Potential use of eminent domain as a means of improving marina access is a divisive issue for Langley’s election candidates.

After the director of Langley Community Planning recommended a combination of projects that included the acquisition of private property for a waterfront walkway, The Record asked this year’s election candidates where they stand on the plan. Most said they were generally opposed to eminent domain, though others agreed the city should pursue discussions with waterfront property owners along Sunrise Lane about a walkway.

Here’s their responses, beginning with those seeking city’s top seat.

Mayoral candidates

Thomas Gill, a councilman, said he unequivocally opposed the city discussing eminent domain as an option.

“Eminent domain as far as I’m concerned is completely off the table and is uncalled for at this point,” Gill said.

A former Planning Advisory Board member, Gill recalled that the waterfront connection from Wharf Street to Seawall Park was raised two years ago and put into the city’s comprehensive plan. They spoke with some potentially impacted property owners then and heard the same concerns raised this past week about privacy and vandalism.

As for a relocated funicular to Boy and Dog Park, Gill said that would not help anyone trying to get to South Whidbey Harbor.

“It doesn’t solve marina access,” Gill said.

Tim Callison noted the difficulty for boaters taking equipment down to the marina under the new recommendation. He did not approve of the city considering eminent domain.

Callison cited other benefits of the walkway project, however, so long as it came about with approval from the affected property owners. Creating a new access other than Wharf Street or by boat would be a benefit in emergencies, and a walkway and a funicular could lead to enhancements of Seawall Park as a destination for residents and visitors.

“The overall concept of the connection to Seawall Park from the marina by a narrow path is something I strongly favor,” Callison said. “I would hope it would be done by mutual agreeable activities and exchanges.”

“It would be very difficult for anyone in a wheelchair to get to Seawall Park now,” he added.

Like the other mayoral candidates, Sharon Emerson liked the walkway idea but would not support eminent domain “unless there was a more critically important reason than just creating a nice walk for us all.” In an emailed response, Emerson gave an example of a slide taking out Wharf Street and the city declaring eminent domain on Sunrise Lane to access the homes and harbor.

An ardent opponent of the Cascade Avenue funicular as originally proposed, Emerson said she did not see a need for relocating a smaller, cheaper funicular. She cited public input forms from the April charrette on which people largely preferred a wheeled option rather than an infrastructure project.

“The only good thing about the new plan is that it makes so little sense and would involve such legal battles, expense, and other problems, so it’s unlikely to ever happen,” she wrote.

City council hopefuls

Squaring off for position 3 this fall, political newcomer Ursula Shoudy declined to weigh in, saying she did not have enough information to give an opinion about city hall’s recommendations.

“I really like to give answers based on having all the information I can,” she said.

Her opponent, Eric Levine, questioned the potential price and effectiveness of the walkway. Regarding the use of eminent domain, he cited state rules regarding the practice that would make it costly and potentially litigious.

Levine compared the distance a pedestrian would travel from the ramp of the harbor to the city between the walkway and the original funicular site up to Cascade Avenue and found the funicular to be a better match.

“I prefer the funicular as originally proposed, which meets the needs so much better, without the city paying out an exorbitant amount of compensation before the project even starts,” he said, reading from a statement.

“I paced it off and it’s over three football fields longer than the original funicular proposal before you even reach town…”

Unopposed candidates and sitting council members Robin Black and Bruce Allen both said their knee-jerk reaction to eminent domain was unfavorable.

Councilwoman Black said it was early to comment on the recommendation because it was still being deliberated by the city’s planning board and had yet to go before the council. But she still had a reaction to the idea of Langley employing eminent domain to make the waterfront walkway.

“Instinctually, I would say I am not (in favor of eminent domain),” Black said in a phone interview Wednesday. “My gut instinct is that’s somebody’s land. I’m not for that.”

The overall proposal for a walkway and a relocated funicular did not sit well with her either, based on what she knows about the Port of South Whidbey Harbor and the port’s expansion. But, she and several other candidates said, more information about harbor visits and projected moorage traffic and ramp usage would be needed for a fully-formed opinion.

“From what I’ve heard, second hand, I’m not in support of it because I’ve not seen any information that would support that decision,” she said.

Allen held a similar position, saying eminent domain is a last-ditch option and would be, if at all a reality, years down the road.

“We’ve talked about the eminent domain thing, that’s going to be years and years away,” he said. “You’re not going to walk into somebody’s property and take it away.”

Building a funicular to Boy & Dog Park, however, was not supported by Allen. He said the city should still consider placing the funicular from Wharf Street up to Cascade Avenue largely because that’s what the grant funds awarded to Langley were designed for.

His position, however, was not unmovable.

“I’m open to whatever the best solution is,” Allen said. “It may not be the funicular. But it’s got to be within the parameters of the grant as far as I’m concerned. We can’t go fishing for more funds.”