The future of Clark County’s Comprehensive Growth Plan became increasingly uncertain this week as interested parties filed a barrage of conflicting legal actions, a judge dealt one side a defeat and the county council passed an emergency ordinance meant to reduce the county’s liability.
“We are in a different world about comp plans from here on,” said Council Chair Marc Boldt at the council’s Tuesday hearing.
Required by state law, the comprehensive plan is meant to guide the county’s zoning, transportation and housing decisions over a 20-year period. After the council passed an update to its plan last year, it was appealed to the Growth Management Hearings Board, a quasi-judicial land-use panel.
Last month, the board issued a 101-page decision that largely supported an appeal from the local environmental group Friends of Clark County and Seattle-based land-use group Futurewise. The groups alleged the plan facilitated sprawl and imperiled agricultural land by improperly creating a rural industrial land bank on the Lagler and Ackerland dairy farms in Brush Prairie while allowing expansions of the cities of La Center, Ridgefield and Battle Ground.
Nearly all of the dozen local governments, businesses and advocacy groups involved responded by filing appeals by Monday’s deadline arguing that the board erred in various aspects of its decision. Both La Center and Ridgefield reiterated in their appeals filed in Clark County Superior Court that the evidence shows that their expansions are necessary to accommodate growth and would not affect agricultural land.
Clark County Citizens United, a landowners’ group that saw all of its arguments dismissed by the board, filed an appeal restating its position that the comprehensive plan essentially discriminates against rural residents.
Battle Ground spokeswoman Bonnie Gilberti said that city chose to work with the county on compliance rather than appeal.
“There is really no immediate need or developer seeking to use that land at this time,” she said.
Steve Horenstein, an attorney who represents the Lagler and Ackerland dairy farms, said he did not file an appeal because the county is appealing the board’s decision regarding the rural industrial land bank.
The county isn’t appealing the entire decision. Rather, it is challenging the board’s determinations that it improperly allowed Ridgefield, La Center and Battle Ground to expand. In its appeal, the county argues that once Ridgefield and La Center completed their annexations, it has “no legal authority” over the land. It said the board’s decision compels it “to take action that it is not capable of taking.”
“The County cannot remove parts of these incorporated cities from their urban growth areas, and it cannot change the comprehensive plan designations of lands within the cities’ incorporated boundaries,” reads the county’s appeal.
In September, Futurewise filed a separate related appeal against Ridgefield’s move to annex 107 acres of land as part of the county’s 2016 comprehensive plan update. However, on Monday, Clark County Superior Court Judge Bernard Veljacic dismissed the case, meaning the annexation stands for now.
“The city is very pleased with this result,” said Janean Parker, the attorney for Ridgefield. “If it’s annexed, it’s annexed.”
Tim Trohimovich, Futurewise’s director of planning and law, wrote in an email that he wasn’t sure if his group would appeal the dismissal.
However, Futurewise has also appealed the board’s decision in Thurston County Superior Court. The group’s appeal asks the court to grant it an even stronger legal position on issues it prevailed on in the board’s decision. The appeal also asks for a review on issues the group didn’t prevail on, including arguments that Clark County’s comprehensive plan underfunds its transportation facilities and fails to address the potential of landslides. It also asserts that the board does have jurisdiction over annexations by cities.
The appeals mean the comprehensive plan may not be finalized for years. The county’s 2007 update to the plan was in litigation until 2014.
Emergency ordinance
On Tuesday, the Clark County council passed an emergency ordinance that puts a moratorium on the filing or receipt of development applications or pre-applications for land within certain agricultural, forest or rural zoning designations. The action was in response to the board’s decision that the county’s plan to reduce the minimum size of agricultural lots from 20 acres to 10 acres and of forest lots from 40 acres to 20 acres violated state law.
Christine Cook, civil deputy prosecuting attorney, explained that the county needed to show it was making a good-faith effort to come into compliance with the decision or it could face sanctions.
Councilor Eileen Quiring cast the only “no” vote.
