New rules are a ridiculous land grab | Letter to the editor

To the editor:

Would you be OK with the city taking 65 percent of your home?

The emergency building moratorium has not helped the housing situation on Bainbridge Island. The city council blames the Critical Area Ordinance (CAO) update process as the need for the moratorium.

The CAO requires landowners to set aside 65 percent of their property as a new type of “critical area,” designated as a NVPA (Native Vegetation Protected Area), for the purpose of future aquifer recharge.

Land use will be limited to 35 percent, property owners receive no compensation for lost property use, yet pay full property taxes.

The CAO stated goal is to prevent a water emergency. Bainbridge Island does not have a water emergency. The cities well-monitoring studies show our wells are in good shape.

Additionally, much of the water pulled from municipal wells originates in the Olympic Peninsula, traveling in aquifers under the Sound. Nothing in the CAO can or will protect off-island recharge.

This is not to say our community could not have water issues down the road if resources are not properly managed. We have skipped conservation efforts and are ignoring other options to secure our long-term water future.

For example, the city of Bainbridge Island currently dumps hundreds of millions of gallons of treated wastewater into the Puget Sound every year, water other communities, like Port Gamble, use for aquifer recharge.

For several years our building codes have required 100 percent on-site infiltration for impervious surfaces and runoff management. It is unclear how a NVPA will further improve aquifer recharge especially in soils like the glacial till prominent on the Island.

Imagine if the council passed an ordinance requiring the city to commandeer 65 percent of your home to provide future housing for others; 65 percent of your home set aside today for use by other families sometime in the future. You would receive no compensation for your lost square footage, you would still pay your full property taxes and you would need to spend tens of thousands of dollars on experts and permits to determine which rooms and areas you would no longer have access to.

As ridiculous as this sounds, it is what is happening with our residents’ land. This unbelievable land grab and decimation of private property rights is being pushed through by our elected officials and most residents have no idea. Our council feels it is appropriate to go straight to abusing property ownership rights, ignoring other possible solutions, and inviting lawsuits that will ultimately be paid by taxpayers. Lawsuits are already in progress.

The CAO is a knee-jerk reaction to certain council members dislike of recent subdivisions, even though the developments are located in designated high-density zoned areas. Areas that have received water and sewer infrastructure specifically to support higher density. The CAO does nothing to address subdivision, now or in the future, as it explicitly exempts all high-density zoned areas.

No other community has attempted anything like the proposed Bainbridge CAO. Less egregious attempts have failed elsewhere.

Other communities have greater respect for land ownership rights and the stewardship provided by those who care most — landowners.

ROBERT FRAIK

Bainbridge Island

More in Letters to the Editor

Paying public officials what they are worth | Letter to the editor

To the editor: In the Oct. 5, 2018 edition of the Islander,… Continue reading

Bainbridge council is making a short-sighted choice | Letter to the editor

To the editor: I just returned home from my volunteer job at… Continue reading

Election Day is only the beginning | Letter to the editor

To the editor: Great news that voters are turning out in higher… Continue reading

Don’t make others deal with your trash | Letter to the editor

To the editor: Oct. 15, 5 p.m.: Post office garbage can was… Continue reading

Trump missed his roll in journalist’s murder | Letter to the editor

To the editor: If Jamal Khashoggi died in a fist fight, where… Continue reading

Focus on inclusion, not identity politics | Letter to the editor

To the editor: While I was unable to make the event due… Continue reading

‘Bully’ label came from old political squabble | Letter to the editor

To the editor: Three citizens have complained to the city’s Ethics Committee… Continue reading

Trump shows violence comes in many forms | Letter to the editor

To the editor: Trump forces himself on Pittsburgh after the mayor, Jewish… Continue reading

A radical shift in immigration policy | Letter to the editor

To the editor: On Oct. 10, 2018 the Trump administration published the… Continue reading

Americans deserve stronger response | Letter to the editor

To the editor: I believe Americans need to take steps to address… Continue reading

The emperor has no clothes – and no clue | Letter to the editor

To the editor: Mr. Olsen has a valid point: “the jaundiced elite… Continue reading

Prop. 1 may not be perfect but vote yes | Letter to the editor

To the editor: I’ve been a recreational bike rider on Bainbridge Island… Continue reading