Hands off the shoreline.

That’s the approach that the critical areas ordinance review committee will follow in light of a recent decision handed down by the state Supreme Court.

It’s a significant change in direction for the appointed panel of nine volunteers, according to county planner Shireene Hale. The committee, she said, toiled over reams of studies and scientific data in recent months in prelude to recommending changes to critical areas’ regulations which would better protect local shorelines and near-shore habitat.

The group has been at odds over prior recommendations, namely ground-water resources and the “land-use element of the county Comprehensive Plan, and the debate over the shoreline promised to be a tug-of-war as well.

“It’s a huge shift in focus for us,” Hale said. “It looks like this committee will not be looking at changes to shoreline buffers.”

The group’s Aug. 5 meeting drew the largest audience to date thanks, in part, to the high court’s controversial 5-4 decision, and, because of flyers which appeared recently in numerous mailboxes warning that the group might endorse expanding the current 50-foot shoreline setback to 150 feet or more.

But the decision by the high court, according to Prosecuting Attorney Randy Gaylord, means the committee should “refocus” its direction inland and in the meantime wait for the ruling to “work itself out.” The court, Gaylord said, determined that a law passed by the state Legislature in 2003 means shoreline critical areas are governed by the state Shoreline Management Act, as well as local shoreline master programs, rather than by the Growth Management Act, the foundation of the critical areas ordinance.

State law requires that counties which plan under the state Growth Management Act, like San Juan, periodically update their critical areas ordinance. Critical areas, as defined by the GMA, include wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat, unstable slopes and flood zones. Updates must be done through the use of “best available science.”

Counties are also required o update their shoreline master programs periodically as well. Hale said that update would be expected by 2012. However, she noted, that update is nowhere on the “radar screen” at the Community Development and Planning Department largely because it lacks the money, resources and staff which such an update will likely demand.

For info about the CAO process visit community development and planning at www.sanjuanco.com.