Local Angle:
Clark County officials have been monitoring the potential effects of last year’s Supreme Court decision that requires counties to determine if water is available for a proposed development before issuing building permits.
Unlike counties elsewhere (particularly in less water-rich areas of the state), Clark County hasn’t considered any legislation that would change its permitting process. But that hasn’t stopped councilors and staff from fretting that the court’s ruling will saddle staff with added duties and ultimately restrain growth.
In December, the council held a work session where Chris Horne, chief civil deputy prosecuting attorney, remarked that Clark County’s comprehensive plan, a document required by state law that directs growth, is currently being appealed and the county could be the first in the state where the water ruling is “analyzed and applied” with guidance from the Growth Management Hearings Board.
State Sen. Lynda Wilson, R-Vancouver, has co-sponsored SB 5239, also aimed at the court’s decision. The bill allows counties to revert back to the practice of using rules written by the state Department of Ecology when evaluating water availability during review of building permits.
Early in the legislative session, the council discussed with its lobbyist, Mike Burgess, bills designed to undo or mitigate the effects of the decision. Burgess told The Columbian that Clark County hasn’t taken a firm stance on any particular bill.
“We certainly have time for the county to weigh in,” he said. “We are continuing to monitor the bills and they will be in play until the end of the session.”
— Jake Thomas