HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil May 22 20121
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
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Regular County Council
May 22, 2012
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 (7:02:26 PM)
Present: Barbara Brenner, Ken Mann, Sam Crawford, Bill Knutzen, Kathy
Kershner, Carl Weimer and Pete Kremen.
Absent: None.
FLAG SALUTE
ANNOUNCEMENTS
MINUTES CONSENT
1. REGULAR COUNTY COUNCIL FOR APRIL 24, 2012
Knutzen moved to approve the minutes.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Knutzen, Kershner, Weimer and Kremen (7)
Nays: None (0)
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. ORDINANCE IMPOSING AN INTERIM MORATORIUM ON THE ACCEPTANCE OF
NEW APPLICATIONS FOR WIND ENERGY SYSTEMS (WES) GREATER THAN
500 KILOWATTS, OR MULTIPLE WES PER PARCEL WITH A CUMULATIVE
RATED OUTPUT ABOVE 100 KILOWATTS (AB2011 -223C)
Kershner opened the public hearing, and the following people spoke:
Forest Kat stated his home in Sudden Valley is very quiet at night. A giant wind
turbine will ruin the peacefulness of Sudden Valley. He accepts the occasional noise of
timber harvest, but not wind energy systems.
Rick Kinney stated keep the long -term in mind. Allow the industry an opportunity to
find out if it will work in the community. He's never heard of birds getting killed by wind
turbines.
Whatcom County Council, 5/22/2012, 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
Christopher Keefe stated that given economic concerns in Bellingham, maintain a
high quality of life, which includes the opportunity to work and long -term, low -cost energy
availability. It has been extremely difficult to find employment in this area. It's a disservice
to the citizens to prevent sustainable energy solutions and job growth in a desirable
employment sector. Don't adopt the moratorium.
John Blethen stated he has solar panels on his roof. Wind turbines are all around
communities in Europe. He is in favor of trying wind turbines.
Karen Steen stated she just relocated from the mid - Columbia region of Washington,
which is the center of wind energy. The Council should do in -depth studies on wind energy.
Jackie Pettit stated move ahead to allow solar and wind energy in the community.
It's critical to move forward. She supports allowing wind energy.
Jerry Hammer stated wind turbines are subsidized by tax dollars. Consider
something that pays for itself.
Hearing no one else, Kershner closed the public hearing.
Mann moved to adopt the ordinance.
Brenner stated this is a moratorium on the big turbines. There is no moratorium on
residential sized turbines. People can get off the grid individually. They are much less
intrusive with fewer impacts. The Council has been working on an ordinance for years.
Crawford noted a scrivener's error requiring a correction, "Now therefore be it
ordained ... abeut above 100 kilowatts...."
Mann asked the citizens to stay aware of and involved in the final ordinance the
Council is developing.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Knutzen, Kershner, Weimer and Kremen (7)
Nays: None (0)
OPEN SESSION
The following people spoke:
• Shane Roth spoke on the issues of the prohibiting topics during open session
and the proposed Lake Whatcom reconveyance.
• Forest Kat spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom reconveyance.
• Rick Kinney spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom reconveyance.
• Stan Snapp, Bellingham City Council Member, spoke on the issue of the
proposed Lake Whatcom reconveyance.
• Donna Clark spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom reconveyance.
• Paul Anderson spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom
reconveyance.
• Tim Craft spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom reconveyance.
• Kris Halterman submitted a handout (on file, Exhibit A) and spoke on the
issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom reconveyance.
Whatcom County Council, 5/22/2012, 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
• Jasmine Minbashian, Conservation Northwest and Cedar River Advisory Board,
submitted a handout (on file, Exhibit B) and spoke on the issue of the
proposed Lake Whatcom reconveyance.
• Lorraine Newman submitted a handout (on file, Exhibit C) and spoke on the
issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom reconveyance.
• Mark Peterson spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom
reconveyance.
• Charles Burleigh, Mt. Baker School District, submitted a handout (on file,
Exhibit D) and spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom
reconveyance.
• Jackie Pettit spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom reconveyance.
• Daniel Probst spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom
reconveyance.
• Carl Uppiano spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom
reconveyance.
• Steve Rogowski, Whatcom Lands and Recreation Coalition, spoke on the issue
of the proposed Lake Whatcom reconveyance.
• Bob Aegerter spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom
reconveyance.
• David Fleming spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom
reconveyance.
• Linda Marrom spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom
reconveyance.
• Matt Petryni spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom reconveyance.
• Christopher Keefe spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom
reconveyance.
• Terry Meyer spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom reconveyance.
• Dick Whitmore spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom
reconveyance.
• Eric Brown spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom reconveyance.
• Kim Ninnemann spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom
reconveyance.
• Judy Hopkinson spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom
reconveyance.
• Naomi Bunis spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom
reconveyance.
• Lisa McShane spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom
reconveyance.
• Patrick Alesse spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom
reconveyance.
• David Wallin spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom
reconveyance.
• Michael Lilliquist, Bellingham City Council Member, spoke on the issue of the
proposed Lake Whatcom reconveyance.
• Ellen Baker spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom reconveyance.
• Greg Brown submitted a handout (on file, Exhibit E) and spoke on the issue of
the proposed Lake Whatcom reconveyance.
• Tom Westergreen spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom
reconveyance.
• Karen Brown spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom
reconveyance.
• David Langley spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom
reconveyance.
Whatcom County Council, 5/22/2012, 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
• Wendy Harris spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom
reconveyance.
• Rod Pemble spoke on the issue of the proposed Lake Whatcom
reconveyance.
OTHER ITEMS
1. REPORT ON COMMITTEE DISCUSSION REGARDING THE PROPOSED INTER -
TRUST EXCHANGE AND RECONVEYANCE OF LAND IN THE LAKE WHATCOM
WATERSHED (AB2012 -066B)
Knutzen stated this is one of the biggest issues ever before the Council. It would be
no cost to Whatcom County to put this on the ballot. They are looking at doubling the size
of the Parks Department and a continued burden to the taxpayers of Whatcom County. He
moved to put this on the general election ballot.
Mann stated he is against the motion. He opposes all citizen initiatives. It's the
Council's job to do it's homework and study the issue. The voters can have their say on
who is elected to the Council. He always votes against all citizen initiatives. This proposal
isn't as momentous as stated.
Brenner stated she believes in the initiative process. It's easy for the Council to
forget what's going on. The Council has taken advisory votes before. State and County law
allow it. Putting an initiative on the ballot is a great idea.
Weimer stated he is against the motion because it's not a momentous vote. It
doesn't involve that much money respectively. The Council is elected to debate these
decisions. This is an opportunity to come to an end to something.
Knutzen stated a cost of $250,000 is significant. It doesn't include the loss to the
Mt. Baker School District or development costs. This came up recently. The process hasn't
been vetted. It's a controversial issue. They currently manage 7,800 acres of park in the
County, and they're talking about adding another 8,700 acres. There is no rush to put this
through. It's elitist to tell the voters that the Council doesn't value their opinion.
Crawford stated he doesn't see how this rises to such a big level. He's researched a
lot of the questions in the last few weeks and tried to respond to a huge amount of
information. This has been one of the most studied and vetted proposals he's aware of in
the last couple of decades. He thought he gave his final vote when he voted on this in the
past. The Council has a job to make a decision of this scale. He's sure he's heard from
every person who has an interest, regardless of their side of the issue. He's ready to vote
tonight.
Kremen stated the bulk of the funds used to complete the reconveyance has already
been voted on by prior councils and been spent. In relation to the general budget, this cost
is a small amount. They would be asking the voters if they support spending an additional
$30,000 or $40,000 per year to maintain a very low impact trail system. It's ludicrous to
ask that of the voters. He's opposed to the motion. He called the question.
The motion failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner and Knutzen (2)
Nays: Mann, Crawford, Kershner, Weimer and Kremen (5)
Whatcom County Council, 5/22/2012, 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
Weimer reported for the Natural Resources Committee and moved to approve the
draft letter in the Council packet to the State Department of Natural Resources (DNR).
Brenner stated approval with fifty percent plus one is not a good way to do the
County's business. The major issue is water quality. They aren't choosing between water
quality or no water quality. DNR forestry practices via the Landscape Plan in the watershed
do not present a risk to water quality. Much land in the watershed is privately owned, and
not subject to the Landscape Plan. The land being reconveyed already has the strongest
regulations on it. She had not seen the newest cost estimates before today. She was told
that $1.5 million is being dedicated for maintenance. It's not a small amount. They're
moving money around. She would never support something that hurt water quality. She's
concerned that people have been terrified into thinking that logging is awful. They can have
both recreational jobs and logging jobs. A recreational plan is allowed right now. The
County can work with the DNR to develop recreational opportunities. The Landscape Plan is
the best in the country. Now they're being told the land is being reconveyed because it isn't
good enough. The costs for cleaning up the watershed are there, and this doesn't have
anything to do with that. The real estate excise tax (REET) II funds can be used for the jail
and public works projects. The only people who knew about this being on the agenda are
the people who were pushing for it. The information isn't included. They already can't log
the old growth. The land is public, and can't be developed. The Mt. Baker School District
isn't the only special district that will lose timber revenues. If it's a matter of people who
just don't like logging, they can't legislate someone's taste. The economy is bad. The
opportunity will never be lost. It's sad that this has been done in such a way to get fifty
percent plus one, and not put it on the ballot. Many people are hurting, and can't get by
easily and can't be here. In the future, there will be so many costs in the watershed, they
need to spend money wisely.
Crawford asked about information submitted by the Parks Department regarding the
state forest transfer.
Mike McFarland, Parks and Recreation Department Director, stated the handout
indicates the impact to the various trusts.
Knutzen referenced the handout from the Parks Department (on file) indicates the
annual cost is more than $30,000 per year. He's disappointed that the Council isn't
listening to the voters of Whatcom County.
Kremen asked if it is likely or possible that the exchange also benefits the State and
that more logging could be conducted than if they don't complete the exchange. McFarland
stated he can't speculate on what the State will do with the land. The general intent of the
exchange is to block land to make it easier for the State to continue to harvest and do
timber management on the trust lands within the watershed. In exchange, the County will
take the land on which it's most difficult to harvest timber because the areas have steeper
slopes, are smaller, and have more critical areas. They've reserved the areas most
appropriate for logging for the State, and moved the areas least appropriate for logging into
a preserve.
Kremen stated the lands in the exchange would be less likely to be approved for a
timber harvest. The land being acquired by the DNR is more likely to be approved or
permitted for timber harvest. McFarland stated that's correct. The junior taxing districts
will continue to get timber revenue from 640 acres.
Whatcom County Council, 5/22/2012, 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
Kremen asked about the ability to use REET II funding for public works projects and
a jail.
Brad Bennett, Administrative Services Department, stated REET II funds are for
roads, parks, and stormwater.
Brenner stated the jail will need stormwater facilities.
Kremen stated the inference is that the bulk of the money used for the exchange
could be used to build a jail.
Brenner stated REET II is not a bottomless pit. It should be used for essential public
services.
Crawford asked if the Mt. Baker School District agreement with the Land Trust is
encumbered with restrictions about how the County can ultimately use this property. He
asked the role of the Land Trust. McFarland stated there isn't a conservation agreement
tied to the reconveyance. The County was not a party to the agreement between the Land
Trust and the School District.
Rand Jack, Whatcom Land Trust, stated there is no condition on the agreement
beyond that the reconveyance is approved by the County Council and Board of Natural
Resources, and that the time for any legal challenges has lapsed. The money has already
been put into a common fund shared by the Land Trust and the School District. The money
will become the property of the School District. The Land Trust has no condition in terms of
how the land will be used. The Land Trust has no control over that as a result of that
agreement.
Kremen asked if there is a condition on how the School District will use the money.
Louws stated there is not. The District is going to set up a school foundation with the
money. Until the conditions are met, the money is jointly managed. The Land Trust put up
some of its money, and there was also an anonymous donor.
Knutzen asked if there are any other anonymous donors who are willing to mitigate
the losses to the other junior taxing districts in the area, as the County was instructed by
the DNR. Jack stated the Land Trust has done what it can. The real concern of the Board of
Natural Resources was with the Mt. Baker School District. The Mt. Baker School District has
been active in the process and was party to the lawsuit regarding timber losses due to the
Landscape Plan. No other junior taxing districts joined in that lawsuit. The Mt. Baker
School District attended and testified at the Board of Natural Resources meeting. The Mt.
Baker School District has a small tax base. It's difficult for them to make up the money it
would have lost. The Land Trust thought it was fair to help with that. He was told by at
least two councilmembers that they would not be willing to support the reconveyance unless
the Mt. Baker School District was taken care of. The reconveyance is so important that the
Land Trust made an effort to take care of the District. The Land Trust met with the School
District and made the best estimate possible of the present value of the timber revenues the
District would receive in perpetuity. The School District is delighted with the deal. They
should all be delighted with the deal.
Crawford stated that at this point, he will support the motion. There has been a
review of any liability that the County would take on. He read the legal counsel opinion on
liability. This issue isn't about water quality. This reconveyance is also not a death knell for
the timber industry. It's a small fraction of the available timber land. The main shrinkage
Whatcom County Council, 5/22/2012, 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
of the timber land base that has occurred in the last 20 years was when most of the
national forest was taken out of the land base. Mr. Whitmore's comments were impressive.
Mr. Whitmore asked why the Council isn't making the timber industry at par with the
agricultural community or mineral resource lands. It's a point well -made. He reviewed the
Comprehensive Plan and talked to Planning staff. The Comprehensive Plan update in 2016
should deal with the timber industry. The County must do a better job of engaging the
timber industry. It's an important resource. They are not deciding on the timber
management plan for the area tonight. The primary use of the reconveyed lands is for park
purposes, but they must work on the timber management plan with the help of the
industry. Councilmembers can work with County staff on efforts to support and engage the
industry. He commended Councilmember Kremen for his vision and thoughtfulness in
developing the reconveyance. He supports the reconveyance.
Brenner stated she is concerned about liability when things happen on the property.
It would be the County's cost to make sure they're corrected. Even if they don't let anyone
in the area, there will still be landslides and mass wasting.
Mann stated the Council has studied this a lot over the years. This will result in a net
job gain, net water quality improvement, and be a boon to recreational uses for the people
of Whatcom County. The head of the county tourism bureau said that most people come to
Whatcom County for outdoor recreation. There is verifiable data that says people come to
the county and spend money for outdoor recreation. The only compelling reason to vote
against it is because of his appreciation of Mr. Whitmore and Mr. Westergreen. However,
the reconveyance is in the best interest of the county as a whole. Regarding the public
referendum, he didn't say he doesn't care about what the public thinks. He was elected to
do a job and that's what they should do.
Knutzen stated the councilmembers have been oversold this project. They've been
told that it's about water quality and recreation, which this won't affect. They will end up
with buyer's remorse over liability issues due to phosphorus loading, mass wasting, revenue
loss, or when trying to justify asking County employees to take a pay cut during a budget
process after they've spent $1.2 million to $1.6 million each for two parks. He will vote
against the motion.
Weimer stated he will support the motion. It's not an easy issue. The water quality
benefits have been overblown. The costs aren't that great due to offsetting revenue. It
comes down to the vision for the future. This is one vote that really matters far into the
future. People in 50 years will thank them for voting for this.
Kershner stated she had dubious thoughts about whether this would pencil out for
the County. She thanked the Whatcom Land Trust to alleviate her concern about lost
funding to the School District. The reconveyance doesn't have anything to do with water
quality. It will be a beautiful place for future generations to visit and recreate. It's
important to keep the area beautiful. It will cost the County $34.50 per acre. That's a
great deal. It's a good business decision. She's still concerned about making sure they get
the timber industry advisory committee going to support a goal to preserve the timber
industry in Whatcom County. She talked to several community members to find out if there
is other land they can put into commercial forestry. She'll continue to work on that.
Kremen stated they are acquiring the 8,700 acres for $33.45 per acre. He worked
on this for a long time with other individuals, including Dan McShane, Rand Jack, and other
councilmembers. It is not easy to do this, even though it's the right thing to do. Future
generations will be grateful that the Council had this vision. He has a great deal of respect
Whatcom County Council, 5/22/2012, 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
for Mr. Westergreen and Mr. Whitmore. Because he disagrees, he will probably lose their
friendship and respect, which makes this difficult for him. The timber industry is important
to the future of the county. He is committed to working with the timber industry and other
councilmembers to formulate a timber advisory task force to work on how they can create
timber lands to retain the timber industry. This proposal addresses both water quality and
recreational opportunities. The Landscape Plan created stringent regulations. However,
recent timber harvests that followed the Landscape Plan still resulted in two mass wasting
events. The watershed is precious. They need to provide an opportunity for timber
harvesting, but the watershed is too precious to allow mistakes affecting water quality.
There is a benefit to water quality. Timber harvesting or the industry is essential to the
future of Whatcom County, and he's committed to working with councilmembers and the
timber industry to provide for land that is not in the watershed. There is a lot of forest land
in Whatcom County that should be harvested as an offset for the land they're preserving for
posterity.
Knutzen stated the former DNR State Trust Land Manager for Whatcom County wrote
a letter about the landslides that happened in 2009, which indicated that the timber
harvests weren't the cause of the landslides. Many misstatements have been given to
create support for the reconveyance.
Kremen stated a letter just received today about something that they've known
about for years is suspect.
Crawford stated the draft letter from the Council is silent about the financial impacts
to the junior taxing districts. Add language to the letter that says the County can't move
funds to those districts. An anonymous donor gave funds to the Mt. Baker School District.
Address an explanation of what impacts are anticipated for junior taxing districts and how
the impacts will be mitigated by the County by stating the County can't mitigate those
impacts.
Kremen stated they will have to defer to legal counsel for appropriate language. The
letter could include a statement that there have been no other junior taxing districts that
have expressed any concerns or requests to be reimbursed.
Brenner asked if the other taxing districts were notified.
Mann asked if the Council needs to agree on the actual text, or can give direction to
the Chair. He moved to allow the Chair to craft the language addressing Councilmember
Crawford's concern.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Crawford, Kershner, Weimer and Kremen (5)
Nays: Brenner and Knutzen (2)
(The Council took a break from 9:56 p.m. to 10:02 p.m.)
CONSENT AGENDA
(10:02:21 PM)
Mann reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and moved
to approve Consent Agenda items one through three.
Whatcom County Council, 5/22/2012, 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
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Knutzen, Kershner and Weimer (6)
Nays: Kremen (out of the room) (1)
1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
LETTER OF AGREEMENT WITH THE FRIENDS OF SUNSET FARM AND
WHATCOM COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT TO ASSIST IN
THE ONGOING MAINTENANCE, OPERATION AND SUPPORT OF SUNSET FARM
PARK (AB2012 -174)
2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE WASHINGTON STATE
MILITARY DEPARTMENT TO ENHANCE THE COOPERATION AND
COORDINATION AMONG LOCAL, TRIBAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL LAW
ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES IN A JOINT MISSION TO SECURE THE
INTERNATIONAL BORDERS OF THE UNITED STATES, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$757,963 (AB2012 -175)
3. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND WEST PUBLISHING FOR
ONLINE DATABASES AND PRINT SERVICE SUBSCRIPTIONS FOR THE
WHATCOM COUNTY LAW LIBRARY, IN THE AMOUNT OF $65,444 (AB2012-
176)
OTHER ITEMS
2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2012 WHATCOM COUNTY BUDGET, EIGHTH
REQUEST, IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,782,566 (AB2012 -173)
Mann reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and moved
to adopt the ordinance.
Brenner stated she is opposed to item eight. The ballot measure about the
conservation futures fund made it clear that the money is intended for purchases, but not
maintenance. Don't divert dedicated funds, even if they were diverted to enhance the
purchase.
Knutzen asked if the public utilities improvement fund is the source of the Economic
Development Investment (EDI) funds.
Jack Louws, County Executive, stated it is.
Crawford stated the ballot language allows the money to be used for maintenance.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Crawford, Kershner, Weimer and Kremen (5)
Nays: Brenner and Knutzen (2)
Whatcom County Council, 5/22/2012, 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. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE CITY OF
FERNDALE CONCERNING PLANNING, ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT
WITHIN THE FERNDALE URBAN GROWTH AREA (AB2012 -178) (10:07:23 PM)
Knutzen reported for the Planning and Development Committee and moved to
approve the request.
Weimer moved to amend the agreement:
• On Council packet page 189, section 1.B.i, "...Reimbursement shall only be
required for road or stormwater capital projects that are done in coordination with
the city ... and development standards in existence at the time of construction or an
alternate standard..."
• On Council packet page 198, section 6.C, "...that are either built to City standards
in existence at the time of construction or an alternative standard...."
The motion to amend carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Knutzen, Kershner, Weimer and Kremen (7)
Nays: None (0)
The motion to approve as amended carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Crawford, Knutzen, Kershner, Weimer and Kremen (7)
Nays: None (0)
4. REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE'S APPOINTMENT OF
CHARLES CANNON TO THE POINT ROBERTS COMMUNITY ADVISORY
COMMITTEE (AB2012 -153) (10:10:41 PM)
Crawford moved to confirm the appointment.
Brenner stated four councilmembers went to Point Roberts. The committee is not
working well. Before appointing more people, work on the advisory committee language to
make sure it's a more diverse cross - section of people.
Jack Louws, County Executive, stated he's aware of the challenges in Point Roberts.
This appointment was postponed once, and he didn't object. Mr. Cannon is well - qualified
for the appointment. He plans to meet with the Point Roberts community in June. The
committee is advisory. He has a responsibility to listen to the committee and also the entire
community. He recommends that the Council go forward with the confirmation.
Kremen stated he was one of the four councilmembers who attended the meeting in
Point Roberts. There was near consensus on the disenchantment of the makeup of the
advisory committee with Mr. Cannon. The majority of residents attending believed that the
advisory committee needed to include more diverse ideologies. It's awkward for the Council
to not confirm an appointment. In this case, it would be beneficial for the Executive to
delay the appointment until after his trip to Point Roberts. Louws stated it would have been
nice if the Council had allowed him the opportunity to go to Point Roberts and work with the
citizens. He was unable to attend the meeting in Point Roberts due to prior commitments.
There will be future appointments to the Advisory Committee. There are avenues to take
care of issues with straight talk. Mr. Cannon was kind enough to complete the application.
A month ago, councilmembers felt he was well - qualified for the position. He would like to
appoint Mr. Cannon and work with the Advisory Committee so they understand the
Committee represents the entire group up there. Move forward with the appointment. If
Whatcom County Council, 5/22/2012, Page 10
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
it's the Council's will to tell Mr. Cannon that it does not believe in his capability to serve the
Advisory Committee, then vote down the confirmation. However, he prefers the Council
confirm the appointment.
Weimer stated councilmembers heard concerns about the make up of the committee.
Some suggestions were to add more members. A number of the residents who complained
about the committee were encouraged to apply, but haven't. He asked if Mr. Louws has
received any new applications for the committee since the councilmembers attended the
meeting. Louws stated he is not aware of any new applications for the committee.
Weimer stated he supports the Executive's decision, although the Executive could
wait until he goes to Point Roberts to see the situation for himself.
Brenner stated everyone at the meeting had no idea there were openings. They
assumed that it was done, even though the Council hadn't confirmed the appointment.
There would be no reason for someone to apply when they figured the position was already
taken. Someone made an excellent suggestion that the boards of the individual
organizations represented on the Advisory Committee should appoint their own
representatives. The committee is very insular as it is. It wasn't her choice to go up there
at that time. They were all invited. The meeting wasn't sponsored by the Council. She
wants Executive Louws to up there and see things for himself. This fellow may be great to
be on the committee. They could also have term limits.
Kremen stated he told the Point Roberts citizens that they need to talk to the
Executive about the advisory committee. As the ordinance is written, three of the five
positions are to be filled by organizations which they represent, and the County Executive
only appoints two at -large representatives. Louws stated he's not had any contact from
anyone from the Point Roberts or from councilmembers since the meeting. He's aware of
what's going on. The right thing to do is respect the man who submitted an application and
has the correct credentials.
Mann stated he supports the appointment. The meeting in Point Roberts was lively.
When Executive Louws goes to Point Roberts, he should take a representative from the
Public Works Department and Finance Division. The residents asked a lot of good, complex
questions.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Crawford, Knutzen, Kershner, Weimer and Kremen (6)
Nays: None (0)
Abstain: Brenner (1)
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business.
REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS
(10:27 :38 PM)
Kershner reported that Lee Gross was appointed to the Board of Natural Resources.
Whatcom County Council, 5/22/2012, Page 11
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
Crawford reported that he attended the Bellingham Technical College welding rodeo
for the first time. It's very impressive. It was also a good opportunity to look at the
training facilities at the school.
Brenner reported that the first Friday in June is the woods tour hosted by the Women
in Timber. She recommends that councilmembers attend the tour.
Kershner reported that she recommends people attend the Ski -to -Sea event this
weekend.
Mann stated he's the emcee of the Ski -to -Sea awards ceremony. He hopes people
attend the awards ceremony.
Brenner stated her husband has a Ski -to -Sea team, and they're going to do great.
Weimer reported that the Northwest Clean Air Agency released a request for
proposals (RFP) recently. It plans to grant several million dollars in mitigation funds that
come from the British Petroleum (BP) refinery expansion. At one point, the County
considered applying for funds for Galbraith Mountain rehabilitation. The proposals are due
the end of July.
Kremen stated he forwarded this grant opportunity to the Executive and Regan
Clover.
Jack Louws, County Executive, stated he has notified the County departments about
the grant opportunity.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 10:32 p.m.
The Council approved these minutes on July 24, 2012.
ATTEST:
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
4
Please contact the Council Office to obtain an
official, signed copy:
360- 676 -6690 or council@�.o.w hatcom .wa.us
Whatcom County Council, 5/22/2012, Page 12