PORT TOWNSEND — The Board of Jefferson County Commissioners held a hearing on the repeal and replacement of county code addressing flood damage prevention.
The state Department of Ecology, on behalf of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), conducted a community assistance visit in August 2023. The code update is a final step in completing the visit.
“We have chosen to pursue a path that is slightly more progressive than the model code for compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP),” Fire Marshal Phil Cecere at Monday’s meeting. “Adopting a code that exceeds the model code allows Jefferson County properties to qualify for reductions in a reduction in flood insurance premiums.”
NFIP is managed by FEMA, which determines, based partially on compliance with standards, which areas are eligible for flood insurance. Cecere said changes in code will not require people to buy flood insurance, but it will maintain the possibility that people can.
The county also will consider enrolling in the Community Rating System (CRS), a FEMA program which provides enrolled communities with the potential for discounts. The program ranks communities on a 10-point scale that grants a 5 to 45 percent discount counting down, where a 10-point community gets no discount, a nine gets 5 percent, an eight, 10 percent, and so on.
Code section 15.15 will be reformatted to streamline the chapter, Cecere said. Definitions will be added and the chapter will gain sections on compliance and enforcement. The chapter will include designations of duties of the floodplain administrator. Changes to chapter 18.040 also are part of the update.
Cecere is also the building official. If the code passes, he will take on the role of floodplain administrator, a role designated and defined by changes in the code.
The purpose is for increased public health and safety, Cecere said, but it’s also an effort to minimize requirements for rescue and relief efforts in floodplains and floodways, often paid for by the public.
New development
“We’ve chosen to develop on floodplains in a way that, unfortunately, has put us at risk,” Peters said. “And I’m talking about the existing development. The idea is to prevent new development. In terms of the floodplain development permit, yes, we established that permit as a standalone permit, but we’ve always had the de facto permit. In other words, you get the building permit, and that floodplain development review was a part of that permit, including the flood elevation certificates.”
Brinnon exists largely within a floodway, which would create real challenges for any future development in the area.
During public comment, Shellie Yarnell of Brinnon decried the changes.
“There are so many problematic things with this,” she said. “The county continues to do the very, very minimum to make sure that they’re aware of what’s happening. We have to do better, because to hear that there’s public outreach and public agreement with this is simply not true. This is a big deal for Brinnon, because you’re basically burying Brinnon with this and we don’t want these things to happen here. There’s no avenue to opt out. Do we consider things like the DNR cuts down a forest and then the erosion off the forest makes the river flood? No, all you’re talking about is a FEMA floodplain. ”
Agricultural consequences
The new code would see agricultural structures, like livestock sheds, falling into the same categories as other buildings, which could be limiting to farmers.
Dean said she worries about the lack of flexibility there is in the proposed code, given the overlap that some agricultural land has with mapped floodplains.
“I’m certainly inclined to support this,” Dean said. “The only place I get hung up, again, is where our prime ag (agriculture) land overlaps, and there’s certainly some places where that’s the case. I think it’s this idea that a house is the same thing as a shed. I remember going through this with a farmer with our wetland regulation where a corner of a shed was in a wetland buffer and it became a compliance issue. When we consider everything a structure, I just think it can provide a lack of rational flexibility.”
The commissioners decided to keep the code rewrite hearing open for another week, for further consideration, and in the hopes of hearing more from the public.
During the meeting, commissioner Greg Brotherton said he gained clarity on how fundamental this code change is.
“I think especially the community of Brinnon is really impacted by this,” he said. “I also don’t see a way to not support it, so I’m not arguing against it right now. I think giving the public a little more opportunity to digest and respond would be helpful.”
Public written comment was open until the close of business Friday. The hearing will resume at 1:30 p.m. Monday in the county courthouse, 1820 Jefferson St. Participants also may access the meeting via Zoom at https://www.co.jefferson.wa.us/492/Board-of-County-Commissioners.
________
Reporter Elijah Sussman can be reached by email at elijah.sussman@sequimgazette.com.
