Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Michelle McConnell <br />From:ken shock [sailboi@gmail.com] <br />Sent:Tuesday, May 11, 2010 7:34 AM <br />To:Stewart, Jeff R. (ECY) <br />Cc:Stockdale, Erik (ECY); Scott; dschultz@waypoint.com; Jim Boyer; BARB; Richard Hild; <br />MIKE BELENSKI; ken shock; Jim Fritz; Henry M Souza; Gene Farr; Ellen Grus; CAO John <br />Richmond; Larry Carter; Norman MacLeod; George Sickel; Bud Schindler; DR KENN <br />BROOKS; dennis@ddrlaw.com; Joe D'Amico; robertc@harpub.com <br />Subject:Jefferson County SMP <br />Categories:LASMP Public Comment <br />Mr Jeffree Stewart, Shoreline Specialist, DOE <br /> <br />Mr Stewart, <br /> <br />I have two five acre properties on the Dosewallips River, which are impacted by this SMP. I made mortgage <br />payments for over 25 years on these properties, beginning in 1983. The one property has a cabin which we built <br />for Summer use, and which we had eventually planned to replace with an all season dwelling. This site will be <br />non conforming if your SMP becomes law. On the second property we built a legally permitted dwelling - both <br />properties are in a family partnership and will go to our children unless the government takes them. <br /> <br />The permitting requirements we experienced dealing with Jefferson County over the years were notoriously <br />rigorous, mostly due to the control of the County by a cadre of overzealous environmental activists based in <br />Port Townsend. I have a feeling that you and in fact the DOE leadership - are well aware of this. In fact I <br />believe that because of this Jefferson County was to be used as a precedent setting County on CAO, SMP and <br />WIRA regulation sought by Futurewise and WEC - via DOE ! <br /> <br />Because I have had first hand experience with Jefferson's DCD regulators, and the expense of dealing with their <br />convoluted processes, I am hereby stating that this new SMP is unnecessary. Port Townsend and the DCD have <br />already quashed any chance of: <br /> <br />*significant population growth <br />*significant retail growth <br />*any industry outside the UGA <br />*significant environmental degradation <br />*access to the National Park <br />etc etc - we are shut down <br /> <br />I have attended the WRIA 16 meetings over the years, I am on their mailing list, so I have an idea of the sort of <br />thrust DOE are taking from a theoretical perspective - and I say theory for a reason. There are State <br />requirements for Best Available Science (BAS) as a basis in the taking of property, even for partial takings - <br />which is what the SMP is intended to do. I have listened, I have studied - I often see no basis in science for <br />DOE proposals, including this SMP. DOE theories are not BAS, fact is theory is more like religion - I don't <br />believe in your religion, Jeffree !!! <br /> <br />I have also studied your artwork, and your photographic art collections linked below. I see you as an idealist <br />who likes the sweeping, uninhabited shorelines you archive. I have also seen the pictures of your art studio, and <br />I am sure you love your studio, and I imagine you have a rustic home of that same property. On a more personal <br />note, Jeffree, I am an organic gardener. Not like so many recent adherents, I first subscribed to these theories in <br />1 <br /> <br />