Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Michelle McConnell <br />From:James C. Tracy [jctesq2002@yahoo.com] <br />Sent:Wednesday, May 05, 2010 8:08 AM <br />To:Stewart, Jeff R. (ECY) <br />Cc:Norman MacLeod <br />Subject:Comments on Locally Approved Jefferson County SMP <br />Attachments:FHM SMP Comment 8Sep09.doc; FHM SMP Comment 15Jan09.doc; CAO COMP PLAN <br />1.wpd; CAO COMP PLAN2 2.wpd; DOE SMP Comment - May 2010.doc <br />Categories:LASMP Public Comment <br />THE LAW OFFICES OF <br />JAMES C. TRACY, P.S. <br />ATTORNEY & COUNSELOR AT LAW <br />OLYMPIC PEAKS BUILDING <br />21106 President Point Rd. NE <br />Kingston, WA 98346 <br />Tel: (360) 779-7889 Cell : (360) 731-4550 <br /> <br />May 5, 2010 <br /> <br />Delivered via e-mail to: jeff.stewart@ecy.wa.gov <br /> <br /> <br />Department of Ecology <br />State of Washington <br />PO Box47775 <br />Olympia, WA 98504 <br /> <br />Attn: Jeffree Stewart <br /> <br />Dear Mr. Stewart: <br /> <br />This letter and its attachments comprise comments on the Shoreline Master Program (SMP) <br />“locally approved”/adopted by Jefferson County and subject to the Department of Ecology’s <br />(DOE) comment period ending May 11, 2010. The subject matter of these comments includes input <br />regarding the Jefferson County Critical Area Ordinance (CAO), adopted by reference in the <br />locally adopted SMP, and incorporates by reference my previous comments submitted to <br />Jefferson County during the SMP and CAO development processes. <br /> <br />As a threshold matter, several issues of procedural irregularity regarding the local adoption <br />of the SMP should be addressed by DOE prior to any further consideration of the document by <br />the State of Washington. <br /> <br />First, Jefferson County held its public hearing on TWO proposals before it, without a <br />specific proposed action and without a recommendation on a single proposal as required by <br />Jefferson County Code and RCW 36.70.030. Please see the attached letter of September 8, 2009, <br />for a detailed foundation and analysis of this factual matter. In summary, the procedure <br />utilized by Jefferson County to hold a public hearing was not only statutorily infirm, it was <br />only made clear to the reviewing/commenting public which was the actual proposal being heard <br />at the hearing itself, depriving non-attending public of accurate information and failing to <br />prepare the attending public for meaningful participation/comment. <br /> <br />Second, further compounding the procedural and statutory impropriety demonstrated above, in <br />their post-hearing “deliberations” the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners (BOCC) <br />1 <br /> <br />