This post comes to us by way of Merri Ann Simonson of Caldwell Banker in Friday Harbor.
As you may be aware, the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) went into effect in March 2014. The Shoreline Master Program (SMP) has been in the update process for the last few years and is currently out for public comment until December 8, 2015. Then it will be sent on to the Department of Ecology for their comments and then back to our County for final revisions.
The Council is holding continued public hearings on December 2, 3 and 4th this week in Friday Harbor. They'll take comments on Lopez December 1st and on Orcas on December 8th.
It is expected that the SMP may be in effect as early as spring of 2016. Many of the proposed regulations as contained in the SMP were established in the CAO or at least precedence set.
It appears that the non-conforming regulation currently in effect under the WAC will be updated in the SMP. The existing formula that regulates how much you can increase the size of an existing non-conforming home on the waterfront or near a wetland is not included in the proposed SMP. In my opinion, the draft SMP language to address a non-conforming home remodel is more discretionary on the part of the Planners during their decision process.
The proposed language is more relaxed as there appears to be no limit on the size that the non-conforming home can be increased. However, you must propose mitigation measures to address any potential negative impacts to the critical areas. This requirement will have to be met by retaining professionals to prepare reports acceptable to the County
A legally non-conforming structure is defined as one that is out of compliance with the current regulations, but was in conformance at the time of its construction. For example, a home that is 35 feet from the shoreline versus the current setback as required by the CAO, is considered a non-conforming structure.
In order to expand an existing non-conforming structure under the current regulation and formula, you will need to obtain a building permit prior to the effective date of the SMP. A Residential Pre Approval is not binding and will not survive a regulation change.
If you are the owner of a non-conforming structure and are contemplating a remodel or expansion, you should review the existing regulation as well as proposed. I have attached links below; one to the current non-conforming regulation and one to the PROPOSED language in the SMP. If you believe that the proposed regulation will be more difficult to comply with than the existing, I would not delay your application for a permit.
CLICK HERE TO VIEW EXISTING WAC FOR NON-CONFORMING CONSTRUCTION
CLICK HERE TO VIEW PROPOSED SMP LANGUAGE
CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE COUNTY WEBSITE FOR ENTIRE SMP
Citizen journalism about environmental deception in the San Juan Islands of Washington State
Showing posts with label Friends of the San Juans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Friends of the San Juans. Show all posts
Monday, November 30, 2015
Saturday, April 19, 2014
FOSJ Litters Beaches
Over the years, the Friends of the San Juans have gotten a lot of PR mileage out of their laudable beach cleanup activities. They have a whole webpage devoted to it.
Pollution of our oceans by marine debris is one of the fastest growing environmental problems.On that same webpage, the Friends talk about their involvement in the San Juan Anti-Litter Initiative.
The San Juan Island Anti-Litter Initiative invites friends and neighbors to help keep our roadside and beaches litter-free. As founding members of the San Juan Island Anti-Litter Initiative ...So we were a little surprised a month ago when the Friends participated in the littering of county beaches for the purpose of collecting data on the currents affecting our county, ostensibly in the name of "science."
conservation groups launched about 650 ‘drift cards’ – biodegradable plywood cards, each with a unique serial numberIt's hard to attribute any rational scientific justification to the Friends' actions. They could have simply looked up existing data about currents. There is a large amount of up-to-date research on the topic, as David Hyde has said:
The circulation models we now have available are mature, detailed, and tested physical science.To us, the drift card gimmick looks like just another Friends' publicity stunt that probably has more to do with their funding than science. Friends' revenues have increased substantially since they took up the fight against coal and oil spills. Annual revenues have doubled since 2009 to over $800K, so who knows what kinds of strings are attached to that kind of money ... littering beaches may be part of the deal.
The Friends are announcing the findings on their Facebook page. We've never seen people so happy to find beach litter. Perhaps a couple of words of caution are in order though. First of all, Land Bank signs frequently say, "All collecting, including driftwood, is prohibited." Also, it's "Stuart" not "Stewart" Island. Like the currents around here, that's well documented too.
Thursday, April 3, 2014
Mission of Tyranny -- Second in a Series
Tyranny is the cruel use of power. Oppressing and harassing neighbors for no good reason is not a "value" our community should have to tolerate, but it has become the specialty of the “Friends."
Originally, this article was going to tell the tales of two sets of victims of "Friends" tyranny, but one of our stories ended up being too painful for the victims to re-tell. It was deleted ... testimony to the personal toll taken by the stress of being in a battle with the "Friends" of the San Juans. The grief and anguish of the ordeal with the "Friends" literally made the victims ill, and they did not want to re-live the pain. They are not alone. The "Friends" have plagued our community for many years, and there are many stories to tell.
Causing trouble between neighbors has nothing to do with saving the environment. Nevertheless, in a recent newsletter, the "Friends" of the San Juans stated their mission as:
Helen King is in her 80’s and has been running a small Bed & Breakfast on the west side of San Juan Island for many years in harmony with her neighbors. Evenutally, Helen decided she wanted to sell her B&B and retire ... that is, until the "Friends" got involved. As Helen explains it,
Originally, this article was going to tell the tales of two sets of victims of "Friends" tyranny, but one of our stories ended up being too painful for the victims to re-tell. It was deleted ... testimony to the personal toll taken by the stress of being in a battle with the "Friends" of the San Juans. The grief and anguish of the ordeal with the "Friends" literally made the victims ill, and they did not want to re-live the pain. They are not alone. The "Friends" have plagued our community for many years, and there are many stories to tell.
Causing trouble between neighbors has nothing to do with saving the environment. Nevertheless, in a recent newsletter, the "Friends" of the San Juans stated their mission as:
To protect the land, water, sea, and livability of the San Juan Islands through science, education and advocacy. [1]This is their public face. This is what they want you to believe, but the truth is starkly different. The "Friends" mission statement belies their practice of simply using our legal system to oppress people they don’t like. Their tactic is to turn neighbor against neighbor in order to raise money using a false narrative of environmental protection. They often exploit disputes between neighbors, waging vendettas that have nothing to do with their stated mission.
The story of Helen King is a case in point.
Helen King is in her 80’s and has been running a small Bed & Breakfast on the west side of San Juan Island for many years in harmony with her neighbors. Evenutally, Helen decided she wanted to sell her B&B and retire ... that is, until the "Friends" got involved. As Helen explains it,
I have the Highland Inn Bed and Breakfast on Hannah Road, San Juan Island. The B&B permit does not go with the land but after trying to sell it as a residence for many years, I had a buyer who only was interested in buying it with a B&B permit.The “Friends” objected to the sale of Helen's property as a B&B, and in so doing, they ruined her chances of selling her property, stopping her retirement plans cold. According to Helen,
ONE neighbor, active with the ‘Friends of the San Juans,’ objected. All the other neighbors were in support and most wrote letters praising my establishment. There was never a complaint from anyone in fifteen years of operation.[2]Helen describes what happened when she tried to get permission to transfer her B&B permit to complete the sale.
The “Friends” attorney (Kyle Loring) was at my hearing. One of my neighbors read the Friend’s mission statement out loud and said to him, ‘I really don’t know how this concerns your group. Why are you here!’ The audience applauded in agreement! As a result of the Friends interference I lost the sale, as the buyers were only interested in having the property as a B&B. I am still trying to sell as a residence with a vacation rental permit, but this is two years later! How sad, but for the Friends, I could now be retired and the couple from Tennessee could have had their dream bed and breakfast inn.
Using tenuous logic, the "Friends" justified their involvement by alleging that a B&B has a greater impact on the environment than a single family residence because of higher occupancy. Ironically, however, Helen was granted a "vacation rental permit" that allows even greater occupancy than a B&B ... so the proposed sale stopped by the Friends represented a lower occupancy than Helen was allowed by law.
In a postscript Helen writes:
__________________________________________________
[1] 2013 Annual Report, Friends of the San Juans publication
[2] Freedom Foundation
In the end I was granted a "vacation rental permit" for anyone buying it, which allows NINE guests, (currently I am allowed two couples with the B&B permit), and no supervision. The B&B permit requires the owner live on the premises. Is a vacation rental better for the neighborhood?Helen’s experience with the “Friends” is unfortunately typical. The "Friends" escalate minor disputes into costly land use battles having nothing to do with the environment. It has become their trademark ... and has nothing to do with either their mission or with friendship.
__________________________________________________
[1] 2013 Annual Report, Friends of the San Juans publication
[2] Freedom Foundation
![]() |
| Helen King -- another Friends victim |
Friday, November 29, 2013
Security State
I'd like to thank everyone who contributed their smart and heartfelt comments to the last post. Since security and harassment issues are on everyone's minds, we should talk briefly about two forums offered by the Common Sense Alliance (CSA) earlier this month. The purpose of the forums was to explain the status of the CAO debacle from CSA's perspective. One of the presentations concerned "What the Friends Really Want," given by Tim Blanchard. Based on everything Blanchard has observed in recent years, he put together a summary slide that bluntly summarizes his interpretation of the Friends' goals. It's not the kind of thing you will find in the Friends mission statement or website, but you will see it in action if you pay attention to the way they operate.
There is more to come on the CAOs and SMP, so pay attention to those who have made harassment one of their core competencies.
There is more to come on the CAOs and SMP, so pay attention to those who have made harassment one of their core competencies.
Monday, September 23, 2013
Pure Imagination: Earth First to Me First
The Friends of the San Juans claim that they were formed in 1979 to defend the "county’s
first comprehensive land use plan." By the mid-1990s, one islander described them as "a curious bunch to watch in action, running from one meeting to the next, or sitting all day in hearings, or threatening lawsuits." Beth Helstein, the Friends President in those days, was quoted as saying, "One place where the taxpayers could stop growth would be by refusing to pay for new schools." In other words, we had warning signs long ago, and some islanders muttered even then that the Friends' motto should be "Sue thy neighbor," but most of us did not heed the warning signs.
first comprehensive land use plan." By the mid-1990s, one islander described them as "a curious bunch to watch in action, running from one meeting to the next, or sitting all day in hearings, or threatening lawsuits." Beth Helstein, the Friends President in those days, was quoted as saying, "One place where the taxpayers could stop growth would be by refusing to pay for new schools." In other words, we had warning signs long ago, and some islanders muttered even then that the Friends' motto should be "Sue thy neighbor," but most of us did not heed the warning signs.
Then, in 1999, Friends President Lynn Bahrych filed a petition to limit guesthouses, a cherished island tradition. That battle continued for the next 9 years, resulting in severe restrictions on guesthouses, and in the eyes of many, the loss of an important aspect of our rural character.
The Friends heritage and personnel are inextricably linked with that of the CBD, but the Friends' end game has changed from saving the environment to saving the environmental bureaucracies that hand out the big environmental-ish grant bucks to insiders ... and directing the insider game to their own economic self-interests at the expense of the rest of society. How might the Suckling of 1998 put it?
In 2001, the Friends hired Stephanie Buffum away from the Southwest Center for Biological Diversity (CBD). Along with her dog Kiva and her then-husband Kieran Suckling, Buffum moved to Shaw, Bahrych's home island. Buffum's husband was a co-founder of CBD, and coincidentally, a doppelganger for outgoing Friends Director Kevin Ranker. Buffum and Suckling's short marriage and 9-year relationship would soon end in divorce, with Suckling returning to the Southwest. But CBD's hardcore tactics would live on in the San Juans in the persona of Buffum ... an expansion of the CBD franchise.
When the CBD began in the late 80s, they were political outsiders complaining about subsidies to ranchers and other "abusers" of public lands who harmed the environment. In a 1998 interview, Suckling said:
Our government and its corporate sponsors have created a system of subsidies that has to be abolished. They turned the lands into a commodity. We have to get public land users off this welfare system. It is not a simple thing to break those chains.
One of the other co-founders of CBD, Todd Schulke, had been an Earth First activist and many CBD'ers drew inspiration from the unconstrained environmental advocacy of Earth First. While Earth First in the 1980s defined itself through direct action like monkey wrenching, CBD began to explore legal monkey wrenching ... relying on legal tactics, particularly litigation, and direct confrontation of bureaucracy. Fundamentally, the CBD strategy was an outsider strategy that did not depend on appealing to politicians or avoiding controversy. They were not interested in influence or being liked. They were interested in winning.
Somewhere along the way, however, the outsiders became the ultimate insiders, especially here in the San Juans. Nearly every Friends annual report since Buffum's arrival heralds the winning of more and more grants. Grant funding for the Friends soared from less than $200K per year before Buffum arrived to an annual high of nearly $450K in 2010. Friends members sit on multiple County committees and as advisors to the Conservation District. Ex-Friends Director Ranker is a suit-wearing State Senator and an ex-Councilman. The Friends have even attempted to silence opponents using accusations of being "uncivil" ... an odd turn of decorum for a CBD franchise. Suckling said as late as 2011 that “Psychological warfare is a very under-appreciated aspect of environmental campaigns.” Showmanship is too, and like the CBD, no Friends program was ever hindered by a lack of science.
With that appetite for litigation, how good are these radicals in their environmental assaults? Suckling claims his “unparalleled record of legal successes” is a cool 93 percent. With that success he doesn’t need solid science, and his own words reflect that. The Arizonan columnist Hugh Holub once asked Suckling if CBD activities suffer from the absence of a science-based approach in its litigious demands for endangered-species listings. “No,” Suckling responded. “Kids with science degrees are hindered by [taught] resource management values.” He added that he preferred philosophers, linguists, and poets who tended to be in front of the curve and were not handicapped by unproductive, traditional thinking.With the arrival of Buffum to the San Juans 12 years ago, the CBD franchise expanded to the Pacific Northwest. It was a natural fit for a Friends organization that had been a kind of prototype of the CBD anyway. The Friends, in turn, helped infect other locales. For example, the Friends' first staff attorney, Amy Trainer, has moved on to northern California and is using CBD tactics to shut down the Drakes Bay Oyster Company.
-- Range Magazine, Fall 2013
The Friends heritage and personnel are inextricably linked with that of the CBD, but the Friends' end game has changed from saving the environment to saving the environmental bureaucracies that hand out the big environmental-ish grant bucks to insiders ... and directing the insider game to their own economic self-interests at the expense of the rest of society. How might the Suckling of 1998 put it?
Our government has created a system of environmental-ish grant subsidies that has to be abolished. They have turned environmental causes into a commodity. We have to get environmental-ish groups off this welfare system. It is not simple to break those chains.My ... how environmental-ish times have changed! Earth First has become Me First.
![]() |
| Two Friends in a pod? -- Ranker and Suckling, Suckling and Ranker ... both are named Kevin ("Kieran" is the Irish word for "Kevin") |
![]() |
| Stephanie Buffum and mentor Lynn Bahrych at a Friends "All Species" Ball (circa 2009) |
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
Pure Imagination: 100% Environmental-ish
Today we start another Trojan Heron series called "Pure Imagination" about the environmental-ish ideas we confront daily in the San Juans. The series title comes from a famous song in Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, and one of the stanzas could be the motto for the Friends and their friends.
If the environmental-ish proponents of the Growth Management Act (GMA) were to get their way, there would be über-planned cities and nothing else. The illogical conclusion would be that we'd all have to live in one crammed city bounded by uninhabited nature. There would be no country lanes ... no farm cottages ... no one-lane bridges ... no bucolic pastures. To feed people in the über city on the smallest possible land footprint, we would need planned factory farms, too ... there'd be no free-range chickens in that world.
At the density of Seattle, the entire population of Washington State would fit into Mason County ... with 50 square miles to spare. At the population density of Friday Harbor, the entire population of San Juan County would fit onto just two-thirds of Lopez. Do we really have a population and development problem, or do we have environmental-ish profit motives at work trying to separate people from nature and the land?
Watch the following entertaining video by (believe it or not) Chipotle, the Mexican natural (fast) food company. The images you'll see about mass produced food also apply to our centrally-planned, mass-produced environmentalism. We're not getting real environmentalism anymore ... we're getting "environmental-ish" ideas that people (especially city people) consume without thinking. And Crow Foods might as well be Friends Incorporated because both are only interested in money and image ... most certainly they are not interested in you, local food, rural character, or the environment.
These days, as with food, we have to ask ourselves, where does our "environmentalism" come from? We'll try to provide some answers in this series.
Books like Fast Food Nation exposed the dark side of the All-American Meal, and there is a dark side to environmental-ish ideas too ... and oddly the two dark sides are linked. Like McDonalds, environmental-ish organizations spew images of wholesome goodness ... but there is an underlying profit motive distorting the truth. The truth about environmental-ish organizations is that their "wilderness loving" policies and actions actually promote urbanism ... by being against rural living. They even support and promote factory farming ... by demanding Conditional Use Permits (CUPs) for new family farming and suing to shut down family-run aquaculture.We'll beginWith a spinTraveling inThe world of my creationWhat we'll seeWill defyExplanation
If the environmental-ish proponents of the Growth Management Act (GMA) were to get their way, there would be über-planned cities and nothing else. The illogical conclusion would be that we'd all have to live in one crammed city bounded by uninhabited nature. There would be no country lanes ... no farm cottages ... no one-lane bridges ... no bucolic pastures. To feed people in the über city on the smallest possible land footprint, we would need planned factory farms, too ... there'd be no free-range chickens in that world.
At the density of Seattle, the entire population of Washington State would fit into Mason County ... with 50 square miles to spare. At the population density of Friday Harbor, the entire population of San Juan County would fit onto just two-thirds of Lopez. Do we really have a population and development problem, or do we have environmental-ish profit motives at work trying to separate people from nature and the land?
Watch the following entertaining video by (believe it or not) Chipotle, the Mexican natural (fast) food company. The images you'll see about mass produced food also apply to our centrally-planned, mass-produced environmentalism. We're not getting real environmentalism anymore ... we're getting "environmental-ish" ideas that people (especially city people) consume without thinking. And Crow Foods might as well be Friends Incorporated because both are only interested in money and image ... most certainly they are not interested in you, local food, rural character, or the environment.
These days, as with food, we have to ask ourselves, where does our "environmentalism" come from? We'll try to provide some answers in this series.
![]() |
| At the population density of Seattle, our State's entire population could fit into Mason County with room to spare. |
![]() |
| Depiction of mass produced community ... or what "growth management" looks like in its ultimate stages (from Behind the Green Mask) |
Monday, September 9, 2013
Creating The Eco Matrix
The movie The Matrix depicts a dystopian future in which reality as perceived by most humans is actually a simulated reality called "the Matrix," created by sentient machines to subdue the human population, while their bodies' heat and electrical activity are used as an energy source.
In San Juan County, our dystopian present is created by the Machine to subdue our human population using trumped-up eco-doomsaying, while grants are used as an energy source. We saw this on display today during Amy Windrope's presentation for the undead San Juan Initiative. The zombie San Juan Initiative 5-Year Review was funded by a TACT grant from the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife. We've talked about the TACT grant before. It stands for "Trouble shooting, Action planning, Course correction, and Tracking and monitoring." Under this grant, the Friends and members of our MRC reportedly worked with armed state police in boats from WDFW's Enforcement Division to map supposed shoreline violations. Sources suggest that this grant-funded activity resulted in a phonebook-sized inventory of purported violations, especially along the west side of San Juan Island, where activity was focused.
This was all supposed to come together in a neat little package. The on-the-ground mapping of the TACT/San Juan Initiative was supposed to be reinforced by Pictometry. The Conservation District would facilitate State agency enforcement (enforcement based on bias and misinterpretation). It was all arranged, and "they" just needed an obsequious, complicit County government to play along with the demands of the State agencies (WDFW, PSP, Ecology), the grant-driven whims of our non-profits/quangos (Friends, Kwiaht, Madrona Institute, Stewardship Network), the illusory subject-matter expertise of the Conservation District, and the self-interests of the tribes.
That's how homeowners get framed. That's how the Eco Matrix is created, and before you know it (see the video), we have soccer moms talking like jackbooted thugs before the Council asking, "What is the concern with armed boats?"
She understands our concern ... sure she does.
She understands our concern ... sure she does.
Friday, August 30, 2013
The ABCs of Political Patronage
Lead Salmon Recovery Entity ... MRC ... LIO/AAOG ... Conservation District ... Stewardship Network ... Madrona Institute ... Friends of the San Juans ... ECONet ... PSP ... glossy Friends messaging brochures funded by State-government (PSP) Targeted Awareness Grants (TAG) ... millions spent on "salmon recovery" with no measurement of results and no accountability for failure ... frivolous and abusive Friends legal actions opposing everything from an 80-year old widow wanting to retire, to the CAOs -- whose passage and approval the Friends demanded.
You can cut the environmental phoniness in this county with a knife. We don't have "save the environment" groups. We have "save the environmental bureaucracy" groups. Their primary interests are ensuring that they continue to get paid while they protect the political patronage system they've built.
The current titular heads of the patronage system are Jamie Stephens and Ron Zee. They are working in tandem to hold on to as much of the patronage system as they can, despite the election outcome. So far, they're doing a pretty good job, and Stephens, in particular, is doing a superb job.
One of the greatest achievements of the patronage system is that we all take for granted that the County deserves a "seat at the table" with the tribes, the PSP, and even its own departments ... instead of actually running the County itself. The County has been demoted to being just another stakeholder, and the group-think of unelected employees and appointees has been promoted to government. That's how the LIO/AAOG works ... and the Stewardship Network ... and the ECONet ... the Lead Entity ... even the County's own MRC. These groups are accountable to no one, and they represent no one but themselves. They reward themselves and their patronage cronies with money and multi-decade appointments while the County sits on its hands, convinced that it's just a "fiscal agent" or some other bureaucratic label that equates to "eunuch."
The congress of "environmental groups" operating here traces back to relatively few people who appear over and over again, but the proliferation of organizations, committees, and trusts makes it seem like the County is outnumbered. The County has been Delphi'd ... go along with the crowd ... behave ... fall in line ... be patient ... be part of a team ... you want to agree with the rest of us, don't you? ... DON'T YOU?!?!
Stephens has this down pat, and he is working the other two Councilmen for all its worth. Stephens' protection of the patronage system is nothing short of heroic. He got himself appointed Chair of the Council. Stephens sits on the MRC. He's the Council representative on the LIO/AAOG too ... all the key places the patronage system wants to protect. Also, despite the fact that major aspects of the patronage system should have been (and could have been) dismantled immediately, Stephens' has effectively used a series of delay tactics and other maneuvers to convince the other Councilmen that they're "part of a team" and reform "takes time" and we need "patience" ... let's get more "input." When you hear one of our politicians use those words, that's the patronage system talking ... that's a Delphi zombie courtesy of Stephens.
John Cleese recently wrote a satirical piece about terror alerts in various countries in Europe. Here's what he said about the French.
You can cut the environmental phoniness in this county with a knife. We don't have "save the environment" groups. We have "save the environmental bureaucracy" groups. Their primary interests are ensuring that they continue to get paid while they protect the political patronage system they've built.
The current titular heads of the patronage system are Jamie Stephens and Ron Zee. They are working in tandem to hold on to as much of the patronage system as they can, despite the election outcome. So far, they're doing a pretty good job, and Stephens, in particular, is doing a superb job.
One of the greatest achievements of the patronage system is that we all take for granted that the County deserves a "seat at the table" with the tribes, the PSP, and even its own departments ... instead of actually running the County itself. The County has been demoted to being just another stakeholder, and the group-think of unelected employees and appointees has been promoted to government. That's how the LIO/AAOG works ... and the Stewardship Network ... and the ECONet ... the Lead Entity ... even the County's own MRC. These groups are accountable to no one, and they represent no one but themselves. They reward themselves and their patronage cronies with money and multi-decade appointments while the County sits on its hands, convinced that it's just a "fiscal agent" or some other bureaucratic label that equates to "eunuch."
The congress of "environmental groups" operating here traces back to relatively few people who appear over and over again, but the proliferation of organizations, committees, and trusts makes it seem like the County is outnumbered. The County has been Delphi'd ... go along with the crowd ... behave ... fall in line ... be patient ... be part of a team ... you want to agree with the rest of us, don't you? ... DON'T YOU?!?!
Stephens has this down pat, and he is working the other two Councilmen for all its worth. Stephens' protection of the patronage system is nothing short of heroic. He got himself appointed Chair of the Council. Stephens sits on the MRC. He's the Council representative on the LIO/AAOG too ... all the key places the patronage system wants to protect. Also, despite the fact that major aspects of the patronage system should have been (and could have been) dismantled immediately, Stephens' has effectively used a series of delay tactics and other maneuvers to convince the other Councilmen that they're "part of a team" and reform "takes time" and we need "patience" ... let's get more "input." When you hear one of our politicians use those words, that's the patronage system talking ... that's a Delphi zombie courtesy of Stephens.
John Cleese recently wrote a satirical piece about terror alerts in various countries in Europe. Here's what he said about the French.
The French government announced yesterday that it has raised its terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide." The only two higher levels in France are "Collaborate" and "Surrender." The rise was precipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France 's white flag factory, effectively paralyzing the country's military capability.Aside from that excerpt being terribly ironic given the positions taken by the UK and France over the last two days, let's hope it's not the role model for our new Councilmen as they contend with our system of political patronage.
![]() |
| Jamie Stephens, Chair of the San Juan County Council |
![]() |
| Ron Zee, Chair of the San Juan Islands Conservation District |
Thursday, August 22, 2013
Conservation District Watch: The Series - Installment #8
The Conservation District that exists today is not the same animal that formed in 1947. In fact, the Conservation District has undergone tremendous change in just the past year. In the last few months, they let go a long-time senior planner (Dana Kinsey). They hired Lyshall as District Manager, and they recently hired a couple of other part-time junior staffers.
Zee and the Stewardship Network Steering Committee (Zee, Lyshall, Stephanie Buffum, Lincoln Bormann) also appointed Julia Vouri as Coordinator of the Stewardship Network/ECONet "under the umbrella of the Conservation District." And when we decipher what that last sentence means, we'll let you know, but it sounds like Zee has found a way to get around the Conservation District Board and absorb whatever/whomever he wants into the CD by using bureaucratic sleight of hand.
So when the Conservation District talks about all the great things they've done (as they do in the email below), the people who are there now are not necessarily the ones who accomplished them. The people who are there now have a different agenda ... empire building. The CD is transforming itself into "grant central" for the county. The CD wants tax money, Salmon Recovery money, Voluntary Stewardship Plan money, and every other public penny it can get its grubby mitts on. It is getting ready for big plans, big money, and good times.
The Conservation District (with their farm plans and native plant sale) is to the Machine/Network what the Genco Olive Oil Company was to the Corleone Family. It's a front. It's a place to launder money from the State and elsewhere ... money for messaging and bad-science ... and re-brand it as grassroots, locally-based, environmentally conscious, conservation "science based planning."
Letting our Conservation District continue to operate would be like letting the mafia survive because we like olive oil.
The email below was sent out recently by the Conservation District to encourage people to support the CD's requested new tax assessment. It was effective. Many people turned out to testify before the County Council about the wholesome goodness of the Conservation District and the wonderful things it does (or used to do). Honestly, though, look how anemic even the CD's own numbers are for the benefits they've bestowed on us.
80 ... they've helped 80 people. Not 80 people per year ... but over 5 years ... that's about half of one percent of our population of 15,000+. And they have benefited (whatever that means) 3,500 acres. Our county has about 110,000 acres.
Frankly, that's not even much of a front. The CD has to go; otherwise, it won't be long before they're making us offers we can't refuse.
________________________________________________
Zee and the Stewardship Network Steering Committee (Zee, Lyshall, Stephanie Buffum, Lincoln Bormann) also appointed Julia Vouri as Coordinator of the Stewardship Network/ECONet "under the umbrella of the Conservation District." And when we decipher what that last sentence means, we'll let you know, but it sounds like Zee has found a way to get around the Conservation District Board and absorb whatever/whomever he wants into the CD by using bureaucratic sleight of hand.
So when the Conservation District talks about all the great things they've done (as they do in the email below), the people who are there now are not necessarily the ones who accomplished them. The people who are there now have a different agenda ... empire building. The CD is transforming itself into "grant central" for the county. The CD wants tax money, Salmon Recovery money, Voluntary Stewardship Plan money, and every other public penny it can get its grubby mitts on. It is getting ready for big plans, big money, and good times.
The Conservation District (with their farm plans and native plant sale) is to the Machine/Network what the Genco Olive Oil Company was to the Corleone Family. It's a front. It's a place to launder money from the State and elsewhere ... money for messaging and bad-science ... and re-brand it as grassroots, locally-based, environmentally conscious, conservation "science based planning."
Letting our Conservation District continue to operate would be like letting the mafia survive because we like olive oil.
The email below was sent out recently by the Conservation District to encourage people to support the CD's requested new tax assessment. It was effective. Many people turned out to testify before the County Council about the wholesome goodness of the Conservation District and the wonderful things it does (or used to do). Honestly, though, look how anemic even the CD's own numbers are for the benefits they've bestowed on us.
80 ... they've helped 80 people. Not 80 people per year ... but over 5 years ... that's about half of one percent of our population of 15,000+. And they have benefited (whatever that means) 3,500 acres. Our county has about 110,000 acres.
Frankly, that's not even much of a front. The CD has to go; otherwise, it won't be long before they're making us offers we can't refuse.
________________________________________________
----- Original Message -----
From: Bruce GregorySent: Friday, August 02, 2013 1:53 PMSubject: Request for supportDear SJC landowner,
I am contacting you because you have worked with the San Juan Islands Conservation District in the last few years and understand what we do and how we are placed within the context of land conservation for residential, farm or forest lands.
Our history goes back to 1947 in San Juan County. The work with do with landowners is done using a non-regulatory, non-enforcement, science based planning process. We have continued to offer our services over the years while growing with the changes in science and our local land base. We have offered access to information and cost-share opportunites for enhancing your management work and your working lands. Our work has benefited over 80 landowners and 3500 acres in the last five years. You were one of those landowners.
The current County Assessment Ordinance provides us with a $5 assessment per parcel. Because of a recent state Supreme Court ruling the ordinance needs to be re-worded to include a per acre amount to meet the requirements of state law. The proposed new ordinance changes the fee to $5 per parcel plus 5 cents per acre. In other words, an owner of a 10-acre parcel would pay $5.50 rather than the current $5 per year. The additional revenues (approximately $3,800) will mostly be spent on County administrative costs to implement the changes.
To make this change in the ordinance a public hearing is required. Our hearing with the County Council is scheduled for next Tuesday, August 6th at 9:00 AM.
If you would be willing to appear in person (if you can!) or even write an email to the County Council members expressing your support we would really appreciate it.
If you do send an email please do send me a copy of it so I can refer to it during the hearing.
You may reach the County Council members collectively at: SJC Council <council@sanjuanco.com>
Our via each Council members email contact:
Bob Jarman <bobja@sanjuanco.com>
Rick Hughes <Rickh@sanjuanco.com>
Jamie Stephens <jamies@sanjuanco.com>Please feel free to contact me or our new district manager Linda Lyshall if you have any questions!Regards,
R. Bruce Gregory
San Juan Islands Conservation District
NRCS Certified Planner
Farm & Forest Resources
▲▲▲▲▲▲☼▲▲▲
Mail: 350 Court St. #10
Office: 530 Guard St.
Friday Harbor, San Juan Is. WA 98250
360-378-6621
b.gregory@sanjuanislandscd.org
Sunday, August 11, 2013
Conservation District Watch: The Stacked Deck
The San Juan Islands Conservation District has merged with the San Juan County Stewardship Network and the Puget Sound Partnership's ECONet. Moreover, the non-profit Madrona Institute and the PSP's Action Agenda Oversight Group (AAOG)/Local Implementation Organization (LIO) have incestuous links to the Conservation District too.
Let's play a shortened version of 20 questions ... let's try 6 questions:
Let's play a shortened version of 20 questions ... let's try 6 questions:
- Who is head of the San Juan Islands Conservation District?
- Who is on the steering committee of the Stewardship Network?
- Who is the founder and head of the Madrona Institute, which acts as the fiscal agent for the Stewardship Network, receiving a modest 5% to 10% cut on all grants?
- Who endorsed Pratt, Stephens, and Byers for Council?
- Who has been trying to take County programs and grants away from the County (e.g., Salmon Lead Entity Coordinator)?
- Who has been discussing #5 above with Jamie Stephens in relative secrecy?
The answer to all of the above is Ron Zee, who is part-creator, part-manipulator of a giant hairball bureaucracy that is a wolf (PSP) in Conservation District clothing. At the end of this post is an effort to depict this hairball with a graph, but honestly, it's an impossible task. Complexity is their disguise. It's a Gordian Knot of bureaucratic self-interest and conflicts of interest. Nevertheless, I hope readers begin to get an idea who the real power is behind this bureaucracy ... and it's not our elected officials.
The Stewardship Network is comprised of 24 organizations, including 5 separate County entities. The Steering Committee for the Stewardship Network is comprised of 4 people: Zee, Linda Lyshall (who works for Zee at the Conservation District), Stephanie Buffum of the Friends, and Lincoln Bormann of the Land Bank. This Steering Committee recently appointed Julia Vouri to be the coordinator of the Stewardship Network/ECONet "under the umbrella of the Conservation District." The Conservation District Board had no say in the matter. Julia Vouri is the wife of Mike Vouri, who happens to be on the Advisory Board of the Madrona Institute. The Madrona Institute was founded and is headed by Zee. He has put together a 4-person Madrona Institute Board (himself, Land Bank Commissioner Jim Skoog, League of Women Voters member Sarah Crosby, and Elaine Kendall of the Ag Guild ... Zee's wife). In addition, Zee has assembled an 18-member Madrona Institute Advisory Committee that includes Linda Lyshall (again), Lincoln Bormann (again), the previously mentioned Mike Vouri, Nick Teague (National Monument/BLM Manager), and Katie Loring, wife of Friends' attorney Kyle Loring who Zee appointed as Associate Board member of the Conservation District.
Given the weight of all these heavily-networked advisors and board members, anyone who thinks the measly Conservation District Board has any power is at best an optimist and at worst a damn fool. The Conservation District Board consists of 5 members, two of whom are appointed by the State. There are just three elected members to the Conservation District Board in an otherwise sprawling complex of self-appointed greased-palm special interests.
And that's not even including the links between the Conservation District and the AAOG/LIO, whose links to the Conservation District are so cozy that the Conservation District has an office reserved for them in their new building. Who's on the AAOG/LIO, aside from the Conservation District itself? Let's see ... the Implementation Committee of the AAOG/LIO consists of a further 12 organizations, including the Marine Resources Committee (again), the Salmon Lead Entity Coordinator (again), the Stewardship Network (again), three County departments (Public Works, CD&P, Health), the Water Resources Committee, the Town, and 3 tribes.
In this impossible-to-follow Gordian Knot, self-appointed Zee-cronies are represented multiple times while the public is shut out. Let's look at the Salmon Lead Entity (SLE), for example. The Salmon Lead Entity Coordinator is Barbara Rosenkotter, who was the Treasurer for Byers campaign (endorsed by then-Democratic-Party-head Zee). Although Rosenkotter ostensibly works for the County, she represents the Stewardship Network, the MRC, and the AAOG/LIO Implementation Committee ... and she has been working stealthily with Zee, the Northwest Straits Commission/Foundation, and the tribes to move her position and State funding to the Conservation District.
There you have it ... 24 organizations in the Stewardship Network, 18 advisors to the Madrona Institute, 4 board members of the Madrona Institute, 13 members to the AAOG/LIO Implementation Committee, 2 State appointees to the Conservation District ... and just 3 elected members of the Conservation District Board. No independently elected official to the Conservation District or even to our County Council has a clue how they're being played by this bureaucracy of mass destruction. No matter how improved the Conservation District electoral system might become as a result of anticipated reforms and lawsuits, the fix is already in ... the elected positions don't even matter anymore ... the Conservation District is machine headquarters where the business of the PSP and Friends is done. The Conservation District is hopelessly broken as a representative body.
And this cabal will pass judgment on whether we, as a County, are good Puget Sound Partners. That's important because whether we are good Puget Sound Partners will matter when our County tries to obtain funding from the State. There is statutory language to that effect. Given the hearings this past week about Conservation District funding, the County Council may be under the misapprehension that they are funding the Conservation District, but in reality, it's the reverse. The County is being set up to be squeezed by the Conservation District, the PSP, and the Friends over State money. If we don't follow their whims, our State funding will be threatened.
And despite the high-minded labels (e.g., Salmon Lead Entity) and the strident, tearful pleas of bureaucratic insiders crying about the environment, absolutely none of the bureaucratic whims have anything to do with improving ecological health. The taxes and grants devoted to bureaucratic eco-efforts aren't funding on-the-ground "save the salmon" or "save the planet" initiatives ... they're funding "save the bureaucracy" initiatives.
Support the Conservation District and save a self-interested bureaucrat ... and maybe even earn a modest 5% to 10% cut for Zee at the same time. Now that's environmental stewardship San Juan style.
Saturday, August 3, 2013
Conservation District Watch: Conservation District = Stewardship Network
The grand plan in the last election had several components, but in typical iceberg fashion, we only saw part of it. The plan included the following:
Cheers!
Ron
Stewardship Network of the San Juans
Website: www.stewardshipsanjuans.org
Email: stewardshipnetwork@gmail.com
A coalition of organizations who envision
a healthy, thriving ecosystem in the
San Juan archipelago, from land to sea
- Ron Zee, as head of the local Democratic Party, would endorse Stephens, Pratt, and Byers for County Council. Massive donations would pour in from party faithfuls, and the Zee-endorsed candidates would win handily.
- Ron Zee would become head of everything else (see email below). Zee would transform the Conservation District into a local amalgam of all State agencies and their non-profit allies operating in the county: PSP (AAOG/LIO, ECONet), Salmon Recovery Lead Entity (Rosenkotter), WDFW (Windrope), the tribes, Ecology, the Friends, and others.
- Stephens, Pratt, and Byers would increase the CD's special assessment in order to provide a local funding backstop against the possibility of diminished State funding.
- Having statutory authority (RCW 89.08.580) for administering water quality and habitat protection grants, the new amalgamated CD would be in a position to blackmail the County into following every outrageous State whim (e.g., Action Agenda of the PSP). Do it, or else no State grants for you!
- The Council would pass civility laws to stifle dissent at public meetings; a stacked MRC and Planning Commission would ram through a draconian SMP even easier than they rammed through the CAOs. "Everyone" would appear to line up behind fierce new anti-citizen regulations.
- The County would upgrade its GIS system. High-resolution aerial photographs (Pictometry) would merge with the TACT grant activities of the MRC/Friends to provide über enforcement opportunities. Open season would begin once the SMP was in place.
- Our Prosecuting Attorney's (PA's) Office would stand by and watch it all happen, if not facilitate it. The Friends would file their usual lawsuits against everyone (except other Friends) and citizens would receive no help from the PA.
Effectively, the net result of the above would have been direct control of San Juan County by hostile State bureaucrats and their non-profit allies (i.e., direct control by the amalgamated CD).
To get an inkling of what that might be like, have a look again at the email from Martha Kongsgaard. You can see echoes of the PSP Targeted Awareness Grants (i.e., Puget Sound is in trouble, our environment is our economy, and locals don't matter).
Our economy should really hum along after we've all been gotten rid of.
The email below was sent out by Ron Zee this past week. The election may not have turned out as planned, but they're still executing the grand plan.
To get an inkling of what that might be like, have a look again at the email from Martha Kongsgaard. You can see echoes of the PSP Targeted Awareness Grants (i.e., Puget Sound is in trouble, our environment is our economy, and locals don't matter).
Our economy should really hum along after we've all been gotten rid of.
The email below was sent out by Ron Zee this past week. The election may not have turned out as planned, but they're still executing the grand plan.
______________________________________________________
Greetings All,
The Steering Committee is pleased to announce the selection of Julia Vouri as our new Stewardship Network Coordinator/ECO Net Coordinator, per the unanimous recommendation of the Search Committee at a special Network meeting held yesterday. Contracting with the Puget Sound Partnership will proceed next week for the ECO Net Coordination grant under the umbrella of the San Juan Islands Conservation District.
Please welcome Julia to the Network when you see her. With her help, we'll continue to move the stewardship ethic ever forward!
Stewardship Network of the San Juans
Website: www.stewardshipsanjuans.org
Email: stewardshipnetwork@gmail.com
A coalition of organizations who envision
a healthy, thriving ecosystem in the
San Juan archipelago, from land to sea
Wednesday, July 31, 2013
Trouble Brewing In The San Juans
On Tuesday, the current Council defeated a proposal for new rules for public meetings. It was an item left over from the previous Council. The "new rules" proposal was drafted by our previous Council to enforce "civility" at public meetings. Over the last couple of years, we have seen pleas for civility used by the Friends and their friends as a weapon to limit public participation and openness. Ironically, those who have clamored the loudest for civility here have often behaved in the most objectively uncivil ways themselves ... for example, by resorting to name calling and out-and-out lying.
And those tactics and strategies have been given succor by influential officials higher up the government food chain. A case in point is the string of emails below from 2011. In the emails, officials from the Puget Sound Partnership (PSP) are complaining about science being introduced by the Common Sense Alliance (CSA) during the CAO process. Specifically, state officials are reacting to a CSA newsletter about ocean science proposed for BAS by Dr. David Hyde, formerly of Scripps Institute of Oceanography. The emails between Bill Ruckelshaus, Martha Kongsgaard, and Gerry O'Keefe illustrate many things:
For reference and background, Martha Kongsgaard is the current head of the PSP Leadership Council. Ruckelshaus (formerly Head of the PSP Leadership Council) and O'Keefe (formerly Executive Director of the PSP) have moved on, but as most San Juan residents probably realize, Bill Ruckelshaus remains a hugely influential figure. And speaking of huge, he also owns one of the largest shoreline homes and docks in the county.
The email string kicks off with Ruckelshaus forwarding the CSA newsletter to O'Keefe and Kongsgaard with the ominous admonition, "Trouble brewing in the San Juans." However, Ruckelshaus is wrong. Any fair evaluator of the evidence would conclude that trouble has already been baked into our state, local, and tribal governments ... garnished with the scientists and non-profits that are in league with them.
_________
Errata: The initial wording of this post incorrectly identified Gerry O'Keefe as being the former Head of the Department of Ecology when in reality he served as the Executive Director of the PSP. Corrections have been made and my thanks to the reader who pointed out the error.
Begin forwarded message:
And those tactics and strategies have been given succor by influential officials higher up the government food chain. A case in point is the string of emails below from 2011. In the emails, officials from the Puget Sound Partnership (PSP) are complaining about science being introduced by the Common Sense Alliance (CSA) during the CAO process. Specifically, state officials are reacting to a CSA newsletter about ocean science proposed for BAS by Dr. David Hyde, formerly of Scripps Institute of Oceanography. The emails between Bill Ruckelshaus, Martha Kongsgaard, and Gerry O'Keefe illustrate many things:
- First, they show that San Juan County is on the radar screen of some of the most influential people in the state.
- Second, they show the casual contempt that state officials have for anyone outside of the Friends, the tribes, or insider scientists.
- Third, they show no respect for the legitimate concerns of local people and display condescension at the premise that differences with the PSP might actually be authentic. Kongsgaard implies that CSA has somehow manufactured controversy and created dialogue that isn't "real." In fact, Kongsgaard shows off her political blinders by denigrating the "world view" politics of her opponents while she simultaneously displays nothing but her own "world view."
- Fourth, the emails employ tactics that we've come to expect in the San Juans -- paint all CSA-like troublemakers with a broad politically-charged brush (e.g., Tea Partiers); lie about them (CSA "screamed" at Ruckelshaus); favor tourists over residents; and generally vilify anyone who encourages broad-based local public participation.
- Lastly, the emails show the speed-dial first-name bonds that existed (and may still exist) between our local manipulative hardball world-view commissars and the state's manipulative hardball world-view commissars.
For reference and background, Martha Kongsgaard is the current head of the PSP Leadership Council. Ruckelshaus (formerly Head of the PSP Leadership Council) and O'Keefe (formerly Executive Director of the PSP) have moved on, but as most San Juan residents probably realize, Bill Ruckelshaus remains a hugely influential figure. And speaking of huge, he also owns one of the largest shoreline homes and docks in the county.
The email string kicks off with Ruckelshaus forwarding the CSA newsletter to O'Keefe and Kongsgaard with the ominous admonition, "Trouble brewing in the San Juans." However, Ruckelshaus is wrong. Any fair evaluator of the evidence would conclude that trouble has already been baked into our state, local, and tribal governments ... garnished with the scientists and non-profits that are in league with them.
_________
Errata: The initial wording of this post incorrectly identified Gerry O'Keefe as being the former Head of the Department of Ecology when in reality he served as the Executive Director of the PSP. Corrections have been made and my thanks to the reader who pointed out the error.
From: Gerry O'Keefe
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 1:10 PM
To: Jeanette Dorner
Subject: Fwd: Note from Ruckelshaus -FW: Ocean Science Missing in Best Available Science
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 1:10 PM
To: Jeanette Dorner
Subject: Fwd: Note from Ruckelshaus -FW: Ocean Science Missing in Best Available Science
FYI.
Gerry O'Keefe
Executive Director
PUGET SOUND PARTNERSHIP
Via iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: martha kongsgaard <martha@kongsgaard-goldman.org>
Date: October 12, 2011 12:59:47 PM PDT
To: Bill Ruckelshaus <bill@madrona.com>
Cc: Gerry O'Keefe <gerry.okeefe@psp.wa.gov>
Subject: RE: Note from Ruckelshaus -FW: Ocean Science Missing in Best Available Science
Thanks for this Bill. This is ongoing up there as you know. I think you have personally been screamed at there, no? The county has adopted the BAS already and this cannot be undone until the CAO is complete which will be sometime in June. Then the law suits will be filed by both sides. The best thing that can happen now is that a thorough record is made by groups like Friends of the San Juans, UW scientists, and the tribes so that they can prevail in court. It is a lousy system, but it’s the one we have. IN the mean time, it is rough to be Lovell Pratt, for example, who is chair and is trying to hold the line.The CSalliance is certainly whipping up fear and introducing new science into the CAO discussion and are managing to fill town halls with 50 – 70 people. At the end of the day, it has much more to do with philosophy than with science – see the Tea Party. If the case could be made publicly that their science is not on point, that over 50% of the shoreline is already built out and that the parcels are by and large under ½ acre, and that the economy of the San Juans depends on the 1,000,000+ tourists who travel there to be sold “beauty and wildness” and on and on, they would still hate government and resist regulation in most any form. They are jamming the planning department by encouraging land owners to go, one by one, to the planning department to ask what effect these regulations ‘could’ have on their land. They are demanding that the council notify all land owners of the same, with individual maps, etc., all under the request for transparency and open government. That plays well and is hard to combat. But it is killing the dept. who otherwise would be working on the CAO etc. and so the worm turns…..This e mail got me off my duff to call Lovell Pratt, the chair, and friends of the San Juans. They need our support to do the hard thing. We need to listen to the CSA, and the worries of the property owners and figure out how to get the hard work done. There is not a lot of real communications getting done. It is world view stuff that doesn’t allow for much dialogue in my experience.MarthaM A R T H A K O N G S G A A R D
4 4 0 8 B E A C H D R I V E S. W.
S E A T T L E, W A 9 8 1 1 6
W - 2 0 6 . 4 4 8 . 1 8 7 4 * C - 2 0 6 . 8 1 7 . 5 4 7 3
martha@kongsgaard-goldman.org
From: Bill Ruckelshaus [mailto:bill@madrona.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2011 9:14 AM
To: Gerry O'Keefe; martha kongsgaard
Subject: Note from Ruckelshaus -FW: Ocean Science Missing in Best Available ScienceGerry and Martha,Trouble brewing in the San Juans.BillDiane L. Hodgson, Personal ManagerWilliam D. and Jill Ruckelshaus
Madrona Venture Group and Evergreen Venture1000 Second Avenue, Ste 3700Seattle, WA 98104From: Common Sense Alliance [mailto:info@commonsensealliance.net]
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 4:14 PM
To: Bill Ruckelshaus
Subject: Ocean Science Missing in Best Available Science
Images not displaying properly? Add info@commonsensealliance.net to your address book now.
Tuesday, 11 October 2011
Vol. 73
Guest Editorial: Why is Ocean Science Missing in the SJC's BAS?
My wife and I came to San Juan Island in 2009 to enjoy the wonderful ambience of these Islands. Like many friends and neighbors, we are environmentally oriented--I having retired from 40 years of ocean technology work, and she a long career in public relations. We both are alarmed by San Juan County’s recent CAO developments and public disclosures--her from a public information perspective, and I from an ocean sciences point of view.We are not directly affected, but I want to speak out as a county taxpayer and home owner in the cause of clarity and transparency. Our fellow taxpayers and residents need the real facts to better judge the truth and value of this “environmentally necessitated” county initiative against the cost and economic risk to all our communities and their residents.Here’s the main issue: the current CAO is based on facts that do not apply to the San Juan Islands and missing the facts that do. My comments are directed toward the centerpiece of the CAO plan--Imposing deep setbacks and buffer zones to protect and restore our marine environment.There’s a big problem with the County’s approach. The County’s agencies have developed a long list of Puget Watershed and related reports, called “Best Available Science.” This BAS forms their justification for the CAO, and the SMP to follow. According to the State these ordinances must be based on some definition of best available science.With my long association with ocean institutes, including the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, CA, I tried to determine the basis of the “ocean truth” in this BAS. I was appalled to find that, despite years of Salish Sea studies, no physical oceanographic studies describing our local marine waters exist in this BAS.Without an ocean-reality baseline, how can this county legitimately proceed with a marine environmental remediation plan? And, how costly will this plan be to enforce if their “science” is missing essential information?I found that, while unacknowledged in the BAS, the body of ocean literature on local waters is extensive, and represents 50 years of model development and measurements by leading institutes. The circulation models we now have available are mature, detailed, and tested physical science. The findings contained in this literature led me to clear conclusions that fundamentally counter SJC’s rationale for shoreline buffer actions:1. The San Juan Islands waters are not part of the Puget Sound at all – They are part of the Southern Straits of Georgia, almost 10 times larger in water volume, and in river outflows. We may be politically connected to the Puget, but our local marine waters are Canadian, and incidentally contain the effluent of 80% of the economic output of BC.2. Mostly blocked from northerly exit, the massive outflows from BC’s Fraser and nearby rivers create a persistent southerly flow of their waters through our islands out into the Straits of Juan de Fuca. These river flows exceed 100 cubic kilometers of river water annually--about ten times that of all Puget rivers.3. Because of seabed and tidal flow features just to the south of us, these northern waters don’t mix much with Puget waters during tidal cycles. This means there is little mixing of our Islands’ and Puget waters by our strong tidal cycles, further isolating us. These tides also create massive upwelling of clean Pacific waters along our shorelines from the bottom counter-current, and constantly bring fresh ocean waters to our shorelines. Our Islands’ shorelines have the best flushed marine waters of any coastline in the lower US, and no local marine water quality measurements can legitimately separate the origins of local and Canadian runoff.The ocean-truth for our Islands is that we are immersed in a huge BC system that mixes massive river outflows from the Fraser basin with Pacific Ocean waters. BC governments have been addressing water quality issues for decades and are making progress—but, we are only a small part of their very large system. We San Juan Islanders will be far better served by focusing on the few local area problems that we have and that we can do something about, rather than by incorrectly pursuing environmental actions that, to no avail impose laws based on incomplete information.It is time for the County of San Juan to step back and get the Ocean reality for our Islands right--before proceeding further with these CAO and SMP initiatives.David Hyde, PhD[Note: David Hyde, PhD, has a professional background in ocean sciences from his association with the University of California, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, and other institutes. The information and opinions in this editorial are his own independent assessments of literature that is available for everyone to assess. He has recently collaborated with Ed Kilduff, a Lopez Island hydrogeologist, to create a presentation entitled "San Juan Archipelago Water Quality & CAO." Mr. Hyde has given permission for CSA to publish his editorial opinion.] Common Sense Alliance
P.O. 1249 Friday Harbor, 98250
info@commonsensealliance.net
www.www.commonsensealliance.net
Sunday, July 14, 2013
Countdown To September 6
As many of our readers know, our Critical Areas Ordinances (CAOs) were appealed by several parties to the Growth Management Hearings Board (GMBH). Hearings were conducted here during the week of June 24. Below is a video link to the summary comments of Sandy Mackie, the attorney representing the Common Sense Alliance (CSA).
The GMHB is expected to announce their decision on September 6.
The GMHB is expected to announce their decision on September 6.
Saturday, June 29, 2013
Fortress Conservation = FU Conservation
In the last post, I referred to the Islands Trust as the Canadian version of the Friends of the San Juans. Some commenters have pointed out that my characterization of the Islands Trust is not accurate. I admit, the Islands Trust is structured differently from the Friends of the San Juans, since Islands Trust is actually part of the provincial government. Some have pointed out that the Islands Trust consists of democratically elected officials. Yes, they are "democratically elected" in a way that parallels the recent vociferous concerns about our Charter, in that the small islands participating in the Islands Trust have substantial and disproportionate influence.
Perhaps, I should have said that the Islands Trust may be what the Friends of the San Juans aspires to be as it labors in league with the Puget Sound Partnership, Stewardship Network, and Northwest Straits Commission ... to be a formal governmental body with genuine clout. In the hope of getting my facts straight on the Islands Trust, I'd like to provide a description of them per the viewpoint and research of one of their constituents, Elizabeth Nickson, a Salt Spring Island resident and the former European Bureau Chief of Life. This is what Nickson has to say about Islands Trust in her most recent book.
Perhaps, I should have said that the Islands Trust may be what the Friends of the San Juans aspires to be as it labors in league with the Puget Sound Partnership, Stewardship Network, and Northwest Straits Commission ... to be a formal governmental body with genuine clout. In the hope of getting my facts straight on the Islands Trust, I'd like to provide a description of them per the viewpoint and research of one of their constituents, Elizabeth Nickson, a Salt Spring Island resident and the former European Bureau Chief of Life. This is what Nickson has to say about Islands Trust in her most recent book.
Salt Spring and its four hundred sister islands big and small are run, for the most part, by a land-use outfit called the Islands Trust, the much quoted mandate of which is "to preserve and protect." Founded in a summer graduate seminar at a local university in 1974 out of a fear that the pastoral islands scattered between Vancouver and Vancouver Island were about to be overrun by developers, the proposal for it was rushed through a session of the provincial legislature and its structure codified. The trust practices what is called fortress conservation, the typical form of conservation everywhere, which involves locking down as much land as possible and practicing "natural regulation," meaning no one touches it. Ever. Even "disturbing vegetation" is disallowed. For most of recorded history, humans have practiced adaptive management of resources --- when a problem crops up, we solve it. If we want a landscape, we create one; a working forest, ditto. Rangeland, farmland, townscapes --- all can be managed for bounty and health of resources and people. Natural regulation cropped up in the 1960s in almost all land-use agencies in the world and swiftly became the preferred method by which all resources and land were to be managed. Over the past five decades, natural regulation has been adopted almost everywhere. Nature knows best. Man is a virus and a despoiler and must be controlled.
The Islands Trust went on to serve as a template for many similar organizations all over the world, including the California Coastal Commission and the Cape Cod Commission. The trust claims it is unique, but it is not, at least not anymore, and like its fellows, it differs from typical democratic government principally by subverting the normal processes of democracy in the name of good green land use.
There are thirteen larger islands in the trust area, to which the smaller ones are attached for administrative purposes, and those larger islands elect two trustees each. When I say big, it's relative. Most of the twelve other islands have a population between four hundred and one thousand, but they each have two trustees. An off-island trustee comes in for the monthly town meeting to vote, breaking any tie. All land-use decisions are first voted on on the island and then considered at a quarterly meeting of all twenty-six trustees, called the Trust Council, which moves with all the glacial formality of the League of Nations. There is, you have no doubt gathered, no proportional representation at the trust. Salt Spring has only 8 percent of the final vote on the way any of its land is used, and in rural areas, land use is just about everything.
The trust is a blue-chip organization; it is expensive, head-quartered in British Columbia's capital city, with forty-five full-time employees and a steady flow of consultants. From its offices streams an unending flood of glossy propaganda about ecosystems saved and dangers advancing that require more land to be saved and more regulations placed on private land, and of course on all waters, whether runoff ditch or ocean.
Every few years, each island puts itself through a revision of its Official Community Plan. Carefully selected islanders serve on committees examining each "problem" within the trust region: affordable housing, tourism, economic development, water. Environmental movement goals are codified and tested during these thrash-tests of "participatory democracy" --- goals like limiting house sizes to less than three thousand square feet, for instance. Or requiring a permit and the consultation of a registered environmental professional ($2,500 fee to be borne by the applicant) to plant a garden within 100 feet of any body of water, man-made or natural. Or requiring a 150-foot setback from the ocean for any house, and if a house already within that 150 feet burns, it cannot be rebuilt in the same place --- well, tough luck for the stinking-rich oceanfront homeowner who just met Nemesis.
The outcome of a year or so of such meetings, displays, and "community consultation" is an astonishing maze of regulation, the result of which is stasis and worse. Despite living within easy reach of three gleaming modern cities filled with active wealthy-ish men and women, with the exception of Salt Spring, which is graying rapidly, every island's population is in steady decline, losing young families every month. On the smaller islands, as the young leave and the economy deflates faster, even the elderly, deprived of the services that the young provide and fund, leave too.
While the trust is supposed to deal only with land use, in typical bureaucratic mission creep it calls itself a local government. But in fact, all the other multiplying details of actual government are handled by a regional director, who spends his life dashing from committee to committee, all staffed by volunteers. ... Salt Spring is typically described as an argument surrounded by water, as, I was to find, is every other community into which the movement has inserted its brand of land-use management.Does any of this "democracy" sound familiar? And we send Councillors to meet with these people every year?
Tuesday, June 18, 2013
Secret Meetings And Friends Interns
Last year, San Juan County voters approved Proposition 3 by an overwhelming 85%. Proposition 3 requires all meetings of the County Council and all committees thereof to be open to the public except when a private (executive) session or closed session is allowed by law.
Then how is it that Jamie Stephens and Rick Hughes have been spending so much time together lately out of the public eye? They both attended a conference on Mayne Island, Canada, sponsored by the Islands Trust. Islands Trust is the Canadian version of the Friends of the San Juans. Also, prior to leaving for the conference, they had lunch together at Haley's in Friday Harbor to discuss what they were going to say at the Canadian meeting. If you watch today's Council session video, you can see them discuss it (see time mark 25:30 to about 30:47).
If you watch the video, you'll see our new Council members ask that the public be patient with them as they try to deal with their new jobs. Why does following the mandate of Prop 3 require patience? It's about as simple a mandate as could exist. At worst, Hughes and Stephens showed outright contempt for the will of the voters (and the law). At best, they showed extremely poor judgment. It was very bad form, and I think voters are out of patience regarding bad form by County government.
It often seems as if the laws here only apply to homeowners. To that end, the Friends are advertising for an intern to aid their efforts to continue to beat up on all of us. The Friends aren't an environmental organization so much as they are a law firm specializing in friviolous lawsuits and hardball, self-serving, pseudo-science advocacy. They're looking for interns to keep it going.
Environmental, Land Use and Natural Resources Law
Position Description: Summer interns work under the direct supervision of Friends’ staff attorney to develop and prosecute environmental litigation and other advocacy efforts. The summer intern will gain practical litigation and policy experience by analyzing local, state, and federal statutory and regulatory environmental protections. Areas of practice may include the federal Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, and Clean Air Act, and Washington’s State Environmental Policy Act, Growth Management Act, Shoreline Management Act, water quantity and quality legislation, and Land Use Petition Act. Tasks may include attendance at citizen committee meetings and other public hearings, evaluating proposed ordinances, review and comment on shoreline and inland development proposals, statutory and case law research, drafting written memoranda, delivering oral testimony to local and state decisionmakers, and enjoying the San Juans’ natural beauty, from shore to sky.
Hiring Criteria: Candidates will be evaluated based on the following: a genuine interest in working at an environmental advocacy organization, excellent analytical, research, and writing ability, initiative, work experience, and legal knowledge in the area of land use, environmental or natural resources law. To Apply: Friends welcomes applications annually during a rolling application period that ends January 31. Please email a cover letter expressing interest in the position, a current resume, a 5-7 page writing sample, and 3 references to kyle@sanjuans.org. In addition, hard copy applications may be submitted to:
Kyle Loring
Staff Attorney Friends of the San Juans PO Box 1344 Friday Harbor, WA 98250 |
Sunday, June 9, 2013
Quick Hits - A Heron Catchup
Despite the lack of posts, there has been a lot going on:
- The Friends have been busy. Together with Futurewise, they held three grant-funded messaging sessions disguised as "Shoreline Science Forums" (Lopez - May 10, San Juan - May 17, and Orcas - June 4). Also, they have been busy opposing shoreline stabilization projects on San Juan Island, objecting to projects by the Woodmans (project approved), Laufers (awaiting decision), and Dickinsons (awaiting decision). In addition, the Friends continue to crank away on their CAO appeal to the Growth Management Hearings Board (GMHB). One of the interesting claims made by the Friends in their GMHB filings is the notion that tourists to the San Juans have "investment-backed expectations" regarding their experiences here (i.e., tourists don't want to see no stinkin' houses). The Friends' relationship with tourism is a flip-floppy one. They back the Scenic Byway and like to use the supposed interests of tourists to justify anti-resident initiatives like the CAOs. However, the Friends are simultaneously opposing expansion of camping sites and RV hookups at the Lopez Islander Resort. On June 7, they held an informational meeting on Lopez with opponents of the proposed Islander expansion. I wonder if the residents who oppose the Islander expansion have any idea that the Friends would probably like to get rid of them even more.
- Susan Dehlendorf resigned from the Planning Commission. In her resignation letter (posted below), she said "I feel strongly that those individuals who are willing to work in government service deserve our gratitude and respect. I deplore the fact that public servants are subject to denigration and attacks as they do their professional work." And despite those expressed sentiments, in the very same letter Dehlendorf denigrated some of her fellow Commissioners (who are all volunteer public servants) by characterizing them as partisan representatives of special interests.
- In an interesting development, the former President of Mexico, Vicente Fox, visited the San Juans along with investors (Jamen Shively) who seek to capitalize on the legalization of marijuana in this state by developing national marijuana brands. The leadership group for this effort held a symposium last weekend on San Juan Island on the topic of marijuana and cancer. Some residents here are beginning to ask whether the San Juans should somehow get in on the ground-floor of what many are calling the "Starbucks of Pot."
- Lastly, the San Juan Journal has started a blog. We wish them the best of luck, and if you happen to stop by to read their blog, be sure to come back here and let us know what you think. Leave a comment.
![]() |
| Click to enlarge. Right click to download |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)











