From:                              Rachel Gay Rosser []

Sent:                               Wednesday, April 30, 2014 6:57 AM

To:                                   Hill, Elizabeth

Cc:                                   peter ray; Truman O'Brien; John (Jack) R. Venrick; Calderwood, Amy; Starbard, John; Ortiz, Cathy

Subject:                          Re: VPD Water tanks


Good Morning Elizabeth,


It is good to hear that a large part of the KC Ombudsman investigation is completed and has written results.


Two questions: 1) may we have a copy of what has been accomplished to review to be better informed @ a future meeting? , 2) "a large part" is an implication that there are yet factors that have not been investigated, what are these topics and when does KC expect to remedy and rectify them? .


We are happy to schedule a meeting after we have some information to review so that we may best be informed and expedite resolution.


Thank you,


Margaret and Gay Rosser

Friends and Neighbors of


On Friday, April 25, 2014 11:47 AM, "Hill, Elizabeth" <> wrote:





We have completed a large part of our investigation into your allegations regarding DPER’s enforcement of the County’s development regulations on the Vashon Park District Project.   I would like to schedule a time with you to come out and review the written results of our investigation with you next week.  


Can you please send me some times and days that would work for you?    In the meantime I will find out where the County office is now located on Vashon since I know it has recently moved closer to town.  Perhaps we can meet there.  I will check.


Thank you Gay.




Elizabeth Hill


Senior Deputy Ombudsman for Rural and Unincorporated Area Affairs

King County Ombudsman’s Office

516 Third Avenue, Room W1039

Seattle, Wa.  98104-2317





This email is a public record and may be subject to public disclosure







From: Rachel Gay Rosser []
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2014 4:34 PM
To: Hill, Elizabeth; Calderwood, Amy; Starbard, John; Ortiz, Cathy
Cc: peter ray; Truman O'Brien; John (Jack) R. Venrick
Subject: VPD Water tanks




Yes, the tanks were moved but not the 50 feet as KCC states in a rural residential area found in recreational/cultural KCC 21A.  


The question that was asked over a month ago and yet to be answered is; "why is KC DPER allowing the use of a code that is for tank setbacks located in industrial/commercial rural area and not the codes that apply to recreational / cultural rural residential areas of 50 feet?  


Why is KC DPER allowing a Tank Farm Utility Facility to be located on a public play field?  


A complaint was filed with KC DDES reference # 437, filed 03/02/2011, 9:29AM, Clearing and Grading without permits, "Fence and property markers…torn out…"  The destruction to our property and this complaint has not been responded to yet.


Various Agencies within KC have been advised of the destruction to private property during a KC permitted project.   


KC Ombudsman & DPER has been advised of noncompliance to WAC, KCC and RCW in the removal of survey markers and WM Section monuments.


KC Ombudsman & DPER has been advised of installations without permit.  Numerous setbacks are in noncompliance, stadium lights, electric poles, bleachers, dugouts backstops.  These actions and installations by VPD are in blatant noncompliance to KCC, WAC and RCW of WA State.


VPD has admitted to not having secured the legal steps required by Law and Regulation to usurp private property into the VPD Fields project or use as inclusions of setback footage.  VPD has admitted that, "no papers exist," that legally alter, move or change the previously existing lot lines and borderlines & VPD acted without securing documents as Law and Regulation requires.  Forestry permits were not secured, water rights were not secured. This is wrongful exercise by a lawful authority.


How much of an investigation does it take when the perpetrators, VPD, have admitted to malfeasance that is negatively impacting private citizens for KC to uphold and enforce VPD compliance to law and regulation?


How much investigation does it take when VPD admits to misrepresenting documents, surveys and statutory property jurisdiction to determine that elements of the project are flawed and in need of correction prior to signing off and allowing the park fields to be dedicated & opened for public use? 


A code is a code, we can detect no ambiguity in this section of law and regulation that would require such an extensive period of time to expire, since March 2011, prior to requesting VPD to adhere.


We are not asking that the fields be shut down forever, ONLY that KC require KCC, WAC and RCW as is directed and required to be adhered, brought into compliance and the damages that have been inflicted upon abutting property owners be remedied and rectified.  When can we expect a definitive answer on these matters?


Thank you.


Margaret and Gay Rosser

Neighbors and Friends of