Save a Forest in Southworth, WA

Southworth Forest Update:

Southworth Developers Attempt to Have This Website Taken Down

Posted July 10, 2026 by Southworth Forest

Impacted neighbors of the Edwards deforestation (in the background) erected a retaining wall with trees atop to protect against environmental impacts the developers were ordered to mitigate at that location but have not. Edwards has a history of using Kitsap County's Department of Community Development as a tool of retaliation against these neighbors, and this wall was the subject of another code compliance complaint. The County declined to take action.

Despite a December 2025 Kitsap County Hearing Examiner ruling confirming that their 2019 forest removal in Southworth, WA caused many adverse environmental impacts upon neighbors, the developers at 11090 SE Southworth Dr. in Port Orchard sought in April 2026 to have this website removed from the internet by its hosting provider. This action follows a dangerous pattern of developer behavior meant to redefine protests about the deforestation as "defamation," following years of retaliatory actions by those developers against the neighbors leading the protest.

Amazon Web Services Complaint

Developers Meghan and/or Clint Edwards contacted Amazon Web Services and asserted that the public documents and impact statements made on this website violate the company's content policies for hosted websites. They suggested that historical public information involving the first legal case between them and neighbors should be removed, as well as their names and the address of the forest violation. Astonishingly, Edwards also continued to argue that this site contains false factual statements amounting to defamation, a claim they made under oath in front of the Hearing Examiner who ruled against that notion by affirming the deforestation impacts.

The organizers of the Southworth Forest group and this website welcome all corrections to any factual information presented as part of the campaign to hold the developers accountable to the law after their code violations. The group's leadership has repeatedly implored Clint Edwards to reveal what information is defamatory, but he is unable to do so. He is particularly fixated on the assertion that his development committed timber trespass on multiple properties, removing trees and shrubs and even re-grading neighboring parcels. Overwhelming evidence presented in the public record supports that history. Edwards has not apologized for these distressing actions despite submitting it to his property's insurance.

Amazon Web Services dismissed the complaint almost immediately, and this website continues to serve as a model for how communities in Port Orchard, Kitsap County, and beyond can hold forest violators to the law, especially when the County government drops the ball. Developers can attempt to silence opposition and erase adverse opinions from the internet. Edwards portrays themselves as the victim despite moving into a neighborhood, violating the law by removing a forest without proper permits, and then declining to fully comply with County requests for clearly revised site plans because, as Clint Edwards testified under oath, such plans did not seem like a good use of his money.

A History of Retaliation by the Developers

Sadly, the direct Southworth neighbors leading the opposition and appeal of the deforestation permit have felt the brunt of the Edwards' retaliation. As part of their corrective permit, Edwards originally proposed removing up to 70 trees from an easement over these neighbors' property for a superfluous second driveway entrance, forcing those neighbors to file defensive legal claims to protect that overburdening of the easement and loss of the only remaining forest buffer in that area. Edwards eventually admitted they did not intend to develop that area but instead pushed through its approval anyway with the County over four years as means of putting pressure on the neighbors to negotiate terms favorable to Edwards in other regards.

At the same time, Edwards left a frivolous obstruction claim active against those lead protesters for years despite claiming to Kitsap County that all litigation had been resolved. As a mortgage officer, Clint Edwards would likely know that such a claim can cloud the title of the neighbors' property, which had an active building permit but could not move forward with the house build. Ultimately, when Edwards approached these neighbors to negotiate a resolution to the situation, Edwards offered no true concessions despite demanding the "scrubbing" of this website, among several other considerations. They then abruptly pulled out of negotiations and claimed to the County that the neighbors had refused a best offer from them that did not exist.

In 2026, Clint Edwards threatened these neighbors with additional legal action. The developer pledged to file a legal claim in regards to a solid boundary fence installed on the property line by neighbors after previously having sued those neighbors for planning the fence four inches off the line on the neighbors' side. Edwards had claimed that this fence was a "spite structure" despite the fence existing to protect neighbors from the multitudes of environmental impacts caused by the Edwards' deforestation. The fence had been properly permitted and inspected through Kitsap County, and the Hearing Examiner ironically cited the fence as a mitigating factor in Edwards' favor.

Developer Use of Kitsap County for Retaliation

At the same time, the County once again became a tool of retaliation against those same neighboring protesters, wasting taxpayer dollars in the process. Facing extraordinary environmental impacts from Edwards' northwest corner as confirmed by the Hearing Examiner, the Clemmensen family erected a 3.5-foot-tall retaining wall 35 feet from the boundary to help create a flat place atop a 12.8% slope on which to plant a hedgerow and trees to stop those impacts. The lead stormwater manager of the Edwards' deforestation permit was consulted about the construction of this wall in December 2024 and indicated to the Clemmensens that no permit would be required for it. A geotechnical analysis of the slope concurred.

Unfortunately, public records received from the County reveal that a complaint about the legality of the neighbors' protective wall and associated earthwork was attributed to a code compliance case originating with Clint Edwards. The contents of the complaint were mere speculation without any measurements. The County made a casual inspection of the work and declined to take action, just as they had declined to intervene when Edwards had complained a year earlier about area signage protesting the impacts of the development. (In that case, he argued that the sign's identification of environmental impacts was once again defamation, and yet its contents were successfully proven to the Hearing Examiner.)

The impacted neighbors have called for the County to more formally respond to this petty complaint and all attempts by the Edwards to use the County as a tool of retaliation. The County has opted thus far to provide no response, forcing an escalation to its leadership. Meanwhile, Edwards' impacts continue to damage neighboring parcels, from environmental consequences to severe road degradation across a shared entryway that Edwards takes no responsibility for despite accounting for almost all traffic over that roadway. Their continuing damage has now existed for the better part of a decade since their arrival in the neighborhood.

Moving Forward With this Campaign

Most importantly, the corrections required by the Hearing Examiner decision about the deforestation are not complete, which alone necessitates this campaign to hold the violators to the law. Edwards submitted a new landscape plan in 2026 that is incomplete and inaccurate, failing to follow basic County rules for all submittals. The area of the worst environmental impacts remains unmitigated by Edwards despite the Hearing Examiner order to do so, which is why campaigns and websites like this one must persist. Entitled developers may retaliate, but impacted neighbors must stand strong to ensure equitable outcomes for all.