PART 6: The Threats From the Corrupt Director of Planning, When Citizens Share Information About His Department's Corruption
- Brian Gass
- Jan 19
- 12 min read
Updated: Feb 26
In October 2024, Whatcom County Planning Director Mark Personius sent a threatening letter to a citizen who had shared my corruption complaint with a local business owner. To fully understand the staggering audacity it took to write this letter - the sheer brass it required to threaten legal action and claim the allegations were "meritless" - you need to understand what we've already documented in this investigation:
Parts 1 and 2: There are two property transactions we document HERE and HERE, which exposed how Natural Resources Planner Matthew Mahaffie bought properties at reduced prices after issuing restrictive regulatory findings, then sold them at massive profits after facilitating the removal of those restrictions - including a $155,000 profit on 4470 Castlerock Drive and a $500,000+ profit on 8358 and 8366 Blaine Rd.
Part 4: The Orchestrated Coverup by the County documented how the "independent" investigation never requested settlement statements proving the transactions, never interviewed the allegedly defrauded sellers, never examined the smoking gun memo that appeared on Personius's own letterhead, and conveniently concluded the evidence was "not supported by preponderance of evidence."
After all of that documented fraud, after an investigation deliberately designed to avoid finding what it refused to look for, the corrupt Director of Planning, Mark Personius, had the gall to threaten a private citizen with legal action for discussing "baseless allegations."
Let's examine that letter. Because what it reveals - both intentionally and accidentally - is even more damning than the threat itself.
The Letter That Revealed the Cover-Up
In October 2024, Whatcom County Planning Director Mark Personius sent a threatening letter to a citizen who had shared my corruption complaint with a local business owner. The letter is remarkable not for what it threatens, but for what it accidentally reveals: that county officials know exactly what they're covering up.
Here's the letter to download:
Let's unpack what this letter actually tells us.
Section 1: "Without Merit" - The Critical Mischaracterization
Personius writes that Kathleen Haggard "deemed it a meritless complaint." This is a lie.
What Haggard actually wrote in her investigation report was that the allegations were "not supported by a preponderance of evidence." This is a profoundly different statement. And completely the OPPOSITE of what the REAL EVIDENCE showed.
Here's why the distinction matters:
"Meritless" means: The allegations are baseless, frivolous, without any factual foundation whatsoever. It suggests the complainant made things up or doesn't understand what they're talking about.
"Not supported by preponderance of evidence" means: The allegations may have (HAD) merit, but the investigation didn't find enough evidence (because they didn't look for any) to prove them to the required standard (more likely than not - essentially 51% certainty).
SEE OUR REVIEW OF THE "INVESTIGATION" HERE where the county prosecutor and planning departments BENT OVER BACKWARDS to present the outcome they wanted.
What they avoided looking for
Haggard's actual finding acknowledges the allegations could be true - she just didn't find sufficient evidence. This is exactly what you'd expect from an investigation that:
Never requested basic documents like settlement statements proving property transactions
Never interviewed key witnesses like the Dierdorffs who were allegedly defrauded
Never examined Mahaffie's property records to trace the pattern of transactions
Never questioned why a county planner was buying and selling properties in areas he regulated
Actively ignored the April 22, 2022 memo that proved everything SEE BELOW
Personius knows the difference between these terms. He's an AICP-certified professional planner with decades of experience. He's choosing to mischaracterize Haggard's findings because "the investigation was rigged from the start" doesn't sound as good as "it was meritless."
But there's a reason he needs to claim "meritless": because he knows it has merit. He knows because he was there. He knew about the April 22, 2022 memo. He knew Mahaffie was buying and selling property in areas he regulated. He knew other planners had reached different conclusions than Mahaffie about the same properties.
He needs the complaint to be "meritless" because if it has merit, then the investigation was woefully corrupt and inadequate. And if the investigation was corrupted, people start asking why. And when they start asking why, they find the April 22, 2022 memo.
Section 2: "Just a Regular Guy" - The Conflict Denial
Personius claims Mahaffie "previously disclosed a personal business relationship with REM, and he has been wholly isolated by the County regarding REM applications."
This is misdirection. The Royal Emerald Motors conflict is a BIG ISSUE if you believe that it's not okay for a REGULATOR to be SELLING WETLANDS MITIGATION CREDITS as a SIDE HUSTLE when their department is deciding SUBJECTIVELY what is and isn't a "wetland" or "critical area."
That being said, the real conflict is that Mahaffie was:
Buying properties at reduced prices after issuing restrictive regulatory findings that depressed their value
Selling those same properties at massive profits after facilitating removal of those restrictions
Pursuing wetland mitigation credits worth up to $400,000 per acre on properties where he told owners their wetlands made the land worthless
Using his regulatory knowledge and authority to identify "problem properties" he could acquire cheaply and later flip
This isn't a "business relationship" with one company. REM owns property RIGHT DOWN THE STREET FROM MAHAFFIE'S!
How the HELL did Mahaffie even KNOW that there was a need for mitigation on a development?
Can I buy property for $10,000 and immediately sell mitigation credits for random developments at $400,000 an acre? Can anyone who isn't a REGULATOR?
The corrupt Director of Planning, Mark Peronius, thinks we are idiots and don't see this as a HUGE CONFLICT and a BIG PROBLEM!!
Personius wants to talk about Royal Emerald Motors because it's easier to explain away as a disclosed relationship. He doesn't want to talk about the systematic pattern of buying low, regulating favorably to gain an economic advantage and selling high.
Because if people understood that pattern, they'd ask: "How did a county planner making $120,000-$140,000 per year afford to buy multiple properties without disclosing he was a REGULATOR and potentially making MILLIONS from a $10,000 lot.
And they'd discover the answer: he couldn't - unless he was using regulatory manipulation to create below-market purchase opportunities.
Section 3: April 22, 2022 - The Smoking Gun Memo
We assume you know that the corrupt Natural Resources Planner Matt Mahaffie denied a permit to the owners of 4470 Castlerock Dr in Blaine, WA, for three years, lying to them that the lot was "totally encumbered by wetlands buffers" and required costly mitigation and other restrictive relief. You can GO HERE if you are unfamiliar.
After three years of trying, the wife's passing, the builder quitting, and the husband's deteriorating health, the son sold the lot to the corrupt Whatcom County Natural Resources Planner, Matt Mahaffie, for 1/2 what it was worth convincing the son that he had the patience, time, and ability to do the mitigation and work to get the lot sold.
That was October 2020, and the price was $80,000.
On April 7, 2022 Mahaffie put the property for sale for $230,000.
On April 22, 2022, the same day that the first buyer backed out, a memo appeared on official Whatcom County letterhead. It addressed the exact regulatory question that was preventing Mahaffie from selling one of his properties ", but also was keeping the previous owners from building their dream home.
Here's the full memo text:
Notice several things about this memo:
1. The Timing: 22 April 2022 was the exact day the corrupt Whatcom County Natural Resources Planner, Matt Mahaffie's, sale of 4470 Castlerock Drive collapsed due to feasibility issues (likely wetlands).
Either Mahaffie WROTE the memo himself, or someone from the Planning Department wrote it on his behalf.
2. The Letterhead: It's on Mark Personius's official letterhead, clearly identifying him as "Mark Personius, AICP" - showing he's a certified professional planner bound by AICP ethics rules.
3. No Author: The memo says it's from "Natural Resources, Wetlands & Habitat Conservation Areas" - a division, not a person. No individual planner's name appears. It's unsigned. This is highly unusual for a memo making definitive regulatory determinations.
4. The Content: The memo states that wetlands in The Greens at Loomis Trail subdivision WERE mitigated in 2002-2003 under permit MIT2003-00021, and therefore "no further critical areas review" is required. That's pretty convenient.
5. The Contradiction: This directly contradicts what Mahaffie told the Dierdorffs in 2017 when he was trying to buy their property (4470 Castlerock) at a reduced price. He told them the wetlands were NOT mitigated and they'd need expensive new studies and permits.
It also contradicts what he told the investigator when a complaint was filed. You can go here to read about the "investigation" that the corrupt Whatcom County Prosecutor's office put out.
6. The Confirmation: This memo proves exactly what junior planner Nathan Goldschmidt determined in 2023 when he actually looked up the 2002 permit records - the wetlands WERE mitigated decades ago.
7. The Timing Miracle: After sitting dormant for 20 years since the 2002 mitigation, this regulatory question suddenly needed resolution on the exact day Mahaffie's property sale fell through? But not in time to benefit the original owners, whom Mahaffie purposely delayed for 3 years unnecessarily.
The probability of that timing being coincidental is effectively zero.
Section 4: Other Planners Reached the Same Conclusion
The April 22, 2022 memo wasn't the only time Whatcom County planners determined these wetlands were already mitigated. Here is one example where the permitting was going on at the same time that the previous owners were being delayed by Mahaffie.
Multiple other permit applications in The Greens at Loomis Trail subdivision received the same determination: wetlands were mitigated in 2002-2003, no further review required. These determinations were made by other planners in the Natural Resources division.
This means:
Multiple planners knew the correct regulatory status
The information was readily available in county records
Mahaffie's 2017 determination to the Dierdorffs was objectively wrong
When Goldschmidt made the same determination in 2023, he wasn't discovering something new - he was finding what other planners had already found
The Haggard investigation never examined these other determinations. Why not? Because looking at how other planners handled the same regulatory question would have proven that Mahaffie's 2017 finding was false.
Section 5: The Coordinated Lie From the TOP DOWN
The MEMO is dated April 22, 2022.
The "investigation" was in 2024. TWO YEARS after that memo was used to defraud the previous sellers.
SEVEN PLANNERS, including TWO SUPERVISORS, and the CORRUPT DIRECTOR HIMSELF signed off in that report that Nathan Goldschmidt WAS WRONG, in fact, the corrupt, lying POS, Whatcom County Natural Resources Planner, Matt Mahaffie, even said this to investigators:
Mahaffie said, "Goldschmidt was a new employee at the time and may not have been RECEIVING ENOUGH SUPERVISION, due to the frequent turnover in department leadership."
So even though the lying POS, corrupt Whatcom County Natural Resources Planner, Matt Mahaffie, was scamming the public, his own SUPERVISORS and the CORRUPT DIRECTOR, Mark Peronius, allowed him to disparage the entire department while throwing a GOOD PLANNER under the bus.
ALL the documents related to the permitting for 4470 Castlerock Dr in Blaine WERE ALWAYS AVAILABLE to EVERYONE...except those seeking the truth.
October 2023: County hires Kathleen Haggard to investigate.
ALWAYS REMEMBER the Haggard investigation:
Never requests settlement statements showing property transactions
Never interviews the Dierdorffs, who were allegedly defrauded
Never examined or was given the April 22, 2022 memo
Never looks at other planners' determinations on the same subdivision
Accepts Mahaffie's statements without verification
Concludes allegations "not supported by preponderance of evidence"
January 2024: Haggard issues a report exonerating Mahaffie.
October 2024: Personius sends a threatening letter claiming the investigation found the complaint "meritless" and threatening legal action if the allegations continue.
Every person in this chain - Mahaffie, Erickson, Smith, Personius, and Haggard - knew or should have known about the April 22, 2022 memo. It was on Personius's letterhead. It involved the same regulatory question as Goldschmidt's 2023 determination. It appeared on the exact day one of Mahaffie's property sales was failing.
The only explanation for none of them mentioning it is that they all knew it would prove the fraud.
Section 6: Professional Ethics Violations
Mark Personius is the only AICP-certified professional planner involved in this scandal. That certification means he's bound by the American Institute of Certified Planners Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct.
If you want to see the membership of the group and their ethical requirements here they are:
His threatening letter to Engelsman claims the investigation found no corruption. His oversight allowed Mahaffie's conflicts to continue for years.
Personius violated numerous AICP ethics provisions:
Aspirational Principles (Section A):
A.1 - Serve the Public Interest: Personius prioritized protecting a corrupt employee and institutional reputation over protecting property owners who were defrauded and maintaining public trust in the planning system.
A.2 - Integrity and Accurate Information: He deliberately concealed the April 22, 2022 memo during the investigation, allowed false findings to be published, and mischaracterized Haggard's conclusions as finding the complaint "meritless" when she actually said "not supported by preponderance of evidence."
A.4.5-6 - Conflicts of Interest: He failed to prevent, identify, or address Mahaffie's systematic conflicts of interest spanning years and multiple properties, despite having direct supervisory responsibility.
A.4.11 - "Expose corruption, dishonesty, and violations of this Code wherever discovered": This is perhaps the most damning violation. When Personius discovered corruption in his department, he didn't expose it - he orchestrated its concealment. The AICP Code explicitly requires planners to expose corruption. Personius did the exact opposite.
A.1.6 - Analyze ethical issues: Instead of examining the systemic failure that allowed a planner to profit from regulatory manipulation, Personius scapegoated junior planner Nathan Goldschmidt for correctly identifying what the April 22 memo had already stated.
Enforceable Rules (Section B):
Rule 1 - Accurate Information: Personius deliberately failed to provide accurate, timely information to the investigation by withholding the April 22, 2022 memo and other planners' concurrent determinations.
Rule 5 - False Findings: He pressured false findings through deliberate evidence omission, allowing the investigation to conclude without examining the smoking gun memo on his own letterhead.
Rule 6 - Acts Reflecting Adversely on Profession: The coordinated cover-up reflects adversely on the entire planning profession and confirms public cynicism about government accountability.
Rule 13 - Disclose to Prevent Substantial Public Injury: Personius failed to disclose the fraud even when it became clear that continuing concealment would cause substantial injury to property owners, public trust, and the integrity of the regulatory system.
Rule 17 - Conceal True Interests: He concealed Mahaffie's true financial interests in the properties he was regulating and the transactions he was facilitating.
The April 22, 2022 memo is particularly damning because:
It bears Personius's letterhead identifying him as AICP-certified
It appeared on the exact day Mahaffie needed regulatory relief
It was never mentioned in the investigation
Personius had direct knowledge of it but said nothing
A certified professional planner who discovers corruption is ethically required to expose it. Personius discovered it, concealed it, and now threatens legal action against citizens who discuss it.
This represents a complete inversion of professional ethics: using the authority and credibility of AICP certification not to protect the public, but to protect the corrupt.
Section 7: What the Threatening Letter Meant
Personius's threatening letter isn't about protecting the county's reputation. It's about protecting a cover-up.
So now you all know that it's not "defamatory" to point out the painfully honest truth that the Director of Planning for Whatcom County is, in fact, CORRUPT. His department is CORRUPT, and he has been protecting the LYING POS, CORRUPT PLANNER MATT MAHAFFIE. Why? We have no godly idea.
"Damage to the reputation of the County"
That's IRONIC, its the corrupt Director of Planning Mark Personius' actions and inactions that have brought disgrace to HIS PLANNING DEPARTMENT, as well as all the planners and employees who WEREN'T involved in these transactions. He obviously didn't care about them when he was allowing FRAUD to happen on his watch.
Consider what he's defending:
A planner who made over $500,000 profit from properties in areas he regulated
An investigation that never examined basic evidence like property settlement statements
An unsigned memo that appeared on his own letterhead at the exact moment it was needed
The scapegoating of a junior planner who correctly identified what other planners had already found
The deliberate concealment of evidence that would have proven everything
The letter reveals the county's strategy: use the inept and ethically challenged Haggard investigation as a shield. Claim it "found nothing" (false - it found "not enough evidence," which is different). Threaten legal action against anyone who continues to question the approved narrative.
Use the Prosecuting Attorney's office as an intimidation tool (notice the cc: list).
The unmitigated hubris for this guy to CCs the corrupt, Whatcom County Natural Resources Planner, Matt Mahaffie as well as the PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE!
What does Mahaffie got on the Director?
But here's what the corrupt Director of Planning, Mark Personius can't explain:
If the investigation was thorough and honest, why didn't it examine the April 22 memo, other planners' determinations, or basic transaction documents?
Personius can threaten legal action all he wants (we can't wait)! But he can't make that timing coincidence go away. He can't explain why a memo on his letterhead appeared exactly when it was needed to save Mahaffie's property deal.
He can't explain away the fact that his corrupt Natural Resources Planner, Matt Mahaffie, required all kinds of restrictions when the previous owner was getting permits, but there WERE NONE when Mahaffie went to sell that same property.
And he can't explain why, as the only AICP-certified planner involved, he violated the most fundamental ethics requirement: expose corruption wherever discovered.
This is Part 6 of an ongoing investigation into systematic corruption in Whatcom County Planning & Development Services. The evidence is documented in public records, official memos, and property transaction documents available for verification.
Coming in Part 6.5: The formal AICP ethics complaint against Mark Personius, and why the certification board must either strip him of his professional credentials or sanction him.
For media inquiries or to provide additional information: protected@realissuespodcat.org
All claims in this article are supported by documented evidence available in public records.
CLICK HERE to go back to the main page