Editor, Gazette-Journal:

Our Board of Supervisors is committed to conserving areas where citizens have public access to the water, and the board committed funds in 1994 to preserve public access to the East River at Williams Wharf Landing.

Isn’t it reasonable to ask the Mathews Board of Supervisors to guarantee public access to the East River at Williams Wharf Landing in perpetuity by not vacating the county’s existing 30-foot right of way established in the 1920s? What do taxpayers gain by such an action? The area in question has always been basically a "turnaround"—a cul-de-sac where people could park to go fishing, walk around, picnic, or just to mediate and enjoy the aesthetic beauty of the river and to experience the Wharf’s historic aura.

The county entered into an agreement with the Mathews Land Conservancy in 1994 to obtain a VDOT grant to purchase Williams Wharf Landing for development as an "engineless, small craft, public access facility." The agreement calls for the county to relinquish its control over the Landing once all the VDOT grant requirements have been met. When that event occurs, the Conservancy will have complete control of the Landing. At that point, what guarantees will the county have in place to assure the Conservancy does not erect a gate or restrict public access at times of its choosing? For example, when you’re at Williams Wharf, you can only fish at one spot—the fishing dock—which is scheduled to be demolished in the Conservancy’s master plan. Where will citizens fish until the replacement dock is built? The Conservancy’s "Master Project Plan" on their website indicates that this project will be three-plus years in the building/funding phase.

Currently, the Conservancy charges $45 for four hours of pavilion use or $250 for use of the outside facility. It charges $270 to rent the community building or $475 for the entire facility (these prices apply to groups of 16 or more). When someone rents the entire wharf for a private function, it is closed to the public. When its highly publicized 16,000 square foot boathouse/conference center "to serve a community need" in a community with a shrinking population is completed, commercialization of the Landing—and instances of closure to the public—will only increase.

If the Board of Supervisors votes to vacate the existing right of way at the end of Williams Wharf Road, then citizens’ public access to the water at the Landing is endangered. A compromise would be for the Board of Supervisors to vote "no" on vacating the right of way at this time, and to revisit this issue in the future. Why the rush?

Linda K. Wilson, Ph.D.

Mathews, Va.