Wouldn’t it have been greener to keep Snohomish building?

Regarding Karen Guzak’s Aug. 19 letter to the editor: “I-1631’s carbon fee would make green future possible.”

I,too, support I-1631 for a “greener future.”

However, I would like to point out some hypocrisy. In 2017, the Snohomish City Council, of which Karen Guzak is a longtime member, voted unanimously in favor of spending another $3 million or so of city taxpayer money at the Carnegie properties at First and Cedar, which includes destroying an adjacent, perfectly sturdy, 5,000-square feet 1960s-era brick building, solely because of aesthetics. The council believes, after 50 years. the brick, one-level architecture doesn’t “fit in” with the eclectic neighborhood buildings constructed from 1900 to 2010. (A councilwoman and the city parks board chairwoman live across the street in the 2010 building.)

I would like to repeat to the mayor and council, an oh-so-true slogan coined by a wise old environmentalist:

The greenest building is the one already built!

Morgan Davis

Snohomish