HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources March 11 20141
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Natural Resources Committee
March 11, 2014
CALL TO ORDER
Committee Chair Barry Buchanan called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. in the
Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
ROLL CALL
(9 :30:20 AM)
Present: Carl Weimer, Sam Crawford and Barry Buchanan.
Absent: None.
Also Present: Ken Mann, Rud Browne, Barbara Brenner and Pete Kremen.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
1. PRESENTATION BY THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
REGARDING THE WHATCOM CLEAN WATER PROGRAM (AB2014 -072)
Andrea Hood, Washington State Department of Health Office of Shellfish and Water
Protection Environmental Planner, submitted and read from a presentation (on file) on fecal
coliform bacteria pollution. The catalyst for the PIC effort Puget Sound -wide was all the
federal and state shellfish recovery initiatives. Whatcom County has shellfish bed areas that
aren't fully approved for harvest, so they're a priority for the State to get these beds fully
approved. They focus on areas where fresh water carries bacteria into the marine water.
There are many partners working on shellfish - related issues. She described the history and
success of shellfish protection district efforts in Drayton Harbor, which has chronically high
fecal coliform in the watershed, and in Portage Bay. The trend they're seeing in Portage
Bay matches the trend in the four sub - basins that contribute the most water to Portage
Bay. All these efforts are about clean water upstream and downstream.
She described similar efforts and PIC investment throughout Puget Sound. Whatcom
County is the only county where the State Department of Health has taken the lead.
County Health Department and Public Works Department have programs for failing septic
systems, monitoring, and development of a countywide publicly assessable database for all
the data collected. The Public Works Department is trying to lead a community solutions
effort in an area of the lower Dakota Creek with chronically high fecal counts, but public
engagement is not happening. They coordinate closely with the Shellfish Protection District
Advisory Committee. There are recommendations for the Council to support water efforts in
these areas. The Conservation District is willing to provide assistance to the homeowner,
but it needs funding to do that.
(9:48:38 AM)
Weimer asked and there was discussion of how long the State will provide staff to
the County and how Whatcom County decided to let the State take the lead.
Natural Resources Committee, 3/11/2014, Page 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
Jarrod Davis, State Department of Health, stated funding goes through January
2017. There was an effort to allow the County to take the lead on coordination, but the
County wasn't comfortable with it, based on strings attached to funding. It was a
negotiation.
Crawford asked and there was discussion about the lack of public engagement and
the overall sense of what is happening with the four sub - basins that all show the same rate
of increase in fecal coliform.
Brenner asked and there was discussion of what determines which county gets the
most money and whether the County Health Department is involved with DNA testing to
find specific sources.
Kremen stated the report is disappointing and frustrating because this has been
going on for a long time. They were making improvements at one point. There was high
compliance with onsite septic systems (OSS) in Drayton Harbor and the Lake Whatcom
watershed, but not as much countywide, so they changed the fee structure. Changing the
fee structure should improve compliance. Whatcom County has the largest farm gate in
Western Washington and should be top priority for receiving grant funding. He asked and
there was discussion of where the contaminants are coming from.
Jack Louws, County Executive, stated the County decided to take a collaborative
approach to work with the State Departments of Health and Ecology two years ago. There
was a decision to not participate in the regulatory portion, and allow the State agencies to
handle regulation. They are moving forward with initiatives. The administration takes this
seriously.
2. PRESENTATION OF A WRIA 1 WATERSHED PLANNING UNIT FUNDING
PROPOSAL (AB2014 -118) (10:15:31 AM)
Perry Eskridge, Association of Realtors and Planning Unit Member, submitted
handouts (on file) and stated the funding request is simply to allow the Planning Unit to
have some administrative assistance. He invites everyone to participate in the process.
The Planning Unit brings together many individuals to work on the extensive scope of the
planning efforts. The water resource inventory area (WRIA) shall provide assistant to the
Planning Unit, per the State code. The facilitator scope of work is limited. He submitted a
draft work plan (on file). It will take another six meetings working with the facilitator to
complete the plan. The facilitator also helps resolve disputes among caucus members.
They request another $20,000 for another six meetings with the facilitator.
Crawford asked and there was discussion of the administration's perspective of the
request, where money would come from if funded, and if changing the operating procedures
are acceptable.
The following staff answered questions:
• Gary Stoyka, Public Works Department
• Jack Louws, County Executive
Louws stated he recommends that the Council change the voting structure for the
Planning Unit from full consensus to a simple- or super- majority to allow decisions to be
made more timely. The current operating procedures make it difficult for the Planning Unit
to succeed and be efficient. At the current rate, they will spend thousands of dollars in
terms of funding the operation and administration of the Planning Unit and the plan.
Natural Resources Committee, 3/11/2014, Page 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
Crawford moved to recommend to the full Council and the Flood Control Zone
District Board of Supervisors to approve an additional $20,000 in funding to continue
Planning Unit efforts for at least six months, finalize the work plan, and develop an
operating process within the group to make decisions more quickly.
Weimer asked and there was discussion of why the Planning Unit is asking the
Council instead of Joint Board for funding.
Brenner stated the State seems to want the process to fail. She supports changing
the operating structure. Farmers who talked to her didn't even know about the Planning
Unit.
Browne asked and there was discussion of which caucuses are represented currently,
which caucuses aren't represented, and how caucus representatives were selected. He also
asked and there was discussion of why they are doing planning instead of implementation
and why it costs $3,000 per meeting for implementation. He would like know what funding
another six meetings will produce that haven't been produced in the past seven years.
Weimer stated he supports the Planning Unit and used to be a member. He is
against the motion. Give the Planning Unit incentive to change their operating procedure to
be more efficient. Ask for the money after that. The County doesn't pay for facilitators for
other advisory committees. County staff should facilitate the Planning Unit to deal with
operating procedures. Come back with an efficient operating procedure first.
Crawford stated people are hearing clearly that the Planning Unit must be more
productive in one form or another.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Crawford and Buchanan (2)
Nays: Weimer (1)
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
1. DISCUSSION REGARDING A PROPOSED INTERIM ORDINANCE ALLOWING
MARIJUANA PRODUCTION, PROCESSING, AND RETAILING AS AUTHORIZED
BY WASHINGTON STATE INITIATIVE 502 AND MEDICAL MARIJUANA
FACILITIES AS AUTHORIZED UNDER CHAPTER 69.51A RCW (AB2014 -074B)
(10:48:43 AM)
Nick Smith, Planning and Development Services Department, read from the staff
report beginning on Council packet page nine.
Crawford asked and there was discussion of the process for adopting the ordinance,
the consequences of creating setbacks to churches and community centers, and how many
current applications would not get to proceed based on this interim.
Weimer asked and there was discussion of whether this will steer permits for a
number of years based on State licensing, even though it's an interim ordinance.
Brenner stated and there was discussion of separating hemp from the definition of
marijuana.
Natural Resources Committee, 3/11/2014, Page 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
Crawford stated he would like to hear from the public about whether the Council's
action will shut down many applications.
Heather Wolf, attorney, submitted a handout (on file), and stated local rules keep
changing. Allow processing and production in the same location. Setbacks are overly
restrictive. It will thwart the goal of the law, which is to eliminate illegal activities. There's
no justification for the setbacks.
(Inaudible) stated his farming plans are all ready to go and he has followed all the
regulations. He's put time and effort into this. Farming will create more jobs. The
moratorium is a hardship on him and his family. He's been planning this for two years.
Art Reynolds stated he advocates for medical and recreational marijuana. The farms
have to get going right now and plant. The interim ordinance stops that effort. There
hasn't been a problem with medical marijuana for the last 15 years. Put the use in
industrial zones for retail, and agricultural areas for farming.
Phillip Dawdy, Agape Research, stated this will bring a lot of jobs to Acme. Get this
going. It's taking too long. Production and processing must be at the same place, or it
won't work.
Sandy Soderberg stated consider industrial hemp in zoning. As they bring industrial
hemp to Washington State, she's concerned marijuana farmers may have to deal with
cross - contamination. With the information from the State resolution due this week, they
can move forward with a better process as they put regulations in place. Make sure the
integrity of the farms aren't compromised.
Jaime White, Whatcom Land Use Consulting, stated the State regulations adequately
cover the concerns about community and church centers. Now there is a 1,000 foot setback
from small churches that meet one day per week.
Mark Wilson stated the State made it clear that it will approve licenses, regardless of
the County's rules.
Susan Lindsay stated retail addresses cannot change their address. Producers and
processors can. She has to pay $6,000 per month for a lease because retail uses can't
change their address.
Weimer moved to introduce one change, if the staff can provide a substitute copy
for introduction, to allow processing in all the same places that allow production. Smith
stated he can do that. His only concern is that agricultural processing is its own use in
County code, and is only allowed in the agricultural zones and rural zones. It may be a
conflict if they allow only marijuana processing, and not other agricultural processing, in a
rural residential zone.
Kremen stated and there was discussion that this will cost the County a significant
amount of money.
Browne asked and there was discussion about retailers who would be affected by this
proposed change.
Crawford asked and there was discussion of allowing retail in an agricultural zone.
Natural Resources Committee, 3/11/2014, Page 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
Mann stated he supports hemp and marijuana. It's too restrictive, but he supports
introduction so there can be a public hearing. He shares the concerns that were brought up
today.
Browne stated he understands the concerns from the Sheriff. He asked for the
evidence used for choosing the setbacks.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Weimer, Crawford and Buchanan (3)
Nays: None (0)
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
1. RESOLUTION DECLARING THE COUNCIL'S INTENT TO CREATE A WATER
ACTION PLAN, SPELLING OUT THE VARIOUS WATER QUALITY, QUANTITY,
AND HABITAT ISSUES TO ADDRESS IN THE 2015 -2016 BUDGET
DISCUSSIONS (AB2014 -067) (11:24:44 AM)
Crawford asked and there was discussion of preparing a fiscal impact report from the
administration.
Jack Louws, County Executive, answered questions.
Weimer stated it just says they're going to prioritize water plans and get input from
the advisory committees about what the priorities should be. There isn't much fiscal impact
other than a bit of staff work from a resolution. Roland Middleton stated he could do that
staff work within his job description. Most of the work will come into the Council Office to
prioritize.
Crawford stated he would like to know if administration can do this with existing
staff.
Weimer stated they are trying to get levels of service on which they can decide. By
this summer, they'll have decisions, knowing what they can get for different levels of
service. Until they get enough information to make those decisions, they won't move
forward. There is a lot of emphasis for moving water programs forward.
Buchanan stated he supports the resolution. There must be a foundation for the
Council to evaluate and come up with things for the budget.
Brenner stated they could add this to the budget for the special projects manager
position being requested later today in the budget supplemental.
Weimer moved to recommend to the full Council approval of the resolution with all
the amendments included.
Browne stated he's interested in taking a lead on this project. Also, look at the
ability to use stormwater and floodwater. Establish the right to use it for fire flow storage
without the need for a water certificate, for example. There are additional things he would
like to see, but move it forward as soon as possible. Don't delay implementation.
Natural Resources Committee, 3/11/2014, Page 5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Weimer and Buchanan (2)
Nays: Crawford (1)
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 11:31 a.m.
ATTEST:
, Council Clerk
-, Minutes Transcription
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Barry Buchanan, Committee Chair
Natural Resources Committee, 3/11/2014, Page 6