HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinance January 13 20091 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
2 Finance and Administrative Services Committee
3
4 January 13, 2009
5
6 Committee Chair L. Ward Nelson called the meeting to order at 11:00 a.m. in the
7 Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
8
9 Present: Absent:
10 Sam Crawford None
11 Bob Kelly
12
13 Also Present:
14 Laurie Caskey- Schreiber
15 Carl Weimer
16 Barbara Brenner
17 Seth Fleetwood
18
19
20 COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
21
22 1. ORDINANCE INCREASING DISTRICT COURT'S PETTY CASH FUND TO A
23 TOTAL OF $450 (AB2008 -450)
24
25 Crawford moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
26
27 Motion carried unanimously.
28
29
30 COUNCIL "CONSENT AGENDA" ITEM
31
32 1. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
33 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE WASHINGTON
34 ASSOCIATION OF SHERIFFS AND POLICE CHIEFS FOR A GRANT TO SUPPORT
35 .5 FTE POSITION WITH THE DRUG TASK FORCE FOR 2009 IN THE AMOUNT
36 OF $23,355 (AB2009 -031)
37
38 Kelly moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
39
40 Nelson asked if an ongoing grant will fund this position.
41
42 Carey James, Undersheriff, stated they have approval for this year only. They are
43 trying to get the grant again next year.
44
45' Motion carried unanimously.
46
47 2. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A LEASE
48 AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND PROPERTYWRX FOR THE
49 RESIDENTIAL LEASE FOR THE POINT ROBERTS RESIDENT DEPUTY IN THE
50 AMOUNT OF $11,595 (AB2009 -032)
51
52 Crawford moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
53
54 Motion carried unanimously.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 1/13/2009, Page 1
1
2 3. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
3 SERVICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE WHATCOM
4 HUMANE SOCIETY FOR THE PROVISION OF ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES
5 FOR AN ANNUAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $505,419.49 (AB2009 -033)
6
7 Kelly moved to recommend approval to the full Council with the replacement page.
8
9 Caskey- Schreiber asked how much is budgeted for this service in 2009.
10
11 Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, handed out information (on file) on the animal
12 control budget.
13
14 Nelson stated the budget doesn't include the cost of the building and vehicles, which
15 the County owns. Desler stated that is correct. The County pays the cost of maintaining
16 and operating the vehicles.
17
18 Nelson stated the County didn't pay for the building with the previous animal control
19 provider. Desler stated the County purchased the building in 2006.
20
21 Nelson asked if the County is receiving more service than it received in 2006. Desler
22 stated it is. More animal control officers are on the road. Many more people are in the
23 shelter handling the animals.
24
25 Brenner asked the animal control budget for 2008. Desler stated the County budget
26 was $569,000 for 2009.
27
28 Nelson stated he supported this item, but they have to start considering the cost of
29 this service to the community. He can't continue to approve these increased costs. The
30 Council needs to reconsider the level of service it will provide to the community.
31
32 Caskey- Schreiber asked about potential additional revenue. Desler stated potential
33 additional revenue may total about $12,000. About $100,000 in revenue will come in from
34 fees. The administration will ask for an amendment if the Council doesn't approve the
35 proposed regulation changes, which would bring in more revenue.
36
37 Crawford stated he doesn't support the contract. Overall, comparable counties
38 spend much less per capita than Whatcom County on animal control services. In addition,
39 the County owns and provides the facility and vehicles, including maintenance. Animal
40 control costs have spiraled out of control. The County is spending over $500,000 per year
41 for this service, and is being told this is the only option. There are other options. This is
42 excessive, especially in this financial time.
43
44 Brenner stated she supports the Humane Society, but the County can't afford to
45 spend more money at this time. There are many things in the contract that can be changed
46 to reduce costs and save the Humane Society time. She will support the contract at this
47 time, but she won't support adding anything else. She would like the County to continue
48 with the Humane Society if the budget stays flat.
49
50 Nelson asked if there are ways to revisit the types of services the County wants to
51 provide in rural Whatcom County.
52
53 Caskey- Schreiber stated the Humane Society has handled more animals than ever,
54 including large animals, partly due to the tough economic times. Before, there wasn't a lot
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 1/13/2009, Page 2
1 of accountability. Now there is more open accounting and factual licensing. Eventually,
2 they should see those numbers decline because more animals will be spayed and neutered.
3 Eventually, this problem should dissipate somewhat. There is also an increasing population
4 in the county, including more pets.
5
6 Nelson stated there should be different levels of animal control services for urban
7 areas and rural areas. For instance, cat licensing should be different in rural and urban
8 setting. Another issue is licensing work dogs in rural areas.
9
10 Brenner stated a bigger difference is having fewer hours spent on patrolling and
11 providing shelter for rural areas. Also, they had a very long discussion about rural versus
12 urban services. At that time, the Council concluded that anything more dense than one unit
13 per five acres (R5A) requires that dogs don't run loose. She's not sure things will get better
14 if loose dogs are picked up, and someone can't afford to get their dog back. Instead, beef
15 up the regulations regarding potentially dangerous dogs to include damage or potential
16 damage to property. Focusing just on loose dogs will take a lot of time. The County could
17 contract with a local attorney to deal specifically with animal control issues that come before
18 the court, so those cases wouldn't be put in line behind hundreds of other cases. The
19 problem is with enforcement of laws they already have on the books. She can't support
20 increased funding at this time.
21
22 Nelson asked if the Humane Society has evaluated services provided. He is
23 concerned about escalating costs.
24
25 Lori Daddio, Executive's Office consultant, stated animal control officers don't patrol,
26 the county looking for loose dogs. They only respond to complaint- driven calls. They need
27 effective animal control. Not as many calls are coming into the Executive's Office as when
28 the previous service provider was contracted. There is a level of service that is being
29 handled and addressed by the Humane Society.
30
31 Nelson stated he gets more calls now than from ever before, from people who
32 complain the cost increases. Daddio stated that's what happens when citizens demand a
33 certain level of service. They have to pay for that level of service to meet those
34 expectations.
35
36 Nelson asked if they need this level of service. Daddio stated that's up to the Council
37 and Executive. The Humane Society indicated it is not willing to lessen its level of service.
38
39 Weimer asked if anyone has analyzed Councilmember Crawford's per capita cost
40 comparison with other counties.
41
42 Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated they gathered some information. In
43 many cases, those other counties don't have the same operating capacity or number of
44 animal control officers. Those counties are making budget cuts to animal control. He
45 looked also at the cost of services in the cities. The Humane Society raises a large amount
46 of money through fundraising, and applies those funds to the services it provides through
47 animal control contracts with the cities. Therefore, the cities pay a lower cost. However,
48 the Humane Society is not willing to raise more money to apply to a County contract, so the
49 County has to pay a larger amount for Humane Society services.
50
51 Weimer stated the Humane Society raised $1 million in 2006, but none of that
52 money is applied to County services. Desler stated that is correct.
53
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 1/13/2009, Page 3
1 Penny Cistero, Humane Society Executive Director, stated the Humane Society is
2 leasing a farm in the County to house the large animals it has gotten through the County
3 program. Previously, the animals where housed at the livestock barn or auction house in
4 Lynden or Everson. They have received 27 horses in the last year. They need a place to
5 house them and someone to take care of them. The Humane Society has absorbed 90
6 percent of the cost of the large animal program when it took over the County contract. It
7 requires a lot of veterinary care. It costs $400 to $500 to euthanize a horse. The Humane
8 Society is contributing its own fundraising money to the County program. The County
9 contract does not require the Humane Society to provide veterinary care to the stray
10 animals past their 72 animal hold. The Humane Society pays for surgery and rehabilitative
11 care for animals needing care beyond the first 72 hours. That's not reflected in the budget
12 reports because it is on the Society's books, not the County books.
13
14 Weimer stated that ought to be reflected in what the County sees, so they know
15 what service the County is really getting. Cistero stated she can provide a second outline of
16 the cost the organization absorbs, because the County isn't willing to pay for it. When she
17 spoke at the last County Council meeting about this budget contract, she said that 80
18 percent of the cost goes to personnel. If they decrease the staffing levels, the level of care
19 the animals receive will lessen. They are at a minimum staffing level as it is. The cost -per-
20 capita survey doesn't take into consideration that the County has a stand -alone program.
21 The City of Bellingham and other cities all get to share certain costs of the Williamson Way
22 shelter. Whatcom County has to pay the costs, whether the Humane Society provides the
23 service or the County provides its own service. Also, Whatcom County is over 2,000 square
24 miles. They require staffing levels to meet the needs of the County. She has three full -time
25 officers, a part -time officer, and a manager. The County wants coverage 24 hours per day,
26 seven days per week, which means they also require an officer on -call in the evening.
27 Humane Society employees don't receive as much salary as a County employee.
28
29 Weimer stated he agrees that the Sheriff's Office can't provide the service for the
30 same cost as the Humane Society. He asked how many unlicensed dogs there are in the
31 county. Cistero stated they won't know that information unless they canvass the county.
32
33 Nelson stated about 10 to 20 percent of the dogs are licensed.
34
35 Cistero stated their licensing program increased in the last year. They don't have
36 the resources to canvass the county.
37
38 Brenner stated she doesn't expect the economy to get better. There may be lots of
39 little ways that they can get people to take more responsibility for animals they have and
40 find, rather than dump the problem on the Humane Society. At some point, there will be no
41 money, if they're not careful. They have to do something. There is only so much the
42 County can do. Health care for people is being cut back. She loves animals, but she asked
43 how they are going to raise this cost when they are reducing health care costs for people.
44 This is not about the Humane Society services. She hopes the Humane ,Society realizes
45 that, and works with the County to reduce costs. Cistero stated the Humane Society cut a
46 part -time position and absorbed the cost of another person's hours. The current staffing
47 level they have is the minimum possible. There are things to change in the ordinance that
48 will enable the Humane Society to disposition an animal prior to the case getting to court.
49 They have done that with the County Prosecutor, to mitigate the cost of caring for the
50 animals.
51
52 Nelson stated he has trouble adjusting to developing urban levels of animal control
53 service in the rural area. Cistero stated they must respond to complaints and injured
54 animals whether it's in an urban area or rural area. There is a cost associated with that.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 1/13/2009, Page 4
1
2 Caskey- Schreiber stated the councilmembers have different opinions about the level
3 of care the County should provide to animals. The Humane Society level of care has been
4 exceptional. She supports the licensing program, and hopes they build that program.
5 There are urban levels of density in rural areas. Many counties on the per- capita
6 comparable analysis have horrific reputations for service to the animal population. This is
7 what they need to do for now. Cistero stated the 2008 budget was based on servicing
8 1,500 animals. At the close of 2008, the County received 2,460 animals. The 2009 budget
9 is projected to serve 2,000 animals. The previous contractor did not provide the level of
10 service necessary for the volume of animals.
11
12 Nelson stated he heard that the County facility was too cramped, and now they've
13 taken in another 1,000 animals.
14
15 Brenner stated she believes in the Humane Society. If they don't do something now,
16 it can get worse. They have to work together to compromise.
17
18 Fleetwood stated the Council already had the policy discussion of level of service
19 during the budget process.
20
21 Motion carried 2 -1 with Crawford opposed.
22
23 4. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A LEASE
24 AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE WHATCOM HUMANE
25 SOCIETY FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING ANIMAL CONTROL AND
26 SHELTER SERVICES AT 1661 BAKER CREEK PLACE (AB2009 -034)
27
28 Crawford moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
29
30 Motion carried 2 -1 with Crawford opposed.
31
32 S. RESOLUTION CANCELING UNCOLLECTIBLE PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES
33 (AB2009 -035)
34
35 Kelly moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
36
37 Motion carried unanimously.
38
39 6. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID #08 -101
40 TO LOW BIDDER DIEHL FORD FOR A REPLACEMENT CAB AND CHASSIS WITH
41 DUMP BODY IN THE AMOUNT OF $52,316.96 (AB2009 -036)
42
43 Crawford moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
44
45 Brenner asked about keeping equipment longer during a down economy. This truck
46 has just over 120,000 thousand miles on it. The County has an incredible maintenance and
47 operations department. She asked why the County is getting_ rid of the truck at this point.
48
49 Eric Schlehuber, Public Works Department, stated the typical replacement schedule
50 is six years or 80,000 to 100,000 miles.
51
52 (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A)
53
54 Schlehuber stated this truck is eight years old and has 120,000 miles.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 1/13/2009, Page 5
1
2 Brenner stated that it seems too soon to surplus this truck.
3
4 Crawford stated a lot of the mileage on personal vehicles is freeway miles, which is
5 easier on a vehicle. However, County vehicles does little of that. A mileage of 125,000
6 miles on a County vehicle could equate to something higher on a personal vehicle.
7 -
8 During a recent snow event, someone was concerned that one piece of County
9 equipment is a dedicated sander, used only during snow events, instead of a dump truck
10 with an attachment that would be more versatile. Schlehuber stated they use that truck all
11 year long for chip sealing, in addition to the winter months. All the plumbing to the pre -wet
12 system is integral to the truck.
13
14 The truck they're purchasing is a diesel truck. The truck being surplused is a gas
15 truck. The life on the new truck will be longer. They will try to get 150,000 to 200,000
16 thousand miles and eight to nine years on the new truck.
17
18 Caskey- Schreiber stated this was included in the budget. The Public Works
19 Department did an awesome job with snow removal. Approve the request.
20
21 Motion carried unanimously.
22
23 7. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
24 PURCHASE, OF AN ANNUAL SUPPLY (ON AN AS NEEDED BASIS) OF
25 HERBICIDES UTILIZING WASHINGTON. STATE CONTRACT; VENDOR UAP, IN
26 THE AMOUNT OF $50,000 (AB2009 -037)
27
28 Crawford moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
29
30 Motion carried unanimously.
31
32 S. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
33 PURCHASE OF AN ANNUAL SUPPLY OF GUARDRAIL UTILIZING
34 WASHINGTON STATE CONTRACT; VENDOR CORAL SALES, IN THE AMOUNT
35 OF $50,000 (AB2009 -038)
36
37 Kelly moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
38
39 Motion carried unanimously.
40
41 9. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
42 PURCHASE OF AN ANNUAL SUPPLY (ON AN AS NEEDED BASIS) OF ASPHALT
43 PRODUCTS UTILIZING WASHINGTON STATE CONTRACT; VENDORS ARE
44 ALBINA ASPHALT, MCASPHALT LTD., AND SPECIAL ASPHALT PRODUCTS, IN
45 THE AMOUNT OF $40,000 (AB2009 -039)
46
47 Nelson moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
48
49 Motion carried unanimously.
50
51 10. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
52 PURCHASE OF AUTOBODY REPAIR SERVICES UTILIZING WASHINGTON
53 STATE CONTRACT (ON AN AS NEEDED BASIS); VENDOR IS CEI GROUP,
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 1/13/2009, 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
54
WITH GITT'S AUTOBODY, IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $35,000
(AB2009 -040)
Nelson moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
Motion carried unanimously.
11. EXTENSION OF THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT REGARDING ANNEXATION
AND DEVELOPMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE CITY OF
BELLINGHAM THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2009 (AB2009 -041)
Crawford moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
Brenner stated that when the lines or services are extended, they should be paid by
the developer or City. The interlocal agreements should include that provision.
Nelson asked when the City approved the agreement.
David Stalheim, Planning and Development Services Department Director, stated the
City passed the interlocal agreement last night. Last time this was brought up at the
Planning Committee, he understood that Councilmember Brenner was going to write
something up for the Planning Committee. He hasn't seen that proposal. Any specifics
about what should go into the interlocal agreement should be put in writing. County staff
will work with the City.
Brenner stated she thought this would be scheduled for the Planning Committee, and
they would work out wording in the Planning Committee. She didn't know she was
supposed to write wording, but she could. This agreement is an extension of the existing
agreement, to the end of the year. The County staff intended to have a new interlocal
agreement by this time, but now they're working on the urban growth area. At some point,
they anticipate creating an entire new interlocal agreement. He welcomes any new ideas.
He would like to see them in writing.
Brenner stated she wants to make sure people aren't forced out of their homes by
having costs put on them because someone else wants to develop. That would take one
sentence. Stalheim stated he doesn't know how that fits into annexation. Councilmember
Brenner needs to articulate how that fits into the annexation procedures.
Nelson stated that has nothing to do with this extension. Stalheim stated that's
correct.
Benner asked if, in the future, services won't be extended anywhere in an urban
growth area (UGA) without annexation. Stalheim stated that's the City's policy.
Brenner stated it does have to do with what's in the UGA, before annexation.
Crawford stated move forward with this extension. They can work on a new
interlocal agreement. Councilmember Brenner has brought this up before. He asked for
examples, by property owner. He would like to know who is bearing costs that they
otherwise wouldn't bear.
Nelson stated a person with a home on a half acre to an acre could be developed into
several lots.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 1/13/2009, Page 7
1 Brenner stated that if that happens in an area near someone else, that neighbor
2 must pay a cost. That's what happened on Bakerview Road.
3
4 Nelson stated the property owners got hit with a local improvement district (LID) fee
5 for doing nothing. People have lost their homes. They must be sure they're looking at all
6 possible problems that may occur with annexation of urban growth areas.
7
8 Motion carried unanimously.
9
10 12. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
11 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND CATHOLIC COMMUNITY
12 SERVICES RECOVERY CENTER TO PROVIDE SUBSTANCE ABUSE EVALUATION
13 AND SERVICES UNDER THE CDDA PROGRAM, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO
14 EXCEED $30,000 (AB2009 -042)
15
16 Crawford moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
17
18 Motion carried unanimously.
19
20 13. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
21 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND WHATCOM VOLUNTEER
22 CENTER TO PROVIDE VOLUNTEER SERVICES TO COUNTY OFFICES AND
23 SERVICE LOCATIONS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY IN THE AMOUNT OF
24 $35,000 (AB2009 -043)
25
26 Crawford moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
27
28 Motion carried unanimously.
29
30 14. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
31 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND BELLINGHAM WHATCOM
32 CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY TO PROVIDE FUNDING FOR
33 ADVERTISING AND PROMOTION OF THE ANNUAL SKI TO SEA FESTIVAL, IN
34 THE AMOUNT OF $29,000 (AB2009 -044)
35
36 Nelson moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
37
38 Motion carried unanimously.
39
40 15. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
41 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE MT. BAKER FOOTHILLS
42 CHAMBER OF COMMERCE TO PROVIDE FUNDING TO PROMOTE TOURISM, IN
43 THE AMOUNT OF $52,750 (AB2009 -045)
44
45 Crawford stated the Glacier Chamber of Commerce feels that some of this money
46 should be given to them. He asked for a review of the process by which the decision was
47 made to give this amount to the Mt. Baker Foothills Chamber of Commerce. According to
48 the Glacier Chamber of Commerce, they were excluded.
49
50 Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated the Glacier Chamber of Commerce was
51 excluded to an extent. There were two proposals before the Lodging Tax Advisory
52 Committee. There was extensive discussion about the services that are provided and the
53 conflict that exists between the two groups. The advisory committee, which is defined in
54 the law, unanimously made the recommendation.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 1/13/2009, Page 8
1
2 Crawford stated he supports the Mt. Baker Chamber of Commerce, and he'll support
3 this. There is a lot of discord up there amongst a significant number of businesses. Be
4 aware that the County is sort of taking sides. Businesses in Glacier feel alienated by this
5 process.
6
7 Weimer asked if they can get a copy of the Glacier Chamber of Commerce proposal
8 before the evening meeting. Desler stated he will provide that information. The Mt. Baker
9 Chamber of Commerce received a $1 million grant to build a visitor's center. There is a
10 significant investment being made by other agencies.
11
12 Crawford stated the State Department of Transportation (DOT) gave the Chamber
13 $800,000 for the purchase of the property.
14
15 Brenner stated the County shouldn't get in the middle of discord between the two
16 agencies. They should work it out themselves. If there are too many business associations,
17 no one will get enough funding to do anything.
18
19 Nelson moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
20
21 Motion carried 2 -1 with Kelly opposed.
22
23 16. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
24 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND NORTHWEST REGIONAL
25 COUNCIL TO PROVIDE FUNDING FOR THE LONELINESS AND ISOLATION
26 PROGRAM, IN THE AMOUNT OF $20,000 (AB2009 -046)
27
28 Nelson moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
29
30 Motion carried 2 -1 with Crawford opposed.
31
32 17. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
33 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE WHATCOM COUNTY
34 COMMISSION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE FOR FUNDING SUPPORT, IN
35 THE AMOUNT OF $45,000 (AB2009 -047)
36
37 Crawford moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
38
39 Motion carried unanimously.
40
41 18. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
42 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND NORTHWEST REGIONAL
43 COUNCIL, BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD, TO PROVIDE FUNDING SUPPORT, IN
44 THE AMOUNT OF $18,000 (AB2009 -048)
45
46 Nelson moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
47
48 Motion carried unanimously.
49
50 19. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
51 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND BELLINGHAM WHATCOM
52 COUNTY TOURISM FOR FUNDING TO PROVIDE SERVICES TO PROMOTE
53 TOURISM, IN THE AMOUNT OF $165,600 (AB2009 -049)
54
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 1/13/2009, Page 9
1 Kelly moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
2
3 Motion carried unanimously.
4
5 20. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
6 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE CITY OF BELLINGHAM
7 FOR USE OF THE PLANTATION RIFLE RANGE FOR FIREARMS
8 QUALIFICATIONS FOR COMMISSIONED AND NON - COMMISSIONED
9 BELLINGHAM POLICE DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL, IN THE AMOUNT OF
10 $25,566.50 (AB2009 -050)
11
12 Crawford moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
13
14 Motion carried unanimously.
15
16 21. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO SIGN AN
17 AMENDMENT TO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT . BETWEEN WHATCOM
18 COUNTY AND THE CITY OF SUMAS FOR ANNEXATION, TO EXTEND THE
19 EXISTING AGREEMENT THROUGH JANUARY 31, 2010 (AB2009 -054)
20
21 Crawford moved to recommend approval to the full (Council.
22 1
23 Motion carried unanimously.
24
25 22. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
26 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT
27 AND DIKING DISTRICT #2 FOR REPAIR OF THE LEE LEVEE NEAR NUGENT'S
28 CORNER (AB2009 -072) (Council acting as the Whatcom County Flood
29 Control Zone District Board of Supervisors)
30
31 Crawford moved to recommend approval to the Board of Supervisors.
32
33 Brenner stated this is great. She asked why they aren't pushing for the State to
34 promote federal government assistance with flood problems. She asked why the Governor
35 hasn't yet contacted the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
36
37 Frank Abart, Public Works Department Director, stated the Army Corps of Engineers
38 is heavily involved. It is contributing about 80 percent. The Army Corps of Engineers
39 focuses on the levees, which is what this is about. There has been a lot of discussion at the
40 State level related to FEMA interests. There is a process in place for the County's
41 emergency management group to report to the State's emergency management group
42 regarding official declarations.
43
44 Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated that he's confident they will meet those
45 parameters around the declarations.
46
47 Abart stated this will come forward later. The Diking District would like to be the
48 sponsor of this particular project. The Corps concurs, so the County can accelerate this
49 work. They can get the work done all at once, rather than wait until this summer.
50
51 Caskey- Schreiber asked what's going on with North Lake Samish Road. Abart stated
52 they moved forward with work before the permit process, because of the emergency
53 declaration. The County has contracted for emergency repairs to stabilize the road and the
54 utilities.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 1/13/2009, 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
Motion carried unanimously.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION
1. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING
WHATCOM COUNTY CODE SECTION 6.04, ANIMAL CONTROL, INCLUDING
THE ADDITION OF NEW KENNEL LICENSES (AB2008 -410)
Lori Daddio, Executive Office consultant, referenced her handout (on file), submitted
earlier. They are trying to develop a likely proposal before it goes to a public hearing.
She's received many comments, so she withdraws the ordinance as submitted earlier. They
will amend and resubmit it before the next agenda deadline. There have been many
inaccuracies spread about what this ordinance would do. She read from the handout
regarding trespassing dogs and the process for contested hearing. They would like
feedback from the councilmembers.
Brenner stated she would not say that some of the statements made by the citizens
were totally incorrect. Regarding trespassing dogs, the County should instead make the
regulation on dangerous and potentially dangerous dog ordinance stronger. It will cost a lot
of money if someone can call for an animal control response just because a dog is on their
property. If a dog is a danger to a person, animal, or to property, she can justify a
response, but not if a dog is just crossing a property. Work within the law they already
have.
Crawford read the definition of a dangerous dog, according to the Whatcom County
Code.
Brenner stated add language to that definition about a dog damaging property. She
doesn't want to get in the middle of any fight that may be occurring between neighbors.
Daddio stated a frequent complaint is that neighbor dogs are frequently on someone's
property, using it as a bathroom. The people complaining don't want that to happen. They
don't want to have a dog or have to clean up after a dog. When they call the Humane
Society, they get angry that the animal control officer can't pick up the dog when it's on
private property.
Brenner stated she understands. In a perfect world, no one should have to put up
with anything they don't like. The question is how far they want to go in terms of level of
service. Daddio stated they get those calls, and the Humane Society has to respond. This
regulation closes the gap so the animal control officers can do something when they
respond.
Kelly asked, if this would allow animal control officers to move onto private property
to enforce something without the owner's permission. Daddio stated it would not. The
property owner would have to call and ask animal control to respond and come onto the
property to remove a trespassing dog.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side 8.)
Kelly asked if enforcement officers would be allowed to come onto his property and
impound his dog. Daddio stated they would not. This would allow animal control officers to
inform him about a complaint about his dog going onto neighbor properties. If the animal
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 1/13/2009, Page 11
1 goes onto neighboring properties again, and the dog is on those properties when the animal
2 control officers arrive, the officers can impound the dog.
3
4 Fleetwood asked about the inaccuracies. Daddio stated she's heard it said that all of
5 Whatcom County was going to have leash law, dogs would not be permitted in any parks,
6 and a dog with puppies needed to have an enthusiast license. There were other
7 inaccuracies.
8
9 Brenner stated she heard many issues that were accurate. She asked why an officer
10 would have to respond to a loose dog on someone else's property. She asked if there is a
11 State or federal law that requires that response. Daddio stated that if the Humane Society
12 gets a call on a compliant about a loose dog, they have to respond.
13
14 Brenner stated the officers can talk to the person on the phone to find out if the dog
15 is dangerous or damaging in any way. If not, the officers can inform the caller that the
16 Humane Society doesn't respond to animals wandering on someone else's property. Daddio
17 stated that's what they do now.
18
19 Brenner stated don't change that. Ms. Daddio said they have to respond. Respond if
20 there is a potential danger, but not if the dog is just wandering onto a neighboring property.
21 Daddio stated they get calls if a dog goes onto a neighboring property every day, several
22 times a day, to go to the bathroom. That is one example of calls they get.
23
24 Brenner stated that add a clause about doing damage to property. Daddio stated
25 that is damaging for some people.
26
27 Caskey- Schreiber stated the Humane Society can't arbitrarily decide which laws to
28 enforce. Most people won't complain if a dog passes through a neighboring yard. They
29 need to educate people about being accountable for their animals. They should have a
30 fenced yard or a property that is large enough that the animal won't leave the property. Or,
31 the animals should be supervised at all times. This proposal makes the processes clear cut.
32 She approves the proposal. Daddio stated that currently, the Code doesn't have any teeth
33 to do any enforcement, according to the Prosecutor's Office.
34
35 Nelson stated they have a choice. As they allow more of this activity, the more
36 business the Humane Society will get and the more funding they will need. It will result in a
37 higher level of service. This reflects the attitude of establishing urban levels of service in
38 the rural areas. They must have a balance. He understands the argument about neighbor
39 dogs, but the solution is for neighbors to talk, not to call the Humane Society. The more
40 government does for the citizens, the less the citizens will do for themselves. The
41 government can educate people. That's its role. Daddio stated there are parts of
42 unincorporated Whatcom County that aren't rural.
43
44 Nelson stated he is against those types of neighborhoods, because they create an
45 expectation of urban levels of service that the County can't provide.
46
47 Brenner stated that in any unincorporated area that is more dense than, the rural,
48 one unit per five acres (R5A) zone, there is already a law that doesn't allow a dog to be off
49 a property without a leash. That's similar to trespass law. They can tweak that law. This is
50 a whole new law for countywide.
51
52 Nelson stated they won't get a lot of complaints in areas that are less dense. Daddio
53 stated that is correct. They need the amendment so law enforcement and animal control
54 can do something about any complaint that does come in.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 1/13/2009, Page 12
1
2 Nelson stated that one option is to apply this proposal to areas that are more dense
3 than the RSA zone. A legitimate question is whether they need to have this dog trespass
4 requirement on properties less dense than R5A.
5
6 Brenner stated they already have something like this for areas more dense than the
7 R5A zone. Daddio stated she will figure that out.
8
9 Crawford stated he is not concerned. Generally, people aren't calling when a dog is
10 just trespassing, but not creating a problem. He is happy with Exhibits B -D. Remove
11 Exhibit the from the proposal, and deal with them separately. He has issues with the
12 requirement for an enthusiast license and a kennel license. He doesn't support that. That
13 is the source of most of the heartache from the citizens. It is a significant change.
14
15 Caskey- Schreiber stated she agrees with Councilmember Crawford. Loose animals
16 are also a safety issue for drivers. Find a larger number than four as the threshold for
17 animal enthusiasts. She recommends a limit of six or eight animals.
18
19 Fleetwood asked if the regulation allows a stay of enforcement in contested hearing
20 cases, pending completion of the appeal. Daddio stated they won't dispose of the animal.
21 Normally, there is a declaration indicating conditions required to ensure a dog isn't running
22 loose. Those take effect until the hearing, to insure the dog wouldn't endanger anyone in
23 the meantime.
24
25 Brenner stated the problem behind the reason for not allowing hoarding is to deal
26 with people who can't take proper care of the animals, and the animals are suffering. They
27 already have rules against neglect. Someone who hoards animals probably won't know
28 about this or ever get a license. It will be complaint- driven by a neighbor, which is already
29 allowed. This is not going to work. It's really an imposition on people's privacy. It will end
30 up causing good people to stop taking care of animals, and they'll end up with more
31 euthanized animals. Instead, work on the laws regarding animal neglect, if necessary. At
32 some point, they have limit what people expect the County to do in rural areas. Instead,
33 there should be fast action on dangerous and potentially dangerous dogs. The proposed
34 legislation won't be that effective, and it will take a lot more money. Daddio stated that this
35 is not to stop hoarders. They want to ensure everyone is doing a great job taking care of
36 their animals and has all the help they need. They want to stop any iss�u.,es;,pefore they
37 happen. The more animals there are in a confined area, the more Piro I. "s 0 e'.,,e,This
38 is an effort to combat the ongoing problem of animals being kepi °u0e� �i ',large
39 numbers in residences., '
a a,.
41 Brenner stated that when it gets to that point, it becomes neglect._, Daddlo staged
42 they don't want to allow it to get to that point. They're trying to stop it from gting to that
43 point.
44
45 Brenner stated that's like someone having to prove they're innocent. ;t
46
47 Nelson stated he doesn't support Exhibits A or B. He has very strong concern.s'about
48 taking out the exempt areas. The problem areas aren't in the R5A and R10A zones. The
49 problems are in more urban areas with people who think they have a farm when they only
50 have a lot. Daddio stated the complaint calls come from people in the non -dog control
51 zones, which are the R5A and R10A zones.
52
53 Nelson asked the Humane Society's process when they get a complaint.
54
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 1/13/2009, Page 13
1 David Peterson, Humane Society Field Officer, stated their first function is to
2 educate. They respond to all calls. First, they try to identify the complaining party and
3 whether the issue is valid. Next, they try to identify the owner if there is an offending
4 animal or person. Next, they try to educate those people. The officers have that discretion,
5 as do police officers regarding traffic. Another thing they do is to try and get the neighbors
6 to talk to each other. The officers try to deal with situations through education and advice.
7 They only enforce if they have to.
8
9 Caskey- Schreiber stated this just clarifies the Humane Society's rules. It helps the
10 Humane Society respond to people who contact them.
11
12 Weimer stated he is fine with the dog trespass and contested hearing portion of the
13 proposal. He has problems with the changes to the enthusiast and kennel regulations in
14 terms of number and enforceability.
15
16 Brenner stated she supports the regulations for dangerous or potentially- dangerous
17 dogs. She's not sure they should do anything if the dog isn't dangerous.
18
19 Crawford stated there seems to be a majority support for eliminating the enthusiast
20 and kennel portions of the proposal.
21
22 Nelson stated the Humane Society will take this feedback and rewrite the proposal.
23
24 -
25 OTHER BUSINESS
01•
27 There was no other business.
28
29
30 ADJOURN
31
32 The meeting adjourned at 1:08 p.m.
33 n
34
35
36 Jill Nixon t�Wigy es Transcription
38 �. '� • ... , vj� �.
39 rC
,Cs'�'�jNg0•.
401 � O: O CO UNTY
42 _
43 = _ -
• O
44 •
45 %na Br X61 !S7 Co Ocil Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
L. Ward Nelson; Commi tee Chair
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 1/13/2009, Page 14