— by Matthew Gilbert, Orcas Issues Reporter —
This past year saw San Juan County take on a series of issues with impacts that will extend far beyond 2019. What ties them all together is how citizens define “quality of life,” a meaningful but subjective notion that differs depending on who you ask and which lens one uses to interpret trends and establish goals. At the center of this conversation is the county’s Comprehensive Plan, a far-ranging and far-reaching document that sets the tone for managing growth and controlling impacts. That Plan is now in the middle of a review process that telescopes out to 2036.
The bulk of the work is being done by the Department of Community Development (DCD) as it updates the Plan’s five main “elements”:
- Economic Development
- Housing
- Land Use
- Transportation
- Water Resources
Each one has required considerable qualitative and quantitative assessments. Each plan also has numerous sub-elements – few parts of county life are left out. Throughout the year, each version of each element has been presented to the public for comment and then to the county’s Planning Commission for feedback and recommendations. Some plans are closer to completion than others, but all will be completed in 2020 and presented to the public and then to the County Commissioners for final adoption.
And while “comprehensive” is truly characteristic of the Plan’s ambitions, two issues in particular are not directly addressed: tourism and vacation rentals. With the impacts of tourism becoming more visible – and the reliability of the ferry system declining – a two-phase tourism research study was initiated in 2016. The results of the first phase – a survey of visitors – was released in June 2018. The second phase, a survey of locals and businesses, was completed this past year. The report is expected to be released this coming January. Each phase will inform a long-needed Tourism Master Plan, the county’s last major planning document.
The second issue that took center stage this past year was the prevalence and impacts of short- term vacation rentals (VRs). A series of workshops led by a group of Orcas Island citizens (the Vacation Rental Working Group) were held over the summer and fall. They presented data and provided a forum for public comment and discussion to packed houses at the high school cafeteria.
Two specific requests for a moratorium, one from the Eastsound Planning Review Commission (that preceded the workshops) and then another from the Working Group (after the workshops), were submitted to County Commissioners, who rejected both. The first time was for a lack of data (further data was then provided), and the second for the lack of county-wide input. The commissioners also noted that his was the first year of a new ordinance establishing additional regulatory and compliance controls for VR permit holders. That ordinance is still to be evaluated for how well it addressed certain impacts. However, given the perceived limitations of the ordinance, the Working Group plans to present yet another call for a moratorium early next year along with language for several specific regulations.
The confluence of the Comprehensive Plan process with the final report of the tourism study and the outcome of the grassroots vacation rental initiative – not to mention the upcoming November elections – should make for a very interesting 2020.
Thank you for the update. Also the petition to the County Council asking for a moratorium on VRs to study the issue and investigate possible actions is approaching 2,000 signatures. See vacationrentalsorcas.org
For clarity, one likely reason San Juan County is not including the impact of tourism (and it’s related side-kick, vacation rentals), may well be that the Growth Management Act (GMA), under which the county’s comprehensive plan is being constructed, does NOT ask or require a county to address the impacts of non-residents. San Juan County is not going to go out on its own to add this anyway; they are already years behind in completing the current update to the plan. They are taking, as is their pattern, the lowest road possible here, i.e., just squeaking by.
Note tho that while GMA does not require San Juan County to include a visitor impact element, (which really ought to be mandatory given the approved Vision Statement), there is no prohibition for the County to add a Visitor Impact Element. Given the recent visitor population growth and consequent unequal economic opportunities where increasing numbers of out-of-county investors are commodifying our community, privatizing our public space (and by space I mean not just physical space, but also emotional and community-harmony space), a comprehensive plan element essentially authorizing the expenditure of funds to explore and resolve these impacts, seems both reasonable and essential.
We won’t get that, however, unless we demand it. That means we all have to up our engagement game, a lot. You can begin with a comment here, or weigh in at the contact us section of the vacationrentalsorcas.org web site.
That’s what our County Councilors tried to do earlier on the Shoreline Management Plan — the minimum necessary to comply with state requirements. Yes, We the People have to up our game and demand better.