PORT LUDLOW VILLAGE COUNCIL
General Meeting Minutes
July 15, 2008
The meeting was convened at 3:00 p.m. at the Bay Club.
Present: Bill Browne, Gene Carmody, Don Clark, Adele Govert, Jack McKay, Lynn Gauché, Larry Nobles, Frank Siler, Dean Mosier and Elizabeth Van Zonneveld (LMC rep.).
Absent: Tom McCay and SBCA representative
Lynn Gauché called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. and ensured that there was a quorum. Approximately 25 persons were in attendance
MSP to approve the minutes of the June 5, 2008 General meeting (all ayes).
Community Reports:
Port Ludlow Associates: Diana Smeland – gave an update as follows:
Appeal on Ludlow Bay Village has been dropped which means that the project has been approved. Permitting will start next week. A condition of the approval was that all permitting has to be complete before work commences.
Ludow Cove 2 (Log dump area) hearings will begin August 22. Community members are invited to express their interests.
Olympic Terrace II has three spec homes under construction which should be completed soon. At this time no new homes are planned until presales take place.
Treasurer’s Report: Gene Carmody gave the June 2008 report (see Appendix A).
Money donations have been received for IMQ legal fund and deposited in a separate account.
MSP to accept the Financials (all ayes)
Committee Reports:
Utilities Committee: Phil Otness, Chair, reported on the County’s progress in moving the current PSE electrical utility activity to the Jefferson County Public Utility District. Adequate petition signatures have been gathered to place the question on the November ballot. This may be a great chance to purchase power from the Bonneville Dam source at a much cheaper cost than integrating these purchases with PSE purchases to serve the entire region. The PUD would operate the county level service and buy power directly from Bonneville. Also the service capabilities would be stationed in Jefferson County and in, all probability react to service needs more quickly. A number of similar small counties are considering this preferred treatment in the sales of Bonneville hydroelectric power. PSE will be going to great lengths to prevent this separation from their company. The November ballot will be asking the voters to have the PUD to study the economics and process of attempting to take over the electrical power service.
Iron Mountain Committee: Lynn Gauche, Chair, indicated that a recent email (Appendix B) to most Port Ludlow residents is still fairly current in regard to PLVC’s Iron Mountain plan to open a rock quarry adjacent to the Shine mine. At this time Iron Mountain has refused Pope Resources request to delete the 22-24 acres from the lease that contains PLA’s easement on the area covering both water rights and the Timberton Trail. Iron Mountain has also refused to enter into a dialogue with PLVC representatives concerning their intended undertaking.
Smeland encouraged Port Ludlow residents to attend the July 25 Iron Mountain hearing being held at the Bay Club at 2 p.m.
Recycling Committee: Steve Failia, Chair, reported that residents can recycle electronic equipment and rechargeable batteries on August 21 at the recycle center. The cost will be 35 cents/pound with any net revenue being split between the CEA and PLVC.
Trails Committee: Soozie Darrow, Committee Scribe, indicated that there were over 190 hikers who hiked the Niblicks Loop on opening day, July 4. Everyone enjoyed the opening cermonies and congratulated the committee for completing the 2 ½ mile trail.
Digital Village: Dean Mosier, co-chair, noted that the committee, because of illness and other commitments, has been dormant for the past 6 weeks.
Old Business:
Dean Mosier, Tom McCay, Dan Meade and Gene Carmody will be developing a policy to give the board guidance in responding to funding requests. They intend to deliver the first policy draft at the October Board Meeting.
Larry Nobles provided an update on the installation of the brackets on the light polls standing the Village/Paradise Road Island. The first banners are being designed and purchased. The Art Walk banners should be hung Wednesday or Thursday.
Adele Govert gave an update of the Port Ludlow bus stop shelters on both sides of the Village/Paradise Road Island.
Lynn Gauche and the board discussed preparations for the Annual Meeting and election of six new board members. Frank Siler and Don Clark have agreed to prepare, print and mail the ballot. Late in August Frank and Don will need everyone to participate in preparing the final ballot package for mailing at least 30 days before the Annual meeting scheduled for October 2. Ballot Boxes will be placed in both the Beach and Bay Clubs.
Candidate names (at least 3 each from North and South Bay) should be given to Frank Siler or Don Clark by August 10, so that their candidacy can be announced in the September issue of the Voice. Candidate qualifications and statement of interest in the PLVC board membership should be forwarded to Frank or Don by August 15 for inclusion in the ballot and the October issue of the Voice.
New Business: None
Schedule of Future Meetings:
August General Meeting – Thursday, August 7, 3:00 PM – Beach Club
August Workshop Meeting – Tuesday, August 19, 3:00 PM – Beach Club
Meeting adjourned at 4:25 p.m.
Respectfully,
Bill Browne
PLVC Secretary
Appendix A June Financial Report
FINANCIAL REPORT FOR JUNE 2008
DEPOSITS PLVC OPERATING ACCOUNT
FRIDAY MARKET
6/6/08--$125.00
6/13/08--$275.00
6/20/08--$340.00
6/27/08--$350.00
6/13/08—COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION INSURANCE SOLUTIONS REFUND--$6.34
6/19/08---CONVERTED CD $5198.34
TOTAL: $6294.68
DEBITS PLVC OPERATING ACCOUNT
CHK#2543 PL VOICE $200.00
CHK#2544 AT YOUR SERVICE PLVC MINUTES $52.50
CHK#2545 ADELE GOVERT PLVC SOCIAL $73.52
CHK#2546 BILL BROWNE PLVC SOCIAL $66.00
CHK#2547 TOM STONE DISASTER SERVICES $28.51
TRANSFERRED $1000.00 INTO TRAILS ACCOUNT
TOTAL: $1420.53
FUND BALANCES
PLVC OPERATING ACCOUNT $7,760.69
PLVC CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT $15,746.83
TOTAL: $23,507.52
PLVC TRAILS ACCOUNT $10,461.36
IRON MOUNTAIN LEGAL FUND STATUS AS OF 15 JULY 2008
DEBITS: $10,587.41
BALANCE: $16,007.59
Appendix B Email Updating PLVC’s preparation for the Iron Mountain plan to Open their Mine adjacent to the Shine Mine and Port Ludlow MPR.
Subject:
Iron Mt. Mining Activities
There are three informational items in this email. The first is a note about an
upcoming meeting regarding Iron Mt. Mining from Lynn Gauche, President of PLVC.
The second is letter an update on activities of SBCA and PLVC relating to Iron
Mt. Mining. The third item is a list of 15 questions/answers presented to Jon
Rose, and others, representing Pope Resources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First Item:
From: Lynn Gauche, President, Port Ludlow Village Council.
To Key Members of Port Ludlow,
You are receiving the attached files because you have a leadership position in
Port Ludlow in which you represent many other residents. As such we are hoping
you also have access to an email address list that would allow you to contact
your group members and share the attached Iron Mountain Update # 2. We are
also attaching the Questions & Answers from a joint meeting with PLA, Pope
Resources, SBCA and PLVC in which Pope Resources was asked to answer a list of
questions pertinent to the proposed mining project. These questions were
assembled from lists of questions received by PLVC from Port Ludlow residents
and also the PLVC Council members.
We, the committee to Stop/Contain the Iron Mountain Mining Proposal led by Lynn
Gauche, would like to get current information into the hands of as many
residents as possible as soon as the information becomes available. In
addition to this and future emails we will post current information at the Beach
Club, the Bay Club, the Golf Club House and on our web site, http://www.plvc.org/.
The current call to action is for hundreds of residents to show up at the July
25th 2:00 PM hearing at the Bay Club and let your voice be heard. We are
asking residents to stand up at the hearing, state their name and address and
that they are opposed to the Iron Mountain mining project. (Without stating
their name and address their comments will not count.)
The topic to be discussed then is the Conditional Use Permit which Iron Mountain
seeks from the county. This hearing will be a first step in our ability to
contain the Iron Mountain project should we be unsuccessful in stopping them
altogether. This permitting process continues simultaneously with the appeal
we filed against the original decision from the hearing examiner to allow Iron
Mountain to proceed under the grandfathered clause "Diminishing Asset
Doctrine". If they had not been able to use the right to operate under this
grandfathered doctrine then Iron Mountain would be limited to mining 10 acres at
a time, giving us ample opportunity to understand the impact of the additional
noise, trucks and dust. With rights to mine all 142 acres from the start their
operation will be 3.5 times larger than the existing Shine Quarry and would
remove two substantial ridges that currently provide a sound/dust barrier from
the existing Shine Quarry.
Please send the attachments to your community group immediately so that they can
be informed and show up at the hearing on July 25th, 2PM in the Bay Club.
With thanks for your support,
Lynn Gauche, President, Port Ludlow Village Council
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second Item: Update on activities
On June 17, 2008 you received a letter from the Port Ludlow Village Council
describing the proposed Iron Mountain Quarry's intent to open a rock mine
operation adjacent to the Shine Quarry just off of Rt. 104. We asked for
contributions to assist us in protecting our property values and quality of
life. This letter contains an update in our goal to insure that our voice is
heard and considered in the development of the mine.
Our appeal to become a recognized participant in the permitting process for the
Iron Mountain Quarry proposal was successful. On June 16 the Jefferson County
Superior Court judge ruled that the PLVC, PLA and SBCA were parties with
standing in the process. Iron Mountain initially asked that Port Ludlow's PLVC,
PLA and SBCA not be considered as we would not be impacted. A Superior Court
trial which should determine the process to be used in developing the permit
will probably be held in October. The PLVC wants to insure that the permitting
process includes conditions that will help maintain the qualities of life we
experience today.
Iron Mountain has also asked the county for a code interpretation on Conditional
Use Permits. This code governs the process that Iron Mountain must follow in
seeking permits to open the mine. This process, depending on how it is
interpreted, could involve Environmental Protection studies and the content of
the conditional permitting. We strongly urge residents to attend these meetings
and express their concerns about the mining proposal. Your voice either at the
hearings or in email to David Wayne Johnson, Jefferson County Associate Planner,
will absolutely make a difference in the outcome. This first hearing is
scheduled for July 25th at 2:00 PM We were able to get this hearing moved to the
Bay Club here in Port Ludlow so that many more of you could come and raise your
voices.
Other important dates/meetings will be made public by the PLVC through email,
articles in the VOICE and other news media. We may also suggest ways that you
can have the most impact on the outcome. Sometimes we may not have much notice
so keep you eyes open for new information on meeting dates and locations for the
Iron Mountain permitting process and/or environmental hearings.
In support of our efforts to stop or contain Iron Mountain, three PLVC board
members, two SBCA board members, PLA representatives, and a Jefferson County
Planner met with Pope Resources representatives to discuss the nature of the
proposed development of a rock mine adjacent to the Shine mine. In preparation
for the meeting we developed a list of 14 questions to provide focus for the
discussions. Attached you will find a list of the questions and our
interpretation of their responses. The document has been forwarded to Jon
Rose, Pope Resources Vice President for Development, who indicated that the
interpretation of the responses was satisfactory.
There has been a healthy response to PLVC's letter regarding contributions to
the council's legal fund. We would like to thank those making contributions. If
you have not done so please consider sending a contribution of $100 as the
council's earlier letter suggested. If you can't afford that amount, please
send whatever you can afford to give. As stated in PLVC's letter, any money not
used will be returned on a pro rata basis. If you did not receive a letter from
the council or read the front page request in the June VOICE or you have
questions and want further clarification, contact PLVC Council members: Lynn
Gauché at 437-1030 or lgauche@msn.com or Bill Browne at 437-8099 or BrowneW@bus.oregonstate.edu.
Please share this email with neighbors and friends who do not have access to
email or list an email address and forward it to others around Port Ludlow who
may not be on the North Bay or South Bay clubs mailing lists. Thank you.
We will attempt to keep you posted as these hearings move along and inform you
where your assistance could be helpful.
L. M. Gauché
Lynn M. Gauché, President, Port Ludlow Village Council
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Third Item: Questions/Answers Pope Resources (PR)/Iron Mountain (IM)
On June 12, 2008 Lynn Gauché, Larry Nobles, Bill Browne, John Cragoe and Dan
Meade met with Jon Rose (PR, Director of Real Estate), Tom Kametz (PR, Director
of Timberlands), Sue Schroeder (PR, Director of Port Gamble Development), Diana
Smeland (PLA, President), Miriam Villiard (PLA), and David Wayne Johnson (Port
Ludlow Jefferson County Planner) to discuss the questions below with PR
representatives and become informed in regard to the proposed Iron Mountain
Quarry development. After an opening background statement by Jon Rose attempts
were made to answer these questions (Developed by Lynn Gauche, Bill Browne and
other members of the community). Our best understanding of these responses
follows each question.
Jon Rose gave a brief history of the Port Ludlow development initiated by Pope &
Talbot, with the real estate development part of the company and part of its
Jefferson County timber land spun off as PR in 1995. PR sold the Port Ludlow
part of the real estate development part of PR to PLA in 2001. During the late
1990s PR attempted to bridge the gulf between the company and Port Ludlow
residents by developing a planning forum to obtain agreement on issues that then
existed. The trail system and subsequent easement was part of this agreement.
PR's major timberland business is currently tree cutting (99%) and mining (1%)
and their other major business is Real Estate Management (excluding actual
building and ownership of businesses on the properties developed). They want to
be good neighbors while developing their properties.
Issue Statement: Pope Resources (PR) developed a beautiful Master Planned
Resort here in Port Ludlow which Port Ludlow Associates (PLA) continues to grow
and improve. Iron Mountain's (IM) mining operations adjacent to our boundaries
could have significant impacts on our environment, aquifers and property values.
1) How will Port Ludlow residents be assured that there will never be
damage/contamination to the OWSI aquifer? For instance could an earth quake
rupture the supposed protection divide between the mining operations and the
aquifer? Jon Rose indicated that no one can guarantee never, but strongly feels
that the proposed mining operation would not cause damage to the aquifer. As far
as chemicals used for the operations there should be none. Currently the forest
spraying, homeowner spraying and fertilizing, golf course spraying and
fertilizing, and other chemical introduced through home ownership would cause
more contamination than the mine.
2) How will Port Ludlow be protected from rock mining operations, rock
crushing and trucking noise?
a) Will mining take place M-F after 6 p.m. possibly causing light reflection
and noise into Port Ludlow? Believes that IM's operation would be much like
Shine's as the employment costs would escalate substantially if they mined
during the night and over the weekend. Currently, Shine has trucks leaving the
site Saturday mornings.
b) What will be done to insure that there will not be a negative impact on
Port Ludlow's air quality from blasting, rock crushing and trucking
operations? The environmental impact studies and rulings should provide for
protection.
3) Approximately how many IM rock trucks will be exiting the mining site each
day?
a) How many might go through Port Ludlow (possibly on Oak Bay Road)?
Don't know, but this will certainly be covered in the environmental phase of the
permitting process.
4) Will the current and future clear cutting open channels for added noise
from State Route 104? Most remaining trees in the area of concern are less than
20 years and it will take 20 more years before harvest. There are some small
areas with mature trees that will be harvested.
5) The golf course is a bird sanctuary. What will be done to negate the
impact of mining operations and related clear cutting:
a) On the bird population and their habitats around the golf course and in
our community?
b) On other native wildlife in the area? As the 142 acres are adjacent to the
Shine mine they believe that there wouldn't any measurable effect.
6) Twenty-two of the 142 acres leased fall within the area of easements
granted to PLA by PR at the time of sale in 2001.
a) Why has PR leased land for mining purposes when they granted easements on
the same land for our trails and utilities?
b) How will these easements be protected? In the planning forum (1998) the
Port Ludlow Trails Committee accepted the fact that resource & timber harvesting
would take place on PR property.
7) What will be done for the rehabilitation of the Port Ludlow Timberton
Trail? When? The area will be replanted.
8) Can PR develop a buffer zone around Port Ludlow's MPR that will exclude
mining operations and other similar disruptions to our environmental and
economic quality of life? Tom Kametz and Jon Rose offered to call Iron Mountain
about the possibility of removing the northernmost 22 acres from the lease, as
it is the area that is of most concern to us.
9) Is rock mining the best long-term use of the 140+ acres of land owned by
Pope Resources? Yes, economically it is in the best business interests of PR to
use the land in this manner.
10) Has PR done economic/environmental studies on how similar size operations
affect local communities? No
a) Has IM done such studies and presented these findings to PR? Don't know.
IM will have to respond to SEPA during the permitting process.
b) Has the Bureau of Mines done similar studies? Don't know.
11) In terms of expanding the mining operations to include an added 142 acres
was Mason (Shine) Quarry considered? No, IM approached PR on an unsolicited
basis in regard to the lease and development. Mason is considered an
environmentally-sensitive operator (a known) versus the unknown record of IM.
PR hadn't looked into IM's record as mining is highly regulated in regard to
operations and effects on the environment.
12) What are PR's expectations for use of the property after the lease
expires? The top soil will be replaced and trees will be planted.
a) What happens if IM abandons the property at any stage of their expected
stay? Bonding is required to cover this possibility.
b) What type of reclamation will take place for the entire mining site? The
top soil will be replaced and trees will be planted.
c) Will this take place as the mine expands of after mining is finished? This
will take place as required.
d) Are there any bonding requirements for rehabilitating the site should IM
abandon the site? Yes. Same question for Pope Resources?
13) Does the IM lease set the stage for the continual addition of other
mining operations on PR property surrounding the MPR? Rose does not believe
that there is a market for added rock mining in the area. Most areas are served
by local quarries because of the high transportation costs.
a) Is there other adjacent PR property with "diminished asset rights"?
b) If so, will it also be leased for mining? When?
c) Does PR have plans for further clear-cutting of timber within the Port
Ludlow easement area? Yes, as the timber matures.
14) Where are IM's major markets? Their major market will be the same as
Shine's. It was estimated that Shine's current lease will provide rock for 10
more years.
a) Will ownership transfer of the rock take place within Jefferson County
giving Jefferson County tax revenue of will it be elsewhere? If so, where?
Again it will be the same as the Shine Quarry.
b) Will any of the rock be transferred onto barges or other water shipping
containers? Not to their knowledge.
15) Did PR disclose to PLA that the PR property adjacent to the MPR would be
mined? If so, when? No.