• Breaking: WA Supreme Court Unanimously Reinstates Pollution Control Hearings Board Decision to Protect Stormwater: State “Vesting” Law Cannot Undermine Clean Water Standards

    December 30, 2016 Author: admin
    Comments Off

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: December 29, 2016

    MEDIA CONTACTS:
    Jan Hasselman, Earthjustice, 206-343-7340, ext. 1025 jhasselman@earthjustice.org
    Chris Wilke, Puget Soundkeeper, 206-297-7002 chris@pugetsoundkeeper.org

    WA Supreme Court:  Developers Can’t Evade Water Pollution Standards

    State high court unanimously overturns Court of Appeals to find that state “vesting” law does not apply to clean water standards

    Olympia, WA—In a major victory for clean water, the Washington State Supreme Court today unanimously rejected an effort by counties and developers to weaken a key permit designed to reduced toxic runoff and protect waterways including Puget Sound.

    State high court justices ruled unanimously that state “vesting” laws can’t undercut clean water standards that local governments must adopt as part of the federal Clean Water Act and parallel state laws.  Under state vesting laws, development projects can apply regulations in place at the time of the project application, even if they are not built for years or even decades later.  The vesting laws have been a major impediment to the implementation of critical standards that prevent sprawl and reduce pollution.

    Stormwater runoff is a toxic brew of rainwater that drains off streets, parking lots, and other hard surfaces carrying motor oil, pesticides, fertilizers, and other urban residues into nearby streams, rivers, and marine waters.  It is the major source of pollution in Puget Sound.

    “Today the Washington Supreme Court stood up for clean water,” said Jan Hasselman, Earthjustice attorney who, along with Janette Brimmer, represented Puget Soundkeeper Alliance, Washington Environmental Council, and the Rosemere Neighborhood Association in the case. “Obsolete vesting laws don’t trump clean water, and Washington state will not fall behind in its ability to protect Puget Sound and its rivers and streams.”

    In rejecting the arguments by developers that the stormwater permits are subject to vesting laws, and overturning a divided Court of Appeals, the high court justices found that state vesting law is intended to limit the exercise of municipal discretion, not undercut federal and state laws intended to reduce pollution.  The high court’s ruling ends nearly a decade of legal wrangling over the Western Washington municipal stormwater permits, which, under a 2008 court ruling, require municipalities to integrate “low impact development” requirements into their development codes.

    “We applaud our state’s high court justices for limiting antiquated vesting laws that have represented a roadblock to clean water,” said Chris Wilke, Executive Director of Puget Soundkeeper Alliance. “The days of taking advantage of the vesting loophole are over.  It’s time to move ahead with solving the problem of polluted stormwater runoff and recovering Puget Sound along with salmon, orcas and communities that rely on clean water.”

    “The ruling by our state’s high court justices is a victory for everyone.   Clean water is essential for the health of our communities, to support our vibrant economy, and protect our iconic yet endangered species: salmon and orca,” said Mindy Roberts, Washington Environmental Council’s People for Puget Sound Director.

    “We applaud the Washington high court panel for their ruling,” said John Felton, chairman of the Rosemere Neighborhood Association. “The justices gave us a wonderful gift—the gift of supporting clean water by closing harmful loopholes that allowed developers to lock in outdated standards. This is an outstanding way to start the new year!”

    Background

    Polluted runoff is the single-largest source of toxic pollution to Puget Sound. Thepollution kills salmon, damages shellfish beds and threatens our drinking-water supplies.

    Oral argument last October 13th before the state Supreme Court was the culmination of nearly a decade’s worth of effort, starting with the challenge to the 2007 Municipal Stormwater General Permits.

    In 2008, in a challenge led by Puget Soundkeeper Alliance represented by Earthjustice, the state Pollution Control Hearings board (PCHB) overturned the state permits, and held that federal and state law required green infrastructure or “low impact development” (LID) approaches to new and redevelopment throughout Western Washington. Green infrastructure, like rain gardens, treats rainfall where it lands, keeping runoff out of the sewers and pollution out of Puget Sound. It is a highly effective, and cost-effective, approach to managing toxic runoff.

    The 2012 permit–which made LID mandatory in Western Washington for the first time–was issued after several years of technical and policy input from stakeholders, but was appealed by regulated municipalities and developers.  Puget Soundkeeper, WEC, and Rosemere Neighborhood Association, again represented by Earthjustice, intervened to defend the permits.

    In 2013, the PCHB rejected all of those legal challenges, and upheld the permit. King County, Snohomish County, and the Building Industry Association of Clark County sought appellate review of that decision on a single issue: whether the state vesting law allows developers to “lock in” outdated development standards for all time.  The PCHB had comprehensively ruled that standards issued under a stormwater permit are not subject to state vesting law.

    Last January, in a surprise 2-1 decision, the state Court of Appeals Division II, reversed the PCHB on the vesting issue.  It concluded that requirements to implement LID designs and other critical standards to protect water were “land use ordinances” subject to state vesting laws.

    Today, the state Supreme Court unanimously rejected the Court of Appeals Division II ruling and reinstated the PCHB decision, holding that the requirements of a state water pollution permit are not subject to state vesting law.  The decision settles a dispute that has spanned nearly a decade and provides a platform for Ecology to further improve water pollution technologies in the next iteration of permit expected in 2018.

    You can download a pdf version of this Press Release here: Earthjustice Stormwater Vesting WA Supremes Win Final Press Release

    Read the full Supreme Court Opinion here: Supreme Court No. 92805-3 – Snohomish County, et al., v. Pollution Control Hearings Board, et al Opinion

  • BIG WIN FOR CLEAN WATER: CLARK COUNTY AGREES TO IMPROVE SALMON HABITAT AND COMPLY WITH STORMWATER POLLUTION LAWS

    December 18, 2013 Author: admin
    Comments Off

    December 18, 2013

    Contacts:
    John Felton, Rosemere Neighborhood Association, 360‐993‐4939
    Brett VandenHeuvel, Columbia Riverkeeper, 503‐348‐2436

    BIG WIN FOR CLEAN WATER: CLARK COUNTY AGREES TO IMPROVE SALMON HABITAT AND COMPLY WITH STORMWATER POLLUTION LAWS

    County agrees to comply with stormwater pollution laws, fund significant stream restoration in lieu of
    potential federal penalties

    (Vancouver, WA) Clark County Commissioners voted today to improve salmon habitat and reduce dirty stormwater pollution as part of a binding settlement agreement with neighborhood and conservation groups.

    “This is a win for clean water and healthy salmon runs in Clark County,” said John Felton, chair of the Rosemere Neighborhood Association. “This is a good result for the community as a whole.”

    Rosemere Neighborhood Association along with Columbia Riverkeeper and the Northwest Environmental Defense Center challenged Clark County’s violation of laws designed to protect salmon and reduce pollution. After the County lost several rounds of litigation, the County has agreed to take steps to correct the problem. Clark County agreed to comply with the Clean Water Act and to provide $3 million in funding to an independent third party, the Lower Columbia Fish Recovery Board, that will oversee projects to protect and restore Clark County rivers and streams harmed by stormwater pollution. The settlement will need to be approved by the U.S. Department of Justice and the federal
    court overseeing the lawsuit.

    “This agreement means cleaner water and more salmon for the region as a whole,” stated Brett VandenHeuvel, Executive Director of Columbia Riverkeeper. “The County will now act to reduce polluted stormwater and invest in protecting salmon. It’s a win‐win.”

    Stormwater pollution, which is created when rain mixes with debris, chemicals, dirt, and other pollutants and flows into storm sewer systems and then into local waterways, is the number one source of water pollution in urban and developing areas in Washington state.

    The settlement comes after a state appeals board found that the County’s stormwater program violated the law—the state appeals board’s decision was upheld by the Washington Court of Appeals and state Supreme Court. At the same time, a federal judge concluded that the County’s stormwater program violated the Clean Water Act and the Court blocked continued implementation of the County’s illegal stormwater program. The federal court ruled last June that the County was liable for violating federal law, exposing it to potentially millions of dollars in penalties and corrective action for projects that were built to inadequate standards.

    Under the County’s disputed stormwater program, damage to rivers and streams from the stormwater pollution had shifted burdens to taxpayers, from developers, to pay for the impacts of urban stormwater runoff. Impacts range from

    Plaintiffs in the litigation were represented by attorneys Janette Brimmer and Jan Hasselman of Earthjustice.

     

    *****

    To view or download Press Release click here (pdf format)

    Related articles:

    The Columbian: Clark County to pay $3.6 million for violating Clean Water Act
    The Oregonian: Clark County to pay $3 million as part of pollution settlement

  • WA State Supreme Court Denies Clark County’s Stormwater Appeal

    March 6, 2013 Author: admin
    Comments Off

    Washington State Temple of Justice

    In a unanimous decision, the Washington State Supreme Court has declined to review Clark County’s appeal of the WA State Court of Appeals stormwater ruling.

    In September 2012, Washington State Court of Appeals upheld the Pollution Control Hearings Board ruling that Clark County’s weak stormwater plan allowed too much polluted runoff and violates both State and Federal laws to protect clean water. For more on that ruling read here: WA Court of Appeals Rules County’s Plan to Manage Polluted Runoff Illegal

    Clark County subsequently appealed that decision to the Washington State Supreme Court which on March 5, 2013 issued a 2 page decision denying Clark County’s petition.

    View the Washington Supreme Court ruling here: WA Supreme Court Rosemere v Clark County Order

    Related articles:

    From The Columbian:

    “Rosemere Neighborhood Association, an environmental advocacy group that, along with Columbia Riverkeeper and Northwest Environmental Defense Center, have been winning at every level in their attempt to force Clark County to follow state default standards for managing polluted runoff.” ……….Read the full article here: Clark County dealt stormwater setback: State high court refuses to review unfavorable ruling

    From The Oregonian: Washington Supreme Court rejects Clark County’s stormwater appeal

  • Federal Judge Lifts Stay on Clark County Stormwater Case

    March 2, 2013 Author: admin
    Comments Off

    US District Court Tacoma

    U.S. District Judge Ronald B. Leighton has lifted a stay on a federal lawsuit against Clark County regarding their stormwater management plan. The injunction was issued against Clark County in December 2011, ordering it to follow the state’s default stormwater rules while its stormwater plan was under review by the state Court of Appeals. The stay had been put in place pending the outcome of state court appeals of proceedings before the Pollution Control Hearings Board due to concerns the federal and state cases would conflict.

    From Leighton’s decision:

    “The case involves Clark County’s municipal storm sewer system, and the Department of Ecology’s 2007 Phase I Stormwater General Permit for that system. Ecology subsequently issued Clark County a Notice of Violation, alleging that the flow control policy was inadequate.

    In 2010, Clark County and Ecology entered into an Agreed Order. Rosemere successfully challenged that Agreed Order before the PCHB, claiming (among other things) that it was not compliant with the Clean Water Act. The PCHB’s determination that the Agreed Order violated the Phase I permit and the Clean Water Act was affirmed by the Court of Appeals.

    While those proceedings were pending, Rosemere brought this federal case. It seeks to enforce the Phase I permit, and penalties. This Court stayed the proceedings pending the resolution of the state court action.”

    In September, the Court of Appeals upheld a ruling by the state Pollution Control Hearings Board, which said a compromise developed between the county and the state Department of Ecology was not backed by science and was insufficient under federal and state clean water laws.

    Judge Leighton lifted the stay saying,

    “The issues in these cases were never overlapping; they were simply similar. That similarity has been greatly diminished in the aftermath of the Court of Appeals’ decision, and the limitation of the issues the County seeks to litigate further in state court.”

    To read the full decision: Judge Leighton Order Lifting Stay 2-21-13

    Related articles:

    From The Oregonian: Clark County could face tens of thousands of dollars in stormwater fines

    From The Columbian: Lawsuit against county to proceed: Federal courts can hear stormwater dispute, judge rules

  • WA Court of Appeals Rules County’s Plan to Manage Polluted Runoff Illegal

    September 26, 2012 Author: admin
    Comments Off

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

    September 26, 2012

    Contacts:
    Jan Hasselman, Earthjustice
    Dvija Michael Bertish, Rosemere Neighborhood Association
    Brett VandenHeuvel, Columbia Riverkeeper
    Mark Riskedahl, Northwest Environmental Defense Center

    WA Court of Appeals Rules County’s Plan to Manage Polluted Runoff Illegal

    Taxpayer subsidy, fish-killing loopholes scrapped by judges
    as violations to clean water laws

    Tacoma, WA – In a major decision with statewide impacts in Washington State, a court of appeals ruled Clark County’s weak development rules that allow too much polluted runoff violate state and federal laws to protect clean water. The ruling, announced late Tuesday, signals an end to the county’s on-going failure to protect rivers, streams and salmon threatened with extinction.

    “We applaud the court of appeals for recognizing that Clark County’s refusal to comply with clean water laws is unfair to other cities and counties in our state, not to mention industries, that continue to work hard to clean up our polluted waterways,” said Dvija Michael Bertish of the Rosemere Neighborhood Association. “As residents of Clark County who enjoy fishing and swimming in our local rivers, we’re fed up with our elected officials’ attempts to compromise our health and safety—especially when the law requires otherwise.”

    Rosemere Neighborhood Association, Columbia Riverkeeper, and the Northwest Environmental Defense Center, represented by Earthjustice, challenged Clark County’s adoption of development standards that were too weak to prevent significant harm to the county’s already-stressed rivers and streams. “The Court of Appeals ruling comes down to this—clean water is our future and everyone needs to do their share to keep our water clean,” said Jan Hasselman from Earthjustice, who is representing the groups.

    Polluted runoff, or stormwater, is a toxic stew of metals, oil, grease, pesticide, herbicides, bacteria and nutrients. When it rains, the toxic runoff drains off roofs and streets in amounts that seriously degrade water quality and kill marine life. The county and an association of developers appealed a January 2011 ruling of the state Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB) that the county is out of compliance with federal clean water laws and shifted the burden of protecting clean water from developers to local taxpayers.

    Specifically, the PCHB found Clark County’s stormwater program:

    • Is not based on any science and failed to protect water quality and salmon.
    • Unlawfully exempts development projects that “vested” prior to April of 2010.
    • Unlawfully allows Clark County to shift resources from its existing retrofit program to mitigate for new development.
    • Unlawfully fails to require “low impact development” at new development and mitigation sites.

    The Court of Appeals concurred. “Not only has Clark County violated the law, it is ignoring the very real economic and quality of life costs associated with dirty stormwater pollution,” said Brett VandenHeuvel, Executive Director of Columbia Riverkeeper. “The County’s rogue approach to dealing with stormwater pollution ignores the very real costs of increased flooding, polluted drinking water, and toxics in fish. It’s time stop using outdated thinking and transition to much greater reliance on low impact development and better land use planning. The stakes are too high for delay.”

    The county has 30 days to appeal the decision to the state Supreme Court if it chooses. Additionally, a federal court has stayed an enforcement action against the county until the appeals court rules, and is likely to open the case now that the appeal is resolved.

    A copy of the Court of Appeals ruling can be downloaded here: WA COURT OF APPEALS D2 41833-9-II PUBLISHED OPINION

    A copy is available online here: http://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/index.cfm?fa=opinions.showOpinion&filename=418339MAJ

    Other news links:

    Editorial: County Keeps Hearing ‘No’ – Stormwater rules fight is being lost in the courts; it’s time to give up

    Clark County loses stormwater ruling

    Washington court rules against Clark County in polluted runoff case

    Clark County loses polluted runoff case

    #

  • Media Advisory: State Appeals Court Hears Arguments by County to Circumvent Clean Water Act

    June 28, 2012 Author: admin
    Comments Off

    Media Advisory for July 2, 2012

    CONTACTS:
    Jan Hasselman, Earthjustice, (206) 343-7340, ext. 1025 (Available July 2)
    Janette Brimmer, Earthjustice, (206) 343-7340, ext. 1029
    Dvija Michael Bertish, Rosemere Neighborhood Association, (360) 281-4747
    Brett VandenHeuvel, Columbia Riverkeeper, (503) 348-2436

    State Appeals Court Hears Arguments by
    County to Circumvent Clean Water Act Protections of Fish and Water Quality

    Community and Clean Water Advocates ask court to ensure federal clean water laws are followed to protect rivers and salmon.

    WHAT: Hearing before Washington State Court of Appeals in Tacoma

    WHEN: July 2, 2012, 9 a.m.

    WHERE: Washington State Court of Appeals, Division II 950 Broadway, Suite 300, Tacoma, WA 98402 (Allow time to go through courthouse security.)

    WHY: Clark County deserves strong, uniform laws that protect clean water, sensitive aquatic environments and endangered species– the same requirements that over 100 other cities and counties in Washington have been complying with since 2008. Stronger stormwater controls are needed now. According to a recent U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) study on stormwater, Vancouver, WA showed a wide suite of contaminants, including some of the highest levels of pesticides, suspended solids, and trace elements including mercury. A copy of the USGS stormwater study is attached.

    BACKGROUND:
    Federal law required Clark County and nearly 100 other cities and counties in Western Washington to adopt new rules governing runoff from development by August of 2008. In 2009, Clark County decided that it would not comply with the terms of a stormwater permit required by the Clean Water Act. The Department of Ecology confronted Clark County for its permit violation but later backed down and agreed to allow Clark County to retain inadequate stormwater standards for new developments in exchange for a promise to implement taxpayer-funded mitigation projects that were much less protective. This didn’t protect streams polluted by development runoff and shifted the burden of protecting clean water to local taxpayers instead of developers. In 2010, community and clean water groups represented by Earthjustice, challenged Clark County’s weak stormwater runoff rules to the state Pollution Control Hearings Board. In January 2011, the pollution board ruled in the community and clean water groups’ favor. The pollution board found Clark County’s weaker program to be illegal in several respects:

    • It is not based on any science and fails to protect water quality and salmon.
    • It unlawfully exempts development projects that “vested” (applied for a permit) prior to April of 2010.
    • It unlawfully allows Clark County to shift resources from its existing retrofit program to mitigate for new
    development.
    • It unlawfully fails to require “low impact development” at new development and mitigation sites.

    Clark County’s Commissioners appealed the Pollution Board’s ruling to the state Court of Appeals. The Builders’ Association joined in the appeal seeking weaker water pollution standards and the appeal will be heard July 2. Last December in a related matter, a federal judge issued a preliminary ruling that Clark County’s controversial development standards appear to violate federal laws to protect clean water. The decision by U.S. District Court Judge Ronald B. Leighton means Clark County must comply with federal clean water laws while the state court challenge is pending. The community and clean water groups include Rosemere Neighborhood Association, Columbia Riverkeeper, and the Northwest Environmental Defense Center. They are represented by attorneys Jan Hasselman and Janette Brimmer of the non-profit public interest law firm Earthjustice.

    #

    To view or print a pdf version of this Media Advisory please click here.

  • Judge Leighton Denies Clark County Motion For Bond

    April 5, 2012 Author: admin
    Comments Off

    US District Court Tacoma

    U.S. District Court Judge Ronald B. Leighton has denied Clark County’s request that Rosemere Neighborhood Association, Columbia Riverkeeper and Northwest Environmental Defense Center (Rosemere et al) post a monetary bond in their ongoing stormwater case.

    In January 2011, the Washington State Pollution Control Board ruled that Clark County’s “alternative” plan for monitoring stormwater was illegal  (see full story here).  Clark County subsequently filed an appeal of the Pollution Board’s ruling, but in December 2011, Judge Leighton ruled that pending their appeal, Clark County must comply with Washington State’s stormwater guidelines (story here).

    In January, Clark County also filed a motion asking the court to require Rosemere et al to post a $2.9 million bond (later reduced to $1.1 million) in the event the county wins in state court the plaintiffs could pay damages.

    Yesterday, Judge Leighton ruled against defendant Clark County’s motion saying,

    Here, Plaintiff has little or no means to post a substantial bond. The litigation seeks to enforce provisions of the Clean Water Act, and as such, is in the public interest. Further, Plaintiffs have demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits, given the indications of the Pollution Control Hearings Board.

    See full order here: ORDER DENYING MOTION TO ESTABLISH BOND

  • Federal Judge Suspends County’s Inadequate Polluted Runoff Standards

    December 29, 2011 Author: admin
    Comments Off

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: December 29, 2011

    Contacts:
    Janette Brimmer, Earthjustice, 206-343-7340 ext. 1029
    Dvija Michael Bertish, Rosemere Neighborhood Association, 360-281-4747
    Brett VandenHeuvel, Columbia Riverkeeper, 503-348-2436

    Federal Judge Suspends County’s Inadequate
    Polluted Runoff Standards

    Injunction requires Clark County to shelve fish-killing loopholes
    in its development standards

    Tacoma, WA.—A Washington state county’s controversial development standards appear to violate federal laws to protect clean water, according to a preliminary ruling by a U.S. District Court Judge.

    The decision, issued December 28 by U.S. District Court Judge Ronald B. Leighton, means Clark County must comply with federal clean water laws, like other cities and counties in the state, to protect rivers, streams and salmon threatened with extinction. The ruling applies to development projects permitted or approved by the county on or after the court’s order while a related state court appeal is pending.

    Rosemere Neighborhood Association, Columbia Riverkeeper, and the Northwest Environmental Defense Center, represented by Earthjustice, challenged Clark County’s failure to protect threatened salmon.

    “Many cities and counties in our state are working hard to clean up polluted waterways and now Clark County must finally do the same,” said Janette Brimmer, an Earthjustice attorney who is representing the groups. “The ruling recognizes that everyone needs to do their share to protect our precious streams, rivers and salmon and that Clark County, like everyone else, must follow the law.”

    Last year, the neighborhood and conservation groups prevailed before the state Pollution Control Hearings Board, which hears appeals of state environmental regulations and permits. In January of this year, the Board rejected the county’s “alternative” plan for managing polluted stormwater runoff finding that it violated the County’s stormwater permit and was too weak to prevent significant harm to already stressed rivers and streams.

    The County’s inadequate “alternative” plan was developed in a compromise with the Department of Ecology (Ecology), which oversees the federal Clean Water Act. Stormwater runoff a major source of water pollution because it is a stew of toxic metals, oil, grease, pesticides, herbicides, bacteria that runs off pavement into streams and rivers.

    Clark County refused to implement the required development runoff standards. After finding Clark County in violation of its stormwater permit, the Department of Ecology yielded to county pressure and agreed to allow Clark County to retain inadequate stormwater standards for development in exchange for a promise to implement taxpayer-funded mitigation projects. The controversial approach did not protect streams polluted by development runoff and shifted the burden of protecting clean water from developers to local taxpayers.

    As noted by the federal court, the Board had found the program to be illegal in several important respects. Specifically, the Clark County program:

    • Is not based on any science and fails to protect water quality and salmon.
    • Unlawfully exempts development projects that “vested” prior to April of 2010.
    • Unlawfully allows Clark County to shift resources from its existing retrofit program to mitigate for new development.
    • Unlawfully fails to require “low impact development” at new development and mitigation sites.

    Clark County appealed the Board decision in state court and refused to comply with the Board’s decision, forcing clean water advocates to take the matter to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington to enforce the Clean Water Act.

    Judge Leighton’s preliminary ruling agreed that the clean water advocacy groups have demonstrated a likelihood of success on their claims that Clark County’s inadequate development standards for polluted runoff violate the Clean Water Act and that irreparable harm to the environment is the result.

    The judge therefore imposed an obligation on the County to follow the original requirements of its stormwater permit; the same requirements that over 100 other cities and counties in Western Washington have been complying with since 2008.

    Judge Leighton’s order states:

    “Environmental injury, by its nature, is often permanent or at least of long duration” (page 11)
    “The public interest favors compliance with environmental laws” (page 12) and the Clean Water Act requires strict enforcement to effectuate its purpose of protecting sensitive aquatic environments” (id)
    “…More than 100 cities and counties in Western Washington are subject to the Phase I [stormwater] Permit’s default flow control standard and are apparently able to comply with its requirements.” (id)

    “Our association applauds the judge’s order because it reinforces that we need to do everything we can to stop undermining water quality,” said Dvija Michael Bertish of the Rosemere Neighborhood Association. “Clark County has ignored the public’s concerns about stormwater violations,and we hope the court’s decision will bring the County back into
    compliance with the law in order to protect the water and endangered species.”

    “Columbia River salmon and our communities need clean water,” stated Brett VandenHeuvel, Executive Director of Columbia Riverkeeper. “Clark County must take steps to reduce pollution.”

    The clean water groups include Rosemere Neighborhood Association, Columbia Riverkeeper, and the Northwest Environmental Defense Center. They are represented by attorneys Janette Brimmer and Jan Hasselman of Earthjustice.

    A copy of the ruling is available here: SJOrderGrantingPreliminaryInjunction12-28-11.pdf

    To view this Press Release in pdf format click here: For Immediate Release:Federal Judge Suspends County’s Inadequate Polluted Runoff Standards.pdf

    ##

  • PRESS RELEASE: Pollution Control Board Rules Clark County Development Standards Illegal

    January 6, 2011 Author: admin
    Comments Off

    PRESS RELEASE****PRESS RELEASE****PRESS RELEASE

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
    January 6, 2011

    Contacts:

    Jan Hasselman, Earthjustice, 206-343-7340 ext. 25
    Dvija Michael Bertish, Rosemere Neighborhood Association, 360-281-4747
    Brett VandenHeuvel, Columbia Riverkeeper, 503-348-2436
    Mark Riskedahl, Northwest Environmental Defense Center, 503-768-6673

    Appeals Board Rules– Clark County Development Standards Illegal
    Taxpayer subsidy & fish-killing loopholes scrapped

    Tumwater, WA.-In a major decision with statewide impacts, a state appeals board today ruled that Clark County’s controversial development standards violate state and federal laws to protect clean water.

    The ruling, by the state Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB), means the county is out of compliance with federal clean water laws. It signals an end to the county’s on-going failure to protect rivers, streams and salmon threatened with extinction.

    “Clean water is our future. Clark County has the potential to be a leader in low impact development, parks and green space. These are real growth sectors in our economy and will put people back to work,” said Dvija Michael Bertish of the Rosemere Neighborhood Association.

    Rosemere Neighborhood Association, Columbia Riverkeeper, and the Northwest Environmental Defense Center, represented by Earthjustice, challenged Clark County’s adoption of development standards that were too weak to prevent significant harm to the County’s already-stressed rivers and streams. [Read More...]

  • Stormy Weather for Clark County Stormwater Plan

    September 28, 2010 Author: admin
    Comments Off

    New story from the Public News Service – Washington:

    September 28, 2010

    Stormy Weather for Clark County Stormwater Plan

    TUMWATER, Wash. – How tough should counties be on developers in planning and controlling storm water runoff, a major source of water pollution? That’s the issue in a case to be argued this week at the Washington Pollution Control Hearings Board. It alleges that Clark County has what amounts to a special deal with builders for managing the stormwater effects of their projects, allowing them to put off planning for runoff control and let the county take care of any problems.

    The Rosemere Neighborhood Association and two environmental groups behind the complaint – Columbia Riverkeeper and the Northwest Environmental Defense Center – say water quality has suffered as a result. Their attorney, Jan Hasselman with Earthjustice, explains.

    “Clark County is effectively subsidizing developers out of very limited county funds. The idea is that developers don’t have to take on the burden of dealing with the storm water from their projects – the county will pay for it from general funds.”

    The Washington Department of Ecology approved the Clark County plan, and will explain its reasons at the hearing. The problem, says Hasselman, is that if one county has a weaker storm water control policy, state law allows others to adopt it.

    “That’s why this case is so important, not just for Clark County, but statewide. This threatens to really undercut our collective efforts to begin improving the health of rivers and streams, and recover Puget Sound.”

    At issue is how strict counties should be with developers in order to meet federal Clean Water Act requirements. Clark County has said new development hasn’t posed much of a stormwater problem, and that it has enough money to mitigate such problems. The complaint asks that Clark County abide by the same standards as other counties.

    The hearing runs Tuesday, Sept. 28 to Friday, Oct. 1, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. daily, 1111 Israel Road SW, Tumwater.

    Click here to view this story on the Public News Service RSS site and access an audio version of this and other stories: http://www.publicnewsservice.org/index.php?/content/article/16097-1

Next Page

Videos, Slideshows and Podcasts by Cincopa Wordpress Plugin

viagra over the counter
generic viagra canada
Guaranteed cheapest viagra
buy viagra online discount
canadian pharmacy generic viagra
buy viagra now
buy cheap viagra online
Cheapest Viagra Online
best place to buy viagra online reviews
Buy viagra usa
buy sale viagra
buy isoptin
buy cheap viagra online
buy real viagra online
Buy viagra Mesa
buy viagra san francisco
Buy viagra where
usa cialis
cheap viagra 100mg
buy viagra with discount
best place to buy generic viagra online
buy viagra online canada
viagra best buy
viagra from canada