By Diane Buckshnis
Edmonds Resident, Former City Councilmember
Posted Thursday, February 13, 2025
Intense weather patterns are happening across the world, and we must recognize the impact on our coastal communities.
We are stewards of our watersheds, and intense rain events have become the new challenge, especially because portions of south Edmonds and Esperance rely on underground injection wells (UIC) wells. This watershed, known as the Deer Springs Creek Watershed, has some of the most sensitive soils.
This unique soil recharges into a drinking water aquifer, a critical aquifer recharge area (CARA). Since this CARA is key for the water supplied to Olympic View Water and Sewer District, in 2021 Olympic View commissioners created a resolution warning the City to write its CARA code.
The council requested immediate action for code development, and money was put in the 2022 budget specifically for this code.
During 2023, the Planning Board, with Olympic View’s assistance, held five meetings and two public hearings. One recommendation was to prohibit UIC short wells in the CARAs to prevent future contamination of the aquifer, as the “forever chemicals” (PFAS) from stormwater was becoming a concern.
After I left office, a highly irregular Planning Board executive session occurred, and now their recommendation changed to allowing the wells in the CARAs. During council’s public process, many contested this change and another strongly worded resolution came from Olympic View’s commissioners.
The two prominent reasons: the Environmental Protection Agency had lowered its allowance of PFAS, and PFAS chemicals had been found at Madrona K-8 school in south Edmonds.
To understand Madrona’s use of UIC wells in the CARAs, Olympic View contracted with environmental firm Robinson Noble and their opposition to the use of UIC wells as best management practices.
When the CARA code came up for a vote, one councilmember stopped the vote until more scientific data regarding PFAS was obtained.
Unfortunately, at the next meeting, councilmembers voted 6-1 to pass CARA code despite that no additional scientific data was provided.
Records will show that the reason for the immediate change of the prohibition was due to facts surrounding the City’s loss to tree code lawsuit with Nathan Rimmer. The lawsuit contended that the City was “taking a portion of their property” by making Rimmer follow the code.
The administration used this same analogy for the CARA code, stating that developers may sue the City if the UIC prohibition remained in code as it would be considered the City “taking away their rights to build.” Support showing the timeline of the code drafting, the legal concerns of the Planning Board executive session and Rimmer lawsuit can be found on my website.
Because local retired scientist Joe Scordino and I felt the council decision was reckless, based on speculation of pending litigation, we contacted a prominent environmental attorney and formed a nonprofit, the Edmonds Environmental Council (EEC). Our attorney filed a petition to appeal this code with the Washington State Growth Management Hearings Board.
The mayor and council agreed to mediation as part of the appeal, and the EEC submitted a brief to the Snohomish County land use judge who took on the mediation case. I wrote a separate agenda memo for council as their discussion topic for their executive session as to provide guidance during the City’s mediation negotiations with EEC.
At the first mediation meeting, not one councilmember was present, and EEC balked. The City gave reasons: it rarely used councilmembers for mediation; the CARA area that allows the UIC wells was “built-out,” leaving only remodels or building detached dwelling units; and Olympic View could buy water elsewhere if the aquifer becomes tainted with PFAS.
EEC challenged those reasons: The last land-use mitigation included Councilmember Strom Peterson and myself for the Haines Wharf mediation; that Edmonds School District could surplus the old Madrona School allowing for housing; and in 2023, a large housing developer purchased two homes and built 11 homes. EEC felt it necessary that a councilmember be present to listen to the discussion to report back to the rest of council.
After recess, Mayor Mike Rosen alleged “trust concerns” and that his team, without a councilmember, had the knowledge and authority. The council’s legislative assistant was added, and the mediation discussions began.
Many times, the conversation returned to the Rimmer tree code lawsuit and the financial loss to the City, as it was not covered by insurance. Our environmental attorney reminded the city that CARAs are critical areas exempt from any “takings law” and the mediation judge confirmed this fact.”
At day’s end, a settlement was reached and included an interim ordinance either prohibiting the UIC wells or a moratorium until best-available science for PFAS was obtained. For City budget considerations, the 2018 Robinson Noble report could be updated to cover PFAS.
Councilmembers rejected the first agreement, as it was stated that it did not want to dissuade developers. A second settlement agreement excluded the interim ordinance and moratorium, but included the Robinson Noble report update.
At the next mediation meeting, which again had no councilmembers present, despite EEC’s request again, the City stated it wanted to select the contractor, so the second agreement was dejected. A third settlement agreement requesting a bona fide scientific report to cover PFAS . That third settlement agreement was rejected over the bona fide language. A fourth agreement was reached, with $60,000 set aside.
In the interim, the code still allows UIC short wells in this small area (320 acres) of Edmonds. As Paul Harvey would say, now you know the rest of the story. Should the City publicly announce to Olympic View customers why the City Council is allowing development prior to understanding the impacts of PFAS?
My website, dianebuckshnis.com/dianes-corner, has many documents to support this lengthy process relating to codes and the unintended consequences. It has a thorough expose piece with external links to municipal research covering critical areas and the takings laws.
Link to article:
https://www.edmondsbeacon.com/stories/administration-advice-taints-environmental-perspectives,112025