Public concerns ignored says Mulliken

State rep. blasts "new" Ecology rules

OLYMPIA (6-28-00)---Last summer, strong public outcry over drastic new restrictions proposed by the Department of Ecology (DOE) on the use of Washington's shorelines led the agency to delay their implementation.

Nearly a year later, DOE Czar Tom Fitzsimmons has offered a new plan, but it virtually mirrors last year's version, according to State Rep. Joyce Mulliken, R-Ephrata.

Mulliken, co-chair of the House Local Government Committee, today described DOE's new proposal to change the Shoreline Management Act as an intrusive abuse of state power that disregards public concerns over the expansive new regulations.

"Gov. (Gary) Locke and the DOE have essentially ignored all of the fundamental concerns we heard from citizens time and again last summer at hearings all across the state," said Mulliken.

"From local government officials to farmers to business owners to average citizens, the proposal was universally criticized. I was told by DOE officials then that the plan would be revised to address those public concerns, but that simply hasn't occurred. In fact, in many ways, this year's proposal is even worse."

Mulliken is especially troubled that the new recommendations would once again place such heavy new financial burdens on landowners and local governments.

She said the regulations would lead to the unconstitutional taking of private land by the state, and at the same time leave local governments liable for substantial costs.

"This is an unfunded mandate against local governments and an unprecedented assault on the rights of private property owners," Mulliken continued. "This is big government tying the hands of everyone who owns shoreline property, as well as the local communities where they live, and then even charging them for the rope."

In addition, the cost to implement and enforce these new restrictions would be enough to bankrupt many local governments, said Mulliken.

"Last year's proposal was estimated to cost local governments upwards of $20 million and this one places even a greater burden on them," Mulliken explained.

"DOE says it hasn't completed an economic impact analysis of this new proposal yet. Well, we need to know how our smaller cities and counties are going to be impacted."

"Basically, the governor and DOE have ignored the input of private property owners, businesses and local governments. They haven't been allowed any input in this process, and yet they will bear the full brunt of the cost and the liability.

"The DOE should not be in the business of stripping the right of individuals to own property or forcing huge unfunded mandates on local governments. But that's exactly what would happen if these proposals are enacted into policy," she said.

Mulliken said she expects the same public reaction this year that DOE's proposal got a year ago.

Over the next three weeks, DOE will hold public hearings on the plan around the state.

"Last year, DOE tried the same tact and the public wouldn't let them get away with it," said Mulliken.

"I fully expect, when citizens see how onerous and expensive these regulations are, that they will again flood these public hearings to demand a greater level of participation in the process and more accountability from the decision-makers at DOE.

"State agencies should not be making public policy decisions," she concluded. "That's the role of the Legislature. When agencies overstep their authority like this, it cuts the public out of the process and they won't stand for it."

CONTACT: Rep. Joyce Mulliken (509) 754-6000