Two weeks after buying 400 acres of state land south of Sequim, the County, its consultant, and FEMA held a well-attended Dungeness River Off-Channel Reservoir open house. However, many community members left the two-hour presentation with more questions than answers, and several wonder if the benefits outweigh the risks.
Finding fault
David Rice, the principal water resources engineer with the County’s consultant, Anchor QEA, talked about the seismic hazards of having an above-ground reservoir south of Sequim. Rice explained that a 2007 US Geological Survey Study identified that the “Sequim Fault” ran below the proposed site. As a result, the future reservoir has been moved slightly south to an area with a “low potential of deformation.”
Kelly, an attendee who lives directly north and downhill from the proposed reservoir, commented that earthquake risk still concerns her. She had contacted her homeowner’s insurance provider earlier that day and discovered that protection against flooding would cost an additional $3,000 to $5,000 annually.
“In 1964, a 9.2 earthquake hit Alaska,” Kelly explained. “If the ground jumps ten feet in one spot, and drops another ten right next to it, the dam of this reservoir will break. So, what is going to happen to those of us who live north?” Kelly asked three times what kind of emergency this would be classified as so her insurer could provide an accurate quote. Despite representatives from FEMA being in attendance, her question went unanswered.
There will be additional seismic hazard analysis once excavation begins.
There could be possible potential benefits, maybe
The County website dedicated to the reservoir states that aquifer recharge will “possibly generate mitigation credits for the Dungeness Water Exchange.”
This means that if water were sent to aquifer charging stations to replenish groundwater, Sequim might be able to authorize more developments (like the 600-home neighborhood proposed for Sequim Bay) while staying within the confines of the Dungeness Water Rule.
A county handout said that when the reservoir is built, “the result will be increased groundwater levels in the heavily tapped shallow aquifer.”
Under “community benefits,” the same handout stated, “Aquifer Recharge — Stored water from the reservoir can be used for aquifer recharge to increase groundwater levels in the heavily tapped shallow aquifer as well as augment flows in local streams.”
Many residents worry their wells will go dry once the irrigation ditches fed by the reservoir are converted into pipelines. Still, the County’s Deputy Public Works Director, Steve Gray, said one community benefit is the “potential for infiltration and aquifer recharge.”
However, later in the meeting, Gray distanced the project from any aquifer recharge potential. “The reservoir project itself is not the aquifer recharge project,” Gray told a concerned attendee.
In other words, the listed community benefit of “aquifer recharge” is uncertain. That’s a surprise since the North Olympic Development Council (NODC), a nongovernmental organization led by Commissioner Mark Ozias, published documents in 2022 saying the reservoir would “promote aquifer recharge.”
Resident Rose Marschall of Clallam Freedom Alliance said she recently attended a public meeting about a proposed 600-home development on Sequim Bay. “We were told by the City that we have more than enough water in our watershed. Now here, you’re saying — that’s the east side, by the way — you’re saying right here that ‘decreasing water supplies is the biggest climate concern for eastern Clallam County.’ Gee, who’s telling the truth here?”
In a pattern that repeated throughout the meeting, Gray encouraged Marschall to contact another agency with her concerns, in this instance, the Washington Water Trust.
Gray reemphasized that the reservoir was for irrigation water, not drinking water. However, the NODC has also identified the Dungeness River Management Team (a partnership between the County and Jamestown Tribe that supports the reservoir) as a “case study or funding option” for ensuring sufficient potable (drinking) water is available for an influx of migrants, refugees, homeless, and transient populations. The Clallam Conservation District, which manages the piping project for irrigators, is also mentioned.
Fred Millar asked what economic benefit construction would have for Clallam County. After seeing so many construction projects go to contractors on the I-5 corridor, he’d like to see some jobs offered to locals. “Why can’t we put this money for this thing into our young kids that need jobs that are driving to Seattle at one o’clock in the morning so they can put food on their table and pay their taxes?” he asked. “That’s why I’m here more than anything else.”
Deputy Director Gray highlighted the benefits for fish and irrigators while noting that climate resiliency would benefit the entire community. He hoped that, once construction began, some of the local contractors would be awarded bids.
Commitment to transparency is murky
During the Towne Road project, Commissioners Ozias and French, DCD Director Bruce Emery, County Engineer Joe Donisi, and County Habitat Biologist Cathy Lear participated in multiple closed-door meetings with the Jamestown Tribe. These sessions, held at the Tribe’s Blyn campus, discussed the Tribe’s demands that a 0.6-mile section of Towne Road have stormwater treatment technology installed that exceeded stringent Department of Ecology requirements.
These exchanges about a public project, paid for by taxpayers, were held on a sovereign nation’s land where laws requiring government transparency do not apply. The decisions made during these discussions drove up the project’s cost considerably.
Dungeness resident Kärin Cummins expressed her distrust in the reservoir project, noting that the partnership between the County and Tribe on Towne Road resulted in massive cost overruns that taxpayers shouldered. “Can you guarantee that any and all meetings and/or correspondence will be on public land so that there is complete transparency?” she asked.
County leaders could not agree to allow public access and visibility for all future reservoir meetings. Cummins suggested that if the county cannot guarantee complete transparency, it should not move forward with the project.
Full steam ahead
There were two notable absences at Tuesday’s open house.
The Jamestown Tribe had a booth but did not participate in the presentation or answer questions about the reservoir it has campaigned for. Although the Tribe was mentioned several times as having concerns, those concerns were not discussed with the public.
Also absent was the elected official who will oversee this project. Director of Community Development (DCD) Bruce Emery did not attend. The Clallam County Charter requires that the DCD Director “shall administer, enforce and advise the County Commissioners on all laws,” including “watershed planning and floodplains.” According to our County Charter, Director Emery should be leading this project, not his staff or the commissioners.
A DCD director’s role in massive infrastructure projects like this is crucial. In August, Commissioner Ozias was asked why the Jamestown Tribe breached the dike ahead of schedule, costing taxpayers millions. He replied:
“This project [Towne Road], as you know, is housed within the Department of Community Development, and at that crucial time, our Director of Community Development was absent. She was unwilling to communicate with the Public Works Department. She was unwilling to communicate with the commissioners. All the commissioners, at Director Winborn’s request, went through a professional mediation process, which she refused to complete. There was very little communication between the Director of Community Development and anyone else in this County, and that was definitely a problem.”
Not only is the DCD Director’s engagement vital, but in Callam County, interdepartmental personality conflicts can derail an entire project.
A sense of urgency
Multiple reservoir configurations are being considered right now. Each design must consider the fault line, Bonneville’s high-voltage power lines, and relocating River Road. The options vastly differ in storage capacity, ranging from 959 to 1610 acre-feet. However, no calculation was given for how much water is needed.
After the open house, several project leaders were asked one question: Who owns the water in the reservoir? They gave very different answers.
Commissioner Mark Ozias: “If you mean how will the water rights be allocated, that work is underway.”
Commissioner Mike French said he wasn’t an attorney nor legal expert in water law. He explained that “waters of the State are owned collectively by the public” and provided links to the Department of Ecology that supported his stance. While the public will own the water in the reservoir, “The right to withdraw from the river and fill the reservoir comes from the irrigators' existing and perfected water right. Even so, I don't believe it's correct to say that the irrigators will own the water in the reservoir. The right to withdraw from the reservoir will be a negotiation between the senior water rights holders (the irrigators and the Tribe), all based on an agreed upon water model that is still being developed,” emailed French.
Commissioner Randy Johnson did not respond.
County Engineer Joe Donisi said that it’s Highland Irrigation’s water.
County Administrator Todd Mielke was unfamiliar with how irrigation districts and companies worked.
The Tribe’s Natural Resources Director, Hansi Hals, said the Tribe might own some of the water.
Ben Smith, a farmer serving on the Highland Irrigation District board, explained that “ownership” isn’t the correct term. More accurately, the Department of Ecology will grant Highland Irrigation a permit to manage the water in the reservoir contingent on river conditions and water flow.
Discussing who owns the water could become a moot point if the Jamestown Tribe pursues water adjudication in court and prevails in establishing senior water rights for all ground and surface water in our area.
Without the benefit of aquifer recharge, the project’s advantages are diminishing. The $36 million reservoir will benefit a few farmers who use irrigation and, we are told, increase endangered salmon populations so they can spawn or be harvested and sold by those allowed to do so. On the other hand, there are several risks — maintenance access to power lines, a hazardous dump, fault lines, residents whose insurance may spike, the risk of more wells going dry, cost overruns, and personality conflicts.
Last year, when the Tribe wanted to convert a county road into an “outdoor classroom,” they asked for a three-year pause on the project. The Tribe recommended “to leave the levee incomplete for three years as a better plan transpires. A delay in future decisions to restore the local road network would give time to examine the usage as an unofficial trial and watch the functionality of the levee…” However, despite community concerns and identified risks in this new project, the Tribe is not recommending a pause.
FEMA provided a court reporter at the open house to gather feedback from citizens. One resident left a court-recorded comment pointing out that FEMA was considering funding a $36 million project near an identified fault line with high voltage power lines running overhead. The resident wanted to record the risk to downriver communities, the risk of building a 25-foot wall around the reservoir, and the risk and costs associated with relocating River Road. The commenter noted that this is being done to take water from the natural river so it can be stored and delivered to three irrigation companies for a handful of farmers only on the east side of the river.
The resident asked the court reporter: Why would FEMA allow so many potential disaster risks and spend so much taxpayer money for so little return to the community?
Regardless of the stance for or against the reservoir, there are grave concerns about the County and Tribe partnering again, especially with so many unanswered questions. FEMA, an agency with a knack for spotting disasters, is currently reviewing the County/Tribe project and is poised to grant $30 million. The agency is soliciting comments from the public through November 20th. Email comments to:
fema-r10-ehp-comments@fema.dhs.gov.
Thanks Jeff.
Once again without your reporting I would have assumed that this is a totally "no brainer" project because...well... everyone wants plenty of water. Right? And maybe it is the right choice. However I'm not sure if we are trying to fix something that's not really broken and if there isn't total transparency then I'm just completely off at any time. If the questions cannot be clearly answered with regards to who and how this all benefits the community before construction then it shouldn't move forward till those question and issues are resolved.
Email sent to Fema.