While many want an easy solution to the uncomfortably high unemployment rate, one state bill to create jobs specifically along the waterfront has riled some local environmentalists.

The state House of Representatives is reviewing a waterfront jobs act that would more easily allow water-dependent projects to occur by streamlining the permitting process. The Senate has already approved SB 6170, after working to alleviate fears the bill would circumvent local jurisdictions. Port Gamble S’Klallam spokeswoman Ginger Vaughn said “on its face” the bill is a good idea, but the tribe is concerned this bill “makes a lot of compromises to the environment and the public process for what would ultimately be minimal economic development.”

Kingston resident Marilyn Bode testified she feels the process doesn’t allow enough time for public or local agency comment.

“Any areas statewide will be vulnerable to development not controlled locally but by the state Department of Fish and Wildlife who lacks in local expertise,” she wrote.

Sen. Kevin Ranker, D-San Juan Islands, the bill’s sponsor, said those concerned about protecting the waterfront’s environment are “rightly concerned.”

“We’re trying to create a process so that only in commercial or industrial [zoned] waterfront properties, we can have a permit streamlining [system],” and the project “must be a net ecological benefit,” he said.

Kitsap’s senator, Christine Rolfes, said the bill was amended on the Senate floor to address concerns, particularly those she had heard from tribal and environmental organization representatives.

“[The bill] is an effort to streamline a lot of state regulation to avoid duplication of paperwork,” she said.

There are a handful of places in North Kitsap that this bill will affect — the waterfronts of Hansville, Kingston, Port Gamble, Poulsbo and Suquamish. Rolfes said she anticipates the major effect would be an easier process for marinas to upgrade.

Ranker said the bill’s goal is to target smaller projects, where the expensive and lengthy permitting process sometimes alienates the applicant from completing the project.

For a redevelopment or restoration project to qualify for this streamlined process, it must generate at least 10 jobs on an ongoing basis, be on land where previous uses have degraded the ecological functions, lead to an ecological improvement, provide protection for fish, and be consistent with local government shoreline rules. For example, Ranker said, if the project requires an Environmental Impact Statement, it is too large and will not qualify for this process.

The departments of Ecology, Natural Resources, Health, the city or county, and appropriate tribes will all weigh in on each applicant, but in an effort to streamline the process, the departments of Fish and Wildlife, Ecology and local shoreline management will be the agencies reviewing the permit.

“The local jurisdiction will have veto authority, plain and simple,” Ranker said.

Noel Higa, director of Port Gamble S’Klallam Economic Development, said the amendments do not adequately address their concerns about agency consulting capacity nor the public comment period.

“Very, very, very few projects require an EIS,” he said. The amendments do “virtually nothing for protecting the public right to give input on the decision.”

The bill is currently in the House Committee on Local Government for amendment discussion.