FREELAND — A potential development moratorium that may come as Freeland marches to cityhood has some residents concerned.
Nancy Walker, a Holmes Harbor resident, said a building ban would hurt local businesses and residents looking for housing.
“A building moratorium would have a tremendous impact on people,” she said.
“For instance people working in construction and banking would be negatively affected. The cost of housing would rise because there wouldn’t be any available,” she said.
The likelihood of a moratorium on new development came up earlier this month when Stan Finkelstein, executive director of the Association of Washington Cities, met with members of the Freeland Chamber of Commerce. At a recent chamber luncheon, Finkelstein outlined the incorporation process and the transition to cityhood.
Instituting a building moratorium was one of several ideas presented by Finkelstein.
Still, it has some people worried.
Walker, who is representing the
Holmes Harbor community association during the incorporation process, said she was caught by surprise by the suggestion that Freeland adopt a land use/building moratorium during its transition to becoming a city.
Finkelstein explained the moratorium would only be enacted during the transition from an unincorporated area to a city.
Finkelstein said the suggestion for the building moratorium was based on
Federal Way’s work to become a city. Without the moratorium, King County was able to grant building permits before Federal Way adopted its own land-use ordinances, he said.
The area affected, he added, was much larger than Freeland’s proposed city boundaries.
“It is 20 times the size of Freeland,” he said.
Walker is critical of the incorporation process. She said residents need more information before they can vote on the issue of cityhood.
“I think the incorporation committee is moving too fast and not providing us with enough information, especially what the costs will be,” Walker said.
“I have the feeling we are being railroaded into making a decision with too few facts,” she said.
For instance, Holmes Harbor has its own sewer system. Walker and other critics say they shouldn’t have to pay for Freeland’s new sewer system.
“We have paid dearly for our sewer system,” she said. “They can’t assess us for the proposed Freeland sewer, but they can tax us for other things.”
Finkelstein, however, said that Freeland has a very good chance at becoming a city.
“They are right on target with their planning,” he said.
Finkelstein said the credit goes to the incorporation committee.
“They’ve researched the process well and are knowledgeable and sophisticated,” he said.
Finkelstein said Freeland is mirroring the process of another Northwest area, Sudden Valley, southeast of Bellingham.
At the chamber meeting on Feb. 12, Finkelstein presented the pros and cons of the incorporation process and the transition to cityhood. He is expected to make more public appearances in Freeland in the future.
Finkelstein said the transition process, which he presented is a “tried and true process” developed in part in cooperation with a transition city manager for Kenmore.
Finkelstein explained the incorporation process, some of which has already been wrapped up for Freeland; set the proposed boundaries, form a committee, develop an incorporation study, start the petition process, complete the boundary review by the board of county commissioners, hold hearings on the petition, and hold the election to create the city. Also necessary: the election of city officials and the creation of a transition plan between voter approval and Freeland’s actual incorporation.
Finkelstein said there are pros and cons for incorporation.
Local control and dissatisfaction with county government are two reasons supporting cityhood for Freeland; the challenge of providing municipal services and the negative impact on county government and special taxing districts such as Fire District 3 are reasons against incorporation.
Gayle Saran can be reached at 221-5300 or gsaran@southwhidbeyrecord.com.
