Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM022708S District No.1 Commissioner: Phil Johnson District No.2 Commissioner: David W. Sullivan District No.3 Commissioner: John Austin Interim County Administrator: Frank Gifford Clerk of the Board: Lorna Delaney MINUTES Special Meeting February 27,2008 Chairman Johnson called the meeting to order in the presence of Commissioner David W. Sullivan and Commissioner John Austin. Proposed Critical Areas Ordinance Hearing: Approximately 140 citizens were present when Chairman Johnson called the public hearing to order in the Chimacum School Auditorium. He read the hearing procedures into the record and introduced the Commissioners, Community Development Staff and the Chair of the Planning Commission. Assistant Planner Joel Peterson explained that the Planning Commission completed the first draft of the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) on October 29,2007 and held a public hearing on November 7,2007. The final draft ordinance was completed on January 9,2008 and forwarded to the County Commissioners on January 11. The Planning Commission Majority and Minority Reports, and the staff recommendations were also forwarded to the Board at that time. The Chair opened the public testimony portion of the meeting. Jim Hagan, Cape George, stated that he doesn't agree with the process that was used to amend this ordinance because it began with the exclusion of the public in "backroom" deals conducted with special interests. A dedicated group of citizens volunteered thousands of hours to develop regulations for critical areas that were specific to Jefferson County and then the Planning Commission took over. There is still a problem with what is best available science (BAS) and what is mandatory. Once a development permit is granted, compliance is largely voluntary. Whatever is passed needs to have wide acceptance because it is going to be up to property owners to make sure it works. It may not be an ordinance that everyone wants, but hopefully it will be one that everyone can live with. This is our ordinance, and it needs to work for us. Jo Yount, Port Townsend, stated that she can identify with Jefferson County property owners and conservationists. Until a few years ago she had a business in Port Townsend. It has been exciting to watch the County grow. The County has significant amenities worth protecting like clean air, trees, streams, and fish and wildlife habitat. We need to do better than counties to the east. The revised ordinance will keep Jefferson County as the place we have chosen as our home. People need protection from poor land use practices. It is our responsibility to protect all citizens from damage to their homes because they build too close to a bluff or in a land slide area. The ordinance can be improved but needs to be adopted now. The Board should do one more review of the whole ordinance for consistency. They shouldn't isolate certain Page 1 " Commissioners Special Meeting Minutes: February 27, 2008 Public Hearing sections for review. The Board needs to listen to the public comments tonight and have a professional code writer revise the ordinance. Bob Pontius, Port Ludlow, stated that people have a constitutional right to own property and this ordinance brings up the "takings"issue. When buffers eliminate the use of a person's property, the Commissioners have violated the Constitution and their oath of office. He doesn't believe that anyone in the room is opposed to conservation or protecting wildlife but thinks it is being done at the expense ofpeople's civil rights. Dr. Ken Brooks, Old Eaglemount Road, Port Townsend, stated that he volunteered on the Critical Areas Ordinance Review Committee (CAORC.) He thinks that they made progress in developing an ecologically relevant CAO that addresses stewardship planning, the multiple rating of wetlands, and a water quality monitoring program. He has specific issues with the CAO as written. The tables for wetland buffers are inconsistent with the point system in the DOE's 2004 manual. The buffer increases are too large in association with small increments in habitat scores and the CAORC had recommended seven wetland buffer widths rather than incrementally increasing buffer widths. The County combined non-fish bearing annual streams and non-fish bearing seasonal streams in one category and there is a huge difference in the value of streams that flow year round and those that flow seasonally and he suggested that these be separated. He also provided photos to show this type of stream on the ground. Teri Nomura, Port Hadlock, stated that she is a real estate agent and she has experience with how buyers and sellers of raw land view this area. Jefferson County attracts people because it is a beautiful area and they want to see it protected. It is important to the value oftheir property. No matter which side of the issue a person is on, people want to see their property values protected. Houses can be damaged if they are in critical areas. It isn't true that real estate agents. want to see the community developed. Everyone lives downstream which includes not only rivers and creeks, but also groundwater. Water is the vital force that we will all need in the future. She is in favor of the ordinance. Andrew Reding, Port Townsend, stated that he supports the Critical Areas Ordinance. There is a lot of talk about property rights, takings, and the Constitution. He has studied history and the Constitution and until recently there has never been an absolute right to property and land. He quoted the Bible and the Constitution. This is due process of law. People don't exist in isolation and they have obligations to their community and the environment. If these things are ignored, this is also a taking. It is important to balance all rights. Dennis Shultz, North Jacob Miller Road, Port Townsend, stated that he has been involved with the Critical Areas Ordinance since 2004 and he has seen all the versions. He volunteered on the CAO Review Committee and was a Planning Commission member for a portion of the time they were working on it but he wasn't reappointed. The ordinance before the Board is a cobbled together piece of code which was put together by a bunch of people who really didn't quite know what they were doing. They did not receive any support from DCD or professional code developers when they were putting it together. In the past when the Planning Commission worked on a number of pieces of code, there was always good support from DCD to make sure the code was complete. The current version will not stand up in court. Have the comments from Page 2 Commissioners Special Meeting Minutes: February 27, 2008 Public Hearing State agencies been released to the public? DCD is holding off their recommendations for changes to the draft until after the public hearing. Will the public get a chance to review and comment on those recommendations? He sees a number of major problems in the draft ordinance. He recommended that the Board contact a good code analyst to find out what is missing and what will be difficult to enforce. There will be lawsuits from all sides, and right now the County doesn't need another lawsuit because of poor development of a County ordinance. Dena Jones, Qui1cene, stated that she has lived in the County for nine months and people just keep taking. She and her husband have put a lot of work into their property and have done a good job. Tonight the County faces the destruction of private property ownership disguised asa Critical Areas Ordinance. It condemns the land and renders it useless and worthless. Environmentalists think that people are not capable and intelligent enough to want to preserve their own land. Many of the properties that have noxious weeds are owned by the State, the County and non-profits. When these entities have their lands perfectly managed and under control, then they can tell property owners what to do with their property. This is all about greed, money and power. Government is not the solution to the problem, it is the problem. Denver Shoop, Port Hadlock, stated that the on-going process to adopt critical areas regulations has affected the sale of his son's property. No one wants to look at the land because they don't know what the regulations are going to be. However, he hasn't been affected as much as the large property owners in the valleys. The County has made his land worthless and he deserves to be fairly compensated for the fair market value. He has invited the Commissioners and some environmentalists to do a site visit of his property so that he can explain what he was told he can and cannot do. He thinks it would help them understand how the regulations will affect people. No one has taken him up on his invitation. He knows of some property that was purchased with conservation grants that evidently doesn't have to follow the same rules because they were allowed to put a building and a septic system very close to a wetland. Joe Breskin, Port Townsend, stated that he was a long time participant in the GMA process and has recently become part of this process. He wants to reiterate something he tried to get into the Unified Development' Code (UDC) the last time around. The document that people are commenting on is incomplete and no one knows what it will look like until the code gets straightened out. A significant omission in the document is advice so it can serve as a free standing tool that people can understand without referring to other documents or getting a legal opinion. It needs to include advice on how overlays relate to one and other, particularly overlays granted to allow uses and protection in forestland and agricultural designations. There are also things that are reserved that cannot be changed such as an aquifer recharge zone and in that case, the code language really doesn't matter. People need to understand that the protection reserved for critical areas "trumps" the protection granted for a designated area, such as a mineral resource land. This document fails to provide that advice and it needs to be clarified. Renee Bush, Qui1cene, submitted and read her testimony. (See permanent record.) Page 3 Commissioners Special Meeting Minutes: February 27,2008 Public Hearing $.~$O':::~:C~ +- + .1S....IN~\~~ Frank Hoffman, Port Townsend, urged the Board to adopt the ordinance because he thinks it is the best that the County can produce at this time. Enough effort has been put into it to make it fair. Landowners, developers, and realtors need to be educated about the stewardship plans. The monitoring required in the ordinance needs to be enforced. This ordinance will help protect the County for future generations. Henry Werch, Unincorporated Port Townsend, stated that he is a member of the Planning Commission and was on the CAO Committee. Detailed law and writing deserves to be scrutinized and given close attention and there was at least one attorney on the committee. The most important goal achieved in this ordinance was that environmentalists, property rights advocates, and the people in the middle agree that no solution simply stated in the form of buffers can adequately deal with an environmental situation created by a critical area. This ordinance only applies to properties with critical areas. It only applies to development on those properties. This is a political document and not a scientific document. It is meant to encourage landowners who want to develop property with critical areas to create a stewardship plan that allows for a cooperative, agreeable and well-thought out customized solution for the property and to avoid an oppressive solution of imposed buffers and restrictions. If an applicant chooses not to work with DCD to develop an environmental solution for their property, the imposed buffers have to be great enough to account for all possible impacts on the environment. A customized alternative designed for their property will be least oppressive, fair and reasonable. Byron Rot, Jamestown S , Klallam Tribe Habitat Program Manager, stated that he supports the Critical Areas Ordinance with a few suggested changes. People have talked about how oppressive the stream buffers are, but they are almost the same as the current buffers except for the change for non-fish bearing streams. He submitted written testimony regarding suggested changes to the channel migration zone (CMZ) section (See permanent record.) These changes are important because the rivers in Qui1cene and Brinnon move around. Fourteen inches of rain fell in a 24 hour period on December 3. The year before, eighteen inches of rain fell near Mount Rainier in a 36 hour period. These events will happen more often due to global warming. Flooding is a health and safety issue. CMZs are also important fish and wildlife habitat. James Fritz, Port Townsend, stated that he has lived here for 20 years. When he visits California, he sees farmlands that have become neighborhoods of thoroughbred horses and million dollar homes. He can see this happening in Port Townsend and Jefferson County also. It's too expensive for working families to live here and the County continues to add more regulations. The County's budget is already in trouble and if there are more programs, there will need to be more government. Jefferson County is a beautiful County and people who live here are good stewards of the land. He thinks that if they are given a choice, they will continue to be. Critical areas should be addressed with 70% education, 20% incentives and 10% enforcement. There is always the occasional person who doesn't use common sense and good stewardship so there will always need to be some enforcement. Roger Short, Center Road, Chimacum, stated that he has lived on a dairy farm for most of his life. He had planned to be a lifetime dairy farmer and went to college and worked hard to achieve that goal. Governmental regulations, environmental threats, poor government advice and the economics of Jefferson Page 4 Commissioners Special Meeting Minutes: February 27,2008 Public Hearing .,< County forced him to sell the dairy 5 years ago. Today he has150 beef cattle and a compo sting business. He looked into starting an organic cheese business a few years ago but gave up that dream because there were so many regulatory roadblocks. The stress of all this has taken a toll on his health. He asked the Board to review copies ofthe U.S. Constitution, The Bill of Rights, the Washington State Constitution, and civil rights information. He asked the Board to remember that government is there to serve the citizens, not hinder them. Dick Bergeron, Brinnon, read and submitted his testimony. (See permanent record.) Scott Glogston, Port Hadlock, stated that he represents the group "Citizens Protecting Critical Areas" (CPCA). He read and submitted his testimony. (See permanent record.) Ron Sikes, Port Townsend, stated that the draft Critical Areas Ordinance provides protection for water quality, wildlife habitat, and addresses channel migration zones in geologically hazardous areas. The ordinance also allows for individual decision making in achieving its goals of protecting common sources. Protecting the wetlands will open up opportunities with additional conservation efforts to some day recover the health of the watersheds. Some day the estuary at Chimacum Creek will have shellfish beds and sustainable fisheries. Rosemary Sikes, Port Townsend, stated that she is in favor of the proposed ordinance. Protecting the wetlands and waterways are critical not only for local streams but also for Puget Sound. Laws are required to protect the environment. Jill Silver, Port Townsend, stated that she is presenting comments on behalf of Amy Hiatt also. She read and submitted testimony. (See permanent record.) George Yount, Port Townsend, stated that he has 5 pages of written testimony to submit and will only highlight one comment at this hearing. One of the issues that the County needs to address is the requirement of benchmarks in the Supreme Court decision regarding the Swinomish Indian Tribe Community versus the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board. The County needs to apply for grant funding to do the inventory and get the benchmarks in place for water-quality monitoring and salmon habitat as soon as the ordinance is approved. James Tracy, Poulsbo, stated that 3 minutes to comment on an ordinance of this magnitude is impossible. He asked the Board to consider increasing the comment time when they have public hearings on any complex legislation. The Board needs to have a dialog with the community. He stated that he has urged the Board several times to seek an independent legal review of this ordinance before they take action on it. The Board has received information from the Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney that is covered under "attorney/client privilege" and they have been unwilling to release it to the public. The public needs to know what it says. Page 5 Commissioners Special Meeting Minutes: February 27,2008 Public Hearing Susan Hopkins, Port Hadlock, stated that she was hoping for an ordinance that would be easy to understand, protect the environment, and meet State law. She doesn't think the current draft ofthe Critical Areas Ordinance is sufficient. She supports Jill Silver and Amy Hiatt's opinions regarding channel migration zones, wetlands and fish and wildlife habitat areas. She agrees with the majority opinion except she doesn't think that just monitoring critical areas is sufficient unless adequate enforcement with specific penalties are included when violations occur. Todd Wexman, Port Townsend, read and submitted his testimony. (See permanent record.) David Woodruff, Port Townsend, stated that he lost 3 family members to an environmentally associated condition that causes cancer. Jefferson County is way ahead ofthe curve on environmental issues. Planned growth and planned management means a healthy, safe environment. He supports the adoption ofthe ordinance. Larry Bonar, Port Townsend, stated that he endorses the draft CAO as prepared by the Planning Commission. He thinks it is a comprehensive and balanced approach to protecting the environment. Bill Miller, Port Townsend, stated that this ordinance protects the characteristics ofthe County that are important to citizens which include functions provided by the natural state of the land. Many citizens worked to address methods for protection, The ordinance was prepared with consideration and respect for the agricultural heritage and rural character. It recognizes the adverse affect of sprawl. The ordinance offers property owners in the County an opportunity to participate in maintaining the functions and values of critical areas and limit their degradation. It is a living document and it is important to continue to work on improving it and not just point out where it is lacking. Dixie Llewellin, Port Townsend, stated that she has a business that deals with wetland resources and she supports the adoption of the Critical Areas Ordinance. She submitted written testimony earlier but would like to summarize some of the points. She is concerned about mitigation plans and how enforcement issues will be addressed. She also has concerns about the stewardship plan option. She thinks that most people don't understand the importance of wetlands and wetland buffers. She would like to see the ordinance developed further in these two sections. Mike McFadden, Lake Leland, stated that he has mixed feelings about the CAO process. He attended several meetings and when the process began there was a lot of science involved and then Jill Silver took over. At the meetings he felt like if a person wasn't from Port Townsend, they didn't count. He is a master gardener and land, plants, and environment are very important to him. He is concerned that this ordinance is taking away the ability of the rural landowner to. control their land. The stewardship plan will allow people more control but will cost them money. He thinks this is the wrong approach. There should be a more equitable system for the rural landowner. Page 6 Commissioners Special Meeting Minutes: February 27,2008 Public Hearing (,+" " Mike Whittaker, Quilcene, stated that he is a Planning Commission member and one of the signers of the minority report. The GMA stresses community involvement and balance. He is concerned that the majority report includes a monitoring program that was largely ignored by the majority ofthe Planning Commission. They chose to pass it on to the Board who will need to find funding for the program. Programs need to have oversight. Everyone wants to protect critical areas. He encouraged the Board to read the minority report. He thinks the current draft of the CAO is not defensible. Phil Baumgaertner, Port Townsend, stated that he fully supports the current draft of the CAO. He thinks that the channel migration zones section will help prevent property damage due to heavy rain storms. He is also concerned about the restoration of rocks and gravel in rivers where salmon lay their eggs. Streams need natural areas for winter runoff. Owen Fairbank, Port Townsend, read and submitted his testimony. (See permanent record.) Norm McLeod, Unincorporated Jefferson County, stated that only 2.5% of Jefferson County's 1.4 million acres are available for residential development and 748 acres are zoned commercial or industrial. The CAO stewardship plan is an effort to building partnerships between government and citizens. Several people have testified that property owners can't be trusted to manage their own land, but he disagrees and thinks that people want to take care of their property. He asked the Board to review the GEl report in the public record that describes how much it will cost for the County to impose a buffer. A 75 foot buffer on an intermittent stream reduces the usable land by 18 acres per stream mile. The CAO stewardship plan is at least as protective as the proscriptive regulations in the ordinance. He thinks that there will be a greater demand for stewardship plans if the proscriptive regulations are too restrictive. He would like to see the land protected and controlled by the people who live on it. He requested that the attorney/client document regarding the CAO that the Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney gave to the Board be released to the public. Al Bergstein, Port Townsend, stated that he has been active in the Shoreline Master Plan Program and has attended several CAO meetings. He believes that this ordinance can be made workable. He supports the suggestions by Jill Silver, Amy Hiatt, and George Yount to change the ordinance to make it better. He is a Board Member of People for Puget Sound. The critical areas of the County are critical to restoring fish and wildlife habitat. The ordinance needs to have more work done on it to make it easier for people to implement. He agrees that there needs to be a baseline for the monitoring and the Puget Sound Partnership is also working on this. The State and counties are going to have to pay for the flood damage from last winter because people were allowed to develop in critical areas. Herb Beck, Quilcene, stated that he lives in the middle of a critical area between the Big Quilcene and the Little Quilcene Rivers. He has spent over sixty years there and he has first hand experience at monitoring the land. It is important to understand the dynamic ofthe rivers on the Olympic Peninsula. They run fast and they drain quickly. In 1996, water was running everywhere because 3 feet of snow that melted in 24 hours. All the rivers ran over. After the flood waters receded, the rivers went back to their original river beds and this is available in photos. Regulating and limiting agricultural lands is an issue because gasoline prices are increasing and people need food. Ask the people who live on the rivers. The economics should Page 7 Commissioners Special Meeting Minutes: February 27,2008 Public Hearing be based on science and not on a warm feeling about big buffers. Salmon runs have increased dramatically in the rivers in the last 5 to 6 years. The streams have huge returns. He lives there and sees it. Peter Bahls, Port Townsend, stated that he supports the Critical Areas Ordinance but has some reservations about it. His company does stream restoration of salmon and wildlife habitat and if there is someone upstream that is harming the environment, it affects everyone downstream. He would like to see taxpayer dollars used wisely to protect critical areas. One of the problems he sees in the ordinance is that most of the streams are not accurately shown on the maps. For instance, about one-third of the streams in Tarboo that are fish bearing streams and non-fish bearing streams are not shown or are misidentified. As an interim solution, if someone proposes a subdivsion or project that triggers a flow review by DCD, they should make sure that any streams are located and stream typed correctly on the map. It has been frustrating to see the lack of enforcement over the past several years even when a complaint has been filed and the County has done a site visit. The CAO needs enforcement procedures and policies. Tom Jay, Chimacum, stated that he has lived in the County for 35 years and worked with some success over the past 20 years to restore salmon habitat and salmon runs. However, a lot more needs to be done. The CAO needs to state and be clear about the basic principals that the County is operating on. People tend to take sides in this type of issue. Human beings live in the world but they don't own the water, the air, or the salmon. These aren't private property issues and the County has every right to tell people what to do. People can own property and defend their right to be there, but the commons can't be changed by some act of private greed or personal pleasure. He supports the ordinance. The ordinance needs to clarify enforcement procedures. The ordinance could simply state, "No net loss of ecosystem functions." This clarifies that the public can do this voluntarily with a stewardship plan and indicates when enforcement is necessary. Steve Harmn, Marrowstone Island, stated that he came to this area because of everything to do with the environment. He attended his first meeting on the CAO a year ago and it was very contentious. He has followed the issue because it means something to him. He thinks there is a communication issue. People are referring to their rights, but he thinks it has more to do with whether or not they see themselves as being responsible. Having a CAO is important because future developments could be irresponsible and harmful to the environment and its future. This is what the CAO is meant to address. It needs some cleaning up and clarification oflanguage. He urged the Board to implement the CAO. Heidi Eisenhour, Port Hadlock, stated that we all need to find common ground to make what we have better. She is a geomorphologist by training has studied the movement of water. Channel migration zones are a huge risk to communities. They need to be taken care of and protected for the environment and for the safety of the people who live near them. Debaran Kelso, Port Townsend, stated that she supports the Critical Areas Ordinance. It is flawed and she hopes that those flaws can be addressed before it is adopted. Julie Jaman, Port Townsend, representing the Olympic Environmental Council, submitted and read her testimony. (See permanent record.) Page 8 Commissioners Special Meeting Minutes: February 27, 2008 Public Hearing '.~\;O"(o<:',;. ~ :,::""":== ~ ;, 'fSJilNl"\~ Linda Lou Marshall, Port Hadlock, stated that she supports the Critical Areas Ordinance. This is not a personal issue, it is much larger. Earth is getting more crowded and Jefferson County will be no exception. She trusts that many neighbors who are opposing the CAO are excellent caregivers of their land, but she cannot trust their children's children or other people who are moving here. Marilyn Lewis, Port Townsend, stated that she doesn't agree with the people who are very concerned and emotional aoout the use of their land. Recently mercury from Chinese factories was found in western forests in the United States which proves that no one can do something on a piece of land without the damage being felt by others. The State law allows for the protection of critical areas. The ordinance could be better and needs enforcement. She asked the Board to pass it. Dave Llewellin, Port Townsend, stated that he endorses the adoption of the Critical Areas Ordinance, but he would like to see some stronger enforcement. He is a taxpayer and business owner and hates to see his tax money used for cleaning up the environment because people aren't paying attention. He agrees with George Yount and Joe Breskin. He doesn't think the people for the ordinance are the minority. Teren McLeod, Unincorporated Jefferson County, stated that this is another area of concern about unbalanced regulatory proscription. Many people who have spoken this evening live in Port Townsend and the impacts of the ordinance will affect rural residents and their lands. The Board is charged with representing the interests of all the residents of Jefferson County. Somehow the rural landowner is being left out of the picture over and over again. Jefferson County has been put in an awkward position by the Washington Environmental Council, an outside interest group, and the pressure from them has affected the critical areas process. The premise is that people need to be protected from themselves. The CAO Review Committee, comprised of well qualified and diverse members, worked for over a year to craft a sensible CAO specifically for Jefferson County. Fourteen of the eighteen members signed the majority report. Four people signed the minority report. The majority report was pretty much ignored in the Planning Commission's review process. She supports the stewardship plans that allow people to do the best they can with their lands. Phyllis Shultz, Port Townsend, stated that she has a great deal of empathy for property owners. She has listened and observed in the meetings leading up to this hearing. She thinks the process has been very open and there has been a great d~al of public input. Several people have been very vocal at meetings, making an effort to divide the community and intimidate people. She has also seen common ground among people on both sides of the issue. She doesn't want to see a housing development in Beaver Valley. She trusts the Board to make the right decision. Clara Mason, Port Townsend, stated she moved here from another state. Other states aren't dealing with these difficult issues. As the population increases, what a property owner does will affect their neighbors. She encouraged the passage of the CAD. John Mckinley, Quilcene, stated that salmon would never have been an issue ifthere had never been the "Bolt Decision." He wonders how many people who have spoken tonight actually own land that will be affected by the CAD. Page 9 Commissioners Special Meeting Minutes: February 27,2008 Public Hearing George Hansberry, stated that he bought his property on Donovan Creek in 1980. It was a fish bearing stream. He was a logger and was injured so he couldn't keep the creek cleaned up. The animal habitat dammed up the creek and there were a few big floods that filled the creek. The creek bed is about 2 feet higher than the fields. Last summer he talked to the Conservation District and he put 4 fish traps in the creek in May and June. He caught rainbow, cutthroat, coho, sticklebacks, and newts. He stopped July 4 and started again in mid August and there weren't any cutthroat, rainbows, or silvers. He checked the traps every day and the sticklebacks and newts were dead because of the lack of water flow and the grass dying. Common sense told him that the water needed to flow. He hopes that the Conservation District will help clean out the creek. He hasn't seen any environmentalists ready to help. He knows what the creek needs to run and be healthy. Bob Shultz, Port Townsend, submitted and read his testimony. (See permanent record.) Diane Johnson, Port Hadlock and Quilcene, stated that she took a WSU entrepreneurial farming class a few years ago and learned to deal with the varying topography, soils, and wetlands on her farm. She wanted to do it in an environmentally correct way because that is important to her. If the land is over regulated, it will be difficult to do anything. She doesn't like the fish and wildlife maps in the ordinance because maps don't have anything to do with real wildlife on the landscape. She suggested a revised map that shows the federally listed species that need to be protected and their known habitat. The riparian zones are fish and wildlife habitat and there is a protection for them. She doesn't agree on the buffer widths for non fish bearing streams. Ken Brooks, an expert in the field and member ofthe CAO review committee, has continued to work with the State DOE after he was ignored by the County. Bill Leavitt, stated that GMA started 20 years ago and this proves that it is still alive in Jefferson County. When he was a kid in the County, there were 11,000 people and now there are around 30,000. The newcomers think that the County will be overrun by increased population so it is necessary to have all these protections in place. The County has thrown away millions of dollars in taxpayers money on GMA. Most people think he's the "bad guy" because he has a trucking and excavating business. He has spent a lot of money on his own land making things nice and making things right. He has lived in harmony with wildlife and nature every day of his whole life, but that isn't considered best available science. Instead, the Board listens to people with college educations that have learned from professors and not experience. It isn't that complicated, if the Board would just listen to the people who live on the land. John Richmond, Hoh River Valley, stated that his grandfather homesteaded in the valley in 1880 and he still owns a portion of the homestead and sixty acres that he purchased. He is very attached to that land and has watched the river for decades. He read and submitted the remainder of his testimony. (See permanent record. ) Mike Belenski, Jefferson County, stated that most of what he wanted to say has been said. As he listened to the testimony tonight, it is obvious that the people who support this aren't the ones affected by it because they live in Port Townsend. He has noticed that there was a agency mentioned tonight that is always asking for money from the County and the Board always grants it. If the Critical Areas Ordinance is enacted, property values will drop 90% and then non-profits can buy it cheap using grants. Who is really going to "gain" from the enactment of the CAO? He thinks the process has been subversive. There was a protest on Page 10 Commissioners Special Meeting Minutes: February 27,2008 Public Hearing June 19,2006 because the County had negotiated an agreement with the Washington Environmental Council behind closed doors. The attorney/client privilege document on the CAO needs to be made public. He thinks people should be able to comment for more than 3 minutes at a public hearing. Hearing no further comment for or against the Critical Areas Ordinance, the Chair closed the public hearing. He stated that the deadline for written comments is close of business on March 5, 2008. The Board will deliberate on the CAO on March 10 at 5 p.m. in the Superior Courtroom at the Courthouse. NOTICE OF ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Sullivan moved to adjourn the Commissioners' Special Meeting at 9:11 p.m. Commissioner Austin seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. : ~ ! . , "".." 1\ :" .... , '" ,. ""'~ . "" ~,/ t _.Iii ~ A TTES -;' I) ,,\ '1 t ~ )/' JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS QJ;jk Phil J olufson, Chair U~~ David W. Sullivan, Member ~~~etrLC Deputy Clerk of the Board Page 11 ;- ,~ JEFFERSON COUNTY GUEST LIST NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY Testimony? YES NO MAYBE ~~D DDl?Sl DD~ DDD I5D DDI&l DD~ DD@ DD~ o D.ID D ~D ~D ~DD DDD DDD -- --1 _)cu-r..: C<.": /1 a / 1/ btj3,1e:l!!/ Co ' I' 'I .:::2. Lf r:! A/ L f n5/ A\li-- (17SY6'8 13 . /a," j2d- / ~91~ ~ jt-. I \-1 JEFFERSON COUNTY GUEST LIST NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY ,./ -'" '1jyi N 1'V\L ~1;JL Ct , >i'l IV lc./ ;v#, 5 Shoyt , S. / 11/ c: 1\/AII) J 7/ C/~~llt/ /', l.v C ~ ie..r ((cr .2 LIt) &~/< 1> ,1, +0 }IJ~<-.rlllJ~ J:1t, 9S31. ~ '3 ~.j 2. 0 PL C//:3 {,.j jJ, 7- er c Testimony? YES NO MAYBE DD0 D D.~ ~DD ~DD ~DD DDlXf mDD D~D D~.< [RDD $DD D.0D ~DD ~DD .~DD D @{]< (\ JEFFERSON COUNTY GUEST LIST NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY ,Lll-jZR/ ~I3LE~- S't,,(5AtV /-fop k.1 AJ5 7t7J d W5LXII'\,C( h ;;ba..., I- (/1.) L a a) Po,<:r f-f.4tX~ P-r PI Q\.A. ; , (.fJ I?-( 81 fIAt? /IIl.s LA4,E ~{ 4/(~ D~. I;J. f:"S- 5 S""-t- ~ .t-. ~{PO t)Lf Jt -'1-1; 5- ( C{~ (C(lrC, Dv' . \~o'~oM '~8 f<il; /J .\1.;. D ,.....jo / II Testimony? YES NO MAYBE It) HEARING RECORD JEFFERSON COUNTY GUEST LIST NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY 5 0 /=t; .5-1(' r .7 PT f Dt\ vE LL€:L() E::LL-1tJ /1-111~ ./J:f (h~,d; /1).; !KZ LUJlrl!/1rp./z /)1 ,Jr E:,s -~I '2 it?' ~ z.. I-!tJ, . /''-'/. f 7 {) tlJt1;1.1 ~ (.J 0/ . . q (,tlt Cc-d c-- f I 'J _ '., , Testimony? YES NO MAYBE DDD DDD D DD '0 DD D D'~ D Dg 0D KDD DDa' DDfZl DDD DDD DDD DDD DDD DDD ') JEFFERSON COUNTY GUEST LIST NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY f>'T '~c~~f4I',r Testimony? YES NO MAYBE D DE( ~D DDC1 D D~ DDD ~ D D' > DDD DDD DDD DDD DDD D DD DDD DDD DDD DDD , JEFFERSON COUNTY GUEST LIST TITLE: Hearinq re: Proposed Critical Areas Ordinance DATE: Wednesday, February 27,2008 at 6:30 p.m. PLACE: Chimacum School Auditorium NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY Testimony? . YES NO MAYBE I \ - '-. i 7'1 (\ (:v.,~~( VDvr Ih-l {eJL- O}~ ' \ ~\ J c/ . CA L1 \ivY' 0 \.---t. ,- \.. /., GI/ \ ... , 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 nnn JEFFERSON COUNTY GUEST LIST TITLE: Hearinq re: Proposed Critical Areas Ordinance DATE: Wednesday, February 27,2008 at 6:30 p.m. PLACE: Chimacum School Auditorium NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY Testimony? YES NO MAYBE 17/ I , ~:/ /;)J) llA.Jll/1^ i( ?7 t./ Pil\.p /~ilfh... (!.IL",.}iJ'~&, 0 [k}1j ..J 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 DD nnn ~ JEFFERSON COUNTY GUEST LIST TITLE: Hearing re: Proposed Critical Areas Ordinance DATE: Wednesday, February 27,2008 at 6:30 p.m. PLACE: Chimacum School Auditorium NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY Testimony? YES NO MAYBE 7J V!J /yfLA.r\J I~Ls,..J 'fr-f F, "11 JrJ/.t.p()~ PI o 0 ~-e- .J; vi /f/lLC~J____' 2~~ ?P'z.. /+w v //)/ t:>u:J{/"~ 0 OJM.; f 7 ~UR"-- 4Iow~~ 1041../ hAr,L(! <)'11 -# 2'z. g, fJr D O~ AIorm:M-. 1I~'L~ 24/ )~ /201 UtA-"" CO I'IJt:7~l::.d ~ODv .'1:. If_ t""_ /.. { 0 00 0 00 000 0 00 OOD 0 00 0 00 0 00 000 0 00 0 00 0 00 nnn \ JEFFERSON COUNTY GUEST LIST TITLE: Hearino re: Proposed Critical Areas Ordinance DATE: Wednesday, February 27,2008 at 6:30 p.m. PLACE: Chimacum School Auditorium NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY Testimony? YES NO MAYBE :fuv\E,. ;fA-.MA,J XDD DDD DDD DDD DDD DDD DDD D DD DDD DDD DDD DDD DDD DDD DDD DDD nnn \ JEFFERSON COUNTY GUEST LIST TITLE: Hearing re: Proposed Critical Areas Ordinance DATE: Wednesday, February 27,2008 at 6:30 p.m. PLACE: Chimacum School Auditorium NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY Testimony? .~ YES NO MAYBE '~//2 - CJ9~d C/ ;r~T;U(/7( v~ ~ D D.-- --- / &,r-- / / DDD DDD 0 DD D DD D DD 0 DD 0 DD D DD D DD D DD D DO D DD D DD D DD D DD n nn ~ JEFFERSON COUNTY GUEST LIST NA~~ (Please P{int}' . .. . .. , ,J ,I ev /llc ~,.( IkJ STREET ADDRESS Iv? ) (... /riL14 tic.: t/l ~ 13~ ~( '] Y l> -:j c.=-h fl'. ~A Testimony? YES NO MAYBE Qg mo Q-.[] D BOD DDD 000 DDD DDD DDD ODD ODD DDD DDD ODD DDD DDD DDD JEFFERSON COUNTY GUEST LIST TITLE: HearinQ re: Proposed Critical Areas Ordinance DATE: Wednesday, February 27,2008 at 6:30 p.m. PLACE: Chimacum School Auditorium NAME (Please Print) STREET ADDRESS CITY Testimony? YES NO MAYBE CS',y-t VL ;j An /Y( / II-I C /'L.z (cn 77-1;' (t )/CJ4/J AJJ) arOB- DDD D DO D DD 0 DD DDD D DD 0 DD DDD D DD D DD D DD D DD D DD D OD DDD nnn '1 I JEFFERSON COUNTY GUEST LIST NAME (Please Print) - r .s~.. ' T/ ,,?;:,- J, ---'-~ 'I(.; ., \ 1..,..1'" ''- '~VL t41{~cJ~CL:1l . -;: I / ND rJl fA. Ire:, , Pi: -vP'j':./, S//:> J j./ STREET ADDRESS CITY ~ 0,.5-', J 111 c25~'Si- I ^ /Yt fJ .(J"13 c:X (os- {} 9' ,~~ (.lcD ?f"l -\~ o~: \& ".... )/""'-:)ftS~ . {XXL ~-iL~ (:+( {1l~4 CV~( fJ{h:"(JU4Z Y -~ t""..... .!. .:? 'gu (; ll-{ G' c /,( ( 0 S~ J:v--- l?~~~ o;;.c 'Je L~l. ? /-1 OJ I.J t';! ~ t. ~.?}/6 LV l. j l) ,f-i -:I,\ (V /] Ml II ( /)/ '{ /:/....,1 /~ / J / t-'l- /~7/9--V'tJ /5' If-1lptC.;,Jc4 Testimony? YES NO MAYBE o JR(0 ~OO". o 0 rr:' ~O o 0 III WfJ ~OO 000 000 OOD ~DD' !1d/Oo o B.-O I NOO o O~ 1!f 0 0.... Page 1 of 1 Leslie Locke From: Phil Johnson Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 7:22 AM To: Leslie Locke Subject: FW: CAO COMMENTS From: Dennis Schultz[SMTP:DSCHUL TZ@WAYPOINT.COMj Sent: Friday, February 22, 2008 7:13:14 AM To: David Sullivan; John Austin; Phil Johnson Cc: AI Scalf; Joel Peterson; Stacie Hoskins Subject: CAO COMMENTS Auto forwarded by a Rule At your meeting, buffers on small streams in the 'highlands' were discussed. I would like to remind you that almost all of the upper reaches of our rivers and streams are in federal and state lands and more of the rest are in forest lands covered by the Forest Practices Act. The COA does not cover these areas, Most of the CAO affected lands are in the lowlands - low flat settled valleys and low non forested hills. The buffer requirements for non-fish bearing and seasonal streams are far different than those for the 'wild' streams up in the mountains. This same reasoning applies to all the aspects of the CAO. Remember just which types of lands it has to cover. Thank you, Dennis Schultz 250 N Jacob Miller Rd Port Townsend 360-379-0338 2/22/2008 - p Page 1 of2 Leslie Locke From: ASM Inc [starrettmansion@cablespeed.com] Sent: Friday, February 22,20088:39 AM To: ASM Inc Subject: County Septic Fee Hike on hold PDN 2/22 County Septic Fee Hike on hold Congratulations to the Olympic Stewardship Foundation! (OSF) Another victory for (OS F) Olympic Stewardship Foundation. What is unfortunate and of course UN American that the Democrats think that THE PEOPLE dissenting means they are threatened with bodily harm. I would guess that the Democrats have been in charge for so long that if THE PEOPLE not agree with their onerous regulation and forever grazing for new taxes they feel threatened. They actually had four County Sheriffs at the Septic meeting. NEXT IS THE ONER_OUS CRITICAL AREA ORDINANCE. OSF has been on the forefront of this and citizens such as farmers, landowners, realtors, engineers and wetland scientists with an actual degree and peer reviewed, (unlike wanna be scientists and radical environmentalist who want to take back Jefferson County to pre European days), have been involved with the process for two years. In a nutshell. A critical area is a suspicion that it could possibly be a wetland because every time we have a wet winter it is soggy. Living next to a stream even one that is dry 11 month of the year (will require 75 feet none touch foot buffers either side) NONE TOUCH MEANS NO HUMAN OR DOMESTIC ANIMAL. . Any water front. CHANNEL MIGRATION ZONES and GEOLOGICAL HAZARD ZONES that are actually already regulated by the State and the Feds will have an additional none touch buffer to an already established buffer. TIRED OF THE RISING PRICE OF RURAL LIVING? A Taxing Water District and Last Week It Was the Septic Ordinance Now, the Critical Areas Ordinance will cost you $$$ Excessive fees and restricted land use are yet another cost directed at landowners/lot owners without any environmental benefits Do you consider yourself a responsible landowner? 2/22/2008 !.-' - Page 2 of2 The Washington Environmental Council does not think so but OSF does. They are trying to determine what is best for you and Jefferson County. AFTER WAITING FOR TWO YEARS, YOU CAN FINALLY TELL YOUR COMMISSIONERS TO STAND UP FOR YOU! Come to the CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE PUBLIC HEARING February 27th, 6:30pm, Chimacum High School ****WHO DECIDES OUR FUTURE**** YOU or Seattle environmentalists? YOU CAN PAY ATTENTION NOW OR PAY $$$ LATER! OLYMPIC STEWARDSHIP FOUNDATION(OSF) http://WWw . olysteward.o rg/ 2/22/2008 .c.c '. ;:DC.~..Yl 'I i.'1c'{o~ '<. PC ",(Ai) '- Page 1 of 1 Leslie Locke From: Phil Johnson Sent: Sunday, February 24,20088:39 PM To: Leslie Locke Subject: FW: For You Information Attachments: Comment On Bud Schindler's Comments on CAO before the BOCC.doc From: George Yount[SMTP:GYOUNT@OLYPEN.COM] Sent: Sunday, February 24,20088:16:00 PM To: David Sullivan; John Austin; Phil Johnson Subject: For You Information Auto forwarded by a Rule Commissioners, Attached is a comment letter regarding Mr, Schindler's statements in the Port Townsend Leader on the Critical Areas Ordinance. Sincerely, George 8, Yount 2/25/2008 George B. Yount 717 _25th Street Port Townsend WA 98368 February 24, 2008 Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners I am sorry I was not able to be at the comment period and the CAO presentation Tuesday, February 19th. My remarks are based what was reported in the Port Townsend Leader Vol. 119 NO.8. I am afraid I have to take umbrage with Planning Commissioner Bud Schindler and his group's view that "harm has not occurred in Jefferson County" and therefore there is no need for the Critical Areas Ordinance. There are many examples that contradict this misinformed statement. I would suggest Mr. Schindler and his colleagues consider the fact that there are species of salmon and steelhead, several birds that are dependent on old forests, and a whole list of shellfish and other smaller animals in the marine food web that are in trouble. They didn't get there on their own. Their plight is a result of pollution (from industrial, shipping, mining and residential uses), and loss of habitat and habitat- forming or supporting processes such as shading of streams and protection of wetlands that store water and provide food. Each of these species also provides work for people - fishing, shell fishing, and recreation. Can Mr. Schindler tell you why we have Endangered Species listed in this county? Does Mr. Schindler know any of the people whose livelihoods depend on healthy forests, wetlands, rivers, and Puget Sound? Perhaps Mr. Schindler didn't notice the many landslides and floods impacting homes and businesses along Hood Canal since the December storm, If he had, he might think not only about the costs of repairing the damaged buildings and roads, but also about how a fish would survive in the many small streams that acted as sluiceways for the landslides? And how do the shellfish at the bottom of the slope do when they're buried? At the Conservation District District's annual meeting, AI Latham and his staff brought out charts highlighting monitoring results in Chimacum Creek for water temperature, fecal coli form, and minerals such as nitrogen from fertilizer and manure. While their data appears to be averaged over a year's time, it shows reductions in harmful pollutants such as fecal coli form, except in certain stretches of Chimacum Creek. This is good news, in part due to improvement in farm practices (best management practices), but mainly due to the CREP program. The numbers alone should give Mr. Schindler and his organization a clue that if the Conservation District is showing improvement, the Conservation District is recognizing harm. ,..- I congratulate those farmers and property owners who have recognized and acted on the community's concern for living in harmony with our ecosystems. If stewardship and conservation really mean what Mr. Schindler's group claims, they should be championing larger buffers than those recommended in the CAO. There are significant portions of Chimacum Creek that are still without shade or buffers. They should be lobbying the remaining farmers to participate in the CREP program, and to widen those buffers. For over thirty years, the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners has been dominated by Republican Commissioners. They enacted weak local land-use regulations, and starved the community service departments of the needed funds to carry on their health, safety, and welfare functions, Minimized government and under funding of services means Iittle-to-no-enforcement of land use regulations. During this period, how many times has the county been to court over their vaguely written comprehensive land use plans and critical area ordinances issues? We have harmed the ecosystems in Jefferson County. and we should be stepping up to the plate to start correcting our policies and actions. About four years ago, Jefferson County residents finally had had enough, and expressed their will at the ballot box by electing three Democrats. The voters' message was and continues to be, change the lassez faire attitude about development and the anti-government, anti-environment culture of the past. The local Republican Party leaders seem absolutely terrified that the Democrat controlled Board of Commission is actually going to start. bringing county codes into the 21 Century. Given the huge over two to one numbers of committed Democrats to Republicans in the County, their fears have turned to panic, I can only assume this must be what is driving their Karl Rove tactics of trying to create fear of government regulation - even when it protects their best interests, Somehow they think their relentless mean-spirited attacks and intimidation of elected officials; their declared war on county department personnel; their war on appointed commissions and boards, as well as on community-minded private citizens, will win them converts to their cause. I don't think so. In his letter to the editor in last week's Leader, "Not Watchdog", Mr. Tony Porto has called a spade a spade. Mr, Porto is like Toto in the Wizard of Oz, when he pulled back the curtain to reveal a very small man with a very big voice via a public address system. Jefferson County has been slow to react to these anti-democratic, anti- community attacks. Mr. Porto's letter should galvanize us into action. Citizens and our community leaders must stand up to these five people who highjack the Commission comment period and all the comment periods of the Planning Commission deliberations. We are tired of their divisiveness and their "any means justifies the end" low tactics of misrepresentation and intimidation. It's time for all of us to say no more and move on. "" . . .. Sincerely, George B. Yount r George B, Yount 717 _25th Street Port Townsend WA 98368 360-385-0456 HEARING RECORD February 27, 2008 Jefferson County Board of County Commissi,oners Jefferson County Courthouse POBox 1220 Port Townsend WA 98368 Testimonv Regarding the Adoption of the Critical Area Ordinances I appreciate the opportunity to share my comments and suggestions on the Critical Area Ordinances. The recommendation before you has had a long, long journey from 2006. I commend the Board of County Commissioners for entering into the settlement agreement with the Washington Environmental Council in an effort to resolve the weaknesses of the previous Critical Area Ordinances. The Settlement Agreement served as a catalyst to arrive at this stage with a set of ordinances that reflect the political, economic and fairness elements that are the cornerstones of good legislation. I commend the Planning Commission members for their long hours of dedicated service to the community of Jefferson County throughout these two years of process and deliberation. And, I also wish to commend the citizenry for voicing their visions and views in support as well as opposition to the Critical Area Ordinances, No one ever said democracy is easy or efficient. This planning effort has received more citizen interest and participation than any other land-use issue I have witnessed in my 24 years as a resident in Jefferson County. All sides of this issue has been thoroughly articulated and discussed. The only regret I have is that we did not utilize public participation mechanisms that would keep the discourse civil. It is unfortunate that there are people in our community who still feel they can win their points through threats of violence, intimidation and misrepresentation of the issues and facts. That is a blot on us all. Good land-use planning with sound, viable regulations is essential to bring stability, sustainability and value to our land and community. Since 1979, I have witnessed the incremental degradation of Jefferson County in the name of economic development. In my professional career and in my retirement, I am one who champions economic development. Unfortunately some seem to misunderstand the fact that economic development is dependent on the infrastructure of our ecosystem. The forces of nature - our forests, streams and open space - are just like roads or power lines; if we use our ecosystem and abuse it, there is a high cost of repair, The pollution of Puget Sound and Hood Canal are the classic examples of our generation's contribution to environmental infrastructure destruction. The salmon, an economic and spiritual icon of the Pacific Northwest and Puget Sound's canary in the mine, highlights what we are doing. The salmon have been telling us for years: Stop killing our habitat with invasive vegetation that chokes the oxygen out of our streams. Don't take away the shade that keeps our ... -.-.' streams cool. Don't silt up our streams and 'destroy our eggs, Stop polluting our world with your industrial waste, your storm runoff, your over-fertilized and pesticide-ridden fields. Nature has been telling us that this is death by thousands of individual cuts. Nature has been saying all along: Pay me now or pay me later. The time is now for us to reverse our lax, frontier approach to development that squanders our resources and ecosystem infrastructure. The knowledge of the damage has been known for over 30 years. One would have thought we would have exercised good stewardship then. If we had, there would not be the need for land-use regulations. We dropped the ball, and now we need to step forward and respect the fact that our economic future rests on the integral connection with our ecosystem infrastructure. I am extremely heartened by the groundswell of local, community and regional citizenry and governments coming together to clean up Puget Sound, The Puget Sound Partnership Coalition's 2020 goal is very ambitious and doable. It will take our help. The residents in Jefferson County appreciate comprehensive land-use planning that recognizes and supports stewardship of Jefferson County's ecosystems because it adds value and stability to property. The following are my comments and suggestions on the proposed new Chapter 18.22 JCC, "Critical Areas." 18.22.010 Purpose: As noted in the opening paragraphs, the purpose is to comply with state law. I am pleased there are two distinct approaches to achieve compliance, a voluntary method through the development of a Critical Area Stewardship Plan (CASP) or by adhering with a prescriptive approach. This sets the tone, from the start, that individual property owners can take the initiative to put their ecosystem stewardship knowledge and skills into practice. It also allows the opportunity to use a default approach for those who are more inclined to let a prescriptive criteria work for them. It is the best of both worlds for the residents of Jefferson County. 18.22.070 General Exemptions: The Planning Commission and citizen advisors have done a great service by listing at the front of the regulations all the exemptions, It makes it user-friendly. (11) Irrigation. This element needs a "prior to" date. Is it now or was it at the time of the adoption of the first series of Critical Area Ordinances? This needs to be clarified. Article VI - Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCAs) 18.22.195 Compliance Alternatives I am pleased to see an alternative to the prescriptive approach noted in Article VI. 18.22.210 Process and Requirements for Designating Habitats of Local Importance as Critical Areas. ~ . ). Of all the prescriptive criteria for what one can or can't do in the CAO, this process and the requirements, seem to be the most detailed. The hurdles clearly make the preservation of a local species of importance almost unlikely, In their letter of Nov. 7, 2008, to Peter Downey, the Washington State Fish and Wildlife Department comments concerning the designation of local wildlife habitat are revealing. "Locally-important species have not been specifically designated within the county's draft CAO per WAC 365-190(5XaXii). Instead the ordinance relies on a nomination process to add species and habitats to the ordinance at some future date. While WDFW supports a local nomination process that can respond to changing information and community values about local fish and wildlife habitat, providing a process for designation is not the same as designating species and habitats of local importance. In addition, application requirements for nominating a habitat (section1 8,22.210) are complicated, requiring steps that would be difficult and costly for the average citizen to meet (e.g. providing a list of all parcels not included in ,the nomination but affected by the monitoring process; submitting an economic impact, cost and benefits analysis). The complexity and expense of the nomination requirements will be a significant barrier to adding species and habitats of local importance to the CAO. Reliance on this nomination process as the only way of designating locally-important species will lead to many vulnerable species not being protected in the foreseeable future." If we believe all species deserve their time and place on this planet, why are we judging their right to life on such things as (5) (b) (XI) "The nomination must also include an economic impact, cost and benefits analysis...." (6) (b) Habitats' nomination for designation under this section must satisfy the following criteria: (1).... "The use of the habitat by that species must be documented or be highly likely or the habitat is proposed to be restored with the consent of the affected property owner, ,. ," What if the property owner is not willing? Is that the end of the species? This process is the only section in the CAO that stipulates a sunset clause. Is this an implied acknowledgement that, in the end, the species of local importance will not survive? What happens, for instance, when a CASP plan fails to perform to its specifications or its fall-back plan? Perhaps there should be a sunset clause in Critical Area Stewardship Plans too, I would recommend the Board of County Commissioners modify the following sections. 18.22.210 (5) iii should be deleted. Any identified species of importance located in Jefferson County should have the right to exist in Jefferson County. Since the nomination of a species of local importance can only be accomplished by a resident of Jefferson County, what is happening in another county is irrelevant. 18.22.210 (6) (b) i strike "with the consent of the affected property owner." Of course it is important that a property owner must be involved in the process and it would be very desirable to have the owner recognize good stewardship. As written, the property owner could be the decision-brealer on the life or death of a species. That is quite a burden of responsibility on an affected landowner. Somewhere we need to state mechanisms and strategies to compensate affected landowners. For those who might be concerned about the prescriptive elements being "too much," Article V Geological Hazardous Areas; VI Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas; and Article VII Wetlands give the DCD administrator wide latitude and flexibility in . .. , shaping buffers. I do not believe the buffer tables provide sufficient protection based upon the "Best Available Science" reviewed by the CAO Advisory Sub Committee. At best the tables reflect a moderate risk. I am concerned that the administrator can reduce buffers to no less than 75%, This can put habitat at high risk. Then again, the administrator could increase the buffers beyond the prescriptive tables and limits. Administrative latitude is a two-edged sword and is intended to make flexibility palatable. We must be very vigilant to preserve the function and values of streams and wetland habitat so that we can really mean "no net loss" when we say it. . 18.22.465 Performance Standards for Critical Area Stewardship Plans is good concept. My concern is that the monitoring protocol should be, and I assume it is, an integral part of the prescriptive side of the ordinances as well as the voluntary stewardship side. This is very important as in the Supreme Court decision Swinomish Indian Tribe Community Vs. Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board ruling Sept. 12,2007, noted, because the monitoring and adaptive management processes must be in compliance with the GMA, benchmarks must be established at the onset of the ordinance. There must be two components: a water-quality monitoring program and a salmon habitat program. Even though Skagit County described in detail its protocol, the Western Washington Hearings Board took issue with how the county proposed to use the data it collected. The hearings board said the county could not sufficiently analyze the data because the monitoring program lacked appropriate benchmarks to compare data as it was collected. The Supreme Court agreed, It is imperative that the first action by the county, in order to administer and enforce the Critical Area Ordinances, is that Jefferson County immediately inventory and set monitoring stations. Otherwise there is no way to compare the "No harm" rule. One of the first things we need to request of the state Legislature, or it must be the top priority on the Puget Sound 2008 Action Plan, is the funding for inventorying and the setting up the monitoring program. If we do not, we are open to another case before the Western Washington Hearings Board. Other Points of Information: There was testimony during the CAO sub committee deliberations that we should advocate education before regulation. I concur that education is vital, but there also needs to be regulations because, for some, knowledge is neutralized by attitude. Generations for the past 35 years have been taught about the importance of the planet's ecology and the systematic destruetion of ecosystems in the Puget Sound region, When species are put on an endangered species list and the documented causes are loss of habitat and water quality, this information should cause us to take action. But there are people who fear change. There are those who feel their doctrinal views trump knowledge. It is here where knowledge, reason and logic will not prevail. One cannot negotiate away one's doctrinal beliefs. Perhaps this is where incentive programs may help. For instance, the U,S. Department of Agriculture through its CREP program rents farmland adjacent to streams for the purpose of restoring and enhancing wetlands. CREP pays for the fencing and revegetation and rents the land for 15 years. It is a proven program and demonstrates the fact that buffers improve the water quality as well as protecting species that need the interface between land and water, Many of the farmers in Chimacum Valley have signed on to the program and we need to commend them for the leadership. But there are some who have not. We need to encourage the Conservation District to help these *. ," -. farmers sign up for the CREP. It is stewardship at its best and would go a long way toward bringing our community together, The citizens of Jefferson County recognized the economic and social values of open space. To protect and preserve forests and farmland, the citizens from Port Townsend to Brinnon stepped up to the plate and agreed to shoulder the property taxes of farmers and forest landowners in exchange for their preservation. Forest landowners and farmers pay about $3.50 per acre per year. That tax shift, since its inception about 25 years ago, has saved farmers and timber owners an estimated 7 million dollars and our citizens continue to add to this amount every year. I would suggest the citizens of Jefferson County have already paid for stream buffers much larger than those proposed in the Critical Area Ordinances. As the county's open space enabling ordinance states in its purpose, county residents are willing to take on forest and farmland taxes in exchange for the preservation of forest, farm and habitat. It is a two-way commitment. I urge the Board of County Commissioners to adopt the Critical Area Ordinances as recommended by the majority of the Jefferson County Planning Commission and include minor modifications to make it better. Respec~ully submitted, ~:~4 ~?'C ;/; George'B. Yount y i ~2/24/2008 10:17 3608671166 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 01/12 ~~ GERALD STEEL, PE ATTORNEY-AT-LAW 7303 YOUNG RD. NW OLYMPIA, WA 98502 Tel/fax (360) 867-1166 RECEIVED FAX TRANSMITTAL MEMO FES 2,) 20D8 DA TE: February 24, 2008 TOTAL PAGES (including cover sheet): 12 JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ORIGINALS WILL FOLLOW TO BOCC. TO: FAX NUMBER: soee 360.385.9382 AL SCAFF 360.379.4451 FROM: Gerald Steel CASE NAME: COMMENTS: IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THE PAGES OR IF TRANSMISSION IS NOT CLEAR PLEASE CALL (360) 867-1166. .......**..oft'tl: THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS COMMUNICATION IS INTENDED ONLY FOR TH.E USE OF THE ADDRESSEE(S) AND MAYBE CONFIDENTIAL OR CONSIDERED A TTORNEY-CLlENT INFORMA nON. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR PLEASE BE INFORMED THAT ANY UNAUTHORIZED USE INCLUD.ING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION OR DlSCLOSURE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY us IMMEDIATELY AT THE ABOVE TELEPHONE NUMBER IF YOU HAVE REC.EIVED THIS IN ERROR. 02/24/2008 10:17 -, 3508571155 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 02/12 .. GERALD STEEL, PE ATTORNEY-AT-LA W 7303 YOUNG ROAD NW Ol YMPIA, WA 98502 Tel/fax (360) 867-1166 RECEIVED FEB 2 5 2008 February 24~ 2008 JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Board of County Commissioners PO Box 1220 Port Townsend, W A 98368 Re: Comments for Feb. 27,2008 Public Hearing 011 CAO Request for enforcement/monitoring program that ensures protection of critica.l areas Dear Chairman and Members: I am writing this letter on behalf of Citizens Protecting Critical Areas ("CPCA"). We support the progress Jefferson County has made so far on the update of its Critical Areas Ordinance ("CAO"), The focus of our ongoing concem is the failure of the CAO to ensure that effective enforcement will be used to actually meet the GMA requirement to protect critical areas. RCW 36.70A.060(2) requires that the County .'shall adopt development regulations that protect critical areas." The record demonstrates that the currently proposed CAO fails to protect critical areas, particularly fish and wildlife habitat areas and associated wetlands, because it does not actually require enforcement and monitoring sufficient to ensure protection. The Jan. 7, 200.8 CAO MaJority Report at 5 recommends adequate enforcement and monitoring and the Jan. 7~ 2008 CAO Minority Report at 9 recommends adequate enforcement but the CAD does not yet provide this adequate enforcement and monitoring. We request that you put additional language in the CAO and commit to the necessary funding to ensure that CAO enforcement a.nd monitoring will be adequate to '.protect critical areas." Attachments: Nov. 9, 2007 Letter to PC (w/o attachments) Nov. 13~ 2007 Letter to PC Nov. 30, 2007 Letter to Molly Pearson (w/o attachments) 02/24/2008 10:17 3508571155 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 03/12 '., GERALD STEEL, PE ATTORNEY -AT -LAW 7303 YOUNG ROAD NW at YMPIA, WA 98502 Tel/fal( (S6D) 867-1166 Emailedtoplanning@co.jefferson.wa.us November 9, 2007 Planning Commission DCn 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend WA 98368 RE: Comments on Oct. 29, 2007 Draft CAO Dear Planning Commission Members and Staff: I submit these comments on behalf of Citizens Protecting Critical Areas ("CPCA"). The Oct. 29,2007 Draft Critical Areas Ordinance ("CAO") fails to ensure that effective enforcement will be used to protect critical areas, particularly fish and wildlife habitat areas and associated wetlands. The Growth Management Act requires that the County "shall adopt development regulations that protect critical areas." RCW 36.70A.060(2); RCW 36.70A.130. The County's development regulations, as proposed, do not adequately prbtect critical areas because they do not include provisions for effective enforcement. The Growth Management Act requires that best available science be used to protect critical areas and that special consideration be given to protection necessary to preserve anadromous fisheries. RCW 36. 70A.l 72(1). Certainly best available science and such special consideration require that regulations intended to protect fish and wildlife habitat areas and associated wetlands have effective enforcement provisions. This conclusion is supported by the best available science ("BAS") in. the record_ Portions of some relevant BAS documents are attached hereto in Appendix A. Much local work has been done in the last 30 years on water resource inventory areas ("WRIAs"). Portions of Jefferson County are included in WRIAs 16,17,18, 20,'and21. The bowldaiies of these WRIAs are shown in App. A -1. The only WRlA, to date, to adopt both a Watershed Plan. and Detailed Implementation Plan is WRIA 17. WRIA 17 includes the 8J/24/2008 10:17 3508571155 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 04/12 Planning Commission and DCD November 9, 2007 Page 2 northeast portion of Jefferson County. See App. A~l and A~5 to A-16. These documents call for local critical areas code enforcement as a necessary element to protect critical areas. The Jefferson County Department of Community Development has a code compliance officer who is actively pursing cases. However, the officer's workload. is very high, and compliance is complaint-driven. Additional resources for enforcement are necessary . App. A-16. The additional enforcement necessary to meet the GMA requirement "to protect critical area" requires more that just improved "complaint-driven" enforcement. Only a small percentage of critical area code violations will be identified by complaint. To ensure protection of fish and wildlife habitat areas and associated wetlands, there must be in-field monitoring for all streams and associated wetlands and buffers, and a specific enforcement protocol designed to ensure protection. Alternatively, there could be a monitoring and adaptive management program such as is discussed in Swinomish Indian Tribal Community v. WWGMHB (Slip Op. 76339-9, Sept. 12,2007). Pursuant to the BAS in the record, the Oct. 29, 2007 Draft CAO is not sufficient to meet the GMA requirement to protect critical areas because it does not have adequate enforcement provisions. ~/24/2008 10:17 3508571155 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 05/12 GERALD STEEL, PE ATTORNEY-AT-LAW 7303 YOUNG ROAD NW OLYMPIA, WA 98502 Tellfax (360) 867-1166 Emailedtoplanmng@co.jefferson.wa.us November 13, 2007 Planning Commission DCD 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend W A 98368 RE: Comments on Oct. 29,2007 Draft CAO Dear Planning Commission Members and Staff: I submit these comments on behalf of Ci.tizens Protecting Critical Areas ("CPCA"), In our letter to you dated November 9, 2007 we demonstrated that in order to meet the GMA requirement to protect critical areas, particularly fish and wildlife habitat areas and associated wetlands, the County must provide for effective enforcement. We discussed how such enforcement must include both im.proved complaint-driven enforcem~nt and an in-field monitoring enforcement program for all streams and associated wetlands and buffers with a specific enforcement protocol designed to ensure protection, or alternativeily, a monitoring and adaptive management program as discussed in Swinomish Indian Tribal Community v, \VWGMHB (Slip Op. 76339-9, Sept. 12,2007). I am separately submitting to the record an annotated copy of the County Cbmpliance Officer's tile for Complaint No, COM06-00037. This file shows that a complaint was filed more than 18 months ago on May 2, 2006 after it was discovered that several hundted ya.rds of fill was illegally placed in the 100 foot buffer of a fish bearing stream in violcttion of the existing critical areas ordinance, The Code Compliance Officer, who apparently has no training in critical areas protection, failed to protect this fish and wildlife habitalt area by requiring compliance with the provisions of critical areas ordinance. The illegal fill remains "vithout any penalty or permit required. I am also separately submitting to the record an annotated copy of the filb for Compliant No. 07-00064. This file documents a compla.int filed over five months ago regarding a nearly solid wooden fence recently built across a stream and associated fish and wildlife habitat area buffer. Pursuant to lee 18.15.3 t 0,1 R.1 0.040, afld 18.1 0.190, a fence is nd>t allowed that alters Q2/24/2008 10:17 3608671166 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 06/12 Planning Commission and DCD November 13.2007 Page 2 the function or character of the fish and wildlife habitat area ("FWHA") or its buffer, even if the fence does not require a building peImit. Here the nearly solid wooden fence alters the function of the FWHA and buffer by providing significant shading and by interfering with the cOlTidor function of the riparian habitat. I incorporate by reference into this letter the WDFW PHS (1997) that can be accessed at: http://www.ser.org/sernw/pdtI'WDFW ripal' ha1> mgmt recommend.pdf This Best Available Science document states: By virtue of their protective cover and connectivity throughout watersheds, riparian areas function as wildlife liavel corridors (Thomas et a1. 1979, Forman and Godron 1986, Noss 1993). Animals often use liparian areas for daily, seasonal, or once~in-a-litetime travel. Mobile species such as marten, fisher, bobcat, cougar, deer, great blue heron, and marbled murrelets frequently have established daily travel routes that parallel streams (de Vos and Guenther 1952, Thomas et a1. 1979, Eisenhawer and Reimchen 1990, Noss 1993). Although a key function of riparian areas is to provide a safe corridor for animals to move from area to area, Noss (1993) outlined other important functions of ripatian corrid{)rs, These other functions include facilitating dispersal and consequent gene flow between populations. . .. Riparian con-idol's that facilitate wildlife movement help maintain the health of species' gene pools and prevent isolation and. perhaps extirpation of subpopulations (Harris 1988). The importance of riparian areas as travel corridors and routes for dispersion is amplified in developed or fragmented landscapes because altemative overland travel routes are often unavailable, discontinuous, or life endangering (Carleton and Taylor 1983, Blake 1986). Dispersing juveniles or adults of some species are prone to predation while traveling through open areas. In highly developed landscapes, riparian corridors may provide essential connections between isolated natural areas. Some animals may be able to meet their large areas requirements by traveling between several patches of natural habitat linked by COlTidors (Noss 1993). WDFW PHS (1997) at 32. Q~/24/2008 10:17 3608671166 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 07/12 Planning Commission and Den November 13,2007 Page 3 The Code Compliance Officer aga.in shmved lack of understanding as to what is required to protect FWHA and their buffers and recommended only that the fence be trimmed at the bottom where it crosses the stream so that it might not be washed out in a high water event. These records show that the CUlTent enforcement program of the County is insufficient to meet the GMA requirement to protect critical areas. In response to a. compIai nt, an adequate cri ti ca.l areas enforcement program requires full enforcement of the critical areas regulations by a person skilled in the fW1ctiol1s and values ofFWHA's, wetlands, and their buffers or if there is not full enforcement, then a. public notice of any enforcement decision with public review allowed by appeal. In addition, to truly protect critical areas there must be more than effective complaint-driven enforcement. There must also be an enforcement in-field monitoring program for all streams and associated wetlands and buffers with a specift.c enforcement protocol designed to ensure protection, or alternatively, a monitoring and adaptive management program. Re~Wlp Gerald Steel, PE Attorney for CPCA Pf/24/2008 10:17 3608671166 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 08/12 GERALD STEEL, PE ATTORNEY-AT-LAW 7303 YOUNG ROAD NW OLYMPIA, WA 98502 Tellfax (360) 867-1166 November 30, 2007 Molly Pearson Dept. of Community Dev. 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, W A 98368 Re: COM06-00037 and COM07-00064 - Critical Area Violations by Joe Thompson Dear Molly, I write this letter on behalf of Citizens to Protect Critical Areas. I have reviewed the COl.mty' s files to date for the two above~referenced complaints, These files demonstrate that the County's current code enforcement program. is not effective in protecting fish and wildlife habitat areas and associated wetlands. I request your support for modifications to the code enforcement program particularly to ensure protection of fish and wildlife habitat areas and associated wetlands. Attachment A hereto is a drawing done by the people who submitted enforcement complaints COM06-00037 and COM07-00064. The first referenced complaint was :filed in May of2006. It alleges that Joe Thompson brought in substantial fill into the buffer of an anadromous fish bearing stream on Assessor Parcel No. 998400011 which is the upper lot (Lot 14 Taylor's Terrace) 8ho\\-11 on said Attaclunent A. The second referenced compliant was filed in May of 2007. It alleges that Joe Thompson is not in compliance with conditions of Building Permit BLDOO~005 59 which conditions apply to said Assessor Parcel No. 998400011 and to Assessor Parcel No. 998400007, Assessor Parcel No. 998400007 is the lower lot (Lot 10 Taylor's Ten-ace) shown on said Attachment A. This second complaint also states that Thompson is building a fence across the a.l1adromous fi.sh bearing stream and its buffer and he is allowing fish rearing pools to d.egrade. On October 16, 2007 a public disclosure request was filed to obtain a full copy of the two referenced complaint files. In my review of the complain.t files, I find that all of the complaints discussed above were valid and represent violations of either the Critical Areas Ordinance or violations of the conditions on Building PermitBLDOO-005 59 that were intended to protect critical areas. As you know, Building Penuit BLDOO-00559 required and received a critical areas variance (or waiver) to allow a reduced buffer width of 38 feet. A condition was placed on the Building Permit to require a 38-foot buffer from the ordinary high water mark of the anadromous fish bearing stream to be "permanently maintained" on Assessor Parcel No, 998400007. No alteration inside the 38-foot buffer was allowed and existing vegetation was to be retained. Pursuant to the Habitat Management Plan, it was required to "maintain the existing plank weirs constructed to provide additional pool habitat"for the anadromous fish bearing stream. B2/24/2008 10:17 3508571155 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 0'3/12 Molly Pearson November 30, 2007 Page 2 REGARDING THE FILL ON ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 998400011 Under lCC 18.15.310, grading is 110t allowed in Fish and Wildlife habitat areas ("FWHA") including buffers unless there is a permit. There is no permit on Assessor Parcel No. 998400011, The buffer width for a 'fish-bearing, Type III, stream is 100 feet. There is substantial fill (reported 8' to 12' high on Attachment A hereto) inside the 100 foot buffer on Assessor Parcel No. 998400011. In the file for Complaint COM 06-00037, there is a September 17,2007 letter from you to Mr McCollum explainin.g your enforcement actions. You determined that fill had been placed in the critical area buffer but you were apparently unaware of the prohibition on this action in .TCC 18.15.310 because you do not mention this code section. You then cite to the conditions of Mr. Thompson's building permit. The variance/waiver for Mr. Thompson's building permit allowed a 38 foot buffer on Assessor Parcel No. 998400007. The fill is on Assessor Parcel No. 998400011. There is no building permit or critical areas variance/waiver on this Parcel No. 998400011. You state that you asked Mr. Thompson "to stabilize the soil and replant native vegetation." You did not enforce .TeC 18.15.310 ofthe critical areas code because you did not require Mr. Thompson to get the required permit. According to Attachment A there is a 10' x 20' shop on the fin on Parcel No, 99840001l. Obviously, native vegetation was not replanted ill the buffer where this shop is located. Because the shop is on fill, there is a building code requirement to have the fill properly compacted in the vicinity of the building. There is no evidence that the fill has been compacted, The fill is in continued noncompliance with the critical areas code (JCC 18.15.310). REGARDING THE FENCE ACROSS THE STREAM AND ITS BUFFER JCC 18.15.3 1.0 controls developm.ent ill a FWHA and its buffer when a permit is not required. After JCC 18.15.310 was adopted, a fence could not be allowed "that alters the function or chara.cter of the FWHA or its buffer" even if that fence did. not require a building permit. The subject fence was built after JCe 18.15.310 was adopted. A nonexclusive set of examples is provided in .TCC 18.15.310 that are considered to alter the function or character of a FWHA or its buffer and this includes alterations that cause shading. Clearly a wooden fence provides significant shading and such a fence can not be allowed in a FWHA or its buffer. Further, it is likely that any fence will alter another critical function of a FWHA or its buffer. A fundamental function and characteristic of riparian habitat is to provide a corridor for animal migration. A fence across that corridor significantly reduces this function and characteristic. See WDFW PHS (1997) at 32 (copied in part below). "By virtue of their protective cover and cOlmectivity throughout watersheds~ riparian areas function as wildlife travel corridors (Thomas et a1. 1979, Forman and Godron 1986, Noss 1993). Animals often use riparian areas for daily, seasonal, or once-in-a-lifetime travel. Mobile species such as marten, fisher, bobcat, cougar, deer, great blue heron, and marbled murrelets frequently have established daily travel routes that parallel streams (de Vas and Guenther 1952, Thomas et al. 1979, Eisenhawer and Reimchen 1990, Noss 1993)." "'Although a key function of riparian areas is to provide a safe corridor for animals to move from area to area, Noss (1993) outlined other important functions of riparian corridors. These other functions include facilitating dispersal and consequent gene flow between populations -D~/24/2DD8 10:17 3608671166 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 10/12 Molly Pearson November 30, 2007 Page 3 . . . , Riparian corridors that facilitate wildlife movement help maintain the health of species' gene pools and prevent isolation and perhaps extirpation ofsubpopulatiolls (Harris 1988)." "The imp011ance of riparian areas as travel corridors and routes for dispersion is amplified in developed or fragmented landscapes because alternative overland travel routes are often unavailable, discontinuous, or life endal1gering (Carleton and. Taylor 1983, Blake 1986). Dispersingjuveniles or adults of some species are prone to predation while traveling through open areas. In highly developed landscapes, riparian corridors may provide essential connections between isolated natural areas. Some animals may be able to meet their large areas requirements by traveling between several patches of natural habitat linked by corridors (N oss 1993)." WDFW PHS (1997) at 32. .Tee 18.15.310 applies to any development activity even if a permit is not required. "Development" is defined in JeC 18.10.040: '''Development' means the division of a parcel into two or more parcels; the constmctioll, reconstruction, conversion, structural alteration, relocation, or enlargement of any structure; any grading, excavation, mining, landfill; or any extension of the use of land." JCC 18,10.040. Building a fence is included because it is "construction. . . of any structure." "Structure" is defined in .ICe 18.10.190: "Structuretl means a perm.anent or temporary edifice or building or any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner, whether installed on, above, or below the surface of the ground or water, except for vessels (WAC 173- 27-030). .TCC 18.10.190. A fence is a structure because it is a "piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner." The compliance files indicate that you required one foot to be removed from the bottom of the wooden fence where the fence crosses the stream. The fence remains in continued noncompliance with the critical areas code as discussed above. There continues to be added shading to the stream and its buffer, and blockage of the corridor to wildlife travel. MAINTAINING THE POOL HABIT AT BEmND THE EXISTING WEIRS It is clearly a requirement for the building permit for the 14'x24' shop on Lot 10 that pool habitat is maintained behind the weirs. This is a condition of a permit that was imposed to compensate for the critical areas variance/waiver to allow the shop with a reduced buffer width. UnderJCC 18.50.020(4) it is a violation tofailto comply with permit conditions. The complaint files include a Hydraulic Project Approval permit issued August 6, 2007 and valid until August 6, 2011 for maintenance repairs for plank weirs. Any work below the ordinary high water mark must be done between July 1 st and September 15th. To the best of my knowledge, no work was done on the weirs during the maintenance window in 2007. The failure of Thompson to maintain. the weirs is in continued noncomplian.ce with the permit condition imposed to protect critical areas. ~~2/24/2008 10:17 3508571155 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 11/12 Molly Pearson November 30, 2007 Page 4 DRIVEW A Y ENCROACHMENT INTO BUFFER Attachment B hereto is a copy of the Habitat Management Plan ("HMP") for the 14' x 24' shop on Parcel No. 998400007, This plan shows a seven foot wide driveway' connecting the proposed building to Hiller Drive. The focus of the HMP is to protect the forested riparian zone plotted on page 2 of the HMP. The HMP at page 2 shows this forested riparian zone a minimum of22 feet from the northern property line of Parcel No. 998400007. Attachment A shows the driveway now expanded to between] 8 and 30 feet wide and shows the driveway now a minimum of 12 feet from the northern property lin.e of Parcel No. 998400007. Attachment A shows the intrusion of a block and wood pile into the fourteen feet between the driveway and the said northem property line. A condition of the building permit for the 14'x24' shop is that a 38-foot wide buffer measured perpendicularly from the ordinary high water mark shall be permanently maintained as a fish and wildlife habitat area and that there shall be no removal of native vegetation within this buffer, No alteration to the buffer is allowed unless approved by the Critical Area Administrator. There is no record of approval of these alterations and so they are not allowed by the Critical Areas Code (lCC 18.15.310) and they are violations of the conditions of Building Permit BLDOO-00559. CONCLUSIONS The critical areas code does not have any specific enforcement provisions or protocols for enforcement. The only enforcement provisions are in Chapter 18.50 .TCe. These enforcement provisions do not absolutely require enforcement of the provisions of the Jefferson County Codes in general and do not absolutely require enforcement of critical areas codes or permit conditions to protect critical areas. .TCC 18.50.020 makes it a violation to fail to comply with the code or fail to comply with the conditions of a permit. However, Chapter 18.50 only authorizes but does not require the administrator to enforce these codes or conditions. ICC 18.50.050(1) states that jf the administrator determines there is a violation~ a notice of voluntary correction letter should be the first attempt at obtaining compliance. It is noted that lCe 18.50.050 only uses the word "should" and does not mandate issuance of such a letter and lCC. 18.50.050(5) states that the voluntary correction process is optional. I have found no voluntary correction letters issued to Mr. Thompson in the said compliance files. Generally, the enforcement of Jefferson County Codes is complaint*driven. While this may be adequate where state law does not mandate enforcement oflocal codes, this is not adequate where' state law (RCW 36.70A.060(2)) requires regulations "to protect critical areas," Therefore: I believe that Jefferson County must have more specific enforcement protocols for critical areas violations and particularly for those violations affecting fish and wildlife habitat areas and their associated wetlands. Codes with these more specific protocols must be sufficient to actually achieve protection of critical areas. It is a certainty that only a very small percentage of critical areas violations result in complaints to the code enforcement officer. This is because 1) most people can't recognize a critical areas violation, 2) most people do not want to take the heat for reporting a violation, and 3) many violations are not easily observed from places of public access. Therefore one canDot expect that a complaint~drivell enforcement program will ensure that cl~itical a.reas are being protected or particularly that fish and wildlife habitat areas and their associated wetlands are being protected. e2/24/2008 +0:17 3608671166 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 12/12 Molly Pearson November 30, 2007 Page 5 Therefore, I would ask your support for the BOCC increa.sillg the number of people enforcing protection offish and wildlife habitat. areas and their associated wetlands. I would. also ask your supp011 for the BOCC adopting an enforcement monitoring program in its development regulations for fish and wildlife habitat areas aud their associated wetlands that is designed to monitor streams and t.heir wetlands, and the buffer protection for both, to ensure that these critical areas are being protected as specified by tbe critical areas ordinance. I would anticipate that this monitoring program would have at least one critical areas enforcement officer who would walk the streams and wetlands after appropriate notice to property owners and who would provide written notice to property owners of what appear to be violations of the regulations to protect these critical areas. Additionally, I ask your support for the BOCC adopting development regulations with specific enforcement protocols for critical area violations both for the complaint-driven enforcement program and for the proposed enforcement moni.toring program. As an alternative to or in add.ition to a smaller enforcement monitoring program, the County may be able to develop an adaptive management program as discussed in SWil10lnish Indian Tribal Community v. WWGMl-lB, Slip 01" (No 76339-9, Sept. 13, 2007). TI1e adaptive management program would develop benchmarks that must be met in streams and wetlands, I.neasurement standard.s, and specific response protocols in case benchmarks are not met. Because an adopted adaptive management program might not be foun.d to comply with the Growth Management Act requirements to actually protect critical a.reas, I recomm.end that the first effort be to develop an enforcement monitoring program with specifications for how often each stream corridor in the County would be visited and what actions the County would take if there is a perceived violation of critical area codes. With regard to the complaint files discussed in this letter, I would appreciate it if you would continue your efforts to ensure that the critical areas on the Thompson parcels are protected consistent with the requirements in the critical areas code and with the conditions in his building permit. Thank you for your efforts to date, Respect.f't1.IlY!I!/J.' . f#l1~ () Gerald Steel PE [ c -C- - \:X:.-O ?./'2610~ Page 1 of 1 Miranda Schryver From: Laura Rosenberg [Ijrbr@hotmail.com] Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2008 6:09 PM To: Miranda Schryver Subject: Critical Areas Ordinance Board of County Commissioners Jefferson County Re: Critical Areas Ordinance Dear Sirs, I wrote to the Planning Commission during their deliberations over the committee reports on the Critical Areas Ordinance strongly supporting what was called at that time the "minority" report. I write now to strongly encourage you to support the compromise version of the ordinance which resulted from the Planning Commission's deliberations. It is a weaker regulation that we need to protect Jefferson County's environment and watershed and possibly too weak to meet state requirements, To weaken it further would be a very big mistake. These regulations become more important as more new people such as my husband and myself move into the county. The property I purchased when I moved here has protected wetlands on it. These were delineated on the plot along with the setbacks and the restrictions on the use of the property were clear. The realtor understandably played down the restrictions, but the documentation was provided and despite the restrictions we purchased the property, The wetlands setbacks greatly restrict the buildable area on my property. Nonetheless, I bought the property and have happily built in accordance with the restrictions. The realtor and landowner profited. My needs and the needs of commerce were still met despite the restrictions on land use required by the ordinance. I cannot say whether the property would have been more valuable to the owner and realtor if the regulations did not exist, but I do know the land was quite costly and more importantly, the existence of the regulations guaranteed the continued existence of the wetlands. As my attention was directed to the fact that there are wetlands on my property, I developed an interest in the wetlands and from that an interest in native plants. As a result I have a far different approach to landscaping and preserving my property than I might have had if the regulations had not existed. There is a small group of individuals in the county opposed to any land use regulation. Their adamant, vocal, and often intimidating opposition to any regulation on the land tends to undermine even the possibility of effective government in the county and certainly inhibits our ability to live together civilly, The state requires us to protect our critical areas: The continued existence of clean water, certain flora and fauna, and the ambiance of Jefferson County as we know it now depends on our protecting the environment. The Critical Areas Ordinance as now proposed has dealt with many of the concerns of the group opposed to the ordinance and they still refuse to accept it even in compromise form. I fear for our ability to govern if their tactics of intimidation are effective. Certainly they inhibited my willingness to speak out or even attend public meetings. It must be very difficult for all of you to carry out your role as legislators in the current atmosphere, but I strongly request you support the compromise ordinance now in front of you. You have my very best wishes, Laura Rosenberg 1044 Blue Sky Drive Port Townsend, WA 98368 2/2512008 Ce. ~ 2./2.6 109 Page 1 of1 Miranda Schryver From: Jerreca@aol.com Sent: Sunday, February 24,20087:19 AM To: Miranda Schryver Subject: Critical Area Ordinance I support the Critical Area Ordinances as recommended by Jefferson County Planning Commission. Jean Erreca 30 Harborview Dr. #2 Port Townsend, WA 98368 jerreca@aol.com Delicious ideas to please the pickiest eaters. Watch the video on AOL Living. 2/25/2008 ~mA .- ,- UP (b oCL- Df I Olympic Wetland Res~~~s~{~D Dixie Uewellin, Principal Biolo.9lst Ft.o 2 7 2008 wetl as a project bi for ic rces, nc. .si projects I have been using the draft updated ordinance (based on the 2004 rating s)'stemand the DOE Volume I buffers) to compare results. Mitigation Compliance My main concern over the new CAO revision is that there is no clear plan for enforcing mitigation plans. I have designed numerous mitigation plans that allow for buffer alteration if the client adheres to a five year monitoring schedule, with contingency plans if the project does not meet performance standards. There are several of these projects that can be viewed from public roads that have not been implemented long after the developments have been completed. I expressed my concerns over these unfulfilled mitigation projects in a letter to Al Scalf dated December 26,2007, but I have not yet heard back from the department. I'm attaching that letter for your information. The actual procedure for developing, conduction, and enforcing mitigation plans is especially unclear under the proposed Critical Areas Stewardship Plan Section (18.22.460). There are opportunities here to improve the understanding by landowners of wetland functions and values and therefore, hopefully, the desire to protect them, but it is especially important under the CASP section that mitigation compliance is enforced since this seems to be a more unproven approach to protection and mitigation. The Department of Ecology has a clear and concise method of reviewing success and failures of past projects which could well serve as a model for Jefferson County to follow. I hie:hlv recommend that a comoliance survey of oast oroiects be conducted to assist in the develooment of a stratee:v to ensure future mitie:ation success and enforcement. 1 L '< Multiple Ratings (18.22.300) The DOE rating system does not support dividing wetland ratings below Category I near a Category II wetland. Divisions oflesser wetland is often difficult to determine and can be very confusing. Smaller buffers can compromise the protection standards of both categories of wetlands. I recommend that the BOCC not adopt the proposed language allowing the multiple rating of hydrologically-connected wetlands. Wetland Categories, Rating Scores and Buffer Widths (Table 18.22.330) The tables in the draft on page X do not address all scores. A wetland I recently assessed was a Category III wetland with high land use impacts with a score of 3 8 points, with a low habitat score. It does not fit within the existing table. Thank you for all your work in helping protect and preserve the remaining Critical Areas in Jefferson County. These are irreplaceable resources to all citizens of Jefferson County. Sincerely, ( Dixie Llewellin Principal Biologist, Olympic Wetland Resources, Inc. Cc: AI Scalf, Director of Community Development Molly Pearson, Planning Manager and Code Compliance Coordinator Peter Downey, Jefferson County Planning Commission Page 2 of2 . ~ . Olympic Wetland Resources) Inc. Dixie Llewellin, Principal Biologist The DepartInent of Ecology has developed. aproc~dure loevalqatethesucce$$(9t'ctlfi1pl1anee)Qf mitigation projects. Several questions :from the DOE's The Science and Eff~9tivenessof'Wetland Mitigation are as follows: . Installation - whether the project was installed . Installation according to plan - whether the project was constructed according to the approved mitigation plan and design . 'Wetland area establishment - whether the project obtained the acreage of wetland that was required . Performance standard/goals/objectives attainment - whether the project performed as anticipated i . Monitoring - whether the project was monitored as required (or was required to be monitored) . Maintenance - whether project maintenance was performed (or required) . Regulatory follow-up - whether any regulatory agencies made an attempt to track the project after the permit was issued The link: below includes more detailed information on DOE's wetland mitigation evaluation. http://www.ecy . wa. gov /programs/sea/wetlandslbas/voll draft/Chapter%206. pdf I look forward to hearing :from you or your staff. Thank you for your attention to this matter during this busy time of changes. Dixie Llewellin Principal Biologist, Olympic Wetland Resources, Inc. Cc: Stacie Hoskins; Planning Manager, Molly Pearson; Code Compliance Coordinator ~61a Olympic Wetland Resources, Inc. Dixie Llewellin, Principal Biologist stewards . idea of wetland functions and values. are even less recognized or underStood. . Even though my work includes helping the landowner understand wetland rules and rmding building solutions I find more and more disregard to the existing rules. It is imperative that the protection regulations outlined by Jefferson County do not become any weaker. I have observed the degradation of large tracks forests and alterations of existing wetlands since moving here in 1980. There are many unmapped wetland even after the delineation are complete and in the hands of DCD. Thank you for all you time and effort in helping protect and preserve the remaining irreplaceable resources in Jefferson County. RECEIVED Sincerely, ~ FEB 2 7 .1008 Dixie Llewellin Principal Biologist, Olympic Wetland Resources, Inc. JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Aquatic Environmental Sciences 644 Old Eaglemount Road H-EARIN'G' RECOR Port Townsend, Washington 98368 . '. _ ~ D Fax and Phone (360) 732-4464 Email: brooks@olYITIPus.net February 27,2008 Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners Jefferson County Courthouse Port Townsend, Washington, 98368 RE: Draft Jefferson County Critical Area Ordinance Dear Commissioners, The following comments are provided after reviewing the Proposed New Chapter 18.22 JCC, "Critical Areas." The Critical Area Ordinance Review Committee (CAORC) spent nearly a year developing proposed code that was specific to Jefferson County; respective of residents' rights to use and enjoy their property; and protective of the county's natural resources. Portions ofthose recommendations are included in the Planning Commission's (PC) recommendations to the BoCC. In particular, the concept of Critical Area Stewardship Planning (CASP) will provide more meaningful protection ofthe county's critical areas than prescriptive buffers will. In addition, the monitoring program recommended by the CAORC will provide an early alert of harm to critical areas followed by a procedure for identifying the specific causes and correction of that harm. The following specific issues require some discussion. Multiple rating of wetlands. The provision in the PCs recommendations for multiple rating of wetlands (18.22.310 (4)0 is important because the existing landscape in Jefferson County's lowlands includes large areas of low value wetlands with included areas having higher value. In the absence of provisions for multiple ratings of these complex systems, the county is faced with alternatives of either providing reduced protection for the high value areas or of imposing excessive and un-necessary buffers on extensive areas of low value wetlands. While the Department of Ecology originally voiced an objection to this provision, it should be noted that the department now recognizes the need for this provision and is working with me to determine how this can be accomplished in a process similar to that used to develop the CASP. Recommendation. Adopt paragraph 18.22.310 (4) as recommended by the PC 1. Erroneous identification of wetland categories by score. It should be noted that the rating scores used to identify wetland categories in Table 18.22.330(1), (2) and (3) are in error. Class III wetlands are those with total scores from 30 to 50 points, not scores <30 as stated in the table. Despite my previous identification of these errors, they continue to occur throughout the tables. Recommendation. Fix the table. 2. Buffer increases are too large in association with small increments in habitat score. During a recent field trip with the Department of Ecology, Rick Mraz and I each rated the same wetland. We both concluded that the wetland was Class III using WDOE (2004). However, his habitat score was 19 and mine was 20. The result using the proposed values in JCC Table 18.22.330(1) for low impact would be an increase in the required buffer from 40 to 75 1 feet. For moderate impacts, the one point difference would result in an increase from 60 to 110 feet. The nearly doubling of the buffers in association with an increase in habitat score of one point has no ecological meaning. In response to this and other examples provided to WDOE, they are now developing recommendations for incrementally smaller steps in recommended buffer widths for Class III and IV wetlands (Rick Mraz, personal communication). The recommendations of the CAORC included continuously distributed buffer widths that were defined by specific wetland functions and hazards. Unfortunately, the PC did not accept these recommendations for a more ecologically relevant approach to managing critical areas. Recommendation. Provide for smaller incremental increases in buffer widths associated with increasing habitat value. The recommendations of the CAORC and Skagit County's CAO provide guides for how this can be accomplished. 3. Excessive buffer widths are being required for streams. This is particularly true for Na and Ns streams which are inappropriately (from an ecological perspective) consolidated into Type N in the recommended CAO language. The Olympic Peninsula has a multitude of stream segments with bank full widths of a few feet that carry water for only a few months during winter. Many ofthese streams are dry after the end of June and provide little or no rearing habitat for amphibians or other life dependent on aquatic habitats for reproduction. These Na and Ns streams do not provided habitat for fish or they would be classified as Type F. Al Latham provided the description of the Type 5 (N s) streams seen in Figure 1. It is my opinion that the functions and values ofthese ephemeral drainages (Na) are fully protected by buffers of one or two meters. There is absolutely no reason that they require 75' buffers as recommended by the PC. The PC's response that 75' is a compromise between the demands of environmental activists and the CAORC's recommendations has no scientific merit and represents an unacceptable compromise that un-necessarily restricts the use of private property. Recommendation. Return to the Na (non-fish bearing annual) and Ns (non-fish bearing seasonal) stream types defined by the Department ofFish and Wildlife. Apply a 10' buffer to the Ns and use the 25' buffer defined in Jefferson County's existing CAO for Na streams. These buffer widths are more than adequate to protect existing functions of these non fish bearing drainages. 4. Existing DNR Stream Type maps are grossly in error. Figure 2a describes a Type 5 stream (<2' in width) currently typed by DNR as a fish bearing stream (Type F). The stream's course is inaccurately depicted on the DNR map. The watercourse originates in uplands on the east side of Highway 19. It flows through a culvert under the highway for approximately 80 feet before entering a concrete lined ditch that carries it between a farm house and adjacent barn. At that point, it enters a very old, 12" diameter, solid steel culvert which carries it 60' to the ditch seen in Figure 2b. The small flow estimated at <0.3 cfs, then percolates into the silt loam soil. On February 28, 2008, after a winter of above average rainfall, the stream ended in the ditch with no evidence of water reaching Chimacum Creek. My point is that the property owner would be required to prove a negative (there is no fish use of this drainage) or the property would be encumbered by a 150 foot buffer on either side of this concrete lined swale and ditch. Correcting the DNR stream type map is time consuming and expensive. I defy anyone to explain why the drainage described in Figure 2 requires a 150' buffer on either side. Recommendation. The errors in stream types on the DNR maps are the result of government carelessness. Jefferson County should treat all streams as non-fish bearing (Na and Ns) in the absence of empirical evidence of actual use by fish. 2 '. Ol l- = l- "t: ~ "- E t; .i :0: .J::. '" ~ 0 % 'C .. ~ :;:; < ;:; i rJ u g .~t ~ ;.. ~ ;. " Ir. ~ " ..; ~ .; t "'" '; ;.: .:: ;t- "' "i' ." 'T. oc r- ~ -- \ ~.~ -~: .. " s ~a M = ~ J. -< -, - = ~ .- - .- J. U .c = = o U = o rIl J. ~ ,.., ~ ~ "C) ~ rIl o 0. o J. 0. ~ .= - - = .= - rIl 8 = ~ J. - rIl -- rIl Z -- lI'l ~ 0. ~ E-- -~ o 0 8 ~ =:9 .= rIl - J. = ~ ...:l.= - < .~ ~= .c 0 "C) rIl ~ J. "C)~ .- ,.., > = o.c J. r- o.lI'l flit-- ~ ~ - rIl 0.0 ~ e- ~ .- ~"C) J.- ~ = .= 0 - ~ o ~ . ~ N = ~ = J. .S ="C) e.llJ. ~o ..: u '. b) ditch into which storm water percolates Figure 1. Ditch carrying stormwater designated at a Type F water by DNR 5. Meaningless reporting requirements. The PC's recommendation in JCC 18.22.450 (3) (c) (vii) for inclusion of "A detailed analysis of wildlife species use of the wetland and its buffer" is naIve in the extreme. To comply in a meaningful way with this requirement would require inventories of wildlife (birds, amphibians, mammals, reptiles, invertebrates) in all seasons of the year over a period of several years. Many wildlife species are secretive and can only be observed by trapping or night-time photography. A detailed analysis of wildlife species 4 " use would take several years and cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. One of the reasons that the Department of Ecology and the Department ofFish and Wildlife have not undertaken quantitative risk assessments in developing their buffer recommendations is that the information being required by the PC is simply not available anywhere. A significant part of my scientific efforts are devoted to characterizing aquatic invertebrate communities in both fresh water and marine environments. Many of these studies have lasted for years. They have been peer reviewed and published in the scientific literature. Point in time, cause and effect, surveys can provide meaningful information. However, trying to characterize any wildlife community in detail is like looking into a kaleidoscope. The communities are constantly changing in both spatial and temporal dimensions. Recommendation. This requirements of 18.22.450 (3) (c) (vii) and (viii) should be dropped because they are too expensive and time consuming. What Jefferson County would likely get in response to the requirement would be meaningless. The recommendations contained herein are made in an effort to make the county's CAO more environmentally relevant. The work undertaken by the CAORC was thoughtful and deliberative. The recommendations were made in an effort to protect Jefferson County's Critical Areas while being respectful of our citizens' rights to use and enjoy their properties. The result was a series of creative recommendations. Several of these are now being supported and/or further investigated by WDOE. In contrast, the Planning Commission did not appear to even attempt to use or understand the science available to it. Rather their deliberations became a contest between a newly appointed majority of environmental activists and a diminished minority of commissioners seeking a reasonable balance among the goals of the Growth Management Act and the concerns' of Jefferson County's citizens. It is unfortunate that the PC listened more carefully to the Washington Environmental Council than they did to the county's citizens. These deliberations now move to Jefferson County's elected officials. Hopefully, the BoCC will not following the same path. Sme ely, ~0~ Kenneth M. Broo s Aquatic Environmental Sciences 5 HEARING RECORD Dick Bergeron 240 Elk Drive Brinnon W A 98320 February 27,2008 Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners P. O. Box 1220 Port Townsend W A 98368 Gentlemen, I'm confused. The Board of County Commissioners established a stakeholder panel to review the Critical Areas Ordinance. A few members of this panel didn't like the way things were going with the majority, which included several astute, credentialed minds. So those who didn't want to sit at the table submitted a minority report to the planning commission, and the minority report was adopted. Then the few people on the planning commission who supported the work of the stakeholder panel submitted a minority report. So the thoughtful majority have become a minority to be shunned. Future generations may look back to this process, shake their heads and say, "Huh!" What the few dissenters did is quite typical of the tactics practiced by those groups that purport to be environmentally conscious, yet whose ultimate goal is to control people and the land, often to the real detriment of ecosystems. In a way this current ploy is an exception, because the usual tactic is to sit on the sidelines until the process is over, then file a lawsuit. It can be said with confidence, and is supported in Jefferson County through the record of the Conservation District, that landowners who are involved in solutions will spend their own time and money to make things better. When government instead tries to regulate through heavy-handed rules and laws, most rural residents will do what they can to defy and ignore the bureaucracy. Under regulation they will let government worry about it. And many will pursue costly legal remedies to what amounts to an unjust taking of their land. I urge you to accept the best available science that has been proposed for critical areas by the experts who comprised the stakeholder panel, while also considering the precedents that have been established through recent court rulings. Sincerely, ,~--~ . Commissioner Phil Johnson, District 1 Commissioner David Sullivan, District 2 Commissioner John Austin, District 3 HEARING RECORD Critical Areas Ordinance (MLA06-242) Public hearing Comments: Jefferson County's two year exercise updating its Critical Areas Ordinance shows how difficult it is to regulate a problem not known to exist. No evidence has been provided demonstrating our development regulations are failing to protect critical areas. These amendments instead have been driven by the pursuit of an ambiguous legal technicality called best available science. It has been a massive undertaking for such a slight reward, and is emblematic of the strain the vagary of bureaucracy puts on small rural counties. The settlement agreement reached with the Washington Environmental Council (WE C) in executive session, behind closed doors, put open public process behind the eight ball before it ever got off the ground. Despite promises to make it right, we have moved inevitably closer to CAO amendments preordained by WEC from the beginning. A low point occurred early in the Planning Commission deliberation, when a respected member supporting the agreement said when someone's harassing you, you do what you can to get them off your back. While harassing the citizens of Jefferson County, WEC declined an invitation to directly participate in a open public process, choosing instead to have their interests advanced through surrogates in the CAORC minority, who themselves acted outside the lines of the public trust. This pattern of failing to act in good faith was in defiance of the terms of their own agreement. In light of the message of change resonating with voters across the country who have felt detached from government decision- making, is this how we represent ourselves and how we are going to be represented by our leaders? Across America and in Jefferson meeting rooms since June of 2006, the answer is no. Experience tells us negotiating with an intractable position is a loser, and what is most ironic is even this draft may not go far enough to appease WECo For all the intention of avoiding litigation and saving money, by capitulating to WEC the County may have invited multiple lawsuits. In the end, the decision facing the BoCC may not be which is the best CAO but which plaintiff do you want to side with? I support the recommendations contained in the CAORC majority reports. The rationale is self-evident, based as they are on local solutions to local concerns as they directly relate to the regulatory authority of the CAO. The saving grace of the last two years has been the determination of citizens who rescued this issue from the back room and returned it out front where it belongs. These efforts have raised awareness of and attention to the importance our critical environmental resources way beyond what previously existed, and for that we have done our community a great service. A dedicated few combined to literally volunteer several thousand hours to this cause, resulting in some ground breaking innovations that even brought the Department of Ecology to Jefferson and has attracted attention throughout the state. And to think how close we were to this flying completely under the radar. Think of the opportunities we would have missed. It is a fundamental principle of nature that sunlight makes things grow. I similarly support the content of the Planning Commission Minority report and incorporate it, along with all CAORC majority reports, into my comments. I highly endorse the PC Minority proposal to find a middle ground buffer width for the purpose of achieving the widest acceptance of an amended CAO. After the second meeting of the Critical Areas Ordinance Review Committee on 8/17/06, the DCn director asked me to "just give us enough to take to the Hearings Board." The extensive findings of the CAORC has provided supporting evidence that this sort of compromise could pass legal scrutiny, consistent with WAC 365-195-915. The CAO amendments remain connected to the 2004 Comprehensive Plan update requiring counties to review and, if needed, revise plans and implementing regulations (RCW36.70AI30). Any update to our CAO must be measured against the circumstances as they exist in Jefferson County and whether those circumstances have changed sufficiently since the adoption of the plan to warrant any revision. This evaluation establishes the regulatory context under which development regulations are specifically applied to the protection of critical areas. The CAO is not a general environmental wish list or treatise on desired conditions, but is limited in scope to definitive standards.. The CAO must also be examined in the context of its relationship with other goals l -.II were nOD~prioritized and did not elevate one goal above another. This CAO absolutely needs to be considered as part of a comprehensive whole. Doing this requires a regulatory strategy that simultaneously prevents harm to the environment while not harming the intent of other GMA goals. As the status quo of Jefferson's one~dimensional view is not working, we need a new paradigm that looks at the CAO from a more holistic perspective. The CAO amendments also need to be evaluated within the context of the legal authority of RCW 36.70A172, which requires protection of critical areas from the imoacts of development. Extensive data has been produced on the county's unique low~intensity development patterns and strict land~use controls, which by themselves form a first line of protection to our environment and with few exceptions prevent the county from expanding the intensity of existing land uses. Jefferson County's unique development patterns also playa major role in determining what science is applicable to producing the desired result. The Department of Ecology and Department of Fish and Wildlife has been deemed to possess the science of choice by WEC and the Planning Commission. The relevance of this science to Jefferson conditions is in dispute. Chapter Three of Wetlands in Washington State Volume 1: A Synthesis of the Science describes four major environmental disturbances caused by human activities to the land; urban, agricultural, forestry, and mining. DOE's entire synthesis and protection guidance is in relation to these impacts, none of which exist in our county. We have no urban land, agriculture is on hold due to SSB 5248, forestry is regulated under the Forest Practices Act, and most mining occurs in forest overlay zones. Even if by a stretch Hadlock and Ludlow were characterized as urban, supporting DOE science is largely based on research based on King County level impacts (Wetlands and Urbanization: Implications for the Future, Azous and Horner, 2001). DOE protection guidelines are based on a "moderate risk" approach. The lack of any supporting risk analysis to accompany this recommendation has been largely discussed. A moderate risk approach also is characteristic of what both DOE and WDFW call the precautionary principle, codified under WAC 365~195~920. The precautionary approach has often been a fallback position whenever the applicability of DOEIWDFW science is challenged, most recently by a DCD planner who stated at the 2/19/08 workshop ''we can't wait until it's too late." The flaw in this argument is that the precautionary approach does not meet the legal standard without monitoring and adaptive management, and which the Planning Commission recommendation does not provide for. Language in the Planning Commission draft stating that stream buffers "are considered to be the minimum required to protect stream functions and values at the time of the proposed activity" cannot possibly be supported by fact, and it is incredulous to think a total of 150' to protect small seasonal creeks is the minimum necessary. Even 150' buffers (300' total) on all fish bearing streams defies simple math when evaluating functions like shading or large woody debris. Placing the context of the specific regulatory functions of the CAO in consideration of adopting final CAO amendments is important. One example would be Commissioner Austin's reference to the damage done to Triton Cove during the December 2007 storms. A question to ask before considering adopting channel migration zones into the CAO would be whether that situation isn't already under jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act. Another would be references to the importance of headwater streams to overall watershed functions in justifying 75' buffers on Type NslNp streams. These are almost assuredly governed by Forest Practices. Even if they were not, the population densities in these areas are too low to warrant this large a buffer. I highly encourage the BoCC to, prior to final deliberations on the CAO, invite DCD staff to advise you on the fundamental principles of integrated growth management planning and also exactly what development impacts are already regulated under other ordinances or sections of the JCC. Until the county monitors results, comparisons of the relative risks between brands of science or regulatory approaches are pure guesswork. The most striking element of the expansive debate that has taken place over the past two years has been the attention given to the virtue of ambiguous best available science, whose main attribute is that it passes legal muster, to the exclusion of any definitive proof it actually accomplishes the intended purpose of protecting our wetlands, streams, and wildlife. Even Dr. Fred Weinmann, an ardent defender of DOE science, has stated in a letter to the Planning Commission on 5/21/07, "In fact, it is difficult to prove in any justifiable way the specific functional differences of one buffer versus another for a specific site. Several years of data costing many thousands of dollars would be necessary." This illustrates both the arbitrary presumption of what buffers widths are necessary and another selling point of DOE/WDFW science - that it's cheaper. When push has come to shove, the main benefits cited of state agency science is that it's cheaper and safer legally. This does not do justice to the overriding goal of all this work., which is to protect our natural resources in harmony with all the other elements that comprise a healthy and thriving community. During the Clean Water District public process, the BoCC stated that water quality was an essential public health and safety function of government. As that is true, and as the two year examination of these CAO amendments has identified environmental protection as a priority, consistent with the GMA, this should be a priority funding issue for government. The question has been continually raised, "who's going to pay for it?" Or, "the money just isn't there." Citizens already pay taxes for precisely for these kinds of essential public services. We are told the money isn't there, and then we see several hundred thousand dollars allocated to save a farm not threatened by development, or several million dollars granted to plant dead trees upside down to restore a watershed populated by one house per 162 acres. While these monies weren't accessible through the general fund, the money is out there, and for something as fundamentally important as basic stream and wetland monitoring, our elected leadership is expected to serve the interests of the land and the people. Why isn't the BoCC pressing the state for money as vigorously as it seeks to charge the citizens they represent? It has been more than a little distressing to hear insinuations that the reward for all the innovative ideas born out of a massive citizen volunteer effort will be another added financial responsibility. It is constitutionally questionable whether private property can be regulated for the general benefit of wildlife. Wetland buffers based on habitat values are not species specific, so it is not possible to provide a nexus or rough proportionality between a particular wetland buffer and the value it is intended to protect, raising questions whether this is in conOict with Washington statutes modeled on the Nolanl Dolan test and Isla Verde v. the City of Camas. In terms of the difficulty of implementing the CASP's, it is nothing that cannot be overcome without simple will. Until the prescriptive approach is supplemented by mandatory monitoring, the CASP is the most responsible and accountable regulatory approach for ensuring on-the- ground protection of critical areas. In that respect it poses far less risk. Any perceived problematic implementation of dual ratings of wetlands fails to take into account that the rating system has been evolving since 1994 through to adoption of the 2004 revision. This system is not static and like the natural processes it evaluates, should remain dynamic and ever changing in response to new information. This is a good idea that can easily be incorporated into the current system. People smart enough to evaluate and rate wetlands are smart enough to adjust to dual ratings. In terms of practical enforcement of achieving the goal of the CAO, it is a remarkable acknowledgement by DCD in their staff report that CAO compliance, once development permits have been issued, is voluntary. Here we have spent two years pouring over mandatory legal requirements, only to find out in the end it is really up to each one of us to make this work. This is precisely why it is vital the BoCC adopt a final ordinance that gains the widest possible acceptance, and why the sort of compromise buffer solution offered in the Minority report, supplemented with an accountable CASP option, is a win-win result that meets polarized positions in the middle. Where voluntary compliance is in play, the social sciences become as relevant as natural science. As then Planning Commissioner Dennis Schultz said at the 8/2/06 workshop when the CAORC was chosen, it may not be the ordinance we all want, but is one we can aU live with. This sort of solution would also go a long ways toward giving citizens the sense that government is on our side and listening to our voice, and would be the closest thing to a people's ordinance, not a WEC ordinance. Jim Hagen Former Planning Commissioner, 2004-2007 Planning commission Chairman, 2005-2007 CADRC Chairman, August, 2006- March 2007 150 Maple Dr. /'7/ Pod 10..,.":>"",,,-1, ()Jf1 - ~ ,r ~tUtt 1~~~ 21fJt::: ~ - U__H__ .'If--, ~ Jk~ / hIr dL7/ ~ f' . _ f2etl/v k: ~________ ~ ?}JAJd-~~.d0~~~ ___.... ,tluI H tifUf/ /d~ f/~ ~1c6~. ~ _ - ~ UU1lrur duutld- t?i~ /UjM .~ '7z~.'. ...- ...--- ~~ fi ~~~~~jL_~._ ~~ tZ4ut ~ ~ ~____._ ~ . Jtu., ~~ ~ Pdttt dkd ,~ ~ {Vh) u~ ,,~~ tUut ~ ;&d~._.. ._. . ~~~., ,~:;;l,~un ' CJt;J ~ t0v. dv ~~ tJ~uI g~/ M/ ~3, _ ... .. ... .~. . .___ ~ ~~ etu4LL ~ M~Md~... .'.._'.. t!t~ 7ML~Z ~.~,~C/ n~I' (I1'1.1/V~ f<1<-td p~ u~ ~. M<.pc ~ dJfL . 4~Lj /J1d ~~ k<<- ~ ;ttf /Y~ ~. . . ... ...~ ;U.~d~ ~~Y:-~.~.~ I W ~ ~ "I c!-U~ ~ , Wi- tU. d ..~_we ~ $ %1L~~~:~~-- u-rvtul ~~~~tV.~4 HEARING RECORD I~~/ ~_z,.~ ~1/4~~~- ~~/... n____.__~.____ ....,;~.~ , ,t ~.A-~/l~~~~'~ ~2- 2/~i ~~~ . ~~ ;t:tut . ~ tUuf./& ~~ ~ Ma ~ ~___..... ! d., ~{l.,~ue~V~/r--a/ ~ 'T. ~~ ~ ~ y. ...... .. ...u_..._... 'z(uW ~. . . 'I/-. f:d .rh ._~ ~. . . U-~. ~rt& -xX~/? y~.~,gj 1V~(tL~' ~~J~~-:rk~~. ~ t0v ~: '" kUM ML ;tA6 ~.~ ~~ tffl~ /,M -- ~ ~JC40 ,DtH;tIG ~ ~dffG$~u__ ~ ~~?th/ tutU cM,iW'7.~ ~..~.~_.. ~!u~dJif/ . ..' ~,~~~r . .M~~t:&~ ~ .~~ '!'.-- /M~dL~ ~~J:~~~ ~ /JM I~~ d ~. 04f!!/&U~1 ~Md. ____ ;U~i~ ~ .' . ~ tfe ~~.. .-,r -twi~~' ~~~~~'-- ~~ ~~- (ULtw,J ~H ~~~ ~ ~~. c<~..... ;U~.~ ~;t7u ~. ~;dt~~ I1K at /HU/f., J11nL ~~ 3:wc1;Z ~. ~ ~ ~ :<4 ~Ln__ . ~tk.~ .. ~~r~~- ~C/~d~~ '%7 z::: ::::w:::J=fZ~- ~~ ~tfl/ w:.u~~ul ~~~ ~~I ~~~ ;duc~#L.~~~n. ;rj;Uzf /,ffU~ ,~ ~. ~~~ ~/. 'J1() ~ #7ud;? Ii piU/t. ~ ~ tZitL pzd-..<<f7 "-- ~ W J1I#i If LV ~Lta t4v ~ ~j4..~. 'ttCCU4M/ _ ~ve ~d $ ~ H~/l/ ~ I &- ~L ~ tfAuL ~ d- ~ tUJ{ 1ru/~ If, H# ~. .... "~ .11ucu, ~ d4v.~ ~ r ~ ~ f1W aw( ~/~ ')4 dJ ~. / .~~ .~ - ~_._------~ .-.--.-.- February 27, 2008 Board of County Commissioners Jefferson County P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 HEARING RECORD Commissioners Austin, Sullivan, and Johnson, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Critical Areas Ordinance dated January 9, 2008. In general we support this draft Ordinance. The protection of fish and wildlife habitat is an important element to the recovery of Puget Sound, which we strongly support. In addition, there are four ESA listed salmon ids in Jefferson County. Without functional habitat, our Tribes reserved Treaty rights to fish and hunt are greatly diminished. The Ordinance offers similar stream/river buffers as is found in the existing 2001 ordinance, with the addition of Channel Migration Zones which is very important. These buffers are a compromise. They are by no means maximum buffers, but are a recognition of the societal balance between resource protection and development. We ask for the Commissioners support by approving this draft with our recommended changes. Our significant changes are in bold. Article V - Geologically Hazardous Areas 18.22.160 (2) (d) Channel MiQration Zones (CMZ). Please note that it is functionally incorrect to have CMZ's listed under the Landslide Hazard Area Section. CMZ's should be in a third area by itself (erosion, landslide, and channel migration). The CMZ map on the County website (from Perkin Geosciences) identified potential moderate and high hazard channel movement. This is a relative probability of channel movement over the next 100 years. These maps are derived from the previous 65 years of channel movement (i.e. the previous 65 years of climate) and other topographical and geologic features. From a public safety standpoint, we feel the CMZ should include both the high and moderate hazard areas. Please note that in 2006, Mt Rainier had a 500 year flood event (18 inches of rain in 36 hours) and the Chehalis R had a 500 year flood event (up to 14 inches of rain in 24 hours) a few months ago. Global Warming models predict that extreme rain events will become more common. This county is not immune from such an event. 2 (2) (d) cont. The second recommendation is to clarify what is a CMZ. The CMZ encompasses both channel meandering and channel avulsion. Avulsion is a dominant channel movement mechanism and must be included. Avulsion paths often follow old historic channels (swales in the floodplain). We recommend deleting the last sentence "These areas also do not include.. ..entire stream channel or avulsion." In addition, please remove the last word of the first sentence, "meanders". Both of these deletions will align this section with the CMZ's as delineated for Jefferson County by the Bureau of Reclamation and Perkins Geosciences. 18.22.160 (3). Please add to your list: "Rapp, C.G. and Abbe, T.B. 2003. A Framework for Delineating Channel Migration Zones, Ecology Publication 03-06-027. 66 pgs. plus appendices." 18.22.170 (3) (a). Clearing and grading. It should clearly state that the applicant must have an approved plan (that includes vegetation retention, buffer marking, and a geotech report) prior to clearing and grading. In general, an applicant should apply for a clearing and grading permit prior to any work in critical areas or their buffers (not just geologically hazardous areas). Once a critical area is cleared, its function is lost. Article VI - Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCA's) 18.22.200 (3). Designation. Please designate channel migration zones as part of the Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas. While the Planning Commission only considered CMZ's in terms of public safety, they have an equal or greater role in creating and providing fish and wildlife habitat. We suggest adding the following: U) Channel Migration Zones. As defined in 18.22.160 (2) d. 18.22.220 Sources used for identification. Please add the above Rapp and Abbe CMZ publication (18.22.160 (3)). 18.22.270 (5) (b) (ii). Prescriptive FWHCA Buffers. Please add CMZ's to the second sentence, "Nevertheless, the required buffer shall be extended to include any.. .Iandslide hazard areas, channel migration zones, and/or erosion hazard areas..." 18.22.270 (5) (b) (ii). Prescriptive FWHCA Buffers (cont). Type Ns slopes (not Np) that are less than 20% grade could have a buffer of 50 ft. Please note this is a concession; while a 50 ft buffer of relatively low grade may protect downstream fish habitat, it will not provide as much forested wildlife habitat as a 75 ft buffer. 18.22.270 (6) (b). To be consistent with the wetlands section, please change it to "The buffers shall not be reduced to less than seventy five percent of the st::md3rd buffer, with 3 minimum buffer of 25 ft for Type Np/Ns and 50 ft for Type Sand F. Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe comments -' ~ 3 Article VII- Wetlands. In general this is a complex product. We do not have enough experience with the new wetland rating system to understand whether this will protect wetland function. Monitoring is a must. 18.22.310 (9) (a) (i). Please clarify that the outer 25 percent is the portion of the buffer away from the wetland. Article IX - Alternative Protection Standards Critical Areas Stewardship Plans (CASP). In theory this sounds like a great idea. In practice, the Jefferson County DCD does not have the staff to implement this standard, there will be no enforcement-thus making this standard a giant loophole around the CAG, and it is experimental. We suggest removing Article IX for now, obtaining funding to do a statistically significant number of case studies, monitor them, and develop the Standards from the results of that study. In general, here are some comments on this plan. 18.22.460. Please add "equal to better than the prescriptive buffer requirements" to the end of the second sentence. If this is to pass review, this cannot be seen as potentially circumventing the CAG. 18.22.460 (cont). Please define "existing functions and values of the critical areas. This is not enforceable without a definition. 18.22.470 (3). DNR water type inventory is widely known to be inaccurate. The water typing must be verified by a qualified professional. 18.22.470 (4). Habitats of local significance documented by Jefferson County within the contributing basin and within 3/10th of one mile from the property shall be documented. 18.22.480 (5) The detailed vegetation plan should also include a map (along with site photos). 18.22.480 (cont). Should also have categories for identifying and restoring in-stream habitat, riparian habitat, and wetland functions. Best Regards, rff Byron Rot Habitat Program Manager Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe comments \--ft 3v-~I~[O~ ~~~~ Regulatory Hammers and Agriculture '" J=t I E y. 11. /;,t During the debate over SB 5248 and HE 2212 (CAO), we hear that a regulatory hammer is needed over agriculture. Here are the statutes, laws, regulations and guidelines or agencies that agricultural operations are subject to, having only to do with environmental issues (presumably the hammer that is desired from CAOs). Other hammers dealing with labor, animal and crop husbandry, food safety, etc. are not dealt with here. HEAR'r~JG RECORD Federal: FIFRA (Federal insecticide, fungicide and rodenticides)-pesticides FFDCA (federal food, drug, and cosmetic act) 3 agencies- pesticides Transportation & Safety Act -transporting/moving pesticides OSHA (occupational, safety, health)-pesticides notification, etc. Resource Conservation & Recovery Act-solid waste Food, Agriculture, Conservation & Trade Act-pesticide records ESA (endangered species act)-actions/activities effecting endangered/threatened species-fish, fowl, animals, plants. Includes county level rules for pesticide use. CW A (clean water act)-pointJnonpoint pollution Safe Drinking Water Act E}( h " to f' t .t:t I f2.. [1 ~ 4 p-,,, ' J J US Corps of Engineers-jurisdiction over near water activities, rivers and harbors act of 1899 USDA acreage reporting to FSA, swampbuster and sodbuster rules Washington State W A Pesticide Control Act-and associated WACs W A Pesticide Application Act-and associated WACs, licensing, testing and recurrent training, relicensing requirements. SEP A-(state environmental policy act) Shorelines Management Act-on going ag practices exempt, changes to practices, building and remodeling are not. Air Quality-ag burning, health hazards dust, smoke, etc. Regional clean air authorities. Flood Plain Management Coastal Zone Management Composting and Solid Waste- rules and regulations, carcass disposal rules. Wetlands-some federal exemptions - not in W A Water Resources-irrigation rules, water rights Instream Flows-- some water rights are going to be curtailed starting in 2007. Ex h 1'6,' t ;t::t: ( 3 o{.' e...( Water Quality-point/non point-farming practices, nutrients Ground Water Quality -exceeds federal laws HPA-(hydraulic projects) WDFW-irrigation pumping standards, flood/erosion protection. RCW 77. RCW 85 Diking and Drainage Districts TMDLs-total maximum daily loads for water bodies= restrictions on farming practices. NPDES-National Pollution Discharge Elimination System--- animal agriculture is allowed no discharges- industry/municipalities are allowed to. Dairy Nutrient Management Act-mandatory-one of strongest in nation. Dam Safety-ponds and lagoons Livestock Nutrient Management Planning-not required, many are going voluntarily. Wastewater Rules---effect some ag operations, produce and bulb washing permits. 2514 Watershed Planning-more rules? Restrictions? FPA (forest practices act---many farms have woodlots WDFW trapping ban, rules. Nuisance animal control. GMA (growth management act)-unequal treatment between counties, right to develop a big issue in non prime ag counties, k ;< /l/'bl +:1). L/ 01-' 4 density mandates so that family members can't live on the farm, etc. Local F irecodes- fIre marshal directives Building/remodeling codes, requirements Siting permits, setbacks This is by no means a complete list. There are many more laws/rules that are commodity specific. DO WE REALLY NEED MORE RULES, REGULATIONS OR REGULATORY HAMMERS? NARA I The National Archives Experience Page 1 of7 ~(~, The Constitution ofthe United States: A Transcription Note: The jiJllowing text is a transcription of the Constitution in its original jorm. [tems that are hyperlinked have since been amended or superseded. \Ve the People of the l)nited States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice. insure domestic Tranquility. provide fi)r the common defence.. promote the gencral Welfllre, and secure the Blessings ofLiherty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States ofAmerira. Article. l. Section. L All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives. Sectioil.2. The Honse of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite fi.)r EJertors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature. No Person shall be a I~epresentative who shaH not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen. Representativesal1ddirectIaxessf1alI be. ,tpp(lrti{)l1e(ll\llJ{)l1gthe S('YGwI5tates \vl1icl1l11ay he inc1udGdwithin this U Ilioll, .accQrcling..tQ..thc ir .respectiyc..N\IIubers......\Yl\ic.l1..shal1. hl:cleti3n:ninc~i .bY..WJcling.to tl1i3w.l1oleNuIl) bec.()f.fi"i3i3 Persons, including those bound. to Service for aTer1110f Years,j1nd .;:xcJudingIlldians nottaxelf,three fitlf1s()falJ()ther l'erSOlls. '1'he actual .Enumeration shall be .made within three Years aner the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term often Years, in such Mlmner m: they shaJj by Law direct. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one tor every thirty l'housand, but each State shall have at I.east one Representative; and until such emmleration shall be made, the State of Nev" Hampshirc'Shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New-York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight. Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina live, South Carolina five, and Georgia three. When vacanries happen in the Representation fhml lmy State, the ExeClitive Authority thereof shall issue Writs of IJection to fill such Vacancies. The House of Reprcsentatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Omcers; and shaJJ have the solc Power of Impeachment Section. 3. http://www .archives.gov 1 exhibitsl chartersl constitution _ transcript.html 2/27/2008 NARA I The National Archives Experience Page 2 of7 The Senate of the United States shaH be composed of two Senators fiom each State, cllQscnhtllCl"gisIlltlJfC thereof for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote. Immediately after they shall be ,r'Ssemhled in Consequence of the lirst Election. they shall be divided as equally as may be into three Classes. 'rhe Seats of the Senators of tile lirst Class shall be vacated at the Expiration of the second Year, of the second Class at the Expiration of the f{lUrth Year, ,md of the third Class at the Expiration of the sixth Year, so that one third may be chosen every second Y ear;lllldiLYaplJ19iesllaPPellhyResignatiQll,QL9tl:wrvyisc,clllJ'i.llgJheRecessQf tl1c..LegislatlJfG..Qf.anY...Sl,ltG,..ll1e...EX.Gcutiye..thCrG(lfIl1,IY..m,1kG.temPQrarY..l\pp()intmcnts..@(i.I..tI1G..nex:t.MGGting..(){'tlw Lggisllltme.,whiclLshanJhcnfi)lsIlchYa(;mli~ie.';;. No Person shall be a Senator who shaH not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant ()fthat State for which he shall be chosen. I The Vice President of the .United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided. The Senate shall chuse their other OITieers, and also a President pro tempore, in the Absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the OHice of President of the United States. The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments, When sitting f{1f that PU!1)ose, they shall be on Oath or A ffinnation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence oftwo thirds ofthe Members present Judgment in Cases ofImpeachment shall not extend fhrther than to removal fiom Office, and disqualification to hold ,md enjoy any Office of honor. "J'rust or pront under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment according to Law. Section. 4. The 'rimes, Places and Manner of holding EJections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such .H.egulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators. The Congress shall assemble at lew,t once in every Year, and such Meeting shall hC()ulhefjrstM()tldliyinJ)G(;(:mbcr, unless they shall byLaw appoint a ditTerent Day. Section. 5. Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, mId aM,~jority of each shall constitute a QuonmJ to do Business; but a smaller Number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the Attendmlce of absent Members, in such Manner, and under such Penalties as each House may provide. Each House may deternline the Rules oEits Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence oftwo thirds, expel a Member. [:ach House shall keep a Journal of its Proceedings, and fi'om time to time publish the same, exccpting such Paris as may in their Judgment require Secrecy; and the Yeas and Nays ol'the Members of either House on ,my question shall, at the Desire of one fifth of those Present. be entered on the Journal. Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place them that in which the two Houses shall be sitting, Section. 6. The Senators ,mdRepresentatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the T'reasury of the [)nited States. .rhey shall in all Cases, except Treason, .Felony and Breach ofihe Peace. be privileged from Arrest during their Attend,mce at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to ,md returning from the same: and for any Speech or Debate in either IJouse, they shall not be questioned in any other Place. No Senator or Representative shall, during theI'ime filr which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either Honse during his Continuance in Office. Section. 7. All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the I.louse of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other BiIls. Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, belore it become a Law, be presented to the President of tile United States: lfhe approve he shall sign it, but ifnot he shall retum it, with his Objections to thatH.ouse in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal. and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which .it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law, But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and Nays. and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the JOllrnal of each llouse respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shaH have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like !Vlanner as ifhe had signed it unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return. in which Case it shall not be a .Law. http://www .archives.gov 1 exhibitsl chartersl constitution _ transcript.html 2/27/2008 NARA I The National Archives Experience Page 3 of7 Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to thc President of the United States; and before the Same shall take EJIect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill. Section. 8. The Congress shall have Power .1'0 lay and coHee! 'faxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Dchts and provide for the common DeJimce and general Well~lfe of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the [Jnited States; To borrow Money on the credit of the United States; To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes: To establish an Ilnifimn Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States; To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof and oflbreigl1 Coin, and fix the Sttmdard of Weights tmd Measures; To provide li)r the Plmislunent of counterfeiting the Securities and CUlTent Coin of the United Statcs; To establish Post OIIices tmd post Roads; To promote the Progress of Science and usefill Arts, by secming li)r limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exc.lusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries; 1'0 constitute 'fribunals interior to the supreme Court; To define and punish Piracies tU1d Felonies committed on the high Seas, tUld Of1ences against the Law of Nations; To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal. and make Rules concerning Captures on Lmld and Water; To raise tU1d support Arnlies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be 11:lr a longer Ternl thml two Yetrrs; To provide and maintain a Navy; To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the ltmd and naval Forces; To provide tl)r calling Ji:Jrth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; To provide till' organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia. tU1d Ii)r governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, rescrving to the States respective.ly, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the ?vlilitia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress: To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles squtrre) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like /\uthority over all Places purchased by the Consent ofthe Legislatlrre of the State in which the Same shall be. fbr the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals. dock-Yards, and other needful BuiJdings;--And To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the t1:ll'egoing Powers. and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof Section. 9. The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars f()(' each Person. The Privilege ofthe Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Satety may require it. No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed. No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid,urlkssiIU'fOportiQILtQJheCellSUSQrellumeratiQuherein 1:Jej'{m: direqed to be taken. No 'fax or Dnty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State. No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another; nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another. No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law: and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published f!-om time to time. No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the lJl1itcd Statcs; /\nd no Person holding any Office of Profit or Tmst under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State. Section. 10. No State shall enter into any .I'reaty, l\Hiance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit http://www.archi ves.gov / exhibits/ charters/ constitution_ transcript.html 2/27/2008 NARA I The National Archives Experience Page 4 of7 Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any l'itle of Nobility. No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary Ii)r executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use ofthe Treasury ofthe United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision emd Controul of the Congress. No State shall, without the Consent o I' Congress, lay emy Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State. or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay. Article. H. Section. 1. The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Ternl of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen tbr the same Tenn, be ele(:ted, as Ibllows: Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector The Elel:t(ll:sshelllm~eljnJheirJespectiYeS\flleS"llldYQJ~by13ellloU\)rJwOP\lrs(ms,\~f Whm:llOlW<\tJ\l<\~t~h\lILllOlh<,: <lJl..!lll1uhitallt. of thesume..Stal.\l...w.i.tl1.tl1ell1SelYeS... AIl<l.tl1ey..sl1all..J11ak\l..\l..Lisl. .of ']l.\..l.l1e..PersoIls..yote<l..fQr,..lllld..Qftl1e NlJll1beLofYot\lsJorgilCh;WhichLi~UheyshellLsigllal1dceni(y,elJl<lJHlllSmitseilledJQJ!leSt;<\tpUhe(1()YemTflemoJ tl1.e.. Ullite<l..States,..<lir9cte<f.to.tl1e..Presidelll..of.tl1e..S9ll<\le ...]'I1.e Presid911t.of.th9..SGllClle...Sl1alJ,...il) tl1.e.PreS911Ce 0 f the..Senate nlJdBt1\lSeofRepre~ellt<ltiYe~.oPen.!l!LtheCer\i..ficnte~,(JIl(ltheYO\t;SShillIJhel1Pt;,CQllIlleQ,'fhe)'ersoflhnyi.l1.g Jhe greatest Nlllll beI.()f Votes. shil.\I.. be..the..Presi(jG.llt,..i.f.Sll(:h..Nllmber..be..aMajority..()f.the..whole...Nlllllb9r..Q.fElectors appoil)ted;..anQ..if.tl1GfebG..lllore..tllall..Olle.~vh().haye..Sllch..Ma.iofilY,..ilI1Q..lmve..an.ell\liil..Nllmhef.pf.Vptes,tl1el\..tllG..Hollsepf R epresentCitiyes sh <llIillllllediately..chusehyUe!.lI()t ()llehftl1el11 Ibrpresi<lGl1t; .'U1.difllQPefSonhaye il....MajoIity,thellfi-tJlll tl1G..tJ ve. higl1estol1.Jhe..l"!st tI1G..siliQ...H.QuSG.shiil.I....i.ll...like..MaIlIleLel1usGthe. presidGI1.LB.ut ..i.ll..clms.i.ng..tht;.f'rt;sidelltthe Votes shall be taken by StateS,the Representati()Jl from eachSt<1te having oneYot~;;\ QlIO.flllJ1 forthispu!1)(lse s\Jelll cOIl.sisLQLaMemlleroLI\r1embersJIQmJwoJhir<lsQftlwSt<1l.es, <\.!ld<1 Major!lYo[Jdltllt;Statess.!mlLbelleceSSilrytQ<\ c::hoice.JIleyc::ryC\lSe, ilflerthc::ChoicepftheJ're~i<lellt,JhePerSQ!1.helvillgtl1egreilJeStNUIIlh\lLQf Votes oJ tl1c::J:':IGctors s.!lCilI.he.tl1eYi.cG..presi(I~I1.LJ3!1t.i.[\h.e.r~sl1(ml.d..rGm;;tiut\YQQL1llQre. wl1ol1;;tYe..eql1<\LY<)tes,..tlwSen<ltgshl,lll(:htl~e..li'Ql11. tl1em])y13 iJIIQtJheVic~J'residt;nt. The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes: which Day shall be the same throughout the United States. No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution. shall be eligible to the OJ11ce of President; neither shall lU1Y Person he eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Iive Ycars, and been fowteen Years a Resident within the United States. InCilScoDheReJ11oYCilQftl1c::J~rcs.iden.tJIQm()meC,QLQJhisJ!Cilth,J~gsiglltltiQ!LPLlnilbj.lity.todischm'gl.':thI.':J'QWerS an<l.plltiesoft\Je s[tid Off'ic\l,tl1eSmneshaIIdeyolye(1I11heVice President.,illJ<ItheCollgressmay.])y .LmYPfQyidell)}' tI1I.':CCJ.s~ofR~lJl0Y<lL))l.':ljlh,.R~sigll;;ttiouorJn1!lJilitY,bQt\JJ}fJhePr~sid~llLilfJ<LYiq"J~rG"si<ll:llLdecJil.riIlgwlliltQt'til:l:r shall...tl1erl. act...il.~..f1resident,..aJ1.<l..such.()mcer..shalI..act.ll.ccordingIY,..llntil..thc .pisabilitY.bc::.rem()ved,..or [t .President .shelll..be elected. The President shall, at stated 'rimes, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the Period liJr which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them. Bcfore he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shalI take the fiJlIowing Oath. or Affirmation:--"I do solemnly swear (or amm1) that I will faitillhlly execute the Of11ce of President ofthe United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." Section. 2. .I'he President shall be Commander ill Chief ofihe Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service ofthe United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Depanments, upon any Subject relating to the ])uties of their respective Offices. and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons fbr OfIences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment. He shall have Power. by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided 1\vo thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public IVlinisters and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all othcr Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided tbr, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Oftieers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads ofDepmtrnents. The President shall have Power to fill up a1l Vacemcies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session. http://www.archi ves.gov 1 exhibitsl chartersl constitution _ transcript.html 2/2712008 NARA I The National Archives Experience Page 5 of7 Section. 3. He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State oftheUnion, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions. convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjoumment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive /\mlmssadors w1d other publie Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, ,md shall Commission all the Officers of the United States. Section. 4. The President, Vice President and all civil OHicers of the United States, shall be removed from Of1ice on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. Article III. Sectioll. 1. The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish, The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated 'rimes, receive for their Services a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Of1ice. Section. 2. The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws ofthe United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls:--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;-- betWecIlaStatgandCiti,gI1Sof{llJQJl1f,:rStatg;-- between Citizens of different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof: and toreign States, Citizens or Subjects. In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in \.vhich a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases beJ{)re mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such .Regulations as the Congress shall make. The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases ofImpeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the 'rrial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed. Section. 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted oCfreason unless on the "festimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to dec.lare the Punishment of Treasou, but no Attainder of Treasol1 shall work Corruption of Blood. or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted. Article. IV. Section. 1. Full Faith ,md Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, ,md judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescrihe the Manner in whieh such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, ,md the Ef1ect thereof Section. 2. The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and lnmnmities of Citizens in the several States. ;\ Person charged in ,my State with Tre<lson, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be [()Und in another State. shall on Demand ofthe executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime. N() Pers(ll1l1eld to Service or Labour ill(ll1c$tate.. UllderthGJ,&wstlwrcQf,escapingjntQ another, shall,in C(ll1Sequellce {)farwJ,awOLRegnJatiQI1Jhcrcill, be {lisch,lrge(IJmI11s11chselyicgmo!,gho\lr,JmtshaILhcdgliYef\)<lU!l(lll(Jaim()f(hc Party to whomsu.ch Service. or LahourmaYheclue. Sectioll. 3. New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be fimned or erected within the Jurisdictioll of any other State; llor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well <lS of the Congress, The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needfiII Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitutioll shall be so construed as to Prejudice any http://www.archives.gov/ exhibits/ charters/ constitution_ transcript.html 2/27/2008 NARA I The National Archives Experience Page 6 of7 Claims of the United States, or of<my partieular State. Section. 4. The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; ,md on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature c,mnot be convened), against domestic Violence, Article. V. The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a ConventionfiJr proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three lourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof: as the one or the otberI\-1ode ofRatifieationll1ay be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thous,md eight hundred and eight shall in any Mmmer affect the first ,md fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived ofits equal Suffrage in the Senate. Article. VI. All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Contederation, This Constitution, and the TAIWS of the United States which shan be made in Pursuance thereof; and all .rreaties made, or which shall be made. under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Umd; ,md the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby. any I'bing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatlll'es, and all executive and judicial OJIicers, both of the l.Jnited States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or AlIinnation, to support this Constitution; bnt no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States, Article. VlI. The RatiIication of the Conventions of nine States. shall be suITicient It)r the Establishment of this Constitution betv....een the Stares so rati(ying the Same. The Word, "the," being interlined between the seventh and eighth Lines of the first Page, the Word "Thirty" being partly written on an Erazure in the filleenth Line of the tlrst Page, The \Vords "is tried" being interlined between the thirty second and thirty third Lines of the first Page and the Word "the ,. being interlined between the forty third and forty fourth Lines of the second Page. Attest William Jackson Secretary Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thous,md seven hundred ,md Eighty seven ,md of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have herelmto subscribed our Names, (j"; Washington Presidt and depu~v from Virginia pd!!ware Geo: Read GUl1ning...l3edfQn:ljllll John Dickinson RichaI<I.B.a.s.sett .laco: Broom Maryland .ra.lnest\:JcHcnfY Dan of St Thos, Jeniler Danl...C(llIoll YixgillJa John Blair ,James Madison Jr, Nflrtl1 Cllrfllina WI11. Blount Richd. DobbsSp<l.ight !Iu Williamson South Carolina http://www.archives.gov / exhibits/ charters/constitution _ transcript.html 2/27/2008 NARA I The National Archives Experience Page 7 of7 .l.Rlltl~c!g~ ChiJrl~~.CQt~~WQl1b .J'jn.t;1m~y Charle~ pinckn~y pierc~l3utler G~Qrgiil WilJimn Few i\brJ:3:J14wlp NeW..U.il.mp~ltjrl.' ]<111l1..Lal1gc!Pll NicllQIasGihnan Massachusetts Nathaniel Gorham RllfllS King CQfllll.'c:.tiC:Jlt Wm.SaJ11). Jphnson RQg~r..Sllel'll1:J!l NewVm'j. Alex~U1der llmnilton New ,Jersey Wil:Liv ingstoll David Brearley Wm. Paterson Jona: Dayton Pennsylvania B Franklin Thomas Mi I1Jin RQbl.Mmris Geo. Clymer rhos. FitzSimons Jared Ingersoll .f<in1esWi.ls9D GOllY Monis For biographies of the non-signing delegates to the Constitutional Convention, see the F()lUlc!ing}'qthers page. 1_ ~BI_l!IiIIIIl~~ --- L__ http://www.archives.gov 1 exhibitsl chartersl constitution_ transcript.html 2/2712008 .... NARA I The National Archives Experience Page 1 of3 Z- The l>reamble to The Bill of Rights Congr'ess or tile United States begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the Jourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine. THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that flllther declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, wiU best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution. RESOL \lED by the Senate and House ofRepreselltatives ofthe United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses eoncllning, that the following Articles be proposed 10 the L,egislatures of the several States, as amendrnents to the Constitution of the United States. all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three 1i:mrths of the said L.egislatures, to be valid to aU intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution: viz. AHTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States. pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution. The Bill of Rights: A Transcription The Preamble to The Bill of Rights Congress ofthe Vnited States begun and held at the City of New- York, on Wednesday the f{mrth oPv1arch, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine. THE Conventions ofa number of the States. having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declararory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, wjJJ best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution. RESOLVE!) by the Senate and House ofJ{epresentatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled. two thirds ofhoth Houses concurring, that the f{)llowing Articles he proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all. or any of which Articles, when ratified by three Jourths ofthe said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents ,md pUl1)Oses, as part of the said Constitution; viz. http://www.archi ves. gov 1 exhibitsl charters/bill_ oCrights _ transcript.html 2/27/2008 NARA I The National Archives Experience , Page 2 of3 ARTICLES in addition to, and A,mendrnent of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the LegisJatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution. Note: The following text is a transcription of the tlrst ten amendments to the Constitution in their original foml. Thesc amendments were ratiJied December 15, 1791, and [(mn what is known as the "Bill of Rights." Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment ofreligion. or prohibiting the tree exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech. or of the press; or the right of the peop.le peaccably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Amendment n ;\ well regulatcdMilitia, bcing necessary to the security ofa free State, the right of the people to keep and hear Arms.. shall not be infringed. Amendment HI No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the O\\11er, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed bylaw. Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and eHects, against unreasonable searches ,md seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shaH issue. but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation. and particularly deseribing the pi ace to he searched, and (he persons or things to be seized. Amendment V No person shall be held to ,mswer felr a capital, or otherwise inJ'i:unous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces. or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of \Var or public danger: nor shall any person be subject lor the same oUence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compeJJed in any criminal case to be a witness against himself. nor be deprived ofliJe, liberty, or property, without due process of law: nor shall private property be taken lhr public use, without just compensation. Amendment VI In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shan have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by Jaw, and to be inf()rmed oHhe nature and cause of the accusation; to be eonlionted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process fl,r obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence. Amendment VB In Suits at common law. where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shaJJ be preserved, and no lact tried by ajury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. Amendment VUI Excessive baiJ shall not be required. nor excessive tines imposed. nor ('mel ,md unusual punishments inflk:ted. Amendment IX The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Ame!lgme!!t~JJ-f7 http://www .archives.gov / exhibits/ charters/bill_ of Jights _ transcript.html 2/27/2008 NARA I The National Archives Experience Page 3 of 3 Nott~: The capitalization and ynmctuation in this version is frorn the enrolled original of the Joint Resolution of Congress proposing the .BilLQf.RigblS.. which, is on pq~mtl,rwuJ:__4t~pl?y.tnJh~_Jsm:tlJghL(}JJh~J"{?!j9f1~LAT9bjy~_~J~J.lihjjJ:lg, Washington, D.C. -- -~ ltl fIa1 http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_oCrights _ transcript.html 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution :3 Inside the Legislature *' Find Your Legislator .. Visiting the Legislature '" Agendas, Schedules and Calendars '" Bill Information '* Laws and Agency Rules '* Legislative Committees '" Legislative Agencies '" Legislative Information Center '" E-mail Notifications (Listserv) .... Students' Page .,. History of the State Legislature Outside the Legislature ,. Congress - the Other Washington '" TV Washington '* Washington Courts .. OFM Fiscal Note Website Page 1 of 50 How To Use This Site I About Us I Contact Us I Search Legislature Home I Senate I House of Representatives print Version I No esta disponible en espallol Laws and Agency Rules> Washington State Constitution Washington State Constitution PREAMBLE We, the people of the State of Washington, grateful to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe for our liberties, do ordain this constitution. ARTICLE I DECLARA TION OF RIGHTS SECTION 1 POLITICAL POWER. All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights. SECTION 2 SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND. The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land. SECTION 3 PERSONAL RIGHTS. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. SECTION 4 RIGHT OF PETITION AND ASSEMBLAGE. The right of petition and of the people peaceably to assemble for the common good shall never be abridged. SECTION 5 FREEDOM OF SPEECH. Every person may freely speak, write and publish on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right. SECTION 6 OATHS - MODE OF ADMINISTERING. The mode of administering an oath, or affirmation, shall be such as may be most consistent with and binding upon the conscience of the person to whom such oath, or affirmation, may be administered. SECTION 7 INVASION OF PRIVATE AFFAIRS OR HOME PROHIBITED. No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law. SECTION 8 IRREVOCABLE PRIVILEGE, FRANCHISE OR IMMUNITY PROHIBITED. No law granting irrevocably any privilege, franchise or immunity, shall be passed by the legislature. SECTION 9 RIGHTS OF ACCUSED PERSONS. No person shall be compelled in any criminal case to give evidence against himself, or be twice put in jeopardy for the same offense. SECTION 10 ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE. Justice in all cases shall be administered openly, and without unnecessary delay. SECTION 11 RELIGIOUS FREEDOM. Absolute freedom of conscience in all matters of religious sentiment, belief and worship, shall be guaranteed to every individual, and no one shall be molested or disturbed in person or property on account of religion; but the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness or justify practices inconsistent with the peace and safety of the state. No publiC money or property shall be appropriated for or applied to any religious worship, exercise or instruction, or the support of any religious establishment: PROVIDED, HOWEVER, That this article shall not be so construed as to forbid the employment by the state of a chaplain for such of the state custodial, correctional, and mental institutions, or by a county's or public hospital district's hospital, health care facility, or hospice, as in the discretion of the legislature may seem justified. No religious qualification shall be required for any public office or employment, nor shall any person be incompetent as a witness or juror, in consequence of his opinion on matters of religion, nor be questioned in any court of justice touching his religious belief to affect the weight of his testimony. [AMENDMENT 88, 1993 House Joint Resolution No. 4200, p 3062. Approved November 2, 1993.] Amendment 34 (1957) - Art. 1 Section 11 RELIGIOUS FREEDOM. Absolute freedom of conscience in all matters of religious sentiment. belief and worship, shall be guaranteed to every individual. and no one shall be molested or disturbed in person or property on account of religion; but the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness or justify practices inconsistent with the peace and safety of the state. No public money or property shall be appropriated for or applied to any religious worship, exercise or instruction, or the support of any religious establishment: Provided, however, That this article shall not be so construed as to forbid the employment by the state of a chaplain for such of the state custodial, correctional and mental institutions as in the discretion of the legislature may seem justified. No religious http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 2 of 50 qualification shall be required for any public office or employment, nor shall any person be incompetent as a witness or juror, in consequence of his opinion on matters of religion, nor be questioned in any court of justice touching his religious belief to affect the weight of his testimony. [AMENDMENT 34,1957 Senate Joint Resolution No. 14, p 1299. Approved November 4, 1958.] Amendment 4 (1904) - Art. 1 Section 11 RELIGIOUS FREEDOM - Absolute freedom of conscience in all matters of religious sentiment, belief and worship, shall be guaranteed to every individual, and no one shall be molested or disturbed in person or property on account of religion; but the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness or justify practices inconsistent with the peace and safety of the state. No public money or property shall be appropriated for or applied to any religious worship, exercise or instruction, or the support of any religious establishment. Provided, however, That this article shall not be so construed as to forbid the employment by the state of a chaplain for the state penitentiary, and for such of the state reformatories as in the discretion of the legislature may seem justified. No religious qualification shall be required for any public office or employment, nor shall any person be incompetent as a witness or juror, in consequence of his opinion on matters of religion, nor be questioned in any court of justice touching his religious belief to affect the weight of his testimony. [AMENDMENT 4, 1903 P 283 Section 1. Approved November, 1904,] Original text - Art. 1 Section 11 RELIGIOUS FREEDOM - Absolute freedom of conscience in all matters of religious sentiment, belief. and worship, shall be guaranteed to every individual, and no one shall be molested or disturbed in person, or property, on account of religion; but the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsistent with the peace and safety of the state. No public money or property shall be appropriated for, or applied to any religious worship, exercise or instruction, or the support of any religious establishment. No religious qualification shall be required for any public office, or employment, nor shall any person be incompetent as a witness, or juror, in consequence of his opinion on matters of religion, nor be questioned in any court of justice touching his religious belief to affect the weight of his testimony. SECTION 12 SPECIAL PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES PROHIBITED. No law shall be passed granting to any citizen, class of citizens, or corporation other than municipal, privileges or immunities which upon the same terms shall not equally belong to all citizens, or corporations. SECTION 13 HABEAS CORPUS. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless in case of rebellion or invasion the public safety requires it. SECTION 14 EXCESSIVE BAIL, FINES AND PUNISHMENTS. Excessive bail shall not be required, excessive fines imposed, nor cruel punishment inflicted. SECTION 15 CONVICTIONS, EFFECT OF. No conviction shall work corruption of blood, nor forfeiture of estate. SECTION 16 EMINENT DOMAIN. Private property shall not be taken for private use, except for private ways of necessity, and for drains, flumes, or ditches on or across the lands of others for agricultural, domestic, or sanitary purposes. No private property shall be taken or damaged for public or private use without just compensation having been first made, or paid into court for the owner, and no right-of-way shall be appropriated to the use of any corporation other than municipal until full compensation therefor be first made in money, or ascertained and paid into court for the owner, irrespective of any benefit from any improvement proposed by such corporation, which compensation shall be ascertained by a jury, unless a jury be waived, as in other civil cases in courts of record, in the manner prescribed by law. Whenever an attempt is made to take private property for a use alleged to be public, the question whether the contemplated use be really public shall be a judicial question, and determined as such, without regard to any legislative assertion that the use is public: Provided, That the taking of private property by the state for land reclamation and settlement purposes is hereby declared to be for public use. [AMENDMENT 9, 1919 P 385 Section 1. Approved November, 1920.] Original text - Art. 1 Section 16 EMINENT DOMAIN. Private property shall not be taken for private use, except for private ways of necessity, and for drains, flumes or ditches on or across the lands of others for agricultural, domestic or sanitary purposes. No private property shall be taken or damaged for public or private use without just compensation having first been made, or paid into court for the owner, and no right of way shall be appropriated to the use of any corporation other than municipal, until full compensation therefor be first made in money, or ascertained and paid into the court for the owner, irrespective of any benefit from any improvement proposed by such corporation, which compensation shall be ascertained by a jury, unless a jury be waived as in other civil cases in courts of record, in the manner prescribed by law. Whenever an attempt is made to take private property for a use alleged to be public, the question whether the contemplated use be really public shall be a judicial question, and determined as such without regard to any legislative assertion that the use is public. SECTION 17 IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT. There shall be no imprisonment for debt, except in cases of absconding debtors. SECTION 18 MILITARY POWER, LIMITATION OF. The military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power. SECTION 19 FREEDOM OF ELECTIONS. All Elections shall be free and equal, and no power, civil or military, shall at any time interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage. SECTION 20 BAIL, WHEN AUTHORIZED. All persons charged with crime shall be bailable by sufficient sureties, except for capital offenses when the proof is evident, or the presumption great. SECTION 21 TRIAL BY JURY. The right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate, but the legislature may provide for a jury of any number less than twelve in courts not of record, and for a verdict by nine or more jurors in civil cases in any court of record, and for waiving of the jury in civil cases where the consent of the parties interested is given thereto. SECTION 22 RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED. In criminal prosecutions the accused shall have the right to appear and defend in person, or by counsel, to demand the nature and cause of the accusation against him, to have a copy thereof, to testify in his own behalf, to meet the witnesses against him face to face, to have http://www1.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 3 of 50 compulsory process to compel the attendance of witnesses in his own behalf, to have a speedy public trial by an impartial jury of the county in which the offense is charged to have been committed and the right to appeal in all cases: Provided, The route traversed by any railway coach, train or public conveyance, and the water traversed by any boat shall be criminal districts; and the jurisdiction of all public offenses committed on any such railway car, coach, train, boat or other public conveyance, or at any station or depot upon such route, shall be in any county through which the said car, coach, train, boat or other public conveyance may pass during the trip or voyage, or in which the trip or voyage may begin or terminate. In no instance shall any accused person before final judgment be compelled to advance money or fees to secure the rights herein guaranteed. [AMENDMENT 10,1921 P 79 Section 1. Approved November, 1922.] Original text - Art. 1 Section 22 RIGHTS OF ACCUSED PERSONS. In criminal prosecution, the accused shall have the right to appear and defend in person, and by counsel, to demand the nature and cause of the accusation against him, to have a copy thereof, to testify in his own behalf, to meet the witnesses against him face to face, to have compulsory process to compel the attendance of witnesses in his own behalf, to have a speedy public trial by an impartial jury of the county in which the offense is alleged to have been committed, and the right to appeal in all cases; and, in no instance, shall any accused person before final judgment be compelled to advance money or fees to secure the rights herein guaranteed. SECTION 23 BILL OF ATTAINDER, EX POST FACTO LAW, ETC. No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligations of contracts shall ever be passed. SECTION 24 RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men. SECTION 25 PROSECUTION BY INFORMATION. Offenses heretofore required to be prosecuted by indictment may be prosecuted by information, or by indictment, as shall be prescribed by law. SECTION 26 GRAND JURY. No grand jury shall be drawn or summoned in any county, except the superior judge thereof shall so order. SECTION 27 TREASON, DEFINED, ETC. Treason against the state shall consist only in levying war against the state, or adhering to its enemies, or in giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or confession in open court. SECTION 28 HEREDITARY PRIVILEGES ABOLISHED. No hereditary emoluments, privileges, or powers, shall be granted or conferred in this state. SECTION 29 CONSTITUTION MANDATORY. The provisions of this Constitution are mandatory, unless by express words they are declared to be otherwise. SECTION 30 RIGHTS RESERVED. The enumeration in this Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny others retained by the people. SECTION 31 STANDING ARMY. No standing army shall be kept up by this state in time of peace, and no soldier shall in time of peace be quartered in any house without the consent of its owner, nor in time of war except in the manner prescribed by law. SECTION 32 FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES. A frequent recurrence to fundamental principles is essential to the security of individual right and the perpetuity of free government. SECTION 33 RECALL OF ELECTIVE OFFICERS. Every elective public officer of the state of Washington expect [except] judges of courts of record is subject to recall and discharge by the legal voters of the state, or of the political subdivision of the state, from which he was elected whenever a petition demanding his recall, reciting that such officer has committed some act or acts of malfeasance or misfeasance while in office, or who has violated his oath of office, stating the matters complained of, signed by the percentages of the qualified electors thereof, hereinafter provided, the percentage required to be computed from the total number of votes cast for all candidates for his said office to which he was elected at the preceding election, is filed with the officer with whom a petition for nomination, or certificate for nomination, to such office must be filed under the laws of this state, and the same officer shall call a special election as provided by the general election laws of this state, and the result determined as therein provided. [AMENDMENT 8, 1911 P 504 Section 1. Approved November, 1912.] SECTION 34 SAME. The legislature shall pass the necessary laws to carry out the provisions of section thirty-three (33) of this article, and to facilitate its operation and effect without delay: Provided, That the authority hereby conferred upon the legislature shall not be construed to grant to the legislature any exclusive power of lawmaking nor in any way limit the initiative and referendum powers reserved by the people. The percentages required shall be, state officers, other than judges, senators and representatives, city officers of cities of the first class, school district boards in cities of the first class; county officers of counties of the first, second and third classes, twenty-five per cent. Officers of all other political subdivisions, cities, towns, townships, precincts and school districts not herein mentioned, and state senators and representatives, thirty-five per cent. [AMENDMENT 8, 1911 P 504 Section 1. Approved November, 1912.] SECTION 35 VICTIMS OF CRIMES. RIGHTS. Effective law enforcement depends on cooperation from victims of crime. To ensure victims a meaningful role in the criminal justice system and to accord them due dignity and respect, victims of crime are hereby granted the following basic and fundamental rights. Upon notifying the prosecuting attorney, a victim of a crime charged as a felony shall have the right to be http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 4 of 50 informed of and, subject to the discretion of the individual presiding over the trial or court proceedings, attend trial and all other court proceedings the defendant has the right to attend, and to make a statement at sentencing and at any proceeding where the defendant's release is considered, subject to the same rules of procedure which govern the defendant's rights. In the event the victim is deceased, incompetent, a minor, or otherwise unavailable, the prosecuting attorney may identify a representative to appear to exercise the victim's rights. This provision shall not constitute a basis for error in favor of a defendant in a criminal proceeding nor a basis for providing a victim or the victim's representative with court appointed counsel. [AMENDMENT 84,1989 Senate Joint Resolution No. 8200, p 2999. Approved November 7,1989.] ARTICLE II LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT SECTION 1 LEGISLATIVE POWERS, WHERE VESTED. The legislative authority of the state of Washington shall be vested in the legislature, consisting of a senate and house of representatives, which shall be called the legislature of the state of Washington, but the people reserve to themselves the power to propose bills, laws, and to enact or reject the same at the polls, independent of the legislature, and also reserve power, at their own option, to approve or reject at the polls any act, item, section, or part of any bill, act, or law passed by the legislature. (a) Initiative: The first power reserved by the people is the initiative. Every such petition shall include the full text of the measure so proposed. In the case of initiatives to the legislature and initiatives to the people, the number of valid signatures of legal voters required shall be equal to eight percent of the votes cast for the office of governor at the last gubernatorial election preceding the initial filing of the text of the initiative measure with the secretary of state. Initiative petitions shall be filed with the secretary of state not less than four months before the election at which they are to be voted upon, or not less than ten days before any regular session of the legislature. If filed at least four months before the election at which they are to be voted upon, he shall submit the same to the vote of the people at the said election. If such petitions are filed not less than ten days before any regular session of the legislature, he shall certify the results within forty days of the filing. If certification is not complete by the date that the legislature convenes, he shall provisionally certify the measure pending final certification of the measure. Such initiative measures, whether certified or provisionally certified, shall take precedence over all other measures in the legislature except appropriation bills and shall be either enacted or rejected without change or amendment by the legislature before the end of such regular session. If any such initiative measures shall be enacted by the legislature it shall be subject to the referendum petition, or it may be enacted and referred by the legislature to the people for approval or rejection at the next regular election. If it is rejected or if no action is taken upon it by the legislature before the end of such regular session, the secretary of state shall submit it to the people for approval or rejection at the next ensuing regular general election. The legislature may reject any measure so proposed by initiative petition and propose a different one dealing with the same subject, and in such event both measures shall be submitted by the secretary of state to the people for approval or rejection at the next ensuing regular general election. When conflicting measures are submitted to the people the ballots shall be so printed that a voter can express separately by making one cross (X) for each, two preferences, first, as between either measure and neither, and secondly, as between one and the other. If the majority of those voting on the first issue is for neither, both fail, but in that case the votes on the second issue shall nevertheless be carefully counted and made public. If a majority voting on the first issue is for either, then the measure receiving a majority of the votes on the second issue shall be law. (b) Referendum. The second power reserved by the people is the referendum, and it may be ordered on any act, bill, law, or any part thereof passed by the legislature, except such laws as may be necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety, support of the state government and its existing public institutions, either by petition signed by the required percentage of the legal voters, or by the legislature as other bills are enacted: Provided, That the legislature may not order a referendum on any initiative measure enacted by the legislature under the foregoing subsection (a). The number of valid signatures of registered voters required on a petition for referendum of an act of the legislature or any part thereof, shall be equal to or exceeding four percent of the votes cast for the office of governor at the last gubernatorial election preceding the filing of the text of the referendum measure with the secretary of state. (c) No act, law, or bill subject to referendum shall take effect until ninety days after the adjournment of the session at which it was enacted. No act, law, or bill approved by a majority of the electors voting thereon shall be amended or repealed by the legislature within a period of two years following such enactment: Provided, That any such act, law, or bill may be amended within two years after such enactment at any regular or special session of the legislature by a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each house with full compliance with section 12, Article" I, of the Washington Constitution, and no amendatory law adopted in accordance with this provision shall be subject to referendum. But such enactment may be amended or repealed at any general regular or special election by direct vote of the people thereon. (d) The filing of a referendum petition against one or more items, sections, or parts of any act, law, or bill shall not delay the remainder of the measure from becoming operative. Referendum petitions against measures passed by the legislature shall be filed with the secretary of state not later than ninety days after the final adjournment of the session of the legislature which passed the measure on which the referendum is demanded. The veto power of the governor shall not extend to measures initiated by or referred to the people. All elections on measures referred to the people of the state shall be had at the next succeeding regular general election following the filing of the measure with the secretary of state, except when the http://www1.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/2712008 Washington State Constitution Page 5 of 50 legislature shall order a special election. Any measure initiated by the people or referred to the people as herein provided shall take effect and become the law if it is approved by a majority of the votes cast thereon: Provided, That the vote cast upon such question or measure shall equal one-third of the total votes cast at such election and not otherwise. Such measure shall be in operation on and after the thirtieth day after the election at which it is approved. The style of all bills proposed by initiative petition shall be: "Be it enacted by the people of the State of Washington." This section shall not be construed to deprive any member of the legislature of the right to introduce any measure. All such petitions shall be filed with the secretary of state, who shall be guided by the general laws in submitting the same to the people until additional legislation shall especially provide therefor. This section is self-executing, but legislation may be enacted especially to facilitate its operation. (e) The legislature shall provide methods of publicity of all laws or parts of laws, and amendments to the Constitution referred to the people with arguments for and against the laws and amendments so referred. The secretary of state shall send one copy of the publication to each individual place of residence in the state and shall make such additional distribution as he shall determine necessary to reasonably assure that each voter will have an opportunity to study the measures prior to election. [AMENDMENT 72, 1981 Substitute Senate Joint Resolution No. 133, p 1796. Approved November 3, 1981.] Referendum procedures regarding salaries: Art. 28 Section 1. Amendment 7 (1911) - Art, 2 Section 1 Legislative Powers, Where Vested - The legislative authority of the state of Washington shall be vested in the legislature, consisting of a senate and house of representatives, which shall be called the legislature of the state of Washington, but the people reserve to themselves the power to propose bills, laws, and to enact or reject the same at the polls, independent of the legislature, and also reserve power, at their own option, to approve or reject at the polls any act, item, section or part of any bill, act or law passed by the legislature. (a) Initiative: The first power reserved by the people is the initiative. Ten per centum, but in no case more than fifty thousand, of the legal voters shall be required to propose any measure by such petition, and every such petition shall include the full text of the measure so proposed. [Note: Signature requirements were superseded by Art. 2 Sec. 1(a), AMENDMENT 30.] Initiative petitions shall be filed with the secretary of state not less than four months before the election at which they are to be voted upon, or not less than ten days before any regular session of the legislature. If filed at least four months before the election at which they are to be voted upon, he shall submit the same to the vote of the people at the said election. If such petitions are filed not less than ten days before any regular session of the legislature, he shall transmit the same to the legislature as soon as it convenes and organizes. Such initiative measure shall take precedence over all other measures in the legislature except appropriation bills and shall be either enacted or rejected without change or amendment by the legislature before the end of such regular session. If any such initiative measures shall be enacted by the legislature it shall be subject to the referendum petition, or it may be enacted and referred by the legislature to the people for approval or rejection at the next regular election. If it is rejected or if no action is taken upon it by the legislature before the end of such regular session, the secretary of state shall submit it to the people for approval or rejection at the next ensuing regular general election. The legislature may reject any measure so proposed by initiative petition and propose a different one dealing with the same subject, and in such event both measures shall be submitted by the secretary of state to the people for approval or rejection at the next ensuing regular general election. When conl/icting measures are submitted to the people the ballots shall be so printed that a voter can express separately by making one cross (X) for each, two preferences, first, as between either measure and neither, and secondly, as between one and the other. If the majority of those voting on the first issue is for neither. both fail, but in that case the votes on the second issue shall nevertheless be carefully counted and made public. If a majority voting on the first issue is for either. then the measure receiving a majority of the votes on the second issue shall be law. (b) Referendum. The second power reserved by the people is the referendum, and it may be ordered on any act, bill, law, or any part thereof passed by the legislature, except such laws as may be necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety, support of the state government and its existing public institutions, either by petition signed by the required percentage of the legal voters, or by the legislature as other bills are enacted. Six per centum, but in no case more than thirty thousand, of the legal voters shall be required to sign and make a valid referendum petition. [Note: Signature requirements were superseded by Art. 2 Sec. 1(a), AMENDMENT 30.] (c) No act, law, or bill subject to referendum shall take effect until ninety days after the adjournment of the session at which it was enacted. No act, law, or bill approved by a majority of the electors voting thereon shall be amended or repealed by the legislature within a period of two years following such enactment. But such enactment may be amended or repealed at any general regular or special election by direct vote of the people thereon. [Note: Subsection (c) was expressly superseded by Art. 2 Sec. 41, AMENDMENT 26.] (d) The filing of a referendum petition against one or more items, sections or parts of any act, law or bill shall not delay the remainder of the measure from becoming operative. Referendum petitions against measures passed by the legislature shall be filed with the secretary of state not later than ninety days after the final adjournment of the session of the legislature which passed the measure on which the referendum is demanded. The veto power of the governor shall not extend to measures initiated by or referred to the people. All elections on measures referred to the people of the state shall be had at the biennial regular elections, except when the legislature shall order a special election. Any measure initiated by the people or referred to the people as herein provided shall take effect and become the law if it is approved by a majority of the votes cast thereon: Provided, That the vote cast upon such question or measure shall equal one-third of the total votes cast at such election and not otherwise. Such measure shall be in operation on and after the thirtieth day after the election at which it is approved. The style of all bills proposed by initiative petition shall be: "Se it enacted by the people of the State of Washington. " This section shall not be construed to deprive any member of the legislature of the right to introduce any measure. The whole number of electors who voted for governor at the regular gubernatorial election last preceding the filing of any petition for the initiative or for the referendum shall be the basis on which the number of legal voters necessary to sign such petition shall be counted. [Note: Cf. Art. 2 Sec. 1(a), AMENDMENT 30.] All such petitions shall be filed with the secretary of state, who shall be guided by the general laws in submitting the same to the people until additional legislation shall especially provide therefor. This section is self-executing, but legislation may be enacted especially to facilitate its operation. The legislature shall provide methods of publicity of all laws or parts of laws, and amendments to the Constitution referred to the people with arguments for and against the laws and amendments so referred, so that each voter of the state shall receive the publication at least fifty days before the election at which they are to be voted upon. [Note: This paragraph was expressly superseded by subsection (e) of this section, which was added by AMENDMENT 36.] (e) The legislature shall provide methods of publicity of all laws or parts of laws, and amendments to the Constitution referred to the people with arguments for and against the laws and amendments so referred. The secretary of state shall send one copy of the publication to each individual place of residence in the state and shall make such additional distribution as he shall determine necessary to reasonably assure that each voter will have an opportunity to study the measures prior to election. These provisions supersede the provisions set forth in the last paragraph of section 1 of this article as amended by the seventh amendment to the http://www1.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 6 of 50 Constitution of this state. [AMENDMENT 7,1911 House Bill No. 153 P 136. Approved November, 1912; Subsection (e) added by AMENDMENT 36,1961 Senate Joint Resolution No.9, p 2751. Approved November, 1962.] Original text - Art. 2 Section 1 LEGISLATIVE POWERS, WHERE VESTED - The legislative powers shall be vested in a senate and house of representatives, which shall be called the legislature of the State of Washington. Note: Art. 2 Sec. 31 was also stricken by AMENDMENT 7. SECTION 1(a) INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM, SIGNATURES REQUIRED. [Stricken by AMENDMENT 72, 1981 Substitute Senate Joint Resolution No. 133, p 1796. Approved November 3, 1981.] Amendment 30 (1956) - Art. 2 Section 1(a) INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM, SIGNATURES REQUIRED. Hereafter, the number of valid signatures of legal voters required upon a petition for an initiative measure shall be equal to eight per centum of the number of voters registered and voting for the office of governor at the last preceding regular gubernatorial election. Hereafter, the number of valid signatures of legal voters required upon a petition for a referendum of an act of the legislature or any part thereof, shall be equal to four per centum of the number of voters registered and voting for the office of governor at the last preceding regular gubernatorial election. These provisions supersede the requirements specified in section 1 of this article as amended by the seventh amendment to the Constitution of this state. [AMENDMENT 3D, 1955 Senate Joint Resolution No.4, p 1860. Approved November 6,1956.] SECTION 2 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND SENATE. The house of representatives shall be composed of not less than sixty-three nor more than ninety-nine members. The number of senators shall not be more than one-half nor less than one-third of the number of members of the house of representatives. The first legislature shall be composed of seventy members of the house of representatives, and thirty-five senators. SECTION 3 THE CENSUS. [Repealed by AMENDMENT 74,1983 Substitute Senate Joint Resolution No. 103, P 2202. Approved November 8, 1983.] Original text - Art. 2 Section 3 THE CENSUS. The legislature shall provide by law for an enumeration of the inhabitants of the state in the year one thousand eight hundred and ninety-five and every ten years thereafter; and at the first session after such enumeration, and also after each enumeration made by the authority of the United States, the legislature shall apportion and district anew the members of the senate and house of representatives, according to the number of inhabitants, excluding Indians not taxed, soldiers, sailors and officers of the United States anny and navy in active seNice. SECTION 4 ELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVES AND TERM OF OFFICE. Members of the house of representatives shall be elected in the year eighteen hundred and eighty-nine at the time and in the manner provided by this Constitution, and shall hold their offices for the term of one year and until their successors shall be elected. SECTION 5 ELECTIONS, WHEN TO BE HELD. The next election of the members of the house of representatives after the adoption of this Constitution shall be on the first Tuesday after the first Monday of November, eighteen hundred and ninety, and thereafter, members of the house of representatives shall be elected biennially and their term of office shall be two years; and each election shall be on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November, unless otherwise changed by law. SECTION 6 ELECTION AND TERM OF OFFICE OF SENATORS. After the first election the senators shall be elected by single districts of convenient and contiguous territory, at the same time and in the same manner as members of the house of representatives are required to be elected; and no representative district shall be divided in the formation of a senatorial district. They shall be elected for the term of four years, one- half of their number retiring every two years. The senatorial districts shall be numbered consecutively, and the senators chosen at the first election had by virtue of this Constitution, in odd numbered districts, shall go out of office at the end of the first year; and the senators, elected in the even numbered districts, shall go out of office at the end of the third year. SECTION 7 QUALIFICATIONS OF LEGISLATORS. No person shall be eligible to the legislature who shall not be a citizen of the United States and.a qualified voter in the district for which he is chosen. SECTION 8 JUDGES OF THEIR OWN ELECTION AND QUALIFICATION - QUORUM. Each house shall be the judge of the election, returns and qualifications of its own members, and a majority of each house shall constitute a quorum to do business; but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day and may compel the attendance of absent members, in such manner and under such penalties as each house may provide. Governmental continuity during emergency periods: Art. 2 Section 42. SECTION 9 RULES OF PROCEDURE. Each house may determine the rules of its own proceedings, punish for contempt and disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds of all the members elected, expel a member, but no member shall be expelled a second time for the same offense. SECTION 10 ELECTION OF OFFICERS. Each house shall elect its own officers; and when the lieutenant governor shall not attend as president, or shall act as governor, the senate shall choose a temporary president. When presiding, the lieutenant governor shall have the deciding vote in case of an equal division of the senate. SECTION 11 JOURNAL, PUBLICITY OF MEETINGS - ADJOURNMENTS. Each house shall keep a journal of its proceedings and publish the same, except such parts as require secrecy. The doors of each house shall be kept open, except when the public welfare shall require secrecy. Neither house shall adjourn for more than three days, nor to any place other than that in which they may be sitting, without the consent of the other. http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 7 of 50 SECTION 12 SESSIONS, WHEN - DURATION. (1) Regular Sessions. A regular session of the legislature shall be convened each year. Regular sessions shall convene on such day and at such time as the legislature shall determine by statute. During each odd-numbered year, the regular session shall not be more than one hundred five consecutive days. During each even-numbered year, the regular session shall not be more than sixty consecutive days. (2) Special Legislative Sessions. Special legislative sessions may be convened for a period of not more than thirty consecutive days by proclamation of the governor pursuant to Article III, section 7 of this Constitution. Special legislative sessions may also be convened for a period of not more than thirty consecutive days by resolution of the legislature upon the affirmative vote in each house of two-thirds of the members elected or appointed thereto, which vote may be taken and resolution executed either while the legislature is in session or during any interim between sessions in accordance with such procedures as the legislature may provide by law or resolution. The resolution convening the legislature shall specify a purpose or purposes for the convening of a special session, and any special session convened by the resolution shall consider only measures germane to the purpose or purposes expressed in the resolution, unless by resolution adopted during the session upon the affirmative vote in each house of two-thirds of the members elected or appointed thereto, an additional purpose or purposes are expressed. The specification of purpose by the governor pursuant to Article III, section 7 of this Constitution shall be considered by the legislature but shall not be mandatory. (3) Committees of the Legislature. Standing and special committees of the legislature shall meet and conduct official business pursuant to such rules as the legislature may adopt. [AMENDMENT 68, 1979 Substitute Senate Joint Resolution No. 110, P 2286. Approved November 6, 1979.] Extraordinary sessions to reconsider vetoes: Art. 3 Section 12. Sessions to convene on the second Monday in January: RCW4.t9.4,Q1.Q. Original text. Art. 2 Section 12 SESSIONS, WHEN. DURA TlON . The first legislature shall meet on the first Wednesday after the first Monday in November, A D., 1889. The second legislature shall meet on the first Wednesday after the first Monday in January, A D., 1891, and sessions of the legislature shall be held biennially thereafter, unless specially convened by the govemor, but the times of meeting of subsequent sessions may be changed by the legislature. After the first legislature the sessions shall not be more than sixty days. SECTION 13 LIMITATION ON MEMBERS HOLDING OFFICE IN THE STATE. No member of the legislature, during the term for which he is elected, shall be appointed or elected to any civil office in the state, which shall have been created during the term for which he was elected. Any member of the legislature who is appointed or elected to any civil office in the state, the emoluments of which have been increased during his legislative term of office, shall be compensated for the initial term of the civil office at the level designated prior to the increase in emoluments. [AMENDMENT 69, 1979 Senate Joint Resolution No. 112, p 2287. Approved November 6, 1979.] Original text. Art 2 Section 13 LIMITATION ON MEMBERS HOLDING OFFICE IN THE STATE. No member of the legislature, during the term for which he is elected, shall be appointed or elected to any civil office in the state, which shall have been created, or the emoluments of which shall have been increased, during the term for which he was elected. SECTION 14 SAME, FEDERAL OR OTHER OFFICE. No person, being a member of congress, or holding any civil or military office under the United States or any other power, shall be eligible to be a member of the legislature; and if any person after his election as a member of the legislature, shall be elected to congress or be appointed to any other office, civil or military, under the government of the United States, or any other power, his acceptance thereof shall vacate his seat, provided, that officers in the militia of the state who receive no annual salary, local officers and postmasters, whose compensation does not exceed three hundred dollars per annum, shall not be ineligible. SECTION 15 VACANCIES IN LEGISLATURE AND IN PARTISAN COUNTY ELECTIVE OFFICE. Such vacancies as may occur in either house of the legislature or in any partisan county elective office shall be filled by appointment by the county legislative authority of the county in which the vacancy occurs: Provided, That the person appointed to fill the vacancy must be from the same legislative district, county, or county commissioner or council district and the same political party as the legislator or partisan county elective officer whose office has been vacated, and shall be one of three persons who shall be nominated by the county central committee of that party, and in case a majority of the members of the county legislative authority do not agree upon the appointment within sixty days after the vacancy occurs, the governor shall within thirty days thereafter, and from the list of nominees provided for herein, appoint a person who shall be from the same legislative district, county, or county commissioner or council district and of the same political party as the legislator or partisan county elective officer whose office has been vacated, and the person so appointed shall hold office until his or her successor is elected at the next general election, and has qualified: Provided, That in case of a vacancy occurring after the general election in a year that the office appears on the ballot and before the start of the next term, the term of the successor who is of the same party as the incumbent may commence once he or she has qualified and shall continue through the term for which he or she was elected: Provided, That in case of a vacancy occurring in the office of joint senator, or joint representative, the vacancy shall be filled from a list of three nominees selected by the state central committee, by appointment by the joint action of the boards of county legislative authorities of the counties composing the joint senatorial or joint representative district, the person appointed to fill the vacancy must be from the same legislative district and of the same political party as the legislator whose office has been vacated, and in case a majority of the members of the county legislative authority do not agree upon the appointment within sixty days after the vacancy occurs, the governor shall within thirty days thereafter, and from the list of nominees provided for herein, appoint a person who shall be from the same legislative district http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/2712008 Washington State Constitution Page 8 of 50 and of the same political party as the legislator whose office has been vacated. [AMENDMENT 96, 2003 House Joint Resolution No. 4206, p 2819. Approved November 4,2003.] Governmental continuity during emergency periods: Art 2 Section 42. Vacancies in county, etc., offices, how filled: Art. 11 Section 6. Amendment 52, part (1967) - Art. 2 Section 15 VACANCIES IN LEGISLATURE AND IN PARTISAN COUNTY ELECTIVE OFFICE. Such vacancies as may occur in either house of the legislature or in any partisan county elective office shall be filled by appointment by the board of county commissioners of the county in which the vacancy occurs: Provided, That the person appointed to fill the vacancy must be from the same legislative district, county or county commissioner district and the same political party as the legislator or partisan county elective officer whose office has been vacated, and shall be one of three persons who shall be nominated by the county central committee of that party, and in case a majority of said county commissioners do not agree upon the appointment within sixty days after the vacancy occurs, the governor shall within thirty days thereafter, and from the list of nominees provided for herein, appoint a person who shall be from the same legislative district, county or county commissioner district and of the same political party as the legislator or partisan county elective officer whose office has been vacated, and the person so appointed shall hold office until his successor is elected at the next general election, and shall have qualified: Provided, That in case of a vacancy occuning in the office of joint senator, or joint representative, the vacancy shall be filled from a list of three nominees selected by the state central committee, by appointment by the joint action of the boards of county commissioners of the counties composing the joint senatorial or joint representative district, the person appointed to fill the vacancy must be from the same legislative district and of the same political party as the legislator whose office has been vacated, and in case a majority of said county commissioners do not agree upon the appointment within sixty days after the vacancy occurs, the governor shall within thirty days thereafter. and from the list of nominees provided for herein, appoint a person who shall be from the same legislative district and of the same political party as the legislator whose office has been vacated. [AMENDMENT 52, part. 1967 Senate Joint Resolution No. 24, part; see 1969 p 2976. Approved November 5,1968.] Amendment 32 (1956) - Art. 2 Section 15 VACANCIES IN LEGISLATURE AND IN PARTISAN COUNTY ELECTIVE OFFICE. Such vacancies as may occur in either house of the legislature or in any partisan county elective office shall be filled by appointment by the board of county commissioners of the county in which the vacancy occurs: Provided, That the person appointed to fill the vacancy must be from the same legislative district and the same political party as the legislator whose office has been vacated, and shall be one of three persons who shall be nominated by the county central committee of that party, and the person so appointed shall hold office until his successor is elected at the next general election, and shall have qualified: Provided, That in case of a vacancy occurring in the office of joint senator, or joint representative, the vacancy shall be filled from a list of three nominees selected by the state central committee, by appointment by the joint action of the boards of county commissioners of the counties composing the joint senatorial or joint representative district, the person appointed to fill the vacancy must be from the same legislative district and of the same political party as the legislator whose office has been vacated, and in case a majority of said county commissioners do not agree upon the appointment within sixty days after the vacancy occurs, the governor shall within thirty days thereafter. and from the list of nominees provided for herein, appoint a person who shall be from the same legislative district and of the same political party as the legislator whose office has been vacated. [AMENDMENT 32,1955 Senate Joint Resolution No. 14, p 1862. Approved November 6,1956.] Amendment 13 (1930) - Art. 2 Section 15 VACANCIES IN LEGISLATURE - Such vacancies as may occur in either house of the legislature shall be filled by appointment by the board of county commissioners of the county in which the vacancy occurs, and the person so appointed shall hold office until his successor is elected at the next general election, and shall have qualified: Provided, That in case of a vacancy occurring in the office of joint senator, the vacancy shall be filled by appointment by the joint action of the boards of county commissioners of the counties composing the joint senatorial district. [AMENDMENT 13, 1929 P 690. Approved November, 1930.] Original text - Art. 2 Section 15 WRITS OF ELECTION TO FILL VACANCIES. The governor shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies as may occur in either house of the legislature. SECTION 16 PRIVILEGES FROM ARREST. Members of the legislature shall be privileged from arrest in all cases except treason, felony and breach of the peace; they shall not be subject to any civil process during the session of the legislature, nor for fifteen days next before the commencement of each session. SECTION 17 FREEDOM OF DEBATE. No member of the legislature shall be liable in any civil action or criminal prosecution whatever, for words spoken in debate. SECTION 18 STYLE OF LAWS. The style of the laws of the state shall be: "Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Washington." And no laws shall be enacted except by bill. SECTION 19 BILL TO CONTAIN ONE SUBJECT. No bill shall embrace more than one subject, and that shall be expressed in the title. SECTION 20 ORIGIN AND AMENDMENT OF BILLS. Any bill may originate in either house of the legislature, and a bill passed by one house may be amended in the other. SECTION 21 YEAS AND NAYS. The yeas and nays of the members of either house shall be entered on the journal, on the demand of one-sixth of the members present. SECTION 22 PASSAGE OF BILLS. No bill shall become a law unless on its final passage the vote be taken by yeas and nays, the names of the members voting for and against the same be entered on the journal of each house, and a majority of the members elected to each house be recorded thereon as voting in its favor. Governmental continuity during emergency periods: Art. 2 Section 42. SECTION 23 COMPENSATION OF MEMBERS. Each member of the legislature shall receive for his services five dollars for each day's attendance during the session, and ten cents for every mile he shall travel in going to and returning from the place of meeting of the legislature, on the most usual route. Compensation of legislators, elected state officials, and judges: Art. 28 Section 1, Art. 30. SECTION 24 LOTTERIES AND DIVORCE. The legislature shall never grant any divorce. Lotteries shall be http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 9 of 50 prohibited except as specifically authorized upon the affirmative vote of sixty percent of the members of each house of the legislature or, notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution, by referendum or initiative approved by a sixty percent affirmative vote of the electors voting thereon. [AMENDMENT 56, 1971 Senate Joint Resolution No.5, p 1828. Approved November 7,1972.] Original text. Art. 2 Section 24 LOTTERIES AND DIVORCE - The legislature shall never authorize any lottery or grant any divorce. SECTION 25 EXTRA COMPENSATION PROHIBITED. The legislature shall never grant any extra compensation to any public officer, agent, employee, servant, or contractor, after the services shall have been rendered, or the contract entered into, nor shall the compensation of any public officer be increased or diminished during his term of office. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to prevent increases in pensions after such pensions shall have been granted. [AMENDMENT 35,1957 Senate Joint Resolution No. 18, p 1301. Approved November 4, 1958.] Compensation of legislators, elected state officials, and judges: Art 28 Section 1. Increase during term of certain officers, authorized: Art. 30 Section 1. Increase or diminution of compensation during term of office prohibited. county, city, town or municipal officers: Art. 11 Section 8. judicial officers: Art. 4 Section 13. state officers: Art. 3 Section 25. Original text - Art. 2 Section 25 EXTRA COMPENSATION, PROHIBITED. The legislature shall never grant any extra compensation to any public officer, agent, servant. or contractor, after the services shall have been rendered. or the contract entered into, nor shall the compensation of any public officer be increased or diminished during his term of office. SECTION 26 SUITS AGAINST THE STATE. The legislature shall direct by law, in what manner, and in what courts, suits may be brought against the state. SECTION 27 ELECTIONS - VIVA VOCE VOTE. In all elections by the legislature the members shall vote viva voce, and their votes shall be entered on the journal. SECTION 28 SPECIAL LEGISLATION. The legislature is prohibited from enacting any private or special laws in the following cases: 1. For changing the names of persons, or constituting one person the heir at law of another. 2. For laying out, opening or altering highways, except in cases of state roads extending into more than one county, and military roads to aid in the construction of which lands shall have been or may be granted by congress. 3. For authorizing persons to keep ferries wholly within this state. 4. For authorizing the sale or mortgage of real or personal property of minors, or others under disability. 5. For assessment or collection of taxes, or for extending the time for collection thereof. 6. For granting corporate powers or privileges. 7. For authorizing the apportionment of any part of the school fund. 8. For incorporating any town or village or to amend the charter thereof. 9. From giving effect to invalid deeds, wills or other instruments. 10. Releasing or extinguishing in whole or in part, the indebtedness, liability or other obligation, of any person, or corporation to this state, or to any municipal corporation therein. 11. Declaring any person of age or authorizing any minor to sell, lease, or encumber his or her property. 12. Legalizing, except as against the state, the unauthorized or invalid act of any officer. 13. Regulating the rates of interest on money. 14. Remitting fines, penalties or forfeitures. 15. Providing for the management of common schools. 16. Authorizing the adoption of children. 17. For limitation of civil or criminal actions. 18. Changing county lines, locating or changing county seats, provided, this shall not be construed to apply http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 10 of 50 to the creation of new counties. Corporations for municipal purposes shall not be created by special laws: Art. 11 Section 10. SECTION 29 CONVICT LABOR. After the first day of January eighteen hundred and ninety the labor of convicts of this state shall not be let out by contract to any person, copartnership, company or corporation, and the legislature shall by law provide for the working of convicts for the benefit of the state. SECTION 30 BRIBERY OR CORRUPT SOLICITATION. The offense of corrupt solicitation of members of the legislature, or of public officers of the state or any municipal division thereof, and any occupation or practice of solicitation of such members or officers to influence their official action, shall be defined by law, and shall be punished by fine and imprisonment. Any person may be compelled to testify in any lawful investigation or judicial proceeding against any person who may be charged with having committed the offense of bribery or corrupt solicitation, or practice of solicitation, and shall not be permitted to withhold his testimony on the ground that it may criminate himself or subject him to public infamy, but such testimony shall not afterwards be used against him in any judicial proceeding - except for perjury in giving such testimony - and any person convicted of either of the offenses aforesaid, shall as part of the puniShment therefor, be disqualified from ever holding any position of honor, trust or profit in this state. A member who has a private interest in any bill or measure proposed or pending before the legislature, shall disclose the fact to the house of which he is a member, and shall not vote thereon. SECTION 31 LAWS, WHEN TO TAKE EFFECT. [This section stricken by AMENDMENT 7, 1911 House Bill No. 153, p 136. Approved November, 1912.] Original text. Art. 2 Section 31 LAWS, WHEN TO TAKE EFFECT. No law, except appropriation bills, shall take effect until ninety days after the adjoumment of the session at which it was enacted, unless in case of an emergency (which emergency must be expressed in the preamble or in the body of the act) the legislature shall otherwise direct by a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each house; said vote to be taken by yeas and nays and entered on the joumals. Effective dates of laws: Art. 2 Sections 1 and 41. SECTION 32 LAWS, HOW SIGNED. No bill shall become a law until the same shall have been signed by the presiding officer of each of the two houses in open session, and under such rules as the legislature shall prescribe. SECTION 33 ALIEN OWNERSHIP. [Repealed by AMENDMENT 42,1965 ex.s. Senate Joint Resolution No, 20, p 2816. Approved November 8,1966.] Amendment 29 (1954) . Art. 2 Section 33 ALIEN OWNERSHIp. The ownership of lands by aliens, other than those who in good faith have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, is prohibited in this state, except where acquired by inheritance, under mortgage or in good faith in the ordinary course of justice in the collection of debts; and all conveyances of lands hereafter made to any alien directly, or in trust for such alien, shall be void: Provided, That the provisions of this section shal. not apply to lands containing valuable deposits of minerals, metals, iron, coal, or fire clay, and the necessary land for mills and machinery to be used in the development thereof and the manufacture of the products therefrom: And provided further, That the provisions of this section shall not apply to the citizens of such of the Provinces of the Dominion of Canada as do not expressly or by implication prohibit ownership of provincial lands by citizens of this state. [AMENDMENT 29, 1953 House Joint Resolution No. 16, p 853. Approved November 2,1954.] Amendment 24 (1950) . Art. 2 Section 33 ALIEN OWNERSHIP. The ownership of lands by aliens, other than those who in good faith have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, is prohibited in this state, except where acquired by inheritance, under mortgage or in good faith in the ordinary course of justice in the collection of debts; and all conveyances of lands hereafter made to any alien directly, or in trust for such alien, shall be void: Provided, That the provisions of this section shal, not apply to lands containing valuable deposits of minerals, metals, iron, coal, or fire clay, and the necessary land for mills and machinery to be used in the development thereof and the manufacture of the products therefrom: And provided further, That the provisions of this section shall not apply to the citizens of such of the Provinces of the Dominion of Canada as do not expressly or by implication prohibit ownership of provincial lands by citizens of this state. Every corporation, the majority of the capital stock of which is owned by aliens, shall be considered an alien for the purposes of this prohibition. [AMENDMENT 24, 1949 Senate Joint Resolution No.9, p 999. Approved November, 1950.] Original text. Art. 2 Section 33 OWNERSHIP OF LANDS BY ALIENS, PROHIBITED. Exceptions. The ownership oflands by aliens, other than those who in good faith have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, is prohibited in this state, except where acquired by inheritance, under mortgage or in good faith in the ordinary course of justice in the collection of debts; and all conveyances of lands hereafter made to any alien directly or in trust for such alien shall be void: Provided, That the provisions of this section shall not apply to lands containing valuable deposits of minerals, metals, iron, coal, or fire-clay, and the necessary land for mills and machinery to be used in the development thereof and the manufacture of the products therefrom. Every corporation, the majority of the capital stock of which is owned by aliens, shall be considered on alien for the purposes of this prohibition. SECTION 34 BUREAU OF STATISTICS, AGRICULTURE AND IMMIGRATION. There shall be established in the office of the secretary of state, a bureau of statistics, agriculture and immigration, under such regulations as the legislature may provide. SECTION 35 PROTECTION OF EMPLOYEES. The legislature shall pass necessary laws for the protection of persons working in mines, factories and other employments dangerous to life or deleterious to health; and fix pains and penalties for the enforcement of the same. SECTION 36 WHEN BILLS MUST BE INTRODUCED. No bill shall be considered in either house unless the time of its introduction shall have been at least ten days before the final adjournment of the legislature, unless the legislature shall otherwise direct by a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, said vote to be taken by yeas and nays and entered upon the journal, or unless the same be at a special session. http://wwwl.leg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 11 of 50 SECTION 37 REVISION OR AMENDMENT. No act shall ever be revised or amended by mere reference to its title, but the act revised or the section amended shall be set forth at full length. SECTION 38 LIMITATION ON AMENDMENTS. No amendment to any bill shall be allowed which shall change the scope and object of the bill. SECTION 39 FREE TRANSPORTATION TO PUBLIC OFFICER PROHIBITED. It shall not be lawful for any person holding public office in this state to accept or use a pass or to purchase transportation from any railroad or other corporation, other than as the same may be purchased by the general public, and the legislature shall pass laws to enforce this provision. SECTION 40 HIGHWAY FUNDS. All fees collected by the State of Washington as license fees for motor vehicles and all excise taxes collected by the State of Washington on the sale, distribution or use of motor vehicle fuel and all other state revenue intended to be used for highway purposes, shall be paid into the state treasury and placed in a special fund to be used exclusively for highway purposes. Such highway purposes shall be construed to include the following: (a) The necessary operating, engineering and legal expenses connected with the administration of public highways, county roads and city streets; (b) The construction, reconstruction, maintenance, repair, and betterment of public highways, county roads, bridges and city streets; including the cost and expense of (1) acquisition of rights-of-way, (2) installing, maintaining and operating traffic signs and signal lights, (3) policing by the state of public highways, (4) operation of movable span bridges, (5) operation of ferries which are a part of any public highway, county road, or city street; (c) The payment or refunding of any obligation of the State of Washington, or any political subdivision thereof, for which any of the revenues described in section 1 may have been legally pledged prior to the effective date of this act; (d) Refunds authorized by law for taxes paid on motor vehicle fuels; (e) The cost of collection of any revenues described in this section: Provided, That this section shall not be construed to include revenue from general or special taxes or excises not levied primarily for highway purposes, or apply to vehicle operator's license fees or any excise tax imposed on motor vehicles or the use thereof in lieu of a property tax thereon, or fees for certificates of ownership of motor vehicles. [AMENDMENT 18,1943 House Joint Resolution No.4, p 938. Approved November, 1944.] SECTION 41 LAWS, EFFECTIVE DATE, INITIATIVE, REFERENDUM. AMENDMENT OR REPEAL. No act, law, or bill subject to referendum shall take effect until ninety days after the adjournment of the session at which it was enacted. No act, law or bill approved by a majority of the electors voting thereon shall be amended or repealed by the legislature within a period of two years following such enactment: Provided, That any such act, law or bill may be amended within two years after such enactment at any regular or special session of the legislature by a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each house with full compliance with section 12, Article III, of the Washington Constitution, and no amendatory law adopted in accordance with this provision shall be subject to referendum. But such enactment may be amended or repealed at any general regular or special election by direct vote of the people thereon. These provisions supersede the provisions of subsection (c) of section 1 of this article as amended by the seventh amendment to the Constitution of this state. [AMENDMENT 26,1951 Substitute Senate Joint Resolution No.7, p 959, Approved November 4,1952.] Reviser's note: (1) In third sentence, comma between "general" and "regular" omitted in conformity with enrolled resolution. (2) Subsection (e) of section 1 of this article was amended by Amendment 72, approved November 3, 1981. SECTION 42 GOVERNMENTAL CONTINUITY DURING EMERGENCY PERIODS. The legislature, in order to insure continuity of state and local governmental operations in periods of emergency resulting from enemy attack, shall have the power and the duty, immediately upon and after adoption of this amendment, to enact legislation providing for prompt and temporary succession to the powers and duties of public offices of whatever nature and whether filled by election or appointment, the incumbents and legal successors of which may become unavailable for carrying on the powers and duties of such offices; the legislature shall likewise enact such other measures as may be necessary and proper for insuring the continuity of governmental operations during such emergencies. Legislation enacted under the powers conferred by this amendment shall in all respects conform to the remainder of the Constitution: Provided, That if, in the judgment of the legislature at the time of disaster, conformance to the provisions of the Constitution would be impracticable or would admit of undue delay, such legislation may depart during the period of emergency caused by enemy attack only, from the following sections of the Constitution: Article 14, Sections 1 and 2, Seat of Government; Article 2, Sections 8, 15 (Amendments 13 and 32), and 22, Membership, Quorum of Legislature and Passage of Bills; http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 12 of 50 Article 3, Section 10 (Amendment 6), Succession to Governorship: Provided, That the legislature shall not depart from Section 10, Article III, as amended by Amendment 6, of the state Constitution relating to the Governor's office so long as any successor therein named is available and capable of assuming the powers and duties of such office as therein prescribed; Article 3, Section 13, Vacancies in State Offices; Article 11, Section 6, Vacancies in County Offices; Article 11, Section 2, Seat of County Government; Article 3, Section 24, State Records, [AMENDMENT 39,1961 House Joint Resolution No.9, p 2758. Approved November, 1962.] Continuity of government act: Chapter 44.14 RCW. SECTION 43 REDISTRICTING. (1) In January of each year ending in one, a commission shall be established to provide for the redistricting of state legislative'and congressional districts. (2) The commission shall be composed of five members to be selected as follows: The legislative leader of the two largest political parties in each house of the legislature shall appoint one voting member to the commission by January 15th of each year ending in one. By January 31 st of each year ending in one, the four appointed members, by an affirmative vote of at least three, shall appoint the remaining member. The fifth member of the commission, who shall be nonvoting, shall act as its chairperson. If any appointing authority fails to make the required appointment by the date established by this subsection, within five days after that date the supreme court shall make the required appointment. (3) No elected official and no person elected to legislative district, county, or state political party office may serve on the commission. A commission member shall not have been an elected official and shall not have been an elected legislative district, county, or state political party officer within two years of his or her appointment to the commission. The provisions of this subsection do not apply to the office of precinct committee person. (4) The legislature shall enact laws providing for the implementation of this section, to include additional qualifications for commissioners and additional standards to govern the commission. The legislature shall appropriate funds to enable the commission to carry out its duties. (5) Each district shall contain a population, excluding nonresident military personnel, as nearly equal as practicable to the population of any other district. To the extent reasonable, each district shall contain contiguous territory, shall be compact and convenient, and shall be separated from adjoining districts by natural geographic barriers, artificial barriers, or political subdivision boundaries. The commission's plan shall not provide for a number of legislative districts different than that established by the legislature. The commission's plan shall not be drawn purposely to favor or discriminate against any political party or group. (6) The commission shall complete redistricting as soon as possible following the federal decennial census, but no later than January 1 st of each year ending in two. At least three of the voting members shall approve such a redistricting plan. If three of the voting members of the commission fail to approve a plan within the time limitations provided in this subsection, the supreme court shall adopt a plan by April 30th of the year ending in two in conformance with the standards set forth in subsection (5) of this section. (7) The legislature may amend the redistricting plan but must do so by a two-thirds vote of the legislators elected or appointed to each house of the legislature. Any amendment must have passed both houses by the end of the thirtieth day of the first session convened after the commission has submitted its plan to the legislature. After that day, the plan, with any legislative amendments, constitutes the state districting law. (8) The legislature shall enact laws providing for the reconvening of a commission for the purpose of modifying a districting law adopted under this section. Such reconvening requires a two-thirds vote of the legislators elected or appointed to each house of the legislature. The commission shall conform to the standards prescribed under subsection (5) of this section and any other standards or procedures that the legislature may provide by law. At least three of the voting members shall approve such a modification. Any modification adopted by the commission may be amended by a two-thirds vote of the legislators elected and appointed to each house of the legislature. The state districting law shall include the modifications with amendments, if any. (9) The legislature shall prescribe by law the terms of commission members and the method of filling vacancies on the commission. (10) The supreme court has original jurisdiction to hear and decide all cases involving congressional and legislative redistricting. (11) Legislative and congressional districts may not be changed or established except pursuant to this section. A districting plan and any legislative amendments to the plan are not subject to Article /II, section 12 of this Constitution. [AMENDMENT 74,1983 Substitute Senate Joint Resolution No. 103, p 2202. Approved November 8,1983.] ARTICLE III http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 13 of 50 THE EXECUTIVE SECTION 1 EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. The executive department shall consist of a governor, lieutenant governor, secretary of state, treasurer, auditor, attorney general, superintendent of public instruction, and a commissioner of public lands, who shall be severally chosen by the qualified electors of the state at the same time and place of voting as for the members of the legislature. SECTION 2 GOVERNOR, TERM OF OFFICE. The supreme executive power of this state shall be vested in a governor, who shall hold his office for a term of four years, and until his successor is elected and qualified. SECTION 3 OTHER EXECUTIVE OFFICERS, TERMS OF OFFICE. The lieutenant governor, secretary of state, treasurer, auditor, attorney general, superintendent of public instruction, and commissioner of public lands, shall hold their offices for four years respectively, and until their successors are elected and qualified. SECTION 4 RETURNS OF ELECTIONS, CANVASS, ETC. The returns of every election for the officers named in the first section of this article shall be sealed up and transmitted to the seat of government by the returning officers, directed to the secretary of state, who shall deliver the same to the speaker of the house of representatives at the first meeting of the house thereafter, who shall open, publish and declare the result thereof in the presence of a majority of the members of both houses. The person having the highest number of votes shall be declared duly elected, and a certificate thereof shall be given to such person, signed by the presiding officers of both houses; but if any two or more shall be highest and equal in votes for the same office, one of them shall be chosen by the joint vote of both houses. Contested elections for such officers shall be decided by the legislature in such manner as shall be determined by law. The terms of all officers named in section one of this article shall commence on the second Monday in January after their election until otherwise provided by law. SECTION 5 GENERAL DUTIES OF GOVERNOR. The governor may require information in writing from the officers of the state upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and shall see that the laws are faithfully executed. SECTION 6 MESSAGES. He shall communicate at every session by message to the legislature the condition of the affairs of the state, and recommend such measures as he shall deem expedient for their action. SECTION 7 EXTRA LEGISLATIVE SESSIONS. He may, on extraordinary occasions, convene the legislature by proclamation, in which shall be stated the purposes for which the legislature is convened. Extraordinary sessions to reconsider vetoes: Art. 3 Section 12. SECTION 8 COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF. He shall be commander-in-chief of the military in the state except when they shall be called into the service of the United States. SECTION 9 PARDONING POWER. The pardoning power shall be vested in the governor under such regulations and restrictions as may be prescribed by law. SECTION 10 VACANCY IN OFFICE OF GOVERNOR. In case of the removal, resignation, death or disability of the governor, the duties of the office shall devolve upon the lieutenant governor; and in case of a vacancy in both the offices of governor and lieutenant governor, the duties of the governor shall devolve upon the secretary of state. In addition to the line of succession to the office and duties of governor as hereinabove indicated, if the necessity shall arise, in order to fill the vacancy in the office of governor, the following state officers shall succeed to the duties of governor and in the order named, viz.: Treasurer, auditor, attorney general, superintendent of public instruction and commissioner of public lands. In case of the death, disability, failure or refusal of the person regularly elected to the office of governor to qualify at the time provided by law, the duties of the office shall devolve upon the person regularly elected to and qualified for the office of lieutenant governor, who shall act as governor until the disability be removed, or a governor be elected; and in case of the death, disability, failure or refusal of both the governor and the lieutenant governor elect to qualify, the duties of the governor shall devolve upon the secretary of state; and in addition to the line of succession to the office and duties of governor as hereinabove indicated, if there shall be the failure or refusal of any officer named above to qualify, and if the necessity shall arise by reason thereof, then in that event in order to fill the vacancy in the office of governor, the following state officers shall succeed to the duties of governor in the order named, viz: Treasurer, auditor, attorney general, superintendent of public instruction and commissioner of public lands. Any person succeeding to the office of governor as in this section provided, shall perform the duties of such office only until the disability be removed, or a governor be elected and qualified; and if a vacancy occur more than thirty days before the next general election occurring within two years after the commencement of the term, a person shall be elected at such election to fill the office of governor for the remainder of the unexpired term, [AMENDMENT 6,1909 P 642 Section 1. Approved November, 1910.] Governmental continuity during emergency periods: Art. 2 Section 42. Original text - Art. 3 Section 10 VACANCY IN -In case of the removal, resignation, death. or disability of the govemor, the duties of the office shall devolve upon the lieutenant govemor, and in case of a vacancy in both the offices of govemor and lieutenant govemor, the duties of govemor shall devolve upon the secretary of state, who shall act as governor until the disability be removed or a govemor elected. http://wwwl.1eg.wa.govlLawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 14 of 50 SECTION 11 REMISSION OF FINES AND FORFEITURES. The governor shall have power to remit fines and forfeitures, under such regulations as may be prescribed by law, and shall report to the legislature at its next meeting each case of reprieve, commutation or pardon granted, and the ~easons for granting the same, and also the names of all persons in whose favor remission of fines and forfeitures shall have been made, and the several amounts remitted and the reasons for the remission. SECTION 12 VETO POWERS. Every act which shall have passed the legislature shall be, before it becomes a law, presented to the governor. If he approves, he shall sign it; but if not, he shall return it, with his objections, to that house in which it shall have originated, which house shall enter the objections at large upon the journal and proceed to reconsider. If, after such reconsideration, two-thirds of the members present shall agree to pass the bill it shall be sent, together with the objections, to the other house, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two-thirds of the members present, it shall become a law; but in all such cases the vote of both houses shall be determined by the yeas and nays, and the names of the members voting for or against the bill shall be entered upon the journal of each house respectively. If any bill shall not be returned by the governor within five days, Sundays excepted, after it shall be presented to him, it shall become a law without his signature, unless the general adjournment shall prevent its return, in which case it shall become a law unless the governor, within twenty days next after the adjournment, Sundays excepted, shall file such bill with his objections thereto, in the office of secretary of state, who shall lay the same before the legislature at its next session in like manner as if it had been returned by the governor: Provided, That within forty-five days next after the adjournment, Sundays excepted, the legislature may, upon petition by a two-thirds majority or more of the membership of each house, reconvene in extraordinary session, not to exceed five days duration, solely to reconsider any bills vetoed. If any bill presented to the governor contain several sections or appropriation items, he may object to one or more sections or appropriation items while approving other portions of the bill: Provided, That he may not object to less than an entire section, except that if the section contain one or more appropriation items he may object to any such appropriation item or items. In case of objection he shall append to the bill, at the time of signing it, a statement of the section or sections, appropriation item or items to which he objects and the reasons therefor; and the section or sections, appropriation item or items so objected to shall not take effect unless passed over the governor's objection, as hereinbefore provided. The provisions of Article II, section 12 insofar as they are inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed. [AMENDMENT 62, 1974 Senate Joint Resolution No. 140, p 806. Approved November 5,1974.] Veto power withheld from initiated and referred measures: Art 2 Section 1. Original text - Art. 3 Section 12 VETO POWER. Every act which shaff have passed the legislature shall be, before it becomes a law, presented to the govemor. If he approves, he shaff sign it; but if not, he shall return it, with his objections, to that house in which it shaff have originated, which house shaff enter the objections at large upon the journal and proceed to reconsider. If, after such reconsideration, two-thirds of the members present shall agree to pass the bill it shaff be sent, together with the objections, te the other house, by which it shaff likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two-thirds of the members present, it shaff become a law; but in aff cases the vote of both houses shaff be determined by the yeas and nays, and the names of the members voting for or against the bill shaff be entered upon the journal of each house respectively. If any bill shaff not be returned by the governor within five days, Sundays excepted, after it shaff be presented to him, it shall become a law without his signature, unless the general adjoumment shaff prevent its retum, in which case it shaff become a law unless the governor, within ten days next after the adjournment, Sundays excepted, shall file such biff with his objections thereto, in the office of secretary of state, who shaff lay the same before the legislature at its next session in like manner as if it had been returned by the govemor. If any bill presented to the governor contain several sections or items, he may object to one or more sections or items while approving other pOrlions of the bill. In such case he shaff append to the bill, at the time of signing it, a statement of the section, or sections; item or items to which he objects and the reasons therefor. and the section or sections, item or items so objected to, shaff not take effect unless passed over the govemor's objection, as hereinbefore provided. Veto power does not extend to initiated orreferred measures: Arl. 2 Section 1 (d). SECTION 13 VACANCY IN APPOINTIVE OFFICE. When, during a recess of the legislature, a vacancy shall happen in any office, the appointment to which is vested in the legislature, or when at any time a vacancy shall have occurred in any other state office, for the filling of which vacancy no provision is made elsewhere in this Constitution, the governor shall fill such vacancy by appointment, which shall expire when a successor shall have been elected and qualified. Appointment of governing boards of educational, reformatory and penal institutions: Art. 13 Section 1. Governmental continuity during emergency periods: Art. 2 Section 42. SECTION 14 SALARY. The governor shall receive an annual salary of four thousand dollars, which may be increased by law, but shall never exceed six thousand dollars per annum. Compensation of legislators, elected state officials, and judges: Art. 28 Section 1, Art. 30. SECTION 15 COMMISSIONS, HOW ISSUED. All commissions shall issue in the name of the state, shall be signed by the governor, sealed with the seal of the state, and attested by the secretary of state. SECTION 16 LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, DUTIES AND SALARY. The lieutenant governor shall be presiding officer of the state senate, and shall discharge such other duties as may be prescribed by law. He shall receive an annual salary of one thousand dollars, which may be increased by the legislature, but shall never exceed three thousand dollars per annum. Compensation of legislators. elected state officials, and judges: Art. 28 Section 1, Art. 30. SECTION 17 SECRETARY OF STATE, DUTIES AND SALARY. The secretary of state shall keep a record of the official acts of the legislature, and executive department of the state, and shall, when required, lay the same, and all matters relative thereto, before either branch of the legislature, and shall perform such other http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 15 of 50 duties as shall be assigned him by law. He shall receive an annual salary of twenty-five hundred dollars, which may be increased by the legislature, but shall never exceed three thousand dollars per annum. Compensation of legislators, elected state officials, and judges: Art 28 Section 1, Art. 30. SECTION 18 SEAL. There shall be a seal of the state kept by the secretary of state for official purposes, which shall be called, "The Seal of the State of Washington." Design of the Seal: Art. 18 Section 1. State seal: RCW 1.20.080. SECTION 19 STATE TREASURER, DUTIES AND SALARY. The treasurer shall perform such duties as shall be prescribed by law. He shall receive an annual salary of two thousand dollars, which may be increased by the legislature, but shall never exceed four thousand dollars per annum. Compensation of legislators, elected state officials, and judges: Art. 28 Section 1, Art. 30. SECTION 20 STATE AUDITOR, DUTIES AND SALARY. The auditor shall be auditor of publiC accounts, and shall have such powers and perform such duties in connection therewith as may be prescribed by law. He shall receive an annual salary of two thousand dollars, which may be increased by the legislature, but shall never exceed three thousand dollars per annum. Compensation of legislators, elected state officials, and judges: Art. 28 Section 1, Art. 30. SECTION 21 ATTORNEY GENERAL, DUTIES AND SALARY. The attorney general shall be the legal adviser of the state officers, and shall perform such other duties as may be prescribed by law. He shall receive an annual salary of two thousand dollars, which may be increased by the legislature, but shall never exceed thirty-five hundred dollars per annum. Compensation of legislators, elected state officials, and judges: Art. 28 Section 1, Art. 30. SECTION 22 SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, DUTIES AND SALARY. The superintendent of public instruction shall have supervision over all matters pertaining to public schools, and shall perform such specific duties as may be prescribed by law. He shall receive an annual salary of twenty- five hundred dollars, which may be increased by law, but shall never exceed four thousand dollars per annum. Compensation of legislators, elected state officials, and judges: Art. 28 Section 1, Art. 30. SECTION 23 COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC LANDS - COMPENSATION. The commissioner of public lands shall perform such duties and receive such compensation as the legislature may direct. SECTION 24 RECORDS, WHERE KEPT, ETC. The governor, secretary of state, treasurer, auditor, superintendent of public instruction, commissioner of public lands and attorney general shall severally keep the public records, books and papers relating to their respective offices, at the seat of government, at which place also the governor, secretary of state, treasurer and auditor shall reside. Governmental continuity during emergency periods: Art. 2 Section 42. SECTION 25 QUALIFICATIONS, COMPENSATION, OFFICES WHICH MAY BE ABOLISHED. No person, except a citizen of the United States and a qualified elector of this state, shall be eligible to hold any state office. The compensation for state officers shall not be increased or diminished during the term for which they shall have been elected. The legislature may in its discretion abolish the offices of the lieutenant governor, auditor and commissioner of public lands. [AMENDMENT 31,1955 Senate Joint Resolution No.6, p 1861, Approved November 6, 1956.] Authorizing compensation increase during term: Art. 30 Section 1. Increase or diminution of compensation during term of office prohibited. county, city, town or municipal officers: Art. 11 Section 8. judicial officers: Art. 4 Section 13. public officers: Art. 2 Section 25. Original text - Art. 3 Section 25 QUALlFICA TIONS - No person, except a citizen of the United States and a qualified elector of this state, shall be eligible to hold any state office, and the state treasurer shall be ineligible for the term succeeding that for which he was elected. The compensation for state officers shalf not be increased or diminished during the term for which they shall have been elected. The legislature may in its discretion abolish the offices of the lieutenant govemor, auditor and commissioner of public lands. ARTICLE IV THE JUDICIARY SECTION 1 JUDICIAL POWER, WHERE VESTED. The judicial power of the state shall be vested in a http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 16 of 50 supreme court, superior courts, justices of the peace, and such inferior courts as the legislature may provide. Court of appeals: Art. 4 Section 30. SECTION 2 SUPREME COURT. The supreme court shall consist of five judges, a majority of whom shall be necessary to form a quorum, and pronounce a decision. The said court shall always be open for the transaction of business except on nonjudicial days. In the determination of causes all decisions of the court shall be given in writing and the grounds of the decision shall be stated. The legislature may increase the number of judges of the supreme court from time to time and may provide for separate departments of said court. SECTION 2(a) TEMPORARY PERFORMANCE OF JUDICIAL DUTIES. When necessary for the prompt and orderly administration of justice a majority of the Supreme Court is empowered to authorize judges or retired judges of courts of record of this state, to perform, temporarily, judicial duties in the Supreme Court, and to authorize any superior court judge to perform judicial duties in any superior court of this state. [AMENDMENl 38,1961 House Joint Resolution No.6, p 2757. Approved November, 1962.] SECTION 3 ELECTION AND TERMS OF SUPREME COURT JUDGES. The judges of the supreme court shall be elected by the qualified electors of the state at large at the general state election at the times and places at which state officers are elected, unless some other time be provided by the legislature. The first election of judges of the supreme court shall be at the election which shall be held upon the adoption of this Constitution and the judges elected thereat shall be classified by lot, so that two shall hold their office for the term of three years, two for the term of five years, and one for the term of seven years. The lot shall be drawn by the judges who shall for that purpose assemble at the seat of government, and they shall cause the result thereof to be certified to the secretary of state, and filed in his office. The supreme court shall select a chief justice from its own membership to serve for a four-year term at the pleasure of a majority of the court as prescribed by supreme court rule, The chief justice shall preside at all sessions of the supreme court. In case of the absence of the chief justice, the majority of the remaining court shall select one of their members to serve as acting chief justice. After the first election the terms of judges elected shall be six years from and after the second Monday in January next succeeding their election. If a vacancy occur in the office of a judge of the supreme court the governor shall only appoint a person to ensure the number of judges as speCified by the legislature, to hold the office until the election and qualification of a judge to fill the vacancy, which election shall take place at the next succeeding general election, and the judge so elected shall hold the office for the remainder of the unexpired term. The term of office of the judges of the supreme court, first elected, shall commence as soon as the state shall have been admitted into the Union, and continue for the term herein provided, and until their successors are elected and qualified. The sessions of the supreme court shall be held at the seat of government until otherwise provided by law. [AMENDMENT 89, 1995 Substitute Senate Joint Resolution No. 8210, p 2905. Approved November 7,1995.] Original text. Art. 4 Section 3 ELECTION AND TERMS OF SUPREME COURT JUDGES. The judges of the supreme court shall be elected by the qualified electors of the state at large at the general state election at the times and places at which state officers are elected, unless some other time be provided by the legislature. The first election of judges of the supreme court shall be at the election which shall be held upon the adoption of this Constitution and the judges elected thereat shall be classified by lot, so that two shall hold their office for the term of three years, two for the term of five years, and one for the term of seven years. The lot shall be drawn by the judges who shall for that purpose assemble at the seat of government, and they shall cause the result thereof to be certified to the secretary of state, and filed in his office. The judge having the shortest term to serve not holding his office by appointment or election to fill a vacancy, shall be the chief justice, and shall preside at all sessions of the supreme court, and in case there shall be two judges having in like manner the same short term, the other judges of the supreme court shal determine which of them shall be chief justice. In case of the absence of the chief justice, the judge having in like manner the shortest or next shortest term to serve shall preside. After the first election the terms of judges elected shall be six years from and after the second Monday in January next succeeding their election. If a vacancy occur in the office of a judge of the supreme court the governor shall appoint a person to hold the office until the election and qualification of a judge to fill the vacancy, which election shall take place at the next succeeding general election, and the judge so elected shall hold the office for the remainder 01 the unexpired term. The term of office of the judges of the supreme court, first elected, shall commence as soon as the state shall have been admitted into the Union, and continue for the term herein provided, and until their successors are elected and qualified. The sessions of the supreme court shall be held at the seat of government until otherwise provided by law. SECTION 3(a) RETIREMENT OF SUPREME COURT AND SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES. A judge of the supreme court or the superior court shall retire from judicial office at the end of the calendar year in which he attains the age of seventy-five years. The legislature may, from time to time, fix a lesser age for mandatory retirement, not earlier than the end of the calendar year in which any such judge attains the age of seventy years, as the legislature deems proper. This provision shall not affect the term to which any such judge shall have been elected or appointed prior to, or at the time of, approval and ratification of this provision. Notwithstanding the limitations of this section, the legislature may by general law authorize or require the retirement of judges for physical or mental disability, or any cause rendering judges incapable of performing their judicial duties. [AMENDMENT 25, 1951 House Joint Resolution No.6, p 960. Approved November 4, 1952.] SECTION 4 JURISDICTION. The supreme court shall have original jurisdiction in habeas corpus, and quo warranto and mandamus as to all state officers, and appellate jurisdiction in all actions and proceedings, excepting that its appellate jurisdiction shall not extend to civil actions at law for the recovery of money or personal property when the original amount in controversy, or the value of the property does not exceed the sum of two hundred dollars ($200) unless the action involves the legality of a tax, impost, assessment, toll, municipal fine, or the validity of a statute. The supreme court shall also have power to issue writs of mandamus, review, prohibition, habeas corpus, certiorari and all other writs necessary and proper to the complete exercise of its appellate and revisory jurisdiction. Each of the judges shall have power to issue writs of habeas corpus to any part of the state upon petition by or on behalf of any person held in actual custody, and may make such writs returnable before himself, or before the supreme court, or before any superior court of the state or any judge thereof. http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 17 of 50 SECTION 5 SUPERIOR COURT - ELECTION OF JUDGES, TERMS OF. ETC. There shall be in each of the organized counties of this state a superior court for which at least one judge shall be elected by the qualified electors of the county at the general state election: Provided, That until otherwise directed by the legislature one judge only shall be elected for the counties of Spokane and Stevens; one judge for the county of Whitman; one judge for the counties of Lincoln, Okanogan, Douglas and Adams; one judge for the counties of Walla Walla and Franklin; one judge for the counties of Columbia, Garfield and Asotin; one judge for the counties of Kittitas, Yakima and Klickitat; one judge for the counties of Clarke, Skamania, Pacific, Cowlitz and Wahkiakum; one judge for the counties of Thurston, Chehalis, Mason and Lewis; one judge for the county of Pierce; one judge for the county of King; one judge for the counties of Jefferson, Island, Kitsap, San Juan and Clallam; and one judge for the counties of Whatcom, Skagit and Snohomish. In any county where there shall be more than one superior judge, there may be as many sessions of the superior court at the same time as there are judges thereof, and whenever the governor shall direct a superior judge to hold court in any county other than that for which he has been elected, there may be as many sessions of the superior court in said county at the same time as there are judges therein or assigned to duty therein by the governor, and the business of the court shall be so distributed and assigned by law or in the absence of legislation therefor, by such rules and orders of court as shall best promote and secure the convenient and expeditious transaction thereof. The judgments, decrees, orders and proceedings of any session of the superior court held by any one or more of the judges of such court shall be equally effectual as if all the judges of said court presided at such session. The first superior judges elected under this Constitution shall hold their offices for the period of three years, and until their successors shall be elected and qualified, and thereafter the term of office of all superior judges in this state shall be for four years from the second Monday in January next succeeding their election and until their successors are elected and qualified. The first election of judges of the superior court shall be at the election held for the adoption of this Constitution. If a vacancy occurs in the office of judge of the superior court, the governor shall appoint a person to hold the office until the election and qualification of a judge to fill the vacancy, which election shall be at the next succeeding general election, and the judge so elected shall hold office for the remainder of the unexpired term. Supreme court may authorize superior court judge to perform judicial duties in any superior court: Art. 4 Section 2(a), SECTION 6 JURISDICTION OF SUPERIOR COURTS. Superior courts and district courts have concurrent jurisdiction in cases in equity. The superior court shall have original jurisdiction in all cases at law which involve the title or possession of real property, or the legality of any tax, impost, assessment, toll, or municipal fine, and in all other cases in which the demand or the value of the property in controversy amounts to three thousand dollars or as otherwise determined by law, or a lesser sum in excess of the jurisdiction granted to justices of the peace and other inferior courts, and in all criminal cases amounting to felony, and in all cases of misdemeanor not otherwise provided for by law; of actions of forcible entry and detainer; of proceedings in insolvency; of actions to prevent or abate a nuisance; of all matters of probate, of divorce, and for annulment of marriage; and for such special cases and proceedings as are not otherwise provided for. The superior court shall also have original jurisdiction in all cases and of all proceedings in which jurisdiction shall not have been by law vested exclusively in some other court; and said court shall have the power of naturalization and to issue papers therefor. They shall have such appellate jurisdiction in cases arising in justices' and other inferior courts in their respective counties as may be prescribed by law. They shall always be open, except on nonjudicial days, and their process shall extend to all parts of the state. Said courts and their judges shall have power to issue writs of mandamus, quo warranto, review, certiorari, prohibition, and writs of habeas corpus, on petition by or on behalf of any person in actual custody in their respective counties. Injunctions and writs of prohibition and of habeas corpus may be issued and served on legal holidays and nonjudicial days. [AMENDMENT 87,1993 House Joint Resolution No. 4201, p 3063. Approved November 2, 1993.] Amendment 65, part (1977) . Art. 4 Section 6 Jurisdiction of Superior Courts. The superior court shall have original jurisdiction in all cases in equity and in all cases at law which involve the title or possession of real property, or the legality of any tax. impost, assessment, toll, or municipal fine, and in all other cases in which the demand or the value of the property in controversy amounts to three thousand dollars or as otherwise determined by law, or a lesser sum in excess of the jurisdiction granted to justices of the peace and other inferior courts. and in all criminal cases amounting to felony. and in all cases of misdemeanor not otherwise provided for by law; of actions of forcible entry and detainer; of proceedings in insolvency; of actions to prevent or abate a nuisance; of all matters of probate, of divorce, and for annulment of marriage; and for such special cases and proceedings as are not otherwise provided for. The superior court shall also have original jurisdiction in all cases and of all proceedings in which jurisdiction shall not have been by law vested exclusively in some other court; and said court shall have the power of naturalization and to issue papers therefor. They shall have such appellate jurisdiction in cases arising in justices' and other inferior courts in their respective counties as may be prescribed by law. They shall always be open, except on nonjudicial days, and their process shall extend to all parts of the state. Said courts and their judges shall have power to issue writs of mandamus, quo warranto, review, certiorari, prohibition, and writs of habeas corpus, on petition by or on behalf of any person in actual custody in their respective counties. Injunctions and writs of prohibition and of habeas corpus may be issued and served on legal holidays and nonjudicial days. [AMENDMENT 65, part, 1977 Senate Joint Resolution No. 113, p 1714. Approved November 8, 1977.] Amendment 65 also amended Art. 4 Section 10. Amendment 28, part (1952). Art. 4 Section 6 JURISDICTION OF SUPERIOR COURTS. The superior court shall have original jurisdiction in all cases in equity and in all cases at law which involve the title or possession of real property, or the legality of any tax, impost, assessment, toll, or municipal fine, and in all other cases in which the demand or the value of the properfy in controversy amounts to one thousand dollars, or a lesser sum in excess of the jurisdiction granted to justices of the peace and other inferior courts, and in all criminal cases amounting to felony, and in all cases of misdemeanor not otherwise provided for by law; of actions of forcible entry and detainer; of proceedings in insolvency; of actions to prevent or abate a nuisance; of all matters of probate, of divorce, and for annulment of marriage; and for such special cases and proceedings as are not otherwise provided for. The superior court shall also have original jurisdiction in all cases and of all proceedings in which jurisdiction shall not have been by law vested exclusively in some other court; and said court shall have the power of naturalization and to issue papers therefor. They shall have such appellate jurisdiction in cases arising in justices' and other inferior courts in their respective counties as may be prescribed by law. They shall always be open, except on nonjudicial days, and their process shall extend to aI, parts of the state. Said courts and their judges shall have power to issue writs of mandamus, quo warranto, review, certiorari, http://wwwl.leg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/2712008 Washington State Constitution Page 18 of 50 prohibition, and writs of habeas corpus, on petition by or on behalf of any person in actual custody in their respective counties. Injunctions and writs of prohibition and of habeas corpus may be issued and served on legal holidays and nonjudicial days. [AMENDMENT 28, part, 1951 Substitute House Joint Resolution No. 13, p 962. Approved November 4, 1952.] Note: Amendment 28 also amended Art. 4 Section 10, ORIGINAL TEXT. ART. 4 Section 6 JURISDICTION OF SUPERIOR COURTS. The superior court shall have original jurisdiction in all cases in equity, and in all cases at law which involve the title or possession of real property, or the legality of any tax, impost, assessment, toll or municipal fine, and in all other cases in which the demand, or the value of the property in controversy amounts to one hundred dollars, and in all criminal cases amounting to felony, and in all cases of misdemeanor not otherwise provided for by law; of actions of forcible entry and detainer; of proceedings in insolvency; of actions to prevent or abate a nuisance; of all matters of probate, of divorce, and for annulment of maniage; and for such special cases and proceedings as are not otherwise provided for. The superior court shall also have original jurisdiction in all cases and of all proceedings in which jurisdiction shall not have been by law vested exclusively in some other court; and said court shall have the power of naturalization, and to issue papers therefor. They shall have such appellate jurisdiction in cases arising in justice's and other inferior courts in their respective counties as may be prescribed by law, They shall be always open except on non-judicial days, and their process shall extend to all parts of the state. Said courts and their judges shall have power to issue writs of mandamus, quo warranto, review, certiorari, prohibition, and writs of habeas corpus on petition by or on behalf of any person in actual custody in their respective counties. Injunctions and writs of prohibition and of habeas corpus may be issued and served on legal holidays and non-judicial days. SECTION 7 EXCHANGE OF JUDGES. JUDGE PRO TEMPORE.The judge of any superior court may hold a superior court in any county at the request of the judge of the superior court thereof, and upon the request of the governor it shall be his or her duty to do so. A case in the superior court may be tried by a judge pro tempore either with the agreement of the parties if the judge pro tempore is a member of the bar, is agreed upon in writing by the parties litigant or their attorneys of record, and is approved by the court and sworn to try the case; or without the agreement of the parties if the judge pro tempore is a sitting elected judge and is acting as a judge pro tempore pursuant to supreme court rule. The supreme court rule must require assignments of judges pro tempore based on the judges' experience and must provide for the right, exercisable once during a case, to a change of judge pro tempore. Such right shall be in addition to any other right provided by law. However, if a previously elected judge of the superior court retires leaving a pending case in which the judge has made discretionary rulings, the judge is entitled to hear the pending case as a judge pro tempore without any written agreement. [AMENDMENT 94, 2001 Engrossed Senate Joint Resolution No. 8208, p 2327. Approved November 6,2001.] Amendment 80 . Art. 4 Section 7 EXCHANGE OF JUDGES. JUDGE PRO TEMPORE. The judge of any superior court may hold a superior court in any county at the request of the judge of the superior court thereof, and upon the request of the govemor il shall be his duty to do so. A case in the superior court may be tried by a judge, pro tempore, who must be a member of the bar, agreed upon in writing by the parties litigant, or their attomeys of record, approved by the court and sworn to try the case. However, if a previously elected judge of the superior court retires leaving a pending case in which the judge has made discretionary rulings, the judge is entitled to hear the pending case as a judge pro tempore without any written agreement. [Amendment 80, 1987 Senate Joint Resolution No. 8207, p 2815. Approved November 3, 1987.J ORIGINAL TEXT. ART. 4 Section 7 EXCHANGE OF JUDGES .JUDGE PRO TEMPORE. The judge of any superior court may hold a superior court in any county at the request of the judge of the superior court thereof, and upon the request of the governor il shall be his duty to do so. A case in the superior court may be tried by a judge, pro tempore, who must be a member of the bar, agreed upon in writing by the parties litigant, or their attomeys of record, approved by the court and sworn to try the case. SECTION 8 ABSENCE OF JUDICIAL OFFICER. Any judicial officer who shall absent himself from the state for more than sixty consecutive days shall be deemed to have forfeited his office: Provided, That in cases of extreme necessity the governor may extend the leave of absence such time as the necessity therefor shall exist. SECTION 9 REMOVAL OF JUDGES, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ETC. Any judge of any court of record, the attorney general, or any prosecuting attorney may be removed from office by joint resolution of the legislature, in which three-fourths of the members elected to each house shall concur, for incompetency, corruption, malfeasance, or delinquency in office, or other sufficient cause stated in such resolution. But no removal shall be made unless the officer complained of shall have been served with a copy of the charges against him as the ground of removal, and shall have an opportunity of being heard in his defense, Such resolution shall be entered at length on the journal of both houses and on the question of removal the ayes and nays shall also be entered on the journal. Removal. censure. suspension, or retirement of judges or justices: Art, 4 Section 31. SECTION 10 JUSTICES OF THE PEACE. The legislature shall determine the number of justices of the peace to be elected and shall prescribe by law the powers, duties and jurisdiction of justices of the peace: Provided, That such jurisdiction granted by the legislature shall not trench upon the jurisdiction of superior or other courts of record, except that justices of the peace may be made police justices of incorporated cities and towns. Justices of the peace shall have original jurisdiction in cases where the demand or value of the property in controversy is less than three hundred dollars or such greater sum, not to exceed three thousand dollars or as otherwise determined by law, as shall be prescribed by the legislature. In incorporated cities or towns having more than five thousand inhabitants, the justices of the peace shall receive such salary as may be provided by law, and shall receive no fees for their own use. [AMENDMENT 65, part, 1977 Senate Joint Resolution No. 113, p 1714. Approved November 8, 1977.] Amendment 65 also amended Art. 4 Section 6. Amendment 28, part (1952). Art. 4 Section 10 JUSTICES OF THE PEACE. The legislature shall determine the number of justices of the peace to be elected and shall prescribe by law the powers, duties and jurisdiction of justices of the peace: Provided, That such jurisdiction granted by the legislature shall not trench upon the jurisdiction of superior or other courts of record, except that justices of the peace may be made police justices of incorporated cities and towns. Justices of the peace shall have original jurisdiction in cases where the demand or value of the property in controversy is less than three hundred dollars or such greater http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htmt 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 19 of 50 sum, not to exceed one thousand dollars, as shall be prescribed by the legislature. In incorporated cities or towns having more than five thousand inhabitants, the justices of the peace shall receive such salary as may be provided by law, and shall receive no fees for their own use. [AMENDMENT 28, part, 1951 Substitute House Joint Resolution No. 13, p 962. Approved November 4, 1952.] Note: Amendment 28 also amended Art. 4 Section 6. Original text - Art. 4 Section 10 JUSTICES OF THE PEACE - The legislature shall determine the number of justices of the peace to be elected in incorporated cities or towns and in precincts, and shall prescribe by law the powers, duties and jurisdiction of justices of the peace; Provided, That such jurisdiction granted by the legislature shall not trench upon the jurisdiction of superior or other courts of record, except that justices of the peace may be made police justices of incorporated cities and towns. In incorporated cities or towns having more than five thousand inhabitants the justices of the peace shall receive such salary as may be provided by law, and shall receive no fees for their own use. SECTION 11 COURTS OF RECORD. The supreme court and the superior courts shall be courts of record, and the legislature shall have power to provide that any of the courts of this state, excepting justices of the peace, shall be courts of record. SECTION 12 INFERIOR COURTS. The legislature shall prescribe by law the jurisdiction and powers of any of the inferior courts which may be established in pursuance of this Constitution. SECTION 13 SALARIES OF JUDICIAL OFFICERS - HOW PAID, ETC. No judicial officer, except court commissioners and unsalaried justices of the peace, shall receive to his own use any fees or perquisites of office. The judges of the supreme court and judges of the superior courts shall severally at stated times, during their continuance in office, receive for their services the salaries prescribed by law therefor, which shall not be increased after their election, nor during the term for which they shall have been elected. The salaries of the judges of the supreme court shall be paid by the state. One-half of the salary of each of the superior court judges shall be paid by the state, and the other one-half by the county or counties for which he is elected. In cases where a judge is provided for more than one county, that portion of his salary which is to be paid by the counties shall be apportioned between or among them according to the assessed value of their taxable property, to be determined by the assessment next preceding the time for which such salary is to be paid. Authorizing compensation increase during term: Art. 30 Section 1. Increase or diminution of compensation during term of office prohibited county, city or municipal officers: Art. 11 Section 8. public officers: Art. 2 Section 25. state officers: Art. 3 Section 25. SECTION 14 SALARIES OF SUPREME AND SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES. Each of the judges of the supreme court shall receive an annual salary of four thousand dollars ($4,000); each of the superior court judges shall receive an annual salary of three thousand dollars ($3,000), which said salaries shall be payable quarterly. The legislature may increase the salaries of judges herein provided. Compensation of legislators, elected state officials, and judges: Art. 28 Section 1. SECTION 15 INELIGIBILITY OF JUDGES. The judges of the supreme court and the judges of the superior court shall be ineligible to any other office or public employment than a judicial office, or employment, during the term for which they shall have been elected. SECTION 16 CHARGING JURIES. Judges shall not charge juries with respect to matters of fact, nor comment thereon, but shall declare the law. SECTION 17 ELIGIBILITY OF JUDGES. No person shall be eligible to the office of judge of the supreme court, or judge of a superior court, unless he shall have been admitted to practice in the courts of record of this state, or of the Territory of Washington. SECTION 18 SUPREME COURT REPORTER. The judges of the supreme court shall appoint a reporter for the decisions of that court, who shall be removable at their pleasure. He shall receive such annual salary as shall be prescribed by law. SECTION 19 JUDGES MAY NOT PRACTICE LAW. No judge of a court of record shall practice law in any court of this state during his continuance in office. SECTION 20 DECISIONS, WHEN TO BE MADE. Every cause submitted to a judge of a superior court for his decision shall be decided by him within ninety days from the submission thereof; Provided, That if within said period of ninety days a rehearing shall have been ordered, then the period within which he is to decide shall commence at the time the cause is submitted upon such a hearing. SECTION 21 PUBLICATION OF OPINIONS. The legislature shall provide for the speedy publication of opinions of the supreme court, and all opinions shall be free for publication by any person. SECTION 22 CLERK OF THE SUPREME COURT. The judges of the supreme court shall appoint a clerk of that court who shall be removable at their pleasure, but the legislature may provide for the election of the clerk of the supreme court, and prescribe the term of his office. The clerk of the supreme court shall receive http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 20 of 50 such compensation by salary only as shall be provided by law. SECTION 23 COURT COMMISSIONERS. There may be appointed in each county, by the judge of the superior court having jurisdiction therein, one or more court commissioners, not exceeding three in number, who shall have authority to perform like duties as a judge of the superior court at chambers, subject to revision by such judge, to take depositions and to perform such other business connected with the administration of justice as may be prescribed by law. SECTION 24 RULES FOR SUPERIOR COURTS. The judges of the superior courts, shall from time to time, establish uniform rules for the government of the superior courts. SECTION 25 REPORTS OF SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES. Superior judges, shall on or before the first day of November in each year, report in writing to the judges of the supreme court such defects and omissions in the laws as their experience may suggest, and the judges of the supreme court shall on or before the first day of January in each year report in writing to the governor such defects and omissions in the laws as they may believe to exist. SECTION 26 CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT. The county clerk shall be by virtue of his office, clerk of the superior court. SECTION 27 STYLE OF PROCESS. The style of all process shall be, "The State of Washington," and all prosecutions shall be conducted in its name and by its authority. SECTION 28 OATH OF JUDGES. Every judge of the supreme court, and every judge of a superior court shall, before entering upon the duties of his office, take and subscribe an oath that he will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Washington, and will faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of judge to the best of his ability, which oath shall be filed in the office of the secretary of state. SECTION 29 ELECTION OF SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES. Notwithstanding any provision of this Constitution to the contrary, if, after the last day as provided by law for the withdrawal of declarations of candidacy has expired, only one candidate has filed for any single position of superior court judge in any county containing a population of one hundred thousand or more, no primary or election shall be held as to such position, and a certificate of election shall be issued to such candidate. If, after any contested primary for superior court judge in any county, only one candidate is entitled to have his name printed on the general election ballot for any single position, no election shall be held as to such position, and a certificate of election shall be issued to such candidate: Provided, That in the event that there is filed with the county auditor within ten days after the date of the primary, a petition indicating that a write in campaign will be conducted for such single position and signed by one hundred registered voters qualified to vote with respect of the office, then such single position shall be subject to the general election. Provisions for the contingency of the death or disqualification of a sole candidate between the last date for withdrawal and the time when the election would be held but for the provisions of this section, and such other provisions as may be deemed necessary to implement the provisions of this section, may be enacted by the legislature. [AMENDMENT 41,1965 ex.s. Substitute Senate Joint Resolution No.6, p 2815. Approved November 8, 1966.] SECTION 30 COURT OF APPEALS. (1) Authorization. In addition to the courts authorized in section 1 of this article, judicial power is vested in a court of appeals, which shall be established by statute. (2) Jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of the court of appeals shall be as provided by statute or by rules authorized by statute. (3) Review of Superior Court. Superior court actions may be reviewed by the court of appeals or by the supreme court as provided by statute or by rule authorized by statute. (4) Judges. The number, manner of election, compensation, terms of office, removal and retirement of judges of the court of appeals shall be as provided by statute. (5) Administration and Procedure. The administration and procedures of the court of appeals shall be as provided by rules issued by the supreme court. (6) Conflicts. The provisions of this section shall supersede any conflicting provisions in prior sections of this article. [AMENDMENT 50,1967 Senate Joint Resolution No.6; see 1969 p 2975. Approved November 5, 1968.] Reviser's note: This section which was adopted as Sec. 29 is herein renumbered Sec. 30 to avoid confusion with Sec. 29, supra. SECTION 31 COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT. (1) There shall be a commission on judicial conduct, existing as an independent agency of the judicial branch, and consisting of a judge selected by and from the court of appeals judges, a judge selected by and from the superior court judges, a judge selected by and from the limited jurisdiction court judges, two persons admitted to the practice of law in this state selected by the state bar association, and six persons who are not attorneys appointed by the governor. (2) Whenever the commission receives a complaint against a judge or justice, or otherwise has reason to believe that a judge or justice should be admonished, reprimanded, censured, suspended, removed, or retired, the commission shall first investigate the complaint or belief and then conduct initial proceedings for http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 21 of 50 the purpose of determining whether probable cause exists for conducting a public hearing or hearings to deal with the complaint or belief. The investigation and initial proceedings shall be confidential. Upon beginning an initial proceeding, the commission shall notify the judge or justice of the existence of and basis for the initial proceeding. (3) Whenever the commission concludes, based on an initial proceeding, that there is probable cause to believe that a judge or justice has violated a rule of judicial conduct or that the judge or justice suffers from a disability which is permanent or likely to become permanent and which seriously interferes with the performance of judicial duties, the commission shall conduct a public hearing or hearings and shall make public all those records of the initial proceeding that provide the basis for its conclusion. If the commission concludes that there is not probable cause, it shall notify the judge or justice of its conclusion. (4) Upon the completion of the hearing or hearings, the commission in open session shall either dismiss the case, or shall admonish, reprimand, or censure the judge or justice, or shall censure the judge or justice and recommend to the supreme court the suspension or removal of the judge or justice, or shall recommend to the supreme court the retirement of the judge or justice. The commission may not recommend suspension or removal unless it censures the judge or justice for the violation seNing as the basis for the recommendation. The commission may recommend retirement of a judge or justice for a disability which is permanent or likely to become permanent and which seriously interferes with the performance of judicial duties. (5) Upon the recommendation of the commission, the supreme court may suspend, remove, or retire a judge or justice. The office of a judge or justice retired or removed by the supreme court becomes vacant, and that person is ineligible for judicial office until eligibility is reinstated by the supreme court. The salary of a removed judge or justice shall cease. The supreme court shall specify the effect upon salary when it suspends a judge or justice. The supreme court may not suspend, remove, or retire a judge or justice until the commission, after notice and hearing, recommends that action be taken, and the supreme court conducts a hearing, after notice, to review commission proceedings and findings against the judge or justice. (6) Within thirty days after the commission admonishes, reprimands, or censures a judge or justice, the judge or justice shall have a right of appeal de novo to the supreme court. (7) Any matter before the commission or supreme court may be disposed of by a stipulation entered into in a public proceeding. The stipulation shall be signed by the judge or justice and the commission or court. The stipulation may impose any terms and conditions deemed appropriate by the commission or court. A stipulation shall set forth all material facts relating to the proceeding and the conduct of the judge or justice. (8) Whenever the commission adopts a recommendation that a judge or justice be removed, the judge or justice shall be suspended immediately, with salary, from his or her judicial position until a final determination is made by the supreme court. (9) The legislature shall provide for commissioners' terms of office and compensation. The commission shall employ one or more investigative officers with appropriate professional training and experience. The investigative officers of the commission shall report directly to the commission. The commission shall also employ such administrative or other staff as are necessary to manage the affairs of the commission. (10) The commission shall, to the extent that compliance does not conflict with this section, comply with laws of general applicability to state agencies with respect to rule-making procedures, and with respect to public notice of and attendance at commission proceedings other than initial proceedings. The commission shall establish rules of procedure for commission proceedings including due process and confidentiality of proceedings. [AMENDMENT 97, 2005 Senate Joint Resolution No. 8207, pp 2799,2800. Approved November 8, 2005.] Removal by legislature: Art. 4 Section 9. Amendment 85 (1989) - Art. 4 Section 31 COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT. (1) There shalf be a commission on judicial conduct, existing as an independent agency of the judicial branch, and consisting of a judge selected by and from the cou~ of appeals judges, a judge selected by and from the superior court judges, a judge selected by and from the district court judges, two persons admitted to the practice of law in this state selected by the state bar association, and six persons who are not attomeys appointed by the governor. (2) Whenever the commission receives a complaint against a judge or justice, or otherwise has reason to believe that a judge or justice should be admonished, reprimanded, censured, suspended, removed, or retired, the commission shalf first investigate the complaint or belief and then conduct initial proceedings for the purpose of determining whether probable cause exists for conducting a public hearing or hearings to deal with the complaint or belief. The investigation and initial proceedings shalf be confidential. Upon beginning an initial proceeding, the commission shalf notify the judge or justice of the existence of and basis for the initial proceeding. (3) Whenever the commission concludes, based on an initial proceeding, that there is probable cause to believe that a judge or justice has violated a rule of judicial conduct or that the judge or justice suffers from a disability which is permanent or likely to become permanent and which seriously interferes with the performance of judicial duties, the commission shalf conduct a public hearing or hearings and shalf make public alf those records of the initial proceeding that provide the basis for its conclusion. If the commission concludes that there is not probable cause, it shalf notify the judge or justice of its conclusion. (4) Upon the completion of the hearing or hearings, the commission in open session shalf either dismiss the case, or shalf admonish, reprimand, or censure the judge or justice, or shalf censure the judge or justice and recommend to the supreme court the suspension or removal of the judge or justice, or shalf recommend to the supreme court the retirement of the judge or justice. The commission may not recommend suspension or removal unless it censures the judge or justice for the violation serving as the basis for the recommendation. The commission may recommend retirement of a judge or justice for a disability which is permanent or likely to become permanent and which seriously interferes with the performance of judicial duties. http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 22 of 50 (5) Upon the recommendation of the commission, the supreme court may suspend, remove, or retire a judge or justice. The office of a judge or justice retired or removed by the supreme court becomes vacant, and that person is ineligible for judicial office until eligibility is reinstated by the supreme court. The salary of a removed judge or justice shall cease. The supreme court shall specify the effect upon salary when it suspends a judge or justice. The supreme court may not suspend, remove, or retire a judge or justice until the commission, after notice and hearing, recommends that action be taken, and the supreme court conducts a hearing, after notice, to review commission proceedings and findings against the judge or justice. (6) Within thirty days after the commission admonishes, reprimands, or censures a judge or justice, the judge or justice shall have a right of appeal de novo to the supreme court. (7) Any matter before the commission or supreme court may be disposed of by a stipulation entered into in a pUblic proceeding. The stipulation shall be signed by the judge or justice and the commission or court. The stipulation may impose any terms and conditions deemed appropriate by the commission or court. A stipulation shall set forth all material facts relating to the proceeding and the conduct of the judge or justice. (B) Whenever the commission adopts a recommendation that a judge or justice be removed, the judge or justice shall be suspended immediately, with salary, from his or her judicial position until a final determination is made by the supreme court. (9) The legislature shall provide for commissioners' terms of office and compensation. The commission shall employ one or more investigative officers with appropriate professional training and experience. The investigative officers of the commission shall report directly to the commission. The commission shall also employ such administrative or other staff as are necessary to manage the affairs of the commission. (10) The commission shall, to the extent that compliance does not conflict with this section, comply with laws of general applicability to state agencies with respect to rule-making procedures, and with respect to public notice of and attendance at commission proceedings other than initial proceedings. The commission shall establish rules of procedure for commission proceedings including due process and confidentiality of proceedings. {AMENDMENT B5, 19B9 Substitute Senate Joint Resolution No. B202, p 3000. Approved November 7, 19B9.] Amendment 77 (1986)- Art. 4 Section 31 COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT - REMOVAL, CENSURE, SUSPENSION, OR RETIREMENT OF JUDGES OR JUSTICES - PROCEEDINGS. There shall be a commission on judicial conduct consisting 01 a judge selected by and from the court of appeals judges, a judge selected by and from the superior court judges, a judge selectee by and from the district court judges, two persons admitted to the practice of law in this state selected by the state bar association, and four persons who are not attomeys appointed by the governor and confirmed by the senate. The supreme court may censure, suspend, or remove a judge or justice for violating a rule of judicial conduct and may retire a judge or justice for disability which is permanent or is likely to become permanent and which seriously interferes with the performance of judicial duties. The office of a judge or justice retired or removed by the supreme court becomes vacant, and that person is ineligible for judicial office until eligibility is reinstated by the supreme court. The salary of a removed judge or justice shall cease. The supreme court shall specify the effect upon salary when disciplinary action other than removal is taken. The supreme court may not discipline or retire a judge or justice until the commission on judicial conduct recommends after notice and hearing that action be taken and the supreme court conducts a hearing, after notice, to review commission proceedings and findings against a judge or justice. Whenever the commission receives a complaint against a judge or justice, it shall first conduct proceedings for the purpose of determining whether sufficient reason exists for conducting a hearing or hearings to deal with the accusations. These initial proceedings shall be confidential, unless confidentiality is waived by the judge or justice, but all subsequent hearings conducted by the commission shall be open to members of the public. Whenever the commission adopts a recommendation that a judge or justice be removed, the judge or justice shall be suspended immediately, with salary, from his or her judicial position until a final determination is made by the supreme court. The legislature shall provide for commissioners' terms of office and compensation. The commission shall establish rules of procedure for commission proceedings including due process and confidentiality of proceedings. [AMENDMENT 77, 1986 Senate Joint Resolution No. 136, p 1532. Approved November 4, 1986.] Amendment 71 (1980) - Art. 4 Section 31 JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS COMMISSION - REMOVAL, CENSURE, SUSPENSION, OR RETIREMENT OF JUDGES OR JUSTICES - There shall be a judicial qualifications commission consisting of a judge selected by and from the court of appeals judges, a judge selected by and from the superior court judges, a judge selectee by and from the district court judges, two persons admitted to the practice of law in this state selected by the state bar association, and two persons who are not attorneys appointed by the governor and confirmed by the senate. The supreme court may censure, suspend, or remove a judge or justice for violating a rule of judicial conduct and may retire a judge or justice for disability which is permanent or is likely to become permanent and which seriously interferes with the performance of judicial duties. The office of a judge or justice retired or removed by the supreme court becomes vacant, and that person is ineligible for judicial office until eligibility is reinstated by the supreme court. The salary of a removed judge or justice shall cease. The supreme court shall specify the effect upon salary when disciplinary action other than removal is taken. The supreme court may not discipline or retire a judge or justice until the judicial qualifications commission recommends after notice and hearing that action be taken and the supreme court conducts a hearing, after notice, to review commission proceedings and findings against a judge or justice. The legislature shall provide for commissioners' terms of office and compensation. The commission shall establish rules of procedure for commission proceedings including due process and confidentiality of proceedings. [AMENDMENT 71, 1980 Substitute House Joint Resolution No. 37, p 652. Approved November 4, 1980.] ARTICLE V IMPEACHMENT SECTION 1 IMPEACHMENT - POWER OF AND PROCEDURE. The house of representatives shall have the sole power of impeachment. The concurrence of a majority of all the members shall be necessary to an impeachment. All impeachments shall be tried by the senate, and, when sitting for that purpose, the senators shall be upon oath or affirmation to do justice according to law and evidence. When the governor or http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 23 of 50 lieutenant governor is on trial, the chief justice of the supreme court shall preside. No person shall be convicted without a concurrence of two-thirds of the senators elected. SECTION 2 OFFICERS LIABLE TO. The governor and other state and judicial officers, except judges and justices of courts not of record, shall be liable to impeachment for high crimes or misdemeanors, or malfeasance in office, but judgment in such cases shall extend only to removal from office and disqualification to hold any office of honor, trust or profit, in the state. The party, whether convicted or acquitted, shall, nevertheless, be liable to prosecution, trial, judgment and punishment according to law. SECTION 3 REMOVAL FROM OFFICE. All officers not liable to impeachment shall be subject to removal for misconduct or malfeasance in office, in such manner as may be provided by law. ARTICLE VI ELECTIONS AND ELECTIVE RIGHTS SECTION 1 QUALIFICATIONS OF ELECTORS. All persons of the age of eighteen years or over who are citizens of the United States and who have lived in the state, county, and precinct thirty days immediately preceding the election at which they offer to vote, except those disqualified by Article VI, section 3 of this Constitution, shall be entitled to vote at all elections. [AMENDMENT 63,1974 Senate Joint Resolution No. 143, p 807. Approved November 5,1974.] Amendment 5 (1910) - Art. 6 Section 1 QUALIFICATIONS OF ELECTORS -All persons of the age of twenty-one years or over, possessing the following qualifications, shaff be entitled to vote at all elections: They shaff be citizens of the United States; they shaff have lived in the state one year, and in the county ninety days, and in the city, town, ward or precinct thirty days immediately preceding the election at which they offer to vote; they shall be able to read and speak the English language: Provided, That Indians not taxed shaff never be affowed the elective franchise: And further provided, That this amendment shaff not affect the rights of franchise of any person who is now a qualified elector of this state. The legislative authority shaff enact laws defining the manner of ascertaining the qualifications of voters as to their ability to read and speak the English language, and providing for punishment of persons voting or registering in violation of the provision of this section. There shaff be no denial of the elective franchise at any election on account of sex, [AMENDMENT 5, 1909 P 26 Section 1. Approved November, 1910.] Amendment 2 (1896)- Art. 6 Section 1 QUALIFICATIONS OF VOTERS - All male persons of the age of twenty-one years or over, possessing the foffowing qualifications, shaff be entitled to vote at aff elections: They shaff be citizens of the United States; they shaff have lived in the state one year, and in the county ninety days, and in the city, town, ward or precinct thirty days immediately preceding the election at which they offer to vote; they shaff be able to read and speak the English language: Provided, That Indians not taxed shall never be allowed the elective franchise: And further provided, That this amendment shaff not effect [affect] the right of franchise of any person who is now a qualified elector of this state. The legislature shall enact laws defining the manner of ascertaining the qualifications of voters as to their ability to read and speak the English language, and providing for punishment of persons voting or registering in violation of the provisions of this section. [AMENDMENT 2, 1895 P 60 Section 1. Approved November, 1896.] Original text - Art. 6 Section 1 QUALIFICATIONS OF ELECTORS - Aff male persons of the age of twenty-one years or over, possessing the following qualifications, shaff be entitled to vote at aff elections: They shall be citizens of the United States; They shaff have lived in the state one year, and in the county ninety days, and in the city, town, ward or precinct thirty days immediately preceding the election at which they offer to vote; Provided, that Indians not taxed shall never be affowed the elective franchise; Provided, further; that aff male persons who at the time of the adoption of this Constitution are qualified electors of the Territory, shaff be electors. SECTION 1A VOTER QUALIFICATIONS FOR PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS. In consideration of those citizens of the United States who become residents of the state of Washington during the year of a presidential election with the intention of making this state their permanent residence, this section is for the purpose of authorizing such persons who can meet all qualifications for voting as set forth in section 1 of this article, except for residence, to vote for presidential electors or for the office of President and Vice-President of the United States, as the case may be, but no other: Provided, That such persons have resided in the state at least sixty days immediately preceding the presidential election concerned. The legislature shall establish the time, manner and place for such persons to cast such presidential ballots. [AMENDMENT 46,1965 ex.s. Substitute House Joint Resolution No.4, p 2820. Approved November 8, 1966.] SECTION 2 SCHOOL ELECTIONS - FRANCHISE, HOW EXTENDED. [This section stricken by AMENDMENT 5, see Art. 6 Section 1.] Original text - Art. 6 Section 2 SCHOOL ELECTIONS - FRANCHISE, HOW EXTENDED - The legislature may provide that there shall be no denial of the elective franchise at any school election on account of sex. SECTION 3 WHO DISQUALIFIED. All persons convicted of infamous crime unless restored to their civil rights and all persons while they are judicially declared mentally incompetent are excluded from the elective franchise. [AMENDMENT 83,1988 House Joint Resolution No. 4231, p 1553. Approved November 8,1988.] Original text - Art. 6 Section 3 WHO DISQUALIFIED - All idiots, insane persons, and persons convicted of infamous crime unless restored to their civil rights are excluded from the elective franchise. SECTION 4 RESIDENCE, CONTINGENCIES AFFECTING. For the purpose of voting and eligibility to office no person shall be deemed to have gained a residence by reason of his presence or lost it by reason of his absence, while in the civil or military service of the state or of the United States, nor while a student at any institution of learning, nor while kept at public expense at any poor-house or other asylum, nor while confined in public prison, nor while engaged in the navigation of the waters of this state or of the United States, or of http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 24 of 50 the high seas. SECTION 5 VOTER - WHEN PRIVILEGED FROM ARREST. Voters shall in all cases except treason, felony, and breach of the peace be privileged from arrest during their attendance at elections and in going to, and returning therefrom. No elector shall be required to do military duty on the day of any election except in time of war or public danger. SECTION 6 BALLOT. All elections shall be by ballot. The legislature shall provide for such method of voting as will secure to every elector absolute secrecy in preparing and depositing his ballot. SECTION 7 REGISTRATION. The legislature shall enact a registration law, and shall require a compliance with such law before any elector shall be allowed to vote; Provided, that this provision is not compulsory upon the legislature except as to cities and towns having a population of over five hundred inhabitants. In all other cases the legislature mayor may not require registration as a pre-requisite to the right to vote, and the same system of registration need not be adopted for both classes. SECTION 8 ELECTIONS, TIME OF HOLDING. The first election of county and district officers not otherwise provided for in this Constitution shall be on the Tuesday next after the first Monday in November 1890, and thereafter all elections for such officers shall be held bi-ennially on the Tuesday next succeeding the first Monday in November. The first election of all state officers not otherwise provided for in this Constitution, after the election held for the adoption of this Constitution, shall be on the Tuesday next after the first Monday in November, 1892, and the elections for such state officers shall be held in every fourth year thereafter on the Tuesday succeeding the first Monday in November. Ct. Art. 27 Section 14. ARTICLE VII REVENUE AND TAXATION SECTION 1 TAXATION. The power of taxation shall never be suspended, surrendered or contracted away. All taxes shall be uniform upon the same class of property within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax and shall be levied and collected for public purposes only. The word "property" as used herein shall mean and include everything, whether tangible or intangible, subject to ownership. All real estate shall constitute one class: Provided, That the legislature may tax mines and mineral resources and lands devoted to reforestation by either a yield tax or an ad valorem tax at such rate as it may fix, or by both. Such property as the legislature may by general laws provide shall be exempt from taxation. Property of the United States and of the state, counties, school districts and other municipal corporations, and credits secured by property actually taxed in this state, not exceeding in value the value of such property, shall be exempt from taxation. The legislature shall have power, by appropriate legislation, to exempt personal property to the amount of fifteen thousand ($15,000.00) dollars for each head of a family liable to assessment and taxation under the provisions of the laws of this state of which the individual is the actual bona fide owner. [AMENDMENT 98, 2006 House Joint Resolution No. 4223, p 2117. Approved November 7,2006.] Amendment 81 (1988) .. Art. 7 Section 1 TAXATION --The power of taxation shall never be suspended, surrendered or contracted away. All taxes shall be uniform upon the same class of property within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax and shall be levied and collected for public purposes only. The word "property" as used herein shall mean and include everything, whether tangible or intangible, subject to ownership. All real estate shall constitute one class: Provided, That the legislature may tax mines and mineral resources and lands devoted to reforestation by either a yield tax or an ad valorem tax at such rate as it may fix, or by both. Such property as the legislature may by general laws provide shall be exempt from taxation. Property of the United States and of the state, counties, school districts and other municipal corporations, and credits secured by property actually taxed in this state, not exceeding in value the value of such property, shall be exempt from taxation. The legislature shall have power, by appropriate legislation, to exempt personal property to the amount of three thousand ($3,000.00) dollars for each head of a family liable to assessment and taxation under the provisions of the laws of this state of which the individual is the actual bona fide owner. [AMENDMENT 81,1988 House Joint Resolution No. 4222, p 1551. Approved November 8,1988.] Amendment 14 (1930) - ART. 7 Section 1 TAXATION. The power of taxation shall never be suspended, surrendered or contracted away. All taxes shall be uniform upon the same class of property within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax and shall be levied and collected for public purposes only. The word "property" as used herein shall mean and include everything, whether tangible or intangible, subject to ownership. All real estate shall constitute one class: Provided, That the legislature may tax mines and mineral resources and lands devoted to reforestation by either a yield tax or an ad valorem tax at such rate as it may fix, or by both. Such property as the legislature may by general laws provide shall be exempt from taxation. Property of the United States and of the state, counties, school districts and other municipal corporations, and credits secured by property actually taxed in this state, not exceeding in value the value of such property, shall be exempt from taxation. The legislature shall have power, by appropriate legislation, to exempt personal property to the amount of three hundred ($300.00) dollars for each head of a family liable to assessment and taxation under the provisions of the laws of this state of which the individual is the actual bona fide owner. [AMENDMENT 14,1929 P 499 Section 1. Approved November, 1930.] Reviser's note: Amendment 14 amended Art. 7 by striking all ot Sections 1, 2, 3 and 4. Subsequently, Amendment 17 added a new Section 2, and Amendment 19 added a new Section 3. Original text - Art. 7 Section 1 ANNUAL STATE TAX. All property in the state, not exempt under the laws of the United States, or under this Constitution, shall be taxed in proportion to its value, to be ascertained as provided by law. The legislature shall provide by law for an annual tax sufficient, with other sources of revenue to defray the estimated ordinary expenses of the state for each fiscal year. And for the purpose of paying the state debt, if there be any, the legislature shall provide for levying a tax annually, sufficient to pay the annual interest and principal of such debt within twenty years from the final passage of the law creating the debt. http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 25 of 50 Amendment 3 (1900)- Art. 7 Section 2, was amended by adding the following proviso: "And provided further, That the legislature shall have power, by appropriate legislation, to exempt personal property to the amount of three hundred dollars ($300) for each head of a family liable to assessment and taxation under the provisions of the laws of this state of which the individual is the actual and bona fide owner. "[AMENDMENT 3,1899 P 121 Section 1. Approved November, 1900.] Original text. Art. 7 Section 2 TAXATION - UNIFORMITY AND EQUALITY - EXEMPTION. The legislature shall provide by la", a uniform and equal rate of assessment and taxation on all property in the state, according to its value in money, and shall prescribe such regulations by general law as shall secure a just valuation for taxation of all property, so that every person and corporation shall pay a tax in proportion to the value of his, her, or its property; Provided, that a deduction of debts from credits may be authorized: Provided, further, that the property of the United States and of the state, counties, school districts and other municipal corporations, and such other property as the legislature may by general laws provide, shall be exempt from taxation. Original text. Art. 7 Section 3 ASSESSMENT OF CORPORATE PROPERTY. The legislature shall provide by general law for the assessing and levying of taxes on all corporation property as near as may be by the same methods as are provided for the assessing and levying of taxes on individual property. Original text. Art. 7 Section 4 NO SURRENDER OF POWER OR SUSPENSION OF TAX ON CORPORA TE PROPERTY. The power to tax corporations and corporate property shall not be surrendered or suspended by any contract or grant to which the state shall be a party. SECTION 2 LIMITATION ON LEVIES. Except as hereinafter provided and notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution, the aggregate of all tax levies upon real and personal property by the state and all taxing districts now existing or hereafter created, shall not in any year exceed one percent of the true and fair value of such property in money: Provided, however, That nothing herein shall prevent levies at the rates now provided by law by or for any port or public utility district. The term "taxing district" for the purposes of this section shall mean any political subdivision, municipal corporation, district, or other governmental agency authorized by law to levy, or have levied for it, ad valorem taxes on property, other than a port or public utility district. Such aggregate limitation or any specific limitation imposed by law in conformity therewith may be exceeded only as follows: (a) By any taxing district when specifically authorized so to do by a majority of at least three.fifths of the voters of the taxing district voting on the proposition to levy such additional tax submitted not more than twelve months prior to the date on which the proposed levy is to be made and not oftener than twice in such twelve month period, either at a special election or at the regular election of such taxing district, at which election the number of voters voting "yes" on the proposition shall constitute three.fifths of a number equal to forty percent of the total number of voters voting in such taxing district at the last preceding general election when the number of voters voting on the proposition does not exceed forty percent of the total number of voters voting in such taxing district in the last preceding general election; or by a majority of at least three- fifths of the voters of the taxing district voting on the proposition to levy when the number of voters voting on the proposition exceeds forty percent of the number of voters voting in such taxing district in the last preceding general election: Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution, any proposition pursuant to this subsection to levy additional tax for the support of the common schools or fire protection districts may provide such support for a period of up to four years and any proposition to levy an additional tax to support the construction, modernization, or remodelling of school facilities or fire facilities may provide such support for a period not exceeding six years; (b) By any taxing district otherwise authorized by law to issue general obligation bonds for capital purposes, for the sole purpose of making the required payments of principal and interest on general obligation bonds issued solely for capital purposes, other than the replacement of equipment, when authorized so to do by majority of at least three-fifths of the voters of the taxing district voting on the proposition to issue such bonds and to pay the principal and interest thereon by annual tax levies in excess of the limitation herein provided during the term of such bonds, submitted not oftener than twice in any calendar year, at an election held in the manner provided by law for bond elections in such taxing district, at which election the total number of voters voting on the proposition shall constitute not less than forty percent of the total number of voters voting in such taxing district at the last preceding general election: Provided, That any such taxing district shall have http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 26 of 50 the right by vote of its governing body to refund any general obligation bonds of said district issued for capital purposes only, and to provide for the interest thereon and amortization thereof by annual levies in excess of the tax limitation provided for herein, And provided further, That the provisions of this section shall also be subject to the limitations contained in Article VIII, Section 6, of this Constitution; (c) By the state or any taxing district for the purpose of preventing the impairment of the obligation of a contract when ordered so to do by a court of last resort. [Amendment 95, 2002 House Joint Resolution No. 4220, p 2203. Approved November 5, 2002.] Prior amendments of Art. 7 Section 2, see Amendments 17, 55, 59, 64, 79, and 90. Amendment 90 (1997) - Art. 7 Section 2 LIMITA 110N ON LEVIES -Except as hereinafter provided and notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution, the aggregate of all tax levies upon real and personal property by the state and all taxing districts now existing or hereafter created, shall not in any year exceed one per centum of the fltle and fair value of such property in money: Provided, however, That nothing herein shall prevent levies af the rates now provided by law by or for any port or public utility district. The term "taxing district" for the purposes of this section shall mean any political subdivision, municipal corporation, district, or other governmental agency authorized by law to levy, or have levied for it, ad valorem taxes on property, other than a port or public utility district. Such aggregate limitation or any specific limitation imposed by law in conformity therewith may be exceeded only (a) By any taxing district when specifically authorized so to do by a majority of at least three-fifths of the electors thereof voting on the proposition to levy such additional tax submitted not more than twelve months prior to the date on which the proposed levy is to be made and not oftener than twice in such twelve month period, either at a special election or at the regular election of such taxing district, at which election the number of persons voting 'yes" on the proposition shall constitute three-fifths of a number equal to forty per centum of the total votes cast in such taxing district at the last preceding general election when the number of electors voting on the proposition does not exceed forty per centum of the total votes cast in such taxing district in the last preceding general election; or by a majority of at least three-fifths of the electors thereof voting on the proposition to levy when the number of electors voting on the proposition exceeds forty percentum of the total votes cast in such taxing district in the last preceding general election: Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution, any proposition pursuant to this subsection to levy additional tax for the support of the common schools may provide such support for a two year period and any proposition to levy an additional tax to support the construction, modernization, or remodelling of school facilities may provide such support for a period not exceeding six years; (b) By any taxing distnet otherwise authorized by law to issue general obligation bonds for capital purposes, for the sole purpose of making the required payments of principal and interest on general obligation bonds issued solely for capital purposes, other than the replacement of equipment, when authorized so to do by majority of at least three-fifths of the electors thereof voting on the proposition to issue such bonds and to pay the principal and interest thereon by an annual tax levy in excess of the limitation herein provided during the term of such bonds, submitted not oftener than twice in any calendar year, at an election held in the manner provided by law for bond elections in such taxing district, at which election the total number of persons voting on the proposition shall constitute not less than forty per centum of the total number of votes cast in such taxing district at the last preceding general election: Provided, That any such taxing district shall have the right by vote of its governing body to refund any general obligation bonds of said district issued for capital purposes only, and to provide for the interest thereon and amortization thereof by annual levies in excess of the tax limitation provided for herein, And provided further, That the provisions of this section shall also be subject to the limitations contained in Article VIII, Section 6, of this Constitution; (c) By the state or any taxing district for the purpose of paying the principal or interest on general obligation bonds outstanding on December 6, 1934; or for the purpose of preventing the impairment of the obligation of a contract when ordered so to do by a court of/ast resort. [AMENDMENT 90, 1997 House Joint Resolution No. 4208, p 3063. Approved November 4, 1997.] Amendment 79 (1986) - Art. 7 Section 2 LIMITATION ON LEVIES. bcept as hereinafter provided and notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution, the aggregate of all tax levies upon real and personal property by the state and all taxing districts now existing or hereafter created, shall not in any year exceed one per centum of the title and fair value of such property in money: Provided, however, That nothing herein shall prevent levies at the rates now provided by law by or for any port or public utility district. The term "taxing district" for the purposes of this section shall mean any political subdivision, municipal corporation, district, or other governmental agency authorized by law to levy, or have levied for it, ad valorem taxes on property, other than a port or public utility district. Such aggregate limitation or any specific limitation imposed by law in conformity therewith may be exceeded only (a) By any taxing district when specifically authorized so to do by a majority of at least three-fifths of the electors thereof voting on the proposition to levy such additional tax submitted not more than twelve months prior to the date on which the proposed levy is to be made and not oftanar than twica in such twelve month period, eithar at a special election or at the regular election of such taxing district, at which election the number of persons voting "yes" on the proposition shall constitute three-fifths of a number equal to forty per centum of the total votes cast in such taxing district at the last preceding general election when the number of electors voting on the proposition does not exceed forty per centum of the total votes cast in such taxing district in the last preceding general election; or by a majority of at least three-fifths of the electors thereof voting on the proposition to levy when the number of electors voting on the proposition exceeds forty percentum of the total votes cast in such taxing district in the last preceding general election: Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution, any proposition pursuant to this subsection to levy additional tax for the support of the common schools may provide such support for a two year period and any proposition to levy an additional tax to support the construction, modernization, or remodelling of school facilities may provide such support for a period not exceeding six years; (b) By any taxing district otherwise authorized by law to issue general obligation bonds for capital purposes, for the sole purpose of making the required payments of principal and interest on general obligation bonds issued solely for capital purposes, other than the replacement of equipment, when authorized so to do by majority of at least three-fifths of the electors thereof voting on the proposition to issue such bonds and to pay the principal and interest thereon by an annual tax levy in excess of the limitation herein provided during the term of such bonds, submitted not oftener than twice in any calendar year, at an election held in the manner provided by law for bond elections in such taxing district, at which election the total number of persons voting on the proposition shall constitute not less than forty per centum of the total number of votes cast in such taxing district at the last preceding general election: Provided, That any such taxing district shall have the right by vote of its governing body to refund any general obligation bonds of said district issued for capital purposes only, and to provide for the interest thereon and amortization thereof by annual levies in excess of the tax limitation provided for herein, And provided further, That the provisions of this section shall also be subject to the limitations contained in Article VIII, Section 6, of this Constitution; (c) By the state or any taxing district for the purpose of paying the principal or interest on general obligation bonds outstanding on December 6, 1934; or for the purpose of preventing the impairment of the obligation of a contract when ordered so to do by a court of last resort. [AMENDMENT 79, 1986 House Joint Resolution No. 55, p 1530. Approved November 4, 1986.] Amendment 64 (1976) - Art. 7 Section 2 LIMITA 110N ON LEVIES - Except as hereinafter provided and notwithstanding any http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/2712008 Washington State Constitution Page 27 of 50 other provision of this Constitution, the aggregate of all tax levies upon real and personal property by the state and all taxing districts now existing or hereafter created, shall not in any year exceed one per centum of the true and fair value of such property in money: Provided, however, That nothing herein shall prevent levies at the rates now provided by law by or for any port or public utility district. The term "taxing district" for the purposes of this section shall mean any political subdivision, municipal corporation, district, or other governmental agency authorized by law to levy, or have levied for it, ad valorem taxes on property, other than a port or public utility district. Such aggregate limitation or any specific limitation imposed by law in conformity therewith may be exceeded only (a) By any taxing district when specifically authorized so to do by a majority of at least three-fifths of the electors thereof voting on the proposition to levy such additional tax submitted not more than twelve months prior to the date on which the proposed levy is to be made and not oftener than twice in such twelve month period, either at a special election or at the regular election of such taxing district, at which election the number of persons voting "yes" on the proposition shall constitute three-fifths of a number equal to forty per centum of the total votes cast in such taxing district at the last preceding general election when the number of electors voting on the proposition does not exceed forty per centum of the total votes cast in such taxing district in the last preceding general election; or by a majority of at least three-fifths of the electors thereof voting on the proposition to levy when the number of electors voting on the proposition exceeds forty percentum of the total votes cast in such taxing district in the last preceding general election: Provided, That notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution, any proposition pursuant to this subsection to levy additional tax for the support of the common schools may provide such support for a two year period; (b) By any taxing district otherwise authorized by law to issue general obligation bonds for capital purposes, for the sole purpose of making the required payments of principal and interest on general obligation bonds issued solely for capital purposes, other than the replacement of equipment, when authorized so to do by majority of at least three-fifths of the electors thereof voting on the proposition to issue such bonds and to pay the principal and interest thereon by an annual tax levy in excess of the limitation herein provided during the term of such bonds, submitted not oftener than twice in any calendar year, at an election held in the manner provided by law for bond elections in such taxing district, at which election the total number of persons voting on the proposition shall constitute not less than forty per centum of the total number of votes cast in such taxing district at the last preceding general election: Provided, That any such taxing district shall have the right by vote of its goveming body to refund any general obligation bonds of said district issued for capital purposes only, and to provide for the interest thereon and amortization thereof by annual levies in excess of the tax limitation provided for herein, And provided further, That the provisions of this section shall also be subject to the limitations contained in Article VIII, Section 6, of this Constitution; (c) By the state or any taxing district for the purpose of paying the principal or interest on general obligation bonds outstanding on December 6, 1934; or for the purpose of preventing the impairment of the obligation of a contract when ordered so to do by a court of last resort. [AMENDMENT 64, 1975-'76 2nd ex.s. Senate Joint Resolution No. 137, p 518. Approved November 2, 1976.] Amendment 59 (1972) and Amendment 55 (1972) . Art. 7 Section 2 LIMITATION ON LEVIES - Except as hereinafter provided and notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution, the aggregate of all tax levies upon real and personal property by the state and all taxing districts now existing or hereafter created, shall not in any year exceed one per centum of the true and fair value of such property in money: Provided, however, That nothing herein shall prevent levies at the rates now provided by law by or for any port or public utility district. The term "taxing district" for the purposes of this section shall mean any political subdivision, municipal corporation, district, or other governmental agency authorized by law to levy, or have levied for it, ad valorem taxes on property, other than a port or public utility district. Such aggregate limitation or any specific limitation imposed by law in conformity therewith may be exceeded only (a) By any taxing district when specifically authorized so to do by a majority of at least three-fifths of the electors thereof voting on the proposition to levy such additional tax submitted not more than twelve months prior to the date on which the proposed levy is to be made and not oftener than twice in such twelve month period, either at a special election or at the regular election of such taxing district, at which election the number of persons voting "yes" on the proposition shall constitute three-fifths of a number equal to forty per centum of the total votes cast in such taxing district at the last preceding general election when the number of electors voting on the proposition does not exceed forty per centum of the total votes cast in such taxing district in the last preceding general election; or by a majority of at least three-fifths of the electors thereof voting on the proposition to levy when the number of electors voting on the proposition exceeds forty percentum of the total votes cast in such taxing district in the last preceding general election; (b) By any taxing district otherwise authorized by law to issue general obligation bonds for capital purposes, for the sole purpose of making the required payments of principal and interest on general obligation bonds issued solely for capital purposes, other than the replacement of equipment, when authorized so to do by majority of at least three-fifths of the electors thereof voting on the proposition to issue such bonds and to pay the principal and interest thereon by an annual tax levy in excess of the limitation herein provided during the term of such bonds, submitted not oftener than twice in any calendar year, at an election held in the manner provided by law for bond elections in such taxing district, at which election the total number of persons voting on the proposition shall constitute not less than forty per centum of the total number of votes cast in such taxing district at the last preceding general election: Provided, That any such taxing district shall have the right by vote of its goveming body to refund any general obligation bonds of said district issued for capital purposes only, and to provide for the interest thereon and amortization thereof by annual levies in excess of the tax limitation provided for herein, And provided further, That the provisions of this section shall also be subject to the limitations contained in Article VIII, Section 6, of this Constitution; (c) By the state or any taxing district for the purpose of paying the principal or interest on general obligation bonds outstanding on December 6, 1934; or for the purpose of preventing the impairment of the obligation of a contract when ordered so to do by a court of/ast resort. [(i) AMENDMENT 59,1971 House Joint Resolution No. 47, p 1834. Approved November, 1972. (ii) AMENDMENT 55,1971 Senate Joint Resolution No.1, p 1827. Approved November, 1972.] Reviser's note: Article 7 Section 2 was twice amended in different respects at the November 1972 general election by the ratification of both S.J.R. No.1. (AMENDMENT 55) and H.J.R. No. 47. (AMENDMENT 59.) 1971 HJR No. 47 contained the following paragraph: "Be It Further Resolved, That the foregoing amendment shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the state in such a manner that they may vote for or against it separately from the proposed amendment to Article VII, section 2, (Amendment 17) of the Constitution of the State of Washington contained in Senate Joint Resolution No.1: Provided, That if both proposed amendments are approved and ratified, both shall become part of the Constitution" [1971 House Joint Resolution No. 47, part, p 1834] The section as printed above reflects the content of both amendments. Amendment 17 (1944) - Art. 7 Section 2 FORTY MILL LIMIT - Except as hereinafter provided and notwithstanding any other provision of this Constitution, the aggregate of all tax levies upon real and personal property by the state and all taxing districts now existing or hereafter created, shall not in any year exceed forty mills on the dollar of assessed valuation, which assessed valuation shall be fifty per centum of the true and fair value of such property in money: Provided, however, That nothing herein shall prevent levies at the rates now provided by law by or for any port or public utility district. The term "taxing district" for the purposes of this section shall mean any political subdivision, municipal corporation, district, or other govemmental agency authorized by law to levy, or have levied for it, ad valorem taxes on property, other than a port or public utility district. Such aggregate limitation or any specific limitation imposed by law in conformity therewith may be exceeded only http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 28 of 50 (a) By any taxing district when specifically authorized so to do by a majority of at least three-fifths of the electors thereof voting on the proposition to levy such additional tax submitted not more than twelve months prior to the date on which the proposed levy is to be made and not oftener than twice in such twelve month period, either at a special election or at the regular election of such taxing district, at which election the number of persons voting on the proposition shall constitute not less than forty per centum of the total number of votes cast in such taxing district at the last preceding general election; (b) By any taxing district otherwise authorized by law to issue general obligation bonds for capital purposes, for the sole purpose of making the required payments of principal and interest on general obligation bonds issued solely for capital purposes, other than the replacement of equipment, when authorized so to do by majority of at least three-fifths of the electors thereof voting on the proposition to issue such bonds and to pay the principal and interest thereon by an annual tax levy in excess of the limitation herein provided during the term of such bonds, submitted not oftener than twice in any calendar year, at an election held in the manner provided by law for bond elections in such taxing district, at which election the total number of persons voting on the proposition shall constitute not less than forty per centum of the total number of votes cast in such taxing district at the last preceding general election: Provided, That any such taxing district shall have the right by vote of its goveming body to refund any general obligation bonds of said district issued for capital purposes only, and to provide for the interest thereon and amortization thereof by annual levies in excess of the tax limitation provided for herein, and Provided further, That the provisions of this section shall also be subject to the limitations contained in Articfe Vfff, Section 6, of this Constitution; (c) By the state or any taxing district for the purpose of paying the principal or interest on general obligation bonds outstanding on December 6, 1934; or for the purpose of preventing the impairment of the obligation of a contract when ordered so to do by a court of last resort. [AMENDMENT 17, 1943 House Joint Resolution No.1, p 936. Approved November, 1944.] Reviser's note: Original section 2, as amended by Amendment 3, was stricken by Amendment 14. The original section and Amendment 3, are set out following Art 7, Section 1, above. SECTION 3 TAXATION OF FEDERAL AGENCIES AND PROPERTY. The United States and its agencies and instrumentalities, and their property, may be taxed under any of the tax laws of this state, whenever and in such manner as such taxation may be authorized or permitted under the laws of the United States, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in the Constitution of this state. [AMENDMENT 19, 1945 House Joint Resolution No.9, p 932. Approved November, 1946.] Reviser's note: Original section 3 was stricken by Amendment 14. The original section is set out following Art. 7 Section 1, above. SECTION 4 NO SURRENDER OF POWER OR SUSPENSION OF TAX ON CORPORATE PROPERTY. Reviser's note: Original section 4 was stricken by Amendment 14. It is set out following Art. 7 Section 1, above. SECTION 5 TAXES, HOW LEVIED. No tax shall be levied except in pursuance of law; and every law imposing a tax shall state distinctly the object of the same to which only it shall be applied. SECTION 6 TAXES, HOW PAID. All taxes levied and collected for state purposes shall be paid in money only into the state treasury. SECTION 7 ANNUAL STATEMENT. An accurate statement of the receipts and expenditures of the public moneys shall be published annually in such manner as the legislature may provide. SECTION 8 TAX TO COVER DEFICIENCIES. Whenever the expenses of any fiscal year shall exceed the income, the legislature may provide for levying a tax for the ensuing fiscal year, sufficient, with other sources of income, to pay the deficiency, as well as the estimated expenses of the ensuing fiscal year. SECTION 9 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS OR TAXATION FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS. The legislature may vest the corporate authorities of cities, towns and villages with power to make local improvements by special assessment, or by special taxation of property benefited. For all corporate purposes, all municipal corporations may be vested with authority to assess and collect taxes and such taxes shall be uniform in respect to persons and property within the jurisdiction of the body levying the same. SECTION 10 RETIRED PERSONS PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 7, section 1 (Amendment 14) and Article 7, section 2 (Amendment 17), the following tax exemption shall be allowed as to real property: The legislature shall have the power, by appropriate legislation, to grant to retired property owners relief from the property tax on the real property occupied as a residence by those owners. The legislature may place such restrictions and conditions upon the granting of such relief as it shall deem proper. Such restrictions and conditions may include, but are not limited to, the limiting of the relief to those property owners below a specific level of income and those fulfilling certain minimum residential requirements, [AMENDMENT 47, 1965 ex.s. House Joint Resolution No.7, p 2821. Approved November 8,1966.] SECTION 11 TAXATION BASED ON ACTUAL USE. Nothing in this Article VII as amended shall prevent the legislature from providing, subject to such conditions as it may enact, that the true and fair value in money (a) of farms, agricultural lands, standing timber and timberlands, and (b) of other open space lands which are used for recreation or for enjoyment of their scenic or natural beauty shall be based on the use to which such property is currently applied, and such values shall be used in computing the assessed valuation of such property in the same manner as the assessed valuation is computed for all property. [AMENDMENT 53, 1967 House Joint Resolution No.1; see 1969 p 2976. Approved November 5, 1968.] ARTICLE VIII STATE, COUNTY, AND MUNICIPAL INDEBTEDNESS http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 29 of 50 SECTION 1 STATE DEBT. (a) The state may contract debt, the principal of which shall be paid and discharged within thirty years from the time of contracting thereof, in the manner set forth herein. (b) The aggregate debt contracted by the state shall not exceed that amount for which payments of principal and interest in any fiscal year would require the state to expend more than nine percent of the arithmetic mean of its general state revenues for the three immediately preceding fiscal years as certified by the treasurer. The term ''fiscal year" means that period of time commencing July 1 of any year and ending on June 30 of the following year. (c) The term "general state revenues" when used in this section, shall include all state money received in the treasury from each and every source whatsoever except: (1) Fees and revenues derived from the ownership or operation of any undertaking, facility, or project; (2) Moneys received as gifts, grants, donations, aid, or assistance or otherwise from the United States or any department, bureau, or corporation thereof, or any person, firm, or corporation, public or private, when the terms and conditions of such gift, grant, donation, aid, or assistance require the application and disbursement of such moneys otherwise than for the general purposes of the state of Washington; (3) Moneys to be paid into and received from retirement system funds, and performance bonds and deposits; (4) Moneys to be paid into and received from trust funds including but not limited to moneys received from taxes levied for specific purposes and the several permanent and irreducible funds of the state and the moneys derived therefrom but excluding bond redemption funds; (5) Proceeds received from the sale of bonds or other evidences of indebtedness. (d) In computing the amount required for payment of principal and interest on outstanding debt under this section, debt shall be construed to mean borrowed money represented by bonds, notes, or other evidences of indebtedness which are secured by the full faith and credit of the state or are required to be repaid, directly or indirectly, from general state revenues and which are incurred by the state, any department, authority, public corporation, or quasi public corporation of the state, any state university or college, or any other public agency created by the state but not by counties, cities, towns, school districts, or other municipal corporations, but shall not include obligations for the payment of current expenses of state government, nor shall it include debt hereafter incurred pursuant to section 3 of this article, obligations guaranteed as provided for in subsection (g) of this section, principal of bond anticipation notes or obligations issued to fund or refund the indebtedness of the Washington state building authority. (e) The state may pledge the full faith, credit, and taxing power of the state to guarantee the voter approved general obligation debt of school districts in the manner authorized by the legislature. Any such guarantee does not remove the debt obligation of the school district and is not state debt. (f) The state may, without limitation, fund or refund, at or prior to maturity, the whole or any part of any existing debt or of any debt hereafter contracted pursuant to section 1, section 2, or section 3 of this article, including any premium payable with respect thereto and interest thereon, or fund or refund, at or prior to maturity, the whole or any part of any indebtedness incurred or authorized prior to the effective date of this amendment by any entity of the type described in subsection (h) of this section, including any premium payable with respect thereto and any interest thereon. Such funding or refunding shall not be deemed to be contracting debt by the state. (g) Notwithstanding the limitation contained in subsection (b) of this section, the state may pledge its full faith, credit, and taxing power to guarantee the payment of any obligation payable from revenues received from any of the following sources: (1) Fees collected by the state as license fees for motor vehicles; (2) Excise taxes collected by the state on the sale, distribution or use of motor vehicle fuel; and (3) Interest on the permanent common school fund: Provided, That the legislature shall, at all times, provide sufficient revenues from such sources to pay the principal and interest due on all obligations for which said source of revenue is pledged. (h) No money shall be paid from funds in custody of the treasurer with respect to any debt contracted after the effective date of this amendment by the Washington state building authority, the capitol committee, or any similar entity existing or operating for similar purposes pursuant to which such entity undertakes to finance or provide a facility for use or occupancy by the state or any agency, department, or instrumentality thereof. (i) The legislature shall prescribe all matters relating to the contracting, funding or refunding of debt pursuant to this section, including: The purposes for which debt may be contracted; by a favorable vote of three.fifths of the members elected to each house, the amount of debt which may be contracted for any class of such purposes; the kinds of notes, bonds, or other evidences of debt which may be issued by the state; and the manner by which the treasurer shall determine and advise the legislature, any appropriate agency, officer, or instrumentality of the state as to the available debt capacity within the limitation set forth in this section. The legislature may delegate to any state officer, agency, or instrumentality any of its powers relating to the contracting, funding or refunding of debt pursuant to this section except its power to determine the amount and purposes for which debt may be contracted. 0) The full faith, credit, and taxing power of the state of Washington are pledged to the payment of the debt created on behalf of the state pursuant to this section and the legislature shall provide by appropriation for the payment of the interest upon and installments of principal of all such debt as the same falls due, but in any event, any court of record may compel such payment. (k) Notwithstanding the limitations contained in subsection (b) of this section, the state may issue certificates http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 30 of 50 of indebtedness in such sum or sums as may be necessary to meet temporary deficiencies of the treasury, to preserve the best interests of the state in the conduct of the various state institutions, departments, bureaus, and agencies during each fiscal year; such certificates may be issued only to provide for appropriations already made by the legislature and such certificates must be retired and the debt discharged other than by refunding within twelve months after the date of incurrence. (I) Bonds, notes, or other obligations issued and sold by the state of Washington pursuant to and in conformity with this article shall not be invalid for any irregularity or defect in the proceedings of the issuance or sale thereof and shall be incontestable in the hands of a bona fide purchaser or holder thereof. [AMENDMENT 92,1999 Senate Joint Resolution No. 8206, p 2387. Approved November 2,1999.] Amendment 60, part, (1972)-Art. 8 Section 1 STATE DEBT - (a) The state may contract debt, the principal of which shall be paid and discharged within thirty years from the time of contracting thereof, in the manner set forth herein. (b) The aggregate debt contracted by the state shall not exceed that amount for which payments of principal and interest in any fiscal year would require the state to expend more than nine percent of the arithmetic mean of its general state revenues for the three immediately preceding fiscal years as certified by the treasurer. The term "fiscal year" means that period of time commencing July 1 of any year and ending on June 30 of the following year. (c) The term "general state revenues" when used in this section, shall include all state money received in the treasury from each and every source whatsoever except: (1) Fees and revenues derived from the ownership or operation of any undertaking, facility, or project; (2) Moneys received as gifts, grants, donations, aid, or assistance or otherwise from the United States or any department, bureau, or corporation thereof, or any person, firm, or corporation, public or private, when the terms and conditions of such gift, grant, donation, aid, or assistance require the application and disbursement of such moneys otherwise than for the general purposes of the state of Washington; (3) Moneys to be paid into and received from retirement system funds, and performance bonds and deposits; (4) Moneys to be paid into and received from trust funds including but not limited to moneys received from taxes levied for specific purposes and the several permanent and irreducible funds of the state and the moneys derived therefrom but excluding bond redemption funds; (5) Proceeds received from the sale of bonds or other evidences of indebtedness. (d) In computing the amount required for payment of principal and interest on outstanding debt under this section, debt shall be construed to mean borrowed money represented by bonds, notes, or other evidences of indebtedness which are secured by the full faith and credit of the state or are required to be repaid, directly or indirectly, from general state revenues and which are incurred by the state, any department, authority, public corporation, or quasi public corporation of the state, any state university or college, or any other public agency created by the state but not by counties, cities, towns, school districts, or other municipal corporations, but shall not include obligations for the payment of current expenses of state govemment, nor shall it include debt hereafter incurred pursuant to section 3 of this article, obligations guaranteed as provided for in subsection (f) of this section, principal of bond anticipation notes or obligations issued to fund or refund the indebtedness of the Washington state building authority. (e) The state may, without limitation, fund or refund, at or prior to maturity, the whole or any part of any existing debt or of any debl hereafter contracted pursuant to section 1, section 2, or section 3 of this article, including any premium payable with respect thereto and interest thereon, or fund or refund, at or prior to maturity, the whole or any part of any indebtedness incurred or authorized prior to the effective date of this amendment by any entity of the type described in subsection (g) of this section, including any premium payable with respect thereto and any interest thereon. Such funding or refunding shall not be deemed to be contracting debt by the state. (f) Notwithstanding the limitation contained in subsection (b) of this section, the state may pledge its full faith, credit, and taxing power to guarantee the payment of any obligation payable from revenues received from any of the following sources: (1) Fees collected by the state as license fees for motor vehicles; (2) Excise taxes collected by the state on the sale, distribution or use of motor vehicle fuel; and (3) Interest on the permanent common school fund: Provided, That the legislature shall, at all times, provide sufficient revenues from such sources to pay the principal and interest due on all obligations for which said source of revenue is pledged. (g) No money shall be paid from funds in custody of the treasurer with respect to any debt contracted after the effective date of this amendment by the Washington state building authority, the capitol committee, or any similar entity existing or operating for similar purposes pursuant to which such entity undertakes to finance or provide a facility for use or occupancy by the state or any agency, department, or instrumentality thereof. (h) The legislature shall prescribe all matters relating to the contracting, funding or refunding of debt pursuant to this section, including: The purposes for which debt may be contracted; by a favorable vote of three-fifths of the members elected to each house, the amount of debt which may be contracted for any class of such purposes; the kinds of notes, bonds, or other evidences of debt which may be issued by the state; and the manner by which the treasurer shall determine and advise the legislature, any appropriate agency, officer, or instrumentality of the state as to the available debt capacity within the limitation set forth in this section. The legislature may delegate to any state officer, agency, or instrumentality any of its powers relating to the contracting, funding or refunding of debt pursuant to this section except its power to determine the amount and purposes for which debt may be contracted. (i) The full faith, credit, and taxing power of the state of Washington are pledged to the payment of the debt created on behalf of the state pursuant to this section and the legislature shall provide by appropriation for the payment of the interest upon and installments of principal of all such debt as the same falls due, but in any event, any court of record may compel such payment. OJ Notwithstanding the limitations contained in subsection (b) of this section, the state may issue certificates of indebtedness in such sum or sums as may be necessary to meet temporary deficiencies of the treasury, to preserve the best interests of the state in the conduct of the various state institutions, departments, bureaus, and agencies during each fiscal year; such certificates may be issued only to provide for appropriations already made by the legislature and such certificates must be retired and the debt discharged other than by refunding within twelve months after the date of incurrence. (k) Bonds, notes, or other obligations issued and sold by the state of Washington pursuant to and in conformity with this article shall not be invalid for any irregularity or defect in the proceedings of the issuance or sale thereof and shall be incontestable in the hands of a bona fide purchaser or holder thereof. [AMENDMENT 60, part, 1971 House Joint Resolution No. 52, part, p 1836. Approved November, 1972.] Original text - Art. 8 Section 1 LIMITATION OF STATE DEBT - The state may to meet casual deficits or failure in revenues, or for expenses not provided for, contract debts, but such debts, direct and contingent, singly or in the aggregate, shall not at any time exceed four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000), and the moneys arising from the loans creating such debts shall be applied to the purpose for which they were obtained or to repay the debts so contracted, and to no other purpose whatever. http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 31 of 50 SECTION 2 POWERS EXTENDED IN CERTAIN CASES. In addition to the above limited power to contract debts the state may contract debts to repel invasion, suppress insurrection, or to defend the state in war, but the money arising from the contracting of such debts shall be applied to the purpose for which it was raised and to no other purpose whatever. SECTION 3 SPECIAL INDEBTEDNESS, HOW AUTHORIZED. Except the debt specified in sections one and two of this article, no debts shall hereafter be contracted by, or on behalf of this state, unless such debt shall be authorized by law for some single work or object to be distinctly specified therein. No such law shall take effect until it shall, at a general election, or a special election called for that purpose, have been submitted to the people and have received a majority of all the votes cast for and against it at such election. [AMENDMENT 60, part, 1971 House Joint Resolution No. 52, part, p 1836. Approved November, 1972.] Amendment 48 (1966)- Art. 8 Section 3 SPECIAL INDEBTEDNESS, HOW AUTHORIZED - Except the debt specified in sections one and two of this article, no debts shall hereafter be contracted by, or on behalf of this state, unless such debt shall be authorized by law for some single work or object to be distinctly specified therein, which law shall provide ways and means, exclusive of loans, for the payment of the interest on such debt as it falls due, and also to pay and discharge the principal of such debt within twenty years from the time of the contracting thereof. No such law shall take effect until it shall, at a general election, have been submitted to the people and have received a majority of all the votes cast for and against it at such election, and all moneys raised by authority of such law shall be applied only to the specific object therein stated, or to the payment of the debt thereby created, and notice that such law will be submitted to the people shall be published at least four times during the four weeks next preceding the election in every legal newspaper in the state: Provided, That failure of any newspaper to publish this notice shall not be interpreted as affecting the outcome of the election. [AMENDMENT 48, 1965 ex.s. House Joint Resolution No. 39, p 2822. Approved November 8, 1966.J Original text - Art. 8 Section 3 SPECIAL INDEBTEDNESS HOW AUTHORIZED - Except the debt specified in sections one and two of this article, no debts shall hereafter be contracted by, or on behalf of this state, unless such debt shall be authorized by law for some single work or object to be distinctly specified therein, which law shall provide ways and means, exclusive of loans, for the payment of the interest on such debt as it falls due, and also to pay and discharge the principal of such debt within twenty years from the time of the contracting thereof. No such law shall take effect until it shall, at a general election, have been submitted to the people and have received a majority of all the votes cast for and against it at such election, and all moneys raiseo by authority of such law shall be applied only to the speCific object therein stated, or to the payment of the debt thereby created, and such law shall be published in at least one newspaper in each county, if one be published therein, throughout the state, for three months next preceding the election at which it is submitted to the people. SECTION 4 MONEYS DISBURSED ONLY BY APPROPRIATIONS. No moneys shall ever be paid out of the treasury of this state, or any of its funds, or any of the funds under its management, except in pursuance of an appropriation by law; nor unless such payment be made within one calendar month after the end of the next ensuing fiscal biennium, and every such law making a new appropriation, or continuing or reviving an appropriation, shall distinctly specify the sum appropriated, and the object to which it is to be applied, and it shall not be sufficient for such law to refer to any other law to fix such sum. [AMENDMENT 11, 1921 P 80 Section 1. Approved November, 1922.] Original text - Art. 8 Section 4 MONEYS DISBURSED ONLY BY APPROPRIATIONS - No moneys shall ever be paid out of the treasury of this state, or any of its funds, or any of the funds under its management, except in pursuance of an appropriation by law; nor unless such payment be made within two years from the first day of May next after the passage of such appropriation act, and every such law making a new appropriation, or continuing or reviving an appropriation, shall distinctly specify the sum appropriated, and the object to which it is to be applied, and it shall not be sufficient for such law to refer to any other law to fix such sum. SECTION 5 CREDIT NOT TO BE LOANED. The credit of the state shall not, in any manner be given or loaned to, or in aid of, any individual, association, company or corporation. SECTION 6 LIMITATIONS UPON MUNICIPAL INDEBTEDNESS. No county, city, town, school district, or other municipal corporation shall for any purpose become indebted in any manner to an amount exceeding one and one-half per centum of the taxable property in such county, city, town, school district, or other municipal corporation, without the assent of three-fifths of the voters therein voting at an election to be held for that purpose, nor in cases requiring such assent shall the total indebtedness at any time exceed five per centum on the value of the taxable property therein, to be ascertained by the last assessment for state and county purposes previous to the incurring of such indebtedness, except that in incorporated cities the assessment shall be taken from the last assessment for city purposes: Provided, That no part of the indebtedness allowed in this section shall be incurred for any purpose other than strictly county, city, town, school district, or other municipal purposes: Provided further, That (a) any city or town, with such assent, may be allowed to become indebted to a larger amount, but not exceeding five per centum additional for supplying such city or town with water, artificial light, and sewers, when the works for supplying such water, light, and sewers shall be owned and controlled by the municipality and (b) any school district with such assent, may be allowed to become indebted to a larger amount but not exceeding five per centum additional for capital outlays. [AMENDMENT 27, 1951 House Joint Resolution No.8, p 961. Approved November 4, 1952.] Provisions of Art. 7 Section 2 (Limitation on Levies) also subject to limitations contained in Art. 8 Section 6: Art. 7 Section 2 (b). Original text - Art. 8 Section 6 LIMITATIONS UPON MUNICIPAL INDEBTEDNESS - No county, city, town, school district or other municipal corporation, shall for any purpose become indebted in any manner to an amount exceeding one and one-half percentum of the taxable property in such county, city, town, school district or other municipal corporation, without the assent of three-fifths of the voters therein, voting at an election to be held for that purpose, nor in cases requiring such assent shall the total indebtedness at any time exceed five per centum on the value of the taxable property therein, to be ascertained by the last assessment for state, and county purposes previous to the incurring of such indebtedness; except that in incorporated cities the assessment shall be taken from the last assessment for city purposes; Provided, That no part of the indebtedness allowed in this section, shall be incurred for any purpose other than strictly county, city, town, school district, or other municipal purposes. Provided further; that any city or town, with such assent may be allowed to become indebted to a larger amount but not exceeding five per centum additional for supplying such city or town with water, artificial light, and sewers, when the works for supplying such water, light, and sewers shall be owned and controlled by the municipality. http://wwwl.leg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 32 of 50 SECTION 7 CREDIT NOT TO BE LOANED. No county, city, town or other municipal corporation shall hereafter give any money, or property, or loan its money, or credit to or in aid of any individual, association, company or corporation, except for the necessary support of the poor and infirm, or become directly or indirectly the owner of any stock in or bonds of any association, company or corporation. SECTION 8 PORT EXPENDITURES - INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT - PROMOTION. The use of public funds by port districts in such manner as may be prescribed by the legislature for industrial development or trade promotion and promotional hosting shall be deemed a public use for a public purpose, and shall not be deemed a gift within the provisions of section 7 of this Article. [AMENDMENT 45, 1965 ex.s. Senate Joint Resolution No. 25, p 2819. Approved November 8,1966.] SECTION 9 STATE BUILDING AUTHORITY. The legislature is empowered notwithstanding any other provision in this Constitution, to provide for a state building authority in corporate and politic form which may contract with agencies or departments of the state government to construct upon land owned by the state or its agencies, or to be acquired by the state building authority, buildings and appurtenant improvements which such state agencies or departments are hereby empowered to lease at reasonable rental rates from the Washington state building authority for terms up to seventy-five years with provisions for eventual vesting of title in the state or its agencies. This section shall not be construed as authority to provide buildings through lease or otherwise to nongovernmental entities. The legislature may authorize the state building authority to borrow funds solely upon its own credit and to issue bonds or other evidences of indebtedness therefor to be repaid from its revenues and to secure the same by pledging its income or mortgaging its leaseholds, The provisions of sections 1 and 3 of this article shall not apply to indebtedness incurred pursuant to this section. [AMENDMENT 51,1967 Senate Joint Resolution No. 17; see 1969 p 2976. Approved November 5,1968,] Reviser's note: This section which was adopted as Sec. 8, is herein renumbered Sec. 9, to avoid confusion with Sec. 8, supra. SECTION 10 ENERGY, WATER, OR STORMWATER OR SEWER SERVICES CONSERVATION ASSISTANCE. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 7 of this Article, any county, city, town, quasi municipal corporation, municipal corporation, or political subdivision of the state which is engaged in the sale or distribution of water, energy, or stormwater or sewer services may, as authorized by the legislature, use public moneys or credit derived from operating revenues from the sale of water, energy, or stormwater or sewer services to assist the owners of structures or equipment in financing the acquisition and installation of materials and equipment for the conservation or more efficient use of water, energy, or stormwater or sewer services in such structures or equipment. Except as provided in section 7 of this Article, an appropriate charge back shall be made for such extension of public moneys or credit and the same shall be a lien against the structure benefited or a security interest in the equipment benefited. Any financing for energy conservation authorized by this article shall only be used for conservation purposes in existing structures and shall not be used for any purpose which results in a conversion from one energy source to another. [AMENDMENT 91,1997 House Joint Resolution No. 4209, p 3065. Approved November 4,1997.] Amendment 86 (1989) - Art. 8 Section 10 ENERGY AND WATER CONSERVATION ASSISTANCE - Notwithstanding the provisions of section 7 of this Article, any county, city, town, quasi municipal corporation, municipal corporation, or political subdivision of the state which is engaged in the sale or distribution of water or energy may, as authorized by the legislature, use public moneys or credit derived from operating revenues from the sale of water or energy to assist the owners of structures or equipment in financing the acquisition and installation of materials and equipment for the conservation or more efficient use of water or energy in such structures or equipment. Except as provided in section 7 of this Article, an appropriate charge back shall be made for such extension of public moneys or credit and the same shall be a lien against the structure benefited or a security interest in the equipment benefited. Any financing for energy conservation authorized by this article shall only be used for conservation purposes in existing structures and shall not be used for any purpose which results in a conversion from one energy source to another. [AMENDMENT 86,1989 Senate Joint Resolution No. 8210, p 3003. Approved November 7,1989.] Amendment 82 (1988) - Art. 8 Section 10 RESIDENTIAL ENERGY CONSERVATION - Notwithstanding the provisions of section 7 of this Article, any county, city, town, quasi municipal corporation, municipal corporation, or political subdivision of the state which is engaged in the sale or distribution of energy may, as authorized by the legislature, use public moneys or credit derived from operating revenues from the sale of energy to assist the owners of structures or equipment in financing the acquisition and installation of materials and equipment for the conservation or more efficient use of energy in such structures or equipment. Except as provided in section 7 of this Article, an appropriate charge back shall be made for such extension of public moneys or credit and the same shall be a lien against the structure benefited or a security interest in the equipment benefited. Any financing authorized by this article shall only be used for conservation purposes in existing structures and shall not be used for any purpose which results in a conversion from one energy source to another. [AMENDMENT 82, 1988 House Joint Resolution No. 4223, p 1552. Approved November 8, 1988.] Amendment 70 (1979) - Art. 8 Section 10 RESIDENTIAL ENERGY CONSERVATION. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 7 of this Article, until January 1, 1990 any county, city, town, quasi municipal corporation, municipal corporation, or political subdivision of the state which is engaged in the sale or distribution of energy may, as authorized by the legislature, use public moneys or credit derived from operating revenues from the sale of energy to assist the owners of residential structures in financing the acquisition and installation of materials and equipment for the conservation or more efficient use of energy in such structures. Except as provided in section 7 of this Article, an appropriate charge back shall be made for such extension of public moneys or credit and the same shall be a lien against the residential structure benefited. Except as to contracts entered into prior thereto, this amendment to the state Constitution shall be null and void as of January 1, 1990 and shall have no further force or effect after that date. [AMENDMENT 70, Substitute Senate Joint Resolution No. 120, p 2288. Approved November 6, 1979.) SECTION 11 AGRICULTURAL COMMODITY ASSESSMENTS - DEVELOPMENT, PROMOTION, AND HOSTING. The use of agricultural commodity assessments by agricultural commodity commissions in such manner as may be prescribed by the legislature for agricultural development or trade promotion and promotional hosting shall be deemed a public use for a public purpose, and shall not be deemed a gift within the provisions of section 5 of this article. [AMENDMENT 76, 1985 House Joint Resolution No. 42, p 2402. Approved November 5, 1985.] ARTICLE IX http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 33 of 50 EDUCATION SECTION 1 PREAMBLE. It is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education of all children residing within its borders, without distinction or preference on account of race, color, caste, or sex. SECTION 2 PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM. The legislature shall provide for a general and uniform system of publiC schools. The publiC school system shall include common schools, and such high schools, normal schools, and technical schools as may hereafter be established. But the entire revenue derived from the common school fund and the state tax for common schools shall be exclusively applied to the support of the common schools. SECTION 3 FUNDS FOR SUPPORT. The principal of the common school fund as the same existed on June 30, 1965, shall remain permanent and irreducible. The said fund shall consist of the principal amount thereof existing on June 30,1965, and such additions thereto as may be derived after June 30,1965, from the following named sources, to wit: Appropriations and donations by the state to this fund; donations and bequests by individuals to the state or public for common schools; the proceeds of lands and other property which revert to the state by escheat and forfeiture; the proceeds of all property granted to the state when the purpose of the grant is not specified, or is uncertain; funds accumulated in the treasury of the state for the disbursement of which provision has not been made by law; the proceeds of the sale of stone, minerals, or property other than timber and other crops from school and state lands, other than those granted for specific purposes; all moneys received from persons appropriating stone, minerals or property other than timber and other crops from school and state lands other than those granted for specific purposes, and all moneys other than rental recovered from persons trespassing on said lands; five per centum of the proceeds of the sale of public lands lying within the state, which shall be sold by the United States subsequent to the admission of the state into the Union as approved by section 13 of the act of congress enabling the admission of the state into the Union; the principal of all funds arising from the sale of lands and other property which have been, and hereafter may be granted to the state for the support of common schools. The legislature may make further provisions for enlarging said fund. There is hereby established the common school construction fund to be used exclusively for the purpose of financing the construction of facilities for the common schools. The sources of said fund shall be: (1) Those proceeds derived from the sale or appropriation of timber and other crops from school and state lands subsequent to June 30, 1965, other than those granted for specific purposes; (2) the interest accruing on said permanent common school fund from and after July 1, 1967, together with all rentals and other revenues derived therefrom and from lands and other property devoted to the permanent common school fund from and after July 1, 1967; and (3) such other sources as the legislature may direct. That portion of the common school construction fund derived from interest on the permanent common school fund may be used to retire such bonds as may be authorized by law for the purpose of financing the construction of facilities for the common schools. The interest accruing on the permanent common school fund together with all rentals and other revenues accruing thereto pursuant to subsection (2) of this section during the period after the effective date of this amendment and prior to July 1, 1967, shall be exclusively applied to the current use of the common schools. To the extent that the moneys in the common school construction fund are in excess of the amount necessary to allow fulfillment of the purpose of said fund, the excess shall be available for deposit to the credit of the permanent common school fund or available for the current use of the common schools, as the legislature may direct. [AMENDMENT 43, 1965 ex.s. Senate Joint Resolution No. 22, part 1, P 2817. Approved November 8, 1966.] Original text. Art. 9 Section 3 FUNDS FOR SUPPORT. The principal of the common school fund shall remain permanent and irreducible. The said fund shall be derived from the following named sources, to wit: Appropriations and donations by the state to this fund; donations and bequests by individuals to the state or public for common schools; the proceeds of lands and other property which revert to the state by escheat and forfeiture; the proceeds of all property granted to the state when the purpose of the grant is not specified, or is uncertain; funds accumulated in the treasury of the state for the disbursement of which proVision has not been made by law; the proceeds of the sale of timber, stone, minerals, or other property from school and state lands, other than those granted for specific purposes; all moneys received from persons appropriating timber. stone, minerals or other property from school and state lands other than those granted for specific purposes, and all moneys other than rental recovered from persons trespassing on said lands; five per centum of the proceeds of the sale of public lands lying within the state, which shall be sold by the United States subsequent to the admission of the state into the Union as approved by section 13 of the act of congress enabling the admission of the state into the Union; the principal of all funds arising from the sale of lands and other property which have been, and hereafter may be granted to the state for the support of common schools. The legislature may make further provisions for enlarging said fund. The interest accruing on said fund together with all rentals and other revenues derived therefrom and from lands and other property devoted to the common school fund shall be exclusively applied to the current use of the common schools. SECTION 4 SECTARIAN CONTROL OR INFLUENCE PROHIBITED. All schools maintained or supported wholly or in part by the public funds shall be forever free from sectarian control or influence, SECTION 5 LOSS OF PERMANENT FUND TO BECOME STATE DEBT. All losses to the permanent common school or any other state educational fund, which shall be occasioned by defalcation, mismanagement or fraud of the agents or officers controlling or managing the same, shall be audited by the proper authorities of the state. The amount so audited shall be a permanent funded debt against the state in favor of the particular fund sustaining such loss, upon which not less than six per cent annual interest shall be paid. The amount of liability so created shall not be counted as a part of the indebtedness authorized and limited elsewhere in this Constitution. http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/2712008 Washington State Constitution Page 34 of 50 Investment of permanent school fund: Art. 16 Section 5. ARTICLE X MILITIA SECTION 1 WHO LIABLE TO MILITARY DUTY. All able-bodied male citizens of this state between the ages of eighteen (18) and forty-five (45) years except such as are exempt by laws of the United States or by the laws of this state, shall be liable to military duty. SECTION 2 ORGANIZATION - DISCIPLINE - OFFICERS - POWER TO CALL OUT. The legislature shall provide by law for organizing and disciplining the militia in such manner as it may deem expedient, not incompatible with the Constitution and laws of the United States. Officers of the militia shall be elected or appointed in such manner as the legislature shall from time to time direct and shall be commissioned by the governor. The governor shall have power to call forth the militia to execute the laws of the state to suppress insurrections and repel invasions. SECTION 3 SOLDIERS' HOME. The legislature shall provide by law for the maintenance of a soldiers' home for honorably discharged Union soldiers, sailors, marines and members of the state militia disabled while in the line of duty and who are bona fide citizens of the state. SECTION 4 PUBLIC ARMS. The legislature shall provide by law, for the protection and safe keeping of the public arms. SECTION 5 PRIVILEGE FROM ARREST. The militia shall, in all cases, except treason, felony and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest during their attendance at musters and elections of officers, and in going to and returning from the same. SECTION 6 EXEMPTION FROM MILITARY DUTY. No person or persons, having conscientious scruples against bearing arms, shall be compelled to do militia duty in time of peace: Provided, such person or persons shall pay an equivalent for such exemption. ARTICLE XI COUNTY, CITY, AND TOWNSHIP ORGANIZATION SECTION 1 EXISTING COUNTIES RECOGNIZED. The several counties of the Territory of Washington existing at the time of the adoption of this Constitution are hereby recognized as legal subdivisions of this state. SECTION 2 COUNTY SEATS - LOCATION AND REMOVAL. No county seat shall be removed unless three-fifths of the qualified electors of the county, voting on the proposition at a general election shall vote in favor of such removal, and three-fifths of all votes cast on the proposition shall be required to relocate a county seat. A proposition of removal shall not be submitted in the same county more than once in four years. Governmental continuity during emergency periods: Art 2 Section 42. SECTION 3 NEW COUNTIES. No new counties shall be established which shall reduce any county to a population less than four thousand (4,000), nor shall a new county be formed containing a less population than two thousand (2,000). There shall be no territory stricken from any county unless a majority of the voters living in such territory shall petition therefor and then only under such other conditions as may be prescribed by a general law applicable to the whole state. Every county which shall be enlarged or created from territory taken from any other county or counties shall be liable for a just proportion of the existing debts and liabilities of the county or counties from which such territory shall be taken: Provided, That in such accounting neither county shall be charged with any debt or liability then existing incurred in the purchase of any county property, or in the purchase or construction of any county buildings then in use, or under construction, which shall fall within and be retained by the county: Provided further, That this shall not be construed to affect the rights of creditors. SECTION 4 COUNTY GOVERNMENT AND TOWNSHIP ORGANIZATION. The legislature shall establish a system of county government, which shall be uniform throughout the state except as hereinafter provided, and by general laws shall provide for township organization, under which any county may organize whenever a majority of the qualified electors of such county voting at a general election shall so determine; and whenever a county shall adopt township organization, the assessment and collection of the revenue shall be made, and the business of such county and the local affairs of the several townships therein, shall be managed and transacted in the manner prescribed by such general law. Any county may frame a "Home Rule" charter for its own government subject to the Constitution and laws of this state, and for such purpose the legislative authority of such county may cause an election to be had, at which election there shall be chosen by the qualified voters of said county not less than fifteen (15) nor more than twenty-five (25) freeholders thereof, as determined by the legislative authority, who shall have been residents of said county for a period of at least five (5) years preceding their election and who are http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 35 of 50 themselves qualified electors, whose duty it shall be to convene within thirty (30) days after their election and prepare and propose a charter for such county. Such proposed charter shall be submitted to the qualified electors of said county, and if a majority of such qualified electors voting thereon ratify the same, it shall become the charter of said county and shall become the organic law thereof, and supersede any existing charter, including amendments thereto, or any existing form of county government, and all special laws inconsistent with such charter. Said proposed charter shall be published in two (2) legal newspapers published in said county, at least once a week for four (4) consecutive weeks prior to the day of submitting the same to the electors for their approval as above provided. All elections in this section authorized shall only be had upon notice, which notice shall specify the object of calling such election and shall be given for at least ten (10) days before the day of election in all election districts of said county. Said elections may be general or special elections and except as herein provided, shall be governed by the law regulating and controlling general or special elections in said county. Such charter may be amended by proposals therefor submitted by the legislative authority of said county to the electors thereof at any general election after notice of such submission published as above specified, and ratified by a majority of the qualified electors voting thereon. In submitting any such charter or amendment thereto, any alternate article or proposition may be presented for the choice of the voters and may be voted on separately without prejudice to others. Any home rule charter proposed as herein provided, may provide for such county officers as may be deemed necessary to carry out and perform all county functions as provided by charter or by general law, and for their compensation, but shall not affect the election of the prosecuting attorney, the county superintendent of schools, the judges of the superior court, and the justices of the peace, or the jurisdiction of the courts. Notwithstanding the foregoing provision for the calling of an election by the legislative authority of such county for the election of freeholders to frame a county charter, registered voters equal in number to ten (10) per centum of the voters of any such county voting at the last preceding general election, may at any time propose by petition the calling of an election of freeholders. The petition shall be filed with the county auditor of the county at least three (3) months before any general election and the proposal that a board of freeholders be elected for the purpose of framing a county charter shall be submitted to the vote of the people at said general election, and at the same election a board of freeholders of not less than fifteen (15) or more than twenty-five (25), as fixed in the petition calling for the election, shall be chosen to draft the new charter. The procedure for the nomination of qualified electors as candidates for said board of freeholders shall be prescribed by the legislative authority of the county, and the procedure for the framing of the charter and the submission of the charter as framed shall be the same as in the case of a board of freeholders chosen at an election initiated by the legislative authority of the county. In calling for any election of freeholders as provided in this section, the legislative authority of the county shall apportion the number of freeholders to be elected in accordance with either the legislative districts or the county commissioner districts, if any, within said county, the number of said freeholders to be elected from each of said districts to be in proportion to the population of said districts as nearly as may be. Should the charter proposed receive the affirmative vote of the majority of the electors voting thereon, the legislative authority of the county shall immediately call such special election as may be provided for therein, if any, and the county government shall be established in accordance with the terms of said charter not more than six (6) months after the election at which the charter was adopted. The terms of all elective officers, except the prosecuting attorney, the county superintendent of schools, the judges of the superior court, and the justices of the peace, who are in office at the time of the adoption of a Home Rule Charter shall terminate as provided in the charter. All appointive officers in office at the time the charter goes into effect, whose positions are not abolished thereby, shall continue until their successors shall have qualified. After the adoption of such charter, such county shall continue to have all the rights, powers, privileges and benefits then possessed or thereafter conferred by general law. All the powers, authority and duties granted to and imposed on county officers by general law, except the prosecuting attorney, the county superintendent of schools, the judges of the superior court and the justices of the peace, shall be vested in the legislative authority of the county unless expressly vested in specific officers by the charter. The legislative authority may by resolution delegate any of its executive or administrative powers, authority or duties not expressly vested in specific officers by the charter, to any county officer or officers or county employee or employees. The provisions of sections 5, 6, 7, and the first sentence of section 8 of this Article as amended shall not apply to counties in which the government has been established by charter adopted under the provisions hereof. The authority conferred on the board of county commissioners by Section 15 of Article II as amended, shall be exercised by the legislative authority of the county. [AMENDMENT 21, 1947 Senate Joint Resolution No.5, p 1372. Approved November 2, 1948.] Original text. Art. 11 Section 4 COUNTY GOVERNMENT AND TOWNSHIP ORGANIZATION. The legislature shall establish a system of county government which shall be uniform throughout the state, and by general laws shall provide for township organization, under which any county may organize whenever a majority of the qualified electors of such county voting at a general election shall so determine, and whenever a county shall adopt township organization the assessment and collection of the revenue shall be made and the business of such county, and the local affairs of the several townships therein shall be managed and transacted in the manner prescribed by such general laws. SECTION 5 COUNTY GOVERNMENT. The legislature, by general and uniform laws, shall provide for the election in the several counties of boards of county commissioners, sheriffs, county clerks, treasurers, prosecuting attorneys and other county, township or precinct and district officers, as public convenience may require, and shall prescribe their duties, and fix their terms of office: Provided, That the legislature may, by http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 36 of 50 general laws, classify the counties by population and provide for the election in certain classes of counties certain officers who shall exercise the powers and perform the duties of two or. more officers. It shall regulate the compensation of all such officers, in proportion to their duties, and for that purpose may classify the counties by population: Provided, That it may delegate to the legislative authority of the counties the right to prescribe the salaries of its own members and the salaries of other county officers. And it shall provide for the strict accountability of such officers for all fees which may be collected by them and for all public moneys which may be paid to them, or officially come into their possession. [AMENDMENT 57, part, 1971 Senate Joint Resolution No. 38, part, p 1829. Approved November, 1972.] Amendment 12 (1924) . Art. 11 Section 5 COUNTY GOVERNMENT. The legislature, by general and uniform laws, shall provide for the election in the several counties of boards of county commissioners, sheriffs, county cler1<s, treasurers, prosecuting attomeys and other county, township or precinct and district officers, as public convenience may require, and shall prescribe their duties, and fix their terms of office: Provided, That the legislature may, by general laws, classify the counties by population and provide for the election in certain classes of counties certain officers who shall exercise the powers and perform the duties of two or more officers. It shall regulate the compensation of all such officers, in proportion to their duties, and for that purpose may classify the counties by population. And it shall provide for the strict accountability of such officers for all fees which may be collected by them and for all public moneys which may be paid to them, or officially come into their possession. [AMENDMENT 12, 1923 P 255 Section 1. Approved November, 1924.] Original text. Art. 11 Section 5 ELECTION AND COMPENSA TlON OF COUNTY OFFICERS. The legislature by general and uniform laws shall provide for the election in the several counties of boards of county commissioners, sheriffs, county clerks, treasurers, prosecuting attorneys, and other county, township or precinct and district officers as public convenience may require, and shall prescribe their duties, and fix their terms of office. It shall regulate the compensation of all such officers, in proportion to their duties, and for that purpose may classify the counties by population. And it shall provide for the strict accountability of such officers for all fees which may be collected by them, and for all public moneys which may be paid to them, or officially come into their possession. SECTION 6 VACANCIES IN TOWNSHIP, PRECINCT OR ROAD DISTRICT OFFICE. The board of county commissioners in each county shall fill all vacancies occurring in any township, precinct or road district office of such county by appointment, and officers thus appointed shall hold office till the next general election, and until their successors are elected and qualified. [AMENDMENT 52, part, 1967 Senate Joint Resolution No. 24, part. Approved November 5, 1968.] Governmental continuity during emergency periods: Art. 2 Section 42. Vacancies in legislature and in partisan county elective office: Art. 2 Section 15. Original text -Art. 11 Section 6 VACANCIES IN COUNTY, ETC., OFFICES, HOW FILLED. The board of county commissioners in each county shall fill all vacancies occurring in any county, township, precinct or road district office of such county by appointment, and officers thus appointed shall hold office till the next general election, and until their successors are elected and qualified. SECTION 7 TENURE OF OFFICE LIMITED TO TWO TERMS. [Repealed by AMENDMENT 22, 1947 House Joint Resolution No.4, p 1385. Approved November 2,1948,] Original text. Art. 11 Section 7 TENURE OF OFFICE LIMITED TO TWO TERMS. No county officer shall be eligible to hold his office more than two terms in succession. SECTION 8 SALARIES AND LIMITATIONS AFFECTING. The salary of any county, city, town, or municipal officers shall not be increased except as provided in section 1 of Article XXX or diminished after his election, or during his term of office; nor shall the term of any such officer be extended beyond the period for which he is elected or appointed. [AMENDMENT 57, art, 1971 Senate Joint Resolution No. 38, part, p 1829. Approved November, 1972.] Original text. Art. 11 Section 8 SALARIES AND LIMITATIONS AFFECTING. The legislature shall fix the compensation by salaries of all county officers, and of constables in cities having a population of five thousand and upwards; except that public administrators, surveyors and coroners mayor may not be salaried officers. The salary of any county, city, town, or municipal officers shall not be increased or diminished after his election, or during his term of office; nor shall the term of any such officer be extended beyond the period for which he is elected or appointed. SECTION 9 STATE TAXES NOT TO BE RELEASED OR COMMUTED. No county, nor the inhabitants thereof, nor the property therein, shall be released or discharged from its or their proportionate share of taxes to be levied for state purposes, nor shall commutation for such taxes be authorized in any form whatever. SECTION 10 INCORPORATION OF MUNICIPALITIES. Corporations for municipal purposes shall not be created by special laws; but the legislature, by general laws, shall provide for the incorporation, organization and classification in proportion to population, of cities and towns, which laws may be altered, amended or repealed. Cities and towns heretofore organized, or incorporated may become organized under such general laws whenever a majority of the electors voting at a general election, shall so determine, and shall organize in conformity therewith; and cities or towns heretofore or hereafter organized, and all charters thereof framed or adopted by authority of this Constitution shall be subject to and controlled by general laws. Any city containing a population of ten thousand inhabitants, or more, shall be permitted to frame a charter for its own government, consistent with and subject to the Constitution and laws of this state, and for such purpose the legislative authority of such city may cause an election to be had at which election there shall be chosen by the qualified electors of said city, fifteen freeholders thereof, who shall have been residents of said city for a period of at least two years preceding their election and qualified electors, whose duty it shall be to convene within ten days after their election, and prepare and propose a charter for such city. Such proposed charter shall be submitted to the qualified electors of said city, and if a majority of such qualified electors voting thereon ratify the same, it shall become the charter of said city, and shall become the organic law thereof, and supersede any existing charter including amendments thereto, and all special laws inconsistent with such charter. Said proposed charter shall be published in the daily newspaper of largest general circulation hrtp://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgency Rules/ constitution.htm 2/2712008 Washington State Constitution Page 37 of 50 published in the area to be incorporated as a first class city under the charter or, if no daily newspaper is published therein, then in the newspaper having the largest general circulation within such area at least once each week for four weeks next preceding the day of submitting the same to the electors for their approval, as above provided. All elections in this section authorized shall only be had upon notice, which notice shall specify the object of calling such election, and shall be given as required by law. Said elections may be general or special elections, and except as herein provided shall be governed by the law regulating and controlling general or special elections in said city. Such charter may be amended by proposals therefor submitted by the legislative authority of such city to the electors thereof at any general election after notice of said submission published as above specified, and ratified by a majority of the qualified electors voting thereon, In submitting any such charter, or amendment thereto, any alternate article or proposition may be presented for the choice of the voters, and may be voted on separately without prejudice to others. [AMENDMENT 40,1963 ex.s. Senate Joint Resolution No.1, p 1526. Approved November 3,1964.] Original text. Art. 11 Section 10 INCORPORATION OF MUNICIPALITIES. Corporations for municipal purposes shaff not be created by special laws; but the legislature, by general laws, shaff provide for the incorporation, organization and classification in proportion to population, of cities and towns, which laws may be altered, amended or repealed. Cities and towns heretofore organized, or incorporated may become organized under such general laws whenever a majority of the electors voting at a general election, shaff so detennine, and shaff organize in confonnity therewith; and cities or towns heretofore or hereafter organized, and aff charters thereof framed or adopted by authority of this Constitution shaff be subject to, and controffed by general laws. Any city containing a population of twenty thousand inhabitants, or more, shaff be pennilled to frame a charter for its own government, consistent with and subject to the Constitution and laws of this state, and for such purpose the legislative authority of such city may cause an election to be had at which election there shaff be chosen by the qualified electors of said city, fifteen freeholders thereof, who shaff have been residents of said city for a period of at least two years preceding their election ana qualified electors, whose duty it shaff be to convene within ten days after their election, and prepare and propose a charter for such city. Such proposed charter shaff be submitted to the qualified electors of said city, and if a majority of such qualified electors voting thereon ratify the same, it shaff become the charter of said city, and shaff become the organic law thereof, and supersede any existing charter including amendments thereto, and aff special laws inconsistent with such charter. Said proposed charter shaff be published in two daily newspapers published in said city, for at least thirty days prior to the day of submitting the same to the electors for their approval, as above provided. Aff elections in this section authorized shaff only be had upon notice, which notice shaff specify the object of caffing such election, and shaff be given for at least ten days before the day of election, in aff election districts of said city. Said elections may be general or special elections, and except as herein provided shaff be governed by the law regulating and controlling general or special elections in said city. Such charter may be amended by proposals therefore submitted by the legislative authority of such city to the electors thereof at any general election after notice of said submission published as above specified, and ratified by a majority of the qualified electors voting thereon. In submitting any such charter, or amendment thereto, any altemate article or proposition may be presented for the choice of the voters, and may be voted on separately without prejudice to others. Authority to incur and limit of indebtedness: Art. 8 Section 6. SECTION 11 POLICE AND SANITARY REGULATIONS. Any county, city, town or township may make and enforce within its limits all such local police, sanitary and other regulations as are not in conflict with general laws. SECTION 12 ASSESSMENT AND COLLECTION OF TAXES IN MUNICIPALITIES. The legislature shall have no power to impose taxes upon counties, cities, towns or other municipal corporations, or upon the inhabitants or property thereof, for county, city, town, or other municipal purposes, but may, by general laws, vest in the corporate authorities thereof, the power to assess and collect taxes for such purposes. SECTION 13 PRIVATE PROPERTY, WHEN MAY BE TAKEN FOR PUBLIC DEBT. Private property shall not be taken or sold for the payment of the corporate debt of any public or municipal corporation, except in the mode provided by law for the levy and collection of taxes. SECTION 14 PRIVATE USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS PROHIBITED. The making of profit out of county, city, town, or other public money, or using the same for any purpose not authorized by law, by any officer having the possession or control thereof, shall be a felony, and shall be prosecuted and punished as prescribed by law. SECTION 15 DEPOSIT OF PUBLIC FUNDS. All moneys, assessments and taxes belonging to or collected for the use of any county, city, town or other public or municipal corporation, coming into the hands of any officer thereof, shall immediately be deposited with the treasurer, or other legal depositary to the credit of such city, town, or other corporation respectively, for the benefit of the funds to which they belong. SECTION 16 COMBINED CITY-COUNTY. Any county may frame a "Home Rule" charter subject to the Constitution and laws of this state to provide for the formation and government of combined city and county municipal corporations, each of which shall be known as "city-county". Registered voters equal in number to ten (10) percent of the voters of any such county voting at the last preceding general election may at any time propose by a petition the calling of an election of freeholders. The provisions of section 4 of this Article with respect to a petition calling for an election of freeholders to frame a county home rule charter, the election of freeholders, and the framing and adoption of a county home rule charter pursuant to such petition shall apply to a petition proposed under this section for the election of freeholders to frame a city-county charter, the election of freeholders, and to the framing and adoption of such city-county charter pursuant to such petition. Except as otherwise provided in this section, the provisions of section 4 applicable to a county home rule charter shall apply to a city-county charter. If there are not sufficient legal newspapers published in the county to meet the requirements for publication of a proposed charter under section 4 of this Article, publication in a legal newspaper circulated in the county may be substituted for publication in a legal newspaper published in the county. No such "city-county" shall be formed except by a majority vote of the qualified electors voting thereon in the county. The charter shall designate the respective officers of such city-county who shall perform the duties imposed by law upon county officers. Every such city-county shall have and enjoy all rights, powers and privileges asserted in its charter, and in addition thereto, such rights, powers and privileges as may be granted to it, or to any city or county or class or classes of cities and http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 38 of 50 counties. In the event of a conflict in the constitutional provisions applying to cities and those applying to counties or of a conflict in the general laws applying to cities and those applying to counties, a city-county shall be authorized to exercise any powers that are granted to either the cities or the counties. No legislative enactment which is a prohibition or restriction shall apply to the rights, powers and privileges of a city-county unless such prohibition or restriction shall apply equally to every other city, county, and city- county. The provisions of sections 2, 3, 5, 6, and 8 and of the first paragraph of section 4 of this article shall not apply to any such city-county. Municipal corporations may be retained or otherwise provided for within the city-county. The formation, powers and duties of such municipal corporations shall be prescribed by the charter. No city-county shall for any purpose become indebted in any manner to an amount exceeding three per centum of the taxable property in such city-county without the assent of three-fifths of the voters therein voting at an election to be held for that purpose, nor in cases requiring such assent shall the total indebtedness at any time exceed ten per centum of the value of the taxable property therein, to be ascertained by the last assessment for city-county purposes previous to the incurring of such indebtedness: Provided, That no part of the indebtedness allowed in this section shall be incurred for any purpose other than strictly city-county or other municipal purposes: Provided further, That any city-county, with such assent may be allowed to become indebted to a larger amount, but not exceeding five per centum additional for supplying such city-county with water, artificial light, and sewers, when the works for supplying such water, light, and sewers shall be owned and controlled by the city-county. No municipal corporation which is retained or otherwise provided for within the city-county shall for any purpose become indebted in any manner to an amount exceeding one and one-half per centum of the taxable property in such municipal corporation without the assent of three-fifths of the voters therein voting at an election to be held for that purpose, nor shall the total indebtedness at any time exceed five per centum of the value of the taxable property therein, to be ascertained by the last assessment for city-county purposes previous to the incurring of such indebtedness: Provided, That no part of the indebtedness allowed in this section shall be incurred for any purpose other than strictly municipal purposes: Provided further, That any such municipal corporation, with such assent, may be allowed to become indebted to a larger amount, but not exceeding five per centum additional for supplying such municipal corporation with water, artificial light, and sewers, when the works for supplying such water, light, and sewers shall be owned and controlled by the municipal corporation. All taxes which are levied and collected within a municipal corporation for a specific purpose shall be expended within that municipal corporation. The authority conferred on the city-county government shall not be restricted by the second sentence of Article 7, section 1, or by Article 8, section 6 of this Constitution. [AMENDMENT 58, 1971 House Joint Resolution No. 21, P 1831. Approved November, 1972.] Amendment 23 (1948)- Art. 11 Section 16 COMBINED CllY AND COUNlY - The legislature shall, by general law, provide for the formation of combined city and county municipal corporations, and for the manner of determining the territorial limits thereof, each of which shall be known as a "city and county, "and, when organized, shall contain a population of at least three hundred thousand (300,000) inhabitants. No such city and county shall be formed except by a majority vote of the qualified electors of the area proposed to be included therein and also by a majority vote of the qualified electors of the remainder of that county from which such area is to be taken. Any such city and county shall be permitted to frame a charter for its own government, and amend the same, in the manner provided for cities by section 10 of this article: Provided, however, That the first charter of such city and county shall be framed and adopted in a manner to be specified in the general law authorizing the formation of such corporations: Provided further, That every such charter shall designate the respective officers of such city and county who shall perform the duties imposed by law upon county officers. Every such city and county shall have and enjoy all rights, powers and privileges asserted in its charter, not inconsistent with general laws, and in addition thereto, such rights, powers and privileges as may be granted to it, or possessed and enjoyed by cities and counties of like popUlation separately organized. No county or county govemment existing outside the territorial limits of such county and city shall exercise any police, taxation or other powers within the territorial limits of such county and city, but all such powers shall be exercised by the city and county and the officers thereof, subject to such constitutional provisions and general laws as apply to either cities or counties: Provided. That the provisions of sections 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 of this article shall not apply to any such city and county: Provided further, That the salary of any elective or appointive officer of a city and county shall not be changed after his election or appointment or during his term of office; nor shall the term of any such officer be extended beyond the period for which he is elected or appointed. In case an existing county is divided in the formation of a city and county, such city and county shall be liable for a just proportion of the existing debts or liabilities of the former county, and shall account for and pay the county remaining a just proportion of the value of any real estate or other property owned by the former county and taken over by the county and city, the method of determining such just proportion to be prescribed by general law, but such division shall not affect the rights of creditors. The officers of a city and county, their compensation, qualifications, term of office and manner of election or appointment shall be as provided for in its charter, subject to genera/laws and applicab/e constitutional provisions. (AMENDMENT 23,1947 House Joint Resolution No. 13, p 1386. Approved November 2, 1948.] ARTICLE XII CORPORATIONS OTHER THAN MUNICIPAL SECTION 1 CORPORATIONS, HOW FORMED. Corporations may be formed under general laws, but shall not be created by special acts. All laws relating to corporations may be altered, amended or repealed by the legislature at any time, and all corporations doing business in this state may, as to such business, be regulated, limited or restrained by law. SECTION 2 EXISTING CHARTERS. All existing charters, franchises, special or exclusive privileges, under http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 39 of 50 which an actual and bona fide organization shall not have taken place, and business been commenced in good faith, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution shall thereafter have no validity. SECTION 3 EXISTING CHARTERS NOT TO BE EXTENDED NOR FORFEITURE REMITTED. The legislature shall not extend any franchise or charter, nor remit the forfeiture of any franchise or charter of any corporation now existing, or which shall hereafter exist under the laws of this state. SECTION 4 LIABILITY OF STOCKHOLDERS. Each stockholder in all incorporated companies, except corporations organized for banking or insurance purposes, shall be liable for the debts of the corporation to the amount of his unpaid stock and no more; and one or more stockholders may be joined as parties defendant in suits to recover upon this liability. SECTION 5 TERM "CORPORATION," DEFINED - RIGHT TO SUE AND BE SUED. The term corporations, as used in this article, shall be construed to include all associations and joint stock companies having any powers or privileges of corporations not possessed by individuals or partnerships, and all corporations shall have the right to sue and shall be subject to be sued, in all courts, in like cases as natural persons. SECTION 6 LIMITATIONS UPON ISSUANCE OF STOCK. Corporations shall not issue stock, except to bona fide subscribers therefor, or their assignees; nor shall any corporation issue any bond, or other obligation, for the payment of money, except for money or property received or labor done. The stock of corporations shall not be increased, except in pursuance of a general law, nor shall any law authorize the increase of stock, without the consent of the person or persons holding the larger amount in value of the stock, nor without due notice of the proposed increase having been previously given in such manner as may be prescribed by law. All fictitious increase of stock or indebtedness shall be void. SECTION 7 FOREIGN CORPORATIONS. No corporation organized outside the limits of this state shall be allowed to transact business within the state on more favorable conditions than are prescribed by law to similar corporations organized under the laws of this state. SECTION 8 ALIENATION OF FRANCHISE NOT TO RELEASE LIABILITIES. No corporation shall lease or alienate any franchise, so as to relieve the franchise, or property held thereunder, from the liabilities of the lessor, or grantor, lessee, or grantee, contracted or incurred in the operation, use, or enjoyment of such franchise or any of its privileges. SECTION 9 STATE NOT TO LOAN ITS CREDIT OR SUBSCRIBE FOR STOCK. The state shall not in any manner loan its credit, nor shall it subscribe to, or be interested in the stock of any company, association or corporation. SECTION 10 EMINENT DOMAIN AFFECTING. The exercise of the right of eminent domain shall never be so abridged or construed as to prevent the legislature from taking the property and franchises of incorporated companies, and subjecting them to public use the same as the property of individuals. SECTION 11 STOCKHOLDER LIABILITY. No corporation, association, or individual shall issue or put in circulation as money anything but the lawful money of the United States. Each stockholder of any banking or insurance corporation or joint stock association shall be individually and personally liable equally and ratably, and not one for another, for all contracts, debts, and engagements of such corporation or association accruing while they remain such stockholders, to the extent of the amount of their stock therein at the par value thereof, in addition to the amount invested in such shares. The legislature may provide that stockholders of banking corporations organized under the laws of this state which shall provide and furnish, either through membership in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, or through membership in any other instrumentality of the government of the United States, insurance or security for the payment of the debts and obligations of such banking corporation equivalent to that required by the laws of the United States to be furnished and provided by national banking associations, shall be relieved from liability for the debts and obligations of such banking corporation to the same extent that stockholders of national banking associations are relieved from liability for the debts and obligations of such national banking associations under the laws of the United States. [AMENDMENT 16, 1939 Senate Joint Resolution No.8, p 1024. Approved November, 1940.] Original text - Art. 12 Section 11 PROHIBITION AGAINST ISSUANCE OF MONEY AND LIABILITY OF STOCKHOLDERS IN BANKS - No corporation, association, or individual shall issue or put in circulation as money anything but the lawful money of the United States. Each stockholder of any banking or insurance corporation or joint stock association, shall be individually and personally liable equally and ratably and not one for another, for all contracts, debts and engagements of such corporation or association accruing while they remain such stockholders to the extent of the amount of their stock therein at the par value thereof, in addition to the amount invested in such shares. SECTION 12 RECEIVING DEPOSITS BY BANK AFTER INSOLVENCY. Any president, director, manager, cashier, or other officer of any banking institution, who shall receive or assent to the reception of deposits, after he shall have knowledge of the fact that such banking institution is insolvent or in failing circumstances, shall be individually responsible for such deposits so received. SECTION 13 COMMON CARRIERS, REGULATION OF. All railroad, canal and other transportation companies are declared to be common carriers and subject to legislative control. Any association or corporation organized for the purpose, under the laws of this state, shall have the right to connect at the state line with railroads of other states. Every railroad company shall have the right with its road, whether the same be now constructed or may hereafter be constructed, to intersect, cross or connect with any other railroad, and when such railroads are of the same or similar gauge they shall at all crossings and at all http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 40 of 50 points, where a railroad shall begin or terminate at or near any other railroad, form proper connections so that the cars of any such railroad companies may be speedily transferred from one railroad to another.. All railroad companies shall receive and transport each the other's passengers, tonnage and cars without delay or discrimination. SECTION 14 PROHIBITION AGAINST COMBINATIONS BY CARRIERS. [Repealed by AMENDMENT 67, 1977 House Joint Resolution No. 57, p 1714. Approved November 8,1977.] Original text. Art. 12 Section 14 PROHIBITION AGAINST COMBINATIONS BY CARRIERS. No railroad company, or other common carrier, shall combine or make any contract with the owners of any vessel that leaves port or makes port in this state, or with any common carrier, by which combination or contract the eamings of one doing the carrying are to be shared by the other not doing the carrying. SECTION 15 PROHIBITION AGAINST DISCRIMINATING CHARGES. No discrimination in charges or facilities for transportation shall be made by any railroad or other transportation company between places or persons, or in the facilities for the transportation of the same classes of freight or passengers within this state, or coming from or going to any other state. Persons and property transported over any railroad, or by any other transportation company, or individual, shall be delivered at any station, landing or port, at charges not exceeding the charges for the transportation of persons and property of the same class, in the same direction, to any more distant station, port or landing. Excursion and commutation tickets may be issued at special rates. SECTION 16 PROHIBITION AGAINST CONSOLIDATING OF COMPETING LINES. No railroad corporation shall consolidate its stock, property or franchises with any other railroad corporation owning a competing line. SECTION 17 ROLLING STOCK, PERSONAL TV FOR PURPOSE OF TAXATION. The rolling stock and other movable property belonging to any railroad company or corporation in this state, shall be considered personal property, and shall be liable to taxation and to execution and sale in the same manner as the personal property of individuals and such property shall not be exempted from execution and sale. SECTION 18 RATES FOR TRANSPORTATION. The legislature may pass laws establishing reasonable rates of charges for the transportation of passengers and freight, and to correct abuses and prevent discrimination and extortion in the rates of freight and passenger tariffs on the different railroads and other common carriers in the state, and shall enforce such laws by adequate penalties. A railroad and transportation commission may be established and its powers and duties fully defined by law. [AMENDMENT 66,1977 House Joint Resolution No. 55, p 1713. Approved November 8,1977.] Original text. Art. 12 Section 18 MAXIMUM RATES FOR TRANSPORTATION. The legislature shall pass laws establishing reasonable maximum rates of charges for the transportation of passengers and freight, and to correct abuses and prevent discrimination and extortion in the rates of freight and passenger tariffs on the different railroads and other common carriers in the state, and shall enforce such laws by adequate penalties. A railroad and transportation commission may be established and its powers and duties fully defined by law. SECTION 19 TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE COMPANIES. Any association or corporation, or the lessees or managers thereof, organized for the purpose, or any individual, shall have the right to construct and maintain lines of telegraph and telephone within this state, and said companies shall receive and transmit each other's messages without delay or discrimination and all of such companies are hereby declared to be common carriers and subject to legislative control. Railroad corporations organized or doing business in this state shall allow telegraph and telephone corporations and companies to construct and maintain telegraph lines on and along the rights of way of such railroads and railroad companies, and no railroad corporation organized or doing business in this state shall allow any telegraph corporation or company any facilities, privileges or rates for transportation of men or material or for repairing their lines not allowed to all telegraph companies. The right of eminent domain is hereby extended to all telegraph and telephone companies. The legislature shall, by general law of uniform operation, provide reasonable regulations to give effect to this section. Eminent domain: Art. 1 Section 16. SECTION 20 PROHIBITION AGAINST FREE TRANSPORTATION FOR PUBLIC OFFICERS. No railroad or other transportation company shall grant free passes, or sell tickets or passes at a discount, other than as sold to the public generally, to any member of the legislature, or to any person holding any public office within this state. The legislature shall pass laws to carry this provision into effect. SECTION 21 EXPRESS COMPANIES. Railroad companies now or hereafter organized or doing business in this state, shall allow all express companies organized or doing business in this state, transportation over all lines of railroad owned or operated by such railroad companies upon equal terms with any other express company, and no railroad corporation organized or doing business in this state shall allow any express corporation or company any facilities, privileges or rates for transportation of men or materials or property carried by them or for doing the business of such express companies not allowed to all express companies. SECTION 22 MONOPOLIES AND TRUSTS. Monopolies and trusts shall never be allowed in this state, and no incorporated company, copartnership, or association of persons in this state shall directly or indirectly combine or make any contract with any other incorporated company, foreign or domestic, through their stockholders, or the trustees or assignees of such stockholders, or with any copartnership or association of persons, or in any manner whatever for the purpose of fixing the price or limiting the production or regulating the transportation of any product or commodity. The legislature shall pass laws for the enforcement of this section by adequate penalties, and in case of incorporated companies, if necessary for that purpose, may http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 41 of 50 declare a forfeiture of their franchises. ARTICLE XIII STATE INSTITUTIONS SECTION 1 EDUCATIONAL, REFORMATORY, AND PENAL INSTITUTIONS. Educational, reformatory, and penal institutions; those for the benefit of youth who are blind or deaf or otherwise disabled; for persons who are mentally ill or developmentally disabled; and such other institutions as the public good may require, shall be fostered and supported by the state, subject to such regulations as may be provided by law. The regents, trustees, or commissioners of all such institutions existing at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, and of such as shall thereafter be established by law, shall be appointed by the governor, by and with the advice and consent of the senate; and upon all nominations made by the governor, the question shall be taken by ayes and noes, and entered upon the journal. [AMENDMENT 83, 1988 House Joint Resolution No. 4231, p 1553. Approved November 8, 1988.] Original text. Art. 13 Section 1 EDUCATIONAL, REFORMATORY AND PENAL INSTITUTIONS. Educational, reformatory ane penal institutions; those for the benefit of blind, deaf. dumb, or otherwise defective youth; for the insane or idiotic; and such other institutions as the public good may require, shall be fostered and supported by the state, subject to such regulations as may be provided by law. The regents, trustees, or commissioners of all such institutions existing at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, and of such as shall thereafter be established by law, shall be appointed by the governor, by and with the advice and consent of the senate; and upon all nominations made by the govemor, the question shall be taken by ayes and noes, and entered upon the journal. ARTICLE XIV SEAT OF GOVERNMENT SECTION 1 STATE CAPITAL, LOCATION OF. The legislature shall have no power to change, or to locate the seat of government of this state; but the question of the permanent location of the seat of government of the state shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the Territory, at the election to be held for the adoption of this Constitution. A majority of all the votes cast at said election, upon said question, shall be necessary to determine the permanent location of the seat of government for the state; and no place shall ever be the seat of government which shall not receive a majority of the votes cast on that matter. In case there shall be no choice of location at said first election the legislature shall, at its first regular session after the adoption of this Constitution, provide for submitting to the qualified electors of the state, at the next succeeding general election thereafter, the question of choice of location between the three places for which the highest number of votes shall have been cast at the said first election. Said legislature shall provide further that in case there shall be no choice of location at said second election, the question of choice between the two places for which the highest number of votes shall have been cast, shall be submitted in like manner to the qualified electors of the state at the next ensuing general election: Provided, That until the seat of government shall have been permanently located as herein provided, the temporary location thereof shall remain at the city of Olympia. SECTION 2 CHANGE OF STATE CAPITAL. When the seat of government shall have been located as herein provided, the location thereof shall not thereafter be changed except by a vote of two-thirds of all the qualified electors of the state voting on that question, at a general election, at which the question of location of the seat of government shall have been submitted by the legislature. Governmental continuity during emergency periods: Art. 2 Section 42. SECTION 3 RESTRICTIONS ON APPROPRIATIONS FOR CAPITOL BUILDINGS. The legislature shall make no appropriations or expenditures for capitol buildings or grounds, except to keep the Territorial capitol buildings and grounds in repair, and for making all necessary additions thereto, until the seat of government shall have been permanently located, and the public buildings are erected at the permanent capital in pursuance of law. ARTICLE XV HARBORS AND TIDE WATERS SECTION 1 HARBOR LINE COMMISSION AND RESTRAINT ON DISPOSITION. The legislature shall provide for the appointment of a commission whose duty it shall be to locate and establish harbor lines in the navigable waters of all harbors, estuaries, bays and inlets of this state, wherever such navigable waters lie within or in front of the corporate limits of any city, or within one mile thereof on either side. Any harbor line so located or established may thereafter be changed, relocated or reestablished by the commission pursuant to such provision as may be made therefor by the legislature; The state shall never give, sell or lease to any private person, corporation, or association any rights whatever in the waters beyond such harbor lines, nor shall any of the area lying between any harbor line and the line of ordinary high water, and within not less than fifty feet nor more than two thousand feet of such harbor line (as the commission shall determine) be sold or granted by the state, nor its rights to control the same relinquished, but such area shall be forever reserved for landings, wharves, streets, and other conveniences of navigation and commerce. [AMENDMENT 15,1931 P 417 Section 1. Approved November, 1932.] http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 42 of 50 Tide lands: Art 17. Original text - Art. 15 Section 1 HARBOR LINE COMMISSION AND RESTRAINT ON DISPOSI110N OF CERTAIN TIDE LANDS - The legislature shall provide for the appointment of a commission whose duty it shall be to locate and establish harbor lines in the navigable waters of all harbors, estuaries, bays and inlets of this state, wherever such navigable waters lie within or in front of the corporate limits of any city or within one mile thereof on either side. The state shall never give, sell or lease to any private person, corporation or association any rights whatever in the waters beyond such harbor lines, nor shall any of the area lying between any harbor line and the line of ordinary high tide, and within not less than fifty feet nor more than six hundred feet of such harbor line (as the commission shall determine) be sold or granted by the state, nor its right to control the same relinquished, but such area shall be forever reseNed for landings, whaNes, streets and other conveniences of navigation and commerce. SECTION 2 LEASING AND MAINTENANCE OF WHARVES, DOCKS, ETC. The legislature shall provide general laws for the leasing of the right to build and maintain wharves, docks and other structures, upon the areas mentioned in section one of this article, but no lease shall be made for any term longer than thirty years, or the legislature may provide by general laws for the building and maintaining upon such area wharves, docks, and other structures. SECTION 3 EXTENSION OF STREETS OVER TIDE LANDS. Municipal corporations shall have the right to extend their streets over intervening tide lands to and across the area reserved as herein provided. ARTICLE XVI SCHOOL AND GRANTED LANDS SECTION 1 DISPOSITION OF. All the public lands granted to the state are held in trust for all the people and none of such lands, nor any estate or interest therein, shall ever be disposed of unless the full market value of the estate or interest disposed of, to be ascertained in such manner as may be provided by law, be paid or safely secured to the state; nor shall any lands which the state holds by grant from the United States (in any case in which the manner of disposal and minimum price are so prescribed) be disposed of except in the manner and for at least the price prescribed in the grant thereof, without the consent of the United States. SECTION 2 MANNER AND TERMS OF SALE. None of the lands granted to the state for educational purposes shall be sold otherwise than at public auction to the highest bidder, the value thereof, less the improvements shall, before any sale, be appraised by a board of appraisers to be provided by law, the terms of payment also to be prescribed by law, and no sale shall be valid unless the sum bid be equal to the appraised value of said land. In estimating the value of such lands for disposal, the value of the improvements thereon shall be excluded: Provided, That the sale of all school and university land heretofore made by the commissioners of any county or the university commissioners when the purchase price has been paid in good faith, may be confirmed by the legislature. SECTION 3 LIMITATIONS ON SALES. No more than one-fourth of the land granted to the state for educational purposes shall be sold prior to January 1, 1895, and not more than one-half prior to January 1, 1905: provided, that nothing herein shall be so construed as to prevent the state from selling the timber or stone off of any of the state lands in such manner and on such terms as may be prescribed by law: and provided, further, that no sale of timber lands shall be valid unless the full value of such lands is paid or secured to the state. SECTION 4 HOW MUCH MAY BE OFFERED IN CERTAIN CASES - PLATTING OF. No more than one hundred and sixty (160) acres of any granted lands of the state shall be offered for sale in one parcel, and all lands within the limits of any incorporated city or within two miles of the boundary of any incorporated city where the valuation of such land shall be found by appraisement to exceed one hundred dollars ($100) per acre shall, before the same be sold, be platted into lots and blocks of not more than five acres in a block, and not more than one block shall be offered for sale in one parcel. SECTION 5 INVESTMENT OF PERMANENT COMMON SCHOOL FUND. The permanent common school fund of this state may be invested as authorized by law. [AMENDMENT 44, 1965 ex.s. Senate Joint Resolution No. 22, part 2, p 2817. Approved November 8,1966.] Amendment 1 (1894) - Art. 16 Section 5 INVESTMENT OF SCHOOL FUND - None of the permanent school fund of this state shall ever be loaned to private persons or corporations, but it may be invested in national, state, county, municipal or school district bonds. [AMENDMENT 1,1893 P 9 Section 1. Approved November, 1894.] Original text - Art. 16 Section 5 INVESTMENT OF PERMANENT SCHOOL FUND - None of the permanent school fund shall ever be loaned to private persons or corporations, but it may be invested in national, state, county or municipal bonds. Funds for support of education: Art. 9 Section 3. ARTICLE XVII TIDE LANDS SECTION 1 DECLARATION OF STATE OWNERSHIP. The state of Washington asserts its ownership to the beds and shores of all navigable waters in the state up to and including the line of ordinary high tide, in waters where the tide ebbs and flows, and up to and including the line of ordinary high water within the banks of all navigable rivers and lakes: Provided, that this section shall not be construed so as to debar any person from asserting his claim to vested rights in the courts of the state. http://wwwl.leg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 43 of 50 Harbors and tide waters: Art. 15. SECTION 2 DISCLAIMER OF CERTAIN LANDS. The state of Washington disclaims all title in and claim to all tide, swamp and overflowed lands, patented by the United States: Provided, the same is not impeached for fraud. ARTICLE XVIII STATE SEAL SECTION 1 SEAL OF THE STATE. The seal of the State of Washington shall be, a seal encircled with the words: "The Seal of the State of Washington," with the vignette of General George Washington as the central figure, and beneath the vignette the figures "1889." Custody of seal: Art. 3 Section 18. State seal: RCWL2Q.Q~Q. ARTICLE XIX EXEMPTIONS SECTION 1 EXEMPTIONS - HOMESTEADS, ETC. The legislature shall protect by law from forced sale a certain portion of the homestead and other property of all heads of families. ARTICLE XX PUBLIC HEALTH AND VITAL STATISTICS SECTION 1 BOARD OF HEALTH AND BUREAU OF VITAL STATISTICS. There shall be established by law a state board of health and a bureau of vital statistics in connection therewith, with such powers as the legislature may direct. SECTION 2 REGULATIONS CONCERNING MEDICINE, SURGERY AND PHARMACY. The legislature shall enact laws to regulate the practice of medicine and surgery, and the sale of drugs and medicines. ARTICLE XXI WATER AND WATER RIGHTS SECTION 1 PUBLIC USE OF WATER. The use of the waters of this state for irrigation, mining and manufacturing purposes shall be deemed a public use. ARTICLE XXII LEGISLATIVE APPORTIONMENT SECTION 1 SENATORIAL APPORTIONMENT. Until otherwise provided by law, the state shall be divided into twenty-four (24) senatorial districts, and said districts shall be constituted and numbered as follows: The counties of Stevens and Spokane shall constitute the first district, and be entitled to one senator; the county of Spokane shall constitute the second district, and be entitled to three senators; the county of Lincoln shall constitute the third district, and be entitled to one senator; the counties of Okanogan, Lincoln, Adams and Franklin shall constitute the fourth district, and be entitled to one senator; the county of Whitman shall constitute the fifth district, and be entitled to three senators; the counties of Garfield and Asotin shall constitute the sixth district, and be entitled to one senator; the county of Columbia shall constitute the seventh district, and be entitled to one senator; the county of Walla Walla shall constitute the eighth district, and be entitled to two senators; the counties of Yakima and Douglas shall constitute the ninth district, and be entitled to one senator; the county of Kittitas shall constitute the tenth district and be entitled to one senator; the counties of Klickitat, and Skamania shall constitute the eleventh district, and be entitled to one senator; the county of Clarke shall constitute the twelfth district, and be entitled to one senator; the county of Cowlitz shall constitute the thirteenth district, and be entitled to one senator; the county of Lewis shall constitute the fourteenth district, and be entitled to one senator; the counties of Pacific and Wahkiakum shall constitute the fifteenth district, and be entitled to one senator; the county of Thurston shall constitute the sixteenth district,' and be entitled to one senator; the county of Chehalis shall constitute the seventeenth district, and be entitled to one senator; the county of Pierce shall constitute the eighteenth district, and be entitled to three senators; the county of King shall constitute the nineteenth district, and be entitled to five senators; the counties of Mason and Kitsap shall constitute the twentieth district, and be entitled to one senator; the counties of Jefferson, Clallam and San Juan shall constitute the twenty-first district, and be entitled to one senator; the county of Snohomish shall constitute the twenty-second district, and shall be entitled to one senator; the counties of Skagit and Island shall constitute the twenty-third district, and be entitled to one http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 44 of 50 senator; the county of Whatcom shall constitute the twenty-fourth district, and be entitled to one senator. Districts and apportionment: Chapter !!:4.,m:.o RCW. SECTION 2 APPORTIONMENT OF REPRESENTATIVES. Until otherwise provided by law the representatives shall be divided among the several counties of the state in the following manner; the county of Adams shall have one representative; the county of Asotin shall have one representative; the county of Chehalis shall have two representatives; the county of Clarke shall have three representatives; the county of Clallam shall have one representative; the county of Columbia shall have two representatives; the county of Cowlitz shall have one representative; the county of Douglas shall have one representative; the county of Franklin shall have one representative; the county of Garfield shall have one representative; the county of Island shall have one representative; the county of Jefferson shall have two representatives; the county of King shall have eight representatives; the county of Klickitat shall have two representatives; the county of Kittitas shall have two representatives; the county of Kitsap shall have one representative; the county of Lewis shall have two representatives; the county of Lincoln shall have two representatives; the county of Mason shall have one representative; the county of Okanogan shall have one representative; the county of Pacific shall have one representative; the county of Pierce shall have six representatives; the county of San Juan shall have one representative; the county of Skamania shall have one representative; the county of Snohomish shall have two representatives; the county of Skagit shall have two representatives; the county of Spokane shall have six representatives; the county of Stevens shall have one representative; the county of Thurston shall have two representatives; the county of Walla Walla shall have three representatives; the county of Wahkiakum shall have one representative; the county of Whatcom shall have two representatives; the county of Whitman shall have five representatives; the county of Yakima shall have one representative, Districts and apportionment: Chapter 44.070 RCW. ARTICLE XXIII AMENDMENTS SECTION 1 HOW MADE. Any amendment or amendments to this Constitution may be proposed in either branch of the legislature; and if the same shall be agreed to by two-thirds of the members elected to each of the two houses, such proposed amendment or amendments shall be entered on their journals, with the ayes and noes thereon, and be submitted to the qualified electors of the state for their approval, at the next general election; and if the people approve and ratify such amendment or amendments, by a majority of the electors voting thereon, the same shall become part of this Constitution, and proclamation thereof shall be made by the governor: Provided, That if more than one amendment be submitted, they shall be submitted in such a manner that the people may vote for or against such amendments separately. The legislature shall also cause notice of the amendments that are to be submitted to the people to be published at least four times during the four weeks next preceding the election in every legal newspaper in the state: Provided, That failure of any newspaper to publish this notice shall not be interpreted as affecting the outcome of the election. [AMENDMENT 37,1961 Senate Joint Resolution No. 25, p 2753. Approved November, 1962.] Original text - Art. 23 Section 1 HOW MADE. Any amendment or amendments to this Constitution may be proposed in either branch of the legislature; and if the same shall be agreed to by two-thirds of the members elected to each of the two houses, such proposed amendment or amendments shall be entered on their journals, with the ayes and noes thereon, and be submitted to the qualified electors of the state for their approval, at the next general election; and if the people approve and ratify such amendment or amendments, by a majority of the electors voting thereon, the same shall become part of this Constitution, and proclamation thereof shall be made by the governor: Provided, that if more than one amendment be submitted, they shall be submitted in such a manner that the people may vote for or against such amendments separately. The legislature shall also cause the amendments that are to be submitted to the people to be published for at least three months next preceding the election, in some weekly newspaper, in every county where a newspaper is published throughout the state. SECTION 2 CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTIONS. Whenever two-thirds of the members elected to each branch of the legislature shall deem it necessary to call a convention to revise or amend this Constitution, they shall recommend to the electors to vote at the next general election, for or against a convention, and if a majority of all the electors voting at said election shall have voted for a convention, the legislature shall at the next session, provide by law for calling the same; and such convention shall consist of a number of members, not less than that of the most numerous branch of the legislature. SECTION 3 SUBMISSION TO THE PEOPLE. Any Constitution adopted by such convention shall have no validity until it has been submitted to and adopted by the people. ARTICLE XXIV BOUNDARIES SECTION 1 STATE BOUNDARIES. The boundaries of the state of Washington shall be as follows: Beginning at a point in the Pacific ocean one marine league due west of and opposite the middle of the mouth of the north ship channel of the Columbia river thence running easterly to and up the middle channel of said river and where it is divided by islands up the middle of the widest channel thereof to where the forty- sixth parallel of north latitude crosses said river near the mouth of the Walla Walla river; thence east on said forty-sixth parallel of latitude to the middle of the main channel of Shoshone or Snake river, thence follow down the middle of the main channel of Snake river to a point opposite the mouth of the Kooskooskia or Clear Water river, thence due north to the forty-ninth parallel of north latitude, thence west along said forty- ninth parallel of north latitude to the middle of the channel which separates Vancouver's island from the http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/2712008 Washington State Constitution Page 45 of 50 continent, that is to say to a point in longitude 123 degrees, 19 minutes and 15 seconds west, thence following the boundary line between the United States and British possessions through the channel which separates Vancouver's island from the continent to the termination of the boundary line between the United States and British possessions at a point in the Pacific ocean equidistant between Bonnilla point on Vancouver's island and Tatoosh island light house, thence running in a southerly course and parallel with the coast line, keeping one marine league off shore to place of beginning; until such boundaries are modified by appropriate interstate compacts duly approved by the Congress of the United States. [AMENDMENT 33, 1957 Senate Joint Resolution No. 10, p 1292. Approved November 4, 1958.] Original text. Art. 24 Section 1 STATE BOUNDARIES - The boundaries of the State of Washington shall be as follows: Beginning at a point in the Pacific ocean one marine league due west of and opposite the middle of the mouth of the norlh ship channel of the Columbia river thence running easterly to and up the middle channel of said river and where it is divided by islands up the middle of the widest channel thereof to where the forty-sixth parallel of norlh latitude crosses said river near the mouth of the Walla Walla river; thence east on said forty-sixth parallel of latitude to the middle of the main channel of the Shoshone or Snake river; thence follow down the middle of the main channel of Snake river to a point opposite the mouth of the Kooskooskia 01 Clear Water river, thence due norlh to the forty-ninth parallel of norlh latitude, thence west along said farly-ninth parallel of norlh latitude to the middle of the channel which separates Vancouver's island from the continent, that is to say to a point in longitude 123 degrees, 19 minutes and 15 seconds west, thence following the boundary line between the United States and British possessions through the channel which separates Vancouver's island from the continent to the termination of the boundary line between the United States and British possessions at a point in the Pacific ocean equi distant between Bonnilla point on Vancouver's island and Tatoosh island light house, thence running in a southerly course and parallel with the coast line, keeping one marine league off shore to place of beginning. ARTICLE XXV JURISDICTION SECTION 1 AUTHORITY OF THE UNITED STATES. The consent of the State of Washington is hereby given to the exercise, by the congress of the United States, of exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever over such tracts or parcels of land as are now held or reserved by the government of the United States for the purpose of erecting or maintaining thereon forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, lighthouses and other needful buildings, in accordance with the provisions of the seventeenth paragraph of the eighth section of the first article of the Constitution of the United States, so long as the same shall be so held and reserved by the United States. Provided: That a sufficient description by metes and bounds, and an accurate plat or map of each such tract or parcel of land be filed in the proper office of record in the county in which the same is situated, together with copies of the orders, deeds, patents or other evidences in writing of the title of the United States: and provided, That all civil process issued from the courts of this state and such criminal process as may issue under the authority of this state against any person charged with crime in cases arising outside of such reservations, may be served and executed thereon in the same mode and manner, and by the same officers, as if the consent herein given had not been made. ARTICLE XXVI COMPACT WITH THE UNITED STATES The following ordinance shall be irrevocable without the consent of the United States and the people of this state: First. That perfect toleration of religious sentiment shall be secured and that no inhabitant of this state shall ever be molested in person or property on account of his or her mode of religious worship. Second. That the people inhabiting this state do agree and declare that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying with the boundaries of this state, and to all lands lying within said limits owned or held by any Indian or Indian tribes; and that until the title thereto shall have been extinguished by the United States, the same shall be and remain subject to the disposition of the United States, and said Indian lands shall remain under the absolute jurisdiction and control of the congress of the United States and that the lands belonging to citizens of the United States residing without the limits of this state shall never be taxed at a higher rate than the lands belonging to residents thereof; and that no taxes shall be imposed by the state on lands or property therein, belonging to or which may be hereafter purchased by the United States or reserved for use: Provided, That nothing in this ordinance shall preclude the state from taxing as other lands are taxed any lands owned or held by any Indian who has severed his tribal relations, and has obtained from the United States or from any person a title thereto by patent or other grant, save and except such lands as have been or may be granted to any Indian or Indians under any act of congress containing a provision exempting the lands thus granted from taxation, which exemption shall continue so long and to such an extent as such act of congress may prescribe. Third. The debts and liabilities of the Territory of Washington and payment of the same are hereby assumed by this state. Fourth. Provision shall be made for the establishment and maintenance of systems of public schools free from sectarian control which shall be open to all the children of said state. ARTICLE XXVII SCHEDULE http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 46 of 50 In order that no inconvenience may arise by reason of a change from a Territorial to a State government, it is hereby declared and ordained as follows: SECTION 1 EXISTING RIGHTS, ACTIONS, AND CONTRACTS SAVED. No existing rights, actions, suits, proceedings, contracts or claims shall be affected by a change in the form of government, but all shall continue as if no such change had taken place; and all process which may have been issued under the authority of the Territory of Washington previous to its admission into the Union shall be as valid as if issued in the name of the state. SECTION 2 LAWS IN FORCE CONTINUED. All laws now in force in the Territory of Washington, which are not repugnant to this Constitution, shall remain in force until they expire by their own limitation, or are altered or repealed by the legislature: Provided, That this section shall not be so construed as to validate any act of the legislature of Washington Territory granting shore or tide lands to any person, company or any municipal or private corporation. SECTION 3 DEBTS, FINES, ETC., TO INURE TO THE STATE. All debts, fines, penalties and forfeitures, which have accrued, or may hereafter accrue, to the Territory of Washington, shall inure to the State of Washington. SECTION 4 RECOGNIZANCES. All recognizances heretofore taken, or which may be taken before the change from a territorial to a state government shall remain valid, and shall pass to, and may be prosecuted in the name of the state; and all bonds executed to the Territory of Washington or to any county or municipal corporation, or to any officer or court in his or its official capacity, shall pass to the state authorities and their successors in office, for the uses therein expressed, and may be sued for and recovered accordingly, and all the estate, real, personal and mixed, and all judgments decrees, bonds, specialties, choses in action, and claims or debts, of whatever description, belonging to the Territory of Washington, shall inure to and vest in the State of Washington, and may be sued for and recovered in the same manner, and to the same extent, by the State of Washington, as the same could have been by the Territory of Washington. SECTION 5 CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS AND PENAL ACTIONS. All criminal prosecutions and penal actions which may have arisen, or which may arise, before the change from a territorial to a state government, and which shall then be pending, shall be prosecuted to judgment, and execution in the name of the state. All offenses committed against the laws of the Territory of Washington, before the change from a territorial to a state government, and which shall not be prosecuted before such change, may be prosecuted in the name and by the authority of the State of Washington, with like effect as though such change had not taken place; and all penalties incurred shall remain the same as if this Constitution had not been adopted. All actions at law and suits in equity which may be pending in any of the courts of the Territory of Washington, at the time of the change from a territorial to a state government, shall be continued, and transferred to the court of the state having jurisdiction of the subject matter thereof. SECTION 6 RETENTION OF TERRITORIAL OFFICERS. All officers now holding their office under the authority of the United States, or of the Territory of Washington, shall continue to hold and exercise their respective offices until they shall be superseded by the authority of the state. SECTION 7 CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICERS, WHEN ELECTED. All officers provided for in this Constitution including a county clerk for each county when no other time is fixed for their election, shall be elected at the election to be held for the adoption of this Constitution on the first Tuesday of October, 1889. SECTION 8 CHANGE OF COURTS. TRANSFER OF CAUSES. Whenever the judge of the superior court of any county, elected or appointed under the provisions of this Constitution shall have qualified the several causes then pending in the district court of the territory except such causes as would have been within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States district court had such court existed at the time of the commencement of such causes, within such county, and the records, papers and proceedings of said district court, and the seal and other property pertaining thereto, shall pass into the jurisdiction and possession of the superior court for such county. And where the same judge is elected for two or more counties, it shall be the duty of the clerk of the district court having custody of such papers and records to transmit to the clerk of such county, or counties, other than that in which such records are kept the original papers in all cases pending in such district court and belonging to the jurisdiction of such county or counties together with transcript of so much of the records of said district court as relate to the same; and until the district courts of the Territory shall be superseded in manner aforesaid, the said district courts and the judges thereof, shall continue with the same jurisdiction and powers, to be exercised in the same judicial districts respectively, as heretofore constituted under the laws of the Territory. Whenever a quorum of the judges of the supreme court of the state shall have been elected and qualified, the causes then pending in the supreme court of the Territory, except such causes as would have been within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States, circuit court had such court existed at the time of the commencement of such causes, and the papers, records and proceedings of said court and the seal and other property pertaining thereto, shall pass into the jurisdiction and possession of the supreme court of the state, and until so superseded, the supreme court of the Territory and the judges thereof, shall continue with like powers and jurisdiction as if this Constitution had not been adopted. SECTION 9 SEALS OF COURTS AND MUNICIPALITIES. Until otherwise provided by law, the seal now in use in the supreme court of the Territory shall be the seal of the supreme court of the state. The seals of the superior courts of the several counties of the state shall be, until otherwise provided by law, the vignette of General George Washington with the words: "Seal of the Superior Court of --------- county" surrounding the vignette. The seal of municipalities, and of all county officers of the Territory, shall be the seals of such http://wwwl.leg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 47 of 50 municipalities, and county officers respectively under the state, until otherwise provided by law. SECTION 10 PROBATE COURT, TRANSFER OF. When the state is admitted into the Union, and the superior courts in the respective counties organized, the books, records, papers and proceedings of the probate court in each county, and all causes and matters of administration pending therein, shall, upon the expiration of the term of office of the probate judges, on the second Monday in January, 1891, pass into the jurisdiction and possession of the superior court of the same county created by this Constitution, and the said court shall proceed to final judgment or decree, order or other determination in the several matters and causes, as the territorial probate court might have done, if this Constitution had not been adopted. And until the expiration of the term of office of the probate judges, such probate judges shall perform the duties now imposed upon them by the laws of the Territory. The superior courts shall have appellate and revisory jurisdiction over the decisions of the probate courts, as now provided by law, until such latter courts expire by limitation. SECTION 11 DUTIES OF FIRST LEGISLATURE. The legislature, at its first session, shall provide for the election of all officers whose election is not provided for elsewhere in this Constitution, and fix the time for the commencement and duration of their term. SECTION 12 ELECTION CONTESTS FOR SUPERIOR JUDGES, HOW DECIDED. In case of a contest of election between candidates, at the first general election under this Constitution, for judges of the superior courts, the evidence shall be taken in the manner prescribed by the Territorial laws, and the testimony so taken shall be certified to the secretary of state; and said officer, together with the governor and treasurer of state, shall review the evidence and determine who is entitled to the certificate of election. SECTION 13 REPRESENTATION IN CONGRESS. [Repealed by AMENDMENT 74,1983 Substitute Senate Joint Resolution No.1 03. Approved November 8, 1983.] Original text. Art. 27 Section 13 REPRESENTATION IN CONGRESS. One representative in the congress of the United States shall be elected from the state at large, at the first election provided for in this Constitution; and, thereafter, at such times and places, and in such manner, as may be prescribed by law. When a new apportionment shall be made by congress, the legislature shall divide the state into congressional districts, in accordance with such apportionment. The vote cast for representative in congress, at the first election, shall be canvassed, and the result determined in the manner provided for by the laws of the Territory for the canvass of the vote for delegate in congress. SECTION 14 DURATION OF TERM OF CERTAIN OFFICERS. All district, county and precinct officers, who may be in office at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, and the county clerk of each county elected al the first election, shall hold their respective offices until the second Monday of January, A. D., 1891, and until such time as their successors may be elected and qualified, in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution; and the official bonds of all such officers shall continue in full force and effect as though this Constitution had not been adopted. And such officers shall continue to receive the compensation now provided, until the same be changed by law. SECTION 15 ELECTION ON ADOPTION OF CONSTITUTION, HOW TO BE CONDUCTED. The election held at the time of the adoption of this Constitution shall be held and conducted in all respects according to the laws of the Territory, and the votes cast at said election for all officers (where no other provisions are made in this Constitution), and for the adoption of this Constitution and the several separate articles and the location of the state capital, shall be canvassed and returned in the several counties in the manner provided by Territorial law, and shall be returned to the secretary of the Territory in the manner provided by the Enabling Act. SECTION 16 WHEN CONSTITUTION TO TAKE EFFECT. The provisions of this Constitution shall be in force from the day on which the president of the United States shall issue his proclamation declaring the State of Washington admitted into the Union, and the terms of all officers elected at the first election under the provisions of this Constitution shall commence on the Monday next succeeding the issue of said proclamation, unless otherwise provided herein. SECTION 17 SEPARATE ARTICLES. The following separate articles shall be submitted to the people for adoption or rejection at the election for the adoption of this Constitution: SEPARATE ARTICLE, NO.1 "All persons male and female of the age of twenty-one years or over, possessing the other qualifications, provided by this Constitution, shall be entitled to vote at all elections." SEPARATE ARTICLE, NO.2 "It shall not be lawful for any individual, company or corporation, within the limits of this state, to manufacture, or cause to be manufactured, or to sell, or offer for sale, or in any manner dispose of any alcoholic, malt or spirituous liquors, except for medicinal, sacramental or scientific purposes." If a majority of the ballots cast at said election on said separate articles be in favor of the adoption of either of said separate articles, then such separate article so receiving a majority shall become a part of this Constitution and shall govern and control any provision of the Constitution in conflict therewith. SECTION 18 BALLOT. The form of ballot to be used in voting for or against this Constitution, or for or http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 48 of 50 against the separate articles, or for the permanent location of the seat of government, shall be: 1. For the Constitution - - - - - - - - - - - - Against the Constitution - - - - - - - - - - - - 2. For Woman Suffrage Article - - - - - - - - - - - - Against Woman Suffrage Article - - - - - - - - - - - - 3. For Prohibition Article - - - - - - - - - - - - Against Prohibition Article - - - - - - - - - - - - 4. For the Permanent Location of the Seat of Government (Name of place voted for) - - - - - - - - - - The result of the election was against both woman suffrage and prohibition. SECTION 19 APPROPRIATION. The legislature is hereby authorized to appropriate from the state treasury sufficient money to pay any of the expenses of this convention not provided for by the Enabling Act of Congress. ARTICLE XXVIII COMPENSATION OF STATE OFFICERS SECTION 1 SALARIES FOR LEGISLATURE, ELECTED STATE OFFICIALS, AND JUDGES- INDEPENDENT COMMISSION - REFERENDUM. Salaries for members of the legislature, elected officials of the executive branch of state government, and judges of the state's supreme court, court of appeals, superior courts, and district courts shall be fixed by an independent commission created and directed by law to that purpose. No state official, public employee, or person required by law to register with a state agency as a lobbyist, or immediate family member of the official, employee, or lobbyist, may be a member of that commission. As used in this section the phrase "immediate family" has the meaning that is defined by law. Any change of salary shall be filed with the secretary of state and shall become law ninety days thereafter without action of the legislature or governor, but shall be subject to referendum petition by the people, filed within the ninety-day period. Referendum measures under this section shall be submitted to the people at the next following general election, and shall be otherwise governed by the provisions of this Constitution generally applicable to referendum measures. The salaries fixed pursuant to this section shall supersede any other provision for the salaries of members of the legislature, elected officials of the executive branch of state government, and judges of the state's supreme court, court of appeals, superior courts, and district courts. The salaries for such officials in effect on January 12, 1987, shall remain in effect until changed pursuant to this section. After the initial adoption of a law by the legislature creating the independent commission, no amendment to such act which alters the composition of the commission shall be valid unless the amendment is enacted by a favorable vote of two-thirds of the members elected to each house of the legislature and is subject to referendum petition. The provisions of section 14 of Article IV, sections 14, 16, 17, 19,20,21, and 22 of Article III, and section 23 of Article II, insofar as they are inconsistent herewith, are hereby superseded. The provisions of section 1 of Article II relating to referendum procedures, insofar as they are inconsistent herewith, are hereby superseded with regard to the salaries governed by this section. [AMENDMENT 78, 1986 Substitute House Joint Resolution No. 49, p 1529. Approved November 4, 1986,] Authorizing compensation increase during term: Art. 30 Section 1. Amendment 20 (1948) - Art. 28 Section 1 COMPENSATION OF STATE OFFICERS - All elected state officials shall each severally receive such compensation as the legislature may direct. The compensation of any state officer shall not be increased or diminished during his term of office, except that the legislature, at its thirty-first regular session, may increase or diminish the compensation of all state officers whose terms exist on the Thursday after the second Monday in January, 1949. The provisions of sections 14, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, and 22 of Article 11/ and section 23 of Article /I in so far as they are inconsistent herewith, are hereby repealed. [AMENDMENT 20,1947 Senate Joint Resolution No.4, p 1371. Approved November 2,1948.] ARTICLE XXIX INVESTMENTS OF PUBLIC PENSION AND RETIREMENT FUNDS SECTION 1 MAY BE INVESTED AS AUTHORIZED BY LAW. Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 5, and 7 of Article VIII and section 9 of Article XII or any other section or article of the Constitution of the state of Washington, the moneys of any public pension or retirement fund, industrial insurance trust fund, or fund held in trust for the benefit of persons with developmental disabilities may be invested as authorized by law. http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 49 of 50 [AMENDMENT 93, 2000 Senate Joint Resolution No. 8214, p 1919. Approved November 7,2000.] Amendment 75 (1985). Art. 29 Section 1 MAY BE INVESTED AS AUTHORIZED BY LAW. Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 5, and 7 of Article VIII and section 9 of Article XII or any other section or article of the Constitution of the state of Washington, the moneys of any public pension or retirement fund or industrial insurance trust fund may be invested as authorized bylaw. [AMENDMENT 75,1985 House Joint Resolution No. 12, p 2398. Approved November 5,1985.] Amendment 49 (1968) . Art. 29 Section 1 MAY BE INVESTED AS AUTHORIZED BY LAW . Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 5, and 7 of Article V/II and section 9 of Article XII or any other section or article of the Constitution of the state of Washington, the moneys of any public pension or retirement fund may be invested as authorized by law. [AMENDMENT 49, 1967 Senate Joint Resolution No.5; see 1969 p 2975. Approved November 5, 1968.] ARTICLE XXX COMPENSA TION OF PUBLIC OFFICERS SECTION 1 AUTHORIZING COMPENSATION INCREASE DURING TERM. The compensation of all elective and appointive state, county, and municipal officers who do not fix their own compensation, including judges of courts of record and the justice courts may be increased during their terms of office to the end that such officers and judges shall each severally receive compensation for their services in accordance with the law in effect at the time the services are being rendered. The provisions of section 25 of Article 11 (Amendment 35), section 25 of Article 111 (Amendment 31), section 13 of Article IV, section 8 of Article XI, and section 1 of Article XXVIII (Amendment 20) insofar as they are inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed. [AMENDMENT 54,1967 House Joint Resolution No. 13; see 1969 p 2976. Approved November 5,1968.] Reviser's note: (1) Amendment 49 (1967 SJR No.5) and Amendment 54 (1967 HJR No. 13) each added a new Artide XXIX to the Constitution. Amendment 49 is carried herein as Artide XXIX while Amendment 54 has been herein redesignated as Artide XXX. (2) The name of this Article has been supplied by the reviser. ARTICLE XXXI SEX EQUALITY. RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES SECTION 1 EQUALITY NOT DENIED BECAUSE OF SEX. Equality of rights and responsibility under the law shall not be denied or abridged on account of sex. SECTION 2 ENFORCEMENT POWER OF LEGISLATURE. The legislature shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. [AMENDMENT 61,1972 House Joint Resolution No. 61, p 526. Approved November, 1972.] The name of this Article and the captions have been supplied by the reviser. ARTICLE XXXII SPECIAL REVENUE FINANCING SECTION 1 SPECIAL REVENUE FINANCING. The legislature may enact laws authorizing the state, counties, cities, towns, port districts, or public corporations established thereby to issue nonrecourse revenue bonds or other nonrecourse revenue obligations and to apply the proceeds thereof in the manner and for the purposes heretofore or hereafter authorized by law, subject to the following limitations: (a) Nonrecourse revenue bonds and other nonrecourse revenue obligations issued pursuant to this section shall be payable only from money or other property received as a result of projects financed by the nonrecourse revenue bonds or other nonrecourse revenue obligations and from money and other property received from private sources. (b) Nonrecourse revenue bonds and other nonrecourse revenue obligations issued pursuant to this section shall not be payable from or secured by any tax funds or governmental revenue or by all or part of the faith and credit of the state or any unit of local government. (c) Nonrecourse revenue bonds or other nonrecourse revenue obligations issued pursuant to this section may be issued only if the issuer certifies that it reasonably believes that the interest paid on the bonds or obligations will be exempt from income taxatfon by the federal government. (d) Nonrecourse revenue bonds or other nonrecourse revenue obligations may only be used to finance industrial development projects as defined in legislation. (e) The state, counties, cities, towns, port districts, or public corporations established thereby, shall never exercise their respective attributes of sovereignty, including but not limited to, the power to tax, the power of eminent domain, and the police power on behalf of any industrial development project authorized pursuant to this section. http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 Washington State Constitution Page 50 of 50 After the initial adoption of a law by the legislature authorizing the issuance of nonrecourse revenue bonds or other nonrecourse revenue obligations, no amendment to such act which expands the definition of industrial development project shall be valid unless the amendment is enacted by a favorable vote of three-fifths of the members elected to each house of the legislature and is subject to referendum petition. Sections 5 and 7 of Article VIII and section 9 of Article XII shall not be construed as a limitation upon the authority granted by this section. The proceeds of revenue bonds and other revenue obligations issued pursuant to this section for the purpose of financing privately owned property or loans to private persons or corporations shall be subject to audit by the state but shall not otherwise be deemed to be public money or public property for purposes of this Constitution. This section is supplemental to and shall not be construed as a repeal of or limitation on any other authority lawfully exercisable under the Constitution and laws of this state, including, among others, any existing authority to issue revenue bonds. [AMENDMENT 73,1981 Substitute House Joint Resolution No.7, p 1794. Approved November 3, 1981.] The name of this Article has been supplied by the reviser. Glossary of Terms I Comments about this site I Privacy Notice I Accessibility Information I Disclaimer http://wwwl.1eg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm 2/27/2008 ;;- Civil rights - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ~iVil rights From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Civil rights refers to two related but different terms. In civil law jurisdictions, a civil right is a right or power which can be exercised under civil law, which includes things such as the ability to contract. In civil law jurisdictions, lawsuits between private parties for things such as breach of contract or a tort are usually expressed in terms of infringement of a civil right. For example, Article 2 of the Contract Law of the People's Republic of China defines a contract as "an agreement establishing, modifying and terminating the civil rights and obligations between subjects of equal footing". In common law jurisdiction, the term civil right is distinguished from "human rights" or "natural rights". Civil rights are rights that are bestowed by nations on those within their territorial boundaries, while natural or human rights are rights that many scholars claim that individuals have by nature of being born. For example, the philosopher John Locke (1632-1704) argued that the natural rights of life, liberty and property should be converted into civil rights and protected by the sovereign state as an aspect of the social contract. Others have argued that people acquire rights as an inalienable gift from a deity (such as God) or at a time of nature before governments were formed. Laws guaranteeing civil rights may be written down,or falsely stated; derived from custom or implied. In the United States and most continental European countries, civil rights laws are most often written. Examples of civil rights and liberties include the right to get redress if injured by another, the right to privacy, the right of peaceful protest, the right to a fair investigation and trial if suspected of a crime, and more generally- based constitutional rights such as the right to vote, the right to personal freedom, the right to freedom of movement and the right of equal protection. As civilizations emerged and formalized through written constitutions, some of the more important civil rights were granted to citizens. When those grants were later found inadequate, civil rights movements emerged as the vehicle for claiming more equal protection for all citizens and advocating new laws to restrict the effect of current discriminations. Contents . 1 Theoretical background: The concept of rights . 2 Implied rights . 3 By region . 3.1 United States . 4 See also . 4.1 Agencies . 4.2 People http:// en. wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil Jights Page 1 of 5 Rights Animal rights Children's rights Civil rights Collective rights Equal rights Fathers' rights Gay rights Group rights Human rights Inalienable rights Individual rights Legal rights Men's rights Natural right Negative & positive Reproductive rights Self-defense Social rights "Three generations" Women's rights Workers'rights Youth Lyndon B. Johnson signs the U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964. Lyndon B. Johnson meets with civil rights leaders. Martin Luther King, Jr., Whitney Young, James Farmer Part of a series of articles on 2/27/2008 .. Civil rights - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia . 4.3 Politics . 4.4 Related topics . 5 Notes . 6 References . 7 External links Theoretical background: The concept of rights Wesley Newcomb Hohfeld (1879-1918) maintained that analysis of legal issues is frequently muddled and inconsistent because the legal concepts are improperly understood. The first question, therefore, is to understand what the rights are in "civil rights". There are two major schools of thought: . N ozick and Rawls approached the concept of rights from the perspectives of libertarian and Logical belief. Implied rights "Implied" rights are rights that a court may find to exist even though not expressly guaranteed by written law or custom, on the theory that a written or customary right must necessarily include the implied right. One famous (and controversial) example of a right implied from the u.s. Constitution is the "right to privacy", which the U.S. Supreme Court found to exist in the 1965 case of Griswold v. Connecticut. In the 1973 case of Roe v. Wade, the court found that state legislation prohibiting or limiting abortion violated this right to privacy. As a rule, state governments can expand civil rights beyond the U.S. Constitution, but they cannot diminish Constitutional rights. By region United States Civil rights can refer to protection against public (government) and or private sector discrimination. In the United States, the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects citizens against many forms of State discrimination, with its due process and equal protection requirements. Civil rights can also refer to protection against private actors or entities. The U.S. Congress subsequently addressed the issue through the Civil Rights Act of 1964 Sec. 201. which states: (a) All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or http://en. wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil Jights Page 2 of 5 Discrimination General forms Racism' Sexism' Ageism Religious intolerance' Xenophobia Specific forms Social Against cultures Against beliefs Manifestations [show] [show] [show] Slavery' Racial profiling' Lynching Hate speech' Hate crime Genocide (examples)' Ethnocide Ethnic cleansing. Pogrom' Race war Religious persecution' Gay bashing Blood libel' Paternalism Police brutality Movements Discriminatory [show] Anti-discriminatory [show] Policies Discriminatory Race I Religion I Sex segregation Apartheid. Redlining . Internment Anti-discriminatory Emancipation' Civil rights Desegregation' Integration Equal opportunity Counter-discriminatory Affirmative action' Racial quota Reservation (India) . Reparation Forced busing Employment equity (Canada) Law Discriminatory Anti-miscegenation' Anti-immigration Alien and Sedition Acts' Jim Crow laws Black codes' Apartheid laws Ketuanan Melayu . Nuremberg Laws Anti-discriminatory Anti-discrimination acts Anti-discrimination law 14th Amendment. Crime of apartheid Other forms Nepotism' Cronyism. Colorism Linguicism . Ethnocentrism' Triumphalism Adultcentrism . Gynocentrism Androcentrism . Economic Related topics Bigotry. Prejudice' Supremacism Intolerance' Tolerance' Diversity Multiculturalism' Oppression Political correctness Reverse discrimination' Eugenics Discrimination Portal 2/27/2008 '-- -"""'":;- Civil rights - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 3 of5 segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin or sex. This legislation and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 are constitutional under the Commerce Clause, as the Supreme Court has ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment only applies to the State. States generally have the power to enact similar legislation, provided that they meet the federal mininuim standard, under the doctrine of police powers. The terms civil rights and civil liberties are often used interchangeably in the United States. Thomas Jefferson wrote, "a free people [claim] their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate. ,,[ 1] The United States Constitution recognizes different civil rights than do most other national constitutions. Two examples of civil rights found in the US but rarely (if ever) elsewhere are the right to bear arms (Second Amendment to the United States Constitution) and the right to a jury trial (Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution). Few nations, not even including a world organization body such as the United Nations, have recognized either of these civil rights. Many nations recognize an individual's civil right to not be executed for crimes, a civil right not recognized within the US. See also Agencies . U.S. Commission on Civil Rights People . Malcolm X . Martin Luther King Jr. . Roy Innis . Steven Biko . Benjamin Chavis Muhammad . Cesar Chavez . Bernice Fisher . Rosa Parks . Ella Baker . Morris Dees . Gerry Fitt . John Hume . Ronald Dworkin . Fannie Lou Hamer . T.R.M. Howard . Winson Hudson . Larry Kramer . Corliss Lamont . Jo Ann Robinson . Bayard Rustin . Omali Yeshitela . Ralph Abernathy . Frank M. Johnson, Jr. http:// en. wikipedia.org/wiki/CivilJights 2/27/2008 Civil rights - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 4 of 5 . Muhammad Yunus . Abraham Lincoln Politics . American Civil Rights Movement (1896-1954) . American Civil Rights Movement (1955-1968) . Timeline of the American Civil Rights Movement . African American history - Black History . List of anti-discrimination acts . LGBT social movements Related topics . Affirmative Action . Black Power . Police Brutality . Anti-Semitism . Civil liberties . Human rights . Teaching for social justice . Natural rights . Inalienable rights . Prisoners' rights . Rights . Second-class citizen . Apartheid . Feminism . Gay rights . Women's rights . Men's rights . Minority rights . Bloody Sunday - 1972, Northern Ireland . Union Organizer . Executive Order Number 11478 . Fathers' rights Notes 1. ^ Thomas Jefferson: Rights of British America, 1774. ME 1:209, Papers 1:134 http://etext.virginia.eduljefferson/quotations/jeffO 1 00 .htm References . Arendt, Hannah, The Origins of Totalitarianism (1951) . Hohfeld, W. N., Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning, ed. by W.W. Cook (1919); reprint, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1964. . Nozick, Robert, Anarchy, State, and Utopia, Basic Books. 1974. . Rawls, John, A Theory of Justice (Revised edition, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Belknap Press, http:// en. wikipedia.org/wiki/Ci vii Jights 2/27/2008 . Civil rights - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Page 5 of 5 1999), ISBN 0-674-00077-3. . Smith, Jean Edward & Levine, Herbert M., Civil Liberties & Civil Rights Debated, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1988. External links . Civil Rights Resource Guide, from the Library of Congress . Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry . The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights . Seattle Civil Rights and Labor History Project . WDAS Radio's Enduring Impact on the Civil Rights Movement . Images of the Civil Rights Movement in Florida . Civil Rights Movement Veterans . Guardians of Freedom - 50th Anniversary of Operation Arkansas, by ARMY.MIL . Berlin Wall Between Church and State News and Commentary on the War on Christianity in the public square. . Civil Rights.org . St. Augustine Race Riots Brief video clip of demonstrations by blacks on Butler Beach in St. Augustine. . Civil Rights Movement . Study of the civil rights movement in America. . Civil Rights Act of 1964 . Civil Rights Act of 1866 . Civil Rights Act of 1871 Retrieved from "http://en. wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil Jights" Categories: Discrimination I Wikipedia external links cleanup I Rights I Civil rights . This page was last modified on 27 February 2008, at 04:54. . All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights for details.) Wikipedia@ is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a U.S. registered 501(c) (3) tax-deductible nonprofit charity. http:// en. wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil Jights 2/27/2008 U\ t} -:::r 00 1-' 0-- .~ 0-- - -- \1) - - C1 . ) . --- f ~ ~ ). " ~ .a. ~ d en V 0- - w { ~ -IJ ('- \{) CJ 'J- ~~ - \&\ . " , P.O. Box 536 Forks, WA 98331 February 26, 2008 Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners ./ P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 HEARING RECORD Dear Commissioners: Johnson, Sullivan and Austin; This letter is in regard to the current draft of the proposed Jefferson County Critical Area Ordinance prepared for public presentation this Wednesday, February 26, 2008, at the Chimicum High School Auditorium. Jefferson County has two distinct and different climatic zones and population densities. Very different problems and opportunities exist in each and what is necessary in one zone is needless and unfair in the other. The west end is characterized as having residents who are hard-working in industries, self-sufficient, well-educated, veterans, career public service- active and retired, reliable and patriotic. Jefferson County's small population and tax base does not provide large general fund operations. Therefore, the scope of services needs to be scaled down to an affordable level. Many parallel facets of public service still require a linear process to complete. This is difficult in Jefferson County, especially when local governing bodies are directed and staffed by those whom have not had sufficient time in residence to adapt to, understand and contribute to, the very unique suburban and rural local culture and environment. When small, irresponsible groups contrive solutions to problems which may not actually exist, but are motivated for preserving a life style financed by grants and contributions supporting a quasi-science claim, rather than earned by honest labor, it is difficult for local government to determine whether the scope of real problems are as great as claimed. If there is a financial advantage to proclaim a new problem, when do "new problems" cease to be found? There are many examples in the proposed Critical Area Ordinance that over extend even the WEC "wish list." Then, the creation of "unfunded mandates" becomes very easy, and these become the excuse to generate the imposition of additional fees and taxes on residents of Jefferson County. By whomever these rigid frameworks of no-risk, onerous and expensive regulations were conceived and promulgated, it certainly was not by those having a vested responsibility of land ownership and a sense of human and environment variables and needs, nor with the background in science to realize both. what it ~ and what it IS NOT . Wherever it was conceived, it was not conducted from presence on the land itself, but behind office walls in large metropolitan areas, from "science" sufficient only to support foregone desires. Self-righteousness is no excuse to put forth for what is the hidden agenda, making rural life more and more difficult to maintain. In one of the newspapers of record, it was stated that the updating of the on-site septic inspection plan process was an "experiment", designed to see what the public reaction would be. This kind of an official thought process begs the question: Who is writing a doctoral thesis on the "Susceptibility of Rural and Urban Residents to Yield to Non-scientific, Non-applicable Regulatory Influences" as both of the processes have evolved over more than the past two years. ~ ., To impose the ideals of extreme examples of urban residency in multi-unit high-rise dwellings may be appealing to those whose past leads them to believe that this is what east Jefferson County should become should consider seeking somewhere else to exist. Sincerely, P:r!~N/ John Richmond Hoh River Valley Cc: Port Townsend Leader Peninsula Daily News ;;. 2/25/08 HEARING RECORD Board of County commissioners Jefferson County, Washington The Olympic Environmental Council has been involved for many years in the comprehensive planning process for Jefferson County. This Critical Areas Ordinance must provide foresight and common sense as we plan for the future. We will be the victims of unknown consequences if we fail to identify and respect the qualities and functions of our critical areas. The Critical Area Ordinance is our rather clumsy attempt as human beings to incorporate these natural systems into some sort of orderly development code using best available science and regulations. With regard to this draft, we believe the county is capable of much clearer code language, and that the county must embrace a strong and fair enforcement component if this ordinance is to work. We must not eschew the need that this CAO be adopted now! It takes only one big landslide to completely destroy an entire drainage ecosystem. It takes only one good soaking to saturate a bluff and cause it to slip; not infrequently, taking someone's home with it. Inadequate or blocked culverts have cost this county dearly in lost fish habitat, failures of road fills, landslides and collapsed bridges. One tractor in a stream can wipe out a salmon run. One dike upstream can impinge on the property of another downstream. Over-allocation of water, failing to accommodate stream movement, and stripping out native species all lead to unintended and most often very expensive consequences. This county has experienced all of these, this last winter being the most breathtaking, as we realized that, except for air travel, we were entirely cut off from the mainland. These events result in suffering, acrimony, heroism and a sub-economy dependent on federal and state money - our tax money. Critical areas do not recognize tax parcels, The systems embraced in these areas have complex interrelationships that, hard as we try, cannot be divvied up amongst agencies or landowners. But they gm be destroyed by over-harvesting, damming, mining, filling, dredging and ignoring; by good intentions and by greed. The mangling and disfiguring of critical areas is the precursors to an economy based on disasters. In Jefferson County, growth and an independent rural spirit have a way of coming together somewhat like a riptide. Mining our very attractive real estate creates temporary jobs and fills bank accounts, and exacerbates pressures on all the natural systems we depend on. Without good buffers, setbacks, recognition of migration channels and protecting native vegetation, we taxpayers will increasingly know the costs of a disaster- based economy. According to the Pentagon, we will be confronted with sudden climate changes in the next 15 to 20 years. Tidal inundation, flooding, and major water shortages will come into sharp focus on the county's agenda and tax payers will reap the benefits of a CAO as these areas function to absorb and mitigate these increasingly frequent situations. .. -~ The Olympic Environmental Council is supportive of the concept and much ofthe substance of this Critical Areas Ordinance. Please adopt this ordinance, once you have considered and incorporated the comments from the county's tribes, the Department of Ecology, the Department ofFish and Wildlife, and from the authors of earlier work, Amy Hiatt, Jill Silver, and George Yount. Thank you, ~4~". , , c.c. ~z...,~,.~,-..-.--' Julie Jaman Board Olympic Environmental Council Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners HEARING RE.C.O RD P.O. Box 1120 " Port Townsend, WA 98368 February 27, 2008 Please accept these as my initial comments regarding the present version of the Jefferson County Critical Areas Ordinance draft now before you for your consideration. I expect to have additional comments after listening to the public at the public hearing. The present draft provides innovative and welcome opportunities for landowners in the management of their properties, while at the same time including a more traditional approach that incorporates prescriptive regulatory language. Some of the prescriptive provisions reflect an overly conservative approach to ecosystem protection that result in onerous restrictions of the right to enjoy and use property. The findings portion of the ordinance will have significant bearing on how it will be treated if it is petitioned for review at the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board, and for any subsequent court actions. If you state up front that you are recognizing not only the landowners' willingness to participate in the alternative regulatory approach embodied in the critical area stewardship planning and management process, but that Jefferson County's citizens are capable of making it work at the individual property and landscape ecosystem levels, the WWGMHB will likely grant the county deference on that. Detailed, well thought out findings played a key role in the Island County case. The findings should also include a statement of your confidence in the locally developed science made available through the volunteer services of qualified individuals as being representative of best available science (BAS). The quality of that science led to the Department of Ecology's participation in the discussions that not only validated the CASP approach developed over the past year and a half, and that work is now in the process of being considered for broader application by the Department. While I recognize the concern that county staff have in regards to the potential demand for the proposed critical area stewardship plans (CASPs) and their associated monitoring, I firmly believe that this method of building alliances with individual landowners is not only wise, but is the opening of one of the most crucial and effective pathways to developing landscape-scale environmental protection and ecosystem services. While there may be a few. . . and I emphasize few. . . landowners who might take unfair advantage, the benefit will far outweigh the risks. The county already has the enforcement tools that are intended for working with those few problematic individuals. We should recognize that the level of demand for CASPs will be driven, in part, by the stringency of the land use restrictions incorporated into the prescriptive side of the ordinance. The tighter the prescriptive provisions, the greater the demand for CASPs will be. This is where you will have some control over that demand. The Department of Ecology's 2004 wetlands manual serves an advisory role, and the buffer widths contained in the document are considered by the Department to represent a moderate level of risk for the protection of the functions and values of wetlands. The problem with accepting their determination is that the Department has never conducted a formal risk assessment to validate their assertion. This represents a programmatic weakness that could be successfully exploited in litigation. The lack of a formal risk assessment also makes it possible for you to support the Planning Commission's recommendation to include the dual ratings of wetlands where appropriate. It also enables you to accept the Planning Commission's recommendation to determine that a single residence on a five acre parcel generally represents a low impact land use, particularly when considered in the context of Jefferson County's land use paradigms. (Only about 2.5% of Jefferson County's 1.4 million acres is available for residential development, and only 748 acres is zoned for a combination of commercial or industrial development. ) Since the time the staff prepared their report to you, the Department of Ecology and Dr. Brooks have continued making progress toward how wetlands are rated, and this will make the dual ratings portion of the CAD proposal a more viable opportunity for Jefferson County. I'm sure that Dr. Brooks would be happy to bring you up to speed on the discussions and field work they've been involved with. I have significant concerns with the "compromise" stream buffers recommended by the Planning Commission. I request that you carefully review the GEl study that is included in the public record with the work accomplished by the Critical Areas Ordinance Review Committee (CADRe), which includes the high cost of stream buffers. For instance, the 75 foot buffers proposed for intermittent non-fish bearing streams is particularly excessive, especially when you understand that this represents the withdrawal from use of eighteen acres per stream mile for the 75 foot buffer. For your information, I have included reduced-size versions of stream maps for East and West Jefferson County, from files produced by the county. Each of the streams indicated on these maps would have a buffer of at least 75 feet on each side of the stream for their entire length, representing a significant land use cost for the county's landowners. While channel migration zones (CMZs) were included in the Second Settlement Agreement between the Washington Environmental Council (WEC) and Jefferson County, there is no statutory requirement that CMZs be included in any county or municipal critical areas ordinance. They are, however, included in forest practice regulations and in ordinances controlled by the Shoreline Management Act. Including them in the CAO is very much an act of legislative discretion on the part of the Board of County Commissioners. Areas defined as CMZs are already heavily regulated under other aspects of County Code, including those pertaining to frequently flooded areas. The science for defining CMZs in Jefferson County is incomplete, and those portions of research completed for a small subset of streams in eastern Jefferson County has not been peer reviewed. The currently available science may also not meet the state's specifications for BAS. I urge that you proceed very cautiously on the question of whether or not to include CMZs in the Jefferson County CAO until and unless a statutory requirement for doing so is passed by the State Legislature. Their inclusion at this time, without adequate science or other backing for promulgating standards, could easily trigger litigation where it could be avoided by either deferring or not addressing the issue. When we promulgate regulations, we are often issuing "stovepiped" solutions that do not fit well in relation to the problems we are trying to solve or avoid. In some respects, the current draft of Jefferson County's CAO is not properly responsive to its intent of protecting the functions and values of the county's critical areas. In others, particularly in the CASP, fish and wildlife habitat conservation area (FWHCA), monitoring and adaptive management areas, it offers the beginnings of an integrative approach to improved environmental protection and strengthening ecosystem management services. We need to move toward this integrative approach in caring for our environment if we are to meet such goals as a cleaner Puget Sound, recovering salmon runs, adaptation to climate change, and a lighter footprint on our landscapes. Instead of discrete "solutions" for critical areas protection, instream flows, landscape-wide sanitation, shoreline protection, we need to be working to develop programs that make more efficient use of staff time and other scarce financial and physical resources. One way to begin is to roll the monitoring requirements for the CAO, the clean water district, the onsite sewer system inspection program and other environmental programs into a single work center for data sharing and monitoring efficiency. If we use the Jefferson County CAO as a stepping-off point for developing that integrative approach, and include support for doing so in the ordinance's findings, we will be able to take advantage of the broad discretion for doing so that is being granted by the State of Washington to those counties and communities that are engaged in RA~GE o. w RAXGE 01 W RA:"GC 01 E ~ p- - ,,,,~ " " .' " ~,,, ,\' rrW1>. ;jJ:f.. 'j,;;-):--~~ 1 ,._~*. ';-':1'7: _ .......~ r-J. -1 _:;__1, _ " J ,....;)1.>--,...... k*u-~-* _I ..,'!'-..~" ,. ~I i)J \ ,- - - - I' ' . : ,/( \ i ! --' {! (-~--- ~-- -1\. u .,~, ! .+. . -~t~..$lIowwtdIt~ - Type2 _~KillllUOO.-....-...._~ - Type3 _.._............--...._......,. - Type. ______o--_QwllIy - 1'ype5 ___.~OM"""'_ .. Type9 ~__ ,. ijj ~. ~ g 7- g r. '/ ~ ". ?J :l. 5: fl) .<: :L; >- z '" ~ i- N :l. :;: :r- '" ~ ~ ~ il< '" R [.------- ---J- ----..--.- RIVER... ,STREAM, AND .5. HORE..L.. INE. CLASSIFICATION =.::.~.- --- EASTERN )EFFERSON COUNTY. WASHING10N --~.- =-e=.:...~:...-::. f--~ &.-€ia.~~- ~ bt:",::~n,::, ----I ____..__ ---.-----------.----.------ -.---- ~A~CE 02 W RA~GE 01 E R'\~GE 01 W ~.. N a. dIHSNMOL N 9Z dIHSNMOL 'N gz dlHSNMOL (;It t(; N t(; dlHSNMOL ~ a- '" o ~ ~ a- '" o Z ~ ~ ~ $a $a t3 '" ~ 0 ~ :.: ~ $a ~ ... ... '" ~ I i ll)'k I !fH' ~ I 'J}lln . li.h ~ !~ '" ~ 0 ~ ~ ~H dIu t3 j ! ~ '" 5 8 ~ ~ l!l '" ~ U"J 0 U"J ~ l!l <CZ '" ...JO 0 Z Ut; ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ffi~ .- I I I I j I ! I r ~ 1 j II ~ I ~ 00 ;!: ;!: ~~ '" .~ '" 0 ! i I I j I z 0 ~-o ~ d Iii I i I ~ --+- 11!1:11 ~I~ IIIII : U"Jz r;:- ~ ~~~ \!l ~~2 '" 0 ~~ ~ .9-.. _~/Ii> similar innovative approaches. The CASP is an innovative tool that will serve this approach very well. When balancing the goals of the Growth Management Act in your deliberations, you have the latitude to take the initial steps toward an integrative program of protecting the functions and values of our ecosystem elements on the landscape scale. If not now, then when? Thank you very much for your time and for your kind consideration of my comments. }~.../.. // -// ~ /;/~ Norman MacLeod 241 Sand Road Port Townsend, WA 98368 HEARING RECORD To Jefferson County Board of Commissioners: February 27, 2008 I appreciate: --the time, effort, and patience that the subcommittee, Planning Commission, and BOC have invested in this process --inclusion of the 2004 DOE wetland rating system with its reasonable, scientifically-derived buffers --inclusion of Channel Migration Zones --offering options for landowners beyond prescriptive buffers A careful and cautious approach to protecting critical areas is warranted because there is no going back. Changes brought about by development cannot be undone easily or effectively. We owe it to future generations, our children and grandchildren, as well as to our neighbors and the other living things that share this County with all of us, to protect these areas while also accommodating appropriate development. As has been amply demonstrated over the last few years, damage from flooding, or from polluted water, costs all of us dearly. As with mediciine, prevention is both cheaper and healthier than repair. As an example, New York City found that buying development rights in the watersheds supplying their drinking water was significantly cheaper than building water treatment facilities. They are thus able to reduce taxpayer expenses and have broader environmental benefits. It is disappointing and embarrassing that many involved in the CAO process here have been subjected to months of negativity and personal attacks as part of attempts to divert and delay everyone from reaching reasonable compromise on the real issues at hand. Please adopt this revised ordinance, and also please commit to improving this version which in places is poorly written, ambiguous, and confusing. In addition the stewardship provisions are incomplete and the monitoring process is unrealistic and ineffective. I am confident, however, these areas can be improved and do not warrant further delays before adoption. Finally, our County's CAD must be supported by reliable and comprehensive data about actual conditions on the ground, as well as by meaningful and consistent enforcement, both of which are currently lacking. Thank you for your consideration. Owen Fairbank 508 Lawrence St. Port Townsend ", To: David Sullivan, John Austin, and Phil Johnson From: Todd Wexman RE: Flawed planning processes and product HEARING RECORD Not long ago, in a letter published in The Leader, I wrote: "Thanks to Jill Silver, Amy Hiatt, and others, far-reaching protections to critical areas, including but not limited to wetlands and riverways, will soon be realized." I spoke too soon. It has come to my attention that much of Jill and Amy's subtly detailed work as members of the Critical Areas Review Committee is being undermined by the Planning Commission and others, each in their turn and each with little relevant experience, intent upon diluting what might have been a document of far-reaching significance---the end result being a poorly written and difficult-to-implement ordinance. The groundwork for a well-written ordinance wa'i developed by Amy and Jill, who, it mus be said, graciously adjusted their sights. They supported the continuation of an alternative regulation, i.e. exemption, of agriculture, the reduction in wetland buffer widths for low-quality wetlands, and the adoption of DOE guidelines and 2004 rating systems. To the Planning Commission's credit, their insistence on the inclusion of channel migration zones was approved. These will save people and their homes, reduce expenditures for damage control, and better protect strellms and shorelines from undue stress. Were in the home stretch. And the rush to compromise .n the face of virulent complaint marks much of the everyday decision-making processes here. Yet compromise--a little here, a little there---is, itself, a big problem. Too much compromise is what we've been doing all along. It's why we've failed to make any significant inroads vis-a-vis the continuing degradation of natural systems everywhere. A careful analysis of these decision-making processes would show failures up and down the line---but especially at the top where leadership matters most; where you've seemingly chosen to remain non- committal until the final hour. In a meeting not long ago, on of you observed, "We should put nature first." The intention is a good one, but where, 1 ask, is the follow through? Without visionary lead ~rship, little or nothing of consequence will be achieved. Our natural environment will ;ontinue its downward spiral to a point of no return. We desperately require new ideas that qualified professionals can bring to the table. When the.Blannffis eOlumissiofl aR~ BOCC choosei to ignore the input of those with much education, experience, and the capacity to think in creative ways, we can only shake our heads when much of what is offered is either undervalued or ignored. It's not too late to take a strong stand against those who wou1rl. dilute the excellent work produced and submitted by Jill Silver and Amy Hiatt in 'e: the CAO. Though it may not seem so, there is much support hereabouts for their approach, and much need for a clear, cohesive and comprehensive CAO built upon their efforts. ~ ~ ! C ~tu ~ r r"R E'"CORD HLP\J'(u~~\" L .~r ',. THE LAW OFFICES OF JAMES C. TRACY ATTORNEY & COUNSELOR AT LAW OLYMPIC PEAKS BUILDING 18887 ST ATE HWY #305 NE - SUITE 500 POULSBO, WA. 98370-7401 COpy TEL: (360) 779-7889 FAX: (360) 779-8197 fii-J;?/~Dff -Nmremg@r 7,2007 ~3;j~~ E-MAIL: jctesq2002@yahoo.com ~~a.rzL t)tf- ~ Planning Commis~~~--'J Jefferson County 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, W A 98368 In Re: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Critical Areas Ordinance UDC Amendment To the Planning Commission: On behalf of my client, Fred Hill Materials, Inc.lHood Canal Sand and Gravel, an owner of real property in Jefferson County, these comments on the above referenced proposal are submitted for the record. As a preliminary matter, I hereby request that the entire prior record of this matter, whether in the possession of the Planning Commission or its individual members or any elected official or employee of Jefferson County, including: all records and materials relevant to the Petition for Review by the Washington Environmental Council on Jefferson County's failure to timely adopt required actions on the CAO before the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board since December 2004; all records and materials relevant to the negotiation, consideration or discussion of any settlement agreement with the Washington Environmental Council with regard to the above cited Petition for Review; all records and materials of the proceedings of the Critical Area Ordinance Review Committee (CAORC); be included in the formal record of this proceeding and be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with the final recommendation of the Planning Commission. Page 1 of 13 F or the convenience of the Planning Commission (hereafter, "PC"), comments are listed by and cross referenced specifically to the Application promulgated by Jefferson County on October 29, 2007. Page 1, Section: 4. "Critical Areas" are not also known as "Environmentally Sensitive Areas". This latter term is obsolete, potentially confusing, and not included in the Growth Management Act (GMA) or the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) provisions implementing it. This language should be stricken from the proposal. See the proceedings of the CAORC for additional detail. In addition, the GMA does not define "similar features" as Critical Areas. See RCW 36.70A.030(5). If other than GMA critical areas are included in the proposal/recommendation, the authority for such inclusion must be identified. Further, Jefferson County is NOT required to incorporate best available science into the CAO as stated. See Washington State Supreme Court, Swinomish Tribal Community v. WWGMHB, et ai, No. 76339-9, September 13,2007. All such statements should be stricken from the proposal/recommendation. Page 2, Section - Article III should be appropriately retitled "Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas" to comport with the GMA Critical Area Definitions. Article V - Inappropriately includes Channel Migration Zones as Geologically Hazardous Areas with no showing or foundation indicating that these areas are "hazardous" within the meaning of the GMA Definition. Article VI should be retitled "Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas" to be consistent with the GMA Definition. There is no requirement in the GMA for enhancement/restoration of Critical Areas. See Washington State Supreme Court, Swinomish Tribal Community v. WWGMHB, et ai, No. 76339-9, September 13,2007. Exhibit A: Issue - Comments regarding Page 1, No.4, above, are incorporated herein as though fully set forth. Page 2 of 13 Board of County Commissioner Concern - The description of the activity of the CAORC is incomplete, misleading, and in error. The CAORC membership included both Jefferson County property owners as well as eminently qualified environmental scientists, professionals and Planning Commissioners. The recommendations of the CAORC included reports that were adopted by a substantial majority of the Committee, along with a series of reports that were endorsed by a minority of the Committee. The majority and minority recommendations included a proposal for a complete revision of the existing Jefferson County CAO in code form. These recommendations were forwarded to the PC rather than to a code writer. No code writer was ever made available to the CAORC. Department of Community Development Recommendation _ The statement here begs the question whether the DCD or the Planning Commission or both will make recommendation to the BOCC in the event of disagreement between the two as to the final product. If such is the case, that possibility should be indicated and justified by appropriate authority. The authority/authorities for the adoption of a CAO should be added or included as a separate Section/Article. For clarity, the statement should read "as required by" rather than "under" the Growth Management Act. Article 1 - Purposes - generally (sic) (5) The CAO is not for the purposes of retaining, protecting or using open space or the natural ecosystem. It is for the "protection" of GMA Critical Areas. See Washington State Supreme Court, Swinomish Tribal Community v. WWGMHB, et ai, No. 76339-9, September 13,2007. (9) The CAO does not regulate or provide a program for controlling storm water runoff. (14) The CAO is not targeted to or focused upon the general preservation and/or the enhancement of the environment. See (5), above. Administrative Provisions - Applicability - The meaning of the second sentence is vague, ambiguous, and virtually incapable of Page 3 of 13 administrative implementation. Unless this provision is specified/clarified, it should be removed. Identification and mapping of critical areas - Replace "is" with "are" in first sentence. (Grammar) Allowable uses - Since the CAO regulates uses and activities only within Critical Areas, the statement is both redundant and irrelevant. Coverage - This Section is essentially redundant given the content of Applicability, above. To the extent it is retained it should be combined with that provision. JCC 18.22.230 is not an exemption section. At present, JCC 18.22.240 is the exemption section for FWHCAs. All exemptions should be integrated into a single exemptions section rather than within individual critical area sections. Further, the CAO regulates ALL uses and activities within Critical Areas whether or not they have "adverse impacts" (itself an ambiguous term). The potential conflict between this Section and proposed JCC 18.22.300(4) should be examined and clarified. The enforcement, appeal, and penalty provisions applicable to 18.22.050 (2) should be stated. General Exceptions - This provision is alarming for several reasons. First, it contains two different "standards" for the Administrator's decision. Secondly, it does not present a process for requesting or applying for such an "exception". Third, it appears to overlap or be redundant with code provisions for buffer averaging/buffer reduction. Fourth, the section seems to provide unfettered discretion to the Administrator to grant or deny exceptions without a "special report" based solely on the Administrator's judgement. Because of these problems, and the fact that the procedure is rarely if ever used, the provision should be stricken from the proposal. Page 4 of 13 General Exemptions - All CAO Exemptions should be contained is a single comprehensive Section. (8) All work within the ordinary high water mark requires HPA approval by WSDFW. The provision requiring notice to WDFW is not only illogical when applied to "emergency actions", it is facially inconsistent with RCW 77.55.021(8). (13) This exemption needs to be reconciled with 18.22.320 (1)(a) which could be interpreted to prevent changes in existing improved areas. As an alternative, (12) could be deleted as the PC approved for 18.22.240 (3). Reasonable Economic Use Variance- This Section, as proposed, presents one of the most egregious infringements on the constitutionally protected rights of property owners who are damaged as a result of the adoption of the CAO - i.e. those property owners who have been deprived of the reasonable economic use of their parcel due to county action. In Summary, this section is fundamentally unfair as it would place the burden for both the proof of constitutional violation (depriving reasonable economic use) and also the solution required to prevent a constitutional takings claim on the property owner, create an onerous and expensive process for the property owner seeking simply to construct a residence on appropriately zoned property, utilize impossible required findings for approval, and create the need for judicial remedy for damages when a taking is shown. The CAORC unanimously adopted the following statement (Foundational Principle )regarding this issue: 10. Regulations adopted by Jefferson County should contain a specific definition of "reasonable economic use" in each land use and zoning designation. Further, a "reasonable economic use exception" should be provided which is available to an affected property owner who can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Administrator that the application of the ordinance prevents the use of the property for the defined "reasonable economic use" (i.e. without requirement to exhaust any other administrative remedy before seeking a "reasonable use exception"). The fee for a "reasonable use exception" application should be minimal, and once the applicant demonstrates that such an exception is necessary, additional processing and/or hearing costs should be borne by the public. The citizens of Jefferson County should not have to pay for the privilege or be financially penalized if they successfully demonstrate (in an application for a "reasonable use exception" or in a final judicial decision) that regulations cause them undue harm or violate their constitutional rights. Page 5 of 13 Implementing this Foundational Principle, the CAORC Committee adopted the following recommendation for replacement of the current CAO: "F. Reasonable Economic Use Exception - Single Family Residence on Existing Lots. This section applies to new single family residences on existing, legal lots where application of this Chapter would preclude reasonable economic use. The Administrator may modify or waive the requirements pertaining to critical areas, including mitigation and buffer requirements, ifhe or she finds all of the following: 1. The proposal is the minimum necessary to accommodate the principal residence access and necessary appurtenances including, if necessary, well site, septic system and drainfield utilities, provided that the foundation of the principal residence and any accessory structures shall not exceed 2,800 square feet. 2. The building footprint, access and utilities are located so as to have the least impact on the critical area and its buffer. 3. The proposal does not degrade the functions of wetlands and streams beyond that needed to achieve a reasonable use. 4. Material adverse impacts resulting from alterations of steep or geologically hazardous slopes are minimized. 5. The proposal includes on-site mitigation required by this Chapter to the extent possible, while allowing a reasonable use. 6. Disturbed critical areas and their buffers will be immediately restored consistent with good restoration practices. 7. This alteration does not allow wetlands or fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas or their buffers to be converted to lawn or residential landscaping. The Administrator's decision on a Reasonable Economic Use Exception may be appealed to the Examiner only by the applicant. G. Reasonable Economic Use Exception - General. This ordinance is not intended to preclude reasonable economic use of property as that term is defined herein. Once an applicant has proven to the satisfaction of the Examiner that strict application of the critical areas standards will deny reasonable economic use of the parcel, development with conditions will be permitted if the Examiner finds each of the following: 1. There is no other reasonable economic use or reasonably feasible alternative to the proposed development with less impact on the critical area; and Page 6 of 13 2. The proposed development does not pose a material threat to public health, safety and welfare on or off the subject property; and 3. Any alterations permitted pursuant to the requirements of this Chapter shall be the minimum necessary to allow for reasonable use of the property; and 4. The inability of the applicant to derive reasonable economic use of the property is not the result of actions by the applicant in subdividing the property or adjusting a boundary line, thereby creating the undevelopable condition after (INSERT DATE OF ADOPTION) (wetlands) or (INSERT DATE OF ADOPTION) (other critical areas); and 5. The proposal mitigates the material impacts on the critical area(s) to the extent reasonably possible, while still allowing reasonable economic use of the parcel. The Administrator shall prepare or have prepared, at County expense, a report based on the applicant's development proposal which shall accompany a reasonable use exception petition to the Examiner and which provides information on the function and value of the critical area(s) proposed for alteration, impact of the proposed development on the critical area(s) and any required buffer(s), what constitutes a reasonable economic use of the property, steps taken to minimize the impact of the proposed alteration, recommended modifications of the code, and any other information deemed necessary by the Administrator and/or Examiner. An applicant for a reasonable economic use petition shall be the only party with standing to appeal the Examiner's decision." This CAORC recommendation rectifies the defects of the proposed continuation of the existing "Reasonable Economic Use Variance (now retitled "Exception" to differentiate it from a zoning variance to avoid confusion and allow for the unique findings required for this constitutional issue versus non-constitutional/volitional variance applications), and placing the costs and burdens for takings avoidance on the government actor where is belongs. The recommended procedure also avoids the necessity of a judicial damage claim against the County when deprivation of constitutional rights are proven. This CAORC recommendation should be adopted or be the basis for developing a similarly effective and fair recommendation by the PC to the BOCC. Section 18.18.090 (5)(ii) is inconsistent with Washington State Supreme Court, Swinomish Tribal Community v. WWGMHB, et ai, No. 76339-9. Article V - Geologically Hazardous Areas - The CAORe engaged in extensive analysis and discussion regarding whether Channel Migration Zones were to be included as regulated critical areas. Page 7 of 13 l After extensive study, the CAORC CMZ Subcommittee presented its report on 1-4-07, finding no statutory or administrative requirement for inclusion of CMZs as critical areas. Further, CAORC Member Bill Wheeler produced an excellent and exhaustive summary of the entire record of Committee discussion on this topic (dated 4-30-07), including analysis of applicable statutes and the CAORC's final action on the matter. Due to their extensive length, each of these documents are incorporated herein as though full set forth. For the reasons set forth is these documents, I recommend that the current proposal for inclusion of CMZs as Geological Hazardous Areas be stricken. Inclusion as proposed was first argued as justified by a minority groups of CAORC members. My recommendation that CMZs not be included as critical areas also extends to the alternative and subsequent proposal by this same minority of CAORC members to include CMZs as FWHCAs. Should the PC refuse to accept the recommendation of the CAORC on this issue, its final recommendation should indicate the statutory or administrative authority for same, its reasons for rejecting the CAORC recommendation, and ajustification for recommending the additional administrative costs (and their source) which will be necessary to administer their proposal. Article VI - Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCAs)- There are no valid reasons for having a separate purpose section for FWHCAs. Any statements that are not redundant and are consistent with the protection of CAs should be incorporated into the Purpose Section at the head of the proposed ordinance. Any purpose statement related to a general obligation to provide global protection to any wildlife should be stricken. Such statements improperly extend the intended reach of the mandate to protect FWHCAs, and are therefore beyond the appropriate scope of a CAO adopted pursuant to the GMA. Proposed 18.22.100 (1) is both inaccurate and redundant. It should be stricken. Serious question exists whether the CAO, per se, has any authority to regulate areas below the ordinary high water mark. These areas are subject to regulation under the Shoreline Master Program, regulated separately but at least equivalently to any such designated critical areas under the County's CAO, pursuant to RCW 36. 70A.480. Relevant limitations to regulations of critical areas below the ordinary high water mark must be included if such areas are incorporated into the PC proposal. Any non-redundant provisions of 18.22.240 should be incorporated into the General Exemption Section of the PC proposal. Section 18.22.250(1) is preempted by or redundant to RCW77.55.021. Section 18.22.250(2) should be incorporated into a section which relates all CAs and CAO Page 8 of 13 provisions into the Subdivision Code. There is no logical or statutory reason for creating a subdivision requirement for FWHCAs and not applying the same provisions to subdivisions containing any other critical area. Section 18.22.250(3) should be combined and made consistent with the Utility Exemption at 18.22.070(5). Section 18.22.250(6) is a general statement that should be moved to the General Exemption Section of the proposal. Section 18.22.260 contains provisions that are generally applicable to all CAs. Section 18.22.270 (1) through (4) are applicable to all CAs, and to the extent they are retained should be moved to a section on general protection standards. Does this section imply that any proposal would require drainage and grading plans regardless of the amount of impervious surface created or earth moved? If so, this should be clearly stated. Section 18.22.270 (5) (ii) is general and applies to all CAs. This subsection should be moved to a general Building Setback Line section. Section 18.22.270 (5) (b) (I) is vague in that the term "dense" is without definition. Further, the "presumption" stated is directly contradictory to the recent judicial definition of "protect as applied to critical areas under the GMA. See Washington State Supreme Court, Swinomish Tribal Community v. WWGMHB, et ai, No. 76339-9, September 13,2007. Section 18.22.270 (5) (b) (ii) is redundant over prior sections and should be deleted. Further, this subsection contains an incomplete allusion to the CAORC recommendation regarding "Physically Isolated Buffers" which are general and should be contained in a separate section. The specific recommendation of the CAORC is as follows: H. Physically Separated and Functionally Isolated Buffers Areas which are both physically separated and functionally isolated from a critical area and do not protect the critical area from adverse impacts due to existing public roads, structures, vertical separation, or any other relevant physical characteristic shall be excluded from buffers otherwise required by this Chapter. The Administrator may require a Biological Site Assessment to determine whether the buffer is functionally isolated. The scientific bases for the buffer width recommendations contained in Section 18.22.270 (1) - Stream Buffers, and the analyses required for balancing these bases with the other goals and policies of the GMA must be identified in order to support the PC proposal. Section 18.22.270 (5) (<<J) does not contain the appropriate "balancing test" for determining Page 9 of 13 buffers. As stated, this subsection must require the appropriate balancing on order to support the exercise of the Administrator's discretion. Table 18.22.270 (2) contains buffer prescriptions for areas over which the CAO does not have jurisdiction - i.e. shellfish areas, kelp and eel grass areas and spawning areas. Further, the scientific bases for the buffer width recommendations and the analyses required for balancing these bases with the other goals and policies of the GMA must be identified in order to support the PC proposal. The buffer reduction and averaging provisions at 18.22.270 (6) and (7) are of general applicability and should be contained in their own separate sections. Further, the scientific bases for the buffer width averaging/ reduction recommendations and the analyses required for balancing these bases with the other goals and policies of the GMA must be identified in order to support the PC proposal. What is the intent of the "permanent physical separation" stated in 18.22.270 (8) (a)? Without such specification the Administrator has no guidance for application/administration/enforcement of this provision. Further, the PC should identify the source of funding for the administration and enforcement (including applicable penalty for violation) of this provision. Section 18.22.270 (8) (c) is of general application and should be relocated to a stand alone section regarding the application of the CAO to existing law and rules (i.e. the subdivision code) . Section 18.22.280 (1) is of general application and should be relocated to the appropriate general section. Section 18.22.280 (2) is general and should be relocated to the appropriate general section. Further, the appropriate balancing test should be added for consistency with the Washington State Supreme Court, Swinomish Tribal Community v. WWGMHB, et ai, No. 76339-9, September 13,2007. Article VII - Wetlands - There are no valid reasons for having a separate purpose section for wetlands. Any statements that are not redundant and are consistent with the protection of CAs should be incorporated into the Purpose Section at the head of the proposed ordinance. Section 18.22.200 is of general application and should be deleted here. This section should be included in the general administrative provisions. Generally, this entire section contains obvious redundancy which should be stricken. The comments regarding the FWHCA, above, pertain equally to the same content of the Page 10 of 13 proposed wetland section. These are incorporated herein by reference as though fully set forth in order to reduce comment repetition. Article VIII - Special Reports - Section 18.22.380 should be revised to reflect those situations (e.g. reasonable use exceptions) when the cost of a special report are not to be borne by the applicant. Section 18.22.390 (3) is an excellent example of a general provision but should clearly specify/indicate who has standing to appeal the Administrator's decision and the time frame/process which would allow resolution of an appeal of the Administrator's decision in a timely manner before any other decision on the project/application. Section 18.22.550 (2) does not pertain to Waiver and should be in a Section of its own. EXHIBIT C - b. This section is woefully inadequate since it does not present/explain the significance of judicial decisions on relevant matters that have occurred since the adoption of the last CAO. This comment is not intended to provide an exhaustive review of such cases. When Jefferson County completes this essential review, additional comments will be provided. The statement that information sources are provided for identifying critical areas is inaccurate and potentially misleading. None of the maps cited as sources are regulatory and require site specific analysis for identification of critical areas. This section should be revised to so indicate. c. This section abjectly fails to note that the public input on the initial CAO proposal was overwhelmingly negative and did not reflect widely held citizen values. Nor does this section indicate that the "Settlement Agreement" with the Washington Environmental Council was not subject to public participation, has been characterized by the BOCC as a non-binding starting point for CAO revision, and was considered by the CAORC but was not considered determinative of the CAORC recommendations. This section does not indicate the unanimous determination by the CAORC that the CAO should be comprehensively revised and designed as a stand alone section of the Jefferson County Code. This section does not indicate the substance of and the process by which the CAORC recommendations were determined inadequate/not followed and either Page 11 of 13 the minority reports of the CAORC or the PC's own determinations were substituted. The statement that implies that the fact that THIS Planning Commission, appointed by THIS BOCC represents the citizen's of Jefferson County is both a naked conclusion and non-responsive to the questions asked. Either explain and justify this statement or delete it. In general, this Appendix should be expanded to include the balancing analyses required by the Washington State Supreme Court, in Swinomish Tribal Community v. WWGMHB. et ai, No. 76339-9, September 13,2007, and the previous line of cases on the requirements for supporting policies and regulations adopted under the authority of the GMA. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS - The Proposed CAO is merely a "minimum effort Band-aid" which does not constitute the comprehensive review requested by the entire membership of the CAORC. The result is a proposal that is internally redundant, contradictory, vague, ambiguous, and plainly inconsistent with the relevant case law on this subject. Further, due in at least part the fact that the BOCC has not provided adequate time, staff resources, and training for the Planning Commission, the result is also essentially incompetent when compared to other professionally prepared regulatory enactments. It is shocking, for example, that the PC had essentially no briefing or instruction on the appropriate process for developing findings and conclusions which would adequately support their recommendation. Virtually no instruction is contained in the record that explains or trains the PC with regard to the range of their discretion, or the task of balancing their recommendations with the GMA and the local plans and programs adopted pursuant to it. Most shocking of all, however, is the fact that the PC has not received any briefing or instruction on the changes in case law that have occurred since the County last enacted a CAO. The Planning Commission has almost completely avoided engagement with the policy questions raised by their proposal: nexus, proportionality, reasonable use, fiscal impacts, adjacency, etc. These factors, taken together with the shameful partisanship and in-fighting displayed during this process, clearly indicate that the PC simply is not up to the job it was directed to perform but rather has engaged in political theater and mere "word-smithing" to the detriment ofthe GMA and the citizens of Jefferson County. Page 12 of 13 Passage of the PC CAO Proposal in its current form is an almost certain invitation to litigation (by multiple parties), litigation which is highly likely to succeed and again further harm the citizens of Jefferson County. Finally, the schedule promulgated by the BOCC would have the citizen's of the County bear the responsibility to understanding this major regulatory proposal as an overlay on their Holiday season, a process that the County has disallowed in the case of major project review by private applicants. The citizens of Jefferson County deserve better. I urge the Planning Commission to pause, reflect on the input received on this proposal, and then move deliberately (with appropriate resources, time and training) to prepare a new proposal for amendment of the existing CAO. Of course, this will necessitate yet another petition to the BOCC and another extension request from the WEC, but the WEC has previously expressed an interest in improving the product rather than observing arbitrary time lines. I would also think that both the WEC and Jefferson County have an interest in reforming the "Settlement Agreement" since at least portions of it are rendered moot by recent judicial opinion. These comments are not to be considered exhaustive, and I reserve the right to supplement them prior to the deadline for input. I also reserve the right to adopt the comments and input of other reviewers as integral parts of my final review, analysis and comment on this proposal. Sincerely, w;~ es C. Tracy, WSBA~ and Use Counsel Fred Hill Materials, Inc. Member, CAORC Page 13 of 13 ~ To: From: Date: RE: Jefferson County Board of County ConutfW'ioners . Jill Silver and Amy Hiatt nEARING RECORD. February 26, 2008 MLA 06-242 Exhibit C - CAO Review and Comments Dear Commissioners: Thankyou for the opportunity to provide comment on this Final Draft of the proposed new chapter 18.22 JCC, "Critical Areas". We appreciate all the work conducted by the many people, volunteers and staff, who contributed to this draft. And we certainly appreciate your willingness to listen to all sides, and to now consider the final comments, and finally to ACT in adoption of this very important piece of the UDC. Jefferson County is one of the last frontiers in the lower 48 states. We have dynamic shorelines, wide migrating rivers, a high density of small streams and wetlands, and steep valley slopes that are as yet relatively undisturbed. Population is predicted to double in western Washington in the next few decades, and we can count on some of that coming here - planting homes in our low elevation valleys and up the steep valley walls and on the high bluffs above our beaches, where flooding and landslides are common. We have a unique responsibility and opportunity - we can choose to act upon the knowledge learned from mistakes made during development in the P<<ilSt on the east side of Puget Sound all the way to the Atlantic, or repeat them here and pay the price in loss of species, the burden of ESA listings, increased damage from flooding, erosion and landsliding, and loss of jobs related to fishing, shellfish, and recreation. This Critical Areas Ordinance is the tool to balance the protection our communities need to ensure that the I green infrastructure' that we depend on to provide sources of clean water and all the other resources we count as contributing to our quality of life. We admit to being sorely disappointed that the draft code language we drafted while serving on the Critical Areas Review Committee for .. Silver and Hiatt Comments to MLA06-242 agriculture, wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, and administrative provisions, were not incorporated by the Planning Commission; who instead chose to work with the original and 'user- unfriendly' format of the current ordinance. We strongly believe the residents of this county would be better served if this ordinance were to follow a cohesive format such as used by many other counties. Individual landowners need a clearly spelled-out process and clearly-defined requirements following a basic structure of WHAT, WHY, WHEN, and HOW. We hope that in upcoming reviews, this very basic flaw can be addressed. We offer the following summary points: 1) There are a number of conflicting statements and terms that should have been caught during the review by the code writer and others. Please see specific comments below. 2) The stream buffers are an improvement over the 2004 draft, and will better protect our important fish, wildlife, and water resources into the future as growth occurs. a. Caveats: 1. Small, intermittent, low-gradient streams must be reassessed for their potential to act as refugia habitat for rearing salmon and trout. These are critical habitats that are being ignored. These streams also need to be added to the County's GIS hydrography layer. ii. Higher-gradient small streams are also very poorly mapped, and pose a potential risk of landslides if they are not buffered from stormwater and erosion. They need to be surveyed for fish habitat, and added to the GIS hydrography layer. 3) The wetland buffers, based on the 2004 rating system and DOE's Volume I Guidance, are more flexible in general, more tailored to specific wetland characteristics, decoupled from ESA, and thus result in smaller buffers on low quality Category ill and N wetlands than the previous ordinance. These categories comprise the majority of wetlands Page 2 of 19 Silver and Hiatt Comments to MLA06-242 in the eastern County. This is a huge change that will provide more useable area for many landowners. a. Caveats: . i. Wetlands should not be subjected to multiple ratings (DOE concurs), and it's not supported by the DOE 2004 rating system, which is used for consistency among wetland professionals. 11. Information from local wetland professionals indicates that some percentage of previously developed wetland mitigation plans have either not been implemented at all, or are failing in their performance. The county must conduct a compliance survey to ascertain how many previously developed mitigation plans have been implemented and what percent are meeting the stated goals. ill. As we've previously recommended, having the County sponsor a public rating process of large connected wetlands such as in Beaver Valley would provide assistance and certainty to the landowners. IV. The low land use impact level for a single residence as defined for parcels smaller than 5 acres is of concern to the Department of Ecology. Please note the following qualifiers recommended in the Hiatt submission, and consider it for inclUsion: . To qualify as a Low Impact Land-Use for determination of prescribed buffers for wetlands and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, the following limitations shall apply: Animal Unit density on grazing land shall not exceed one or less per 2.5 acres; any combination of developed landscape features such as orchards, vineyards, row crops, vegetable gardens, ornamental gardens, lawns, livestock confinement areas, and open riding arenas shall not cover in total more than 30 percent of the entire area of the parcel; impervious surfaces (including parking areas and roof areas, but not driveways) shall not cover in total more than five percent of the entire area of the parcel. . When any of these limitations is exceeded, the entire parcel becomes a Medium Impact Land-Use, subject to wider prescribed buffers for wetlands and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. Enhancement or restoration of critical areas and buffers may be required as a condition of approval for subsequent new development. Alternatively, a Critical Area Stewardship Plan may be prepared, approved, and implemented in accordance with the applicable section of this ordinance. Page 3 of19 Silver and Hiatt Comments to MLA06-242 4) The inclusion of CMZs is important to Jefferson County's economy, public health and safety, and environment - particularly for salmon. This county has several large, relatively intact rivers with broad migration zones where the hazards to roads and homes and property are increasingly clear. b. Caveats: i. New development and new parcel subdivision must not be allowed within the moderate or high hazard zones! These zones pose a health and safety issue, and cost the taxpayers, county, state, and federal government millions of dollars per decade in repairs to roads and in bank hardening. Channel migration is predicted to increase by the University of Washington's Climate Change Group of scientists due to climate change and changes in rainfall and snow melt, increasing the zone of instability. These areas are also critical to fish, and to wildlife and water quality. Once they're developed, banks are hardened to protect homes from erosion, which degrades the habitat. (See the front page article on homes threatened on the Duckabush - PI Leader, December 5th, 2007.) 11. The Hoh River Channel Migration Zone studies conducted by the Bureau of Reclamation and Perkins Geosciences for Jefferson County Public Works and for the Hoh Tribe, respectively, must be adopted as best available information for the west end. This is the fourth year of requesting this action! 5) Article V, Geologically Hazardous Areas, MUST be rewritten. The appropriate format would separate out each different type of geohazard and land use. Please see King or Whatcom County's Geohazardous Areas sections for examples, and see specific comments below. 6) A process for updating the GIS map layers for critical areas with new information must be developed. This is one of the key reasons that landowners are impacted by unexpected regulatory burdens and that critical areas are not sufficiently protected during development. A process for updating the databases that support the GIS map layers with new information, and for validating this data, must be developed and Page 4 of 19 Silver and Hiatt Comments to MLA06-242 implemented [ . A data dictionary that provides metadata fully explaining the source(s), revision history, and defining the quality and reliability of all data used in GIS map generation is essential. Current data, including the parcel layer survey data, is of variable quality, and much of it is undocumented or inadequately documented. For example: rubber-sheet distortions have been applied in some areas to create the illusion that orthophotos and contour data match survey and other data layers. 7) Staffing must be improved for field reviews including stream typing, fish habitat identification, and wetland rating. 8) Enforcement provisions should be spelled out in this Chapter, and must be an active part of the DCD's implementation of this ordinance. 9) Simple language is not necessarily better! The more carefully and fully worded an ordinance, the less that is left up to interpretation. This ordinance is written so as to be short and sweet, but it's difficult to comprehend and to APPLY! 10) We recommend revisiting the ordinance sections submitted by Hiatt and Silver for examples of more coherent, easier for lay people unfamiliar with the code to get through. We're attaching, for your review, three of our submissions - CAO Administrative Provisions, Appendix A, Land-Use Impact Levels, and Definitions for Appendix A. Specific Code Recommendations: 18.22.020 Applicability Insert the words <General Exemption' after 18.22.070 18.22.030 Identification and Mapping of Critical Areas First sentence: Insert the word <the' between... 'within' and 'county'. Page 5 of 19 Silver and Hiatt Comments to MLA06-242 Third sentence: Change the word 'need' to 'should' in "...These maps need not to be relied upon. . .." And delete the word 'to' in the same sentence. The following insertion is excellent: "To the extent practicable, The County shall ensure that its critical areas maps are updated as inventories are completed in compliance with the requirements of the GMA." lIDs needs to become a high priority for county funding as it not only supports better protection, but also better certainty for landowners and developers. Wetland delineations or stream mapping and typing submitted with permits should be incorporated into the GIS (geographic information system) map database. 18.22.050 Coverage (1) Concern with the statement "When provisions of this section conflict with one another, or when the provisions of this section conflict with any other law, the provision that provides more protection to the critical area shall apply. Does this section jive with the Comprehensive Plan Amendment? If a developer or landowner has a binding site plan, how does that apply to individual action on separate parcels? Are they vested under the rules that existed when they developed? How will that impact critical areas as we learn more? 18.22.070 Exemptions (13) Vegetation Management Add a phrase that specifies the conduct according to BMPs such as - ... when conducted in accordance with BMPs as proposed or developed by (WSV, CD, Master Gardeners, JCNWB, etc).. . and develop such BMPs, create a manual, and provide it to permit seekers. The following language was submitted to CAORC in the submission by Amy Hiatt on 2/21107 as part of the Wetlands chapter. Vegetation Management Plan templates are available from other counties. The excerpted language may be helpful in this draft: Vegetation management activities that implement an approved Vegetation Management Plan prepared in accordance with the applicable section of this ordinance are allowed, in wetlands and buffers, for purposes of controlling noxious/invasive species, improving wildlife habitat, promoting forest health, or maintaining or enhancing views, provided that the activities do not have any adverse impact on the wetland or on the protective functions of the buffer. (16) Harvesting wild crops - ''planting crops" should be deleted; it's contradictory with (17) where the planting of indigenous plants is encouraged. Page 6 of 19 Silver and Hiatt Comments to MLA06-242 (18) Categorical exemption for trails: a Cannot meet the intent of an unpaved trail with an elevated walkway through a wetland... must have concrete piers, creosoted railroad ties, etc. Instead - reword it to provide for 'construction of unpaved trails in buffer areas that are no more than jive feet wide, except in wetlands". b. The regulatory guidance for trails in wetlands should be in the Wetlands section, not included as a categorical exemption - because the impacts of piers, posts, and excavation to install them are potentially too significant. c. Delete the categorical exemption for building trails along precipices - this is a public safety concern, and should be reviewed. (20) Take out 'wetlands' - and replace with 'provided that impacts to critical areas and their buffers are minimized' (emphasis added). Here, the word 'minimize' is really!!!!! a useful term. Use of this term always results in net impact to the environment. Development impacts should be mitigated and reviewed within one growing season, and criteria need to be developed in order to achieve success. Require photos before, after, and one growing season after clearing, grading, or construction. Insert this requirement in another more appropriate section... perhaps related to Adaptive Management and Monitoring, or Best Management Practices, but not in Exemptions. 18.22.80 Non-conforming uses (1) This should did not read as though anything you had that was in existence is considered non-conforming. It's 'any' and 'shall be' that are the problem words. One must read the legal non-conforming use language to understand that's not the case. Illegal structures and activities remain illegal, and this should be clear. This was previously pointed out in our November comments. 18.22.90 Reasonable Economic Use Variance (Have to have applied for a permit and had it denied before you can come here - Burden of proof still on property owner - Still requires public hearing - No REV with less impact is possible) 4 (b )(i) How about reduction in scope or scale too? (d) ...is circular - "disturbance has been minimized by..." This section could be deleted altogether as it's pretty much covered in (c). Or, change it to: ... disturbance of critical areas has been minimized by locating alterations in the buffer to the maximum extent possible. (f) Either add in the other relevant regulatory acts: CW A, SMA, GMA, HP A, and FP A; or delete ESA. Page 7 of 19 Silver and Hiatt Comments to MLA06-242 (g) add in 'immediate or long-term'... to refer to 'material damage' and 'threat'. (5) Conditions If someone is building in a wetland, they have to compensate somewhere else, and therefore cannot restore the original site to pre-development condition! However, the same requirement to document the site with photos would be relevant here, and could provide an idea of what needs to be replaced if off-site or off-area mitigation is required. While mitigation standards don't exist for streams and riparian areas, we should consider a reference to them, and proVide a means to develop them on a site basis by WDFW, WDOE, and USFWS, or with input by tribes and local NGOs (North Olympic Salmon Coalition, for instance). ( c) In granting approval for REU variances involving other critical areas (better to have left out the word 'mitigating' from (a)), make provision for a habitat restoration plan or other mitigation plan to substantially restore the site. Add (d) - requirement for a performance bond to cover costs of review and replacement if the project fails to meet intended goals. Information from local wetland professionals indicates that a high percentage of previously developed wetland mitigation plans have either not been implemented at all, or are failing in their performance. The county must conduct a compliance survey to ascertain how many previously developed mitigation plans have been implemented and what percentage meet the stated goals. 18.22.95 Physical Separation, Functional Isolation Add the word 'buffer' to read "A buffer area... ". This section would benefit from a separate sentence to define what constitutes a functionally-isolated buffer - after 'adverse impacts', delete all the rest - ....shall be excluded. Functional isolation can occur due to the presence of roads, dikes, vertical separation, etc. Article III Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas (provided by Joe Breskin) One of the more significant failures of the various adopted comp plans (ACP) and of the UDC has been the lack of guidance as to how various land use overlays "stack" and what precedence occurs (i). In particular, guidance is missing or unclear as to how to resolve conflicts that occur due to the overlay of Resource Lands and Critical Areas. No guidance is provided in the . Definition of Overlay District in Definitions Section 2 page 13 of the UDC. Overlay Districts are described as areas and uses which warrant specific recognition and management. Article V Geologically Hazardous Areas Page 8 of 19 Silver and Hiatt Comments to MLA06-242 This section has one positive change - the addition of Channel Migration Zones (CMZs) as high erosion hazard areas. Most western Washington counties that contain large migrating rivers have also made this addition. CMZs are very important habitat areas for fish and wildlife, and pose a considerable risk to landowners and county infrastructure. This will help save taxpayers money if fewer road or bank repairs are necessary. However, the rest of the article, especially 18.22.170 - Protection Standards, is confusing and often at cross-purposes. Break out the protection standards into sections depending on the geo- hazard (seismic, erosion, landslide) being addressed, as the risk and requirements are different for each. The buffer setback of 5 feet is not large enough to accommodate construction of a footing. It may be appropriate for some construction (deck, etc), but should be expanded to address the logistics of construction. Any contractor knows this!!! This causes the development to intrude into the buffer if it's allowed as worded. Tsunamis should be included... they don't fit anywhere else. (1) Classification - move 'and' to a position after 'seismic' and insert 'channel migration' before 'hazard' - or drop it entirely, as there isn't a crosswalk to depict a classification system of the different potential combinations of the different hazard. (d) STILL HAVEN'T ADDED THE HOH STUDIES! New and risky development is occurring in the CMZ of the largest migrating river in Jefferson County because of it! There should be included language specific to NO SUBDIVISION in CMZ high or moderate risk zones - or people will end up with their homes hanging over the edges of our rivers! (9)(a) (ii) includes a requirement for documentation of the hazard when the applicant proposes 'creation of a new parcel within a known landslide hazard area, but doesn't automatically preclude such development. And, CMZs are considered 'erosion' not landslide hazards, so are not covered here. (9)(b)(v) should have the words 'and hydrologic' inserted after ... 'normal geologic conditions'. 18.22.170 Protection Standards A logical sequence is needed here. This section doesn't say anywhere that building is precluded in a geohazard area! Why? See the attached general provisions submitted by Hiatt on 4/26/07 for recommendations on effective wording and text for inclusion. This section needs to provide a strategy to identify where the hazard is on the ground, mark it, establish where the buffers need to be, and then define what can and cannot be done within each type of hazard area and their buffers. Page 9 of 19 Silver and Hiatt Comments to MLA06-242 (2)( d) is covered in (b) Drainage and erosion control plans, and if it stays, should not just cover hydro-seeding. There are many more BMPs than this category. (3) Clearing and Grading - imposing additional conditions from 18.30.060 Clearing and Grading ordinance. Specifying the time of year is good, but doesn't preclude C & G on geologically hazardous areas. Why does (3)(a)(ii) apply only to roads and utilities? Why not to homes and outbuildings? And why apparently only to landslide areas? This section would work much better if it was broken into sections specific to the different geo-hazards. (ii) Should say: "Temporary sedimentation and erosion control measures must be installed PRIOR to clearing activities." Installing them after makes no sense. (2)(a)(ii) - One should NOT be allowed to create a new parcel in a known geologically hazardous area! What is the reasoning behind allowing this?? What is the County's responsibility to human health and safety? These protection standards apply only if a permit is required. Class I forest practices can be conducted with no review at all. If you already live on a geologically hazardous feature, and want to cut down all the trees, this section is silent. If I wanted to build a house on a geologically hazardous feature, I wouldn't understand how to apply this section of code. The section should be divided into sub-sections based on the type of alteration as in Article VI - FWHCAs. This section can't be read without reading the Clearing and Grading ordinance - 18.30.060 - and relevant portions would be helpful within this section. Note the helpful 'hotlinks' throughout this section. This would also be helpful in the CAO chapter, at least for those who review it on- line. 18.30.060 Grading and excavation standards. (1) General Regulations. (a) All grading and clearing activities shall be conducted so as to minimize potential adverse effects of these activities on forested lands, surface water quality and quantity, groundwater recharge, and fish and wildlife habitat, adjacent properties and downstream drainage channels. (b) Grading and excavation to construct ponds and reservoirs shall: (i) Meet all applicable setbacks specified in this code, except for stormwater detention facilities authorized by the county engineer; (ii) Maintain in-stream flows of natural drainage courses; and (iii) Protect adjacent property from damage. (2) Drainage and Erosion Control. All grading activities shall be accomplished as follows: (a) Design and maintain adequate buffers of undisturbed native vegetation to minimize off-site impacts of surface water runoff, erosion, and sedimentation. (b) Design and construct all graded surfaces that are to be revegetated so that the graded surfaces will hold topsoil and to minimize surface runoff, erosion, and sedimentation. (c) Selectively salvage the upper six to 12 inches of topsoil, stockpile it, and respread over all disturbed areas to be revegetated Excess excavated material. if not retained on-site, must be disposed of at a permitted site approved by the administrator. Page 10 of 19 Silver and Hiatt Comments to MLA06-242 (d) Any area cleared or graded and not covered with gravel or an impervious surface shall be seeded immediately on completion of the project. If erosion is probable, areas with exposed soil shall be protected by temporary means during and following construction until seeding is established. All disturbances should at least be revegetated with grasses and forbs; including shrubs and trees as appropriate in the revegetation effort. Use of plant species native to the county is encouraged. (e) Natural vegetation shall be retained to the maximum extent possible in construction and operation of any use. All development shall ensure that soil erosion and sedimentation of drainage ways will be controlled to prevent damage to adjoining property and downstream drainage channels and receiving waters. (f) Surface drainage shall not be directed to or discharged into county roads or ditches within county rights-of-way unless approved by the county engineer. (g) A drainage analysis shall be prepared if required by ICC 18.30.070. Drainage controls may be required to regulate volume, peak flow and velocities of runoff water and to control pollutants, erosion, and sedimentation if it is probable that damage could occur downstream to property or to water quality. Such controls may include landscaping or re-establishing native vegetation, ponds, catch basins, and other control structures. (h) For effective long-term weed control, it is suggested that the landowner coordinate with the county weed control board to eradicate nuisance species. (3) Best Management Practices (BMPs). BMPs from the currently adopted Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (SMM) (see ICC 18.30.070) or as specified by the county engineer shall be employed in the control of erosion and sediment during construction, to permanently stabilize soil exposed during construction, and in the design and operation of stormwater and drainage control systems. (4) Environmentally Sensitive Areas. All clearing and grading activities that will adversely affect environmentally sensitive areas shall be subject to the regulations of Article VI-D et seq. of Chapter 18.15 ICC, and ICC 18.30.070, without limitation to thresholds found herein: (a) Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas. Standards governing development activities in these areas are found in Article VI-E of Chapter 18.15 ICC. (b) Frequently Flooded Areas. Fills in flood hazard areas as identified on the FIRM (Flood Insurance Rate Maps) are not permitted unless the administrator finds that no reasonable alternative exists. (c) Geologically Hazardous Areas. Standards governing development activities in these areas are found in Article VI-G of Chapter 18.15 ICC. (d) Fish and Wildlife Habitat Areas. Standards governing development activities in these areas are found in Article VI-H ofCbapter 18.15 ICC. (e) Regulated Wetlands. Alteration (filling, excavating, or draining) of regulated wetlands shall be subject to the provisions of Article VI-I of Chapter 18.15 ICC. (5) Grading. (a) Project or building permits which involve grading of 500 or more cubic yards are subject to environmental review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) (see Article X of Chapter 18.40 ICe) unless the grading is SEPA-exempt under WAC 197-11-800. (Note: this does not apply when grading is associated with a development or activity which is categorically exempt from SEP A review requirements. Most minor new construction, including construction of a single-family house and related outbuildings, is exempt from SEPA review; see WAC 197-11-800.) (b) All grading of 500 cubic yards or more shall be subject to a stormwater management permit, as specified in ICC 18.30.070(6), with the exception of: (i) Maintenance of gravel roads; (ii) A SEPA-exempt (cf. WAC 197-11-8oo(2)(d)) residential driveway; (iii) Construction of a Class I - III logging road (per RCW 76.09.050 and WAC Title 222); (iv) Drainage improvements constructed in accordance with subsection (2) ofthis section and ICC 18.30.070; or (v) Construction ofa pond of one-half acre or less which is not in a regulated wetland. [Ord. 8-06 ~ IJ Page 11 of 19 Silver and Hiatt Comments to MLA06-242 No thresholds are provided in Article V. Where are the standards for clearing and grading for 7,000 ft 2 in a geologically hazardous areas, other than obtaining a geo-tech report? Thresholds provide better consistency. See Whatom or King County's. (3)(b)(i)(B) One should not be allowed to create a new parcel in a known geologically hazardous area! This will put people's safety, animals, and homes at risk, and the landowner at risk of not being able to sell the parcel. People will blame the county for not identifying the hazards. The Chehalis River flooding provides a recent example of what happens when this is allowed. How are our rivers different? The Duckabush was in the news on December 5th for flooding. The Quinault River area suffered terrible damage during the December storm. Homes all along Hood Canal (Brinnon and other areas) were impacted by flooding and movement of gravel in alluvial fans during the December storm event. Why would we want to exacerbate these problems? The moderate hazard zone will be the zone next impacted by river migration if the climate change predictions are true. The BOCC should be proactive on this issue. (9) Geotechnical Report CMZs are not mentioned in this section, and must be included. The appropriate delineation methodology relative to rural residential development is the Washington Department of Ecology's method: A Framework for DelineatinG Channel MiGration Zones. Ecology Publication 03-06- 027, Cygnia Rapp, R.G.; Timothy Abbe, Ph.D., R.G, 2003 http://www.ecy.wa.gov I programs I seal sma I st guide/iurisdiction/CMZ.html The method outlined in the WAC 222 Forest Practices Board Manual in Section 2 is NOT appropriate for rural residential development. It is intended for lands that will remain in forestry, and that sustain fewer and shorter-term impacts than 5 - 80 acre parcels with permanent homes, driveways, outbuildings, light, noise, pets, clearings, and pollution from household and yard chemicals. Article VI Fish and Wildlife Conservation Areas 18.22.200 Classification/Designation (3)(c) DELETE THIS!. The Forest Practices Act WAC 222 rules do not provide sufficient protection for rural residential development in lands zoned forestland. It is intended for lands that remain in forestry, in large blocks of ownership. Adjacent forestlands must not be assumed to provide for species that occur or rely on rural residential lands, and do not provide the same quality habitat as low-elevation riverine ecosystems, wetlands, marine shorelines, and estuaries. 18.22.210 Process and Requirements for Designating Habitats of Local Importance as Critical Areas Page 12 of 19 Silver and Hiatt Comments to MLA06-242 Refer to WDFW's letter of November 7,2007 for specific recommendations and concerns related to this section. 18.22.250 Regulated Activities Change to "ALL ACTIVITIES ARE SUBJECT" - make consistent with 18.22.020 Applicability (1)( d) 100 year flood flows should take into account recent and updated USGS and DOE and DFW recommendations - You can install utilities, but can't install sewer lines or septic systems... 18.22.270 Protection Standards (4)(b) In some cases, directional felling may be more appropriate -large wood in wetlands and in buffers is beneficial. Standards (BMPS or CASPS) should be developed. (Metrics in WAC 222 and the State Habitat Conservation Plan are 2,400 cubic feet per acre for uplands, but in reality, the natural 'loading' of downed wood can be much higher.) (5) Buffers - Standard Requirements Refer to the critical area - Wetlands, Article VI, or Geologically Hazardous Areas, Article V - Erosion hazard area is included in the buffer - does this include both Moderate and High Hazard zones? It should, and should be specified as such. The same protection from light and noise afforded to wetlands in Article VII should be applied here to riparian zones and streams. 18.22.250 Regulated Activities (5) - Forest Practices - Glass IV General We applaud that these will be required to comply with CAO buffers and other provisions, as forest practices are not intended for permanent and relatively dense development, and do not require enough protection for s~ch development. We'd previously recommended: "Forest Practices Class N General Conversions. Parcels proposed for conversion shall be assessed for critical areas including CMZs, streams, geologic hazards, critical aquifer recharge zones, and wetlands, and those areas shall be buffered in accordance with Chapter 18.22." Article VII Wetlands 18.22.290 Stewardship Alternatives Page 13 of 19 Silver and Hiatt Comments to MLA06-242 Actually, Article VII sets for the prescriptive requirements for both wetlands and their buffers, not just their buffers, as stated here. CASPs would be allowed in wetlands and their buffers. The CASP committee agreed that buffers of Category 1 and 2 wetlands would not be subject to CASPs. (See language inserted below relative to 18.22.470, CASP Contents - Existing Conditions; that was apparently dropped by the PC.) 18.22.300 Classification and Designation (4) Eliminate multiple rating section - see DOE letter of October 22, 2007, for specific reasomng. 18.22.310 Regulated Activities (would be better titled 'Prohibited Activities') (2) This should be changed to read: "Dumping or discharging of any material or placement of any fill." One does not 'fill material'. 2(b) Wetland boundary and "CATEGORY". Wetlands are not differentiated by 'CLASS'. 2( c) The staking and flagging of a wetland boundary should be conducted before approval of the delineation, not after - otherwise, how does the delineation become approved? If there are changes made, then staking and flagging would need to be adjusted after the review. Wetlands buffers (9), makes no sense with regard to the previous paragraph. The CASP process is the 'reasonable alternative' that should be used in this instance. The whole concept of allowing a landowner to use the outer 25 foot of a buffer as lawn without having any burden of proof that they've met protection standards should be eliminated from this code. If it's in there, it'll be used. (7) DELETE THIS. If it's exempted, it should be included in the introductory section. If you're this far into the CAO, you're not looking at conversion of forestland. Ifwhat a proposal intends is to convert forestlands, activities within critical areas including forest wetlands must be conducted according to the CAO (Article 6 (5))... 9(b) is already covered in Article II General Exemptions (18.22.070). 18.22.330 Protection Standards (2)(d) "Qualified Wetland Evaluator" (this is a different title than required in 18.22.450(2)). Either be consistent with the section 18.22.450(2) - or insert the definition (B) into 18.22.450(2). (2)(d)(ii) Subdivisions should be conducted in accordance with the guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan, which stipulate that parcels with critical areas should remain larger than 10 acres. This section appears to be in conflict with this requirement. And, what is the reason to waive a delineation for a subdivision???? This can create a lot with not enough buildable area, but the Comprehensive Plan also directs to not have a higher density of development around wetlands. Look at the critical areas section of the Comp Plan. Page 14 of 19 Silver and Hiatt Comments to MLA06-242 Article IX Critical Areas Stewardship Plans Advice to the BOCC - this section is not ready for Dublication! This is a work in progress that we support in concept, but it should not be adopted in code - even as a placeholder - until the program is fully designed and peer-reviewed, vetted by the public, and the language is completed developed. Take out the word 'existing' in 18.22.465 (1) with regard to invasive plants. Change to: Compliance with water quality standards shall be measured on the site in accordance with a plan. Conducting monitoring of water quality parameters at the mouths of distributaries (streams, rivers), some up to 20 miles away, is simply not an effective way to establish compliance with the plan or achievement of protection of existing functions. If DCD is not going to require monitoring at the site that will establish baseline and responses, then we shouldn't allow reduction in buffer widths. Performance Standards seems okay, but needs development and peer review. 18.22.470 CASP Contents - Existing Conditions None of this section has been vetted with habitat professionals, and it shows. It's unbelievably poorly written! . There is nothing related to the wording below in the wetland section or the CASP section, that was included in the CASP committee's draft after everyone on the committee agreed to it. This should NOT have been dropped from this draft: Applicability and limitations. "The following provisions define the applicability and limitations of the CASP. a. CASPs apply to only residential development, related activities and appurtenances, including accessory dwelling units (ADUs). They may be used in Rural Village Centers but are not to be used in Urban Growth Areas (UGAs). They are not to be used for commercial or industrial uses or developments, as identified and defined in JCC 18.10. b. They can be applied to properties ~ acre or larger. c. CASPs are only applicable in Wetlands or Fish and Wildlift Habitat Conservation Areas. d CASPs must provide equal or greater protection than prescriptive pathway of buffers and setbacks. e. They may be applied within Category II, III & IV wetlands and buffers, and within buffers of Category I wetlands. They cannot be used in Category I wetlands. Page 15 of 19 Silver and Hiatt Comments to MLA06-242 f CASPs may not be used for activities involvingjill for building within wetlands and FWHCAs, but may be used for jill or vegetation management within these critical areas if it is for enhancement of their functions. g. CASPs will be administered as a Type 1 Permit, per JCC 18.40. h. A CASP may be prepared by any person, but it is strongly advised that a qualified professional be at least consulted " Also, it should be noted that residential property owners are still allowed to develop the outer 25% of their buffers for lawns and gardens without any limitations other than the landowner's judgment that "no reasonable alternative is available." [18.22.300(9) (a)]. Shouldn't this be dropped given that it's the kind of thing the CASP alternative is designed for? What needs to be in this section is details about performance standards, and not necessarily every detail of how they should be prepared. There could be a checklist of submittals, and the article needs to be organized into WHEN, WHAT, WHERE, WHY, and HOW. King County mitigation guidance is a well-organized document, not specific to buffer reduction, but the basic concept applies. We need to state (admit) that we're not requiring scientific data collection in this assessment, but the opinion of a qualified professional. What has to be guaranteed is what is being proposed to be done will protect existing function. In the details, include an outline of the following: . a list of what needs to be determined technically (rating, delineation, typing, mapping), . what needs to be depicted in the site plan, . and what, in the narrative, needs to be assessed. Besides vegetation, the hydrology, and habitat structures should be maintained, reestablished, or restored. Include - . Streams - habitat for fish and wildlife (expand as for wetlands below) . Riparian - aquatic and riparian habitat functions for fish and wildlife (ditto) . Wetland functions listed in the literature include (from Richardson 1994): Hydrologic flux and storage . Aquifer (groundwater) recharge to wetland and/or discharge from the ecosystem . Water storage reservoir and regulator . Regional stream hydrology (discharge and recharge) . Regional climate control (evaporation export = large-scale atmospheric losses of H2O Biological productivity . Net primary productivity . Carbon storage Page 16 of 19 I" Silver and Hiatt Comments to MLA06-242 . Carbon fixation . Secondary productivity Biogeochemical cycling and storage . Nutrient source or sink on the landscape . C,N, S, P, etc. transformations (oxidation/reduction reactions) . Denitrification . Sediment and organic matter reservoir (including L WD input) Decomposition . Carbon release (global climate impacts) . Detritus input for aquatic organisms (downstream energy source) . Mineralization and release ofN, S, C, etc. Community/wildlife habitat . Habitat for species (unique and endangered) . Habitat for algae, bacteria, fungi, fish, shellfish, wildlife, and wetland plants . Biodiversity There are also cultural resources specific to wetlands. (1) - Insert ..."ofthe parcel" to ... A site plan... because it needs to include the entire parcel for effective evaluation of function in context of development. (2) The most current.... ADD IN: '....the ratingsforms and supplemental information required for completion of those forms shall be included in the report.' Delete... 'shall ensure that the most pertinent score is accorded the greatest weight in rating the wetland' . The reason for deletion is that the score IS THE SCORE, and there is no such thing as 'the most pertinent' . (3) There is no such thing as a DNR Water Type Inventory for lentic and lotic waters. There is a DNR hydrography map layer. This section would better be phrased as: "All surface waters and wetlands shall be surveyed for accurate stream typing and/or wetland rating by a qualified professional. " What should be required is a site plan, drawn to scale showing the entire parcel, (see page 11 section 8 D in Hiatt's Wetland section). (4) This is a new number - the next would be (5). The Site Plan shall show the mapped and accurately typed features and the JCC 18.22 prescribed buffers. This would allow DCD and reviewers to understand what part of the buffer that is being altered. (5) Habitats of Local Significance We recommend changing 'within 3/1Oths (of) one mile - should be changed to... 'within the contributing basin.' 3/10s of a mile is an arbitrary distance unrelated to habitat function. Page 17 of 19 Silver and Hiatt Comments to MLA06-242 (6) This should not be limited only to floodplains. It should read... 'Presence of ANY OTHER CRITICAL AREAS. ' (7) Delete 3/10th of one mile... should ask for a contour map of the contributing basin (very easy to print off the county website. This must be done to correctly conduct the rating and fill in the ratings form anyway.) (c) Should be its own number - requiring a qualitative assessment of hydrology in order that it not be impaired below that baseline. (8) "Large organic debris" could be a dead cow. Large Woody Debris is the accepted terminology. 18.22.470 - Existing Conditions Add in 'Existing Water Quality data shall be collected and reported from the Conservation District, DOE, local tribes, the DOH, or other sources. ' 18.22.510 As Built Requirement These sections are positive additions, but seem largely incomplete - works in progress. Certainly we support the expansion of all listed components as very important to the success of the CAO program. We support the plan to bring all existing data into one database. We support the concept ofbio-monitoring as a good indicator of aquatic health. Three years is not a long enough time frame in which to monitor the success of an alternative plan. In (3)(a) In... 'do not plant invasive ornamental plants in or adjacent to wetland buffers' - DELETE 'wetland' ... this should apply to all buffers. Article X Stewardship Incentives, Monitoring Incentives and monitorine: should not be in an ordinance. These are Dolicv recommendations. not code. 18.22.610 Static buffer widths for voluntarily enhanced buffer areas should be put into code... 18.22.630 Watershed Monitoring This county needs to recognize that an effective monitoring program is a crucial component if we are to demonstrate that we're achieving goals in maintaining or improving degraded conditions, either with CASP buffers or regular buffer prescriptions. However, having single Page 18 of 19 Silver and Hiatt Comments to MLA06-242 monitoring stations at the marine interface of Type S and F streams and rivers will not provide information necessary to evaluate impacts from individual parcels and their buffers. Funding for development of the program, implementation of it, analysis of data, and reporting is necessary. 18.22.640 BMPs should not be in code. Should be a separate section - most appropriately be in a manual applicable to specific CAs and activities. Need a technical manual for clearing and grading, such as the stormwater management manual. (3)(a) In...'do not plant invasive ornamental plants in or adjacent to wetland buffers' - DELETE 'wetland' ... this should apply to all buffers. Article XI Adaptive Management These are advisory policy recommendations and guidance, and should go into the Comp Plan and be referenced and discussed there. The development of an adaptive management and monitoring program is a complex undertaking both at the scale of individual properties and watersheds. The current proposed language in this section proposes that monitoring water quality will occur at the mouth of waters where every impact is masked by mixing, and source points are not discernable. This is not a reasonable strategy to document site-specific responses to buffer prescriptions. Whatever gets developed must be independently peer-reviewed and supported by adequate staff. This requires significant funding and staff expertise, with a commitment to long- term management of data as well as education; and more importantly, enforcement. Jefferson County must find a way to fund a comprehensive program, especially if it is to accept reduction in buffer widths that are based on (compromises from the) best science we have available. Page 19 of 19 Amy Hiatt, CAO Advisory Group 04-26-2007 Final Appendix A - Land-Use Impact Levels (Revision of DOE's land-use impact table. The items with strike-out would be omitted if SSB 5248 is enacted.) Types of land-use that can result in high, moderate, or low levels of impact to adJacent wet1ands, and Osh and wildlife habitat CODSel'Vlltion areas (FWHCAa). High Impact Land-Uses: I. .,8ingldamily residential use on parcels smaller than. 1 acre; . Commercial, industrial, and institutional uses on lands designated as Rural Commercial, Rural Industrial, Public, or Urban Growth Area; Public roads; . Active recreation areas (see Definitions); . Class IV-General forest conversions, including conversion option harvest plans, on lands not designated as Resource Lands or Rural Residential. Medium Impact Land-Uses: I. ,!'lewa~riculture (seeDefinitionsj; Single-family residential use on parcels of 1 acre to less than 5 acres; I. Single-family residential use on parcels of 5 acres or larger withJandS<:l:lping'maC<.:esS(>IYm m m structures, and impervious surfaces exceeding the limitations for Low Impact Land-Uses (see Definitions); . Private roads or driveways serving 3 or more residential parcels; Paved trails; Passive recreation areas (see Definitions); Utility corridors (private or public) with a maintenance road; . Class IV-General forest conversions, including conversion option harvest plans, on lands designated as Resource Lands or Rural Residential. Low Impact Land-Uses: I. ~ingldsmilyresilier1tial Use l>I1: parcels of 5 acres or larger with Janli~g,~~~ry mmm _ _mmm m - structures and impervious surfaces not exceeding the limitations for Low Impact Land-Uses (see Definitions); . Private driveways serving no more than 2 residential parcels; Unpaved trails; Utility corridors (private or public) without a maintenance road; Class I, II, III, and IV-Special forest practices on lands of any Comprehensive Plan land-use designation except Urban Growth Area; Class IV-General non-conversion forest practices (equivalent to Class I, II, III, and IV-Special forest practices) conducted on lands platted after January 1, 1960 and of any Comprehensive Plan land-use designation except Urban Growth Area. Notes: 1. 1bis list is an adaptation of Table 8C-3, Appendix 8C, Volume 2, Wetlands in Washin~on State, April 2005, Washington State Department of Ecology; 2. All new buildings must be set back 15 feet from the edge of the prescribed buffer for a wetland or FWHCA (see Definitions); ~: The potential impact to ana.djacent wetlan<lorFWHcArroDi a iari<l~use not<lescnbedin tlUsllst shall be determined by the Administrator on a case-by-case basis. r----- j Deleted: <#>High-intensity ! agricultural activities (see l Dermitions);1 -1 Deleted: <#>Medium-intensityr1 agricultural activities (see j DermitionsJ;1 I Foo jllllUled: Bullets and Numbering ; . j Deleted: agricultural activities, J , ,~___.___nn_________________ i Deleted: <#>Low-intensity : agricultural activities (see j Deflnitions);1 t Deleted: agricultural activities, Deleted: On lands where existing and ongoing agriculture is being conducted in a wetland or FWHCA, the area of the prescn1:Jed buffer may be developed for new low-intensity agricultural activities, subject to mitigation of new adverse impacts to the values and functions of the wetland or FWHCA. fftfu eM VfAU/d; to ffiatf- f Jz7v~ LffU1 MU1P / z11-7 ! rJ'b Amy Hiatt, CAO Advisory Group 04-26-2007 Final Sections 6, 7 and 8 of the CAO Administrative Provisions (See the Table of Contents for the other sections that should be included in the Administrative Provisions. The items with strike-outs are to be omitted if SSB 5248 is enacted.) 6. Regulated Uses and Activities (Adapted from Whatcom County Critical Areas Ordinance, Section WCC 16.16.225) A. The following activities shall be subject to the provisions of this ordinance when they occur within critical areas or their prescribed buffers: 1. Clearing, grading, dumping, excavating, discharging, or filling with any material. This includes creating impervious surfaces. 2. Constructing, reconstructing, demolishing, or altering the size of, any structure or infrastructure, subject to the provisions for a non-conforming structure pursuant to JCC 18.20.260. 3. Any other activity for which a County permit is required, excluding permits for interior remodeling. B. Alteration of critical areas and prescribed buffers is prohibited except when one or more of the following conditions applies: 1. Alteration is approved pursuant to the reasonable use or variance provisions of this ordinance. 2. Altemtion is necessary to accommodate an essential public facility or public utility where no feasible alternative location will accommodate the facility and the facility is located, designed, and constructed to minimize and, where possible, avoid critical area disturbance to the maximum extent feasible. 3. Alteration is necessary to accommodate a commercial/industrial shoreline- dependent use permitted in accordance with the Jefferson County Shoreline Management Program (SMP) where the facility is opemted, located, designed and constructed to minimize ~d, where possible, avoid critical area disturbance to the maximum extent feasible. 4. Alteration is essential to an activity allowed by this ordinance, and all feasible measures to avoid and minimize impacts have been employed. Such feasible measures shall include, but not be limited to, clustering where permitted by zoning and as appropriate to protect critical areas. The purposes of clustering shall be to minimize adverse impacts of development on critical area functions and values, minimize land clearing, maintain soil stability, preserve native vegetation, maintain hydrology, and mitigate risk to life and property. 5. Alteration is associated with an allowed activity under this ordinance, or is allowed pursuant to the notification provisions of this ordinance, or is allowed pursuant to the specific regulatory standards for each designated critical area, as enumemted in the subsequent sections of this ordinance. 6.. Alteration is associated with a Vegetation Management Plan, Mitigation Plan, or Watershed-based Management Plan approved pursuant to the applicable sections of this ordinance. A {teuk1 vutUt ~ C(JUA~ Jt-h2rff ~ 8Jivtr Z/2--7/06 ~ .. Amy Hiatt, CAO Advisory Group 04-26-2007 Final 7. 7. Activities Allowed without Notification (Adapted from Whatcom County Critical Areas Ordinance, Section WCC 16.16.230) The following activities as specified are allowed in critical areas and buffers without notification under the provisions of this ordinance: A. Class I, II, III and N-Special forest practices conducted in accordance with the applicable standards of the Washington State Forest Practices Act, WAC 222-16, except where either of the following applies: 1. On lands that have been, or are proposed to be, converted to a use other than the production of commercial forest-products as provided in chapter RCW 76.09.050 and RCW 76.09.240; or 2. On lands that have been platted after January 1, 1960, as provided in RCW 76.09.050 and RCW 76.09.240; or 3. On lands that are located in an Urban Growth Area. B. Class I forest practices conducted in accordance with the applicable standards of the Washington State Forest Practices Act, WAC 222-16, on the portions of parcels platted after January I, 1960 (as provided in RCW 76.09.050 and RCW 76.09.240) that are used primarily for the production of commercial forest-products. C. Agricultural activities conducted under the following conditions: 1. On lands meeting the definition of "existing and ongoing agriculture'~_QLiI1._um__Ji accordance with the provisions established for non-conforming uses and ! structures in JCC 18.20.260"m_m___ ___mmmm____m__m____u__m_m__m __mm__i 2. 3. D. Routine maintenance of drainage channels on lands meeting the definition of "existing and ongoing agriculture," provided that,.mJ.h-~_1ll~~~~~J~_____m__m/ necessary to support activities conducted in accordance with the definition of "existing and ongoing agriculture," and the maintenance activity does not expand the dimensions of the drainage channel beyond the original, lawfully established dimension~___ n mn______mmm m_m_____m_n ____m__m~ E. Maintenance or repair of legally established single-family residences and accessory structures provided that the activity does not further alter, impact, or encroach upon critical areas or their prescribed buffers. The maintenance or repair activity shall not result in increased risk to life or property. F. Maintenance of, in association with legally established single-family residences and accessory structures, ornamental landscaping and landscape features within a critical area or its prescribed buffer including, but not limited to: repair and maintenance of features such as fences, trellises, rockeries, walls, pathways, patios, play areas and other similar improvements; cutting or mowing of lawns; removal of weeds and noxious/invasive species; cultivating, planting, and harvesting of garden crops; pruning 2 DeIebed: Altemtion on land used for agriculture is associated with a Watershed Protection Plan, Critical Area Protection Plan or Critical Area Protection Checklist approved pursuant to the applicable sections of this ordinance., DeIebed: of any land-use ; designation ! DeIebed:, and only when the :! activities conducted remain at the existing level of impact or intensity, or a lower level of impact or intensity, as defined in this ordinance DeIebed: On Agricultural Resource Lands in accordance with an approved Critical Areas Protection Plan or Watershed Protection Plan, pursuant to the requirements of the section of this ordinance titled Protection of Critical Areas on Aluicu1t:ural Resource Lands DeIebed: On Rural Residential ,: lands in accordance with an approved Critical Areas Protection Checklist or Critical Areas Protection Plan, pursuant to the requirements of the section of this ordinance titled Critical Areas Protection on Rural Lands with Agricultuml Uses. DeIebed: all of the fu1lowing conditions are met:, , 1. DeIebed:;oI1 , 2. _ The maintenance activity is conducted in accordance with an approved Critical Area Protection Plan prepared under the applicable provisions of this ordinance;and1 , 3. _ The land owner or farm opemtor obtains a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA), if required, from the WashingtDn Department ofFish and Wildlife (WDFW) prior to the maintenance activity; and' , 4. _ The land owner or farm opemtor provides a copy of the HPA to the Administrator. "or Amy Hiatt, CAO Advisory Group 04-26-2007 Final 3 and replanting of non-invasive ornamental vegetation or indigenous native species to maintain the general condition and extent of such areas, provided that mitigation sites, or other areas protected by means of conseIVation easements or similar restrictive covenants are not covered by this exception. G. Vegetation management activities not covered under sections A through D and F above that implement an approved Vegetation Management Plan, prepared in accordance with the applicable section of this ordinance, for purposes of controlling noxious/invasive species, improving wildlife habitat, promoting forest health, or maintaining or enhancing views, provided that the activities do not have adverse impact on the functions and values of the critical area' or buffer,and do not result in increased risk to life or property. H. Activities with minor and temporary impact such as hiking, canoeing, photography, hunting, fishing, education and nature study, or nondestructive scientific research. I. Activities undertaken to comply with a United States Environmental Protection Agency super fund related order, or a Washington Department of Ecology order pursuant to the Model Toxics Control Act, or a Department of Homeland Security order that specifically preempts local regulations in the findings of the order. J. Routine site investigation work including land SUIVeyS, shallow soil test pits dug in conjunction with wetland delineations, geo-technical soil borings, groundwater monitoring wells, percolation tests, and similar or related activities necessary for land- use application submittals. K. Emergency construction or activity, provided that: 1. An emergency is an unanticipated and imminent threat to public health, safety or the environment that requires immediate action within a time period too short to allow full compliance with this ordinance. 2. Emergency construction does not include development of new permanent protective structures where none previously existed. Where the Administrator determines that new protective structures are the appropriate means to address an emergency situation, the project proponent shall either obtain any permits that would have been required absent an emergency, pursuant to RCW 90.58, WAC 173-27 or this chapter, or remove the structure upon abatement of the emergency situation. 3. Within the jurisdiction of the Jefferson County Shoreline Management Program (SMP) all emergency construction shall be consistent with the policies and procedural requirements of the SMP and this ordinance. 4. The applicant shall make a reasonable attempt to contact the Administrator prior to the activity. Provided that when prior notice is not feasible, notification of the activity shall be submitted to the Administrator as soon as the emergency is addressed and no later than fourteen (14) days following such action. 8. Activities Allowed with Notification (Adapted from Whatcom County Critical Areas Ordinance, Section WCC 16.16.235) The following activities as specified are allowed within critical areas and buffers provided that the applicant delivers written notification to the Administrator. The notification shall contain Amy Hiatt, CAO Advisory Group 04-26-2007 Final 4 specific information describing the activity, the equipment to be used, and the protective measures to be implemented to ensure that the activity will not result in increased risk to public health, safety and welfare, that adverse impacts to critical areas are minimized, and that disturbed areas are restored as soon as possible following the activity. Notification shall be submitted to the Administrator at least ten (10) business days prior to initiating work. Unless otherwise specified, notification of an activity shall be valid for one year provided that there is no change in the scope, location, or extent of the activity as described in the notification. Upon receipt of the notification, the County may provide guidance on best management practices for tree and vegetation protection, construction management, erosion and sedimentation control, water quality protection, and chemical applications. Activities allowed with notification include the following: A. Maintenance or repair of existing infrastructure improvements, including dikes and drainage ditches, rights-of-way, trails, roads, fences, and utilities provided that the activity does not further alter, impact, or encroach upon critical areas or buffers or further affect their functions. The maintenance activity shall not result in increased risk to life or property. B. Installation of navigation aids and boundary markers in accordance with applicable state and federal laws. C. Installation of mooring buoys in accordance with the Department of Fish and Wildlife design guidelines and the Jefferson County Shoreline Management Progr~. D. Restoration or enhancement projects in wetlands or fish and wildlife habitat conselVation areas and their buffers, provided that the project is approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Washington State Department of Ecology, Washington State Department Fish and Wildlife, or other appropriate local, state, federal, or tribal jurisdiction. E. Removal of trees that are hazardous, posing a threat to public safety, or posing an imminent risk of damage to an existing structure, public or private road or sidewalk, or other permanent improvement, on lands where forest practices are not allowed under the provisions of Section 6: Activities Allowed Without Notification, subsections (A) and (B), provided that: 1. The applicant submits a report on a form provided by the Administrator from a certified arborist, registered landscape architect, or professional forester that documents the hazard and provides a planting schedule for the replacement trees; 2. Tree cutting shall be limited to pruning and crown thinning, unless otherwise justified by a qua1ified professional. Where pruning or crown thinning is not sufficient to address the hazard, trees should be converted to wildlife snags and completely removed only where no other option removes the identified hazard; 3. All vegetation cut (tree stems, branches, etc.) shall be left within the critical area or buffer unless removal is warranted due to the potential for creating a fire hazard or for disease or pest transmittal to other healthy vegetation; 4. The landowner shall replace any trees that are removed pursuant to a planting schedule prepared in accordance with (1) above; Amy Hiatt, CAO Advisory Group 04-26-2007 Final 5 5. If a tree to be removed provides critical habitat, such as an eagle perch, a qualified wildlife biologist shall be consulted to determine timing and methods for removal that will minimize adverse impacts; 6. Hazard trees determined to pose an imminent threat or danger to public health or safety, to public or private property, or of serious environmental degradation may be removed or pruned by the landowner on whose property the tree is located prior to receiving the permits required under this part; provided, that the landowner makes reasonable efforts to notify the Administrator, and within 14 days following such action, the landowner shall submit a restoration plan that demonstrates compliance with the provisions of this part. F. Alteration or removal of beaver built structures two years old or less, provided that there is no adverse impact to wetland, river, or stream functions; the land owner obtains an HPA from WDFW prior to the activity; and the land owner provides a copy of the HPA to the Administrator as part of the written notification. ,.. Amy Hiatt, CAO Advisory Group 05-08-2007 1 Definitions for Appendix A - Land-Use Impact Levels Building Setback. . Unless otherwise provided, building foundations shall be set back fifteen feet from the edge of a critical area buffer, or from the edge of the critical area itself if no buffer is required. The following structures or improvements are allowed within the building setback area: landscaping; fences and arbors; uncovered decks; roof overhangs and projecting bays cantilevered from the building; impervious ground surfaces; and overhead or below ground utilities. Recreation Area, Active. . Shall include areas, generally open to the public, with structures or with large areas of compacted or impervious surfaces, or with the potential to generate significant adverse impacts from noise, light, or human activity, such as ball fields, tennis courts, play grounds, golf course fairways and driving ranges, equestrian arenas and holding areas, off-road vehicle trails and obstacle courses. Recreation Area, Passive. . Shall include open space, non-forested areas used for such activities as walking, jogging, picnics, tent camping, and fishing. Residential Agricultural Activities, Landscaping, and Impervious Surfaces. . Shall include new, or existing and ongoing, agricultural activities conducted for commercial or non-commercial purposes as allowed in connection with single- family residential use within Rural Residential land-use designations. · To qualify as a Low Impact Land-Use for determination of prescribed buffers for wetlands and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, a Critical Area Protection Checklist shall be prepared, approved, and implemented, and the following limitations shall apply: Animal Unit density on grazing land shall not exceed one or less per 2.5 acres; any combination of developed landscape features such as orchards, vineyards, row crops, vegetable gardens, ornamental gardens, lawns, livestock confmement areas, and open riding arenas shall not cover in total more than 30 percent of the entire area of the parcel; impervious surfaces (including parking areas and roof areas, but not driveways) shall not cover in total more than five percent of the entire area of the parcel. . When any of these limitations is exceeded, the entire parcel becomes a Medium Impact Land-Use, subject to wider prescribed buffers for wetlands and fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. Enhancement or restoration of critical areas and buffers may be required as a condition of approval for subsequent new development. Alternatively, a Critical Area Protection Plan may be prepared, approved, and implemented in accordance with the applicable section of this ordinance. Bew Agriculture. . Agricultural activities proposed or conducted after (the adoption date of the revised CAO) on land that has not previously been used for agriculture within any of the Comprehensive Plan land-use designations, and that do not meet the definition of "existing and ongoing agriculture." AtftzU1~+ -tv ~vwu6 J ~crtt ~ ~lr/if ~l ~7 t {) Jb i.-_ .. Amy Hiatt, CAO Advismy Group 05-08-2007 2 . A change in agricultural activity from a lower to a higher intensity is considered new agriculture. . New agriculture is not allowed within wetlands or fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas. . New agriculture is not allowed within the prescribed buffer of a wetland or a fish and wildlife habitat conservation area (FWHCA), except when the wetland or FWHCA the buffer is intended to protect already has a use that meets the definition of "existing and ongoing agriculture," and subject to mitigation as specified in this ordinance. . New agriculture is allowed within critical aquifer recharge areas, frequently flooded areas, and certain geologically hazardous areas, and their prescribed buffers, subject to the standards specified in the applicable sections of this ordin~ce. High-Intensity Agricultural Activities. . (Applies to designated Agricultural Resource Lands only.) Shall include dairies and concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), as defined in UDC 18.10; livestock grazing with an Animal Unit density greater than three per acre of pasture land; and impervious surfaces (including roof areas) totaling more than 5,000 square feet per acre of contiguous land. Medium-Intensity Agricultural Activities. . (Applies to designated Agricultural Resource Lands only.) Shall include livestock grazing with an Animal Unit (AU) density of one but not greater than three per acre of pasture land; livestock confinement areas with an AU density of one or more per 1,600 square feet, and that do not meet the defmition of a concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO); all agricultural and horticultural operations on cultivated land; impervious surfaces (including roof areas) totaling more than 2,000 square feet but less than 5,000 square feet per acre of contiguous land; and all other activities not considered either Low or High Intensity. Low-Intensity Agricultural Activities. . (Applies to designated Agricultural Resource Lands only.) Shall include the growing of perennial crops without regular cultivation such as hayfields, orchards, vineyards, and Christmas tree plantations; livestock grazing with an Animal Unit (AU) density of less than one per acre of pasture land; livestock confinement areas with an AU density of less than one per 1,600 square feet, and that do not meet the definition of a concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO); impervious surfaces (including roof areas) totaling less than 2,000 square feet per acre of contiguous land. , Hello, I'm Scott Clogston from Hiller Drive, Port Hadlock HEARING RECORD I am speaking for the group "Citizens Protecting Critical Areas (CPCA). Our attorney, Gerald Steel, has provided you with a letter that notifies you that the latest draft of the CAO remains infective to meet the GMA requirement to have development regulations that protect critical areas because Jefferson County Code 18.50 does not provide enforcement sufficient to actually protect Critical Areas. I have another copy of his letter which I wish to submit for your review. Citizens Protecting Critical Areas believe this is a significant violation of the GMA and requests that the CAD be modified to adequately address the issue. I also have for your review and inclusion into the record a satchel containing several citizens letters supporting this position, a letter from CPCA, and information and photos illustrating the difficulties we have had obtaining enforcement of Critical Areas Ordinance violations. We support Jill Silver and Amy Hiatt's majority opinion as relates to Channel Migration Zones, Wetlands and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Areas. I would like to conclude with a quote from one of the enclosed letters by Ray Lowrie one of the first restorers of fish streams and runs in this area as follows: "Good laws that are not enforced are a travesty and an insult to the governed." Thank you. ~.J~~ fO,t ~p~ A ~ State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Mailing Address: 332 E. 5th Street #230 Port Angeles W A 98362 November 3, 2004e- ,(.'Ylc<.:r'"Llt{')(" . LpJ;o[ft.. l ( Scott Clogston and Susan Hopkins P.O Box 1075 Port Hadlock, W A 98339 Dear Mr. Clogston and Ms. Hopkins: SUBJECT: Little Goose Creek, Tributary to Oak Bay; Section 07, Township 29 North, Range 01 East, Jefferson Co I apologize for not responding to your letters dated August 10, 2007 and August 15, 2007. I would like to clarify that I was not working in East Jefferson County two years ago as your November 18, 2007 letter stated. I started assisting other Area Habitat Biologists with coverage of that area on September of 2006. My time spent working in East Jefferson County has been limited by my 40% work schedule. From the flood pictures of 1993 and 1997 that you had sent, it is apparent that the high flows in Little Goose Creek can be problematic especially with the undersized culverts and proximity of the houses. The pictures did depict the severity of flows through the weir areas during those years. My interpretation from the flood pictures, it appears that the fence and associated posts located above the weirs may have been constructed in a way to obstruct or change the natural flow or bed of the creek, which would have required a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) prior to construction. Any work done without an HPA is a violation of the State Hydraulics Code. A copy ofthis letter and other associated materials (pictures and past letters to me) will be forwarded to WDFW's Enforcement Program. If you have any questions, please contact me at (360) 417-1434. Sincerely, dZ, Theresa Powell Habitat Program Cc: WDFW Enforcement Program, Sergeant Henry August 10, 2007 Dear Teresa- We wanted to send you these photos that show Li,*le Goose Creek during a flood event, spreading out on the adjacent area -which te assume is a "floodplain". I AI Scalf said that you determined there is no floodhlain there, which reduces the county's ability to enforce buffer regulations relat~d to critical areas in floodplains. He considers you to be the expert on the subject. I I Our m~in concern is for the reach. where the fence ~s along and across the creek and the weirs - between Hiller Drive and Oak BayIHighwa~. We're concerned that in high water, there will likely be scour along tt from high velocities hitting the boards or the posts, which would probably cause n1.ore filling upstream of the weirs - or possibly even directing the flow into the ends ~f some of the weirs, destabilizing them. We've seen this type of scour ~ccur before in this creek - it really roars in the winter! I We really don't understand how a fence, fence posk and the associated cement piers in a stream and stream bank can be considere~ appropriate to protecting the stream-functions. . I Thank you for your consideration. We recognize ~at you're extremely busy, and would fmd it difficult to get into the middle of this onflict - but we're trying to do the best for the stream and the fish that live in it. e've loved this creek since 1952! We hope to hear back from you soon. I ! Sincerely, Scott Clogston and Sue Hopkins 360-385-3365 .:-..-< . .--- -;7Q,-~~ ~~-------------- ~-==-=-~::::~rr-~=~ ____== _~~_~~~D;jji~-~d;;tiL~;j~~-i- __ __ f ~ ~QZ~()(LQk!t___.___._._____.__.______.______.______.______ ~~.Q.~~:idL~~7'---------'---'--- ~E~_.C0id_M_~~_~~~~.___._._____..__.,__ .,lL/~/IrJJ___~_~~~l221L~Jlt!JL~ Zo..(/(~__ ______.. ill ..,. '~___~~~_~~cd2_~. ,--: ~-~~-~- ._______ ~.,~.:...-~_~fWL~~-~.,---------- ~~._~ ~--~~-~-~L-~---..-.-.....-.--.-.,--- ,~~~~~-~-~--_._-------_..,-_._- -.-:-=- --------- -~~~~~==~~~-~~-~-=~~-~~=~=-~-~-==== ------...... e.<2"-.P~-~-~-.t,4.-~--~~-.F...~.,.~~-. -.---.--.-...---- --+--- -...... ......----1"-.- -.-----. n . _ .1. I ! i .....- ~ ,"-.j" Washington Department of FISH and WILDLIFE HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL RCW 77.55.181 - Appeal to Hydraulic Appeals Board RCW 77.55.021 - Appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 RCW Coastal 48 Devonshire Road WA 98563 Issue Date: August 06, 2007 Project Expiration Date: August 06, 2011 Control Number: FPAlPublic Notice #: 109663-1 N/A PERMITTEE AUTHORIZED AGENT OR CONTRACTOR Joe Thompson 101 Hiller Drive Port Hadlock, WA 98339 . . Jefferson County Conservation District ATTENTION: AI Latham 205 W Patison Street Port Hadlock, WA 98339 360-385-4105 Project Name: Project Description: Little Goose Cr Plank Weir Maintenance Maintenance repairs for plank weirs - fix leaks along stream bank to prevent flow from routing around a plank weirs. Repair is needed to facilitate fish passage. PROVISIONS 1. TIMING LIMITATIONS: The project may begin immediately and shall be completed by September 15, 2011, provided: Work below the ordinary high water line shall only occur between July 1 st and September 15th of calendar years 2007 through 2011. 2. NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT: The Area Habitat Biologist (AHB) listed below shall receive notification (phone, fax, mail or email) from the. person to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval (HP A) is issued (permittee) or the agent/contractor no less than 1 working day prior to the start of construction activities. The notification shall include the permittee's name, project location, starting date for work, and the control number for this HPA. ~. '. BYPASS PROVISIONS: 3. Bank repair work shall be conducted in the dry or in isol.ation from the stream flow by the installation of a bypass flume or culvert, or by pumping the stream flow around the work area. ...t~'i:,. ......(.:'; 4. A temporary bypass to divert flow around the' work area shall be in place prior to initiation of other work in the wetted perimeter. 5. A sandbag revetment or similar device shall be installed at the bypass inlet to divert the entire flow through the bypass. 6. The bypass shall be of sufficient size to pass all flows and debris. for the duration of the project. 7. Any device used for diverting water from the fish-bearing stream shall be equipped with a fish guard to prevent passage of fish into the diversion device pursuant to RCW 77.040 and 77.220'- The pump intake shall be screened with 1/8-inch mesh to prevent fish from entering the system. The screened intake shall consist of a facility with enough surface area to ensure that the'velocity . through the screen is less than 0.4 feet per second. Screen water is withdrawn from the stream Page 1 of 5 0..,00>> Washington Department of FISH and WILDLIFE HYDRAULIC PROJECT ARPROV AL RCW 77.55.181 - Appeal to Hydtaulic AppealSI Board RCW 77.55.021 - Appeal pursuant to Chapter ~.05 RCW I Coastal 48 Devonshire Road Montesano. WA 98563 (360) 2494628 Issue Date: August 06, 2007 Project Expiration Date: August 06, 2011 I Control ~umber: FPAlPub!ic Notice #: 1 09663-1 N/A I I through the pump intake. The pump shall be large enoughl to pump the entire stream around the work areas. Once the pump is started, it shall run continU1USIY until the streambed and banks in the work areas are restored. The pump discharge shall be pia ed downstream of the sandbag dam into an area that will not create erosion. i 8. Upon completion of the project, all material used in the temporary bypass shall be removed from the site and site returned to preproject or improved conditi~:>ns. 11. All repair activities shall be done by hand or with hand~held tools. WATER QUALITY PROVISIONS: I 12. Every effort shall be taken during all phases of this pro~ect to ensure that sediment-laden water is not allowed to enter the stream. I I 13. Wastewater from project activities and water removed from within the work area shall be routed to an area landward of the ordinary high water line to allo~ removal of fine sediment and other contaminants prior to being discharged to the stream. ! o 0 I 14. If high flow conditions that may cause siltation are enc?untered during this project, work shall stop until the flow subsides. Project activities shall not degrade water quality to the detriment of fish life. 15. All work operations shall be conducted in a manner th~t causes little or no siltation to downstream areas. Prior to starting work, silt fencing shalllbe in place immediately downstream of the project site during repair activities. Accumulated sedinlents shall be removed during the project and after completion of work. . 16. Alteration or disturbance of the streambed and banks $hall be limited to that necessary to repair . weirs. Within seven calendar days of project completion, alII disturbed areas shall be protected from erosion using hay mulch, grass seed, or other effective m~ans. I I 017. Extreme care shall be taken to ensure that no petroleulm products, hydraulic fluid, roadbed fill material,. dirt, mud, chemicals, or any other toxic or deleternous materials are allowed to enter or leach into the stream. Page 2 of 5 .i.....-..., Washington . . Department of FISH and .. WILDLIFE HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL RCW 77.55.181 - Appeal to Hydraulic Appeals Board RCW 77.55.021 - Appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 RCW Coastal 48 Devonshire Road Montesano, WA 98563 (360) 249-4628 Issue Date: August 06, 2007 Project Expiration Date: August 06, 2011 Control Number: FPAlPublic Notice #: 109663-1 N/A 18. If at any time, as a result of project activities, fish are observed in distress, a fish kill occurs, or water quality problems develop (including equipment leaks or spills), cooperations shall cease and the Washington Department of Ecology at 1-800-:-258-5990, and to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife at (360)902-2537, shall be contacted immediately. Work shall not resume until further approval is given by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. PROJECT LOCATIONS location #1 Little Goose Creek WORK START: August 06, 2007 /WORK END: August 06, 2011 WRIA: Waterbody: Tributary to: - 17.0000 Various Various' 114 SEC: ~ Township: Range: Latitude: Longitude: County: SW 1/4 07 29 N 01 E N 48.994663202 W 122.73225 Jefferson Location #1 Driving Directions Unnumbered tributary to Oak Bay. On Quimper Peninsula, travel south on Oak Bay Road from Hadlock to Hiller Drive. Turn and follow to marker 102. APPL Y TO ALL HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVALS This Hydraulic Project Approval pertains only to those requirements of the Washington State Hydraulic Code, specifically Chapter 77.55 RCW (formerly RCW 77.20). Additional authorization from other public agencies may be necessary for this project. The person(s) to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued is responsible for applying for and obtaining any additional authorization from other public agencies (local, state and/or federat) that may be necessary for this project. This Hydraulic Project Approval shall be available on the job site at all times and all its provisions followed by the person(s) to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued and operator(s) performing the work. This Hydraulic Project Approval does not authorize trespass. The person(s) to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued and operator(s) performing the work may be held liable for any loss or damage to fish life or fish habitat that results from failure to comply with the provisions of this Hydraulic Project Approval. Failure to comply with the provisions of this Hydraulic Project Approval could result in a civil penalty of up to one hundred dollars per day and/or a gross misdemeanor charge, possibly punishable by fine and/or imprisonment. All Hydraulic Project Approvals issued pursuant to RCW 77.55.021 (EXCEPT agricultural irrigation, stock watering or bank. stabilization projects) or 77 .55.141 are subject to additional restrictions, conditions or revocation if the Department of Fish and Wildlife determines that new biological or physical information indicates the need for such action. The person(s) to whom this Hydraulic Project Approval is issued has the right pursuant to Chapter 34.04 RCW to appeal such decisions. All agricultural irrigation, stock watering or bank stabilization Hydraulic Project Approvals issued pursuant to RCW 77 .55.021 may be modified by the Department of Fish and Wildlife due to changed conditions after Page 3 of 5 .. I I HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL RCW 77.55.181 - Appeal to Hydraulic Appeals kOard RCW 77.55.021 - Appeal pursuant to Chapter ~.05 RCW I I Control N~mber: FPAlPUblip Notice #: I I consultation with the person(s) to whom this Hydraulic Project Approvall is issued: PROVIDED HOWEVER, that such modifications shall be subject to appeal to the Hydraulic Appeals Boar~ established in RCW 77 .55.301. I APPEALSINFORMAr~ If you wish to appeal the issuance or denial of, or conditions provided it a Hydraulic Project Approval, there are informal and formal appeal processes available. A. INFORMAL APPEALS (WAC 220-110-340) OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSUANT TO RCW 77;55.021, 77.55.141,77.55.181, and 77.55.291: A person who is aggrieved or a~versely affected by the following Department actions may request an informal review of: ! (A) The denial or issuance of a Hydraulic Project Approval, or the co~ditions or provisions made part of a Hydraulic Project Approval; or I. (B) An order imposing civil penalties. A request for an INFORMAL~VIEW shall be in WRITING to the Department of FIsh and Wildlife HP A Appeals Coordinator, 600 Capitol w. ay North, Olympia, Washington 98501-1091 and shall be RECEIVED by the Department within 30 days of the denial or issuan of a Hydraulic Project Approval or receipt of an order imposing civil penalties. If agreed to by the aggrieved party, and the aggrieved party is the Hydraulic Project Approval applicant, resolution of theconcems will be facilitated throug~ discussions with the Area Habitat Biologist and his/her supervisor. If resolution is not reached, or the aggrieved party i~ not the Hydraulic Project Approval applicant, the Habitat Technical Services Division Manager or his/her designee s~all conduct a review and recommend a decision to the Director or hislher designee. If you are not satisfied with the res~lts of this informal appeal, a formal appeal may be filed. I ! . " Washington , Department of FISH and WILDLIFE Coastal 48 Devonshire Road Montesano. WA 98563 (360) 249-4628 Issue Date: August 06, 2007 Project Expiration Date: August 06, 2011 109663-1 N/A B. FORMAL APPEALS (WAC 220-110-350) OF DEPARTMENT ACTIf.NS TAKEN PURSUANT TO RCW 77.55.021 (EXCEPT agricultural irrigation, stock watering or bank stabilization pr 'ects) or 77.55.291: A person who is aggrieved or adversely affected by the following Depa ment actions may request a formal review of: (A). The denial or issuance of a Hydraulic Project Approval, or the co ditions or provisions made part of a Hydraulic . Project Approval;' . . (B) An order imposing civil penalties; or "I (C) Any other 'agency action' for which an adjudicative proceeding is required under the Administrative Pr~dure Act, Chapter 34.05 RCW. ~! A request for a FORMAL APPEAL shall be in WRITING to the Depart ent of Fish and Wildlife HPA Appeals Coordinator, shall be plainly labeled as 'REQUEST FOR FORMAL AP .. EAL' and shall be RECEIVED DURING OFFICE HOURS by the Department at 600 Capitol Way North, Olympi ,Washington 98501-1091, within 30-days of the Department action that is being challenged. The time period for re uesting a formal appeal is suspended during consideration of a timely informal appeal. If there has been an informa appeal, the deadline for requesting a formal appeal shall be within 3O-days of the date of the Department's written ecision in response to the informal appeal. C. FORMAL APPEALS OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSU NT TO RCW 77.55.021 (agricultural irrigation, stock watering or bank stabilization only), 77.55.141, 77.55.181, or 77.5.241: A person who is aggrieved or adversely affected by the denial or issuance of a Hydraulic Project Approval, or tJe conditions or provisions made part of a Hydraulic Project Approval may request a formal appeal. The request or FORMAL APPEAL shall be in WRITING to the Hydraulic Appeals Board per WAC 259-04 at Environmental Heari gs Office, 4224 Sixth Avenue SE, Building Two - Rowe Six, Lacey, Washington 98504; telephone 360/459-6327. . D. FORMAL APPEALS OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSU NT TO CHAPTER 43.21L RCW: A person who is aggrieved or adversely affected by the denial or issuance of a ydraulic Project Approval, or the conditions or provisions made part of a Hydraulic Project Approval may request a fo al appeal. The FORMAL APPEAL shall be in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 43.21L RCW and Chapter 1 9-08 WAC. The request for FORMAL APPEAL shall be in WRITING to the Environmental and Land Use Hearings Bo rd at Environmental Hearings Office, Environmental and land Use Hearings Board, 4224 Sixth Avenue SE, uilding Two - Rowe Six, P.O. Box 40903, Lacey, Washington 98504; telephone 360/459-6327. I Page 4 of 5 " . ,-' . Washington Department of FISH and WILDLIFE HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL RCW 77.55.181 - Appeal to Hydraulic Appeals Board RCW 77.55,021 - Appeal pursuant to Chapter 34.05 RCW Coastal 48 Devonshire Road Montesano, WA 98563 (360) 249-4628 Issue Date: August 06, 2007 Project Expiration Date: August 06, 2011 Control Number: FPAlPublic Notice #: 109663-1 N/A E. FAILURE TO APPEAL WITHIN J"HE REQUIRED TIME PERIODS results in forfeiture of all appeal rights. If there is no timely request for an appeal, the department action shall be final and unappealable. ENFORCEMENT: Sergeant Henry (28) P3 Habitat Biologist Theresa Powell ' 360-417-1434 CC: Jefferson Co DCD ~2, for Director WDFW ,rowe.L Tep e. D F=l.....I. W't+-..JC1V Page 5 of 5 e JEFFERSON COUNTY CONSERVATION DISTRICT 205 W. Patison St., Port Hadlock, WA 98339 - Phone (360) 385-4105 FAX (360) 385-4823 jccd@olypen.com HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR JOE THOMPSON 102 HILLER DRIVE, PORT HADLOCK WA 98339 Tax Parcel # 998-400-007 Prepared by; AI Latham, District ManagerlTechnician Jefferson County Conservation District 9-28-00 Nature and Density of the proposed development: The proposed development on this property is the construction of a 14'x24' building for covered storage. There is an small existing storage shed on the site of the proposed building that will be removed. There is also a reserve drainfield on the property for Mr. Thompson's home which is on an adjoining property. Both the reserve drainfield and building site are, located on a portion of the property that has been cleared and used as lawn, garden, and storage for many years. The property is approximately .25 acres in size. Little Goose Creek, a Type 3 stream, bisects the NW comer of the property. It runs through a forested riparian zone containing large red alder trees with an understory of native shrubs and small conifers. The building site is approx. 40' from the creek and 10' to 12' outside the forested riparian area. The creek and forested riparian zone occupy approximately 'X of the property and are in very good condition as far as fish and wildlife habitat is concerned. Analysis of the effect of the proposed development: The proposed building for covered storage will not change the existing land use as the site has been used for storage for many years. It is being built where an existing, smaller storage shed is currently located. Since there will be no additional clearing of the existing forested riparian area it is my opinion that the new building will have no additional impact on the fish and wildlife habitat on the property. MitiQatinQ measures: Mr. Thompson and his neighbors are concerned about maintaining and improving the existing fish and wildlife habitat within the forested riparian area Salmon habitat restDratiDn projects were implemented by volunteers several years ago on this and adjoining properties to provide additional pool habitat and fish passage through the culvert under the county road (Oak Bay Rd). Mr. Thompson has planted numerous trees and shrubs throughout the forested riparian area. As stated above, there should be no adverse impacts on fish and wildlife habitat created by the development that need to be mitigated. However, it is important to fish and wildlife that the existing forested riparian area be maintained as such. Recommendations for maintenance of the forested riparian area: 1. Maintain the existing vegetation. The large alders should be retained unless they deteriorate and become a danger to health and safety. The existing thick understory of shrubs and small trees should also be retained. If the landowner plants additional trees and shrubs I would suggest planting shade tolerant conifers such as sitka spruce and western redcedar to eventually replace the red alder when they die out. 2. Maintain existing plank weirs constructed to provide additional pool habitat and fish passage of the county road culvert. . .... I '7 I '5,- _,' I , ~); , \.J:. \'< . ~l ---- . ----- --- I I I . 10 ~ '-I} --0 0- " I I . I' . I .1 'T~~~' ~, r 100. 0 ~ ~ ~ l\ i j \ I I I , J "- " ...... I A' e.t..f ,.. oJ:i:: ........ I t;,,.nl,,rll" /..1 I~l IlrellJ I I ...- - - - ......., _1- ~ - c '" '...hLLee. . DJ'.' tiE: LEGEND HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN 4=00 JOE THOMPSON, 102 HILLER DRIVE, PORT HADLOCK WA 98339 . ! Legal Description: Lot 10, Taytoffi Terrace I 'as 1'& l'tat, recorded in Volume 4. of Plats,l page 9, records of Jefferson! County, Washington I PARCEL #998-400-007 I I Scale: 1 ": 25' Prepared by: At lmtlam Jefferson Co. Conservation District 9-29-00 qN . e Joe Thompson 101 Hiller Dr. Port Hadlock WA 98339 JEFFERSON COUNTY CONSERVATION DISTRICT 205 W. Patison St., Port Hadlock, WA .98339 - Phone (360) 385-41. '. '! (~. .O~3D5~8f@ . rr\\~ I Jccd@olypen.com ~ I -- -.. l! IIII ro'li;\ !I, II Sept. 22, 2000 :' C;::::P? J:; ,I J I \ I..'l_. -.j ! 1.::.; I L_.___.__.---1 I JEFFEfiSON COUNTY OEPT. OF COMMUNiTY DEVELOPMENT Dear Joe, After visiting your property on Hiller Driver (Parcel # 99840007) and looking over the riparian area of Little Goose Creek and your proposed location of a garage (Jeff. Co. Permit Application CAR#00-00388) I have the following comments: 1. The riparian area adjacent to Little Goose Creek is in excellent condition, providing a closed canopy of large red alder trees with an understory of diverse shrub species and some conifers. This forested riparian zone extends from the creek uphill to the break in slope, approx. 30 ft wide adjacent to your proposed building site. 2. The existing forested riparian area provides, in my opinion, adequate protection for fish habitat and water quality. The area should be maintained as a forested riparian buffer. Construction of your proposed garage where it is staked out on the ground, and indicated on the map, will not compromise the functions and values of the existing forested buffer. Since the property has been cleared for many years there should be no additional impacts from garage construction on that site. 3. YOll are to be commended for the planting of additional trees and shrubs throughout your property along the creek. You indicated that you will be planting additional trees/shrubs in the future. I would suggest adding a few more shade tolerant conifers (sitka spruce, western redcedar, western hemlock) to the understory to eventually replace the large alders when they die. 4. You are also to be commended for your stewardship of the riparian area and interest in salmon habitat improvements in your section of creek. Even though iUs a small creek your efforts set an example for others and are part of the overall movement towards salmon recovery. If I can be of assistance with any of your salmon enhancement efforts please let me know. If any of the County Community Development Dept. staff have any questions regarding the siting of the proposed garage and its effect on the creek please have them contact me. Sincerely, - AI Latham ConserVation District Manager C'. ~/tI.f ~~e'-i.- - .J €;1='F; C4 I () ".I 17 11~(' T\ e, \, 'r./1~ O ,/ -_J I I i ! I , ~L' \',,~' . \.. ......~..:{ . " .~ If ) I ------ I ~ ';\.. ~~L.d .;,.... ..;', '~;.):.' '-: ..I. . ....: ....J ~:", 7 ~;. 'I. ......."'l~~..,...,.. ,..,:. ~.. ", . ~H... . .' '._ .'. ,.. ,Ol\. ''':;'.' !. <.' : . - I -- 110 ..---- ---- --- --G;p6E~F' ~ ( rt /W'~ ,-.( ~I'/o.I. 1lA'lLO~'5 If p. R fl c..E . T lO$ , rJ' 5 ,_ _, I 1 I , 10 I I : . I ., 2~---7 . , . . i " " l:Q 'J? --0 . I Q\ , I I ..... "'- / /..' t!.L, ,. v ~~ :-..... I hrnl,,{"~/...1 " , IItea.., l '.... - - - - '- llJ c u. '-l Q .J! I loS~ '. , ~ fry 1 tOO' 100.OLi - Q) {"\,. ; l'J' \ I \ " 't ,..,. . /":: 2..5' 't I .... ~'y AI \ ! I H IL LE n... Q 0 LV c.. .. Ik-WL1"'C>otJ'I. '~I';' .l.......:.,.. . ~ , ': ..!~~l..J:.h.o~ ".-. 1 I I ! I~ILLER.~ \..lnrCRFR1Jt-pl ,p. 1\(. f L1Yf (I /IJRRfN-/ "\ \ l..f"'.. "'.............-----" . ~ .t~ \ \ ()n().. A r;'1 . / ....f.I;1 ./ \3' 6) ,,/' h QY~/~' Fi'-- .,~, @ Own/V'" p~1>I6? ~ . A~ @ (},nvl'l.WOO;O ~ ''<j!P B!WI(fIO , ~ /.,t!Jfi) @ @ (j) <?;kok p'~e ",- .~ ~/@ ~ @@ ((p 5{l/h-uJ Ftrl, ~ OY>' /F/J ~ @@ tJ ~ (f) UIfVf.- MIJfJLe- ~ (F,)' 'I //B @ IV (f;' @ f-wJU>: Ft ~ . ~ @~ ~>, ~ ~,,@ . $ ~trl7 UJ,liJJIJI ~ ~ ~ ',,' , ' . @ (t,i? <;'l~Uw WIth-< ~ ~. '. lPj& €V <j!i> @) f..c~ ~~, D:7.J WX1!) ~ ~ , . @ p/IeiHt- t::osl<iW" . 0 ~- ~ @ tlot~ 'Sft-d!e- ' . ~ h @, cW &a>ef(. f,eU>lhw ~_ ~ " $<l). . -'~I M Bz4:~ ~ ~- I" ~ Q>> 'Gl'& //~ ~C'I ~., ..// \9(' /./"' ")() ~ ~ @/./.... '8(. Cl> ' ~, (a ~ 1./@tY _///~ /../ \- ~GS€D ,'. Ij ~rY V, - 1A,\If)~F.J,) ~LJ U/C1 r (..; . - P:p - /Wpgot.eDh 13.'1 . Fd-l-I Q;v-J. WIUDL f~\ 'b \P~' \ . \ - )-- .~ ~ \~ ~ '\ . '" ----- .\ -~ . __-----.j.---'---"- , 1,11.;ll D fl1U~ .1 G1,. c a oJ.6r' ..~? b"Z~ ~p.. county Department of Community Development ~ She~idan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 t(360) 379-4450 October 11, 2000 FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AS REQUIRED UNDER THE JEFFERSON COUNTY INTERIM CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE Applicant: JOE THOMPSON 101 HILLER DR PORT HADLOCK WA 98339 ~I. IE (~ '~ ~ IliJI- II. ..,.,~ l' U ~Ji'J: ; b WI rE. rll, 'I ", .; I Critical Area Review Case Number: CAROO-00388 Project Description: 14X24' shop Parcel Number: 998400007 S-T-R: 7-29N-01E Site Address: 101 HILLER DR PORT HADLOCK WA, 98339 L- . ~EFF~~'--:_~", t"'-~'::~ '~i __,;___.-J OEPT. 'J:- _ ,.,..:":~l.: -c',.,', \iJr l;::NT ._._ _. - ...,.... ...~......' t \.... FINDINGS: In accordance with the authority provided under subsection 4.101 and the requiremenls contained in Subsection 5.402 of the Jefferson County Interim Critical Areas Ordinance, the following are findings of fact relating to the referenced application: 1.) The application was reviewed by Jefferson County Permit Center staff on 8/28/00 for the potential presence of critical areas regulated under the provisions of the Ordinance, and the following critical areas were confirmed as potentially present on the subject property: Fish and Wildlife Stream (Type III), Erosion Hazard Area, and Seismic Hazard Area. 2.) Acting upon the above information, Jefferson County staff conducted a site inspection of the subject property on 8/31/00 and confirmed the existence of the following critical areas and/or their associated buffers on the property: Fish and Wildlife Stream (Type III). 3.) The applicant submitted a Habitat Management Plan to address the potential impacts of development near the Type III Stream. The Plan was prepared by AI Latham from the Jefferson County Conservation District. 4.) The applicant is proposing to site a shop 38-feet from the Type III Stream. The Habitat Management Plan is required when a reduction in the setback is requested. The proposal is requesting the Critical Areas Administrator to waive the required 50-foot setback down to 38-feet. The applicant is limited due to topographical constraints on the property. This waiver from the provisions of the Jefferson County Interim Critical Areas Ordinance is granted subject to the following conditions. Any deviation from these conditions shall result in this waiver being revoked and the application becoming subject to further review. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1.) Vegetation retained on-site following completion of clearing for roadways, utilities and the like, may be cleared only if such clearing is absolutely necessary to complete the proposal (Note: This condition shall not be construed as allowing removal of native vegetation within a designated critical area or its associated buffer). 2.) Among the native conifer species which may be used are: grand fir (Aibes grandis), sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis), shore pine (Pinus contorta), Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), western redcedar (Thuja plicata), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla). 3.) Among the native tree species which may be used are: vine maple (Acer circinatum) big-leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), red alder (Alnus rubra), Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii), quaking aspen (populus tremula), black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), bitter cherry (prunus emarginata), Oregon white oak (Quercus garryana), cascara (Rhamnus purshiana), Pacific willow (Salix lasiandra), Scouler's willow (Salix scouleriana ). 6.) 7.) <,ng the native shrub species which may be used are: ~ervice-berry (Amalanchler alnlTOlla), rt::u U~It::f dogwood (Comus stolonifera) salal (Gaultheria shallon), ~ean spray (Holodiscus discolor), indian plum <<?emlaria cerasiformis), Pacific ninebark (Physocarpus c pitus), red flowering currant (Ribes sanguineum), wild rose (Rosa gymnocarpa), Nootka rose (Rosa nutkan ), swamp rose (Rosa pisocarpa), willows (Salix ssp.), red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa), snowberry (tymPhOricarPI s albus), evergreen huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum), red huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifoli m). Vegetation retained on-site following completion of clearin for roadways, utilities and the like, may be cleared only if such clearing is absolutely neces$ary to complete the proposal (Note: This condition shall not be construed as allowing removal of native vegetation!within a designated critical area or its associated buffer). i A setback (buffer) of 38-feet, measured perpendicularly tjm the ordinary high water mark along the bank shall be permanently maintained as a fish and wildlife hab'tat area. Fish and wildlife habitat area buffers shall remain naturall vegetated. Should buffer disturbance occur during construction, replanting with native vegetation shal be required by the Critical Area Administrator. No alteration shall be made to the fish and wildlife habitat area buffer without prior authorization by the Critical Area Administrator. ! The applicant shall meet the conditions stipulated through! the Habitat Management Plan. The conditions are as follows: ' 8.) 1. Maintain the existing veg.etation. The large ald.. ers ShO~'ld be retained unless they deteriorate and become a danger to health and safety. The existing thick understory of shrubs and small trees should also be retained. If the landowner plans additional trees and s rubs I would suggest planting shade tolerant conifers such as sitka spruce and western red cedar to e entually replace the red alder when they die out. 2. Maintain exisiting plank weirs constructed to provide a ditional pool habitat and fish passage of the county road culvert. ' buWUUM IL · j-- 10 / ~ It> 0 war:en Hart, Atc!;;v' ,. Date I Critical Areas Administrator I I understand that the granting of the above waiver from the p~isions of the Jefferson County Interim Critical Areas Ordinance is made subject to my complying with the ab e listed conditions, and that any violation of said conditions shall result in revocation of the permit or approval and further review of the project under the Critical Areas Ordinance. i Please sign and retum to the Department of Community Deve!opment. Appl~';"Signa~ 0 c: File I:\F _CAR_Waiver_W_Conds.rpt 12/13/99 ~.t .. Permit Details ~1}/1.L/ /1~vtz;/ ~fYJ11:J,:rt_ . 3 7Q:<' 1-1-:;V . Page 1 of 3 ,,)i-;.l; ,~-ovL LCtLl'Cit ' W Il SlU~'rl\. DI.5.'frtic-r 3 S 5 - If 10 !;' Weather Station ~ Database Tools (~ Maps ::,-.2.,., Webcam Home Counl',/ Info Sear Cil DeporlmenlS Pennit Case SUrnnl,j Case Number: I Search II ) Ileip I Case Number: CAROO-00388 1"""-"- :;CU;,.: Finaled Date Received: 8/28/2000 Description: 14X24'shoD Date Issued: 10/16/2000 Applicant: JOE THOMPSON Expiration Date: Site Address: 101 HILLER DR Case Finaled: 10/16/2000 Parcel No: 998400007-:: '. . '.:,-" , :\:l~Ji.:;:t - '-'; - '_,-c' Case Actions Below is a list of actions that have been taken by staff for this permit case. They are sorted based on the date they were added to the database with most recent actions at the top. A value in the "Date Completed" field indicates that the action has been completed. Description: Date Completed: Description: Date Completed: Description: Date Completed: Descri ption: Date Completed: Description: Date Completed: Description: Date Completed: Description: Date Completed: Description: Date Completed: Signed Waiver Returned to App 10/16/2000 CLEAR CA REVIEW SEP &lor BLD 10/16/2000 II JH' i{i IF'Ir\( (.Jr:'11T \. ,A 1.\/ If'<' IJ A /.. J(jH 1 0 . IV (} "1'~7. (} 4iJiJ. Storm water Review CLEARED 10/16/2000 CLOSE CASE STATUS F 10/16/2000 t t rffl.\JJI 4(llfU t til] . Waiver w Conditions:status "T" 10/16/2000 Waiver w Conditions:status ''T'' 10/16/2000 Begin Project Review 8/31/2000 DRD Info Request 10/11/2000 Case Conditions Below is a list of conditions for this permit case. Conditions typically record requirements that the applicant must meet to be in compliance with the permit. Title: FINDING: POTENTIAL CAs htto://www.co.iefferson.wa.us/commdevelopmentlPPQuery/caseDetails.asp?csm_ caseno=... 9/26/2006 -~ J" i . Permit Details Wording: Title: Wording: Title: Wording: Title: Wording: Title: Wording: Title: Wording: Title: Wording: Title: Wording: Title: Wording: Title: Wording: Ti!t~;i , Wording:' I _ 1\ ......oj,..\-I The application was reviewed by Jefferson County Permit Center staff on 8/28/00 for the potential presence of critical areas regulated under the provisions of the Ordinance, and the following critical areas were confirmed as potentially present on the subject property: Fish and Wildlife Stream (Type III), Erosion Hazard Area, and Seismic Hazard Area. FINDING: CONFIRMED CAs Acting upon the above information, Jefferson County staff conducted a site inspection of the subject property on 8/31/00 and confirmed the existence of the following critical areas and/or their associated buffers on the property: Fish and Wildlife Stream (Type III). FINDING: OTHER RELEVANT INFO The applicant submitted a Habitat Management Plan to address the potential impacts of development near the Type III Stream. The Plan was prepared by AI Latham from the Jefferson County Conservation District. DEVIATE FROM RQD STBCK The applicant is proposing to site a shop 38-feet from the Type III Stream. The Habitat Management Plan is required when a reduction in the setback is requested. The proposal is requesting the Critical Areas Administrator to waive the required 50-foot setback down to 38- feet. The applicant is limited due to topographical constraints on the property. NATIVE PLANTS-CONIFERS Among the native conifer species which may be used are: grand fir (Aibes grandis), sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis), shore pine (Pinus contorta), Douglas-fir (pseudotsuga menziesii), western redcedar (Thuja plicata), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla). NATIVE PLANTS-BROAD LEAF Amon~the native tree species which may be used are: vine maple (Acer circinatum) big-leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), red alder (Alnus rubra), Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii), quaking aspen (populus tremula), black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), bitter cherry (Prunus emarginata), Oregon white oak (Quercus garryana), cascara (Rhamnus purshiana), Pacific willow (Salix lasiandra), Scouler's willow (Salix scouleriana). NATIVE PLANTS-SHRUBS Among the native shrub species which may Qe used are: service-berry (Amalanchi,er alnifolia), red osier dogwood (Corn us stolonifera) salal (Gaultheria shallon), ocean spray (Holodiscus discolor), indian plum (Oemlaria cerasiformis), Pacific ninebark (Physocarpus capitus), red flowering currant (Ribes sanguineum), wild rose (Rusa gymnocarpa), Nootka rose (Rosa nutkana), swamp rose (Rosa pisocarpa), willows (Salix ssp.), red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa), snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), evergreen huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum), red huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifolium). VEGETATION RETAINED Vegetation retained on-site following completion of clearing for roadways, utilities and the like, may be cleared only if such clearing is absolutely necessary to complete the proposal Note: This condition shall not be construed as allowin removal of native ve etation within a designated critica area or Its assocIate u er . FISH & WILDLIFE CUSTOM COND A setback (buffer) of 38-feet, measured perpendicularly from the ordinary high water mark along the bank shall be permanently maintained as a fish and wildlife habitat area. =. BUFFERS NATURALLY VEGETATED . Fish and wildlife habitat area buffers shall remain naturally veaetated. Should buffer disturbance occur during construction, replanting with native vegetation shall be required by th,e Critical Area Administrator. No alteration shall be made to the fish and wildlife habitat ,.(qre~: b14ffer without prior authorization by the Critical Area Administrator. }'EGETATION RETAINED Vegetation retained on-site following completion of clearing for roadways, utilities and the , ....~ '; Page 2 of ,3 httn:/ /www.co.jefferson.wa.us/commdevelooment/PPOuerv/caseDetails.asp?csm caseno=... 9/26/2006 ~~ '~ ' . "Permit Details Title: Wording: No Findings Found 1Q \f,J~ II, \ . like, may be cleared only if such clearing is absolutely necessary to complete the proposal (Note: This condition shall not be construed as allowin removal of native ve etation within a designated critical area or its associate bu er. CUSTOM CONDITION The applicant shall meet the conditions stipulated through the Habitat Management Plan. The conditions are as follows: 1. Maintain the existing vegetation. The large alders should be retained unless they deteriorate and become a danger to he~lth and safety. The existing thick understory of shrubs and small trees should also be retained. If the landowner plans additional trees and shrubs I would suggest plantmg shade tOleranr conifers such as sitka spruce and western red cedar to eventually replace the red alder when they die out. 2. Maintain exisiting plank weirs constructed to provide additional pool habitat and fish passage of the county road culvert.' I I Cf)t~NTY INFO! DEPARTtJiENTS l SEARCH Page 3 of3 '"-,, htto:/ /www.co.iefferson.wa.us/commdevelopment/PPQuery/caseDetails.asp?csm _ caseno=... 9/26/2006 Best view:;.-:(j wiUI f\.1;c:""C,scft internE!: Explore" lJ. J or laret f!J \f\J:r.::iO'NS - j''''1ac - . " Re: Little Goose Creek January 21, 2008 The situation at Little Goose Creek is continuing to deteriorate. September 28, 2000 Al Latham of the Jefferson County Conservation District prepared an "Habitat Hanagement Flanll for Joe Thompson to help him obtain a building permit within the Critical Areas Ordinance Buffer. The last line of the document - "I"li tigation Measures' "lVlaintain existing plank weirs constructed to provide additional pool habitat and fish passage of the county road culvert." October 11, 2000 Warren Hart, Critical Areas Administrator for Jefferson County Department of Community Development issued a "Findings and Conditions of approval as required u...'1der the Jefferson County Interim Critical Areas Ordinance" (Stamped October 16 at D.C.D.) The last line of the document: "Maintain existing plank weirs constructed to provide additional pool habitat and fish passage of the county road culvert." October 16, 2000 The Department of Community Development issued the permit case summary. The last line of this document; "maintain existing plank weirs constructed to provide additional pool habitat and fish passage of the county road culvert." In 2007 Al Latham helped Joe Thompson obtain an "Hydraulic Project Approval" from WDFW. Page 2, number 9, under "Repair Provisions" states that; "Gravel removal from the stream is not authorized by the HPA. Material that will be used to fill the gaps between the stream bank and weirs shall be imported gravel." This is a five year permit! Long term survival of coho in Little Goose Creek is problematic at best. Unless the rearing ponds are restored the fish have very limited habitat available. And unless the full volume of the stream runs all summer on the surface there is no way that the coho can move up and down the stream and from pool to pool as they did for over a decade after they colonized the stream. You can see the conflict that we have detaild above. It is our speculation that the county did not inform WDE'W of the dual purposes of the weirs/pools when they helped Hr. Thompson abtain the liPA. cc; Gerald Steel Best Regards, Citizens Protecting Critical Areas ~11.. ~~ e~~~~ Susan ho;kins a~d Sdot~-Clogston (~hfll ~qi:;_ ~'.z;hi:; Jefferson County Department of Community Development 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 CRITICAL AREAS QUESTIONNAIRE Applicant Name (,.JO~ 'ii1 (1 "]b SON land Use Application Subdivision Application Shoreline Application Other: x Building Application On-site Sewage Application 1. Is there any standing or running water on the surface of the property or on any nearby property at any time during the year? If YES, please describe: A- 5h11t-LC S~ it ft/~y X- Yes _ No 2. Has any portion of the property or any nearby property ever been identified as a wetland or swamp? If YES, please describe: _ Yes ..x. No 3. Are any willows, s~unk cabbage, alders, or cottonwoods present M... Yes No on your property or adjacent properties? If YES, please describe: J ...~.'h,.. I. ~70!> .3 WI '/.J..ow..s M b SeiJe..RA<- Co t"tC1N ~ PL.lT7'I ~ , )N AproL cJ1=- 'Zfx;JO ~ 1: B>~hr FIlPH 'He.- CoNseA.V,4't1DN ptS:r1l\'c.. "t-Ree.. SAle.. ". Are there any indications on any portion of the property or on any _ YES ...2S... No nearby property of rockslides, earthflows, mudflows, or landslides? If YES, please describe: Please indicate which line best represents the steepest slope found on your property. (Check appropriate box) 9999900 I I I I / /' /' 1111/ / / 11111// 1111// / ~ I I I I / / / ..."-J I I I I / / /" 11111/ /" 111/// /" 0 I I I I / / / ,,"'" I I I I / / /... ",'" 1111/// '" I I I I / / / ,," ",'" ...0 I I I I / / / " '" ...... I / " / / // // ,,"..."'...... a I I I / / / / ... "'......... ...... I I I I I / / ,,"" ...'" ......... 111/ / / / / ...'" ............... ......00 1111// /...""...... .......... ......... 11111// ..................- d IIII///"~,.,, .",'" .........' ----)liJ 1111////..."'..................... _......... uu/~1~,.~.",.",..."" _--- . ---{J UHUL~~~.",~;'_...-- _------ ~~~~:-::------ -------{] leE===----------- (Questionnaire Continues on Back) Page 1 of 2 5. Does the site have steep slopes with little to no veg~tation? YES -A No If YES, please describe: Does the site contain high percentages of silt and/orl very fine sand? YES _~NO If YES, please describe: , '. Does the site contain ground water seepage or sprin~s near the surface of the ground? _' YES .:x. NO If YES, please describe: 'I signing the. application form, the applicant/owner attests that the information p~ovided herein is. true and correct to the best of their 10wledge. Any material falsehood or any omission of a material fact made by the i applicant/owner with respect to this application packet ay result in this permit being null and void. . further agree to save, indemnify and hold harmless Jefferson County against all liabi*ies. judgments. court costs, reasonable attorney's fees 1d expenses which may in any way accrue against Jefferson County as a result of or iril consequence of the granting of this permit. I further agree to provide access and right of entry to Jefferson County and it's etplOyeeS' representatives or agents . for the purpose of 'plication review and any required later inspections. Access and right of entry to the applicant's property or structure shall be requested and lall occur during regular business hours. ignature 9-. iL, ............. ..- Date 8"!?5l'~6 FOR OFFICE USE ONLr I I RITICAL AREAS ON OR .IIMEDIA TEL Y ADJACENT TO SITE: a Wetlands a Aquifer Recharge Are~ (zone_) a Frequently Flooded Ar~a a Erosion aSeismic a Seismic e"Fish & Wildlife Area 1 a Fish & Wildlife Area 2 a Landslide a Commercial Forest Township North FRange ection arcel Number: 911 '-/00 lX>7 *arcel Size: / ZJODO St J::} . . omprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: ~eViewed by: ~ate: I ommunity Plan: Page 2 of 2 home\plncntrlforms\car .doc 1 tOO ~... . Jefferson County Department of Community Development 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 CRITICAL AREAS QUESTIONNAIRE RING REC RD Applicant Name -- l';O ~ 'ft, (1 ~ S50tY land Use Application Subdivision Application Shoreline Application Other: x Building Application On-site Sewage Application 1. . Is there any standing or running water on the surface of the property or on any nearby property at any time during the year? If YES, please describe: h SI11ltU- S~ .is jVe,4VlJ3y X Yes _ No 2. Has any portion of the property or any nearby property ever been identified as a wetland or swamp? If YES, please describe: _ Yes ..x.. No 3. ". Are any willows, s~unk cabbage, alders, or cottonwoods present on your property or adjacent properties? If YES, please describe: 11I.~.ho 1:. FtA-N~ 3 Wl'U.Dk!5 Mb SeveP.A<- Cor/t.1N.W':PO p...".,.",:;) , )N AP./lJL c)f= 2P:J(J ~::r: Pbl.!)hr FrlPH 'fi.L CoNSt..RV,4't1D"" Pt~T1l"c.. ~ee... SAle.. Are there any indications on any portion of the property or on any nearby property of rockslides, earthflows, mudflows, or landslides? If YES, please describe: lX..: Yes _ No YES ..25.. No Please indicate which line best represents the steepest slope found on your property. (Check appropriate box) c;J1;J9 P I;] 9 I I I I / / I I I I / /. I I I I / / 1111// r-1 I I I I I / ,,~ 11111/ / I I I I / / / ,," 1111// /" 0 1111/1/" '" I I I I I / / ,," .,,'" 11111//" '" I I I I I / / " ,,/ ...0 I I I I / I " " " ...... I " / //11/ // ,,'" ,,"',,'" a I I I / I / / ",," ,," .......... I I I I I / / ,,"" ,," ....... 111/ I / / " ,," ...,," ...<1'''' ........a 1111/" / " "" ... ....... 11111,/,/ ",," ".......... .......... d 11111//"".,",,,,"...... ,......... ,-.......'f"J 111/1//"""" ......... ......... __...... llH//~~~;~~,~ ,--- ---{J NHH~~~~~,~:__-:___------ ~~~--=----- --------{J ~====----------- o , ,/ / / " / (Questionnaire Continues on Back) Page 1 of 2 6. i Does the site have steep slopes with little to no vegletation? I -. YES -A No If YES, please describe: 7. 1 Does the site contain high percentages of silt and/oJ very fine sand? '1 . YES _~NO If YES, please describe: 3. Does the site contain ground water seepage or springs near the surface of the ground? _ YES X NO If YES, please describe: Iy signing the. application form, the applicant/owner attests that the information Itovided herein is true and correct to the best of their nowledge. Any material falsehood or any omission of a material fact made by th~ applicant/owner with respect to this application packet lay result in this permit being null and void. 1 further agree to save, indemn.jfy and hold harmless Jefferson County against all liabilities, judgments, court costs, reasonable attorney's fees nd expenses which may in any way accrue against Jefferson County as a result of or ~n consequence of the granting of this permit. I further agree to provide access and right of entry to Jefferson County and it's etnployees. representatives or agents for the purpose of pplication review and any required later inspections. Access and right of entry to th, applicant's property or structure shall be requested and hall occur during regular business hours. ;ignature 9- · iL,- ~. - Date <6/~/z-C$)U FOR OFFICE USE ON~Y i ;RITICAL AREAS ON OR VlMEDIA TEL Y ADJACENT TO SITE: o Wetlands i o Aquifer Recharge Arer (zone_) o Frequently Flooded A ea o Erosion i OSeismic ; i o Seismic ir'Fish & Wildlife Area 1 o Fish & Wildlife Area 2 o Landslide o Commercial Forest Township North I i I Range ~arcel Size: I ~eviewed by: I ,ection arcel Number: 9rr lfoo aJ '7 I ZJODO S t Ff . . omprehensive Plan land Use Designation: bate: I I i I 1 Page 2 of 2 ommunity Plan: .home\plncntr\forms\Car .doe 1/00 f -~ Jefferson County Final Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report - STAC Draft 1 of many houses to provide views; locally, there are several large intact regions of vegetation. 2 Surf smelt spawn on a pocket beach in the southern part of the reach (Long et aI., 2005). 3 Reach II includes the accretionary zone of drift cell JE-l, about 1 Ian of shore in the minor 4 embayment in the northwest corner of Oak Bay that has developed into a spit and barrier beach 5 system. The north side is a broad depositional beach and spit that has been bulkheaded to 6 stabilize it for a campground and parking lot associated with the Oak Bay County Park. This spit 7 and the jetty on the west side ofthe Portage Canal keep the salt marsh isolated from the bay, 8 although in recent years, the spit has eroded and riprnp is farling, allowing for a regular tidal 9 connection with the saltmarsh/lagoon behind the spit (Todd, personal communication, 2006) 10 Sand lance spawn on the Oak Bay Spit beach (Penttila, 2000; Long et aI., 2005). Although 11 previous reports ( Hirschi 1999) suggested that coho no longer inhabited Little Goose Creek, 12 local residents have observed coho and resident cutthroat salmon in Little Goose Creek on 13 several occasions during recent years (Davis, personal communication, 2006, Clogston and 14 Hopkins, Personal communication 2007). 15 4.2.11.5 Land Use and Altered Conditions (Maps 12~ 22, and 25) 16 Land Use and Zonina 17 Land use along the Oak Bay watershed is dominated by residential development and commercial 18 forestry. Within all reaches except for Reach II, 100 percent of the planning area is zoned Rural 19 Residential (69 percent in Reach II). Remaining Reach II areas are zoned Parks, Preserves, and 20 Recreation, and Water. 21 Transportation and Utilities 22 Within the Oak Bay planning area, Jefferson County and WDNR have mapped 0.8 mile and 0.6 23 mile of road, respectively. Roadways within the planning area provide access to residential 24 properties along and near the shoreline. 25 Shoreline Modifications 26 Residential development has encroached on the salt marsh on the north side of Olele Point. There 27 are relatively few bulkheads along this stretch of shoreline. However, at the terminus of drift cell 28 JE-2 at the spit in front of the salt marsh at Oak Bay County Park there is major shoreline 29 alteration. The front of the spit is armored with riprap for park access and the campground. 30 Combined with the jetty along the Ship Canal, this cuts off the salt marsh from the nearshore 31 under most conditions. Due to major erosion during winter 2005/2006, there is now tidal access 32 to the marsh/lagoon. Dredging of the Ship Canal resulted in major loss of tidal flat by 33 conversion to deep water and upland fill of the salt marsh (Todd, personal communication, 34 2006). In addition, at Little Goose Creek, a small coho stream, was rerouted out of the marsh and 35 through a culvert to the southwest of the Oak Bay Lagoon. 36 Bulkhead and stairways are mapped along the Oak Bay shoreline as follows: Reach FF, 280 feet 37 ofrock and wood bulkhead and 3 stairways; Reach GG, 130 feet of wood bulkhead and 12 May 2007 page 4-61 .1 '~l1ap Output Page 1 of 1 'f. ~oc{:.~.s ~YJS+:c.c:.x:! '?984oct:oC-l ~C.::O~ ~ 9',;.e.tC\:\:t:-!> 99I!-lc-:<:"1 ~:OO' 3 ',;'~OCC<:05 ~lC''':~J~2 Legend CJ Selected Fealt Road Syste m PalCels-H . wetlands Boundaries o .cr;c,-...., Can:;- o ',"iIl<!" o a;.,... Ca.r1;.... lr o lr Ui .... -' y 99&l00(109 0--' - . " -tOl1t, " FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONL y- Jefferson County does not attest to the accuracy of the data contained herein and makes no warranty with respec orrectness or validity, Data contained inthis map is limited by the method and accuracy of its collection. Fri Ju11: 007 http://gisserver/servlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap ?ServiceN ame=ovmap&Client V ersion=4.... 7/13/2007 1/./ Is . r7 /\ J...) (\j \-J r>c....,-) I \ ~ '."-'. !d.1v (J 'Y \I'.l " E).. CV~}j R A~.\ J!; Y--;:--(Rj"v ~.J ~ - ,- C- c ,.,OUNlj ..:>~~TI' vS:J,\ / I ) \ j('fV j' ~f) ;}., (") J DR,~T .;- I ,^' i 'j ~ '0" ' .LT' /.ii i{ . TH~ 1 . "~. /~ \! E: FKE' .I{~ i'~.J \.. V 'JJ'~ 7 (:AJ ~~ ;t ~~ D f.J ,lj (j~ WE; 'Tfv., tft.)~R((tJE<j..( o,,\)\ CV fA/.-. IJNfJ CK\l1I(\~A~, RJvrp/.-Ti'()"" /~~JuJ)~D \ i ., r r , '" - , l i. 'l t.G , '. DRAFT i. A full and complete record shall be kept of all proceedings and all testimony shall be recorded. The record of testimony and exhibits together with all papers and requests filed in the proceedings shall constitute the exclusive record for the decision in accordance with the law. j. All decisions shall become a part of the record and shall include a statement of Findings and ConClusions. k. Notice of the decision of the Board of Health shall be provided not later than ten (10) days following the date of its decision. I. The petitioning party, permit applicant, permit holder, or designated agent, and JCPH shall be notified of the decision of the Board of Health, together with the Findings and Conclusions. JCC 8.15.180 ENFORCEMENT/PENALTY (1) other Laws, Regulations and Agency Requirements a. All OSS management shall be subject to the authority of other laws, regulations or other agency requirements in addition to these rules and regulations. Nothing in these rules and regulations is intended to abridge or alter the rights of action by the state or by persons, which exist in equity, common law or other statutes to abate pollution or to abate a nuisance. b. If a conflict exists between the interpretation of Chapter 246-272A WAC and these regulations, the more stringent regulation shall apply to better protect public health and the environment. (2) Enforcement Authority. The Health Officer, his or her designee, or any person appointed as an "Enforcement Officer" by the Jefferson County Board of Health shall have the authority to enforce the provisions of these regulations equally on all persons. The Health Officer is also authorized to adopt rules consistent with the provisions of these rules and regulations for the purpose of enforcing and carrying out its provisions. (3) Right of Entry a. Whenever necessary to make an inspection to enforce or determine compliance with the provisions of these regulations, and other relevant laws and regulations, or whenever the Health Officer has cause to believe that a violation of these regulations has or is being committed, the Health Officer or hislher duly authorized inspector may, in accordance with federal and state law, seek entry of any building, structure, property or portion thereof at reasonable times to inspect the same. b. Prior to entering any building, structure, property or portion thereof the Health Officer or hislher duly authorized inspector shall attempt to secure the consent of the owner, occupant or other person having apparent charge or control of said building, structure, property or portion thereof. i. If such building, structure, property or portion thereof is occupied, the inspector shall present identification credentials, state the reason for the inspection, and request entry. ii. In attempting to contact the owner, occupier or other persons having apparent control of said building, structure, property or portion thereof, JC Code 8.15 revised 2007 page 35 of 47 . DRAFT the inspector may approach said I building or structure by a recognizable access route, e.g., ~ street or driveway, leading to said building or structure. I c. If permission to enter said build ing, stru~ure, property or portion thereof is not obtained from the owner, occupier or ot er persons having apparent control of said building, structure, property or p rtion thereof the inspector may enter said building, structure, property or port on thereof only if the entry into the building, structure, or property is consistent with applicable state and federal law. ! d. If permission to enter said building, stru~ure, property or portion thereof is not obtained from the owner, occupier or ot ers persons having apparent control of said building, structure, property or p rtion thereof, the Health Officer or hislher duly authorized inspector shall a so have recourse to any other remedies provided by law to secure ent ,including but not limited to search warrants based on probable cause or s tutory authority. (4) Notice and Order to Correct Violation I a. Issuance. Whenever the Health Officer ~etermines that a violation of these regulations has occurred or is occurring he/she may issue a written notice and order to correct violation to the pro erty owner or to any person causing, allowing or participating in the violation. b. Content. The notice and order to corre violation shall contain: i. The name and address of the pr perty owner or other persons to whom the notice and order to co ect violation is directed; ii. The street address or descriptio sufficient for identification of the building, structure, premises, or U:md upon or within which the violation has occurred or is occurring; ! Iii. A description of the violation and I a reference to that provision of the regulation, which has been violat~; iv. A statement of the action requir~ to be taken to correct the violation and a date or time by which cor~ction is to be completed; v. A statement that each violation of this regulation shall be a separate and distinct offense and.in the ~se of a continuing violation, each day's continuance shall be a sep~rate and distinct violation; vi. A statement that the person, to ~hom the Notice and Order is directed, can appeal the Order to the Health Officer, in accordance with the terms of this Chapter, and that a,y such appeal must be presented to the Health Officer with ten daYS;~ vii. A statement that the failure to ob y this notice may result in the issuance of a notice of civil infra ion, and/or the assessment of an administrative remedy, and/or, if pplicable, the imposition of criminal penatties. I c. Receipts. The notice and order to corre~ violation may also include a statement requiring the person. to whoni the notice and order to correct violation is directed to produce receipts ~rom a certified professional to demonstrate compliance with~n order irSUed by the Health Officer. JC Code 8.15 revised 2007 page 36 of 47 , DRAFT d. Service of Order. The notice and order to correct violation shall be served upon the person to whom it is directed, either personally or by mailing a copy of the order to correct violations by first class and / or certified mail postage prepaid, return receipt requested, to such person at hislher last known address. The notice and order to correct violation shall also be served via certified maiVreturn receipt requested to the owner of the parcel or parcels where the alleged violations are occurring, to the owner's last known address. e. Extension. Upon written request received prior to the correction date or time, the Health Officer may extend the date set for corrections for good cause. The Health Officer may consider substantial completion of the necessary correction or unforeseeable circumstances that render completion impossible by the date established as a good cause. 1. Supplemental Order to Correct Violation. The Health Officer may at any time add to, rescind in part, or otherwise modify a notice and order to correct violation. The supplemental order shall be governed by the same procedures applicable to all notice and order to correct violations procedures contained in these regulations. g. Enforcement of Order. If, after any order is duly issued by the Health Officer, the person to whom such order is directed fails, neglects, or refuses to obey such order, the Health Officer may: i. Utilize any remedy or penalty under Section 180(5) of these regulations; and/or ii. Abate the health violation using the procedures of these regulations; and/or iii. Pursue any other appropriate remedy at law or equity. h. Written Assurance of Discontinuance. The Health Officer may accept a written assurance of discontinuance of any act in violation of this regulation from any person who has engaged in such act. Failure to comply with the assurance of discontinuance shall be a further violation of this regulation. (5) Violations, Remedies and Pena1ties a. Violations. i. Violations of these regulations may be addressed through the remedies and penalties provided in this section. ii. Each violation of these regulations shall be a separate and distinct offense and in the case of a continuing violation, each day's continuance shall be considered a separate and distinct violation. iii. The Health Officer may investigate alleged or apparent violations of these regulations. Upon request of the Health Officer or designee, the person allegedly or apparently in violation of these regulations shall provide information identifying themselves. iv. Violations, apparent or alleged, that occurred or are occurring in en'Jir:eAFRentally sen6iti\~ areascritical areas, as that term is defined in this Chapter, of Jefferson County will have the highest priority for investigation by those persons charged in this Chapter with investigating such violations and enforcing this Chapter and such violations will be subject to a 'zero tolerance' policy. JC Code 8.15 revised 2007 page 37 of 47 .' , DRAFT b. Civil Remedies. i. Except as provided in Section 18P, the violation of any provision of these regulations is designated . a Class 1 civil infraction pursuant to Chapter 7.80 RCW, Civillnfracti9ns, ii. In addition to or as an altemativelto any other judicial or administrative remedy provided herein, or by la~, any person or establishment who violates this regulation, may be a sessed a civil penalty up to $513.00 per day of continuous violation to be directly assessed by the Health Officer until such violation is COrl ctect. iii. The Health Officer may issue a n tice of civil infraction pursuant to Chapter 7.80 RCW if the Health lcer has reasonable cause to believe that the person has violat~d any provision of these regulations or has not corrected the violation las required by a written notice and order to correct violation. Civil inftactions shall be issued, heard and determined as described in chatPr 7.80 RCW, and any applicable court rules. iv. All other legal and equitable rem ies are also deemed available to Public Health or its Health Office and may be invoked, utilized or sought at any time regardless of Whether other remedies have or have not been undertaken or $ought I c. Criminal Penalties. ~ i. Any person who. fails, neglects, or refuses to obey an order of the Health Officer to correct a violatiqn as set forth in Section 180 above shall be, upon conviction, guilty o~a misdemeanor and shall be subject to a fine of not more than $1000, r imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed ninety (90) days, or bo . The court may also impose restitution. I ii. Any person who fails, neglects, ot refuses to comply with a written assurance of discontinuance pu~uant to Section 180 above shall be, upon conviction, guilty of a misden,eanor and shall be subject to a fine of not more than $1 000, or imprisbnment in the county jail not to exceed ninety (90) days, or both. The court may also impose restitution. d. Stop-Work Orders. The Health Officer ay cause a Stop-Work order to be issued whenever the Health Officer has ason to believe that a violation of this regulation is occurring, The effect 0 the Stop-Work order shall be to require the immediate cessation of suchlwork or activity that has contributed to the violation until authorized by the H$alth Officer to proceed. i. Content. A Stop-Work Order shall include the following: 1. The name and address fo~ the person responsible for the alleged violation; I 2. The street address or desqription sufficient for identification of the building, structure or ptemises, or land upon or within which the alleged violation has o~urred or is occurring. JC Code 8.15 revised 2007 page 38 of 47 ) DRAFT 3. A description of the violation and reference to the provision of the Jefferson County Board of Health Ordinance, which has been allegedly violated; 4. The required corrective action; 5. A statement that a failure to comply with the order may lead to issuance of a civil infraction to the person named in the order; 6. A statement that the person to whom the Stop Work Order is directed can appeal the Order to the Health Officer in accordance with Section 170 of this Chapter and that any such appeal must be presented to the Health Officer within ten days. ii. Service of Notice. The Health Officer shall serve the Stop Work Order upon the owner of the property where the alleged violation occurred or is occurring and the person, firm or business entity that has allegedly violated this Chapter, either personally or by mailing a copy of the notice by regular and certified or registered mail, within a flVe-day return receipt requested, to the owner at his or her last known address. A copy of the Order shall also be posted on the property where the alleged violation occurred or is occurring. iii. Posting of Notice. In addition to service of the notice listed above, an additional notice shall be posted on the property in substantially the following form: Under the authority of Jefferson County Public Health Code 8.15 Onsite Sewage Regulations you are hereby required to immediately STOP WORK This order is in effect at this property for all work and activities that relate to violations of Jefferson County Public Health Code 8.15 Onsite Sewage Regulations, and remains in effect until removed by Public Health. It is a violation of these regulations to remove, deface, destroy, or conceal a posted Stop Work Order. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS ORDER MAY RESULT IN THE ISSUANCE OF A CIVIL INFRACTION. e. Voluntary Correction. When the Health Officer determines that a violation has occurred or is occurring, he or she shall attempt to secure voluntary correction by contacting the person responsible for the alleged violation and, where possible, explaining the violation and requesting correction. i. Voluntary Correction Agreement. The person responsible for the alleged violation may enter into a voluntary correction agreement with Public Health. The voluntary correction agreement is a contract between Public Health and the person responsible for the violation in which such person agrees to abate the alleged violation within a specified time and according to specified conditions. The voluntary correction agreement will be in lieu of the issuance of further citations or the abatement of the property pursuant to RCW 7.48 or of this JC Code 8.15 revised 2007 page 39 of 47 DRAFT Chapter. The voluntary correction agreement shall include the following: 1. The name and address of ~e person responsible for the alleged violation; ~ 2. The street address or oth r description sufficient for identification of the buildin ,structure, premises, or land upon or within which the alleged viplation has occurred or is occurring; 3. A description of the allege~ violation and a reference to the regulation, which has been violated; 4. The necessary corrective .ction to be taken, and a date or time by which correction must ~e completed; 5. An agreement by the pers n responsible for the alleged violation that Public Healt may enter the property and inspect the premises as may be n cessary to determine compliance with the voluntary correcti n agreement; 6. An agreement by the pers . n responsible for the alleged violation that Public Hea~lmay enter the property to abate the violation and recover its sts and expenses (including administrative, hearing an. removal costs) from the person responsible for the alleged I violation if the terms of the voluntary correction agreement are ~ot satisfied; and 7. An agreement that by enti'ng into the voluntary correction agreement, the person res onsible for the . a.. IIeged violation waives the right to a heari g before the Health Officer under these regulations ior otherWise, regarding the matter of the alleged violation and/or th~ required corrective action. it Right to a Hearing Waived. By en~ering into a voluntary correction agreement, the person responsib e for the alleged violation waives the right to a hearing before the Heal Officer under these regulations or otherwise, regarding the matter 0 the violation and/or the required corrective action. The person res onsible for the alleged violation may, by through written documentatio . provided to the Health Officer, state his or her decision to reject and n~lIify the voluntary correction agreement, at which time that pe on is entitled to an appeal to the Health Officer pursuant to Sectio 170 of this Chapter. iii. Extension and Modification. The ealth Officer may, at his or her discretion, grant an extension of e time limit for correction or a modification of the required corre ive action if the person responsible for the alleged violation has sho n due diligence and/or substantial progress in correcting the violatio ,but unforeseen circumstances have delayed correction 'Under th~ original conditions. iv. Abatement by Public Health. Thel county may abate the alleged violation in accordance with SectiPn 180(5)(f) if all terms of the voluntary correction agreement a~ not met. v. Collection of Costs. If all terms of the voluntary correction agreement are not met, the person responsi Ie for the alleged violation shall be JC Code 8.15 revised 2007 page 40 of 47 ., DRAFT assessed all costs and expenses of abatement, as set forth in Jefferson County Public Health Code 8.15. f. Abatement Orders. Where the Health Officer has detennined that a violation of these regulations has occurred or is occurring, he or she may issue an Abatement Order to the person responsible for the alleged violation requiring that the unlawful condition be abated within a reasonable time period as determined by the Health Officer. i. Prerequisite to Abatement Order. Absent conditions which pose an immediate threat to the public health, safety or welfare of the environment, the procedures for abatement of conditions constituting a violation of these regulations should be utilized by Public Health only after corrections of such conditions have been attempted through the use of the civil infractions process. Once it has been determined by Public Health that there is an immediate threat to the public health's safety or welfare and that correction of such conditions has not been adequately achieved through use of the civil infraction process, then Public Health is authorized to proceed with abatement of such conditions pursuant to these regulations. Public Health shall also attempt to enter into a voluntary corrections agreement prior to issuing an Abatement Order. ii. Content. An Abatement Order shall include the following: 1. The name and address for the person responsible for the alleged violation; 2. The street address or description sufficient for identification of the building, structure or premises, or land upon or within which the alleged violation has occurred or is occurring; 3. A description of the violation and reference to the provision of the Jefferson County Board of Health Ordinance, which has been allegedly violated; 4. The required corrective action and a date and time by which the correction must be completed and after which, the Health Officer may abate the unlawful condition in accordance with this Chapter. 5. A statement that the costs and expenses incurred by Public Health pursuant to of this Chapter, including any amount expended on staff time to oversee the abatement, may be assessed against a person to whom the Abatement Order is directed in a manner consistent with this Chapter; and 6. A statement that the person to whom the Abatement Order is directed can appeal the Order to the Health Officer in accordance with this Chapter. iii. Service of Notice. The Health Officer shall serve the Abatement Order upon the owner of the property where the alleged violation occurred or is occurring, either personally or by mailing a copy of the notice by regular and certified or registered mail, a five-day return receipt requested, to the owner at his or her last known address. The Order JC Code 8.15 revised 2007 page 41 of 47 DRAFT shall also be served on each of 1,e following if known to the Health Officer or disclosed from.. official ublic records: the holder of any mortgage or deed of trust or oth r lien or encumbrance of record; the owner or holder of any lease of r~rd and the holder of any other estate or legal interest of record i~ or to the property or any structures on the property. The failure of th~ Health Officer to serve any person required herein to be served, sh~II not invalidate any proceedings hereunder as to any other perso duly served or relieve any such served person from any duty or bligation imposed by the provisions of this section. A copy of the Order hall also be posted on the property where the alleged violation occur ed or is occurring. iv. Authorized Action by Public Heal h. Using any lawful means, Public Health may enter the subject pro erty and may remove or correct the condition that is subject to abate~ent. v. Recovery of Costs and Expense.! The costs of correcting a condition which constitutes a violation of th' e regulations, including all incidental expenses, shall be bill d to the owner of the property upon which the alleged violation occur ed or is occurring, and shall become due within fifteen calendar days f the date of mailing the billing for abatement. The term "incidental xpenses" includes, but is not limited to, personnel costs, both direct a d indirect and including attorney's fees; costs incurred in documenti g the violation; towing/hauling, storage and removaVdisposal e enses; and actual expenses and costs to Public Health in. preparin' notices, specifications and contracts associated with the abatement, a d in accomplishing and lor contracting and inspecting the w rk; and the costs of any required printing and mailing. vi. Collection of Costs and Expense . The costs and expenses of correcting a condition, which con titutes a violation of these regulations, shall constitute a pe~onal obligation of the person to whom the Abatement Order is di. cted. Within fifteen days of abating any violation, the Health Officer hall send the person named in the Abatement Order a bill that detail the work performed, materials removed, labor used and the cos and expenses related to those tasks as well as any other costs nd expenses incurred in abating the violation. I g, Notice to Vacate. When a condition con~titutes a violation of these regulations and poses an immediate threat to life, lirjnb, property, or safety of the public or persons residing on the property, the H~alth Officer may issue a Notice to Vacate. : i. Content. A Notice to Vacate shal include the following: 1. The name and address to the person responsible for the alleged violation; 2. The street address or des ription sufficient for identification of the building, structure or p emises, or land upon or within which the alleged violation has ~rred or is occurring; JC Code 8.15 revised 2007 page 42 of 47 . --, DRAFT 3. A description of the violation constituting an emergency and reference to the provisions of the Jefferson County Board of . Health regulations, which has been allegedly violated; 4. A date, as determined by the severity of the emergency, by which any persons must vacate the premises. Incase of extreme danger to persons or property immediate compliance shall be required; 5. The required corrective action; 6. A statement that the person to whom the Notice to Vacate is directed can appeal the order to the Health.Officer in accordance with Section 170 of this Chapter and that any such appeal must be presented to the Health Officer within ten days. ii. Service of Notice. The Health Officer shall serve the Abatement Order upon the owner of the property where the alleged violation occurred or is occurring, either personally or by mailing a copy of the notice by regular and certified or registered mail, with a five-day return receipt requested, to the owner at his or her last known address. A copy of the Order shall also be posted on the property where the alleged violation occurred or is occurring. iii. Posting the Notice. In addition to providing service as states above, an additional notice shall be posted on the property in substantially the following form: DO NOT ENTER UNSAFE TO OCCUpy It is a violation of the Jefferson County Board of Health Code 8.15 to occupy this building, or to remove or deface this notice. , Health Officer Jefferson County Public Health iv. Compliance. No person shall remain in or enter any building, structure, or property which has been so posted, except that entry may be made to repair or correct any conditions causing or contributing to the threat to life, limb, property, or safety of the public or persons residing on the property. No person shall remove or deface any such notice after it is posted until the required corrective action has been completed and approved. (6) Appeals - see section 8.15.170. (7) Administrative - Certificate Holders. a. Suspension of Certificate. . i. The Health Officer may suspend any certificate upon making the determi!1ation, after a hearing between the Health Officer and the certificate holder, that the holder has performed with negligence, incompetence, misrepresentation or failure to comply with the applicable rules, regulations, guidelines, policies or practices which pertain to water supply and waste water disposal, to have made JC Code 8.15 revised 2007 page 43 of 47 ~ , I I I I DRAFT I fraudulent misrepresentation in ~aking application for a certificate or to have made fraudulent n1isrepres~ntation in making application for a permit to install an on-sit..e sew~ system, either existing at the time of certification or as thereafter ena ed. ii. The Health Officer shall give w' en notice of the hearing to any person aggrieved who has filed a written complaint with the Health Officer and the affected certificate holder(s).1 iii. For the first confinned violation uf,' der this subsection, the suspension period shall not exceed thirty (30 days; and the second violation in any three (3) year period shall result n a suspension of the certificate for a period not less than fifteen (15) 1ays and not to exceed one hundred eighty (180) days. i iv. If the Health Officer suspends a 4ertificate, the certificate holder shall not proceed with any further wo~ in connection with the activity covered by the certificate. ~ v. The certificate holder shall be no ified by certified mail of suspension of the certificate upon determinatio of a finding that a violation has occurred requiring suspension. I b. Revocation of Certificate. . i. A certificate may be revoked for ~epeated violation of any of the requirements of these reg. ulationlO r any other applicable regulation or if, after a hearing with the Board f Health, the holder of such certificate shall be found grossly ncompetent or negligent, or to have made fraudulent misrepresentati ns in making application for a certificate or for a permit to install an on-site sewage system, or should the bond or insurance required h~rein be cancelled. ii. The Health Officer shall give wr~n notice of the hearing to any person aggrieved who has filed a written I complaint with the Health Officer and the affected certificate holder(s). I iii. The third Notice of Violation issu~d by JCPH staff within any twelve (12) month period shall be consigered as repeated violations and result in certificate revocation. I iv. If the Board of Health revokes a dertificate, the certificate holder shall not proceed with any further wo~ in connection with the activity covered by the certificate. ! v. The certificate holder shall be nOfified by certified mail of revocation of the certificate, upon determinatio of a finding that a violation has occurred requiring revocation. vi. If, after revocation of a certificate the applicant desires to reapply for a certificate, the applicant must wa~ six (6). months prior to reapplication. Any person whose certifICate hasl been revoked will be required to pay all applicable fees and take and 'ass the written examination again before issuance of a new certifi te. c. Reinstatement of Suspended ot Revok d Certificate. i. The certificate holder shall make . en application for reinstatement , to the Environmental Health Dire or specifying what practices, JC Code 8.15 revised 2007 page 44 of 47 - . i DRAFT performance, and conditions that were named as grounds for suspension or revocation have been remedied; and the certificate holder will provide a description of the changes in performance that will occur which will directly avoid the repetition of past violations. ii. The Environmental Health Director, upon determining that noted deficiencies have been satisfactorily addressed, shall schedule the individual for participation in the next available examination where applicable. Reissuance of the certificate is subject to the individual's successful completion of the application and testing procedure and payment of testing and certification fees as per the Fee Ordinance. d. Probation. A period of probation consisting of additional reporting or inspection requirements may be imposed on a certificate holder as a result of violations of these rules or as a condition of operation following suspension/revocation of a certificate. Said period and requirements shall be the decision of the Health Officer and shall be determined after an administrative hearing with the certificate holder. e. Appeal. Any person feeling aggrieved because of the suspension or denial of a certificate by the Health Officer may, within fifteen (15) days ofthe suspension or denial, appeal to the Board of Health as set forth in JCC 8.15. 170. (8) Administrative - Property Owners a. Notice to Tttle. If the Health Officer finds than an owner has failed to comply with the requirements of this regulation, AND all administrative remedies have been exhausted, AND the case has been forwarded to the Jefferson County Prosecuting Attorney for further action, the Health Officer may record a Notice of Potential Uncorrected Violation finding on the title of the property with the Jefferson County Auditor. b. Removal of Notice. The owner shall make written request to the Health Officer for rescission of the Notice to Title. The request shall specify corrective actions that have been completed. c. The Health Officer, upon determining that noticed violation has been corrected, shall record a Rescission of Notice with the Jefferson County Auditor. d. The owner shall pay fees as required to complete inspection(s) to verify correction and to record the Rescission prepared by JCPH. JCC 8.15.190 SEVERABILITY Provisions of these rules and regulations are hereby declared to be separable, and if any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of these rules and regulations is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of these rules and regulations. JC Code 8.15 revised 2007 page 45 0147 " (pjVlPr Ct7ih~ Page 1 of 1 Jeanie Orr 50 to { 0.,... From: RAY E LOWRIE [cray@q.com] Sent: Sunday, November 18,200710:20 PM To: #Long-Range Planning Subject: Draft CAO HEARING RECORD Re: Gerald Steel's letter of 09 Nov 07 concerning Draft CAO Dear Planning Commission Members and Staff, I heartily concur with the position taken by Mr. Steel and the Citizens Protecting Critical Areas (lfCPCAIf). Good laws that are not enforced are a travesty and an insult to the governed. Sincerely, Ray E. Lowrie 111] 9/2007 ~/YLA- ,'A~; !l"_j'~ Page 1 of 1 .. Jeanie Orr 50&1 ~ From: Jeanie Orr Sent: Wednesday, November 28,2007 10:07 AM To: Miranda Schryver Subject: FW: Comments on Draft CAO of October 29, 2007 HEARING RECORD Hi, please add this comment to the SoCC packet as you see fit. Thanks, Jeanie From: ron hirschi [mailto:whalemail@waypoint.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 27,20075:38 PM To: #Long-Range Planning Cc: Gerald Steel Subject: Comments on Draft CAD of October 29,2007 Planning Commission, i I am writing in support of Gerald Steel's letter to you regarding e~forcement needs to protect Critical Areas in our ooun~. I I My family first settled in the county in the 1860s along the Ducklbush River and I've worked for the county, state, and Tribes as a biologist in many ways to protect our incredible atural resources. It is clear, after all these years, that we are reaching a critical point in our history with so muchew growth and impacts from sources well beyond our control. At the very least, we need to be as aggressive as possible in co~tinually updating where critical areas are located and protecting all known critical areas once mapped and identifi~d. I As a field biologist, I have witnessed many violations Of. natural ~source interests that are the very heart of what makes our coun~ so special. Streams lose valuable riparian ha itat and we then must spend thousands of dollars "restoring" them. Marine shorelines are armored only to negativ Iy affect up and down drift properties. With identification of the critical areas along our shores, streams, and other sites of importance, we need strong enforcement for buffer protection and other requirements essent al to their protection. I trust that you will see to it that adequate enforcement provision~ are enacted so that our resources are not lost for future generations. Kind Regards, Ron Hirschi PO Box 899 Hadlock, Washington 98339 whalemail@wavooint.com 11128/2007 (prrl ft Page lof 1 Jeanie Orr ~obl p., From: Jeanie Orr Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 9:25 AM To: Phil Johnson; David Sullivan; John Austin; John Fischbach Cc: David Alvarez Subject: FW: Enforcement Provisions for Protecting Critical Areas H RECORD Hi all. See comment letter. Jeanie From: Mitch Brennan [mailto:mksfbrennan@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, November 30,20078:35 AM To: #Long-Range Planning Subject: Enforcement Provisions for Protecting Critical Areas Dear Planning Commission: Our family read Mr. Steel's letter to you (dated November 9) with great interest. It seemed impossible to us that such a letter needed to be written. How could a commission go to all the time, trouble, and tax payer expense to use the best available science to draft regulations and then not include provisions that would ensure that the regulations be adequately enforced? We understand that there are people and companies who would be delighted to be able to ignore the critical areas ordinances that you worked so long to create. It seems that we should be long past allowing this degredation but some people will do anything for money. We also believe that there are many more people who would be delighted to see their tax dollars spent on securing resources and personel to enforce environmental codes. Therefore, we respectfully request that you do whatever it takes to give your ordinances the enforcement teeth they need. Otherwise, you have simply wasted your time. Thank you for all that you do for our community. Mitch and Karen Brennan 1076 Schwartz Road Nordland, W A 98358 Be a better pen pal. Text or chat with friends inside Yahoo! Mail. See how. 11130/2007 (f)fV1!-t pc. L-rt-P 1:>PA-.__. .k e.oft'\.yYWt""'~ To The Jefferson County Planning Commission RE:Critical Areas Ordinance Feedback 5 D~l ~ November 12th, 2007 HEARING RECORD Commissioners, staff and volunteers: Thank you very much for your hard work on this very cont~ntious issue. I have attended meetings over the last year, and witnessed the difficult conditions yqu have had to work with. i I I am very gratified that the final draft I have reviewed has ~ reasonable setback buffer for streams and wetlands. It seems a compromise that may work giveh all the various points of view that have to be taken into account. . There is wording in the document that discusses parcels that have no buildable areas outside of 150' on them, and I recommend that you consider doing aisurvey to identify the number of these parcels in the county, so you can have some science to sfpe the issue? Is it a huge number of parcels, or just a few? Could the county buy those? Or 100 at some other mechanism to handle them. While I support voluntary regulatons, I would also hope th;t the county creates rules with penalties. There are always scofflaws who will ignore the e rules. We need to have stiff penalties for those who would seek to ignore our rules for their own reasons. I I , Sincerely, ~ AI Bergstein People for Puget Sound Board Member Port Townsend, WA G J1tft C1JM~ Page 1 of 1 Jeanie Orr ~Ob I tt From: Jeanie Orr Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 9:23 AM To: Phil Johnson; David Sullivan; John Austin; John Fischbach Cc: David Alvarez Subject: FW: Concern about CAO, compliance and enforcement Hi all. See comment below. Thanks, Jeanie From: AI Bergstein [mailto:albergstein@gmail.com) Sent: Thursday, November 29,20076:00 PM To: #Long-Range Planning Cc: Mike Sato; Jill Silver; George Yount Subject: Concern about CAO, compliance and enforcement I am writing to add my voice to the chorus of people who are concerned that the vast amount of work that the CAO group has done over the last two years is going to be for naught. There are many good ideas incorporated into the CAO. It is very near a done document. But after all this work, there still does not appear to be a serious effort to create a compliance, enforcement and a penalty element in the new CAO. To meet the GMA requirement to protect critical areas, there must be effective enforcement. The notion of complaint-driven enforcement is not enforcement, in my mind. In-field monitoring programs, enough compliance officers to properly do the job and training for them on what to do, along with a budget from the County to make it all happen, is needed. And rounding that out, is a process for penalties for offenders. Without that, I cannot give my approval, nor will I suggest that People for Puget Sound support, the CAO as it is being drafted. I look forward to you addressing these concerns. Al Bergstein Jefferson County Resident Board Member, People for Puget Sound 11130/2007 GmA ~ Page I bfI- Jeanie Orr 5 DIP' tv From: Jeanie Orr I Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 9:24 AM I To: Phil Johnson; David Sullivan; John Austin; Jbhn FisCh~aCh Cc: David Alvarez Subject: FW: Enforcement provisions in CAO H Rlt~ RECORD Hi all. See comment letter below. Jeanie From: Nancy [mailto:nalu@harbomet.com] Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 6:52 PM To: #Long-Range Planning Cc: Jeanie Orr Subject: Enforcement provisions in CAO Dear Planning Commission and Staff: As being an owner of a residence at 150 Hiller Drive, p()rt H~dIOC~ Wa. and having a portion of Little Goose Creek run thru part of my property, I support and adopt by referen e the comments in the Nov. 9, 2007 letter and follow up letter of Nov. 13, 2007 written by Gerald Steel, PE (Atto ey-at-Law). Thank You. Nancy Brockob 7702 36th S1. C1. W. University Place, Wa 98466 11/30/2007 Jeanie Orr co (nft t-umfl1M\- f5 LJD(P{t)- m: .....;nt: To: Subject: Julie Jaman [Jaman@Olympus.net] Friday. November 16,20071:26 PM #Long-Range Planning draft CAD Hello County Commissioners and Planning Staff. I am writing regarding the draft CAO. It seems like years of my life have been devoted to encouraging attention, wise and effective documentation, and application of best available science needed for critical areas. The current draft CAO demonstrates concurrence and compromise in order to assure healthy and functioning critical areas in Jefferson County. However it is all for naught if the county does not provide enforcement for the ordinance. This appears to be the one weak area and, from past experiences, the single requirement needed to assure success and a legacy for the future. The monitoring needed for enforcement could be assisted by the many volunteers who are dedicated to the protection and enhancement of fish, wildlife, plants, and waters of this county. But there must be funds and protocols for enforcement to back up all such efforts. Please revisit the sections of the ordinance concerning enforcement and put some teeth into it. Thank you Julie Jaman Board member, Olympic Environmental Council Quimper Peninsula ':lqS-6078 1 ~ ..".. e,occ.. p~A 5Db/a.., Gom.m~S Dear Planning Commission, I am in full agreement with the attached letter from Gerald Steel. More enforcement is needed to protect critical areas. Here at Second Chance Ranch we have set aside 6 acres to wetland and creek buffers to produce ideal habitat for wildlife. We have even replanted these areas with native plants. We know the importance of protecting wildlife and fish habitat, especially in wetlands. We wish others would do the same. Sincerely, Sara Penhallegon Director of Second Chance Ranch - Jefferson Co. 11900 Center Rd Quilcene, Wash. 98376 (360)765-0598 RECEIVED NOV 2 8 2007 JEffERSON ~aUNrY DeD GERALD STEE~, PE ATfORNEY-A~T- . w 7303 YOUNG ROAD OLYMPIA. WA Telffax (360) 867-11~.. .! i lEmailedtophmning@coJefferson.wa.us November 9, 2007 .Planning Commission DCD 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend W A 98368 RE: Comments on Oct. 29, 2007 DraflCAO Dear Planning Commission Members and . Staff: I submit these comments on behalf of Citizens Pro . Critical Areas ("CPCA "). The Oct. 29~ 2007 Draft Critical Areas Ordinance ("CAO") fails to ensme that effective enforcement will be used to proteCt critical areas, particularly fi and wildlife habitat areas and associated wetlands. The Growth Management Act requires the County "shall adopt devel~pment regulations that protect critical areas." RCW 6.70A060(2); RCW 36.70A.130. The County's development regulations, as proposed, I do not adequately protect critical areas ~ they do not include provisions for effecti~e enforcement. i The Growth Management Act requires that best ~a ailable science be used to protect critical areas and that speciul consideration be given to p i1ection necessary to preserve anadromous fisberi~. RCW 36.70A.172(1). Certainly available science and such spec~ consideration require that regulations intended to rotect fish and wildlife habitat areas and . associated wetlands have effective enforcement prpvisions. This conclusion is supported by the best aV8.11able science ("BAS") in the record. lortions of some relevant BAS documents are ~hed hereto in Appendix A. , - ! Much.local work has been done in th~ last 30fears on water resource inventory areas . ("WR1As"). Portions ofJefferson County are incl ded in WRlAs 16, 17, 18, 20,.and 21. . The . boundaries of these WRIAs are shown in App. A- . The only WRIA, to date, to adopt both a Watershed Plan and Detailed Implementation Rlan is WRIA 17. WRJA 17 includes the R'. .R. CEll'''' \ ;I ;j "If V. . o~, "'Tn .1'11) .' w V LJ,I. JEHf8S0N,GOUNIY Ir~i. ~ Planning Commission and DCD · November 9~ 2007 Page 2 northeast portion of Jefferson County. See App. A-I and A-5 to A-16. These documents. call for local critical areas code enforcement as a necessary element to pi-otect critical ~ . The Jefferson County Department of Community Development has a code compliance officer who is actively pursing Cases. However, the officer's worldoad is VeIY high, and compliance. is complaint-driven. Additional resources for enforcement are necessaIy. App. A-16. '.The additional enforcement necesSary to meet the GMA requirement ~ protect critical area" requires more that just improved "complaint-driven" enforcement. Only a small . percentage of critical area code violations will be identified by complaint. To ensure protection of fish and wildlife habitat areas and associated wetlands, there must be in-field monitoring for all streams and associated wetlands and buffers, and a specific. enforoement protocol designed to ensure protection. Alternatively, there could ~ a monitoring and adaptive management program such as is discussed in Swinomish Indian TnoalCommunity v. WWGMHB (Slip Op. 76339-9, Sept. 12, 2(07). . Pursuant to the B~ in the record, the Oct. 29~ 2007 Draft CAO is not su:fficientto meet the G~ requirement to protect critical areas because it does not have adequate' enforcement provisioDS~ . . f~ ECEIVJ'h" 'ii, 1"\"Ah, '.~'~ .":' .:.~, :1 ~ : JrfffRSON COUNlY Den GrmA &;,)')\.~ bt> c.L Jeanie Orr ....)&t.L Page 1 of 1 50C,1 ~ ( I. From: Teri Proctor [t.proctor@comcast.net] Sent: Sunday, December 02,20075:28 PM To: #Long-Range Planning Cc: geraldsteel@yahoo.com Subject: Need for CAO Enforcement Provisions December 1, 2007 To Whom it may concern. As a property owner in Jefferson County I am extremely concerned by the lack of enforcement provisions in the CAO. Please be advised that I adopt by reference the comments in the attached letter (Nov. 9, 20071etter from Gerald Steel to Planning Commission and DCD) related to the need to have enforcement provisions in the CAO to meet the GMA requirement ''to protect critical areas." Sincerely, Ten Proctor 61 Hiller Rd Port Hadlock, W A 98337 1?nn007 - . Gmft CiJ-t'YV~ ~Ofo(~ /{-/7--67 " . . NOV 1 9 2007 .. .. . GERALD STEE1h PE AITORNE.... Y.' -AT-~W. 7303 YOUNG ROAD OL YMPlA, WA 98502 TelIfax ~ 867-1166' , I Emailedtoplanning@co.jeffersoawa.us November 9, 2007 PlanningCoInmission DCD 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend WA 98368 RE: Comments on Oct. 29, 2007 Draft CAO Dear Planning Commission Members and Staff: I submit these comments on behalf of Citizens ProteJting Critical Areas ("CPCA "). The Oct. 29, 2007 Draft Critical Areas Ordinance ("CAO")~' s to ensure that effective enforcement will be used t.o protect critical areas~ particularly fish d wildlife habitat areas and associated wetlands. The Growth Management Act requires .. the County "shall adoptdevel~pment regulations that protect critical areas." RCW 36~70A.06O(2); RCW 36.70A.130. The County's development regulations, as proposed, db not adequately protect critical areas beca'!lSe they do not include provisions for tffective ~nforcement. . I The Growth Management Act requires that best aV~lable science be used to protect critical areas and tha.t special. consideration be given toprottion necessary to preserve anadromous fisheries. RCW 36.70A. 1 72(1). Certainly be available science arid suchspec~ consideration require that regulations intended toprptect fish and wildlife habitat areas and associated wetlands have effective enforcement pro~sions. This conclusion is supported by the best available science ("BAS;') in the record. Po~ons of some relevant BAS documents are attached hereto in Appendix A. : M. .UC.h. JOC. al. wor~ has been done in ~ last. 30 yJlir~ on water resonree inVCII. .to~ areas. .' . eWRIAs"). Portions of Jefferson County are mclud~ lD,WRIAs ] 6, 17, 18,20,'and 21.' The boundaries of these WRlAs are shown in App. A-I. I .The only WRlA, to date, to adopt both a Watershed Plan and Detailed Implementation Plab is WRIA 17. WRIA 17 includes the. ~ RECEli\VEJl) ~r '1 \t 1 n ~)nrI7 p~ t; ~~ . iJ l.t.HJ , 1"-r'"l""rt'\nnl~ nf",'jt\,'Y-.i.; nnn Planning Commission and OCD November 9, 2007 Page 2 northeast portion of Jefferson County. See App.A-land A-5 toA-16. These docwnents.ca1l for local critical areas code enforcement as a necessmy element to protect crltic8I area ' 1\, The Jefferson County Department of Community Development has. a code ..compliance officer who is actively pursing Cases. However, the officer's workload is very high, and compliance. is complaint-driven. Additional resources for enforcement are necessary. App. A-16. 'J'he additional enforcement necessary to meet the GMArequirement ~ protect critical area" requires more that just improved "complaint-driven" enforcement. Only a sma1l '. percentage of critical area code violations will be identified by. complaint. To'e~ protection of fish and wildlife habitat areas and associated wetlands, there must be in-field monitoring for aU streams and associated wetlands and buffers, and a specific'enforcement protocol designed to ensure protection. Alternatively, there could .b.e a monitoring mid adaptive management program such as is discussed' in Swinomisb Indian Tribal.Commumty v. WWGMHB (Slip Op. 76339..,9, Sept. 12,2007). ... Pursuant to the BA~ in the record, the Oct. 29, 2007 Draft CAO IS not sufficientto meetthe GMA requirement to protect critical areas because it does not have Bdequateenforcement provisions; . .."'..........'..- s' '-'" .....-."'7-;-~~ ! . ! ~ .~ ~:!..:.:.. .J .:J._d. J J ': -. . ~: nnMTV ~ '\ ......~, ,. ':........, '.,' ", o. _ ~ 0mA COYV\W1GV\1> 500 I a.. flrt'Ufryz))f/Uq/ "&.00., JEffERSON COUNlY DeD Dear Planning Commission Members and Staff: ~w~~~:2~==~T~~ir;,,;';J' V{~tIapds.The Growth Management Ac,t reqUIreS I that the ~Wl.!l~~t~ re,guhUions that protect critical.areas." RCW ~6.70A.060(&);;t~, " .,. . ,. CQuntY's _development regulations, as proposedJdo notad~~J ,i .. .,,::,' .~they do not include provisio:ns for. effectite enforcellle.ii~:"; . "~j,;i')ii:' .. j t;:; , ',;r' . .~I~f;. ~ ~M':f~~~~~:':::;:' ~*:~~~ ==.~;;,~~;,~:;II)::";"'iL I'" ,'~ ' 'il~J:1~~. . RCW .36.70A.172(1~. SeJ1ai11lYlfst availalJ~e'~~~,';:"";:i ~.._:,..;.~,.....t.l_..'.;,....,'.'.',:,:f, ;.,j~,..'.'.:~ .C9~slderation reqUIre that regUlations mtended to Iprotect fishand.;t~"'t,.:.. Ik't""",;:.'", ::..." ..... .\ ., ~()ciated wetlands have effective enforceIl1,ent 'p~visions. 'Tbj$,9Aq~~~~9~:; :"'.:~~ i;~";~:~::- fix:' " "t4~~available s~ience ("B~S") in the r~ord., fortions of some.,~le,X~J~Wl;!~~'f:'iiJit}~ume~~.:;,:;':~' >"nc,~ ~-ii ~ attached hereto m AppendlxA. I' '-,' 'JI. ""ff;:;':':' ~?:: ' . I:!J ' :(:~~;,;' I~;'~'~" :" .... 11uch.local wor~ has been done in th~' last. 30~Year~ on wa~~ ~ <' i .'T,':<"-:? ,', (~~;wRIAs''). Portions of Jefferson County are:m~l ded In W'R.It\~ l~.~l > . < , ,.' ,'bQ.~daries of these WRIAs are shown in App. A 1. The only,." ' " , f;, "-i.ttEI~EDd P,lan and Detailed Implementation IrIan is WRlA"l'7:, ":;'.f. :j.~ .~. . -, I .' I;h:;,[" (,;;:; i~"~t.:::)~" I:>~:tr, , \ GERALD STE*L, PE AITORNEY-AT{[AW 7303 YOUNG ROAD OLYMPIA, WA 98 2 Tellfax (360) 867-11 '" ....~ Emaileid to planning@co.jefferson. wa.~' , .; . ." N;()vember 9,2007 :. ,~ . .... !" "-. ~'. ~ : . Plannine Commission Den ..621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend W A 98368 RE: Comments on Oct. 29, 2007 Draft CAO "'.-f ;. . t;,:~~:'~. ~~" if':";~ "'NOV2:0 2007 +. ;. jff~~A~n~1 rOIlNTY nrn ' Planning Commission and DCD November 9, 2007 Page 2 \ , northeast portion of Jefferson County. See App. A-I and A-S to A-16. These documents call for local critical areas code enforcement as a necessary element to protect critical areas. :s1, ...,-::"f The Jefferson County Department of Community Development has a code compliance officer who. is actively pursing cases. ~ However. the officer's workload is very high, and compliance is complaint-driven. Additional resources for enforcement are necessary. App. A-16. Jbe additional enforcement necessary to meet the GMA requirement "to protept ~tical area" requires more that just improved "complaint~driven" enforcemetlt. Only a~ ~rc.entage of critical area code violations will be identified by complaint. To ensufe protection of fish and wHdlife habitat areas and associated wetlands, there mustbe in~fi61d monitoring for all streams and associated wetlands and buffers, and a specific enforcem~t protocol designed to ensure protection. Alternatively, there could be a.~oDitoring ap.d adaptive management program such as is discussed in Swinomish Indian Tribal Communl~ v. WWGMHB (Slip Gp. 76339-9, Sept. 12,2007). Pursuant to the BAS in the record, the Oct. 29,2007 Draft CAO is not sufficient to meet ~ GMA requirement to protect critical areas because it does not have adequate enforcemq,.t provisions. ..;...,;.. .. ~ RECEIVED NDV 2 02007 JEfFERSON COUNTY ncn /' Gmt\- Pf - C, f{, O. C{)~ <~j; 1s)SvO 7 ,)b& I CL ; .. . GERALD STE*L, PE ATTORNEY-AT-~W 7303 YOUNG ROAD ~ OLYMPIA. WA 98$2 Tellfax (360) 867-1166 ....."4:v , Emailedtoplanning@co.je#.erson. w~~ :.:;1'loy~mber 9,2007 ~~ ~.:.. . ". .". Plannin~ Commission 'DeD 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend W A 98368 RE: Comments on Oct. 29,2007 Draft CAO ~"'~i.~. ";', Dear Planning COnmllssion Members and Staff: .;;~~~~:~~:~~~~=;:~~;~~ will be used to protect critical areas, partieuiarly fi~h and wildlif~ ~,~i~1"Ji~f~~9~ .. wetlan~. 'The Growth M~~gement Ac.trequires Ithat the Co~ty,'~~s~m~;gp~~~!9PID,~t: regulations that protect cntlcal.areas:" RCW ~6.70A.060(2);~e~'J~~7q~~t~0; .~.. =~~o=:~l~~~:=~: 1o~~4;oen:~>'I'rot'1"\'~1 . The Growth Management Act requires that.best a~ailable sCicmcebe~<t~'i~[9~criti~ . "'!'I'" :md that special consideration be giv~ top*ection !'~lO~~J!"~IOmo!# ~n~. RCW 36.70A.172(1). CernllnlY ~st availaPIe ~cle~.'lU,J,e'~~~' ~Wf.. .~dEE~~E~2=:1~;:~~!I~~ . . . I ":.! I . . . .'; ~uch.loca1 work has been done in th~ last 30 ~ears on wa~rres9~i1l~;[W~ry':.ar~t' ("WRIAs''). Portions of Jefferson Countyareincl~ded in WRlAsl~,17;:l~:;,~Q,,~~P;~1.~'~$' . boundaries of these WRlAs are shown in App. A-~. The only WRIA"t()..#~~:;tq:~c;>pth9.~'. . a Watershed Plan and Detailed Implementation nlan is WRlA 17. ~":.~~~~7~~~~':~~..,,-,\ .,,!.(. ...,.'~ ;; lL(t1,L- ['::.< ::.+1 Jt~~.JL}i:": .... "c :j .. .'. ,""-'. ji.(~.t' H~(H.i j'nl'I'Mfirf! .'i.. ;. :V~HJ \,1; I~ ! I, ,. Planning Commission and DCD November 9, 2007 Page 2 northeast portion of Jefferson COlU1ty. See App. A-I and A -5 to A-16. These documents call for local critical areas code enforcement as a necessary element to protect critical areas. .....~ . The Jefferson County Department of Community Development has a code compliance officer who is actively pursing cases. However, the officer's workload is very high, and compliance is complaint-driven. Additional resources for enforcement are necessary. .. tI App. A-16. '.The additional enforcement necessary to meet the GMAreq1Prement ''to prot~t , .' cnticalarea" requires more that just improved "complaint-driven"enforcemel1t. Only asm#ll~, :J.;.;~( ~~~~ge of critical area code violations will be identified by complaint. Toe~ protection offish and wildlife habitat areas and associated wetlands, theremustbe in-fi~Jd moni~oring for all streams and associated wetlands and.buffers, and,a'speCific eJi.forcem~~t protocol designed to' ensure protection. Alternatlvely,there could be,'a'inonitoring ~. adaptive management program such as is discussed in SwinomishIndianTribal CommutVtx" v.WWGMHB (Slip Gp. 76339-9, Sept. 12, 2007). " PUrsuant to the BAS in the record, the Oct 29,2007 Draft CAO is not sufficient to meet the OMA requirement to protect critical areas'because it does not have adequate enforcement provisions. ;'. ~4. ~.. ~ R' E. CEf'\liC"/r" . , ~,lCi.l...t Nav <) r; 2flfl7 J...J ~;... J....! lJ J . ~ ". \JffHRSUN COUNTY fiCO - pc;... ~~ gf~rn~t~ J i""}_ H1 L,? /Yo..... loP n a1 I._ fy ~,(j IJV II l{/VL. OJ 2aJ 7 .,.,.. r2A1.d DC/) 5(){,J tL- ~7 SU5tUl J+opkln<; PO. 13 ox {CJ 7 p~~ 3t? JfHfR . . leanie Orr {91Yl4 (/()yn fh-evt t-~ 5D&/,^- From: Sent: To: Jeanie Orr Tuesday, November 13, 20074:10 PM AI Scalf; Ashley Bullitt; Bill Miller; Bud Schindler; Christina Pivamik; Edel Sokol; Henry Werch; JD Gallant; Jeanie Orr; Joel Peterson; Karen Barrows; Mike Whittaker; Patricia Farmer; Peter Downey; Stacie Hoskins; Michelle McConnell David Alvarez; Donna Frostholm FW: CAO letter from Tribes Cc: Subject: Jefferson County Planning Comm... Hi all. See attachment for comment letter. Print a copy for yourself. Thanks, Jeanie -----Original Message----- From: Steve Todd [mailto:stodd@pnptc.org] Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 3:48 PM To: Jeanie Orr Cc: Hans Daubenberger; 'Scott Chitwood'; Chris Weller Subject: CAO letter from Tribes Hi Jeanie, Attached is a letter addressed to Peter Downey, Chair of the Jefferson Co. Planning Commission, from the Point No Point Treaty Council, Port Gamble S'Klallam and Jamestown ~'Klallam Tribes, commenting on the CAO Planning Commission Hearing Draft. The Tribes )preciate this opportunity to comment. Thank you, Steve Steve Todd Habitat Biologist, SSHIAP Hood Canal/Strait Point No Point Treaty Council 7999 Salish Lane Kingston, WA 98346 360-297-6526 1 .. .. I I Poin~~!?Kt~!~~m:~~1<~I~U nci! ! November 13, 2007 Peter Downey, Chairman Jefferson County Planning Commission 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, W A 98368 I Re: Jefferson County Planning Commission Hearing ~raft CAO (dated 10/29/07) I I Dear Mr. Downey: ! I , ! The Port GambleS'K.lallam and Jamestown S'Kla1larhTri~, and the Point No Point , Treaty Council co1D.tnend the tremendous effortsofthb Planning Commission, subcommittees, county staff, and others involvedin d~' velopingdarevised Critical Areas ~. ;.r.:;C:.b~~;::...~l:~.:..~e~..'..urn.t.o.a.:a=u.s.'..~:S.w~.' ..'~mo.;.~~.e.:d. :.~ d.~.~.e:. o..~:w. .realize that this process involved individuals withvar ous perspectives, and that working through differences has been nOSfilall feat. i The afo",menfioned TrilleS. .ppr.e.Cjal.etb~. ..0. pport. un!tyllo pro.Vi?e comm. enLon. the latest CAOdraft. We havereVlewed the Plannmg Comm1ssion Heanng Draft, Proposed New Chapter 18.22 JCC,"Critical Areas" (dat~ Oct.. 29, 2~. .7), and in general wesll,pport the p.tate. ct. io.ns p.roVidedthr..oughmany ele.ments. nota.... b.ly hann.. el Migration. Zones (within Article V), Wetlands (Article VI) and FWHCA{Artic eNII), particularly stream and marine shoreline buffers. I I However, we have concerns with respect to several pa~ts of the draft CAO as follows. . Agriculture: There needs to be rn.ore clarity initheCAOwithrespectto agriculture and SSB5248..Also, existing and n-goingagriculture lhatproposes to expand or convert toa land uSe other than a iculture (e.g., residential or commercial) needs to comply with the CAO r quirements (e.g., buffers) that govern these other land uses. . Geo- Hazard Areas (GHAs): The GHAsectio (Article V) is currently COnfusing and possibly contradictory. For example inse9uon Ht22.170 (3Xa)(i), d~ring and grading is allowed in GRAs, butlater in s~ction 18.22~170 (6)(1), it is stated that buffers are required adjacent to landslide cflHAs. Part of the problem may be that the different types of GBAs Deed ta be cl~ly distinguiShed in this section. I I I 1 I 7999 N,E: Salish Lane · Kingston, Wa$hingtQn98346 . Kipgston (360) 297-3422 . FAX (360) 297-3413 I I I I ! f · Channel Migration Zones (CMZs)(within Article V): We strongly support the inclusion of CMZs in the CAO. Channel migration zones are among the most ecologically diverse and productive habitats for saImonids and many other aquatiC and terrestrial wildlife species, they are inherently risky to build in, and it is therefore costly to maintain human infrastructures in CMZs. For these reasons, and because CMZs include some GRAs, we recommend that CMZ boundaries themselves provide the "buffer", and that a building setback of 15 feet from the CMZ boundary be established. However, when FWHCA or wetland buffers extend beyond the CMZ, the FWHCA or wetland buffer would then supersede the CMZ. Also, we recommend that the subdivision of existing parcels be prohibited in CMZs. · Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCAs)(Article VI): In addition to the buffers for Type S, F,and N streams, and marine shorelines, this section of the CAO needs to provide adequate habitat protection (e.g., through buffers and corridors) to other species of importance including those found in the WDFW Priority Habitat and Species (PHS) list. Doingso will minimize the fragmentation of aquatic, riparian and terrestrial upland habitats in the county. Also, we recommend that at a minimum, vegetation management needs to be addressed within the FWHCA, wetland, and GRA critical areas. In addition to the importance of a buffer width, there needs to be an emphasis on the character and function of those buffers. · Wetlands (Article Vll): The exemption in section 18.22.320(2) allowing for lawns and other residential activities (including fences) into the outer 25% of wetland buffers should not be permitted, nor should it be permitted in other types of buffers such as FWHCAs. This effectively allows for buffer reduction without proper review. · Critical Area Stewardship Plans (CASPs)(Article IX): We generally support the concept-of alternative plans when they provide alternatives for landowners that cannot meet minimum buffer requirements due to lot configurations, and when the CASP provides equal or better habitat protections than a prescriptive buffer. However, the requirement for 3 years of post-implementation monitoring in most cases would not be adequate to ensure the long-term effectiveness of a CASP. In addition to the first three years, there should be 5 andlO-year and perhaps longer- tennmonitoring following CASP implementation. We recommend that iIiformation gained from this monitoring be captured in a geographic information system (GIS) and used in developing and implementing other conservation and critical area plans, including future CAOs, through adllptive management. We also recommend that the effectiveness of the CASP program be evaluated following three years of implementation. Also, there needs to be a requirement for the public notification of CASPs. Finally, in the current draft we are uncertain how one demonstrates (i.e., through monitoring) whether they are providing "equal or better protection" to critical areas and resources (e,g., fish and wildlife habitat). It is one thing to monitor whether plantedveg~tation is surviving adequately, buUt isanothet iSSue altogether to gau~e whethenhat ve~etatjon is adequa~ly protecting wetland or stream functions such as songbird habitat, or sediment and temperature regimes. .. .' · Uke the CASP section, we understaIldthat th~ Watershed . Monitoring section (Article X, 18.22.630) in theturtentdraft rell1ains in development. We encourage a more complete and strategic plan mat can be! supported by adequate funding. Witha.dditianal work, this Watersbed Manitot1,ng plan Il1ay be effective in documenting status and trends on'wa~eJ:'Shed s es that would bebelpful in determining cumula.tive impaCts; hawever,as' escribed in the Clirrent draft, the manitoring plan falls. far short .of being able to definitely dis.cem t:hecauses .of water quality, stream flow, .or habitatimproveent or degradation. Furthermare, at the scope and scale described in the current raft CAO, the monitoring plan wauld be unable ta link these water qualitym~asurements to specific land use actions. Therefore, it shauld not be stated that piis is the iritent of such a Watershed Monitoring plan. i · Also with respect ta the Watershed Monitorin 'pla.n, the Tribeswould encourage and suppart such a monitoringpla.n if they (Le , the Tribes) and others engaged in water quality, stream flaw and habitat monito ng activities in the county, are invalved in review and .oversight of the monit . ring plan. · We need to adequa.tely fund the WatershedM ;nitoringplan. , , Again, we tbank the many individuals engaged in the revision .of the Jefferson County CAO. We encourage you to seriously consider theTri~es concemsand comments as yau finaIlzethe CAO. I Sincerely, ~~ Hans' Daubenberger, Itat Bialogist Port Gamble S'KlallamTribe Scott Chitwaod, Natural Resources Director Jamestown S'K.lallam Tribe .. .Jeanie Orr 0111r+ (A;yn ~t-~ SD&ItA. ~'" From: Sent: To: Jeanie Orr Tuesday, November 13, 20074:10 PM AI Scalf; Ashley Bullitt; Bill Miller; Bud Schindler; Christina Pivamik; Edel Sokol; Henry Werch; JD Gallant; Jeanie Orr; Joel Peterson; Karen Barrows; Mike Whittaker; Patricia Farmer; Peter Downey; Stacie Hoskins; Michelle McConnell David Alvarez; Donna Frostholm FW: CAO letter from Tribes Cc: Subject: Jefferson County Planning Comm... Hi all. See attachment for comment letter. Print a copy for yourself. Thanks, Jeanie -----Original Message----- From: Steve Todd [mailto:stodd@pnptc.org] Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 3:48 PM To: Jeanie Orr Cc: Hans Daubenberger; 'Scott Chitwood'; Chris Weller Subject: CAO letter from Tribes Hi Jeanie, Attached is a letter addressed to Peter Downey, Chair of the Jefferson Co. Planning Commission, from the Point No Point Treaty Council, Port Gamble S'Klallam and Jamestown Q'Klallam Tribes, commenting on the CAO Planning Commission Hearing Draft. The Tribes )preciate this opportunity to comment. Thank you, Steve Steve Todd Habitat Biologist, SSHIAP Hood Canal/Strait Point No Point Treaty Council 7999 Salish Lane Kingston, WA 98346 360-297-6526 1 .. .. I Poi n~Q~G?.!?~at!~~m:~~'!:l?mu nci' November 13, 2007 Peter Downey, Chairman Jefferson County Planning Commission 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, W A 98368 Re: Jefferson County Planning Commission lIeari!lg r CAO (daled 10/29/07) Dear Mr. Downey: I , The Port G.'.~.ble S'K.J.all.all1 and.' Jamesto.wn s.... 'K.J.... aI. l~. '..' Tri.bes.....' and the~o...i?t..NO pOin. t , Treaty CouncIl commend the tremendous effortsofthf Plannlng ComlnlSSl(}fl, subcommittees, county staff,and others invoilved in d<tvelopingda revised Critical Areas Of. di?ance (CAD)th.. at.~rot:~t. s our. natural fesOUf.. CCS. ,*um. an safety , and dra.ws on the conSIderable energy of Its CItIZenry to be better stewar~s of our land and water. We realitethat this process involved ineJividuals wi.th varjpus perspectives, and that working through differences has been nOSIllall feat. I , I , I The aforementioned Tribes appreciate the opportunity to provide comment on the latest CAD draft. We have reviewed the Planning COmmisso on Hearing Draft, Proposed New Chapter 18.22 JCC,~'Ctitical ~as" (dated Oct. 29, 2 . 7), and in general We support the protections provided through many elements, notably hannel Migration Zones (within Article V), Wetlands (Article VI) and FWHCA (Artie eVII), particularly stream and marine shoreline buffers. I However, we have concerns With respect to several pab of the draft CAD as follows. I ! · Agriculture: There needs to be more clarity in I the CAO with respect to agriculture and SSB 5248.. Also, existing andqn.,going agriculture that propOses to expand or convert to a land use <>ther than a iculture (e.g., residential or , commercial) needs to comply with the CAD r uireIilents (e.g., buffers) that govern these other land uses. . Geo-Hazard Areas (GHAs): The GHA.sectio (Article V) iscurtently confusing and possibly contradictory. For example in s 'on 18.22.170 (3Xa)(i), clearing and grading is allowed in GRAs, butlater in s~ction 18.22.170 (6)(f), itis stat~d tbat bufti. . e.rs are requ. ire.....d adjacent to landslide 'HAs.. ..: P~rt 0: theRrobl~m n1~y be that the different types of GRAs need to be c1errr1y dlstlDguIShed III thIssectlOD. 7999 N.E.. Salish Lane . Kingston. Wa!ihingtQn98346 .. I Kt8'l<>O (3601297-3422 I I i . FAX (3M) 297-3413 .' , · Channel Migratien Zones (CMZs)(within Article V): We strengly suppo.rt the inclusien of CMZs in the CAO. Channel migratien zones are among the most ecologically diverse and productive habitats for salmenidsand many other aquatic and terrestrial wildlife species, they are inherently risky to. build in, and it is therefo.re costly to. maintain human infrastructures in CMZs. For these reasons, and because CMZs include some GHAs, we recommend that CMZ bo.undaries themselves pro.vide the "buffer", and that a building setback o.f 15 feet from the CMZ boundary be established. However, when FWHCA o.r wetland buffers extend beyond the CMZ, the FWHCA or wetland buffer wo.uld then supersede the CMZ. Also, we recommend that the subdivisien of existing parcels be pro.hibited in CMZs. · Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCAs)(Article VI): In addition to. the buffers for Type S, F,and N streams, and marine sho.relines, this sectio.n o.f the CAO needs to pro.vide adequate habitat protectio.n (e.g., through buffers and corridors) to other species of importance including those fo.und in the WDFW Prio.rity Habitat and Species (PHS) list. Doing so. will minimize the fragmentatio.n o.f aquatic, riparian and terrestrial. upland habitats in the county. AlSo., we recommend that at a minimum, vegetation management needs to be addressed within the FWHCA, wetland, and GHA critical areas. In additien to the impo.rtance o.f a buffer width, there needs to bean emphasis on the character and function o.f those buffers. · Wetlands (Article Vll): The exemption in section 18.22.320(2) allewing for lawns and o.thet residential activities (including fences) into. the outer 25% o.f wetland buffers sho.uld net be permitted, nor sho.uld it be permitted in other types of buffers such as FWHCAs. This effectively allo.ws fer buffer reduction without proper review. · Critical Area Stewardship Plans (CASPs)(Article IX): We generally support the concept'o.f alternative plans when they provide alternatives for landowners that canno.t meet minimum buffer requirements due to. lot configurations, and when the CASP pro.vides equal or better habitat pro.tections than a prescriptive buffer. Ho.wever, the r~uirement fer 3 years o.f post-implementation monitoring in most cases wo.uld net be adequate to ensure th.e lo.ng-term effectiveness of a CASP. In additio.n to. the fust three years, there should be 5 andl0-year and perhaps longer- termmo.I1ito.ring fo.llo.wing CASP hnplementatio.n.Werecommend that info.rmation gained ftom this mo.nitoring be captured in a geographic information system (GIS) and used in developing and implementing other conservation and critical area plans, including future CAOs, thro.ugh adaptive management. We also recommend that the effectiveness of the CASP pmgram be evaluated following three years o.f implementation. Also, there needs to. be a requirement for the public notification o.f CASPs. Finally, in the current draft we are uncertain how one demonstrates (Le., through monitoring) whether they are pro.viding "equal or better protection" to. critical areas and reso.urces (e.g., fish and wildlife habitat). It is one thing to monitor whether planted vegetation is surviving adequately, butit isanothet issue altogether to. gauge whether that vegetation is adequa~ly protecting wetland or stream functions such as songbird habitat,or sediment and temperature regimes. ~ · like the CASP section, we understand that thd Watershed Monitoring section (Art.. i.el.e....x. ,.,.'18..2.2.6.30) in. the.cu. .rrent..d......r..a..ft........r..e..m........~.I...n..s.i..n.......d. e... v... elo..p....m....e..n.. t..... W.......e ..e n co. .urage a more complete and strategic plan that can be supported by adequate funding. With additional work, this Watershed Monito ngplan may be effective in documenting status and trends on watershed s es that would be helpful in dete~i~ing..cumUla.tive impacts.; hO.W. ev... er.,as.~e..s. cri?ed in.the cu. rren.t d.....ra. ..ft, the monItormg plan falls far short of beU!lg able to I defl.filtely dIscern the causes of Water quality, stream flow, or habitatimproveljnent or degradation. Furthermore, at the scope and scale described in the currentFraft CAO, the monitoring plan would be unable to link these water qualitym asurements to specific land use actions. Therefore, it should not be stated that is is the intent ofs.uch a Watershed Monitoring plan. · Also With.. respect to the .W~tersh.. ed. ~onito.. ~ng plan, tee T. h. .beS.WOUld e. ncou.ra~e and support such a mOnItonng plan If they (l.el, the Tnbes) and others engaged In water quality, stream flow and habitat monit011ng activities in the county, are involved in review and oversight of the monitqring plan. . We need to adequately fund the Wat~rshedM~nitoringplan. I I Aga. in, we thank .the many indiv. idUalSengaged. in the tevision of the Je.. fL. erson County CAO. We encourage you to seriously consider the TriPes concerns and comments as you finalize the CAO. Sincerely, ~~ .--- Hans' Daubenberger, Itat Biologist Port OambleS'Klallam Tribe Scott Chitwood, Natural Resources Director Jamestown S'K.1allam Tribe to TYll-A {JC-p ~A- VOMm~t:s General comment: d111 s:a ViR' NO-VUMiuY t> o hi'^-- C-AO 7- / *2-007- r m glad to see that the public process worked, that people were heard, the issues fully discussed. The draft CAO represents a reasonable integration of the needs expressed by the citizens of the County. . Article n Administrative Provisions 18.22.030 Identification and mapping of critical areas: ..." To the extent practicable, The County shall ensure that its critical areas maps are updated as inventories area completed in compliance with the requirements of the GMA.". Also, wetland delineations or stream mapping submitted with permits should be incorporated into the GIS (geographic information system) map database. Good insertion! This needs to become a high priority for county funding as it not only supports better protection, but also better certainty for landowners and developers. 18.22.070 General Exemptions (1) Agriculture... Cannot be exempted. as worded in this section per SSB 5248. What can be stated is that this ordinance maintains the existing ordinance with respect to allowing existing and ongoing agriculture. (9) Artificial wetlands and ponds... the exemption for constructing or maintaining these features needs to be better articulated 18.18.080 Non-conforming uses (2) Any use or structure... Do uses or structures that are illegal in the current code also get vested? This should be changed. Article m Aquifer Recharge Areas 18.22.130 Protection Standards for Aquifer Recharge Areas (2) (a) Good that this incorporates the updated stormwater manual - stormwater is very damaging to water quality, habitat structure, and flooding in streams, wetlands, and in the marine nearshore. (4) Good that golf courses are spelled out for specific best management practices to protect water quality and aquifer recharge. 18.22.135 Adaptive~~ment Page 1 of 4 Good - I support the monitoring commitment foJ groundwater in this ~on, especially to provide background conditions an~ evidence of changes. I I Article V Geologically Hazardous Areas I This section has one positive change - the additiEOf Channel Migration Zones (CMZs) as high erosion hazard areas. I applaud this addi . on, and note that most counties in w. W A that contain large migrating rivers have also de this addition. CMZs are very important habitat areas for fish and wildlife, and ose a considerable risk to landowners and county infrastructure. This will help save taXpayers money, too, if fewer road or bank repairs are necessary. . I I However, the rest of the article, especially 18.22.1VO - Protection Standards, is confusing and often at cross-purposes. I recommend lm~' out the protection standards into sections depending on the Geohazard (selsmic, e osion, landslide) being addressed, as the risk and requirements are different for each. . e entire section needs a comprehensive re-write. . . I The buffer setback of 5 feet is not large enough to I accommodate construction of a footing. It ma. y be appropriate for some cpnstru~on (deck, etc), but should be expanded to address the logistics of construction. I There should be included some languagespecificlto NO SUBDMSION in CMZ high or moderate risk zones. It does include' creation of. new parcel within a known landslide hazard area ((9)(a) (ii). ButCMZs are considered rerosion' not landslide hazards, so that might be a loophole. I recommend (9)(b)(v) have the word' and hydrolf>gic' inserted after ...' normal geologic conditions' . Article VI Fish and Wildlife Habitat Areas The Purposes section is GOOD. 18.22.195 Compliance Alternative - Critical as stewardship plan (CASP) I support this alternative in concept, and believe t involving landowners in active stewardship is a laudable goal. In this section, th last sentence, the word 'may' should be changed to 'will' ... "necessitate additional mop.itoring." There is considerable support, both in precedent and in regulation for $e recommended" prescriptive" buffers, but where landowners are allowed to deHart and reduce buffer widths, there must be adequate monitoring. (More below in Atjticle IX comments) I I I I Page 2 of 41 18.22.250 Regulated Activities (2) Land Divisions (a) .. . new lots must contain at least one building site that meets requirements of this code including buffers - GOOD! (d) '" buffers areas shall be dedicated as permanent ope n space tracts... GOOD! 18.22.270 Protection Standards The buffers for streams and nearshore resources specified in (5) are to be applauded! They represent a compromise - not the largest or smallest, but are tailored according to good science to be adequate as we continue to subdivide and develop our valley bottoms and hiIIslopes, impacting habitat structure, wildlife habitat and water quality as we do. These represent the only continuous corridors that will exist unless we designate wildlife corridors in the future. We recognize the importance of flexibility for those whose existing lots do not allow a reasonable use because of buffers. Preserving dense native vegetation is of critical importance to fish and wildlife, and will keep buffers functioning into the future. Protection of fish and wildlife habitat, streams, wetlands, and water quality is the key to the survival of the 300 plus native species of plants, animals and fish that co-exist in this county with us. I have the right, as a citizen, to continue to enjoy watching, eating, and living alongside them. It's also critical to our community survival and wellbeing to protect these areas - not just aesthetically, but economically and in terms of health and safety. H we don't protect now, there will be homes and roads and businesses in the zones that are required for ecosystem health. These zones actually belong to the public - to all of us. Article vn Wetlands The wetland section, the buffer strategy, the land use intensity table, and the concepts entailed in it are reasonable, based on good information, and should be enacted. The strategy is flexible in application, fair in terms of representing the mid-range of recommendations, and represents the conditions specific to each wetland. Any further recommendations by DOE, the agency with expertise, should be addressed and incorporated. Article IX Alternative Protection Standards Page 3 of 4 This is a work in progress which we support in c~ncept, but it should not be adopted in code - even as a placeholder - until the program ~ fully designed and peer-reviewed, vetted by the public, and the language iscomple1ed developed. One item - in 18.22.470 - existing conditions - ~ting Water Quality data shall be collected and reported from the Conservation Di$hict, DOE, local tribes, the DOH, or other sources. I , 18.22.510 Three years is not a long enough ti$e frame in which to monitor the success of an alternative plan. , Article X Stewardship Incentives; Watersh1 Monitoring; Residential BMPs These sections are positive additions, but seem largely incomplete - works in progress. Certainly I support the expansion of all listed c~ponents as very important to the success of the CAD program. ! , I In particular, 18.22.630, Watershed Monitoring, iE' to recognize that an effective monitoring program is a crucial part of the abili to demonstrate that we're achieving goals in maintaining or improving degraded con . tions with CASP buffers or regular buffer prescriptions. However, having single mofrltorlng stations at the marine interface of Type S and F streams and rivers will :pot provide information necessary to evaluate impacts from individual parcels and their buffers. Funding for development of the program, implementation of it, analysis of ~ta, and reporting is necessary. ! I support the plan to bring aU existing data into ore database. I support the concept of bio-monitoring as a ~ indicator of aquatic health. , In (3)(a) In...' do not plant invasive ornamental plants in or adjacent to wetland buffers' - DELETE 'wetland'... this should apply ~o all buffers. Page 4 of~ I I I I ! l.P prt.M (1vo L.(Lr ~ Testimony before the Jefferson County Planning Commission RE: Critical Areas Ordinance Draft MLA06-242 November 7,2007 5"blol ()... Jill Silver 888 - 53rd Street Port Townsend, W A 98368 I offer my appreciation for a reasonable ordinance that balances both community needs and environmental protection. Jefferson County reflects a diverse population, but we all have the same basic needs for shelter, clean water, healthy food, and good work. We all live downstream. Though we dislike change, we have to evolve to meet new challenges of decreasing resources, expanding populations, and climate change. The GMA is an important tool because it makes us change - directing us to incorporate new information, and to respond to changes to the land, communities, and resource bases that require different strategies. Information related to landscape changes due to fragmentation and development is readily available - it's being discussed in the Puget Sound Partnership and Strategy, in the Shoreline Master Program updates, and is evident in the databases at the Conservation District, the Jefferson County Department of Health, and our state agencies - DOE and DFW. We have degraded water quality in every major river and stream in Jefferson County except the mainstem Hoh River. We have endangered salmon. Shellfish is sometimes not fit to eat. 100 years ago, there were only slight differences between Jefferson County and King County. The differences now are several million people to the east, along with the changes they've wrought before we knew we needed wetlands and fish and trees; including endangered fish stocks, polluted beaches and shellfish beds, streams that run under parking lots, and avastly altered forest, prairie, and wildlife community. We have a chance to grow here in Jefferson County and apply the lessons learned over the decades in the rest of the country - so that we, here on the frontier, can retain the quality of life and environment that we love; and raise families, eat locally, and work here as well. The way to protect critical resources is to provide adequate buffers and to manage stormwater and pollution of all kinds. H we believe they're critical to our health and economic well-being, it's in our best interests to do so. . .r STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY PO Box 47775. Olympia, Washington 98504-7775 · (360) 407-6100 October 22, 2007 Mr. Peter Downey, Chairman Jefferson County Planning Commission 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, W A 98368 Dear Mr. Downey: We appreciate this opportunity to provide early comments to the Planning Commission on its draft of the JeffelsonCounty Clitical Areas Oldinance (CAO). Our stafI'is pleased to contribute to the effort of this gIoup and its subcommittee in developing enviIonniental protections for the County. We have found om collabOIation with County staff~ the Planning Commission and its subcommittee members to be productive and thought-provoking.. We support many of the proposed revisions, including the use of Ecology's revised wetland rating system and many of the buffer strategies reflected in. Section 1822330. However, we are concerned that some elements of the draft regulations will not protect wetlands in the County. We believe that revising sections of the proposed ordinance as recommended below will help JeffeIson County achieve its stated pmpose ofplOtecting the functions and values of the County's CIitical areas. Exemutions and exceutions (18.22.060. .070. .320) The wording in the Administrator's exception listed in section 18.22.060 seems to provide a pathway that bypasses all substantive regulatOIY review. The cwrent dIaft contains provisions (e.g., reasonable economic use Valiance, critical areas stewardship pl~ etc) that allow individuals to demonstrate that their proposals "will not create significant adverse environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated". Those pIOvisions include substantive review and, where appropIiate, public process. They appeal to eliminate the need for this general exception. We are very concemed with the wording in Section 18.22.070 that appears to exempt all agriculture including new or expanded operations. lhis provision is problematic for at least two reasons. First, Substitute Senate Bill (8SB) 5248 states that counties and cities may not amend or adopt critical area oIdinances under RCW 36.70A.06O(2) as they specifically apply to agricultural activities. Thus, the new exemption is in conflict with the 8SB. Second, the conversion of wetlands that are not currently in agIicultural use to a new agricultural use should be regulated by the same regulations ~.. o as any new development.Similatly, a change in use from agriculture to non- agricultuIal uses should also be regu1at~ by the standmds of this ordinance. As has often been stated in our plesentations to Jeffe1son County, Ecology lecommends that the ongoing agricultural activities in wetlands should use best management PlactiCes 01 wm plans in order to minimize wetland impacts. We are also concemed about the exemption in Section 18.22..320, which allows expansion oflawns and other residential activities (including fences) into the outer 25% ofa wetland buffel (18.22.320(2)). lhis essentially allows reduction of the required buffer without any assessment, mitigation or considelation of the wetland resource. Buffer width reductions are not SUPPOIt by the best available science (BAS) othel than when included in a flexible buffer width system as desclibed in the next paragraph. Best available science in this context includes Ecology's BAS documents Wetlands in Washingron State - Volume ]. A Synthesis oj the Science (Publication #05-06-006, March 2005) and Wetlands in Wa.shington State - Volume 2. Guidance for Protecting and Managing WetlandJ (publication # 05-06-008, April 2005). It is in consideration of and in reference to these documents that the following comments are provided. Buffers (18.22.330 Table 3): If the County is going to modify the Land Use Intensity table contained in the dtaft then we recommend that you consider the following: 1 We do not believe it is appropIiate to include any residential structure under the definition of low intensity. The impacts associated with lesidences, even on a 5-acre or lmger lot, are significant enough to warrant the mode1ate- intensity buffer widths. Most othel uses of a residential parcelS-acres or latger could reasonably be included under low-intensity land uses. 2 .If you wish to address lural residential land uses in greateI detail, we recommend that you consider adopting pl'Ovisions similar' to the ones outlined below. These are draft recommendations cmrently being developed by Ecology to address the wide range ofland use activities that typically occur on lural residentiallmge lots. Draft recommendat;onsfor defining land use intensity in rural-areas: Hiflh Residential development and appuT1enances on lots less than or equal to 1 acre. Dai,. ies~ feedlots and nUT series Moderate Residential development and appurtenances on lots greater than one acre PaS/Ule (> one AUper 2.5 acres ojpasture) Glowing crops with annual tilling Paved driveways . Gravel driveways selving 3 or more residences Barns and other agricultulal buildings (e.g.. greenhouse fOT personal use) Kennels (non-commel cial) Stockpiling or storing offill, blUsh, sawdust, shavings 07 other natural mate7ials Low Pastu7e (< one AU per 25 acres ofpastwe) Growing C70pS without 7egular cultivation such as hayfields, Christmas l7ees, 01 chards, and vineyar as Timbel management Glovel driveways se1ving 2 orfewerlesidences Walking or hiking trails Buffer' reductions (18.22.330 (6) & (8)): The result of applying buffer reductions, increases, and averaging should be a buffer that is adequate to protect the functions of the wetland, as established by the best available science Much of the proposed draft does a good job of providing adequate provisions for wetland buffers. However, the proposed buffer reduction strategy includes a provision from Ecology's guidance but applies it in an inappropriate manner. The measures in subsection (d) are recommended by Ecology as a means of reducing . buffets from high intensity widths to moderate intensity widths. Allowing reductions when these measmes are applied to moderate or low intensity land uses is not appropriate and will result in inadequate buffer widths, In addition, the provision allowing up to 50% reductions for CategOlY m and IV wetlands is inconsistent with BAS. What is the justification for allowing higher percent reductions on CategOIY ill and IV wetlands than on Categoty I and II wetlands? In addition, the provisions for buffer averaging under subsection (8) are not adequate. Jefferson County should incolporate the recommendations on averaging in Appendix 8C 2.6 of Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 2.' Guidance for Protecting and Managing Wetlands, which includes the following text: . Averaging to improve wetland protection may be pe1mitted when aD of the following conditions are met: . The wetland has significant differences in chaIacteristics that affect its habitat functions, such as a wetland with a forested component adjacent to a degraded emergent component or a "dual-rated" wetland with a Categoty I area adjacent to a lower Iared area . The buffer is increased adjacent to the higher-functioning area of habitat or more sensitive portion of the wetland and deCle8sed adjacent to the lower-functioning or less sensitive portion . The total ar'ea of the buffer after averaging is equal to the area required without averaging . The buffel' at its narrowest point is never'less tban 3/4 of tbe required width (emphasis added) . . Averaging to allow reasonable use ofa parcel may be peImitted when aU of the following are met: . There are no feasible altematives to the site design that could be accomplished without buffer averaging . Ihe averaged buffer will not result in degradation of the wetland's fuilctions and values as demonstrated by a report from a qualified wetland professional (see Appendix 8-G for a definition of a qualified wetland professional) . Ihe total buffer- wea after- aver aging is equal to the area required without averaging . The buffer at its nalTowest point is never less than 3/4 of the l-equired width (emphasis added) Mitif!fition (18.22.350): The proposed ratios in Table 18.22.350 reflect an outdated approach to compensatory mitigation. Ihey will not adequately ensme that wetland functions are r'eplaced, Ecology's guidance on compensatory mitigation ratios is contained in Appendix 8-C of Wetlant:fj in Washington State - Volume 2. I able 8C-l1 in this appendix shows suggested compensation ratios for different types and categories of wetlands and for various kinds of mitigation, Appendix 8-F explains the Iationale used to develop the mitigation ratios_ In addition, Ecology has developed new mitigation guidan~: Wetland Mitigation in Washington State,I'ml J, Agency Policies and Guidance (Version I, Publication #06-06-01 la, March 2006) and Wetland Mitigation in Washington State, Part 2 Developing Mitigation Plans (Version 1, Publication #06-06-011b, March 2006).. lhis new guidance is the result of a collaborative effort between Ecology, the CorPs, and EPA. Pwt 1 includes infounation on the geneIaI permit process, the laws, IUles and policies that apply to projects where wetlands are involved and agency policies, requirements, and recommendations for compensatory mitigation. I echnical infotmation on the prepaIation of proposals and plans for compensatory mitigation are found in Pwt 2 of this guidance_ By adopting this guidance, the County will help applicants by providing consistency with state and federal requirements, which will str'eamline the appl'OvalplOcess for mitigation pmjects. We encowage you to adopt these latios_ The proposed ordinance does not include lequirements for monitoring the compensatory mitigation, Ecology recommends lequiring monitoring for at least 5 years or a peliod necessm:y to establish that pelfOImance standards have been met For example, ten year's or more ofmonitOIing are needed for forested and scrub-shrub communities. These communities take at least eight year'SafteJ planting to leach 80~ percent canopy c1osme.. Having a ten-yew' monitoring program need not require biologists to collect data and produce a report evelY yeaL That could be done in years 1,2,3,5, 7, and 10, for example. Multiple wetland ratin2S (18.22.300): This section allows multiple wetland ratings without limits, guidance or any reference to the 2004 ratings system. Dual ratings should only be allowed within the context of the 2004 latings system, which the County has chosen to adopt. '. DepaIture from this approach is not supported by any science, and Ecology does not SUPPOIt the proposed applOach as an appropriate way to late wetlands. We are not sure what perceived problem is being addressed by this provision. What is the need for dual ratings that cannot be addresSed by existing provisions? Non-compensatory enhancement (18.22.340) We SuppOIt the concept of addressing noncompensatOIY enhancement effOIts . We suggest that the County tIack these efforts, especially as they relate to restored wetland area and function. However, as WIitten, the ClUTent dIaft omits Iigorous detail in the enhancement plan for the more disruptive types of enhancement activities. We suggest that the draft add a section detailing the contents and requirements for Type 1 enhancement proposalsH In addition, many of the activities contemplated under Type 1 enhancements (and perhaps Type 2) would require federal and state permits. As such, it would be useful to any reader of this section to acknowledge that other' pennits (state and federal) may be required fOI these actions. Critical Areas Stewardship Plan Section 08.22.460) This alternative pathway is a wOlk in progress. We are working with county staff and other stakeholders to provide a comprehensive document that plovides detail on these plans. We understand that this pOItion of the CAO contains only Dr. Brooks' original CASP template and does not reflect the wOIk of the Wetlands AdvisOIY I earn. For example, its goal is still to protect functions at the watershed level rather than the existing functions of the critical area. It does not clarify other consensus recommendations of the AdvisOlY T earn such as: Which Critical Areas are subject to the CASP provisions? CASPs apply to Wetlands and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCAs) Where may CASPs be used? CASPs apply to IUral residential development including Rwal Village Centers CASPs do not apply to industrial, commercial or p81cels within a UGA CASPs apply to parcels that me ~ acre or 181ger Which land uses qualify fol' a CASP? CASPs apply to single-family residences and appurtenances (including ADUs) Do CASPs apply to activities within wetlands and FWHCAs? CASPs may not be used for activities involving fill for building within wetlands and FWHCAs but may be used for fill or vegetation management within these critical areas if it is for enhancement of their functions 4 ',;' . CASPs may not be used for activities within Category 1 wetlands. Many of om other consensus concepts are not expressed in the cunent version of the CASP approach. Also absent from the cunent language is an overarching statement that requires the CASP to provide "eq~al Qr better" protection of the critical area functions and values as compared to the standard provisions of the CAO. In addition, we recommend adding a provision that includes the requirement to audit this approach, detelmine its frequency of use, its area of wetland and buffer impact, the efficacy of the plans emplaced, etc., We sincerely hope that you will incolpOIate the consensus Jecommendations of the AdvisOIY T earn to ensure that CASPs provide their intended benefits. Thank you for the oppOItunity to comment on your draft ordinance.. We hope these comments are helpful to the Commission and the County in their effOIts to develop reasonable and effective wetland regulations that are based on best available science, If you have any questions .about these comments, please call me, at (360) 407-6221 OI Andy McMillan, oW' Wetlands Science and Policy Manager at (360) 791-2254. cc: Andy McMillan, Ecology Donna Bunten, Ecology Doug Peters, CTED Steve Kalinowski, WDFW G-ry,\/\ ~ \ t-o'lY\ ~ir,,-tf -L\ GAd~ \J~ fT 00 j,"-l.tte- '\ To: l>lanning commission members . \.l Scalf, Director Department of Community Development Jefferson County RE: Critical Areas rules M i-ft-{)fo.- d-.L\;L I enthusiastically support the proposed amendments to rules that will help protect critical environmental areas from the effects of development. That these were imposed as a result of a settlement agreement between Jefferson County and the Washington Environmental Council in an appeal before the Washington Growth Management Hearings Board suggests a lapse in judgment. One hopes that, in the future, the WEC won't have to step in to s~ve us from ourselves. From now on, those in charge should pointedly abjure all policies that serve destructive and costly development patterns-among others, urban and rural sprawl, loss of prime agricultural land, environmental degradation, and the dilution of community character. Washington State's action in the case above notwithstanding, it must be said that growth management laws passed to date have unsuccessfully dealt with the problems' referred to abo' e. In local settings, advocates of little or no growth in terms of development wield little power against those who believe that privately-held lands be subject to few or no restrictions as to use. The latter, and the planners that serve. them, believe we can accommodate growth AND protect the environment---in spite of mounting evidence that growth no longer represents a viable option or survival strategy. A point has been reached in human history where further growth-economic and otherwise--must be rejected if we .are to preserve the biodiversity that sustains us. Todd Wexman 611 Scott St. Port Townsend o "" "") tl. .,,+ ~--Ol \-0 to , \\PC' \>\\c, kA~\~<i 11 CD t^- f'^ \J G(Vl P\-u C'O {V\. ~1;\j>\;'Vtsv Laurence C. Bonar 917 Logan Street, Port Townsend, Washington 98368-2337 Telephone (360)385-1237; FAX (360)385-1294 Sl~1" 0- CAO May 16, 2007 Members of the Jefferson County Planning Commission Dear Member: I have attended many of the early meetings of the Planning Commission's CAO Subcommittee, and most or the recent Commission and Subcommittee meetings where the final recommendations of the Subcommittee were discussed. I urge you to develop Critical Areas Ordinance provisions which are closer to the minority report of the CAO Subcommittee than those proposed in the majority report. I believe some of the suggestions in the majority report, particularly those relating to buffer zones around wetlands, represent a radical departure from accepted practice, and I suggest that, until such suggestions have been reviewed and tested by time and further research, it would be risky to "cast them in concrete" in ordinances. It would be wiser to err on the side of caution. Inadequate protection of a farm from runoff or other contaminant migration from adjacent agricultural operations can have disastrous effects. We have had serious problems, in this country recently, with inadvertent contamination of spinach and other field crops with pathogenic E.Coli, probably from adjacent or nearby agricultural operations. This contamination caused serious illness and death in many individuals across the country, but it also devastated the livelihood of the growers who innocently raised the vegetable crops involved. It should be noted that the vegetable crop contamination was a rare event; crops from the affected fields had been successfully harvested and marketed for many years with no problems, until a "perfect storm" of as-yet not fully understood conditions resulted in the disastrous contamination event. Protective regulations should protect against "worst-case" situations and again, err on the side of caution. The majority report stresses voluntary compliance with best practices, and, in fact, Jefferson County has been blessed with a large contingent of farmers committed voluntarily to practices protective of the environment. But we cannot depend on always having such enlightened agriculturists. The record for voluntary environmental protection in this country is abysmal. Reasonable and enforceable regulations are needed to protect the public from land- owners who do not subscribe to the environmental stewardship standards of those Jefferson County growers whose efforts have been so effective in restoration and protection up to the present. Members of the Jefferson County Planning Commission May 16, 2007 Page 2 of 2 And lastly, I strongly recommend that the Planning Commission request that competent legal counsel be made available to it. Cautionary notes by James Tracy, Counsel for Fred Hill Materials and a CAO Subcommittee member, suggest there are legal "land-mines" awaiting any ill-considered ordinance provisions. The Planning Commission needs to have legal counsel, experienced in land-use law and GMA Hearings Board decisions, to advise it as it prepares Critical Area ordinance provisions. The CAO is almost certain to face legal challenge at some time in the future, and it is important that ordinances be formulated and drafted so as to have the greatest likelihood of withstanding challenge. I would like to express my thanks, as a resident of Jefferson County, to the Planning Commission members, and especially to the CAO Subcommittee members who have and will continue to devote their time and efforts to developing Jefferson County's Critical Areas Ordinance( s). Very truly yours ;f CWvJ /J~ Laurence C. Bonar , GM1l- lY1nvv~ Jeanie Orr Page 1 of3 50&1 From: Jeanie Orr Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 3:11 PM To: AI Scalf; Brent Butler; Joel Peterson; Karen Barrows Subject: FW: Marine shoreline buffers Hi all, FYI... ... Jeanie From: Michelle McConnell Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 12:08 PM To: Jeanie Orr; Cheryl Halvorson Subject: FW: Marine shoreline buffers Correspondence re: CAO <><><><><><><><> MicheUe McConnell ldTCo SMP Coordi1/1J.tor 360-379-4484 NOTE: All e-mail $ent toIfrom th/$ .ddren of the Jefffnon County HIlI" $f$tem may be subject 10 Public D/$cIO$ure under Chapter 42.56 RCW <><><><><><><><> From: Jerry Gorsline [mailto:jgors@cablespeed.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 20078:38 AM To: Michelle McConnell Subject: RE: Marine shoreline buffers Michelle - I have been advised that a CAO shoreline buffer proposal would need to be submitted next week. Do you suppose I could have your feed back on this question by the end of this week? Thanks. -----Original Message----- From: Jerry Gorsline [mailto:jgors@cablespeed.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 04,2007 10:10 AM To: Michelle McConnell Subject: RE: Marine shoreline buffers Hi Michelle, I totally sympathize with your situation, and will state my question here: Q: Since the SMP update will not be completed any sooner than June 2008, and the county's more than 200 miles of marine shorelines are the focus for intense development, and agency guidelines interpreting ESHB 1933 make it clear that the county is required by law to designate and protect shoreline Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCAs) during its CAO update to provide interim protection for marine shoreline 5/15/2007 Page 2 of3 ,. .~ ecological functions pending completion of the SMP u~date pursuant to the new guidelines, I am wondering if it makes sense to submit a marine slioreline buffer proposal for the County's current CAO update process? To the best of my knowledge, the county's present pol~cy on shoreline buffers is described in its shoreline permit application information and insttuction material as follows: i i "Removal of Vegetation and Other Land-Disturbing Activitie~ along Marine Shorelines" : UDC 3.6.4 addresses environmentally sensitive areas, among whi(::h are fish and wildlife habitat areas (FWHAs). : FWHAs include marine shorelines per UDC 3. 6. 8. a, in that Type~waters include all marine waters of the state andat this time marine. shorelines provide primary associatl n habitat for Federal and State-listed endangered, threatened, and sensitive species (i.e., Puget Sound hinook, Hood Canal Summer Chum, and/or CoastallPuget Sound Bull Trout). i I I Among the provisions in UDC 3.6.8 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Ar4as, are general prohibitions related to the alteration of FWHAs or their buffers (UDC 3.6. 8.j)-including c/e4ring, grading, and removing vegetation- regardless of whether a permit is required for the activity or not. !Additionally, there are protection standards (UDC 3.6.8.g) that address drainage and erosion control, grading, vegetation retention, and buffers for activities on parcels that contain a designated FWHA or its buffe~. UDC 3.6.8.g(5) states that FWHAs shall have buffers and building setbacks established. The FWHA buffer for marine shorelines is 30 (thirty) feet, which is the minimum "standrrd setbackfor residential structures" in the SMP (see previous paragraph). i ! The buffer/setback is measuredfrom the ordinary high water ma~ or the top of the bankfor banks that exceed 10 feet in vertical height. Please note that land-disturbing activitY in the 30-foot marine shoreline buffer, including the removal of vegetation, may occur only with Departftient approval under specific circumstances. i A thirty-foot buffer is clearly inadequate to protect mahy critical marine shoreline functions, and it seems we have enough information on hand tOd~. y to use as the basis for justifying larger bU. ffers on marine shorelines using the CAO up ate.. However, I don't know what the time lag will actually be between the CAO and SMP u ates and also wonder if this strategy would also divert scarce staff time from comp eting the SMP update, so I 'm not at all certain how much we could gain by this process. i ' I would like to get you perspective and advice on this 1natter. Thanks. Jerry Gorsline -----Original Message----- From: Michelle McConnell [mailto:mmcconnell@co.iefferson.w~.us] Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2007 I :44 PM To: Jerry Gorsline Subject: RE: Marine shoreline buffers Hi Jerry, Thanks for the Pierce Co. geoduck regs. youtre right that I'm swamped with catch-up after being gone las~ week, and a busy month of March. Depending on the urgency of your ~AO/SMP marine shore buffers questions, I'd prefer to wait 'ti! next week i~ I I I 5/15/2007 . , Page 3 of3 possible. Also, if you could send specific questions by email, I may well want to confer with Margaret/Adolfson to provide a reply to you... Thanks, Michelle <><><><><><><><> Michelle McConnell JeffCo SMP Coordinator 360-379-4484 NOTE: All e-mail sent to/from this address of the Jefferson County e-mail system may be subject to Public Disclosure under Chapter 42.56 RCW <><><><><><><><> ----Original Message----- From: Jerry Gorsline [mailto:igors@cablespeed.com] Sent: Monday, April 02, 20072:53 PM To: Michelle McConnell Subject: RE: Marine shoreline buffers Michelle - I realize you attended the Georgia Basin/Puget Sound Research Conference all last week and are probably facing a back log, but when you can free up a few minutes I want like to talk with you about how the CAO/SMA updates will work together with regard to marine shoreline buffers. If you can specifY a time that works for you, I will give you a call. Thanks. Jerry Jerry Gorsline 5282 Cape George Road Port Townsend W A 98368 Email: jgors@cablespeed.com I am using the free version of SP AMfighter for private users. It has removed 12 spam emails to date. Paying users do not have this message in their emails. Try SP AMfighter for free now! I am using the free version of SP AMfighter for private users. It has removed 14 spam emails to date. Paying users do not have this message in their emails. Try SF AMfighter for free now! 5/15/2007 (o/v'vvt-" 8o'rY\,~ Page 1 of2 Jeanie Orr SDlo ( tt- From: Jeanie Orr Sent: Thursday, November 08,20078:09 AM To: Ashley Bullitt; Bud Schindler (schindlerbudval@embarqmail.com); Edeltraut Sokol; Henry Werch; JD Gallant; Mike Whittaker; Patricia Farmer; Peter Downey (peterdowney@cablespeed.com); William Miller Cc: David Alvarez; Donna Frostholm Subject: FW: CAG commentary Hi all. See comment letter below. Jeanie From: Owen and Sarah Fairbank [mailto:sofairbank@olympus.net] Sent: Thursday, November 08,20076:56 AM To: #Long-Range Planning Subject: CAO commentary Planning Commission members- Nov. 8, 2007 Your remarkable hard work, commitment, patience, perseverance, and good humor throughout the long process of developing CAD code recommendations, are greatly appreciated. I am optimistic that you have succeeded in reaching a compromise that satisfies the requirements of the settlement agreement, and you certainly have encouraged public input! As was often mentioned in last night's hearing, the background keeps shifting and I am hopeful that what you are recommending will continue to evolve and be refined. It distresses me to hear repeated assertions that the people opposing your recommendations represent a majority. We all like to think our view is the 'right' one, but the County's vote on Measure 933 suggests that many of us believe in the need for governmental oversight to ensure protection of important and irreplaceable elements of our County for future generations. A few specific comments on the draft: -- I am glad that you are joining the rest of the State in adopting the 2004 wetland rating system. -- This is a good start. Eventually we need an ordinance that is clear, concise, internally consistent, and understandable by the public. We are not there yet. -- The inclusion of accurate mapping data of critical areas in Article II is very important. Both County staff and the public are hampered by incomplete and inaccurate data. -- As someone extensively involved with Jefferson Land Trust, I look particularly at Article IX. I realize this article is still being developed, but see significant weaknesses in the current draft. It calls for protection "in perpetuity", but the only assurance of that protection is self-monitoring for 3 years. Although currently in vogue at the Federal level, we have seen that making industry responsible for clean air and water is not effective. Here we are not generally dealing with industry, but the principle is the same. If citizens were all responsible for their own conformance to laws, we would have no need for police! Even if self-monitoring was effective, 3 years is insignificant when one is attempting protection 'in perpetuity'. Our County does not have the resources to provide meaningful monitoring to ensure the protections proposed, and it would be unrealistic to expect individual property owners to assume the cost of the effective independent monitoring that would ensure compliance. -- The Administrator is given sole responsibility for implementation and review, power to waive portions of a CASP, as well as responsibility for enforcement. Without any oversight, this could make the whole CASP provision unpredictable and ineffective. 1118/2007 (8oTfi SH)(S) Page 2 of2 Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Owen Fairbank 508 Lawrence Port Townsend 11/8/2007 Letter Gmft . UvrY\M~ Page 1 of 1 Jeanie Orr 50 3D From: Joel Peterson Sent: Monday, November 05,20074:48 PM To: Jeanie Orr; AI Scalf; Stacie Hoskins; 'Peter Downey'; AI Scalf; Ashley Bullitt; Bill Miller; Christina Pivarnik; Edel Sokol; Henry Werch; JD Gallant; Jeanie Orr; Joel Peterson; Karen Barrows; Michelle McConnell; Mike Whittaker; Patricia Farmer; Peter Downey; schindlerbudval@embarqmail.com; Stacie Hoskins Subject: FW: Follow-up DOE comment letter for Planning Commission Please distribute. Long-Range Planning Division Department of Community Development 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 379-4472 Fax: (360) 379-4451 www.co.jefferson.wa.us From: Mraz, Richard A. (ECY) [mailto:rmra461@ECY.WA.GOV] Sent: Monday, November 05,20071:56 PM To: Joel Peterson Subject: Letter Hi Joel . , Attached plca<;e find a .PDF copy of our follow-up letter to the Planning Commission, which you may forward to Peter Downey. A hard copy is in the mail. We offer this as clarification of our comments regarding the regulation of agriculture in the Critical Areas Ordinance. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. <<20071105141520437.pdf>> Rick Mraz Wetlands/Shorelands Specialist Shoreland.s and :Environmental Assistance Program Southwest Regional OHice (360)407 ~6221 nnra461@ecy.wa.$ov 11/612007 r''1r I lS'i STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLPGY PO Box 4777S · Olympia, Washington 98S04-77~5 · (360) 407-6.300 I I ~ovember5,2007 Mr Peter Downey, Chaitman Jefferson County Planning Commission 621 Shelidan Street Port Townsend, W A 98368 Dear Mr. Downey: It has come to ow attention that some of the comments~' -ovided in our lettel, dated October 22,2007, have led to confusion about our guid ce regmding the regulation of agticulture in Jefferson County's Critical Areas Otdinan e. We offer this additional letter to provide clmification on that issue. Please note t we continue to be concerned about the other issues raised in the October 22 lettel', These concerns are reiterated at the end of this letter. ' As you are aware, Substitute Senate Bill (SSB) 5248 est~blishes a "timeout" on revising CAO provisions related to agricultural activities. The ex~sting CAO (lather than the new one) will apply to agricultutal activities until the timeout~ends in mid-201O. Our initial comments were offeled with the undel'standingthat, pel ection 18.15.330 (e) ofthe existing CAO, the only exemption fOI agricultUre was de cribed as: i I "Existing and ongoing agticultut'al activities on lands enrolled in the open space tax program for agricultW'e or on lands designated as agricultwallands of 10ng-teJ:m commercial significance on the official map ofCompIeh~nsive Plan land use designations.. For the purpose of this section, "existing atid ongoing" means that agticultw:al activities have been conducted within the fiv~-yem' petiod leading up to the adoption ofOtdinance No. 5-03 on Aplil28, 2003;" I . I The existing CAO also appears to regulate conversion to lagriculture as new development. I , Draft Section 18.22.070 and any othelJefferson County CAO sections (including Table 18..22330 (3)) referencing agricultural activities need re~ision to remove references to agricultural activities. Also, in ow' last letter we suggest~d some new language for defining land use intensity. Ow recommended language lincluded some agricultUIalland uses that m'e common in the County. However, it was infPpropliate for us to recommend any changes to your CAO that adchess any agricultwa11$d uses. Thus, we have revised -"~. . I ; ! ! i ! i j , j 1 1 i .. I ~ o om recommendations on land use intensity and included the new recommendations below: High Residential development and appmtenances on lots less than or equal to 1 acre. Moderate Residential development and appmtenances on lots greater than one acre. Paved driveways Gravel driveways serving 3 or more residences Kennels (non-commercial) Stockpiling or storing of fill, brush, sawdust, shavings or other natural materials (?) Low Timber management Gravel dliveways serving 2 01 fewer residences Walking or hiking trails We recognize that agricultw.al activities have been a significant topic of discussion during the CAO update process. We suggest that the wOlk on this topic be set aside as it may be useful in the future SSB 5248 requires that the CAO pIOvisions related to agticultuIal activities be updated dming the July 2010 - December 2011 period. Ecology consistently supports the use of agr icultuIa1 best management practices or farm plans on existing and ongoing agriculture to minimize impacts on wetlands. These types ofvoluntaIy measures are specifically supported in SSB 5248 forjmisdictions subject.to the CAO "timeout". We also continue to support the voluntary pathway expressed in the Clitical Areas Stewmdship Plan appIOach. As noted above, we wish to Ieiterate our concerns about other sections of the CAO as follows: Exemptions and exeeutions (18.22.060. .070. .320) The wording in the Administrator's exception listed in section 18.22.060 seems to pIOvide a pathway that bypasses all substantive regulatory review. The cuuent draft contains provisions (e.g., reasonable economic use variance, CIitical ar'eas stewardship plan, etc..) that allow individuals to demonstrate that theiI proposals "will not create significant adveIse environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated". Those provisions include substantive review and, where appropliate, public process. They appear to eliminate the need for this general exception. We are also concemed about the exemption in Section 18.22.320, which allows expansion of lawns and other residential activities (including fences) into the outer 25% ofa wetland buffer (18.22320(2)). This essentially allows reduction of the required buffer without any assessment, mitigation or consideration of the wetland resource. Buffer width reductions are not suppoIt by the best available science (BAS) other than Pc. .A o:~ '(. ..7, .f. --- when included in a flexible buffer width system as descli~d in the next paragraph. Best avaihible science in this context includes Ecology's BAS bocuments Wetlands in . Washington State - Volume ]- A Synthesis of the Science ~ublication #05-06-006, Mmch 2005) and Wetlands in Washington State - Volume 2: Gui(Jance for Protecting and Managing WetlandJ (Publication # 05-06-008, .April 200~). It is in consideration of and in refelence to these documents that our comments are pI,<!>vided. I I Buffers (18.22.330 Table 3): I If the County is going to mod!fy the Land U~e Intensity ~ble contained in the chaft then we recommend that you consIder the followmg: I L We do not believe it is appropriate to include any tesidential sbucture und~r the definition oflow intensity. The impacts associate4 with residences, even on a 5- aC.le or larger lot, are signi~cant .enou~ to wanant the moderate-intensity buffer WIdths. Most other uses of a Iesldential parcel 5-apres or larger could leasonably be included under low-intensity land uses. I . . 2. If you wish to address IUral lesidentialland uses in greater detail, we lecommend that you consider adopting provisions sirhilar to th~ ones outlined below. These are draft recommendations cWlently being develoPed by Ecology to addresS the wide range ofland use activities that typically occF on nnal Iesidential.large lots. I . Buffer reductions (18.22.330 (6) & (8)): , !he result of applying buffet r~uctions, increases, and a~er:aging should be a bu,ffel that IS adequate to protect the functiOns of the wetland, as estaplished by the best avaIlable science.. I i , Much of the proposed draft does a goodjob of providing .dequate provisions fOI wetland buffers. However, the proposed buffer reduction stIategy lincludes a provision ii-om Ecology's guidance but applies it in an inappropliate ma$er. The measures in subsection (d) are lecomm~nded by Ecology as a means o~'reducing buffers from high intensity widths to moderate intensity widths. Allowing r~uctions when these measures are applied to moderate or low intensity land uses is not al>propIiate and will result in inadequate buffet, widths. In addition, the provision allo~g up to 50010 reductions for Category III and IV wetlands is inconsistent with BAS. What is the justification for allowing higher percent reductions on Category m and :N wetlands than on Category I and II wetlands? . I . ! The provisions for buffer averaging under subsection (8) ~e not adequate. .Jefferson County should incorporate the recommendations on averaWng in Appendix 8C.2..6 of Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 2.. Guidance f01 It,.otecting and Managing WetJands, which includes the following text: ; . Averaging to Improve wetland protection may J pennitted when all of the following conditions ~e ~et:. . I .. ... . The wetland has sIgmficant dIffelences In chmlactenstics that affect Its habItat functions, such as a wetland with a forested cOJnponent adjacent to a degraded f E-4J emergent component 01 a "dual-rated" wetland with a Category I area aqjacent to a lower rated area . The buffer is increased adjacent to the higher-functioning area of habitat or more sensitive portion of the wetland and deCleased adjacent to the lower-- functioning 01 less sensitive portion . 1he total area of the buffer after averaging is equal to the area requited without averaging . The buffer at its narrowest point is never less than 3/4 of the required width (emphasis added) . Averaging to allow reasonable use ofa parcel may be permitted when all of the following are met: . There me no feasible alternatives to the site design that could be accomplished without buffer averaging . The averaged buffer will not result in degradation of the wetland's functions and values as demonstrated by a report from a qualified wetland professional (see Appendix 8-0 for a definition of.a qualified wetland professional) . The total buffer mea after averaging is equal to the aYea required without averaging . Tbe buffer at its nanowest point is never less than 3/4 oftbe required width (emphasis added) Multiple wetland l'Stines (18.22.300): TIris section allows multiple wetland ratings without limits, guidance or any reference to the 2004 ratings system. Dual ratings should only be allowed within the context of the 2004 ratings system, which the County has chosen to adopt. Departure from this approach is not s~pp01ted by any science, and Ecology does not support the proposed approach as an applOpriate way to rate wetlands. We are not sure what perceived problem is being addressed by this provision.. What is the need for duallatings that cannot be addressed by existing provisions? Non-compensatOJV enhancement (18.22.340) We SUPP01t the concept of addressing non-compensatory enhancement efforts. We suggest that the County track these efforts, especially as they relate to restored wetland area and function. However, as written, the current draft omits rigolOus detail in the enhancement plan for the more dislUptive types of enhancement activities. We suggest adding a section detailing the contents and'lequirements for Type I enhancement proposals. Also, many of the activities contemplated under Type 1 enhancements (and perhaps Type 2) would require federal and state permits. As such, it would be useful to any reader of this section to acknowledge that other permits (state and federal) may be required for these actions. FC) r.. r <;0 Critical Areas Stewardshin Plan Section 08.22.460) ~ This alternative pathway is a wOIk in progress . We are OIking with county staff and other stakeholders to plOvide a comprehensive document that provides detail on these plans. We understand that this portion of the CAO conuUns only DI. BlOOks' original CASP template and does not reflect the work of the Wetl!mds Advisory Team. For example, its stated goal is still to protect functions at the tvatershed level rather than the existing functions of the clitical area. However, the cons~nsus of the group was that the CASP's goal should be to plOtect functions of the specifi~ wetland affected. by a proposal The CASP draft also does not clmi:fy other cOlfensus recommendations of the Advisory Team such as: I I . ! Which Critical Areas are subject to the CASP pJ'ovisi~ns? CASPs apply to Wetlands and Fish and Wildlife Habitat ~onservation Areas (FWHCAs) Where may CASPs be used? CASPs apply to lUml residential development including Rural Village Centers CAS}>s do not apply to industrial, commercial or parcels ~thin a UGA CASPs apply to parcels that are Y4 acre 01 1m gel I I I Which land uses quallly for a CASP? i . CASPs apply to single-family residences and apPUItenanges (including ADUs) Do CASPs apply to activities within wetlands and ~CAs? CASPs may not be used for activities involving fill for bu~lding within wetlands and F WHCAs but may be used fOI fill or vegetation managentent within these critical areas if it is for enhancement oftheiI functions. I CASPs may not be used fOI activities within CategOIY ] vretlands I ! Many of OUI othel consensus concepts me not expressed ih the cuuent version of the CASP approach. Also absent flOm the' CWlent language i$ an oveIm'ching statement that requires the CASP to provide "equal or better" pro~ection Iofthe critical area functions and values as compared to the standmd provisions of the tAO. . In addition, we recominend adding a provision that inclU~S the requirement to monitoI and audit this approach, determine its frequency of use, i area of wetland and buffer impact, the efficacy of the plans emplaced, etc. We since ely hope that you will incorporate the consensus recommendations of the Advis ry T earn to ensure that CASPs provide their intended benefits I I i :(, ( t~) ~,<, .' /s"1-tr"-\t- t--\ . C~~ t.v \"- "/~-e/,, ragt: 1 01 1 I.... Cheryl Halvorson From: Brent Butler Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2006 5:22 PM To: Cheryl Halvorson Cc: Rachel McHugh Subject: FW: Jefferson Land Trust comment letter ~ a'f'..L A 1'10- ~ Lt "3...- FYI From: Sarah Spaeth [mailto:sspaeth@saveland.org] Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 20063:09 PM To: Brent Butler; Josh Peters Subject: Jefferson Land Trust comment letter Hi Brent and Josh - Here is a last minute comment letter from the Land Trust regarding the Unified Development Code Amendments. We are sending a hard copy as well, but I wanted to make sure I met the deadline. Please forgive any formatting issues - I was having difficulty with the email attachment. Thanks, and good luck! Sarah Spaeth Land Projects Manager Jefferson Land Trust 1033 Lawrence Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 Phone 360-379-9501 FAX 360-379-9897 For the remaining open spaces 6/15/2006 ) Jefferson Land Trust -\ Helping the community preselVe open 1pace, working lands and habitat forever. 1033 Lawrence Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 360-379-9501- office 360-379-9897 - fax www.saveland.org jlt@saveland.org June 13, 2006 Mr. AI Scalf, Director Department of Community Development Jefferson County 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 I I I I Proposed Amendments to Jefferson County Unifi.d Development Code Definitions I RE: Dear Mr. Scalf: I Jefferson Land Trust wishes to commend you and yo.ur staff for your efforts to update definitions of key resources and resource classification terms in the Jefferson County Unified Development Code. We are submitting this letter in support of the coniments and feedback provided to you by several of our partner organizations. Specifically, these irclude: I · Letter from Northwest Watershed Institute to Jeff~rson County Department of Community Development dated June 7, 2006. · Letter from Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife to Jefferson County Department of Community Development dated June 12, 2006. i · Letter from 10,000 Years Institute to Jefferson Co~nty Department of Community Development dated June 13, 2006. I We appreciate the thoroughness of their comments, and feel no need to duplicate them, with the exception of the following specific recommendations merltioned in the above referenced letters: !he Jefferson Cou~tyCore Habitatmap is missinbsome critica.1 wildlife habitat core areas. These Include several project areas that Jefferson Land rr rust and project partners have worked extensively to protect, namely habitat on t. he QUi~.1 per Peninsula including: the Quimper Wildlife Corridor project area, and the lower two miles of ~himacum Creek that includes the ESA summer chum habitat. The Tarboo-Dabob Bay area is alsp rich habitat that the Land Trust is helping to protect, and along with Chimcum Creek, represe~ts one of the highest quality estuaries remaining in Puget Sound. We recommend that the Core H~bitat study and maps include each ofthese important habitat project areas in their entirety. . · The County relies on the stream typing system arid stream type maps provided by DNR. The Land Trust has direct experience with the inaCCuracy ofl these maps, and would agree with previous comments that. the maps greatly underestimate tria occurrence of fish-bearing streams and other stream types. We also concur that aU Type 4 and Is (or Type N) streams should be field verified. I Page 2 Jefferson land Trust ' Jefferson LDnd Trust is a 501 (c) (3) non-profit, ti1-exempt, private corporation. Donations are deductible to the full ~nt of the law. I, ., J- · Small wetlands provide habitat for localized populations of amphibians, birds and mammals, and are also important for flood storage and aquifer recharge. These wetlands should not be exempt from critical area review without rigorous habitat and hydrologic assessment and documentation. We thank you for your consideration of our comments, and wish you all the best as you move through this process. Sincerely, JEFFERSON LAND TRUST Sarah Spaeth Land Projects Manager Cc: Jefferson County - Brent Butler .Jefferson County - Josh Peters ,,\ LOt/\... ~-t0,-€f -q Vlh La.'^- 'Y"'\.~ "' ~ . Cheryl Halvorson From: North Olympic Salmon Coalition [nosc@jefferson.wsu.edu] Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2006 5:05 PM To: #Planning Department Subject: Jeffco Code ammendments comment Comments are attached. Thank you Paula Mackrow, Executive Director NORTH OLYMPIC SALMON COALITION P.O. Box 699 Port Townsend WA 98368 360379-8051 nosc@Jefferson.wsu.edu 6120/2006 N.OS.C. NORTH OLYMPIC SALMON CCMlmON P.O. Box 699 Port Townsend WA 98368 360378-8051 nosc@Jefferson.wsu.edu June 16, 2006 Mr. AI Scalf, Director Department of Community Development Jefferson County 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, W A 98368 , i I RE: Proposed Amendments to Jefferson County Uni~ed Development Code Definitions ! Dear Mr. Scalf: Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments regcirrding the Proposed Amendments to Jefferson County Code. The mission of North Olympic ISalmon Coalition to protect and increase salmon stocks on the North Olympic Peninsula inc1udeslproviding education and technical assistance to the communities in our region on how to a4complish that mission through habitat protection and restoration. I have reviewed the commedts sent by Jeff Davis, WDFW and Jill Silver, Thousand Years Institute. They have provided a tombined list of references that represent best available science for this area. I hope the conc1usiohs and recommendations made in these documents are. carefully reviewed and adopted as appropriate for full inclusion of BAS in the Jefferson County Code. NOSC would like to take this opportunity to educate coL."ty staff and the Commissioners on the importance of marine riparian buffers for the protection ~d restoration of salmon stocks along Jefferson County coastlines. NOSC supports the technic.ill statements made by Jeff Davis regarding the importance of retaining shoreline vegetatiQn, particularly mature conifers, in the shoreline riparian zone and on marine bluffs and steep slbpes. While NOSC and our partners are working to provide meaningful outreach and educationa~ opportunities to shoreline residents, best available science as listed below and particularly th~ Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative, (Co-Managers, 2000) indicate that marine bl~ffs should have considerably larger buffers to provide for a variety of desirable habitat cond~tions. These conditions include but are not limited to L WDrecruitment in the nearshore which ~ontributes to bluff stabilization, juvenile rearing, hiding and migration habitat. Natural processes pn marine shorelines include recruitment of fine sediment to sand lance and surf smelt spawning *ds as well as to drift cell systems . essential to healthy spits and beaches. . A. ssunn. . g that the Jefferson coun. ty Code uses BAS in re~lation development and enforcement is critical to the recovery ESA listed Puget Sound Chino~k, summer chum salmon and Orca whales. These multiple listings are indicators of a failint system that has sustained our health I l' safety and welfare for generations. Protecting these critical habitats will help protect the ecosystem we all depend on. Thank you for your consideration. Paula Mackrow, Executive Director North Olympic Salmon Coalition References: US Bureau of Reclamation. 2004. Geomorphic Assessment ofHoh River in Washington State: Hoh River Miles 17 to 40: Oxbow Canyon to Mount Tom Creek. U.D. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Technical Service Center, Denver, CO. Knutson, K.L. and V.L. Naef. 1997. Management Recommendations for Washington's Priority Habitats: Riparian. Washington Department ofFish and Wildlife, Olympia" Washington. 181pp. Hayes, Marc P. Email to Jeff Davis. June 1,2006. Electronic mail Research Scientist, Habitat Program, Science Team. Washington Department ofFish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington. Washington Department of Ecology. 2005. Volume 2: Guidance for Protecting and Managing Wetlands, Publication Number 05-06-008. Olympia, Washington. Washington Department ofFish and Wildlife. 2003. Integrated Streambank Protection Guidelines. Olympia, Washington. 300pp. Washington Department of Natural Resources. 2002. Washington Forest Practices: Rules, Board Manual and RCW's. Olympia, Washington. Brummer, C. J., T.B. Abbe, l.R. Sampson, and D.R. Montgomery. 2006. Influence of vertical channel change associated with wood accumulations on delineating channel migration zones, Washington, USA. Article in Press. Geomorphology. Herrera Environmental Consultants. 2002. Hoh Riverin the Vicinity of U.S. Highway 101, MP 176.6 to MP 170.2. Report prepared for Washington Department of Transportation. April 2002. May, C.L. and R.E. Gresswell. 2004. The Importance of Wood in Headwater Streams ofthe Oregon Coast Range. USGS Cooperative Forest Ecosystem Research Fact Sheet. April 2004. http://www/fs;/prstledi/cfer May, C.L. and R.E. Gresswell. 2003a. Processes and rates of sediment and wood accumulation in headwater streams of the Oregon Coast Range, USA. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 28:409-424. ! May, c.L. and R.E. Gresswell. 2003b. Large wood recrui~ment and redistribution in headwater streams in the southern Oregon Coast Range, USA. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 33:1352-1362. I , Perkins Geosciences. 2004. Lower Hoh River Channel Migration Study. Report and study prepared for the Hoh Indian Tribe. Rapp, C. F. and T. B. Abbe. 2003. A Framework for Del~eating Channel Migration Zones. November 2003. Shorelands and Environmental Assis~ce Program, Washington State Department of Ecology and Herrera Environmental Cqnsultants, Inc. http://www.ecy.wa.g:ovlbiblio/0306027.html . Washington Department of Natural Resources. 2002. Washington Forest Practices: Rules, Board Manual and RCW's. Olympia, Washington. i http://www.dnr . wa. gov /forestpractices/rules/ I i Washington Department ofFish and Wildlife and Point No Point Treaty Tribes. 2000. Summer Chum Salmon Conservation Initiative. i j-:}l" 'q \ ~ \ etA) \V\. S+/~~L-\ l.lO a \~" , D~~ L.(}"''\~..' Page 1 of 1 Cheryl Halvorson From: Roseann Carroll Sent: Wednesday, June 21,200610:34 AM To: Josh Peters; Brent Butler; Rachel McHugh; Michelle McConnell; Cheryl Halvorson Cc: AI Scalf Subject: FW: comment on proposed critical areas ordinance From: george bush [mailto:gbush@olypen.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 9:53 AM To: RoseannCarroll Subject: comment on proposed critical areas ordinance Comments on proposed Critical Areas Ordinance amendment to the UDC. The important role that wetlands and riparian areas play in the overall health of the aquatic ecosystems in this County is not in question. The critical areas ordinance has used the very best scientific studies to make the case for the protection of those areas. The only effective way to protect and regain the proper functioning of the critical areas is to prevent mechanical damage such as compaction, and/or chemical pollution such as fertilization. This too, is not in question. Private property rights do not include the right to injure resources that belong to all citizens. As scientific understanding progresses, all manner of discoveries have caused society to change from the old ways to new practices that limit personal gain in order to promote the future health of our environment. For instance, laws and ordinances have been created to alter the way we harvest trees to protect wetlands and riparian areas because it became clear that many animals and fish would come dangerously close to extirpation, and water quality would suffer long term damage if we didn't do so. The time has come to apply the same protection strategies to both urban and farm lands. Were I a farmer who would be required to limit my farming (and so, my income) to areas outside the buffers, I would be equally upset and angry as those farmers currently protesting the ordinance. It is natural for fellow citizens to feel sorry for their loss. However, the plight of a few cannot be reason to limit laws or ordinances that benefit the overall current and future health of our natural world. The argument against the retention of buffers to protect the critical resources revolves around the supposed "right" of property owners to continue to damage wetlands and riparian areas SIMPLY BECAUSE TIlEY HAVE BEEN DOING IT FOR A LONG TIME. Getting away with doing the wrong thing - whether through ignorance or malice - is not a valid excuse to continue doing the wrong thing. Nor is it a reason for our County Commissioners to promote or allow exceptions to the ordinance. George Bush (retired US Forest Service Soil Scientist) 1 00. McMinn Road Port Townsend, Washington 98368 379 1201 gbush@olypen.com 6/21/2006 Comments on proposed Critical Areas Ordinance amendmentto the UDC. I The important role that wetlands and riparian areas pl~y in the overall health of the aquatic ecosystems in this County is not in question. the critical areas ordinance has used the very best scientific studies to make the case tpr the protection of th~se areas. The only effective way to protect and regain theproIXir functioning of the critical areas is to prevent mechanical damage such as compaction, add/or chemical pollution such as fertilization. This too, is not in question. i I I I Private property rights do not include the right to injw[e resources that belong to all citizens. As scientific understanding progresses, all ~anner of discoveries have caused society to change from the old ways to new practices ~at limit personal gain in order to promote the future health of our environment. For ins~ce, laws and ordinances have been created to alter the way we harvest trees to proteft wetlands and riparian areas because it became clear that many animals and fish w~uld come dangerously close to extirpation, and water quality would suffer long term.~.' amage if we didn't do so. The time has come to apply the same protection strategies~o both urban and farm lands. Were I a farmer who would be required to limit my f~ing (and so, my income) to areas outside the buffers, I would be equally upset and angry as those farmers currently protesting the ordinance. !tis natural for fellow citiz~s to feel sorry for their loss. However, the plight of a few cannot be reason to limi~ laws or ordinances that benefit the overall current and future health of our natural world. I I I The argwnent against the retention of buffers to prote~t the critical resources revolves around the supposed "right" of property owners to co*tinue to damage wetlands and riparian areas SIMPL Y BECAUSE THEY HAVE BE~N DOING IT FOR A LONG TIME. Getting away with doing the wrong thing - w~ether through ignorance or malice - is not a valid excuse to continue doing the wrong th\ng. Nor is it a reason for our County Commissioners to promote or allow exceptioQ.s to the ordinance. I George Bush (retired US Forest Service Soil Scientistf> 100 McMinn Road r Port Townsend, Washington 98368 379 1201 gbush@olypen.com Page 1 of2 Grnl1 Jeanie Orr 5tJft;lb PlNb(,'C-Co~ Jeanie Orr Tuesday, May 01, 2007 8:27 AM AI Scalf; Ashley Bullitt; Bill Miller; Brent Butler; Bud Schindler; Christina Pivarnik; Edel Sokol; Henry Werch; JD Gallant; Jeanie Orr; Joel Peterson; Karen Barrows; Mike Whittaker; Patricia Farmer; Peter Downey Subject: FW: Critical Areas subcommittee recommendations From: Sent: To: Hello all, Please see email from Sally Lovell. Jeanie Planning Clerk From: Sally Lovell [mailto:whynotslovell@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 12:03 AM To: #Long-Range Planning Subject: Critical Areas subcommittee recommendations I want to thank the planning commissioners for engaging the public and creating the critical areas subcommittee, and I want to thank all the critical area committee members who put hundreds of hours into this task. I know it's been difficult, in many ways. There were many knowledgeable and caring people putting their heart and time into this. I know this is a very complex subject, and that I don't have a good understanding of all it's complexities and ramifications. I am saddened that the committee decided early on that they didn't need to adhere to the County's WEC settlement as they began their process, because I think that puts the committee's work in jeopardy of not being legally defensible. So, as a citizen of the county, I urge the planning commission to promote a critical areas ordinance (CAO) that will be: 1. Protective of streams, wetlands, fish and wildlife for future generations 2. Legally defensible - based on Growth Management Hearings Board precedents 3. Based on credible science relevant to Jefferson County's unique character, wildlife species, and landscape 4. Easily comprehensible, and implementable 5. Affordable to both the County and to landowners 6. Supports agriculture in Jefferson County I do not support Dr. Brook's recommendations for making required buffers less than the amount supported by DOE's best available science for our watershed, and then voluntary buffers above and beyond that. In my opinion, that solution is not legally defensible, and does not adequately protect our resources for future generations. The idea of making such voluntary safeguards ones that are monitored either by the landowner in question or "volunteers" I think is entirely inadequate. And to put the monitoring burden on the County is unrealistic, unaffordable, and defeats any concept of protection to critical areas. Further, I do not think simply claiming forest practice rules are sufficient for critical areas subject to rural development. Isn't that what our growth management act is about? Forest practice rules are for hundreds of acres of unconverted forestland, but on 5, 10 and 20 acre lots, critical areas within those forested areas need protection under the critical areas ordinance. That's why I think we should not 5/1/2007 (B,~rli S;~Cj) ~ \ LOn, CDI/\,.l'tte " ~~fE-q Co ~hiryl Halvorson - --0- - ..........- From: Josh Peters Sent: Wednesday, June 07,20061:42 PM To: Cheryl Halvorson Subject: FW: DNR Stream Typing Information HEARING RECORD From: Peter Bahls [mailto:peter@nwwatershed.org] Sent: Wednesday, June 07,2006 12:56 PM To: Jill Silver; AI Scalf; Josh Peters; Michelle McConnell; Rachel McHugh; Brent Butler; Jeff Davis Subject: Re: DNR Stream Typing Information Folks, Here are NWI's comments to Jeff Co. I put some additional in about ag use - which seems very unclear. ----- Original Message ---- From: Jill Silver To: AI Scalf; Josh Peters; 'Michelle McConnell' ; 'Rachel McHugh' ; Brent Butler; Jeff Davis; Paula Mackrow ; Peter Bahls; Sarah Spaeth Sent: Wednesday. May 31, 20064:43 PM Subject: DNR Stream Typing Information Hi- Thanks very much to all for a very productive meeting; My notes (including comments from Peter) are attached. Please add or comment in 'edit mode', save with your initials in the file name. and send around. Here's the link for DNR stream typing information: http://www.dnr.wa.gov/forestpracticeslwatertyping/. You can find the stream type modification form, instructions for the form. the data dictionary for GPS/GIS for the hydrography layer. and links to maps and other info. http://www3.wadnr.gov/dnrapp5Iwebsite/fpars/viewer.htmis the link to the 'activity maps' - just put in a legal description for the site of interest.. Base mapsare also on the site. I'm not positive that the base maps are updated on a 90 day schedule - but will contact DNRto ask. They say the maps may not be accurate! It's printed on the website! I'll be sending the DOE Shorelines Update report by Alan Ward for BAS on Shorelines of Statewide Significance, as well as the papers by May and Gresswell, and Bunn supporting large wood function in headwater streams with regard to increasing the Type 5 buffer in concurrence with WDFWs PHS guidance. I'll send the CMZ board manual guidance from DNR to anyone who wants it - it's 2 MS. so let me know. I need to confirm that new guidance related to 'vertical aggradation' of streambeds is incorporated in this version as it's from 11/04, and to my knowledge, a working group produced more detailed methods after that date. Regards - Jill 6/8/2006 - "0- - --- Jill Silver Watershed Program Manager 10,000 Years fnstitute 211 Taylor Street, Suite 6 Port Townsend, WA 98368 360.385.0715 jsilver@10000yearsinstitute.org www. 1 OOOOyearsinstitute. org 6/8/2006 Northwest Watershed Institute 3407 Eddy Street I Port Townsend, Washington 98368 voice 360.385.6786 fax 360.385.2839 email peter@nwwatershed.org I www.nwwatershed.org June 7, 2006 Al Scalf, Director Department of Community Development Jefferson County 621 Sheridan St. Port Townsend, W A 98368 RE Proposed amendment of Critical Areas Ordinance Dear Mr. Scalf, I really appreciate the progress that you and the planning staff have made over the past several years to address deficiencies in the county's Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO), as well as progress in implementing and enforcing the CAO. As the County's population and development-related impacts continue to grow, the importance of the CAO in safeguarding the public's fish, wildlife, and clean water cannot be overstated. I generally support the latest proposed amendments to the CAO. However, I believe that the following items need to be addressed for it to adequately protect public resources. 1) I understand that currently, DNR forest practice regulations are applied to all forest practices, even those timber cutting operations proposed for development purposes (conversions). CAO requirements need to be applied to all forest practices proposed as conversions (Class IV) or as conversion option harvest plans since these areas may never be in forest habitat again. 2) The CAO relies on the stream typing system and stream type maps provided by DNR. However, research has shown that these maps are grossly inaccurate (Bahls and Ereth 1994, Stream Typing Error in Washington Water Type Mapsfor Watersheds of Hood Canal and the Southwest Olympic Peninsula). The maps greatly underestimate the occurrence of fish-bearing streams and other stream types. In the Olympic Peninsula region, a total of 72 percent of the Type 4 streams (non-fish bearing} surveyed by two agencies in 16 watersheds were found to be fish bearing. In addition, in my years of experience as a fish biologist in eastern Jefferson County, I have found that many of the smallest streams (Type 5) do not show up on the maps at all. DNR does recognize that their maps. can be inaccurate with a disclaimer on their map website. DNRalso has a process in place for continually updating maps based on field information. Protecting these small streams is critical for preventing ~iltation of downstream fish-bearing streams and shellfish beds. The amended CAO needs to clearly state that Jefferson County has responsibility for ensuring that all development. proposals will be field reviewed prior to approval to -1) identify and accurately map streams that may not appear on the DNR maps, and 2) field verify stream typing based on the DNR stream typing criteria. As part of the process, corrected stream type NWI comments on Jefferson County CAO Amendment June 7, 2006 Page 1 of3 maps, prepared either by County staff or a qualirted contractor paid by the applicant, should be submitted to DNR on a Water Type Change Fo~ so that DNR can correct their GIS map layer. 3) The CAO references using DNR regulations and Icriteria for stream typing. Although these DNR criteria are generally adequate, there are a few e*eptions where 'Best Available Science' requires the county to make several changes - I a. Ordinary High Water Mark, as defined i* the Shoreline Management Act ('mark upon the soil with respect to vegetation') should bF used by the County as ihe outer edge of any stream or wetland delineation, not b~ll width as in DNR regs (W AC 222-16-030). b. Associated wetlands must be stated for ~clusion - as in Type I or Type S waters - they are excluded in WAC 222-16-030 definitions. 4) Proposed 50 foot buffer widths on Type 5 streamb are inadequate in many cases, especially if the stream is in an area with over 60% slopes. PHS r~commendations are for 225 feet for Type 5 streams in mass wasting areas and 100 feet for otl1er Type 5s. I recommend a minimum buffer width of 100 feet for Type 5s to adequately protebt the downstream water quality and habitat functions of these areas. i 5) The "Core Habitats" draft map and wildlife rePOIt is missing some critical wildlife habitat Core areas including - a) Core 1 -the lower two miles qf Chimacum Creek that includes the ESA summer chum habitat, and b) Core I - an importalnt portion ofTarboo-Dabob Bay - the west side extending from DNR lands to the north to Broad Spit and the Jefferson County's park to the south. The Tarboo-Dabob Bay area represents on6 of the highest quality and biologically diverse estuaries remaining in Puget Sound and 'the Core IHabitat needs to include the area in its entirety. The portion of Shoreline that was left out include~ important shellfish beds and estuarine habitat, older conifer forested, undeveloped and unstable ~horelines, and bald eagle habitats. Finally, upper Tarboo Creek, north of Center Road, need~ to be included as a Core 3 habitat. This area of ov. er ~OO acres hundred acres is mostlycomprise4 of large. parcels of private timberlan~s that contain the headwaters of Tar boo Creek, Tarboo take, and Browns Lake wetlands. This area provides extremely important aquatic habitat in alrelatively dry upland area of the county, the headwaters are an important part of the Tarboo ~tershed stream corridor and it serves as a core area connecting. the Tarboo waterShed to the Chi~acum' watershed. I 6) Jefferson County needs more staff to implement $denforce the CAO. . I i 7) The CAO amendment should include a fee sched~le for enforcement, with automatic penalties . I that are large enough to dissuade persons from violating thc'CAO. I 8) New rock bulkheads should not be allowed alongl marine shorelines as they degrade habitat for juvenile rearing salmon and spawning grounds' for forage fish. 9) It is very unclear to me how theCAO protectScri~ical areaS from so-called agricultural uses. I can understand that commercial agriculture uses in agriculturally zoned areas would be exempt from CAO. But if a new 60 acre subdivision of5-acre ~ots is permitted with a 150 ft buffer required along the stream, and a new owner wants to havelhis six pigs and ten goats within ten feet of the creek, calling it an ~'agricul~l Use", is this allo~ed or is this an enforcement issue? In response NWI comments on Jefferson County CAO Amendment June 7, 2006 Page 2 of3 to this and other similar questions, Planning staff said that this was a "grey area" in need of further discussion. The CAOneeds to clearly define under what conditions agricultural use is considered exempt from CAO and under what conditions agriculture-related impacts, such as draining and clearing a wetland for new pasture on a 5 acre lot, are not permitted. Sincerely, Peter Bahls Fish Biologist and Aquatic Ecologist NWI comments on Jefferson County CAO Amendment June 7, 2006 Page 3 of3 e;~.,~~~ ~7~,~~t- i ~,',w~ ,,'he +-\.. ;~,. r:~?:?:;~.~ ~_ "-',;, -gO _ _, _~ ;",;. :~"",~ -~ ....~~--,~-~ .. .. &~t:' ,,:,"t ~~~ d' nX, i>~~ ~;:;:\. III :I"~ [COM Number: , / L. Notif)rofResponse 0 Yes 0 No , ~ write "CONFIDE~L" bere in ~ Phone 5XS - 330S ~J tJb sf-o-v-. Phone Parcel number Location of Problem Problem or Adjacent Address Are there any gates, dogs, no trespassing signs, mile markers, etc? ,\. rf ictt:fL~ dnL " ., i1A~t Program Area: 0 Abandoned Vehicles Assigned To DCD Staff Name: Date: Is there a "no access" letter or notice on file with the County? 0 Yes 0 No -If "Yes", forward a copy of this fonn to County Administrator - An site visitation due to this com laint will be in com liance with Jefferson Coun olicies and rocedures re ardin No action necessary because: 0 no potential violation in complaint 0 complaint has already been investigated on o referred to 0 other roo. ~..jf-;w-1,-- / ". ,vi HPA- -= U(uM ~lJvtvy-/tuDF0 ~. ~~,f , Admin Time Spent: Date Completed: DeD Time Spent: Director Time Spent: ece Time Spent: pe.r son Complained Notified: 0 Yes 0 No Parcel Numberf!-9fj; f o~ " ,.t~ L ~lt<f t= fw., . , \\~<;t-rlfJ-~ ~ ~M Referred to inspector I for ip.vestigatirm. Assigned Date I I I I I I I , Date Action 1:)--2"3 ~ I 'f -3/ fW';J;Jj --Iv ~ .J!trluWv]) KJ g r1I {_ SLijv~ r n~ Additional Comments or directions to property: . Action Summary: Site Visits: 0 o Informational Letter Sent: ~ ---1_ 0 Prosecuting ~ttomey's letter sent -1-1_ FOrwarded o Ticket # ~ I By I I I I I I NoProblems R!Esolved I Written -1-1_ o Notice and Order Sent: _/ ~_ Abated? Y N / / --- CAncelled UNresolved I Please attach an activity report for field notes relevant to this case. Please track all your ti~e spent on each complaint! I 2 I I I I . ' .Permit Details Page 1 of2 Weather Station Database Tools tJI\ Maps =--.!!,; We beam Home County Info Deparlmen ts Search ~.rrl se Summa Case Number: I Search II ") ildp I Case Number: COM06-00037 Ie",.,. ',::1[U5: Pending Date Received: 5/31/2006 Description: Possible fill issues involving a type 3 stream. Date Issued: Applicant: JOE THOMPSON Expiration Date: Site Address: .................... Case Finaled: Parcel No: 998400011- Other Cases Parcel Data ~'1ap It Case Actions Below is a list of actions that have been taken by staff for this permit case. They are sorted based on the date they were added to the database with most recent actions at the top. A value in the "Date Completed" field indicates that the action has been completed. Description: Case Entered Date Completed: 5/31/2006 No Conditions or Findings Found http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/commdevelopment/PPQuery/caseDetails.asp?csm_caseno=...11/5/2006 Parcel Print Page 1 of 1 . Parcel Number: 998400011 07/26/2006 Owner Mailing Address: JOE S THOMPSON 101 HILLER DR PORT HADLOCK WA 983399718 Site Address: Section: Qtr Section: Township: Range: Planning area: Sub Division: Land Use Code: 7 SW1/4 29N lE Tri-Area (4) TAYLOR'S TERRACE 9100 - VACANT LAND School District: Fire Dist: Tax Status: Tax Code: climacum (49) I C~imacum (1) Taxable 2~1 i I Property Description: TAYLOR'S TERRACE I 14 I ..:J No Photo Available I I I http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/assessors/parceIlParceIPrint.atP?PARCEL..NO~98400011...11/5/2006 i COM Number: Com 0/'- 0, "al: f1 0 n Jefferson County Department of Community Development Citizen Concern/Complaint Form Date of Report 5131101 . . ConfidentialD Yos i No . Notify of Response ~ Yes 0 No Information Taken By (staff name) 1< A --l h I -L Ii t1 fl e. 51.1 K a-Y-'1- Citizen Filing Concernl~C?mplaint (if requested to be .confidential, please write "f<:.~NFIpENTl~L: here in red.) Full Name ClO!!&lon Sf 0++ Dr Su5AJl Ho~lionef\~ f)<fJ':J~ 33fc5 Street or Mailing Adafess 70':0 1075 .q:> 1+ / ~ I Ii ( Ilw 1)y . f H . , . Location of Problem Concern/Complaint Regarding (must get this information!) FullName ,-'D~ lh.omp:::G\'\ . . Phone t..~35~ oh31 Street or Mailing Address ~I. 4 I 1/ f/Y 1> r .: fj Parcel number ~COCOI ~ Qf{84-DOO/1 'PH 5 A+e.~ t nD ' fJ)-SSpu:DI'j €/'Y D ~ noW e.- \ (\ C\. m DU t1 D yY\ Ou./'Yl \) ~rogram Area: 0 Abandoned Vehicles 0 DeD (specific division, if possible) o Nuisance 0 Other Assigned To DCD StatfName: Date: Is there a "no access" letter or notice on.file with the COunty? 0 Yes t;J No -If "Yes", forward a copy of this fonn to Couitty . Administrator - . Any site visitation due to this complaint will be in comeliance with Jefferson County Dolicies and procedures regarding trespassIng. No action necessary because: 0 no potential violation in complaint 0 complaint has already been investigated on o referred to 0 other Conditions Found and Actions Taken Admin Time Spent: ~e Completed: DeD Time Spent: Director Time Spent: CCC Time Spent: P~on Complained Notified: 0 Yes 0 No Parcel Number:3C(O 4lry) 0/ 1 ! ~- , , I Referred to insPector for investig~tion. Assigned Date . Date Action Additional Comments or directions to property: Action Summary: o Informational Letter Sent: -1-1_ Site Visits: 0 1 2 US 6 78 9 . o Prosecu, AttOrney's letter sent ~ -1_ . .0 Tieket#-l' Written ~-1~ By -1-.-1_ o Notice and Order Sent: -1-1_ . Abated? Y N CAncelled , I ~solved I I Please attach an activity report I for field notes relevant I to this case. Please track all your 4e spent on each complaint! I , i I FOrwarded NoProbleI1)s UNresolved 2 .f- .~. C(Jlv1 (j 7 -.00 I s-:i COM Number: GdM 07- 0006'-{ INCLUP(:. lN1Hi..s FILL. Confidential: NO Jefferson Connty Department of Commnnity DeveloP~~~-Rf€~Form Date of Report i 2. - 21:;- 0 7 Confidential 0 Yes Jl( No NotifY of Response O(Yes 0 No Information Taken By (staff nMte) (rl'}a/led i 11). . . . Citizen Filing Concern/Complaint (if requested to be tonfidential, please write~CONFIDENTlAL" here in red.) Full.Name SUSAN f.!oPi<lIJS 4 J. SCa7TatJ6>TOAJ Phone ?:8S- 3.3'=>S Street or Mailing Address Po, frj}( {O PORT HADLtJd:::... 9 { i-Ill.L&z Oy{llJE... POR..r 1-/ItDi.o[:.iJ::.. (F{(::.PfCESWlI/V6, CfTltUJ5 P~OTE l!Jq CIC./7lCAL MEA$ (f:pc4 Concern/Complaint Regarding (must get this information!) Full Name. JOE. Tl-td/ViPSOAJ Phone. 385" -ObB / Street or Mailing Address I () / I-I/~ 0 J{!JUE PO/<:r I-f-4DLiJ4c. Parcel number QQf3lfo{Joo 7 an.4 qqg4-00olf. Location of Problem Probiem or Adjacent Address / () L 1-/1t...Lff/l?.. .Dlel VIE., POI<.. T R4fjLo<:-k... r Are there any gate~, dogs, no trespassing signs, mile markers, etc? 6ATf_ f. ND Tf'<.E!>5PA SS/A.)6 S/6/JS Written description of complaint: ~f-~~ 6YLfJtVvCPIqqff'fooo7 CUl.d...-tit.x~ ~~'~ =~~ . . ( '.' IL.(jL fPr,u., , -:: ..' =:~:; w - . "" -~ . -FtMHA A1Zf 1fAU1Z&A.J.JtiJrJJJU iDO/' "f FWI-/A. ., ~ ~ ~ . . ~rogram Area: 0 Abandoned Vehicles 0 DCD (specific division, if possible) n Nuisance 0 Other . Assigned To DCD Staff Name: Date: Is there a "no access" letter or notice on file with the COunty? . . Administrator- Any site visitation due to this Complaint wili be in compliance with Jefferson County policies and procedures regarding trespassfng. No action necessary because: 0 no potential violation in complaint 0 complaint has already been investigated on o referred to 0 other o Yes P No -If~Y es", forward a copy of this fonn to County Conditions Found and Actions Taken Admin Time Spent: Dllte Completed: DCD Time Spent: Director Time Spent: C?C Time Spent: Person Complained Notified: .0 Yes 0 No Parcel Number: 1 .-. .. I I I Dear Ms. Pearson, D.C.D. Enforcement Off~cer, Please include these comments into f: omplaint File #COM 07-00064. Mr. Thompson is continuing to fence, his Critical Area Fish and ! Wildlife Habitat Area. I Within the past few weeks he has ad~ed two sections of wild- life excluding fencing within the forres~ed riparian area of his Habitat Management Plan on Parcel #99840p007. These new sections of fence are conFtructed of natural materials. (Logs and sticks gathered on site). Still, they are tall and dense and solid enough to exclude any wildlife! not small enough to pass through them. These fences, along with ~hose that preceded them are : not shown on his Habitat Management Plan I. Is it the case that in the time sinpe the above complaint was filed on May 31,2007 no one at the Department of Community Develop- ment has explained Mr. Thompson's obliga~ions and responsibilities to him? Additionally virtually all of the f~ncing surrounding Mr. Thompson's Parcels #998400007 and #99840p011 are within 100 feet of the FWHA of Little Goose Creek and ar~ in violation of JCC 18.15.310 in as much as they ..."alter the functior or character of the FWHA or its buffer." 12/16/07 I As we mentioned in a letter to Mr. Scalf on July 15, 2007 ...ItA fish and wildlife habitat buffer zpne cannot be maintained if the wildlife are fenced out." I Mr. Thompson is not conducting agripultural activities on I this property. No cows to fence in - nol crops to protect. Mr. Thompson's large gate on the Oak Bay Highway is within 100 I feet of the stream and is therefore non-pompliant. The gate open3; to a large amount of fill, both long andl wide, that has been placed I on a steep slope and is non-compliant f~r several reasons. The fill allows access to a building constr~cted within the FWHA and upon the fill and is non-compliant. And still I"Ir. Thompson is erecting Ifences. The ~epartment of Community Develo~ment has told us several times that they have no authority to en~orce the Critical Area I Ordinances. We believe they do. I We urge you, once again, to take a9tion to preserve the fish and ~ildlife within this Critical drea Fish and Wildlife ~bi tat BUffe.r Zonei, ,)3iqcerely, Ci +izen~ Pro~ecting Critical. Areas, (.. ,.,...~ hV;..l;'-fj~ 7(a1tt4~t:iMt~ ~ ~ rJ!,7fI~ 3verett~ ~pr~gue, Nanc~ Goodreau-Brockqb, Susan Hopkins, ~0COtt ~logston ;..,.. . r,."'....al A ~+."'pl ~ I (360) 385-3365 fcn11lt Details Search '" Permit Case Summary Case Number: ( Search Ilt& Help l Case Number: COM07-00158 lr-.", c.;..'),"' Pending Date Received: 12/27/2007 :-.Cl.~,~. _l_h~:'.L,,- ~. Description: ALLEGED CONTINUED FENCING AND UNPERMITTED GATE ON Date Issued: FILL ALONG OAK BAY RD Applicant: JOE THOMPSON Expiration Date: Site Address: 102 HILLER DR Case Finaled: Parcel No: 998400007- Q.th~r c:::as!=$ P?[<;f.1 J)ati.i fv1~R lX Pa(ce[s Case Actions Below is a list of actions that have been taken by staff for this permit case. They are sorted based on the date they were added to the database with most recent actions at the top. A value in the "Date Completed" field indicates that the action has been completed. Description: Date Completed: Case Entered 12/27/2007 No Conditions or Findings Found http:.!/w\V\V.co.jefferson. \Va. us/col11l1ldevelopl11entlPPQuery/caseDetai Is.asp ?csl11.caseno... 12/29,'2007 ----.-- -+ .'r"f!o1(..~ 'f~1:(-----:--1 t I __..L_..._~_-+-- . ~ ---+---~----+~-.. ~ 1Lf<!UA-R~"'-__-_.~ \ - 7. COM Number: dential: o Jefferson County Department of Community Development Citizen 'Concern/Complaint Form Date ofRepon I Z -2& 0 1 Confidential 0 Yes O(No Notify of !tesponse {Yes 0 No Information Taken By (staff name) (/YI..tli..M.... iAt....-) . . Citizen Filing Concern/Complaint (if reque~ted to .be c:onfidential, please write "'CONFIDENTIAL" here in red.) Full.Name Slt54AJ .HoPkiNS t/ J'. SQj7T CLO&STON . Phone 36 5~ 336S- Street or Mailing Address P.O. /3DX /077 POJt'J U40LiJCk, /8/ If {Lalt D R.I(/L (REPRlSt^J7VJ<!i crTlUA1;S PR.oTE.f:-rfA)6 C12171cit\LA~tAS (G.PCA) . , Concern/Complaint Regarding (must get this information!) . FullName JOE TI-i(JIl1PSON Phone. 3fJ5'-Ob8i Street or Mailing Address ,a I HI lLEjI( D Jet V if- " poeT f-JA DLOGk.. , . Parcel number qqgf{.(JOOO 7 anc/ q1fIJ Lf()OOII Location of Problem ProblemorAdjacentAddress 102-. #/LLtI{ D1(IVc., .PORT HADL-OGk::. '" Are there any gates, dogs, no trespassing signs, mile markers, etc? 6- A IE ttnd No.7l( f..$S PASS; JJ 6j S/6NS Written desc:ription of complaint: p~/ a'Tld ~~~ Lpdlt&u a CNftr,tI. . .~_i~t~~,~~~~~: ~)~~~~~~ - . .. ~ . ,-rogram Area: 0 Abandoned Vehicles 0 DeD (specific division, if possible) n Nuisance 0 Other Assigned To DeD Staff Name: Date: Is there a "no access" letter or notice on.fiIe with the COunty? 0 Yes p No-If~Yes", forward a copy of this fonnto County . Administrator- . site visitation due to this Com laint wili be in corn Hance with Jefferson Coun olicies and ures r din No action necessary because: 0 no potential violation in complaint 0 complaint has already been investigated on o referred to 0 other . Conditions Found and Actions Taken . , Admin Time Spent: Dilte Completed: DCD Time Spent: Dire;aor Time Spent: CCC . Time Spent: P~on Complained Notified: 0 Yes 0 No Parcel Number: 1 << ... - Ms. Molly Pearson, DCD Enforcement Office~ i We, all members of Citizens Protectin~ Critical Areas (CPCA), I I are filing a written complaint against a fiolation of the Critical Areas Ordinance happening on parcels 9984p0007 and 998400011 owned by Joe Thompson. Parcel 998400007 has an! Habitat I~nagement Plan. Section 18.15.310 of the current Critlcal Areas Code states "no land use or development activity, eveh if the activity does not require a permit, shall be allowed thi' t alters the function or character of the FWHA or its buffers." Most of the area of parcels 998400007 and 998400011 fall with- i in the Critical Area and its buffer of Li~tle Goose Creek. Mr. Thompson has 3 buildings, one on ~he south side and 2 on I the north side, of the stream. All of th~ buildings have outside lights. One of the buildings on the nortb side of the stream has a light on all night that lights up a Sigfificant portion of both parcels. The building on the south side has lights on all 4 sides. I Two of the lights are left on all night frequently, and light up a large portion of parcel 998400007. All o~ these lights shine into the riparian area of the FWHA of Little Gloose Creek. Some shine I into the Habitat Management Plan area of Iparcel 998400007. I In addition Mr. Thompson has at leastl16 lights on stanchions approximately 12 inches to 18 inches abo~e ground level placed throughout the area that are also lit all! night. At least 4 of these lights are within the Habitat Mana~ement Plan for Parcel 998400007. No lighting is shown on his ~abi tat rlJ.anagement Plan. Several of the lights on both parcels arel within the flood area of I the stream. At least 3 of the lights shilne light into the "pool" area of the stream where the coho that irkabit the stream, prior to going to sea, spend m~ch of their tim~. The natural character of a FWHA is to be dark at night. In addition to these lights~nn I stanchions he has additional lights on s~anchions on parcel 998400007 that are not currently lit but could be 1ctivated at any time. The lighting was installed after JCC 18.15.310 was adopted. i Most of the references in a letter tq Molly Pearson from Gerald Steel PE, dated 11/30/07, on pages 2 and !3 "REGARDING Th'"E FENCE I i ACROSS THE STREAM AND ITS BUFFER" also a~ply to lighting. Quoting Mr. Steel.. ."A fundamental ~unction and characteristic I of riparian habitat is to provide a corr~dor for animal migration." Lighting within a corridor significantly Ireduces this function and characteristic. Quoting from Mr. Stdel's letter again, I ..."See VJDFW PHS (1997) at 32 (copied inlpart below). - , , i I i I 12/15/07 Page 1 , . "- "By virtue of their protective cover and connectivity throughout watersheds, riparian areas function as wildlife travel corridors (Thomas et ale 1979, Forman and Godron 1986, Noss 1993). Animals often use riparian areas for daily, seasonal, or once-in-a-lifetime travel. Mobile species such as marten, fisher, bobcat, cougar, deer, great blue heron, and marbled murrelets frequently have established daily travel routes that parallel streams (de Vos and Guenther 1952, Thomas et ale 1979, Eisenhawer and Reimchen 1990, Noss 1993)." "Although a key function of riparian areas is to provide a safe corridor for animals to move from area to area, Noss (1993) out- lined other important functions of riparian corridors. These other functions include facilitating dispersal and consequent gene flow between populations...Riparian corridors that facilitate wildlife movement help maintain the health of species' gene pools and prevent isolation and perhaps extirpation of subpopulations (Harris 1988)." "The importance of riparian areas as travel corridors and routes for dispersion is amplified in developed or fragmented landscapes because alternative overland travel routes are often unavailable, discontinuous, or life endangering (Carleton and Taylor 1983, Blake 1986). Dispersing juveniles or adults of some species nre prone to predation while traveling through open areas. In highly developed landscapes, riparian corridors rllay provide essential connections bet'ifeen isolated natural areas. Some animals may be able to meet their large areas requirements by traveling between several patches of natural habitat linked by corridors (Noss 1992)." "WDFW PHS (1997) at 32" Also on page 3 of Mr. Steel's letter he states..."JCC 18.15.310 applies to any developnent activity even if a permit is not requi-red. 'Development' is defined in JCC 18.10.040: "'f Development I means the di visi.~:m of a parcel into two or more parcE:ls; the construction, reconstruction, conversion, structural alteration, relocation, or enlargement of any structure; any grading, excavation, mining, landfill; or any extension of the use of land." Page 2 - - JCC 18.10.040. Installing lighting is i~cluded because it is "construction...of any structure". !I " t Structure' is defined in JCC 18.10.190: I I "Structure" means a permanent or temporaJy edifice or building or any piece of work artificially built up ~r composed or parts joined together in some definite manner, !whether installed on, above, or below the surface of the groun~ or water, except for I I vessels (WAC 173-27-030)." I ! JCC 18.10.190: The lighting on Parcels 998400007 and 998400011 are I a structure because they are a "piece of Iwork artificially built up or composed of parts joined together :iln some definite manner." I i ! CONCLU::510N: ! ! I cc: Gerald Steel The lighting of a fish and w~ldlife Jabitat area definitely , changes its functions and character on t~e above two parcels. Nocturnal animals that are able to aqcess this area by finding ways around, over, or under the vast amo~t of fencing are further I discouraged from using this area because !of the lighting. I Diurnal animals that might want to ""tied down" in this area are also impacted from doing so because of tije lighting. Fish in any pools in the stream may ~ecome active during their normal dark cycle resting time because at the lighting. The lighting during nightime on thes~ parcels ..."alters the funct.ion and character of the FWHA or i t~ buffers." I ! Cttizens Protecting Critical Areas, ~~ I S1jlsan Hopkins i ($60) 385-3365 I {Ibwo.-U~ ~t Scott Clogston ~tlntJk jj)N~1/ 11i~ N~ncyLGoodreau Brockob ~~~~~~ Eterettw Sprague (~\ 48) ~~C IH E J"{;<ff<..1< J'Q t-J' <J"" l\\j~1 r JA r'HI h~ \l-' (-. . '" ..;) ,,,,",, ;t.!) 'l l' f j d ~j r I ;-1 {\ I-. D JV~ FT' I; S ~)'~,' f'~l~Mcl A~(H\(Jf~t Iii (5 t (-{(~ ~ A r J 8:, ;J-;j ,(,4 () "3 (" Page 3 .P~rmJt DetaIls .t'age 1 or 1. Permit Case Summary Case Number: [ Search 11,~p'f Case Number: COM07-00159 ICase Status: Pending Date Received: 12/27/2007 Description: ALLEGED EXTENSIVE AND CONTINUED NIGHTTIME LIGHTING Date Issued: W/IN A CRITICAL AREA Applicant: JOE THOMPSON Expiration Date: Site Address: 102 HILLER DR Case Finaled: Parcel No: 998400007- Other Cases Parcel Data Map It Case Actions Below is a list of actions that have been taken by staff for this permit case. They are sorted based on the date they were added to the database with most recent actions at the top. A value in the "Date Completed" field indicates that the action has been completed. Description: Case Entered Date Completed: 12/27/2007 No Conditions or Findings Found http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/commdevelopment/PPQuery 1 caseDetails.asp ?csm _ caseno... 12/2912007 rl HJ~ () .,..-' ) I f'. f;tl-- Look\!.:.>(J' ^J :.1 (.1';:\ Ii f'~< ,~. .IV". J , (j C r., ,,' ,.! .. ~J < ........;,'<7 -~ ~v 1. .,.. #/.> J- () \ '0 ACf~tG~' 0y Iii A -(, ':., f,': (: t" C.., '-. ,,-0 .J ^." "J - ".), - '.. . . ,'-- '.' ..~ ..--,;. :' l'. C' , - /l Q'"'-1 p-"/'). '-. l' ) ~_ t{.. . -/.J() ~ l i1 ) -- , .::.- ;"'1' i -{\- /'. ".,'" _ I (" { , - . ,--; ~ (> f'~ i-, ( ,:C:, ~.IO f- .Rl".1 , .,~ - ','" -. ... I ' . "';""- ", . . ) /'.1 . .., '" r, ......\ iF- t-\ -...; .-,'1 ; ..,~ .~, / -'I O.~ ,'\J '.... 1..~ S !!r.A ,j.j.. ()' k (0 '),,) :"~rzo ;~,,\ !'-)'{l .~. \~ :'-, -':--..) ~ -~. } { ~ i!/: p..[ \ ' f -' -c--'" , ,...~ \ .., f-U} r'~ ; 14.... h\ I""'; fJ?..~ fY' , _ . ,,(, r.' ,- If /" .... n /')~'A. '.,.f" h.) \.. .. _.... ..,l " 1,,;:Y,.)....1i t '0," . f) p;..~",,\ '~ .. '~. " '; ~~} ~ t\.- \ ~\J \~\ :J..~ C ..\.-r... '0 .,,-/.1. \J (/\~ , F.R~N ~.J)<;) ~C.(;\~I YH~~V\i;\~ ,f .r~, ','\~.) ., 4---~ ~",1.} :J ~(', Vj~ I- ?~~ ';,).j '..: <j . <-~ \~"I;, ..., ~'. .-' f-,J ..- ~ 'f (: ,! f~, .c' L >1.':. :~\ ~ ,,! ,4. -'. f~'; , i J. ',-- r ": ) ('" , { (1 i...:, "d- rt .. I~. ; {j o h, I:::' ;', , 1;/ ; !'~ l'~';; I' ", ~ / ( (>1""-; :' l.,"i I'.' ~.. ~ ..", {'~ ;' i'" ~--(.(,r.-;), r~:- (.' ( "; t.: r" ~ J l, {~ ,,' (r I"~ J_'. '-'1' ~-~. ('. \ """r1') I ~-' f.:"'~ "--" f - i! I:'~ .:..(< l) Ii ~ ~j ') ,..... 'tJ(f" 1'J)~b!<i'5J,(.: c.. o (',Ai 0-'1 -' p '..,-:-") -;;. ", I) Fp. ~,,~ ,'J P. '-; \ (,~ \ ~) 'f :;-f'.' ~ J (.J~ L:,i'-;/ I' . II'! \';, ~;.. ;~ ~ ~~'~ t f f ~ , ~- r. J ~ ~. r f t r.- ~. t I- I f: f; ( i I ~. I . r- t Ie f f ~ COM Number: C~) 4! ( 1 ' Co (, ( Cc; (; " <~ 'J L'~ I I. ,I It \. ~ ~ 1.,- ,. -'~ t"" r f ~ ~ J!,~" / r\ t.; Confidential: No Jefferson County Department of Community Development CitizenConcernlComplaint Form Date of Report 12- 2b--- 0 7 Confidential 0 Yes f(No Notify of Response ~ Yes 0 No Information Taken By (staff name) (ma. i led ; rl) . Citizen Filing Concern/Complaint (if requested to be confidential, please write "CONFIDENTlAL" here in red.) FullName S'U.SM+loPt:...ilV.5. 4- .7'. SLL'7T CL06SroAJ Phone 385- 33bfJ Street or Mailing Address P.o. Oy 1(/"(.. 8i HILUI<.t::>RI 01<. HADUJc..k. (,:(EPAf5EN-'IN~ C.17"IZf..A1S ~OTE.C.T/Ntr. CK.{ cA.L Aie.EAS (CPcA) Concern/Complaint Regarding (must get this information!) . Full Name . .Yo E.., It ONl iP SOA) Phone. 3 g 6" - 0 b g I Street or Mailing Address 10 f I-fILLIC-R.. D Rt UP- , PoeT 1+4;)Loc..J<' / Parcel number QQ84-0000 7 alto/. QQ84-(Jo(J1 ( Location of Problem Probiem or Adjacent Address . 102... HI LLtl?. DR J U iL.. . . P WeT H40 L-06K ~ Are there any gates, dogs, no trespassing signs, mile markers, efc? GA'/.F5 ~. NO Tf?;;. ~S PA-$S I Nt:;,. Sib N f1 Written description of complaint: (~tuY~-1 ~,~~ U~~F~A (;"Ltl~l&,.~upcn!Mn:::!!~ g:::;z::;~~../;::U;~~;:;::Z::Yi;~:-. . . ~ aA1d...tt ~ .{}.u~)t, pa'- U~ of tI~au..,'6/{..ttec-(/..vqaIUl1L -t<J'iwAe fJAU~j/o-nh..;/ ttftt. ~/uuid./r t~'1rY1fda(-:tt;G..Jihl..utr/Uittf/la~f' &f ~d /1d:k1./o . ~rogram Area: 0 Abandoned Vehicles 0 DCD (specific division, if possible) ONuisance 0 Other' F r i r ~. [ I...~..'.. Is there a "no access" letter or notice onfile with the COunty? r .' Administrator- ~. Any site visitation due to this Complaint will be in comQliance with Jefferson County policies and procedures regarding trespassi'ng. J: No action necessary because: 0 no potential violation .in complaint 0 complaint has already been investigated on t. 0 referred to 0 other Assigned To DeD Staff Name: Date: DYes I;J No-If "Yes", forward a copy of this fonn to County Conditions Found and Actions Taken . , Admin Time Spent: Dilte Completed: DCD Time Spent: Dir~tor Time Spent: ece . Time Spent: Person Complained Notified: 0 Yes 0 No Parcel Number: .. ,. 1 12/16/07 ........ ....-~" Dear Mrs. Pearson, D.C.D. Enforcement Officer, Su-t.tt;J;C At~ - , Everette Spr~e, cc:Gerald Steel We members of Citizens Protecting Critical Areas (CPCA) do file a complaint against the construction and continued existence I of the building constructed on Parcel 1998400011 (Lot #14, Taylor's Terrace) by Joe Thompson within the buffer of a Fish and Wildlife Habitat Area (FWHA) surrounding a Clas~ III salmon/cuthroat stream. I This building is in violation of JCC 18.15.310 in-as-much as it is a "Development". "Development" ~s defined in JCC 18.10.040. I "Structure" is defined in JCC 18.10.190. In addition, and again in violatidn of JCC 18.15.310, the building, as well as the extensive unpJrmitted fill (see Complaint #COM 06-00037) that provides both phys~cal support and access to it have been placed on top of the native ~egetation. The fill has not been planted with native vegetation but rather has been surrounded with vegetation much of which is non-nJtive species. (Bamboo) Please consider this complaint to linclude the large amount of bamboo planted within the Critical AreJ on both of Mr. Thompson's I parcels - #998400011 and #998400007 including within his "Habitat Management Plan" area. I We believe the fill to be unstable, and hazardous as much of it was placed on a steep hillside on top of several springs. In additioh, the fill has disrupte~ the natural drainage pattern into Little Goose Creek and resulted inl diverting water, that typically flowed down into the creek, onto the GO~dreau-Brockob property to the north. This has created a long stretch of very wet area and a pool of standing water on Goodreau-Brockob's property. The removal of much native vegetat,ion, the placement of hundreds of yards of potentialy hazardous fill, ~he alteration of drainage patterns and the construction of a building on the fill alter the function and character of the FWHA in v~olation of JCC 18.15.310. It should be pointed out that a sm~ller building was moved onto Parcel #998400011 inyear 2000 prio~ to the time when 100 foot buffers were in effect and is still~ in hse. Also, Nr. Thompson I already has a large two and one half stpry shop/covered storage building on Parcel #998400007 that was built with a Critical Area Variance and an Habitat Management Planl Sincerely, Citizens pr~tection Critical Areas, I ~tt1tttfA~LVl3hHtIr Nancy Goodre~u-Brockob, ~^- ~~ p~~LAri~ Susan Hopkins, \..Bcott ~Cik;gst'on (360)385-3365 'i:~ Permit Details Page 1 of2 ,- ~ Permit Case Summary Case Number: [ Search Case Number: COM07-00160 ICase $tgtus: Pending Date Received: 12/27/2007 Description: ALLEGED CONSTRUCTION OF A BLDG W/IN THE FWHA CRITICAL AREA UPON NON-PERMITTED FILL, DESTRUCTION OF Date Issued: VEGETATION, DISRUPTION OF NATURAL DRAINAGE PATTERN, ETC Applicant: JOE THOMPSON Expiration Date: Site Address: 102 HILLER DR Case Finaled: Parcel No: 998400007- Ot.her Cases Parcel Data fv1ap It Case Actions Below is a list of actions that have been taken by staff for this permit case. They are sorted based on the date they were added to the database with most recent actions at the top. A value in the "Date Completed" field indicates that the action has been completed. Description: Case Entered Date Completed: 12/27/2007 No Conditions or Findings Found http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/commdevelopment/PPQuery/caseDetails.asp?csm _ caseno... 12/29/2007 _0 ":'~ r;'~ 'J ,11.4 ~. .( t! ~ }S'. "., ,~ ~-}:t 9, #1 - f; \; ~. ... '~'; 1'. ':-< ,. .... -: ) -. ~) (~; l~ ,-; ''".' l \" :-A; P t;l f' '" ;;-",': , .-:; ..; ....,.."W' 'P"''''''''"'':.-r- / :::>J,~11 () -;- .oci (,:J . 1 --' It) J (y~ C ~ ~ 17 0 c C Fo 0 I 1 J'\, /0 C, \..,1' i UN ;,JC It G . 1~ CARDS 6't Y0ofoS REIN((iTE F,J6 I I TT J c ~ ~ . s.. HEARING R' E'~rOt" DD r \S' () () ~ c ~ (€ \:: 1r\ 'J- fro fZ- '" If ~. C () #I\!0 \ Nt'S - C~ () fV\ 6 b - GOO j' 7 Co r!\ 07- OCe::, ~J.r C (j M (j 7- 00 I 5 B (OM Ql~ GD IS-<=( eClAt', Of - 0 tl I ~O ~ 'I 1 1 I I t t ., 1 . 'I! . i 'l I t .~ .~ ,.\ ': :, ",'To c t30CC "'f1!qfl1~ (fCA (017 zfJ\lS PiCD'TfC--17tJq ce meAL /WAs) SlJ/!fYlt;f[fJJ: Ff;B, 27; 2009 AI 60CC H€4R/AJ6, ." I r2 ,1)1112.1 f1 p~ t1 F= ~ ~ 1) o €]) mA'~1 '6) a()~ 7 I ,.j" r"."O~(...~r 14 ')(:)..4 COVC\.~\U 0 III1(Ji.J . f.UZ 'IAV;\~T f~~,t.JA~f\'\kS'7' f'J..PJ f'l .. 'J.- ~- <~ ~ -}, -- I '7 11 LJ I ~ "'I~'TOS~'I' y..~.'( '( f., ?!,t \:..' .,;,j) .{j p: U~ \" "r~ iJ:; (\ Iii< ~ f.-P :;'\I.I~,) ~ ~;11t <:'b " Il~ \' c rj ~ 'V "'t-f {' ~ : ~~ V f,J4} ~ ,<:' gJ.. C f (.; ?X l h) (" 3"7 I l~1)A'1 <:"TRE.rq:". ::-v.J i-/A ::.i<. \\"\UH (:.\i.:..fA :,~tt3';~;Z:1~ ,', /:F~~~~~':'J.~-~C(: .. . -:II l c; /0 If,fi.I.\.?- , -it J -r-:....cn~,..{ i .r-; J kc,9,,{ (" ..1,,1' \.~ ~,.., 17' ,'~ '1 ", ~ - J.f (J ~ - (:;yO I )~ r-' r ,c'.p I' ,;: /l" l"." '.J ~ ," c. r...:.', ""1'" ,- \J l\l ~:p ~~_'l'_IV \V\:'I.. ~ j.. ,;;;' V <;: '~(' He \l I.' '-" \".N: /0 j.. {.j! ~.~(A SH'... ~ V( ~ /VI ~ /1 .1 0'...., 1 .. , ("/ "oJ.) (f- \, j II' I i"f> ':-' r' N) h ",l;<o." :lJ)<' ,)~" 101 ( o. L1\) \' I' ?- \( ;~'J ~') t;P>~)'~f.T f)F~...~ O\'J\, J-C l!J~;~~ 11,:1[5<>\ I ,j';'" - \. tJ; @;J J O'd.. I.J IlJ(f\ D~ \ V ( -:Cr' " r<.. I O(]C( -';"')c;' ~(J'~ 7 ~r<t....... ,IJ.... \ I <;) ~_J rfJ) . ~") , ,-. f11'~'1 tJ) d-\J~I J (L-J {'/1:'l; t E (\,x J rl() ;.p:'JJ F,) (:.... A .r; J..j ,I;'" P l~' t '"Je V f.. I .r. ,'J'- c,~ . -- ", . /) Q J(E'(D :; \(,1.(.:(;('1.'-. ~, -=:::-- ------ u'"" r ~ ---i >-. ~ <! .,:. ~ ('-... ~ \,"1 N ~~'~ f -.....' '--....., \}:./ y..,'~. ~ I ,"_ r .~., -~ \~ ....... ~. '-... ~i ~~ i ~.i '" \~, ..:...... .. .t~"": . ~ ._~- '. --.....:, .-...--'" rl ! I:;;' 1:5 /9 1(", b i pI i~ , ~ i k'" !- ~ --fZ) )t' k'J iJ:-, i. i i- ,- h .f....:~;'--'- .,., .........,., ':<ti._-' ~_~_..;o.~.~7-::~"'.~~~, : ~ ;"~;:: ....~ "'.p. '~; i~:~;i. .. ,i:.' ,~!! f-ll\, ': '"c.. -'" ~ ,~ -,. '~..~~..;C'!O ......... -1. ~ --- - --.. <- ~ --\ \ t~' ~. ~ '" t\t ~ -- 0- cr) -\ 7> ..? C. "'. '0 ,1 11 <:. ~ (..'-1 ;-~ L"? 91 \i-:- ,-t"', I ( .. .co J:> I ~: \... r j< 'i:~' ~..- '4-. ~~~ "i~ ~.. (~ -+.:<. '-... ~ "'. '\....... 1~' ~ , pt' ~~ ~. , ':. ~,,", .fJ f+-;:-: .1' ,.t. ~J;. -"f " ,,,,,'t 61 l././ {l 1--- ,1.. r ! ,"l* _' l ,~ ~.- .:/" " ,. ('.-1 't.." .., ~~. t. ~ ' o ~ -\ ]> <- I' (-:; -~ ';:0 E-, ,~ on ~-"" /J )1 " /f'J J; {c j.':> L""? ~ ~ I';;:' ~ \ \, ..........- '(;:) \ \ ~ .., "~,/ ~~:'~ ), (}) c. ~ R~'\ <~ / ..,#:/0 ""If.} 'Pf\~C;'~~ / ) 1.JQ~('\~ ~ 11 iI. iJ..D j !'<0- I' \?ACI(b{\ll~~ ;~~" A'.~~'.;<' ....., '. ~ ( '" \;;.....~, . \.~~ }~,.. . ..~~;~$~, <~r7fi; ;x~..-'~ ~l'< -, . X~1:!~f~,. .J ~.:...ii.,: I ", ~~- i~l' ,: ... ):~' \/A,.~. I. . ~f 'J; r, 'f" 'f -:''1'' Lc ~ 'II- '; 'f;" ~<! ..-~ f ~:' ). J .~ .~ ~ jl.l) tJ1 ..511 ~ i)(:.t.j , 4- 'K'-t 'U?1~ r ~ ..tT ~~~)"R\f~ J.niH S{(3I!Oi f7(~. I 't J v? ~v '~..)? /V,W,(~xR.\l/tR.IJI .),tj'1 '\, --.---" . "") I t4 r t.,iJ Q..:;, -c"""tr ~'bO-+11 (I r:- .j oi #/'0 ~lfl 14; f . .J f'Cci6i7R(7(-Jl\ K (.,....(.),e ~C~f. ......(..eOl:\r. , I '. "-r< y ~ .. ;;;;-(,1,") ~ E jJ.J.J 11m IG rt) r::" 1'0 /Uf~ 11 F.reo.n1 FfJ.J,Li Jv~ i~}l'c, c.-~Cl{ l i.JCjtJ( t1.}o7 i)YJ0f)\>-) ~ TE' ON 0 1\, K B 0?, N v.J t " l::;fJ:JC6iPG--Ay( t:.u.N "'(I.<.M (00' FRo~AC*- " Ou 01\1-<' 'i3.Jly i'Jivt, b(/J/t>7 r- (~ (~~ 0 UtOV'f\ f S<),J f .R~j~ f0) ~ -7<"l,J G 13 (1/ tD I- N (j-!; 0 J.j /U \ R-11I ~ i~';: 0 ~ fS<'f(((17 h WiRt {/x. (, II f(;bCi.\\G> '. (/(J/01 "- ---_.-.....--------~-- t>REJ'JU.P,S 1r<..(fiJ~J) 80.1~\J I CS/<:'!L(A..JO J.(U~t -C_IJTiSl..F i( ~r". ~iD" P-J..:,C{ ~} ;""'iJ'!:'~T/( u)2. ... \" ,~ < IV!3! ,0'1TZCTr/l( _. t:-, AI iJ.JO(( LP B(o 'l. ED. I () rt:.1'-')( ( F< P.. ST A 53 1)..; 7./J r' ~ (,', " , ;;/;3/D7 ." jP '''''' . i..' ",- " ~~ ~ 1 (.j 0 l...r\ ~ '---. 0- --- b C"" -..j w ~ 0 ....... t~ ~~A J- ' ' ;:.,. =- v lXj ~ ~ -<:.... -- <: -\ 2:;. E ~ (1', 7> "';h .....3 ~ :.~ -\ .." L ..,...., <;-. """"' ~ E r' :s: co c c . -- ~ .-t> r;-, 'f,-"J q-. 7: .~ rJ"'-- \. --- - 0 0 ~ "- C:> ::-: \ c-" G ~ t7 q) --...... '-'j rf' ...... "'H X", -:'>-- :J0 r <:- ):::. c. ~ -r; ,~ ...... (::) () ~.." <:::(l (j a "- -z; ~ ~. "0- (..., ....... ::\ S.: ~":\ 1:-~ ?-- 14 ~ ~ -(-. (1"\ r-It \ <,.... 0 ~ ;::::.- ---,--/ G ]:'. ;:\ ):) ~ ,?, ECj\ '. C" (-" G.' C ::;;> ;::.. C" c.., ~ r> ..... C '1~ r;f 3! -'""' .-:- - . c.: l., i? t_, " X:l S.. ' "'" i\\ ,;"'" .:; ~. @ (; ;T' /' z. J;:, (\ l~ t" t: v .---n C -r ..(/ 'C' j) 7- 6J (j 0 ;B 1Q c - ,';-', c r2 ~ N '"".Sf' '7' ~ -- --:::.... <::;J <> .~ ...J <6 I 5:., ~ '0 ;;0 "t. tl') 6 ::0. 3 1I 7..,' C:l 1R-1) ~\ :;o~ ~ z. 'z. -' 9) + 4~ y ~ X;) c. ~ G; to ~ C _-1 :r; :.C> .~ ~ G "l f') -, .N t;;;J P c t- D 7> 1\ ~ '0 -....-J ): - '() p 'C <;P ~ / \.-;'~> ....or: - , . "::~ R~~~..r -"li- :;;;. .- - CA --- w "}.... ... -. '"'"'""- it ~- -t-,l ~ ~ A! ~ '7-; r1 () A'. ~ I> ~ ~ ~~ ':\ ~ o~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~~ t>' 6 5 7' ~ c. }- .' ~ r <, m'~ ~) ~-/' 6) /,hr{TH E.\l~ Q ~ G R; \Y~' - g f<}-', NN U'\l 0- 0 ~ 7" / s-rRrrt IJ \JT 'f'~i;-.JCG f'/.J,AI" <.:Ru.l.({f ).i-rr,J....f Gi.!OJ.'( <: .RH~ A~.:v) 'fl~0J R.uN,(' At..u~tY- .5 ". \<.".--~ .., 1 ... ~ -.(". ~ .AJ "2:> K o i3,... ......, ) ;.\ ~ "- .~Z '\ 1:. ~ o t>"", dI ~ c:o , J C\~ ~'.~ F-, ~ (; c _ -0 q.. 1:> ~ s:. 0 }'t> '0 ~ 4'\ J:<::}:' ;\ ~ ~ ~ A~ ~ 'V j;} :1 ';o;::R? -J ~ r ~- (0) (? "7 b ~'- ~ ~ G ~ -( ,.,., -.,. c:n ~ ~%,~C: c:t?t: ~ ~ - B ;p (f\ ~ z::> .s- z:>"""'O CJ ~ c--.. :;'=> t c?f l. ~ 0- ~~...... "- = <:l\ -, ~ ~ ,.... -:::--.. ^<1 ~. ~~ L l;)-111l/9~? ()J p-;{{ {'''0 ;J,.>(Y A <:RnJ'.l jJ i ),./3/1... DR; LJ G -r::-I);~l.r (-rJ :f..(lf.)~ ~Q..D U:!(t lJ(D A \,,0 ()i" -~~,j\J'( '1'5l0 1)1: FA~'<l}.VW ~ c,~)i .,t/fJ .A,or.16\\i.( {I tlf?,..(lS, ~. ~ C ~.---.... ~ .. <w (::J S< ~~ -. ''9 ..J-~ r;; >1.~::s ~"?s -. 't:7 4i ~ ';;00 I e' ~ c . =\" e ~' c ;t 2'~~ ~ C'1 'f" - ';t:> t;~~.!1 ~ "\;.... , (,0 "to. 0 r: ~ "'fl (;; (f'.. ~.~~~ , 2'- <c:. ..., 7\ -':!J :.:>:..t~ ...... ""'p i; ES- ~ ~~ ~\...... :tV(.~ ~ ;,;) ~ ~ ~~ 7:.. J1? " ; 1.; ~ .~ .~.~ ~ l'. " -0 -,... ~ ~ ~ ,,' 1 )-;; ~"'" ~- c , G(", ~ ~. ~ ; -\4 ~ I ~ C C' <c ~ .-r- ;;: .:> - e- 5' ~ ." 7- eI ~ () A1 ~ f! 0 '1: ,+, ~ 0 c. ~) & tr'> 70 III (\(7 - j,rrrJ { ~.nd.{ c~ ff K f' (OI\{ I'1l-lCN flr(,({(~ D~lZirv6 --r,~( bl6-t-tT \ L. ~ ...... ~ (; ~ c; 'C .co ~ 2 r'I >Q ,-. ..::--" ""'" ~ ::\ -...i 'V c:: e:- ll> ~ '-.........~ ".,., -z:-~ , (~ C\ ~ c:-. g ~ ~ L 0 r- ~ ". 0 }O t:.- t -- G 'Z ..,..." t;n a-- ~ "t> ll- t:. G. - ("I ~ a ~ t7 Q) -p. ~ -.. SQ l 0 E ~ ..(\ "2 (;-~ l? -:I: E::> t::J '(:7 l; i~ :J: ~ ,;. 0 ~ ~ c::::> '0 /0 ~ ~ PD ~ ^ fj' Oll.:T J (; 1'/ ~-r- HiJ.,i(R, \.\R., € ~ "., 0 ) /l1 ( F~f..)..A':JO.( I.hll) ~\\\0S~~.:>S /..HiA.I(.{ " ~ '" m~ ~ r; ...... __ c ~~ ___ ~~'E~ 8~~ ~ . G' ~ :-~ 'Co /'1"', :tt1 > '}-' 2:. ~~ ~ \ ~ 0- ~ - r> ~ :? ;;-- ~ t:. R,~ ~~ (....,. -. o' -i ~ '1- ~ '7'. 1> c;: (;;:J z:::- Z) () K A; ':p ".., h_./\ c /0 ........ 7> .I) ;:;\ ?O 3> ~ "7 -' ~ 'ih S ~ o "" -t--: \~ ~ ':i::::' ~. ~ ....~Ol c) f-. :;\ i'~ (.J !h L\ ff\ c Y' b c- :u 1" t:) ; p ~ j;!:: 'J- ~. \'\ -....r >) G (' A'"\ r-.. .... ..... C; -r1 ~ :2:: ~ .J ~ ~. C s;.' c;1 -r:-- c Q 'P v ... 0 -n 1-, "- 1> "1'\ ~ Z. r. ";,:) 'C "t- .t }--- Co lr;) -n ^ .- L, p ..... "j) -Z q (J e;;. ~ Q 7\ r::t:! .,.... ... ')- ;'"~~ .p (') '&::> ?::> !!; :;v/O c. tJ -r-. C" ~..... 7'> _. Z-. i' r Q 'C) ~ ", @ fI 8 1'!;"'-:r;::-.. j i/ ""1"... l/I! 17 -' J'f(j((?A).. 1-1. ~v.R...f A ~T(?, fr1 ,.A ~I !11lAjJ\ FJ IJo.g fTR~.p 11 .s."\i). j.. 0 ~)~?!.1").1) w i f':>& .r'n<.{ tl (t1 T3L D ~ )).1<.10 1\.;"1\)(, J ~ FR 0:/11 R \ G "T '\ I/-J( llA..d '/~({[ A~€ (<.1 I/( ~J..{;-1'~L'7 WF\-r[f., 0~'1~...\lU t.J.D~~ "\ ~. -- -- <1; ~. y I ~ ~ ~ s ~ - S 7:- '" .t",;1~.";: . ~ .. 'r' '.'~:. (h. 'J~..\ OJ. 1 '... 'II.:" . ~ ';$ ,~+> "; ~~~-~lN \ ~ > }~~\~~,1 :,}~>:J\). ^'......~l. ; i \ , j l . 1 ~ ~ r -~ ;;' I V ';: ~.... ,a~~J'!~))~~~Jf\:(;ii ~ .~ ,< '...'. "I ",. ".' 1?-':f' ;~!/.\<. :;~'ii::;' '::'>~'~r~X3~\ ,{~;. ~.(~, ',( "~";"".: ,.Q<:,w,- ~\< .' 'f:~~~t~\!?'.'; '" 1,.-, ~_~..J)','t. ,t., ,-, _ }'1.' . 1. ;~,_,,: .1"'t~}!:':'~~ 'J"'f:-~' ~. \ , " r.',,-,t'~i~~t\t !\:',......:.: ; ( .~ J.~~;7 4:'~~...:. .. ,3:1;'" ~: ~ ..; ,1; 'i~.'. ~"j~.".l:../;y.':;'(~: '.: .' If,' ~.< .fl' .!.~ . .'V ,1.:"';"1" ...-.:;....-:.:p~.. " . ",:'~' ~I:r:r~{!:~~rt" Jl~., ~;.' . .~.~- 4"-1,m"J 'j1 ')_ , ~~~~;f~}'!"I~.1t.; 1::.. . l,r.!. . >~ ;.ft~~~~f ;.. ..~~~~,~: " .,~ ?--: li(..-':.. .,-;r"'~?7 . ~~:Y;:~Jr'14i,t.'~:!t' ./", ~~ ' II , ~ ~ .\,tl' .1\: .'c ~ . !.' "':','~'~R' ~~"f'~ ~ ~1 -..... ?-~ \: -:::::-. ^ ? s:- ~ --- ,~ ,...... --<;., '1) ':%:. (...; f> E \ .(:.. 2' E ~ "7 V t:::, .. ........ C 1a 4-. ...... '. t?' . n 2:: ,;;:,.. <::. <;;: ::- '- b ....... ---.s:' -"1 \ I ~ ~ '\ <:: E -, ",", ::>> r- 'b ,.... r-- ~ 't\ ~ :F) ~ 'I ;J 0 1\ ..;-0 --; '--.. 4: :;j 1-- ; ci-f ! ~ll "] - ..)) Q ~f\i v'1 ~Ilu-l~ Lls-rfR wa52JT ~~~~'S;-S= 4~ ~ <:;0 <) ~ '7'. ""- ~ ~ -... o ------- ~'" l;J I ~. .~ b :c c: ..:.,-.t::;. 'D J::. --..... '::>- - C.: q L--.~ ,.T\ 0- c. .fl. 6 ~;a c;;;;;-K: 9~ 1::::> .A'S I.I'\~ -:J:Z "1"')~ b I -. ~ - -... 0- --.......... ~ ~ l 1::- ~. -, <7', ~ .r~ l? ~~. 4\ c c- ~ C' '--. C\ '"'"l () c; c: :'it) f:} ~ -('0 .-.-, "7'\. 'D ~'::- ~ ( -. ..... c: C C. G: '0 '<' ."'? C,? I.- ~-. q-. ...- ,'l"J 0 1d..ll~/r3 - )f.rtf.. )~ bp-, - Ci(~!\li.A~ Jj"(6-\ )-.\S , ~ (' ~~. ~~ ~""".' g., ~~i r-:-- (-~ ~,f'":, ~~ ('~~ s \?RS- ~ r:~-S ~,~+, ~ ~- r.:i ~- ~ r'"-. --l ~. ~ t ' ~.D 1-,/t?t .......-...- l ~. ~~. ~. "; \ Q"! \::.. l Z --10 t{:<7 :::~{i f\LfbtL-:j<J--' (ck 1'v/{--+4..II/!.A.1.t:L~ (JZI hr. I&:/L/J ''2[ t/() ,~Yc<C7 .fl} d{{/(fl'C /. f/'....,. .J f. .<1 'J" } ;Ht, ,~"'/1 /1,1 /h.",l..t i"J.;. f>, . ,:~ n ., . i - _'~ ," -.-' l' I /-~. I '. J ~~t::- ~~;::\ .... ~ ~ ~ 7'\' 0-, 2'l1g () VI ~ \'\, ~ :t: () \,') ..... ~ ~I ~ b\ 'I;r ~ t't\ ~ )\. t3' : ~ , ~ 0:-..: ~~~ 'J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Q ~\' ?'b,.<::' l/l~ t :"'1 ~~ -} ~ \} {~[-tt1 , ... TOM 6kY1 Hl~1l5' If' UlLVtiET jl-l(/Il.j.)11J6 4f-""-1e/" (vllL)(II~'lt-IJJl ~l()D l}Uf(/X116. ~/(LH7 c(JVl;Jie)!::j-~1 P/u.../:f) CaC.1A;K:T ). (\, ~ C> }:Q <:> ~ :x: ~ ~ u ~ .... l' I" 2- tf'"> !\ 't3.1 ~ "}- )-- A:> i::s >> "i -.f .... -C 0 ....Q Jr ~ X J-- 'Z: ~ \~ r:::- q-. UJ "Z :;.. 0 E 10 to ~ ~~ v '" C\ ~ r ;z:... ~ '? ~ 1 3 ,...... c. ~ ""'l ;r n--.. C(' ~.~. 7J. ~ (7 =-t 0--, )":> "" 5 :j ~ 2:'j J=::> (l'\ 'f'\ "c,' 7\. 1---.... ~~ ::\ +. c;. "2 /1'> <C. ?'o <:::J:;, s;: c:r ~~\ <:: ? r;'" 1(/ / 9? . R ( il'. P i "J "F or it;\D "'''' N 6. p" b -"I( ,\ l;r (. p,{ ':;..E V(9.~ I- <j,.~ .q I ~ ,', /"I l' {J. "'0"""n~ rn (J. 'A, I t1,\ f! 11\ ~ J \,\ (; 0 \ t, ~77 ~fj ~ ~\ ~fu ~ \j ~,~ f5:' ~- ~.\::. ,'or. g- ~. rJ~ &- ~~ ~ ~ ~ f;:" C>~' t 7~ . ~ -- ~~ . ~ .~ .- r' ~ ~ ,",~'0l c::{:;_ r, , ~-f F: C c" ;:{; 1 ~c- '; ~ \jJ ~~ :.S ~~ : ?,:. ~~ I' r... $. ~. ~ I .. 12-/{) "(13 ,'I r; j .ir 'l'I...-{ ...~..J>--L-....... ..... 4'"0 .. 'VJ... f 1 "'; -. . J') "n /'., ^ .. l. ,c. S "/ UJ UI[Y-Ul..u] f,[,r-{.ufA.'... fY;:{) CU-({~t'/\:t., hC'k:'V~}; a}-tJ:.L.' ,1rla:!-i. it Lia./f;C J/r:f..~fZc( tU:t.g11':{; l) (,,1 ) ,t-.; ) ..;' ~ .) .~ )-... '.,' "::t:: ,=> r:: <:.- , ~ ~ " J>' " ,. j - ~ S :2> ~ ~ b S :s; L .:s .. -., t.! c.- ....... c c; 0 L: ~ (A" ~ ~ ';'1 ;1' , tJ l ~ ~; r '4./1 , ........ ~ ""'--.. ""- ~ ..j) c." ~ 0. o :::-. Z- <(' ~ .;, ~ A'-, "0 3- ~ ~ ..... E f'" ~ t; /J.//6r?i'-cl.I'rl/~' G\lhY( Cj?G'( vfjiJuJ u.l'.~S fCU(f!.A). f/6l/P..J A,Y1\~- ~ "'--t _ L /.,' IrT ....... <A --...... -- V\ 0 It\~ ~ 4i ""'. I ~ . ~ !:- .,..... t. ~ ~ C> (: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ .~ i1 ~ s~ ~ ~ ;;:1 ? ~ ~ -,:. :io ;!! (:) z. ~ 0 fI') :z:: ~ ...., .q-- ~ , 7 .~ :"''-..1 '- "":''\ 7--_ - l:;:I t. p :> C'~, ., ")' ""') .!\:) IS ...-;; - - '-' fs / ~"'I ~ q', (; r [\.4 .p ..< '.~ '- ....... -.......:. -, "-- ')-.. --\:. ,-; ,~ 'J :^'.. '7 ~ ~. :.:\ <;<- 0 ":r, 0 'L '1 ~ '- .J y ~ f'"'{ ~'D " . , .~ :;p ~::; .. ",') ^ ~ 1.......__ 'J $: :7..- ~-zJ p '. \~ o t.,-' 1. ." " . , i \ ,~ ;;;;;; -~ ..-'. " . t (1'$' ].-. / I K\ I ~ i-1J\I''?-.I.5'" ij'Cd-vw ,('. (lv.L) Ci"' e>\J 6p.k( \dO; C '-i /-J}{ r;r:) N t'(; I...J ('$-, j ... -. --...... ""- --....... 1~ =3 ~ ~ Z-- _. CC t:;:? ~ ~ ."'1"\ f: '11 z ~ (: ~ --1 0" ~ f r,-. :;0 '" '-...;. -:::--- -- -r.. ~ D ~ "z: ~ ..lot7 ..,...., "2> 3 ;[} v' ~ ~ -. ;;;0 ~ ~ ;----: . ~ '. . I -. -1':._ -. -J!.t" _~.' .:. ~~ '~-"::-'--J~:::--. . . -\ - "', \"~~"-:; : "', r '.~: \ .;. -<. ~'.~ - 12JI()(q:~ D f.t~~R.f.Af1\ F'r<..V M wC;R~, Cj) c ~ ~ ';?:) c ~ ~ ~~~ ~ t b t:> ~ 7 ~ yt) "'"' 1::> :: Vo_ ~ ..... <: h. ....... 1J G S' ~ /i\ t i it.;' .r:" Jf ....... f, ..., w ..,.. . i4l i2i\ \"p t "- \ >;. ............ ~ ~- '" -:cr ~ .0- ("...I." --......... ~ ,~, ~. t U-J .x \ ~ ~ ?: ........... "t-. <:::; -'= +-. 'T', ~ ~ ~ ?i) il ..(..-J '> q...::a f <' t; ~ . ....- E:::> ::c. (l 0:>- f;:. ~ J::' "::? f<::J ,'0 --\ ~ '-.. ";b '7'1 "C ~ ~ ~ -' ~ .,. ~~ <;\ .", '2; c: p -1 .-. ,""'>> ~ .;;:. {-' .;;:> ~ '.4:: 0. S c' ;::l:. s:= ........ S- o r:J. ~ c ~ ~ j 1/ ),...1 r.<' '.:? I K~.j N-tI" .r: n (_ I ... ,J;~'.Jv I _ ,r.(~ ---.... ., ". "'"",. ,?". j,..". (''\)Q (\(,,/,(<' l//J/! fl. (} ~ J.J I'Ll.. (_!~T/ EK ~T'(j lJO GG r-r<iJ/1/l CC17ZElJ:S. PlZo-r€.CT[A1~ CfZl-rIC'AL A-f<:r::.A. S HEAR1~'JGRECORD ? PA{2;(fAL O'c!)ClJlVltN"1Irff ON V~ l2:r:F(JI'CT5 i3l(~ Cf-rfLYJs PR071[c;JIAJcl Ct<JllC4L AR_fCk3 fO UAV E-. CI2.IIfC:A-L.A.(<..JtA5 VlOLAiLOAJ.S C()IR..R-€,-CI rD ,~ ~ , ,~ ',,' " j :*1 .t .~ '* t ~' t ;'c1 ~-I II '~ I ~ ~,I ~(I -~ ;,:1;1 f ~ " :1' I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ,lJ 10: t30CC FI<Otv(' CPcA (CrTlt~S P!<.(}/fL17tJ6 Cl<tTIC4LN.U\SJ SU8flll TrfD: f7"@3. 2-1} W{)8 AI BoCCH.~RJAJ Ei.. ( f)!\J fj f:Al VGLO P e, OF 5') ! II , 1 1 i (_[ZT/ EK- ~7'O l~O GG f-!<'.{J/1/l eff! Z~/\J 3 Pl(o-rEC){/J~ C fZ lif cAL_AtZ f::A-- S H- RING RECORD PA#d7AL O~cJCU1(,fV,J1J1-r(ON (9~ 6r:F(I~T5 f3l{ -\ji C f:-rIl.fd\J $ PRO T1!..CII/tJ 6. Cf()TI C4 C AR..€A;S -{ 0 filA v. f- C/2..1 TlCA.L AR.i&.Ae5 V l 0 LA -rIa I\.J.S CoreR.. €- CI r 0 10: i3eCG R<O N{: CPc.A.: eel Tf [vJ5 Pi<.. o/lL-n!Jd Cfi.rTJCA.L N.,fAsJ SU8flll TrfP :b<EB. 2."lJ W()8 AT BoCC HlfAKUAJ Et ((JfJ~ fi!AHJG1{)Pe, Or ~) .. HEARING RE(\(\Dn To: Jefferson County Board of County CommIssIoners, "tMJMJ Re: Critical Area Ordinance Rewrite Please enter the enclosed manila envelopes and contents into the file for consideration by the Board of County Commissioners of the Critical Areas Ordinances. We represent "Citizens Protecting Critical Areas". (CPCA) The envelopes contain five complaints that we have filed with the Department of Community Development and relevant information. They concern a stream and fish run that we have worked on with State permits and initial State funding since 1991. The complaints all represent Critical Area violations that the Department of Community Development refuses to enforce or has not enforced. Some of the earlier letters that we have written refer to a 50 foot Fish and Wildlife Habitat Area Buffer zone. We learned subsequently that the 100 foot buffer rule was in force at the time. The only enforcement was a minimal and insufficient fix for one part of Com07-00064. The fish run isUrisk. We have written many letters and have testified before the Board of County Commissioners, and the Planning Commission and have had a conference at the Department of Community Development. We hope to have strong enforcement provisions written into the new Critical Area Ordinance rewrite and to have our previous complaints properly addressed. Sincerely, Susan Hopkins . ~~/J1,V Scott Clogston ~ '.{r:VJ\ *itizens Protecti g Critical Areas P.O.Box 1077 Port Hadlock, Wa. 98339 (360) 385-3365 cc: Gerald Steel . RECORD :J~ i7JZfXlB l~: .~.P~1 ~~2~MiflJ. G.*flt1tfX;D _. . _ '-UJ.(j1/JItu~- ~..a~~ .-'({2LVLW'-''1f-'SQ'J - 071 'Yl1.p..~!fA~ajMLdA!1L~~~#~LfM/~?@ ,~~~~~::;:::........ .......= 0;11-u./ryw~_qqBLfQo09 ItJ!t4mn9Jl~'fQQg{J--Q]L-:-YuL-~- __m____ ___...__.~m-~ .~~~Qrmfl~&1J~')>>~ _______n_m_ _~~ ____m~__ _. .. ..~.._____;}jLfL__~~vC/~~/11-,!-~iH!L-"Q~L01- _QQ{~O_ ..d_!.kO-.C(_~/nk~.~... IQ XZQ~~~~j?Aj!J:tR.L OIL .. . __)P/ll1fLLt]2U/l1JL.~ qq _~_'IJ2CZQIL.. _(~~LIk.J/L/l!~.-Lt.rllJ'"u~~- (1) i.l;-u~-~--~ll-iJ1f1Lu~.([!L.~~-~-~ ,~ dfJ!ll/M~' ... riv..~c.~~~ek~t4~-_.- __~ pa/~./JMA/n~YLLqftg!t-QJIQ-Q_l.-... .... ..__________.__.__1______Jtl1..__~(~ ~~~~~# ALX-M~ ..I~,I)JJ/AA,K~~J:t1~~~ i~-!W)&Ldj/rLf~-.-H--- . __U___4?_dU_____~-. I J)~ lJJfM?liw:::t~CJ/JJd~~ . . ~u/.}/_~_ JfLLfji-/.g!k:_____u_ ~io~ ----~-~ ~.~iJJLVVl{f1~l/1~~~..4<<1~-{{)t~. m4~/f1fM.,-~~--~)-iliu/~~Ida1f!U!_J--- .~...11()jJf/mlYA-~(J120Q7~~011... ~~!Mui1r .... .-(>\j!LU){UUUt~yi)u...,~-4u1J-.~.~tfM ... l~~~"1:~-w/lgA~/rrlR,ddL g?L~~k2Jzme,- ... i~---u~~~~k~-@ ~~._-- diA/rv.~~~ h,1fh:~trJj;;/ ~.-<lJL_do.~ _~_~~:aI1l/j~4A1eLfA1JI1~-U~ !a~.~.(wLa~~.... If;~StJ&L. =z,~~ilMu- . ~M~ L-tLf ~ ~ To: Jefferson County Planning Re: Critical Areas Ordinance EARl 12/06/07 RD 50& ( a.- Commission suggested language change We would like to propose a minor addition to the Jefferson County Planning Commission Hearing Draft: Pfoposed New Chapter 18.22 JCC, "Critical Areas". We would like to see added to 18.22.260 (2) of the Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas language that prohibits nighttime lighting. Nighttime lighting is disturbing to wildlife in as much as it reduces "bedding down" areas and inhibits passage of nocturnal animals. Also the natural day/night, active/rest cycle of fish in pools is disturbed. . All river fishermen are aware that a light shone upon a pool at night keeps the fish active during the hours that they normally rest. Section 18.22.330, 6d(i) of the Wetland section requires "directing_ lights away from the wetland and buffer". Surely this is at least equally important in a Fish and Wildlife Critical Habitat Area. Thank you for your consideration, Citizens Protecting Critical Areas SiouL ~ l ~<Yt\~ Susan Hopkins an~Scott Clogston (360) 385-3365 cc: Gerald Steel RECEl"ED DEC 0 7 lOa? JffffRSflN COUNTY DCa {tJ rrvn- l~P .....~~ Ii " J ,~ fC~ R" ....' J ~ ~,i: 1/29/07 To: Jefferson County Commissioners (BOCC) Re: Critical Areas Ordinance 5 !J (, I tI\.; We are writing you in our capacity as representatives of the group "Citizens Protecting Critical Areas". (CPCA) We wisb to express strong opposition to the plan, currently being proposed; to assign the Jefferson County Conservation District a major role in monitoring the "Critical Areas" for 'compliance or violation. It is our opinion that senior staff at the Conservation District currently have an agenda that, they believe, supersedes the need for protection of Critical Areas or the fish and ~ildlife that inhabit them. We do not believe that it is reasonable to expect conscientious monitoring of Critical Areas, or reporting or enforcement of violations of the Critical Areas Ordinances, by the Jefferson County Conservation District. We have a compelling and disturbing recent example before us. Protection of the Critical Areas consistent with the relevant ordinances is what we seek. We have taken no pleasure in drafting this letter. Sincerely, Citizens Protecting Critical Areas ~~ Susan Hopkins j %6JC~ 0cott Clogston cc: Jefferson County Planning Commission Gerald Steel RECEIVED I'\t-r 0 tii: l" 3 2007 ; J.qJuN L'OllNTY Den . ," PORT GAMBLE S'KLALLAM TRIBE 31912 Little Boston Road NE · Kingston, WA 98346 ., r . September 6, 2007 HEARING RECORD AI Scalf, Director Department of Community Development Board of County Commissioners and Planning Commission Members Jefferson County P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, W A 98368 Re: Little Goose Creek, Oak Bay and Critical Areas Ordinance Issues Dear AI, Commissioners and PC Members: I was very disturbed to find out about an existing problem in the Oak Bay area that appears to be an example of what happens if the counties critical area ordinance has no ''teeth''. Without any significant and standardized enforcement or follow through for potential violations of the existing or future revised ordinance, it becomes questionable as to what real value or benefit, resides within the Jefferson County CAD. On July 29th, 2007, I received a letter (see attached) from Everette and Ruth Sprague, Jack Clogston and Susan Hopkins all of Port Hadlock, WA. These folks live, on or adjacent to the Little Goose Creek drainage in the Oak Bay area. In their joint letter, they describe the history of working together with Chimacum High School (Ray Lowrie and students) on fish biology and habitat restoration in Little Goose Creek back in 1991. They installed five weir/pools to help the coho salmon and cutthroat get up the stream and gain access to much improved spawning, incubation and rearing habitat. Two of these weir/pools are on the property of Everette and Ruth Sprague (Ruth is a Snohomish Tribe member). The weirs were rebuilt in 1993 and documented successful fry and smolt production resulted from these habitat restoration efforts ever since. As you can see in the letter, some property was purchased and a CAD variance was granted for land that has a section of the stream going through it including three of these weir/pools and now there is a "shop" turning into a house, septic systems going in and fencing running blatantly across this fish bearing stream in multiple places. We understand that these concerned folks that wrote the attached letter have testified, written numerous letters to you and others and worked very hard to bring these issues to your attention. I went out to meet with these folks in early August of 2007 and they presented me with copies of many documents, photos and information and seemed quite knowledgeable about the overall situation there. Little Goose Creek may be a small system, but it is a fish bearing stream with dwindling stocks of coho salmon and cutthroat trout. These types of systems, because they are classic coho salmon and cutthroat trout habitat, are collectively very important to the overall health of these species in (360) 297-2646 Kingston (360) 478-4583 Bremerton (206) 464-7281 Seattle (360) 297-7097 Fax 1 ; . ! I Hood Canal. If these smaller systems are written off and the issues and potential CAO violations are ignored because of a land owners perceived politic~l influence, the structure of a reasonable violation response process not being in place, or mayb~ just because no one really cares enough about them, then the system is indeed broken. : I I The true test of any regulation or ordinance is what h~pens when th ey are violated, challenged or otherwise ignored. It is essential that these cases suc as the Little Goose Creek and any other reported CAO violations get adequate and standardiz . review, follow up, and if necessary, enforcement actions to encourage, negotiate or force ~mpliance. i We sincerely hope that you will take a much closer loo~ at the situation there in Little Goose Creek and meet with the folks who are concerned about this. A more detailed and proactive review is in order specifically as to whether or not ther~ has been any violations of the Jefferson County CAO along or within Little Goose Creek, inclu~ing the specific variance (issued in 2000) in question. I I We are concerned about the potential impacts of these ~AO violations on both the Little Goose Creek and the coho salmon and cutthroat trout populati~ns there. Of even greater concern, however, is the appearance of a broken process without I the necessary mechanisms to follow up on concerns and potential violations. We feel that this i~sue may be an important indicator case in that it appears clear cut and significant CAO viOlatiOE' s are taking place, being systematically and meticulously presented, yet being basically blown ff or ignored. Th. em ost significant value of these CAO's is their ability to provide deterrence fro potential violations. The power of this critical deterrence factor is when clearly stated criteria e in place and enforced such that property owners are worried enough about the ramifica~ons of violations, (citations, fines, incarceration etc.) that encourages them to follow the inkent of the law. Ifhowever, as it appears is this Little Goose Creek case, the process is inconsiste~t with little or no enforcement, then deterrepce will break down and people will note that notng really will happen regardless of what they do so why worry about silly things like buffe s or CMZ's. Its really important to make sure this Little. Goose Creek issue and the larger associa ed issues of addressing potential CAO violations and enforcing and insuring compliance are pr perly addressed. I I Thank you for taking our requests into consideration. Si~.~c.e effee1y , ? / /~ /%.. I C?bf/r/ 'Y. . Paul McCollum Natural Resources Director cc: Steve Todd, Point No Point Treaty Council I Hans Daubenberger, Port Gamble S'Klallam Tri~e Lauren Rasmussen, Rasmussen Law Service pur Enclosure: July 29th, 2007 Letter from Sprague's, Clogsjn and Hopkins 2 Page r 1 To: Mr. Paul McCollum Director of Natural Resource Department Port GamblejS'Klallam Tribe July 29, 2007' We are contacting you to ask for help in defense of Little Goose Creek a coho and cuthroat bearing stream that runs into Oak Bay south of the Oak Bay Parko We started working on the stream in 1991 with Ray Lowrie's students from his Chimacum High School fish biology and restoration class. The work was primarily the construction of five weirs that progressivety raise the stream to a level where fish could pass through the Oak Bay Highway culvert which had previously been a "fish stopper" due to a 30 plus inch drop to the stream below. ~wo of the weirs are on the property of Everette and Ruth Sprague who have been very supportive of the project from day one. Mrs. Sprague is of the Snohomish Tribe and is very active in the attempts to Federally "List" ,the Snohomish. Nr. Sprague has been tireless in his physical on site assistance at the 'weirs (including installation) and is also very active .in Tribal affairs. We rebuilt the weirs in 1993 with superior materials obtained with state funding and coho spawned in the stream naturally (not planted) during the winter of 1993. We had several hundred fry by 1994 that even- tually matured to smolt and "went .to sea" around I\lother's Day ,1995. This has continued ever since. However in late 1999 the property that the other three weirs and rearing ponds are on was sold to Mr.Joe Thompson. He professed then and still does to be fish friendly but his actions have not demonstrated this and our fish count has dramatically declined. I~~late 2000 he applied for and was granted a Critical Areas Ordinance variance to build a "shop" within the 50 foot buffer that was in effect at that time. He built the building. It includes a 16l x 24' hardwood dance. floor. He is a professional dance instructor and a contractor. He has held dances in this "shopu and his live in girl.friend has held exercise classes. In our opinion, Mr. Thompson has violated both the letter and the intent of the Critical Areas Ordinance. We believe, as well, that he has not met his obligations to the Critical Areas Building permit variance that he was granted. We have asked the county to enforoe the above ordinance and variance Page 2 , prov1s1ons but, as yet, no help has been fprthcoming. Now Mr. Thompson is proposing to inst~ll a septic system in the now 100 foot buffer area of a Fish and Wildlif~ Habitat Area. Meanwhile our fish numbers are dropping because Mr Thomp~on's rearing ponds have somehow filled with gravel and sediments and one wrir does not even have water flowing over it but rather around and under. This situation has persisted for over two years and we fear might soon result in the extinction of the i coho and cuthroat. i He has an "Habitat fl1anagement P1an" t~t does not show the large amount of non-native species - specificallr bamboo placed within the 50 foot buffer or the huge amount of bamboo p~aced within the 100 foot buffer. i It does not show the hundreds of feet of f~ncing that he has subsequently installed. Nor does it show the huge amo~ts of fill brought in at both ends of his property. He has planted many I trees and some shrubs but has - I decimated the understory of small brush. freviOusly it looked like a wild stream area - now it looks like a pubtiC park. Mr. Thompson has recently installed almailbox for 102 Hiller Drive (Lot 10). We believe it is Mr. Thompson'sj intent to convert his "shop" on Lot 10 into a residence with a septic srstem. In as much as a septic easement on Lot 10 was granted for use as f dedicated reserve septic area for Mr. Thompson's waterfront home in 19921 and in as much as that easement I area has been discredited because of its pfoximity to Everette and Ruth Sprague's well less than 100 feet from the I easement, then we qelieve that any remaining possible septic area must bejdedicated for use at ~tt. Thompson's one bedroom waterfront home. (Sfe ~he letter to Al Scalf dated July 15, 2007 , exhibit #5 , "Assessor Detai} Building #1 ) . Mr. Thompson's. t1Habitat Management Plan" of 9/28/2000 ma.k$s no provision for any septic installation or septic area other than that previously dedicated for use servicing his waterfront home. (See. septi~ Easement recorded in Volume 390 Pages 452, 453 of official records). Any feptic in a Fish and Wildlife Habitat Area can only be allowed for competling reasons. Mr. Thompson's I "shed" or "covered storage" - see Habitat Management Plan - does not meet this standard. Any possible exceptions tolthe Unified Development Code prohibition of septic systems in a Fish An~ Wildlife Hah1tat Area 18.15.205 I (3B) must be replacement for the discreditfd (by location) 1992 Easement for the beach house at 101 Hiller Drive. I I Mr. Thompson has recently brought in rn huge mound of dirt on Lot 10 Taylor's Terrace, he has had perc holes dUf' he is working with a septic designer and the health department but we fO not know which building this Page 3 septic system will be ser~lclng because Mr. Thompson won't speak with us and the Health Department says they won't tell us until a permit has been applied for. He nas also recently had one of his two wells decommissioned. The well farthest away from his proposed septic area. We believe that Mr. Thompson has violated the 2000 edition of the Critical Areas Ordinance by: not maintaining a 50 foot Fish and Wildlife buffer from the Type 3 Fish stream~ ~uch of the fencing shown on the map that depicts 50 foot buffers is within (well within) 50 feet of the stream. However all of the fencing was built after 2000 - we believe it was all built in 2004 through 2006 and falls within the 100 foot buffer criteria. The south fence on Lot 14 is an hazard to fish, running as it does, across, along and over the section of the stream with the weirs and rearing ponds. It is also a potential hazard to persons and property, ~his issue is addressed in the letters to Al Scalf and the County Commissioners. The fill on the northwest corner of Lot 14 was brought in over an unpermitted culvert and plac~ on a steep hillside and had a 10! x 20' ,building built on it during the period that the 100 foot buffer rule would apply. Virtually ~ of it is within 100 feet of the stream. Please see the map' drawn on July 28, 2007 that shows 100 foot buffers. We believe that the fill on the southeast corner of Lot 10 has all been brought in since September 2006 and is virtually all within 100 feet of the stream. We believe that Mr. Thompson has violated the conditions -of his Critical Areas Building Permit Variance by failing to maintain the weirs and pools on Lot 14, by failing to construct the building according to the submitted plans, by failing to maintain the Fish and Wildlife Habitat Buffer and by grading and constructiong a far larger than necessary driveway and parking area almost all within 50 feet of the stream on his property and on the right of way. 6~~ ~ 'Ptl ~~ Respectively, t:=~ Everette Sprauge 60 Hiller Drive Port Hadlock, Wa. 98339 (360) 385 0860 J. Scott Clogston Susan Hopkins 81 Hiller Drivel P.O.Box 1075 Port Hadlock, Wa. 98339 (360) 385-3365 {VI fin J.Jtf--"'HUlI'Il ; , ~x.'f -- , (t€AJU:- Po>r-----,-----j '::l:: .J. , I -...-t-- .j ( .l_ Page Dear Mr. Al Scalf Department of Community Development July 15, 2007 HEARING RECORD When we spoke at the Critical Area Ordinance meeting of the County Planning Commission on Wednesday, July 11, 2007 you(expressed strongly to Sue and I that you did not feel that a fence should cross a stream. Again, on Friday, July 13 you expressed the same opinion to us at the door to the building of the Department of Community Development. In as much as you have previously agreed with us that Joe Thompson's building permit variance only allows the standard Critical Area buffer and fish and wildlife habitat buffer surounding a . Type III salmon/cuthroat stream to be reduced to 38 feet at the building itself and_that the 50 foot typical buffer must apply on the rest of his property, I believe that we are of one mind as to the actions that must be taken to bring the over- fenced reality into compliance with the building permit and relevant codes and laws and ordinances. However, just to be sure that we are on the same page we have enclosed a map that shows in red the sections of fence that do not comply with the building permit that your department issued, Al Latham wrote the conditions of approval for, and Joe Thompson agreed to and signed. (Map and permit copies enclosed).r When last I spoke with Al Latham he expressed the opinion to me that, "A fellow ought to be allowed to fence his property." Well - no. Not if he has signed a contract wherein he willingly gives up this right in exchange for rights and priv~legesnot available to the general public. Not when the stormwater flows of the typical 4 - 6 year storm event (you have seen the photos) will begin to lever the solid wooden fence on the south side of Lot #14. Not when such a fence is supposed to be able to withstand a 100 year storm. Not when the fence is beginning to fail after only two years with no storm event. Not when this movement will allow water to infiltrate the large concrete and 4ft x 4" filled post holes, and soften and collapse the long established steep banks allowing continued erosion. Not when this erosion will break down the south bank and allow long term infiltration of mud while widening the narrow stream to the poimt where, for most of the year, the water will run under the mud gravel mix or spread thinly across it as it currently does in Mr. Thompson's three "ponds". Not when a collapsed fence will begin an erosion process that will certainly result in the extinction of the coho and cuthroat in i , Page 2 i i I , Little Goose Creek. Not when a collapsed ~ence will create an hazard to persons and property when it plugs the cul~ert at Hiller Drive. Not when it can all be avoided if Mr. Thompson is r~quired to abide by the Critical Area conditions that he agreed to and bene~itted by and attached: his signature to. i The red marked fences were all built ~ubsequent to the signing of the permit and subsequent to the construct~on of the building. Joe Thompson is a. contractor. ~e knows what a Iwritten contract is. Were you, in your capacity as Critica4 Areas Administrator, consulted about the alterations to the "fish and wildllife habitat area" as required I by section seven of the Critical Area Revie~ that Joe signed or by the "Fish and Wildlife Custom Condition" in thel permit case summary CAROO- i 00388 (encloseq)? I I hope you agree with Ruth and Everettle SPz:ague to the sout~ and every member of the Goodreau clan to the no~th, Susan Hopkins and myself that however many trees Joe may plant, a fijSh and wildlife habitat buffer zone cannot be maintained if the wildlife a~e fenced out. If only the i rton-c~mpliant fences constructed within thel Critical Area S.fter the completion of the building were removed there would be ample access to the s1?ream for wildlife. I assure you thatl neither Spragues or Goodreaus will be building any wildlife excluding fenbes. i - I wouLd like to address a se~rate sublject that also involves Joe's Taylor Terrace Lot #10 - parcel 998400007 afd focuses on Health Depar~ment 9.nd the Shoreline Master Plan. You are awafe that in 1992 as mitigation for an impro.perlY issue.dbuilding permit th t alloued Pat Thompson (Joe's sister) to expand the footprint of her beac house, a septic easement was placed upon Lot #10 Taylor's Terrace for th~ exclusive use of Lot #9 Hiller's Waterfront Tracts. 354145 Volume I 390 Pages 452 & 453. Joe is currently attempting to have a diffe~' ent septic system d~signed for installation on the lower portion of th's lot. Most of the Tayler's Terrace lot is wi hin a 100 foot arc swung from i Spragumactive well on Lot #13 (see exhibitl 1). When Linda Atkins appraised the site in 1992 she was probably not aware I of that well and Pat clearly did not tell her. This reserve area has ~pparertly and rightfully been dis- allowed. This leaves very little room on t~e lot for the new reserve system for the one bedroom waterfront home. I If the area is d~dic~ted to a septic system for Joe's "shop" then any rrserve area for the waterfront lot dissapears entirely. So many conditionp exist on the proposed septic site that we are highly ambivalent that any I reserve area should be allowed . i ! 'I. .' Page 3 at all but will concede that, despite the negatives, it is probably a better location for the one bedroom reserve area necessary to serve the beach house at 101 Hiller Drive. However, given the number of reasons that this is a bad location for a septic system, we will object strongly if the intent is to provide septic capabilities fo~ Thompson's "shop" or for his shop and his beach house or for another expansion of his beach house or the conversion of a portion of the beach house into another bedroom. (Exhibit 5 Just as Joe knew he was giving up some "rights" in exchange for others when he signed his shed building Critical Area conditions document, so too did his sister Pat, a real estate broker,and her partner Dan Youra understand that they were giving up something (small) in exchange for something else (an expanded beach house footprint) when they dedicated the easement in 1992. Some of the reasons that only the smallest possible reserve area, if any, should be allowed on the site are as follows: 1. There is a legal dispute between Mr. Sprague and Mr. Thompson regarding the long time established line between Taylor's Terrace Lot #11 and Lot #10. Joe has recently had a survey done there. There is up to a 22 inch disparity and the setbacks will be hard to determine until the lawyers are through. 2. When last I talked to l'ols. Susan Porto (Wednesday, July 11) she was scheduled to assist Mr. Thompson in decommissioning a well the next afternoon. At that time he had not acknowledged the existance of another deeper well approximately 40 feet closer to, or in the proposed septic area than the one they were decomissioning. City water was brought out here in 1989. I asked Pat if she was going to decommision the well. She told me that her brother Joe, a contractor, would take care of it. In late 1991 or early 1992 someone did, apparently, "take care of it". We were gone for 3 or 4 days and when we returned 2 or 3 dump truck loads of dirt had been dumped where the well was. Only Thompson or Youra could probably say exactly where the well is but I believe it to still be there. I helped plumb it to the 101 Hiller Drive house in the late 1960's when it was dug by Mike Sedlak (6 inch casing). I don't know if Ms. Porto questioned Joe about this on Thursday July 12th when she was with Joe, or if he admitted to it if she did - but I believe that I Can prove it existed. The Department of Ecology in Olympia has no record of a decommissioning on this parcel. It would certainly impact a septic de~ign. I wonder if Mr. Thompson's septic designer knows about it? {.* Page 4 3. Vir~lly ~ portion of Taylor's Terrade Lot #10 is more than 100 feet away from the Type III salmon/cuthroat str~am. I I I ! 4. Nearly all of Lot #10, Parcell 9840000l is shown as wetlands on map Arc Ims HTML Viewer map we obtained at the IDepartment of Community I Development Friday, July 13, 2007. The en~ire southwest corner hill weeps and drains continuously although Mr. IThompson has covered much of the flatter area with several feet of sand.1 (Exhibit 3) I 5. During bur meet ing wi th yourse~f, Ms. ~cC onnell, Ms. Pearson, Susan Hopkins and myself held on June 18, 2007 Md. McConnell agreed that the Shcreline -Management'-Plan' 'Would apptytoa Istream with less thah 20 cubic . feet/minute flow if that stream was within laCritical Ordinance Area that was within 200 feet of a marine water body I(Oak Bay). I believe that the Shoreline Management Plan requires any dra~n. field to be not less than 100 feet from fresh water. You can see on Exh~bit 1 that Little Goose Creek meets all of these criteria. ! I 6. The lower (southeast) corner of Taylor'ls Terrace Lot #10- abuts a cut down gradient bank which runs further sout~ for a considerable distance. It is an 18:1nch dropand if it is to be ch1nged will not be done so until legal issues under litigation are resolved.1 I I I I 7. Once more, much of the area in questiorl is within 100 feet of Ruth and Everette Sprague's active drinking wat~r well. I I I I Mr. Thompson did not check on his bUijding permit application that the building would be within 200 feet of t e shore~ine. (Exhibit #1 &; #6) Mr. Thompson also did not check that ny of the property required a Shoreline Application on his Critical ArJas Questionnaire. Also, he did check that it had never been identifieq as a wetland. (Exhibit #7) On the same questionnaire he claimed to hate no ground water seepage. I This is not correct. I On Mr. Thompson's Stormwater Calculat+on Sheet he wrote down 336 square feet. This is the area of the smaller fir~t floor. We estimate the impervious roof surface at about 50% large~. (Exhibit 8) The building does not conform to the wlans. The inside stairs have been moved to the outside. Six feet closet to the stream. (Exhibit #9) I I I ! I I I ,~,--S .. , Page 5 In our opinion Mr. Thompson has not been forthright from the time he submitted his plans (through the Critical Areas Ordinance process), or about anything pertaining to the Shoreline Master Plan requirements. Nor through the construction of his "shop". We further believe that after completion of the "shop" he willfully violated the terms of the Critical Areas Ordinance agreement that he had signed by construction of non- compliant fencing and failure to maintain the pools behind the weirs. We believe his actions will result in the extinction of fish in Little Goose Creek if not rectified. Even now (or certainly as late as July 12) he has not cooperated with the Health Department and acknowledged a well directly abutting, or in an area he is planning for septic use. We beseach you - Please use your authority to require Mr. Thompson to comply with the stipulations that he agreed to in writing thereby preserving fish in Little Goose Creek and wildlife access to the wildlife buffer area. ~ ~~~ N~ncY~OOdreau Brockob 150 Hiller Drive Port Hadlock, Wa. 98339 (360) 379-9780 (253) 565-1970 (Tacoma) Sincerely, ~~ Scott Clogston & Susan Hopkins P.O.Box 1075 Port Hadlock, Wa. 98339 (360) 385-3365 Enclosures: 1. Map of pertinent area 2. Critical Area Review 3. Wetlands map 4 . Permit Case Summary 5. Assessor Detail Building #1 6. Permit Application 7. Critical Area Questionnaire 8. Storm Water Calculations 9. Second Floor Framing Plan cc: Molly Pearson - Community Development Linda Atkins - Health Department Deputy Hernandez - Sheriff Department David Sullivan - County Commissioner Al Latham - County Conservation District }1lo.county Department of Community Development Sheridan' Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 "!f'60} 379-4450 October 11, 2000 FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AS REQUIRED UNDER THE JEFFERSON COUNTY INTERIM CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE Applicant: JOE THOMPSON 101 HILLER DR PORT HADLOCK WA 98339 ro;. !!E(Gren ';1- r- " ; II .. ," t"\ ~ ~ ,"\ U'- ..J...: ,0 WI fE:hJ. : " .,1 ' ; l.-.... Critical Area Review Case Number: CAROO-00388 Project Description: 14X24' shop Parcel Number: 998400007 S-T -R: 7-29N-01E Site Address: 101 HILLER DR PORT HADLOCK WA, 98339 L__._ i . r ,. ,JE~F::~:~~.: t'.~::7"~::y-.--.J ~ DEP I. ':'~_J.L":":~I; '( ";~'.~. 0IJr,tENT . FINDINGS: In accordance with the authority provided under subsection 4.101 and the requiremen1s contained in Subsection 5.402 of the Jefferson County Interim Critical Areas Ordinance, the following are findings of fact relating to the referenced application: 1.) The application was reviewed by Jefferson County Permit Center staff on 8/28/00 for the potential presence of critical areas regulated under the provisions of the Ordinance, and the following critical areas were confirmed as potentially present on the subject property: Fish and Wildlife Stream (Type III), Erosion Hazard Area, and Seismic Hazard Area. 2.) Acting upon the above information, Jefferson County staff conducted a site inspection ofthe subject property on 8/31/00 and confirmed the existence of the following critical areas and/or their associated buffers on the property: Fish and Wildlife Stream (Type II/). 3.) The applicant.submitted a Habitat Management Plan to address the potential impacts of development near the Type III Stream. The Plan was prepared by AI Latham from the Jefferson County Conservation District. 4.) The applicant is proposing to site a shop 38-feet from the Type III Stream. The Habitat Management Plan is required when a reduction in the setback is requested. The proposal is requesting the Critical Areas Administrator to waive the required 50-foot setback down to 38-feet. The applicant is limited due to topographical constraints on the property. This waiver from the provisions of the Jefferson County Interim Critical Areas Ordinance is granted subject to the follcming conditions. Any deviation from these conditions shall result in this waiver being revoked and the application becoming subject to further review. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1.) Vegetation retained on-site following completion of clearing for roadways, utilities and the like, may be cleared only if such clearing is absolutely necessary to complete the proposal (Note: This condition shall not be construed as allowing removal of native vegetation within a designated critical area or its associated buffer). . 2.) Among the native conifer species which may be used are: grand fir (Aibes grandis), sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis), shore pine (Pinus contorta), Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), western red cedar (Thuja plicata), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla). 3.) Among the native tree species which may be used are: vine maple (Acer circinatum) big-leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), red alder (Alnus rubra), Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii), quaking aspen (populus tremula), black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), bitter cherry (Prunus emarginata), Oregon white oak (Quercus garryana), cascara (Rhamnus purshiana), Pacific willow (Salix lasiandra), Scouler's willow (Salix scouleriana ). 6.) 7.) 8.) c: File I .-..-- ,.,.u 11\.'" ':::I ....- . .-...... - -. It UIJ ~t'''''''''U.,;r ......."'., .11c.Al ...."'" ~"'_.... -. _. __'111' .__ ...,v, '1 \' u, _____ I_' ,._. _.. .., -"_.,, . - - --._. "dog"'ood (Comus stolonifera) salal (Gaultheria shallon), oce~n spray (Holodiscus diSCO. .IOr), indian plum . (Oemlaria cerasiformis), Pacific ninebark (Physocarpus capi us), red flowering currant (Ribes sanguineum), wild rose (Rosa gymnocarpa), Nootka rose (Rosa nutkana), wamp rose (Rosa pisocarpa), willows (Salix ssp.), red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa), snowberry (SY[Phoricarp~ albus), evergreen huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum), red huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifolium . ,~ Vegetation retained on-site following completion of clearing ~ r roadways, utilities and the like, may be cleared only if such clearing is absolutely necessary to complete the proposal (Note: This condition shall not be construed as allowing removal of native vegetation wiU,in a designated critical area or its associated buffer). I A setback (b.uffer) of 38-feet, measured perpendic. ularly from Ithe ordina.ry high water mark along the bank shall be permanently maintained as a fish and wildlife habitat area. Fish and wildlife habitat area buffers shall remain naturally v~getated. Should buffer disturbance occur during construction, replanting with native vegetation shall b~ required by the Critical Area Administrator. No alteration shall be made to the fish and wildlife habitat ar~a buffer without prior authorization by the Critical Area Administrator. ~ The applicant shall meet the conditions stipulated through th~ Habitat Management Plan. The conditions are as follows: . 1. Maintain the existing vegetation. The large alders should e retained unless they deteriorate and become a danger to health and safety. The existing thick un erstory of shrubs and small trees should also be retained. If the landowner plans additional trees and shru s I would suggest planting shade tolerant conifers such as sitka spruce and westem red cedar to event ally replace the red alder when they die out. 2. Maintain exisiting plank weirs constructed to provide addit onal pool habitat and fish passage of the county road culvert. ! I:\F _CAR_Waiver_W_Conds.rpt 12/13/99 ~ " :Map Output 'm-tOOO.(; 99Moy..oo3 9980\OCOC"i 99MC':>O~ !> ~t!:<<.;:o!> 9!leiIOOO~4 9ge4OOO~ :3 ~ ~ll...":\J~ 2 lr o lr W ...J ..... :f ~00009 o Page 1 of 1 Legend [J Selected Featl " ~. Road System PalCels-H . Wetlands Boundaries D~CoJ"Clo' Ow..... D~Ccr.rll.cs FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONL Y- efferson County does not attest to the accuracy of the data contained herein and makes no warranty with respec orrectness or validity. Data contained in this map is limited by the method and accuracy of its collection. Fri Ju11: 007 http:// gisserverlservlet/com.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?ServiceN ame=ovmap&Client V ersion=4.... 7/13/2007 Permit Details 0rI1tmu/vul:lj a(.XllJ!JtJ'YII2/1't--C 3 lq- 'f1-SU Page I 0[3 . If Search rmit Ca Summary Case Number: I Search II >) Help I Case Number: CAROO-00388 Ca,;e Status: Pinaled Description: 14X24' sho Applicant: JOE THOMPSON Site Address: 101 HILLER DR Parcel No: 998400007- Cases Parcel Data Map Date Received: 8/28/2000 Date Issued; 10/16 2000 Expiration Date: Case Finaled: 10/16/2000 Case Actions I Below is a list of actions that have been taken by staff for this permit cas . They are sorted based on the date they were added to the database with most recent actions at the top. A value in the "Date Completed" field indicates that the action has been completed. Description: Signed Waiver Returned to App Date Completed: 10/16/2000 Description: CLEAR CA REVIEW SEP &lor BLD Date Completed: 10/16/2000 Description: Storm water Review CLEARED Date Completed: 10/16/2000 Description: CLOSE CASE STATUS F Date Completed: 10/16/2000 Descri ption : Waiver w Conditions:status "T" Date Completed: 10/16/2000 Description: Waiver w Conditions:status "T" Date Completed: 10/16/2000 Description: Begin Project Review Date Completed: 8/31/2000 I I Description: DRD Info Request I Date Completed: 10/11/2000 ! Case Conditions Below is a list of conditions for this permit case. Conditions typically reco~d requirements that the applicant must meet to be in compliance with the permit. 1- --- - I I I I http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/commdevelopmentlPPQuerf 1 caseDetails.asp ?csm _ caseno=... 9/2612006 I Title: FINDING: POTENTIAL CAs ?ennit Details Wording: Title: Wording: Title: Wording: Title: Wording: Title: Wording: Title: Wording: Title: Wording: Title: Wording: Title: Wording: Title: Wording: Title: Wording: Page 2 of3 The application was reviewed by Jefferson County Permit Center staff on 8/28/00 for the potential presence of critical areas regulated under the provisions of the Ordinance, and the following critical areas were confirmed as potentially: present on the subject property: Fish and Wildlife Stream (Type III), Erosion Hazard Area, and Seismic Hazard Area. - FINDING: CONFIRMED CAs Acting upon the above information, Jefferson County staff conducted a site inspection of the subject property on 8/31/00 and confirmed the existence of the followinq critical areas and/or their associated buffers on the property: Fish and Wildlife Stream (Type III). FINDING: OTHER RELEVANT INFO The applicant submitted a Habitat Management Plan to address the potential impacts of development near the Type III Stream. The Plan was prepared by AI Latham from the Jefferson County Conservation District. DEVIATE FROM RQD STBCK The applicant is proposing to site a shop 38-feet from the T e III Stream. The Habitat Management Plan is required when a re uction in the setbac is requested. The proposal is requesting the Critical Areas A ministrator to waive the re uired SO-f down to 38- ee. e app Icant is limited due to topographical constraints on the property. NATIVE PLANTS-CONIFERS Among the native conifer species which may be used are: grand fir (Aibes grandis), sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis), shore pine (Pinus contorta), Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), western redcedar (Thuja plicata), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla). NATIVE PLANTS-BROAD LEAF Among the native tree species which may be used are: vine maple (Acer circinatum) big-leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), red alder (Alnus rubra), Pacific madrone (Arbutus menziesii), quaking aspen (populus tremula), black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), bitter cherry (prunus emarginata), Oregon white oak (Quercus garryana), cascara (Rhamnus purshiana), Pacific willow (Salix lasiandra), Scouler's willow (Salix scouleriana). NATIVE PLANTS-SHRUBS Among the native shrub species which may be used are: service-berry (Amalanchier alnifolia), red osier dogwood (Corn us stolonifera) salal (Gaultheria shallon), ocean spray (Holodiscus discolor), indian plum (Oemlaria cerasiformis), Pacific ninebark (Physocarpus capitus), red flowering currant (Ribes sanguineum), wild rose (Rosa gymnocarpa), Nootka rose (Rosa nutkana), swamp rose (Rosa pisocarpa), willows (Salix ssp.), red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa), snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), evergreen huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum), red huckleberry (Vaccinium parvifolium). VEGETATION RETAINED Vegetation retained on-site following completion of clearing for roadways, utilities and the like, may be cleared only if s.uch clearing is absolutely necessary to complete the proposal (Note: This condition shall not be construed as allowin removal of native ve etation within a eSlgnate cntlca area or Its associate u er. '~iI:,~~.D ~~~._.cof~"'; ats,g9,.~*~q,Jlk ,shall ',.,.^/W,> ..,............ ...,.:.}"'..."'..'.<;-.:...,....:...-,."<;.:.(.:.--. > VEGETATION RETAINED Vegetation retained on-site following completion of clearing for roadways, utilities and the hi+~.lIm"nH N\ ;pf"fprc:nn ur~ l1<::/r()mmne:velonmentlPPOuerv/caseDetails.asp?csm caseno=... 9/26/2006 Permit Details Page 3 of 3 .. .. like, may be cleared only if such clearing is absolut Iy necessary to complete the proposal Note: This condition shall not be constl1ued as allo in removal of native ve etation within a designated critical area or its associated buffer). Title: Wording: No Findings Found ,.,.( HOME. I touNTY l' 'FO I DEFI\RH,lEN-, S ';Ei\rU,' . -.^J:i I [/1;C!^('l(;ort if'~ ;'-':/..."p!O:(--'1 ~ VV!n(-jn'/J~; - httO:llwww.co.jefferson.wa.us/cornrndeveloprnentlPPQu ry/caseDetails.asp?csrn _ caseno=... 9/26/2006 , - Jefferson :Gounlv WAHHf~GrON " 'Ji I ' I \ ", ,_:3~~~f~~!,~n::, ",~~_~o-l~~~~~t!~J~,"-:l~~!'h"'__:'_~~'~~~ Home County Info Search Departments Assessor Detail Building #1 Parcel Number: 960300006 Bui/din Number 1 Buildin Exterior Year Built 1968 Buildin Area Year Remodeled 1992 Buildin Interior ulldlng Type: HOUSE ulldlng Style: MULTI STY oundatlon:CONCRETE PERIM. xterior: SIDING/STUCCO (LAP) oof Cover: ROLL 1st Roor Area: 1128 nd Floor Area: 432 rd Floor Area: 0 ft Area: 0 ttic Area: 0 otal Area: 1560 asement Area: 0 nt. Walls (Cabin): eat: ELECTRIC BB/WALL 000 STOVE loor Cover (i): VINYL loar Cover (2): CARPET Buildin Rooms Mobile Home Garage drooms: 1 ull Baths: 2 alf Baths: 0 ake: odel: ength: idth: ear Built: klrting: rea: 0 ype: rea: 0 xtenor: oof: rport Square Footage: 288 1st Addition 2nd Addition To view another building associated with this arcel. Select buildin 123 :"rt. HGt.1E i COUNTY INFO i DEPARHo1ENTS ! SE.6.RCH ;;cs: \'iE'~.vcd "......i!!'; r.1ic:ros.:-:fr int{~rn(~: E:"~phji'l:r (j.Oo:'lcl~:('!' e '/h,-o".',s - r.-",.:;( http://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/assessors/oarcel/assessordetail.aso?Parcel NO=960300006 Page 1 of 1 5/8/2007 . h- 121 " CIuIty -"tJlIIII( of CImIIDty ~.Iull Str8ot, PII1 TOWII88III WI lal1al31H4fill" p~rmoif ~~~ O~@cfr'o@1fU Project ype: ..e"New o Addition i o AlterationlRfnodd o Repair i o Demolition I i Frame ype: t9/Wood o Steel o Concrete o Masomy o Other: Enmng- Proposed: Total: Type of Sew . Disp~S . Oloosc one: i . I'll It o Sewer OOl>mm . S'yStem o Iodividwl iem If nQt sewer, out the following: o Conveotio 0 AlterD2tive Permit # SEP N ~ Two Party Well 0 Public: Name of water system:! Bathrooms: FYimnr; Nt fr Proposed: Total: Type 0 H~ o Elea!:f(r o Woodstove o Heat Pump o Other DOil D Propane Water Supply: o Private well Square Footage: Main Floor 33(,0 33 2ND Floor' ~1o".Y' 3rdFloor~ Htd Basement Uobtd Basement Garage/Carport Decks Commercial Indusuial Other i i Or I Estimated Cost~,-O, fX)O ~ I . 1 If within 200' of the Shoreline, \ Distance to Bank or Ordiwuy High Water Mark I ft. By signing app' Oon 0lJD, the ap' owner mests tbt. onmrion providedhen:in is true and coma to e best 0 cir Any or my omission of a ID2WiaI fact made by the appliantl owner with mpea to this appliczion packet ID3Y resuk ~ this permit being Dull and void. . I further agree to 5n'e, indemnify aDd hold harmless ]effmon ~ against aD.1i.abi1iries, judgments, c~ CostS, re:isOn2ble anomey's fees and c:xpenses whJch DI2f in my wzy accrue ag;Unst ]effmon County as a RSUit of or in coosequmce of the graotint of this permit. I further agree to provide access and right of ermfto ]effmon County and it's employees, repl'=uDves orl ~u for the purpose of apPJiarioa review and mympmd lzer inspeaioas. Jo.s:ass and right of n the applicant's property or structure shall be requested and shaD 0IlC\Il' during ~ business hours. Signm= '1~ 'fL;.- ~ <(/7.. <r / ~ I : i Total Valuation:" , -7 Jefferson County Department of Community Development 621 Sheridan Street, Port Townsend, WA 98368 CRITICAL AREAS QUESTIONNAIRE Applicant Name - l';O ~ it1 (') ~ .sON Land Use Application Subdivision Application Shoreline Application Other: x 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Building Application On-site Sewage Application Is there any standing or running water on the surface of the property or on any nearby property at any time during the year? If YES, please describe: A- .5h11l<<... S~ ~ ft/eMflJ3'1 X- Yes _ No Has any portion of the property or any nearby property ever been identified as a wetland or swamp? If YES, please describe: _ Yes ){ No Are any willows, sk.unk cabbage, alders, or cottonwoods present on your property or adjacent properties? If YES, please describe: ,~I>AJ 111~.h- I. Fl.A+f.~ .3 Wl'U.o~ Mb ~evu"",,- Cot=ftJN~ p~'~ , ~N AP./lJL (;)1= ~(J ~ J:: Potah/FrlPH "*- CoNse.RVPflDN Pt~r1l''c.. ""t'R.~ 5;Ale.. Are there any indications on any portion of the property or on any nearby property of rockslides, earthflows, mudflows, or landslides? If YES, please describe: .!if... Yes _ No YES 2S.. No Please indicate which line best represents the steepest slope found on your property. (Check appropriate box) c;J1;J9 ~ 99 0 , I / I / / /' 1111/ / / 1111/ / / 11111/ /,..., I I I I . / / / ........... I I I -I / / /... 1111//... ... 1111// /... r-1 I I I I / / ... ... ,,'\...I I I I / / / / ...... ,," 1111//// '" I I I I / / / ... ,," ....0 1111// /"... ... I I I I / / / " '" ...... I I I I / / / ...... "......... ...0 I I I / / / /... _" ...... " I I I I / / /... ' '" ,... 1111 / / /... ,,'" ......... ,~... ,,0 1111// / ... ","'... " _,' 1111,... / "'" "','" d 11/1/.../...';""'............ ,--' ----)1" 11111//... "'...... ,,' ,,- ,_-- "u/~!~~~,~ " _---- _---{J UHUL~~,';'-__- _----- z~~_,_-- _--- {] I~g====:::_------------- (Questionnaire Continues on Back) Page 1 of 2 , 6. I Does the site have steep slopes with little to no veretatiOn? If YES, please describe:" YES -A No 7. Does the site contain high percentages of silt and/qr very fine sand? _ YES _~NO If YES, please describe: 8. Does the site contain ground water seepage or springs near the surface of the ground? _ YES .:x NO If YES, please describe: By signing the- application form. the applicant/owner attests that the information provided herein is true and correct to the best of their knowledge. Any material falsehood or any omission of a material fact made by ttjle applicant/owner with respect to this application packet may result in this permit being null and void. I I further agree to save, indemnify and hold harmless Jefferson County against all lia~i1ities, judgments, court costs, reasonable attorney's fees and expenses which may in any way accrue against Jefferson County as a result of o~ in consequence of the granting of this permit. I I further agree to provide access and right of entry to Jefferson County and it's lemployees, representatives or agents for the purpose of application review and any required later inspections. Access and right of entry to t~e applicant's property or structure shall be requested and shall occur during regular business hours. i Signature if. iL,,- ........... - Date <6!7$/z~() I i I FOR OFFICE USE ONIL Y I I a Wetlands a Aquifer Recharge Ar~a (zone_) a Frequently Flooded trea a Erosion i aSeismic I I i i i North Range Parcel Size: I ZlOb09t f:1- . a Seismic Ir"Fish & Wildlife Area 1 a Fish & Wildlife Area 2 a Landslide a Commercial Forest CRITICAL AREAS ON OR IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO SITE: Section Township Parcel Number: Cfrr '700 007 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: Reviewed by: Community Plan: Date: Page 2 of 2 'l:\home\plncntr\forms\car .docl JOO ,. ,0 Owner/Applicant: i 7O~ "'}ko~ Site Address: I () , H1 u eut ,,~ V 'G -{'bucr ~((; L{Jp- q~33 r 9 Digit Parce/ldentification No.: o/9<t 4n1) &07 Permit Number: PLOT PLAN NDICATE the following information. )raw entire parcel to scale. Indicate scale of plot plan: One inch equals % /3. "4 ~ North arrow All property boundaries and dimensions Names of adjacent streets Driveway/s & parking spaces Major features such as ravines, seasonal creeks. bodies of water. etc. . drainfield and reserve area location. 6. Nt; . ;ng or proposed. and distance to :.,to~t structure 7 ~er lines 8.~or water lines 9. '~g wells within 150 feet I O~surfaces (patios) , 1. Structures. existing and/or proposed ... 2. Setbacks (distances to property boundaries. structures. banks. and shorelines) 3. Easements for access or utilities 4. Arrows showing direction of slope-- assume an elevation of 100 feet at one lot corner and indicate the other lot corner elevations in relation to it : APPLICATIONS ADJOINING SHORELINES. CATE: I. Ordinary high water mark I. Top of bank. if over 10 feet high Slope of bank in degrees MFIPI Nr.NTR\FnRU"\Pl nTPl N I'AUO'07 Proposed Structures (all roof area) j.3--' sQ.ft. Existing Structures (all roof areal 97 sQ. ft. Sidewalks ~ sQ.ft. r ~ Concrete Patios ~ .. sQ. ft. r Proposed: Driveway Length X Width ft. ft. = Total Driveway Total Impervious Surface sQ.ft. sq.ft The Stormwater Manual sets forth the folloWing Small Parcel Minimum Requirements: · Construction Access Route Stabilization: Construction vehicle access shall be, whenever feasible, limited to one route. Access points shall be stabilized with quarry spa lis or crushed rock to. minimize the tracking of sediment onto public roads. If sediment is inadvertently transported onto public roads, roads shall be cleaned thoroughly at the end of the day by shoveling or sweeping. Street washing should only be done after the bulk of the sediment has been removed by sweeping. · Stabilization of Exposed Soil: All exposed and unworried soil shall be stabilized by sodding, seeding, mulching, plastic covering, application of gravel base on roads and driveways, or other appropriate means within seven days during the period from May 1 to September 30 and within two days during the period from October 1 to April 30. Mulch shall be app-Iied to a minimum depth of two inches. · Protection of Adjacent Properties: Adjacent properties shall be protected from sediment deposition by appropriate use of vegetative buffer strips, sediment barriers or filters, dikes, mulching, or by a combination of these measures and other appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs). . Maintenance: All erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be regularly inspected and maintained to ensure continued performance of their intended function. · Other Appropriate BMPs as required by Jefferson County to mitigate the effects of increased runoff shall be ap lied. .'1 Z <c' ~ c.... "" \.!}. z .~ <( .Q:: 1_. LL .Q" 'Z: 'N . '4:ci f!\l.!J - - ~: ,....2 <Q)~ ~~ \) 4. . .~.~ Qt:, ~ \.D.Lt) -....... , ., ~l ~ .I - .....~ M ct.: o o --J LL I i .\ -~ i j '1 ---r , I i i I:: I ....~I 11' I ' f ! i I . I J I . i j . , i I I f ; I . , ~.' 1 . . t i : f=tLI I 1 -.-' I-T- l ! " o ~ ()")<. f'. N 11 it e:: a o U1-oo :r&.)><. X<N o \lJ,.... \.1):I;.C ~ HO,h? D I~T I I ! ! i i I i j ; I . ! i 0:\ \_ r: .~!~ Of,... . f51~ -& -Ie. ~ 4::.. , u)i4. ct olf '" :t:j ~ ~ ~i... ~ lcP " :0 0 Q:.t) - . ~" Q ~ _, c! V'iii:I:. ~ k ..:); .~ ~; 5.: F~ ~ , , i I I 10~' ,~or ><'4 j ! 1 i j \ I . i I t I j ! ! 1 I l ~ i , i I i I I i j ; , i I i ! t ! I j I i " I i , i Ii f! ~ ; ;.'-+1 i ; -4-- i i -4--: - ~ i 1 ! (l \G ~ r:. ~ . r-J ~x -----;.:... ct ~ ofT l' . U.llv"1 ;t:. n -' . t5~ , Q ?- ~. ~ ~i ~-J ~:t ~3 C) ~~ ~~ Q Ii ~ O. OJ :>~ QZ AW h ~ .q: \J Fl~l I \~ : I i i ! ! 1 I I I . i I I I - I i _ 01 <:) - i 1'1 -, I I hi ~I '" H i' , I I 1 , i ~ :.D , i - :r- h' ,:to l ><. ~:' ! I - ~ 0 , 11 ;\..0 ). ; I ., i i' j I I I t 1 i---t. r-t l 1 ~ '-S) -- - . -' ., Page Dear Mr. Scalf Department of Community Development July 9, 2007 HEARiNG RECORD I write to you in your capacity as Critical Areas Ordinance Administrator and pursuant to the meeting held June 18, 2007 in your conference room with Ms. McConnell, Ms. Pearson, Ms. Hopkins, yourself and myself. This meeting was immediately subsequent to our presentation to the Jefferson County Commissioners. During that meeting you agreed with us that a 50 foot Fish and Wildlife buffer must be maintained on either side of the category III salmon/cuthroat stream Little Goose Creek. We continue to maintain that the owner, Mr. Thompson, has not complied with the conditions of his building permit or the Critical Areas Ordinance. We maintain that he has violated those conditions. He continues to work with the Health Department and a septic system designer to get a permit to install a septic system for a building that was only permited in a critical area because it was to be a small workshop, on a piece of property that is mostly Critical Area, is mostly within 100 feet of Everette and Ruth Sprague's drinking water well, abuts the county right of way, contains a pond excavated after the 1992 Reserve Area was dedicated, is largely crushed compacted driveway and building and contains two wells that the State Department of Ecology has no record of decomission- ing. One well apparently simply buried, and the other, near the pond, opened wide this past week for whatever reason. Approximately 20 inches inside diameter. Mr. Thompson is still not in compliance, in our opinion as the persons who built the ponds, with the "maintainance" conditions as defined by BLDOO-00559; Case #CAROO-00388 on either parcel 998400007 or parcel 998400011. It remains our opinion that if Mr. Thompson can construct a legal septic system on the small corner of his property tha remains outside of the Critical Area, with proper setbacks from Right of Way and other property boundaries and at a legal distance from both wells that a septic permit should not be granted until he is in compliance with his previous commitments. During our make a visit to heard from you, meeting of June 18 the site to assess we assume this has you the told us that you would personally situation. Since we have not yet occurred, and have taken the not ~,~ Page 2 opportunity to send you more information than was contained in the packet given to you and the County Commissioners in the form of a map, drawn to the best of our abilities and limitations, to represent more clearly the situation. It is our belief that if the fences inside the Critical Area that have been built subsequent to the construction of the building were removed and the weirs and ponds were maintained in the condition that they were in prior to the construction of the building that the wildlife would return and the fish would flourish as well as before. A "Fish and Wildlife" buffer zOne. We assume that our multiple complaints face to face have been taken as "official". what we must do to complain "officially". Many members of our community besides Mr. Sprague, who requested that you meet with him when you come out here, and besides the large number of people in the"Goodreau Clan" and ourselves are very concerned about all of the above as well as the other complaints you have received from us concerning this subject in the past. We would appreciate being informed of the date and time of your planned visit so that we can inform Mr. Sprague - or pleawe call Mr. Svrague directly. I'm sure that you are aware that he has been leaving messages on your voice mail. written and telephoned and If not, please let us know ~ g<fl'(!l ~ ~~~~ Scott Clogston & Susan Hopkins P.O.Box 1075 Port Hadlock, Wa. 98339 ~<g.r-~~~~ <i:~~ Everette Sprague 60 Hiller Drive Port Hadlock, Wa. 98339 VCO'S-OObO cc: Linda Atkins - Health Dept. Al Latham - County Conservation District David Sullivan - County Commissioner I'.. ... i ~~,~~ ,l~~;j:~~c-;~'f.*~JIpt<!S]f~7ir _..-~~_.~ _ ~~'T:-OA ~1-J(ii~7!fcifi1f55~IJ-- -- ----. -~~J' p,\()::i /I~~ "'~, ~ I /vb;~~~ ..'"1' -: f~aL-.lifq~;';;;I----- - ~q... , ;: ~.~.3:"'__u_L "'~ "I>' dt;'), !''t "iT .' AU..-~._... ...~~ Ii 1.;',/ ' i Y - ".-----+------------------ , I'.W '! . ,'~,------..-_V,~4oc; 4f.Vf.~€.:7:r~" ..' (\ ~gJ~ ~ dfb,P;-/, tt~-; ------b'~tr:f. ; · \ ..".... ..,..;-~'- -- - --~_.~--.---- - f -;- ,( . ,,- t- "-..-," .-j I. p"fi~ i,.!, T:fri c .:, C01 'C ~ d i j' i '.- ~;, - 1 -t- :_' ~ YLi{ft'S ~ TetUA~~ , I ; QrCJ ~ '~ -c_ ~hl J ....]r/_, V "" Nc;:/ 'I - i ~ - ".; I';,,:....... ~...~ ' ... ~ >, C--rl\"jL,,-; , ~& F1;"?~, ' .~ I: ~ I j - . ~1 t$';, ~., -64 ! \' ,1.1 ,l~ ~lL ' *;1' ".rl~e~ kp~{t.l:! ~ ~.: . 1;;:._1' Ii: ~i. ~ -Ii ~",!I~; .,. .1:,'/" - I ' - ,'" -, ! il -:-t.,.... ,.......-. I '. I I 11 t ,., i." , ..-...1-:-' I ,- , ;'- . II T- T Ii I II I 'I' . IT :l7"~--.:' > ,.~"l I ___ ' . . I "'. .:'.J..J. ." . ," I:, -,'- i l~c).1 ~-~,Fyiii/(7~ I I ~ 1'_ ''-\L.5..F~.1, r . I lit -'I Tjl 't,tFrE.l-?~~<'~-' ! :-""I"-~ 'r' -l,AR.Hv '--:-:-6 :: , - f-=l=- ;.. __'_" ", ,:,::- : :_l,/!rf!~/~'~~ I 1 ': 1- - . . . - - ..-' - .--" ; Ii;' i I : ' ~I: I --r--:;'-.---;-----7- ..- I ~~qlf;eLf{)tJobl; , ;';';~' ~ : I j' ! I ! j I 1 i . : 1';'1';"'< .: i - I~I'" -;1 ;i..1 I ; , ," 't' I"ii': . ,., ,sdli'y,c:L.., 1 ...}1.z ~A-6'&sJ/b ; i! i : ,'Tje':-,JG li~ ". ".' i I I ~"\li!i I ,! J=~-, : ,J--,'f!_}i/-[f'..I" I --r .! ;, :O~(f/~.... t r - ~ ~l{ I-jfIt-sl N~ ~tcolROi < i i i i Iii ',I ,; :: : ' , , -e. 111ft: VIE L. L.oQ (;>j PAIp""f#" r If) Fi &J L ! I J I i --r---+-! \: 1\1- -r- :>! ' ' ";~'~I'~~ lOr l() 7AjJ;;l IfIlJI4 b4vA ~J k/~f1J o~1~\~ .: ;.~~ ; : I ,lii:~~;'>\JJ ;,,:.~~~:jdll~.: ~ I ; ! : : ~ !: . t4s~.i 4:. of.i.AI.~~.i&~~ 'V:. ~.t{ ~,l; ~BH#++-! I I I i rl : i ! : i i ! I e"7~~EfJr! ~&fC~ 1 .~..~... __" ~UI i 1 i ! I : I : : ,~ot.-:r-:39o-tP~~--'tfC~ 1- f!"1,T:',:.J'. ...1. I: I I': i i i I : : I ! : Ifdt'1 If)' J.+/~p~JV€.... ! ~.. ;i\r Atl/ ).' ~~~.-l.4!.11g~~-il~b+.. s I i '.i ': I CllJJifQ,{! ' :! : ! ~:: ''f} +iff- I i --i ~~I f : I I lei. , ! : ~"--r----;-'i-r-T 'f -t--~---r-! . r;;;'-6t". .:'.. - i--l-YU.-llO-+-. ---f.- _~_.._L_--:_--.J. ~__.' _...-i._UlT.,;__'1_.,.____..'_____i-_L____--L..-----' i. i <, ., : i . , : . : ! : . ':' :,'" ' . .~. -.~ -. ..---. _.- .-" .- -.....---.-.-. .-.-. ".. '... -... -... .....' .... . - - ... -.- -.. .. .-- - . .-' ..__. .,,---- ----_._---_..--._- ',' .. , ,-" , ~:: c,. I, " I,;'::' :. . . ~"'-'II , 'V I ~,-,,--( Complaint Received (e-mail, fax, walk-in, phvl1e, mail referral) Violation Compliance Complete Yellow Form Completed Complaint Form to DRD Planning Clerk for Data Entry & Case # HEARlt~ ~ RECORD Compliance Coordinator - Initial Evaluation & Check for Completeness of Information Compliance Coord -Evaluate Complaint 1) Interview Complainant 2) Determine Nature of Complaint DCD Bldg DRD Ofc Director Ofcl Sr Planner Coord . I Close I ~I Call Complainant ~ Case Refer to Contact Close Appropriate Complainant Case Agency - Initial Investigation - Gather Information from Complainant & Plaintiff Contact Close Track Does this appear to be a violation? Complainant Case All Time Field Investigation/Fact Finding - Begin using Activity Report Form Prepare Field Report & Documentation usi Activity Report Form Contact Close Track Complainant Case All Time UDC Section 10 - Enforcement Stop Work Order Correction Notice Notice & Order Other Pros Atty Track All Time (. -- -Ioc+w we-I '. . Roseann Carroll From: Molly Pearson Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 20074:09 PM To: AI Scalf Cc: Roseann Carroll Subject: Joe Thompson decision? Page 1 of 1 -- AI, - ~ Have you made a decision about Joe Thompson's fence over Little Goose Creek? ~-l~ ~~<\'lr. \ lO ) ~~ ~~ CD ~ov-r-\o."'Q. ~~. ~G c;~ CA\ CJ '(~, · ::\ IOJL '{ <<'- \t \ {~~\J-\~ \ MollY J1?; Pearson [nvestigationsjCompliance Officer )eparbnent of Community Development efferson County, Washington i60-379-4458 npearlion@co.jefferson.wa.us It is our responsibilities, not ourselves, that we should take seriously." r-S-R.tSt1 POLD eJ(.-- /d--/L 0-M*A W\ ~ ~ :.y <i 'Q8 ~ -\- ~ ~\ S CL~~F5 "C j\-L --\- ~ ~\. \\1'\\ \(:0'1 - ~ - ft~vU ~;> 1/2007 ..a.~ r At:J Q , M, / /J1~.; )/( .{f I/rf/. . _ jj ( / .!.____ / /f'-Pj/ 6 -!';-t, r I. tuw Iv- A. ~ ItJHA- . z.MJ. ~ 1/ zvt'(5 ~ i @~~~~/~f#w<d 3q..f~ _AL~ ~ ~, ~. . -=~~~ 501~ I ~ ~ o-e -- ~~~ )4J~ ~ . ~ ~ ~<"--~ t1r6 {~O @ {;v{.. #i ~ (;LV m ~ rvv-J.- Investigations/Compliance Officer " Department of Community Development Jefferson County, Washington 360-379-4458 mpearson@co.jefferson.wa.us "It is our responsibilities, not ourselves, that w~ should take seriously." 3 , ~~-'. R~ oR? ~~.1()9(;hS-1 ~1 V Q-Q . . ~~~ ~ f{Pk) ~j(~ ~ /(~;::~.o7(Ax~/ 9$Cf/c-~r~' ~ 4. . J~ 7vd-o. I':to f'Vu-.. ~ .~H~])~J~~ r... . I:jpl 9x 1<J ~ ~~. r:u...J~ _ . r( ~~ ~~. J~ii-;W~f' .'--fW J ~ ~ ~ A-r~~~~ . ~ L? . ~rtrt7-~ {) . .~ -r~ew4P~~ (jS\ ~. . ~~ wcJj ~ ~ PO'tn/1 ztt~ ~-s~ t ~ ~ . ~~ .. {o-eL~ ~~ '~~ft.t::h11~ . ~ tli-W ~ Id If . f!:::! . .. l'~~ CJ-~ f~!I^- ~ Q~ ~ .'( C9it..%~~~~~~) '--~ Li-rA..._J ~.. (;, .A _ ~ . -.I' " . , -. ~u6 fJ6-rr- . 41 h/O-;Y tl: WCU<M-tu ~.~ A)U . dt:;!~e:;;;:;~~~~ ~ . '''J) ~ I~ (If ~ ~ "<1 '!/fo ~ ') ;1 " ~~-h ~4 ''7L-~~d..o{Jad-. I I q(t~.jrr. ~ tJ~ # lli. 10_ ~ ;_ ~ w-~ ~~ -f;ej ~ ~ \W:~~ f ;' q{((fOr 0CK ~ ~ i. ~W-{'~J~ UreJJ -- -~..., ( !JET! Nlk., ,..... " pe. e.- :J ~( i-v S MttC ,tvAA'-UL. Lc.e-e l. ~ ,." F age 1 To: The Jefferson County Commissioners June 17, 2007 Re: Little Goose Creek HEARING REC RD We residents and property owners of Jefferson County, and all owners of proper~y on Hiller Drive, Port Hadlock - Nancy Goodreau Brockob, Everette Sprague, Susan Hopkins and J. Scott Clogston do respectivel~r petition the Jefferson 00unty Commissioners for assistance with problems that we are having in a "Critical Area" designated area to protect Little Goose Creek, a Category III salmon/cuthroat stream that we have been working on since 1991, with many volunteers and State funding. The problems have come about as a result of a "Critical Area Ordinance" variance that was granted in 2000 to allow the property owner to build a shop within the "Critical Area". The permit contains multiple conditions that must be met and maintained. It is our contention that many of those conditions are not being maintained by the owner, a contractor and professional dance instructor or by his live-in girl friend a WSU Water Watcher and a conductor of exercise classes. These people are currently seeking to obtain a septic permit for this "shop" in a "Critical Area". The second story of this "shop" is an 18' x 24' hardwood dance floor with music system. Dances and exercise classes have been held here before. It is our fear that the addition of toilet facilities to the work shop, just across Hiller Drive from their two bathroom home is an attempt to convert a private shop built on strict conditional variances into a commercial enterprise of dance and exercise classes or a residential rental. We do not know for sure because they will not speak to us. We have taken our complaints to other County Agencies and have not had satisfaction. A County Planning Board Commissioner strongly suggested last Wednesday, June 13 that we bring our problems to you. Friday, June 15 another Planning Board Commissioner called me (Scott Clogston) at home and suggested that we go directly to enforcement through the Sheriff's Office which we have initiated. Our complaints are many and in an attempt to keep this petition from s becoming a book will be presented briefly. We can expand on them and have much photographic evidence we can provide. Many of them are based on the word "maintain" which is used frequently in the conditional building permit. (Enclosed) Page 2 To assure that we are all on the s~e page we have included a definition I of that word taken from "Webster' sNew Wolrld Dictionary". "Maintain - 2B _ To keep in a certain condition or posit~or, especially of efficiency, good repair, etc, preserve as the state mainta~ns the roads." I Due to an unfortunate and unexplaine~ error in the Jefferson County Shoreline Master Program Update - STAC Re~iew Draft, September 2006, it was stated in said draft that "...coho ha~e not been seen here for over 10 years". However, we have been able toj have that mistake corrected in I the new Jefferson County Shoreline Master! Program Update - STAC Review May 2007 - made available only last week.! Please see enclosed page 4 - 61 lines 10 - 14 and the enclosed letter to ~ichelle McConnell. WSU Water Watchers also have incorre~tlY declared on an internet posting that coho do not inhabit Little Grose Creek and we have asked them to correct it. I Two recent letters that we have written to Molly Pearson of Jefferson County Community Development are also enclosed. A Letter from Nancy Goodreau Brockob is enclosed. Our complaints are as follows. They regard Building Permit BLDOO- 00559: Case number CAROO-00388: Parcel ~umber 998400007, issued to Mr. Joe Thompson. 1. The last sentence of the bUilding perzh,it requires Mr. Thompson to; "maintain existing plank weirs constructe~ to provide additional pool I habitat and fish passage of the County rO.d culvert." While the weirs still exist the POOI+ behind them have been let to fill and we estimate that we have lost hatf or our overall rearing habitat and that nearly all of the salmon, which ~ust live in these ponds for a year ar holding on in the two pools immediately above Thompson's pU~perty on Mr. Everette Sprague's property. i Al Latham recently looked over the sftuation and felt that it was alright. We agree that it is still prettt but we strongly disagree that the pools have been"maintained". Does ant one think we have too many salmon I in Puget Sound? In addition, one of the three weirs on Thompson's property is not even functioning. No water is flowing over it. Mr. Latham says he and Joe can fix it. It has not functione~ for some time and does not allow I the fish to move up and down the stream a~ they are want to do. Is this maintainance? I notice the Joe has let t~e weir fail, I call Mr. Latham, he comes and verifies it and then he and 40e eventually fix it. It is supposed to be always working. Maintaine4. When Mrs. Pearson was out I Page 3 here to inspect the three weirs recently she was unable to notice that one of them, all within 25' was not flowing. 20 The Fish and Wildlife Custom Condition stipulated that a 38' Fish and Wildlife habitat must be maintained. On the South side of Lot #14 Taylor's Terrace is a 76' stretch of solid wooden fencing that runs directly across then along, parallel to and even over the stream at a distance of -3' (where the stream runs under a portion) to perhaps a 2'- 4' average distance south of the stream. Where do you find a 38' Fish and Wildlife buffer between a stream and a tall fence so close that in many places you can't even walk between them? I believe that all of therest of the fence on the south side of Lot #14 is less than 38' away as well. The wooden fence, not two years old, is already beginning to lean toward the stream and, in one place, has been lashed to a pole set further back into the bank to keep it from collapsing. During storm conditions the stream can become 60' 'Nide and rise 2' or more (we have photos) and this fence will likely be clogging the Hiller Drive culvert within minutes. Only a few years ago the County replaced the Hiller culvert with an expensive eliptical culvert pecause of the frequent flood damage to 3 homes on Hiller Drive. A clogged culvert is a severe threat to public safety, to Hiller Drive itself and to the aforementioned homes. On the NorthEast end of Taylor's Terrace Lot #10 Mr. Thompson has fenced with 6" x 6" wire fence to within 6' of the northeast side of the stream and a 4"x4" post is already in place to receive the fence on the south side. 19' diagonally. A good portion of this fence would have to be removed to leave a 38' buffer. The 6" x 6" mesh with ground board underneath does not allow wildlife access. 3. Why did approximately 150' of stream on both sides have the critical area buffer reduced from 50' to 38' because of one building on Lot #10? 4. The area, while still woodsy and pretty, is not as heavily veg~tated as it was in 2000. During this last winters' bad storm a large cluster of cedar trees blew over. They were "harvested" and removed. The logging operation left a large barren patch of hillside. It has been our impression that you are not allowed to remove fallen timber from a "Critical Area". Was the Critical Area Administrator consulted? Mr. Latham or Mrs. Pearson have made Thompson replant the area but this is repair not maintainance. Page 4 Much native vegetation has been removed tb allow construction of an extensive network of wide pathways. i i 5. If the shop is intended to be a comme~cial enterprise then nearly all of th parking will be within 38' (not to kention 50') of the stream. In i the past when dances and exercise classesl were held there all of the extensive parking area was used. Critica~ Areas are not for commercial enterprise parking lots. Vehicles were p~rked up and down Hiller Drive as well. i i We would like Mr. Thompson held to tpe conditions of his "Critical Area" Building permit variance. The once abundant wildlife is now ne~rly non-existent and the removal of the non-compliant fences would! allow them to return. We would like the pools restored to ~he condition they were when the permit was issued and then "maintaine~". His "Critical Area" I variance building permit did not allow folr an high traffic commercial enterprise or residence - only a small s~op. We certainly do not think that he s~ould be given a septic permit for his "shop" until he is in compliance. We request that the Health Department be so notified. We will appreciate your considerati~n. ~~ Scott Clogston Susan Hopkins P.O.Box 1075 Port Hadlock, Wa. 385-3365 ;5.~ --JfU-C2-~ Everet~e Sprague 60 Hil~er Drive Port H~dlock, Wa. 385-08do Si')na1ure Ie; Ot'l Cl-HlflcMt:{ leJ/er Nancy Goodreua- Brockob 150 Hiller Drive Port Hadlock, Wa. 379-9380 (253) 565-1970 Enclosures: Building Permit (BLDOO-J0559; Case 4CAROO-00388; Parcel #998400007) Page 4 - 61 Jefferson County STAC rlraft May 2007 (Shorelines) May 14, 2007 Letter to Michelle Mcqonnell - Community Development June 2 & June 11, 2007 Letters to Mdlly Pearson - Community Development June 16, 2007 Letter to County Commissioners from Nancy Goodreau- Brockob , 4 r ~ i cJd tL~hl:':J1'L .0 (J/-J111-f!td,-,.:k-/ I 0//~ /11 ? / / .,' ~ ~ c-L- fJ.. ./ -00 73LlJr11D. -~5b~, , Co, -.' '~A~~/~'r~ "~ '~~ :,~~ = ! '. -'", . . . . , ..-, . !.I.cl ~. ..... ;d-:-, ... . ~aJj..~ JfJ!,~ ~J .LJ:lli~ ~~~-C j H..R t'. J./14..4- -r~ !yt.-tLl.y/;:i::zU}lUId 4.~- d&' .:::h- _ evrwd/ . ____ ~.. ...,~.j--..~~~. U ~.-!t-M-t#/~~~.0~... 67 .~. ,~ . vf' . ;1j'/' ../._ '- .' fu.e~o-1~ . ~'. '~__-"-- . ~/ Oi..r!.;& ..1. - , .. ... - .;-;.,." · Au; ~~. ~ .~.~..V~k/~. - ... -il~./~.-r::..~-J:~~. ._-=-__~ .' - , .,. ~..Ju ~ 11", ..,)/7.? -. aM-eJI ~ (ZI..- J-+:--/J 1;5 .t '.. ~ ~ ~~. J;~ ~ML JuiTu<~Y!!tz:W ~_tu4.L~j .'.~.h.Jl1.M~.. -....:~...dit _.().orr~L_'a1f.L._~ --It.e.i!f ~'<- - -~ ~6~<.:P. ~* i : el;-/.1 rM/~ . /'5(J %~i0u~~ f}t-. ,1I{~J:c<3'~2 WO-- (3/dJ\ 311,J-(3?tJ t~53) o6G/f'/o 'oJ V 10 N 1f1( 1v1..4 P C f!. i ri CA~ c Ri) i N~}Jt~ A. "~A wrrH '1),f/CAT -iJl S f.J.J..t-fON 1 cu~n./. (i.\I ,liT &" 19,{f\tIA \ .D 3 B u iLS)i}0"S A.:vtl ~..M~ 1.1 ~ v~ . -N(;1 "\ S f..lowt-J ." 1-< \) ~ -rH~.r' r A.I'II\ /va r ~4.1~~. NOW tv'lAv F P rt/'':- i ;q.'Q...{A. ,,C"'<.R.r'ff<..p..J.u~Ll\,.(.si I~ I " Lrrrt..L 6005c. CR..~ck:.. / I I I I (jJiCK~~ ~.l~1< 001.0 I is 6/x6" w\Rt Ff~'/\v6-- iI..J i-r}.J I ~)gOD(.I.) ~os-rS FINO S n f}.. p<>stS. / fit /.I. Urv(;:; IH W~oV.l~D 13AS(, I . Ti.llvK{j.)~ 8Lv.S Bc7,~E~ II'" ALL S' oLin .~ ~~c.i pc" / Jl(R1"icf\1. cfDM~ Bo~RDS -t /' " }1.,,/..J fr;:; IS - -a. ,...11 J:.! o~"F$ T}lr 3 Lu~ fR~ A9.('Cfi/ ~7- to! #f/I~PH~Tc4 A~( .' I ~ tI~ ,.t. ~ Bl-{: is. tA9.G( S'~ ~ If ~ $ ) ~ OV ;..QI I /111 v\l"'~ /-(Ar ij'( ~~f ~fR.{ g Da~ ;:l!D AWP ~(fl>t. ~ ( -1 ~lo~e:rSiS)( i \' {SifC<SJP 'JZ,\J(/ f1)6 I (j.'l>(-.J {l~.(A)fJi'\7N I~ rl-/f 0 i.t.I NC,~ '1 AS i",'1I /lJ' ~n:j('\ c/!.. i f~ i./J L I (,Rfcr A ~;ft.~~6- c::.njl'la~.oj pf.!.tM'1\. c)./f. z: A~(.A .1ci,~ If. w.~ f -rf.J4T' j-Jf. it14rf\Y)QirJ ~ or 1l.J(. Co LJ1))p!>~ '}..pj., . rr' /-1. A I; j rAT/1 e..~f1 /'" n~ ~l~'~':~~~ ~~1 ~'l~t:llr<{~_ tip-I D~E"~~ t>J{,'rRf:.r-' ,"'./111'-1 NT&_~-: ~,I!-'~~Fo~,S€\>. \ -~ '. OAK 8AY ..... ?; T +-- :t: Do ,.,,~T l!(:)..1f I!.f ili (IT "iflf w lH).Df"," l""f ~C'f ~ C5N~n~uc1f.o AJ.l v6J A c,R ~JS) A-Ml (j V'I<-,N( G~r€K.. atJ ff4f' r-~ urfi f'l,g{ or- J.4T #-1'; w( tJ. W)fflJ.r-rAtJ.I) ~~"1 Cd~J)rrh~.sruC.t-t AI /.IJ(; jJ~~ W:.er3' tlNS)"<J17 (> ..tI'V AJUlin'4N) At!.. OS= 1]-1f . 4 ,"Kr~tvfi(j( P~t.:J_(lilG,' /..( ~~T~_~tv.~ ~fJT~imN~ t4.J1'W~Je kc.~f~ ~~, f'~~~~,'TAT It 1'4..D If' Ar~EA~j' 1-~fR~/..r rrr . /Yf'~t - Ft~~JAJ6- JC .J1{ ~N~ \ rT, r hor?'a Al~~ ~H1 ST~fA ......... ... -... II-If /LI1~~ ~~~~~~f_~,~o~~1\1) Ow ~R /.J <V rJffN -J)u~ ~~ ~~e.-Lq~ €'~ \. : - -r ~. ~ ( ~ ()1 0 '- i 6 tV Lt) T 14 i 3 - . tV ELJ J) f~~~~ ;ff ~~~()f..fT our-, CRA-t: 1'eJJ fl. f\ ~ €A c ~ i lV~ fV<)< jtIJ IHJ~~ 6f'St:K-Qr.) c~u N1r G;V;ft(JJJ~ .JX(I~I<(~ JWJf /~ 07 - /10',4 ~(R~\1tJN ..... -- . - l..~: Q'fT CLu&:fT()N ~IN( l 3) 07 - fI. f"j.{(jJ/Z f ~{{ "if..JE /11 ff:f{ W vAl( \ r ~fJ'O /i'IVI-f: <1 f-- '~A,...r5>(l1P.TI31i'ON- I\JE i -rjiEX TOTl=L P. a1 : cs'i( ~~6-A 0 I~ C> 1M T /1t'1 A1"'r€ ~'! iT '1"0 D~.J) (f-t-.J;qif .,.. to( {' r~'/;:.CJ "''1 8.f (\/oJ bO SJ l>~ Len SUo) 8; Co}.o9., AS Jt1 \u"ii/o,,(-S) I ~ 1'/..1+ 4<H"t k: 1"1' C6(2.,Nf~ UJ I.\J"r-j-l w A "..r"to 'S3 LI f'r'\ 7 I P A fj i (.. J 1/ ~n W' 'fj ~ C {)Lo~ (. pH:R. . D f~R. fVtR. J, ?~ f< J~N ) ,~.; ~i~ ;'I~)~\\dH~lf J) JUN1~ . rttffl~"" 11mtllt fl'~1 A -rn.1\41 ~J .~J~JJ :. !; ~ C i: 8~~-~~j~ I I #~f/dh. / '165- d~ r ,- mi'; 7 ,-", .'1 ,'1.'-. 'f" ) 1',,, ~ / /- ljly,/J"- ~i I (' ,'1":.();-(I T.' ~ ... Vt. Y'<\~ pc P-. "'...-- ~ ~ /; l' io.Rf\\f'~ >-1(.1::' -or- (." I\t-)~ ,I 1,'('.' }'f i~-I,-1 r\ 'I f' . U ~ I \..., ,t." ~ ,< I' ' .. ~- ,- j,;1"~) 0'-;, Iv [; \'--;-'/'. "- -oJ i'" , ( / i A ,f;( 0 '~J c;.) D i~-' /?J-<.J....J// PfeIJ:::'- Fi,,~f,- ,- ).1 ( 0 ; -; (J (\ ,\ ,') -;(;C ~- t) . - ,) \' p. 'I 1- J 'f'l' ;J Ii ( 9- 'i l~J Il/''.';, /- ( N\"C 3"7 I "FRv/!1 .S'if:\I\~.fi'l F l~J li A -:.. e j-; \,~ (;/ f'. p,....A .,,;of !\ - I" fi:rJ\;R'( TTQ~P,\i:.' )~ ".; g_/-I';:- ~:.:~. j. ,; \''!'. R'. ".t.. ..)\("1:\ \ tY' ", p.o Ti j~(,":,,~ }'-J,.\J'~' NO' r~:) ... 1"',- t:"1: 1- -') , f .) ~ "r>' .Co ;1 ~,,, ....... ,...... '\ v , e<l. f'/JLJ.(I', Py(\v( @ (r'f' 7 :))8 O'J 7 1 0/ /-( t p:'Ji, )).[",'; \) ( /-/r!IIJ'() f-PS:; r; i r\~) r>t.>r:, p~p,T .t.l~~t ()iV~ "- \' " \ ' 1 OJ..D i"U h'-I ': n1f::;~G~X .p AR J< i !,J(~ ~ ,1--. I - (:2~. '~ j (Yd' /-i ;J. j!, r:" DR: \):: FI', R C rf. '1 tf d - 1.; oJ - 0'-'" @j) /'-1.,-0'1' If,J.~'J7 I i 1\) ~O.j fV1 {J!'JB~X / ,0 I ~A).J.[[j n fZ. J (j '2... H: I). Ei'<.. 0 R, v 4 C <) V ( "'~ C (j ::;"!lJf-.,Ji G- ,; /1 ; II RECORD t4:i Ii ,if i' Page 1 Dear Mrs. Pearson Jefferson County June 2, 2007 Community Development JUt\! (] € ZUUl' It~ttttlltt(1 '.lfllNIVtU:O Thank you for your prompt on site inspection of our problems at Little Goose Creek that you made on June 1,2007 following our telephone conversation of May 31, 2007. Little Goose Creek, as you know, is a Class III salmon/cuthroat bearing stream and a ~ritical Ordinance Area. When we spoke on May 31 you asked if I would put our complaints in writing and submit them. I am sitting down to do so and I fear that I may-~ave more complaints than you would have hoped for. \ First - Joe Thompson is not in compliance with the conditions and terms of Building Permit BLDOO -00559, Parcel 998400007 wherein, in exchange for a permit to build a 14' x 24' shop in a "Critical ~rea" area he agreed to . . . "maintain existing plank weirs constructed to provide additional pool habitat and fish passage (emphasis mine) of the county road culvert." Neither habitat or passage currently exist behind the three weirs on Thompson's fenced property. Second - The existing thick ~derstory of shrubs and small trees has not been maintained. Rather, a series of wide bouleyard._ str.ollipg areas complete -with cement pavers, "rock slabs and ground level night- time lighting criss cross the area. A large group of cedar trees blew over this past winter and they have been "harvested" and hauled away (cedar permit?) rather than left in their natural state. An huge area has been left completely barren by the work that this entailed. Third - The solid wooden fence that runs immediately adjacent, and crosses over and is washed under to/by the stream and all of the other fencing and the severe reduction of natural vegetation have made the area inaccessable and unattractive to virtually all wildlife. Fourth - You must have noticed that since your last visit out; here with Deputy Hernandez May 26, 2006 much more fill and a new building have been added all, I believe, within the 100' distance from the stream that you mentioned on May 31, 2007. Also, I have yet to see that a stormwater permit was finaled for the earlier-fill. (Parcel # 998400011) Page 2 Fifth - South of the stream and ea~t of the "14'x 24' shop" an huge, long flat topped pile of loose d~rt has recently been brought in and shaped but not planted or seeded. IAt approximately 4'-5' high, approximately 45' long and 18'-20' wid~ th is must present a substantial erosion hazard. (Parcel # ~98400007) The nortern end of this mound abut~ the 18' wide portion of I Thompson's double-wide crushed rock!sp~ll driveway where two I vehicles are often parked side by side.1 It extends north above I a portion of the approximate 30'x30' p~rking area which includes Right of Way parking that Thompson has lexcavated and allows a vehicle to park on both sides while leaving roof to drive up the middle. None of the above disturbs th e three pbrking spaces at Thompson's I I home across Hiller Drive. . i I estimate that 10 vehicles could e~sily park on the Taylor's Terrace driveway.- All within 50' of a blass 3 Salmon!Cuthroat stream- in a "Critical Ordinance Area" I I If this mound is intended to be a sbptic system, the gravel I driveway will provide excellent drainagb directly to the stream. I On May 8, 2007 when the last dirt w~s added to the mound and I more gravel was placed on the driveway,! the driver of the backhoe! blade and th e driver of the dumptruck ~ere overheard by neighbors speaking of the septic system to be installed. The backhoe operator, who has been grading the driteway for years, indicated I that he thought there must be 18" to ?4" of gravel there now. I expect that is excessive- but not by $uch. On October 15,1992 a septic e~sement was granted by then I owners Patricia Thompson and Dan Youra ~n Taylor's Terrace Lot #10- Parcel 998400007 for the exclusive use 1S a reserve drainfield for Thompson's home on Lot #9 Hiller's aterfront Tract. The easement is much farther away from the stream than the current mound is. (Vol. 390 Pgs. 452,453 of Official Records-copy enclosed.) The Easement was required by the HeJlth Dept. as a mitigation I for a large footprint expansion of Thom*son's waterfront home. A permit was granted for the expansion bu~ it did not comply with code even at that time. I complained. LindJ Atkins agreed that the permit should not have been granted forlthe expansion but, since it had been, and the construction compl~ted, all that could be done was to mitigate it by requiring the ded~cated reserve septic reserve on Taylor~~ Terrace. 1 I I I I ......... -- \ ""lllIlIIII \, Page 3 Sixth- It is mJ suspicion that the outside stairway to the second floor was' erected after the building was "finalled". The plans I saw showed the stairway running inside the building and through the second floor. I did see the hole in the floor,later filled, dUring the building construction. This makes a 20'x24' footprint.. If my suspicion is correct, the building exceeds the alloted 14'x24' variance limitations. I question tha.t a contractor's "shop" requires an 18'x24' second story dance floor (hardwood) ,or a third story "Meditation Space". The dance floor is used intermitantly by Thompson, a professional dance instructor with several persons in attendance and for excercise classes by his live-in girlfriend Amanda Lawn- the person named in the WSU Water Watchers internet posting that I have enclosed in this packet. No facilities. "Critical Ora~nance Areau variance for a 14'x24' shop. A cynic might speculate that the stream has been allowed to degrade, or has been purposely degraded, the wildlife excluding fences have been constructed, the surrounding habitat severely degraded and/or removed, th e immense amount of unpermitted fill placed on a steep hillside on P,;,rcel #998400011 in c-onjunction with an unpermitted culvert from the Oak Bay Highway, a newly constructed 10'x20' shop and a second smaller building moved in and remodeled- are all an a~tempt to kill off the salmon/cuthroat o:r declare them gone and to remove the "Critical Ordinance Area" classification of the Class 3 SalmonjCuthroat Stream and convert the 14"x24" shop into a commercialdance/excercise studio with bathroom facilities. Perhaps a residential rental as his! sister proposed when she first applied for the permit in 1991:or a three story home sale? I have enclosed a set of the information that we sent Ms. McConnefA. ~ ~1T1,.f/~007 .. . Aga~lt1~a~I~~~your prompt attention. The Fry will soon be coming ~otBe2007 Your assistance will be appreciated. Jt_'tl~.r413l Scott Clogston P.O.Box 1075 Port Hadlock, Wa. 98339 360 - 385-3365 .g,:!~ P.O.Box 1077 Port Hadlock, Wa. 98339 c:.,~"",,~~ 1~1u#.^ . cc: lv1ichelle Mcaonrfen: - Shorelines Al Latham - County Conservation Chris Burns - WDFW Rick Mraz - Dept. of Ecology David Sullivan - Jeff.. Co. Commisioner Al Scalf - Jeff. Co. C~i~y ~evleopment 'l,/!.if!11/L 2/ ?<Jo 7 -<\~\{ (n'\C\: -', " 'l4.\\'~ \t'.r>\l- " .\. .-....))". . ..c." It "" ,f<.~ . ,~\~. .'".. ~\- .:ju" \ \'\ \ . \\\\\\' '" ~\ \,\ \t"~\\~\\\\ .' . fYh. af SC/lII " . u/ - , . trJR al&d ~f!e/lj7M/C ti?t )1~/3~ Z(JO~ a.L~i:- . _ ~ Cti>1<!i/lrta:' dtlVt. tJlfl.e t?aJ~ ~IRRJc ~ CL -J1/.e7lL ~ dJtd :CIi~ )J'(//}U1~ ~fft-l:JW; ,1t1UJ~ que B~ - ~ .~.. Of)( f?ltYmpsP0;.l{Jfb (J2I/rtq tZ fJn:htt 1-Tk. . ~JK....l ~~,Jt~:utnt~P:or.~t. JrldlL;r IM/l()dt[ ~ 4.41_ ,0)[ ~')C'l.tr{A.,l: .tJ>t. cTtvne t - ~;tree d/nd ~ LeLLI/le"'- f J, . \ , . ( '- . I '. . J o-t~. ~LUL Mt, Pffl1;nd... . . . I" _ ., ., O/K f!4/L frl1tt -:y . ~~utt::-:t{fi:f[-~WJ' ~~, ,~ aMid. A~/;)' 7t() f2k;t (lU/l .CdJn(IJf:at-~ A/J(., .~ ~ ~ ~~ Ju/L. 3M ~/L ~rn~/lJu:t-{u7v~ ff~ J/JlcLl1~ ~. ~ o-f-.;;tIu J.!JIi~. iit~ l)ML-;{~ J14rft;f 12b/lLJl>1-- aLmlf_U/LlJ[ tiInff ,~L ~Iid~fw iW. .~ ~nt. . (~-l.a. It Owa;lUf 0advM1t1YZ a/lu~. . ~117~A/ - ... ~) ( !SflJ-II L:e~ ~ I~?L~ ! 360 38S:3~~ V~ c( f407 / Map Output Legend D P alOElls4i DNR Streams ~ T)'IlO9 ~ TypoS /"I' T)'PO .. ~ T)"I'O 3 ~ T)"PO 2 ~ Typo 1 ~ 01....- - 2005 Aerial Pt Boundaries 0 .~ Co.rt," liD Wl'IIIs ~'(;-'~: 0 One.- C<>_ l i U 0 I U~ -J11:- n ~/V/\ { it" .r-W' " 1 JP~J-t,\ ~ (r( ~J~ yvv http:// gisserverlservletlcom.esri.esrimap.Esrimap ?ServiceN ame=ovmap&Client V ersion=4.... 5/31/2007 . FILE JEFFERSON COUNTY U DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORfl RING RECORD ACTION REQUEST Requested By - Address - Scott & Sue Clogston 81 Hiller Drive- PO Box 1075 Port Hadlock, W A. 98339 Date - 5/1612006 Phone No. - 385-3365 Alt.Phone~o.- , ~ Taken By - . Jim Pearson ) Nature of Request DIn Person t8I By Phone 0 By Letter- ... ./ Pertaining to OOffice ~EngI SurveyORoad Maint. OEquip. Maint. OSolid Waste~, ~ Request For Location - Road Name Oak Bay Road Road Number 569908 M.P. Project - Project Title Project Number Description - Following ?p o~ diSCUS. sio~ w~tp M~nte and Bruce on site, re: filling.. by Joe Thompson on Oak Bay Road ROW. Concerned that fill matenal WIll erode/slide ~to LIttle Goose Creek. --fo -----, -h e> Ir~ ~, -, I ~lc ...t:- II> I Ii d---? ,j.-- j , / (i :~~ J " (i1 A / /, rr AJ/,.PI ~1'1c--<. ~<{ 1\, /1- lj L.tT LC-""--{ a/ rJ. I{ , I ;, -h 11 -j'/ j. '1;; ...-1-1,- j, '--' /'/ ,;;r/ - J,.lluVLtJO,. Ii) 1.v/itr;<.f ../ J.- C V~ L- '-- .' /, , ,-- I J. 7 ! . , ~ :~A~~ ) ~ ~~, /-'1 !'_"- t,_ ~-J~,~t_c/-7, !2.tJcU?./ j ,to ~~,. -, I --' rC-/ .- 1 i \ I I Attach Map or Sketch Refer To Monte Respond By - Response~~ _ ~~~ 7P a I . f f ' V U/Aj-A 1--c0 :O~ ,MJ~C!~~ /,""; . f .'-,,--(" . -" ! Reviewed By - Contacted Requester 0 In Person o By Phone Date - o By Letter Contacted By Recommendation - Prepare Estimate For - Route To - Initial o Director o Assistant Director o Road Supervisor Initial Initial 0, Construction Engineer o Planning Engineer o Administrative Assistant o Accountant Department ui Ecology - EnvironmentallReport Tra\;n.mg System ERTS # 555252 Ext i Department of Ecology - Environmental ~eport Tracking System i El4ernal Reference # i Where did it ~aDoen LOC:~~~t~smO: Street A dress OAK BAY RD & OAK RD Other A dress City)Place PORT HADLOCK State WA Zip County - Region JEFFERSON SWRO FS 10 VVIRA# Wa~lWay UTILE GOOSE CREEK Type CREEK LJtitude Longitude Topa Quad 1:~4:000 PORT TOWNSEND SOUTH DirectiOnlLandrJ,ark (mile post, cross roads, township/range) south of Port ~adlock, about 1/8 mile south of the five way intersection Middle Last CLOGSTON Initial Report ~aller Infonnation First Name SCOTT Busines Name Street Address Other Address City PORT HADLOCK State WA E-mail Zip Confidential]L 0 Phone (360) 385-3365 WhathaDoened Type Home Incident Date Received Date 512212006 11: 13 Medium SURFACE WATER-FRESH Material MUDISIL T Quantity Unit Source CONSTRUCTION SITE Cause OTHER Activity BUILDING CONSTRUCTION Impact NATURAl RESOURCE DAMAGE Vessel Name Type Primary Pot~ntially Responsible Partv Information i First Middle Last Nam~ Business Nam~ Street Addres~ Other Addres~ Cit}j Phon~ E-mail State Zip Type Ext lA.dditlonal Contact Information Name Phone Ext Type More Infonnation Hello Barb, A gentleman named Scott Clogston (ph. 360-385-3365) called me with concems aboutitwo construction projects next to Little Goose Creek, located just south of Port Hadlock in Jefferson County. He and some other folk. out there have been restoring this Creek since 1992. He said it is a fish bearing stream and ha.s a recently established Coho Run. Ac 'acent to the site is a development Mr. Clogston referred to as Oakview Estates that he said is 400 acres in size (couldn't find a stormw~ter permit in WPLCS for this site). On the other side of the Creek is a project where they are dumping a significant amount of fill on the side of a slope. He says that when it rains the creek goes brown with dirt from the construction project. He is also very concemed the t the fill on the other side won't hold up in a large rain event and will slide into the creek. Mr. Clogston said the County has been out and will not do anything about it. He also said FISh and Wildlife was very concemed but told him they can't do anything until damage occurs. He would like to take whoever goes out there on a tour to show them-his-amcems. I told him to take photos of the issues. I also tol( him that someone from SWRO WQ WILL can him to discuss the issue. The site is south of Port Hadlock, about 1/8 mile south of the ifive way intersection shown in the map below. Thanks Barb, if I didn't cover everything you neecl, please let me know. i Jaron Smith Construction and Industrial Stormwater Inspector Water OuaHty Program Department of Ecology - NWRO Phone: 425.649.4485 Fax: 425.649.7098 Jars461@ecy.wa.gov ................................****.*****....***..********....***..****..***'*****.*****...*****.****.** WED MAY 23.2006: CALLER ALSO CONTACTED CRAIG GRABER (ECOLOGY WQ) WITH THE SAME II FORMATION. Wednesday, May 24, 2006 ... The Initial report contains only info111llltion proviejed to Ecology from the complaillant. Page 1 of 5 ; Department _Ecology - Environmental Report Tra, _fig System ERTS # 555252 Followup Inspector Information Referral # 90068 Lead Inspector DICKES, BETSY Program/Organization WATER QUALITY Start Date 5/24/2006 Where did it happen Business or Location Name Street Address OAK BAY RD & OAK RD Other Address CitylPlace PORT HADLOCK State WA Zip County JEFFERSO Region SWRO FS 10 Waterway LITTlE GOOSE CREEK Type CREEK WRIA# * RegionlLocation SWRO # of Ecology Staff 1 Action REFERRAl Overtime 0 End Date 5/24/2006 What happened Incident Date edium SURFACE WATER-FRESH Hazardous 0 Latitude Longitude LatILong Method Topo Quad 1 :24,000 PORT TOWNSEND SOUTH Potentiallv Responsible Partv Information Check if the primary PRP provided notice to Ecology 0 o Estimated arrative --C>riginal Message-- From: Dickes, Betsy Sent: Tuesday, May 23. 2006 5:36 PM To: Tope, Barb (ECY) Subject: ERTS for 555252 Barb, I can't locate the original electronic ERTS for 555252 - If you haven't already would you please send it on to AI Scalf, Director of Community Development (ascalf@co.jefferson.wa.us) for Jefferson County. Thank you. Also, I have called Seton Construction - apparently they are at least one of the contractors on site. They didn't know if they had a NPDES permit or not - Our records do not show a permit - I haven't scheduled a site visit yet- Betsy Dickes Water Quality Specialist Dept of Ecology-SWRO PO Box 47775 Olympia, WA 98504-7775 Phone (360) 407-6294 F~(360)407-6305 A i~. )1 ,,-v....v{ \) ~- p~.h:~~ DrU-,>t-+r~ ~ . ~~~ 5l.-j/ r J..v- Wedne.~day, May 24, 2006 .... The Initial report contains only infonnation provided to Ecology from the complainant. Poge " of 5 j:.;, ~..~ ....or.:::.... ;Oli:::' ,'.,. ....J-,.._,..,~ .. COP"-' 1R~~~~ HEAf{I^!~ ~~e2~7 tffHl~lttl("II~WOCD.1 .\ IVb RECORD Dear Ms. McConnell, I am writing to you in regards to the telephone conversation held between yourself, Susan Hopkins and myself on Wednesday May 9, 20d7~ The subject of'the conversation was an error found by Susan in the Jefferson County Shoreline Master Prol2:ram Update. Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report. STAC REVIEW DRAFT. September 2006. We spoke~out the section of the Document that addresses Oak Bay and begins on page 105 of the Document. Sue and I ~ere disputing the statement made on page 107 that reads as follows; "Coho have been . documented in Little Goose Creek; however, due to the loss of habitat coho have not been seen here for over 10 years (Hirschi, 1999)." During our conversation you were able to find references that dispute that claim. and you asked Sue and I if we could provide you with evidence to support our claim. You asked if' we had photographs of fry, hydraulio permits, names of fish biologists and other govern- ment employees who had seen the fish, ponds and weirs and for the names of non-govermental persons who prior to or after 1999 have seen them. We are pleased to be able to include in and with this letter Fry . photos, Hy'~uljDpermit copies, and. names of some of the Governmental persons who have seen the stream, weirs and or fish, fe do not .remember all of their names. Also included is a list of local residents who are willing to testify that they have seen the coho well within the above. mentioned time frame. These pe'ople have all seen the coho (andsome have seen cuthroat) and have .thrown bait into the ponds to watch them hit the bait. Some will say.that they have seen coho within 10 years, others will testify they have seen them within 5 years, others 2 yearS and Sue and myself watched several coho go to sea (salt water) last year. In addition, after speaking with you May 9, 2007, Sue and I went to the upper pond and almost immediately had a smolt hitting bait. They always go to sea within a few days of Mother's Day so this is not the ideal time of year to find mature smolt in the creek. The fry will hatch out above the Oak Bay highway and drop down into the ponds in a month or slightly longer. ,- )~ ll~'''' It.d& \v 'tAIl' , MAY 1& ...A1~ ~ I~.!~" ':'~_.,,, 10 ... .. . Page L We gathered these persons names in ltttt"~UI,"UI~s oyer this Mother's.Day weekend (May 12 .-ll) aDd t~ey were all a~;iJous to be I on the list. I I The list represents over 20 people a+though some I will just ! represent by family/elan name. ! .Still more were going to take the opj>ortunity of the Mother's Day gatherings to confer amongst themsel tes and expand the list. ! I expect more calls to be c.oming in toni~ht. These people have. loved having a salmon stream .flowing thr~ugh the neighborhood and most of them are seriously irritat~d tha1 anyone should say that it is not so. Several of the yoUng adults ~ave watched and fed (baited) ! these fish since they were children. Th~y include several curre~~ school teachers, a veterlnarY:technici~~ a civil. engineer's.pec.i.ui.z.ing in hYdraulic projects, state employees a4d many other stalwarts of the community. Also, a Snohomish Deputy ~rosecutor, his wife and son. The point is - Little Goose Creek ~Ia salmon stream and we have I witnesses. Mr. Al Latham of the Jefferson County Conseryation District has been instrumental in the entire Little Goose Greek project, particularly so . ! ~.the early stages and it was he who su gested we contact you when Sue found the error in the Document.. Be said that we could tell you that you niay call him if you wish. He a so suggested that we call the Jefferson County Extension of WSU Wa er Watchers group regarding their incorrect internet posting (copy e~closed) Little Goose Creek Water. Quality Moni torinJ;!:, wherein. they s1ate... II no salmon have been .. I " seen here for years. n We called and ask1d for "Jadeen" but. received a call back from II Sally" on May 8 but hare heard nothing since. , i I ~ndy Johnson WDFW Mitch & I Karen Brennan 21 Hiller DriVe Ron Seymour (Jim?) WDFW Sara pe~alagen 31 Hiller Drive Phil Henry WDFW Everett~ Sprague 60 Hiller Drive Ch~isBurns WDFW Terri pf'octor 61 Hiller Drive Laura Till WDFW Richard I McCutcheon 71 Hiller Drive Jeff Davies ? Scott c~ogston 81 Hiller Drive Ron Whitney WDFW Susan Hqpkins 81 Hiller Drive Al Latham Jeff. Co. Conservation GOOdr,au Family/clan 150 Hiller Drive , Ann Shaefer Shorelines? Joe.& Jqan Noel 162 Hiller Drive Vail Case DNR I ! I i '{ -~ Peter Bahls Pt. Gamble Tribal Biologist Tim (?) Rymer WDFW Jeff (?) Soncarty WDFW Ray Lowrie Originator of Chimacum High School F,isher-ies, Program. Locaf' restoratiQn.expert Craig & Sally Hopkins Steven Hopkins Bridget Hopkins Randy & Joyce Yates Tim Yates Diane Butler Page 3 Shoreline, Va. Mill Creek, Wa. Kirkland, Wa. Snohomish, Wa. Snohomish, Wa. Nanaimo, B.C. We hope this is of as,sistance to you. Flease do not hesitate to contact us if we can be of further assistance. IRR(lmTED l"'iAY 1 fI _ trtttadIft'Dm cc. A1 Latham ", Scott Clogston P.O.Box 1075 Port Hadlock, Via. 98339 360 .... 385-3365 {~~~ Susan Hopkins P.O.Box 1077 Port Hadlock, Wa. 98339 360 - 385'-33.65 ~~ ,- .,....f. . " -- - -.' f9'J'V"M).U'-Y /0 ?L{J/J.5//jlqy 1V7~ -rFuJ /J1.u;~5 . ~ tJ.CI" '-- - , /..2 - 7-9...1 ~ 1-1- _. P WATER TYPE ARD/LOCA~tN CHANGES .'1 fL (Side 2) KA ILED FOR CONCURRENCE \ ml dl y I i 2... I _I ~ COUNTY J-.? ~ € y- S ,l 1-',. LOCATION OF PROPOSED CHANCE: !leg ins Sect ion I 7 -:''''p. 2. 9 A' Rqe. i E (i)w) ., WRIA # Ends' sectioni /3' T''''!".2 tt.,1/ Rqe. ib1/(e:G-; NAME OF' WATER L. tlfe C;_,,(I~> "C r i". UPGRADe i i REASON(S) FOR CHANGE ~sical Characteristifs 'Nater Quallty ('-(' Benefici.al Use ( J Kihd . - I p(J DOWNGRADE ( I LOCATION (~:-ese' 'e ot Fish (~ of I):;c , /i) EVALUATION METHOD(S) AND RESULTS (required) i vn. I . .s, fe i ~~p.... fz'O";( f I IF YOU BEL:tEVE THE PROPOSAL IS INCOMPLETE OR YOU DISAGREE, contact :'he representative that initiated or sponsored t.echange and resolve difference~. ('rhe Change is not made until di:fferences ar~ resolved, EXCEPT, when a timely decision is required, e.g., forest practices! applications pending.) .. - PHONE 3/~ -6/3( ~BE SPONSOR OR INITIATOR MUST LIST THE ORGAN~Z.ATION REPRESENTATIVES CONTACTED ABOUT THE PROPoSED CHANGE(S). RECORD CONTAC DATE, AND CONCURRENCE OR NONCONCURRENCE, OR LACK OF RESPONSE FOR THE ROPOSED CHANGE. (wIin 30 days) CONCUR/R~SOLVE DATE" NO CONCtf.R !NO RESPONSE (' c) }'\:<.Ij.A.... ,1-/, I f ~ I I I I NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE DNR lX'L~ ( DOE C c:w2. loa_I ~ k~ d-, ~ I--f> Oh. I \} 1V\. f( J M.e..-t' .JI i~r- &-^j) C ha.,. /.(1 ~ LANDOWNER NO WDF . WOW TRIBE(S) . lriJ"l' , I I i I ATrACB COLOR CODED DNR BASE MAP SHOWING ('''~ES IN WATER TYPE'AND LOCATION. Type I-blue; 2-~_een; 3-red; 4-yellow; 5-. :r!ple. If known, change the "?" on water types. Clearly show -ends of water typle .changes and co~nect.ionsf no orphan!l ~ Use adj acent map (~) as needed. ONIR Reg ion Cartographer enters water type changes per CIS protocols of ONR, Inforr:ation Management Divisi.on. (There is no ~u. pportfor existing obsolescent w.a.ter type maps. Your help is needed to rOY1.ew and. correct the new GIS water type mapa.) 3/15/93 ! . ! PECEIVED , DEe - 3 1993 -0 -', t 1- ~ ,-\ il C C T i \j~L~ I .- r~. " ;-:.. 1 \ '0 f" , r V_ r \:-- r- o j-J-,. '.~ r MAP 1 c-. W N S HIP 2 9 N 0 ~. T ~ P A I.j G E 0 1 [ A S T w u ') .~ C J ION 0 7 APP~ICA":JII I QAlA lAYtQS ~NAVAllABL[ r~1~ 'I-'I~, SECTION C 0/\ f (j. I.J ~ S t 32 66 "' EB ..8 .93 417 OJ .ff] 64 / T 1) .... A=I m R 1Ft"( 1IIiJ7R .' '4 . An '.dY 1 fl2lJ Jtff~ . '. . rrt ... ..1JJU!i/~lINfYql!/J SCALf o tOOO ~~ " l~ ~ ~ I' \. '-I ~~O," '" "" ,.,",,,,, ,~OO~ ..000 . '000 ~"""",~"" : 15000 ~ r:UT 1 H11' ._. .;. w.P OAT ~J 09. 935 CJr.to~r Interval: 4') : e ei L::CU>IO: See I,\Slfu(!on, :~ 1\ J 2 7 O:SCLAIMER: See . :0 ~ ~ r Jet ion s . \1~h~. (lASG" , . ...1:> t-.\ 1<. Rv. tVt L,.- (2. T I ~)l(67S" fO~ \04 ~.3Z I '> '*-. " -, (PJfi7:1)' ~9l/~] Date Hailed * WATER TYPE CHANGE '. lCATION OF PROPOSED CHANGE:. Begins in S _.I.~. . T 1-*"'t0~R IE..' (E/V) Ends in s' 7. T 'J.9 NR / .f- (E/W) Water Bodyl.i17ll &ooi.(.CRf({(/~~~~IA' County.TE. ~.RS6k.J ASON FOR UPGRADE vi- or DOWNGRADE . (must meet WAC 222~i6-020/030): rl/f Phys f ca 1 characterfstl c(-r.;.f'ioP' '" P f ~ lIWow - h"1f~ ... MA\, r ~ '" Ct.o f(,g ) r1' 'Presence of fish. r ... . []-'WaterqualitY/use . . . -::~ Evaluation Method and Results (required for allj ~~~ .. - . ..s. .' . ..... to." .. ::'.,r - . .." . -- ~.,. ..., .., .... ,':0 .. .......:J:~...:. :__.....1.-;'. t.;.._-- .....-;~-:;_.. - . :.~_..~ _ .. ~ .._ ,.. ) .~. _...:'._"~' -. L _....., _.... ~ _' ..:; _ . ., . .. .... ~i' ... _ ,..... .. . ~. . - -,. .-. ... ~ ." V' -... '. - ,'.:".. -..'- ..'\L .,' -. ~ _ -~.. I'" ....- _.._ .. ., t :~ _'.._ ; YOU DISAGREE WITH THE PROPOSED CHANGE (or' believe it is incomplete) call the initiator lediately to resolve any differences. l'h'l pro-cess can not be' completed until the agreement }S resolved_ (See note 1 below) ; ::-+:. .:~:~..~.~ 'i~~;;:;::',,-:~~ .--: ~:~"~:~}!' .' . :~. "';~'.~ .}'." .~.' ':~....': '. . ....:. f<~',; !' - :,_~,~..., .:., .:"!~ ..... '1'< ~~.~~-f~':'" - tiator......:...:.~:... . , '. '.'.' ..~.>:....Organization.:...:--.. -'.~",". . phone: <'::.;~r~;;~:'~:::: .':~...~ ,7.' . .' <.~ .~.... '~' .~ '; :~,~:.::, ~ !.;~. . ..~;. initiator"s"'ise'.onlY :~. ..,;, . .:~. ~ '.: ~ '. .'. - - _' _' _ ';,.'~ . ~ _ . 4 ,...: : ",~'. .....!~. "::. ._ - ..-... - . ':'.1 . , . ...~.:1~ ."".'~'... ..... '., ...- t. the'repr,esen.ta.tives concurring with the .change: -:'... . Indlvldual-, na.e (required) concurrenc;e. or resolutton date norespanse nonconcutrence ONR -WOW .h___.....___ '.wb;:" . DOE TRIBE ---''--.'---"-~' 'J,Jit;jr>'r----...--.,-c-.,- . . . .' 'f4y 1 . - . ,f f . It' . e 2tJuz. - !"... i I r.' . " . u 'I w-;~':'? /l~. - l.~. P'.p; -, .,." f.-.,j.[ ..f,. . . vUj lu; ;:;:u.,~ ~ tJ'{jjlil/;~lJ LANOOW".~R.(S)';~.~.:..:i...i... "..', ...;. .:.' . '- -Contacted yes' no----. . Notff.ication:.is:-strongly urged (but'i'Ot required) . _ . -. .~ _. ....-;.:;~:~g:~.!:-n:.g:~,~?:~.~.::..;;:. "'~..:i:'I/_ ,.... _ _ ..' ..::.~: ..:):. ~[!:lh.e""~~.~~ge': i~volv~s a pendi.~g fPA,. contact DNR prio:r to fPA due !1ate t~ ~nsure :"~u:.e.r~r.~tec~1~n at th~. higher: l~ve1. .' . ". . .... ~ _ .,\. ;':" ,. . -,?:- .A.;!~.p/s!a~~1~ ~he ~~lor coded change. must aCCOlIIDany this fnm '/Tvnla 'l.hl;... ~_ IRp4 "ElrVRlJ) , D € f\f{. n~~1 u,,f() 1 '.. . . IJ '/mE;~:~'1.~.:- ......~: .. . " . . I .. - . . JUINff4ltll. . .--.-.- u_ . --- . :( S'pd t::'.( IN; 'n, "-tott Ui.!.4 (( /6f JftJ.$..~{J (j) 1 Jv6o....'.d.7 \ . :L l<O€(i njf(( 1: W4u( I~C/.-{JJJ.(JL({j~'rr)-li}.l'" .. 'f"4 .N((-!l 11" 1 y( " '/)Jd! r-rM,A,/fI, J'k/l,JC ACe. .. H.. '. lY\( l( N6 uJ IF y: CilN r../l".((f" .r:~(.j(bUJ,",-,,-,- -"--"-"- '.".. . - i . I. . I ... - . -r);? -S~/f!,.t.AJ/l I.> NO~ .!2.o5,(."Jl-fJ) t;... -.l/-J'- .. . .. . .. .'.'j_;""1'.-(,;'/ - (J.a6.{(.. .CR.f€l< ))j AJ,A~.[),,'-,-IJ~.J(:fl.---.--rH{... - -- . _ .' ... .... _. ..Ln cRG-( /J [kI6()-N7- ...o_F__ .fh~i-r'Lc:,.. -J5J(u:J(-_.Jf-RiJ-N r..._._. : . . . ...... TJ-IJI-( G, J..,6ft<G ~ If:;..AJ-r ~({ .fVt oa:(.U . ~ .RG,u 6Jlj) .. . . ..... j ~:rt: r~JlJ?tAARr ~)f:p-(u6-Aell~ ,./hA Z .,-------.- 'q' .... .- ,;-.:.~:6U-f~ 10~f7o.;:-~~~t!;;J~-g~~~(-. ~..:-';f.!Jt;1-7.'.. .. _.. .. .._.' _ .....)--l=Rt:-V>JM 0 - --".'!,_.... .--.:t.__"'__~'_~"_.---jl_~__.-v._..._.) I'.I~"" ..n.._IL_~_____._.._-..._...._ . .... ..... r<.ov.~~~t-!S'!. _\.N\Af(JlN1Ljf.{Yt(R~IlJ>)1-~JS.,~..s-;~ ,-c-- l'-:~.---';: ~~#i4:0~;~~*:~j~J-!i~~:;~'~9 {__..no__ - -._~~ ". ~~S~.!J.~.~:r1ll.JNJJ~~j~~~9~}-.y~~fNJJ : :--~ :1 .~. .':." :'.:". A~Jl:'rtc"::' .:....: ..... ... ." .' I .':- '. .' .:.' . .;.:?}~~~~.::-::. l' . . ....- . ."._ _ ~__ . _._____ _. _ ~_ _ _. ---.....--:-_---:..-__ ,_.--.+--_______.._----.---:-...-... "l:. .:~ ' """- __-0._ :._: .,n. ..~' ,~.~Y_t.M....fl-&~n_w,UJ~cj}J!l.C.)1ilil~~~7' '.u .' .. .... . .__._ .l<inl.R., ~~.{2. -j-.J<:6J2 -~.l\-i.J..o:lfj,J.Jo.\h:J\:\ ~~.l) -..-_.- ..:... ..:... _~. ~~'.:Al~~i.~~J).~(~~)S~,_'L ::~ffl.~~..~::~j):.:.: '. .,. 7 .... - .... ... -.L. . JJ.Ap( ..COufi:NT. '.. rJ 1N i. fi~ ~ -r}J.\./_. ...CIR..(-ft.kL .. - ...... _"" . u" . ~ .~ .~(f.. -- -!-g~J.._---A-.A(J--UJL~-ti--- ./JA(j{---1Jt(J4'-l~-"-"-"""--.'-'-'--'- ___.__...~_...____ _._ _____~~ -~jJ.$-S-_;;U;~~A-$~!).LJ).Nl1.M..6l) u 7N(_ . . -.'.... __._._._._. _nO. . .:r-R-(OJ4-_-L5~~A-__.Q~__:I1:\'!~tJ)._.-Ih.j~(-_.[RO\h4--1H~-i1Jl-7---_.' _._ . _. ....u_. _._.. ... __.._. ~J\l.:l) _J.1f>.c_t:(D_}(L-t:.-~ .o~~..Q. .J.:L.....Do ._~()-r_-~~w-..E~P..-6.. .,_ __ _0 .... . ._-.~.-..._- {:2---T1~( ._~j)1J.U{--g~Jf~--~~rzl.jt.-..L~O( n..~O.{'_:rfl~, ~r_.__.._.__.._ ~ ~'(~_.~'''-.,l~.;t~~ut~~~R1~~:~;:i::~ThCi: ~._--_. "-":'~:-~ ~*;r;. :.7Ji.f~-lJ.6J{fJ~r_of!b'__'_ --. --.---.- .. . . . .,.- ~ .' '. -':. ,~.~ ::.;.~:~lr.;.t;)'r~~.:~~i~~~~.:.:~~. ~~~. ;'_; .~'C".:~~~,.-~.._..,.'~.~~... " I . W . ,,':' . . t., ;:'~'.:-f~;~ft ,. . ,.;;;:~iS5"';"f.;.~:t1~~~~Jr');~'"-'~""~i;':;1'~1~;.~ . .'. .:. ..1. . ::: '~L .;;~ < ~..LJ.;~;~~ik~~i _...: . :..:-.:~~tt~ . I .' r '-'.- . '..., 't _ \, -. ,/-" ::,./_1. ,":} . . . I. /-:""" : -' . \ 1f 7HC },\j in ^~ .CNo~ r 77vJJ!: wo. _}(j)y.( . ./}IN{.... _ ... .... w A ~ l.v (I\JoQC jlA. f!J(-R .0 ~ I C; C; I. w i'TJi C H ,W\!j()J.~.. . _ .. /J I << ]"I. t'c; }I... J. f-) J-.J) . RA 2 J. Out:.. (6 b .. u.__u :. u I 7h ISif"JJR l.N( ){IJ ( ..&(('j-,) ~ R(~ k6 _._wi.T)\ _'_q _. _ __ '. w,.J 0 0 t}"'t ~ Jft 1 MO 10, ... . ...w . .....___...,______.__.... . ". ... .~ .. _. .. . '" -.. -...---.--...-...----.---.----.. .-.. , . f ~~Ul . 7J1~RO"'W1l1nJ(J.(J;f,(f~il!Rlf[j?)u_ (f..JfQJ (Ju. t .../~J"~.E{.I.l M. _ j ,'1JJ-( . ~~ t . .W.!..1tU.hJ.,...__._.,._......._... ._. .. - -- .,P"l .. ~J>.[f../Y.lOJJ-rH._:.8uT.... r - ...01 O_._MT-..,/}r{~-6l1.)t)-f'_"__'_''''''__'_ ... ... ... .. . .ih.(,"(1(~n~;;'I:iRS.7:.N6-r1. ~~.a Jl c;.~ i. Jj~~~ ii";0_i~-.. .:~~ : .. . ... -- ~~r-j"'I~r:,f..U;)f>.I('/lA~.,;;).J'C(;N J~~~.~-;,.- "----..- . ... ..-... . ~~<: (,L1 0 ~ ~;~;_TJ{( ~V~.C~f. I~ <J . \j,.. .q~-~Uh>~_,_...u~ .. . ,. . ..... ... C R I_U: '" . ,/"-~'L o.~ '" l~ ..,.~ . ., .... . .. -......... u "----..--.... ...-1 : . . i G~.=~;~~~~'~;~~; f'-:-"'-.-._"'~- --'- .., .u . . . ..--', . ." '~.2JI.._:.~. ~1jjJ\)7':~ f .. ~.'. ~ ~~~~ . '-.' . . . . ..~ 1i:> <J f? l 0 7~ . . .:" '. . ...:.----:------.,-- .-- -----~.I. .lJ9.1I . ~ .',,--__ _ :_'_' _ '. !.. - ....... .:_-_... "'- .. ----.-----. -_..__........_-_.._...._~_.- --~.._.J~oJ{t~J~~ D~o, .~.) ~~.._.,--~-1.K:i.?-7.:.-______ :._-- - . .. .... -.- ~_.:~.::=.~-:----=~==-=~:. :-.-6>~. i~:7{;-;,Jj .==---: ... '_ ~.~__..==.-~~ i .-.... .- ..--...- ... -........ ...--....--....-..-.-.,-....-...._ .4 ..-..-- ..:.._...u......_..~....a.. .-- ... .~._.-. ... .... -. _._ ..____ .. ".. " ___..._ n_.___.._______________ ._..... -_...... '-." ...--.-.-...-- ..-----------..----.--.-------------------.----.-- ..__....~ . --'- --- .._-""":--.~.__.._......- --...---.-.-----.-...-.-----..----......-...- .... ._-_.._--~-_.._._- ._-~ , . - "-. --.---.--.-.-.-..-------REOclr.-- . ~___.....J _:~=.. :-=-~-- .--.-- ~.-. ----..- ...-..-.-----~-- ~.JjE1-)'"- . _..__ -- {'/ .. ... . --.----.....-....--..--.--- icq;IfAY..1.8._-... ~--------- ......:.- "--1 ~~-'-~--____--:.-:~--_.--4t:f"'dJJIJ!ttlIlN1K ~- ..~.~. .-..--.-J .-.-.---~.:...: . .... . - :.' . ----~-. .-.....WID...____ I ..... ..~.~. ~~~~;~~~0~:~~~~i~.i ". ...... _1 - . ....' .\ . ;(1 -. . -. PG.l .!!~ .\'fRE:P!'\ .. '. Stream Name: Tributary To: WRIA #: Sample Frequency: WDFW-SSHEAR PHYSICAL SURVEY OF OTENTlAl HABITAT UPSTREAM.SURVEY COMME Ie oose Cr Date: Oak E$ay Observer(s):1 17.02ooA Section surv~yed: 30/161 Site 10: 1eqs14 o 1 TiIVSoncarty Oak Bay Rd to Insufficient flow . Hip Chain Reach 1 . Abbrevlstic:ms:. 162200 Damloverflow pi R8= RIght Bank "B= left'Bank. .US= UpStream OS= Down Stream Comment I CST= ~atecl.m:ee1 The flshway Immediately OS of the Oak Bay rd. culvert, lwas evaluated by Ron Whitney and Is In Sshearbase as 17.0200 A 0.10. : - . Begin survey at Oak Bay rd. Official name for stream is U* Goose. Named for flock of 8rants that winter in the bay near the outlet Named by Scott Clogstow and Sus n Hopkins who live hi A fr8fTIe home on Hitler rei on RB. Scott and Susan joined us for this survey and provided the ater typing info included in the hard file. Short grad~nt increase aod increase in boulders. . Passable Culvert! Site #162201. Fully bedloaded, 4.Oft d,am., CST on private farm access rd. Recently installed and approved by Randy Johnson. Pipe was maxed out this wint~rof 199a.:.99 and last: See photos Provided by Scott and Susan. .. : .. Upstream end of culvert. i . . . . Found credit cards belonging to Alene Green. Seott tUmed~m over to the police. . Overflow CUlve.rt for Dam!. p. ond, $Ite # 162. 200. L s hapedwith win. dow.screenln. 9 aro. un d.toP.. 0% passable. Standpipe in pond at upstream end of pipe. 14m .1ong horiz ntally and about 2.4 to 3m long vertically. . This culvert/dam/pond was also evaluated by Ron Whl ey and Is In Sshearbase as 17.020(LA_0.40. Pond is owned by the McMillans and has been stocked eve year for the past 25 years with "Kamlopes . The pond is 12 ft dee. P and a temperature of 70 degrees F ~s been measured at that depth. At the edge it Was 21 degrees C. Saw lots of fry along edge. Average pond Ie~gth and width measured off map. . Reach Break for pond habitat and Barrier Dam. . . . Reach 2 288 Downstream end of pond. The stream runs yearrouncl but$,en now, 7/13199..the flOW Is low. This may b . retaining the water coming into it and releasing tlilat amount inus whet Is evaporated or absorbed from t c1earcutting up$tream has probably decreased the flow by a lowing rainfall to evaporate or transpired through dense vegetation that typically grows in c1earcuts. The fill areas upjstream of the pond are also probably due to allows fine sediment to be washed downstream to settle out I in low gradient areas; This causes the strea single braid having sufficient flow to allow fish to pass even fmall debri$ jams or create pools deep enough for fry to survive when riffles are dry. , Upstream end of pond. . Reach break for return to stream habitat I - , o 94 137 143 .175 274 288 348 Reach 3 348 , , This section of stream has a low gradient and almost no gra~eL large quantities of sand fill settle outcau . braid. Riffles are very shallow and already Isolating many frY In the pools. '.' Reach Break for substrate change, increase In gravel, and.~nopy COVer change from shrubs to trees. 561 Reach 4 561 585 600 789 ) x~' .. fes. d-- .VJO~JlJ~t~€.ft l' WDFW-SSHEAR PHYSICAL SURVEY OF POTENTIAL HABITAT DOWNSl'-REAM-GHEGK-COMMENT.s - . UttIeGoose Crt)ate: Oak Bay Observer'(s): 17.Q200A Section surveyed: 30/161 Site 10:' 160814 RM 07/13/99 TiIVSo.ncarty Oak Bay Rd to Insufficientflow 96 115 140 Comment Begin Survey at Oak Bay rd MP 0.71 First Plank' Control. Bevel cut downward to center. , 2nd plank control 3rd plank oontrOl 4th plank CQntrol 5th plank CC!ntrol RB pond ~ into stream. Man made. stagnate. Gradient 2.5% Debris jam passable at higher flow. ' Log control, center notched, Streambed has washed out fill. Flow goesuoder and around logs.' Hiller rd new culve,rt 100% passable. Site #162199, gps points lost in download. Duplicate site Id is 17.0200_A_O.02 has old 18 Inch pipe da~. That pipe was replaced in 1998 and new data is on Site fonn 162199. Old culvert was breached in 1/1997; Photos provided by Scott Clogstow and Susan Hopkins. ' , ' OO~~~. ' Rock control. End Survey at High Tide line. Stream is channelized and rip rapped on both banks to Oak Bay. No DS Barriers. Hip Chain. O. 4 5 7 10 16 35 sa 72 79 ,90 . , ; .\-' .' -: ,- \....f \( '~IlV'~ /. ' 'j ;: .' \ ":"'....... '.- ~'. ',_ i'~ ~ P NAY 1 "~<'\n,'7 "i J (./Ji.! i .~, .j~.'!',!/,:_".t... ," _ , .It(.l.v~ 1 ~~~t,ii Utt;J \RTMENT OF GAME . ;JO Capltof'Wiy North lympla, Washington 98504 DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES General Admin. Bldg. Olympia. Washington 98504 ~ LAST NAME '. lW t~ I~' I STREC"r v!'lAtJRAL ROIJT~ e h., '..--v\\~...C L) vV\... CITY Q. ~, VV'. '''''V,c U YY\.. STREAM OR LAKE - , . ljJ.lN/:,n'lfcb- Glk~.w..1'\ cl(kJ2."tlc;. /jw (?l~~(AJi,.<:~.f : .-A:'1J';{\/ QUARTER SECTION - -' - . SECTION TOWNSHIP RAI'fGE (E-W) '/: - -n',.,-- . . . .. .'!:;.. . . .. . . . . . . . . -. . . . -.. .. eo. . .. .. -. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ I_ .. . . . . . . . I I \-\ \C, \.\ s~.\'\oc-.. \ I'j9I CO TACT PHONElS) rj"l. Gl_ ~ '3$ -,7.-''1 H,.y.-.:: ~ L,.::.J 13 - "Iii t :<'<:-r<" 123 4m ClJ ill [2] WRIA STATE. A COUN"TY -;-. J[~... '. _ ~f. ","-~' :~(.':'\ ABCU ~ lliL [ill mJ F G IITl -TYPE or PROJECT /1'./V'{I(~: (.: O,.~ 'fI:t.c.. /(~.. i ...... V. . ... . . .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,... SEPA _/-, '. oUNDER.$S;'0C!6' o vesBr'NO-. -, . o OVER $5.0Qi UNDERSTO.OO THAT NO WOFiK WILt. TARTED UNTIL kSIGNE:D APPROVAL Q.ElVED. . DESCRIPTION Or WORK. METHOD. A D EQUIPMENT ~ .oy,a, ~. Loa C l1("c.E 't";, v.-'l..c"' ~ +" "'(..~i{"'/;!t' cl1 eOL-"l/l'i., F.d (, " - " r .' . 'n' ~ 'L~.J'':t'~;J-'';';''''1,A:~~ '1 j ~ 'b' r:;'kr;~l"C' '~'~j":-~;i:",.:./t '..J' n' 'l',c';;/";.;.;,', . I;....". '/' 7,':.'_::.: . '.~: "'''I~':-: .... .. 7..Jl., ~,,_.~V/~\""'.'f.r...T.'_r' .,,,,,.It' .,..Y".............../! .,;...J......,/.......J:!:. ...........:.....-.... . . ;r:!. ~ h t. . _0 ;-. . . . . . .. . .- . . . ;. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. ... . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . '. . . . ';.' . (IF NECESSARY USE BACK OF THIS SHEET 08 AOOlT ONAl SHEETS) . -- DISTANCE. DIRECTIONS TO. PROJECT SITE ROM NEAREST :TOWN , .f" ~ 'r I ..," .~....'" /) .. .\" ! ~ (i 7" i'1 ii}f~~. .01 . ..19(...lu'~ -OJil!. ~I'IV \ -'~.' '; \ '. . , , : ( :."~- In', 1.' \ oseo STAAnN<UjArth. 'AAOPoSED-FINISHIN<i DATE' - I PARTlCII'ATlNG 'JW;M;'.U"'uNS (Ie ANY')' I J...J()v'9l.; . ........, .~r? .':\~,,\ V\ 9 I,t. ~_.,' eillJ{ltli".!<f'~~,__:~-~,"-i,(-;,) OJHlR PERMITS . i' , - . Ale> T To rH k'-l 0 t...._) Ie. \)C.,.t~ .:.,.. .~ ..~ ~ .. rv1E LIMITATIONS: ;;.'t '1 - l-v\..,. . DATE (-_! ..? ("'(:/ Cj I .. . . ... . .. .. .. . . .. .. "." .. .. :~:' :.,.:,., .. ~ .," ..'.. ..... .. .. .. ~ .. .. .. ..'.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .! .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .," .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . .. .. . , - ~ . . . . '-' . . . : ~",~. :'~i.l~~0{:;" ',~ :.", . . . . .". . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . '1' . . . . . .. . . . - . . . . . . . . . · . . . . . . . " . " . . . . . . .. . . ... . . . . . . '. . '. . . . .:.. ... . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . . . .. ...... . .. . . .. . - .. . .. . . . '. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. . . . .1. . . . . . ... .. .. . .''; . . . . .. . . .. ". . .. .. . .. . ... .. .. .. . . . . . .;. _. . ~ - i "" . . .. . . .. . . .~. . . . . c.. .. . .. .. ..! ~ .. . . .. ..... . .. . . . .. . .'. . . . . . . . .. .. .. . . . . . .. . . ... . . r . . .. . .. . . .. .. . .. . . .. '" . .. '" .. ... .. . '" .. .. .. .. . .. . . . .. .." . . . ... ...~:: , , . - .. . . . '" .. . .. .. . .. .- . " .~".. .. ~. . ;",a .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . ;. . .. . .. .. . . . .. .. .. ~ .. .. . . . . .. . .. . .. f . . . . .. .. . . . .. . .. . . . .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. . :. .. . .. .. . . .. . . . .. . . . . ......... ....;'.<::.~..':~:.;.:~>...:. ~'. !........................ . -........ .....1.... ~.. 'R' ~~. !81l'" .'... .... .......... '. . "~" ,< ." . i '~t-f il rIfF[ . "'::'::":~',;t~~"...~.<.::. I . it ',. . ~. i-i.. . , .~, ',' ., 1 .AX "-'._4 a I ,. T . . . . . '.' -.- . ..-. . ~ ',' ".--' " ,,' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .'. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ". ~ '1' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . . . . ..- :~. . ':. t:. ZrfJ- ') . . . . . . . .' ", " ,./: '-:: " .' i C;.tt .. . 'Ji ~ - . .. . . '"' . i f'1'/;V .'" , - - . '- 'I' ,', ,- "/'8 2/l/;-:--- ......... ... ..... ............ ........... .... .... - - .. " '" - .-..... ............,....... ."1", . ':21. . . . I . ,. ..,. .. .. ......... .... . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . .. ::~. ; . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . > .l. . . .. . !='; ';,;i. . . ,::;':.~" . ., . .. .. . . . .. .. . I . : :: : : :: :: : .. .. : .. : ~:r;.. .. :: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : .; : : : : : : .. : .. .. .. : .. ..: .. .. : .. : : : 1: : : : : .. : : : : : : .. : : : .. : :: : : : : : : ..: : : : : : : : : : : : :' ...... '.... ..... ~ '~".: .. . . . .. ...... .:... .... . ... .. ~ . .. . .. .. .. ... ~ ~.......... . '.' f.' .' "., : I . ........................... ... , ..' .,~ .' I.. . , - . :'. - ~. 1 . I> '. : . '~....-~ . p.' }!i:A"~ HYDRAULic -:<"-if .' ._"';...~:-.... ;. ::,.;.;":", ---1 . .' 0<._ t, ",:. ..,. .. ~".;, .' 1 ~ .~ . .'~~'". ~~..;,';..\. .- '".:, I. "~40... _ :; .~- ..-_:.:_;-- '.l --":i~~.':: -"--,:,,":,., ..' -;Aj; ti;~; .. . ,;.,\~f";'",;,,~~~~ 1l~~ ~~~;3~~~5~ as o"""BEIIi OF n....'.., .., ....'Ic...' ......d '"'' '. ..... do'e'ii i't.f 1<""e'''''''''''e' ;~. :0_" . ';'~"...:~. . PAGE :, Of. .~ :>:o'PAGES ......... "/~.l. ~?f,~,"-~__..77___ " . T'. . -;;:-.. .. ffOlLASTLo NAHEwr-ie- -, .'....-" ;;a":y'" , ,. nRST ftilcoNTACT PHPHE($) 'r:lCOHTROl NlJIiSER . = A > ,,::rj85-1l!74 l1J ..' 00-52913-01 ,.. " . ",' '~r ......... '~:'-"" ,. .'REET 1M ....... llQIfE [f] ." ."@J "..... '.".,..,,,,. ChilllaCUIII High SchOOl.", . <. i" f!.?:{9~1l6 :::f~~!ZJ~~;'~__JP'" ~~h!~;~., 983:~~~'t~iit~~..c' g t~.?+S~~~~ft2~~-1-_~ 01~__~~~~2.~:;_ __________ ~ ", ~'..~' ,:',.Z:::W~P::.. " l'IHEl.);KI"'A!-.i~;f' m "i~~7a~~~" ,: (~I.:i. '. ~:}:.~~~~~~~;'> , ., .. :':t.;::-~~;~~~.: >~.:~ ~ ..~~ '-",'" .... ......... ';.::~ :.":.. . ;.:{:~.!~. .. .~ '.':".' ,':.... .Z-. .... '- .:~~Et;r'-~,. ' ..':",.~., }::;~~ ' .~ . ;~,. '.., ., .-. .._--....._,~_.-.... i:.:.~~:.:"f . ~.?~~~~:~. . ~.::.F~~~~j~..._.. . :-:. ,;'.~' ., J~;::;:: ":"~"''''''' .- ... ..~:~,....~~""'-,.,;~:. ,.' !.:. "~ ,.' . . .~:;):i~A ~ ......:.. ". ,~:J.' \ii, . Exemp~,.: ~~~:~~~-~*empt p.~nni ~s iEl~iJ;"eci. "HAilTAT ~NAGet<t..,,,_; .';.~~nclY J()hns?~ 4<~?-2634, :" < r - l(:::'fF~~~TjIL3~.';".t" ThU~y ,.: ~;;o~f.}V1 ,._~~,~~~; : -'. ~. . .~~r ......". .' .:.~ 5fi(,Jj,) , . I....~~ ;! '.;-- .-.. ,:-' '.)i ~. ;.:<' .. ~.' .---" R.' .E.'^"""..' ~~iJ.D~DIN.._ l-'S'$ , "4 PAGE~ -. ". \>;~ uRfoFFlCIf\L REq)ROS ~~t$l o~ ~ ~~92 OCl fr'tK ~ '8 . . ~cv E GP,BOURl' J~ERSOH COUlH'i AUDITOR - ~ Q..,O{' \-1.. ,rOEfll11 61, . 354145 BXAMPLB BASEHENT DECLARATION OF "EA$EMENT FOR a valuable'consideration, receipt of ~hich is hereby acknowledged, the GRANTOR(s), ... P;<f7KI(' 14 ,'o'/HOlY\ps..C'tU .. ,?y!^'l'tt (";." '-(O<./i:?:.i+ \. , owners of the following property: (GRANTOR'S legal 4e.oriptiop) HILf-cR'swPtT1Rf'7<OOT T~I"eT, LOT C( AI\) l) TlIlfLOFd>- -r'[~RI'tGf... I LO I 10 hereby grant, convey, establish and create an easement for the placement,. maintenance, construction, reconstruction, repair and upkeep of a primary and reserve drainfield for septic tank and sewer line leading thereto, including the cutting and removal of brush, trees and other obstructions which interfere with the use of said easement, together with the rights of ingress, egress, and regress, ,over, under, along and across the following described portion of the above referenced property: (.nt.r legal d..oription of tb. drainfi.ld .a....nt op tb. GRANTORS property) It ?ORTIC71O () F -rltyL.O~)S:- T'i'K~~GL I t....or 10, /fs Pi iZ ItlT f\ ettt.. D .]) lit &e-t IYl " l<t.:s.r: i< Ut.- .D"R-17 If\) FltLD IT R."i It '~ said easement is appu~tenant to and for the benefit of the GRANT~E(s),____ PAnN' ,.4 3".,..tj o"fJ"i>O'I "r .i>A I\) /'l L. (0_ tf(JvR- A- ,. the present owners, their heir,- future own rs, . successors, and assigns of the fOllowing described property: H 1t...t.€:.R.S ~ f+TfR.FROI\:)T TRPte.,/ t..oT '1 (GRANTEB'S legal d..oription, looation of r..idenoe .erved by 4raipfield) SAID BASBMBNT SHALL BB CAlfCBLBD ONLY AT SUCR 'lIMB AS TBB JBJ'J'BRSON ,'.. ' " COUNTY HEALTH DBPARTKBHT WILL APPROVB CANCBLLATION OJ' SAKB~ IN WITNESS THERE9~ the undersigne~ have hereunto set their~ hand and seal this A67:;;L- day of o.~........, , 19.z:e=. . . ' ~ ~ ~~.:...~ . ~'\~ . S TBOr WASHINGTON, County of "k$" .AA..." ./ On this day personally appeared before me PATQ./C-IA :r THornP~c>D-I)t:':"I.(" A/VD lJArv ,/OtLeA .' r..)Z[tJ { to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the ~~~ within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that <(:::>:;) ~ signed the same as THEIR.. free and voluntary act and de d :_:~'IIr.n ~ for the Uses and purposes therein mentioned.. e, :fl~~ ~ ~~~':". OIlDIIl H~ IWID AIID OnIOIAL 8BAL this J:;:"'" dsy of c~"~ :;;l" t= -< ~ < .... LL7 ./ . ~f-t .~ N.ot~~' Public in ~f';~~:. ~ Wsshington, raaid~ng gao~ at ocrTI......j..,>:>E:7Ul:> . My appointment expires: q-I-c,:)" . <u:>- CI;) c: ~RANTEE(s) -"'. NOTE: Signatures are' to be notarized and completed form ~iled with the Jefferson County AUditor. ' .. for record t GCt,&_ vat. 390' "'..c452 fJ?1Y3(]/~3'd ...1.N3~~mJ b .J.. A, J. ?\/'dJ.. .L ('IlnJ1'2l'11l C"\ , ~):l3111 H C9v 1~'!1 06& 101\ ,. \ \ '~' \ '\ \ IV ./C" I S"Z :. III "'V"'.A""1J,~~tJ.; '8311/H '-. '- , , fTo '00/ I \l) I, (too ~ 001 I I Ut ~ .., 1 Ul. o 1',sot k ,.. t> ~ - " I '7?~~~ -: ...... /"1 'V","'',, I ::(".. hill/' ' " ' I -'I - 10/ ,- ~ 1- I ,,,,-,9 01 1.01 ,3-;) ~ ~ 'Zl3..t. S,'z;/07hlJJ. --------- . , -, ~, ".:"-7 , :_~\ :~" -t' .4',.... , 't~ ~ ;.:.:;.r._. ,,5,01 QI71{\dZ! j'l) ~}, . .1- "I;". _, '.. ~_ .,tl ,< . STATEMENT TO BOCC HEARING RECOR~HIMACUM HIGH SCHOOL HEARING U FEBRUARY 27, 2008 RECEIVED :',; ,", f).''>;(tB ;:_. ;-"1 tJJU My name is Bob Schultz. I live at 938 Monroe in Port Townsend. JEFFERSON COUNTY I add my thanks to all who have put such an enormous amount of work into tl$OMMt68~NERS I stand in support of the revised CAO, with the reservation that the text evidently still needs considerable work in the interest of logical clarity and completeness. I'd like to add a few words to what's been said already regarding the big picture framework of this debate. Some of the CAO debate is clearly about economic advantage. Much of it reflects concerns about anticipated population growth. But beneath all this and underlying the myriad regulatory details are two fundamental, and competing, principles. On the one side is the principle of community and the common or public good. We've celebrated this principle in our country's history by raising barns together, joining volunteer fire departments, and by legislating the New Deal and the Great Society. In Biblical terms, this is the principle of the Golden Rule and of being a good neighbor. And it's the principle to which our founding fathers pledged their "lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor." The other principle promotes individual rights and liberties-the rights of women and minorities, the rights of the 1 st amendment, and-especially here-property rights. The two principles are dependent on each other and they must be continually balanced and rebalanced. The protection of either the common good or of individual rights must depend on personal moral responsibility-as in voluntary stewardship of the land. But we know from experience that moral responsibility, while necessary, is not always sufficient-hence the need for governance and regulation. We should not doubt that there are many responsible landowners in Jefferson County. But neither should we doubt that there are and will be some who believe it's acceptable to do as they wish with their property, that their property rights are absolute. It is for these that rigorous, carefully crafted regulations must be written, implemented and enforced. For the health, safety and well-being of Jefferson County citizens, the protection of both the common good and of individual rights must be ensured. These protections must be grounded in both personal moral responsibility and in law. In addition-and lastly-the BOCC should ensure these protections, especially of the land, with an eye to our obligations to those who'll live here when all of us are gone, and with en eye to our obligations to the earth itself, beyond property lines and beyond our human appreciation and use of it. Thank you. ::t:~. ~3 J.!J.Q!D'5 Phyllis R. Schultz 2023 East Sims Way - Box 285 Port Townsend, WA 98368 HEARING RECORD February 28, 2008 RECEIVED Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners P.O. Box 1220 Jefferson County Courthouse - 1820 Jefferson Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 2 9 2008 JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Dear Commissioners Austin, Johnson, and Sullivan: This is a written version of my comments at the public hearing on the draft Critical Area Ordinance (CAO) sent to you from the Jefferson County Planning Commission (JCPC). The hearing was held on February 27, 2008 at Chimacum High School. Since early 2007, I have attended several public meetings at the WSU Learning Center about the CAO -- the JCPC's sub-committee appointed to advise on developing a draft document - and deliberations by the JCPC as that group prepared their recommendations to you. I have also attended the "public comments" part of several of the Monday weekly sessions of your board at which times, the CAO has been a featured topic. My comments on February 27th wete made to specifically enter into the public record what I have observed and heard in these intervening months. First, I note that you have been alleged to have failed to provide opportunities for public input into the CAO document. I disagree with those who have made these allegations. The sub-committee meetings, the JCPC meetings as well as the public comments part of your meetings have been open to the public; the dates, times and places announced and posted. In addition, there has been constant and detailed coverage in area newspapers: The Jefferson County Leader and the Peninsula Daily News. Second, what I have observed and heard in these meetings is the use of words to polarize the public's view of the ordinance-development process and many of its specific components. Threats of suing the county coupled with the taking of photographs and videotaping have appeared to me as attempts to intimidate you and the relevant county staff in your decision making and in implementing your lawful duties. ...< ..~ \ \. " < Page Two There have also been attempts to use words and to write sections of the ordinance to "find common ground". For example, I view the section pertaining to the Critical Area Stewardship Plans (CASP)as a c1earexample of efforts tomediate between property owners who oppose most of the draft ordinance and those who support it. Yet, the po~ intimidating andthreateninghavecontiuped throughout the past year including at the hearing on February 27th. Third, I urge you to move forward and pass the document submitted to you from the Planning Commission by the March 18, 2008 deadline taking into consideration the substantive recommendations to strengthen the CASP section so that monitoring and enforcement can be actualized. Finally, my intent in my comments on February 27th and in writing this letter is to make sure that what I have observed and heard is a part of the public record about the development of and decision-making on the Critical Area Ordinance. With this in mind, I want you to know that I am willing to be called upon to provide legal testimony in this regard should a defense of the ordinance be necessary. Sincerely, ~ rf. ~d- Phyllis R. Schultz . ,..ce>'~J 3/3/0'! 2/29/2008 Comment on Critical Areas Ordinance HEARING RECORD To the Jefferson County Commissioners As the co-owner (with the bank) of ten acres along the East branch of Chimacum Creek, I am happy to report that thanks to the efforts of JL T, NOSC and the Conservation District, the entire creek frontage (about 1300') along the Western border of my property has been restored and is under protection. There is a 150' buffer in Open Open Space with a conservation easement from the Jefferson Land Trust in place on one five-acre parcel and a 180' buffer on the other five-acre parcel with the Jefferson County Conservation District. Due to the fact that many owners along this branch of the creek have voluntarily provided buffers, the salmon are now able to navigate up the creek towards the headwaters to spawn. I strongly support the adoption of the Critical Areas Ordinance that is currently being proposed and am grateful for the time and energy of a large number of people to make this plan both flexible and (hopefully) enforceable when necessary. The streams know no property boundary lines and there is little point in restoring parts of a water flow and risking that other parts of the creek are open to intrusions that will negate the hard work accomplished on other parts of the stream. Although a majority of the people currently living here take care not to diminish the value of the wetlands and streams that cross their lands, without this ordinance, there is no guarantee that this good behavior will continue. Landowners of large parcels are under increasing pressure to sub-divide and sell, leaving our aquifer recharge areas open to possible degradation. On a personal note, I see from your Critical Ordinances area map that you show a Class V stream coming down across my lower five acre (parcel # 901-114-007). I have seen no evidence of water there since moving here in 1999, but am aware that up on the ridge above me there is a stream that runs above-ground part of the year. I see no problem at this time with having a 75' buffer on either side of the area shown on the map, but for . the sake of accuracy would like to point out that I believe the map to be in error. Thank you for your time and consideration, Linda Lou Marshall PO Box 861 Chimacum WA 98325 152 Brookside Street Port Hadlock WA 96339 360-732-5070 Iindalou@cablespeed.com <.~ Page 1 of 1 - . Miranda Schryver From: Linda Lou Marshall [Iindalou@cablespeed.com] Sent: Friday, February 29,20084:58 PM To: Miranda Schryver Subject: Comment on Critical Areas Ordinance Attachments: Comment on Critical Areas Ordinance.pdf Greetings: Please find a PDF file attached with my comments! Thanks, Linda Lou Marshall Iindalou@cablespeed.com 3/3/2008 ~" 0 '~~ ~7~~Da ~LJ' HEARING RECORe -21-Q 7 ---!_=~.=...fe..~.....~~;C/igw.~I~.iaLjfl&~_~~-;'Tip~~~14{ .'4tff.<l: ~1;) ---------.-.-.--1~~.~~~~-Et\lEIr-. ~=_==_.-=..~~:J:;.-e2!2t:L~~ -~~;.O=~-;~8-===..... -----------------~~~.~-~tf-~tyg!~s;- _______Q&____~_________________ ___________I~i"';\__,..._~_ ---------------------. --- ------ -- ...-.... ----JEFFERSON COtJNlV . ----------------- ... - ...-----.------------- .._______~n t~-+--€_eMMf5StONERS ------------___________________________ .____________ ___._ SU~ 11 I-IvplLt 17 ~ ~ ________"______ -----------------..~-__ .'.- .-..---- ..---- ------_______________ ________ ________CLfr.tuJ.S_/Jpiecft~ en -It 4/{ LV ~tlS__..______ ...., '-- I_L-l.-.. A f ' ~ L--.---.--XSCiJ?nw.~ Lt. fJ.d~~~.fu1Lj .. ---------------4--Q~j~~-k=-- :fJ, U-,___~------------~_------------------ --......---.----------~_CAD.-~-~__!lJ..&__cdl~~~-~-Lcl0)-----_____________ ._....._-.-----_...._.~_.:.--.._._--_._----_.__......- ". .......- - ..--....-....-..-----..--.------------.-----.---.------.----.-.---------------. _"._...~._.n,_,_'.,_.~.~_~~~______.__;___....~,,_~.,_~..~~.~,_..~_~.....__._,_~_._,___,_, .,"___.,._..~.,.__._,__,_.~,~__~_,,"_~_....._.._,..,_~~__.,,_____._____.___.,"_~___~.__~~,_._",..._~.~____.,,__,.....__.~........_~_._._._._.~..__'"...__..__.._ '_,_....__"~.,_.~..____.~__._....___.__.._...."__ ~__._"..~._~___...~.._-"._.._,..'"_'"_,_.,^.w.._....___ __,_~,_,>o.."_.~. _<__...__~...___'_,_~___'_'_h".___.___"__~___'<..__"........,_"._~__~~.~.__,_._._______".,~M.'_'..."__...~__.._._~__~__~_.~_~_,...._~~__..~____.~__.._.,___.,,~~..._'..__._........._________....___"_~_.,,.. ..... -~..._"'_.~.~~-,_..~.."-,."_..~....-..-.,..._,...._.~,..,,.._._..,... .. ~...--...."-_._-'--~~~--~.~.~.~-,._.~.~-------,.---._.~---~-._--_._----._---,_...__._--_.._..,-~------_.~"'---~-_...----._~--~~_..~~-~-=_.~._.~."<."--,,...-_..-..".-..._",.'- ,..~..,----~..~ ~---...~-.~_-.,..______...___,,_~.,,_..~_... .. _ _. . ..___... '"__".______~.__...___""~m..__.~.,___.,._........,""_.-___...._.______..~..__~_..____..___________~~___~.'"_~~_..._"_~.,.~_.-...__....~.".._,_.~.,_"_..._."'.. ._-~.._._~.~-_.__..._._._._-~ ..--...-...... ..-.G .. Yahoo! Mail- sueatob@yahoo.com Page 1 of 1 MAIL (;16$1<: Subject: RE: Critical Areas Ordinance violations Print - Close Window Date: Wed, 27 Feb 200812:17:40 -0800 From: "AI Scalf" <ascalf@co.jefferson.wa.us> To: "susan hopkins" <sueatob@yahoo,com> cc: geraldsteel@yahoo.com Susan I am reviewing these COM cases. I have not made any decisions about them. AI From: susan hopkins [mailto:sueatob@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 27,200811:52 AM To: AI Scalf Cc: geraldsteel@yahoo.com Subject: Critical Areas Ordinance violations 2/27/08 To: Al Scalf From: Citizens Protecting Critical Areas We recently had a message on our answering machine from DCD Enforcement Officer Molly Pearson regarding our CAO violation complaints against Joe Thompson filed 12/16/07. (Com07-00158, Com07-00159, and Com07-00160) She referred us to you with "any concerns" we might have about these as you are" the one who made the ultimate decisions". She did not tell us what those decisions were. So, what are your decisions? Are you going to take any action concerning these complaints? These are all serious complaints that deserve to be addressed. Best Regards, Susan Hopkins Citizens Protecting Critical Areas E-mail address:sueatob@yahoo.com cc: Gerald Steel Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Tryit now. http://us.f301.mai1.yahoo.comlym/ShowLetter?box=%40B%40Bulk&MsgId=8625 _0_142... 2/29/2008 :,- .. Olympic Wetland Resources, Inc. Dixie Llewellin, Principal Biologist Board of County Conunissioners 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, W A 98368 Dear County Commissioners, I would like to make comments on the final draft of the Critical Areas Ordinance (18.22 JCC) as recommended by the Planning Commission dated January 09, 2008. I have been conducting wetland delineations and wetland mitigation plans using the current ordinance in my daily work as a project biologist for Olympic Wetland Resources, Inc. since 1995. For the last several projects I have been using the draft updated ordinance (based on the 2004 rating system and the DOE Volume I buffers) to compare results. Mitigation Compliance My main concem over the new CAO revision is that there is no clear plan for enforcing mitigation plans. I have designed numerous mitigation plans that allow for buffer alteration if the client adheres to a five year monitoring schedule, with contingency plans if the project does not meet performance standards. There are several of these projects that can be viewed from public roads that have not been implemented long after the developments have been completed. I expressed my concems over these unfulfilled mitigation projects in a letter to Al Scalf dated December 26, 2007, but I have not yet heard back from the department. I'm attaching that letter for your information. The actual procedure for developing, conduction, and enforcing mitigation plans is especially unclear under the proposed Critical Areas Stewardship Plan Section (18.22.460). There are opportunities here to improve the understanding by landowners of wetland functions and values and therefore, hopefully, the desire to protect them, but it is especially important under the CASP section that mitigation compliance is enforced since this seems to be a more unproven approach to protection and mitigation. The Department of Ecology has a clear and concise method of reviewing success and failures of past projects which could well serve as a model 1'\.lr Jefferson County to follow. I highly recommend that a compliance survey of past projects be conducted to assist in the development of a strategy to ensure future mitigation success and enforcement. :;.- ... Multiple Ratings (18.22.300) The DOE rating system does not support dividing wetland ratings below Category I near a Category II wetland. Divisions of lesser wetland is often difficult to determine and can be very confusing. Smaller buffers can compromise the protection standards of both categories of wetlands. I recommend that the BOCC not adopt the proposed language allowing the multiple rating of hydrologically-connected wetlands. Wetland Categories, Rating Scores and Buffer Widths (Table 18.22.330) The tables in the draft on page X do not address all scores. A wetland I recently assessed was a Category III wetland with high land use impacts with a score of38 points, with a low habitat score. It does not fit within the existing table. Thank you for all your work in helping protect and preserve the remaining Critical Areas in Jefferson County. These are irreplaceable resources to all citizens of Jefferson County. Sincerely, Dixie Llewellin Principal Biologist, Olympic Wetland Resources, Inc. Cc: AI Scalf, Director of Community Development Molly Pearson, Planning Manager and Code Compliance Coordinator Peter Downey, Jefferson County Planning Commission Page 2 of2 \?~ Olympic Wetland Resources, Inc. Dixie Llewellin, Principal Biologist Board 621 Port Townsend,WA 98368 Re: Support in Adopting Final Draft of the Critical Areas Ordinance Dear County Commissioners, I support the current draft of the Critical Areas Ordinance and urge you to adopt it as written. Revisions can be made in the future. The new Ordinance is a compromise to the existing Ordinance. I feel wetlands and buffers will be more at risk with the voluntary stewardship plan (CASP) since the majority of most clients I have worked with have no idea of wetland functions and values. Buffers are even less recognized or understood. Even though my work includes helping the landowner understand wetland rules and finding building solutions I find more and more disregard to the existing rules. It is imperative that the protection regulations outlined by Jefferson County do not become any weaker. I have observed the degradation of large tracks forests and alterations of existing wetlands since moving here in 1980. There are many unmapped wetland even after the delineation are complete and in the hands of DCD. Thank you for all you time and effort in helping protect and preserve the remaining irreplaceable resources in Jefferson County. Sincerely,. -) -.----_.., 1/ .,:<_;:;1 .//;;/rtc~ .r ~ Dixie Llewellin Principal Biologist, Olympic Wetland Resources, Inc. Olympic Wetland ::> tJ rc: E~~ 'S ~ , lClC, }i' ~ \lY~, . . 'f~~' ::f,~t~ . ~{./[;;~1.~:p . . . . " ~:;~~;r ,:::;;/ Al Scalf, Director of Community Development <~~,':'!i:!~:/ PO Box 2070 . ,\J.,;: Port Townsend, W A 98368 \~\l\t . \~. \"\ UI" ; : t.~ 85650th Street portToWDsend, WA 98368 360385-6432 dixie@cablespeed.com December 26, 2007 \\\ AI, l:) 1"1 I have been delineating wetlands and designing wetland migration projects in Jefferson County since II 1995 as principal biologist for Olympic Wetland Resources, Inc. During this time we have completed 1:1 many mitigation designs that were approved by the Department of Community Development. I However in driving past several of these projects the development is complet but mitigation was never implemented. It is imperative that a survey is conducted by Jefferson County staff to evaluate the success of past mitigation projects. Since the Critical Areas Code is about to be updated this is a good time to see if ; past enforcement for wetland regulation has been effective, The Department of Ecology has developed a procedure to evaluate the success (or compliance) of mitigation projects. Several questions from the DOE's The Science and Effectiveness of Wetland Mitigation are as follows: Installation - whether the project was installed . Installation according to plan - whether the project was constructed according to the approved mitigation plan and design Wetland area establishment - whether the project obtained the acreage of wetland that was required Performance standard/goals/objectives attainment- whether the project performed as anticipated Monitoring - whether the project was monitored as required (or was required to be monitored) . Maintenance - whether project maintenance was performed (or required) Regulatory follow-up - whether any regulatory agencies made an attempt to track the project after the permit was issued The link below includes more detailed information on DOE's wetland mitigation evaluation. http:;/\v\vvv,ec\!, \va. gOY /programs/sea!wet lands/has/vo II d ranft' ha J2l1,:.!:.U!.'!2JL~~,p~U' I look forward to hearing from you or your staff. Thank you for your attention to this matter during this busy time of changes. Sincerely, ./..... ./ ({'. / <' C Lt( ., L_ Dixie Llewellin Principal Biologist, Olympic Wetland Resources, Inc. Cc: Stacie Hoskins; Planning Manager, Molly Pearson; Code Compliance Cuordinator .;;cc:~v ~31~Og J. v1v-'2>1\Y'- J Page 1 of2 Leslie Locke From: Phil Johnson Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 11 :04 AM To: Leslie Locke Subject: FW: CAO draft HEARING RECORD From: Renee Bush[SMTP:RENEESENSE@HOTMAIL.COM] Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 10:57:58 AM To: David Sullivan; jasustin@co.jefferson.wa.us; Phil Johnson Cc: news@ptleader.com Subject: CAO draft Auto forwarded by a Rule OPEN LETTER TO THE BOCC RE: Draft CAO Dear Members of the Board of County Commissioners: During the public hearing (Wed. Feb 27, 2008) on the draft critical areas ordinance, everything was brought up as a reason for passing or not passing the ordinance-the environment, property rights, science, the Constitution, and even "takings." I think I can safely say that everyone believes that protecting the environment is a good thing; no one wants to foul his own nest. At the same time, no one wants to give up the use of land she has paid for and should have the right to use. One field that hasn't been thrown into the discussion is economics: the cost/benefit trade-offs of any decision. The benefits of protecting critical areas are shared by all of the residents of Jefferson County. A short list of the benefits provided by wetlands-flood control, water purification, habitat-is an example of just how important these critical areas are to all of us. But the costs are born by the landowner alone-price of property lost to use in the buffer, taxes paid on unusable property, maintenance of unusable property. That's hardly a prescription for whole hearted acceptance of the CAO by anyone who owns or hopes to buy property that has a critical area. The economic problem is to get the incentives right. According to economist Steven E. Landsburg, "When you're doing something that makes strangers better off, you should be encouraged to do more of it." The current draft CAO doesn't do that. Ifwe're all going to enjoy the benefits of protected critical areas, we should all share the costs. The carrot will protect critical areas and ultimately be cheaper than the stick. A short list of carrots would be: classes that result in a stewardship plan that provides the landowner with a tax break, assistance with mapping and marking areas, and help with protecting the area while continuing to use it (e.g., Conservation District program for Chimicum Creek). The stick will be costly: degraded critical areas because landowners refuse to obey unenforceable ordinances, law suits the County can ill afford, and skewed land values because only the wealthiest can afford to pay for the variances to avoid the buffers. 3/3/2008 ~ Page 2 of2 I know everyone has worked hard and long to get the right CAO for Jefferson County, from the volunteer citizens on the CAD Review Committee to the members of the Planning Commission and staff of the Planning Dept., to each of you on the BOCC. Please make sure you include all the issues in your deliberations. Don't leave out economics. Sincerely, Renee Bush Quilcene 360-774-1859 Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need your Hotmail@-get your "fix", Che_~lsJt out, 3/3/2008 ". eC~\~'D.! 315/00 BOCC) RECEIVED 0,... zonl') .;) umJ Renee Bush Fair Lea Tree Farm PO Box 94 Quilcene, W A 98376 March 3, 2008 JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Members of the Board of County Commissioners PO Box 1220 Port Townsend, W A 98368 HEARING RECORD RE: Draft CAO During the public hearing (Wed. Feb 27, 2008) on the draft critical areas ordinance, everything was brought up as a reason for passing or not passing the \ ordinance-the environment, property rights, science, the Constitution, and eve. "takings." I think I can safely say that everyone believes that protecting the environment is a good thing; no one wants to foul his own nest. At the same time, no one wants to give up the use of land she has paid for and should have the right to use. One field that hasn't been thrown into the discussion is economics: the cost/benefit trade-offs of any decision. The benefits of protecting critical areas are shared by all ofthe residents of Jefferson County. A short list of the be:befits provided by wetlands-flood control, water purification, habitat-is an example of just how important these critical areas are to all of us. But the costs are born by the landowner alone-price of property lost to use in the buffer, taxes paid on unusable property, maintenance of unusable property. That's hardly a prescription for whole hearted acceptance of the CAO by anyone who owns or hopes to buy property that has a critical area. The economic problem is to get the incentives right. According to economist Steven E. Landsburg, "When you're doing something that makes strangers better off, you should be encouraged to do more of it." The current draft CAO doesn't do that. Ifwe're all going to enjoy the benefits of protected critical areas, we should all share the costs. The carrot will protect critical areas and ultimately be cheaper than the stick. A short list of carrots would be: classes that result in a stewardship plan that provides the landowner with a tax break, assistance with mapping and marking areas, and help with protecting the area while continuing to use it (e.g., Conservation District program for Chimicum Creek). The stick will be costly: degraded critical areas because landowners refuse to obey unenforceable ordinances, law suits the County can ill afford, and skewed land values because only the wealthiest can afford to pay for the variances to avoid the buffers. '1;' .6t Page 2 Renee Bush Re: Draft CAD I know everyone has worked hard and long to get the right CAD for Jefferson County, from the volunteer citizens on the CAD Review Committee to the members of the Planning Commission and staff of the Planning Dept. to each of you on the BDCC. Please make sure you include all the issues in your deliberations. Don't leave out economics. ~ .. Page 1 of 1 Leslie Locke From: Miranda Schryver Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 5:03 PM To: Leslie Locke Subject: FW: CAD exemption Attachments: II-SteepSlope.pdf HEARING RECORD From: AI Scalf Sent: Monday, March 03, 20084:10 PM To: Miranda Schryver Subject: FW: CAD exemption Miranda Please take this in as a comment letter on the CAD AI From: Susan Shaw [mailto:pssi@olypen.com] Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 10:36 PM To: AI Scalf Subject: CAD exemption AI, I spent some time tonight reviewing the DRAFT CAO. I hope you will consider allowing mineral extraction as an outright Use or allowed alteration to geologic hazardous areas. Extraction under WSDNR reclamation and DOE Stormwater Sand & Gravel NPDES permits stabilize geologic hazard areas. King county has done this. www,metrQ~c.,gQv!gge~!caQ!man\.lel!It=~.teeQ slopes.pdf. I have attached a copy for your review. Each individual application should not have to cross this bridge. Additionally, this will save staff and hearing examiner time. Thanks for considering this addition. Cordially, Mike Shaw 3/3/2008 Part Two - Critical Areas S,teep Slo\pe Hazard A,,,,s Steep slopes (meaning slopes greater than 40% grade and greater than 1 0 feet tall) are regulated as critical areas in King County because of the potential for erosion problems and .Iandsliding on the slopes. The steeper the slope, the greater is the potential for hazardous conditions that threaten development and the surrounding environment. In general, the King County Zoning Code encourages avoidance of the slopes and actually prohibits development on and near the slopes in many cases. Despite this, people often choose to build near the top of a steep slope in order to gain a good view, but clearing on the slopes and in buffers around them is restricted, leading to a conflict between the wishes of developers and the requirements for slope and buffer protection. As a result, code violations resulting from slope clearing (for view creation) are numerous. Substantial revegetation (planting both trees and understory plants) may be required at sites that have been cleared illegally, sometimes resulting in significant costs to the property owner. Development Standards General Provisions Steep slopes, meaning those slopes greater than 40% grade (about 21 degrees inclination) can be divided into four groups for regulatory purposes: 1. Steep slopes that are less than 10 feet high in vertical extent, which are NOT regulated by King County and so not affected by these development standards; 2. Steep slopes that are between 10 and 20 feet high, which may be totally exempted from these development standards based upon a critical area report prepared by a geotechnical engineer or geologist that approves of the proposed development and concludes that no impact will result from the development of the steep slope; 3. Steep slopes greater than 20 feet high, which are regulated by these development standards; and 4. Steep slopes that were created by previous legal grading, which can be altered and/or developed if the alteration is geotechnically feasible. A report prepared by a geotechnical engineer is typically required. The report must approve the proposed development/alteration and conclude that no impact will result either to the development or to adjacent properties. Steep Slope Hazard Areas 2-43 Buffers A buffer is required around all edges of a steep slope, which shall consist of unaltered native vegetation on undeveloped parcels or maintained landscaping or vegetation on lots that have been previously legally altered from their natural state. The purpose of the buffer is to minimize the risk of damage resulting from landsliding and erosion of the steep slope caused by adjacent development. The width of the buffer shall be determined based upon a critical area report prepared by a geotechnical engineer or geologist. In the absence of a critical area report, the buffer width shall be a minimum of 50 feet. For single detached dwelling units only, the department may waive the critical area report requirement and authorize buffer reductions if the department determines that the reduction will adequately protect the development and the critical area. Unless otherwise provided for, removal of any vegetation from a steep slope or steep slope buffer is prohibited. If a steep slope buffer was developed or altered prior to November of 1990, that use is grandfathered and may be maintained. Building Setback Unless otherwise provided or as recommended by a critical area report prepared by a geotechnical engineer or geologist, a building setback of 15 feet is required between the steep slope buffer and any building or other structure. Landscaping, uncovered decks, pavement, patios and utility connections (including some elements of septic systems) are allowed within building setbacks. Critical Area Tracts Critical area tracts are used to delineate and protect steep slopes and steep slope buffers greater than one acre in size in proposals for such developments as subdivisions and short subdivisions. The critical area tract is a separate parcel that is recorded on all titles of record and held in an undivided interest by each owner of a lot within the subject development. The maintenance and protection of the tract is thus guaranteed in perpetuity. Allowed Alterations The following activities generally are allowed within steep slope hazard areas (please refer to Section 131 for a complete listing of allowed alterations). For steep slopes greater than 20 feet high (and their buffers) that have not been developed previously: 1. Utility lines in certain locations (including above ground electric lines, septic/sewer lines and water lines, with restoration/revegetation as appropriate); Steep Slope Hazard Areas 2-44 2. Certain surface and storm water facilities, such as discharge sites, provided other restrictions are met 3. Mining and mineral extraction; 4. Water wells (as utilities, but NOT well houses or maintained access roads, with restoration/revegetation as appropriate); 5. Trails and viewing platforms; 6. Hazard tree removal; 7. Restoration/revegetation using native plants; 8. Maintenance and/or creation of view corridors through very limited trimming and pruning; 9. Construction of a farm field access road if in compliance with a farm management plan; 10. Limited clearing and grading needed to prepare a critical areas report; and 11. Stabilization of the slope necessary to protect existing structures and other features. For steep slopes greater than 20 feet high (and their buffers) that have been developed prior to November of 1990 (please note that one form of development, such as logging, does not necessarily allow an expansion of other forms of development), all of the above plus the following: 1. Maintenance and repair of existing structures (provided there is no landslide hazard that is not mitigated); 2. Maintenance of existing landscaping, pavement, slope stabilization, uncovered decks, and other existing alterations; 3. Replacement of existing structures (provided there is no landslide hazard that is not mitigated); and 4. Expansion of existing structures provided: · there is no expansion of the footprint of non-residential structures, · for dwelling units, the expansion is no more than 1 ,000 square feet of footprint, and · the location of any expansions have the least impact on the critical area. All expansions must be accompanied by landslide hazard mitigation as necessary. For steep slopes greater than 20 feet high (and their buffers) that were created or altered through previously legal grading such that the current surface topography can be considered man made: Basically, all of the above is allowed along with new construction and development provided that the alterations are geotechnically feasible. A report prepared by a geotechnical engineer is typically required that approves the proposed development/alteration and concludes that no impact will result either to the development or to adjacent properties. Steep Slope Hazard Areas 2-45 " . There is no limit on clearing or grading or structure expansions unless other critical areas issues or development restrictions supercede these manmade steep slope restrictions. Steep Slope Hazard Areas 2-46 <;c: Yi? ]3N?J& Page 1 of 4 :~::_~-~~-~-~ Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 1 :53 PM To: Leslie Locke Subject: FW: MLA #06-242 Critical Areas Code update From: Jerry Gorsline[SMTP:JGORS@Q.COM] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 1 :50:08 PM To: Joel Peterson; Phil Johnson; David Sullivan; John Austin Subject: RE: MLA #06-242 Critical Areas Code update Auto forwarded by a Rule Memorandum Date: 03/04/08 To: Jefferson County BOCC From: Jerry Gorsline Subject: MLA #06-242 Critical Areas Code update I am writing to express my general support for the proposed new Chapter 18.22 Jefferson County Code Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) update. The proposed amendments will help protect the health, safety, and welfare of our citizens; help sustain the stock of natural goods and life;.support services (our "natural capital" that we should faithfully steward and pass on to future residents of our county), and help to implement the following environmental goals and policies in the Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan such as the following: Goals: ENG 5.0 Allow development along shorelines which is compatible with the protection of natural processes, natural conditions, and natural functions of the shoreline environment. ENG 11.0 Protect flood hazard areas from development and uses that compromise the flow storage and buffering offlood waters, normal channelfunctions, andfish and wildlife habitat and to minimize flood and river processes risk to life and property. ENG 12.0 Protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat throughout Jefferson County. ENG 14.0 Protect and enhance wetlands in all their functions. Policies: ENP 12.2 Land use decisions should recognize the priority of the protection and enhancement offish and 3/4/2008 Page 2 of 4 wildlife habitat in accordance with proposed listings of threatened and endangered species under the Federal Endangered Species Act. ENP 12.3 Buffers for fish and wildlife habitat areas should be consistent with the best available science for habitat protection. ENP 12.6 Cooperate and coordinate with appropriate agencies to avoid adverse impacts to fish and wildlife habitat in the review and approval of development proposals. ENP 14.1 Designate and manage wetlands based on the best available science. The county's more than 200 miles of marine shorelines are the focus for intense development and I am pleased to find Table 18.22.270 (2) provides an adequate buffer for marine neashore habitats. Buffers for marine shorelines perform functions similar to their freshwater counterparts, and protect vital functions for maintaining nearshore habitat. By protecting marine shoreline riparian zones, the CAO will also protect the integrated functions and values of marine shorelines as critical salmon habitat. The proposed amendments provide considerable flexibility. The agriculture exemption from standard CAO buffers helps balance the Growth Management Act's (GMA) agricultural conservation goal with the mandate to protect the functions and values of critical areas. The amendments also include the concept of stewardship plans that can substitute for the standard CAO prescriptions. However, while voluntary efforts on agricultural lands that result in conservation easements and acquisitions, stream fencing, riparian plantings and in-stream habitat restoration projects are commendable, they nonetheless represent a piecemeal approach that will not provide certainty that agricultural riparian functions will be protected. The scientific literature demonstrates that a comprehensive system of streamside protection from the headwaters to the mouths of our rivers is a prerequisite for salmon recovery to succeed. While this does not necessarily entail a "one-size-fits-all buffer", it does require the county to develop a comprehensive, integrated approach to ensure science-based "best management practices" will be applied to agricultural lands to protect critical area functions and values. Likewise, stewardship plans must maintain the values and functions of the habitat. The following words from the Eastern Washington Growth Management Hearings Board ruling are instructive: In adopting development regulations, counties cannot rely on vague exhortations to do the right thing, but must develop specific protection measures that include requirements or standards sufficient to demonstrate that GMA mandates will be met. If the county wishes to rely on voluntary implementation of best management practices or BAS to protect critical areas, benchmarks, timeframes and monitoring must be developed and funding to ensure that these voluntary actions are working to achieve the needed protection. It is of particular importance to the success in providing adequate protection to fish and wildlife resources, that the program includes a rigorous monitoring program and adaptive management process. The program and process must be capable of detecting changes in the functions and values of habitat in a timely manner, and must include processes through which management techniques are reevaluated and modified as necessary in response to this iriformation, to ensure that the goals of management are being met. (EWGMHB 00-1-0016, EWGMHB, Order on Compliance, November 13, 2003). I also note county DCD staff concerns expressed in its February 12, 2008 staff report regarding implementation of Critical Area Stewardship Plans that the BOCC ensure sufficient staff and budget requirements for implementation, monitoring and adaptive management programs and enforcement. Under the GMA, local governments are granted the authority to manage critical areas and other resources that reflect state interests. With "local control" comes the responsibility to protect public resources such as water quality and fish and wildlife habitat. Regulations remain the most practicable 3/4/2008 Page 3 of 4 means of providing certainty for adequate critical areas protection, and I hereby endorse and adopt by reference comments written on behalf of Citizens Protecting Critical Areas from attorney Gerald Steel to both the Planning Commission and DCD relating to the need to have enforcement provisions in the CAO to meet the GMA requirement "to protect critical areas." Citizens Protecting Critical Areas has documented a disturbing pattern of non-compliance and lack of accountability in county oversight of critical areas protection regulations. One area where the county needs to make future progress is summed up in the following Comprehensive Plan goal: ENP 12.4 Promote the protection ofwildlife habitat corridors that connect otherwise isolated habitat areas. The GMA directs local governments to take planning and regulatory measures to designate and protect areas identified as important for fish and wildlife habitat. WAC 365-190 080 (5) defines "fish and wildlife habitat conservation" to mean, ".. . land management for maintaining species in suitable habitats within their natural geographic distribution so that isolated subpopulations are not created." RCW 36. 70A.160 directs local governments to identify open space corridors within and between urban growth areas "useful for recreation, wildlife habitat, trails, and connection of critical areas." The purpose of the County's wildlife study was to identify and map the habitat in eastern Jefferson County that is most valuable to wildlife. The next step is for the studies to go forward to the Planning Commission for its review and recommendations for use. GMA regulatory tools include building codes and zoning, clearing and grading, stormwater, critical areas and resource lands ordinances. These regulatory tools can be used to compliment nonregulatory approaches such as the use of conservation easements, transferable development rights, land acquisition and tax incentives, including current use tax incentives combined with a public benefit rating system. I recommend the county use its wildlife habitat mapping and study results to: o Designate "habitats of local importance" o Designate areas identified as key landscape patches and corridors in its comp plan and zoning codes as "rural conservation zones"; within "rural conservation zones," offer bonus densities if developers cluster units rather than spread development out over a wide area o Employ TDRs for "rural conservation zones" o Target lands for purchase using "conservation futures" funding o Combine current use tax incentives with Public Benefit Rating System * o Use info to designate SMP Aquatic Conservancy and Rural Conservancy shoreline segments Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Jerry Gorsline 5282 Cape George Road Port Townsend W A 98368 Phone: 360.385.6132 3/4/2008 .. Page 4 0[4 3/4/2008 '. ec.~:' ~j 3!L/lo'6 Page 1 of 1 Miranda Schryver HEARING RECORD From: djohnson [djohnson@tfon.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 3:01 PM To: Miranda Schryver Subject: Public Comment on the proposed Critical Areas Ordinance Attachments: CAO Comment, Feb 26.doc i'. i.\ '1W.11'1 .J i.-t LuUU Dear Commissioners Austin, Johnson, and Sullivan: JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Please find my comments on the proposed Critical Areas Ordinance in the attached file. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Diane Johnson, Ph.D. DISCOVERY CENTER for Behavioral Health 360-379-8821 3/4/2008 RECEIVED o 4 2008 HEARING RECORD JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS February 26, 2008 Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Dear Commissioners Johnson, Sullivan, and Austin: This letter is in regard to the current draft of the proposed Jefferson County Critical Area Ordinance prepared for public presentation on Wednesday, February 26,2008, at the Chimacum High School Auditorium, and constitutes my public comment on the proposed ordinance. For the record, I was a member of the Critical Ordinance Committee of citizens commissioned by the Jefferson County Planning Commission in 2006 to study the issues and draft a new ordinance. I joined that committee in part because I am part owner of a small, 120-year old beef farm in Tarboo Valley. I grew up here, was very active in 4-H programs in school, and am from a family that has always been active in the Conservation District. I have also been a card-carrying member of the Nature Conservancy, the National Wildlife Foundation, and the Sierra Club, among others, as well as a lifelong Democrat. I have feet in every group with an opinion on these issues. I believed, and still believe, that I am more aware than the average resident of the issues in both the farming and the "environmental" community, and very knowledgeable about the work that has already been done to improve the streams and rivers of Jefferson County and the Olympic Peninsula to save the salmon. As I said in my public comment on the 26th, I am disturbed by a number of aspects of the proposed ordinance and the process by which it was derived by the Planning Commission. It was disconcerting, though totally predictable, considering the philosophical bent of the new appointees to the Commission mid-way through the process, that the majority report, which I signed, became the minority report following the Commission's deliberations. I was not even totally in agreement with the "majority report," as I had hoped that the outcome would be a strengthening of the process already underway in the county with such marvelous success. The model I'm referring is the Chimacum Creek Watershed project, primarily under the Conservation District. This landmark voluntarv project had virtually cleaned up and protected pretty much the entire creek, and the salmon showed their approval! The project included monitoring of water quality, which was one of the main features of our proposal. It further empowered landowners and farmers to take responsibility and pride in their work FOR wildlife. As far as I can see, this ordinance has virtually entirely scrapped this model, which was in the process of being expanded to the other major watersheds at the time we began. Instead, it sets up the micro- management of postage-stamp "habitats" (tiny wetlands as well as large, fish-less dry streams and ditches as well as rivers), and loses sight of the big picture, which is overall watershed health. In the process, it has alienated the good will of the very people who need to be included, and who could be most counted on to make any plan actually work, with very little expenditure of funds or effort on the county's part. I was surprised, after all the dissension over "best available science," that science of any kind was not mentioned at all in the proposal, except to name the DOE ratings for wetlands as the standard. I was disappointed that Dr. Brooks' contributions to BAS appear to be entirely ignored, as is the large body of actual data from the monitoring done over the last 30 years by the Conservation District-what better .ii. ... science is there than the actual collection of data!!! Even the DOE was surprised to see data, and Dr. Brooks has convinced them to take a hard look at the additional "science" produced by his effort to find peer-reviewed research to add to their BAS. My understanding of the Growth Management Act and Board findings is that the County can depart from DOE science AS LONG AS it considers that science and can clearly state the science that backs up what it proposes to do. Why, then, are we ignoring these important sources of information? Because they don't support the large buffers the WEC wanted to impose? Or that the minority of the citizen's group were pushing for? (Jean-Francois Revel, a French political commentator who served in the Resistance in WWII and just died in 2006, said, "Ideology functions as a machine to destroy information, even at the price of making assertions in clear contradiction of the evidence.") The third major point I wish to make is about the maps the County is using to indicate Critical Areas, and the way they are being used. When I got my building permit, DCD told me I had a stream. I said I didn't, and they said I had to have an official verify that. A DNR employee came out and verified that I did not. The County map shows a stream where there is a confluence of two hillsides and a dip in the treetops in the aerial photo-the dip is there, but the stream is not. The map also shows "streams" all over our farm-coinciding with our drainage ditches. We fenced most of these ditches many years ago under an agreement with the Conservation District, so they are "protected" from animal intrusion-but they ARE NOT streams. My point is that the DCD staff should make an initial site inspection of their own to get an idea of the accuracy of their map BEFORE they send the land-owner off for expensive delineations and management plans. The second half of point three, maps, has to do with the Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas map the County refers to in 18.22.200. Wednesday night, I said this map is a "fairy tale." What I meant by that is that it represents a theoretical idea of what areas the county might wish to preserve as wildlife habitat, not necessarily what areas are currently used as habitat, or the best habitat, or even which species would be protected by "saving" such areas. Except for state and federal regulations specifically governing endangered, threatened, or sensitive species, and the riparian areas around streams and wetlands that we all agreed to protect, there are no officially designated species of local importance on the books. While the proposal states that the maps you have "are to be used as a guide and do not provide a definitive critical area determination," I don't believe that language is strong enough. They MUST NOT be used as indicators of critical areas. I think you should not use them at all, actually, but start over, with a map that indicates what we have to protect under state and federal law, and with other areas added as they are researched and go through the process to become part of the law as species or habitats of local importance. Point four has to do with stream buffers, with reference to Table 18.22.270( 1). These are presumably buffers designated to protect an FWHCA, i.e., some species, probably salmon. We all pretty much agree on the 150 feet for type "S" and "F" fish:'bearinQ streams. However, we do not agree on the 75 foot buffers for the type "Np", and particularly, the type "Ns," streams. To put that kind of buffer on a stream that isn't even there for a large part of the year, or has no fish in it, seems absurd. Dr. Brooks has demonstrated that such areas can serve their hydrologic functions quite nicely while being used as part of a lawn or for passive recreation purposes. And there is a matter of degree-a trickle is different from a 6 inch stream is different from a 1 foot stream is different from a 3 foot stream-the one-buffer-fits-all is just too restrictive. Where's the common sense to go with the "science?" My last point is that I believe MY MONEY would be better spent to beef up and expand the Public Health Department and the Conservation District monitoring programs to cover all the watersheds of the County, and impose only the minimum buffers necessary for water quality protection. Good overall monitoring programs will pinpoint the location and nature of problems, and the people have overwhelmingly told you for two years that they will be more than happy to solve problems that they can be shown exist. The track record is excellent in Jefferson County on this point (Conservation District programs, data, and results available on request)! Don't throw it away! ....i . ,Ecology comments on Planning Commission draft CC: ~cj 3/'1/0'6 Miranda Schryver _ HEARING RECORD Page 1 of2 RECEIVED From: Joel Peterson Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 1 :13 PM To: Miranda Schryver Cc: Jeanie Orr; AI Scalf; Stacie Hoskins Subject: FW: Ecology comments on Planning Commission draft Attachments: BOCC-CAO comment Itr 3-4-08.pdf 04 JEFFERSON COUNlY COMMISSIONERS Miranda, The attached PDF is a comment letter for the Critical Areas Ordinance. David Sullivan had asked about it in anticipation. Would you see that the commissioners get a copy today? Thanks! Joel Joel M. Peterson Long-Range Planning Division Jefferson County Department of Community Development 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 379-4472 Fax: (360) 379-4451 www.co.jefferson.wa.us From: Mraz, Richard A. (ECY) [mailto:rmra461@ECY.WA.GOV] Sent: Tuesd,ay, March 04,200811:36 AM To: Joel Peterson Cc: McMillan, Andy (ECY); Bunten, Donna (ECY); Schroeder, Rebecca (ECY); AI Scalf; Stewart, Jeff R. (ECY) Subject: Ecology comments on Planning Commission draft HiJoel:' Attached please find our comments on the Planning Commission's draftjefferson County Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO), which we ask that you present to the Board of County Commissioners within the current public comment period for the CAO. We are also sending a hard copy by mail that should arrive tomorrow. Please let the commissioners know that they may contact Andy McMillan or me if they have questions or require clarification on any of our statements. Thanks very much for your hard work <lid facilitation of our involvement in this process. <<BOCC-CAO comment Itr 3-4-08.pdf>> Rick Mraz Wetlands/Shorelands Specialist Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program Southwest Regional OHice (360)407-6221 rmra461@ecy.wa.gov 3/4/2008 , ,Ecology comments on Planning Commission draft Page 2 of2 3/4/2008 HEARING RECORD RECEIVED STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY PO Box 47775 .. Olympia, Washington 98504-7775 · (360) 407-6300 0 4 March 4, 2008 JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners 621 Sheridan Street POIt Townsend, W A 98368 Dew Commissioners: We appreciate this opportunity to provide comments to the Board of County Commissioners on the Planning Commission's maft of the Jefferson County Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO). As you may know, oUI staff has been actively involved with the County in this pI'Ocess over the last two yews, We have attended public hearings, made technical presentations, coordinated a work group to develop a rural stewardship approach, and provided regular comments as new drafts were produced, We have found our collaboration with County staff~ the Planning Commission, and its subcommittee members to be productive and thought-pI'Ovoking. We SUPPOlt many of the pI'Oposed revisions, including the use of Ecology's revised wetland rating system and many of the buffer strategies reflected in Section 18..22.330, However, we w'e concerned that some elements of the maft regulations w'e not consistent with the best available science and will not protect wetlands in the County, In addition, certain sections in the cunent draft are essentially unworkable and will create confusion fOl citizens, consultants, and County staff alike. We believe that revising sections of the proposed ordinance as recommended herein are necessary to help Jefferson County achieve its stated purpose of protecting the functions and values of the County's critical areas, These revisions will also produce an ordinance that is functional, clear, and consistent with Best Available Science (BAS).. Our comments ar'e offered in consideration of and reference to Ecology's BAS documents: Wetlands in Washington State - Volume 1.: A Synthesis oj the Science (publication #05-06- 006, Mar'ch 2005) and Wetlands in Washington State - Volume 2 Guidance [01 P,otecting and Managing Wetlands (Publication # 05-06-008, April 2005), We have organized our comments by adm'essing the issues of concern below in this letter and attaching specific code revision recommendations for two of the issues. ,~~, o Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners March 4, 2008 Page 2 Areas and topics of specific concems are: Multiple wetland ratifies 08.22.300): This section allows multiple wetland ratings without limits, guidance or any reference to the 2004 ratings system. The language from Jefferson County Planning Commission MajOIity Report (dated 2-7-08) states: Multiple Rating of Wetlands This CAO amendment allows multiple ratings of adjacent or connected wetlands. Most wetlands in Jefferson County are rated as Class .3 OJ' 4 and provide limited habitat value, Those wetlands that have a better rating (Class 1 or 2) are often bordered by or connected to a Class 3 or 4 wetlands. The Department of Ecology argues that conjunct wetlands be given the bettenating for the entire system.. A small high quality wetland would dictate a higher rating for an adjacent lower quality wetland.. Ecology argues that such a rating scheme is needed as there is risk of underrating adjacent portions of the higher quality w~tlands. Ecology's assertions w'e not related to a scientific analysis, but to the feeling that some wetland raters may not wish to preseIve those high quality wetlands., This assertion seems pessimistic and unsupported The Planning Commission does not agree with Ecology's assertions. Ecology's methods will effectively expand buffer ar'eas and provide excess protection for wetlands oflimited value., With the multiple ratings as proposed by the Planning Commission, all wetlands will still be protected, and wetlands buffers will still be fully enforced. The Planning Commission does not accept Ecology's assertion that high quality wetlands will be undervalued and under-protected by a multiple rating system., Instead, the wetland rater will be mOle inclined to rate wetlands accurately without the need to assess a stricter' rating on a lower' valued system.. Ecoloev's Response: The Planning Commission (PC) made several erlors in their position on multiple latings ofwetIands. Their asseltion that Class I or 2 wetlands are often bordered by or connected to a Class 3014 wetland is not suppOIted by any data We doubt the accuracy of such a claim. In several yeals of applying the new rating system (and over 15 years of applying its predecessor) we have not found this to be tIue. What is oue is that some Class 1 OI 2 wetlands have a portion that has been degraded by human activities ovel the years. This is not a separate, lower class wetland, but a degraded piece of a contiguous, larger wetland Contlary to the claim made by the PC that "Ecology's asseltions are not related to a scientific analysis", Ecology does asselt that the attempt to subdivide larger, contiguous wetlands based on habitat condition is not suppOIted by current science. In fact, our rating system is scientifically valid only if the entire wetland is lated The calibrations of the scores ale based on a best fit of the data to Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners March 4, 2008 Page .3 assessments of functions for the entire wetland unit. Rating sub-units of wetlands invalidates the scientific assumptions and principles used in developing the method. Developing a method for rating sub-units of wetlands would require collecting an entirely new set of data and re-calibrating the scores to those data Such an effort would require a significant investment of time and would result in a method that is not rapid and would make consistency in results much more difficult to achieve. In fact, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to develop a method that allows for the subdivision of wetlands based on habitat condition without introducing a huge potential for enol'. Ecology does not believe that this assertion is overly pessimistic and we believe that it is strongly supported by the science. We fmd it interesting that a body of citizens without training and experience in applying wetland ecology is so sure of its position that Ecology's rating system will "provide excess protection for wetlands of limited value" and that "with the multiple Iatings, as proposed by the Planning Commission, all wetlands will still be protected. " We believe that neither of these statements are tIue. In addition, the language adopted by the PC provides absolutely no guidance on how such multiple ratings should be conducted Without such guidance, no user of the rating system could possibly discem how such a pIOvision could be applied. Unfortunately, the members of the PC did not consult with Ecology staffto tIy to understand the implications of such a proposal The result is a proposal that: 1 is not based on the best available science; 2. is not implementable by wetland professionals; and, J. will result in inadequate protection of wetlands in Jefferson County.. We urge the Board to strike this pr'ovision fr'Om the CAO prior to adoption. Buffer Tables (18.22.330 (1). (2). (3)): Several of the buffer tables reference wetland tating scores that are fundamentally erroneous FOI example, Table 1822330 (1), prescribes buffers for CategOlY III wetland that SCOIe less than 30 points. By definition, in the Washington State Wetlands Rating System for Westem Washington (2004), Category III wetland score between 30 and 50 points., Thus, CategOIY III wetland cannot score less than 30 points Similar errors exist in this table and the other two Buffer Tables regarding Category I and II These mistakes make the tables unwOIkable. County stafI'are aware ofthese errors in the tables and will suggest revisions to correct them Buffers (18.22.330 Table 1). specificallv Sine:le Family Residential as Low Impact: The Planning Commission m~jority report states the following: Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners March 4, 2008 Page 4 Single Family Residential as Low Impact. The Department of Ecology atgued that single family residential structwes on lots zoned at Rl :5 should be considered medium impact when applying prescriptive buffer sizes. Their argument was that habitat impact can be great from single-family residences and that additional buffers are needed to ptotect wildlife from noise and glare associated with single-family lesidences., The Planning Commission chose to disagree with Ecology because most wetlands in Jefferson County are Category:3 or 4 and have lower habitat scores than Category 1 and 2 wetlands, Also, BAS was presented that indicated that single family residential development on five acr'es or more is most likely l,ow impact development because vegetation within the buffer area is to be preserved.. Most high habitat Sooling wetlands at'e associated with heavy vegetation in the buffer at'ea., Development on parcels smaller than 5 acres is considered niediwn or high mtensity.. Ecolo2Y's Response: The Planning Commission failed to considel the essential factors related to single-family residences (SFRs) next to wetlands.. The size of the parcel is not what is most lelevant A house has celtain impacts to adjacent wetlands regardless of lot size. A SFRon a 3-acl'e lot that is 40 feet flOrn a wetland will have the same noise, light and distmbance impacts as a SFR on a 10-acre lot where the house is 40 feet flOrn a wetland" Also, the issue of whether the buffet is well vegetated is umelated to the intensity of the land use or the size of the lot All buffers should be well vegetated, whether they ate 40 feet wide or 100 feet wide In ordet to protect a wetland's functions flom the impacts of SFRs, buffeI widths associated with moderate-impact land use intensity at'e necessary, The other land use activities associated with rural lots ar'e generally low impact and can be buffet ed accOl ding I y We do not believe it is applOpriate to include any residential 01 appurtenant structure under the definition of low intensity. The impacts associated with residences, even on a 5-act'e or larger lot, are significant enough to warrant the moderate-intensity buffer widths. Most other uses of a residential parcel 5-acres or larger could reasonably be included under low- intensity land uses. 1. We recommend that you revise the code to reflect single-family residences and appurtenances as moderate intensity impacts. 2, Other rural land uses such as landscaping, lawns, gr'avel driveways, etc" can be considel'ed low intensity. Buffer' reductions (18.22.330 (7) & (8)): The result of applying buffet reductions, increases, and averaging should be a buffer that is adequate to protect the functions of the wetland, as established by the best available science, Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners March 4, 2008 Page 5 Much ofthe proposed draft does a goodjob of providing adequate prescIiptive provisions for wetland buffers. However, the proposed buffer reduction language would allow excessive reductions, in some cases to less than halfthe prescriptive buffer. Additionally, the buffer reduction and averaging provisions treat Category 3 and 4 wetlands differently than Category I or 2 wetlands by allowing greater percent reductions in buffers next to these wetlands. The standard buffer widths already account for differences in functions associated with the different categories and provide for buffers based on both category and habitat score. We are unawar'e of any scientific information that supports allowing a higher percent reduction in buffers a~jacent to Category 3 and 4 wetlands than those buffers adjacent to Categmy I and 2 wetlands Unless the County has some scientific data to suppmt such a provision it should be revised (see suggested language in Attachment A) Allowed Activities 08.22.310) We are concerned about the exemption in Section 18.22310, which allows expansion of lawns and other residential activities (including fences) into the outer 25% ofa wetland buffer (1822.3 10(9 a.)}. This essentially allows reduction of the required buffer without any assessment, mitigation or consideration of the wetland resource.. It would create confusion and enforcement problems when property owners impact wetlands without any review or oversight by the County and then have to defend themselves after the fact if challenged whether there was a "reasonable alternative". We recommend that the Board strike this provision from the CAO prior to adoption and addr'ess buffer reductions through proposed language in Attachment A, Buffel'Reduction 08.22.330 (7)) The provisions allowing up to 50% reductions for Category III and IV wetlands and 25% reductions in Category I and II are inconsistent with BAS and can result in inadequate buffers. Such provisions, in combination with the already allowed creation or expansion of lawns and other residential activities would result in the following scenarios: A Category III wetland with < 20 habitat points - Moderate intensity buffer = 60' With 50% reduction the buffer, per the Planning Commission draft CAO = 30' With the additional allowed 25% encroachment = 22.5', (63% reduction) A Category III wetland with 20 -28 habitat points - Mod intensity buffer = 110' With 50% reduction the buffer, per the Planning Commission draft CAO = 55'. With the additional allowed 25% encroachment = 4125. (63% reduction) A Category II wetland with moderate habitat (20-28 points) - BAS buffer =110' With 25% reduction, per the Planning Commission draft CAO = 82..5' With the additional allowed 25% encroachment = 62'.. (44% reduction) The final adjusted buffer widths in these instances are not adequate to protect the functions and values of the described wetlands. Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners March 4, 2008 Page 6 In addition, the language in 18.22330 (7) relies on a special report to justify the initial reduction. However, there is no specific language in the draft: CAO that establishes the contents ofthis report, If such buffer reduction plovisions are retained, we recommend that buffels not be reduced mOle that 25% in any wetland category per this provision We suggest that reductions greateI than 25% follow the reasonable use exception process.. We also recommend including some specificity regaIding what information should be contained in such a special report. (See Attachment A for recommended language for buffer reductions.) Buffer Aver'aldnl! (Section 18.22.330 (8)) The plovisions for buffer avelaging under subsection (8) will not adequately protect wetland functions" Jefferson County should incolporate the recommendations on avetaging in Appendix 8C.2.6 of Wetlands in Wm,hington State, Volume 2. Guidance [Of Protecting and Managing Wetlands, which includes the following text: . Averaging to improve wetland protection may be peymitted when all ofthe following conditions are met: . The wetland has significant differences in chaIacteristics that affect its habitat functions, such as a wetland with a forested component adjacent to a degraded emergent component or a "dual-rated" wetland with a Category I ar'ea adjacent to a lower rated aI'ea (The term "dual-rated" in this instance is used only within the context of Ecology's Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington (2004)) . The buffer is increased adjacent to the higher-functioning ar'ea of habitat or more sensitive portion of the wetland and decreased adjacent to the lower- functioning or less sensitive portion . The total ar'ea ofthe buffet after averaging is equal to the area required without avelagmg . The buffer at its narrowest point is never less than 3/4 of the required width (emphasis added) . Averaging to allow reasonable use of a par'eel may be permitted when .i!!Lofthe following are met: . There are no feasible alternatives to the site design that could be accomplished without buffer averaging . . The averaged buffer will not result in degradation of the wetland's functions and values as demonstrated by a leport fi'Om a qualified wetland professional . The total buffer area after averaging is equal to the ar'ea required without . . averagmg . The buffer at its narl'owest point is neyel' less than 3/4 of the required width (emphasis added) Jefferson County Board of County Commissionets March 4, 2008 Page 7 18.22.330.6.iii Buffel'Vee:etation lane:uae:e This version of the draft ordinance no longer makes clear that buffer widths are based on an assumption they are well vegetated. Ecology's BAS documents clearly establish that buffer widths are prescribed based on the assumption that the buffers are well vegetated with native species. We recommend that the following language be added to Section 1822 330.6 as (iv): The recommended widths for buffers are based on the assumption that the buffer is vegetated with a native plant community appropriate for the ecoregion or with one that performs similar functions. If the existing buffer is unvegetated. sparsely vegetated. or vegetated with invasive species that do not perform needed functions. the buffer should either be planted to create the appropriate plant community or the buffer should be widened to ensure that adequate functions of the buffer are provided. Mitie:ation (18.22.350): The proposed ordinance does not include requirements for monitOIing the compensatory mitigation Ecology recommends requiring monitoring for at least 5 years or a period necessmy to establish that performance standards have been met. For example, ten years or more of monitoring ar'e needed for forested and scrub-sluub communities. These communities take at least eight years after planting to reach 80-percent canopy closure. Having a ten-yem monitOIing program need not require biologists to collect data and produce a report every year. That could be done in years 1,2,3,5, 7, and 10, for example.. We recommend modifying Section 1822.350 to address these issues as follows: 1. Add letter if) MonitOl ing the impact and takin!! appropriate corrective measures. 2.. Add Section 18..223503 (h) A mitigation ulan should include a monitoring plan. The dmation. frequency. and methods of monitoring deoend on a project's goals. objectives. and performance standards. In general. monitoring is requited for at least five years. If a scrub-shrub or forested vegetation community is proposed. monitoring may be required for 10 years or more. MonitOIing may be extended if interim performance standmds are not being met. Qualified wetland evaluator (18.22.330): This section defines a qualified wetland evaluator as "an individual recognized and accepted..in using the most current edition of the Depmtment of Ecology's "Wetlands in Washington State Volume 2: Guidance for Protecting and Managing Wetlands" (Volume 2) in categorizing and rating wetlands.. Unfortunately, Volume 2 does not provide guidance and information on the categorization or rating of wetlands The Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington (2004) is the publication that provides this information.. This section should be revised to reflect the correct citation. Jefferson County Board ofCotinty Commissione!s March 4, 2008 . Page 8 Non-compensatory enhancement (18.22.340): We support the concept of addressing noncompensatory enhancement efforts We suggest that the County track these efforts, especially as they relate to restored wetland area and function.. However, as written, the cwrent draft omits rigorous detail in the enhancement plan for the more dismptive types of enhancement activities, We suggest that the draft add a section detailing the contents and requirements for I ype 1 enhancement proposals. In addition, many of the activities contemplated under I ype 1 enhancements (and perhaps I ype 2) would require federal and state permits, As such, it would be useful to any reader of this section to acknowledge that other permits (state and federal) may be required for these actions Critical Areas Stewardship Plan Section (18.22.460): This alternative pathway is a new concept Weare not aware of any other jurisdiction in the state that has adopted such a provision. We do support the concept and believe it has the potential to provide a voluntaty alternative that can result in equal 01' better wetland protection and encourage landowners to play an active part in managing their property to improve critical area functions and values. However, such an approach needs to be car'efully constructed to enSUle that it provides equal or greater protection of critical areas and provides a realistic alternative for landowners, Ecology asked the County last spring to convene an advisory team comprised of county staff and key stakeholders to develop a rural landowner stewardship program. T his group met several times and worked hard to come to a consensus agreement on the parameters of such a ptogram with the understanding from the Planning Commission that they would incorporate the advisory team's agreements into theil draft CAO Ihis did not happen. The PC dnift CAO contains only Dr Brooks' original CASP template and does not reflect the work ofthe Wetlands Advisory Team. While we were disappointed that the PC did not incorporate the work of this team, we hope the Board will do so. The basic pammeters of a Critical Area Stewardship Plan that the advisory team agr'eed to are: Which Critical Areas are subject to the CASP Pl'ovisions? CASPs apply to Wetlands and Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCAs) Where may CASPs be used? CASPs apply to rural residential development including Rural Village Centers CASPs do not apply to industrial, commercial or par'cels within a UGA CASPs apply to parcels that are Y4 acre or larger Which land uses qualify fora CASP? CASPs apply to single-family residences and appurtenances (including ADUs) Jefferson County Board of County Commissionels March 4, 2008 Page 9 Do CASPs apply to activities within wetlands and FWHCAs? CASPs may not be used fOI activities involving fill fOI building within wetlands and FWHCAs but may be used for fill or vegetation management within these critical areas if it is for enhancement of their functions.. CASPs may not be used for activities within CategOIY 1 wetlands. Several of our other consensus provisions are not contained in the CUIl'ent version of the CASP appIOach One critical requirement absent from the current language is an overarching statement that requires the CASP to provide "equal OJ better" protection of the ctitical area functions and values as compared to the standard provisions of the CAO. In addition, we recommend adding a provision that includes the requirement to audit this approach, determine its frequency of use, its area of wetland and buffer impact, the efficacy ofthe plans emplaced, etc.. We sincerely hope that you will incOIporate the consensus recommendations of the Advisory Team to ensur'e that CASPs provide their intended benefits. Please see Attachment B fOI recommended revisions to the CASP section of the CAD Thank you for the oppOItunity to comment on your draft ordinance. We hope these comments are helpful to the Commissioners and the County in their effOIts to develop reasonable and effective wetland regulations that are based on best available science. If you have any questions about these comments, please call me, at (360) 407-6221 or Andy McMillan, our Wetlands Science and Policy Manager at (360) 791-2254. RM:dn Attachments cc: Andy McMillan, Ecology Donna Bunten, Ecology Doug Peters, CIED Steve Kalinowski, WDFW Attachment A ~ Code Revisions to Buffer Provisions Section 18.22.,330 (7) Reducing Buffer Widths. Upon submission ofa wetland buffer reduction (see next section) repOlt by a qualified professional that demonstrates a buffet reduction does not have any adverse impact on the existing functions and values ofthe wetland, the administratOl shall have the authotity to reduce the prescribed buffer widths, (within a defined area), listed in the section above, provided that all of the following shall apply: (a) The buffer ofa CategOlY I 01 II wetland is not reduced to less than seventy-five (75) percent of the required buffet 01 fifty (50) feet, whichever is gteater; (b) The buffer ofa CategOIY III or IV wetland is not reduced to less than fifty (50) seventy- five OS) percent of the required buffet or twenty-five (25) feet, whichevet is gt'eater; (c) The applicant implements reasonable measures to reduce the adverse impacts of structures and appurtenances on the su~ject parcel such as those in Table X below. or as determined by the Administr atOl; (d) Buffet area reduction shall be minimized to accommodate only those structures and appurtenances as approved by the administmtOI. Table X. Examples of measures to minimize impacts to wetlands from buffer ,'educlions Examples of Activities and Uses that Cause Examples of Measures to M.inimize Impacts Disturbance Distur:bances lights . Pat king lots . Use shielded lights and direct lights away . Warehouses from wetland and buffer . Manufactuting . Residential Noise . Manufacturing . Locate activity that generates noise away . Residential from wetland and buffer T oxic runoff . Parking lots . Route all new, untreated runoff away flOm . Roads wetland while ensuring wetland is not . Manufactw ing dewatered . Residential areas . Establish covenants limiting use of pesticides within 150 ft of wetland . landscaping . Apply integrated pest management StOlmwatet . Parking lots . Retrofit stormwater detention and treatment mnofl . Roads for roads and existing aqjacent development . Manufacturing . Prevent channelized flow from lawns that . Residential areas directly enters the buffer . Commercial . Landscaping Change in . Impelmeable surfaces . Infiltlate or treat, detain, and disperse into water regime . lawns buffet new IUnofffrom impervious surfaces . Tilling and new lawns - . , - Attachment A (continued) - Contents of a Wetland Buffer Reduction Report Section 18.22.455 Wetland Buffer reduction reoort: A wetland buffer reduction repOIt shall include the following elements: I A site plan identifying the wetland and the prescriptive buffer per Section 18.22.330 and the location of the development activities proposed at the site. 2 The wetland delineation report and rating using the most current edition of Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington and the scores determined for hydrologic. water quality and habitat functions. 3. Habitats of Local Significance documented by Jefferson Countvonsite. 4.. A description ofthe proposal. to include: a.. The details ofthe encroachment. including proposed structures or uses that will exist in the buffer b The reason a buffer reduction is necessroy such that development cannot be accommodated outside the buffer. 5. A description ofthe property to include: a.. A contour map describing land elevations onsite. b. Documented OI obseryed presence of threatened OI endangered species. c. A qualitative assessment of the property's hydrologv to include evidence of prolonged flooding or ponding. known significant aquifer rechmge areas. observed srnface water drainage pattems and stream flows. 6. A qualitative assessment oIthe existing landscape located within the prescriptive buffers including: a the presence of invasive and/OI exotic plant species and the presence and condition of all strata of vegetation. The species composition and general age and condition of existing forests within this area should be documented. This section should be supPOIted with photodocumentation: b. evidence of his to tic or existing and ongoing agricultural and/or forestry activities: c a determination of the landscape slopes adiacent to surface waters to include a qualitative assessment of soil textures and stability together with an assessment of the value of existing vegetation for stabilizing soils. d. The presence of any wildlife using the wetland or its buffer. based on actual observation or secondary physical evidence (tracks. scat. feathers. etc.) 7. A description of existing human distrnbances within wetland and its prescriptive buffer. including roads. bridges. bulkheads. hvdrologic modification to include pre-existing farm Attachment A (continued) - Contents of a Wetland Buffer Reduction Report 8. ponds. excavated ditches. drain tile lines and other structures. The location ofthese features should be annotated on the site plan. 9 . A description of the nature. densitv and intensity of the proposed use 01' activity in sufficient detail to allow analysis of such land use change upon identified wetland functions: 10, An analysis of the effect of the proposed use or activity upon fish and wildlife species likely to be present in the specific wetland. 11 Discussion of how the applicant will avoid. minimize OI mitigate adverse impacts to wetland functions cleated by the proposed reduction. This explanation must address the management goals. policies and recommendations presented in this ordinance. . Attachment B - Code revisions to CASP Provisions We recommend the addition of the follow language: Section 18.22.461. Applicability and limitations. The following pIOvisions derme the applicability and limitations of the CASP. 1 CASPs apply to only residential develooment. related activities and appurtenances. including accessory dwelling units (ADDs). They may be used in Rillal Village Centers but are not to be used in Drban Growth Areas (UGAs). They are not to be used for commercial 01 industIial uses 01 developments. as identified and defined in lCC 18.10. 2. They can be applied to propeIties 14 aCle or larger. 3 CASPs are only applicable in Wetlands or Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conselvation Areas. 4. CASPs must provide eqUal or greatel protection of cIitical area functions and values than the prescriptive standatds of buffers and setbacks. 5. They may be applied within Category II. III & IV wetlands and buffers. and within buffeI s of Category I wetlands. They cannot be used in Category I wetlands. 6.. CASPs may not be used fOl activities involving fill for building within wetlands and FWHCAs. but may be used fOl fill 01 vegetation management within these critical areas if it is for enhancement of their functions. 7. CASPs will be administered as a Type 1 Pelmit, per lCC 18.40. 8.. A CASP may be prepared by any person. but it is strongly advised that a qualified professional be at least consulted. ~~btot~ ciMtrl:2J p.t~ COi'Orn~t 3131o~ . tC'tft5J314/0'6 RECEIVED Jefferson County Board of Commissioners Phil Johnson, Chairman, District 1 David Sullivan, District 2 John Austin, District 3 O (' 2nna _ c) JJl, JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Comment on MLA06-242 (Critical Areas Ordinance) Commissioners, HEARING RECORD Responsible decision making confines the adoption of a final Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) to the context of its regulatory authority. Support for the proposed ordinance at the 2/27 public hearing was based on general desired environmental conditions, problems that have occurred out of the county, restoration of past damage or mitigation of future anticipated population growth fifty years into the future, and fear of development scenarios that are extremely remote. With the exception of clarifying language and purpose, not one person testified for this ordinance in response to correcting existing problems. The Sw;nom;sh v. Skal!it decision has clarified that GMA mandates protection of existing functions and values of critical areas from the impacts of development. GMA requires mandatory review of CAO's every seven years to adjust protection standards, if necessary, to respond to changing future conditions. If need be, counties can amend their CAO on a yearly basis to comply with the protection standard. The idea that our current CAO will protect our environment for our children and their children is not the legal intent of this CAO. Self-described constitutional experts also discussed property rights and takings issues in very broad, philosophical strokes that ignored specific legal precedence on what constitutes a taking. I am well aware our property rights, along with other fundamental rights such as free speech, assembly, right to bear arms, and privacy are not absolute and come attached with conditions that also account for the common good. I am also aware that the threshold for regulatory takings is quite high. There are, however, certain requirements regulation of private property must meet, the most widely applicable being the NolanIDolan test of nexus and rough proportionality. The Washington Supreme Court used this precedence to rule against the city of Caroas' requirement that a developer set aside 30% of land in a proposed project for habitat protection, determining there was no demonstrated relationship between the perceived harm and the regulatory remedy. It was difficult to ignore the overwhelming percentage of support for the CAO that came from Port Townsend residents. Most of the addresses given were small city lots. Port Townsend has its own CAO. There is a strong perception in rural areas Port Townsend has a disproportionate influence over rural lifestyles, and frankly it takes nerve for city people to tell their rural counterparts they are not responsible for caring for the land. The interest in the CAO has been driven by three major factors; the Washington Environmental Council from Seattle, Port Townsend environmental activists, and rural preservation activists. Interestingly, the only ones who have to live with this ordinance are rural residents, who haYe been dictated to by special interests. And make no mistake, WEC is an organization who has a single issue purpose. Affinity for their mission does not exempt them from special interest status. The introduction to Jefferson County's Comprehensive Plan explains what a comprehensive planning process is intended to accomplish, and how to do so. One of the foundational principles of growth management planning is early, ongoing, and open public participation. In fact, Planning Objective V -- Continuous and Ongoing Public Involvement, emphasizes the importance in the community vision for meanin/!ful input from a spectrum of county interests. Every aspect of the conduct of public business is subject to the Open Public Meeting Act, ensuring a transparent and fair process. The Planning Commission By-Laws state in Section 8 that "al/oublic commissions. councils. committees. subcommittees. deoartments. divisions. offices. and all other oublictll!encies of this state and subdivisions thereof exist to aid in the conduct of the oeople's business. It is the intent of this chaoter that their actions be taken openlv and that their deliberations be conducted ooenlv. " The opening meeting of the Critical Areas Committee (CAC) began with a description by the chair of what the scope and purpose the CAO was, the fact that the committee was governed by the Open Public Meetings Act was brought up by an attorney, and later staff cautioned against improper correspondence. The parameters under which the CAC was operating were clear from the beginning. In that context, when are the improper actions on the part of four members of the CAC going to be addressed? The memo of 2/1/07 submitted by Jill Silver, Amy Hiatt, George Yount, and Planning Commissioner Henry Werch was a unilateral decision on their part to operate separately from the rest of the committee, without authority from the committee chair or the Planning Commission. An important report submitted by Jill Silver on behalf of the CAC "minority," the Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCA) report, was never even made available to the whole committee or the public at all prior to its presentation to the full Planning Commission. This is the most glaring example of direct violations of the Planning Commission By-Laws and the Open Public Meetings Act. The whole notion that the four would decide to submit their own alternate reports outside the boundaries of proper and legal procedure was never questioned by the Planning Commission, despite numerous requests from the public and a minority of Planning Commissioners to do so. H there was designated instruction from the Planning Commission to produce alternate reports, why did the CAC ever make motions or vote on anything? If there were alternate reports, why were the terms "majority" and "minority" used so often by staff and the Planning Commission? This idea of alternate reports, agreed to by motion of the Planning Commission on 3/21/07, near the end of the CAe tenure, is in conflict of its governing rules of order and practiced custom. The Planning Commission accepted large sections of these reports and forwarded them to the code writer, where they were incorporated into the draft CAO. In essence, the Planning Commission accepted illegal reports. The current CAO draft is thereby tainted. There are specific mechanisms for minority views to be expressed. The minority members of the Planning Commission followed this procedure in their Minority report to the BoCC. Committees and subcommittees are subject to the rule of law. Other actions relating to proper procedure and open public involvement have to do with the behavior of Jill Silver. During a Planning Commission field trip on 6/20/07, Ms. Silver announced that the stream buffers on her already illegally submitted report had been increased in one instance in response to her "constituents." When sbe was asked, by a member of the public at an open public meeting, who those constituents were, she replied, "That's none of your business." Public business is conducted in the open and under no circumstances can anyone submitting policy for public review be allowed to withhold information from the public. While a member of the CAC, Ms. Silver was also participating in the development of public policy in matters to which she had a related interest. Unbeknownst to the rest of the committee, she had a grant application in the pipeline to Laird Norton for a Watershed Stewardshio and Resource Center. During this same time, she was opposing the concept of stewardship plans being recommended by Dr. Brooks and the CAC. While this may not b~ illegal, it would certainly be noteworthy to interested public observers who also have a stake in the impact of an amended CAO. This is exactly why public business is made public and why disclosure of pertinent information such as this alleviates concerns that private interests are not being advanced ahead of the common good. Suspicions also become heightened when Ms. Silver, as a member of the entity that sued the county, promoted the terms of the WEC settlement agreement to the exclusion of any compromise path. Several attempts to negotiate a middle ground solution by different members of the committee were rejected by Ms. Silver and Amy Hiatt. The cumulative affect is a perception of a back room, not a sunshine, ordinance. The propriety of all these actions needs to be separated from any affinity for their material content, and evaluated impartially so all citizens are governed by the rule of law and not the preference of the majority. The conduct of the BoCC has also breached at least the spirit of impartiality. Commissioner Sullivan initially defended the main body of the May 17, th 2006 draft and DOE science despite repeated assurances the draft is not harm to anyone, and well in advance of a promised extension where an objective review of the draft would take place. He has described our current ordinance as inadequate prior to obtaining any knowledge of existing problems. He has been quoted calling concerned citizens who objected to the content and process of the May 17th draft "bullies." In a letter to the Leader he impugned the integrity of Republican appointed Planning Commissioners simply through guilt by association. When the idea for the Critical Areas Committee was being proposed, he wondered aloud whether people who volunteered might be "disappointed" in the outcome. Commissioner Austin was .., f'~ .... quoted in a Peninsula Daily News article that he was inclined to agree with the CAC minority position, well before the final reports were due and while earnest attempts were being made negotiate compromise. The entire BoCC misrepresented the role of the Planning Commission chairman in appointing the CAC, disregarding the accurate record of events contained in the meeting minutes. A Republican appointed Planning Commission rnember seeking re-appointment, who was well respected and a major contributor to award winning UDC amendments related to agriculture, was replaced by a candidate who promoted her qualifications by association to a family foundation who contributed to the entity which sued the county over the CAO and who subsequently set the terms of a revised draft ordinance. These are examples of the kind of premature statements, opinions, and actions that give an appearance of prejudice before all information gathered during public process, which is integral to legislative decision making, is complete. It is not with pleasure, but out of necessity that I raise these issues in formal public comment. Jim Hagen 150 Maple Dr. Cape George i t cc: 'DC. ~\)S I J. 9" \>c 3 5 ()o BOLL RECEIVED Jefferson County Board of Commissioners Phil Johnson, Chair, District 1 David Sullivan, District 2 John Austin, District 3 Or:; 2W!B u (,iU JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Public Comment on MLA06-242 (Critical Areas Ordinance) Commissioners; COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ISSUES: HEARING RECORD 1) Goals of the Vision Statement: The Vision Statement describes a balanced set of values intended to preserve rural character and a variety of rural lifestyles. In its own words, "To accomplish the above principles, our decision-making must take into account the need for local communities to shape their own sense of the future within the guidelines contained in this plan." It is doubtful subservience to an outside special interest group, for the purpose of avoiding litigation, was what the Vision had in mind. For the Comprehensive Plan to accomplish its goals, it "must ultimately support a community and a future that is liveable, affordable, and sustainable," and that the plan "must a) balance the needs of the community with the rights of the individuals; b) recognize and reflect the diversity of landscape and tradition found in the county; and, c) provide for both consistency and flexibility in their application." This is the vision for our county, not to be supplanted by one-dimensional WEC or Port Townsend interests. The Environment Element in our Comprehensive Plan is optional, yet there are more goals and policies (107) than the Housing and Economic Development Element combined (79). Numerous other policies in the plan come attached with environmental mitigation. Under GMA, rural character is not subjective but is defined by statute (RCW 36.70A030(14)). It basically relates to preserving traditional rural lifestyles, opportunities to live and work in rural areas, and preserving rural landscapes. Yet, in a county largely undeveloped, we have more goals for preserving open space (39) than preserving affordable housing (28). Is it any wonder that the CAO and a moratorium on McMansions are issues-of-the-day, while affordable housing and a supporting economic sector receive half the attention? The financial andsocio- economic impacts of an expansive CAO needs to be measured against the corresponding environmental benefits, and then balanced with its relationship with other equally important community goals. McMansions are a real canary-in-a-coal-mine about the direction the county is headed. 2) Balancinl! the CAD with all Elements of the Plan; The first two goals of the Land Use Element, which are currently the first two goals of the entire plan, are largely intended to establish land use goals and policies that are internally consistent with and reflective of all other goals of the plan. A synopsis of how the CAO may impact other goals and policies of the plan are as follows: LNP 1.2; Property rights must be protected against arbitrary actions, including unwarranted buffer widths. LNP 1.8; Analyze the impacts and costs of CAO permitting requirements on applicants and overall permit efficiency in relation to available county resources. Increased permit efficiency was one of the promises of GMA. LNP 5.3.3 & 5.4.3; Will larger buffers based on commercial land use designation inhibit the intent of these policies for affordable housing? LNP 6.1; Will new home-based businesses or cottage industries be impacted amended buffer requirements? LNG 8.0; Analyze impact of amended CAO on expansion of economically viable Legal Existing Uses. LNG 15.0; Analyze cost of CAO permitting on affordable housing goals. LNG 18.0; Analyze financial and socio-economic impacts of amended CAO on maintaining a variety of rural lifestyles. LNP 20.3; Analyze the impacts of amended CAO on innovative design standards such as clustering. As has been mentioned during workshops, many of the remaining build able parcels are "problem lots" posing design challenges that could be triggered by larger buffers. HSG 1.0; See LNP 15.0. HSG 2.0; Ensure a variety of housing choices aren't inhibited by excessive building permit requirements and costs. HSP 2.1; This Policy describes the balance between environmental protection and economic impact on the development of housing. HSP. 2.2; There was consensus that current information on critical areas, including maps, to assist applicants in a timely and efficient manner is lacking in accuracy. HSP 2.3& 2.4; Strive for an amended CAO that is easily understandable for the applicant and can be most efficiently administered by DCD. HSP; 2.7; Ensure innovative housing types and development patterns aren't inhibited by an amended CAO. HSP 4.7; Encourage, if necessary, expedited review of administrative buffer reductions to ensure low-income housing on vacant public land is viable. EDP 1.1; Support an amended CAO that recognizes the difference in commercial impacts on the environment, and allows flexibility to achieve the purpose of this policy. Not all commercial, light industrial, and institutional uses on lands designated as "Rural Commercial," "Public," or "Urban Growth Area" are automatically a high impact. Buffers should be assessed in direct response to actual impact. EDG 5.0; Include regulatory incentives within an amended CAO to facilitate economic opportunities in the county. EDP 5.1; Assess whether an amended CAO will be successful in streamlining environmental review procedures and processes, considering the resource limitations at DCD. EDP 5.2; See HSP 2.3. EDP 5.3; See HSP 2.3. EDP 5.4; SEP A review is an existing first line of defense against environmental impacts. EDG 9.0; This goal and related policies provide more indications that environmental consciousness pervades every aspect of the Comprehensive Plan. A strict CAO is unnecessary considering our strong zoning controls and present level of environmental attention and awareness. 3) Comorehensive Plan Policies That Preserve Existinl! Land Uses; Virtually the entire Land Use Element provides clear criteria upon which existing land use designations are based and maintained. Changes to land use designation, besides being time consuming and costly, demands a thorough public review under the Comprehensive Plan amendment process, and are subject to evaluation of at least seven general requirements. Conversion of natural resource land to rural residential is highly improbable. Conversion of any lands to commercial is virtually impossible under GMA LAMRID statutes. Other Goals and Policies that preserve existing land uses are: NRG 1.0 NRP 1.2 NRP 1.7 NRG 2.0 NRP 3.1 NRG 4.0 NRP 4.1 NRP 4.6 NRP 5.2 NRG 10.0 NRP 10.1 NRP 10.3 NRP 10.6 NRP 10.7 . NRP 10.9 4) Comprehensive Plan Goals. Policies. and Strate1!ies related to CMZ's; All specific references to channel migration zones (lateral migration of channels) are contained within the Flood Hazard section of the Environment Element. ENG 11.0; "Protect flood hazard areas from development and uses that compromise the flow, storage and buffering of flood waters, normal channel functions, and fish and wildlife habitat and to minimize flood and river process risk to life and property." ENP 11.1; Coordinate flood plain management with watershed and habitat plans. ENP 11.2; Use County Flood Plain Ordinance to manage land use rather than the river. ENP 11.9; Land use decisions should consider cumulative cost to public from flood plain development. ENP 11.10; Implement policies of Jefferson County-City of Port Townsend Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan (2004). Critical Areas Strategy: 3. Ensure development regulations are sufficiently protective to maintain County-wide National Flood Insurance Community Rating System. 7. "Review the flood proofing and storm water management measures for development in the flood plain to minimize adverse impacts to property and to natural flood plain functions, such as channel storage and lateral migration of channels." A major question to be considered before adding another layer of regulation that complicates permit process and efficiency is, will current permitting standards provide a means to the same end? Another thing . . to consider; channel migration zones in lands governed under Forest Practices are subject to compensation for land taken out of use. It is with no small amount of irony that with all the negative assumptions about the impacts of 1-933, heightened awareness of this issue could result in increased payments from the state to atTected landowners. c:.GI~.$ Why would we cut and paste King County CMZ Jf iatioM into Jefferson's CAO when we know our river processes are unique to our landscape? 5) Aoolication of the Environment Element to the CAD,. In general, all references to enhance do not apply to the CAO. Goals and policies related to enhancement can be achieved through other voluntary, non-regulatory means. ENG 1.0 and related policies; Watershed manage plans and water resource protection strategies, including monitoring, should be consolidated into a coordinated etTort that avoids duplication and maximizes available resources. ENG 2.0 and ENP 2.1, 2.5, 2.6; The recommendations of the CAC and the Planning Commission Minority Report satisfy this goal and associated policies. ENG 8.0; This goal does not apply with respect to views and the best available science related to required butTer widths for noise mitigation is inconclusive. ENG 11.0; This goal and relevant policies were discussed earlier in regard to channel migration zones. ENG 12.0; The recommendations of the CAC and Planning Commission Minority Report satisfy this goal and associated policies. ENG 14.0; The local best available science developed by Dr. Kenn Brooks is preferred under WAC 365-195-905(3) to a compendium of science derived from outside the county. Dr. Brooks was one of only two . . scientific experts (Dr. Crittenden being the other) directly involved in the CAO amendments who met the criteria for a qualified scientific expert under WAC 365-195-905(4). The CAO remains connected to the overall 2004 Comprehensive Plan update, and should be reviewed in that context, not in isolation. The Critical Areas Stewardship Plan deserves particular attention. This concept is much more attuned to actual on-the-ground conservation in concert with preserving other planning goals. GMA encourages innovative techniques for maintaining coordinated growth, and the Comprehensive Plan contains existing policies for funding and implementation of the CASP. Jim Hagen Former Planning Commission Chairman and CAC Chairman 150 Maple Dr. Cape George S~'omM-\-e.d 'ULAn (\j ~t\.b\\c cc ~ 1)CnY3(Lllo~ ?c , (OVV\W\tv'\+ 3/s/o~ RECEIVED HEARING RECORD George 8. Yount 717 _25th Street Port Townsend WA 98368 0:3 2fJOB March 3, 2008 JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Jefferson County Board of Commissioners Jefferson County Court House POBox 1220 Port Townsend WA 98368 The CAO HearinQ and CAO Issues I read with interest the PDN article on the Board of County Commissioners hearing on the Critical Areas Ordinance. My remarks are based on this article and what I have observed over the past two years. It was noted that several people spoke against the house procedure of allowing citizens three minutes to speak. The three minute rule is very generous. It allows as many people to speak as possible within a given time. It forces people to come to the hearing prepared. One should collect and organize one thought and make one's points efficiently and effectively. If a person has more to say than can fit in three minutes, he/she can put their thoughts in writing, and there is no limit on words or pages. In fact, written testimony is far more effective if one purpose is to give thoughtful suggestions in detail. If the hearing's purpose was input on and get new ideas on the table, a longer limit would seem useful. But in this case, we are now at the end of a very long debate. Since the issues in the CAO have been discussed, debated, and repeatedly discussed and debated in fifty or more public meetings of the Planning Commission, its hand picked sub committee, and numerous formal hearings, would seem questionably unless the speaker had something else in mind. However, if the purpose is to speak through the Commissioners to the audience, or to filibuster to stave off an inevitable decision, then we can understand why the opponents of the CAO legislation would champion a longer time. What we witnessed Wednesday evening was an attempt to break the "rules of decorum" and I was pleased the Board of County Commissioners kept the playing field level for the benefit of all who testified. For the past two years the opponents of the Critical Areas Ordinance have been critical of the WEC settlement agreement. They obviously misunderstood its purpose then and continue to deliberately misinterpret its most important points. Not only did it call for greater cooperation and use of valuable DOE assistance and best available science, it called for renewed citizen involvement. It gave the farmers of Jefferson County not only an olive branch but WEC cut down a whole olive tree forest by requesting agriculture,be exempted from the critical areas ordinances. What a gift! Here was a wonderful opportunity to heal and unite our community on a contentious issue. But it went right over their spokes person's head. Now, we have a draft CAO that has the exemption of agriculture codified. So why would farmers as well as other opponents get up and testify that somehow this ordinance would be detrimental to their business? They have missed it by a country mile. The WEC Settlement Agreement became the focal point of a much bigger issue, what happened next is something akin to Picket's charge at the Battle of Gettysburg. It became politicized when the Republicans, in attempt to discredit the current Democratic Party majority Board of County Commissioners for working to correct the old CAOs errors developed by the previous Republican dominated Board of County Commissioners. The fear that the Democrats were actually going change the regulation brought out the tractor brigade reaction. The pictures in the newspapers revealed the same faces observed in the Republican Party's newsletter. That gave the Chairman of the Planning Commission an excuse to hand 'pick these same faces for the subcommittee. I am amused that Mr. Hagen often criticizes WEC as an out of county organization telling the county what's good us, but that did not stop him from appointing two property rights activists, Jim Tracy of Kitsap County and Robert Crittenden of Clallam, to be on the PC sub committee. The Planning Commission Minutes of June 13, 2007 are startlingly revealing that the Planning Commission chair and members of the PC audience had already pre-selected these same faces plus one of these out-of-county residents before the Noah's Ark meeting where the rest of the public was to be chosen. With a sea of hands, a classic ruse used many times in a strong desire to predetermine the outcome, the Chairman was free to select his friends and constituents, along with a few "token" environmentalists to lightly season the mix and give it an air "balance". The WEC's hope for true citizen involvement was side tracked and derailed before it started. What could have been a wonderful community spirited community building problem solving exercise was exploited and ultimately destroyed by a politically inspired dogmatic power trip of a few people. I am a firm believer that people can get together and resolve major community issues like the critical areas ordinances. As a former mediator for the University of Washington Institute for Environmental Studies who has assisted helping divergent groups resolve land use issues, I know there are proven methods to achieve consensus. When I hear this small group call for a group of "stake holders", great care must to be taken to make sure all the constituencies are represented and have an equal and respected voice in the outcome. There are a number of very reputable professional mediation organizations that can provide assistance in helping determine the issues and players, and whether there is a desire on everyone's part to achieve resolution. I would much rather see us go this route that to gu to court. Sincerely, ~~??;Y~ CC\ ~cj 3Mo'l HEARING RECORD RECEIVED v' 5 March 2008 o 200S Board of County Commissioners of Jefferson County, Washington Phil Johnson, District #1 Commissioner David Sullivan, District #2 Commissioner John Austin, District #3 Commissioner JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Dear Commissioners, This is to correct information in my 4 March 2008 letter regarding definitions for the proposed Critical Areas Ordinance. The value for impervious surface area in each of the three definitions should be corrected and, to be consistent with current code, read "twenty-five (25) percent". I apologize for my error. Jt/~ #}~~ William Miller / 2023 E. Sims Way #360 Port Townsend, W A 98368 Cc: DCD Attn. Al Scalf CF,: ',ft-- 3/41D~ 4 March 2008 HEARING RECORD RECEIVED Board of County Commissioners of Jefferson County, Washington VPhil Johnson, District #1 Commissioner David Sullivan, District #2 Commissioner John Austin, District #3 Commissioner " A 2-' flrji U 0, .Utlu JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Dear Commissioners, This is to suggest adding the following definitions into Chapter18.1 0 of the Jefferson County Code. They are offered as supplementary information to the proposed Critical Areas Ordinance (Chapter 18.22). Add to JCC 18.10.080 for H definitions High Impact Level Means the impact level with regard to a Critical Area by land use in areas established for urban commercial, industrial and institutional development activities and in rural residential areas the development activities of: a) one (1) single family residence with its typical appurtenances on a parcel size of one (1) acre or less or b) two or more dwellings with their typical appurtenances on a parcel size less than five (5) acres, but greater than one (1) acre. Nevertheless, cumulative impervious surface areas shall not exceed thirty-five (35) percent of the parcel area and water runoff is directed away from the critical area buffer. Add to JCC 18.10.120 for L definitions Low Impact Level Means the impact level with regard to a Critical Area by land use in areas ~stablished for forestry, passive recreational open space, unpaved trails and in rural residential areas the development activities of one (1) single family residence with its typical appurtenances on a parcel of five (5) acres or more and that does not result in a cumulative impervious surface area exceeding thirty-five (35) percent of the parcel area and water runoff is directed away from the critical area buffer. Add to JCC 18.10.130 for M definitions Moderate Impact Level Means the impact level with regard to a Critical Area by land use in active recreational parks, open space with paved trails, logging roads and in rural residential areas the development activities of one (1) single family residence with its typical appurtenances on a parcel less than five (5) acres in size, but more than one (1) acre and that the development does not result in a cumulative impervious surface area that exceeds thirty- five (35) percent of the area of the parcel and water runoff is directed a,way from the critical area buffer. fL William Miller 2023 E. Sims ay #360 Port Townsend, W A 98368 Cq: DCD Attn. Al Scalf II . HEARING RECORD RECEIVED 5 March 2008 Board of County Commissioners of Jefferson County, Washington ......"Phil Johnson, District #1 Commissioner David Sullivan, District #2 Commissioner John Austin, District #3 Commissioner -, u 2fi {lB' v"U,&J JEFFERSON COMMISS/~~~~TY The following contains the changes necessary to correct errors introduced into the proposed Critical Areas Ordinance Land Use Impact Tables. Each table had one area where a descriptive criterion was incomplete and one area where a descriptive criterion was incorrect. The buffer sizes ate not affected by these changes. Dear Commissioners, Table 18.22.330(1) for Low Impact Land Uses Table 18.22.330(2) for Moderate Impact Land Uses Table 18.22.330 (3) for High Impact Land Uses Correct the 2nd entry for Wetland Category III (it indicates a resulting buffer of75 feet) by inserting new text: "[Total of scores between 30 &; SO]" that will be seen to apply to the existing text of: "And with [H=20 to 28]". Correct the 2nd entry for Wetland Category I by changing the value to "70" and the word "less" to "more" so that it will read as follows: "With total scores 70 or more and:" Note: Because there is quite an increase in buffer size when the habitat score increases from 28 to 29, (consistent with the "step" identified by the DOE) a graduated scale could be developed by the county to ~~) that "step" issue. See attachment. /t/~1~ William Miller / 2023 E. Sims Way #360 Port Townsend, W A 98368 Cc: OCD Attn. Al Scalf Attachment ....... "'". r- , Attachment to BoCC letter of 5 March 2008 Corrections to proposed Critical Areas Ordinance Land Use Impact Tables Because the DOE habitat point system appears to be linear (as compared with exponential) and the buffer sizes are also presented as linear: One way to address the large "step" (essentially a doubling in a buffer size but only a one point change in habitat value) is to calculate an incremental buffer size by calculating a linear relationship between the range of the habitat values and the range of the buffer SIzes. Habitat values range from 0 (zero) to thirty-six (36) for all levels of impact use And buffer sizes are impact level dependent. To address the doubling factor in Categories II & I for Low Impact- A graph of the linear relationships using habitat scores (19 to 36) on the abscissa axis and buffer sizes (50' to 150') on the ordinate axis results in about 5.88 feet for each habitat point and the change in the buffer sizes from a change in habitat score from 28 to 29 points would be from @ 102.92' to @ 108.80' (not the 75' to 150' in the table). To address the doubling factor in Categories II & I for Moderate Impact - A graph of the linear relationships using habitat scores (19 to 36) on the abscissa axis and buffer sizes (75' to 225') on the ordinate axis results in about 8.82 feet for each habitat point and the change in the buffer sizes from a change in habitat score from 28 to 29 points would be from @ 154.38' to A 163.20' (not the 110' to 225' in the table). To address the doubling factor in Categories II & I for High Impact- A graph of the linear relationships using habitat scores (19 to 36) on the abscissa axis and buffer sizes (100' to 300') on the ordinate axis results in about 11.76 feet for each habitat point and the change in the buffer size from a change in the habitat score from 28 to 29 points would be from @ 205.84' to 217.60' (not the 150' to 300' in the table) The ''trade-off' is accepting larger buffer sizes than those in the tables for the lower habitat scores for the doubling of a buffer size because of the change from 28 to 29 of the habitat score. This "incremental" method could also be applied to the smaller buffers established for wetland categories IV and III. · tc:'l{U] 315/D~ Page 1 of 1 HEARING RECORD Leslie Locke From: Phil Johnson Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 20088:13 AM To: Leslie Locke Subject: FW: CAO comment Attachments: CAO _ Comment_ Sandy Hershel man . pdf RECEIVED o 5 200B From: Sandy Hershelman[SMTP:HERSHELMAN@OLYMPUS.NET] Sent: Wednesday, March 05,20088:11:19 AM To: David Sullivan; Miranda Schryver; John Austin; Phil Johnson Subject: CAO comment Auto forwarded by a Rule JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Hello all. . . I've attached a comment for the CAO process. I hope you all have a great day! Sandy 3/5/2008 . ~ Sandy Hershelman P.o. Box 521 Port Hadlock, W A 98339 RECEIVED o 2DDB March 1, 2008 Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, W A 98368 JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Gentlemen: I was asked by Jefferson County Department of Community Development staff to sit on the Critical Areas Ordinance Review Committee (CAORC). It was an amazing, eye-opening experience- and I say that with sincerity. The Jefferson County Home Builders Association's membership is very diverse. With only a third of them builders, I was representing men and women from many walks of life. As the weeks turned into many months, I watched the CAORC become highly polarized. This was extremely disturbing because it was my quest-on that committee, as it is in life-to learn as much as I possibly could from the experience. On May 23, the CAORC majority sent a plea to the Planning Commission to allow an interactive workshop, when Ecology came to Jefferson County on May 30. While we were all excited at the opportunity for Dr. Kenn Brooks to discuss the science with Ecology reps, the DOE had dictated that its staff would present to and take questions from only the PC. On May 24, I sent this e-mail to the JCHBA, after the HBA's May 23 dinner meeting: The reason for this e-mail is in response to the crowd last night. They were appalled that some members of the PC appeared willing to allow the Department of Ecology (DOE) to dictate the parameters of the May 30 "workshop." DOE wants to present to, and take questions from, the PC only. . .essentially eliminating input from the citizens group that has put in thousands of hours over the last nine months. If the PC really wanted to have a balanced informational session, they would want both Dr. Kenn Brooks and DOE available to answer their questions. Brooks is the world-renowned scientist (and Jefferson County resident) who dissected DOE's "Best Available Science" (BAS) and is of the opinion a lot of it is not "best" at all, nor do some of the studies back the claims they're being used for, as evidence. I couldn't put my finger on Brooks' papers on the County's website, so I put them all in one place for you: wwwjeffcohomebuilders.com/CAO/CAO.htm. I also linked to the County's CAO page...and the HUGE file that has all of the committee's reports in it. Bottom line: Brooksfeels the DOE recommended buffers are too extreme in a lot of cases. If you are in support of DOE's wider buffers, that's fine...I would encourage you, however, to wonder why DOE would not be willing to have a healthy discussion, scientist to scientist, to educate our planning commission. They should be able to defend the science that they've published as this state's "BAS." As a citizen wanting to be better educated on the subject, I'd really love to hear both sides! We need to protect our critical areas. Not only are we legally mandated to do so, but it's the right thing to do. On the other hand, having onerous regulations based on bureaucrats' edicts isjust wrong. Our forefathersfought long and hard to ensure our right to question authorities. . Ecology came and talked May 30. At least Dr. Brooks was allowed a few more than his three minutes of public comment. The passion with which Jill Silver presented her case throughout the CADRC process was inspiring, but she was out-gunned in that environment. I admire that she stuck it out-and I learned a lot from what she offered. Still frustrated, I wanted the PC and public (and me!) to hear an interactive discussion between Dr. Brooks and someone with at least the equivalent experience. (The Ecology staffers sent May 30 fell short.) After a minimal response from the JCHBA members to e-mail the PC, I tried another step: I approached Jill Silver with the idea of she (as 10,000 Years Institute) and I (as the JCHBA) co- sponsoring a discussion between Kenn and Fred Weinmann, PhD. Her group and mine...environmentalists and builders...the perceived left and right. Thought it would be about as "fair" as I could get it. When she didn't respond yes, I went directly to Fred. His fear was that the property rights folks would eat him alive. Even after I assured him that the meeting would be on my turf, with me calling the shots-and everyone would have to play nice-he still didn't bite. Quite frankly, I can't blame him. He didn't know me well enough to know that I could indeed control the meeting I had in mind. I've thought long and hard about why Ecology refused to discuss the science in an open forum. I realized it was because they didn't have to-they held all of the cards. I offer this information to you as yet another piece to consider when making your decision on the CAD. Gentlemen, be wise... Regards, ~/ Sandy Hershelman ce. ~ ]3/5/03 Leslie Locke From: Sent: To: Subject: Phil Johnson Wednesday, March 05, 2008 9:02 AM Leslie Locke FW: Approve the CAO HEARING RECORD From: Michael Dawson[SMTP:MICHAELB.DAWSON@GMAIL.COM] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 8:39:14 AM To: Erin Lundgren; Lorna Delaney; Julie Matthes; John Austin; Phil Johnson; Leslie Locke; Miranda Schryver Subject: Approve the CAO Auto forwarded by a Rule I am writing to urge you to act on the proposed CAO revisions. As a wetland consultant I have experience working with the current CAO in Jefferson County and the CAOs of the cities of Port Townsend, Poulsbo, Bremerton and Port Orchard, and Clallam, Kitsap, Pierce, Mason, and King Counties. All of these have updated their ordinances to use the revised wetland rating system Ecology updated in 2004, which is a large improvement over the old rating system currently in use in Jefferson County. All of these jurisdictions have increased buffer widths for valuable habitat, although we have seen that under the new rating system, wetlands that perform fewer functions tend to rate lower than under the old system and receive lower buffers. In my opinion these changes are a good thing, providing more protection where needed without causing unnecessary burden where they are going to be less effective. One change that is important to make in the draft CAO is to make sure it is in alignment with the new rating system in terms of whether multiple wetland ratings are allowed (they are in the draft and aren't in the rating system). The rating system already has allowances in it for different wetland and habitat types and multiple ratings imposed on top would basically render the whole system useless. The stewardship option is a generous offer to land owners and could provide a lot of flexibility in the administration of wetland regulations. It will be important to have public education on how to do stewardship plans and have some ground rules in place. As written, the code gives no hint as to how these might look. The most important thing is to give some teeth to enforcement of wetland mitigation and habitat management plans. This involves having a clearly stated monitoring process and penalties for non-compliance. In my experience, when it gets to mitigation counties have some administrative wiggle room to make things reasonable and landowners and developers want to do the right thing, when they know what that is and when they know what the bottom line is. Washington State has the best wetland laws in the country. They are clear and based on solid science and offer the kind of protections for critical areas needed as we move into a new era of increased growth coming at the same time as ecological restoration is becoming critical. Jefferson County needs to catch up and could be an example with a well- crafted CAO. Critics who say this will lower property values need only look to the south in Kitsap County where the pace of development actually picked up when their new CAO went into effect. Mike Dawson 1361 51st Street Port Townsend 1 :. CC '. ~fD.~.. ? 3/sfD"6' - t6OCC) Miranda Schryver From: Sent: To: Subject: Taylor Kathleen [kmmetaylor@gmail.com] Tuesday, March 04,20084:56 PM Joel Peterson; Miranda Schryver Critical Areas Ordinance HEARING RECORD My name is Kathleen Taylor. My husband and I bought a property at 746 Van Trojen Road, Chimacum in 2002. We became permanent residents of Jefferson County April, 2006. We currently live on our boat at slip E12 Port Ludlow Marina, 1 Gull Drive, Port Ludlow while we build our home on the 83 (or so) acres in Chimacum. Since over 90% of our Chimacum property is under a formal forestry plan and the piece reserved for our personal use has none of the characteristics described in the ordinance, my concerns are not motivated by fears for my property or my use of it. My husband and I take political action seriously and try to be informed about the local and national issues. We vote in all elections and make campaign contributions according to our beliefs. So I read the first version of the ordinance, the second version, the majority report, the minority report and various appendices. As to the first version of this ordinance (the Amy version?) I was appalled that there was no acknowledgement of agricultural or forestry uses of the land and that the buffer zones were so large. So I was happy to see in the second version the statements about the agricultural uses and forestry uses being governed by their existing regulations on practices. I hope this applies to new agriculture as well as old. What I see in the Chimacum/Beaver Valley area are small, organic enterprises. We need more of those. With what's happening to food prices in general and with the "move" to local growing, we should be encouraging this, not throwing up roadblocks. I am still concerned with the buffers for Non fish bearing, seasonal streams. I'm not sure these should have any buffer more than 10 feet. I don't see the need for anything more than that. And I am concerned with the handling of this. Since the way things work, if the regulatory agency says you have one and the buffer applies, and the property owner disagrees, then the property owner has to pay for experts to prove the rule doesn't apply. I've talked to three property owners who've gone through this over drainage ditches that were claimed by the regulatory agency to be "seasonal streams" needing certain protections. One gave in, one held several subsequent discussions and prevailed and the third had to go to court but won in the end. I think this one buffer is going to cause the county a great deal of grief. It is somewhat absurd to go through all this to "settle/avoid" a lawsuit by an outside entity who had time and resource to "sue" but none to be part of a constructive solution. Yet set yourself up for certain lawsuits by residents of the county, some of them for multiple generations. I listened to the conunents of the "pro" group who seemed mostly to come from Port Townsend with interest. It seemed to me that they were often concerned with growth/urban sprawl. First, if that is the concern, then zoning is the answer to density not ordinances to protect natural resources. Zoning in the critical areas doesn't allow the densities they described as concerns now. Our area is zoned one house per 80 acres hardly a dense concentration. I also listened to the enforcement discussions with some concern particularly how they would be financed. I think I heard requests for more staff, more penalties, etc. It seems to me that in this economy, we need to be very careful about what government takes on. We can't repair our parks and roads as it is. Budgets in the towns and the county are under stress as it is. I don't agree with the "con" group that any regulation is bad and against the constitution. But it does need to have something needful to accomplish and to be as straightforwad and fair as possible. Under this one there will be economic loss to some current landowners. There will also be administrative hassle and cost where differences of definition arise. Unfortunately this will favor those with the time and resources to fight it out (like me) 1 , - and to disadvantage some of those current landowners. So it's important to be sure that each proscription is really needed and can't be easily contested by good science such as what Dr. Brooks provided. So, I'm asking you to be sure that all the various proscriptions are really necessary, that you seek to promote voluntary stewardship plans and co-operative solutions and that you straighten out the language about the non fish bearing streams. Kathleen Taylor 360-301-6431 Mail address: 46 Village Way PMB 105, Port Ludlow, WA 98365 2 0-C'~. \50~C? '0:2J3/sID~ Page 1 of 1 From: Dr. Kenneth M. Brooks [brooks@olympus.net] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 9:00 AM To: Miranda Schryver Cc: Joel Peterson; AI Scalf Subject: Comments regarding Jefferson County's CAD from Dr. Brooks Attachments: Dr Brooks Response to Hiatt and Silver regarding the CASP.doc ~D Miranda Schryver Dear BoCC, Please read the attached letter submitted in response to the comments by George Yount, Amy Hiatt and Jill Silver. Please confirm that the attached document has been entered into the public record for this issue. Dr. Kenneth M. Brooks Aquatic Environmental Sciences 3/5/2008 Aquatic Environmental Sciences 644 Old Eaglemount Road Port Townsend, Washington 98368 Fax and Phone (360) 732-4464 Email: brooks~olvmpus.net March 5, 2008 Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners Jefferson County Courthouse Port Townsend, Washington 98368 RE: Draft Jefferson County Critical Area Ordinance Dear Commissioners, I was forwarded the comments made by George Yount, Amy Hiatt and Jill Silver and asked specifically to respond to their discussion of the Critical Areas Stewardship Plans (18.22.470). Contrary to Hiatt and Silver's assertion that the section is not ready for publication, please note that the draft forwarded to the Planning Commission was deliberated and approved by several wetland scientists from the Department of Ecology and by Dr. Brooks, who has published numerous papers in the peer reviewed literature dealing with the environmental response of wetlands to anthropogenic inputs. In addition, the section was reviewed by Al Latham of the Jefferson County Conservation District who has extensive experience in actually Putting Conservation on the Ground. Amy Hiatt was a member of the review committee where she made many of the same inappropriate recommendations included in their current letter. Her recommendations were rejected by Ecology and other members of the review committee as inappropriate during development of the CASP. The comments of Hiatt and Silver found on pages 15 through 18 of their submission remain inappropriate for the following reasons. Lack of experience of Hiatt and Silver is evident. Throughout the deliberations ofthe CAORC and ofthe CASP committee, Amy Hiatt has repeatedly asked for detailed lists describing WHEN, WHAT, WHERE, WHY and HOW. The reason for this appears to be that neither she nor Jill Silver has experience or training in wetland or wildlife science or management. Ask yourself these questions with respect to their qualifications: 1. What advanced degrees in biology or ecology does either have? 2. In which Washington State counties are they listed as qualified to delineate wetlands or to produce habitat management plans? 3. How many wetland delineations or'habitat management plans have they actually written and had approved? 4. How many peer reviewed papers have they written that have been published in scientific journals? 5. Other than demanding that someone else make sacrifices, what have either of these two activists done on a voluntary basis to actually improve natural resources in Jefferson County? Rural citizens look to the Conservation District for guidance in this respect because of the district's long record of accomplishment. 1 Their lack of professional training and/or experience in these areas is evident in their demand for endless checklists and detail. Most of the detail they demand is known, as a matter of experience and training, by professionals. The goal ofthe CAO should not be to produce a checklist that unqualified persons can use to create a CASP. The environment and human interactions with it are far to complex to be amenable to a checklist approach - no matter how complex the checklist is. Good stewardship planning requires years of training and experience to achieve the degree of understanding required. The Western Washington Growth Management Act Hearings Board (WGMAHB) has made it clear that the goal of GMA is to maintain existing functions and values - not to require a return to some pre-European settlement condition. The importance ofthis is evident in Hiatt's and Silver's comment on page 16 that, "Besides vegetation, the hydrology, and habitat structures should be maintained, reestablished, or restored." What is actually required is that these functions be maintained - not that they be re-established or restored. Re-establishment and/or restoration of functions that were historically lost depends on good stewardship by the land-owner - the WGMAHB has made it clear that local jurisdictions cannot require this. That is one reason that the CAORC emphasized stimulation of stewardship in Jefferson County as the most effective way to maintain and enhance our natural resources. What needs to be included in the site plan will be determined by the activity for which the CASP is being developed and the site specific characteristics of the wetland or wildlife habitat involved. These needs will differ from plan to plan. They will be apparent to qualified professionals and are not amenable to a checklist. At the bottom of page 17, Hiatt and Silver note that a site plan should show the mapped and accurately typed features. That is what a delineation report (which is required) does. If Hiatt or Silver had ever actually written a delineation report, they would realize that. The CAO and particularly the CASP are not textbooks. Quantitative evaluation of the list at the bottom of page 16 and top of page 17 of their comments could take years to accomplish and cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. I deal with mineralization and release of nitrogen, sulfur and carbon associated with sedimented organics in wetlands and deepwater habitats. Requirements for consideration of this in the CASP in other than a qualitative manner are simply not possible in any practical sense. If you would like, I would be pleased to provide you with anyone of my peer reviewed and published articles on this issue or with a several hundred page report prepared for the British Columbia Ministry of Environment. Assessing wildlife communities and their biodiversity. As I noted in my written comments submitted during the February, 2008 public hearing at the Chimacum High School, wildlife (including algae, bacteria, fungi, fish, shellfish, wildlife, and wetland plants) changes with season and from year to year. Trying to quantitatively describe these communities on a parcel is well beyond the scope of what should be required or what can be reasonably expected. The inclusion of these requirements by Hiatt and Silver simply demonstrates their lack of understanding with respect to what is 2 ~ " required. I can also provide you with long and detailed scientific studies that have been peer reviewed and published describing the temporal and special variability of benthic invertebrates in wetlands in Oregon or in deepwater habitats in British Columbia. Habitats of Local Significance. Hiatt and Silver suggest that habitats should be characterized 'within the contributing basin." For extensive areas like Beaver Valley or Chimacum Valley or any of our major river systems or even small watersheds, that would present an insurmountable burden for a property owner or a CASP planner working for DCD or the Conservation District. Three tenths of a mile was acceptable to Ecology and the group that reviewed the CASP and it is adequate. Assessment of a site's hydrology. Hydrology changes from season to season and year to year. In addition, an assessment of subsurface hydrology (shallow groundwater) is well beyond any reasonable demand to be placed property owners. Monitoring. George Yount's demand for a more detailed and rigorous monitoring program also demonstrates a lack of experience and knowledge in this area. Dr. Brooks has developed dozens of monitoring programs in association with his scientific studies. The proposed monitoring program is similar to that used for decades in Washington State to provide a "first alert" of watershed problems. When watershed monitoring indicates a problem, then a specific set of protocols is developed to trace down the problem. Trying to intensively monitor water and sediment quality in all areas of Jefferson County would cost literally tens of millions of dollars and that cost would not be balanced by a significant increase in our first alert of problems. I have to wonder how many water quality monitoring protocols and studies Mr. Yount has developed and carried out and which governments ask for his assistance in these efforts. Summary. The recommendation made by Hiatt and Silver in their critique of the draft CAO are similar to recommendations they made to the CAORC and CASP committees. They were rejected then as inappropriate and/or infeasible and they should be rejected now. Their recommendations are consistent with what should be expected from untrained and inexperienced people pretending to have expertise that they do not have. If they had that training and experience, they would realize how impractical and un- necessary many of their recommendations are. I remind the commissioners that the CASP was developed by professional biologists with advanced degrees who have published in the peer reviewed literature and who have decades of experience in this field. Having said that, I do see subtle changes by the Planning Commission to the draft CASP presented to them by the CASP committee. I recommend the original draft to include the section on Applicability and limitations that was dropped by the Pc. Sincerely, Dr. Kenneth M. Brooks Aquatic Environmental Sciences 3 a. a: OeD 8/6)0 g Point No Point Treaty Council Port Gamble S'Klallam · Jamestown S'Klallam March4,2008 HEARING RECORD RECEIVED Board of County Commissioners Jefferson County, P.O Box 1220 Port Townsend, W A 98368 JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Re: Jefferson County Planning Commission Final Draft CAO (dated 1/9/08) Dear Commissioners: The Port Gamble S'Klallam and Jamestown S'Klallam Tribes, and the Point No Point Treaty Council are re-submitting comments sent to the Planning Commission in November 2007. Please consider these comments to the extent that they are still relevant. The aforementioned Tribes appreciate the opportunity to provide comment. We remain engaged in the CAO update process and look forward to a successful revision. Sincerely, ? r ~ ?:::Y' Steve Todd, Habitat Biologist Point No Point Treaty Council Hans Daubenber , Habitat Biologist Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe I 7999 N.E. Salish Lane · Kingston, Washington 98346 . Kingston (360) 297-3422 . FAX (360) 297-3413 ~. .' " Point No Point Treaty Counci,1 Port Gamble S'KlaUam . Jamestown S'Klallam November .13, 2007 Peter.powney, Cha4m(1n Jefferson County Planning Commission 621 Sheridan Street Pon.TQwnSelld, WA 98368 Re: Jefferson County PlaIllling Comnrlssion He1Uing Draft CAO (dated 10/29/07) Dear Mr. Downey: The Port GambleS"K.1a.llamandJam.~wuS'Kla11am'I'tiPes,.andthePoilltNo Point 1 Treaty Co~cil. commend the tremendous efforts QfthePlanning C,;lInlllission, subcommittees, county staftandothersinvolvedin developing a revised Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO)that protects ournaturalreSOUtces, human safety, and draws on the considerable energy of its citizettty to be betterstewatdsofo1ll' land. and Watet. We realiZe that this process invol~d in.dividuals withv1Uious ~rwectives,and that working 1 through differences has been. noS1ll3l1 feat. The aforementioned. Tribes appreciate the oppoftunityto provide. OOmmelltonthelatest CAO dtaft. We have reviewed. the Planning Commission Hearing Draft, Proposed New Chapter 18.22 JCC,.'CritiealArea$" (dated Oct. 29,2,0(7), and in general we support the protections provided th1:oUgbllllU1Y elelllen~, notabIyCbanneIMigration Zones {within Article V),Wetlands. (Article VI) and FWHCA (ArticleVlI), particularly stream and marine shoreline buffers. However, we have concerns With I'e$pect to several paItS of the draft CAO. as follows. . Agriculture: Tb~re n.~ed$tQ belI1orecl~ty i1) the CAOWith respect to agricnlture al1d SSB.s24.8. Also, ~xistiIlg andon-gQing~gl'i'cn1t~re that proposes to expand or convert to ala.nd llse other than agricnlture.(e.g.,.restdential or commercial) needs to comply with the GAO re.ql1ltements (e.g., buffers) that govern these otherland Uses. . Geo-Hazard Areas (GHAs):The GHAsection(ArticleV)iSeutrentlycon!Using and possibly .conu-adlctory. Fore:x:ampI~insectiQn .1&.22.170 (3)(a)(i),clearillg and grading i$aUow~din GHAs, ~utJater in ~ijQll18.22.170 (6)(f),it isst~ted that buffers are required adjacent to landslide ORAs. part of the problem may be , th~t the different types of GHAs need to be clearly distinguished .inthissection. 7!l99 N.E. Sali~ Lane . Kingston, ~$hjngton9834.6 · Kin~ton (a6()) 297-3422 · FAX (~6Q)297-3413 .. ,. ... ~ . Channel MiJP"atiOl1 Zones (CMZs)(withi.n Article V): We strongly support the inclusion of CMZs in the CAO. Channel migration zones are among the most ecologically diverse and productive habitats for sahnonids and many other aquatic and terrestrial wild1ifespecies~ they are inherently risky to build in, and itis therefore costly to maintain human infrastructures in CMZs. For these reasons, and because CMZs il1cludesomeGHAs, we recommend that CMZ boundaries themselves provide the~buffer', .andthat a building setback of 15 feetfrom the CMZboundary be established. However, when FWHCA or wetland buffers extend beyond the CMZ, the FWHCAor wetland buffer would then supersede the CMZ. ,Also, we recommend thatthe subdiVision of existblg parcels be prohibited in CMZs. . Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas (FWHCAs)(Artic1e VI):. In addition to the buffers for TypeS, F,and'N streams,. and marine shorelines, this section of the CAO needs to proVide adequate habitat protection (e.g., through buffers and corridors) to other species of bnp<>rtance including those found in the WDPW Priority Hf,tbitatandSpecies (PHS) list. Doing so will minimize the fragmentation of aquatic, riparian and terrestrial upland habitats in the county. Also, we recommend thatata minimuIt1~ vegetation management needs to be addressed within theF'WliCA, wetland, and OHA critical areas. In addition to the importance oia buffer width, there needs to be anempl)asis on the character and [unction of those buffers. . Wetlands (Article Vll): The ex:elllption in section 18.22.320(2) allowing for lawns and other residential actiVities (including fences) into the outer 25% of Wetland buffers should not be pertmtted, nor should it be permitted in other types of buffers such as FWHCAs. 'thiS efl1~vely allowsforbuffeueduction without proper review. . Critical Area Stewa:rdshipPlans(Ci\SPs)(Article IX): We generally support the concept~of alteX'llativeplans when they provide alternatives [or landowners that cannot meet minimulll buffer requirements due to .lotconfignrations, and when the CASPpro\lides equal or betterhabita.t protections than apreseriptive buffer. However, th.erequirementfor3y~o[ pQ$t-implementation monitoring in most cases would not lJe adequate. to ensure the IQng:-tel'tIl effectiveness of'a: CASP. In addition .to the first three years. there should be 5 andlO-year and perhaps longer- term monitOringfoUowing CASPiIt1plementation.wereconunend that information gained from this monitOring be. captured. in a geographic information system (GIS) and used in developingc.andimplementing other conservation and critical areaplans,.includingfutureCAQs, through adaptive management. We alsorecommeIid that the effectiveness of the eASP program be evaluated following three years of implementation. Also~ there n.eeds to be a requirement for the public notifi~tiol1 of CASPs.Finally,in the current draft we are uncertain how one demonstrates(i.e.,ilirough monitoring) whether they are providing t~equalor better protection"to critical areas and resources (e.g.,.flSh and wildlife habitat).1tis one thing to monitor whether planted vegetation is surviving adequately, budt is another issue altogether to gauge Whether that vegetation is ade<tuat~ly prot~ing wetland Of. stream functioussuch as songbird habitat, or sediment and temperafilre regimes. . r _ ..... " ,. . Like the CASPsecU(')ll, we unclerstandfhat the WaterShed Monitoring section (Article X, 18.22.630) in the current draft remains in development. We encourage I a more co~plete and strategic plan that can be supported by adequate funding, With additional w()rk,thisWat~rsbed Monitonngplanmay beeffectiyein documenting status and trends on watershed scal~ that would be helpful in determining cumulative impacts; however, 8$. described inthecurre.nt draft, the monitoril1gplan falls far short of being able to definitelY discern the causes of water (fuality, . streatnt1(')w, .or habitathnpt(')vement ()tde.gr~dation. Furtheltllore, at the scope. and s<:ale described in the current drafiCA.O, the monitoring plan would be unable to link these water quality measurements to specific land use actions. Therefore, it should not be stated that this is the intent of such a Watershed Monit()ringpl$ll, . Also with reSpeCt l()theWateJ'$hedll(')nltorl.l)gplan,.the Tribes would ellC<>tlrage and suppottsuch a monitoring plf;Ul ifthey(i~e.,the Tribes}an4 others engaged in water quality, sQ:eamflow and habitat U1Qnitoringactivitiesinthecounty, are involved in review and oversight oftheIl'loniwringplan. . We need to adequately. fund the Watershed Monitoring plan, Again, we thank the m.any individualsengagedin thel'eViSionof the J"effersonO>unty CAO. We enCQurage you to seriQusly consider the Tdbcsconcerns andco~entsas you; finalize the CAO. Sincerely, ~~ ~.... Hans Daubenberger, ttatBiologi$t Port GambleS'Klallam Tri~ Scott Chitwood, Nat;w"al BesolJ1'C6s Dir~ Jamestown S'l(lallam Tribe , , ~f'l.' -~cl ) J \-,-. neb 3 S 7)r P-c... Miranda 5 ryver From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: CAD comments 200S.doc (34 KB) Ordinance. Debaran Kelso [dlkelso@olympus.net] Wednesday, March 05, 2008 11 :34 AM Miranda Schryver CAO comments HEARING RECORD CAO comments 2008.doc Please see attached last minute comments on the proposed Critical Areas Thanks very much for your time- Debaran Kelso 1 ;.i .... E'.. ,.. . Debaran Kelso 451 E. Middlepoint Rd. Port Townsend, W A 98368 4 March 5, 2008 Dear County Commissioners- I would like to submit written testimony to the fact that I support the adoption of the current revision of the Jefferson County Critical Areas Ordinance. I do hope, however, that the final product is both more clearly written, and includes some of the suggested improvements submitted by the Dept. of Ecology, Point No Point Treaty Council, W A Dept. ofFish and Wildlife, along with thoughtful review and inclusion of various changes offered up by Jill Silver and Amy Hiatt. I will not reiterate what has already been covered in detail by those that have spent much more time studying the current CAO than I have. I would simply urge you to stand firm in giving us a Critical Areas Ordinance that does what it is supposed to do: I) protects lands both critical to continued human health and safety, as well as to the welfare of other wildlife species, 2) states and maps clearly what areas are to be protected and how, 3) educates and provides practical aid to those whose property may by affected by the new CAO, and 4) includes enough teeth to enforce violations to the ordinance when and if they occur. Thanks very much for your time, and for all of your patience and hard work in dealing with this often frustrating and divisive, yet critically important, issue. Sincerely yours, Debaran Kelso " cOf?[~J3151{;'3 Leslie Locke HEARING RECORD Page 1 of 1 From: Phil Johnson Sent: Wednesday, March 05,20081:14 PM To: Leslie Locke Subject: FW: Comments on Input to 2/27/08 CAO Public Meeting Attachments: 3-4-08 to bocc re geo jill.docx From: john richmond[SMTP:WATERMAPS@HOTMAIL.COM] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 1:14:03 PM To: Phil Johnson; David Sullivan; John Austin Subject: Comments on Input to 2/27/08 CAO Public Meeting Auto forwarded by a Rule Dear Commissioners; Please refer to the attached letter. Sincerely, John Richmond 3/5/2008 P.O. Box 536 Forks, WA 98331 March 4, 2008 Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Dear Commissioners: Johnson, Sullivan and Austin; This letter is in regard to comments submitted Wednesday, February 27,2008, at the Chimicum High School Auditorium, for the current draft of the proposed Jefferson County Critical Area Ordinance. I will address some of the contentious issues now, and others in the next week, or so. First, I am extremely disappointed after making a trip of over 100 miles each way, then having only 3 minutes to present a perspective on the current process, or lack thereof and having the advertised meeting cut short by some 45 minutes. Much more guidance to the process should have been brought into the open for the remainder of the allotted time. No open forum has yet been implemented to develop dialog between qualified scientists, both private and DOE and with the Planning Commission members, DCD and the BoCC present. The CAO Committee was formed to "work out differences" and come up with a document for discussion with the participation of the code writer, who was promised by DCD to be on hand while the committee would still be deliberating. As a consequence, the documents prepared by the then majority of the committee, (the scientific group) were flexible, for the purpose of negotiation. Calls were made to the group which advocated rigid regulation, for submittal of scientific, peer-reviewed material. Almost none was presented by qualified persons capable of explaining applicability of cited sources. It was then this group of five decided to splinter off from the process and submit a version of highly regulatory code language borrowed from another county. The result is the dissension, between emotional politics and science, now witnessed by the public. Species of local importance: Regard the benevolence of any property owner, urban or rural, allowing such things as a barn swallow to build a nest under the roof of an open porch, messing up the steps and floor while hatching and feeding its young; A family of spotted skunks living under the stock-feed grain shed for the winter, owls in the barn, each earning their keep by catching rodents, otters in the lily pond strip-mining the native trout. As long as they leave the chickens alone, these are usually tolerated, often encouraged by feeding, even though they can become predators and dealt with accordingly. An obstreperous buck deer may simply vanish if a threat to a community. Decisions must be left to the landowner regarding the abundance and compatibility of wild critters on his land. They cannot be "stockpiled". When a species of concern is found to be extremely troublesome, over abundant, thriving elsewhere, and largely unnecessary to be burdensomely protected, is responsible for reaction from emotional people to the detriment of property or human life, the advocacy's emotions may be in more need of assessment. CMZ's do not have to be designated by ordinance, in any form, on the Hoh River. Through implementation of Forest Practices by the DNR, adequate protection of the resource is afforded. To do so, would overlap the existing protection. The standing remains of SOD-year old Spruce bear withness that the valley does permit very long stability, in places. WEC does not require that CMZ on the Hoh be a part of the County Ordinance. The concept to provide and improve fish habitat is being addressed in the draft WRIA20 Watershed Management Plan. Habitat improvement is being conducted at this very moment by the North Pacific Coast Lead Entity (NPCLE) and has been done for more than 3 decades by various agencies and organizations on the Olympic Peninsula. This ongoing work is in conflict with the concepts in the proposed county ordinances of: Not protecting infrastructure, not making stable bank slopes, not using drift logs and logjam management to create resting ponds, and a plethora of other ironies. Until the excess of marine mammals is controlled and overfishing threats of offshore and river gillnetting and barriers to returning spawners are severely curtailed, no amount of County ordinances will prevent extirpation of salmon ids in the Hoh River. In that event, no amount of habitat protection or restoration funding would do more than just financially sustain a few locals. The approach by creating onerous county ordinances is aimed at making it difficult, if not impossible, to maintain a livelihood through farming the rich floodplains of the river valleys. Imposing burdens on people and farms that provide safe, unadulterated food for your families is not only unfair, it is dangerous to your health. What is being experienced in this process is that a small, emotional, group of advocates is imposing their cathexis on a group of scientific thinkers. An open forum with the BoCC for debate is most likely to settle the differences and should include DOE and Dr. Brooks. Sincerely, /s/ John Richmond Hoh River Valley :~ ~ ~'D ? 3/5JOY, lJDCCJ Miranda Schryver HEARING RECORD From: Teren MacLeod [teren@ptproperty.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 1 :48 PM To: Miranda Schryver Cc: AI Scalf; 'AI Latham' Subject: Jefferson County Board of Commissioners.pdf - Adobe Reader Attachments: Jefferson County Board of Commissioners.pdf Page 1 of 1 o 20GB JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Please accept this attached document as public testimony for the Critical Areas ordinance update. Thank you very much. T eren Macleod 3/512008 .. . Jefferson County Board of Commissioners P.O. Box 1120 Port Townsend, WA 98368 March 5, 2008 Dear Commissioners Austin, Johnson and Sullivan: I am writing to put my thoughts into the public record regarding the Critical Areas Ordinance update, as the time frame allowed in the recent public hearing did not provide sufficient time or consideration to complete my thoughts on this all-important issue. In that, I am certainly not alone. There are many aspects of the ordinance that I am opposed to as a landowner, as a citizen, and as a Realtor. In my latter capacity I am fortunate to work with people who have a vision for how they will live and work on the landscape, many with the interest and means to create small farming opportunities on our rural parcels. Unfortunately, it is often the case that these potential small farmers and growers leave Jefferson County for greener pastures as they are unable to get through the prescriptive regulations and limitations of the land left available here. When that happens, we lose - in taxes, in offerings to our local food market, in future quality of life, and in environmental protections. People who care for their land are the very best stewards of it. This is a demonstrated fact. Another demonstrated fact is that the County coffers are on the empty, so the reliance on prescrigtive regulation with no enforcement is a slap in the face of the people who you have promised to represent. Not only is it the wrong approach, but it is not feasible without throwing a lot of money that you do not have to fix a problem that does not exist. Education and incentive will work far better in the long term and create an atmosphere of accountability and respect, rather than a divisive, defiant leaning. Specific areas of concern in the ordinance include: . 75 foot buffers around non-fish bearing streams. Many "mapped" streams are merely old depressions from fence lines. This single l restriction will affect a significant amount of land in our county - most of which is land that would support our ((Buy Local)) interests. Seems to me you can't support both without contradicting yourselves. . The Channel Migration Zones are a leap of faith that will not serve you or the citizens of this County. There is already ample restriction and consideration of these sensitive areas as a means of protecting human life and safety. The inclusion of the CMZ's in the CAD update is clearly a means to create more fish and wildlife habitat areas, yet another means of hands-off to the people who have a rural lifestyle. We know this is an important aspect of the WEC settlement agreement. We, who you serve, ought to know why, in the presence of other overlapping protections, this is important to you. The following aspects of the CAD update I would like to voice support for: . The Fish and Wildlife Conservation Habitat Areas represent a creative approach to looking at what actually exists and protecting what actually matters. This is an example of the heads-up, pragmatic environmental awareness that was brought forward by the majority (14 of 18) of the CAD review committee. . The Critical Areas Stewardship plan (CASP) is a breath of fresh air that allows landowners to be a part of the vision they create for managing their critical areas in a hands-on fashion. If managed and fostered by . the Conservation District, this unique program has the ability to protect the imp€>rtant functions and values of the critical areas while building a climate of responsible land use at no cost to the County. It would bring best management practices to bear on rural residential lands and allow for adaptive management and monitoring. This is far better than a no-touch zone where, as we heard in the Public Hearing, there is no real way to know if the regulations are helping or hurting. Both Ms. L1ewellin and Mr. Bahls remarked of the protected wetland areas that they had seen go to waste with mitigation plans that were not helping and a sense of helplessness to do a better job without the extremes of aggressive enforcement. This out of the mouths of the people who are in the field doing the work on a daily basis. t . The multiple ratings of wetlands, as proposed by Dr. Kenn Brooks, is another area where Jefferson County could step out of the box and into the light. If you wish to see this County be first at something, why not this? The Department of Ecology believes it has merit. We know that it applies to our Puget lowlands. . lastly, the WWGMHB has spoken and acknowledged the importance and relevance of locally-derived and applicable best available science. We have been handed peer-reviewed science from Dr. Brooks on a silver platter. We should pay attention and embrace what is offered in earnest as a best approach. To not do so begs the question, to whom do you answer to? As a part of the <<process" since the May 17th draft almost 2 years ago, I have been exceedingly aware time and time again of the unwillingness of our Planning Commission and of you, as our Commissioners, to take serious light on the reasoned and responsible approach offered by the many who represent what had been the majority of the review committee. Now, as the minority opinion and report, the opportunity still exists for you to make choices for the rural people in your County to thrive. Please don't take that opportunity away from the future generations who wish to reside here in order to please the people and outside special interest who don't. Teren Macleod 241 Sand Road Port Townsend, WA iQC'.:J)ev) ,1-/ pC ) 3(5f()'j Page 1 of2 Leslie Locke From: Phil Johnson Sent: .Wednesday, March 05, 20084:11 PM To: Leslie Locke Subject: FW: CAO thoughts HEARING RECORD From: Joy McFadden[SMTP:JOY.MCFADDEN@COBALTMORTGAGE.COM] Sent: Wednesday, March 05,20084:07:24 PM To: David Sullivan; John Austin; Phil Johnson Subject: CAO thoughts Auto forwarded by a Rule Good afternoon Gentlemen - I have a couple thoughts and questions for you to ponder regarding this very important decision you are about to make. First off, you had a committee of citizens from varying walks of life with varying view points. These 18 people all very different from each other with varying degrees of education. Some even with their doctorates plus experience in related fields giving them the necessary intelligence and know how to research and come up with some valid answers for you. Of these 18 people, 4 felt very strongly one way while 14 of the people felt the research done showed a very different picture. The 4 people were originally referred to as the minority and the 14 as the majority. This makes since. At the last several meetings I have attended this has switched and now the 4 people are referred to as the majority and the 14 as the minority. Someone needs a dictionary. It is my opinion that as the representatives of the people of the county you should put most of the weight of your decision on what the majority has said, and I mean the 14 committee people when I refer to majority as that is the definitions my dictionaries give. At the last two public hearings, it got to where once someone gave their address, you almost knew for sure what they were going to say. The people who live in town on postage stamp sized lots who will not be directly affected by the decision feel they have the right to tell the people who live in the more rural areas what they can and can not do with their land, in the name of environmental protection. Think about this, who has the greater vested interest in the land, the town people who live miles away or the rural people who own and live on the land? It seems to me this is about power. The want of power by people who feel deserving of it because - why? The town people who feel they know more about how to care for our land, streams, rivers and lakes than the rural people who live, own, and care for our land streams, rivers and lakes. Some of the rural people have lived all their lives on this property and take great environmentally healthy care of this land because they know from experience how it all flows together for people and wildlife. People who live in rural areas choose to live their because they like being surrounded by trees and wildlife. They do take care of it and don't appreciate people who choose to live surrounded by people who seem to need to find something to do with their lives other than to tell others how to live and what they can and can not do with land they have purchased and cared for for years. The science that has come to light by the CAO committee is current, real science that has been researched from the works of others and in the field. The "Best Available Science" the State people are using is out dated and did not include much field work. It has just been setting on the shelves of Olympia for the last 20 years. This old "Best Available Science" is what the DOE and the Minority (4 committee members) are using. Why? Is it comfortable for them because they are familiar with it and to learn something new is too mind boggling? The set backs being requested in the latest draft of the CAO are outrageous! Please, use some common sense and come up with a more real more viable ordinance since it is felt that we the rural land owners are to dumb to know how to best take care of our land. We need you our commissioners to listen and hear what is being said and 3/5/2008 ~ Page 2 of2 to take action which follows the real best science and the real majority of your constituents. The three things you need to remember are: 1. The correct definition of Majority and of Minority 2. Who has the greatest vested interest in our land 3. Know the most current best available science 3/5/2008 03/05/2008 16:47 3608671166 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 01/31 c~ ~~D lj 3/' (glo?; ry)CC . . HEARING RECORD GERALD STEEL, PE ATTORNEY -AT-LAW 7303 YOUNG RD. NW OLYMPIA, WA 98502 Tel/fax (360) 867-1166 RECEIVED o 2008 FAX TRANSMITTAL MEMO JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DATE: March 5, 2008 TOTAL PAGES (including cover sheet): 31 ORIGINALS WILL FOLLOW TO BOee. TO: FAX NUMBER: BOCC 360.385.9382 AL SCAFF 360.379.4451 FROM: Gerald Steel CASE NAME: CAO Comments COMMENTS: TF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THE PAGES OR IF TRANSMISSION IS NOT CLEAR PLEASE CALL (360) 867.1166. ........"'*.... THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THJS COMMUNICA nON IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE ADDRESSEE(S) AND MAYBE CONFIDENTIAL OR CONSIDERED A TIORNEY ..cLIENT JNFORMA nON. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICA nON IN ERROR PLEASE BE INFORMED THAT ANY UNAUTHORIZED USE INCLUDING COPYING, DISTRIBUTION OR DISCLOSURE IS STRICTI.V PROHIBITED. PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDJA TEL Y ^ T THE ABOVE TELEPHONE NUMBER IF YOU 8A VI. RECEIVED THJS IN ERROR. 03/05/2008 16:47 3608671166 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 02/31 /"Y GERALD STEEL, PE ATTORNEY -A T -LAW 7303 YOUNG ROAD NW OLYMPIA, WA 98502 Tel/fax (360) 867-1166 March 5, 2008 Board of County Conu:nissioners PO Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Re: Comments for Feb. 27, 2008 Public Hearing on CAD Dear Chairman and Members: I am writing this letter on behalf of Citizens Protecting Critical Areas ("CPCA"). In our letter of February 24, 2008 we requested that you include an adequate enforcement section in the Critical Areas Ordinance ("CAO"). We believe that the failure to have an adequate enforcement section is a violation of the GMA requirement to protect critical areas. If the County does not have time to development an adequate enforcement section prior to adopting the new CAO, then we request that you include a section in the adopting ordinance that directs the staff to bring a proposal for adequate enforcement through the planning commission process and back to you for your action by this time next year. Attachment I to this letter is a full copy of my November 30, 2007 letter to your enforcement officer documenting the County's failure to provide adequate enforcement to protect critical areas for complaints filed in May, 2006 and May, 2007. There has not been adequate enforcement of these complaints to date. There is a general flaw in the GMA public participation process that the County used to take public comment on the Critical Areas Ordinance and that the County uses to take comments on other GMA enactments. The public notices requesting comments allow those comments to be submitted by email. The problem is that email comments are sometimes prevented from being delivered by your email system without giving any notice to the sender that their email did not get through, I have documented this problem with respect to my emails being "intercepted by [y]our firewall" in Attachment 2 to this letter and I previously brought this matter to your attention in pages 2 and 3 of my letter provided herein in Attachment 3. I have since found additional evidence from otherpeople in Jefferson County who have documented the failure oftheir emailed public comments actually being received by DCD. Attachment 4 is a series of emails where a letter composed in Word was attached to an email and sent by Sara Johani to the DCD. Jeanie Orr ofDCD got the email but could not open the attachment and emailedbackrequesting it be resent in another format. This is not a problem because there was a communication that the letter was not able to be viewed. But then another email was sent with the letter attached and it was never received by the DCD and Ms. 10hani never got notice that this email did not get through. Ms. Iohani also put the letter into the body of another email and that one was received and acknowledged by Ms. Orr. 03/05/2008 16:47 3608671166 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 03/31 ~,.. Board of County Commissioners March 5, 2008 Page 2 The problem arises because the County invites emails but its email system intercepts some emails and no one gets notice that the emails were not delivered. When this.happens,the typical member of the public will never know that their email was not received. Their time preparing the email was wasted and the County did not get the benefit of their information. This is a serious failure of the County public participate process because the County is required by RCW 36.70A.140 to consider public comments. Many counties do not accept email public comments. I appreciate that Jefferson County does. However, the system must ensure that a person submitting an email knows if their email was or was not received. The glitch in the County email system that allows emails to be intercepted with no notice to either the sender or the County is unacceptable. One fix would be to put into public notices that DCD will acknowledge all emails that it receives and if no acknowledgment comes within one business day, a person should call the DCn contact person. I have observed that it has been common for Jeannie Orr to send acknowledgments. But when an email is intercepted by the County's firewall and no notice to the sender or to the County is given, the average person assumes their email was successful and the information is lost forever. We would appreciate it if you would address this problem with submitting public comments byemail. We suspect that the problem is much larger than we have been able to document. We have no way of telling just how many emails are being lost. We did look in the DCD binder of CAO public comments and we did not find the Johani emails that we provide in Attachment 4 hereto so we are concerned that these emails were not properly considered by DCD. Thank you for your consideration of our issues. Attachments: Nov. 30, 2007 Letter to Molly Pearson (w attachments) Documentation of my emails being intercepted by the County's firewall Dec~ 7, 2007 Letter to BOCC Documentation of. Sara Johani's emails being intercepted by the County's firewall 03/05/2008 16:47 . , ~ 3608671166 GERALD STEEL PE Attachment 1 PAGE 04/31 03/05/2008 15:47 3508571155 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 05/31 GERALD STEEL, PE ATTORNEY -A T -LAW 7303 YOUNG ROAD NW OLYMPIA. WA 98502 Tel/fax (360) 8137.1166 November 30, 2007 Molly Pearson Dept. of Community Dev. 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, W A 98368 Re: COM06-00037 and COM07~00064 - Critical Area Violations by .Toe Thompson Dear Molly, I write this letter on behalf of Citizens to Protect Critical Areas. I have reviewed the County's files to date for the two above-referenced complaints. These files demonstrate that the County's current code enforcement program is not effective in protecting fish and wildlife habitat areas and associated wetlands. I request your support for modifications to the code enforcement program particularly to ensure protection of fi.sh and wildlife habitat areas and associated wetlands. Attachment A hereto is a drawing done by the people who submitted enforcement complaints COM06-00037 and COM07-00064. The first referenced complaint was filed in May of2006. It alleges that Joe Thompson brought in substantial fill into the buffer of an anadromous fish bearing stream on Assessor Parcel No. 998400011 which is the upper lot (Lot 14 Taylor's Terrace) shown on said Attachment A. The second referenced compliant was filed in May of 2007. It alleges that Joe Thompson is not ill compliance with conditions of Building Pertnit BLDOO-00559 which conditions apply to said Assessor Parcel No. 998400011 and to Assessor Parcel No. 998400007. Assessor Parcel No. 998400007 is the lower lot (Lot 10 Taylor's Terrace) sho\\>TI on said Attachment A. This second complaint also states that Thompson is building a fence across the anadromous fish bearing stream and its buffer and he is allowing :fish rearing pools to degrade. On October 16,2007 a public disclosure request was fiJed to obtain a full copy of the two referenced complaint files. In my review of the complaint files, I find that all of the complaints discussed above were valid and represent violations of either the Critical Areas Ordinance or vio lations of the conditions on Building Permit B LDOO-OOS 5 9 that were intended to protect critical areas. As you know, Building Perrnit BLDOO-00559 required and received a critical areas variance (or waiver) to allow a reduced buffer width of 38 feet. A condition was placed on the Building Pennit to require a 38.:.foot buffer from the ordinary high water mark of the anadromous fish bearing stream to be "permanently maintained" on Assessor Parcel No. 998400007. No alteration inside the 38-foot buffer was allowed and existing vegetation was to be retained. Pursuant to the Habitat Management Plan, it was required to "maintain the existing plank weirs constructed to provide additional pool habitat"for the anadromous fish bearing stream. 03/05/2008 15:47 3508571155 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 05/31 Molly Pearson November 30, 2007 Page 2 REGARDING THE FILL ON ASSESSORPA~CEL NO. 998400011 Under lCC 18.15.310, grading is not allowed in Fish and Wildlife habitat areas ("FWHA") including buffers unless there is a permit. There is no permit on Assessor Parcel No. 998400011. The buffer width for a fish-bearing, Type III, stream is 100 feet. There is substantial fill (reported 8' to 12' high on Attachment A hereto) inside the 100 foot buffer on Assessor Parcel No. 99840001.1. In the file for Complaint COM 06-00037, there is a September 17, 2007 letter from you to Mr McCollum explaining your enforcement actions. You determined that fill had been placed in the critical area buffer but you were apparently unaware of the prohibition on this action in JCC 18.15.310 because you do not mention this code section. You then cite to the conditions of Mr. Thompson' s building permit. The variallce/waiver for Mr. Thompson's building permit allowed a 38 foot buffer on Assessor Parcel No. 998400007. The fill is on Assessor Parcel No. 998400011. There is no building permit or critical areas variance/",,-aiver on this Parcel No. 9984000 11. You state that you asked Mr. Thompson "to stabilize the soil and replant native vegetation." You did not enforce .TCC 18.15.310 of the critical areas code because you did not require Mr. Thompson to get the required permit. According to Attachment A there is a 101 X 20' shop on the fill on Parcel No. 998400011. Obviously, native vegetation was not replanted in the buffer where this shop is located. Because the shop is on fill, there is a building code requirement to have the fill properly compacted in the vicinity of the building. There is no evidence that the fill has been compacted. The fill is in continued noncompliance with the critical areas code (lCC 18.15.310). REGARDING THE FENCE ACROSS THE STREAM AND ITS BUFFER .TCC 18.15.310 controls development in a FWHA and its buffer when a permit is not required. After .TCe 18.15.310 was adopted, a fence could not be allowed "that alters the function or character of the FWHA or its buffer" even if that fence did not require a building permit. The subject fence was built after .TeC 18.15.310 was adopted. A nonexclusive set of examples is provided in lCC 18.15.310 that are considered to alter the function or character ofa FWHA or its buffer and this includes alterations that cause shading. Clearly a wooden fence provides significant shading and such a fence can not be allowed in a FWHA or its buffer. Further, it is likely that any fence wiIl alter another critical function of a FWHA or its buffer. A fundamen,1al function and characteristic of riparian habitat is to provide a corridor for animal migration. A fence across that corridor significantly reduces this function and characteristic. See WDFW PHS (1997) at 32 (copied in part below). .'By virtue of their protective cover and connectivity throughout watersheds, ripariaJl areas function as wildlife travel corridors (Thomas et al. 1979, Fonnan and Godron 1986, Noss 1993). Animals often use riparian areas for daily, seasonal, or ol1ce~in-a-lifetime travel. Mobile species such as marten, fisher, bobcat, cougar, deer, great blue heron, and marbled murrelets frequently have established daily travel routes that parallel streams (de Vos and Guenther 1952, Thomas et a1. 1979, Eisenhawer and Reimchen 1990, Noss 1993)." "Although a key function of ripaJ'ian areas is to provide a safe corridor for animals to move from area to area, Noss (1993) outlined other important functions of riparian corridors. These other functions include facilitating dispersal and consequent gene flow between populations 03/05/2008 16:47 3608671166 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 07/31 Molly P~arson November 30, 2007 Page 3 . . .. Riparian corridors ~hat f~cilitate wildlife moyem~mt help maintain the health of species' gene pools and prevent IsolatlO11 and perhaps extirpatIOn of subpopulations (Harris 1988)." "The importance of riparian areas as travel corridors and routes for dispersion is amplified in developed or fragmented landscapes because alternative overland travel routes are often unavailable, discontinuous, or life endangering (Carleton and Taylor 1983, Blake 1986). . Dispersing juveniles or adults of some species are prone to predation while traveling through open areas. In highly developed landscapes, riparian corridors may provide essential connections between isolated natural areas. Some animals may be able to meeHheir large areas requirements by traveling between several patches of natural habitat linked by corridors (N oss 1993). " WDFW PHS (1997) at 32. .Tee 18.15.310 applies to any development activity even if a permit is not required. "Development" is defined in .Tee 18.10.040: '''Development' means the division of a parcel into two or more parcels; the construction, reconstruction, conversion, structural alteration, relocation, or enlargement of any structure~ any grading, excavation, mining, landfill; or any extension ofthe use ofland." .Tee 18.10.040. Building a fence is included because it is "construction. . . of any structure." "Structure" is defined in lee 18.10.190: "Structure" means a permanent or temporary edifice or building or any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner, whether installed on, above, or below the surface of the ground or water, except for vessels (WAC In.::. :n.:0.1(l). .Tee 18.1 0.190. A fence is a structure because it is a "piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner." The compliance files indicate that you required one foot to be removed from the bottom of the wooden fence where the fence crosses the stream. The fence remains in continued noncompliance with the critical areas code as discussed above. There continues to be added shading to the stream and its buffer, and blockage of the corridor to wildlife travel. MAINTAINING THE POOL HABITAT BEIDND THE EXISTING WEIRS It is clearly a requirement for the building permit for the 14'x24' shop on Lot 10 that pool habitat is maintained behind the weirs. This is a condition of a permit that was imposed to compensate for the critical areas variance/waiver to allow the shop with a reduced buffer width. Under .lee 18.50.020(4) it is a violation to fail to comply with permit conditions. TIle complaint files include a Hydraulic Project Approval permit issued August 6; 2007 and valid until August 6, 2011 for maintenance repairs for plank weirs. Any work below the ordinary high water mark must be done between July ]SI and September 151h. To the best of my knowledge! no work was done on the weirs during the maintenance window in 2007. The failure of Thompson to maintain the weirs is in continued noncompliance with the pemlit condition imposed to protect critical areas. 03/05/2008 16:47 3608671166 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 08/31 Molly Pearson November 30, 2007 Page 4 DRIVEWAY ENCROACHMENT INTO BUFFER Attachment B hereto is a copy of the Habitat Management Plan ("HMP") for the 14' x 24' shop on Par~el ~o. 998~00007: This plan shows a seven fo.ot wide driveway connecthig the proposed bUlldmg to HIller Dnve. The focus of the HMP IS to protect the forested riparian zone plotted on page 2 of the HMP. The HMP at page. 2 shows this forested riparian zone a minimum of22 feet from the northern property line of Parcel No. 998400007. Attachment A shows the driveway now expanded to between 18 and 30 feet wide and shows the driveway now a minimum of 12 feet from the northel11 property line of Parcel No. 998400007. Attachment A shows the intrusion of a block and wood pile into the fOUl1een feet between the driveway and the said northern property line. A condition of the building permit for the 14'x24' shop is that a 38-foot wide buffer measured perpendicularly from the ordinary high water mark shall be permanently maintained as a fish and wildlife habitat area and that there shall be no removal of native vegetation within this buffer. No alteration to the buffer is allowed unless approved by the Critical Area Administrator. There is no record of approval of these alterations and so they are not allowed by the Critical Areas Code (lCC 18.15.310) and they are violations of the conditions of Building Permit BLDOO-00559. CONCLUSIONS The critical areas code does not have any specific enforcement provisions or protocols for enforcement. The only enforcement provis.ions are in Chapter 18.50 JCC. These enforcement provisions do not absolutely require enforcement of the provisions of the Jefferson County Codes in general and do not a.bsolutely require enforcement of critical areas codes or permit conditions to protect critical areas. Jee 18.50.020 makes it a violation to fail to comply with the code or fail to comply with the conditions of a permit. However, Chapter 18.50 only authorizes but does not require the administrator to enforce these codes or conditions. .TCC 18.50.050(1) states that if the administrator determines there is a violation, a notice of voluntary correction letter should be the first attempt at obtaining compliance. It is noted that Jce 18.50.050 only uses the word "should" and does not mandate issuance of such a letter and JCC. 18.50.050(5) states that the voluntary conection process is optional. I have found no voluntary correction letters issued to Mr. Thompson in the said compliance files. Generally, the enforcement of Jefferson County Codes is complaint-driven. While this may be adequate where state law does not mandate enforcement oflocal codes, this is not adequate where state law (RCW 36.70A.060(2)) requires regulations "to protect critical areas." Therefore, I believe that Jefferson County must have more specific enforcement protocols for critical areas violations and particularly for those violations affecting fish and wildlife habitat areas and their associated wetlands. Codes with these more specific protocols must be sufficient to actually achieve protection of critical areas. It is a certainty that only a very small percentage of critical areas violations result in complaints to the code enforcement officer. This is because 1) most people can't recognize a critical areas violation, 2) most people do not want to take the heat for reporting a violation, and 3) many violations are not easily observed from places of public access. Therefore one cannot expect that a complaint-driven enforcement program will ensure that critical areas are being protected or particularly that fish and wildlife habitat areas and their associated wetlands are being protected. 03/05/2008 16:47 3608671166 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 09/31 Molly Pearson November 30, 2007 Page 5 Therefore, I would ask your support for the Bacc increasing the number of people enforcing protection of fish and wildlife habitat areas and their associated wetlands. I would also ask your support for the BOCC adopting an enforcement monitoring program in its development regulations for fish and wildlife habitat areas and their associated wetlands that is designed to monitor streams and their wetlands, and the buffer protection for both, to ensure that these critical areas are being protected as specified by the critical areas ordinance. I would anticipate that this monitoring program would have at least one critical areas enforcement officer who would walk the streams and wetlands after appropriate notice to property owners and who would provide written notice to property owners of what appear to be violations of the regulations to protect these critical areas. Additionally, I ask your support for the BOCC adopting development regulations with spedfi.e enforcement pl'otocols for critical area violations both for the complaint-driven enforcement program and for the proposed enforcement monitoring program. As an alternative to or in addition to a smaller enforcement monitoring program, the County may be able to develop an adaptive management program as discussed in Swin.omish Indian Tribal Communitv v. WWGMHB, Slip Op. (No 76339-9, Sept. 13, 2007). The adaptive management program would develop benchmarks that must be met in streams and wetlands, measurement standards, and specific response protocols in case benchmarks are not met. Because an adopted adaptive management program might not be found to comply with the Growth Management Act requirements to actually protect critical areas, I recommend that the first effort be to develop an enforcement monitoring program with specifications for how often each stream corridor in the County would be visited and what actions the County would take if there is a perceived violation of critical area codes. With regard to the complaint files discussed in this letter, I would appreciate it if you would continue your efforts to ensure that the critical areas on the Thompson parcels are protected consistent with the requirements in the critical areas code and with the conditions in his building permit. Thank you for your efforts to date. 03/05/2008 16:47 3608671166 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 11/31 e JEFFERSON COUNTY CONSERVATION DISTRICT 205W. Patison st., Port Hadlock, WA 98339 - Phone (360) 385-4105 FAX (360)385-4823 jccd@olypen.com HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR JOE THOMPSON 102 HILLER DRIVE, PORT HADLOCK WA 98339 Tax Parcel # 998-400-007 Prepared by; AI Latham, District ManagerlTechnician Jefferson County Conservation District 9-28-00 Nature and Density ofthe DroDosed development: The proposed development on this property is the construction of a 14'x24' building for covered storage. There is an sma I' existing storage shed on the site of the proposed building that will be removed. There is also a reserve drainfieldon the property for Mr. Thompson's home which is on an adjoining property. Both the reserve drain field and building site are located on a portion of the property that has been cleared and used as lawn, garden, and storage for many years. The property is approximately ,25 acres in size. Little Goose Creek, a Type 3 stream, bisects the NW comer of the property. It runs through a foreste~ riparian zone containing large red alder trees with an understory of native shrubs and small conifers. The buifding site is approx. 40' from the creek and 1 O'to 12' outside the forested riparian area. The creek and forested riparian zone occupy approximately % of the property and are in very good condition as far as fish and wildlife habItat is concerned. Analvsis of the effect of the Dfoposed development: The proposed building for covered storage will not change the existing land use as the site has been used for storage for many years. It is being built where an existing, smaller storage shed is currently located. Since there will be no additional clearing of the existing forested riparian area it is my opinion that the new building will have no additional impact on the fish and wildlife habitat on the property. MitlQatinQ measures: Mr. Thompson and his neighbors are concerned about maintaining and improving the existing .fish and wildlife habitat within the forested riparian area. Salmon habitat restoration projects were Implemented by volunteers several years ago on this and adjoining properties to provide additional pool habitat and fish passage through the culvert under the county road (Oak Bay Rd). Mr. Thompson has planted numerous trees and shrubs throughout the forested riparian area. As stated above, there should be no adverse impacts on fish and wildlife habitat created by the development that need to be mitigated. However, it is important to fish and wildlife that the existing forested riparian area be maintained as such. Recommendations for maintenance of the forested riparian area: 1. Maintain the existing vegetation, The large alders should be retained unless they deteriorate and become a danger to health and safety. The existing thick understory of shrubs and small trees should also be retained. If the landowner plants additional trees and shrubs I would suggest planting shade tolerant conifers such as sitka spruce and western redcedar to eventually replace the red alder when they die out. 2. Maintain existing prank weirs constructed to provide additional pool habitat and fish passage of the county road culvert. /J((IJJwut /J .,. if' '71 ($1- -, I I . It) , 3508571155 \" .~~~ '. . .~:~ : ...-: . GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 12/31 03/05/2008 15:47 >. .' .:. ,.. di --- ------ I I ~ ~'; :. . .f~~~. ~ l, j ~,I , ....... f I A"e.L, r~~ \1; I hrnl,,-r, r /~ " " ('Ii Ih- e. (l.J I , wo-___ ~ C ~. Q '0 \ ~ J i~ .",:11...'1,.... .. ....., '.' ..' .,.,...... \'1~:...~;);.}::..'i:;;. ~....;;. . I - - .. ~ ~ '. .....:.l:.::;{,:;;.;;;.:;.<:::::~ . . J.hLLIlEe.. 'D(Z.,&i~ " \ I J " '.'.\ 100, O~ I ~ " LEGEND HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR JOE THOMPSON, 102 HILLER DRIVE, PORT HADLOCK WA 98339 l.egal Description: Lot 10, Scale: 1 H= 25' Taylors Terrace, as per plat recorded in Volume 4 of Plats, c). N page 9. records of Jefferson County, Washington PARCEL #998-400~007 Prepared by: AI Latham Jefferson Co. Conservation District 9-29~OO 03/05/2008 15:47 3508571155 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 13/31 e Sept. 22, 2000 JEFFERSON COUNTY CONSERVATION DISTRICT 205 W. Patison St., Port Hadlock, WA.98339 - Phone (360) 385~41 t 3~5\f8~~ lr\\i Jccd@olypen.com 1- __-1-..--.:~ r nIl i I'L" II 'i II "".0 2 5 '!;-:',~ :1 1)1 . \:it!.., 1\...-.... i L r; ~ I __._._~~.__._....J I JEfFEfiSON COUNTY : I OEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOP~'lENT i Joe Thompson 101 Hiller Dr. Port Hadlock WA 98339 Dear Joe, After visiting your property on HiHer Driver (Parcel # 99840007) and looking over the riparian area of Little Goose Creek and your proposed location of a garage (Jeff. Co. Permit Application CAR#OO-00388) I have the following comments: 1. The riparian area adjacent to Little Goose Creek is in excellent condition, providing a closed canopy of large red alder trees with an understory of diverse shrub species and some conifers. This forested riparian zone extends from the creek uphirl to the break in . slope, approx. 30 ft wide adjacent to your proposed building site. 2. The existing forested riparian area provides, in my opinion, adequate protection for fish habitat and water quality. The area should be maintained as a forested riparian buffer. Construction of your proposed garage where it is staked out on the ground, and indicated on the map, will not compromise the functions and values of the existing forested buffer. .Since the property has been cleared for many years there should be no additional impacts from garage construction on that site. 3. You are to be commended for the planting of additional trees and shrubs throughout your property along the creek. You indicated that you \tvill be planting additional trees/shrubs in the future. I would suggest adding a few more shade tolerant conifers (sitka spruce, western redcedar, western hemlock) to the understory to eventually replace the large alders when they die. 4. You are also to be commended for your stewardship of the riparian area and interest in salmon habitat improvements in your section of creek. Even though iUs a small creek your efforts set an example for others and are part of the overall movement towards salmon recovery. If I can be of assistance with any of your salmon enhancement efforts please let me know. If any of the County Community Development Dept. staff have any questions regarding the siting of the proposed garage and its effect on the creek please have them contact me. . AI Latham ConserVation District Manager. Ct, KE;v1i\l ~e'-'- - ...i ca=r:; C4 83/85/288S 16:47 368S671166 GERALD STEEL PE Attachment 2 PAGE 14/31 03/05/2008 16:47 3608671166 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 15/31 Page 1 of2 Gerald Steel From: Jeanie Orr Uorr@co.jefferson.wa.usl Sent: Friday, November 30,20074:38 PM To: Gerald Steel; #Long-Range Planning Subject: RE: Test with attachment (Email Test 8) [Email Test 9] Gerald: Received. Central Services' investigation revealed your attachments were intercepted by our firewall. The denial of service was due to malformed MIME format from your ISP. Bad characters were found in the attachment. Attachment needs to be cleaned-up. You may send attachment in HTML format or in Text format. No further tests are necessary. Jeanie From: Gerald Steel [mailto:geraldsteel@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, November 30,20072:14 PM To: 'Gerald Steel'; Jeanie Orr; #Long-Range Planning SUbject: RE: Test with attachment (Email Test 8) [Email Test 9] No one responded that they received Email Test 8. I did receive it. It was an email and 91 KB attachment originally from Orr that was forwarded back to Orr and Planning, This is a "Reply to All" email to Email Test 8 (therefore without the attachment) which I believe you all will receive. I have added this message to the email and ..[Email Test 9]" to the title. Please "reply to all" when you receive this Email Test 9. Gerald Steel, PE Attorney-at-Law 7303 Young Rd. NW Olympia. WA 98502 Ph/Fax 360.867.1166 -----Original Message----- From: Gerald Steel [mailto:geraldsteel@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 2:47 PM To: 'Jeanie Orr'; 'planning@co.jefferson.wa.us' Cc: 'Gerald Steel' Subject: FW: Test with attachment (Email Test 8) Email Test 8. Please reply to all if you receive it with the 91 KB attachment. Gerald Steel, PE Attorney-at~Law 7303 Young Rd. NW Olympia, WA 98502 Ph/Fax 360.867.1166 -----Original Message----- From: Jeanie Orr [mailto:jorr@co.jefferson.wa.us] Sent: Thursday, November 29,200711:45 AM 12/1/2007 03/05/2008 15:47 3508571155 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 15/31 Page 2 of2 To: Gerald Steel Subject: Test with attachment Here is an attachment. Let me know if you receive and can open it. Jeanie E-mail message checked by PC Tools Spyware Doctor (5.0.0.169) Database version: 5.06871 http://www.pctools.com/spyware-doctor/ E-mail message checked by PC Tools Spyware Doctor (5.0.0.169) Database version: 5.06871 http://www.paools.com/spyware-doctor / E-mail message checked by PC Tools Spyware Doctor (5.0.0.169) Database version: 5.06871 http://www.pctools.com/spyware-doctor/ 12/112007 03/05/2008 15:47 3508571155 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 17/31 Page 1 of3 Gerald Steel From: Gerald Steel [geraldsteel@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, November 29,20072:45 PM To: 'Joel Peterson'; 'Karen Barrows'; 'Jeanie Orr'; 'Michelle McConnell' Cc: 'Gerald Steel' Subject: RE: Email Test Five--Check Yahoo Jeanie. Joel, Karen, and Michelle, You all reported receiving email test 5 and all but Jeanie reported receiving email test 4. Jeanie, did you get email test 4? None of you received the same two emaHs when I attached a 2 M B pdf file to each. I also emailed all four emaHs to myself and received all four including the ones with the 2 MB files. I have successfully sent attachments to other counties with 2-5 MB files attached. j do not have the free service from Yahoo but instead a special paid service. While I will check with Yahoo. I do not believe that is the source of the problem. What is interesting is that the email tests 6 and 7 used exactly the same addressing as email tests 4 and 5 and the only difference was the addition of a 2 MB attachment. While I am using a 2 MB attachment for these tests, I emailed to planning@co.jefferson.wa.us a 95 KB attachment (my Nov. 13 letter) on Nov. 13 and I resent that email with that attachment (as well as another email with the 2 MB attachment) to the same email address and to Jeanie's email address on Nov. 27 and again to Jeanie's email address only on Nov. 28. Jeanie sent me an email today "Re: Test with Attachment" where she attached some meeting minutes as a test. I received her email and attachment. As email test 8, I am now going to forward her email with attachment to myself and planning@co.jefferson.wa.us and to jorr@co.jefferson.wa.us. Let me know if you get email test 8. Gerald Steel, PE Attorney-at-Law 7303 Young Rd. NW Olympia, WA 98502 Ph/Fax 360.867.1166 -----Orlg Inal Message----- From: Joel Peterson [mailto:jpeterson@co.jefferson.wa.us] Sent: Thursday, November 29,2007 1:50 PM To: Gerald Steel Cc: Jeanie Orr Subject: RE: Email Test Five--Check Yahoo Received. Gerald, You may need to consider that Yahoo likely has restrictions on attachment sizes. Check with their service guidelines and customer service representatives. Free email services often have restrictions and may not be as reliable as subscription services. I have not received any attachments from you. Joel M. Peterson Long-Range Planning Division Department of Community Development 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 379-4472 Fax: (360) 379-4451 www.co.jefferson_wa.us 12/1/2007 03/05/2008 15:47 3508571155 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 18/31 Page 2 of 3 From: Gerald Steel [mailto:geraldsteel@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 11:39 AM To: #Long-Range Planning; Jeanie Orr Cc:'Gerald Steel' SUbject: Email Test Five Planning, This is test email five. Please reply to all so that Jeanie Orr and I can confirm that you have received this emai!. Gerald Steel, PE Attorney-at-Law 7303 Young Rd. NW Olympia, WA 98502 Ph/Fax 360.867.1166 -----Original Message----- From: Gerald Steel [mailto:geraldsteel@yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, November 29,20079:36 AM To: 'Jeanie Orr' Subject: RE: Email test Second Test Gerald Steel, PE Attorney-at-Law 7303 Young Rd. NW Olympia, WA 98502 Ph/Fax 360.867.1166 -----Original Message----- From: Jeanie Orr [mailto:jorr@co.jefferson.wa.us] Sent: Thursday, November 29,20079:17 AM To: Gerald Steel Subject: RE: Email test Hi, did you resend your emails? I have not received anything yet. Jeanie From: Gerald Steel [mailto:geraldsteel@yahoo.com) Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 12: 19 PM To: Jeanie Orr Subject: RE: Email test Received. I will resend the emaHs sent yesterday using the same format for your address. Gerald Steel, PE Attorney-at-Law 7303 Young Rd. NW Olympia. WA 98502 Ph/Fax 360.867.1166 -----Original Message----- 12/1/2007 ~3/05/2008 15:47 3508571155 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 19/31 Page 3 of3 From: Jeanie Orr [mailto:jorr@co.jefferson.wa.us] Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 11:55 AM To: geraldsteel@yahoo.com Subject: Email test Hi, just sending a test to see if you receive this. Please respond back asap. E-mail message checked by PC Tools Spywal:'e Doctor (5.0.0.169) Database version: 5.06871 http://www.pctools.com/spyware-dDCtor/ E-mail message checked by PC Tools spyware Doctor (5.0.0.169) Database version: 5.06871 http://www.pctools.com/spyware-doctor / E-mail message checked by PC Tools spyware Doctor (5.0.0.169) Database version: 5.06871 http://www.pctools.com/spyware-doctor / E-mail message checked by PC Tools Spyware Doctor (5.0.0.169) Database version: 5.06871 http://www .pctools.cQI11/spyware-doctor / E-mail message checked by PC Tools Spyware Doctor (5.0.0.169) Database version: 5.06871 http://www.pctools.g>m/spyware-doctor/ 12/1/2007 03/05/2008 15:47 3508571155 GERALD STEEL PE Attachment 3 PAGE 20/31 03/05/2008 15:47 3508571155 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 21/31 GERALD STEEL, PE ATTO&'JEY-AT-LA W 7303 YOUNG ROAD NW OLYMPIA, WA .98502 Tel/fax (360) 867.1166 December 7, 2007 Board of County Commissioners PO Box 1220 Port Townsend, W A 98368 Re: Postpone the Decision on the Brinnon MPR to the 2008 Docket More GMA Violations Dear Chairman and Members: I 8m writing this letter on behalf of the Brinnon Group and the Brinnon MPR Opposition. We continue to recommend that you postpone the decision on the Brinnon MPR Comprehensive to the 2008 Docket. FAILURE TO MEET PUBLIC PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS OF GMAAND SEPA In our letter to you dated December 6, 2007 (" 12-6-07 Letter"), we urged you not to accept the Decembel' 3,2007 Staff Recommendation for a larger MPR mapping designation because it was not within the scope of the site specific Statesman comprehensive plan application and because it is outside the scope of the EIS which did not consider full development of the Statesman property with 890 homes plus additional MPR development on adjoining properties. Also in our letter to you dated December 6, 2007, we urged you not to accept the majority or minority Planning COtnriliSSiOll Recommendations for approval of the StatesmanMRP mapping designation because of lack of opportunity for public review and comment on the specific language proposed for these conditions and because text changes necessary to make the Map Amendment internally consistent with ~he text of the Comprehensive Planhave never been submitted for public review. On November 27,2007 we tried to get the Planning Department and Planning Commission recommendations on this comprehensive Plan amendment. Copies were not available. See Attachment 1 hereto which collected from staff all written recommendations available 011 November 27;2007 (none were for the BrinnonMPR). Further efforts to getthePC andDCD recommendation were unsuccessful until December 3, 2007 when we were able to get (unsigned only) recommendations from the Planning Commission. We could 110t get copies of the Planning Department recommendation until December 4,2007 and again the versions we were able to get were unsigned. Hearings before the BOCC require adequate notice so parties may intelligently prepare for the hearing. Barrie v. Kitsap County, 84 Wn.2d 579, 584- . . 03/05/2008 15:47 3508571155 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 22/31 Board of County Commissioners December 7, 2007 Page 2 85, 527 P.2d 1377 (1974). The Growth Management Act requires enhanced public participation. RCW 36.70A.140. The public review process for this comprehensive plan amendment has not been adequate. This is a huge project and the community and BOCC deserve to have the time necessary to ensure that the size and scope of the Brinnon MPR meets the needs of the County and the community. We ask that you postpone your decision on the MPR Amendmentuntil the 2008 docket. There is another pub lie participation problem. The hearing notices state that public comments may be submitted by email toplanning@co.jefferson.wa.us. I submitted a comment with an attached letter by email on October 24,2007. When I received my copy of the FEIS on Nov. 28, 2007, I discovered that my emaiI and attached letter were not in the public comment record. I found out on Friday, November 30, 2007 that the spam filter or firewall on the County's email system traps my emails with attachments and does not deliver them to anyone @co.jefferson.wa.us. See Attachment 2 hereto. The County Claims its system prevented a smgle email delivery because of a malfonned MIME format in one attachment. The County misunderstands the scope of the problem. I sent an email with one attachment on 7/24/07 to ascalf, rcm'oll, and dalvarez all @co.jefferson.wa.us and I checked \\o1th them on 12/2/07 and none said they received that email. I got no delivery failure notice and they did not get a delivery notice. In October and November, I sent four different emails with four different attachments to plaIlIling@co.ietIerson.wa.us and I have now verified that none were received by plannil1g staff. Again I got no delivery failure notices and they did not get a delivery notice. These emai1sweresentonlO/24/07.11/9/07.11113/07.and.11l29/07 (this last email was also sent to jorr as part of a testing effort). Also as part of a testing effort, I sent two revised emails each with one of the above attachments on 11/27/07, 11/28/07, and 11/29/07. None of these email were received by planning staff and again there was no delivery failure notice to me and 110 delivery notice to them. All of these emails were sent from Microsoft Outlook on my XP computer using yahoo.com as myemai1 server. I sent emails with the 11/13/07 attac1unentto more than 20 people outside "co.jefferson.wa.us" and to the best of my kn.owledge all of these emails were received. On 3/25/07 and again on 3/26/07 I sent emails with the same 3 attaclunents to ascalf and jeffbocc both @co.jefferson.wa.us and I have not yet checked if these emails were received. Because I have sent these emails from a commonly used computer system, because I have documented that the County's email program has trapped all of the emails with attachments (five different sets of attachments) that I have sent from my system since August, 2007, because the same emails are delivered without problems to all others (more than 20 other people), because the County's emaiI system does not give a failure to deliver notice to me or an attempted delivery notice to the County staff, because the County has no way of knowing if it is trapping emails with attaclunents from some other people. [ The County's public notices stating that it accepts comments by email for the Brinnon MPR amendment (and other issues on the 2007 Docket) do not provide for adequate public participation because the County.semail system is flawed in that it does not receive emails with attachments from some systems (included mine) and it has not provided any notice to the public ofits system flaw or I The fact that the County receives some emails with attachments does not provide information on the munber of emails with attac1urients that are being blocked. The fact that others have not done the extensive testing program (that I have done) to discover that the County is trapping their emails with attachments does not verify that the County is receiving everyone else's emails with attachments. . ~3/05/2008 15:47 3508571155 GERALD STEEL PE PAGE 23/31 Board of County Commissioners December 7, 2007 Page 3 . . developed any system to give notice to anyone when an email containing a public comment is trapped. This is a failure to meet the public participation requirements ofRCW 36. 70A..140 or RCW 36.70 which require the County to consider public comments. The County is not considering those comments that its email system is trapping without notice to anyone. The Comprehensive Plan states that amendments to the Comprehensive Plan must conform with Chapter.RCW 36.70. 12N6N07 Letter at D-2. RCW 36.70.390 requires 110tice of the purpose of any public hearing. 12-6N07 Letter at B-2. The County has violated this statute by not being clear as to exactly what map amendment 'and text amendment (or range of amendments) were being proposed for either the planning commission hearing or the HOCC hearing. . The purpose of the notice required by this statute is to fairly and sufficiently apprise those who may be affected by the proposed action of the nature and character of the amendment so that they may intelligently prepare for the hearing. Barrie v. Kitsap County, 84 Wn.2d 579, 584N85, 527 P.2d 1377 (1974). Because the Comprehensive Plan requires compliance with RCW 36.70, failure of the County to be clear about the nature of the proposed Brinn.on MPR amendment (map and text) violates the GMA.. RCW 36.70A.020(11), N.035, -.070(preamble), -.120, -130, and -140. Because ofthe scale of the project and the lack of adequate opportunity for public participation, the Growth Board should find the Brinnon MPRamendment invalid if the decision is not postponed to the 2008 Do.cket. Prior to the notice for pu.blic hearing by the BOCC, the Plalmmg Commission was required to deliver to the BaCC and make available to the public the signed and dated recorded motion of the Planning Commission with findings of fact, reasons for action, and specific reference to the maps and text that constitute the amendment with the approval of the commission recorded on the map and text by the signature of the chairman and secretary. RCW 36.70.400; -.420 (12-6-07 Letter at B-3 and B-5). This requirement was not met and the so the public, including my Clients and myself, were not able to intelligently prepare for the BaeC hearings. I have reviewed the majority and minority recommendations of the Planning Commission. Pursuant to RCW 36.70.430 (12-6-07 Letter at B-6), if the Board wants to deviate from the majority Planning Commission recommendation (and we hope that the Board would want to), the Board is required to identify its change and refer the proposed change back to the Planning Commission wherein the Planning Commission is required to hold a hearing on any such change after appropriate notice. RCW 36.70.430 (12-6-07 Letter at B-6). Only if the Planning Commission fails to report to the BOCC 90 days after the proposed change, may the BOCC hold a hearing to consider such change. RCW 36.70.440 (12-6-07 Letter at B-7). SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES The existing Comprehensive Plan is a legal document that guides decisions of the BOCC. 12- 6-07 Letter at C-I. The Comprehensive Plan requires the BOCC to carefully balance economic reasons for having a Brinnon MPR with the potential for significant environment impacts from such a proposal. 12-6-07 Letter at C-2. Any Brinnon MPR must be consistent with the policies in LNG. 24.0. 12-6-07 Letter at C-2 and C-4 to C-5. The Comprehensive Plan has Policies specifically for the Port Ludlow MPR. 12N6-07 Letter at C~4. The