tool name

close
tool goes here

Wary of lawsuits, Whatcom County rewrites slaughterhouse rules

Published: Feb. 15, 2013 at 4:00 a.m. PST
0 comments

A proposal to allow slaughterhouses on Whatcom County farmland got a major rewrite this week, after the threat of a legal challenge. A group called Friends of Whatcom County has bombarded the county council with strongly worded emails opposing the proposed ordinance.

For the group, there simply is nothing worse than a slaughterhouse. The ill effects would be far-reaching, from extinction of Nooksack River chinook salmon to "bad karma," said Douglas Tolchin, director of research for Friends of Whatcom.

"Slaughter and rendering really are the most notoriously noisome land uses imaginable, with potentially terrible consequences for both human health and the environment," group member Tip Johnson wrote in a Jan. 7 email to the council.

Emails such as another one Johnson sent the council on Dec. 4, 2012, amounted to a thinly veiled threat to appeal the slaughterhouse ordinance to the Growth Management Hearings Board, which hears complaints about excessive growth outside of cities.

"You propose a willy-nilly industrial rezone of the entire (agricultural) district," Johnson wrote. "That is a laughingstock matter for the Growth Management Hearings Board. It's illegal. Don't do it."

The emails prompted council members to meet with county attorneys behind closed doors on Tuesday, Feb. 12. Immediately after that meeting, the council Planning and Development Committee met in public and introduced the new language.

"It was a very real threat of legal action against the county," council member Ken Mann said in an interview. "We take that seriously and took a close look at our ordinance in that light."

The new ordinance also takes into account criticisms from other citizens and members of the council. The intent of the latest version, according to Planning Manager Mark Personius, was to establish what the council has wanted all along - small, locally operated slaughterhouses.

Provisions of the new proposal, which are still subject to change:

-- Maximum building size of 5,000 square feet, or 10,000 for a larger category that requires a public hearing.

-- "Kill floor" limited to no more than 1,000 square feet, or 1,200 in the larger category.

-- A limit of six slaughterhouses on farmland.

-- Public notice to neighbors.

-- No processing of animal byproducts.

-- No poultry.

The changes were "a step in the right direction," Tolchin said, but he was suspicious of council's motives. The restrictive set of rules could be just enough to pass legal scrutiny, only to open the door to less regulated slaughterhouses, Tolchin said.

"If it goes forward, this establishes a precedent for what they really want, which is an unlimited number of relatively unregulated slaughterhouses," Tolchin said.

Council member Barbara Brenner said in an interview the ordinance may introduce too many regulations, but she might "hold my nose and vote for it."

"It would be nice to get something passed," Brenner said. "When it works out, we can look at it again in the future."

At the public meeting on Tuesday, more than a dozen people spoke about the latest slaughterhouse proposal. While some were opposed, several supported allowing small slaughterhouses as part of a local food movement.

Some farmers spoke for slaughterhouses but against a limit on the number allowed, as that would impede business growth.

"You can't preserve farmland without preserving the farmer first," said Jessica Elenbaas of Farmer Ben's in Lynden.

The council will hold a formal public hearing before considering a vote on the latest ordinance. The hearing date hasn't been announced.

Reach Ralph Schwartz at ralph.schwartz@bellinghamherald.com or 360-715-2289. Read his Politics blog at blogs.bellinghamherald.com/politics or get updates on Twitter at @bhampolitics.

JOIN THE DISCUSSION | Register here

We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part — and abiding by these simple rules. A thorough explanation of rules of conduct can be found in our Terms of Service. If you have any questions, including why your comment may not be showing immediately after you submit it, be sure to visit the commenting FAQ.

CONTESTS

Similar stories

  • Board: Whatcom County still has work to do on lake, rural growth rules

    Whatcom County is not doing enough to protect water quality in Lake Whatcom, and developers remain barred from thousands of acres of rural land because the county has not yet complied with the state's growth management law.

    The County Council has six months to approve another ordinance governing development on rural land and protections for the lake that supplies drinking water to about 100,000 residents.

    The Growth Management Hearings Board released a 93-page order on Friday, Jan. 4, outlining ways the county fell short on its most recent attempt to comply with the state Growth Management Act.

  • One-acre lots could be allowed in new Lake Whatcom development moratorium

    A temporary but longstanding moratorium against small-lot development around Lake Whatcom could be passed one of two ways at the Whatcom County Council meeting, Tuesday, Jan. 15.

    A moratorium on development on lots smaller than five acres in the Lake Whatcom watershed has been in effect since 2005, council member Sam Crawford said. The temporary ban must be renewed by council every six months.

    The moratorium is intended to contain the amount of pollution caused by runoff from developed lots. Lake Whatcom provides drinking water to about 100,000 Bellingham-area residents.

  • Long-awaited vote on 8,844-acre Lake Whatcom park expected Tuesday

    Barring a delay, the "reconveyance," an issue that has dogged the Whatcom County Council for six years, will be decided at the council meeting Tuesday, March 12.

  • City Council wrestles with cost of boat inspections at Lake Whatcom

    BELLINGHAM - City Council members still hope to avoid a taxpayer subsidy of the boat inspection plan for Lake Whatcom, but they have yet to reach agreement with the Whatcom County Council on how much boaters will pay for a legally required inspection sticker.

    At a Monday, March 25, committee discussion, City Council members appeared to be moving toward a boat inspection ordinance that would allow the city's public works director to set the inspection sticker price, with an eye toward covering the estimated annual cost of about $140,000 for the program.

    The goal of the inspections is to head off the introduction of destructive species, such as zebra and quagga mussels, into the lake.

  • Pierce County working on its own pot rules

    As the state prepares for today's release of draft rules to control the marijuana market, Pierce County is slowly developing its own plans to zone where pot can be legally grown, processed and sold.