Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSurface Water Work Session February 16 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 Special Surface Water Work Session February 16, 2010 Council Chair Sam Crawford called the meeting to order at 10:30 a.m. in the Whatcom County Civic Center Annex, Second Floor Meeting Room, 322 N. Commercial, Bellingham, Washington. Present: Barbara Brenner, Sam Crawford, Kathy Kershner, Bill Knutzen, Ken Mann, L. Ward Nelson and Carl Weimer Absent: None SURFACE WATER WORK SESSION (AB2010 -024) 1. RIVER AND FLOOD AND STORMWATER FY 2010 PROGRAM REVIEW AND DISCUSSION OF UPCOMING BUDGET CYCLE Jon Hutchings, Public Works Department, stated they will discuss the river and flood programs and the stormwater program today. They will bring a discussion of the natural resources program to the Natural Resources Committee. Crawford stated he would like to reduce the increase the Council passed for the 2010 collection. He asked if it would be helpful to staff if the Council made a motion to that effect. The Council won't make that actual decision until this fall, when it considers the 2011 tax levies. He intends to make a motion to request that any discussion of future funding look at what happens if the Council approves that reduction, in addition to the existing funding. Hutchings stated that removing the $.03 tax increase is on the table, and needs to be a part of any budgeting discussion. He intends to talk about the effects of that reduction, in the context of what they are spending money on and how important those things are. In March, the Council will take a tour of various programs and operations. In April, they will talk specifically about the question of level of service (LOS), potential reductions, and other alternatives. He's already taking that direction seriously. Weimer stated the Council also directed Council Policy Analyst Rebecca Craven to write a report on the effects of that reduction. That report will inform the Council, also. Brenner stated the State and federal government will push through as many unfunded mandates as they can. She asked the point at which the County is allowed to not follow those unfunded mandates. They may need a legal opinion on that. Hutchings referenced the responses to questions posed at the January 19th surface water work session (on file) in the work session packet. He doesn't know that anyone has pressed the question of not responding to the national pollutant discharge and elimination system (NPDES) phase two permit or the total maximum daily load (TMDL) study for Lake Whatcom, other than challenging the original phase two lawsuit. Bigger cities took legal action against phase one permits. There is a threshold they can define. In the end, it will depend on who decides to challenge the County, how they challenge the County, what court they go to, and which judge happens to be assigned the challenge. Nelson stated that, in short, the court will decide. Hutchings stated that is correct. The County staff's job is to make sure the County is compliant, without knowing exactly Surface Water Work Session, 2/16/2010, 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 what that means. The staff will err on the side of being compliant in case the whole thing unravels and the County ends up in court. That is the conundrum of deciding exactly what level they should fund. Brenner stated the County should contact other counties and make sure they all can agree on a certain threshold. The federal and State governments will continue to dump things on counties until the counties go out of business. Hutchings stated Whatcom County is in compliance right now, and will remain in compliance if they follow the plan. Other counties are on the brink of insolvency, and are struggling to maintain compliance. That question will come forward by those local governments before Whatcom County. Paula Cooper, Public Works Department, referenced the comprehensive flood hazard management plan (CFHMP) for the lower Nooksack River. The Board of Supervisors adopted the plan in 1999, and is used as the guide for work on the lower Nooksack River to reduce future flood damages and help with flood repair expenditures. The implementation section includes different program areas to implement the plan (on file). Cost centers parallel those program areas. It's how they organize the budget and programs. She read through a presentation (on file) and described the different river and flood programs, including the early flood warning system and comprehensive flood planning. The planning effort is to develop flood hazard reduction projects, which are supposed to lessen future damages. Hutchings stated a budget line item with about $1 million was to design and build a new levee extension improvement project would ultimately reduce the damages by catastrophic flooding events are likely to be put off until the next fiscal year, due to the last flood. They will talk about it in the budget for 2011 and 2012. It is a question of level of service and expectations for the frequency of building improvement projects. Now, about $1 million accumulates in the flood control zone district fund every five years, which can be spent on those substantial improvements. How much money accumulates and is spent on a big project depends on the rate of money coming in and money going out. Cooper stated the goal of comprehensive flood planning is to reduce the need for repair and maintenance projects and to build a system that is predictable, not prone to failure, and not as costly to clean up after. Hutchings stated today's purpose is to draw lines between the document that is their guide for the work they pursue and the actual budget line items. Kirk Christensen, Public Works Department, stated he would present the stormwater program, including the Lake Whatcom Management Program, TMDL response, NPDES phase two permit compliance, the Birch Bay Watershed and Aquatic Resources Management (BBWARM) District, and the Lake Samish stormwater plan. Daily, the staff provides technical assistance to the public, County departments, and other agencies. The guiding document for the Lake Whatcom Management Program is the Lake Whatcom Comprehensive Stormwater Plan. They also design and construct capital projects, including the recent Cable Street project and other current projects. There are a six -year capital plans for Birch Bay and Lake Whatcom. He spends a fair amount of time filling out grant applications for various capital projects. Hutchings stated they also make congressional funding requests annually. Surface Water Work Session, 2/16/2010, 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 53 Nelson asked if they use the grant proceeds to fund items as they are on the comprehensive water resources integration project ( CWRIP) list. Christensen stated they have to match grant requirements to projects on the CWRIP list. Nelson asked how available grant funds changes the project ranking on the CWRIP list. Hutchings stated all the projects funded from grants and other funds are generally in the top 20 percent of the CWRIP list. There are instances where money becomes available for something that doesn't rank high. There may be a good reason for the Board of Supervisors to trump the benefit evaluation priority. The Board gets the opportunity to set those priorities in the end. Nelson asked how the Council evaluates contracts based on the project's rank on the list and staff's workload. He asked if the staff does that evaluation before bringing anything to the Council. Hutchings stated the staff does that evaluation, and brings it to the Council before there is a contract. The Council approves budget authority for any match requirement. The Council has to approve the expenditures before a contract is let. Christensen stated the inter - jurisdictional coordinating team (ICT), including the City of Bellingham, Water and Sewer District, and County, is an important part of the Lake Whatcom Management Program. The ICT coordinates everyone's efforts. Brenner asked if the ICT has recently discussed adopting the State Department of Ecology's low impact development manual. Christensen stated he's looked into it. The manual doesn't necessarily fit to Lake Whatcom. The County is targeting different things than people in Seattle, for instance. Locally, they focus on phosphorus and bacteria. Adopting the manual is still up for discussion. Brenner stated she knows the manual well. Much of it has to do with other areas, but adopting the manual makes it legal for people to implement these things so they don't have to go through variance procedures. It seems like the City, County, and Water District should approve it. One of the authors of the manual is local to Whatcom County. The County should take advantage of the talent that is already here. Christensen stated that sounds like a conversation to have jointly with the Planning Department and the development review section, which has to approve projects. Brenner stated she's been asking for this since the manual came out. Someone must do it. Christensen stated they don't want to be forced to do the wrong thing. Nelson asked the process for the Council to look at this document. He asked if it's correct that people would be able to have things permitted with the adoption of the manual. He asked if there is a process to consider using the manual in the watersheds to allow permitting of low- impact development. Hutchings stated they can schedule it. Crawford stated staff can take a look at it and come up with something. Christensen stated the Lake Whatcom Management Program is doing a focus project on the Silver Beach Creek drainage basin. He described the project. Nelson asked if there is any new information on the efficacy of the Cable Street system versus the vault system. Christensen stated they are used for two different purposes due to topography. He has new test results from the Cable Street project. The phosphorus results look good. Surface Water Work Session, 2/16/2010, 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 Nelson asked if staff is using science on both systems to evaluate Silver Beach, before they put in a system. Christensen stated staff is. He described the Silver Creek Beach bank stabilization project planned for this year. Hutchings stated a goal is to incentivize local neighborhood subdivisions that rely on those stormwater ponds to invest in specific improvements to those ponds. A question is whether they provide public money in that effort, and by how much. They must first know the scope of what they will ask people to do. A focus is to develop that scope. Mann stated someone in Glacier is not contributing to stormwater runoff at Silver Beach Creek. He asked if they can targeting fundraising in that area. Christensen stated they are working on that. Hutchings stated the Council will talk about the options for funding stormwater programs during an upcoming meetings. A key is to figure out the level of funding needs, expectations, and funding options best - suited for the applications. Crawford stated it's not just about the people who are causing pollution. There is also a beneficiary, the water users. It makes sense to include those who use the water for drinking. A question is whether the entire county gets involved in Lake Whatcom issues. Christensen stated they are working with the City to target homeowner retrofits. There are also education and monitoring components. Hutchings stated the budget revenue comes from the real estate excise tax (REET), grant funds, and budgeted funds. They don't know how much longer granting agencies will be able to keep providing funding for these purposes. Christensen stated another responsibility is the TMDL compliance regarding phosphorus and bacteria. He described the TMDL requirements. The ICT is developing a summary implementation strategy to comply with the TMDL. The approach will be lead by the Department of Ecology. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has to approve the approach. The work plan is to create this document. Nelson stated the Department of Ecology (DOE) is responsible to the federal government for implementing the Clean Water Act. He asked if the County's efforts will be monitored by DOE, as the agency responsible for making sure things in the State are being done right. He asked if the County is not responding directly to the federal Clean Water Act. Christensen stated that's correct. The DOE has the authority to hold the County to the standards of the Clean Water Act. Nelson stated the DOE set standards far above those of the Clean Water Act. Christensen stated they are in the process of reviewing the DOE's findings on the levels of phosphorus the County must reduce in Lake Whatcom to see if they are appropriate to improve the quality of the lake. Nelson asked if they should look at the federal standards for that review. Hutchings stated the federal government defers to the State to set the State's water quality standards. The State agreed with the federal government on the level of the appropriate requirements. It is passed to the County via the NPDES phase two permit and TMDL. If the State doesn't live up to its agreement, the EPA will withdraw its delegated authority from the State. Then the County would work directly with the federal government. Surface Water Work Session, 2/16/2010, 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 Nelson asked if they are reviewing the DOE's requirements with the federal requirements. Christensen stated they are. They are questioning those State requirements. He described potential sources of phosphorus and bacteria. Mann stated he would like a scientific analysis of whether they care about phosphorus in Lake Whatcom, due to a recent newspaper article. Christensen stated phosphorus is derived from many sources. It is a pollutant. Too much phosphorus will accelerate the degradation of the lake. Mann stated that degradation would lead to more treatment requirements and trihalomethanes in the pipes. He asked how worried they are about that and how near they are to that scenario. Hutchings stated Lake Whatcom is in pretty good shape compared to some lakes. It's a question of how aggressively they want to protect that water quality to offset likely treatment costs down the road. Mann stated he is in favor of offsetting future costs. He asked for clarity on whether phosphorus or bacteria are a water quality threat right now. Hutchings stated the delivery of phosphorus into the lake is not an acute health risk in and of itself. The delivery of fecal coliform to the lake has direct implications to health. However, they must consider the value of the resource as a whole and how they manage that resource to avoid additional costs and additional health risks associated with chlorination byproducts and other impacts to human health that result from the treatment process. There are longer, less acute implications related to nutrient loading. Crawford stated the phosphorus aids the algae. The chlorine treats the biological component of the algae. Christensen stated it's a complex cycle. They will see today's impacts to the lake in ten years. The impacts they see now is due to the stuff that went into the lake in the 1970's. He described the County's requirements under the NPDES phase two permit. NPDES requirements will increase significantly in the next couple of years. They are transitioning from programmatic tasks to project implementation, which will be much more expensive. Nelson stated he would like to know more about the dollar impact and about what they are doing with roads. He asked if they are correlating the stormwater work related to roads with the NPDES permit. Christensen stated they are keeping track of everything and compiling the information. Hutchings stated they are tracking all the road work done in maintenance and operations (M &O) and reporting those costs. They are looking for ways to reduce those costs going forward. It is more difficult to determine the construction costs. The design standards have changed. The road program builds according to those standards. He doesn't track how much of that money goes to creation of stormwater retention facilities or infiltration facilities, as opposed to tarmac. They would have to separate that information project -by- project. Nelson asked if there are specific amounts they can use for stormwater management in road construction, according to law. Christensen stated there is not a specific, legal amount. It's been discussed. At this point, they are talking about designating a certain percent. Surface Water Work Session, 2/16/2010, 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 53 Christensen described the background and project status of BBWARM and Lake Samish. Hutchings stated County staff provided technical assistance on the Lake Samish stormwater plan at the insistence of local residence, similar to Birch Bay. Crawford asked why they don't have a watershed and aquatic management district for Lake Whatcom. Hutchings stated they could. They started debating the benefits of a subzone versus a utility. Crawford stated it seemed at the time like the cost for Lake Whatcom was big enough to require more than the residents who live there. Hutchings stated that's correct. First, the area served by Lake Whatcom is much bigger. Second, the cost of this work is high. Not including those service areas to generate revenue would burden the people in the watershed to pay for it. Third, the permitee is the County, not the flood control zone district. When lawsuits begin and compliance letters arrive, they come to the County, and the County must be prepared to address those problems and finance that work. If there's a disconnect between the wishes of the flood control zone district and the wishes of the County, there is a problem. Therefore, the County assesses for stormwater purposes through a stormwater utility. Christensen stated once there is a plan, there will be an opportunity to apply for grants for that watershed. Kershner asked about certain states claiming rights to rainwater. She asked if Washington State or Whatcom County has decided to own the rainwater. Hutchings stated the State determines all water rights. There has been a question for some time about whether people need a permit to harvest rainwater. The Department of Ecology has been working on a policy for incidental use of rainwater. The person will collect the rainwater and put it back into the ground to infiltrate. It is about intercepting the rainwater and allowing it to go into the ground as opposed to putting it to a beneficial use. It would be disallowed to collect the rainwater and use it to irrigate a farm, for example. Rebecca Craven, Council Policy Analyst, stated any use that interferes with an existing senior water right would also not be allowed. Brenner stated Ecology allows it if people are using less than 5,000 gallons per day. Kershner stated the State claims rights to rainwater, which becomes stormwater. She would like to know whether they can hold individual homeowners more accountable and responsible for paying more money for living in a watershed than another homeowner in the county. Hutchings stated the natural resources program includes 2.7 fulltime equivalent (FTE) employees. One is grant- funded. They have a number of important programs, and use up a small fraction of the water resources budget. Know how that connects to this. When a new project is proposed by one of a variety of ways, the way to evaluate the project against other ongoing activities is through the CWRIP list. Roland Middleton, Public Works Department, described projects that have recently been run through the CWRIP process, including High Creek, Breckenridge Creek at Sorenson Road, Sante Fe Trail in Kendall, and Double Ditch Road. Surface Water Work Session, 2/16/2010, Page 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Hutchings stated none of these things were on the radar for the 2009/2010 budget process. The Council will have to decide on allocating resources because the County staff responds to citizens with technical assistance to solve problems. Over the course of the last few years, they've developed this process to provide that assistance. The process works well. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 12:32 p.m. Please contact the Council Office to obtain an 23 24 25 26 official, signed copy: 360- 676 -6690 or council(g-.o.w hatcom .wa.us Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk Sam Crawford, Council Chair Surface Water Work Session, 2/16/2010, Page 7