In the last week, I’ve been trying to learn as much as I can about the motivation for the proposed new Marine Critical Areas ordinance. Here’s what I think I’ve learned.
In 2006, the Suquamish Tribe asked the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board to review the city’s Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) because it didn’t designate marine critical areas and did not adopt regulations to protect shoreline habitats in accordance with “best available science” as required by the state’s Growth Management Act (GMA).
Subsequently, the City of Bainbridge Island (COBI) hired Battelle Marine Science Laboratory to review its CAO and Shoreline Management Master Program (SMMP). Battelle concluded that these ordinances were not consistent with the “best available science.”
(Note: Have you read enough acronyms yet?)
Apparently, the Hearings Board did not specifically rule in favor of the Tribe or against the City. However, in January 2008, the City Council agreed to process an amendment to the Critical Areas Ordinance to address marine critical areas.
City staff has prepared a detailed Marine Critical Areas ordinance which will receive its second reading on Wednesday, July 30. The ordinance is based on a document called “Protecting Nearshore Habitat and Functions in Puget Sound, An Interim Guide” This is an “interim guide,” not a mandated policy under state law, but it purports to represent “best available science.”
In his July 9th letter to the City Council, attorney Dennis Reynolds said that a group of his clients object to the proposed ordinance because regulation of shoreline use and development is to be handled under the state’s Shoreline Management Act (SMA) and not the Growth Management Act (GMA). Because COBI has a Shoreline Master Program (SMP), it is required by state law to update the SMP and not the CAO.
If Dennis is right, the city and its taxpayers are in for another expensive round of lawsuits, appeals, hard feelings and acrimony. Staff is not required to research the legal implications of its work. One would hope that the mayor would, but we should insist that the City Council does. Shouldn’t we?
Based on his argument, the City Council could simply direct staff to go back to work and prepare a modification to the city’s SMP. However, the state SMA has no provision for “best available science.” That’s why certain environmental activists prefer the GMA over the SMA. Unfortunately, “best available science” isn’t necessarily peer reviewed science. It’s simply the best available, even if it is an unreviewed paper written by a PhD candidate at a minor university.
Lost in all of this legal mumbo jumbo is the notion that these new regulations may protect marine critical areas, but they don’t protect the property rights of Bainbridge Island homeowners.
In my opinion, unless and until the state mandates specific, statewide shoreline regulations, the City should focus on protecting its citizens. Let the larger political process work, then let’s all climb aboard.
Ken Sethney
South Beach
0 Responses to “How did we get here?”