Critical Areas Code must be repealed

(This editorial is in response to the Editorial by the Sequim Gazette)  Click here to read the one referred to in this article

by Bob Forde, Chair, Committee to Repeal the Critical Areas Code

In response to your editorial about the Critical Areas Code, the author obviously has never sat down and read the Code for himself, or he wouldn’t make the statement that it “provides landowners with clear limits of their development rights.”

First, the Code encompasses more than ½ of unincorporated Clallam County.  The maps covering the “critical areas” are, according to the county itself,  incomplete and often in error.  In order to determine if a landowner can build on his own property, he must consult these maps and the county.  If the map shows that his property is within the 55% area covered by “critical areas”, then he must “employ” a county planner to come and visit his land and tell him whether he can build there, and where!  This includes outbuildings as well as residences.

Seasonal runoff creeks and swales are considered “streams” under the Critical Areas Code.  These types of “streams” dry up during the summer, and there are no fish that could use the them unless they were to grow legs!  Yet when such a stream exists on his property, the landowner must provide for “buffers” depending on the stream designation, of up to 50 feet on each side.  (This total of 100 feet is the depth of a standard size city lot!) 

I’ve talked with people who have such creeks running through their property -  who have saved for years to be able to build their own home, only to be thwarted by the “community development” department.  Sometimes, after months of jumping through hoops and huge additional expense – which most ordinary working folks cannot afford – a waiver can be obtained.  This should not be happening.  There’s no common sense – and it’s a “one size fits all” type of regulation.

Secondly, if the writer had read the Code, he would realize that the commissioners are not the ones who administer it!  The Code says that the “Administrator” is in charge of all aspects of the Code.  In fact, the unelected planners in the Department of Community Development (DCD) not only wrote the Code, they are in charge of interpreting it and enforcing it!  At present, the county has hired a number of Code Enforcement Officers and one newly hired Code Enforcement Attorney – all of whom are responsible for looking for people who are violating the Code (whether they know it or not – doesn’t matter), and taking action. 

I know of a case where a man had set a trailer up for a disabled vet to live in which happened to be in a “critical areas”.  He was turned in, and the Code Enforcement Officer issued a citation.  He proceeded to appear before the Hearings Examiner, and in the course of events, the planner from DCD stated on the record “no harm had been done to the environment, to the fish, or to anyone”.  Yet the Hearing Examiner stated he couldn’t do anything about it, that the “Code” had been violated, and therefore, the citation would remain.  This man has appealed to the County Commissioners, and is still battling for the right to use his land as he sees fit, at great expense!  You stated that the Code “does, in fact, offer the protection it was designed to address:  to developers/owners, to neighbors; to the public”.  Here is but one example as to how that is not a true statement!!

Private property rights do NOT have a high priority under the Critical Areas Code; in fact, they are secondary to the desires of the county planners.  There is too much power in the hands of one unelected individual (the Administrator) to determine who complies and who doesn’t – and too much opportunity for the potential of graft.

Not only is the Critical Areas Code hurting our neighbors here on the Olympic Peninsula, but it is unconstitutional on its face.  The state constitution and the county constitution (Clallam County Charter) state that there can be no more than one subject per ordinance.  The Critical Areas Code, on the very first page, contains at least seven (7) subjects.  The courts overturned both Initiative 695 and 722 on this basis, despite the fact that both were strongly supported by the voters.

The people of Clallam County already have plenty of regulations covering environmental protection on the books – layer upon layer of them.  This is one more overlay that is really unnecessary.  When do we, as a people, begin to tell our elected officials that more regulation will not be tolerated until the existing regulations either expire (sunset) or are no longer viable!  When is enough, enough!?

We might have “sensitive” areas, but we do not have “critical” areas in our county. Words mean things, and words are used to compel people to act where no action is necessary or to submit to new rules and regulations when they are not needed.  Our Founding Fathers said that people grant power to the people who govern, not the other way around.  The backbone of a free people is private property ownership.  Without that, we are not a free people.  When the least of these rights are eroded, all are in jeopardy.  To amend this Code is to compromise.  Better to stand on the principle of freedom and get rid of one little piece of legislation that erodes it.

 The Critical Areas Code must be repealed.

Bob Forde, Chair
Committee to Repeal the Critical Areas Code 

Bob Forde can be reached at 360-681-6955 (days) or 360-681-3023 (eves) for more information about the Critical Areas Code or where to sign a petition to repeal it.