LAST UPDATED: January 17, 2024

This is the lawsuit that has been in process for over a dozen years, started because the County wants the land we are on for their "heritage" park and help developers sell new homes around a massive and "quite" park. All this with the help of Central Kitsap Citizens for a Safe and Quite Neighborhood, LLC. (AKA: Safe and Quite, or "Useful Idiots")

Currently, a major injunction was removed as a court found we were not in contempt, the judge specifically stating we could operate our range, however, we are still under an order to obtain after-the-fact permits for improvement work that the State of Washington had performed on the property when the State owned the land, approved the plan for improvement, funded the work, inspected and fully approved of the completed projects. (As a side note: One has to ask, why was the State not sued or named in this suit?? Or the County for that matter as they owned the property with those improvements before they sold it to the Club?)

So why not just get the permit? We've tried and are continuing to work towards that end, however, the County Commissioners through the Department of Community Development (DCD) has refused on multiple occasions to accept our application and fee for a Site Development Activity Permit (SDAP) for review, which is what they told the court would be required.

We had recently approached our Commissioner Katie Walters who had given her word that she would find out what needs to be done. She said she supported us and that we need to be open. After an extended period of not hearing anything from her, and requests for an update, she sent an email simply saying that we would be contacted directly by DCD. We were never contacted. When asked about a timeline for them getting back to us, Commissioner Walters has failed to respond any further.

Evidence and testimony from the trial demonstrate that all we would need is a SDAP Grading permit. The County claims we need a commercial permit required for projects that will move in excess of 5000 cubic yards of material. In court, when the County employees/witnesses were pressed, they did not know what had been moved at the Club or when. The final decision only indicated that 5 times something in excess of 150cy was moved. Combined, that is less than 1000cy. The County did not appeal the findings.

The difference between the two permits is tens, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars. The permit we believe fills the court decision and KCC would run well less that $10k and could be completed in a couple months. The one the County commissioners and DCD insists be filed for will run a minimum of $50k just to complete the application to a point they will accept it and begin review. The final cost could be well in excess of $250k with the County maintaining a permanent presence over all land use activities and in perpetuity.

A Kitsap County Deputy Prosecuting Attorney has flippantly said in open court that we need to have a few "bake sales" to come up with the funds necessary to satisfy the demands of the County.

LAST UPDATED: January 17, 2024

This is the lawsuit that started in 2014 as a result of the County Commissioners/DCD being overturned by the Appeals Court and failing to get us permanently shut down with Kitsap 1 so they passed a new ordinance requiring all ranges, including previously established and grandfathered facilities such as ours, to have a new operating permit. In other words, we must beg and pay for their permission to exist and function.

While we believe it is beyond the scope of their authority to require a recognized historic organization to apply for new operating permits after being open and operating safely since 1926, a bias (provable) court ordered that we obtain a permit and has enjoined the discharge of all firearms until a permit is obtained.

Currently, we have filed with DCD and paid 3 times for their range operating permit and the DCD is refusing to process the last attempt though we have submitted more than 2000 pages of material and have requested inspection and approval. In comparison, Poulsbo Sportsmans Club has a complete permit package including inspection reports, copy of the ordinance etcetera, is about 50 pages in length.

Isn't it wonderful that people who know nothing about shooting ranges now get to write the rules for how they operate? For example, the County has actually argued that approved levels of lighting is necessary so that range users "can see the bullets coming at them".

While we have paid for and submitted everything the application asked for and we have asked for final inspection and approval, the County now says that until the Kitsap 1 permit is completed, they do not have to proceed with the operational permit, so it is on indefinite hold.

We have asked for a partial occupancy permit for those areas not requiring an SDAP, which is most of the facility, so that we can reopen to firearms discharge and training. We offered that we would set aside 25% of the income in a secured account until all other permitting issues are resolved. So far, the County refuses to budge or counter with any other solution.

We are open to suggestions.