It's BAAAAA - - CK
So, you thought it had died a proper and much deserved death?
The League of Women Voters has resurected it.  Following is a letter
I wrote to the County Commissioners about it in '03' (still unanswered)

Clallam County Planning Commission's Proposed
Stormwater Management Ordinance Comments to the Commissioners

TO: County Commissioners, Chapman, Doherty and Tharinger

RE: Proposed "stormwater" ordinance

Having read portions of your proposed ordinance but lacking the time to digest the
entire 29 pages, I have a few short comments:

1- It is supposed to be about Stormwater handling, but exempts Clallam County
activities from any requirement to comply. Doesn't storm water run off roads, parking
lots, buildings etc owned by the county? Government should abide by the same rules
it imposes on the public - otherwise, change the stated purpose to what it really is
-Control of the public!

Clallam County recently installed a culvert in the county road that directs road
runoff directly down my driveway. The proposed ordinance does nothing to
prevent or modify such actions.  That is STORMWATER!

2-- County Liability

Exemption of the county from liability. If the county is going to dictate what is done,
it will be liable for the results and many judicial decisions have thrown out such
exemptions - as they should. That passage should be removed from the bill. Get into
the real world folks.

3- Trespass on private property

The language here is pretty vague, but it appears to authorize county officials to
enter on to private property at any time (?) That would appear to be an unconstitutional
"taking" of the property. What's wrong with arranging for an inspection while the property
owner is there? I personally have experienced county officials entering my property and
using it for purposes I did not authorize which worked out to my detriment. This is and
should remain illegal.  A "permission" forced as a prerequisite for issuing a permit is not
freely given.

4- Land disturbing Activities

 Turning over a shovelful of dirt is a "Land disturbing activity".

5- Vagueness of language

The whole proposition is couched in language so vague that it would appear to
authorize anything a county officer should choose to dictate. It should be discarded and first,
a study should be done to determine if there is some specific problem relating to stormwater
that s not covered by current law.  If so,
                                (And I don't believe it is so)
then a specific law should be drafted to cover that specific situation. This appears to be
just a law to further restrict anyone who wants to do anything that disturbs some dirt. To
add more county employees and increase the cost and limitations to any kind of
development.

Sincerely,
 

________________________

J. Marvin Chastain
marv@marvchastain.com
928-3154

Commissioners' response as of 12/30/03    SILENCE!

Please let us and the commissioners know what you think

Return to index