Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources September 9 2008WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Natural Resources Committee September 9, 2008 Committee Chair Carl Weimer called the meeting to order at 9:33 a.m. in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. Present: Absent: Seth Fleetwood None Bob Kelly Also Present: None 1. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO PURCHASE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS ON THE BAUTHUES FARM PROPERTY IN THE AMOUNT OF $124,900 (AB2008 -306) Samya Lutz, Planning and Development Services Department, submitted a handout (on file) and stated this is the second of the six ranked properties recommended by the Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) Oversight Committee. She described the location and characteristics of the property. Weimer moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. Lutz introduced the new Agricultural Senior Planner, Dean Martin. Dean Martin, Planning and Development Resources Department, described his background. OTHER BUSINESS Mike McFarland, Parks and Recreation Department Director, stated he presents a status report on the Lake Whatcom land reconveyance process (AB2008 -074) with the State Department of Natural Resources (DNR). Nothing has changed lately. He described the reconveyance process. The next step is to enter into the memorandum of agreement (MOA) to go forward with the process, which initiates an interagency agreement. The County pays the costs for doing the real estate work that needs to be done on the reconveyance. Once the inter -grant is done, there will be a legal description of the properties, which will come to the Council in a resolution for approval. The Council would request the reconveyance, but the County will have already committed the administrative work to get to the point of reconveyance.. It's a straightforward process. All parties have to confirm that the purpose of the reconveyance is for park purposes. Within 16 to 18 months, the resolution requesting reconveyance will come forward. At that time, the State will hold a public hearing on the request, but the process will move forward to completion. Natural Resources Committee, 9/9/2008, Page 1 1 2 He will bring the MOA forward on September 23. He may have the interagency 3 agreement with a commitment on how the County would reimburse the State. Those two 4 actions will set the process in motion. 5 6 All the background information is on the website for Council and public review. The 7 Executive established a review panel. He submitted the panel's recommendation and 8 minority report (on file). Cost and revenue estimates have remained the same. There is 9 really nothing more for the staff to do until the State does the inter -grant exchange. This is 10 a proposal in concept. The actual parcel- per - parcel exchange needs to be presented. 11 12 Weimer asked if a budget request for costs will also come forward. McFarland stated 13 the funds were set aside last year, but they lapsed, so he will put forward a budget 14 supplemental request. He recommends moving forward. Approving the MOA essentially 15 commits the County to the reconveyance. 16 17 Weimer asked if there is a plan for the County Council to have a public hearing on 18 the reconveyance. McFarland stated that's up to the Council. The staff held public 19 meetings and it has been well - publicized. The County is not required to hold a public 20 hearing. 21 22 Fleetwood stated the Council wanted to have a work session to get questions 23 answered. People in the community would come to a Natural Resources Committee 24 meeting. He recommends putting this item in committee for discussion on September 23. 25 26 Weimer stated a question is the cost of long -term maintenance of the park. They 27 need to think about that now. McFarland stated he presented a proposal for financing 28 development, using REET II funds, grants, volunteer labor, and Park Department staff labor. 29 They continue with planned work, but all that development work is on land the County 30 already owns. The funding mechanism for ongoing maintenance is conservation futures 31 funds. They've tried to not put an additional burden on the general fund. He has a funding 32 and operations plan, but those decisions are made through the budget by the Council and 33 Executive. The development costs for trail projects and similar work are budgeted as 34 capital projects. They try to match grants and donations. 35 36 Fleetwood asked if they can use conservation futures funds for maintenance. 37 McFarland stated legal counsel determined maintenance is an eligible expense. The amount 38 they can use is capped, but the budget is less than the cap. He has not heard why it 39 wouldn't be an eligible expense. This isn't a use agreement or easement. The County will 40 hold title to the lands. The County plans to use conservation easement funds for ongoing 41 maintenance, which the State legislature now allows. 42 43 Weimer asked if they plan to do an independent financial analysis of annual 44 maintenance costs. McFarland stated that wouldn't be prudent. They've looked at actual 45 costs for maintaining and managing park areas, and he is comfortable with the estimates. 46 47 Weimer stated other people have looked at the estimates for maintenance and 48 operations and think the estimates should be higher. Director McFarland should be able to 49 answer those questions at the meeting on September 23. McFarland stated the County now 50 owns over 1,000 acres of parkland in the watershed now. He can do a comparison to 51 various other parks. The trailhead work is already included in the maintenance and 52 operations budget, independent of the reconveyance. They are really looking at the impact 53 of the forest lands. Operating costs will increase if they develop the existing lands to a Natural Resources Committee, 9/9/2008, Page 2 1 higher level. However, that's not tied to the reconveyance. Those decisions are tied to the 2 Council's budget decisions. The major trailheads are already built and being maintained. 3 4 They long -term intent of this project is to connect with the Bellingham Parks and 5 Greenways program. This project will address the County's levels of service, which are 6 deficient. The cost of going through with the reconveyance and providing a land base for 7 trails and connectivity is a bargain. However, if they have to build 50 miles of trails 8 elsewhere in the county, where the County doesn't own property, the cost will far exceed 9 $300,000. The Council should consider that aspect when considering the reconveyance. 10 The reconveyance helps the County meet its level of service requirements for recreation at 11 a reasonable price. 12 13 Fleetwood asked if the process for reconveyance is spelled out in the Revised Code of 14 Washington (RCW). McFarland stated it is. 15 16 Fleetwood asked the true effect of the reconveyance is to talk away about half of 17 what is currently managed under the Landscape Plan. McFarland stated they don't know 18 the exact acreage until the State determines its value- for -value exchange. The range will 19 be one -third to one -half of the land. Not all of the reconveyed land is in the watershed. It 20 could be as much as half of DNB's ownership in the watershed. They can't determine the 21 exact acreage until the inter -grant exchange. They can estimate what is there conceptually, 22 but it won't be the final product. 23 24 Fleetwood asked the point when they approve the resolution for reconveyance. 25 McFarland stated that is when the inter -grant is done. That is the last formal act of the 26 County Council. After that, there is a deed exchange with the County. 27 28 Fleetwood asked if the Board of Natural Resources can scuttle the deal. McFarland 29 stated the reconveyance will happen. However, the Board can negotiate the exact lands 30 reconveyed and other issues, such as easements. 31 32 Weimer stated get answers on whether there will be a conservation easement over 33 the entire park. McFarland stated that is a Council decision. There is a legal question about 34 how to do that. If the County stops using the lands for park purposes, the lands go back to 35 DNR. Aside from that, the lands will be County lands, like any other County lands. The 36 legal staff has a decision about conservation easements on County property. It would be an 37 additional layer of protection for the lands, but is not part of the reconveyance process. 38 39 Weimer asked to find out that cost of an easement before the reconveyance. 40 Weimer stated it is a matter of the County selling the easement to someone else, such as 41 the Whatcom Land Trust. The County may not be able to just give away that right. The 42 conservation easement doesn't come with a set cost. 43 44 Weimer stated he would like more clarity on that during the meeting on September 45 23. Another question is about payment of lost funds to junior taxing districts. McFarland 46, stated that under current laws, the County doesn't have a way to make those taxing 47 districts whole. He's asked that question to legal staff, County finance staff, and the 48 municipal research center. 49 50 Kelly asked if there is any dispute about how much of the property can be harvested. 51 McFarland stated that under the Landscape Plan, those numbers are worked out for each 52 parcel. Now, about half of the reconveyed land, however much that will be, could be 53 harvested. Natural Resources Committee, 9/9/2008, 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 Fleetwood asked who should attend this discussion on September 23, other than Director McFarland. McFarland stated his staff has done most of the work so far. A number of individuals were on the review panel. Dave Wallin, a review panel member, had concerns about mass wasting, road building, and stabilized slopes. Tom Pratum also expressed concerns. Fleetwood asked that Mr. Wallin and Mr. Pratum be invited to attend the meeting in two weeks. Weimer stated he will do outreach to the advisory committees. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 10:10 a.m. )ill Nixon, Minutes Transcription ATT �Y CO vi A O 40 Dz&ia Btpr -, -,[ v WaRr WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON erk Carl Weimer, Committee Chair Natural Resources Committee, 9/9/2008, Page 4