end of the month.



  1. Gee, even if I didn't ravel in a RV, I would rather have a beach sold to an organization that had plans for people using it than an organization that would destroy and pollute it. Way to go Port of Woodland; finally a government group using their heads to protect the environment!

  2. Yes, I agree "rvlovers 10100"! This is a beautiful area and I would much prefer to pay a little to an RV park to enjoy it vs. have the unsightly results of a mining firm to look at after they had extracted everything they could out of the ground and water.

  3. I believe the taxpayers of the county are entitled to more consideration than the scenic needs of RVers passing through. The Port Commission has a fiduciary duty to the taxpayers

    Was the deal in the best interests of the county? Maybe it is, but selling it to a private company for 25% of its real value smacks of cronyism, not environmental protection.

    If the county doesn't want the beach used for industrial purposes, simply don't put it on the market, or go for a zoning change.

    1. Why not exploit every square inch of the planet for profit. The highest bidders rule and the environment be damned. Do you people ever get enough?

  4. There is more to providing for the public trust than getting the top dollar in a land deal. Providing a safe beach area for the RV park (and the public as they access the area from adjacent properties) is preferable to having an industrial operation that, while having a greater money making potential, would be an eye-sore at best and a pollution source at worst.

    Keep the area safe, public and , most importantly, pristine.

  5. RV Parks are good option for camping as you can take all comfort things in the RV and the fun will be double with this.
    rv parks dallas