York Rejects Plan to Cede Local Wetlands Decisions

By WYDaily Staff Wednesday, June 16, 2010

A plan to save York County around $12,000 a year while turning over the work of an all-volunteer local wetlands board to a state agency failed last night, as citizens packed the Board of Supervisors meeting for a public hearing on the issue.

On the table was a proposal by Vice Chairman George Hrichak to eliminate the York County Wetlands Board, a five-member advisory group that is a waterfront property owner’s first stop when considering any work within the watershed.

Supervisors rejected the proposal 4-1. Had it passed, York County would have been the only locality in the state that had ceded local involvement in wetlands issues.

Walt Zaremba, who acknowledged being considered the “swing vote,” said after hearing the citizens’ defense of the board, “I don't understand how any member of this board could vote anything but no on this amendment.”

Just one – Hrichak – did. Hrichak said he started looking at the necessity of the wetlands board last year during budget discussions, going through documents after “lots of people” complained about the local wetlands process. Hrichak said the county has to consider the value of every line item in its budget, a $125 million spending plan. “I think it is something we can live without,” he said.

Citizen after citizen – including marine scientists and contractors – disagreed. Many shared anecdotes, explaining why county residents shouldn’t live without a local wetlands board. For most, it was an issue tied to both time and keeping local people involved in local issues. The local decisions, they pointed out, have been overturned just four times of 193 recent cases.

The Virginia Marine Resources Commission, which is the next stop for watershed permitting, has one employee who covers 27 jurisdictions – including the southwestern part of the state. The VMRC has an obligation to follow deadlines, but citizens lined up to say those deadlines were impractical and not often followed.

The effort to disband the wetlands board got a push from local Realtor Greg Garrett, who sent an email urging county conservatives to attend the hearing and speak out against “what every conservative should hate.” On that list was big government that resulted in too many layers, an abridgement of private property owner rights, government waste and unnecessary delays. Garrett, a waterfront property owner of a multimillion-dollar property, said in the email that the wetlands board “has constantly and unnecessarily punished our waterfront homeowners and is unneeded to clean up the Bay.”

Garrett also spoke at the hearing, saying he thought many were confused about what was on the table and calling the current process "a bureaucracy - an incredible, out of control bureaucracy."

Garrett’s neighbor Tim McCulloch, who owns several Dandy properties including his own multimillion-dollar waterfront parcel, disagreed. All of his many dealings with the wetlands board and staff had been “professional and courteous.” McCulloch acknowledged that the board had sometimes asked him to do things that were more costly or different from what he’d planned, but said, “You win or lose by the rules. If there’s a problem, it’s with the rules, not the boards.”

McCulloch said the move to disband the wetlands board was the work of a few people who were “very good at bullying public servants.”

Board Chairman Don Wiggins, who seemed to favor disbanding the wetlands board, spoke emotionally about the number of waterfront property owners who have come to him in the past three years with concerns about how the board operated. He talked about “people who are all to pieces over a small piece of driveway,” but don’t have the savvy to navigate the process or funds to hire a contractor who does.

In voting against eliminating the board, however, Wiggins pledged to do what it takes to improve the board and the experience the county’s many waterfront property owners have when taking their issues to that board.