Camas resident David Gerton discusses the pollution in Lacamas Lake
Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in this letter to the editor are those of the author alone and may not reflect the editorial position of ClarkCountyToday.com
If I were an elected official in the city of Camas, it would be my obligation and fiduciary responsibility to inform the City Council, city staff, city attorney, paid consultants, and unelected city bureaucrats of a risk facing the citizens of this city. I AM NOT. However, my wife and I are residents and tax paying Camas citizens, having escaped Oregon and by moving to Prune Hill 18 years ago.
I have supported and campaigned for Camas City Council candidates as well as for county and state positions. For eight years I acted as president for the Renaissance Summit HOA. During that period, I had occasion to address the City Council in person and/or in writing on important issues. That paradigm worked and always netted solutions that were amenable to everyone involved. Until now.
The failed biofilter in Lacamas Shores is adding pollution to Lacamas Lake daily and has been for years. This fact was detailed in a Federal Citizen’s Clean Water Act lawsuit filed by a resident of Lacamas Shores. Any interested party could and should read the lawsuit and the decisions made by the Federal Judge who ruled in favor of the plaintiff.
The ‘staff report’ produced by city staff is in error that places the city and the citizens at great risk, financially and environmentally. These reasons pale in light of something more important. LIFE SAFETY. It is a matter of time before someone becomes seriously ill or dies because of the toxic algae blooms in Lacamas Lake. Note the warning signs placed around the lake by the city. These do not absolve the city of responsibility.
The Lacamas Shores HOA asked the city for permission to maintain their biofilter even though it was completely unnecessary given the existing permits already in place. The city said NO. In the staff report, the city said because you did not maintain it, you may now not maintain it and magically it has become (according to staff) a natural wetland.
In making this assertion, city staff seized operational control of a private biofilter which places the city liable for Clean Water Act violations and resulting fines which would be substantial.
The city should order the Lacamas Shores HOA to restore its biofilter to its original condition. The one that met standards devised by WA Dept of Ecology which enabled the granting of the permits to build Lacamas Shores in the first place. Restoration and maintenance is well defined by this city, Clark County, WA Dept of Ecology, and the Federal EPA. Lacamas Shores needs to use and follow those published standards.
It is common knowledge that Lacamas Shores is under a consent decree which only addresses storm water distribution and does not address storm water filtration. Filtration is the issue.
Discharging storm water into a wetland without pre-treatment or a permit violates Federal law. The Clean Water Act can occur where the storm water enters the biofilter or where it exits. Either way, it is a violation of the Clean Water Act.
If Lacamas Shores goes back to court over this CWA violation and is subsequently fined, they will most assuredly come after the city for interference and for seizing operational control.
Action must be taken. An enforcement order must be issued. This will solve the problem and will cost the city nothing.
David M. Gerton
Camas resident
Also read:
- Opinion: Half the road, full stop – Understanding pedestrian right-of-way
Doug Dahl explains how Washington’s law requires drivers to stop when a pedestrian is within one lane of their half of the road, not just when directly in front. - Opinion: The state’s RFK-proofing bill comes with a cost
Mandates like HB 2242 can lead to higher premiums as insurance companies absorb costs for new preventive services, affecting affordability statewide. - Opinion: What is the cost of a bridge?
John Ley argues the I-5 Bridge replacement’s soaring cost stems from costly extras like light rail, noting other states deliver larger, toll-free bridges for much less. - POLL: Do you agree with giving a state commission the power to remove an elected sheriff?
A new poll asks if a state commission—not voters—should have the power to remove an elected sheriff, following concerns raised by Clark County Sheriff John Horch. - Opinion: Defending Democracy by denying it?
Washington voters are blocked from weighing in on new income taxes as state lawmakers and officials bypass public input, drawing criticism from Northwest voices.
wpDiscuz
