Letter to the editor

The letter to the editor following our comments appeared in the June 30, 2006 Jefferson County edition of the Peninsula Daily News.

We applaud the letter's author for her courage to present her comments during the June 21 meeting. We have points of agreement with what she said, and we have points of disagreement.

We agree that we should work together to protect our water and wildlife, and that we should take measures to prevent landslides and problems related to flooding.

We understand that there is an exemption for existing and ongoing agriculture, and we are glad that this is included in the proposed regulatory changes. However, we are deeply concerned that this type of agriculture is defined in paragraph 18.15.335 (1) (e) of the proposal as follows:

"For the purpose of this section, "existing and ongoing" means that agricultural activities have been conducted within the five-year period leading up to the adoption of Ordinance 5-03 on April 28, 2003;"

Lands eligible for exemption are also required to either be part of the open space tax program for agriculture or designated by the county as agricultural lands of long-term commercial significance. There is no mention of an exemption for agricultural operations started after April 28, 2003, or for any operations that may be initiated in the future. Unchanged, this would mean that it would be incredibly difficult for someone to initiate a new farming operation.

While there are indications that provisions will be made for opeations starting after April 28, 2003 and for future farms, those provisions remain to be entered into the proposal.

While the settlement agreement may have been approved during a public meeting, discussions leading up to that approval were held in executive session, which means that a record of the session where the agreement was discussed is not available for public review. The lack of public process at that time, and during the months following the agreement until the draft was released, are areas of great concern to those of us committed to open public process in government.

We are doing our best to provide factual information, and are not trying to distort any facts. We are not conducting a smear campaign, nor are we interested in doing so.

We are expressing our concerns, and we are working to gain access to the process so that we may work directly with staff and the County Commissioners to arrive at a critical areas update that provides excellent site-specific protection to all types of critical areas, while also allowing the best possible opportunity for our rural families, our children and generations to come.

---

Farms, critical areas

I support local farms in Jefferson County, both in concept and in fact — I buy lots of produce and cheese grown right here.

I also support preventing floods and landslides and protecting our water and wildlife.

That is exactly what the improvement to Jefferson County's critical areas safeguards is setting out to do.

So I was very disappointed to read the stories in the paper over the past two weeks claiming that local safeguards will be harmful to local farmers.

For many good reasons the Washington Environmental Council, of which I am a proud member and former member of the board of directors, negotiated to have farmers exempted from the buffers that some people are complaining about.

It is right there — printed in black and white: Current agriculture is exempted from the new buffer requirements.

The agreement between the Washington Environmental Council and the county that helped lead to the development of these newly proposed protections and the exemptions for farmers was approved at a public meeting and has been publicly available for months.

Both the council and the county sought and received local media coverage, including an article in the Peninsula Daily News months ago.

Wetlands store and clean water for use by everyone, so it makes sense to support rules that protect them.

I believe that most of your readers want to know the news and understand the issues, not some distortion of the facts or a smear campaign on a good organization.

So I hope this clears up any confusion about proposed buffers to protect our clean water.

The Washington Environmental Council has worked hard over the past five years to improve local protections and help local agriculture.

Jill Silver
Port Townsend

---

EDITOR'S NOTE: Silver was the lone proponent of the proposed critical areas code who spoke June 21 at a Jefferson County Planning Commission hearing.

After four hours, the commission indefinitely extended written comments on the proposal.

County commissioners have delayed considering the proposal until later in 2006 under a new, as-yet undetermined time line.

The updated time line will be posted on the Web on the county's home page.

Also, a July 5 question-and-answer forum has been canceled.

Submit comments by e-mail to planning@co.jefferson.wa.us or by mail to Department of Community Development, 621 Sheridan St., Port Townsend, WA 98368.

Information is available on the Web at the county's home page, www.co.jefferson.wa.us.

Go to the second text item on the home page, "Amendments Proposal to Critical Areas Regulations" and click on "Critical Areas page" for background and other information.

Paul Gottlieb
Commentary Page editor