Jefferson County's grant application for a Watershed Stewardship Resource Center

Mr. Richard Parkin, Acting Director
Office of Ecosystems
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900
Seattle, WA 98101-31140

Mr. Parkin,

I trust that in the final review of Jefferson County's grant application for a Watershed Stewardship Resource Center you will pay close attention to the accountability of the detailed budget narrative. There appears to be no quantification of how the County arrived at the totals for personnel. And while I haven't had the opportunity to review what was actually submitted to EPA, there is a discrepancy between one version of personnel costs listed on the Standard Form 424A ($349,669.24) and a later version dated 4-20-2010 totaling $466,077.00. This increase significantly raises the fringe benefits. I have not been able to determine the rationale behind this revision, which is notable in that $617,554 out of the total grant proposal of $800,646 is directed toward personnel and benefits.

At a time when so many local jurisdictions are facing all-time budget challenges, it is remarkable this grant is proposing $70,000 rain gardens, $140,000 Stormwater Parks, and $40,000 for plants! Has the world of civic planning populated by agencies, work groups, action networks, stakeholders, consultants, and non-profit partners become so detached from mainstream reality that they fail to recognize the public outrage this generates? The undercurrent running through the purpose for the WSRC is building trust and acceptance in a proposal that seeks to "navigate the dirty waters of regulation." DCD is already a department in financial crisis; to turn around and indulge in this kind of spending shows no respect for taxpayer money. You reap what you sow.

And whether intended or not, word of these figures incites fears that sustainable building practices will substantially raise the cost of single family homes. Most future development in Jefferson will occur on large rural parcels similar in size to the demonstration garden. The demonstration garden is designed to "inspire" homeowners to incorporate LID practices but the prohibitive cost is more deflating. People who spend their own money tend to have a different view of the value of a dollar.

You have already received numerous comments on offers to build rain gardens and the like at a fraction of the cost. Hopefully all aspects of the WSRC will be subject to competitive bidding for services, including open advertising for personnel hires. As the recent embarrassing audit of the Puget Sound Partnership confirms, public funds must be spent in an accountable manner. Contracting of all services and purchases for supplies and equipment should be conducted in a manner that maximizes taxpayer investment.

The number one concern of Jefferson citizens is undoubtedly the general budget. On December 14, 2009, County Administrator Philip Morley advised that "the difficult public service cuts we are recommending in 2010 will position Jefferson County for budget stability in 2010 and 2011 if revenues hold at today's levels. However, by 2012 further program and service cuts will likely be necessary unless the State Legislature or our citizens are willing to provide additional funding to maintain services even at 2010's reduced levels...In 2010 we will need to continue to carefully track actual revenues and expenditures, and adjust our operations to live within our means." Since then it is apparent even modest revenue projections are not holding. Meanwhile, Jefferson County proposes additional expenditures such as $30,000/yr. for a Resource Conservation Manager, $10,000/yr. for an Economist, and at least $30,000/yr. for the WSRC. In the case of the WSRC, DCD is hoping to leverage its match for what amounts to a $530,000 fund transfer to sustain the financial health of the department. Expenditures are self-propagating, and what happens in 2012? The WSRC budget contains no structural changes to the current DCD model that are truly sustainable.

Simple as we are perceived to be, the public understands this in a second. The Logic Model is based on the premise that environmentally-minded (obsessed?) DCD staff will, through an elaborate social marketing program and an inspirational demonstration garden, be able to convince people to "change their behavior." In going through the WSRC files it is obvious to a blind man that the regulatory mentality behind the WSRC utterly fails to relate to the typical citizen applying for a permit in any meaningful way. It speaks volumes for just how out of touch this proposal is that I believe its authors fully do not understand how condescending they are coming across. Particularly offensive is the objective "Watershed Center staff is trained to understand how to position desired behavior against competing unwanted behavior." Mr. Parkin, people do not want to live inside the heads of policy wonkers!

Please explain the logic predicated upon a 50% success rate during a roughly 200% decline in permit activity (from 2006 highs), and how this correlates to the need for an $800,000 advisory program with $70k rain gardens and $40k for plants - installed - during a recession! Hello? I can assure you that the citizens of Jefferson County will engage in their own social marketing program in opposition to the WSRC. It will be extensive, grassroots, will relate to regular people, and best of all the cost is $ZERO.

Returning to the repeating theme of building trust with the public, which DCD acknowledges as a problem or it wouldn't be such a focus of attention, recent actions have demonstrated that rather than an inspiring experience, a visit to DCD ends more likely in visible frustration and even a decision to look outside Jefferson County for future residence. Amongst the County files on the WSRC is the rhetorical question, "Why a Watershed Stewardship Center?" The answer is "DCD proactive response and structural rebuilt for" followed a a series of environment-based bullet points. This sentence indicates DCD is shifting its mission to an enviro-centric model of permit processing - a dramatic shift from traditional objective evaluation of building permits. Our state laws and codes are based on the principles of the balancing of the 14 Growth Management Act planning goals. It is the single-minded pursuit of environmental protection, which ironically further complicates rather than simplifies permit administration, that is what has built public distrust to begin with. The WSRC will turn existing distrust into a bonfire. To quote a County observation from Ralph Waldo Emerson, "Our distrust is very expensive." You can't build trust from a negative, which the WSRC assumes from people simply wanting a home.

Finally, I have to ask what is meant in the same document by the prediction "The next ten years will see: The Puget Sound initiative will have failed and the environmental impacts of urbanization will have affected water and air quality. Nature will adjust and heal in a different biological and botanical pattern." Is the necessity for the WSRC and its innovative coaching model, which is driven by the Puget Sound Partnership, based proactively upon the anticipated failure of the PSP?


Jim Hagen
Jefferson County