A hearing finds strong public opposition to new private docks.

Blakely Harbor should remain as-is.

That was the consensus of residents who packed City Hall Monday night for a public hearing on proposals allowing new docks along in the south island harbor.

“Blakely Harbor is the most pristine in Puget Sound,” said Sally Adams, who supports a 2003 city ordinance allowing only three more docks along the harbor’s largely undeveloped shoreline. “The harbor belongs to all of us and is an integral part of the larger ecosystem.”

Marine scientists have recognized Blakely Harbor as one of the least-impacted by human development in the central sound. An increase in docks could endanger the habitat of sensitive salmon populations and other aquatic life, they say.

But a handful of harbor landowners sued the city, claiming the legal right to build a limited number of docks. A settlement reached last year requires the city to amend its dock moratorium and pay out $250,000 to settle nearly a dozen lawsuits. Of the settlement money, $150,000 would go to claimants, with the remainder to be used for improvements to Blakely Harbor Park.

The city is now in the midst of gathering public input on five options for rules governing docks in the harbor.

Most who spoke at the hearing favored “Option D,” which would uphold the current ordinance. The ordinance permits one new public dock and two new community docks in the harbor.

Other options range from stripping all local regulations, which could allow more than 50 new docks, to making the entire harbor a “marine conservation area” with no new docks.

The option preferred by litigants would allow “local neighborhood docks.” Residents could then build docks for four or more properties, or for the use of one or more properties with 400 feet of shoreline.

Also called “Option B,” this alternative is “about balance, not running over the city with litigation,” said Dennis Reynolds, an attorney representing the litigants. “It’s not about developers getting their way. It’s about families having docks.”

The council is scheduled to decide on a dock rule option by Dec. 13.

Many attendees called the city’s process for amending the dock moratorium both rushed and flawed.

“There has been an unanimous concern of a perceived unfair process and what is not an appropriate way of (deciding) on what may be irreversible,” said Iver MacDougall, who said many more options should be on the table, including a conservation area encompassing the harbor’s navigable waters.

“We can’t discuss all (options) before Dec. 13,” he said. “There’s just no way. It’s simply wrong.”

Tom Morgan, who supports some new dock construction in the harbor, also cited “critical flaws” in public process. Morgan said the city has failed to adequately explain to citizens that the dock moratorium lacks legal ground to stand on.

Option B, the proposal backed by litigants, should have been framed as a “radical, progressive concept” that reduces 75 percent of the potential dock build-out under lesser prohibitions, Morgan said.

“It’s a concept that should be embraced,” he added.

But few are ready to cuddle up to the notion of more docks. Many at the hearing admonished the council for “caving in” to landowners.

“I was stunned how the council caved in,” said Cara Cruickshank, a conservationist. “It doesn’t seem ethical.”

Cruickshank expressed surprise and enthusiasm for the Bush Administration’s commitment this week to channel new federal assistance toward restoring the sound’s environmental health. The Bainbridge council should show the same level of concern, she said.

“Thank Bush,” Cruickshank said. “Because if you screw up, you’ll have to answer to him.”

South Beach Drive resident John Duncan also urged the council to show leadership on the issue. “It’s time for Bainbridge Island to stand up and take the long view,” he said.

Some also urged harbor residents desiring new docks to reconsider. Leaving “one of the last naturally-functioning marine estuaries” uncluttered with docks would give harbor residents a long-lasting feeling that they had made a positive difference, said Elise Wright

“You can say, when you’re looking in the mirror or when you’re talking to your grandchildren, that you helped preserve the harbor (and) that it’s still the way it was,” she said. “It’s your last chance.”