HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil May 7 20131
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
Regular County Council
May 7, 2013
CALL TO ORDER
Council Chair Kathy Kershner called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council
Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
ROLL CALL
Present: Barbara Brenner, Ken Mann, Sam Crawford, Pete Kremen, Kathy
Kershner and Carl Weimer.
Absent: Bill Knutzen.
FLAG SALUTE
ANNOUNCEMENTS
1. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION
ON FILE NO. APL2012 -0005, FILED BY JOSEPH BOWEN, REGARDING
APPLICANT THOMAS FENTON'S APPEAL OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION
BY WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES (AB2013-
079)
Crawford moved to uphold the Hearing Examiner's decision.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Kremen and Weimer (5)
Nays: Kershner (1)
Absent: Knutzen (1)
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON ROMA ROAD
(AB2013 -161)
This item was withdrawn from the agenda.
2. ORDINANCE AMENDING WCC 10.34, FERRY RATES (AB2013 -162)
Frank Abart, Public Works Director, gave a staff report and stated the ordinance was
before the Council about a year ago, except with a new start date of January 1, 2013. This
ordinance changes the 45 percent road fund subsidy, which is calculated on the exact same
expense figure as the 55 percent fare revenue calculation.
Whatcom County Council, 5/7/2013, 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
Kershner opened the public hearing and the following people spoke:
Greg Brown stated he requests that a budget breakdown be given to the Ferry
Advisory Committee. Approve it now, but please provide the committee with information on
where a lot of these numbers come from.
Hearing no one else, Kershner closed the public hearing.
Crawford moved to adopt the ordinance.
Brenner moved that the Ferry Advisory Committee gets an update on where those
numbers come from. Abart stated he understands the Council will get a letter that makes
that request. The letter will provide detail on what the committee wants. Public Works is
happy to provide that information.
Brenner withdrew the motion.
Weimer stated he didn't get the letter from Mr. McKenzie. According to the Advisory
Committee minutes, it seems the committee supports the idea of the calculation. He
doesn't have any problem with that. However, everyone seems to miss the ferry deficit
reimbursement. He understood that both funds would be removed, to come up with the
base 45/55. Now they're changing the wording to include only one of those funds the
County receives because it has a ferry, but not both of them. He asked how much is in the
fund that they aren't including. Abart stated he doesn't have that detail. There was a lot of
discussion among the attorney, staff accounting person, and Finance Division Manager.
Everyone concluded that the funding, which is only available to counties with ferry
operations, is to reimburse the counties' road funds for the burden. It is not necessarily for
those monies to go back into ferry operations. The Council could decide to include it. Now
the ferry deficit revenue is the only revenue that is segregated from funds that come from
the State specifically for ferry operation.
Weimer stated that if they are trying to level the playing field so the 45/55 is figured
from the same number, he questions why that other subsidy to the road fund regarding
ferries is not part of the same calculation. When they wrote this five or six years ago, he
thought they tried to include both. Include the other fund. He cannot support the change
without the other fund being included in the ordinance. Abart stated the clarification is
included because of the discussion they had three or four years ago. It hasn't been included
in the time he's been with the County.
Weimer stated he knows it hasn't been included. A number of people have said the
only reason the County gets it is because it has a ferry, so it should be part of the
calculation.
Brenner moved to refer the ordinance to the Public Works Committee.
Kremen stated he agrees with Councilmember Brenner. He asked if the County is
obligated to put the State money into the road fund. Abart stated this revenue comes in
with all the other deposits for the road fund. Because Whatcom County has a ferry
operation, there is a law that designates this fund for county road funds that have a ferry
operation. It's not necessarily to benefit the ferry operation. It's to benefit the road fund
that has the burden of a ferry operation. The County attorney, the Finance Division
manager, and he spent a lot of time reviewing this and came to the same conclusion.
Whatcom County Council, 5/7/2013, 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
Kremen asked if nothing precludes them from adding it to the ferry operations.
Abart stated the Council can designate it if it chooses. It never has. They've never done it
that way.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Kremen, Kershner and Weimer (6)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen (1)
3. ORDINANCE REGARDING INSTALLATION OF STOP SIGNS ON VARIOUS
ROADS WITHIN THE COUNTY (AB2013 -163)
This item was withdrawn from the agenda.
OPEN SESSION
The following people spoke:
• Greg Brown submitted a handout (on file) and spoke about the Whatcom
Land Trust intervening in the Lake Whatcom reconveyance.
• Donna Clark spoke about the aquatic invasive species ordinance.
• Michael Knapp, Whatcom County Sheriff and Police Chief Association Chair,
submitted (on file) and spoke about a resolution regarding the proposed jail
siting.
• Wendy Harris spoke about the aquatic invasive species ordinance and
protecting geese at a County park.
• Tip Johnson spoke about a proposed packing house ordinance.
• Steven J. Carter spoke about a motorcycle track on Hemmi Road.
Sheri Lambart spoke about a motorcycle track on Hemmi Road.
• Dave Onkels spoke about motorcycle noise, the proposed packing house
ordinance, and Lake Whatcom water studies.
• Bob McWhorter spoke about a motorcycle track on Hemmi Road.
• Chet Dowe spoke about the 2016 Comprehensive Plan review.
• Karen Brown spoke about the aquatic invasive species ordinance.
CONSENT AGENDA
Mann reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and moved
to approve Consent Agenda items one and two.
Brenner withdrew item two.
The motion to approve Consent agenda item one carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Kremen, Kershner and Weimer (6)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen (1)
1. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID #13 -12
FOR RENTAL CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT TO ALL BIDDERS, IN AN AMOUNT
THAT MAY EXCEED $35,000 WITH A SINGLE VENDOR (AB2013 -173)
Whatcom County Council, 5/7/2013, 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
2. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO USE THE KCDA
CONTRACT TO PURCHASE PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT AS PREVIOUSLY
AUTHORIZED IN ASR 2013 -5028 FOR SILVER LAKE PARK FROM VENDOR
LANDSCAPE STRUCTURES, IN THE AMOUNT OF $84,003.90 (AB2013 -174)
Mann moved to approve the request.
Brenner stated spending $85,000 seems extremely extravagant. This contractor is
not local and doesn't do anything to help the local economy. The County could install a big
plaque for free advertising as incentive for local bidders. They can keep the cost down by
doing the bid that way. It should go back to the County Executive, who should bring it back
in a different form.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Crawford, Kremen, Kershner and Weimer (5)
Nays: Brenner (1)
Absent: Knutzen (1)
OTHER ITEMS
1. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 2013 WHATCOM COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
ZONE DISTRICT BUDGET, SECOND REQUEST, IN THE AMOUNT OF $53,155
(AB2013 -160)
(Clerk's Note: Council acting as the Whatcom County Flood Control Zone District
Board of Supervisors.)
Mann reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and moved
to approve the resolution.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Kremen, Kershner and Weimer (6)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen (1)
2. ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING INTERFUND LOANS TO FINANCE CASH FLOW
FOR ROAD CAPITAL PROJECT BUDGETS (AB2013 -164)
Mann reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and moved
to adopt the ordinance.
Brenner moved to amend Council packet page 71, "All interfund loans will be
reported to the County Council yearly." The only argument made against it was that it's no
big deal. If it's no big deal, she should get a report that it's happening. They probably
won't have to send anything since it rarely happens.
Mann asked if this creates a lot of work, or can be done fairly easily.
Brad Bennett, Administrative Services Department, stated they can handle the
request. There won't be a lot of these.
Kremen stated he supports the motion.
Whatcom County Council, 5/7/2013, 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
Crawford stated he won't support the motion. The Treasurer clarified that he has the
responsibility to do make sure it's paid back into the fund. It's also subject to the annual
State audit every year. It would be checked anyway. It's not necessary. He respects
Councilmember Brenner's desire to look at that stuff.
Brenner stated the Council doesn't go through all the minutia that the State Auditor
goes through. It's not a big deal. If there are certain things they want and that aren't a big
deal, it should be done. Otherwise, they would have to go through everything. She doesn't
know that the State Auditor looks at that every year.
Crawford stated the motion puts into an ordinance regarding a specific loan a
generic, blanket policy. This isn't an appropriate spot to do it.
Brenner stated that's not what she's doing. These are all interfund loans. This isn't
just one loan. It's any interfund loan from the County road fund to the road capital project
funds for cash flow purposes. It's information. People should be allowed to get information,
especially when it's not a big deal to produce it.
Kershner asked if Mr. Bennett could make these reports, along with other quarterly
and cost center reports, without it going into the ordinance. Bennett stated he can. It's all
public information.
Kremen stated the underlying intent is a good government move. Because this does
not happen often, the report is only done annually, and the report doesn't require much
work, this motion is beneficial. Putting it into an ordinance may not always be the best
thing to do. In this case, in the event that a future administration is unwilling to provide the
information requested by the Council, who would therefore have to get a public disclosure
request, this codifies the request and is good government. It makes the Council more
financially responsible to the people. He supports the motion
Weimer suggested a friendly amendment, "All new interfund loans from the
county road fund will be reported to the County Council annually."
Brenner accepted the friendly amendment.
Crawford suggested a friendly amendment, "All new interfund loans from the
county road fund will provide a report to the County Council annually."
Brenner amended her motion, "A report of all new interfund loans from the county
road fund will be provided to the County Council annually."
The motion to amend carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Kremen, Kershner and Weimer (6)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen (1)
The motion to adopt as amended carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Kremen, Kershner and Weimer (6)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen (1)
Whatcom County Council, 5/7/2013, 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
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
3. REQUEST APPROVAL OF A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH PROFESSIONAL
AND TECHNICAL EMPLOYEES 17 REGARDING EXTENSION OF MAY 20, 2008 —
DECEMBER 31, 2012, COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT (AB2013 -171)
Mann reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and moved
to approve the request.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Kremen, Kershner and Weimer (6)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen (1)
4. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND FIRE DISTRICT
7 TO SUPPORT THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH PARAMEDIC INCENTIVE PAY
AND CONTINUING EDUCATION (AS APPROVED BY THE EMS ADVISORY
BOARD AND ADOPTED BY COUNTY COUNCIL THROUGH ORDINANCE 2012-
048), IN THE AMOUNT OF $117,245 (AB2013 -172)
Mann reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and moved
to approve the request.
Crawford stated the Ferndale Fire Chief has some concerns about phase -in and
timing, how he is going to staff a full unit, reducing the number of units by a half, and
increased call volume. He's looking at potentially hiring about six firefighters. This
reimburses for the current situation, not the future. The Chief asked if the Executive
anticipates that this would begin in 2014. The Executive responded that it would be in the
second half of 2014. He supports this resolution. There may be negotiation as this goes
forward.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Kremen, Kershner and Weimer (6)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen (1)
5. DISCUSSION AND APPROVAL OF THE DRAFT PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN
FOR WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT
REGULATION AMENDMENTS (AB2013 -177)
Mann reported for the Planning and Development Committee and moved to
approve the plan with one amendment to packet page 173, table 2.1, to add the WRIA 1
Planning Unit.
Crawford stated he likes the motion to amend in spirit. He is concerned because he's
not sure of the legal status of the group, which Dan Gibson reviewed. He thinks the
Planning Unit is still a legal entity, but its roles and responsibilities may have ended. He
asked if it's appropriate to add that group.
Mann stated that question did not come up during committee. The committee
thought it was relevant to include. This list is a select group of committees that may be
asked to comment on portions of amendments. Nothing obligates them. It's an opportunity
to affirm the Council's support of the group.
Whatcom County Council, 5/7/2013, Page 6
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
Brenner stated the Prosecutor did not question the Planning Unit's legality. This just
acknowledges that the Planning Unit exists. It's up to the Council to reactivate the Planning
Unit.
Kershner moved to amend to add the Forest Advisory Committee.
The motion to amend carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Kremen, Kershner and Weimer (6)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen (1)
The motion to adopt with amendments carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Kremen, Kershner and Weimer (6)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen (1)
OTHER BUSINESS
DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO WHATCOM COUNTY CODE CHAPTER
20.51, LAKE WHATCOM WATERSHED OVERLAY DISTRICT; PLN2011 -00015
(AB2013 -102)
Weimer reported for the Natural Resources Committee and stated most of the
changes were given the nod of approval, but they delayed a decision about exempting small
lots. More information will come forward.
DISCUSSION REGARDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE SECTION 2.27A, AQUATIC
INVASIVE SPECIES (AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE 2013 -018 ON APRIL 23, 2013)
(AB2013 -145A)
Brenner reported for the Public Works, Health, and Safety Committee and stated
there was discussion regarding the aquatic invasive species ordinance. The committee
made two recommendations.
Brenner moved to ask staff to prepare an amendment that can be implemented as
soon as reasonably possible, to allow a one -time charge for boats used exclusively in
Whatcom County.
Crawford asked the mechanism used to ensure this would happen.
Brenner stated this is to request staff to make a recommendation on how to make
that happen.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Kremen and Kershner (5)
Nays: Weimer (1)
Absent: Knutzen (1)
Brenner moved to ask staff to prepare an amendment to create a graduated fee
structure, depending on the difficulty of inspection, for all boats that are not used
exclusively in Whatcom County.
Whatcom County Council, 5/7/2013, Page 7
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 asked if this is for kayaks.
Brenner stated people have said repeatedly that it seems punitive to the motor
boats. It should have more to do with whether there is difficulty inspecting the boats.
Crawford stated he will support it. They need to work with the City of Bellingham.
The County has to have a plan that fits with the City plan. He will not be in favor of two
different plans. As staff prepares this, he hopes to hear from the City that it is willing to
adapt their ordinances in a way that makes sense for both.
Brenner stated the City did not work with the County on the fees. The City worked
with the County on what they are supposed to be doing. The City did what it did
unilaterally. The City represents only city residents. The County represents all residents.
The County has a broader responsibility to people. The Council is also the Board of Health.
None of the City council members showed up today, although they were invited. The
County can't make the City do anything. The County is supposed to do what is in the best
interest of the residents it represents.
Mann stated the committee talked today just to five guidance to staff about what the
Council would like to see. The committee members don't know how staff would implement
these things. The committee wants to coordinate with the City. This is to ask staff to bring
forward changes and how they could be implemented. He wants to see what staff thinks
and how it could work with the City.
Weimer stated he supports the motion. They want to look at all types of boats, and
he's interested in what staff will bring forward. They don't need to pick a fight with the City
Council. Their members support a fee for small boats, but thought the County Council
wouldn't approve that.
Kershner stated she won't support the amendment. She wants to see less
regulation. She wants a state program that protects all the waters of the state. Not all
localities throughout the state can afford these expensive programs. She's interested to see
what the staff will bring forward. That doesn't mean she won't support what the staff brings
forward. Continue to look at improvements that make sense. They've been told that
kayaks are not the source of aquatic invasive species because they don't live on those
things long enough. They don't have little hiding places. If that's not the case, she's willing
to listen to different evidence. However, this is the wrong path to go down.
Brenner stated they were never told the invasive species couldn't survive on small
boats. They only talked about motor boats. It didn't treat everyone the same. She didn't
support the ordinance because she had amendments. It isn't right to charge some of the
people who use their boats, but not others. She would support an amendment to stop the
whole program until they get it right.
Kremen stated the best way to deal with these invasive species is on a statewide
basis. He would ultimately like to see the State Department of Fish and Wildlife and
Department of Health collaborate on a statewide program. Therefore, he suggested a
friendly amendment, "...in Whateern Geunty Washington State." The rationale is that
ultimately a state program will happen. It's uncertain when. The State of Washington will
come up with some sort of statewide policy and program that will address invasive species.
When that is done and implemented, all the County has to worry about are watercraft
outside Washington State.
Whatcom County Council, 5/7/2013, Page 8
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
Brenner accepted the friendly amendment. She restated the motion to ask staff to
prepare an amendment to create a graduated fee structure, depending on the difficulty of
inspection, for all boats that are not used exclusively in Washington State.
Mann stated this seems premature.
Kremen stated this just asks staff to prepare an amendment for the Council to
consider. Councilmembers Mann doesn't have to support the amendment.
Kershner stated they can make that choice when the amendent comes forward.
Brenner stated she received information that only .03 percent of the boats inspected
were found with aquatic invasive species, and they were plants. All three of them were
from the same like in British Columbia (B.C.)
State.
Weimer asked if this would only charge a fee for a boat from outside of Washington
Brenner stated that's correct.
Weimer stated he will vote against the motion.
Kershner asked if this amendment would repeal most of the ordinance that the
Council adopted, because boats from Washington State would not be subject to the
ordinance. They are getting ready for a State inspection program. The Council could
implement this in place of the current ordinance.
Brenner stated the State Department of Fish and Wildlife already has paperwork that
people fill out regarding aquatic invasive species and how to take care of their boats. There
are many spots on a bigger boat that can't be inspected. They can be cleaned out. The
state has the educational material that the County should hand out to people right now.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Crawford, Kremen and Kershner (4)
Nays: Weimer and Mann (2)
Absent: Knutzen (1)
INTRODUCTION ITEMS
Crawford moved to accept the Introduction Items.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Kremen, Kershner and Weimer (6)
Nays: None (0)
Absent: Knutzen (1)
1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2013 WHATCOM COUNTY BUDGET, SIXTH
REQUEST, IN THE AMOUNT OF $658,009 702,109 (AB2013 -178)
2. ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 81 -06, AUTHORIZING THE
TREASURER TO ESTABLISH A FUND TO BE KNOWN AS THE WHATCOM
COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND (AB2013 -179)
Whatcom County Council, 5/7/2013, Page 9
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
3. DRAFT ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE TITLE 20, THE
OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING MAPS, AND THE WHATCOM COUNTY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND MAPS TO IMPLEMENT CHANGES RELATED TO
RURAL LAND USE PLANNING (AB2013 -180)
4. ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 2011 -030, ESTABLISHING A PROJECT
BASED BUDGET TO FUND CIVIC CENTER EXTERIOR REPAIRS (AB2013 -176)
OTHER BUSINESS
Brenner referenced the issues with the Hemmi Road motorcycle track and stated
there is a decibel limit. The Sheriff will have those details. It's unfortunate that it's gotten
really bad for the neighbors. It would be nice if there were sound buffers for these kinds of
facilities. Since this is grandfathered in, adopting an ordinance wouldn't affect this use.
Kremen stated it's possible for the Council to revise the code, because the owner of
the facility seems to be skirting around the commercial prohibition by asking for donations
rather than an actual fee. The Council may be able to craft some language to prohibit any
compensation whatsoever that would include donations. That might have some effect to
minimize the use of the facility. The proprietor advertises and sends out emails and is listed
in certain websites that promote his facility. When people use the facility, donations are
accepted. Donations generate more money than a set price. The County may be able to
provide a disincentive, or reduce the incentive for the proprietor to promote his facility.
Kershner stated she would like the Council's legal counsel to consider whether the
Council can take any legal action.
Karen Frakes, Prosecutor's Office, stated any legal action would have to go through
the entire Planning staff and Planning Commission process.
Kershner stated she would support any emergency action to allow a cease and desist
order for what's going on out there. She would like to know if that can happen.
Kremen stated that the administration should aggressively do what it can to shut
down that facility as soon as possible, with whatever justification or legality available. It's
an untenable situation that has been going on for years. The use has significantly increased
the last couple of years.
Weimer stated he's communicated with the Sheriff's Office, Prosecutor's Office, and
neighbors. The Prosecutor's Office has already noted some part of the code that could be
used as leverage in this situation. A deputy has been assigned to work with the neighbors.
The neighbors' evidence will be key. He will forward additional information.
REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS
Mann stated a young person recently died at Whatcom Falls in the creek. He feels
bad for the family. This seems to happen every few years. He hopes teenagers are
reminded how dangerous the rocks are at Whatcom Creek.
Whatcom County Council, 5/7/2013, Page 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 8:37 p.m.
The Council approved these minutes on May 21, 2013.
ATTEST:
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Please contact the Council Office to obtain an
official, signed copy:
360- 676 -6690 or council@�o.w hatcom .wa.us
Whatcom County Council, 5/7/2013, Page 11