----- Original Message -----

Sent: Friday, July 09, 2010 8:12 AM

Subject: Re: State review continues

Ecology sent all the
public comments to Jefferson on May 28
for County "feedback." At that time Ecology said they would
create a summary of comments that would be posted on their web-site for public
viewing. (They have said posting individual comments would "take up an
inordinate amount of server space."). The Ecology web-site has described
this as a "Responsiveness Summary." But it is over two months
after the April 20 public hearing and still there is nothing for the interested
citizens of Jefferson to review. But the County has them. Can't the citizens of
Jefferson be extended the same courtesy as the agencies that supposedly serve
them? This is not exactly Responsive. The citizens of Jefferson are once again
on the outside looking in.

The sheer volume of comments and
subsequent delay in making them available to the public ought to be the
canary-in-the-coal-mine that the SMP process in Jefferson has failed to
represent and serve the people directly affected. It certainly couldn't
have been a surprise that there would have been this level of citizen comment.
Of the roughly 200 people who showed up at the public hearing at Ft. Worden,
nearly 90% expressed opposition to the proposed new shoreline rules. No
matter, to date citizen participation has continuously
been marginalized and even belittled by the County. With that kind of
track record, people are very curious to see how their "feedback"
is being translated by same County staff. Add to that Commissioner
Austin's remark that the 200 people at the hearing were the angry ones and
didn't represent the true sentiment of the County. This is the same John Austin
who told a citizen the 150 foot buffers were final before the Planning
Commission had even embarked on their review of the draft SMP. The
philosopher William James called this "contempt prior to
investigation."

At this time it is more important
than ever that citizens be kept directly in the loop. Citizens deserve
immediate access to the same individual comments - not just a
summary - as are available to Ecology and the County.

Happy Summer,

Jim

----- Original Message -----

Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 12:27 PM

Subject: Re: State review continues

This
should be done in the form of a legal demand letter from the attorneys of
either OSF, or CAPR - or both - and delivered to the each of the BOCC, personally  !

On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 8:23 AM, E S
<> wrote:

If
Michelle is making substantive comments as an employee facilitator of the
county/DOE then the  process is obviously flawed.
It also is blatantly obvious that Michelle's job is to skew the process into whatever the county commissioners and DOE
thinks it should be.

For a public employee this is highly unethical if not also illegal.

Since we still live in the USA and "We the People" takes precedent
and not -"we the bureaucrats" or "we the politicians" all  comments  must be made public ASAP!

RCW 90.58.090 among others that Jim
Hagen found obviously will have legal
ramification?

Edel

Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 07:27:57 -0700

Ken,
you are right.  The
County must make Michelle's comments available and allow comment on them.
State agencies allow comments to be submitted, but do not make their replies
available until it is too late to respond back.  Kind of a parent-child
relationship, "I don't want to hear your excuses, we're doing it because
'I said so' "

----- Original Message -----

Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2010 10:41 PM

Subject: Re: FW: State review continues

"1.       The
County is currently working to provide Ecology some feedback on the issues
raised by the 300+ comment letters received during the state-wide public
comment period. "

OK, why was the
comment period state wide ??? Oh, I know, everyone on
the planet has an interest in MY PROPERTY !

Why can our 'County'
(who else but - Michelle?) provide DOE with 'some feedback' after the comment
period ended
??

The County is US, WE
THE PEOPLE - not Michelle. We have spoken and she has no right to clarify or
'feedback' - ANYTHING.
(we should demand copies of everything she fed back)

This is especially
true because she is paid from a state DOE grant - a very incestuous situation !!   Why is a defacto state employee
representing the property owners of Jefferson County who pay the property taxes
and who are being hurt by this SMP ?? (essentially DOE
represents the county in DOE decision making)

As far as I am
concerned Michelle's actions reopen the comment process and roll back the
timeline, otherwise we are denied equal protection as guaranteed by the 14th
amendment! Our comments have not been protected from her SPIN
!

Ken

From: Michelle McConnell [mailto:[email-masked]]

Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2010 4:15 PM

To: Michelle McConnell

Subject: SMP: State review continues

Greetings & Happy Summer
Interested Parties!

STATE PROCESS

The State’s review of our Locally Approved SMP
(LA-SMP) continues with WA Department of
Ecology:

1.
The County is currently working to
provide Ecology some feedback on the issues raised by the 300+ comment letters
received during the state-wide public comment period.

2.
After our Response to Comments is
submitted to Ecology (within the next month or so), Ecology will prepare their
Findings and Conclusions along with their decision to A) approve; B) approve
with required changes; or C) deny the SMP.  If changes are required, some
dialogue may be required to find complete agreement between the State and the
County.

3.
After Ecology approval, the final
step is for the Board of County Commissioners to adopt the new SMP by ordinance
as new components of the Comprehensive Plan and Unified Development Code.

So while the process is moving
forward, we still have a few months to go before final adoption and the new SMP
takes effect.  Stay tuned… this email list will continue to receive
project updates.

NEWSPAPER CLARIFICATIONS

You may have seen the recent
articles in last week’s Leader newspaper – a few points of
clarification are needed:

·         Buffers & Setbacks – While
it may seem a finer point, there is a difference between the terms buffers and
setbacks as proposed by the LA-SMP.  The 150-foot distance proposed is a
standard shoreline buffer for stream/river and marine shorelines that
fall under SMP jurisdiction.  There are separate 5-foot side-yard and
10-foot building setbacks proposed as well.  Far from a
‘one-size-fits-all’ approach, the LA-SMP also proposes 6 options to
adjust the standard shoreline buffer when specific situations arise.

The current SMP has only requires
setbacks:  30 to 100-feet for residential and a minimum of 15-feet for
commercial and urban development.  The County’s Critical Areas
Ordinance has included a 150-foot buffer for fish & wildlife habitat
conservation areas since early-2008, and has successfully withstood legal
challenge.  The City of Port Townsend SMP requires buffers that range from
50 to 200-feet.  Other jurisdictions around Puget Sound also have 150-foot
buffers in place (e.g. Whatcom County).

·         SMP jurisdiction – Not all
shoreline areas in the county meet the statutory definition for
‘Shoreline of the State’.  The SMP will apply to all
shorelines that meet the criteria for SMP jurisdiction.  Lakes less than
20 acres in size, rivers/streams with less than 20 cubic feet per second mean
annual flow, and lands under federal or tribal ownership do not qualify.

Thanks for your continued interest,

Michelle

No reply to this message is
required.  You have received this message as a member of the Jefferson
County Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Interested Parties Email Distribution
List. If you do not wish to receive further project notices, reply to this
message with "UNSUBSCRIBE" as the subject and body text. Anyone who
wants to be added to the list may send an email with "SUBSCRIBE" as
the subject and body text. Please note: Recipient names and email addresses are
not shown to keep that information private.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Michelle McConnell,
Associate Planner - LRP Lead

Jefferson County
Department of Community Development

Long Range Planning
Division

621 Sheridan St., Port
Townsend, WA 98368

MAIN
360.379.4450        DIRECT
360.379.4484        FAX 360.379.4473

WEB
www.co.jefferson.wa.us/commdevelopment

OFFICE OPEN:  9:00 a - 4:30 p Monday - Thursday;
Closed Friday

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All e-mail sent to
this address will be received by the Jefferson County e-mail system and may be
subject to Public Disclosure under Chapter 42.56 RCW and as such may be viewed
by parties other than the intended recipient.

P
SAVE PAPER - Please do
not print this e-mail unless absolutely necessary

The New Busy is not the old busy.
Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox. Get started.