The Bellingham Herald reported today that County Council Chair Carl Weimer said "Happy Earth Day."
This is a stunning development. After all, Council Chair Weimer's remark stands in stark contrast to the official Whatcom County moniker for Earth Day: “as [County Executive] Louws called it, National Jellybean Day.”
Therefore, Q.E.D., the environmentalists are winning. Everyone, please go back to sleep until the next election.
I wish that I could join the happy siesta. Truly. The past four years of County Council mismanagement have worn us all down.
But the thing is, there's this pending case addressing Whatcom County’s failure to plan for the protection of its water resources in rural areas. Yes, that case, the one where the Growth Management Hearings Board found that the County had not protected water quality or quantity.
The case that the County lost, although you wouldn’t know it from the folks vigorously asserting the sanctity of the County’s right to continue not to plan.
These saber-rattlers neglected to address one salient fact: not only did Whatcom County lose, but it has a current legal obligation to comply with the GMA.
On April 15, 2014, the Growth Management Hearings Board found that the County remains in noncompliance with the Growth Management Act, because it still has not implemented the planning needed to protect its water resources. The Board’s “Second Order on Noncompliance” states:
The Board requires the County to file a status report in early October 2014, with compliance due on November 21, 2014.This is a stunning development. After all, Council Chair Weimer's remark stands in stark contrast to the official Whatcom County moniker for Earth Day: “as [County Executive] Louws called it, National Jellybean Day.”
Therefore, Q.E.D., the environmentalists are winning. Everyone, please go back to sleep until the next election.
I wish that I could join the happy siesta. Truly. The past four years of County Council mismanagement have worn us all down.
But the thing is, there's this pending case addressing Whatcom County’s failure to plan for the protection of its water resources in rural areas. Yes, that case, the one where the Growth Management Hearings Board found that the County had not protected water quality or quantity.
The case that the County lost, although you wouldn’t know it from the folks vigorously asserting the sanctity of the County’s right to continue not to plan.
These saber-rattlers neglected to address one salient fact: not only did Whatcom County lose, but it has a current legal obligation to comply with the GMA.
On April 15, 2014, the Growth Management Hearings Board found that the County remains in noncompliance with the Growth Management Act, because it still has not implemented the planning needed to protect its water resources. The Board’s “Second Order on Noncompliance” states:
"Whatcom County is in continuing non-compliance with the Growth Management Act as found in the Board’s June 7, 2013, FDO. This matter is remanded to the County to take action to comply with the Growth Management Act. . .”
How does the County plan to comply? Nobody talked about that in the Herald article.
Republican Party leader and Tea Party activist Charlie Crabtree talked about how Whatcom County ought to fight in court because that's what "the party and conservatives" across the state want the County to do. If the County Council believes that it is under an obligation to uphold the statewide conservative agenda, then so be it -- and does that mean that the County will continue to thumb its nose at the Growth Management Hearings Board?
Council member Ken Mann asserted that my clients and Futurewise would need to come up with a "profound settlement proposal" to avoid court. No word on the County's plans to "take action to comply" with Board's order on water quantity.
Whatcom County is in charge of planning. The County has staff. The County is the entity that is required “to take action.”
Whatcom County is [still] the outlaw.
I hope that optimism over the new County Council will be justified by words and actions demonstrating that the Council takes its own obligations seriously.
The responsibility for “profound” proposals to address the County’s ongoing noncompliance with state law ought to be a two-way street.