For decades, the Port of Centralia has pursued a simple mission: create jobs, expand economic opportunity and strengthen our local tax base.
That mission is not new. It is not controversial. And it is not a surprise.
The industrial development now being proposed in the Fords Prairie area is the result of planning that stretches back decades. The port established its industrial park framework in the 1980s, adopted a master plan in 1990, and has continued refining that vision ever since. The area in question was specifically planned for industrial development.
That is why one statement made during recent discussions between Logistics Property Company and the Centralia City Council stood out above all others.
When former Mayor Kelly Smith Johnston asked company representatives what they had learned during the process, the answer was simple:
"It's hard to do business here."
Those six words should concern every resident of Centralia.
Logistics Property Company is not asking to build a project in a residential neighborhood. They are not proposing a new land-use concept. They are investing in land that has long been designated and planned for industrial development. Even the company's presentation emphasized that the question is not whether industrial growth belongs in this area, but how that growth should be managed.
That distinction matters.
Reasonable people can disagree about traffic, infrastructure, environmental impacts or building design. Those are legitimate concerns. But those concerns should be addressed through the review processes that already exist.
Transportation impact studies. SEPA review. Utility capacity analysis. Conditions of approval. Mitigation requirements.
Those tools already allow the city to evaluate real-world impacts and require solutions where necessary.
What they do not do is punish investment before a project is even proposed.
That is why the current debate over arbitrary building-size limits is so troubling. A building's square footage alone does not determine traffic, noise, employment levels, utility demand or environmental impacts. Even LPC's presentation demonstrated that different building configurations can produce similar overall development outcomes, while actual impacts depend on tenant operations and site-specific conditions.
In other words, evaluate impacts, not dimensions.
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of the recent discussions was hearing suggestions that private employers should be required to guarantee wages through lease agreements or even hints that they might consider building elsewhere.
Imagine the message that sends to future employers.
A company signs a purchase agreement. It invests millions of dollars. It follows the rules that existed when it entered the process. Then, halfway through development, local government begins changing the rules and questioning whether the project should happen at all.
What business would look at that situation and conclude Centralia is a predictable place to invest?
The reality is that Lewis County needs jobs.
Our unemployment rate remains higher than the state average. Businesses have closed. Families continue to leave the area in search of opportunity. The port's own economic analysis projects hundreds of direct jobs from this development over time, along with substantial infrastructure improvements and increased property values that benefit schools, fire districts and local governments.
The first building alone represents nearly $88 million in investment and includes millions of dollars in infrastructure improvements, including a regional sewer extension, road improvements, utility upgrades, and the Gallagher Road connection designed to improve traffic circulation.
Those improvements do not just benefit the developer. They benefit the community.
None of this means the City of Centralia should abandon planning. Quite the opposite.
If city leaders believe zoning regulations need updating, they should update them. If growth management policies need refinement, they should refine them. If residents have concerns about future development, those concerns deserve to be heard.
But changing the rules in the middle of the game is different from planning for the future.
The precedent matters.
Today's target may be Logistics Property Company. Tomorrow it may be another manufacturer, distributor, technology company or employer considering Centralia.
When businesses look at communities, they evaluate more than land and infrastructure. They evaluate certainty. They evaluate whether the local government keeps its word. They evaluate whether rules are stable and predictable.
Right now, Centralia faces a simple choice.
We can continue supporting the long-term vision that generations of leaders created for the Port's industrial district, while using existing regulations to address legitimate concerns.
Or we can send a message that even projects planned for decades may face moving goalposts once significant investments have already been made.
If we choose the latter, we should not be surprised when future employers decide it is easier to build somewhere else.
And when they do, the jobs, tax revenue and economic opportunity will leave with them.
•••
Chad Taylor is publisher and co-owner of The Chronicle and its CT Publishing parent company. He can be reached at chad@chronline.com.
