Residents in Brinnon on Monday expressed concern over a proposed $18 per parcel fee to help fund creation of a new clean water district.
"Why can't the government just operate with the money it has?" Brinnon resident Dick Bergeron asked Director of Environmental Health Mike McNickle. The audience applauded.
Residents were concerned about several issues: a perceived imbalanced distribution of the fee, the impact on fixed-income property owners, whether Port Townsend would participate in the fee, and the possibility that the fee would increase in the future.
Because the fee is per parcel, residents who own multiple parcels will be hit harder - despite the fact that a resident might not own any more acreage than his one-parcel neighbor.
Purpose
The proposed clean water district stemmed from the county's need to take action on water pollution problems threatening the county's shellfish industry. Fecal coliform, bacteria that commonly stem from fecal matter, are the biggest threat to shellfish.
Because shellfish are filter-feeders, the bacteria accumulate in their bodies and can pose a threat to the humans who consume them.
The county also hopes to exercise local control over a tidal wave of state-prompted cleanup efforts.
The goal is to raise $500,000 a year - permanently - to fund water-quality monitoring in streams as well as offer education programs through the county's existing conservation district.
"We need to have stream monitoring for water quality ongoing so that we can show our progress, identify problems early. What this will enable us to do is get more money from the DOE and other sources," said Jefferson County Commissioner David Sullivan.
Sullivan noted that when the county goes to the state grant "trough," as he called it, the state often requires the county to come up with matching funds. Funds from the clean water district would provide a stable stream of revenue from which to dip for matching dollars, Sullivan said.
Glenn Gately of the Jefferson County Conservation District pointed out that a constant stream of funding would help maintain both continuity and quality of data. "When you go from grant to grant, it's really hard to plan ahead," Gately said.
Gately also believes that monitoring inspires land-use change, which decreases fecal coliform problems. In previous stream monitoring efforts - which largely centered on dairy farmland - adjacent landowners were presented with data each month so they could see firsthand how their land-use decisions affected the stream.
"Landowners came to ask, 'What can we do?'" Gately said. He then produced a graph demonstrating a downward trend in fecal coliform levels among the streams, showing that the monitoring had indeed produced positive change. Some farmers have been able to obtain grants for solar-powered pumps that draw fresh water from the stream up to a trough, so that cattle don't have to go to the stream to obtain water. Fences have also been erected to keep cattle from contaminating streams.
Funding
As Brinnon resident Dick Bergeron said, "I don't think there's anybody in this room who doesn't care about water or a healthy environment."
Sullivan feels similarly. "I think everybody in the county benefits from having clean water. Even the City of Port Townsend gets its water from Quilcene," he said.
Everyone agrees that clean water is a good thing; the controversy arises over how the county opts to fund the efforts.
Sullivan says there are limited funding mechanisms in state law available to the county. The county could have created a shellfish protection district, for example, or fund the monitoring through a stormwater management fee. Levying an $18 fee on every parcel in the county is one option permitted by state law.
Sullivan says commissioners will get feedback from residents in the next few weeks and then look at the program in the fall. The fee could show up on tax bills as early as next spring.
Sullivan said the county can charge the city for things the city is not doing - such as stream monitoring and education - but cannot charge city property owners for things the city is already charging them for. He said the county would probably need to come to a working agreement with the city and coordinate with it.
"One of the challenges we have is to show people how it benefits everybody and how it impacts them. Otherwise, people will say, 'What am I getting for my money?'" Sullivan said.
Sullivan said the numbers - how much the fee would be, for example - are still in flux. An $18 per parcel fee is the suggestion that has been brought to the public.
Brinnon concerns
"I think it would be more fair if everyone pays equally," said Brinnon resident Bill Morris. "The guy who owns four parcels for investment purposes gets punished four times, while the renter living on that property might not pay anything at all."
Under the proposal, even undeveloped land parcels - whose forests and riparian zones actually help clean the water - will be charged a clean water district fee.
Resident George Sickel asked the question, "Why can't we just require fees for parcels with septic systems?"
Another audience member asked, "Are you going to allow us to combine four parcels into one?"
The community also expressed concern over the fact that some of the pollution contributing to the growth of fecal coliform might not be human. Audience members noted the large populations of elk, which at low tide sometimes walk onto the beach and deposit fecal matter onto the shoreline.
If instituted, the monitoring proposed as part of the clean water district would be able to determine whether the fecal coliform present is of animal or human origin.
Bill Morris was concerned about another possible pollution source. "I understand there's talk of putting an 18-hole golf course up here. Golf courses are one of the worst polluters around. How does that fit in to all this?"
Other audience members expressed concern over the impact on residents living off a limited, fixed income. Bergeron said: "I get a set amount of money deposited in my bank account every month. If I add something, I have to cut something out. It might be food, it might be a visit to my grandkids."
Audience members noted that property taxes were a significant burden already. Someone in the audience claimed his property taxes had recently risen by 300 percent.
County Commissioner David Sullivan recognized that the distribution would be unequal, and he empathized with residents' concerns. "Budget is a struggle," Sullivan said. He noted, "Collection mechanisms are imperfect." Sullivan emphasized the sense of county community and the public good of having clean water.
In an email to McNickle after the meeting, Sickel pointed out that the fire protection assessment fee is also assessed on a per-parcel basis, at $14.50 per parcel.
He wrote, "Property owners of multiple parcels can request a refund of this fee using the Fire Protection Assessment Refund Form through the Jefferson County Treasurer." He then suggested that this option be considered if the fee proposal is going to go through.
Number of parcels
County Assessor Jack Westerman said there are 29,000 parcels in East Jefferson County. Some of those parcels are as small as 2,500 square feet and could be unusable, he said.
"If it's on a per-parcel basis, you could have a number of parcels that make up one lot in Irondale, which are 25 by 100 feet. They would pay the same on a parcel basis as a 640-acre parcel on Discovery Bay owed by a timber company or anyone else with a 640-acre parcel," Westerman said.
McNickle said the fee is not his call. And the parcel issue is a policy decision.
"It's time to roll it out and see what people think," McNickle said.
A draft water quality improvement plan details the goals, objectives and methods to be used by a clean water district. The primary focus of the plan is aimed at "assessing and addressing water quality trends in parameters associated with human sewage and animal waste from nonpoint pollution sources," an introduction states.
The county would partner not only with the conservation district but Washington State University to provide education.
If Port Townsend does not participate in the district, then no data will be collected from surface waters within the city. McNickle said an interlocal agreement with the city would need to be worked out because the city has a fee already.
Like Sullivan, McNickle noted that while the county has been successful at getting grants, it often needs to match a state grant.
One of the issues that has surfaced is how far the Puget Sound Partnership might encroach on county turf and possibly dictate to the county.
"If we do our job, then we're going to get to the heart of the concerns of the state, which are water quality and shellfish protection improvements," McNickle said.
At the Brinnon meeting, McNickle said: "If you want to ignore the problem, go ahead and do that. I can't. I'm under state law not to."
He added, "Everything that's done here will be brought to the county commissioners for them to vote on it."
Four more public meetings are scheduled, to take place in Port Ludlow, Port Hadlock, Gardiner and Port Townsend. Staff will be on hand to answer questions and receive public comments.
(Reporter Allison Arthur contributed to this story.)
Reader Comments
Posted: Monday, August 13, 2007
Article comment by:
Christine Stephens
My husband and I came here from Sequim to retire. We are on fixed income. We left Clallam County because of rising taxes and over growth. Now, two years later, our property taxes have doubled. They are now comparable to the taxes we paid for a four year old home, and this is a twenty-five year old double wide. Our income, however, did not raise accordingly. Yet, knowing that the Hood Canal and our water sources are so fragile, we are even considering the condhotel so that outsiders can foul our waters? We have worked carefully to keep our stream pristine, our septic system healthy, we use screens on all our sinks, etc. And now we are looking at another tax. We have been considering leaving Jefferson County for the same reason we left Clallam County; i.e., unaffordable taxation and disregard for the growth this environment can carry and stay healthy. I'm disappointed and saddened.
For "the rest of the story" and full coverage of all Port Townsend and Jefferson County news, events and people, subscribe to our award-winning weekly newspaper.
