Dear
family, friends, citizens and business associates:
News
Blackout Regarding Shoreline Master Program Hearing...Why?
Editorial
by Joe D'Amico
Port
Townsend, WA -
On April 20, 2010, the Washington State Department of Ecology held an Open
House and Public Hearing regarding proposed changes to Jefferson County
Shoreline Master Program, which will likely result in the biggest land grab in
Jefferson County history since the inception of the National Parks. Currently
Jefferson County has a 35' setback and the Board of County Commissioners
(Austin, Sullivan and Johnson) is proposing 150' setback. What was most
noticeable was the lack of media coverage during the hearing. The hearing was
held at the Fort Worden commons and it was standing room only. Jeffco101
was present and videotaped the entire meeting. There was an estimated crowd of
225 citizens, which eighty-eight (88) people gave testimony. Eighty (80)
percent of the citizens attending were against the new proposed 150' shoreline
buffers. "Shorelines" includes streams, rivers, lakes, ponds and
wetlands. Some properties in Jefferson County will become unbuildable,
crushing the dreams of families, who have lived in the community for decades
and were holding their properties for their children and grandchildren, all the
while paying taxes on their property at highest and best values.
What
Jefferson County has failed to recognize is the number of non-conforming lots,
businesses and uses that will be created and the economic impacts, which will
likely bankrupt Jefferson County and many of its taxpayers. Today, if you ask
Jefferson County the number of non-conforming homes/structures/business and
uses, which will result from this proposed 150' setback, Jefferson County
doesn't know the answer. This is a failure to conduct proper due diligence by
the Board of County Commissioners prior to making this impulsive decision. The
planning commission originally proposed, a 50' setback. The BOCC has made the
decision themselves to change the standard to 150'. Three County Commissioners
(Austin, Sullivan and Johnson) with significantly less knowledge and
understanding of the issue supersede and decide to overrules the Planning
Commission - the very group that has worked on and studied the issue in great
detail. This is an insult to the planning process and the citizens of
Jefferson County.
This
will be financially catastrophic for Jefferson County and its employees.
Here's why. What the board of County Commissioners has overlooked is that once
the property owner/user becomes non-conforming and the property owner appeals
any county enforcement action, a Hearing Examiner (HE) will hear the case.
This will be the same for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The HE will be
appointed at the cost to the county to the tune of $3 - $5K per case/hearing.
In SSNW case, I would estimate that HE cost was $20-25K. After the hearing,
the landowner/user will have the right to appeal to Superior Court. Again,
Jefferson County will need to bear the cost of defending its decision in court
adding additional burden to the Prosecutors office. The Risk Pool, which
insures Jefferson County, will NOT pick up the cost of the
hearing examiner or the appeal to Superior Court unless the land owner is
seeking damages. In other words, don't file your damage claim until your land
use action is final otherwise you will be fighting 28 combined counties (The
Risk Pool) instead of one. Also, be mindful of your statute of limitation with
regards to the timing of your damage claim.
The
term non-conforming was used throughout the DOE hearing and no one knows the
word better then Joe D'Amico, President of Security Services NW (SSNW). The
dispute regarding SSNW on Discovery Bay is all about SSNW's non-conforming
status. And has cost SSNW over $800K to defend its self. Anyone who becomes
non-conforming through this proposed regulation can expect future litigation,
physical and mental stress, and even be threatened with possible criminal
action if you fail to comply under UDC 18.50, not to mention being dragged
through the press. Even though all through the hearing DOE representatives
said you can " carry on with what you got ", it's not what the county
attorneys will use against you in court (see below).
The following was taken from a Jefferson County brief filed against
SSNW on March 8, 2006
....Not
surprisingly, the Hearing Examiner determined that SSNW had not established
itself as a lawful
nonconforming use. In Washington, nonconforming uses are disfavored.
Rhod-A-Zalea
v. Snohomish County, 136 Wn.2d 1, 959 P.2d 1024 (1998). Therefore, it is
the landowner's
burden when confronted with an enforcement action to prove a lawful
nonconforming
use which existed prior to the adoption of the land use regulation. State v.
County of
Pierce, 65 Wn. App. 614, 623-24, 829 P.2d 217 (1992).
DATED this 8th day of March,
2006.
JEFFERSON COUNTY'S BRIEF IN
OPPOSITION TO STAY - 15
#572974 vI
/30313-015
Mark R. Johnsen, W BA #11080
Of Karr Tuttle Campbell
Attorneys for Defendant
Jefferson County
l,ulI' ()ffices
KARR TUTTLE
CAMPBELL
...are you getting a warm and fuzzy feeling regarding non-conforming
Note:
Kitsap Superior Court later found that SSNW did have a legal non-conforming
use reversing the contracted Jefferson County Hearing Examiner Irv
Berteig
Once
the burden of legal non-conforming falls in your lap, it's up to you to prove
your non-conforming use. In the eyes of Jefferson County this will mean
written proof not verbal testimony, which they historically argue has no
standing in an administrative proceeding. In other words you are proven guilty
until YOU prove otherwise. Also, if you should abandon your use for
more than two (2) years (UDC 18.20.260 sec. 1a), you lose your non-conforming
status. This element the county needs to prove. Bottom line, becoming
non-conforming adds risk to your property for the purpose of resale, use and
enjoyment. It perked my ears when I heard Jeffree Stuart say " carry on
with what you got ". What this means to me is not one change or increase
in use, which is also in the Jefferson County code. In the eyes of Jefferson
County an increase in the quality of a service is a change/increase, which
means you would be legal. The citizens of Jefferson County should request in
writing, from DCD, that their property/use is a "Lawful
non-conforming use", if and when this proposed rule is adopted.
What Jefferson County tried to do with SSNW was to say that SSNW was
non-conforming but not a Lawful non-conforming use. Remember the
Hearing Examiner that hears your case is contracted by Jefferson County.
Another
mindful point regarding non-conforming uses. Once the masses are put to rest,
it's easier to pick you off one non-conforming use at a time. Better to fight
now with your neighbor or forever hold your peace.
These
comments are not to be intended as legal advice and its worth what you paid for
it.
Other
News:
·
May
11, 2010, DOE SMP Written Comment deadline...send your comments to Mr. Jeffree Stewart, Regional Planner for DOE Email: jeff.stewart@ecy.wa.gov
·
Al
Scalf, Director of Community Development said it could take 30 - 45 days to
review SMP comments (video coming soon)
·
Commissioner
John Austin touring SSNW Wednesday
·
Need
ammunition? SSNW is an approved Winchester dealer info@ssnwhq.com "SSNW helping
citizens shoot more for less"
·
Interested
in learning how to do Public Records Request? Contact Jeffco101 at Jeffco101@yahoo.com
What’s
going on in Jefferson County? Watch Jeffco101 and find out.
New Videos Uploaded:
April 20, 2010, Washington State Department of Ecology Public
Hearing Regarding Jefferson County Shoreline Master Program - Public Comment
(click on link below) The following videos parts 1- 5 represent the first
portion of the meeting in its entirety.
Ø Part - 1 - Jeffree Stuart,
DOE Regional Planner - PowerPoint
Ø Part - 2 - Jeffree Stuart,
DOE Regional Planner - PowerPoint
In the interest of raising and family,
running a business and keeping track of Jefferson County. I decided to chose
four pro and four con videos regarding the 150 buffers. These videos will
consist of parts 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15 Note: Although I'm being
equal in choosing four videos pro & con it in no way represents the
overwhelming speakers, which spoke out against the increased buffers.
Against the 150 ft Buffer For
the 150 ft Buffers
Part - 8 Jim Tracy Part - 6 George Yount
Part - 10 William Whitney Part - 7 Jill Silver
Part - 13 Wayne King Part - 12 Kees Kolff
Part - 14 Jim Hagen Part - 15 Jo Yount
Part 16 - Clint Allen - Video
of the Night! " I lost my legs for this Country "
Upcoming Meetings/Events:
May 1, 2010, 0900 hrs, JeffCo HomeShow, "Building,
remodeling and landscaping focused" Jefferson County Fairgrounds
May 2, 2010, 0900
hrs, JeffCo HomeShow, "Building, remodeling and landscaping
focused" Jefferson County Fairgrounds
May 3, 2010, 0900 hrs, Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners
(BOCC) Meeting;
ü 0901 - Public Comment
(up to 30 minutes);
ü
- Commissioners Briefing (time and duration
indeterminate);
ü
- Regular
Agenda
(time and duration indeterminate);
ü
- Recess to lunch;
ü 1330 - County
Administrator Briefing (duration indeterminate).
May 28, 2010, Juan de Fuca Festival of the
Arts, Port Angeles;
August 14, 2010, Fort Discovery Picnic, 1200 hrs, USN SAR
Helicopter, 56th US Army Band, Airlift NW, USN EOD Bangor, US Border Patrol,
SSNW ATFP Boat, Jefferson County Fire District #5, Clallam County Fire
Dist #3, Jefferson County Sheriff's Department and Costco.
Over 13,727 Jeffco101
channel views from concerned citizens!
Listen to citizens speak about the real issues in Jefferson
County. Watch for yourself and see what actually happens with your own
eyes and ears. Forward this email to your family and friends.
Click on Jeffco links below:
Respectfully,
Joe
D'Amico, Editor
Jeffco101