-
The Precautionary Principle
The most important policy for Bainbridge Island What is the Precautionary Principle? The Precautionary Principle is a decision-making framework that calls for taking preventive action when an activity or technology poses a plausible risk of serious or irreversible harm, even if the exact nature or extent of that harm has not yet been scientifically proven. Why the Precautionary Principle is important for Bainbridge Island? The Precautionary Principle .pdf
Continue reading -
The History and Importance of our Guiding Principles
The genesis of Bainbridge Island’s Guiding Principles goes back to before Bainbridge Island became a city, and the desire for local control and sustainability among Islanders. To understand the origins of Bainbridge Island’s Guiding Principles you need to understand the movement for local control leading up to the vote that created all-island government in 1990.
Continue reading -
The Peer Review of COBI’s Draft Groundwater Management Plan
The Peer Review of COBI’s Draft Groundwater Management Plan.pdf Despite being identified as a priority in its 2016 Comprehensive Plan, the City of Bainbridge Island (COBI) has not yet completed and adopted a Groundwater Management Plan (GWMP). GWMPs are essential for responsible land use planning, necessary to ensure that human activity, including future development plans, protect and preserve a sustainable source of clean fresh water for human use and for a healthy natural environment.
Continue reading -
Blair King’s 2022 Letter In Defense of Bainbridge Island
Blair King’s 2022 Letter In Defense of Bainbridge Island With the State Legislature poised to impose massive growth on Bainbridge Island in 2022, city manager Blair King wrote an eloquent letter to the legislature in defense of local control. His letter now stands in stark contrast to the City of Bainbridge Island’s current campaign for massive upzoning. Read Mr. King’s letter at: https://bainbridgeconservationcoalition.org/2026/02/04/blair-kings-letter-to-the-legislature/
Continue reading -
BCC Supports Historic Preservation
BCC Supports Historic Preservation COBI’s historic preservation program is a package of federally guided procedures and guidelines developed speci/ically for the CLG program and managed by the HPC. Its work is to establish, maintain, and update a local inventory of historic structures compatible with the state’s inventory; it seeks to preserve historic properties through a review process that ensures public participation; and it maintains a local register of historic places.
Continue reading -
Bainbridge Island: Washington’s Unique Island-city
Out of 490 towns and cities in Washington State there is only one EPA designated Sole Source Aquifer island-city—100% dependent upon aquifers for domestic water—and surrounded by saltwater. That island-city is Bainbridge Island, incorporated in 1991.
Continue reading -
-
Bainbridge Comp Plan Update as 2026 Begins New Deadline for Completion is 6/30/26
Bainbridge Comp Plan Update as 2026 Begins New Deadline for Completion is 6/30/26 City Council recently set a new completion date for updating Bainbridge Island’s comprehensive plan (Comp Plan) -- June 30, 2026. The Comp Plan revision was supposed to be completed by the end of December 2024. So why is it taking so long?: because the massive growth proposed by the City’s Planning Department is highly controversial and divisive. Rather than recognize that and change course, COBI has instead changed the marketing for the process several times, the most recent being the Planning Commission's proposed "plan." Before Discussing the Latest Plan, Here's the History After the 2024 Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) the high-growth alternatives being promoted by city staff were soundly rejected by many Bainbridge Islanders and some on the City Council. The Planning Commission (Commission), made up of seven volunteer commissioners, was then presented with a preferred plan (an expanded and densified map of Winslow) in January of 2025 to work with. This Plan combined two planning alternatives for imposing massive upzoning on Winslow taken straight out of the City’s biased and defective DEIS: alternatives 2 &3. Here are the housing unit and population numbers for Alts. 2 & 3 compared to Winslow’s existing zoning: Alternative 1: existing Winslow zoning Remaining capacity for 1,334 new residents in Winslow Capacity for an additional 592 housing units Alternative 2, “Growing Up” Winslow: Increased zoning capacity for 6,397 new residents (5,063 more than Alt. 1) Increase capacity for 2,868 new housing units (2,276 more than Alt. 1) Alternative 3, “Growing Out” (expanded Winslow boundaries) Increased zoning capacity for 5,412 new residents (4,078 more than Alt. 1) Increase capacity for 2,386 new housing units (1,794 more than Alt. 1) The DEIS claims that Alternatives 2 and 3 would satisfy the state’s housing requirements by more than tripling the current remaining zoning capacity of Winslow and requiring 10% affordable units. The housing planning requirement is about 1,300 units; these alternatives would produce a mere 238-286 units. So, that claim was false. Anxious for a quick recommendation of approval for their preferred plan, City staff and consultants appeared to attempt to mislead, manipulate, and bully the Commission for a short turnaround. A year later—after much disagreement and public comment on both sides of the upzoning issue—the Planning Commission considered 24 motions, approving 20 related to zoning during their 12/11/25 meeting, but no actual plan that can be easily deciphered. Here are a couple of examples of those motions: MOTION: I move to recommend the Central Core Zone boundary as originally recommended by the Planning Commission on June 5, 2025, except for the “Winslow Way Overlay District” corridor area, and parcel ID 4-095, and step-backs recommended by the Planning Commission on October 30, 2025. Schaab/Blossom - The motion carried unanimously, 5-0. MOTION: I move to extend the Winslow Way Overlay district along Winslow Way, east of Hwy 305, to Ferncliff. Blossom/Birtley - The motion carried unanimously, 5-0. The Planning Commission’s Dec 11th meeting yielded a bunch of approved motions but no updated Winslow Zoning map. The big picture is only slightly discernable. Creating that new zoning map, including application of voluntary affordable housing incentives, is apparently going to be left up to City Staff and the City’s pro-development consultant, LMN Architects. For those shuddering at the thought of Winslow being transformed into a mini-Bellevue, turning City Staff and LMN architects loose on the Winslow Subarea zoning map should not be a comforting thought. To underscore this concern, here is a conceptual drawing of Winslow by LMN Architects prepared in 2023, when they were helping the City attempt to sell Bainbridge Islander’s on the virtues of massive upzoning during public workshops: Here’s what LMN Architects say about the City’s public process in 2023: The Winslow Subarea Plan is a bold new vision for an economically inclusive, sustainable, and walkable downtown for the City of Bainbridge Island. Throughout this project LMN has co-created this vision with the community and elected officials through an interactive and inclusive process. This action-oriented and implementable planning framework is based on careful urban systems and environmental analysis and is the basis for the Island’s comprehensive planning work. In reality, the public workshops referred to by LMN were dog and pony shows full of disinformation and attempts to stack participation with pro-growth advocates and supporters. Existing zoning was described as being inconsistent with new state laws—mainly HB 1220—while the two alternatives for expanding and massively upzoning Winslow described above were promoted as necessary for meeting supposed mandates under the Growth Management Act. As shown, those claims were false. LMN also helped work on the City’s draft combined environmental impact study for the Winslow Subarea and Bainbridge Island Comprehensive Plans. The latter is a 615-page tome full of obfuscation and disinformation that understates environmental impacts, overstates vague mitigation measures, and misrepresents the Island’s yet-to-be-completed groundwater management plan. The Planning Commission's Outline of a Plan Upzones for Winslow: Connection Zone (Madison) 1.5 Max FAR Ferncliff (some transferred to Connection Zone) R8 Rest of Zones 3.0 - 4.0 Max FAR Extra stories/FAR (up to the maxes) for 20% - 25% affordable units (or underground parking) Absent from the "Plan" is a land capacity analysis that would compare the increased population allowed by the proposed upzoning to Alt. 1. What the new base FAR (market rate upzoning) is without any affordable units (or underground parking) is unclear. If (and this is a Big If) the Planning Commission attempted to promote the 1300 affordable units, the upzoning has to be at least 6,500 units (at 20% affordable). That's an extra 14,000 people just in Winslow. And this is at a high inclusionary participation rate by developers of 20%. The participation rate could be much lower based upon a regional average. Even if 14,000 more people in Winslow was acceptable/possible, the Planning Commission dictated that the affordable units would be for those earning "up to 80% AMI." Since the state law planning requirement is for many units far below 80% AMI, this massive upzone will not satisfy the state law (HB 1220). Here is Appendix F from Kitsap County’s county-wise planning policies, which is linked to HB 1220 housing requirements found in the Growth Management Act—RCW 36.70A.070(2): Also absent is any analysis of the infrastructure costs required for massive upzoning - we know from Planning Commission Chair Sarah Blossom that a mere 1k new units in Winslow will max out the City’s Winslow sewer plant, requiring a new one. Public Works told Council last year that 14,000 more people would require another $25M water tank (and lines, pumps, likely new wells, etc.). The Commission promised it would not "upzone" without this concurrent analysis. That promise has been ignored. Some commissioners also promised they would not vote to "upzone" before the Groundwater Management Plan was completed, so we would know that the additional population is sustainable. Those assurances have apparently been forgotten. What You Can Do If the pro-growth majority on the Planning Commission, City Staff, and the City’s hand-picked progrowth consultants get their way, Winslow is in danger of massive and unsustainable growth. The wildcard in this trajectory is the election of two new City Council members who aren’t bullish on this. Combined with the departure of two Council members who were supportive of massive upzoning, there’s reason for hope. But it will depend on Bainbridge Islanders stepping up to say “no” to massive upzoning and unsustainable growth. Your support will be essential for what is likely to be a minority on City Council to prevent massive upzoning in Winslow. The City Council needs to stop passing the buck, and get back to representing the community. Write to Council - council@bainbridgewa.gov Speak to the City Council at meetings Write letters to the editor Our work is not over – we can win this battle but need to stay the course!
Continue reading -
Bainbridge Island’s Water Supply Cannot Support the City’s Pro-Growth Agenda
Bainbridge Island is an EPA-certified “sole source aquifer,” obtaining all its water from aquifers that are “recharged” almost entirely (∼95%) by rainfall. For that reason, the entire Island is designated as a “Critical Aquifer Recharge Area.” Development, by creating impervious surfaces, increases rainwater “run-off” and reduces aquifer “recharge,” while also increasing water extraction. See City of Bainbridge Island (COBI) Groundwater Fact Sheet: https://www.bainbridgewa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/15376/Groundwater-Fact-Sheet?bidId= Well Monitoring Data (reflecting effects of past water extraction) already show Significant Aquifer Depletion, based on our existing population (∼25,000 people). Water levels have been declining in COBI’s major production wells, and in at least one of KPUD’s major wells. Table 1 shows declines in the deep Fletcher Bay Aquifer (FBA), which provides about one-third of the Island’s water. The declining water level in this critically important deep aquifer (FBA) means that extraction is happening at a faster rate than its ability to recharge, even at our current population level. There is also evidence of decline in the Island’s other, shallower aquifers, which provide water for most private wells and for surface streams that support wildlife and sensitive wetlands. A clear sign of unsustainable stress on the shallow aquifers is the order from Washington State Dept. of Ecology closing portions of the Fletcher Bay and Murden Cove watersheds to new wells due to alarming reductions in surface streamflow. (Ironically, while COBI plans for growth that will further diminish aquifer levels and streamflow, the State spends millions to install larger culverts in the hope of restoring salmon runs!) Depletion of Island aquifers is further evidenced by the following: 2015: COBI’s Commodore well was over-pumped by the City and essentially “mined out”; 2016: KPUD drilling for SB #9 in Lynwood failed, producing only a small amount of water; 2023: KPUD drilling for SB #11 at Gazzam Lake failed to find water; that effort was abandoned; KPUD’s failed efforts for major production wells at SB #9 and #11 cost the utility ∼$500,000; 2025: drilling by Wing Point Country Club for new production well failed; another dry hole. Similarly, Groundwater Modeling (reflecting effects of expected future growth and climate change) by COBI’s own water consultants (EA Engineering, Science, and Technology, Inc.) projects Continued Unsustainable Aquifer Depletion. An EA presentation to City Council in February 2025 showed the following expected drops in the Sea Level Aquifer, and EA’s April 2025 Technical Memo showed the following expected drops in the FBA, under EA’s “Low-Mid Impact” and “Mid-Impact” scenarios: Expected Declines in Sea Level Aquifer Under Low-Mid Impact Scenario Expected Declines in Fletcher Bay Aquifer Under Mid-Impact Scenario While these declines were described by the City’s Public Works Director as “sustainable outcomes” at the February 11, 2025, City Council meeting, in reality they are evidence of unsustainable and irresponsible “aquifer mining.” In July 2025, EA provided this Summary of its Groundwater Modeling Findings: COBI Draft Groundwater Management Plan and Summary available on City website at: https://cityofbainbridgeisland.civilspace.io/en/projects/groundwater-management-plan Note that under the Mid-Impact Scenario, the FBA may decline an additional 16 feet in the 0-20 year timeframe. In the 20-50 year timeframe, a possible 37-foot drop puts the mean groundwater level of the aquifer below sea level (resulting in sea water intrusion), with central and south end production wells experiencing 60-foot decreases. These declines are based on the EA Model assuming a population growth of 8,380 new residents over the next 20-year period (419 new residents per year; see Summary page 7), with a similar trajectory thereafter. But the COBI Planning Commission is advancing zoning changes for even greater population growth over the next 20 years, beyond 8,380, and well beyond the 4,524 target set by the Washington State Growth Management Act, upzoning the Ferry and High School Road districts to accommodate ∼10,000 new residents Island-wide (those two districts + existing capacity on the rest of the Island). Moreover, in June 2025 COBI City Council directed the Planning Commission to continue to upzone additional districts of Winslow, which if adopted would further increase population growth and result in even greater depletion of the Island’s aquifers and greater reduction of surface streamflow. In addition to the water supply issue, which is of primary importance, the infrastructure costs of supporting such growth will create extraordinary burdens for Island residents, with serious displacement effects. Water rates for residents have already gone up significantly in 2025, with additional rate increases scheduled for the next several years, and plans for additional wells and water-related infrastructure will impose substantial new costs on Island taxpayers. Island residents should not be expected to subsidize growth they do not want, at levels that exhaust the Island’s aquifers and other resources, degrade the natural environment, choke the roads with congestion, and destroy the small-town quality of life that Island residents have made clear they wish to preserve. But even if all these other adverse consequences of COBI’s irresponsible growth strategy are disregarded, the sustainable management of the Island’s aquifers – the source of its most precious natural resource, water – must take priority over all other planning goals.
Continue reading
- 1
- 2