HomeMy WebLinkAbout090922 Letter re: Port Ludlow Development; Burt Loomis cx - G(i cft /
IS THE JEFFERSON COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CORRUPT OR ARE THEY JUST INCOMPENENT?
The abandoned Trail Nine" issue fits into a long pattern of the Cognry(thapiag the interests of
the Developer (PLA, Pope, etc.) ahead of the interests of the Port Ludlow community. The
following are just a few examples: JEFFERSON COUNTY��
1. I successful challenge to Ordinance No. 01-0117-95, which designated a Port Ludlow
Interim Urban Growth Area. My attorneys challenged Jefferson County and Pope Resources
before the Growth Management Hearings Board. The Board ruled in my favor, finding that the
County had made this designation based on 'fatally flawed"premises and without the evidence
required to support it. [See Loomis vs Jefferson County 95]
2. Another example is the successful challenge to PLA's proposal to build Trendwest-a
large commercial development-at Ludlow Cove. PLA argued this 120- unit timeshare
development was "residential"and not "commercial, "while residents pointed out the absurdity
of calling the development anything but the latter. The County sided with PLA. But the Hearings
Examiner agreed with the residents, ruling that Trendwest was commercial, and as such
inconsistent with the MPR designation of the area as single-family residential.
3. Also, the County's approval of PLA's plan to build town homes over the lagoon at the
Port Ludlow Marina, in direct violation of the County's own Shoreline Management Program.
4. The County's decision to enter a settlement with PLA permitting it to harvest timber in
the MPR Single Family Tract and MPR Open Space Reserve, despite the County's previous
(and clearly correct)position that this activity was inconsistent with the permitted uses of the
land.
5. The County's entry into a five-year extension of the original Development Agreement on
May 13, 2013, which provided PLA a valuable continuation of preliminary plat approval
vesting without requiring PLA to address its failure to complete the development by 2020.
Note: At the present rate completion is estimated to be around 2044 with the County losing
millions of dollars annually in property tax revenue, etc...
6. The County's failure to comply with the MERU Ord.17.45.010/17.45.020 Sections, 3-18,
8-99 (3.802) for the past twenty-two years while knowingly publishing false and misleading
information regarding the true MERU counts, water rights, quality and capacity for the Port
Ludlow MPR build out.
Loomis legal file
Wave Welmnall
bertiecabkspeedicom
17.45.020 MERU - A system shall be established no later than 60 from the effective date days
From :bertl@cablespeed.com Thu, Nov 19, 2020 09:1Subject 2
0 MERU - A system shall be AM
established no later than. 60 days from
the effective date
To :Greg Brotherton
<gbritarton@co.jefferson.wa.us>
cc :Philip Morley
<Pmorle co.jefferson. a.us>, Patty
Charms
<lmas@co.jefferson.wa.us> Debra
Murdock
<'dmnurdock@ co.jeffersan.wra.us>,
Philip Hunsucker
<phunsucker@ .je'ferson.wa.us>
Bcc :Jim Searantino
<jrscarantino@gml.com>E Steve
Hammond
mond
<sha rnond46@reagan.c >,
Christine Spagie
<c pag12@gmail.com>, S Bay
Community _ _s r
<bayclub@cab fespeed.corn>, Barbara
Schaefer <b lba 1@grr;ail.co n>, Bill
Cooke <gw @comcast.net>, Douglas
Henderson <chendlQ@rnsn.corn>
Greg,
It has now been more than twenty-one
create this Ordnance. I have years since I worked with .�effer County to
DCD six tars over the last nine years requesting
that they comply with the€ rdnance requirements: "A system shall be established
kiteatkl-Loska from the effective date of the ordinance codified"-- "shall
r> retain a cr rre co ,nt"
" mair ire a matrix s oleic /ioo �n of residential and commercial
_� u—
The current (02/06/2018) MERU report is inaccurate, incomplete and does not
comply with the Ordnance requirements. lime for DCD to follow the requirements of that
Ordnance!
Regards,
Bert
17.45.020 MERU record.
The department of community development shall maintain a count
of MEBILand of r t_dw [ir c pinta. A fern shall be esta shed
ng
l h
division that provides n _ v in this
system ll taliatesQuat of i This
Mtn a �rr c , shall be available to the general
public for inspection during regular business hours, and shall be u as
needed to reflect current usage and allocations of MERUs. Alloc:atio�nsof
MERUs shall be determined according to the provisions of
JCC 17,45s412. The department shall maintain records of ERU and MERU
allocations and
aintaln a rna shgjocation of r Sides ; ;;d
commercial MERJ lc, [Ord. 3-18 § 2; Ord. 8-90 § 3.802]
From : David W Johnson
Subject : Port Ludlow MPR current MERU count
To : Bert Loomis
Tue, Nov 17, 2020
Good based upon question, Bert. I noticed that last year while doing a reconciliation
the Assessor's records. I don't know who came up with that
number (22) or what the rational was, but I believe that is a long-standing
error that was never corrected. I believe the actual number should be
eleven (11), but I need to corm that and issue a new count.
From: Bert Loomis
atatathanciay spite r. �
To: David W. Jolson
Subject: RE: Port Ludlow MPR current MERU count
David, Could you please clarify the bases for allocating 22 IERU's to the
Loomis Short Plat (pg 3). Also how many reciential b i en• have
been issued within the Port Ludlow MPR from 10/04/99 to 11/13/20.
Thank you
Bert Loomis