HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil April 26 20111
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
April 26, 2011
CALL TO ORDER (7:01 :04 PM)
Council Chair Sam Crawford called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. in the Council
Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
ROLL CALL
Present: Barbara Brenner, Sam Crawford, Kathy Kershner, Bill Knutzen, Ken
Mann, Tony Larson and Carl Weimer
Absent: None
ANNOUNCEMENTS (7 :03 :10 PM)
1. CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF EMS PLANNING AND THE "CRITICAL
ELEMENTS LIST" - AB2011 -107
Crawford reported for the Special Committee of the Whole and stated they will have
a joint City /County Council Emergency Medical Service (EMS) Task Force. Councilmembers
Kershner, Brenner, and Crawford will serve on that Task Force.
2. REVIEW OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS (IF ANY) ON
PROPOSED WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
RELATED TO RURAL LAND USE PLANNING - AB2010 -072C
Crawford reported for the Special Committee of the Whole and stated the Committee
accepted all Planning Commission changes except the Laurel map. The County Council will
hold another hearing in two weeks only on these specific accepted changes.
3. DISCUSSION REGARDING POTENTIAL PROPERTY ACQUISITION FOR THE
FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT - A132011 -018
Knutzen moved to authorize the Executive, acting on behalf of the Whatcom
County Flood Control Zone District Board of Supervisors, to move forward with and
complete acquisition of four properties in the Glacier Springs subdivision as long as the
purchase price of each parcel does not exceed the amount discussed in executive session.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Larson, Crawford, Weimer, Knutzen and Kershner (5)
Nays: Brenner and Mann (2)
4. DISCUSSION WITH SENIOR DEPUTY PROSECUTOR KAREN FRAKES
REGARDING PENDING LITIGATION - RURAL LAND USE PLANNING ISSUE -
AB2010 -072C
(Clerk's Note: This item was withdrawn from the agenda.)
Whatcom County Council, 4/26/2011, 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
(7:05:33 PM)
SPECIAL PRESENTATION
1. QUARTERLY REPORT FROM THE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH REVENUE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE - AB2011 -106
(Clerk's Note: This item was withdrawn from the agenda.)
2. UPDATE ON CRIME STATISTICS FROM WHATCOM COUNTY SHERIFF BILL
ELFO - AB2011 -147 (7 :05 :45 PM)
Bill Elfo, Sheriff, submitted and read from a presentation (on file).
MINUTES CONSENT (7 :22 :54 PM)
Mann moved to approve the Minutes Consent items.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Larson, Crawford, Brenner, Weimer, Knutzen, Mann and Kershner (7)
Nays: None (0)
1. SPECIAL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FOR MARCH 29, 2011
2. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FOR MARCH 29, 2011
3. REGULAR COUNTY COUNCIL FOR MARCH 29, 2011
4. BOARD OF HEALTH FOR APRIL 5, 2011
OPEN SESSION (7 :23 :21 PM)
The following people spoke:
• Bruce Diele, citizen, spoke about Council Minutes and about Lyme disease.
• Kay Sardo, 510 South State Street, Bellingham, spoke about the Jail Planning
Task Force and jail siting.
• Barbara Sternberger, Rural Avenue Neighborhood Association and Right -Sized
Jail Coalition, spoke about the Jail Planning Task Force and jail siting.
• Irene Morgan, Whatcom County Reentry Coalition Founder, spoke about the
Jail Planning Task Force.
• Kevin Mennard, PreserveGalbraith.org, spoke about protecting Galbraith
Mountain.
• Diane Kanda, 4595 Wynn Road, spoke about the Jail Planning Task Force.
• John Moon, Habitat for Humanity Executive Director, spoke about
administering the Economic Development Investment (EDI) Loan Program.
• Gary Jensen, City of Ferndale Mayor, spoke about administering the Economic
Development Investment (EDI) Loan Program.
• Eric Brown, Preserve Galbraith Member, spoke about preserving Galbraith
Mountain.
Whatcom County Council, 4/26/2011, 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
• Dadra Phillips, 612 - 16th Street, Bellingham, spoke about preserving
Galbraith Mountain.
• Jacob Perry, 1214 Roland Street, spoke about preserving Galbraith Mountain.
• Thadeus Quinn, citizen, spoke about preserving Galbraith Mountain.
• Matt Kauffman, 2629 Madrona Street, spoke about the Kulshan Community
Land Trust affordable housing program.
• Brett Bauer, 200 W. Illinois Street, spoke about preserving Galbraith
Mountain.
• Rob Oscar- Murphy, 2682 Wynn Road, spoke about the Jail Planning Task
Force.
• Michael Linden, Whatcom Community College Bike Club, spoke about
preserving Galbraith Mountain.
• Bonnie Lahecka, Skagit County citizen, spoke about preserving Galbraith
Mountain.
• Darcy Morris, Skagit County citizen, spoke about preserving Galbraith
Mountain.
• Lisa Blackwood, 2480 Aldergrove Road, Ferndale, spoke about the Economic
Development Investment (EDI) Loan Program.
• Holly Gangle, 1418 Undine Street, spoke about preserving Galbraith
Mountain.
• Darcy Jones, Jones Engineers, spoke about the Economic Development
Investment (EDI) Loan Program.
Pete Kremen, Executive, stated the Administration's goal is to make Galbraith
Mountain accessible to the public for non - motorized vehicle use. He is committed to
working with others to make Galbraith Mountain accessible in perpetuity. It will take
funding to accomplish this. Creative ways to come up with funding might be available
through the Northwest Clean Air Agency for greenhouse gas mitigation. Half of the acreage
they're talking about on Galbraith Mountain are within the Lake Whatcom watershed. There
is a meeting at 9 a.m., May 5, in McIntyre Hall at Skagit Valley College. He encouraged
people to attend and demonstrate their support of the allocation of $3.5 million.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. ORDINANCE IMPOSING AN EMERGENCY 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 -145 (8:14:31 PM)
(Clerk's Note: This is a procedural hearing. The Council adopted this ordinance on
April 12, 2011.)
Crawford opened the public hearing and the following person spoke:
Abe Jacobsen, 2314 Samish Way, stated he supports the moratorium. He was
initially skeptical about this process. He recently read the draft ordinance from the Planning
Commission. It's a solid piece of work. The ordinance is well worth it.
Hearing no one else, Crawford closed the public hearing.
2. ORDINANCE IMPOSING AN INTERIM MORATORIUM ON THE ACCEPTANCE OF
NEW APPLICATIONS FOR WIND ENERGY SYSTEMS (WES) GREATER THAN
Whatcom County Council, 4/26/2011, 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
500 KILOWATTS, OR MULTIPLE WES PER PARCEL WITH A CUMULATIVE
RATED OUTPUT ABOVE 100 KILOWATTS - AB2011 -145A (8:20:17 PM)
Crawford stated Mr. Jacobson's comments from the previous hearing will apply to
this item. He opened the public hearing and, hearing no one else, closed the public hearing.
Brenner moved to adopt the ordinance.
Weimer asked how close the Planning Commission is to recommending a permanent
ordinance.
Roxanne Michael, Planning and Development Services Department, explained where
this issue is in the process. It will come forward soon.
Larson asked the source of the 500 kilowatt threshold. Michael stated they looked at
other ordinances.
Crawford stated there was talk in the past about submitting an application for the
largest of these wind energy systems.
Mann stated the proposal on the table was for a size of multiple megawatts. The
moratorium was low enough to make sure nothing really big was built, but high enough to
allow single windmills on someone's farm.
Brenner stated the Council worked on residential wind mills for years. Industrial
wind generators came in at the very end of the process. There wasn't much research done
on it. After it was passed, they received a lot of information from people that showed they
needed to really look at the industrial systems.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Larson, Crawford, Brenner, Weimer, Knutzen and Kershner (6)
Nays: Mann (1)
3. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING CODE TITLE 20,
THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING MAP, AND THE WHATCOM
COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND MAPS, TO IMPLEMENT CHANGES
RELATED TO RURAL LAND USE PLANNING - AB2010 -072C (8 :25:29 PM)
Crawford opened the public hearing and the following people spoke:
Barbara Dykes, City of Bellingham representative, submitted and read from a
handout (on file) describing the City's concerns. Be careful about existing use conditions.
Abe Jacobson, 2314 Samish Way, submitted and read from a handout (on file)
regarding creating a corridor from Bellingham to Lynden. Also, the Sudden Valley limited
area of more intense rural development (LAMIRD) should not be extended. He referenced a
letter from David Stalheim dated March 9, 2011 regarding amendments that need a public
hearing in addition to the hearing being held tonight.
Isabel VanDerslice, Washington Conservation Voters Whatcom Chapter, stated
maintain adequate buffers in agricultural land. Development potential should be reduced in
the Lake Whatcom watershed for environmental, economic, and social reasons. It's time to
bring the County into compliance with the Growth Management Act (GMA).
Whatcom County Council, 4/26/2011, 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
Dave Wareing, Sudden Valley Community Association General Manager, stated he
asks the Council to include a 2.21 -acre parcel housing the Community Association's rotunda
and postal facility. It was omitted from the small town commercial zone boundary.
Henry Bierlink, Farm Friends Executive Director, submitted and read from a letter
(on file) regarding agriculture setbacks from commercial and industrial land uses. He
suggests language for several different places in the code.
Robert Wilson, Nicon International, Bellingham, submitted and read from a letter (on
file) about his client. He asked the Council to accept the change proposed by Planner Gary
Davis regarding businesses becoming conditional uses. He described the status of his
project. Downzoning his property decreases the value for the community. He wants a type
3 LAMIRD, zoned general commercial (GC) for his property and the church next door.
Art Hyatt, 2318 Northshore Road, stated the objective of the GMA is the preservation
of rural areas where development pressures are limited. These areas are sparsely settled
and are a buffer between resource lands and urban centers. The Council's amendments
reveal an intent to turn rural into suburban. Councilmembers are corrupt and in collusion
with corporations, whose attorneys are writing land use law. Their devotion to developers is
a disservice to taxpayers of Whatcom County, who subsidize development. Speculators get
their profits, the County gets its revenue, and the citizens get the bill. Speculators don't
pay the cost of their development. Vesting rights are in their favor. They don't pay for fire
protection or law enforcement. They pay only a fraction of the transportation and school
costs they generate. The result of development at any cost is higher taxes, more crime,
more congestion, more pollution, and mindless regulation.
(Clerk's Note: The following testimony is transcribed in detail at special request.)
Steve Hood, Washington State Department of Ecology, submitted handouts (on file).
He stated he thanks the Council. Whatcom County has worked really well with the
Department of Ecology. However, some of the great progress they've made on Lake
Whatcom seems to be called into question with just two particular elements of this plan.
His supervisor, Dick Grout, wrote to the Council about that on March 29. He will highlight a
couple of areas.
The first is in the policy discussion about Lake Whatcom. They've softened the
language from residential development being a primary cause and has been, and quite
assertive language that is well - supported by the science. The consultants the County hired
to review Ecology's work as they've had discussions, they haven't agreed on everything.
The one agreement on what needs to be fixed is how they do residential development. It
concerns them to see that dropped. They don't feel that softening that language is
supported. In a sense, it belies the great work that Executive Kremen put forward with how
they're going to revise how residential development takes place in the future. As a side
note, they are making good progress on that effort.
The second is the downzone in the two -acre zone to allow those lots to be reduced to
something less than two acres. They went through and looked at the lots that were
evaluated as potential to be reduced to less than two acres in that two -acre zoning. All but
two of them are adjacent to forest zoning. They sort of already are creating a buffer.
They're on the margin. So they might have people that are lake -ward of them that are less
than two acres, but on the other side of them they've got at least 20 -acre zoning in the
Whatcom County Council, 4/26/2011, 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
rural forestry, he's not sure if there's a minimum size in the commercial, but wouldn't be
supporting additional development.
The two exceptions to that are the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). One of
those, they've forgone their sewer, so they're not allowed any development currently. But
they do have certified that they have one transferrable development right. It seems sort of
crazy that the other lot that is owned by the DNR, the City has bought the intervening lots,
they're basically almost adjacent to forestry because it wouldn't be developed.
What they're doing is, if they do this, they're allowing a few people to just kind of
expand the dense development, whereas they're already sort of creating a buffer between
the dense development and forestry. So for their reading pleasure, he will pass out maps.
Wendy Harris, citizen, stated the Council has not spoken on behalf of the land in its
work on this issue. The Council did not consider natural resource issues. The rural element
is supposed to protect natural resources, fish, and wildlife from rural development. The
County did not reconcile the LAMIRDs and density overlays with the location of critical areas
or habitat conservation areas. Current regulations to protect natural resources are
inadequate. Spend the next two weeks redrafting the rural element to honor and protect
the land.
Dan McShane, 1451 Grant Street, Bellingham, stated he is concerned about the map
for the area northeast of Interstate 5 (I -5) and Birch Bay. It's still included as a commercial
zone. However, in 1991, the area was rural. Correct that map. Not much analysis has
been done, including on the building size expansion in the LAMIRDs, which is inconsistent
with what existed in 1991. Buffers on agricultural land are also concerning. They are
removing the ability to harvest the sun when they shorten those buffers. That's important
during cool Springs. He referenced page 17 of 29 of the marked version of the ordinance.
It seems they are denying that residential development is causing phosphorus loading in
Lake Whatcom. It's pretty definitive. Regarding Lake Whatcom zoning, change to R5A.
Greg Brown, resident, stated people who own land on Governor's Point should have
the right to develop or should be compensated.
Chet Dow, 5491 Woodfern Way, stated the GMA is a flawed law. The 13 goals are
inconsistent with each other. No matter what the Council produces, there will probably be a
lawsuit. The Council made a diligent effort to respond to prior complaints. He thanked the
councilmembers for their work.
Hearing no one else, Crawford closed the public hearing.
(8:56:39 PM)
Crawford stated the Council will hold a hearing in two weeks on the proposed
changes recommended by the Planning Commission.
Knutzen moved to approve the suggested amendment from Farm Friends to WCC
sections 20.59, 20.61, 20.63, 20.67, and 20.69 to include the language, °.601 or .551
When a parcel situated within this district adjoins an Agriculture, Rural or Residential Rural
District... increased to 25 feet. Unless adjoining an agriculture zoning district, said area shall
be landscaped...."
Whatcom County Council, 4/26/2011, 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
Crawford stated this will be part of the ordinance introduced tonight and subject to
the public hearing in two weeks.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Larson, Crawford, Brenner, Weimer, Knutzen, Mann and Kershner (7)
Nays: None (0)
Brenner moved to amend page 17 of 29 of the Comprehensive Plan text, the first
line of the second paragraph, °A significant cause of declining oxygen levels n9ay be has
been from residential development...." The language used to say it was a primary cause.
She doesn't have any problem saying it has been a significant cause. It's important to be
clear.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Crawford, Brenner, Weimer, Knutzen and Mann (5)
Nays: Kershner and Larson (2)
Weimer moved to amend page 17 of 29 of the Comprehensive Plan text, the first
line of the second paragraph, "A signifleaRt, The primary cause of declining oxygen levels...."
Kershner asked the source of the statement.
Weimer stated one source is the total maximum daily load (TMDL) study. They just
heard from the Department of Ecology that it was concerned about the change of this
language. Everything they've heard is that the primary cause of low oxygen is due to
impervious surfaces from development around the lake. They ought to say it in the
Comprehensive Plan.
Kershner asked what study has shown that. If there is, the study should be a source
listed in the Comprehensive Plan that backs up that assertion.
Weimer stated there have been many studies. Robin Matthews' studies for years
have shown the links between impervious surface from development and lower oxygen
levels.
Kershner asked if it is caused or correlated.
Weimer stated it's been well - established for years in front of the Council.
Hood stated everyone understands there is a relationship between dissolved oxygen
and phosphorus. They have a long record of showing that the most developed watersheds
have the highest levels of phosphorus. It's backed up by numerous studies, which are cited
in the work his consultants did when calibrating Ecology's model. They went through the
literature to get starting values, and then fine -tuned their model looking at the percent of
residential development and the percent of forestry and other land uses, which there
weren't so many, when they calibrated the model. They found that the model is calibrated
correctly, and there are much higher levels of phosphorus coming from the residential
development. There has been a lot of concern that forestry should be considered a
significant source as well. The problem is that a forest has less than one percent of
impervious surface. Even after it's been clear cut, it's got better amended soils than the
best amended soils in developments. None of it acts like a lawn or roof, except for a little
bit of road. After 15 to 20 years, it's back to functioning like a forest. Only one -third of the
watershed is disturbed at any time. As long as people are following the rules, it's the
Whatcom County Council, 4/26/2011, 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
ongoing sources that come from residential. They've changed the hydrology. Every day the
hydrology has changed and is really generating the phosphorous that changes the
watershed. When people don't follow the rules, some pretty disastrous things happen.
However, that happens both with residential and forestry uses. They are not looking at
modeling a situation where people are violating the law. They're looking at what is going to
work when people are following the rules.
Knutzen asked who gave the presentation on hypoxia in the watershed. Hood stated
he's talked about hypoxia in the lake many times.
Knutzen asked if it's correct that hypoxia is a naturally- occurring process, and that
matter deteriorates when it comes into the watershed. Hood stated that's correct.
Knutzen asked if they are saying that the primary cause of this naturally- occurring
process that is depleting the oxygen level is development. Hood stated the issue is not that
they have hypoxia at all. The issue is that the hypoxia comes on sooner and lasts longer.
That's where the decline in oxygen comes from. When they reference a "decline in oxygen,"
they're talking about a decline from natural conditions. When they delete the oxygen faster
and the lake is exposed to extremely low oxygen for longer, that's the decline that is a
violation of water quality standards. A very brief hypoxia has minimal effects. Now, it lasts
several months. That has a much bigger effect on the lake.
Brenner suggested a friendly amendment, The primary cause of
declining oxygen levels has been from previous residential or existing residential
development in the watershed." She's not sure the language would apply to the newer
development and what they proposed with regulations. They have regulations now that
they didn't have back then.
Weimer did not accept the friendly amendment.
The motion failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Weimer and Mann (2)
Nays: Larson, Crawford, Brenner, Knutzen and Kershner (5)
Brenner moved to remove the density overlay from the Lake Whatcom watershed.
Gary Davis, Planning and Development Services Department, stated that motion
would apply to the zoning maps for the Lake Whatcom and South Bay. It would entail a
change in the proposed zoning.
Kershner asked how many potentially - developed lots would this motion reduce.
Davis stated the potential for new lots to be created for both areas is about 72 lots, not
including the Sudden Valley LAMIRD area. The most current version would be reduced to
17 potential new developments, with the overlay. The motion to remove the overlay and
the rezone would allow three potential new developments.
Brenner stated it's about 13 lots. Davis stated that's if they rezone the R2A to R5A.
One of the areas proposed for an overlay, which is about 91 acres along Lake Whatcom
Boulevard, is currently zoned R2A. It is proposed to be zoned R5A.
Brenner restated the motion to remove all of the residential overlays in the Lake
Whatcom watershed and zone all those areas R5A.
Whatcom County Council, 4/26/2011, 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 failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Weimer and Mann (3)
Nays: Larson, Crawford, Knutzen and Kershner (4)
Weimer moved to amend page 20 of the ordinance document to create a new
section 4, "The changes to the Whatcom County official zoning code that would allow any
subdivision of land of less than five acres in the Lake Whatcom watershed will not become
effective until June 1, 2012 or until the Council adopts more protective development
standards as promised to the Department of Ecology by the County Executive, whichever is
first." The Executive and Department of Ecology had a deal that Ecology would stop all
well - drilling in the watershed in lieu of the County making new development standards. If
they pass this soon, new lots created would be vested before they implement the new
development standards. This would delay the subdivision of any new lots until new
development standards are considered or in place.
Crawford asked if the moratorium has expired.
Weimer stated the moratorium expires in July or August. They can address it now.
Crawford stated he is against the motion. The moratorium is in effect now. This
ordinance pertains to the rural element of the Comprehensive Plan. It's not wise to tie a
particular portion of the ordinance relating to the rural element to get Growth Management
compliance with a separate action on whether or not it's okay to subdivide below five acres
in the Lake Whatcom watershed.
Brenner stated she supports the motion. It sounds really reasonable. She doesn't
see harm in making sure that any future subdivision complies with standards they're trying
to work out.
Pete Kremen, County Executive, stated he supports Councilmember Weimer's
motion. He appreciates the Council for reducing the number of potential new, developable
lots from 70 to 17. However, it's inconsistent with what he promised the Department of
Ecology, when the Department sided with Whatcom County. Councilmember Weimer's
motion honors that commitment and still enables the Council to move forward at this time
with adopting policy the Council thinks is appropriate. The Council does have the ability to
reduce the potential new, developable lots from 70 to four. If the Council approves the
motion, it will demonstrate to everyone that the County is serious about protecting Lake
Whatcom.
Weimer stated the motion doesn't say they'll develop new standards, but that they
will consider what is brought forward or these will go into effect in a year. The language
gives the Council a year to come up with something. He understands Councilmember
Crawford's opinion, but the community is very concerned that the County Council is doing
something nefarious to Lake Whatcom, even though they've reduced the density. This
would alleviate that concern.
Knutzen stated this is inconsistent with what they're doing. This morning, they
decided to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars to purchase the development rights in
agricultural land. They are taking away 55 development rights by reducing this from 72 to
17, and not compensating those owners. Now they're going to take another 13
development rights away and not compensate those owners either.
Whatcom County Council, 4/26/2011, 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
Weimer stated his motion to amend does not include any development reduction. It
would extend the moratorium on any subdivision for a year, while they consider what
Executive Kremen brings forward in terms of development standards.
Kremen stated Mr. Grout and Mr. Hood from the Department of Ecology agree that
development can occur in the watershed with zero impact under the right conditions and
restrictions. If they are able to come up with some standards that achieve that in the next
year, no development rights would be lost. When they've worked on the standards, those
lots will have their development rights. Councilmember Weimer's motion to amend does
not result in any lost development rights.
Crawford asked whether or not this amendment would really extend the moratorium.
If they let the moratorium expire, people will be able to develop 74 lots instead of 17 lots. If
they let the moratorium expire in July, it seems this motion would allow the original zoning
to take place over the new zoning and allow 74 lots.
Brenner stated that's not correct. This is additional language that deals just with
development standards. She suggested a friendly amendment to amend page 20 of the
ordinance by adding a new Section 4, "The changes to the Whatcom County official zoning
code that would allow any subdivision of land of less than five acres in the Lake Whatcom
watershed will not become effective until June 1, 2012 or until the Council adopts more
protective development standards as pFeFRised to discussed with the Department of Ecology
by the County Executive, whichever is first."
Kershner stated she's concerned that they won't get more protective development
standards done by June 1, 2012. She's concerned this language will extend the
moratorium. She asked what work has been done on development standards in Lake
Whatcom so far.
Weimer stated it was indicated that the County Executive would bring forward the
new standards this summer.
Mann asked what changes would allow a subdivision of land less than five acres.
Weimer stated the density overlay would.
Crawford stated the moratorium is still in place.
Mann asked the best way to reference that package of actions that would occur in
this document. He's not sure the language is specific enough. He supports the attempt.
The motion failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Weimer and Mann (3)
Nays: Larson, Crawford, Knutzen and Kershner (4)
CONSENT AGENDA (9:33:58 PM)
Crawford withdrew items two and three, as they must be acted upon by the
Whatcom County Flood Control Zone District Board of Supervisors.
Mann reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and moved
to approve items one, four, six, seven, eight, ten, and eleven.
Whatcom County Council, 4/26/2011, 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
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Larson, Crawford, Brenner, Weimer, Knutzen, Mann and Kershner (7)
Nays: None (0)
1. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND SMS CLEANING, INC. TO
PROVIDE CUSTODIAL SERVICES FOR SIX WHATCOM COUNTY OUTSIDE
BUILDINGS — FOREST STREET, CENTRAL PLAZA, CIVIC CENTER, HEALTH
DEPARTMENT, CENTRAL SHOP AND NORTHWEST ANNEX IN THE AMOUNT OF
$136,440 - AB2011 -149
2. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND BROWN AND CALDWELL TO
PROVIDE CONSULTING SERVICES FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A CONCEPT
DESIGN PLAN FOR THE DEMING LEVEE UPSTREAM IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
IN THE AMOUNT OF $60,000 - AB2011 -150
(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 request.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Larson, Crawford, Brenner, Weimer, Knutzen, Mann and Kershner (7)
Nays: None (0)
3. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE WHATCOM
COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT AND SUBZONES FOR DISTRICT
OPERATIONS AND ADMINISTRATION - AB2011 -151
(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 stated the
substitute version is held in committee.
4. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
PUBLIC USE SCHEDULING AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND
THE JET OLDSTERS ASSOCIATION FOR THE FERNDALE SENIOR ACTIVITY
CENTER FOR SUPERVISION OF ALL FACILITY RENTALS - AB2011 -152
5. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE CITY OF
FERNDALE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADMINISTERING AN EDI LOAN PROGRAM
SPECIFICALLY FOR THE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY PROJECT, IN THE
AMOUNT OF $25,000 - AB2011 -123
Mann reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and stated
this item did not have approval in committee. He moved to approve the request.
Whatcom County Council, 4/26/2011, 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
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
Crawford stated he is in favor of this request. He was concerned that the loan
should have a sunset date for repayment, which it now does. The proposed sunset date for
repayment of principal and interest is 50 years. Based on the use of this, it's appropriate.
Mann stated he is in favor of the request. He would love to have proposals for a
more strategic use of the money, but there aren't any right now. This is a good proposal.
Knutzen stated he appreciates the administration's willingness to address concerns.
They are approving the corrected version.
Crawford stated the corrections were in the Deed of Trust and Covenants regarding
repayment of principal and interest in 50 years.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Crawford, Brenner, Weimer, Knutzen, Mann and Kershner (6)
Nays: Larson (1)
6. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID #11 -21
FOR ON -CALL RENTAL EQUIPMENT TO ALL BIDDERS, WITH THE INTENT OF
OBTAINING FIRM PRICING ON RENTAL EQUIPMENT IN AN ANNUAL AMOUNT
THAT COULD BE MORE THAN $35,000 FOR A SINGLE VENDOR - AB2011 -153
7. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID
#11 -29 FOR THE DELIVERY AND SUPPLY OF ASPHALTIC MIXES TO BOTH
VENDORS WHO PLACED BIDS AND THEN PUBLIC WORKS STAFF WILL
SELECT THE VENDOR THAT IS THE BEST VALUE BASED ON PRICE AND
TRANSPORT COST TO THE SPECIFIC JOB SITE IN AN ANNUAL AMOUNT OF
APPROXIMATELY $85,000 - AB2011 -154
8. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
PURCHASE OF RADIO EQUIPMENT FOR THE WHATCOM COUNTY SHERIFF'S
OFFICE USING THE WASHINGTON STATE CONTRACT FROM HARRIS
CORPORATION, IN THE AMOUNT OF $144,552.12 - AB2011 -155
9. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WHATCOM COUNTY'S ANNUAL RISK MANAGEMENT
SELF - ASSESSMENT - AB2011 -156
Mann reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and stated
this item is held in committee for two weeks.
Brenner stated the Treasurer contacted Randy Watts and told Randy Watts that he,
the Treasurer, was in charge of the one thing that has an unknown, and he told him there's
a committee. The Treasurer did give that information.
10. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND AMY A. GLASSER, MSW,
LICSW FOR MENTAL HEALTH TREATMENT SERVICES (AB2011 -159)
11. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND INTERFAITH COMMUNITY
HEALTH CENTER FOR MENTAL HEALTH TREATMENT SERVICES (AB2011 -160)
Whatcom County Council, 4/26/2011, Page 12
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
OTHER ITEMS
1. RESOLUTION AFFIRMING THE PDR OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE RANKING AND
AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE AND PDR ADMINISTRATOR TO
PROCEED WITH THE ACQUISITION PROCESS FOR ROUND 9 APPLICATIONS -
AB2011 -157 (9 :43:42 PM)
Weimer reported for the Natural Resources Committee and moved to approve the
resolution.
Crawford stated he would abstain because of his relationship with the Weatherbys,
who are recipients of this.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Larson, Brenner, Weimer, Knutzen, Mann and Kershner (6)
Nays: None (0)
Abstains: Crawford (1)
2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2011 WHATCOM COUNTY BUDGET, FOURTH
REQUEST, IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,016,482 - AB2011 -144 (9 :44 :41 PM)
Mann reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and moved
to adopt the ordinance.
Larson moved to amend to remove the appropriation of $136,658 to fund the Lake
Whatcom reconveyance.
Weimer stated he is against the motion. The reconveyance has been moving along
for years. This money, through a memorandum of understanding, has been obligated to the
Department of Natural Resources (DNR). Approve the appropriation so the County can pay
its obligations.
Larson stated that agreement was done three years ago. Things have changed
substantially since then. This whole process needs to be reviewed. There are a number of
new issues and questions that need to be answered. The County's responsibility to pay for
any invoices is part of the agreement. No one's arguing that. He wants to stop any future
expenses until questions have been answered.
The motion failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Larson, Brenner and Knutzen (3)
Nays: Crawford, Weimer, Mann and Kershner (4)
Larson moved to remove the appropriation of $410,000 for an Economic
Development Investment (EDI) program regarding affordable housing, which is item six.
He has not supported this from the very beginning. He would like to vote for the other
items he supports in the ordinance.
The motion failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Larson (1)
Nays: Crawford, Brenner, Weimer, Knutzen, Mann and Kershner (6)
Kershner asked about the motion to take another look at the reconveyance. It's a
good idea. Removing the committed funding here isn't appropriate, but they need to have a
Whatcom County Council, 4/26/2011, Page 13
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
look at the reconveyance. She's asked for that. The administration is working to put
together a presentation for the Council.
Brenner stated the Council has been asking for a presentation for awhile. She wants
to know why they should incur more expenses if they're thinking about not doing the
reconveyance. Pay for what they've spent, but they have the right to not continue spending
money.
Knutzen stated they have to stop the process before they allocate the taxpayers
money for 8,500 acres, for which the DNR is doing a fine job of managing.
Larson moved to direct the administration to discontinue any additional
expenditures as of April 26, 2011 associated with the Lake Whatcom reconveyance until the
Council has been fully briefed on the most current developments and had its questions
satisfactorily answered, including the questions of the administration's vision for the park;
how trust beneficiaries, including the Mt. Baker School District, will be impacted; the costs
of park design, construction, and maintenance; whether a plan is in place for the Sheriff's
Office to service that area once a park is built; who will be responsible for the maintenance
of roads shared by Whatcom County and DNR; what is the environmental impact,
particularly to Lake Whatcom, of additional use; whether there is any management of
timber on reconveyed lands; what are the obligations for habitat conservation plans; what
are the fire control responsibilities; what are other legal rights, obligations, and
responsibilities; how they're going to pay for it, and; why it's a priority now, given the
substantial financial difficulties.
(Clerk's Note: The Council did not vote on this motion.)
Crawford stated there is already a motion on the floor. There may be charter issues
about directing the administration. The motion on the floor is the budget before the
Council.
Brenner stated the motion is not out of order. They can revisit that issue. They
haven't voted on the budget yet. He made a motion different from his other motion.
Kershner asked if the Finance Committee discussed the item for Superior Court
regarding family treatment court, items four and five. She asked if this is a request to fund
the family treatment court through the end of the year.
Mann stated they didn't discuss the timelines.
Regina Delahunt, Health Department Director, stated it's being funded with the one -
tenth of one percent behavioral health funds. The request is for continuation of the funding
through the end of the year, at a reduced funding level.
Kershner asked if the program or outcomes were changed, or if there are
recommendations for improvements. Delahunt stated the Superior Court is working with
community partners to revise some of the methodology used in family treatment court.
They are working now with providers in the community. The advisory committee asked that
the Court enter into an agreement with the Health Department to put forward some
outcome measures for effectiveness.
Brenner stated she won't support the ordinance with item one in it. She would like
to revisit that motion. Steve Hood said State forestry practices are not a problem in the
Whatcom County Council, 4/26/2011, Page 14
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
Lake Whatcom watershed. That land is being very well managed by the State with the most
stringent landscape plan that exists. Half of that property can never be logged. They also
have a letter from the Department of Ecology and Department of Health saying that the
forestry management practices by DNR in the Lake Whatcom watershed are not a problem.
That land has no development rights. People keep saying they have to do this to protect
water quality. However, it will become a public park that will be advertised. It will cause
problems in the watershed unless they have plenty of deputies and park rangers to patrol
the land, which still won't stop problems.
Larson moved to reconsider the motion to remove the funding for the Lake
Whatcom reconveyance. He will add a motion to stop any sort of future activity that will
cost Whatcom County taxpayers money until they have their questions answered.
Separating this will not keep them from meeting the obligations of the agreement with DNR.
The motion to reconsider carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Larson, Brenner, Knutzen and Kershner (4)
Nays: Crawford, Weimer and Mann (3)
Larson moved to amend to remove the appropriation of $136,658 to fund the Lake
Whatcom reconveyance.
Kershner asked if the County has already committed $136,658, and has to pay it.
Mike McFarlane, Parks and Recreation Department Director, stated the amount he
asked for is the amount they committed to do the contract, and not to exceed. The DNR
has already spent a certain portion of that. He doesn't get an invoice until the work is done
and submitted through the billing process for the first quarter. In addition, they've
contracted for the appraisal review, which they're responsible for paying, but they will not
release payment of the vendor until the appraisal review has been vetted by their staff.
Work has been done. He doesn't know how much of the $136,658 has been spent. The
DNR could not give him that number.
Kershner asked the effect of stopping the work on the contract. McFarlane stated
they are trying to move the money so they can pay the contract when the invoice comes.
They have one vendor with whom the Council approved direct payment. He will receive that
invoice as soon as DNR signs off on the appraisal and says it's okay to pay it. Generally,
they have 30 days to pay the bills.
Larson stated Mr. McFarlane can submit the invoice when it's received. The Council
could approve those numbers. On May 9, the DNR is preparing a meeting on the inter -grant
portion, which is the portion the County agreed to pay for, under contract.
Brenner stated some of the appraisals have not yet been done, according to the DNR
person she talked to. They may or may not be stuck to pay for work from this day on. If
there is a way to stop future money from being spent, they should stop it until they get
questions answered.
Dewey Desler, Administrative Services Department, stated he respects the Council's
wishes to ask questions. If the Council decides this project is not worth going forward with,
the County can prepare a letter to terminate the service with DNR. He recommends that
the Council allow the administration to give the Council the information before taking any
action.
Whatcom County Council, 4/26/2011, Page 15
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 suggests asking the questions of the administration and getting a
presentation in two weeks. This project has many phases to it. It's hard to identify what
appraiser is doing what work, when, and where the bills are. The Council could develop and
pass a resolution to stop the project. It's not appropriate tonight to stop the project. They
don't know what appraisal is being done, when, and where it is in the billing cycle.
Larson stated that's what he's trying to find out. They haven't been given that
information. That's information he's looking for.
Pete Kremen, Executive, stated these are fair questions. Councilmember Larson can
come to the administration with questions.
Larson stated he just put this together this evening. At the last meeting when this
same $136,000 appropriation came up, Councilmember Kershner asked for this same
meeting. He thought the special May 9 meeting was to be the meeting where the Council
would get answers. It wasn't. It had to do with the process continuing. He would like to
stop appropriating money until these questions are answered.
Kremen stated they're almost done with the project. They are just finishing the
project.
Larson stated they're not. They are doing the study. There is no downside to
slowing this down. It would cost the County no more money. They should make sure they
agree to move forward before they spend more money they don't have to spend.
Kremen stated most of the money to complete the transaction has already been
spent.
Larson stated the County staff can tell them that. The Council has been asking that
question for the last month.
Kremen stated Councilmember Larson could come to him with concerns.
Councilmember Larson has not once talked or called him. He emailed only once. If
Councilmember Larson feels passionately about this, they should work together. He has an
open door policy. The questions are legitimate. They can talk and work it out. Also, the
conservation futures fund will reimburse the general fund for every dollar spent on the
entire project.
Brenner stated the conservation futures fund will only reimburse the general fund if
they go through with the reconveyance.
Knutzen stated he has talked to Executive Kremen and been through the process.
Before this money was spent, he wanted to stop the project. He's repeatedly been told that
it's not the appropriate time. The survey, which is the most expensive cost, has not yet
been done. He would like to stop the process to get all the questions answered.
Brenner stated this project was approved by a previous Council, after the election.
At the time, she opposed its approval when those councilmembers were leaving, when there
were obvious concerns by those who had been elected. She talked to DNR. Not all the
work has been done. They will pay for the work that's been done, but don't accrue more
bills. It's an important issue. She's asked twice how much work has been done, and she
can't get an answer.
Whatcom County Council, 4/26/2011, Page 16
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 that if the Council majority wants to stop further work on the
reconveyance, the Council must request a report on the specific questions. If the Council is
not satisfied that the reconveyance is worthwhile, it would draft a resolution and put
forward to a vote, so the Executive understands the will of a majority of the Council. The
Council doesn't direct the Executive to do anything. The Council gives the Executive budget
authority, which has already been passed for this item. This supplemental transfers the
money between funds. There is a good, measured, reasoned process that does not involve
this ordinance. Schedule the item in committee and discuss it. If councilmembers are
opposed to the reconveyance, they can bring forward a resolution to stop the reconveyance
for the Council to vote on. They aren't going to pass any resolutions tonight.
Brenner stated the 1,400 acres on Galbraith Mountain has a number of developable
lots. The County should focus on land that can be developed, not highly protected land that
can't be developed. The County has limited funds. The conservation futures funds will be
used to buy developable lots in the watershed. Vote on Councilmember Larson's motion.
The motion to amend failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Larson, Brenner and Knutzen (3)
Nays: Crawford, Weimer, Mann and Kershner (4)
The motion to adopt the ordinance carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Crawford, Weimer, Mann and Kershner (4)
Nays: Larson, Brenner and Knutzen (3)
3. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A WHATCOM COUNTY JAIL PLANNING TASK
FORCE - AB2011 -078A (10:24:01 PM)
Brenner moved to approve the resolution. This is supposed to be for a variety of
people, not just experts. One doesn't have to be an architect to be on the task force. She
didn't support the consultant or the product the County received. She's glad people want
more information. The task force is a great way to do that. She appreciated the support
from the Executive and Sheriff.
Larson asked about the appointment process.
Crawford stated the Executive's Office has a protocol for appointing positions.
Larson stated he would like the opportunity to see the applications of all the people
who submit their names. He suggested a friendly amendment to amend the last third
resolved statement, "...that the selection criteria for the Jail Planning Task Force shall
include no fewer than six citizens. It should include ineluding members with various
expertise +R such as architecture, commercial real estate, and construction of commercial
projects, accounting, finance, and other areas that might bring value to the process."
Brenner accepted the friendly amendment.
Pete Kremen, Executive, stated the current language was created by the Right Size
Jail Committee.
Brenner stated the language came from a meeting that included her, the Sheriff, and
members of the Right Size Jail Committee.
Whatcom County Council, 4/26/2011, Page 17
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
Kremen stated they suggested the specificity of the three areas of expertise. He
envisions a committee of nine to eleven, so they can include lay people. However, it is
important to have some members with expertise in specific fields, in addition to having
members who may not have any affiliations or credentials. He suggested amending the
motion, "sheu'd shall."
Larson accepted Executive Kremen's suggestion as a friendly amendment to his
motion.
The motion to amend carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Larson, Crawford, Brenner, Weimer, Knutzen, Mann and Kershner (7)
Nays: None (0)
The motion to approve the resolution as amended carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Larson, Crawford, Brenner, Weimer, Knutzen, Mann and Kershner (7)
Nays: None (0)
INTRODUCTION ITEM (10:34;19 PM)
1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING CODE TITLE 20,
THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING MAP, AND THE WHATCOM
COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND MAPS, TO IMPLEMENT CHANGES
RELATED TO RURAL LAND USE PLANNING - AB2010 -072D
Mann moved to accept the item.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Larson, Crawford, Brenner, Weimer, Knutzen, Mann and Kershner (7)
Nays: None (0)
OTHER BUSINESS
Crawford stated a discussion of the reconveyance should be held in the Natural
Resources Committee.
Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated the administration will send information
prior to the meeting.
Larson moved to request that the administration discontinue any additional
expenditures as of April 26, 2011 associated with the Lake Whatcom reconveyance until the
Council has been fully briefed on the most current developments and has had its questions
satisfactorily answered. He will submit his questions to Mr. Desler.
Crawford stated he is against the motion. He's not in favor of submitted a request to
stop the process. It's more appropriate that the Council have that discussion in the broader
policy context of the reconveyance. Two weeks is not going to create that much of a
financial difference that it will affect anything. It's difficult to put the administration in a
position where they would try to put a halt on things for two weeks, and possibly go forward
again after the discussion.
Whatcom County Council, 4/26/2011, Page 18
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 stated she is against the motion because she doesn't want to stop it
tomorrow, but she's interested in getting her questions answered. This process was rolling
along when she was elected. She wants to make an informed decision after her questions
are answered. She doesn't have the information she needs to make that decision right now.
She may support stopping the process in two weeks.
Mann stated he appreciates the questions from everyone. He looks forward to
hearing the answers. However, he agrees that they shouldn't stop the work tonight. Wait a
couple of weeks, get questions answered, and then decide.
The motion failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Larson, Brenner and Knutzen (3)
Nays: Crawford, Weimer, Mann and Kershner (4)
Crawford stated this issue will still be scheduled in the Natural Resources Committee.
REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS (10:40:31 PM)
Knutzen referenced the Wayne Gruene case of shining a light at a border patrol
aircraft pilot. Mr. Gruene is his neighbor and friend. It is out of the hands of Customs and
Border Protection, and is now in the U.S. Attorney's hands. He's disconcerted that the U.S.
Attorney wants to make an example of Mr. Gruene. He is not someone hiding in the bushes
at the airport with a laser shining at pilots. He was also wondering what was going on that
night. Pictures were shaking off the wall. He didn't know shining a light was illegal. It's a
lack of common sense to put someone away for five to 50 years for shining a light. He
asked that people call the U.S. Attorney's office and pray for the Gruene family. He agrees
it was stupid, but it should not have come to this.
Brenner stated she feels bad for what's happening to Mr. Gruene. She thanked the
Executive for working on the Galbraith Mountain issue. She's encouraged. There are so
many ways to be able to look at this. It might not require anything costly. They may be
able to end up with the best of all worlds. She attended the Ferry Task Force meeting. It's
an amazing group. The County will get a lot of good information from them. Task forces
have their place.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 10:45 p.m.
The Council approved these minutes on June 7 , 2011.
ATTEST:
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Please contact the Council Office to obtain an
official, signed copy:
360- 676 -6690 or council &o.whatcom.wa.us
Whatcom County Council, 4/26/2011, Page 19