Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinance June 20 20061 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL 2 Finance and Administrative Services Committee 3 4 3une 20, 2006 5 6 Committee Chair Sam Crawford called the meeting to order at 12:10 p.m. in the 7 Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. 8 9 Present: Absent: 10 L. Ward Nelson None 11 Carl Weimer 12 13 Also Present: 14 Barbara Brenner 15 Seth Fleetwood 16 17 18 COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL 19 20 1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2006 WHATCOM COUNTY BUDGET, NINTH 21 REQUEST, IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,442,842 (AB2006 -257) 22 23 Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated this is a series of projects to address 24 needs of the Public Works Department and Planning Department. It is one of the last large 25 supplemental budget requests that will come before the Council, other than modifications 26 for the jail project. He read the list of items. 27 28 Nelson stated there is a request for full -time equivalent (FTE) employees in this. He 29 asked if they were approved in the two -year budget cycle. Desler stated they have not 30 been approved. The administration needs to address workloads and the opening of the new 31 jail. After discussions with District Court judges and the District Court Administrator, the 32 administration was convinced that handling the workload, with the dramatic increase in the 33 offender population, was necessary. Other items in the request relate to the County's 34 efforts to build solutions around significant problems in attracting and retaining staff as well 35 as getting other projects going. They need this capacity in these operations to do that. 36 37 Nelson asked if the 5.5 FTE's will be reflected in the new budget as having been in 38 the 2005/2006 budget, or supplemental. Desler stated they will be shown as supplemental, 39 and included in the 07/08 budget. The Council will see they were supplemental requests in 40 2006. 41 42 Nelson moved to recommend approval. He asked if flood control projects are 43 ongoing projects. 44 45 Paula Cooper, Public Works Department, stated they are all projects that have been 46 underway for years. 47 48 Weimer asked if the pipeline revetment referenced belongs to the City of Bellingham 49 or Williams Pipeline. Cooper stated site one is near the water pipeline. 50 51 Weimer stated the City is not concerned if the pipeline is washed away. 52 53 Motion carried unanimously. 54 Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 6/20/2006, Page 1 2. ORDINANCE REGARDING PROJECT BUDGET AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO THE 7006 BUDGET IN THE AMOUNT OF $577,724 (AB2006 -258) Dewey Desier, Deputy Administrator, stated the County approved the implementation of the maintenance management program. The administration delayed it for the newest version of the software. The administration let last year's appropriation lapse at the end of 2005. He is asking to reauthorize it. Weimer moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. COUNCIL "CONSENT AGENDA" ITEM 1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID #06 -73 TO LOW BIDDER, FOSS MARITIME COMPANY, FOR ANNUAL DRY DOCK REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE OF THE WHATCOM CHIEF FERRY, IN THE AMOUNT OF $163,171 {AB2006 -265} Crawford moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. 2. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING COUNTY ROAD PROJECT NO. 999022 AND THE AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE "CABLE STREET, PHASE I -- GENEVA STORMWATER RETROFITS" AND REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND LOW BIDDER, RAM CONSTRUCTION GENERAL CONTRACTORS, INC., FOR THIS WORK, IN THE AMOUNT OF $712,675 (AB2006 -266) Bruce Roll, Public Works Department, stated they are working to create a retrofit project in the neighborhood. They are also looking at traffic issues germane to Lake Louise Road and Lake Whatcom Boulevard. This project is specific to Geneva. They must .address the stormwater that is running straight down Cable Street. They must intercept and treat the stormwater before it is released into Lake Whatcom. They have been working with CH2M Hill on feasibility. Constraints include a lack of space and condemnation. Appropriate options include swales and infiltration technology to allow phosphorus to be incorporated into the biological cycling process prior to release into the lake. The Council, Executive, and community have been engaged in the process. They have sent notices to homeowners with frontage and many other homeowners to discuss the entire project. When changing a community that was not designed for stormwater retention and treatment, they are talking about changing the land. There is a desire to have the community support the activities. From the beginning, individuals have expressed an interest in the project. Staff has worked with them and continues to work with the residents. The Executive is interested in not moving forward with the Wall Street portion through this bid. This proposal is to move forward while continuing to work with the residents in the Wall Street area. That will allow 80 to 90 percent of the project to be completed this summer. The second phase would be next year, and include Cable Street. They must work through the issues with Wall Street. Crawford asked if Ram Construction bid this job including Wall Street. Roll stated Ram Construction will not be bill for work on Wall Street. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 6/20/2006, Page 2 Crawford asked how it is managed. Roll stated it won't be simple. They will have to discuss it with the contractor, but it's a small portion of the project. As the contractor gets into any area, there will be issues to work through. Wall Street accounts for about ten to 15 percent of the work. Brenner stated that hearing from certain residents on Wall Street made her look at it again. She is concerned about how they are making the decisions. She's not comfortable moving on until questions are answered. Fleetwood asked if they are going to defer the work. He asked if this vote authorizes the work on Wall Street, or if staff will come back for authorization again. Roll stated approval of this item approves Wall Street. Weimer asked if other residents in other neighborhoods have concerns. Roll stated he will let the residents speak. He can't predict their issues. Don Shepherd, 4515 Wall Street, stated he has concerns. There is a lot of water coming down to the street. His concern is that the project constraints of keeping costs low and not purchasing property means there won't be any mitigation. On other streets, there is a 30 -foot path and a vault. He wants a vault. He is concerned about financial constraints affecting quality of the design. Constructions on his block have already been undermined from previous developments. Adding more water will be dangerous. Crawford asked if pulling Wall Street from this proposal is still a concern because other problems haven't been mitigated. Shepherd stated the water is still coming down to Wall Street, and the project is constrained by not purchasing land for a vault. Kirk Christensen, Public Works Department, stated they are just routing the low flows down the street. The street won't get a 20 -foot wall of water. They are using a diversion structure for the low flows. The large flows will continue down Cable Street and the lake. Shepherd stated the ditch is going to be 20 feet. Another ditch is 30 feet. There is more development around the smaller ditch. If they need a 30 -foot ditch on the other street, they probably need a 30 -feet on this ditch. Christensen stated they try to maximize the surface area they get out of the swales, to maximize the amount of infiltration and treatment. They will use as much space as possible to flatten out the water to maximize infiltration. The size of ditch doesn't dictate the amount of flow coming down. They -are trying to get the best treatment they can. Fred Wicknick, 4508 Wall Street, stated he hasn't got clarification from the Council about what will happen with the water in the current plan that directs the water to Wall Street. Water is brought off Cable Street to be mitigated. There is no routing down to Wall Street currently. They propose to route the water down Wall Street to end in a blind spot, with no clarification of where it will go after that. Second, people were notified on May 8. Many people will be impacted by these proposed changes. Only four residents were notified of the proposal. There wasn't enough time and most residents were not notified of the proposal. It is a narrow, single -block street. The proposed swales would go directly in front of their houses. Maintenance will be an issue. The by- product of the surface runoff will land on a street that has 18 kids who use it. That has not been addressed by the engineers or the City. They still have issues of property value. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 6/20/2006, Page 3 There is a history of water problems with construction and engineering in the recent past. The Geneva Park project had an inadequate control of surface water runoff. Homes in the immediate vicinity were damaged. The surface water runoff required retrofits. There is no guarantee they will be more successful. This neighborhood has tried to maintain their quality of environment. Don't table this issue. Instead, defeat the idea of putting in open swales in ditches. Mike Plenkovich, 4503 Wall Street, stated he lives on the lake side of Wall.Street, which isn't supposed to be impacted by this project. There are significant existing problems with groundwater. Presently, water runs through a covered culvert. Property owners on Wall Street will not be persuaded that this is a good project. Look at all alternatives to direct the water to some other fashion. Kent Nelson, 4511 Wall Street, stated there is a groundwater problem, as the previous speaker stated. After the proposed retrofit is done, he is afraid he will also have a water problem. The Council has heard from the residents. The residents appreciate what the Council is trying to do, and the residents are trying to help the Council. Having more water come into a neighborhood that is already saturated isn't good. There is a 17 -acre park that would be a better option. It will probably be more expensive. Don't bring the toxins from Cable Street into a neighborhood with 18 kids when Glen Cove, with no one in it, is available. Explore other options. Old Lakeway has swales or the ability to perk water as effectively as any plan he's seen. Remove Wall Street from this proposal. Explore other options that may be more feasible and have less impact on the neighborhoods. Margaret Curtis, Wilson Engineering, stated they recognized the concerns of the citizens. When using the term bio- infiltration swale, they are infiltrating the water through amended soil to help with treatment. There is an under -drain system to bring the water to the lake. The water will not go into the ditches and dissipate. The ability to build within the right -of -way and keep the cost down while providing a green solution is the reason for the design that includes bio - swales. The under -drain is important. Crawford stated a pipe underground is carrying stormwater now. He asked if that portion of pipe could be beefed up to the point where these residents get a benefit from this project. Allow it to pull out some of that water. Curtis stated it is conceivable. An underground pipe can't treat like the swales can, but it will help with the cross -slope drainage water. If they change the contract award to take out the Wall Street section, the contractor won't direct water to Wall Street until there is a solution. If they are taking out the swales, they don't want water directed to their street. She agrees with that. That would have to be part of the change order. Crawford stated that is what they intend to do. Water will not be directed to Wall Street. McShane stated it sounds like the neighbors haven't had a lot of time to look at this. Approve the contract, but allow the contractor to resolve issues that come up. These issues probably have been addressed already by the design. The citizens need time to learn about the design. Weimer stated these treatments are more like lining and collecting a bog filter. Curtis stated they are not lined, but they are not depending on the native soil for treatment. They are bringing in soil for treatment, collecting the water that is treated, and delivering the treated water. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 6/20/2006, Page 4 Weimer asked the percentage of the water that doesn't end up in the closed pipe. Curtis stated not much, because the soil is glacial till, which will move the water to the under - drain. Wicknick stated he appreciates the Council understanding their desire of not redirecting water without addressing filtration. When the Geneva Park project engineering failed, they had 40,000 gallons of water per day running through the neighborhood. It required a retrofit that feeds into a closed culvert. This engineering proposal is to open the culvert, bringing all the groundwater they're already dealing with into an open system, then taking water from a distant source and putting it into an open swale in a neighborhood. Even if there isn't flooding, they're still bringing contaminants into an open swale in a neighborhood with kids. It makes an area that is useable less useable. This is the only place in the county that would have open swales between the street and in front of homes. They are going to tear out an area that the neighbors use. Crawford stated there are open swales in neighborhoods all over the county. Curtis stated this is the first retrofit of an existing neighborhood, and they are trying to fit these in places where they weren't planned for years ago. However, they are putting in bio- infiltration swales in many new developments. It is a green way to treat stormwater, better than the underground vaults. People walk by the source of contaminants all the time. They are trying to take care of the runoff from cars. Wicknick stated he understands, but they are bringing new water into a community that already has a water problem. Crawford moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Nelson moved to amend the contract so the issues can be worked out. "Remove Wall Street from the program and not divert water to Wall Street project 10 until issues of the community are resolved, at which time the County Council will review approval." Crawford asked if the motion is acceptable to staff. He stated staff indicated it is acceptable. Brenner stated it is better to table the issue until all the questions are answered. Christenson stated that if they table the item and don't move forward, they can't construct anything this year. Brenner stated that makes her less confident. Fleetwood stated he hopes this gets resolved to the satisfaction of the neighborhood, but it might not and there might still be a good reason to proceed. The effect of the motion is that the County can't review it unless the community approves it. Crawford offered a friendly amendment, "Remove Wall Street from the program and not divert water to Wall Street project 10 until issues to the community are resolved to the Council's satisfaction, at which time the County Council will review approval." Nelson accepted the friendly amendment. Jeff Monsen, Public Works Director, stated the agenda item is a request to award a contract. Procedurally, the Council is asking the administration to negotiate a revised bid price with the low bidder to remove this element. He doesn't know what that price will be. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 6/2012006, Page 5 (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.) Monsen continued to stated it's better to put off the discussion to have a discussion with the contractor to find out if project costs change. He doesn't promote that this be delayed, but this request is to award a contract, not negotiate the scope of work. Crawford asked if they are tampering with awarding a contract. Monsen stated the recommendation to award, recognizing that this element of the project would be removed, gives the Executive the ability to make a decision of whether or not it's still a viable contract. He's not clear how to engage the Council in a future decision. McShane stated he has concerns about messing around with this contract. Some of these issues have been addressed. It is the responsibility of the neighborhood to make sure they aren't being harmed and to raise issues. It's the responsibility of the Public Works Department to address those issues during construction. If they find problems during excavation, it is a change in condition that will be addressed. He's confident that this problem has been thought about. The Council has to give some discretion so it doesn't manage the contract. Nelson stated he understands the community's concerns. The community has been impacted by past projects with problems that were supposed to have been addressed, but weren't. It's not fair to the community to not listen to them. He'd like to be able to support the contract. He's concerned about undue burdens on the citizens. The administration should be able to work out the conditions with the community in two weeks. If not, put the contract out for another bid. A contract is about quantities and materials. There is nothing about site locations in the contract. That isn't going to affect the contract. Brenner stated the Council never told the Public Works Department that this had to be done cheap. They all knew this would be expensive. Make sure ahead of time that they don't run into problems during the construction process. If they are going to do this, make sure there is more communication with the residents. Crawford stated he is against the motion to amend. He agrees with Councilmember McShane. He has a tremendous amount of trust in the engineers and administration. Executive Kremen will work on this issue vigorously to address these concerns and mitigate impacts. He hopes the community may even see an improvement to the drainage problems in that area. Shepherd stated this is not a trust issue. Even if it works, it is arrogant to think this is the best solution. McShane stated that if the Wall Street area isn't the right one, they don't need to amend the contract. Nelson stated that all the motion does is clarify what they expect from the administration. McShane stated it changes the bidding process. Their decision of the bid is based on the amount of time and materials. Desler stated the administration wants to do no harm to Wall Street. It wants clear communication with the residents. If the contract were amended by the Council, the administration intends to bring the arrangement to the County Council for confirmation. If the Council approves the motion to amend, the administration would bring it back for another conversation. If there are procedural issues with the Finance and Administrative services Committee, 6/20/2006, Page 6 contract and a problem with the bidding process, the administration would suspend everything. However, he doesn't think that will need to happen. A ten or 15 percent material adjustment should not adversely affect the contract. Crawford stated that if that's the case, he will support this. Nelson restated the motion to amend "Remove Wall Street from the program and not divert water to Wall Street project 10 until issues to the community are resolved, at which time the County Council will review approval." Weimer asked for clarification. Originally, the Council was asked to approve the contract as provided, with the understanding that all of that would go on. Now, if the Council approves this motion, nothing will be done on Wall Street until this is clarified. He asked if a two -week delay will jeopardize the entire project and if the project is worth doing without Wall Street. Roll stated the project will be jeopardized by a two -week delay, and the project is worth doing without Wall Street. Motion to amend carried 2 -1 with Weimer opposed. Motion to forward as amended carried unanimously. 3. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND HERRERA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC., TO DEVELOP A PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE AND PROJECT DESIGN FOR THE LOWER CANYON CREEK SALMON HABITAT RESTORATION PROJECT, IN THE AMOUNT OF $94,888 (AB2006 -267) Weimer moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. 4. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND COMPASS POINT SURVEY GROUP, INC., TO PROVIDE ON -CALL SURVEYING SERVICES FOR THE RIVER AND FLOOD DIVISION PROJECTS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $75,000 (AB2006 -768) Nelson moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. S. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND PACIFIC SURVEYING AND ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC., TO PROVIDE ON -CALL SURVEYING SERVICES FOR THE RIVER AND FLOOD DIVISION PROJECTS FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $75,000 (AB2006 -269) Crawford moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. 6. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL TO PROVIDE REPAIR FOR 8 -12 MOBILE HOMES FOR INDIVIDUALS OR Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 6/20/2006, Page 7 FAMILIES AT OR BELOW 30% OF THE MEDIAN INCOME IN WHATCOM COUNTY, UTILIZING WHATCOM COUNTY 2060 FUNDS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,000 (AB2006 -270) This item was withdrawn from the agenda. 7. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A COLLECTION AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE USDA FOREST SERVICE, MT. BAKE R-SNOQUALMI E NATIONAL FOREST FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE RAZOR HONE CREEK BRIDGE (MP 2), IN THE AMOUNT OF $90,000 (AB2006 -271) Crawford asked the location. Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, explained the location (inaudible). Weimer moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. S. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND WHATCOM COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT NO. 9 FOR FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES TO THE PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT BUILDINGS AND EQUIPMENT LOCATED WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO THE ESTABLISHED BOUNDARIES OF FIRE DISTRICT NO. 9 (A132006 -272) Nelson moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. 9. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A RESIDENTIAL LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND ERIN EMRY AND JAMES RUSS GOFORTH TO LEASE THE HOUSE LOCATED AT 367 EAST LAKE SAMISH DRIVE, BELLINGHAM, IN THE AMOUNT OF $895 PER MONTH FOR THE PERIOD FEBRUARY 24, 2006 THROUGH FEBRUARY 23, 2007 (AB2006 -273) Nelson moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. 10. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT AND LEASE BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE POINT ROBERTS PARKS & RECREATION DISTRICT FOR WHATCOM COUNTY TO LEASE A PORTION OF THE POINT ROBERTS COMMUNITY CENTER AS ONE OF ITS SATELLITE FACILITY SENIOR ACTIVITY CENTERS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $600 PER YEAR FOR FIVE (5) YEARS BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2006 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2010 (AB2006 -274) Weimer moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 6/20/2006, Page 8 11. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A FARM LAND LEASE BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND JIM SNYDAR TO ALLOW MR. SNYDAR TO LEASE APPROXIMATELY 80 ACRES OF LAND WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF HOVANDER HOMESTEAD PARK IN FERNDALE FOR FARMING PURPOSES IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,000 PER YEAR FOR ONE FARMING YEAR COMMENCING MAY 1, 2006 AND TERMINATING DECEMBER 31, 2006 (AB2006 -275) Nelson moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. 12. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND LORETTA SIMPSON FOR THE PURCHASE OF HER PROPERTY IDENTIFIED BY TAX NUMBER 380217361542 (AN UNNUMBERED PROPERTY ON MARINE DRIVE, MARIETTA), IN THE AMOUNT OF $10,000 PLUS CLOSING COSTS (AB2006 -276) Crawford moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. 13. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO. 5 BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND LYNN BARTON EXTENDING THE CURRENT CONTRACT THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2006 AND INCREASING THE MAXIMUM CONSIDERATION BY $10,700 FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $21,400 (AB2006 -238) Nelson moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. 14. RESOLUTION IN THE MATTER OF THE SALE OF SURPLUS PROPERTY AND THE SETTING OF A DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING THEREON PURSUANT TO WCC 1.10 (AB2006 -277) Weimer moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. Nelson asked what they are doing with the firing range. Mike McFarlane, Parks and Recreation Department Director, stated the firing range carrier system equipment will be replaced. The range may still have value for someone else. Otherwise it would be scrapped. 15. RESOLUTION TO SET HEARING TO SELL TAX -TITLE PROPERTY BY PUBLIC AUCTION — REQ. #TR2006 -09 (AB2006 -278) McShane asked if this is tidelands. Jeff Monsen, Public Works Director, stated both this and the next item are in the same vicinity, on the west side of the Lummi peninsula. They are beach reserves with Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 612012006, Page 9 divided interests. The Property Management Committee recommends that this go to a public hearing and to dispose through an auction so the adjoining property owners have an opportunity to bid. McShane stated the County currently owns a small interest in the tideland. He asked what goes with that interest. Monsen stated this is within tax title status. The County could acquire this and be a partial owner. Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated it is an undivided interest. Nelson moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. 16. RESOLUTION TO SET HEARING TO SELL TAX -TITLE PROPERTY BY PUBLIC AUCTION — REQ. #TR2006 -10 (AB2006 -279) Nelson moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. 17. RESOLUTION TO SET HEARING TO SELL TAX -TITLE PROPERTY BY NEGOTIATION TO WHATCOM COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS ROAD FUND — REQ. #TR2006 -11 (AB2006 -280) Weimer moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 1:21 p.m. ��lflf!!1 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 6/20/2006, Page 10