Rich Family Farm - Ag Rights & Code

We Won!

The Hearing Examiner has submitted his 18 page formal ruling. Not only will we be able to move forward with our farm, but it clearly establishes farming as a valued priority on our island. 

Some highlights from the ruling:

"The City has adopted a rather wide-open code interpretation procedure that arguably creates more problems than it resolves."

"...staff interpretation is not persuasive. It reads more like an attempt to rationalize a politically attractive outcome than an effort to provide a fair and objective reading of the code - an impression confirmed by staff testimony at the appeal hearing."

"The fundamental defect of the staff's regulatory approach was that it indulged in interpretations of the code that undervalued the Riches' interests as property owners seeking to establish a legislatively favored farm use.  The result was a scheme of regulatory interpretation that imposed excessive development limitations unrelated in some instances both to stated code standards and actual protective requirements, or else placed unduly burdensome limitations on the appellants under circumstances where less oppressive options were readily available."

"Trying to transform it into a tree preservation ordinance by means of various back door interpretations was an ill-conceived exercise that finds no credible support in the chapter language and subverts its essential policy and purpose."

" 'fully completed' would lead to an absurd result and could not have been intended.  First, the farm plan is a dynamic document that will continue to evolve as long as the property is being actively farmed; it probably will never be completely implemented.  Second, there is no compelling public policy that supports rapidly effecting all elements of the farm plan at the outset; gradual introduction of livestock to the farm over a number of years, for example, is more likely a good thing than a bad one from the perspective of avoiding adverse offsite impacts."

"placement into agricultural use is not a subterfuge for avoiding the more restrictive standards that apply to non-agricultural conversion of timberlands."

"Staff's attempt to force the Riches to maintain the 'nonfarmed buffer' in its current timbered state is not merely unsupported by any language to be found in the code.  It also would operate to unnecessarily diminish and perhaps even defeat the Riches' agricultural purposes in pursuing the intended conversion."

"The staff's windfirm condition requirement was piggy-backed onto the nonfarmed buffer timber preservation interpretation rejected above and thus was also felled with the same stroke.  In other words, the staff condition itself was not legally windfirm; when the first regulatory tree fell it pulled down the second regulatory tree with it."

"It appears undisputed that both Ms. Laughlin's characterization of the stormwater conveyance system downstream from the property and Ms. Hitch's subsequent review of it were based upon standard topographical data resources and not actual physical inspections of the downstream flow path."

To quote an old friend in a roundabout way - "We are the Riches'.  We don't do anything small."  This is a huge victory for all of us - fighting for local farming by ordinary people.  Standing up for what is right!

We did the hard work of fighting this battle to preserve our rights for all of Bainbridge Island - please help us by contributing to our legal fees so we can get to farming!

__________________________________________________________

The background, if you want more information:
Fight for the Right to Farm!

For over 20 years our family has dreamed of having our own working farm.  After a very long search to find the perfect place and save enough money, we bought a wonderful piece of land.  It is perfectly situated on Bainbridge Island – almost at the heart of the community.

Our farm was thoughtfully planned with the help of the Kitsap Conservation District to use permaculture and organic methods, good livestock management, pasture rotation, diverse crops and conservation.  We hope to have a thriving Crop Share Association selling locally to our neighbors.  We have an area set aside for the Farms to Schools Program and rows dedicated to Helpline House – our local food bank.  Our dream with community values in mind – what we hoped would be supported enthusiastically by all.

Unfortunately, we’ve run into issue after issue with our permitting.  Although our land has agriculture as a preferred use and is in a farming neighborhood, the City would rather preserve the trees than allow a new farm to be built.  Our land was a strawberry farm about 75 years ago and has rich sandy loam soils.  It doesn’t have critical areas, unstable slopes, wetlands or streams.  There is simply no reason to oppose the preferred use of this wonderful property.

The City of Bainbridge Island has put several unreasonable conditions on our Vegetation Management Permit which makes farming impossible.  They are using our permit as a means to rewrite land use code for the entire island, which will prevent future farms from being created and existing farms will have a difficult time managing their lands. 

So… Our fight isn’t just about building a home for our family, this is about the protection of farming for our entire community.

We’ve filed an appeal with the City of Bainbridge Island to fight four of the conditions.  They are:

 1.    1 general NPDES construction permit from the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) must be obtained by the applicant prior to any clearing, vegetation removal, or vegetation disturbance on the property.  A copy of this approval shall be provided shall be provided [sic] to the Department of Planning and Community Development (PCD) prior to commencing any clearing activity.

2.    A 25-foot nonfarmed buffer must be provided along the entire perimeter of the property.  In accordance with the Director’s code interpretation all trees and existing vegetation shall be retained within areas designed as a “nonfarmed buffer” with the exception of the construction entrance.

3.  The applicant’s farm plan, submitted with this application, shall be implemented within one year after the completion of the conversion harvest.  The applicant shall report the implementation of the farm plan when complete to PCD, and it shall be inspected and verified by PCD.  An extension of up to one additional year may be granted if necessary for full implementation.  Should the owner/applicant fail to implement the farm plan as required, this permit approval shall be revoked pursuant to BIMC 16.22.097, and revegetation and fines as described in that section shall apply.

4.  All residual forest areas, including the 25-foot nonfarmed buffer, shall be retained in windfirm condition pursuant to BIMC 16.22.060.A.3.  Prior to commencing any clearing activity, the applicant shall provide verification to PCD from a consulting arborist certified by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) that the retained vegetation on the site will remain in windfirm condition after the clearing activities proposed have been completed.  The dimensions of the nonfarmed buffers shall be increased and/or additional planting required as a result of the arborist’s recommendations to ensure a windfirm condition.  The buffer shall not be reduced below the 25-foot requirement as a result of the arborist’s recommendations.

A general explanation to the objections –

1.      The Department of Ecology and our family discussed the requirements for the Construction Stormwater Permit and they stated they do not feel our property meets the requirements to apply for it.  Although our land meets the size requirement for the permit, it does not discharge stormwater into waters of the state.  In general, this permit is designed for commercial developers or large housing developments or land with critical areas.

2.    A nonfarmed buffer is a conservation land use practice to help farmers manage their operations with minimal environmental impacts. It can be a variety of things depending on what an individual farm needs; hedgerows, pollinating shrubs or trees, grasses that filter farm runoff, raingardens, screening from nonagricultural parcels, etc.  There are helpful resources written by the USDA & Conservation Agencies that discuss the benefits of these buffers and how it helps increase habitat, support local bee populations, prevent runoff into streams, and other good land management techniques.  Nonfarm buffers are not native vegetation buffers.  Rewriting the definition of a nonfarm buffer would drastically alter the purpose of those buffers. In particular, for us it would prevent sunlight from reaching the crops & pastures, create a falling hazard and drastically reduce the area we can farm.  The symbiotic relationship of the buffer to benefit the farm and surrounding neighbors would be eliminated.

3.  Implementation means to start.  A Farm Plan is a living breathing document designed to change as the needs of the farm change, new science is developed or better techniques become apparent.  Land conditions and farmers abilities change over time.  To fully implement a farm in one year is not only financially impossible for us, it is physically unreasonable to complete that much work.  Farms take time to develop.  Good pasture takes time to mature.  Livestock must be added in a progression that makes sense for success.  Raw land takes time to compost before planting.  If you are doing things right, a farm is never finished.  Rushing a farm is one of the fastest ways to fail.

4.  Requiring the nonfarm buffer to remain in windfirm condition would mean we would be unable to clear our property.  Due to the shape and the fact that these trees have grown up together over the years, they will not be windfirm if cut to a 25 feet wide area.  The suggestion from City Staff was to expand the buffer to 50-75 feet around the entirety of our property.  This would leave us with 15 feet down the center for over two thirds of our land; completely negating the ability to farm.  As I mentioned earlier, a nonfarm buffer is not a native vegetation buffer.  Our property has a tremendous amount of invasive species.  If required to be “no touch”, scotchbroom, English Ivy, Holly and even tansy will continue to spread – all of which are toxic to livestock.  The nonfarm buffer has a purpose and actually enhances and beautifies a farm if done well.  The fines imposed for noncompliance are severely punitive and a strong armed tactic to prevent success.

 We’ve gathered Seasoned Farmers, Conservation Managers, Pollination Experts, Engineers and many Community Members to testify to the value of farming in our community.  Our community comprehensive plan is full of language to preserve, protect and promote farming on our island.  We’ve told our kids it is important to always stand up for what is right.  We are showing them through our actions this is good, honest work and to follow your dreams even when it is hard.  There is a values conversation happening in our community right now.  Farmers are aging quickly – the average age of a farmer is 60 and makes up less than 1% of our countries population.  It is a labor of love similar to being a firefighter or a teacher.  Please help us by supporting our legal battle to overturn these conditions and make farming a reality for our family!  If we are lucky enough to cover the costs of the legal battle, any additional funds will be put directly into building the farm and the first harvest goes to the food bank!