Here is a couple responses regarding the King County CAO land grab attached and below.  There will be a possible vote on Aug. 24 at 1:30 in the King County courthouse 516 3rd Ave. 
I went to the last and third public hearing at the courthouse and gave a 2 minute talk before being cut off.  They had so many people, standing room only and Ron Sims attorney took up most of the time responding to questions from the Council that the public was only left with 2 minutes.  What can you say in two minutes?  There were only three environmental people speaking for the CAO against dozens of  people against it.
The bottom line appears to be this ordinance is going through whether we like it or not?  The public hearing is just a political protocol upon deaf ears.  The 7 Democrat council members are locked into voting Yes on the CAO against the 6 Republican council members who will vote No.  Apparently this is highly unusual.  The rumor is Ron Sims(D) wants this CAO passed to use to run for governor and Councilman Larry Philips (D) is very passionate about the CAO passing as well maybe he wants Ron Sims position?  Council member Larry Philips is rumored to be pressuring all the other Democrats to hold a Yes vote.
The Critical Areas Ordinance is very complex and even one of the council members said she did not understand it after listening to it for several weeks.  I think Councilman McKenna email below may summarize it at a high level. 
I received a copy of a newsletter called "The Naked Fish" which was apparently started by a May Valley group of concerned property owners that went through a similar land grab.  They have given the paper rights over to to continue to fight for our property rights.  It is an exceptional paper and says it all and then some.  Its the March-April 2004 issue.  The address of those commendable people fighting this for you and I are Citizens Alliance For Property Rights, 718 Griffin Ave #7, Enumclaw, WA 98022, 206-335-2312. 
At this point I think praying that this Critical Areas Ordinance be stopped will work better than anything else.  We need Devine intervention!  The politicians no longer represent their constituency!
Another interesting point is the rural areas only have 15% of the population of the county and the urban areas hold 85%, i.e. the city rules over the country in political power. 
More detail here
----- Original Message -----
From: McKenna, Rob
To: 'John R. Venrick'
Sent: Friday, August 13, 2004 10:55 AM
Subject: RE: NO Critical Areas Ordinance NO 65-10

Via E-mail:


Dear Mr. Venrick:


Thank you for contacting my office regarding the King County Executive's proposed new land use regulations commonly referred to as the CAO (Critical Areas Ordinance).  I have received a large number of comments on this controversial subject and wish to share with you my position on it.


The proposed CAO is a poorly written, troubling piece of legislation which appears to have less to do with Best Available Science than with denying rural property owners the reasonable use of their land, thereby stopping most growth in the rural area.  How else to explain a regulation that expands rural wetlands buffers while development are greatest?  The proposed CAO potentially triples the buffers around wetlands and streams in the rural area while leaving the urban buffers unchanged.


Most troubling to me, however, is that no one has satisfactorily answered my oft-repeated question: "Who, and by what authority, says that King County is currently out of compliance with the Growth Management Act?" I believe that the failure of anyone to articulate a satisfactory answer to my question shows that the proposed CAO is unnecessary.  Though the county has a statutory obligation to review its development regulations, it is not required to amend them by expanding buffers and increasing other development requirements in the absence of a compelling, scientifically based need to do so.


Thank you again for contacting me on this important issue.  Please keep speaking up to all of us in county government.




Rob McKenna

Councilmember, District Six

Metropolitan King County Council

-----Original Message-----
From: John R. Venrick []
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 11:55 AM
To: Ron Sims; Carolyn Edmonds; Bob Ferguson; Kathy Lambert; Larry Phillps; Dwight Pelz; Rob Mckenna; Pete von Reichbauer; Dow Constantine; Steve Hammond; Larry Gossett; Jane Hague; David Irons; Julia Patterson
Cc: Rodney McFarland PropRights; John Carlson KVI; KOMO4TV KOMO4TV; Arnold Koh; KIRO7TV KIRO7TV; KIRO710AM KIRO710AM
Subject: Fw: NO Critical Areas Ordinance NO 65-10

From: John R. Venrick
To: Patterson, Julia
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 11:06 PM
Subject: NO Critical Areas Ordinance NO 65-10

Dear Councilwomen Patterson:
Thank you for your reply.  I live on and own 10 acres on the Enumclaw Plateau for the last 26 years.  I am retired from Boeing on a fixed income and am 61 years old.
I have bolded and underlined a statement in your email reply below that I would like to specifically address.
The perspective from those of us who live on acreage and farms and who steward our own land is this CAO proposal together with the so called "1000 Friends of Washington" is so extreme there can be no talk of balance. 
This proposal is so bazaar it is receiving national media attention as being the most extreme environmental control of any county in the nation. 
If you go to Property Rights Foundation of America, Inc. at you will see how court decisions are being made by cases brought by private groups organizing across America to fight this environmental and government over reaching into private property rights.  
I also have to ask you why this extreme environmental over reaction is following down party lines?  If it was even 50% Republican and 50% Democrat then I would suspect it was somewhat fair and balanced.  But this is overtly a political issue.  Why have the Democrats chosen to push their political agenda over our property rights. I thought the Democrats were the people's party?
Also ask yourself why do most if not all of the people pushing this CAO live in the urban areas of King County.  None of you live out here in the rural areas I suspect otherwise you wouldn't be voting for this proposal.
My property is not your playground.  Please go play in your own back yard and stay out of my yard.  King County has too many other more important problems to deal with than trying to entertain environmental extreme groups.
You cannot enforce this even if it passes.  It is too unpopular!  Plus it will be fought in the courts for years.  It will waste private and public funds.  You are wasting precious time and money!
John R. Venrick
41250 250th Ave SE
Enumclaw, WA 98022
----- Original Message -----
From: Patterson, Julia
To: 'John R. Venrick'
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 10:46 AM
Subject: RE: NO Critical Areas Ordinance NO 65-10

Dear Mr. Venrick,


Thank you for your email regarding the Critical Areas Ordinances and the update to the King County Comprehensive Plan.  While I do not serve on the Growth Management Committee (the committee currently analyzing the proposal before it comes to the full Council in September), I have been meeting with concerned property owners, environmental groups and I have toured a number of rural properties to gain a first hand perspective on the legislation's potential impacts on the environment and property owners. 


The challenge before us is how to most appropriately balance environmental protections with the rights of property owners.  This is no doubt a difficult task. The Growth Management Committee has spent hundreds of hours meeting with concerned citizens, holding public hearings and analyzing this complex legislation.


I very much appreciate hearing from my constituents on this issue as I continue to analyze the proposal.


Thank you again for contacting me and letting your views be known.




Julia Patterson

King County Councilmember

District Thirteen