HomeMy WebLinkAboutHEARING re: Chimacum Drainage District #1 (DD1) Reactivation JEFFERSON COUNTY
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA REQUEST
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Heidi Eisenhour, Commissioner
DATE: July 14,2025
SUBJECT: Chimacum Drainage District#1 (DD1) reactivation Hearing
STATEMENT OF ISSUE:
Drainage districts are local special purpose A Chimacum Creek Drainage District
districts organized under chapters 85.06.010 07 Be
"`"`ate>
and 85.38.180 of the Revised Code of —1
to Thena<txr Cr
Washington. DD1 was formed on June 23, Elev'"p `°l'°a ee`
Wm 5feet
1919. The original territory of DD1 F R �t
6
7'
encompassed about one-third of the tt
— \t
Chimacum watershed, totaling 7,526 acres N
f
(see Figure 1). A 1
., dx
DD 1 remained active until 1974 but has been
• inactive since then. Considerable drainage
system infrastructure was completed in the
early years of the district but keeping up with
ongoing maintenance has always been a
challenge. (More information here). Flooding
and drainage problems have persisted ,.-, — ) ,
throughout the past half century, much as
they did during the previous half century, 4.
impacting landowners and fish habitat.
During the past few decades, drainage ^'
problems have worsened because of
increasing beaver populations and the lack of
comprehensive maintenance. During this
period of drainage district inactivity, drainageI I 10 -
t7
system maintenance responsibilities have .k
fallen upon individual landowners. This has �" f
resulted in inconsistent, inefficient, and
sometimes ineffective efforts to address
conditions, that by their very nature, demand
I rid
a comprehensive approach to be successful.
Figure 1. Elevation relative to Chimacum Creek
ANALYSIS:
Over the course of the past few years,we explored -via mtgs with the Conservation District,public focus
groups, an open house, and finally a survey sent to all landowners in the DD 1 geography - the pros and cons
of reactivating DD1. The BOCC also held two hearings and decided to keep DD1 in its inactive status rather
than dissolve while we undertook this outreach. The Jefferson Conservation District(JCD) and WSU
Extension were major partners in the outreach led by consultants from Maul, Foster and Alongi. A number
of options for drainage management were considered including Individual Landowners Manage the Creek,
Organizations Support Landowners, Drainage District(DD), Watershed Improvement District(WID) and
Flood Control District(FCD). The outcome of all of this community engagement has been strong interest in
reactivation of DD1 and engaging JCD in undertaking drainage maintenance and improvement activities.
Since our recent workshop on this matter, our GIS Lead—Kevin Hitchcock—did the analysis included here
of`Elevation relative to Chimacum Creek' to start analyzing the potential for Benefit Zones in DD l.
Additionally, JCD has begun initial DD1 maintenance budget analysis(included as additional background
for this hearing). The purpose of this hearing is to give background, hear community input and consideration
authorizing reactivation of DD 1.
FISCAL IMPACT:
TBD.
RECOMMENDATION:
• Review DDI Story Map -
https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/d 1 b7dc353a624aa691 bf12395396f8b2
• Review DRAFT DD1 Elevation Map—Kevin Hitchcock
• Hear from JCCD re: drainage maintenance budget information and their plan for year 1 activities
while DDI is being reconstituted—Joe Holtrop
• Hear testimony from constituents.
• Discuss and potential motion to pursue reactivation.
REVIEWED BY:
—7/iC) e)".
Josh ' ters, County Administrator Date !
Hers
dby tr6 0 c\ss�o
,le
Jg�a s�
Chimacum Creek Drainage Maintenance Budget Analysis
July 3, 2025
Anticipated Maintenance
Below is a summary of the most significant Chimacum Creek drainage maintenance needs:
• Reed canarygrass(RCG) management
o Approximately 7 miles of stream channel require periodic(once every two to three years)
treatment to remove RCG
o Unknown length of ditches requires RCG control
o Annual mowing of ditch banks and some stream banks can lessen the need for RCG removal
from the waterways
• Beaver and beaver dam management
o Beaver activity, particularly new dam construction, should be monitored at least a couple times
per year. Removal or alteration of dams over one year old may require mitigation.
o Management options include installation of beaver deceivers and pond levelers, and trapping
Anticipated Near-term Costs
The current estimate for RCG removal is roughly$15,000 per mile. If one-third of the 7 miles of
stream channel are treated each year,the annual cost would be approximately$35,000 (2.33
miles x$15,000). Treatment once every three years is a viable option, especially if banks are
mowed. If banks are not mowed,treatment every other year may be necessary in some stream
reaches.The cost of beaver monitoring and management are unknown.
Anticipated Long-term Costs
Establishment of woody riparian buffers along waterways, including hedgerows along narrow
waterways and forested buffers along wide channels,will suppress RCG growth,thus
substantially reduce the need for RCG control. It is estimated that over 5 of the 7 miles of stream
channel currently plagued with RCG could support woody buffer establishment. Approximately
1.85 miles of stream channel are in areas of organic soils that are prone to extensive flooding that
makes successful woody vegetation establishment extremely challenging.
Establishing woody buffers to the point where RCG is sufficiently suppressed that it no longer
constricts water flow will require at least a decade of maintenance. However, state and federal
programs currently exist to cover the costs of woody buffer establishment and maintenance.
Jefferson County Conservation District (JCCD) has utilized such programs for decades.
Eventually, RCG removal could be reduced to about 2 miles of stream channel,which if done
every other year would cost about$15,000 (current estimated cost) annually, or$10,000 annually
if done once every three years.
Conservation District Assistance
Jefferson County Conservation District is prepared to contribute staff time for technical
assistance, such as for permit application and compliance, beaver monitoring, grant writing, and
woody buffer establishment, at least for the next few years. In addition,JCCD has access to grant
funding to support RCG removal(currently through June 2027). Up to $80,000 could potentially be
secured over the next two years. Additional funding from JCCD may also be available for this work.
Drainage District Assessment Options
One scenario for assessing properties in the current boundaries of the Chimacum Drainage
District is to divide the district into benefit zones based on flooding vulnerability, such as land
elevation relative to stream channel elevation. For example:
• Lands with elevations 5 feet or less above the stream channel elevation could be assessed
at 100 percent.
• Lands with elevations 5 to 15 feet above the stream channel could be assessed at 50
percent.
• All other lands could be assessed at 25 percent.
A GIS analysis of the drainage district using these criteria resulted in the following:
• Benefit Zone 1 (<5') = 1,896 acres
• Benefit Zone 2 (5-15') = 1,091 acres
• Benefit Zone 3 (>15') = 3,537 acres
Using the above example, at a full assessment rate of$2 per acre, $6,779 could be generated,
broken down by benefit zone as follows:
• Benefit Zone 1 (<5') = 1,896 acres x$2=$3,792
• Benefit Zone 2 (5-15')= 1,091 acres x$1 = $1,091
• Benefit Zone 3 (>15') = 3,537 acres x$0.50= $1,896
Some lands would likely be exempted from assessments for various reasons, including senior
exemptions, or assigned a lower assessment rate because of conversion to wetland habitat (thus
not or minimally benefiting from drainage maintenance activities). Decisions about exemptions
not codified would be made by the directors of the drainage district.
Given the availability of technical and financial assistance from JCCD, the amount of assessment
revenues generated in the example above likely far exceeds the near-term needs.Therefore,the
assessment rate could be lower or assessments could be collected for future needs.
Initially, drainage district assessments would only need to cover administrative costs, such as
insurance, bonding, and elections. Long-term assistance from JCCD is uncertain; however,
through establishment of woody buffers, annual maintenance and associated costs would go
down over time,thus reducing the need for outside assistance.
; ,4•� I ' "
1--y IP 4tips, ..ir._,.,
71
Ar y
C' ,
y ytlI ♦ t I,
,
w A ~
l Y � ,
4 "•
5 .;....it x
The Jefferson County Conservation District used Natural Resource Investment funding to help 15 landowners restore
salmon habitat in Chimacum Creek through removal of reed canary grass.Registered as a noxious weed,the
overgrowth of grass choked stream flow and contributed to flooding,pollution,and low oxygen levels.
frern PT Leader article about focus group meeting March 2024 Chimacum Drainage District workshop
STRONGLY AGREE I NEITHER DISAGREE STRONGLY PEA TOTAL
AGREE AGREE NOR DISAGREE
DISAGREE h ,
Hooding is a challenge for me 39 47% 15 79% 2 63% 15 79% 15 79% 10 53% d .
15 6 1 6 6 4 38
Reed canarygrass is a problem and is 57 89% 15 79% 7 89% 526% 5 26% 7 89% '
hard to manage 22 6 3 2 2 3 38
I need help understanding what 15 79% 36 84% 21 05% 7 89% 5.26% 13 16%
regulations apply to me when 6 14 8 3 2 5 38
managing the creek on my property
,w ..
IL.'
, _,'�. ,-
I find the permitting process for 26 32% 23 68% 13.16% 5 2696 10 53% 2105%
managing flooding on my property 10 9 5 2 4 8 38
challenging
My neighbor's management of 36 84% 28 95% 2 63% 5 26% 10 53% 15 79%
Chimacum Creek impacts my 14 11 1 2 4 6 38
property
Beavers are impacting my property 26 32% 15 79% 15 79% 10 53% 13.16% 18 42%
10 6 6 4 S 7 j"
Fish habitat IS degraded on my 23 68% 18 42% 15 79% 7 89% 7.89% 26 32%
property 9 7 6 3 3 10 3z
Chimacum Drainage District workshop
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
I am a steward of the land 8421% 32
r°.
I want to support salmon nuns in Chimacum Creek 71.05% 27
I want to support local agriculture 86 84% 33
I want to support my neighbors who have challenges with the Creek on their property 68.42% 26
I want individual property managers to be responsible for managing the Creek
23 68% 9
I would be willing to pay a reasonable levy/fee if the main challenges on Chimacum Creek were addressed by a special 60 53% 23
district
Other (please specify) 23 68% 9
Total Respondents. 38
Chimacum Drainage District workshop
Options considered
Scenario Floaadal Responsibility Maintenance Responsibility Formation Governance
I Indio idual landowners Landowners arc responsible for Management is voluntary A None 'None
Manage the('reek costs of managing their section landowner may choose not to
of creek maintain their section
2 Organizations Support Landowners pay management Management is voluntary A None None
Landowners costs,with technical and landowner may choose not to
financial support horn maintain their section
organizations
-Xi1
d Drainage District IDD) Landowners pay annual benefit Drainage District is Vote by County 3 district board members elected by district
assessment and Drainage responsible for management Board of landowners
District uses money for and maintenance Commissioners
maintenance
4 Watershed Landowners pay annual benefit WID manages and mamtams, Requires a vote by Hoard members elected by WID landowners
Improvement District assessment for WID and can also purchase land, 2'3 of landowners
1 W Ill) maintenance or other wrier,and warm rights to in proposed
management needs support local water supply district
needs
5 Flood Control District landowners pay annual levy fix FCD manages and maintains County Board of Huard of Commissioners can serve as gosenong
1 F('UI flood control activities Commissioners board,appoint an advisory board,or appoint
vote to create a independent governing hoard
subzonc of an
existing FCD
Chimacum Drainage District workshop
Potential steps for standing up Chimacum Drainage District �4
(DD1)
1. Jefferson County works with JCD to identify old Chimacum Drainage District boundaries,
acreage,assessed valuation,&#of land owners PLUS assessment of methods for
collecting assessments including assessment of benefits accrued to landowners in
different sections of DD1.
2. BoCC holds Hearing on Reactivation Resolution per RCW 85.38.220 finding that
Reactivation is in the Public Interest(see#3 above) and after Reactivation Resolution is
adopted,Appoint an initial Board per RCW 85.38.0`/0. 1
3. DD1 Board works with Auditor to open Filing Period& hold General Election or Special
Election per RCW 85.38.060&.070&.100& .105 &.110-.130
4. DD1 Board passes Resolution to opt in for Rates&Charges per RCW 85.38.140.
5. DD1 Board,County Engineer&BoCC create/adopt system of rates&charges per RCW
85.38.140-165.
6. DD1& BoCC imposes annual assessments per RCW 85.38.160(4)-(6) & RCW 38.38.170,
collected by Treasurer
7. DD1 enters into a contract with JCD to undertake drainage maintenance and
improvement projects in DD1,exercising powers authorized by RCW 85.38.180. and
other statutes.
Chimacum Drainage District workshop
Jefferson DD1 Survey
Q1 Where do you own land in the Chimacum Creek Drainage District?
Beaver valley .
Downstream
Rhody Drive
I own property
outside the
Chimacum Cre..
I have an I
interest in
Chimacum Cre...
Other(please
specify)
0% 10% 20°0 30% 40% 50% 60°h
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Center Valley 53.85'-
Beaver valley 12.82% 5
Downstream of Rhody Drive 17.95% 7
I own property outside the Chimacum Creek Drainage District in Jefferson County 2.56°/6 1
I have an interest in Chimacum Creek but am not a property owner 2.563/6
Other(please specify) 10.26% 4
TOTAL 39
ti OTHER(PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE
1 I m filling out for Jefferson Land Trust -the Land Trust owns land throughout the District. and 4/21.'2025 10:58 AM
holds conservation easements throughout the district
2 Center Valley Highlands 3/30/2025 9:22 AM
3 Both Center Valley and Beaver Valley 3/27'2025 7.04 PM
4 I have family members and friends who live along Chimacum creek. 3/18/2025 11:02 AM
1/28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
Q2 Please select which statements describe how you use land in the
Chimacum Creek Drainage District. You can select multiple statements.
use the land
as my primary
year-round...
use the land'
as a secondary
residence an...
I use the land
to farm as my
main source_.
use theland
for fay,ming,
but not as m...
use the land
for recreation.
use the land
for short-term
rentals as a..
I lease the
land to others
for farming.
se the land
to
to run a local
business(no_.
Other(please
specify)
0% 10% 20% 30°11 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
I use elan, as my primary year-round residence. 76.32% 29
I use the land as a secondary residence and live there part-time. 2.63% 1
I use the land to farm as my main source of income. 18.42% 7
I use me land for farming. but not as my main source of income. 36.840ro 14
I use the land for recreation. 23.68% 9
I use the land for short-term rentals as a landlord. 2.63% 1
I lease the land to others for farming. 7.89% 3
I use the land to run a local business (not farming). 5.26% 2
Other(please specify) 18.420/6 7
Total Respondents: 38
OTHER(PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE
2 /28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
1 The Chimacum Ridge Community Forest is also partly within this district, and it is managed to 4/21/2025 10:58 AM
produce economic, ecological,and social benefits for the community through active forest
management. It includes a full-time residence as well. The Land Trust leases land within the
district to farmers, and holds conservation easements on several farms which help ensure the
habitat and agricultural values of those farms are managed with future generations in mind.
2 I use the land for Timber and Community Education 3/27/2025 7:04 PM
3 I live on land part time with my daughter. She owns the land. 3/18/2025 11:02 AM
4 Chimacum Grange property, community center 3/13/2025 8:59 PM
5 currently vacant,possible future residence 3/12/2025 7:32 PM
6 We keep three horses on the property 3/9/2025 5:09 PM
7 Art studio and developing a local business 3/9/2025 11:54 AM
•
3/28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
Q3 Please share how much you agree or disagree with the following
statements on challenges faced by local property owners. If the statement
does not apply to you, then select N/A.
Reed
grass is a
a problem an
I
■
I need help
understanding
what
■
4/28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
I find the 011
permitting,
process for
■
My neighbor's
management of Chimacum Cre-.
alBeavers are
impacting my
property.
5/ 28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
Fish habitat -.-4,,.:
3 c.
is degraded on
my property.
III
]% 10°.. 20°n 20', 40°,, 50°, 60°,. ^D','., 30"s, 90
III '
STRONGLY AGREE I NEITHER DISAGREE STRONGLY NIA TOTAL
AGREE AGREE NOR DISAGREE
DISAGREE
Flooding is a challenge for me. 39.47% 15.79% 2.63% 15.79% 15.79% 10.53%
15 6 1 6 6 4 38
Reed canarygrass is a problem and is 57.89% 15.79% 7.89°' 5.26% 5.26% 7.89%
hard to manage. 22 6 2 2 3 38
I need help understanding what 15.79% 36.84% 21.05% 7.89% 5.26% 13.16%
regulations apply to me when 6 14 8 3 2 5 38
managing the creek on my property.
I find the permitting process for 26.32% 23.68% 13.16% 5.26% 10.53% 21.05%
managing flooding on my property 10 9 5 2 4 8 38
challenging.
My neighbors management of 36.84% 28.95% 2.63% 5.26% 10.53% 15.79%
Chimacum Creek impacts my 14 11 1 2 4 6 38
property.
Beavers are impacting my property. 26.32% 15.79% 15.79% 10.53% 13.16% 18.42%
10 6 6 4 5 7 38
Fish habitat is degraded on my 23.68% 18.42% 15.79% 7.89% 7.89% 26.32%
property. 9 7 6 3 3 10 38
6/28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
Q4 Are there other issues that impact you related to Chimacum Creek?
RESPONSES DATE
1 Flooding generally is degrading the agricultural values of certain areas of conservation 4/21/2025 10:58 AM
easement protected farmland.
2 Occasional flooding in isolated areas. beavers fell trees from time to time 4/10/2025 8:31 AM
3 Flooding 4/2/2025 9:27 PM
4 For decades, individual property owners have been responsible for maintaining Chimacum 3/30/2025 9:22 AM
Creek. Over time. invasive canary grass and beaver dams have increasingly clogged the
waterway. causing flooding and environmental strain. However, removing the canary grass or
notching beaver dams now requires special permits, which are extremely difficult sometimes
impossible to obtain due to ecological regulations surrounding fish and salmon habitats. Not
lust ecological regulations but the willingness for neighbors cooperation. Neighbors may share
a road for instance but the beaver damn is or canary grass is on the person's property that
either does not want to take action or spend the money to get the permit or take action even
after offering. Now there is flooding and erosion with no solution. This creates a frustrating
conundrum, property owners are expected to maintain the creek, but they're legally prevented
from doing so The government created a system that now requires a government solution,
funded again by taxpayers. To make matters more complicated. the local population is largely
older and physically unable to do the demanding work needed even if it were allowed.
Reestablishing the Chimacum Drainage District is being considered as a way to centralize
efforts and possibly secure the necessary permits, but transparency is critical. Residents need
clear, honest communication about how decisions are made. where money is going, and who is
held accountable. The permitting problem and lack of access to reasonable solutions have led
to inaction and the community deserves a process that is both effective and fair.
5 I have 2 creek systems on my property.. one is running thru my fields n blocked from entering 3/28/2025 7:13 AM
the other creek system from canary grass an rock... turning grazing land into unusable wet
lands..
6 Black berry's and silt sediment 3/27/2025 9:14 PM
7 Not directly 3/27/2025 7:04 PM
8 The additional drainage coming from properties above me(hillside). 3/27/2025 5:52 PM
9 Increasing rains and early mountain snow melt leave cause erosion and leave creek low in late 3/18/2025 11 02 AM
summer.
10 No 3/17/2025 10:19 AM
11 The invasive canary grass along the creek is spreading rapidly in my wetland and grazing 3/16/2025 9:19 PM
areas, and spreading to the portion of the farming land I have
12 Downstream mismanagement or no management of creek maintenance. In 2019 Jefferson 3/12/2025 9.51 PM
County adopted the new flood zone maps from FEMA which changed some properties that the
creek borders from a Flood zone C designation(least strict)to a Flood Zone A designation
(most strict, like rapidly flowing water with waves). This presents increased building
challenges, cost in building, and long term insurance costs. I would think a drainage district
would be able to have some influence on educating FEMA on the actual rise and fall of the
flood waters in the valleys and the fall that affects how much flow the creek actually
experiences.
13 Cost of fixing the drainage issue. Permitting. Soil degradation due to flooding. Decreased use 3/12/2025 12 04 PM
of farmland due to flooding. Loss of income.
14 No. we have a small pond that drains to Center valley 3/11/2025 11.07 AM
15 My neighbor turning a wetland into a junkyard. making retrieving the Junk almost impossible as 3/9/2025 8 59 PM
7 / 28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
it starts to sink and eventually gets swallowed. I'd more like to see a task force doing
something about the people turning farmland into a toxic dump site in salmon bearing habitat
and highly sensitive habitat.
16 The creek runs stronger and faster in the winter which erodes my land which did not historically 3/9/2025 11:54 AM
happen.
17 THE BUFFER SHOULD BE REDUCED TO 50'. 3/8/2025 2:13 PM
8/28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
Q5 Which of the following value statements do you agree with? Please
select all that apply.
I am a steward
of the Land.
I want to
support salmon
runs in
I want to
support local
agriculture.""g"- 3a�aa'
wan[to
support my
neighbors wh.,.
I want
individual
property...
I would be
witting to pay
a reasonable...
Other (please
specify)
0% 10°% 20% 30% 40% 50°3 60% 70% 80% 900m
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
I am a steward of the land. 84 221°%0 32
I want to support salmon runs in Chimacum Creek. 71.05% 27
I want to support local agriculture. 86.84% 33
I want to support my neighbors who have challenges with the Creek on their property. 68.42% 26
I want individual property managers to be responsible for managing the Creek. 23.68°,6 9
I would be willing to pay a reasonable levylfee it the main challenges on Chimacum Creek were addressed by a special 60.53% 23
distract
Other(please specify) 23.68% 9
Total Respondents: 38
# OTHER(PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE
1 We understand the creek and drainage system of the district were engineered to facilitated the 4/21/2025 10.58 AM
creation of productive farmland in the valleys over 100 years ago. We also understand that in
order to sustain the agricultural productivity in many parts of these valleys drainage is
necessary. We also understand that habitat for salmon and other wildlife was not adequately
considered when creating the drainage system, and that habitat was severely degraded and
destroyed in that process. and in subsequent years of management. If re-activated, the
drainage district must work with partners and landowners to actively help improve the habitat
conditions in the system.
9/28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
2 Regulation and permitting needs to be reformed. 3/30/2025 9:22 AM
3 I would be willing to pay a reasonable levy/fee to help clean up and remeander Chimacum 3/16/2025 9:19 PM
Creek, and restore more of the beaver habitat.
4 I would be willing to pay a portion for work completed. I don't want to fund more employee 3/13/2025 9:36 PM
hours.
5 Please define reasonable levy. Tens of dollars is reasonable. Hundreds of dollars is not. 3/12/2025 4:12 PM
6 Managing the creek from a watershed perspective rather than an individual landowner 3/11/2025 11:34 AM
perspective is essential. Everyone should have to contribute based on linear feet of creek
frontage, regardless of impact on their own property.
7 I want no new taxes or fees on my land. nor loss of use through unreasonable regulation. n 3/10/2025 6:16 PM.
8 I care about the beaver populations and salmon runs. The early snowpack melt effects salmon 3/9/2025 11:54 AM
runs in the summer.
9 I DO NOT NEED GOVERNMENT MICRO MANAGING MY PROPERTY 3/8/2025 2:13 PM
10/28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
Q6 Please share how much you support or oppose the following
management strategies for Chimacum Creek.
Mowing reed
canarygrass
Ii
■
Beaver and dam
management
■
Periodic II
removal of reed
canarygrass...
Decommissioning
of obsolete ®�
11 /28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
willow
removal/replac
ment
Planting
hedgerows along
waterways
Removal of
sediment EN
buildup in_. ,
Riparian
buffers(i.e.
tree and shr..
12/28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
Stream channel
restoration
with willing...,
urge state
stream and
wetland... ■
Compensating
landowners for
converting.. ■.
water storage
dwIng the
water for..■
t
13/28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
•
STRONGLY SUPPORT I NEITHER OPPOSE STRONGLY TOTAL
SUPPORT SUPPORT NOR OPPOSE
OPPOSE
Mowing reed canarygrass 50.00% 23.68% 18.42% 7.89% 0.00%
19 9 7 3 0 38
Beaver and dam management 65.79% 10.53% 13.16% 7.89% 2.63%
25 4 5 3 1 38
Periodic removal of reed canarygrass and 68.42% 21.05% 5.26% 5.26% 0.00%
aquatic vegetation from the stream channel 26 8 2 2 0 38
Decommissioning of obsolete drainage 21.62% 16.22% 37.84% 13.51% 10.81%
ditches 8 6 14 5 4 37
Willow removal/replacement 27.03% 18.92% 37.84% 13.51% 2.70%
10 7 14 5 1 37
Planting hedgerows along waterways 26.32% 18.42% 28.95% 21.05% 5.26%
10 7 11 8 2 38
Removal of sediment buildup in specific 55.26% 26.32% 13.16% 5.26% 0.00%
reaches of drainage ways 21 10 5 2 0 38
Ripanan buffers (i.e. tree and shrub 42.11% 23.68% 18.42% 10.53% 5.26%
plantings)with willing property owners 16 9 7 4 2 38
Stream channel restoration with willing 42.11% 31.58% 18.42% 5.26% 2.63%
property owners 16 12 7 2 1 38
Large scale stream and wetland restoration 42.11% 21.05% 21.05% 10.53% 5.26%
projects with willing property owners 16 8 8 4 2 38
Compensating landowners for converting 34.21% 15.79% 26.32% 10.53% 13.16%
flooded farmland to wetlands 13 6 10 4 5 38
Water storage during the winter for irrigation 28.95% 31.58% 28.95% 7.89% 2.63%
use 11 12 11 3 1 38
14/28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
Q7 Are there other options that should be considered for managing
drainage and the creek?
RESPONSES DATE
1 Water storage is important, and we need to be thinking about the ground as a storage space... 4/21/2025 10:58 AM
Smart management can help ensure that in the winter the groundwater is fully charged and the
ground is saturated in a way that can provide a slow release for agricultural and habitat needs.
Also, it's very important to emphasize that any of the buffer plantings will require ongoing
maintenance, and landowners often don't embrace that maintenance -so, a drainage district
could potentially be involved in regular maintenance of those habitat buffers to the extent that
it helps with the drainage and habitat function of the system.
2 Prioritize the goals! Which is number 1?Salmon or farmland?Enable farmers to be able to 4/2/2025 9:27 PM
legally get rid of beavers! Such as help them become a licensed trapper!
3 Beaver dams need to be addressed and need to line up people to contract for the canary grass 3/31/2025 4.39 PM
removal since the window to do this work is so small. Need to calculate costs and how much
needs to be generated to cover this &/or if there are any grants to help.
4 Simplify and streamline the permitting process. Provide assistance for elderly and disabled 3/30/2025 9:22 AM
landowners. Form a local crew or task force for coordinated maintenance, Improve
transparency and communication between agencies and residents. Allow community-wide or
district-level permits to reduce burden. Support low-maintenance native plant buffers. Offer
educational resources and workshops on creek management. Partner with conservation groups
for balanced, practical solutions.
5 Safety from floods due to early snow melt and increased raining 3/18/2025 11:02 AM
6 Monitoring the water quality. 3/17/2025 10:19 AM
7 Remeandenng and restoring original Creek course as much as possible. Encouraging farmers 3/16/2025 9.19 PM
to consider other. non-destructive uses for their lands.
8 Making the creek an accessible walking park if possible 3/14/2025 2.35 PM
9 50 ft on either side of the creek is an easement but still owned by the land owner. Once a year 3/12/2025 9:51 PM
the district has access to perform maintenance, which would need to be defined. for a certain
amount of time agreed upon by the land owners, Good luck! Thanks for making the effort.
10 Expanding existing Drainage District Boundaries: homes being built on uplands, logging are 3/12/2025 12.04 PM
causing additional runoff.
11 There are so many birds that use the flooded valley bottoms and I would want to know how the 3/11/2025 11.56 AM
proposed strategies would affect them.
12 I think the creek should be circuitous and bend rather than going straight. 3/11/2025 11:07 AM
13 Balance between fish and Farming needs to be found. Removing Farmland and restricting use 3/10/2025 6.16 PM
is not fish management. Taking of land without reduction of taxes is Theft.
14 I highly encourage the cleanout of the drainage to continue all the way to the canal. not lust 3/9/2025 8:59 PM
ending at rhody drive. It needs to be cleaned all the way out in order to alleviate the water
backups. I find it hard to believe that salmon swim up the east fork of chimacum drainage to
spawn. as it dead ends at Egg and I road. its 100% peat with zero gravel to nest in, the water
is warm. choked with RCG. very low in oxygen, and very high in tannins. I do not believe there
are any salmon in beaver valley between Egg and I Rd and the Chevron. That being said.
management styles should be different for Center and Beaver Valley, as one is actual salmon
habitat and one is not.
15 What are we doing about run off from roads in the county impacting salmon? 3/9/2025 3:48 PM
15 / 28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
16 Protecting chimacum creek will require mixed strategies that were not historically used that 3/9/2025 11:54 AM
need to be used due to climate change. For example, storing and retaining water up creek to
use down creek for the salmon and to replenish our aquifers. Beaver dams could be a natural
solution to retaining water an then releasing it later for the salmon.
17 CHIMACUM CREEK SHOULD BE LEFT ALONE. 3/8/2025 2:13 PM
16/28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
Q8 Please share your level of support or opposition for individual property
owners managing the creek.
I strongly
Support this
scenario
support this■
scenario
I neither
support nor
oppose this..
I appose this
scenario
I strongly
oppose this
scenario
0% 10% 20°0 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100°/0
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
I strongly support this scenario 18.92% 7
support this scenario 8.11% 3
I neither support nor oppose this scenario 13.51% 5
I oppose this scenario 32.43% 12
I strongly oppose this scenario 27.03% 10
TOTAL 37
OTHER(PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE
1 Support individual landowners managing their own property, but establish a process to address 3/30/2025 9:22 AM
situations where one landowners inaction or issues with the creek negatively impact
neighboring properties.
this is not effective 3/11/2025 11:51 AM
3 no need to pay salanes and use fees for administration which takes away from protects. 3/10/2025 6.42 PM
17/28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
Q9 Please share your level of support or opposition for individual property
owners managing the creek with assistance from agencies and
organizations.
I strongly
support this
scenario
supportio
scenario
neither
support nor
oppose this...
I oppose this
scenario
I strongly
oppose this
scenario
0% 100/ 20% 30% 40% 50°,6 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
I strongly support this scenario 18.92% 7
I support this scenanc 21.62% 8
I neither support nor oppose this scenario 8.11°r6 3
I oppose this scenario 37.84% 14
strongly oppose this scenario 13.51% 5
TOTAL 87
OTHER(PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE
1 Don't you think something is broken if technical assistance is needed for a simple permit?... 3/30/2025 9:22 AM
2 better than 1. but not nearly enough 3/11/2025 11:51 AM
3 allows for landowners to have a say in how their property is managed without being dictated to. 3/10/2025 6.42 PM
18/28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
Q10 Please share your level of support or opposition for reactivating the
Drainage District.
I strongly ■
support this
scenario
I support this■-
scenario
neither
support nor
oppose this...
I oppose this
scenario
I strongly
oppose this
scenario
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 90% 90% 100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
I strongly support mis scenario 37.84°rb 14
I support this scenario 27.03% 10
I neither support nor oppose this scenario 13.51% 5
1 oppose this scenario 5.41% 2
I strongly oppose this scenario 16.22% 6
TOTAL 37
OTHER(PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE
1 Everyone is thinking this is just a move to take peoples land from them by claiming 3/30/2025 9:22 AM
environmental wetland or reserve. This gives the government a reason to be on peoples land
and inspect it which then gives reason to"preserve".
2 This proposal may lead to significant cost burden for some land owners. How can costs he 3/17/2025 10.34 AM
mitigated?
3 I need more information as to what they would be doing to the creek. 3/14/2025 2:45 PM
4 Taxes and fees are already too high and burdensome. 3/10/2025 6:42 PM
5 I can not afford more fees or levies. 3/9/2025 9:10 PM
6 I don't think the landowners think they could afford on going cost 3/9/2025 4:00 PM
19/28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
Q11 Please share your level of support or opposition for creating a
Watershed Improvement District.
t ongly
support this
scenario
I support this
scenario
neither
support nor
oppose this..
I oppose this
scenario
strongly
oppose this
scenario
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 60% 90% 100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
strongly support this scenario 8.11% 3
I support this scenario 29.73% 11
I neither support nor oppose this scenario 29 73% 11
I oppose this scenario 5.41% 2
I strongly oppose this scenario 27.03% 10
TOTAL
37
OTHER(PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE
1 Too ruch government 3/17/2025 10.34 AM
2 I don/fully understand.tihat this would look like and am concerned about potential nightmare 3/11/2025 11.51 AM
of issues around water rights. This could open up a whole can of worms. . I would want to
know a lot more before supporting this.
3 County already wants to control wells in the watershed, how are water rights going to be 3/10/2025 6:42 PM
allotted when the county and State limits future water already.
4 I can not afford more levies or fees. I'd rather do the work myself which I already do. than have 3/9/2025 9:10 PM
to pay for another levy or fee for work THAT I ALREADY DO.
5 I don't think landowners will support giving control of their property 3/9/2025 4:00 PM
20/28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
Q12 Please share your level of support or opposition for creating a
Watershed Improvement District.
I strongly
support this
scenario
I support this
scenario
I neither
support nor
oppose this...
I opposethis
scenario
I strongly
oppose this
scenario
0% 10% 20% 30°1, 40% 50°0 60% 70% 80% 90°0 100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
I strongly support this scenario 2.63% 1
I support this scenario 31.58°ro 12
I neither support nor oppose this scenario 26.32% 10
I oppose this scenario 13.1646 5
I strongly oppose this scenario 26.32% 10
TOTAL 38
OTHER(PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE
1 The main issue is flooding, so perhaps this focusses energy on that, without getting too 3/11/2025 11:51 AM
involved with landowners. That said, the root of the problem is much bigger so perhaps the
other scenanos would in the long term be more impactfuL I would want to know more about
how this differs from z3.
2 I already pay for storm water on my taxes and see no results. 3/10/2025 6 42 PM
3 I do not want to pay more for a levy for work I already manage on my own. 3/9/2025 9:10 PM
4 I don/want the Port of Port Townsend dictating what is done in the county 3/9/2025 4:00 PM
21/28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
Q13 During the 2024 community workshops participants shared ideas for
how to increase support for a special district. Examples that community
members shared included changing the size of the district to make it larger
or smaller, the amount of money property owners pay depending on the
level of work needed for their property, and a cap on the amount of money
that the special district could levy on property ideas. Please use this space
if you would like to share ideas for what would increase your support for a
special district that manages Chimacum Creek.
RESPONSES DATE
1 There have been several studies of the watershed that provide a lot of foundational information 4/21/2025 10:58 AM
that will support smart active management. We encourage using this science-based
information to conduct management that will best prepare us all for the predicted future
climate.
2 How have other districts in other communities navigated the complexities of a levied district 4/10/2025 8:31 AM
3 Either charge a per acre fee or per parcel fee 3/31/2025 4:39 PM
4 i believe having maximum clarity and transparency on cost and requirements through out will 3/31/2025 9:05 AM
provide maximum acceptance for the drainage district. i also for see the biggest hurdles being
funding/cost and concerns of government over reach. on a side note as a property owner on
the creek, giving able body land owners the option to self preform creek maintenance along
with helping others using district funding may be appealing to those whom dont want just any
old contractor on there property.
5 Clear budgets and spending transparency Caps on fees and lower rates based on property 3/30/2025 9:22 AM
impact Community accountability through regular reviews Shared maintenance crews for those
who need help A way to resolve issues when one property affects another Let low-impact
properties opt in or pay less Help landowners access grant funding Emphasize how supporting
local agriculture benefits the whole community, strong drainage supports food production, local
jobs, and keeps land productive and get the entire town involved, but they are voluntary
support.
6 My support for a levy would be affected by the assessment process regarding the equation 3/27/2025 7:04 PM
needed to be created in determining amount a property owner would pay. My concern is upland
properties that affect the lowland with primary land use practices included in the assessment
of dues. Practices on acres that aid or hinder flood mitigation, flow regulation and improved
water quality from upland acres need to be assessed. Higher rates for practices that lead to
poor water quality and flooding(clear cutting large acres, large homes/septic's, poor culvert
infrastructure, amount of impermeable surfaces. poor vegetation buffers in tributaries. Potential
incentives for practices that maintain forest and vegetation coverage. protect and maintain
upland wetlands, minimal infrastructure. and noxious weed management, especially near
tributaries drainages.
7 I think the district needs to be expanded. I don't think ludlow creek is on here and they also 3/27/2025 3:56 PM
flood really bad taking out driveways and culverts.
8 Residents don't have much money in this county. They cannot be burdened with increased 3/18/2025 11:12 AM
regulations and costs.
9 Provide expertise and keep costs low for land owners. Offer a reward system for compliance. 3/17/2025 10:34 AM
10 I don't mind paying fees to support work on the creek, but I want to support salmon habitat 3/14/2025 2:45 PM
restoration on the creek as opposed to maintaining drainage ditches. If there is some middle
22/28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
ground that supports salmon and the farmers, I would go for that.
11 Limit levies to the cost of management field work accomplished. Allow drainage district 3/13/2025 9:42 PM
members to vote up or down proposed projects and budgets.
12 I think the size of the district should either be county wide or just the affected property owners. 3/12/2025 4:16 PM
13 If the amount of money property owners pay depending on the level of work needed for their 3/11/2025 12:04 PM
property. I would be in 100%for whatever was proposed.
14 The fee really needs to be assessed on property tax so everyone pays. Historically it has only 3/11/2025 11:51 AM
been the farmers and people who care who have contributed. It's fair that all property owners
along the creek pay their fair share. I think the fee should be a set amount of$per linear feet
of each side of the creek. So, if someone own 1000'on both sides of the creek, they are
charged for 2000'. If someone owns 4000'on one side of the creek, they are charged for 4000'.
The model of owners who have more work to do to pay more is not equally sharing the load.
Obviously there would need to be an assessment of creek frontage, hopefully this could be
done with maps online, otherwise if its boots on the ground I imagine this could cost a whole
bunch of money out the gate.
15 Spend the money collected already from taxing landowners in the area for storm water on the 3/10/2025 6:42 PM
projects in the area. Do not add additional taxes and fees to landowners.
16 Did not go 3/10/2025 11:00 AM
17 I would support it if it was run by a community volunteer group. and did not have to increase 3/9/2025 9:10 PM
what I pay to simply live here.
18 Knowing how much it will cost. 3/9/2025 4:00 PM
19 It is an unfair burden to make landowners pay for creek restoration with money they don't have. 3/9/2025 12:01 PM
If we are held responsible,the costs should be low and relative to the property owner's income.
The area is not wealthy.
20 GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO STAY OUT OF THIS. 3/8/2025 2:16 PM
23/28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
Q14 Are there other solutions or scenarios that the County should consider
for managing the Creek?
RESPONSES DATE
1 Once a solution is arranged. there will be a fair amount of regular work to maintain and restore 4/21/2025 10:58 AM
the system, and engaging with the Chimacum Schools to participate in that could provide a lot
of benefits to the community, and the land. in the long-term.
2 I'm just in favor of management scenarios that benefit both agriculture where it makes 4/10/2025 8:31 AM
common sense and has long term viability and habitat restoration and conservation where the
conditions are naturally conducive. I'm concerned that a lot of resources will go towards trying
to make ag land out of what naturally wants to be wetland/or that has been made to be more
prone to flooding due to historic land use practices. Thus more suited to wetland habitat.
3 Seeking the permit to fix the damage done by beavers as an umbrella permit like what has 3/31/2025 4.39 PM
been done for the canary grass removal.
4 a perfect world i see is a drainage district that works for the land owners to gather or produce 3/31/2025 9 05 AM
funding and fight for blanket type permitting for work to be done while allocating funding for the
creek maintenance by the linear foot. this funding could be sent to land owners self preforming
the work supervised or to an approved contractor voted on by the land owners to do the work
for whom aren't equipped to do it them selves.
5 Tiered Service Model: Let landowners choose from different service levels (basic, moderate. 3/30/2025 9:22 AM
full). with corresponding fees. based on how much help they need. Pilot Protects: Start with
small. focused areas to show proof of concept before expanding district-wide build trust
through results. Voluntary Work Days: Organize community creek clean-up days supported by
the district to reduce labor costs and increase involvement. Third-Party Management. Contract
with a neutral. professional third-party (not county government)to manage maintenance.
permits. and enforcement. Mobile Permit Team: A district-funded team that helps landowners
get through the permitting process faster and more efficiently. Drainage Watch Program:
Similar to Neighborhood Watch local volunteers monitor and report drainage issues for quicker
responses. Drainage Co-op Model: Similar to a utility co-op—owned and governed by property
owners themselves rather than a top-down agency. Public Infrastructure Investment: Upgrade
culverts. ditches, and flood channels in public areas to relieve pressure on private landowners.
Incentive Programs Offer small financial incentives or tax breaks for proactive drainage
maintenance or volunteer participation.
6 Put a water retention lake on the Shorts Farm property. It already nearly is one anyway. Then 3/18/2025 11:12 AM
permit farmers to do with their land as they want or can.
7 Allow nature to take it's course. If a property owner is having issues with flooding that is 3/12/2025 7.40 PM
affecting agriculture, they can take steps to mitigate on their own property. They can offer to
pay for mitigation efforts to adjacent property owners if needed.
8 Since property owners paying more money is bound to be the issue on passing any of these 3/11/2025 12:04 PM
management scenarios where the properties are required to help. is it possible for the money
to be raised entirely from outside organizations from the broader community to help with the
ecological programs?
9 There needs to be an access right of way for the county or DD/etc. to be able to access the 3/11/2025 11:51 AM
creek on every property. The work should not be optional Again. this sounds like a nightmare
to navigate. but absolutely necessary.
10 No. I think this is a good start 3/11/2025 11.13 AM
11 3/10/2025 6:42 PM
12 Yes 3/10/2025 11:00 AM
13 Find a way to do it without increased cost to the property owners. 3/9/2025 9:10 PM
24/ 28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
14 volunteers, apprenticeships. internships, universities. 3/9/2025 12:01 PM
15 THE COUNTY SHOULD JUST LET THE PROPERTY OWNERS TAKE CARE OF THE 3/8/2025 2:16 PM
CREEK.
25/28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
Q15 Would you like to share any other feedback or questions with us?
RESPONSES DATE
1 One of me benefits of reactivating the drainage district is that the district already holds real- 4/21/2025 10:58 AM
estate interests throughout the channelized system-no other solution could use these
interestsirights.
2 Thank you for putting this together 4/10/2025 8:31 AM
3 Didn't know a sole leading that meeting! Felt more like your trying to shove a new government 4/2/2025 9:27 PM
lob down our throats at our expense!
4 creek maintenance should be treated like a shared driveway. land owners must all contribute 3/31/2025 9'05 AM
and understand this work needs to be done. big thanks to everyone working on this' your doing
a great lob!
5 We need real-world solutions that prioritize function and landowner rights over red tape. 3/30/2025 9:22 AM
Transparency must be built into every part of the process especially with money. permits. and
protect decisions. The current permitting system is broken. If we can't touch a beaver dam or
cut back grass without a drawn-out permit, then we're being set up to fail. Any special district
must be accountable to the people funding it not just to environmental agencies. If we're
paying in, we should have real say over how things are managed.
6 As a landowner. I would prefer to choose who performs the necessary work. I also feel very 3/27/2025 5:52 PM
strongly that each landowner should be required to maintain their section of creek.
7 How would beavers and dams be managed or maintained? 3/27/2025 3:56 PM
8 My property is located on the outskirts of the zoning map and I don't feel it would be fair for me 3/12/2025 7:40 PM
to pay fees for an issue that does not affect me nor are there any impacts downstream to
Chimacum Creek with my land.
9 Thank you for taking this on! It has been a long time coming. I am fully in support. 3/11/2025 11:51 AM
Unfortunately many landowners are oblivious or don't care so it's going to be a long road. Good
luck!
10 Question 16 will not allow for selecting more than one issue 3/10/2025 6:42 PM
11 78 farmer in the valley Manager 5 mites of chimacum creek lam a living person with vast 3/10/2025 11:00 AM
knowledge of Manager of chimacum creek and farming the land
12 no 3/9/2025 12:01 PM
26/28
Jefferson DD1 Survey
Q16 If you would like to receive updates please select all topics you are
interested updates on and enter your email in the textbox. Your email will
not be linked to your answers in this survey.
Chimacum
Drainage
District
_r.rrac,.ri Creek
management
(this mclud...
General
agricultural
updates
Opportunities
for technical
assistance a.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Chimacum Drainage District 100.00"b 29
Chimacum Creek management (this includes water. agriculture. habitat. and flood management) 86.21% 25
General agricultural updates 79.31% 23
Opportunities for technical assistance and for resources for agriculture 65.52% 19
Total Respondents: 29
ENTER EMAIL ADDRESS HERE. DATE
1 info@saveland.org 4/21/2025 10:58 AM
2 Crystie@chimacumgratn.com 4/10/2025 8:31 AM
3 knssims@setonconstruction.com 3/31/2025 9:05 AM
4 aalascola@gmail.com 3/30/2025 9:22 AM
5 Fastlanefarm@gmail.com 3/29/2025 8.12 AM
6 bishopfamilyfarm15@gmail.com 3/27/2025 9:14 PM
7 rhelzer@saveland.org 3/27/2025 7:04 PM
8 Info@dharmaridgefarm.com 3/27/2025 6.14 PM
9 wallyh65@yahoo.corn 3/27/2025 5:52 PM
27/28
f
Jefferson DD1 Survey
10 Kristamudge@hotmail.com 3/27/2025 3:56 PM
11 joseph.goularte@yahoo.com 3/17/2025 10:34 AM
12 eviechilds@gmail.com 3/16/2025 9:26 PM
13 jswalk3@gmail.com 3/16/2025 9:26 PM
14 Chasitysade89@protonmail.com -3/14/2025 2:45 PM
15 chimacumgrange@gmail.com 3/13/2025 9:01 PM
16 dhysko@gmail.com 3/12/2025 4:16 PM
17 westbrookangus@yahoo.com 3/12/2025 12:07 PM
18 desjardins.leah@gmail.com 3/11/2025 12:04 PM
19 karyn@reddogfarm.net 3/11/2025 11:51 AM
20 macintag@msn.com 3/11/2025 11:20 AM
21 gareth@olympus.net 3/11/2025 11:13 AM
22 hickmans@tscnet.com 3/10/2025 7:41 PM
23 jjellis@olypen.com 3/10/2025 6:42 PM
24 See hard copies 4433 Albatross Street,pt 3/10/2025 11:00 AM
25 grayfoxfarm@ymail.com 3/9/2025 9:10 PM
26 pvd@olympus.net 3/9/2025 5:13 PM
27 staceyburrellrn@gmail.com 3/9/2025 4:00 PM
28 helenstimson93@gmail.com 3/9/2025 12:01 PM
28/28