Port of Grapeview looks at social media, Wi-Fi

Commission debates pole placement, type

Kirk Boxleitner | Mar 02, 20230

Port of Grapeview Commissioner Mike Blaisdell shared his findings on having the port use social media, one of several online matters commissioners addressed at their Feb. 21 meeting.

A recent port workshop included a suggestion that the port create a Facebook page, but no action was taken on it.

Blaisdell has since discovered the port must adopt policies on how it would administer and manage such social media accounts.

Due to open public meeting laws that cover government entities such as ports, Blaisdell said a port official couldn’t run or comment upon such an account, in part because any two port commissioners commenting on the same social media posts would constitute a quorum.

Even without any port officials taking part, any posts or comments on such a social media account would be considered public records the port would legally be required to retain.

“We couldn’t use it to promote elections or do any campaigning,” Blaisdell said.

Port Commissioner Jean Farmer noted Grapeview is a small port, with only one — part-time — employee, and conceded those obligations might be beyond the port’s capabilities.

Blaisdell tabled the matter until the port addresses its options for outreach into the port district.

Port Commissioner Art Whitson said efforts to have a Wi-Fi hotspot are at a bit of a standstill as Mason

County PUD 3 and the Port of Grapeview’s Strategic Planning Advisory Committee have conflicting views about the mechanics of how to provide such public internet service.

Bob Pastore spoke on behalf of the advisory panel to indicate misgivings about using a yard pole to provide Wi-Fi, after the port had spent an estimated $40,000 to “underground” its systems. He offered the advisory panel’s recommendation, arrived at during its own meeting earlier that same day, to delay any action.

Pastore told the port commissioners such a hotspot “is not a Port of Grapeview problem. It’s a Grapeview Community Association and marina problem. They hold the Water Festival. If their vendors can’t connect (to the internet), it’s not our problem. As good neighbors, the port is trying to solve their problem.”

The pole’s placement concerned Blaisdell, who feared one proposed location would make it vulnerable to being clipped by people backing up their boats. Whitson also noted the advantages of having it adjacent to utilities.

Whitson suggested using a spare light pole instead of a yard pole, which would be given to the PUD for $1, so PUD 3 would have access to work on it as they wished. Pastore agreed a light pole would be more aesthetically pleasing than a yard pole.

Whitson said PUD 3 would need to have a structural engineer examine the light pole to verify it would be acceptable, and while he did not know whether it would incur any costs, he pledged to inquire with the PUD 3’s project manager, with whom Whitson said he had developed “a good rapport.” Blaisdell deemed the Wi-Fi hotspot worth the effort because “it’s good for the community.”

Farmer responded to concerns about the port and the Grapeview Community Association’s respective responsibilities for Wi-Fi by saying, “The GCA is not responsible for economic development. We are, and this is economic development.”

During the public comment period, Phil Wolff said he appreciated the port’s position regarding the positioning of a pole and agreed that a priority should be placed on the port serving itself, the community, local businesses and area commerce as a whole through such a Wi-Fi hotspot.

“Whatever we can do to facilitate Wi-Fi would be great,” Wolff said. “There’s nothing wrong with helping out the marina. That’s what the port is here to do.”