HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil February 10 20091
2
3
4
5
6
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
February 10, 2009
Council Chair Seth Fleetwood called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council
Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
Present:
Barbara Brenner
Sam Crawford
Carl Weimer
Laurie Caskey- Schreiber
L. Ward Nelson
FLAG SALUTE
ANNOUNCEMENTS
There were no announcements.
MINUTES
Absent:
Bob Kelly
Brenner moved to approve the minutes items with one amendment to the Regular
County Council for January 13, 2009 minutes.
Motion carried unanimously.
1. SPECIAL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FOR OCTOBER 21, 2008
2. REGULAR COUNTY COUNCIL FOR NOVEMBER 12, 2008
3. REGULAR COUNTY COUNCIL FOR NOVEMBER 25, 2008
4. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FOR JANUARY 13, 2009
5. REGULAR COUNTY COUNCIL FOR JANUARY 13, 2009
6. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FOR JANUARY 27, 2009
7. REGULAR COUNTY COUNCIL FOR JANUARY 27, 2009
OPEN SESSION
The following people spoke:
Kris Ungern, 2095 North Shore Road, submitted and read from his comments (on
file). The Council has ducked its responsibility and made the temporary building
moratorium effectively permanent. The focus on nonconforming structures in the Shoreline
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2009, Page 1
1 Master Plan appears to be a bureaucratic end run around properties that should be
2 grandfathered by virtue of having been in compliance with regulations in effect at the time
3 of original construction. There are arbitrary rules on setback, impervious surface limits, and
4 dock dimension limits that do not address differences in property size, slope, shoreline type,
5 and water depth. The Council approved the changes by resolution, which isn't legal, without
6 even reading the resolution. He asked if the Council will incorporate public comment or pre -
7 decide the final product, which seems to be its normal manner of doing business.
8
9 Bruce Deila, Bellingham, stated he is homeless. Hotels require credit cards to rent a
10 room. That affects different types of people, including those who are homeless, flood
11 victims, university students during school breaks, mortgage crisis victims, and the elderly
12 who are forced out of nursing homes due to rising healthcare costs. He read from a recent
13 article from the Seattle Post- Intelligencer called "Even Elderly are Facing Eviction." Seattle
14 University's closure of its nursing home coincided with the Union Gospel Missiorr's action to
15 evict the homeless from the streets, parks, and libraries and into a day center. When they
16 talk about getting people off the streets, they could be talking about these elderly people
17 who have been forced out. The homeless aren't just undesirables. They're talking about
18 taking away their freedoms. He asked the Council to enact a law that prohibits motels from
19 requiring a credit card to rent a room.
20
21 Brenner stated she contacted a representative from the Homeless Project, who
22 provided her with a list of six to ten motels around Whatcom County that rent without
23 requiring a credit card. She can make that list available. Deila stated the problem is the
24 trend across the country for motels to require credit cards, particularly during the mortgage
25 crisis and a failing economy. The local government needs to take a stand.
26
27 Dennis Jones, 122 Sudden Valley Drive East, Bellingham, stated he observes the
28 watershed in a position with the Cooperative Extension. Seattle University also works with
29 the Franciscans in a truly ecumenical group. They try and get people to find common
30 ground. It is a worldwide effort.
31
32 The interim moratorium on subdivisions in the Lake Whatcom watershed as it is
33 doesn't work well. The land clearing ordinance of November 2003 does tend to work. Move
34 the non - building period from seven months to six months. Look at when the fish are
35 spawning, and move to six months. It's impractical at this time.
36
37 There's no excuse for the County Council to not have paid for a State Environmental
38 Policy Act (SEPA) impact for the Chuckanut Mountain parks district. The Boundary Review
39 Board was forced to turn it down. There is no excuse for 20 -acre parcels on Squalicum
40 Mountain to not be required to have an environmental impact statement (EIS). It is
41 significant. Last, the interim ordinance prohibiting subdivisions in the watershed must
42 continue. It should be tightened up so no one can turn forestland into subdivisions.
43 Tighten it up to deal with five- to twenty -acre parcels.
44
45 Jan Eskola, Glacier Chamber of Commerce Member, stated they request funding from
46 the Lodging Tax funds collected in the Glacier area. The Lodging Tax Advisory Committee
47 did not give them a reasonable opportunity to present their proposal. There was no notice
48 of the meeting. There is no schedule or information on the County website about the
49 committee. No one represents the community and businesses of Glacier to promote
50 tourism. It is a nonprofit corporation registered with the State of Washington with 31
51 members in the Glacier area. The Glacier Chamber of Commerce mission is to provide
52 information about Glacier, and to promote and maintain the uniqueness of their rural
53 community. Tourism is essential. They must promote the area. She described Chamber
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2009, Page 2
1 events. Currently, 15 lodging businesses in the Mt. Baker Foothills pay into the lodging tax.
2 Fourteen of those businesses are located in Glacier. Those tax funds should be distributed
3 to the Glacier Chamber of Commerce. RCW 67.28.187 gives the County Council the
4 authority to grant this request.
5
6 Ellen Baker, Glacier Chamber of Commerce, stated she made a public records
7 request for all the expenditures paid from the fund since the year 2000. From the
8 information she received, many expenses have been paid from that fund that are
9 inappropriate for tourism, such as the printing of Parks Department brochures, expenditures
10 to recipients under contract, operating costs for the Glacier restrooms. The need for the
11 restrooms was a public health concern. In 2008, they paid over $232,000 in Public Works
12 revenue to the County. This operating expense was from the tourism fund. She questions
13 that expenditure. It's wrong. She will put all the details in a follow -up email to the Council.
14 The tax base in the area is over $162 million. Glacier is a viable tourist area. Don't use
15 tourism funds for public health issues.
16
17 Dannon Traxler, 709 Dupont, Bellingham, stated she represents several clients with
18 shoreline properties. Clarify the variance issue. Variances are very difficult to obtain. A
19 person has to prove hardship. The State Department of Ecology (DOE) rarely approves
20 variances.
21
22 She's concerned about the process. Staff recommends passing a resolution tonight,
23 which doesn't make sense if they are going to schedule a public hearing. The purpose of a
24 public hearing is to hear the public's concerns and possibly make changes in response. She
25 asked for an explanation.
26
27 Weimer stated this item is scheduled to be introduced to the Council tonight and a
28 public hearing at the next meeting.
29
30 Traxler asked to schedule the public hearing in March, not February, to provide more
31 time for the public comment period. She didn't know that the public comment period has
32 been open all this time, so the general public didn't know it either. There was no
33 opportunity to comment on DOE's substantive changes, so it would be nice to have
34 adequate time to comment on this amendment package.
35
36 Last fall, the Council directed staff to talk to DOE about the legality of the 150 -foot
37 setbacks. She asked for an update on that issue and whether there have been substantive
38 comments.
39
40 Mary Dickinson, Building Industry Association Governmental Affairs Director, asked
41 why the Council would approve a resolution, not an ordinance, regarding the shoreline
42 amendment package. According to the County Charter, resolutions do not have the force of
43 law. However, those amendments will have the force of law. Staff has taken the
44 opportunity to write entirely new amendments. Section (N) includes a rewrite of part of the
45 critical areas ordinance. If they want to do that, the Shoreline Master Program is not the
46 place to do that. Get County legal staff to write a comprehensive analysis on this resolution
47 issue and the critical areas ordinance in relation to the Anacortes and King County cases.
48 Everyone is confused, so more time would be helpful. The County staff and councilmembers
49 are confused. March would be a better time to do the public hearing. The February 24
50 agenda is packed.
51
52 Bob Wiesen, 3314 Douglas Road, stated the Building and Code Division and Planning
53 Department need a change of attitude. They should ask how to help people instead of how
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2009, Page 3
1 to stop people. People who have a right to do projects are frustrated by being obstructed
2 illegally or inappropriately. The public process is really failing down. The Planning
3 Commission treated the members of the Foothills Subarea Plan planning group atrociously.
4 They won't get various public interests to participate if they discount all that hard work.
5
6 Dave Pros, 1466 Roy Road, submitted a handout (on file). He agrees with Bob
7 Wiesen about the public process. There has been very little public process for the
8 population projection exercise. The public process that has occurred has been disregarded.
9 Encourage public process from the beginning. There has been no public dialog on the X and
10 Y alternatives for the scoping process. The Planning Department should include a cost
11 analysis for growth, at various spots along the range of growth options. Use the projection
12 of 219,000 from the Office of Financial Management (OFM). Using that projection will make
13 the County compliant with the Growth Management Act (GMA) and eligible for funding.
14
15 John Lesow, 317 Madronna Place, stated Mr. Wiesen shouldn't cast aspersions
16 against the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission held a three -hour meeting.
17 There were 58 letters the commissioners had to read before that meeting. Of those, 38
18 were opposed to the majority opinion. Nineteen were in favor of it. The public had a fair
19 shake at that public hearing. Councilmembers should read the minutes of the Planning
20 Commission and decide whether the public was fairly heard. They were.
21
22 Chet Dow, 5491 Woodfern Way,. Bellingham, stated he disagrees with Dave Pros'
23 testimony that the public totally accepts the OFM projection of 219,000. That hasn't been
24 established. All the comments made about public process are well- taken. Consider how to
25 engage the regular people.
26
27
28 PUBLIC HEARINGS
29
30 1. RESOLUTION TO SELL SURPLUS COUNTY PROPERTY BY PUBLIC AUCTION
31 (AB2009 -087A)
32
33 Fleetwood opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public hearing.
34
35 Nelson moved to approve the resolution.
36
37 Motion carried unanimously.
38
39 2. ORDINANCE ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY
40 ZONING ORDINANCE, TITLE 20, TO INCLUDE REGULATIONS AND
41 INCENTIVES THAT RESULT IN THE CREATION OF PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED
42 STREETSCAPES IN URBAN GROWTH AREAS; AND ALSO ADOPTING
43 AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 20.97 TO ADD DEFINITIONS THAT CLARIFY
44 TERMS USED TO DESCRIBE ELEMENTS OF THE STREETSCAPE (AB2008 -398)
45
46 Crawford stated staff found a minor discrepancy about and made a change to the
47 incentive section. The version before the Council has that minor change. People speaking
48 should be aware of it.
49
50 Fleetwood opened the public hearing and the following people spoke:
51
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2009, Page 4
1 Bill Quehrn, Building Industry Association of Whatcom County Executive Director,
2 stated he thanks and commends the Council for accepting amendments last week. Adopt
3 the ordinance.
4
5 Bruce Deila, Bellingham, stated he thanks the Council for making America more
6 pedestrian - friendly. It's difficult to walk around the country without any trails and
7 walkways. Europe has trails and paths so people can walk anywhere. To hike the western
8 coast of America, they have to go around private property and up onto the road in
9 numerous places to navigate the system. In England, one can hike over 600 miles along
10 the coast.
11
12 Dennis Jones, 122 Sudden Valley East, stated he agrees with Mr. Quehrn. Leave
13 flexibility for builders to get the job done. In his experience, the Planning Department is
14 crowded and staff is busy. They're doing their jobs with the resources they have, while
15 staying pleasant. The critical areas ordinance is Title 20 and where regulations have teeth.
16 They can allow greater amounts of pervious surfaces versus impervious surfaces. He
17 worries about the constant harangue against County staff and the Council. People have
18 delayed the Lake Whatcom Management resolution since 1992. It's not done. He would
19 like to help with a moratorium.
20
21 John Lesow, 317 Madrona Place, Point Roberts, submitted a handout (on file). He
22 and Ken Mann drafted this handout in 2005 and put it through the system and the Planning
23 Commission. The concept is helpful to eliminate "apartment-vi lies" on the coming
24 landscape. His examples include successful examples of ways to use dense zoning in the
25 UGAs. He commended Erin Osborn, PDS Staff, for putting together the staff report. The
26 Council should go on a tour of the development in Ladner, British Columbia. Once they
27 have developed walkable communities with front porches and side garages, then they can
28 move forward with developing the waterfront and nearby places to where people don't have
29 to drive. He would like to see that be mandatory.
30
31 Brenner asked if a requirement to recess the garage could cause more impervious
32 surfaces. She asked if this kind of thing be done without increasing costs. She likes the
33 pictures he sent. Lesow described the setbacks in the photos he sent. John Steensma
34 brought up the question of impervious surfaces at the Planning Commission. Erin Osborne
35 addressed that issue. The answer was that the amount of impervious surfaces wasn't that
36 much more.
37
38 Brenner stated the Council received comment from two of the local Cities who
39 thought it is fine. A third local City was not happy, because it felt the County was imposing
40 into its UGA. She asked if staff contacted all the Cities. She asked the reactions from those
41 Cities. Lesow stated he didn't make that contact. Respected developers have commented
42 and support the regulations.
43
44 (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
45
46 Lesow stated this is an opportunity for innovative zoning.
47
48 Brenner asked who made contacts with the cities.
49
50 Crawford stated the Council can ask staff that question after the hearing.
51
52 Ken Mann, 710 E. Maryland Street, stated Mr. Lesow has done great work on this.
53 The principle was not to make aesthetic improvements, although they are aesthetic
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2009, Page 5
1 improvements. Community improvements, not just pedestrian- oriented streetscapes, such
2 as front porches, will put more eyes on the. street and more people interacting. It's safer.
3 Crime is reduced in neighborhoods like this. Hopefully they will get people out of their cars
4 and walking. This is a small step. They're not imposing draconian overlays that will
5 bankrupt builders and first -time homebuyers. The incentives are good. The regulatory
6 steps will nudge them closer in this direction. There isn't a big downside.
7
8 Hearing no one else, Fleetwood closed the public hearing.
9
10 Caskey- Schreiber asked how to reinstate language that was removed.
11
12 Fleetwood stated Councilmember Brenner, Nelson, or Crawford would have to move
13 to reconsider the vote.
14
15 Brenner stated she would like some answers from staff. She likes what she sees.
16 She's having a hard time visualizing that it wouldn't cumulatively create much more
17 impervious surface. She asked if there was any communication with the Cities.
18
19 David Stalheim, Planning and Development Services Department Director, stated the
20 staff sends out any ordinance amendment to neighboring jurisdictions for comment. The
21 letters received. are from those who commented. The City of Lynden provided a verbal
22 comment.
23
24 Mr. Lesow covered the issue of impervious surfaces. They considered impervious
25 surfaces. The buildings are stepped back. Part of the notion that was in the package at one
26 point was to allow buildings to go closer to the street, as compensation for that
27 requirement. They would reduce front yard setbacks for these types of houses, in trade.
28 The garage would be at the same point, but the house might be five feet further forward,
29 for instances.
30
31 Fleetwood stated the Council voted to delete Whatcom County Code (WCC) section
32 20.80.211.
33
34 Crawford stated that language was mandatory, and required in all urban growth
35 areas (UGAs) in Whatcom County, per the Planning Commission recommendation. They've
36 removed the 'mandatory portion and kept the incentives proposed for planned unit
37 developments.
38
39 Stalheim stated setback reductions are in WCC 20.85.109(6) as an incentive. That
40 was the trade -off.
41
42 Brenner stated she wants to table this issue, so they don't have to have another
43 hearing. She'd like to call the Cities.
44
45 Crawford moved to adopt the ordinance. They've taken out the requirement to do
46 this in urban growth areas. The incentives remain: The Planning Commission had a good
47 concept. Using incentives is a much better way to do things. He would support language in
48 the code about yielding the regulatory and design standards in urban growth areas to the
49 adjoining jurisdictions. Encourage the Cities to annex these areas and take total
50 governmental and jurisdictional control over them, rather than having a gray area between
51 County regulation and City regulation. It confounds development practices in those areas.
52 He is willing to allow the Cities to have their say about development standards in these
53 urban environments. No other county has implemented these kinds of design standards.
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2009, Page 6
1 The examples given were city standards. He is leery of the County imposing these kinds of
2 standards.
3
4 Caskey- Schreiber stated two of the Cities that have weighed recognize now that they
5 have ultimate authority by deciding whether to extend services. That's why the Cities aren't
6 concerned. They already have full control.
7
8 Brenner moved to amend the ordinance to reinstate section 20.80.211 and add a
9 sentence, "Thrrdrn`anceshalt ' be rn`,effec tn" UGAhere adj ro nrng ,Ctresapprove „ One or
10 two Cities have already said they approve it. With this amendment, the requirement won't
11 happen unless the Cities want it. She is sensitive about respecting the property that will be
12 City property. They've already talked about using City standards in all UGAs connected to
13 cities. This is an incentive. It is a tool for Cities to put through their own planning process
14 if they want.
15
16 Weimer stated he is fine with the amendment the way it is. This isn't a big
17 regulation that applies to all UGAs. It only applies to short -term planning areas with public
18 water, sewer, and stormwater collection and detention facilities, which is a very small area
19 of the county. He suggested a friendly amendment to motion, ThrsorcErna "nce ",shall be
20 rn, effect rn s "shori terrri, planning areaswhere a'dyginir g Crties approve."
21
22 Brenner restated her motion to reinstate 20.80.211 with added language to
23 .211(l), "...detention facilities and shall be in,, effect rn UGAs in which rng G %trey
24 approve; and...."
25
26 (Clerk's Note: The Council did not vote on this motion to amend.)
27
28 Fleetwood asked how difficult it would be for staff to deal with this condition. He
29 asked how this would work. Stalheim stated it's not clear how the Cities would indicate
30 their approval. He needed the Council to be more specific on how the Cities would indicate
31 their approval. They don't want to ask the Cities to go through a process to adopt County
32 standards. The County could ask the Cities for resolutions to agree to implement these
33 standards.
34
35 Karen Frakes, Prosecutor's Office, stated the use of the word resolution' is always
36 dangerous because it means different things in different places. To many non - charter
37 counties, a resolution is the same as an ordinance. She's not sure what the local Cities call
38 their statements of policy.
39
40 Crawford stated he is against the motion. Councilmember Brenner should withdraw
41 her motion. He agrees in spirit with the intent. To do this properly, they must do
42 something at the level of the Comprehensive Plan, in terms of how the County deals with
43 urban growth areas and what the County's relationships will be with the adjoining Cities.
44 That can be done thoughtfully and methodically. Tagging a specific regulation about a
45 specific issue isn't appropriate. There are many issues to which such a concept could apply.
46 He would encourage the Council to look at this at a higher level. Decide on a policy level
47 whether the County can work with the Cities to assist them in developing streetscapes that
48 meet the needs of their urban design. He disagrees that this would apply to a small area.
49 To begin development in most urban growth areas, they will be short -term planning areas
50 by nature. They will require water and sewer provisions, by nature. This will apply to
51 virtually all the urban growth areas in the county. They don't all have water and sewer
52 today, but the development won't be triggered until water and sewer occurs, and this would
53 apply. He's concerned about minimizing the impact of this.
Whatcorn County Council, 2/10/2009, 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
Nelson stated he's leery of dictating design standards. They're not out in the field
dealing with each and every case. He is in favor of incentives for pedestrian walkways and
increasing the use of people - friendly neighborhoods. He doesn't know what the stormwater
requirements will be in those UGAs. The design standards will incur more expense and
make it more difficult to protect the environment if they start requiring restrictions that
don't fit the site.
Brenner stated the regulations aren't all that tight. Most of her concerns have been
addressed. If a site is part of a city or UGA, there will be stormwater facilities. That's
covered. Cities have to collect the stormwater runoff, wherever it comes from. Her
concerns were about whether there would be more impervious surfaces and about the
Cities. She asked if staff can come up with language to put forward the intent of her
amendment. Stalheim stated staff could. He would like to collaborate with legal counsel
when developing that language.
Brenner moved to hold in Council for two weeks.
Motion to hold in Council carried 4 -2 with Crawford and Nelson opposed.
CONSENT AGENDA
Crawford reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and
moved to approve Consent Agenda items one through four.
Motion to approve Consent Agenda items one through four carried
unanimously.
1. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A LEASE
AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND CASCADE BUSINESS PARK
FOR USE AS A SHERIFF'S OFFICE SATELLITE OFFICE FOR THE TERM
FEBRUARY 1, 2009 THROUGH JANUARY 31, 2010 IN THE AMOUNT OF
$10,164 (AB2009 -104)
2. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND
THE WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE FOR
MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF COOPERATIVELY MANAGED LANDS
(AB2009 -105)
3. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID #09 -06
UPON REVIEW OF ALL BIDS AND THE SELECTION OF THE MOST
APPROPRIATE VENDOR AS DICTATED BY SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE
PARTICULAR JOB FOR THE PURCHASE OF ROCK GRAVEL AND SOIL FOR
COUNTY ROAD MAINTENANCE PROJECTS (AB2009 -106)
4. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO AUTHORIZE THE USE
OF WASHINGTON STATE CONTRACT TO MOTOROLA AND DAY WIRELESS FOR
THE PURCHASE AND INSTALLATION OF RADIO EQUIPMENT FOR SHERIFF'S
VEHICLES IN THE AMOUNT OF APPROXIMATELY $60,000 (AB2009 -107)
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2009, Page 8
1 OTHER ITEMS
2
3 1. ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 21, LAND DIVISION REGULATIONS,
4 REGARDING GENERAL PROVISIONS, EXEMPT LAND DIVISIONS AND
5 BOUNDARY LINE ADJUSTMENTS, SHORT SUBDIVISIONS, PRELIMINARY
6 LONG SUBDIVISIONS, FINAL LONG SUBDIVISIONS, SURVEYS AND
7 DEDICATIONS, AND DEFINITIONS (AB2008 -404A)
8
9 Caskey- Schreiber reported for the Planning and Development Committee. She
10 moved to adopt the ordinance with amendments according to the recommendations in the
11 memo on Council packet pages 70 and 71.
12
13 Crawford moved to amend Whatcom County Code (WCC) section 21.04.150(1)(f)
14 on Council packet page 102, "...as required byWCC 20,7,$."
15
16 Motion to amend carried unanimously.
17
18 Caskey- Schreiber moved to amend the ordinance by approving the recommended
19 amendments in the memo from David Stalheim to the Executive and Council dated February
20 3, 2009 regarding Title 21 Proposed Changes, on Council packet pages 70 and 71.
21
22 Motion to amend carried unanimously.
23
24 Crawford stated he would vote for this ordinance. He has reservations. Through this
25 process, they compromised quite a bit. He appreciates Planning Commissioner Mann for
26 working on this. He appreciates all the staff who worked through this, also. He still has
27 reservations. Mr. Stalheim suggested that the payoff would be a more efficient process in
28 the long run. He hopes the net result of this ordinance would be a certainty that an
29 applicant will be done with the process in about six month once the wetland data is
30 submitted. He's skeptical that will happen, however he will take this at face value.
31
32 Motion to adopt as amended carried unanimously.
33
34 2. APPOINTMENT TO FILL VACANCY ON THE OPEN SPACE ADVISORY
35 COMMITTEE - APPLICANT: TODD SMELTZER (AB2009 -098)
36
37 Brenner moved to appoint Todd Smeltzer by acclamation.
38
39 Motion carried unanimously.
40
41 3. APPOINTMENT TO FILL VACANCIES ON THE SOLID WASTE ADVISORY
42 COMMITTEE— APPLICANTS: CALVIN DENHARTOG (APPLYING FOR WASTE
43 COLLECTION INDUSTRY REPRESENTATIVE POSITION, FULL TERM EXPIRING
44 ON 12/31/2011), ARTHUR REBER, & SHANNON TOMSEN (APPLYING FOR
45 CITIZEN REPRESENTATIVE POSITIONS, ONE CITIZEN POSITION TO FILL
46 PARTIAL TERM EXPIRING ON 12/31/2009, AND ONE CITIZEN POSITION TO
47 FILL FULL TERM EXPIRING ON 12/31/2011) (AB2009 -102)
48
49 Weimer stated applicants Renee Coe and Shannon Tomsen are both in the group
50 that challenged solid waste stuff to the Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC). He
51 sent them both an email and asked them which of the two they preferred to be on the Solid
52 Waste Advisory Committee (SWAC), if it made a difference to the Council. If they want to
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2009, Page 9
1 split the citizen positions, Renee Coe was the one applicant that they preferred the Council
2 to appoint.
3
4 Crawford stated another, unnamed applicant applied for this committee a couple of
5 weeks ago. He asked if there is litigation by Renee Coe and others, also.
6
7 Weimer stated they have a complaint to the UTC against the hauler in Point Roberts.
8
9 Crawford asked about the issue with the applicant a few weeks ago.
10
11 Weimer stated the County is in a legal situation with that applicant.
12
13 Crawford asked if the County is not in a legal situation with these applicants.
14
15 Weimer stated the County isn't in a legal situation with them.
16
17 Fleetwood moved to nominate all applicants for the positions to which they've
18 applied.
19
20 Brenner stated some of the councilmembers asked some of these citizens to apply
21 for the SWAC, because they seemed to have a wealth of knowledge. Arthur Reber just
22 moved to the area. Shannon Tomsen and Renee Coe have a history of involvement. She
23 likes that these two can hit the ground running.
24
25 Waste Collection Industry Representative
26
27 Fleetwood stated there is one applicant to this position, Calvin DenHartog.
28
29 Motion to appoint Calvin DenHartog carried unanimously.
30
31 Citizen Representatives
32
33 Crawford stated the applicants are Renee Coe, Arthur Reber, and Shannon Tomsen.
34 He voted for Reber and Tomsen.
35
36 Brenner stated that the person who gets the most votes would be appointed to the
37 full term.
38
39 Weimer voted for Reber and Coe.
40
41 Fleetwood voted for Coe and Reber.
42
43 Brenner voted for Reber and Coe.
44
45 Nelson voted for Reber and Tomsen.
46
47 Caskey- Schreiber voted for Reber and Coe.
48
49 The Council appointed Arthur Reber to the full term position and Renee Coe to the
50 partial -term position.
51
52 4. REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE'S APPOINTMENT OF
53 KEN OPLINGER TO THE LODGING TAX ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AB2009 -109)
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2009, Page 10
1
2
Crawford moved to confirm the appointment.
3
4
Motion carried unanimously.
5
6
5.
REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE'S REAPPOINTMENT
7
OF SYLVIA THORPE AND PHIL SHARPE TO THE WHATCOM COUNTY ETHICS
8
COMMISSION (AB2009 -110)
9
10
Crawford moved to confirm the reappointments.
11
12
Motion carried unanimously.
13
14
Brenner stated she would like an update on the Ethics Commission.
15
16
6.
REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE'S APPOINTMENT OF
17
STEVEN BURGER TO THE SUBSTANCE ABUSE ADVISORY BOARD (AB2009-
18
111)
19
20
Crawford moved to confirm the appointment.
21
22
Motion carried unanimously.
23
24
7.
REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE'S APPOINTMENT OF
25
JOEL BERGSBAKEN AND THE REAPPOINTMENT OF BILL ELFO AND SHIRLEY
26
FORSLOF TO THE AMERICAN'S WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) COMPLIANCE
27
COMMITTEE (AB2009 -112)
28
29
Brenner moved to confirm the appointments.
30
31
Motion carried unanimously.
32
33
34
INTRODUCTION ITEMS
35
36
Caskey- Schreiber moved to accept the Introduction Items, including the substitute
37
for Introduction Item three.
38
39
Motion carried unanimously.
40
41
1.
RECEIPT OF APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION ON APL2008 -0023
42
FILED BY PHILIP BURI, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF BELLINGHAM,
43
REGARDING SEWER SERVICE TO NORTH SHORE ESTATES (AB2009 -100)
44
45
2.
ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2009 WHATCOM COUNTY BUDGET, SECOND
46
REQUEST, IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,084,653 (AB2009 -113)
47
48
3.
RESOLUTION DECLARING THE COUNCIL'S APPROVAL AND INTENTION TO
49
ADOPT THE FEBRUARY 10, 2009 AMENDMENTS TO WHATCOM COUNTY
50
CODE, TITLE 23, - SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (AB2008 -303C)
51
52
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2009, 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
OTHER BUSINESS
Brenner stated she scheduled two short, generic discussions in the Public Works
Committee about some issues that have come forward. Yesterday she received a copy of a
memo from the Public Works Director, who expressed concern about the type of agenda
items appearing on the Public Works and Safety Committee agenda. She reviewed the
agendas for the past year. All the items scheduled in the Public Works Committee have
come from the Public Works Director or Executive, except for three items. Two of those
three items didn't involve the Public Works Department. There was one item in over a year
that she put on the agenda, which didn't come from the administration, that required a
response from the Public Works Department
In the memo, the director mentions stop sign issues. She has been forwarding a
stop sign issue to the Public Works Director's office. She's received and forwarded
complaints from citizens on Brown Road and Vista Drive, who said they didn't get a
response from the administration. She read from her comments to those residents, which
expressed her belief that Public Works staff was busy responding to-recent flooding`. 1 She
was shocked to see the memo from the Public Works Director to the Executive.
Caskey- Schreiber stated there are a lot of little things that Councilmember Brenner
brings forward. To be respectful of staff time, Councilmember Brenner could email staff
with a list of things to talk about. Staff can look at their schedule and try to find a good
time when staff is available to address all the items at once, rather than being reactive to
one citizen complaint at a time. The Public Works staff is in a bad situation trying to recover
from all of the damage the County incurred with the recent flood and snow events. She
understands both perspectives. Find a way to make the committee more supportive of
them while helping the public. It sounds like the staff wants more time to prepare.
Brenner stated the only reason she scheduled these discussions was because there
was already an item scheduled on the committee agenda from the Public Works
Department. At the last minute, that item was transferred. She wouldn't have scheduled
anything otherwise. She has been respectful. As long as staff was going to be at the
committee meeting anyway, she thought they could have a generic discussion.
Councilmembers Kelly and Nelson were also interested to have that discussion, so she
wasn't off on a tangent. She has been trying to be respectful, and thought she was doing a
good job. Executive Kremen can tell her what to do better next time.
REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS
Caskey- Schreiber stated the flood tour she took in the Acme Valley showed damage
that was very shocking. It made her think twice about where the County allows homes to
be built.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side B.)
Caskey- Schreiber continued to state that she doesn't know what course of action the
County has available to assist them, but it's frightening.
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2009, Page 12
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 8:36 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
The Council approved these minutes on March 17 , 2009.
O .• W HA '
• "' O •
Canao�a;@�', Counc_# Clerk
•9s — o�:
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
r
Whatcom County Council, 2/10/2009, Page 13