COUNTY REVERSES WETLAND RULES CHANGE
October 28, 2003
By James Pitkin, Wenatchee World staff writer

Douglas County commissioners voted 2-1 on Monday to reverse a change that weakened waterfront protection rules after a challenge from a citizen watchdog group.

"This measure was not adopted to protect the public welfare, but rather to compromise the public welfare for the benefit of one property owner," wrote Michael Gendler, a lawyer for the group's organizers, in a letter to the commissioners.

The change removed riparian areas -- strips of vegetation along waterways -- from the county's definition of protected wetlands. State law requires riparian areas to be protected along with other wetlands, but county staff said the change could leave some areas unprotected.

Commissioners made the change Sept. 9 after a group of developers complained that the rule was holding up a planned golf course and residential development along the Columbia River north of Orondo. The vote was made in an open public session, but citizens were not informed and there was no public hearing.

Douglas County Prosecutor Steve Clem advised commissioners on Monday to take back the change, saying they altered the county code without a public process.

"We really don't know what the impact would be for over 100 miles of Columbia River shoreline and riparian areas around other bodies of water in Douglas County," Clem said.

The developers, Jack Corning and Dave Mehelich, both declined to comment Monday on the commissioners' decision.

Last week the commissioners received a letter from Gendler dated Oct. 20 that questioned the legality of the rule change and asked the county to hand over records on the development project. Gendler was hired by Baker Flats orchardist Jack Feil and Robert Johnson, an Orondo fruit marketer. The Seattle attorney helped block plans to build an Eastside riverfront highway in the 1980s.

Feil and Johnson both fought the riverfront highway 20 years ago. Now they say they have organized a new citizens' group to police government in Chelan and Douglas counties.

"They took an action that didn't involve citizen input," Feil said. "It's time to put the hammer down and say you can't do that sort of thing without consequences."

Commissioners said the change was needed to fix inconsistencies in the code that the developers brought to their notice. They said it was only an interim change, and they had intended to hold public meetings before making a final decision. Commissioners Ken Stanton and Dane Kean, who voted Monday to reverse the change, defended the decision to rewrite the rules last month but said they doubt it would hold up in court.

"I still stand by why we entered the changes into the code. We did so with the best of intentions," Stanton said. "(But) I don't feel that what we've done can possibly be defended."

Commissioner Mary Hunt voted to keep the change, claiming the commissioners' decision could put a halt to development throughout the state because of the precedent it sets.

"I'm sorry, but this is something I feel very emotional about," she said in the meeting Monday, with tears in her eyes. "When I ran for county commissioner, I ran for the protection of personal property rights."

The developers met several times with the commissioners over the summer to complain that the wetlands rule was holding up the permit process for the 360-acre development, known as the Twin W Orchard project. They're currently applying for permits to split the property into 72 residential lots along the water.

The change to the rules would have allowed them to place some houses up to 25 feet closer to the river, according to members of the county planning staff. The developers have paid $23,156 in fines to the Chelan-Douglas Land Trust for removing about 115,000 square fee of protected vegetation along the shoreline earlier this year, county officials said.

The county hired an independent biologist last month to study whether riparian areas should remain part of the wetlands definition. Commissioners said they'll hold public meetings and ask the county planning commission for comments before deciding whether to make the change again.