Transparency, or the lack thereof, in Whatcom County Administration / Facebook post, Sj Robson

personius to sandy hirst resolution 05022017

2 hrs  May 3, 2017  Sandy Robson

Copied and pasted below, and shown in attached screenshot photos, are my recent email communications with County Planning and Development Services Assistant Director Mark Personius, about the Resolution (2017-019) that County Council approved on April 18, 2017, requesting the state legislature to amend the Growth Management Act, relating to the Washington Supreme Court decision on the Hirst et al. case. My initial curiosity regarding the origin of the resolution was borne out of my having listened to part of the audio recording of the April 18, Council Natural Resources Committee meeting, during which Council members seemed to be unaware of who proposed the resolution.  Continue reading

Addressing a statement by Whatcom County Council Member Brenner at 4/18/17 Council Meeting regarding exempt well report / Letter to Council Member Barbara Brenner, Dena Jensen

consumptive water use chart exempt wells doe

April 28, 2017  Dena Jensen

Below is a letter I sent to Whatcom County Council Member Barbara Brenner regarding a statement she made at the April 18, 2017 Whatcom County Council Meeting related to a Department of Ecology report on exempt wells.  The Council was voting that night on interim amendments to the Whatcom County Comprehensive plan pertaining to the Hirst decision. Continue reading

Planning Commission, With Help From Friends In Ag, Undermine Court Required Compliance With Hirst Decision / Facebook Post, Whatcom Hawk, Wendy Harris

personius impervious hirst 04052017

Click the graphic above to view the full April 5, 2017 Memorandum from Gary Davis,  Whatcom County Senior Planner, “Impervious Surface and Animal Husbandry Proposals”

4 hrs  April 9, 2017  Wendy Harris

While the county continues to seek state legislative fixes to the Hirst decision, and at all costs avoid its obligation to actually plan, the county is still under a court imposed obligation to come into compliance with the GMA, and protect rural water quality and quantity. (Yes, somehow with all the hysterical theatrics that surrounds this decision, it is easy to forget that it is, after all, a GMA compliance case). Continue reading