— from Joe Symons —
I have noticed that there are significant changes to the SJC web site (in general) and the GIS Open Data Portal files, in particular. These changes are not announced. There is no opportunity for the public to either know about these changes and/or prevent/discuss these changes prior to their occurrence. Links that once worked no longer work. Data that once was there is no longer there. No history file or explanation accompanies these changes. No pre-change notice is given. I refer primarily to legacy data, not e.g. daily updates to meetings, agendas, etc.
Here are two examples.
- Last year a section of the SJC web site was devoted to the discussion and public comment regarding the updates to the Vacation Rental Regulations. One part of this site included a list of every comment received by DCD / CC on this topic. Earlier this year, given a renewed interest in the issues surrounding VR Permits, I searched for this site as it had (as I recall) considerable legacy info about the topic. I could not find it. I asked DCD. I was told that since the topic was resolved, the info was removed so (as I recall) ’not to confuse the public.’ While i recognize this as a possible consideration, a simple “This topic has been processed” as a headline on the web site would serve to achieve that goal. Removing the web site entirely is overkill. I did a public records request for the comments received. I do not know how many were on the original web site, but my memory recalls several dozen or more. The public records request got me only a few, mostly, sadly, my own. Nowhere near the full number of comments.
- Less than a week ago I was prompted to look at the GIS parcels database. I discovered that at least half of the fields that were in earlier versions of this critical database were no longer available. The website informs me that the database was last updated on 29 Aug 2019. There is no crib sheet that explains what changes were made to the number of fields and why those changes were made.
I write because I am concerned that citizens can have adequate, reliable, and dependable data upon which to review and comment on public decisions and policy. I have no idea how many other changes are being made, by whom, for what purposes, under what authority, to public data that I had (and have) come to rely upon to study critical issues regarding county challenges.
Within the last week I sent in comments regarding what I would call critical and essential updates to the information gathered by DCD for VR Permit applicants and for VR compliance. As it is, the VR data supplied via GIS does not contain all the information gathered on the VR Permit application form. The data gathered today is grossly insufficient to track VR trends, impacts, and permit efficient enforcement; the suggestions I made are an opening attempt to enrich the data so that more accurate, timely and effective VR Permit monitoring and enforcement can take place. There are additional data points that should be added to the list I already submitted.
Going forward, everyone will benefit if significant changes to data files and web resources are not made prior to some public announcement including an explanation as to why these proposed changes are essential. Previous sections of the SJC web site could be archived (meaning: left in place but annotated as to their current relevance) rather than deleted, so they are always available for review.
Reports critical to understanding the difficult challenges faced by the county, such as the “Study of Socioeconomic Impacts of Growth Pressure in Selected Seasonal/Resort Communities” done by SJC in May 2000, which may have been on the SJC website 19 years ago, but is no longer available anywhere except here
http://www.doebay.net/appeal/socioeconomicgrowth.pdf should be restored. Other relevant studies, such as the Cost of Community Services study (COCS), done in 2004, highly relevant to our challenges today, now only available at:
http://www.doebay.net/appeal/COCS%20Report%20Exec%20Sum%20%205%2018%2004.pdf should be published. This is essential and relevant material, especially during a GMA update process. Withholding this information is not a reflection of integrity or of full disclosure, qualities that SJC should strive to achieve excellence in.
I could not agree more, Joe.
Polaris has changed and is less useful for me.
Why are these useful interactive sites changed without public input?
Well, that’s disturbing. I had been pleased with what I thought was the continual expansion of information being put up on the website. Not only does it make citizen access easier; it saves the County costs of producing under Public Record Requests.
I wonder whether any state laws regarding public records have been violated in the process of deleting them. Washington state is perhaps the most stringent enforcer of the public’s right to know exactly what its governing agencies and individuals are doing.
It is imperative that accurate public information be shared in order for the Orcas community to make informed decisions. SJC should be providing this information as a means of engaging the public in issues that greatly affect our communities. I too request adequate, reliable and dependable data available to the public in order for the community to make informed decisions.
Please can we have a response from SJC as to why these changes were made and how we can now access this information?
Thank you
Michael,
Good question. See https://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=40.14.070
Makes things clear as mud doesn’t it? The term “not a fair playing field” comes to mind.