HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil January 26 20101
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
January 26, 2010
CALL TO ORDER
Council Chair Sam Crawford called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council
Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
ROLL CALL
Present: Barbara Brenner, Sam Crawford, Kathy Kershner, Bill Knutzen, Ken Mann, L.
Ward Nelson and Carl Weimer
Absent: None
FLAG SALUTE
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Crawford announced that the Committee of the Whole discussed the following two
items in executive session:
1. Strategy planning discussion and positions to be taken regarding collective
bargaining (AB2010 -018)
2. Update and discussion regarding Lummi Island Ferry dock negotiations
(AB2010 -078)
Crawford also announced that the Committee of the Whole had a discussion with
the Council's Planning and Policy Analyst regarding work assignments (AB2010-
017).
MINUTES CONSENT
1. SPECIAL COUNTY COUNCIL FOR DECEMBERS, 2009
Brenner moved to approve the Minutes item.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Nelson, Crawford, Brenner, Weimer, and Knutzen (5)
Nays: None (0)
Abstain: Mann and Kershner (2)
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, 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
OPEN SESSION
The following people spoke:
• Abe Jacobson, 2314 Samish Way, Bellingham, submitted and read from
testimony (on file) and spoke on the process for Planning Commission
appointments at the last Council meeting.
• (Clerk's Note: The speaker following Abe Jacobson requested that his /her
testimony not be included in the minutes.)
• Bob Busch, Lummi Island, submitted and read from testimony (on file) and
spoke on the ferry dock situation as it's related to emergency response.
• John Lesow, Point Roberts, submitted and read from handouts and spoke on a
donation account that has been opened at Whatcom Educational Credit Union
(WECU) for Rebecca Boonstra and the Planning Commission's receipt of a
letter from Skagit County regarding a critical areas ordinance infraction.
• Dana Brandt, 1435 Humbolt Street, spoke in support of the Sustainable
Connections contract.
• Seth Bidana, Western Washington University Campus Sustainability
Coordinator, spoke in support of the Sustainable Connections contract.
• Bob Wiesen, 3314 Douglas Road, spoke on the process regarding limited
areas of more intense rural developments (LAMIRDS) and the Planning
Commission appointment process.
• Joseph Knight, 3880 Cabrant Road, Everson, spoke on the Planning
Commission appointment process at the last meeting.
• Leah Raney, 5814 Maleng Road, Acme, submitted handouts (on file) and
spoke on concerns about a proposed park in the Acme Valley.
• Alex Ramel, Sustainable Connections Energy Program Manager, spoke in
support of the contract with Sustainable Connections.
• Larry Helm, 2660 E. 41St Terrace, spoke on the Skagit County critical areas
ordinance infraction.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. ORDINANCE PROHIBITING THE ILLEGAL AND ILLICIT DISCHARGE OF
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND NON - STORMWATER RUNOFF TO THE
COUNTY'S MUNICIPAL SEPARATE STORM SEWER SYSTEM (MS4) (AB2009-
320D)
Crawford opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public hearing.
Nelson moved to adopt the ordinance.
Brenner asked if the section regarding applicability and severability included
consideration of whether they want to have an urban level and a rural level.
Jon Hutchings, Public Works Department, stated there was a discussion about
whether or not the area in the Lake Whatcom watershed outside of the national pollutant
discharge elimination system ( NPDES) phase two permit should apply. The previous Council
decided that it should apply, based on the observation that the NPDES phase two area will
likely encompass the rest of the watershed by the year 2012.
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, 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
Mann asked why they need an ordinance about something that is already illegal.
Hutchings stated the Clean Water Act delegates to the State the responsibility for managing
stormwater under the NPDES. It's done through a permit system mandated by the State.
The State sets permit requirements that include the adoption of an ordinance by a local
government to accomplish that which is already on the books under State law.
Nelson asked how they enforce against people who divert water from their property
onto other properties, and if that's an illicit discharge. Hutchings stated it is not an illicit
discharge. It has to do with the point in which it enters the County's jurisdiction. Polluted
water is defined in the ordinance, and the language is straight out of State statute. The
County is seeking administrative authority over a threshold that triggers enforcement. The
Planning Department and Health Department will do enforcement. The County must
balance compliance with State law against not overreaching its authority and overburdening
individuals. They've worked closely with the Prosecutor's Office to develop an ordinance
that meets the letter of the law, is truly enforceable, and has the appropriate level of
administrative discretion to decide what is reasonable and what is not.
Nelson stated he hopes the administration works with the public to help them
understand what is a discharge into municipal systems. Hutchings stated this ordinance
replaces the interim ordinance. They intend to work with landowners and deal with those
issues as reasonably as possible before resorting to enforcement.
Weimer stated he supports the ordinance and thanks staff. This ordinance is much
clearer and causes less concern than the interim ordinance.
Brenner stated the definition of pollution is very broad. She asked if staff has talked
to any other counties about their language. She asked if the Council can revisit this section.
Hutchings stated the Council can revisit the ordinance at its discretion. Most other counties
adopted the ordinance that is in place now, and have not veered from that.
Knutzen asked if agriculture is exempt. Hutchings stated this applies to the areas
that are regulated under the NPDES phase two permit, which are urban growth areas and
those census areas with a density greater than 1,000 per square mile.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Brenner, Weimer, and Knutzen (7)
Nays: None (0)
2. ORDINANCE AMENDING WCC TITLE 20.80.636, 20.80.734, AND 20.04.076
REGARDING STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS, GENERAL
REVIEW THRESHOLDS, AND NPDES PHASE II BOUNDARIES (AB2010 -046)
Crawford opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public hearing.
Weimer moved to adopt the ordinance.
Crawford asked staff the difference between this and the previous item.
Roland Middleton, Public Works Department, stated this item amends the Whatcom
County Code Title 20 and modifies thresholds for clearing permits and requirement of the
Department of Ecology (DOE) stormwater manual. It doesn't do a lot on the ground. Most
of the area is city urban growth areas. The County already has interlocal agreements with
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, 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
cities to do the DOE manual anyway. All this does is make the County Code comply with
the requirements of the NPDES phase two permit.
Knutzen referenced Council packet page 363 and asked about the two -acre threshold
in the rural zone, outside the NPDES phase two permit area.
Chip Anderson, Public Works Department, stated the current clearing threshold is
two acres. The phase two permit requires that threshold be reduced to a one -acre
threshold in the NPDES boundary.
Middleton stated the current clearing threshold is two acres everywhere. Now
they're dropping it down to one acre inside the NPDES boundaries.
Knutzen asked for a definition of 'frequently flooded areas.' Middleton stated it is the
100 -year flood plain according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Brenner, Weimer, and Knutzen (7)
Nays: None (0)
3. WASHINGTON STATE AUDITOR'S PERFORMANCE AUDIT REPORT (AB2010-
050)
Crawford opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public hearing.
David Stalheim, Planning and Development Services Director, gave a staff report on
the issues involved in permit process and stated Initiative 900 requires the legislative body
to hold a public hearing once the Auditor releases a report. The Council is not asked to do
anything right now. By July, they will bring back a response for the Auditor.
Brenner asked how code enforcement expenses are included in the permit expenses.
Code enforcement happens after the fact. Stalheim stated the Auditor did not believe that
code enforcement could be recovered at all in the permit fees. However, the County
believes that is an expense of the building department. They want to try to separate code
enforcement activity related to building permits versus activity related to critical areas or
shorelines, and propose that amount to the cost - allocation plan.
Brenner stated fees are for direct services, not for ancillary services, such as
department time - tracking. She asked if all fees should have a standard amount of time
assigned to it. Stalheim stated building permit fees are typically done in comparison to
other jurisdictions. They're trying to track a few cases so they can have an accurate
comparison.
Brenner stated they are not allowed to take a longer term approach in accounting
permit revenue regarding staffing because they charge a fee. She asked if most planning
staff are cross - trained to do things other than permitting, if the fee goes down. Stalheim
stated this audit was only about the building permit inspection program, not about the other
aspects of the department. They must look at staffing over a period of time longer than one
year. That would always be a rollercoaster. They must lengthen that timeframe to a couple
of years.
Brenner asked if things would be more even if people are cross - trained to perform
other services. Stalheim stated it could potentially.
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, 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
Knutzen asked if the administration operates a separate fund for instances in which
there are fluctuations in funding. Stalheim stated there is not an enterprise fund. It all
comes from the general fund. The money in the better years can't cover other years.
That's an option with pros and cons.
4. ORDINANCE STAYING PRO - ACTIVE ENFORCEMENT OF WHATCOM COUNTY
CODE 24.05, ON -SITE SEWAGE SYSTEM REGULATIONS, IN CASES WHERE
PROPERTY OWNERS ARE OTHERWISE NOT TRANSFERRING TITLE OR
CONVEYING REAL ESTATE (AB2009 -135)
Brenner stated she sent the wrong draft of the ordinance for introduction. It lacked
the amendments she made to it. The copy in the packet is not the intended document. She
read the provisions in the intended draft, which includes eliminating the requirement for
professional inspections, offering everyone homeowner classes, and setting up a low -
interest loan program. The intended draft does not eliminate State law requirements
regarding frequency of inspections. It allows homeowners to do their own inspections.
However, they haven't had a legal opinion on the constitutionality of the inspection
requirements of this Washington Administrative Code (WAC), although the issue has been
raised repeatedly. Ask the Prosecutor to give an opinion, or request an opinion from the
State Attorney General.
They can work on both drafts and input they receive from the public at the hearing.
To incorporate significant input from the public on controversial issues requires more than
one hearing. It would not be a problem to add the correct draft to their discussions after
the hearing. They can adopt an interim ordinance tonight, after the hearing, to stay
enforcement of professional inspections, and take the time necessary for in -depth
discussion. She is sorry for introducing the wrong draft. It had nothing to do with people
who have blogs or with veteran councilmembers not vetting enough before introducing it. It
had to do with her lack of proficiency on the computer. A simple conversation with her
would have cleared that up. A public hearing is an excellent place to vet the draft that was
introduced. They have gotten an opinion from Prosecuting Attorney Randy Watts that there
is a constitutional issue specifically and especially with professional inspections. He said the
Council may adopt what was introduced as an interim, knowing that they are going to
continue to amend it.
Karen Frakes, Prosecutor's Office, stated that adopting this ordinance tonight would
not make it an interim ordinance. In this case, they would be adopting an ordinance. The
Council may intend for it to be interim, but it could be on the books forever. Her only
concern is about having a public hearing on the ordinance that was introduced. It sounds
like the ordinance they introduced doesn't include certain provisions.
Brenner stated the introduced ordinance has a lot more specific information and is
more finely tailored.
Crawford stated what was submitted to the public for a hearing is quite a bit
different. Councilmember Brenner would like an immediate stay on the enforcement of the
existing ordinance, in the absence of an introduction and hearing on an ordinance different
from what was introduced. He asked if there is an action the Council can take to limit
enforcement. Frakes stated it needs to be done by ordinance. The only possibility is if it
falls under the criteria necessary to adopt an emergency ordinance.
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, 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
Regina Delahunt, Health Department, stated the stay can be handled
administratively for two weeks, if that's what the Council decides. The new ordinance would
be introduced tonight, and acted on appropriately. It's not necessary to pass another
ordinance tonight, for two weeks.
John Wolpers, Health Department, gave a staff report and described the history of
this issue, operations and maintenance (O &M) programs developed to -date, and the current
status of reports of system status submitted.
Crawford opened the public hearing and the following people spoke:
Keats Garmin, 8710 Oertel, Blaine, stated continue the inspection program as
currently designed. It has benefits that include early detection of repair and maintenance
needs, owner education and information, documentation of systems not currently in County
records, help in cleaning up pollution of waters, and environmental protection. If initial
inspections are allowed by owners, add a provision for a random audit of these to ensure
accuracy and completeness. Funding for the audit could come from fees from owner
education classes or a small increase in the current administrative fee. Hold public health
and environmental quality of utmost importance when considering this issue.
Susan Burke, Marine Resources Committee, submitted and read from a handout (on
file). They are concerned about the potential relaxation of regulations. People could choose
to do self- inspections or hire a professional, but self inspections could be audited.
Percy Hoekema, 1448 Emerson Road, Everson, stated his concern is that they
shouldn't go on people's property without permission.
Marita Goldsmith, Point Roberts, stated the waters around Point Roberts were
consistently the cleanest waters in the lower mainland in 2003. Since then, there have
been unreasonable regulations from the State and County Council hardliners for reasons of
political ambitions. It is a lie that a -coli and fecal matter in Puget Sound is from 30,000
septic tanks. That claim turns people against other people. They are avoiding blaming big
business, collecting new revenues, creating jobs for septic installers, and appeasing the new
power from environmentalists.
Tom Graham, 5570 Starry Road, Bellingham, stated Councilmember Brenner has
represented the people from the beginning. He thanked her. Times are hard.
Janice Claussen, 3781 Brownsville Place, Bellingham, stated she experienced a
municipal salmonella epidemic almost 40 years ago. She is concerned about anything that
can affect the water supply.
Bill Barquist, 8608 Stein Road, Custer, stated his inspection last spring cost $200,
and his system was just fine. He already knew it. He is peeved about the regulations.
They shouldn't have to spend money to prove they are innocent. Allow people to inspect
their own systems.
Sunny Meehan, 7779 Ham Road, Custer, stated his system was inspected and was
fine. He tried to sign up for a class, but was told he couldn't because he has a white water
system. If they are going to allow people to take classes to manage their own systems,
allow a provision for those who have white water systems. A $75 filing fee is too much.
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, 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
Patrick Grover, 3965 Loomis Trail Road, Blaine, stated he has both versions of the
proposed ordinances. The second version is much better. One problem not addressed is
elderly widows not capable of inspecting their own systems. They may have others who
could do the inspections for them, but those others aren't the property owners. Someone
who has been trained should be able to do the inspections for them. Allow an alternative
for a homeowner who is physically unable to do an inspection. Regarding fees, $35 per
15,000 inspections per year equals $525,000 in reporting fees. They don't need to increase
that. It's extra income that won't be all consumed by administrative costs.
Wendy Steffensen, RE Sources North Sound Baykeeper, submitted and read from a
handout (on file). They are disappointed in the proposal to roll back the current program.
Septic systems need to be regulated. She is concerned about those people not proactively
getting their systems fixed. They need to deal with low- income folks directly. Develop a
proactive way to help people protect water quality, rather than throw out an effective
program.
Ken Cameron, Point Roberts, stated he is concerned about the Point and is
committed to a clean environment. The County permitted small -lot subdivisions on Point
Roberts. It must have been clear that onsite septic systems couldn't provide effective waste
disposal on those lots. Mandatory inspections and upgrades requires a large financial
burden. It will force some owners to sell, and will affect the market value of properties.
Because the County contributed to this situation, it must pay greater attention to the
situation in Point Roberts. One factor is the presence of systems installed before permits
were required and systems that met permit requirements at the time of installation. A
second factor is the seasonal and limited use of many of the systems. A third factor is that
the Point doesn't use groundwater for drinking purposes. A fourth factor is the lack of any
evidence of any soil or water pollution caused by Point Roberts systems. Support the
proposed ordinance, and pay attention to Point Roberts.
Art Anderson, 5326 Williams Road, Everson, stated he supports the Brenner proposal
to allow residents to take a class and do self- inspections after taking a class. Whatcom
County residents will be very observant with their systems, and get them fixed if necessary.
Those on fixed incomes don't need extra fees and tax increases.
Terry Doyle, 1729 Province Road, Point Roberts, stated they all know they need to
look after the environment. However, he doesn't understand the sledge hammer approach
to dealing with septic owners whose systems have failed. The fees and timelines are
excessive and unreasonable. The Health Department gave him an extension, but he was
told he would be fined $125 per day for every day past the due date. He also will have to
pay a $900 permit fee. The public was blind -sided by these letters. Whatcom County drags
their feet in Point Roberts on getting their waste disposal pickup and replacing broken water
mains. The County is vehement in enforcing this regulation when it can't do things that
really count in Point Roberts.
Al Melton, 1420 Mt. Baker Highway, stated he supports Councilmember Brenner and
Crawford's efforts to lessen onsite septic system (OSS) rules. The Health Department
passed up money from the State to fund public information, classes, owner inspections, and
low- interest loans for repairs and installations. Septic systems have a low failure rate and
little to do with polluting local waters. There are other causes for pollution. Most septic
owners are trustworthy and maintain their systems.
Perry Eskridge, Whatcom County Association of Realtors, submitted and read from a
handout (on file). He is in favor of homeowner self- inspections. The proposed regulation
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, 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
includes a current report of system status before their can be a transfer of property.
However, it is not the purview of the Council to interfere with real estate contracts.
Transactions have been held up because of this. The Washington Administrative Code
(WAC) requires that maintenance records be provided to the purchases if available. State
law already has a disclosure requirement for septic systems. It's not incumbent upon the
Council to impose another disclosure requirement.
Don Imhof, 2869 W. 63rd Lane, Ferndale, stated they need education and to inspect
and repair failing systems. However, don't force paid inspections every three years on
something that is working properly. Allow homeowners to self- inspect.
David Bower, 2074 Harksell Road, stated he supports allowing homeowners to self -
inspect their own tanks. Make the class schedule and fees easy to obtain. He shouldn't
have to pay more because someone else isn't obeying the law. People who have taken the
class should be allowed to do inspections for immediate family members. Failure rates in
certain older, more established neighborhoods may be higher than in newer neighborhoods.
The way people have to pay makes them required to prove their innocence.
Abe Jacobsen, 2314 Samish Way, Bellingham, stated he is generally in favor of
reducing this regulatory burden, but hopes they can build into the program robust
inspections so they can find the people who are not taking care of their systems. This room
is full of extremely knowledgeable, motivated, and responsible people. More people should
be like that. The Council has a fiduciary responsibility to public health. Have some kind of
rolling inspections or some kind of presence at the County to trust, but verify.
Steve Schneider, 2455 Tuttle Lane, Lummi Island, submitted and read from a
handout (on file). He is a septic designer, and will continue to have work regardless of the
regulations. He supports retaining the current OSS regulations. Repair of failing systems is
the most critical, and will result in the most immediate improvement to public health and
the environment. He fears that failing systems will not be reported by self- inspectors.
These regulations are not meant to burden honest owners, but to protect against dishonest
and non - proficient system owners. He submitted suggestions for changes.
Joe Kirkman, 967 Loomis Trail Road, Lynden, submitted and read from a handout
(on file). The current septic system process and fees cannot be justified at this time. They
need mass education. Modify the rules and remedy the excessive examination fees.
Steve Hood, State Department of Ecology, stated education is important, but doing
the inspection is also important. With the regulations, people are maintaining their systems
and don't have to pay for expensive repairs. Maintain the inspection system. Have a good
professional inspection to start things off, at the very least. After that, homeowners can do
self- inspections. Most of all, have an enforcement program to make sure it's not just the
willing people who are doing inspections, but that everyone steps up to that responsibility.
Wes Kentch, 6870 Enterprise Road, Ferndale, stated he is okay with professional
inspections, but the County should pay for it. He maintains his system, and his drinking
water is fine.
Doug Binder, 3858 Sweet Road, Blaine, stated he has been a septic system inspector
for many years, and the County won't accept a report of system status (ROSS) for his own
system. That's wrong. Many home owners can and should be able to inspect their own
system. It shouldn't cost as much as it does. At least allow installers to inspect the
systems.
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, 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
Dorie Belisle, 231 Ten Mile Road, stated she is against the proposal to change the
existing code. There is a waste of taxpayer dollars and a threat to the watersheds. The
OSS Advisory Committee worked for over a year on making responsible decisions to meet
State and County demands, determine what is best for county citizens and septic system
owners, and to protect resources. Don't let the complaining and fear of a few throw away
the regulations. The proposal will cost more money in the future as they continue to work
to improve failed systems. They are asking homeowners to have a paid inspection every
nine years. In 2008, her inspection fee was $194 and having the system pumped was
$397. Over nine years, that equals an annual fee of $65.67. They all have money woes,
but they must save for what is important. The inspections actually save money from
expensive repairs.
Roger Almskaar, 233 S. State Street, Bellingham, stated allow people to inspect their
systems after taking a class. State rules do not require an inspection every time a house or
property with a septic system is transferred. A property transfer doesn't require an
inspection, according to the State. If they allow neighbors or friends to inspect a system on
behalf of someone who cannot inspect their own system, the regulation should call them
agents instead of assigns. He suspects many of the failing systems are old ones that
weren't built correctly in the first place. Faulty original construction is more likely to be the
culprit than inadequate maintenance.
Jim Julius, 301 Marine Drive, Point Roberts, stated perk tests are done on all sales in
Point Roberts. Homes are inspected by a licensed septic tank designer. Those systems
work. Point Roberts is probably not the problem. They have their own water supply from
Vancouver. If anything gets into a ditch, the rain will wash it away. They would be more
effective if they regulated the City of Victoria, which dumps raw sewage into Puget Sound
daily, for the last 100 years. Vancouver drains for storm sewage will cause their primary
treatment to overflow. Don't be so paranoid about what they are doing to Orca habitat.
Bob Cecile, 4806 Beach Way, Ferndale, stated he is a member of the Marine
Resource Committee. Failing septic systems are real issues. County highway engineers and
employees have to deal with the roadside ditches. Be careful about any modifications.
Review the suggestions from the Marine Resources Committee. They need staff to do this.
The existing program generates more income to create staff positions. Consider the effects
on the marine environment if they cast aside these regulations. Particularly consider bays
with shellfish beds. The Puget Sound and straits are already showing signs of degradation.
Consider the public health of work crews that have to work in roadside ditches in the
county.
Eliana Friedlob, 6934 Holeman Avenue, Birch Bay, stated don't completely throw out
the regulations. There are critical issues. Failures are small in number. Many require
maintenance. Prevention costs less than major repairs. People do need help, so provide
assistance to the people who need it. Be careful about how this is implemented. There is
no doubt that untreated sewage in the water has an incredible impact on fish and wildlife
and also on public health.
Shelley Fitzpatrick, 1290 Gulfview Crescent, Point Roberts, stated she can't afford to
pay for installing a new system. Most people will have to sell, and the property will be
worth nothing. As a Canadian, she can't get money in the States, and she can't put the
land up as collateral in Canada because the property is in the United States. These systems
only last ten years. Pumps break down after five years. She doesn't have room on her
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, 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
property for a septic system. The same people who are doing the inspections are also the
ones who are putting in the systems. That is a conflict of interest.
Carol Ann Brewer, citizen, stated she represents her brother on Bay Road. Her
brother bought the old Jensen place. He wasn't told that the septic system is old. He is not
able to put in a new system. He is being harassed. A government agency should not use
their power to harass people. Her brother is in fear of being thrown out of his house and
that his house will be condemned. Many people with failing system may not be able to
afford a new system. Everyone wants clean water. This is not an issue of water. It's an
issue of whether a person can or cannot pay. It's not an issue of someone being unwilling.
If the government is willing to provide some kind of financing, her brother will be willing to
apply for it. Her brother tried to comply with the regulation, but has received an order to
get it done.
Brenner stated that Ms. Brewer's brother is physically disabled, and his wife, who
took care of him, died two years ago on the farm.
George Raper, 3363 Best Lane, Bellingham, stated he thanks Councilmembers
Crawford and Brenner for this proposed revision. He supports self- inspection and allowing
family members to help with inspection if necessary. Keep the cost down, and let them
take the classes. Classes and education are very good ideas. Property owners won't want
their property to depreciate, so they will do the best they can with it.
Pete Ruese, 6229 Aldrich Road, Ferndale, stated The State law says it's the owners'
responsibility to operate, monitor, and maintain their systems. Nothing in the State law
says that a licensed specialist has to inspect the septic systems. Don't make the regulation
more stringent than that. Allow self- inspection and education.
Pat Spiller, 870 Reveille, Bellingham, stated there was an instance of waste from a
failing treatment facility in Sudden Valley. As a contractor, he's dug up and installed many
systems. Right now in the city of Bellingham, there are huge amounts of raw sewage
running into the drain lines. It's an assumption that the pollution is coming from septic
systems. A lot of city sewage is running into the bay. They ought to look at the real causes
of the coliform in the water. It doesn't come from failing systems. Allow them the
opportunity of inspecting their own system. Use the money from filing fees to help people
with failing systems.
Dale Zaugg, 4181 Red Cedar Road, Blaine, stated he tried to sign up for the class.
He takes care of his home and property. He suggests that all homeowners be trained and
inspect their own systems, and require a professional inspection every fourth or fifth year
for verification.
Rob Vander Veen, 2074 Willeys Lake Road, Custer, stated he has been a licensed
OSS designer for over 20 years. He would like the opportunity to inspect his own systems.
They do more to protect the environment than those in other places in the world. Lighten
up on inspections, and give themselves a break. He supports the proposed ordinance.
Christa Brumbuck, citizen, stated he supports the Crawford and Brenner proposed
ordinance. The new regulations are too much of a burden to too many citizens. Not
everyone should be responsible for the few failing systems. Many are experiencing financial
difficulties. Trust the people.
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, 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
Hank Terpsma, citizen, stated everyone is talking about money. Those in town pay
$50 or $60 per month. Those in the County pay about $5 per month.
Fred Rheinhard, 3854 Cabrant Road, stated they say that fecal coliform is polluting
local waters, but they don't say where or by how much. That comment leads to a
bureaucracy that gives people a hard time to stay in their homes. People can't swim in
Silver Lake because of swimmer's itch caused by Canadian Geese. The County is being
taken by conmen who are putting out bureaucratic paperwork, and the County wants to be
careful about what it says so it isn't held accountable. He put his septic system in 40 years
ago, and have had no problem.
Hearing no one else, Crawford closed the public hearing.
Brenner moved to request the administration to stay the portion regarding
enforcement of professional inspections for approximately one month. She will put this in
committee.
Crawford stated this stay is only for the proactive inventorying of new septic
systems, and doesn't change anything about addressing a known failing system.
Brenner stated she agrees. Get the low- interest loan set up so they can help people
who need help.
Wolpers stated he reviewed the original proposed ordinance and Councilmember
Brenner's amended ordinance. He suggests that the language be addressed in the Health
Committee meeting in February. Homeowner evaluations was a recommendation brought
to the Council through the Public Health Advisory Board by the Health Department. He
supports looking at having homeowners do some of their initial inspections. The proposed
language is doable.
Delahunt stated there are problems with the ordinance as introduced because it
doesn't comply with State law. The amended proposed ordinance is close. They need a few
clarifications. Originally, the recommendation was to allow homeowner inspection. A
previous Council put in place the initial inspection by the professionals. Staff always
supported homeowner inspection and homeowner classes.
Nelson stated there is a lot of anger and frustration in the community. He hopes the
Council can regain the trust and faith of the community. All they need to do is keep their
ears open and create workable solutions. They need to work on defining a failure. He is
concerned about the definition of a failure. They are trying to prevent pollutants off
property. Exactly define what constitutes a failure. Delahunt stated that is a clarification
they need. Broken pipes are not failures.
Crawford restated the motion to request the administration not continue to notify
folks of the need for professional inspection, which means not pursuing the inventory at this
point until they get this resolved.
Weimer stated he is against the motion. He is in favor of professional inspections.
The amended proposal is much closer. The introduced ordinance didn't meet State law.
The most recent version of the ordinance does meet State law, and he is close to supporting
it. The reason the County is doing this is because of the total maximum daily load (TMDL)
study under the Clean Water Act for Lake Whatcom because Lake Whatcom is found to be
polluted by fecal coliform. The taxpayers are going to spend hundreds of thousands of
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, 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
dollars to fix that. They have a TMDL study for Portage Bay, which includes the entire
Nooksack watershed, because it's been found to be polluted with fecal coliform. The
taxpayers have already spent a good deal of money cleaning up that water to get the
shellfish beds open again. They have a TMDL study in Drayton Harbor because it's been
found to be polluted with fecal coliform. They have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars
of taxpayer money to do DNA testing to figure out where that fecal coliform is coming from.
They've found that in over half of the places tested, it's coming from humans, most likely
through septic systems. They recently had to close parts of Birch Bay because it was found
to be polluted with fecal coliform. They don't know yet if it's human. There is significant
fecal coliform pollution going on in the county. Almost everywhere, they've found instances
where it is human fecal coliform coming from septic systems. There is a need to address
this. He is in favor of letting people inspect their own septic systems. He was in favor of
professional inspections to begin with because dairy and cattle owners blame people with
septic systems, and people with septic systems blame dairy and cattle owners. They won't
know who is to blame until they put an end to that. One way to put an end to it is by
having an initial septic inspection by professionals so they have a good database of where
they are now with the 30,000 systems in this county. After they do that, he is fine with
letting property owners do their inspections from there on out. They really need to put an
end to the arguments and finger - pointing about where all the known fecal coliform within
the county is coming from. That's why he is against this proposal. They really need a one-
time professional inspection to put an end to the arguments. There is no doubt there is
fecal coliform pollution throughout the county that is not only affecting shellfish, but also
has the potential to affect human health in groundwater.
Brenner stated she disagrees about the polarization between the dairymen and
cattlemen and the homeowners. Most of the people who have farms also have septic
systems. They do understand. Some people buy property with a septic system, and don't
really understand it. The County has never before offered classes. They are offering them
now. People will do the right thing after taking a class because they become aware of the
true cost if the problems aren't fixed. It has yet to be proven that tests for human fecal
coliform track the pollution to onsite septic systems. Having a class is such a huge
difference from what they had before. People who take the class will take better care of
their systems, which will have a significant impact. This isn't a polarizing issue. She
appreciates the respect that was shown tonight.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Brenner, and Knutzen (5)
Nays: Mann and Weimer (2)
(Clerk's Note: The Council took a break from 10:10 p.m. to 10:18 p.m.)
CONSENT AGENDA
Mann reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and moved
to approve Consent Agenda items one through 17.
Crawford withdrew items one through four.
The motion to approve Consent Agenda items five through 17 carried by the
following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Brenner, Weimer, and Knutzen (7)
Nays: None (0)
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, 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
1. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND
WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY TO CONTINUE THE JOINT SHARING OF
COSTS FOR A FACULTY POSITION FOR WHATCOM COUNTY EXTENSION IN
2010, IN THE AMOUNT OF $83,542 (AB2010 -036)
Mann moved to approve the request.
Crawford asked if Councilmember Knutzen is going to support this item.
Knutzen stated he sees the value in Cooperative Extension. He supports the motion.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Brenner, Weimer, and Knutzen (7)
Nays: None (0)
2. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND SUSTAINABLE CONNECTIONS
FOR PROVISION OF GREEN BUILDING AND RESOURCE CONSERVATION
OUTREACH SERVICES IN 2010, IN THE AMOUNT OF $20,000 (AB2010 -037)
Mann moved to approve the request.
Crawford stated he is against the motion. He has a lot of respect for what
Sustainable Connections does, and is very impressed with how they can rally the public on
their behalf. However, a number of these items are elective and not required. Sustainable
Connections and the Green Building program do a lot of good. They are in a situation where
the Council will have to cut a lot of things.
Mann stated this should be the last place the Council should cut. Sustainable
Connections returns an amazing amount on the investment from grants and energy savings.
It is an economic development, environmental, and educational engine. If every nonprofit
were as productive and effective as Sustainable Connections, they'd have a lot easier time.
They wouldn't have to spend all the money they have to spend. He strongly supports
Sustainable Connections, they work they do, and the return on this investment.
Brenner stated she is in favor of the contract. Sustainable Connections is the group
that brings all elements together. No other organization is as inclusive and draws people in.
There has been more and better economic development. Lots of people are getting
interested in and learning about alternative energy and other things that save money. It is
not an amenity. Sustainable Connections saves the County departments a lot of money.
Nelson stated the budget information should include returns on investments.
Sustainable Connections is an example of a program that provides a return on the
investment. Evaluating all the programs is a good idea, but have criteria more than
whether or not the program is necessary. Make sure dollars are getting something in
return. He supports the motion.
Crawford stated he appreciates that Sustainable Connections is the impetus for a lot
of programs, but he is skeptical that any savings realized could be otherwise realized with
County efforts. The County administration and Executive are very interested in
conservation in many regards. He's not sure what investment return they're talking about.
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, 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
He doesn't regret spending money on those programs in the past. Now those programs are
in place. The County can't afford to continue funding them.
Knutzen stated he sees the value to the community. However, they must begin to
distinguish between wants and needs. He is in favor of the contract for one year, but wants
Sustainable Connections to become self- sustaining.
Mann stated money paid out to Sustainable Connections isn't a want or a need. It's
an investment that has massive payback. It's pennywise and pound - foolish to save some
money by not funding this contract. It's not about what they've done, but about what they
will do next in upcoming years. Sustainable Connections is a model nonprofit that works for
this community, raises millions of dollars in grant funds, and sets an example for everyone.
Brenner stated she suggests that Councilmember Knutzen agree to continue funding
if Sustainable Connections can show their benefit financially.
Knutzen stated there are other organizations that return a value to the community
and that the County doesn't fund, such as Building Industry Association (BIA).
Brenner stated the BIA is not nonprofit. As the County cuts back on programs and
staff, the bridge will be working with organizations such as Sustainable Connections and the
BIA. They work well together. They don't have to decide between the two. It's about
where the money is best spent. The administration and Executive recommend this contract.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Kershner, Nelson, Brenner, Weimer, and Knutzen (6)
Nays: Crawford (1)
3. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND BELLINGHAM FOOD BANK
FOR THE COLLECTION, WAREHOUSING, AND DISTRIBUTION OF FOOD TO
LOCAL FOOD BANKS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,000 (AB2010 -038)
Mann moved to approve the request.
Crawford stated he will vote against this item for the same reasons as the previous
agenda item. It's something that the County can afford.
Kershner stated the County's contribution to the Food Bank is $58,000. The total
income for the Food Bank is $887,618. Their expenses are $804,396, leaving them with a
net operating income of $78,222, not including $5,000 for capital purchases. The $58,000
could be absorbed by their operating income.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Brenner, Weimer, and Knutzen (4)
Nays: Nelson, Crawford, Kershner (3)
4. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND WHATCOM VOLUNTEER
CENTER FOR THE PROVISION OF VOLUNTEER SERVICES, IN THE AMOUNT
OF $35,000 (AB2010 -039)
Mann moved to approve the request.
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, 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
Crawford stated he will vote against this item for the same reasons as the previous
agenda items.
Nelson stated the County receives 18,000 volunteer hours. They quoted a rate of
$20 per hour, which is high. At a rate of $11, the savings is $198,000.
Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated the money is also used to support other
volunteer efforts throughout the community. The return is not just to the County
government.
Crawford stated he will support the motion.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Brenner, Weimer, and Knutzen (7)
Nays: None (0)
S. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO
PROJECT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT #1 WITH THE WASHINGTON STATE
RECREATION AND CONSERVATION FUNDING BOARD (RCFB) TO INCREASE
THE AMOUNT OF STATE FUNDING FOR THE ACQUISITION OF LILY POINT BY
$436,885 WITH A CORRESPONDING REDUCTION IN THE PROJECT SPONSOR
MATCH AMOUNT (AB2010 -059)
6. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
RESIDENTIAL LEASE AGREEMENT WITH DAVID FLARRY AND EMILY SMITH
TO LEASE 5236 NIELSEN AVE., FERNDALE IN THE TENNANT LAKE
INTERPRETIVE CENTER, IN THE AMOUNT OF $650 PER MONTH (AB2010-
060)
7. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO WAIVE BID
REQUIREMENTS AND ENTER INTO A CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM
COUNTY AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE & SEXUAL ASSAULT SERVICES FOR THE
PROVISION OF ASSISTANCE TO SUPPORT AND REPRESENT THE
COMMISSION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. IN THE AMOUNT OF $45,000
(AB2010 -061)
S. RESOLUTION CANCELING UNCOLLECTIBLE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES
(AB2010 -062)
9. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE TREASURER'S ANNUAL LIST OF PROPERTY
TAX REFUNDS CONSISTENT WITH RCW 84.69.020 (AB2010 -063)
10. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND WASHINGTON
STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY FOR COORDINATED PREVENTION GRANT
ACTIVITIES TO INCLUDE THE OPERATION OF THE DISPOSAL OF TOXICS
FACILITY, IN THE AMOUNT OF $234,577 (AB2010 -064)
11. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND CATHOLIC COMMUNITY
SERVICES FOR JUVENILE COURT BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SPECIALIST
SERVICES, IN THE AMOUNT OF $95,000 (AB2010 -065)
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, 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
12. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
PURCHASE OF AN ANNUAL SUPPLY (ON AN AS NEEDED BASIS) OF ASPHALT
PRODUCTS UTILIZING WASHINGTON STATE CONTRACT; VENDORS ARE
ALBINA ASPHALT, ARROW CONSTRUCTION SUPPLY, PARTNER
CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS, AND SPECIAL ASPHALT PRODUCTS, IN THE
AMOUNT OF APPROXIMATELY $40,000 (AB2010 -066)
13. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
PURCHASE OF THE ANNUAL 2010 SUPPLY OF GLASS BEADS FOR TRAFFIC
LINE MARKING PAINT USING WASHINGTON STATE CONTRACT AND
VENDORS ALPINE PRODUCTS AND POTTERS INDUSTRIES, IN THE AMOUNT
OF APPROXIMATELY $77,000 (AB2010 -067)
14. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
PURCHASE OF THE 2010 ANNUAL SUPPLY OF LIGNOSITE FOR DUST
CONTROL ON COUNTY ROADS ON AN AS NEEDED BASIS FROM SOLE
VENDOR MEENDERINCK, LLC, IN THE AMOUNT OF $25,000 (AB2010 -068)
15. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
PURCHASE OF LUBRICANTS USING WASHINGTON STATE CONTRACT AND
VENDOR CONOCO PHILLIPS 76 /REISNER DISTRIBUTOR, IN AN AMOUNT
THAT COULD EXCEED $35,000 (AB2010 -069)
16. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
PURCHASE OF THE ANNUAL 2010 SUPPLY OF CARQUEST AND NAPA AUTO
PARTS FROM LOCAL FRANCHISE DEALERS ON AN AS NEEDED BASIS USING
WASHINGTON STATE CONTRACT, IN AN AMOUNT THAT WILL EXCEED
$35,000 (AB2010 -070)
17. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND WHATCOM
COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS FOR THE DELIVERY OF SERVICES THROUGH
THE SMART TRIPS PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF $60,000 (AB2010 -071)
OTHER ITEMS
1. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL
ZONE DISTRICT AND WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY FOR PASS
THROUGH FUNDS TO ASSIST WITH THE MANAGING OF SEDIMENT
DEPOSITED BY SWIFT CREEK (AB2010 -055)
(Clerk's Note: Council acting as the Whatcom County Flood Control Zone District
Board of Supervisors.)
Weimer reported for the Natural Resources Committee and moved to approve the
request.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Brenner, Weimer, and Knutzen (7)
Nays: None (0)
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, 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
2. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SOUTH FORK REGIONAL PARK CONCEPTUAL
PLAN (AB2010 -056)
Weimer reported for the Natural Resources Committee and stated this item was held
in committee.
3. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2010 WHATCOM COUNTY BUDGET, FIFTH
REQUEST, IN THE AMOUNT OF $599,233 (AB2010 -051)
Mann reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and moved
to adopt the ordinance. The committee recommends two amendments that exclude
$395,000 for emergency medical services (EMS) and include $250,000 for Superior Court
funding with the condition that they can't spend any of that money until the working group
makes a recommendation on Superior Court funding.
Nelson moved to exclude $250,000 for Superior Court.
Knutzen stated the Executive's Office will continue to work with Superior Court on a
resolution to this.
Nelson withdrew his motion.
Mann moved to exclude item fourteen, which is $395,000 for emergency medical
services (EMS), as recommended by the committee.
Weimer stated the administration attended an EMS Committee meeting, and was
convinced to put this funding in the request. This was ongoing training money that was
planned for the already- existing funding for the EMS units, and it's needed to keep that
number current, regardless of the District 7 operation. He asked if that's correct.
Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated the City has the choice of training these
people anytime between 2010 through 2012. They chose to do the training in 2010
because it contributed to their objective to get the Western Washington University training
program credentials. Since the County is paying for most of it, the committee wanted more
information on how implementation is going for the five additional District 7 paramedics that
have been trained. The administration will discuss this with the Finance Committee in two
weeks.
Brenner stated they need a legal opinion on whether Dr. Wayne has a conflict of
interest in his position. He is keeping paramedics who are ready from getting their
certification. That's not right. They are supposed to work for the entire county. That's not
happening. She likes the recommendation, but make sure the paramedics they've already
paid for are certified first.
Crawford stated he agrees with Councilmember Brenner. They have five, trained,
working paramedics who are ready to go. They have exceeded the hour training
requirement that Bellingham has. Yet, the Medical Director is preventing them from doing
the local ride - along. The paramedics have done ride - alongs in other jurisdictions, at great
cost to the taxpayers, because Bellingham is closing them out. It's time to work with
Bellingham to implement the EMS plan that this Council, the City, and the Union adopted in
2005. A sales tax increase was attached to that plan, so they can extend the argument to
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, 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
53
say that the voters of Whatcom County approved the plan. However, these guys are being
rejected. That's not fair or a good way to run a system for the people of Whatcom County.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Brenner, and Knutzen (6)
Nays: Weimer (1)
Mann moved to add $250,000 for Superior Court with the condition that they can't
spend any of that money until the working group makes a recommendation on Superior
Court funding.
Brenner stated she supports the idea. The Executive set up this advisory committee
that will make recommendations and work with Superior Court and local attorneys. Be
ready to give them what they need. They have a good faith offer going on right now, and
they ought to stick with it. She doesn't know that they need this at this time.
Weimer stated he believes that the Council can't add things to the budget outside
the budget process. Since this is still part of the biennial budget review, they can put this in
there now so they can use it for Superior Court if they can't work it out. This morning, Mr.
Desler confirmed that the Council can put things into the budget any time a supplemental
budget request comes forward, so it's not important to do this now. Desler stated it's
subject to interpretation. It has to do with how much money the Executive determines they
have to spend. The Charter indicates that the Council can add programs if they create more
money or decide there is more money than the Executive determines. Go slow until they
decide it's appropriate, especially during times when they need to make major reductions in
the budget.
Brenner stated the Council received a legal opinion that they can add something as
long as it is budget neutral. She hopes to work with the administration this year to find
other, programmatic cuts.
Crawford stated it doesn't make much sense to create a budget amount before they
determine what they need. The Executive will come back with a proposal as a result of the
committee's recommendation.
Brenner stated she's glad they had this discussion. Superior Court knows they're
working it out. They don't need to do it at this moment.
The motion failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann and Weimer (2)
Nays: Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Brenner, and Knutzen (5)
Weimer asked if they need to leave $52,000 in the Planning Department to cover
potential problems with permitting fees covering expenses. Desler stated nothing linked the
transfer to reducing the budget cut. It's not there.
Brenner stated she wanted to support this budget amendment, but can't because
they can't keep making cuts across - the - board. Decide which programs to cut. Don't cut
$58,000 from the Sheriff's Office. People are struggling more due to the recession, and
certain crimes are increasing. She wants to hear from the Sheriff before making such a cut.
Remove the item that creates a .5 percent cut across - the - board, work with the Executive's
Office, and have a work session to decide which programs to cut instead. Pierce County
prioritized essential public services needs versus wants. She would like to do the same
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, 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
thing here. She's been asking for it for a year. She won't approve any more across -the-
board cuts.
Weimer stated he agrees with Councilmember Brenner, and will oppose the
ordinance.
Brenner moved to remove item five, which is the .5 percent across - the -board
reduction. Every time they do across - the -board cuts, she's agreed. Now, she wants to
review the programs instead. She won't agree again.
Knutzen asked if the Sheriff, unions, and others have already agreed to the
reduction. Desler stated it has not. They normally don't take these kinds of matters before
the unions.
Brenner asked what the Sheriff said. Desler stated there is a series of reductions
going on throughout the operation. The Sheriff's Department budget in and of itself is $13
million. The efforts on the administration's part to reduce staff through attrition and
furloughs is far more than this particular account represents. The Council approved a one
percent across - the -board reduction in the vetoed supplemental budget request ordinance in
December, except the County Council and Superior Court. The Executive is requesting
approval for a .5 percent reduction. It does not include a .5 percent reduction to Superior
Court.
Brenner stated she didn't support the budget, for other reasons. They did what they
did. She appreciates that the Executive wants to reduce that cut. Let's go further and not
make that cut. If they want to, they have the right to open budgetary stuff and look at
programs, even before the biennial budget process. It's getting worse. It's going to
happen anyway. Make sure they don't break essential public services in the meantime.
Pete Kremen, County Executive, stated that the budget stabilization effort included
the 3.6 percent minimum across - the -board budget reduction. The Sheriff's Office was
exempted from that cut. The Sheriff's Department is not just officers on the road. It is the
most visible and highest priority of the Sheriff's Department, but there is a lot of
administration, travel, and other components that make up that $13 million. It's reasonable
to request a .5 percent reduction. It's good public policy. It enables the Sheriff to take a
look at nonessential aspects of his operation, in conjunction with the rest of the
organization.
Brenner stated she appreciates that. However, she totally trusts the Sheriff. Public
safety is the highest priority. The Sheriff has come before them on several occasions, when
they've cut his budget. The Sheriff told them how serious it's getting. At one point last
year, $400,000 was cut.
Knutzen asked if vacant positions due to retiring officers will be filled, given the
hiring freeze. He asked how this cut affects their budget. Desler stated the Executive
approved a series of replacements for the Sheriff deputies, even though the Sheriff hasn't
met the attrition target.
Kremen stated he already approved the unfreezing of two of the commissioned
officers. Two more just became frozen this month. He is taking another look at that, and
working with the Union and Sheriff to unfreeze those as well. The Sheriff's Department is
getting high priority focus, attention, and treatment. It's a value and priority a large portion
of the community shares. The administration respects that priority. It is working with the
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, Page 19
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
Sheriff's Office as best it can. They have a great relationship. A half percent for the largest
division of the entire organization doesn't ask too much. It's a token percentage to
participate in some of the financial pain that they all are sharing. All the other departments
within the organization have taken significantly higher hits. Their highest priority is public
safety. That will remain. It's good public policy to spread some of the financial burden
across the organization.
Knutzen asked why the Council is exempt from that half percent. He's willing to give
up some of his travel expense. They don't need to be exempt. Kremen stated he used to
be a legislator. He knows what it's like to have an Executive branch exert what might be
considered to be a lot of authority. He wants to work collaboratively with the legislative
branch, the County Council. He was disappointed the County Council didn't participate in
the budget stabilization effort. He understands. He will leave it up to the Council. The
Council approves the budget. That was a Council decision. He hopes that issue is revisited
and reconsidered.
Weimer stated he is against the motion. They can't afford to remove $200,000 more
from the budget. He is against the entire ordinance because the whole process on the
budget wasn't particularly targeted or strategic. They could have done a better job. He
can't abide by cutting $500,000 out of the conservation futures fund. It's one of the few
taxes in the county that the taxpayers voted on.
Nelson stated it's also not being used.
The motion failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner (1)
Nays: Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Knutzen, Mann and Weimer (6)
The motion to adopt the ordinance as amended carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Mann and Knutzen (5)
Nays: Brenner and Weimer (2)
4. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND
NORTHWEST HYDRAULIC CONSULTANTS FOR ENGINEERING DESIGN OF AN
INTEGRATED FISH HABITAT AND FLOOD PROJECT ON THE SOUTH FORK
NOOKSACK RIVER NEAR ACME, IN THE AMOUNT OF $73,000 (AB2009 -055)
(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: Mann, Weimer, Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Brenner and Knutzen (7)
Nays: None (0)
5. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A JOINT
FUNDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND US DEPARTMENT
OF INTERIOR, US GEOLOGICAL SURVEY FOR OPERATION AND
MAINTENANCE OF STREAM FLOW AND WATER TEMPERATURE GAGES IN
BERTRAND CREEK IN THE AMOUNT OF $18,800 (AB2010 -058)
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, Page 20
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
(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.
Knutzen asked about a Conservation District project for agriculture on a nearby
creek.
Jon Hutchings, Public Works Department, described the background of this item and
stated this is a nearby project the Conservation District is referring to.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Weimer, Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Brenner and Knutzen (7)
Nays: None (0)
6. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND BROWN AND CALDWELL
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS & CONSULTANTS FOR LAKE WHATCOM
PHOSPHORUS AND BACTERIA TMDL ASSISTANCE, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$329,204 (AB2010 -035)
(Clerk's Note: This item was withdrawn from the agenda.)
7. ORDINANCE REPEALING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 2.125, UTILITIES
PLANNING AND ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AB2010 -045)
Knutzen reported for the Planning and Development Committee and moved to
adopt the ordinance
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Weimer, Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Brenner and Knutzen (7)
Nays: None (0)
8. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 20, TO
CLARIFY AND REVISE THE DEFINITION AND STANDARDS OF HOME
OCCUPATIONS (AB2010 -047)
Knutzen reported for the Planning and Development Committee and stated this item
is held in committee.
9. ORDINANCE CLARIFYING AND REVISING THE DEFINITION AND
STANDARDS OF ACCESSORY APARTMENTS AND SECOND COOKING
FACILITIES WITHIN WHATCOM COUNTY'S ZONING CODE, TITLE 20
(AB2010 -048)
Knutzen reported for the Planning and Development Committee and stated this item
is held in committee.
10. ORDINANCE CLARIFYING THE APPLICABILITY OF AGRICULTURAL
PROTECTION OVERLAY (APO) BY INCLUDING THE AREA OF ADJOINING
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, Page 21
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
ROAD RIGHTS -OF -WAY IN THE CALCULATIONS OF PARCEL ACREAGE FOR
APO ZONE (AB2010 -049)
Knutzen reported for the Planning and Development Committee and stated this item
is held in committee.
11. NOMINATIONS AND APPOINTMENTS TO FILL VACANCIES ON THE FLOOD
CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE, TRIBAL
REPRESENTATIVE AND GEOGRAPHIC REPRESENTATIVES. (AB2010 -034)
(Clerk's Note: Council acting as the Whatcom County Flood Control Zone District
Board of Supervisors.)
Nelson nominated Jeff DeJong, Scott Bedlington, Richard Maricle, Mary Raines, and
Rodney VandeHoef.
Knutzen voted for VandeHoef and DeJong.
Kershner voted for Maricle and VandeHoef.
Nelson voted for Maricle and VandeHoef.
Mann abstained.
Crawford voted for Maricle and VandeHoef.
Weimer voted for DeJong and Raines.
Brenner voted for Maricle and DeJong.
The Council appointed Maricle and VandeHoef.
Nelson moved to nominated Jeff DeJong as an alternate, by acclamation.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Weimer, Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Brenner and Knutzen (7)
Nays: None (0)
Nelson moved to nominate William Coleman as the Tribal Representative, by
acclamation.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Weimer, Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Brenner and Knutzen (7)
Nays: None (0)
12. NOMINATION AND APPOINTMENT TO FILL VACANCY ON THE
SUMAS / EVERSON/ NOOKSACK FLOOD CONTROL SUB -ZONE COMMITTEE
(AB2010 -034A)
(Clerk's Note: Council acting as the Whatcom County Flood Control Zone District
Board of Supervisors.)
Nelson moved to appoint Larry Mades and Richard Adams.
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, Page 22
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
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Weimer, Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Brenner and Knutzen (7)
Nays: None (0)
13. NOMINATIONS AND APPOINTMENTS TO FILL VACANCIES ON THE
WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION (AB2009 -386B)
Brenner moved to nominate and appoint at the same meeting. The Council has
always allowed applicants to submit an application right up until 5 p.m. on the evening of
the vote. She doesn't know why someone thinks they can't do that. She thought that at
the last meeting they said they would not take any more applications.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Weimer, Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Brenner and Knutzen (7)
Nays: None (0)
Mann read from the Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure by Alice Sturges, by
which the Council operates, regarding a quote on procedure, "Procedure is more than a
formality. Without procedural safeguards, liberty would rest on precarious ground, and
substantive rights would be imperiled." He stated that quote is from Supreme Court Justice
William O. Douglas. The Council has a bit of an image problem at this point. Perhaps they
are not aware of some of the procedural standards they should follow. According to the
Growth Management Act (GMA), the Council is missing all kinds of deadlines. They owe it
to the community to follow their own rules. They have published information on the web
about the application process for Planning Commissioners. They should follow those
procedures. Originally, there was a deadline for applications. They took last minute
applications under the excuse that they've always done it that way. That's not a good
enough excuse. They should take time to find out and follow their own rules.
Brenner stated the rules were not properly printed on the website. The rule has
always been to allow people to submit an application until 5 p.m. on the day of the meeting.
That's been the Council procedure for years. They are not perfect. If people want
perfection over someone who works hard, then they need to elect professional politicians.
She stopped reading the editorials. Don't be manipulated by editorials and letters to the
editor, or they will lose focus. The councilmembers have great images.
Crawford stated Councilmember Mann makes a great point. They should set an
example for the community, and not bend or change rules. The Council is following the
rules by redoing this vote tonight. If the definition of "rules" is a deadline posted on the
internet, then the Council blew it. Those on the Council had a different mindset and there
was different communication. In the past, the Council Office let people know that it would
accept applications to the end of the day. If the definition of "rules" is what the Code says,
then the Code does not address a deadline process for the applications. It's not a matter of
the Council violating the Code by accepting late applications. The Council broke the rules by
not doing a nomination, which they are fixing. This is much ado about nothing, but they
have specific regulations to follow.
Mann stated he asks that councilmembers only vote for people who applied by
November 20, 2009.
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, Page 23
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 he agrees with Councilmember Mann. There has been a lot of
confusion. One way to end the confusion is to fix the Code and designate a deadline so
everyone knows what the rules are.
Crawford stated each councilmember will have to decide what is right and fair, and
nominate and vote accordingly.
Nelson asked if anything precludes someone from putting in an application for
Planning Commission at any time, whether or not there are any openings. The question is
about the position each applicant is applying for.
Planning Commission - District 1
Nelson nominated Theresa Sygitowicz and Jeff Rainey.
Knutzen voted for Rainey.
Kershner voted for Rainey.
Nelson voted for Sygitowicz.
Mann voted for Rainey.
Crawford voted for Rainey.
Weimer voted for Sygitowicz.
Brenner voted for Sygitowicz.
The Council appointed Jeff Rainey.
Planning Commission - District 2
Crawford nominated Gary Honcoop and Mary Beth Teigrob.
Knutzen voted for Honcoop.
Kershner voted for Honcoop.
Nelson voted for Teigrob.
Mann voted for Honcoop.
Crawford voted for Honcoop.
Weimer voted for Honcoop.
Brenner voted for Honcoop.
The Council appointed Gary Honcoop.
Planning Commission - District 3
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, Page 24
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 nominated Rod Erickson, Alan Friedlob, and Michelle Luke.
Weimer nominated Wynne Lee.
Knutzen voted for Erickson and Luke.
Kershner voted for Erickson and Luke.
Nelson voted for Luke and Erickson.
Mann voted for Erickson and Friedlob.
Crawford voted for Erickson and Luke.
Weimer voted for Friedlob and Lee.
Brenner voted for Friedlob and Luke.
The Council appointed Michelle Luke and Rod Erickson.
14. APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL "STANDING" COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE FOR
2010(AB2010 -080)
Nelson moved to approve the schedule.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Weimer, Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Brenner and Knutzen (7)
Nays: None (0)
15. COUNTY EXECUTIVE PETE KREMEN REQUESTS CONFIRMATION OF HIS
APPOINTMENT OF ETHAN REMMEL TO THE WHATCOM COUNTY PUBLIC
HEALTH ADVISORY BOARD (AB2010 -073)
Weimer moved to confirm the request.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Weimer, Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Brenner and Knutzen (7)
Nays: None (0)
16. COUNTY EXECUTIVE PETE KREMEN REQUESTS CONFIRMATION OF HIS
APPOINTMENT OF MARK MCDONALD AND RONALD KLEINKNECHT TO THE
WHATCOM COUNTY MENTAL HEALTH ADVISORY BOARD (AB2010 -074)
Nelson moved to approve the confirmations.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Weimer, Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Brenner and Knutzen (7)
Nays: None (0)
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, Page 25
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
INTRODUCTION ITEMS
Nelson moved to accept the Introduction Items, including the addendum item.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Weimer, Kershner, Nelson, Crawford, Brenner and Knutzen (7)
Nays: None (0)
1. RECEIPT OF AN APPEAL FILED BY WHATCOM COUNTY OF THE HEARING
EXAMINER'S DECISION ON APOL2009 -0011, REGARDING CERTAIN
CONDITIONS CONTAINED WITHIN A NOTICE OF PRELIMINARY SHORT PLAT
APPROVAL DOCUMENT FOR SSS2006- 00225, KREBS CLUSTER SHORT PLAT
(AB2009 -502)
2. ORDINANCE AMENDING WCC TITLE 20 TO MODIFY THE DATES OF
SEASONAL RESTRICTIONS ON CLEARING ACTIVITIES FROM SEPTEMBER 1sT
THROUGH APRIL 30TH TO OCTOBER 1ST THROUGH MAY 31ST AND IMPOSING
A DEADLINE ON THE ISSUANCE OF DEVELOPMENT PERMITS TO TWO WEEKS
PRIOR TO THE SEASONAL CLOSURE DATE IN THE WATER RESOURCE
SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREAS (AB2010 -075)
3. ORDINANCE REGARDING ESTABLISHMENT OF A POINT ROBERTS
COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AB2010 -076)
4. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2010 WHATCOM COUNTY BUDGET, SIXTH
REQUEST, IN THE AMOUNT OF $25,000 (AB2010 -077)
S. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 24.05, ON -SITE SEWAGE
SYSTEM REGULATIONS (AB2009 -135A)
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business.
REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS
Weimer stated he talked to a group of fifth graders about the legislative branch of
County government. It was fun, and he will volunteer to do that again.
Mann stated he went on a ride -along with a Sheriff deputy Saturday night. He felt
very sad for everyone they arrested and their victims. It was all about illegal drugs. Drugs
are everywhere out there.
Knutzen stated he went to the Conservation District last Saturday. It was
interesting. He appreciates what they can do to help agriculture, such as continuing to
monitor the water flow on the Bertrand Creek in the summertime.
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, Page 26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
i
1
i
IF
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 11:46 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
Please contact the Council Office to obtain an
official, signed copy:
360- 676 -6690 or council &o.w hatcom .wa.us
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
Sam Crawford, Council Chair
Whatcom County Council, 1/26/2010, Page 27