Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAP21 Showalter Request for Documents Order SDP 2024-00006M A R I L Y N S H O W A L T E R 1596 Shine Road, Port Ludlow, WA 98365 marilyn.showalter@gmail.com, 360-259-1700 Aug 15, 2025 Honorable Gary N. McLean Jefferson County Hearing Examiner Jefferson County, Washington carolyn@co.jefferson.wa.us Dear Hearing Examiner McLean: Re: Request for Order to Produce Voluntary Compliance Agreement Documents Rock Island Shoreline Application SDP 2024-00006 As a Party of Record, I request the Hearing Examiner to order the County to file the “Voluntary Compliance Agreement” referenced in Condition 37 of the Staff Report, EXH CL-10. I further request that the Public Hearing be held open for 14 days after it is filed or delivered to me. My reasons are: 1. “Implementing” the Voluntary Compliance Agreement (VCA) is a condition (Condition 37) in the Staff Report. It is therefore part of the Staff Report, and needs to be made available, as an attachment or some other accessible mode, at least 14 days prior to the Public Hearing under Rule 4.2. 2. As far as I can determine, in the whole casefile, this VCA is mentioned for the first time, twice, on pages 8 and 14 of the Staff Report: Unpermitted development occurs in the adjacent shorelands. The development on the three parcels owned by the applicant is within the shoreline buffer. To address the violation, the applicant has signed a Voluntary Compliance Agreement (VCA) with the county, which allows the applicant time to either obtain 'after-the-fact' permits or remove the development from the properties. Compliance with the VCA is addressed as a permit condition in this staff report. (Emphasis added.) And (37) The Permittee shall implement the Voluntary Compliance Agreement, which addresses the unpermitted development on three upland parcels associated with this shoreline application. 3. I have searched the case file and Laserfiche for the VCA and cannot find it. 4. From the sparse information provided above, it appears that this document directly relates to arguments I have made regarding the necessity of addressing violations of law in the upland properties in a manner that complies with the SMA, and not precluding SMA enforcement by excluding the uplands from the scope of the Application “site.” 5. There are several initial questions I have about this unseen document: • What violations are admitted? Under what code, WAC, or RCW provisions? • Is the VCA executed under authority of the SMA and JCC 18.25? • What is the Applicant required to do, and by what dates? • Will there be any public process into what is to be done or not done under the VCA? Why isn’t that this process, i.e., this public hearing in SDP 2024-00006? • When was this agreement signed and who signed it? • What discussions led to this agreement, and why aren’t emails or notes of meetings and telephone calls included in the County’s filings in this case, as they are for other emails and notes in this case? • Did the County deliberately decide to omit the VCA and related documents from this proceeding? Or was it inadvertent. For these reasons, I request the Hearing Examiner to order the VCA to be produced immediately, and to produce all County records leading up to its execution, including internal and external communications, emails, notes, and drafts, as soon as practicable. I further request that the Public Hearing be held open until 14 days after the filing of these documents. Respectfully, Marilyn Showalter Marilyn Showalter