Camano developer sues Island County

A developer claimed that Island County commissioners acted illegally in refusing an application.

A developer filed a lawsuit against Island County, claiming that the commissioners acted illegally in refusing an application to open an unopened right-of-way on Whidbey Island.

Camano Island Properties Inc. filed the petition for writ of review and constitutional writ of certiorari in Skagit County Superior Court this month. Under state law, a lawsuit against a county can be filed in either of the two closest counties.

The company wants Rowe Road to be opened so that a property currently without access to a right-of-way can be developed.

In addition to the county as as whole, the lawsuit names Commissioners Melanie Bacon, Janet St. Clair and Jill Johnson individually as plaintiffs, even though Johnson repeatedly tried to pass a motion supporting the company’s application.

The lawsuit states that the county’s own engineer recommended that the road be opened. The company claims that the board of county commissioners are in violation of several laws, and the state constitution, by refusing the application. The lawsuit states that the county has a duty to open a right-of-way that is designated as a public street to allow an abutting property owner to access the property.

The company’s application to open the road was opposed by residents in the neighborhood, who cited such concerns as an increase in traffic on a challenging road, future logging of other properties in the area and a change in stormwater drainage in neighboring properties.

At meetings on April 2, June 11 and June 24, Johnson made motions to adopt the application made by Camano Island Properties, but each time the motion died for a lack of a second. At the June 24 meeting, Bacon ended the issue by making a motion to deny the application, which passed in a 2-1 vote.

The lawsuit states that neither Bacon nor St. Clair explained their decision or discussed the issue publicly. At the June 24 meeting, Johnson said she understood the residents’ concerns but that the issue needed to be addressed in the planning process, not as part of an application to open a right-of-way.