CRGC's building problem

The final inspection report describing the condition of the building, at 288 E. Jewett Blvd. in White Salmon, has not yet been issued. However, there are some potentially serious concerns that have cropped up -- the presence of asbestos in pipe joints chief among them.

Those concerns need to be taken care of properly. Any asbestos needs to be abated before CRGC staffers are subjected to potential health risks.

Yet it's also clear that the owner of the building is fully agreeable to making any improvements the CRGC staff can identify.

"We're willing to fix anything," said William Robert Hardy, who lives in Vancouver. "I'll take care of any problems. I've told them to make me a list."

Given Hardy's obliging stance, it's difficult to understand why there is a brewing controversy regarding the condition of the building.

Hardy pointed out that having the Gorge Commission office in White Salmon is an important economic draw for the community. He added that his biggest concern was that the commission might pull out of White Salmon; indeed, he seemed more concerned about the welfare of the town rather than his own financial considerations.

Unquestionably, Hardy has kept the rent in his building relatively low. That has served to benefit state taxpayers, because it is the states of Washington and Oregon that pay operating costs for the CRGC. In that regard, Hardy has done all of us a little favor.

CRGC officials say they are waiting for the final report before deciding what course to follow. But Gorge Commission Executive Director Martha Bennett noted that some of the issues may not be conducive to a fix. Bennett explained that due to its location, the building may be acting "like a wick" in that it attracts water.

But if that is a critical concern, why did it take 14 years to realize it?

Other issues are said to be as simple as changing furnace filters more often, and other basic maintenance.

Bennett also noted that the current facility offers inadequate parking, and is seriously limited in conference space. Those issues, however, ought not to be used as excuses to prompt a move. The CRGC needs to be careful to avoid using the building's problems -- most of which can be corrected -- to justify a move to fancier digs.

At this point, Mr. Hardy needs to be able to read over the final report before any options are discussed. Naturally, he deserves to have that document in writing so he can respond to it. Following that, the CRGC needs to create a list of what it sees as the building's deficiencies, and present it to Hardy so he can judge how -- and whether -- he can fix the respective problems.

Until those steps are taken, it would be premature for the CRGC to conclude that it needs to move to another building.

JB