Why rewrite CAO? | Letter
Published 3:13 pm Monday, April 9, 2012
It is hard to believe that the county is hard at work on making something terribly complicated when tight money and staff budgets should dictate economies of the effort to accomplish any given task. The money and time spent on the CAO initiative must be enormous.
We hear the protestations by our officials who claim that they are only complying with state mandates. Is this really inaccurate?
State law requires a periodic review of the SJC Comprehensive Plan. Instead, county staff planners and county council have decided to re-write rather than update the current CAO ordinance. This has gone way beyond state requirements and has resulted in a far-reaching regulatory document that imposes new controls over most homeowner activities.
Example: The so-called “buffers” around loosely defined “wetlands” and various water courses found on most residential and farmland properties in the County; the effectiveness of these buffers is questionable.
Another example is the expectation that homeowners obtain written approvals from the county before making changes on their property. County officials apparently want to assure that the homeowner’s activities don’t damage their new county-declared “buffers” on the homeowner’s property. If property owners don’t have written permits from the county, they may be subject to misdemeanor charges and fines levied by the Community Development and Planning Director, according to a new enforcement now underway.
Furthermore, under the new rules, the county will declare many existing homes and uses in the uplands and shorelines as non-conforming. Does any homeowner want such a label attached to their property? Are consequences on property values and possible sale not predictable?
Has the impact on the economy of our county been studied, if the re-written CAO were to become law? A big hit on all builders and contractors can be expected. Other businesses may follow. This could mean lost jobs.
There have been many meetings and presentations on this subject during the past several weeks and months. Our elected county council representatives and county officials should take note of our opposition to the proposed new law and enforcement measures. We would like to see that they are getting the message and understand what we think about the proposals.
Rolf C. Nedelmann
Orcas Island
