HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil December 7 20041
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Regular County Council
December 7, 2004
Council Chair Dan McShane called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the
Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
Present:
Barbara Brenner
Laurie Caskey- Schreiber
Sam Crawford
Seth Fleetwood
Sharon Roy
L. Ward Nelson
FLAG SALUTE
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Absent:
None
McShane announced there was discussion with Whatcom County Public
Works Director Jeff Monsen regarding two possible property acquisitions
(AB2004 -018).
McShane moved to pursue a grant for the purchase of a property in the
Acme area on the Jones Creek alluvial fan.
Motion carried 4 -3 with Brenner, Caskey- Schreiber, and Roy opposed.
McShane announced there was also discussion with Senior Deputy
Prosecutor David Grant regarding an administrative appeal (AB2004 -018)
in executive session during the Committee of the Whole meeting regarding a
petition the County filed against the State Department of Natural Resources for the
implementation of the Lake Whatcom Management Plan.
McShane also announced there was discussion regarding the possible
acceptance of a land donation for park or scenic purposes, per RCW
36.34.340 (AB2004 -413) during the Committee of the Whole meeting.
McShane announced that the Committee of the Whole voted to accept the
donation.
OPEN SESSION
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
The following people spoke:
P. Huck, 1407 Iris Lane, submitted information (on file, exhibit A) and stated
the Council has not addressed his citizens complaint. It was forwarded to the
Attorney General, who said the Council should have sent it to the Washington Bar
Association for judicial misconduct. The complaint concerns the charges of hit and
run filed against Adrian Sassan in an accident resulting in the death of Deputy Matt
Herzog on Samish Way. Mr. Sassen was never at the scene of the crime and
should not have been convicted of hit and run. One must be at the scene of the
crime to be charged with hit and run. He asked the Council to address the issue.
In addition, the Council has all the powers of any judicial system in the United
States. The Council should investigate this. They should not put a citizen in jail
who wasn't involved in a situation.
Elizabeth Kilanowski, Bellingham, stated she is opposed to fish farms in
Whatcom County. In Vancouver, the fish farms have negative impact on the
environment and little positive return for residents. Fish farms are a blight.
Because they are located in remote areas, most people don't know they exist.
Reasons to oppose fish farms include concentrations of fecal matter, sea lice, bio-
mass taken to feed the fish, escaped salmon into non - native habitat, and many
more reasons. Support the moratorium on fish farms in Whatcom County
John Lesow, 317 Madrona Place, Point Roberts, submitted information (on
file, exhibit 8) and stated he is an applicant for a position on the Planning
Commission. He asked the Council to appoint him. He's been a resident of the
Pacific Northwest for 34 years. He's been active in environmental and land use
issues. His reason for applying is to ensure the concerns of unincorporated areas
are represented by someone who actually lives there. He's the only applicant with
Canadian and American citizenship, and is involved in cross - border commerce daily.
Population growth in Vancouver, British Columbia will present challenges to
Whatcom County. Future land use considerations will have a cross - border
component. He has served on elected and appointed boards. He's familiar with
problems, processes, and politics of both regions.
Bob Wiesen, 3314 Douglas Road, stated the public process is hard for the
public to keep track of. Often, people participating in a public hearing aren't aware
of changes proposed that day during a work session.
McShane thanked Mr. Wiesen for his volunteer service on the Planning
Commission.
Maggie Matheson - Hanson, 206 Bayside Road, Bellingham, stated the Council
should not to be too fast to shut down poll voting. All over the nation, they are
looking at voting patterns. It would be premature to shut down poll voting at this
time. That's been the intention of the County for six years. She thanked the
Council for putting the name of precinct committee officers on the ballot. Don't
take away the privacy of the voting booth.
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Jeremy Brown, 3217 Greenwood Avenue, Bellingham, asked the Council to
enact legislation banning fin fish farms for any species in Whatcom County.
Darrell Pope, 3106 Edward Street, Bellingham, stated he is opposed to fish
farms in Whatcom County. If there were a fish farm in Whatcom County, and some
kind of disease got loose, it would be difficult to combat. They won't see it or can't
find it. The salmon runs are starting to rebound. They don't need a disease
outbreak.
Anne Mosness, 1081 Sudden Valley, submitted information (on file, exhibit
C) and stated the Council should pass a moratorium on fish farming in Whatcom
County. There are incredible impacts to native wild fish, coastal communities, and
the marine environment. Sea lice infestations affect the wild species. When fish
lose their value, coastal fishing communities have to find other industries. There
are ramifications to a monoculture crop raised in pens. These pens are not closed
containment. They are open pens that flush everything into the marine
environment.
Adam Prince, 4559 Orcas Way, Ferndale, stated he is an applicant for the
Sewage Appeals Board. He's designed septic systems in Whatcom County for nine
years. He teaches for Washington On -Site Sewage Association (WOSSA). He
wants to give a fair look at appeals and to interpret the code. He's gone through
appeals in the past. Some of the depth of knowledge wasn't right there. He
installs, designs, and teaches about septic systems.
Dave Grant, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor Attorney, stated this is his last
night as the Council's attorney. He thanked the Council for his appointment to the
District Court seat as judge. He promised to work as hard as he can to live up to
the Council's trust. He recited a history of his work history with the County.
Whatcom County has hard - working public officials and staff.
CONSENT AGENDA
Crawford reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee
and moved to approve Consent Agenda items two through 25. Item one is held in
committee.
Brenner withdrew item eight.
Motion to approve Consent Agenda items two through seven and nine
through 25 carried unanimously.
1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH
MICHAEL BOBBINK FOR HEARING EXAMINER SERVICES (AB2004-
414)
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION TO ENTER INTO THE PROPOSED 2004-
2006 CORRECTIONS OFFICERS COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
AGREEMENT (AB2004 -439)
3. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY
AND WILSON ENGINEERING, LLC FOR ON -CALL SURVEYING
SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $75,000 (AB2004 -416)
4. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY
AND COMPASS POINT SURVEY GROUP, INC. FOR ON -CALL
SURVEYING SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $75,000 (AB2004 -417)
S. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
PROFESSIONAL SERVICE CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY
AND SHEARER DESIGN, LLC FOR THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF E.
SMITH RD. ANDERSON CREEK BRIDGE NO. 277 IN THE AMOUNT OF
$44,534 (AB2004 -418)
6. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
SUPPLEMENTAL CONTRACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM
COUNTY AND NICHOLLS ENGINEERING FOR TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
WITH THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF HUTCHINSON CREEK
BRIDGE #157 REPLACEMENT PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $12,630,
FOR A TOTAL AMENDED CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $51,300
(AB2004 -419)
7. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE
BERTRAND WATERSHED IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR
DEVELOPMENT OF FISH PASSAGE PROJECTS, HABITAT/ RIPARIAN
ENHANCEMENTS AND DEVELOPMENT OF INSTREAM FLOW
RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE AMOUNT OF $69,945.52 (AB2004 -420)
S. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND PUBLIC
UTILITIES DISTRICT NO. 1 OF WHATCOM COUNTY FOR
IMPLEMENTATION OF WRIA 1 WATERSHED PLANNING ACTIVITIES
INCLUDING COMMUNITY OUTREACH, DEVELOPMENT OF INSTREAM
FLOW RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE BERTRAND WATERSHED, AND
TENMILE WATERSHED IMPROVEMENT EFFORTS IN THE AMOUNT OF
$226,655 (AB2004 -421)
Brenner stated she objects to Public Utility District (PUD) 1 being in charge of
this. The program includes many activities that deal with the public. The PUD
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
management does not do a good job of reaching out to the public. There has been
a lot of criticism of that lack of ability in the past. People who deal with the public
need to be able to deal well with the public. This is a major contract. When the
County is spending that kind of money, make sure the people in these positions
have proper people skills.
Caskey- Schreiber asked if there was any explanation during committee about
who would facilitate the outreach efforts.
Crawford stated the committee did not ask that question and get to that level
of detail. The PUD is being hired in the contract to produce specific deliverables.
Roy stated one of the goals with the water resources inventory area (WRIA)
was to try to get responsibility for this program spread out through other agencies
so it's not perceived as a County activity. Here is an instance of another agency
providing services, but the County is paying for it. This is an agency that can raise
its own revenue. She asked if they are ready to wean the County away from the
financial responsibility of WRIA.
Bruce Roll, Assistant Director, stated 2004 is the end of the Water Resources
fund. The fund is eliminated. That capacity no longer exists in the County. In the
future, the Council will need to consider its priorities in terms of County staff and
financing.
These are activities that the Planning group felt should move forward as they
finalize the final draft of the plan because they embody what the collective group
wants to implement at this point in time. As the plan comes out, there may be
other requests or needs identified.
Crawford moved to approve the request.
Motion carried 6 -1 with Brenner opposed.
9. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT AMENDMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND
PARAMETRIX, INC. TO COMPLETE THE REVIEW OF THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS
OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT AND AMEND, AS NEEDED, THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE IN THE
AMOUNT OF $15,275, FOR A TOTAL AMENDED CONTRACT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $90,275 (AB2004 -422)
10. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND FLEX -
PLAN SERVICES, INC. FOR THE DIRECT REIMBURSEMENT DENTAL
PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION FOR UNREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES IN
AN ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $24,500 (AB2004 -423)
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
11. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND COMPU-
TECH, INC. FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF
PHASE 1, PARTS 1 -3, OF THE WENET DATA INTEGRATION PROJECT
IN THE AMOUNT OF $279,200 (AB2004 -424)
12. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND COMPU
WORK PACIFIC, INC. FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION
OF PHASE 1, PARTS 1 -3, OF THE WENET DATA INTEGRATION
PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $192,150 (AB2004 -425)
13. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO
CONTRACT ADDENDUM #5 BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND DR.
GRANT DEGER TO RENEW THE JAIL PHYSICIAN'S SERVICE CONTRACT
FOR AN ADDITIONAL YEAR IN THE AMOUNT OF $44,000 (AB2004-
426)
14. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO
CONTRACT ADDENDUM #5 BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND
WHATCOM COUNSELING AND PSYCHIATRIC CLINIC TO RENEW THE
JAIL PSYCHIATRIC SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR AN ADDITIONAL
YEAR IN THE AMOUNT OF $29,040 (AB2004 -427)
15. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT ADDENDUM BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND VISITING
NURSE PERSONAL SERVICES FOR RENEWAL OF CURRENT CONTRACT
AND TO PROVIDE FOR INCREASED LEVELS OF SERVICE, PERSONNEL
ADJUSTMENTS, AND EXPANDED COVERAGE IN THE AMOUNT OF
$89,704 FOR A TOTAL AMENDED CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF
$536,550 (AB2004 -428)
16. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO
CONTRACT ADDENDUM #4 BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND
HOAGLAND PHARMACY TO RENEW THE JAIL PHARMACY AGREEMENT
FOR AN ADDITIONAL YEAR IN AN ESTIMATED AMOUNT OF $189,778
(AB2004 -429)
17. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
INTERDEPARTMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY
JAIL AND PUBLIC WORKS, RIVER AND FLOOD FOR WORK CREW
SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $68,237.50 (AB2004 -430)
18. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
AWARD OF BID #04 -89 FOR REPAIR OF THE RAINWATER LEADERS
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, 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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
AT THE COURTHOUSE TO THE LOW BIDDER, DIAMACO, INC. IN THE
AMOUNT OF $64,551.04 (AB2004 -431)
19. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
AWARD OF BID #04 -90 FOR ADDITIONS TO THE PUBLIC WORKS
CENTRAL SHOP TO THE LOW BIDDER, EBENAL GENERAL IN THE
AMOUNT OF $258,305.86 (AB2004 -432)
20. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
AWARD OF BID #04 -94 FOR A REPLACEMENT MULTIPURPOSE
DITCHING MACHINE TO THE LOW BIDDER, FARMERS EQUIPMENT IN
THE AMOUNT OF $164,800.21 (AB2004 -433)
21. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
AWARD OF BID #04 -95 FOR THE SUPPLY OF PRECAST CONCRETE
GIRDERS TO THE LOW BIDDER, PACIFIC CONCRETE, INC. IN THE
AMOUNT OF $140,005.39 (AB2004 -434)
22. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
PURCHASE OF TWO POLICE MOTORCYCLES USING THE WASHINGTON
STATE CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $40,715 (AB2004 -435)
23. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
PURCHASE OF TEN POLICE VEHICLES USING THE WASHINGTON
STATE CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $235,000 (AB2004 -436)
24. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
PURCHASE OF FOUR FULL SIZE UTILITY VEHICLES USING THE
WASHINGTON STATE CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $112,600
(AB2004 -437)
25. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
RESIDENTIAL LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND
RONALD MORGAN TO LEASE THE HOUSE LOCATED AT 3211 NORTH
SHORE ROAD, BELLINGHAM IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,350 PER MONTH
(AB2004 -438)
OTHER ITEMS
16. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR LAKE WHATCOM TRIBUTARY
MONITORING — CITY OF BELLINGHAM (AB2004 -311A)
Crawford reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee
and moved to approve the correct amount of $28,693.13.
Motion carried unanimously.
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, 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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN, CHAPTER 2 — CHERRY POINT URBAN GROWTH AREA (AB2004-
395A)
Caskey- Schreiber opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the
public hearing.
Fleetwood moved to forward to the concurrency meeting.
Motion carried 6 -0 with McShane out of the room.
2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN, CHAPTER 2 — CUSTER PROVISIONAL URBAN GROWTH AREA
(AB2004 -396A)
Crawford stated he works for the firm that did the initial land use work on
this project. If this project were to go through, it's likely the firm he works for will
have considerable additional work to do. Therefore, he will recuse himself from
participating in the hearing or voting on the matter.
(Clerk's Note: Councilmember Crawford left the room.)
Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, gave a staff report. The staff
recommendation is to continue the urban growth area (UGA) designation for two
more years, until 2006. She also recommends adding more policies to make
wetland mitigation and delineation clearer in the master plan. The Department of
Transportation says the area would be valuable for passenger rail facilities in
addition to freight facilities. The Planning and Development Committee introduced
an alternate ordinance to eliminate the UGA altogether and return the area to a
rural designation. That is the subject of this public hearing. She identified related
Comprehensive Plan policies in other chapters that would have to be modified.
McShane opened the public hearing and the following people spoke:
Dana Feldmann, 3161 Arnie Road, Custer, submitted (on file, exhibit D) and
read his testimony. Remove the UGA designation and revert the area back to a
rural, one unit per ten acre (R10A) zone.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
Feldmann continued to read his testimony.
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 8
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
1 Jim Trull, 7878 Birch Bay Drive, Birch Bay, submitted information (on file,
2 exhibit E) and stated that Custer is unique. The Custer project fulfills national
3 mandates, State law, and County policies and goals for intermodal transfer
4 facilities. Local people need this facility to move goods throughout the state. The
5 Growth Management Hearings Board deemed the facility as an essential public
6 facility. A delay in the process had to do with water availability. Water is now
7 available from the Public Utility District (PUD). Over 200 surrounding neighbors
8 support the project. California Creek is a valuable asset, which they've talked
9 about. Custer Creek flows through his property at 20 cubic feet per second (cfs).
10 It's been seriously degraded from cattle, horses, herbicides, and fertilizers. They
11 will correct this problem. Support the facility.
12
13 Gordon Rodgers, Whatcom Council of Governments (COG), stated COG has
14 developed a regional transportation model with a cross - border component. They've
15 recently run scenarios based on the County Comprehensive Plan that relate to
16 cross - border movement. In 2000, 1.3 million trucks moved across the border. In
17 the year 2030, 3.7 trucks will move across the border. That movement includes
18 about $13.5 billion in goods traveling back and forth across the border. It's not a
19 small thing. Everyone is talking about the doubling of freight in the next ten to 20
20 years.
21
22 The property is unique because of its proximity of the highway and the rail
23 service to the site. People are looking to get trucks and autos off the highways.
24 It's hardest to say today what the highest and best transportation use for the
25 property is. Two years for a project may not be enough. Support the intermodal
26 transfer facility.
27
28 Bill Campin, 3101 Arnie Road, Custer, stated he agrees with Mr. Dana
29 Feldmann. He lives directly across from transfer facility site in Custer. The transfer
30 facility has not been viable. The people who live there don't know what to do with
31 their properties. The proponents have had long enough. Returning the zoning to
32 rural doesn't close the door for the applicants. They can still produce a viable
33 project. Return the zone to rural.
34
35 Louis Leclezio, Bellevue, submitted (on file, exhibit F) and read his testimony.
36 Allow a two year extension of the UGA.
37
38 William Popp, William Popp Associates, 14400 Bel Red Road, Bellevue, stated
39 he is a transportation planning engineer who conducted the original traffic impact
40 study in 1991 for the site currently owned by the Grand Ronde Tribe. This site fits
41 into the interest of intermodal facility. Burlington- Northern approached Louis
42 Leclezio in 1991 to intercept truck traffic for deliver to rail service north of the
43 Seattle facility. He became an investor in a companion 60 -acre site when
44 convinced of the project's viability. The north -south traffic is huge in California and
45 Oregon. An intermodal site near the border is ideal to intercept Canadian truck
46 traffic. This site is unique because it has 440 acres and because of the
47 configuration of the site.
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 9
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Mark Aamot, 3225 Arnie Road, stated he is opposed to the intermodal
facility. He's lived where he does for many years. They didn't choose to live next
to an industrial site. If the UGA zone goes through, it will destroy their property.
Government should be for the people.
Eric Laschever, 600 University Street, Suite 3600 Seattle, submitted
information (on file, exhibit G) and stated he represents the Confederated Tribes of
Grand Ronde. The tribes acquired 290 acres in a Sheriff's auction due to the Trulls'
foreclosure. The tribes are not in partnership with the Trulls. The tribes asked the
Planning Commission to extend the deadline for a master plan, which the Planning
Commission granted. It spent a lot of time talking about viability. Viability is about
the designation, not the viability of any one entity. They can't assess viability by
the fact that seven years have passed and one person has not succeeded.
Some people view a Sheriff's auction as a market test of whether a project is
viable. It's very unusual for people other than those holding the paper to bid at an
auction. Look at the viability in terms of the site's characteristics.
There is an opportunity through one ownership and master planning to
create a better environmental solution for this property than if the property is
developed by a lot of residential units. Planning Commission Member Menzies
supports the UGA deadline extension because he recognizes, as a shellfish grower,
the better environmental solution through the master plan. He asked the Council to
adopt the Planning Commission proposal.
Daneen Aubertin - Keller, 9615 Grand Ronde Road, Grand Ronde, Oregon,
stated she represents the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde. The tribes
acquired the property through a Sheriff's sale on November 5, 2004. The property
has a one year redemption period in which the borrower can redeem the property.
The property is 209 acres. The tribes are discussing possible development of the
property with the Lummi Tribe. The Tribe is a good steward of the land. If
developed, it will be developed consistent with the preservation and environmental
needs of the property. The Tribe asks the Council to adopt the Planning
Commission proposal to allow the Grand Ronde and Lummi Tribes to work together
to develop the property.
Caskey- Schreiber asked what the Tribe has in mind for the property.
Aubertin - Keller stated the plan for the property when purchased was for an
intermodal property. At this time, that appears to be the best use of the property
given the railway and connection to Interstate 5. At this time, the Grand Ronde
Tribe has only had ownership for four weeks, and is in the process of doing that
planning.
Henry Cagey, Lummi Nation Economic Director, and Lummi Council Member,
stated the Tribe looks at this as an economic opportunity. There are some
problems to work through. They are interested in acquiring property off-
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, 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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
reservation because most of the reservation is in the floodplain. He asked the
Council to adopt the Planning Commission recommendation.
Caskey- Schreiber asked if the Lummi Nation would share ownership with the
Grand Ronde Tribe. Cagey stated they haven't begun official discussions yet. The
Lummi Council will meet with the Grand Ronde representatives tomorrow.
Dwayne Schaffner, 3501 North Shore Boulevard NE, Tacoma, stated he owns
a small parcel in the 440 acre Custer site. He is recently retired, and may retire in
the Bellingham area. One aspect he's interested in is a community with a
reasonable residential tax base. A community in a county that participates in a
project such as this would be a good place to live.
He estimates that 60 percent of the 440 acres could be developed. The other
40 percent would be preserved for environmental purposes. The tax base of the
developed area would be between $23 million and $57.5 million. That's a valuable
asset in the county. The site would also be valuable because of the transportation
and B &O taxes collected from a developed site. Those taxes are more stable than
sales taxes, for example.
A second aspect of the economic value of the site would be the living wage
jobs that would be developed. Tacoma announced a new terminal site of 160 acres
will provide 650 full -time jobs. Out of those, it appears about 400 of those jobs are
not related to the maritime industry. The investors assume a similar amount of job
development would occur on the Custer site. The average wage for the Tacoma
jobs would be $53,000 per year. The site has many economic advantages for the
County. He asked the Council to adopt the Planning Commission recommendation.
Charla Wilder, 7931 Valley View Road, Custer, stated she supports the
project. It is a very viable project for Whatcom County.
Tom Carpenter, 5391 Northwest Road, stated he owns a piece of the 440
acres. He bought the property to build a house. After listening to both sides, it's a
good idea to develop an intermodal facility. The traffic on Interestate 5 is getting
worse and worse. It would benefit Whatcom County.
Jack Philbert, Puyallup, stated he is part owner in the property. His expertise
in biology and medicine. He has access to the head of the Water Quality Division in
King and Pierce Counties. He asked them about the situation as it pertains to this
site. The Council has two alternatives tonight. The Whatcom County Conservation
District will work actively with farmers to make sure the water quality and runoff
from animals is controlled, but it's voluntary. If an intermodal went in, the
permitting process would be stringent and held to a higher standard. From an
environmental standpoint, the proposal is a positive, not a negative. Also, they're
trying to get trucks off the road by using rail. Rail uses about one -third the amount
of hydrocarbons. He supports the intermodal facility.
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, 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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Bob Wiesen, 3314 Douglas Road, Ferndale, stated this issue has two
components: planning and transportation. Location is the most important thing.
This location is the best site for an intermodal facility because of the close proximity
of the highway and rail.
His educational background is a degree in transportation from the University
of Washington. He operated a trucking service serving local, small businesses that
are locally owned. He established an intermodal transportation service serving
customers all over the United States. This facility would reduce truck traffic on
Interstate 5. The congestion on Interstate 5 is costing local businesses money. He
supports the intermodal facility. It took his trucks at least two hours per day or
longer to go back and forth from Seattle.
These types of facilities take years to establish. Time is of the essence. If,
when first proposed, there hadn't been so many obstacles, the facility would have
been up and running by now. However, there was so much contention from the
beginning that they missed that window. When the next window comes up, it
would be unfortunate if they weren't ready.
JoAnne Creasey, 7650 - 4t" Street, Custer, stated she lives a little over a mile
from the site. She has fought against this proposal for the past 15 years. They
have waited through one process after another. The proponents have had 15 years
to put together their plan. Nothing has happened in that time. Now, they're asking
to be put on hold for another two years. These people should have decided to get
the project underway in this time. Don't put the residents on hold for another 15
years while they do nothing. Put the zoning back to rural.
Win Wilson, 3015 Arnie Road, Custer, stated this proposition started when
Councilmembers Nelson and Brenner were on the Council. They've heard the
arguments. The proponents of the operation have borrowed money to develop a
master plan. They blew the money. They were forced into foreclosure. Now, they
have tried to join with the Lummi Tribe. They don't know what an intermodal
transfer facility is. They have no concept of it at all. In addition, the truck drivers
from Vancouver get paid by the mile. A facility here won't work. The Burlington
Northern has a facility in North Vancouver that handles intermodal facility work
every hour.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side 8.)
Wilson continued to state that if the railroads had wanted this facility, they
would have gotten it going. The Council should revert the area back to its rural
designation. After that, someone can apply for the proper zoning when they come
up with a master plan.
Chris Smith, 8528 Custer School Road, Custer, stated he's attended every
meeting on this issue in the past 11 years. If the railroads really wanted this
project, they would be here to make their voices heard. They never have. The
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 12
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
only time he's heard anything about the railroads was second -hand information,
which is hearsay. There's no document that says the railroad is behind this
intermodal facility. The railroads don't want the intermodal facility. It isn't one of
their needs. This whole thing is a giant red herring. Don't extend the UGA zone.
John Hruby, 7401 Valley View Road, stated he has been involved in the
process from the beginning. The people who oppose the project are concerned
about this project not paying for its infrastructure. The Growth Management Act
came at the right time. From the beginning, the idea was to develop the project
and then services will come. He supported the idea of the provisional growth area
because it forced the master plan concept. That is always an option for any piece
of land. This is not a viable concept. Truck drivers are paid by the miles. If
someone wants to, they can develop a master plan for something else. He is
against the intermodal facility.
Jack Petree, 2995 Sunset, stated 14 hears ago, he developed most of the
public policy arguments supporting this facility. He's had no contact at all with it
since. It seems that they have three things to consider. First, the project has the
potential to take several thousand trucks off of Interstate 5. That's a huge
environmental benefit.
Second, two nations, the Lummi Nation and the Grand Ronde Nation, are
willing to look at this and decide what may be done. If the zone stays UGA for a
couple of years, they've lost nothing. The land has remained vacant for 14 years.
That's what the opponents want. If the land stays vacant for two more years, then
stays vacant forever, there's not problem. If a viable facility that meets the
Council's standards can be developed, they have benefited greatly. By continuing
the UGA zoning designation, they lose nothing and potentially gain a lot.
Doug Worthington, 7811 Hamm Road, Custer, stated the proposed site is in a
flood plain. There's no way to get the water out because beaver dams are
downstream. Look at the fact that there is potential for flooding.
Hearing no one else, McShane closed the public hearing.
Nelson moved to continue the provisional urban growth area for two more
years. In 1997, the Council worked extensively on this. There was a five -year
window for this project to happen, which was extended to seven years. He asked if
the County has any information on whether water is an issue for the project. An
environmental impact statement (EIS) may be required for the project.
Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, stated there is nothing from the
water district. The Public Utility District (PUD) 1 sent a letter saying it now has the
ability to serve the area with the necessary water. The County also has a master
plan submitted by Mr. Trull. It has some detail about the water, sewer, and
infrastructure needed, but it wasn't detailed enough about where the water would
come from and how it would be laid out. That plan was done in 2000. It's got a lot
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 13
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
of information, but not to the level of detail for the staff to decide whether or not
the project is viable. The 2000 plan didn't say where the water would come from,
what would happen with the stormwater, and what would be done with the
wetlands. Of the 450 acres, about 57 percent is wetlands or stream buffers. Only
191 acres, which is 43 percent, is likely to be developable. The hearing tonight is
just on eliminating the urban growth area (UGA).
Nelson amended his motion to forward to the concurrency meeting.
McShane stated that if the Council approves this ordinance, it would move
forward to the concurrency hearing. If the Council does not approve this ordinance,
it would need to vote on the version recommended by the Planning Commission,
which already had a public hearing.
Nelson withdrew his motion and moved to remove the overlay zone from
the Custer area.
Brenner stated she is in favor of the ordinance. Nothing has changed except
the people in the area have had to wait seven years. The proposal hasn't ever
been viable. The owners are trying to get the Lummi Nation to buy into this
scheme, but most of the investors are from out of the area. It's time to let the
residents get back to their lives. They must respect the residents. This project is
not for the greater good of the community. She's disappointed that staff felt
flooding, stormwater detention, and wetlands weren't significant. Those issues
should be at the forefront of their decisions.
Caskey- Schreiber stated she is in favor of the ordinance. She initially
supported this project because it's hard to find industrial land and thought the
project had been given the green light. Now, they don't know the intent of the new
owners. They could do something other than an intermodal facility. This may not
be the best place for an intermodal facility. She doesn't agree that Burlington -
Northern has its site on this. She used to work for Burlington- Northern and knows
that the company can get things done quickly when it wants to. She would feel
better if it was a Lummi owned project. She's leery about turning over their natural
resource areas to outsiders. She's also concerned about the low lands subject to
flooding. Adding impervious surfaces can increase that problem. The owners have
had 14 years to make this happen.
Roy stated she is in favor of the ordinance. This project is a fantasy. There
are no letters of support from the truckers, railroads, or others who would actually
use this. If the new owners want to come forward with a proposal, they can.
California Creek, which drains into Drayton Harbor, runs right through the middle of
this property. A light industrial site is not necessarily more environmentally healthy
for the water. Until they see a plan and the project becomes a reality.
Goodwin stated she has a letter from Burlington- Northern Railroad dated
September 2004 supporting the continuation of zoning for the site. She read a
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 14
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
portion of the letter. There is also a similar letter from the Columbia Rail
Intermodal Systems.
Fleetwood stated he is in favor of the ordinance. This was a tough decision.
The neighbors are against the project and those with a financial interest are in favor
of the project. They're balancing two important values expressed in the
Comprehensive Plan, which are the value of industry and the value of rural lands.
He is impressed by findings in the ordinance regarding rural land protection and the
industrial land analysis. He questions the actual benefit to Whatcom County. The
applicant has been on notice for years that he had to comply with conditions. He
didn't comply. Hopefully, redemption will afford people recovery of some of their
investments. At the end of the day, the lands should be rural because they are
beautiful. Nothing precludes an applicant from coming forward with a
Comprehensive Plan amendment in the future.
Nelson stated this is a tough decision. They must also look at the positive
economic impacts of this to the community. He asked if there has been a public
process on this project, which was promised in 1997. Goodwin stated there hasn't
been any public process. The owner of the 209 acres submitted an inadequate
master plan in 2000. If they had submitted a complete master plan, the staff
would have forwarded it to the Hearing Examiner for the public process. The plan
submitted in 2000 wasn't detailed enough to proceed with. If the plan were
completed, all the issues would be discussed during the public hearing process.
Nelson asked if there is a detriment to leaving the designation for two more
years. Goodwin stated the only detriment is that the adjacent and surrounding
property owners are uncertain about what will be next door. The advantage is that
the acreage isn't divided and developed into ten - acre "ranchettes," which can't be
recovered. Another option is to designate the acreage agriculture so it stays in
large parcels.
Brenner stated it's easy to say they have an incomplete master plan.
However, the details missing are the ones they need to determine if there is a
viable plan. There is no viable plan. Custer is not just an area of rural resources.
It's also a community. Stop destroying small communities in the name of some
far - fetched progress. Whatcom County seems so open to outsiders coming here
and making promises that aren't viable. Protect the rights of the people who
already live here.
Fleetwood asked if a yes vote on this item is a vote to return the land to a
rural designation.
Nelson stated his concern is that a change to the rural zone could have an
adverse affect on the economy. It is important to allow two years for the
proponents to complete the process. Transportation is a critical issue they must
not ignore. This is a possible east -west corridor. Bringing outsiders into the
community is not a negative. If it were, the community wouldn't have Intalco,
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 15
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
British Petroleum (BP), and many other businesses that provide an economic base
for the community. They have to allow flexibility for proposals. He will support
extending the zoning for two years.
McShane stated the Transportation Chapter goals and policies may need to
change if this ordinance were to pass. Goodwin stated the Council should vote on
whether or not it intends to revert the designation to rural. If it does, continue to
the next meeting to decide which of the policies should be stricken for consistency.
At the least, strike or modify policy 6Q -3 in the Transportation Chapter and 7C -6 in
the Economics Chapter. The Council can do that tonight.
Brenner stated it's not right for people from the outside to destroy
communities of people who already live here. They keep saying that the two -year
deadline is a drop -dead date. However, that could change given a different council.
Let the people who live in the community get back to their lives.
McShane stated he heard good arguments about the transportation issue,
but it's a statewide issue. He wants to see a broader view of transportation. He
doesn't see the project being good for Whatcom County overall. He supports the
ordinance. He restated the motion to forward the ordinance to the concurrency
meeting as it is, to remove the provisional UGA designation for the Custer area.
McShane moved to amend the Transportation Chapter by deleting goal 6Q
and it's policies completely. In the future, people may want to come forward with
an intermodal idea. He questions whether having that as a goal of the County is
necessary.
Fleetwood stated Goal 6Q isn't inconsistent with what they are doing with
Custer. The goal specifies supporting facilities where feasible. They can keep the
goal and be consistent with this ordinance.
Brenner stated she is against the motion to amend. These goals don't bother
her. They have a positive aspect for county residents in general.
Nelson stated he doesn't support the motion to amend. There are few places
where they can develop an east -west corridor. This is one of those places. The
county has a unique deep -water port and may be the only remaining deep -water
port with significant land area and a rail line that can go to the area. If they are
going to remove this goal, they won't talk about any intermodal facilities.
McShane stated he questions why Whatcom County needs to be an
intermodal location. A good intermodal location is good for the nation and state.
Brenner asked if the county could have a different kind of intermodal facility
for shipping things within the county.
McShane stated that if they want to do that, they can. The County doesn't
need to support it specifically.
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 16
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Caskey- Schreiber stated she is most afraid of developing the port at Cherry
Point for shipping purposes. It is a vulnerable shoreline for habitat and a state
significant herring bed. Don't allow deep water shipping going on out there.
Seattle and Vancouver are doing that job. It will lead to rapid deterioration of the
county.
Motion to amend carried 4 -2 with Nelson and Fleetwood opposed and
Crawford out of the room.
Caskey- Schreiber stated it should be the railroad's burden to make
connections between the communities. Don't drive a railroad through farmland and
rural land.
Roy moved to amend the Economics Chapter by deleting policy 7C -6. She
questioned why the County is in the business of transportation planning. It's a
state or federal issue. It's also an issue for private companies. She'd vote for an
intermodal facility if it would reduce truck traffic on Interstate 5 between the border
and Bellingham. It won't.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape two, side A.)
Nelson stated the reason they get involved in these things, as they do with
all- weather roads, is to facilitate commerce, which creates jobs.
Fleetwood stated the language says they will investigate the option. It
doesn't obligate the County to anything. He won't support the motion to amend.
McShane stated that if someone wants to develop the Cherry Point port
facility, they can convince the Council it's a good thing to do.
Motion to amend carried 4 -2 with Nelson and Fleetwood opposed and
Crawford out of the room.
McShane moved to amend the Transportation Chapter to delete policy 6P-
2.
Motion to amend carried 4 -2 with Nelson and Fleetwood opposed and
Crawford out of the room.
3.
McShane moved to amend the Transportation Chapter to delete policy 6P-
Brenner stated that this policy should remain.
Caskey- Schreiber asked if this policy mandates the County to do this. She's
never worked on something like this.
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 17
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Nelson stated these are policies and goals. It doesn't mean they will happen.
Caskey- Schreiber stated she's fine with the language.
McShane stated there is no need to go forward with developing incentives for
these facilities.
Motion to amend failed 3 -3 with Nelson, Fleetwood, and Brenner
opposed.
McShane stated the Council needs to have a public hearing on these changes
to the Transportation Chapter.
Brenner stated the Council would have a public hearing on those issues, not
on the Custer rezone.
Nelson stated Councilmember Crawford should be voting on some of these
transportation issues. He doesn't have a conflict on the transportation issues.
Dave Grant, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, stated Councilmember Crawford
may vote on that particular issue. Because of the tie vote, circumstances allow him
to cast his vote in spite of a conflict.
(Clerk's Note: Councilmember Crawford returned to meeting to break the tie
vote.)
McShane restated the motion that just received a tie vote to amend
the Transportation Chapter to delete policy 6P -3.
Motion to amend failed 3 -4 with Roy, Caskey- Schreiber, and McShane
in favor.
Nelson asked why the Council would not redo any of the votes on the
Transportation Chapter, for which there is not conflict, if Councilmember Crawford
wants his vote cast.
Crawford stated his vote would have no impact on the outcome of the votes.
Goodwin suggested:
• Approving the original ordinance to go forward to the concurrency
meeting, and
• Drafting a new ordinance to be Introduced, with the changes to the
Transportation Chapter for consistency.
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 18
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Motion to forward the ordinance to the concurrency meeting carried
5 -1 with Nelson opposed and Crawford recusing himself and absent from
the room.
The Council will introduce an ordinance with the amendments to the
Transportation and Economics Chapter on January 11, 2005.
(Clerk's Note: The Council took a break at 9:33 p.m. The following portion of
the minutes is recorded on the last half of side B of tape two and the beginning of
side A of tape three.)
3. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMP. PLAN,
CHAPTER 3 — HOUSING (AB2004 -353)
McShane opened the public hearing and the following people spoke:
Mary Dickinson, Building Industry Association (BIA) Governmental Affairs,
stated the ordinance needs some work. She's objected to portions of the ordinance
from the beginning. The members of her association have been working for years
on lot clustering, varied lot sizes, small family dwellings, accessory dwellings,
minimizing permit times, and minimizing other delays that add to the cost of the
housing. The latter part of this chapter is radical. The chapter as a whole is
incomplete. It advocates for housing redistribution methods will make homes more
unaffordable. The Housing Advisory Committee from the 1990's was not used for
this update. There should be creative choices for low income housing. Land trusts
and cooperative housing should not be the only choices in the housing plan.
She is most concerned about inclusionary zoning, which will mandate setting
aside housing units for low- income housing as a condition of the building permit. In
reality, it will create greater housing un- affordability, according to a study.
Paul Schissler, Kulshan Community Land Trust Executive Director, stated he
helped update the Housing Chapter. Fifty percent of the community cannot afford
housing unless they already have housing or a large down payment from
somewhere else. The rents are out of sync with wages. Home prices in the last
nine months have climbed more quickly than wages. Home prices have increased
an average of 10 percent per year. Wages have increased an average of three
percent per year.
Kulshan Community Land Trust received grant money to find alternatives,
which it brought to the County staff. Much of the Housing Chapter remains as it
was in 1997. There is one major new goal. The action items remain mostly
unchanged. The commission added the last 12 action items that are used
elsewhere. The inclusionary zoning information cited by Ms. Dickenson doesn't
represent the best practices. There are many other factors that play in the area
cited that are causing housing prices to be as high as they are. There are ways to
adopt inclusionary zoning proposals that don't require builders to give up anything
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 19
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
and that allow builders to make a profit. As a housing advocate, he's willing to
work with the BIA and anyone else on this challenging problem. He asked the
County to find more time and money to work on these issues next year.
Jack Petree, 2955 Sunset, Bellingham, stated he is in favor of the ordinance.
Remember that this chapter requires land supply to achieve affordable housing.
Keep those things in mind. The state has information to allow cities and counties to
address affordable housing and special -needs housing. Affordability is as much an
issue of where the home is as how the home is built. Many of the future jobs will
be in Bellingham. Bellingham has to be a focus of affordability. Address
affordability efficiently and well in the places where people who need affordability
live.
Brien Thane, 218 Bayside Road, Bellingham, stated he supports the proposed
Housing Chapter. He moved to the community six years ago, and was lucky
enough to find a house that works for him. Today, he wouldn't be able to qualify
for a mortgage to buy his home. The job market isn't overflowing with high - paying
jobs. Adopt this chapter. Implement as many recommendations as possible so
they can have a healthy community for everyone.
Hearing no one else, McShane closed the public hearing.
Brenner moved to forward to the concurrency meeting. The BIA had some
valid comments. However, the inclusionary zoning recommended in the chapter is
as an incentive, not a requirement. She would never support a requirement as a
part of the building permit. Land owners and builders should not be forced to
subsidize others' housing.
Brenner moved to amend action item 34, "Develop inclusionary zoning
incentives that integrate affordable housing...."
McShane stated he is against the motion to amend. This applies only to
inclusionary zoning, which won't be everywhere.
Motion to amend failed 3 -4 with Crawford, Nelson, and Brenner in
favor.
Crawford moved to amend action item 32, "Allocate
"fair share " When determining UGA's, look at
the options to create affordable housing units that are needed...."
McShane stated he is against the amendment. They have established urban
growth areas. They know that there will be a problematic affordable housing issue
in the county, no matter what the land supply is. Market forces alone will create an
issue. There are UGA's that have not yet been upzoned. As they work with the
cities, address the issue as much as they can now, before they need to expand the
UGA's in the future.
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 20
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Crawford stated UGA size has a lot to do with housing cost. Make sure there
is an inventory of buildable land that assures and adequate supply. How much of
that buildable land exists will have a direct correlation to housing affordability.
Brenner stated she agrees that land supply has something to do with
affordability. She asked at what point they stop. Land supply has something to do
with affordability, but so do market forces. If they keep expanding UGA's,
eventually the cities will be totally enmeshed in each other. She asked how they
solve the problem of keeping adequate separations between the cities and still keep
people from bumping up to each other.
Caskey- Schreiber stated they can't build their way to affordable housing.
Housing prices are created by market demand. Eventually, they will run out of
buildable lands and housing prices skyrocket. People want to come to this area
because the County is protecting its amenities. If they keep building for growth,
they will eventually lose their quality of life. It's better to incorporate affordable
housing into any development they approve. Houses are not going to drop in price.
Fleetwood stated the notion of allocating land supply for single tract housing
only works for so long. The Comprehensive Plan, visioning process, and the Council
is committed to preserving rural lands. That means that at some point in time,
they have to alter their perceptions of things and they must alter from business as
usual. They know that incremental expansion of growth boundaries over time
result in cities that bounce against each other. Having to build up will happen when
the entire county becomes urbanized. They may as well contemplate and
implement that now so they can preserve amenities.
Crawford stated the councilmembers have a fundamental disagreement
about growth. With the current policies, they are urbanizing the entire county by
not having enough urban growth area so people build on five- and ten -acre parcels
all over.
McShane stated the cities should allocate affordable housing in the current
UGA's because they are the areas close to jobs.
Motion to amend failed 2 —5 with Crawford and Nelson in favor.
Crawford moved to eliminate Action Item 33 and the header above it on
chapter page 3 -24, "Pelmey PFieFity in FaVeF ef PeFFnanent Gengmunity Be " It
has been said that the proposals are so vaguely written that they are nearly
meaningless. The idea of solving the growth and housing affordability issues with
this action item does not represent the ultimate solution. Folks still want to own
their own homes as an investment strategy that compounds the investment.
Brenner suggested a friendly amendment to delete the heading, but leave
the action item.
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 21
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Crawford amended his motion to amend action item 33, "As an option for
home ownership affordability, -Sseek perpetual affordability..." and to amend the
heading, " Nonprofit Rental
Housing and Community Land Trusts"
Caskey- Schreiber stated she is against the motion to amend. She likes the
existing language and how it highlights the Kulshan Community Land Trust. She
explained the Kulshan Community Land Trust program.
Nelson stated he doesn't agree with having just one tool in the toolbox, and
the program offered by the Kulshan Community Land Trust, as just described, is
frightening and is almost like a Soviet communal system.
Brenner stated the amendment doesn't make it the highest priority. It's one
of all the option.
McShane stated he is against the motion. The policies regarding affordable
housing should be viewed as in favor of a permanent community benefit. The
action item is one tool in the toolbox. It will work for some and is already working
for some people now. It's a good program to achieve affordable housing for some.
Roy stated the priority is community benefit. She won't support the motion.
Motion to amend failed 3 -4 with Crawford, Brenner, and Nelson in
favor.
Crawford moved to eliminate the heading "Inclusionary Zoning" and Action
Items 34 and 35. Studies looked at advocacy issues brought up by inclusionary
housing from a national database, not just the Bay Area of California. The study is
legitimate. He read from the conclusion that inclusionary zoning only makes
housing more expensive.
Brenner stated that could happen if it was just a requirement, but not if they
provide incentives. When they give people extra units, it offsets the costs.
McShane stated the authors of the study is a nonpartisan public policy think
tank promoting choice competition and a dynamic market economy, with a mission
to promote libertarian principles and individual liberty free markets. The study may
be skewered. This action item will require careful review to move forward. If they
find that the tools aren't useful, the County won't move forward with them.
Roy stated they don't have to do the same system that is not working in
California. They can be creative and make it work. Look at every option they can
to increase the range of affordable options in the community. She heard the same
report about the system from National Public Radio (NPR), which has a different
slant than the study.
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 22
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Motion to amend failed 2 -5 with Nelson and Crawford in favor.
Crawford moved to delete Action Items 36, 37, and 44. They all deal with
tax policy, tax credits, and tax revenue. The language is vague and interpretation
is difficult.
Brenner stated Action Item 37 uses the term incentive,' which is a good
thing. Consider anything that provides affordable housing. Policies tend to be
vague so they can have a broad approach. One incentive she'd consider is tax
breaks for people who have affordable housing.
Nelson stated there are a lot of ramifications to the tax code and the
County's financial well- being. The Council needs to consider the financial impacts.
He suggested a friendly amendment to amend Action Items 36 and 37, "Seek
and adept Explore...."
Crawford accepted the friendly amendment and withdrew his motion to
delete Action Item 44.
Fleetwood stated he supports the amendment. Seek' and adopt' don't
necessarily go together.
McShane stated he is opposed to the amendment. There is a serious
affordability issue currently. If they can seek out and find legislative authority to
put forward these policies in a meaningful way, they should commit to doing that
now as an action item. If it doesn't work, it won't be adopted in the end. Making
the statement to pursue this now is important.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape three, side A.)
Brenner stated she agreed with Councilmember Fleetwood.
Motion carried 4 -3 with Nelson, McShane, and Caskey- Schreiber
opposed.
Crawford moved to amend Action Item 40, "fie Consider the creation of
a housing trust fund...."
McShane asked if there is currently a housing trust fund available through
fees charged in the Auditor's Office. The fund is already there. Keeping it as an
action item would be a good thing.
Brenner stated that if the fund is already there, say they will use the housing
trust fund.
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 23
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Crawford stated they are currently using 20/60 dollars for the assistance of
homeless populations in shelters. There might be a way to create a housing trust
fund for home ownership. Schissler stated that's what this was intended to do.
The 20/60 money is prescribed by State legislation only for extremely low income
housing needs. This housing trust fund concept is used, for example, on the east
side of King County. They are not 20/60 dollars. They are other funding sources.
About 12 jurisdictions in east King County pool their funds to have a better impact.
Fleetwood suggested a friendly amendment to amend Action Item 40,
"Consider and, if viable, C-create a housing trust fund...."
Crawford accepted the friendly amendment.
McShane stated he is opposed to the motion. Make a commitment to these
types of actions, which are critical to the issue of affordable housing. Having a
trust fund is a commitment they should make.
Fleetwood stated he is persuaded by Councilmember McShane.
Nelson stated they are not going to create affordable housing simply with
these tools. Jobs will also have to be created.
Motion failed 2 -5 with Crawford and Nelson in favor.
Crawford moved to amend Action Items 42 and 43, which are from the
Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 84.52.105. It's a levy that is allowed by State
law, up to $.50 per $1,000 of assessed value. It has to go to very low income
households, with the determination there is an emergency. It was designed to deal
with a federal matching requirement. This was a property tax levy created for an
extremely distressed area. Whatcom County, in its current Comprehensive Plan,
should not talk about this levy. Whatcom County's situation wasn't the intent of
the State legislature.
Brenner stated the action items say they will consider the option. The
County should consider every option it can. Councilmember Crawford may be
wrong in his interpretation. Include the action item in case the County can use the
option.
Motion to amend failed 1 -6 with Crawford in favor.
Motion to forward to concurrency as amended carried 6 -1 with
Crawford opposed.
4. ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE 2005 WHATCOM COUNTY UNIFIED
FEE SCHEDULE (AB2004 -410)
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 24
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Brad Bennett, Finance Division Manager, stated the Unified Fee Schedule
implements the County Council's instructions to recover the cost of services
wherever possible. It identifies changes to fees mostly in the Parks Department
and Health Department.
McShane opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public
hearing.
Caskey- Schreiber moved to adopt the ordinance.
Crawford stated that at some point in the future, consider giving a better
rate to county residents who already contribute to the parks through their property
taxes. Encourage the folks who are paying taxes for the parks to use the parks.
Motion carried unanimously.
S. ORDINANCE ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE COUNTY -WIDE
PLANNING POLICIES, ADOPTED AS APPENDIX C OF THE WHATCOM
COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (AB2004 -272A)
Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, gave a staff report and stated
this is part of the County's seven year review. She recommends adopting these as
an appendix to the Comprehensive Plan, then revisit the amendments next year if
the cities make changes.
McShane opened the public hearing and the following people spoke:
Roland Harper, Sehome Planning and Planning Consultant for the cities of
Everson and Nooksack, stated the City of Nooksack accepted the amendments. The
City of Everson has not taken action. The City of Everson referenced policy N.6
prefers that the language be, "All jurisdictions should shall maximize...." Should' is
more realistic. It may be a good goal, but is not particularly achievable.
The origin of bringing this forward tonight was to get all the same
jurisdictions on the same page. The original Countywide Planning Policies was later
amended by Whatcom County unilaterally. Not all the jurisdictions have approved
the same version. The Growth Management Act (GMA), in RCW 36.70A.210, lays
out the procedure for adopting countywide planning policies. He's not sure
Whatcom County ever established the procedure initially. Ferndale did not adopt
the policies. It's ambiguous whether they are on solid ground for the GMA.
Consider whether it is appropriate to take action or go back and try to achieve
consensus.
Hearing no one else, McShane closed the public hearing.
McShane stated the procedures are difficult. Also, they have debated many
times the difference between shall' and 'should.'
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 25
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Brenner asked Mr. Grant if Mr. Harper is correct.
McShane stated staff recommends a procedure of how to deal with the issue
for the time being. Staff recommends conditional adoption, with provisions to
revisit them next year. It's a struggle to get all cities to work together.
Dave Grant, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, stated the County shall not and
should not leave the hearing open until the other jurisdictions adopt.
McShane moved to forward the ordinance to the concurrency meeting, with
the provision that the County will revisit them next year.
Nelson asked about the Countywide Transportation Facilities Strategies
section. He read item five and asked if the County can zone heavier densities that
can affect the level of service (LOS) and then ask new development to pay for it, or
if everyone shares equally in the benefit as new development occurs.
Hal Hart, Planning and Development Services Director, stated this is a
concurrency requirement that the cities and counties should agree on
transportation systems, who should pay, and when they should pay. An example is
if a very large shopping mall is developed and impacts a neighborhood. The
development would pay for the impacts to LOS.
Brenner stated they want development to pay its share of the cost of
maintaining LOS. Hart stated they are moving toward regional modeling.
Motion carried unanimously.
6. ORDINANCE ADOPTING A ONE -TENTH OF ONE - PERCENT SALES AND
USE TAX FOR THE PURPOSE OF FUNDING JAILS (AB2004 -412)
Brad Bennett, Finance Division Manager, gave a staff report and stated this is
an important step in the process of establishing the fund for the voter - approved
tax.
Fleetwood asked what the 'use' part of the sales and use tax is for. Bennett
stated that someone purchasing goods out -of -state without paying for a sales tax
must pay a use tax. It's difficult to enforce on individuals. Corporations and
governments that are audited do pay use taxes.
McShane opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public
hearing.
Caskey- Schreiber moved to adopt the ordinance.
Motion carried unanimously.
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 26
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
OTHER ITEMS
1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2004 WHATCOM COUNTY BUDGET,
FIFTEENTH REQUEST (AB2004 -411)
Crawford reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee
and moved to adopt the ordinance.
Motion carried unanimously.
2. APPOINTMENT TO CONSOLIDATED DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT NUMBER ONE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS - APPLICANT IS
JOHN DICKINSON (AB2004 -379)
McShane moved to appoint John Dickinson.
Motion carried unanimously.
3. APPOINTMENTS TO THE FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT ADVISORY
COMMITTEE, SPECIAL DISTRICTS AND IMPACTED CITIES POSITIONS
- SPECIAL DISTRICT APPLICANTS ARE ART ANDERSON AND RON
BRONSEMA; IMPACTED CITIES APPLICANTS ARE CARNELIA FOSTER
AND FRED POLIDER (AB2004 -304A) (COUNCIL ACTING AS FLOOD
CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS)
Caskey- Schreiber moved to appoint all applicants.
Motion carried unanimously.
4. YEAR END APPOINTMENTS TO VARIOUS BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
IN PREPARATION FOR THE YEAR 2005 (AB2004 -304)
Board of Equalization
Fleetwood nominated Gary Harris.
Nelson nominated David Parsons.
McShane closed the nominations.
Crawford voted for Parsons.
Caskey- Schreiber voted for Parsons.
Fleetwood voted for Harris.
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 27
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
McShane voted for Parsons.
Brenner voted for Parsons.
Nelson voted for Parsons.
Roy voted for Parsons.
The Council appointed David Parsons,
Whatcom Community Network
Brenner nominated Joan Myers.
The nomination carried unanimously,
Noxious Weed Control Board - District 1
Nelson moved to appoint Dale Yoder.
Motion carried unanimously.
Planning Commission - District 2
Crawford moved to appoint Ron Roosma and John Belisle by acclamation.
Motion carried unanimously.
Planning Commission - District 3
Brenner nominated all applicants.
Crawford voted for Simms.
Caskey- Schreiber voted for Lesow.
Fleetwood voted for Lesow.
McShane voted for Lesow.
Brenner voted for Lesow.
Nelson voted for Lesow.
Roy voted for Friedlob.
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 28
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
The Council appointed John Lesow.
Sewage Control Appeals Board - Unincorporated Area
McShane moved to appoint Adam Prince.
Brenner stated Mr. Lesow said he was willing to give up this position if he is
appointed to the Planning Commission. Mr. Prince has incredible qualifications.
Motion carried unanimously.
Utilities Planning and Advisory Committee - District 1
McShane moved to appoint Paul Stephensen.
Motion carried unanimously.
S. REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE EXECUTIVE'S REAPPOINTMENT OF
TODD JONES, WILLIAM DEGROOT AND CHARLES ANTHOLT TO THE
AGRICULTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AB2004 -442)
Caskey- Schreiber moved to confirm the appointments.
Motion carried unanimously.
6. REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE EXECUTIVE'S APPOINTMENT OF
PAUL STEPHENSON AND MARK POLHAMUS AND THE
REAPPOINTMENT OF ELLEN BARTON AND JEFF MARGOLIS TO THE
BICYCLE/ PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AB2004 -443)
Fleetwood moved to confirm the appointments.
Motion carried unanimously.
7. REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE EXECUTIVE'S REAPPOINTMENT OF
DAVE RALSTON TO THE COUNTY APPEALS BOARD (AB2004 -444)
Roy moved to confirm the appointment.
Motion carried unanimously.
8. REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE EXECUTIVE'S REAPPOINTMENT OF
DOUGLAS DOSTAL TO THE PURCHASE OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS
OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE (AB2004 -445)
Caskey- Schreiber moved to confirm the appointment.
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 29
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Motion carried unanimously.
9. REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE EXECUTIVE'S APPOINTMENT OF
SYLVIA THORPE AND PHILIP SHARPE, JR. TO THE WHATCOM
COUNTY ETHICS COMMISSION (AB2004 -446)
Brenner moved to confirm the appointments.
Motion carried unanimously.
10. REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE EXECUTIVE'S APPOINTMENT OF
TOM RICHARDSON AND THE REAPPOINTMENT OF JAMES HARLE TO
THE WHATCOM COUNTY MENTAL HEALTH ADVISORY BOARD
(AB2004 -447)
Brenner moved to confirm the appointments.
Motion carried unanimously.
11. REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE EXECUTIVE'S APPOINTMENT OF
GARY CHADWICK TO THE WHATCOM COUNTY PARKS AND
RECREATION COMMISSION (AB2004 -448)
Nelson moved to confirm the appointment.
Motion carried unanimously.
12. REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE EXECUTIVE'S REAPPOINTMENT OF
BRET BEAUPAIN, DEREK HOLZL AND LARRY STEELE TO THE
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
(AB2004 -449)
Crawford moved to confirm the appointments.
Motion carried unanimously.
13. REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE EXECUTIVE'S REAPPOINTMENT OF
ANDREA OLAH AND CHRIS FAIRBANKS TO THE MARINE RESOURCE
COMMITTEE (AB2004 -450)
McShane moved to confirm the appointments.
Motion carried unanimously.
14. REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE EXECUTIVE'S REAPPOINTMENT OF
JAN HUNTER TO THE RURAL LIBRARY BOARD (AB2004 -451)
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 30
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Fleetwood moved to confirm the appointment.
Motion carried unanimously.
2004 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
1. ORDINANCE ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE WHATCOM COUNTY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, CHAPTER 8, MINERAL RESOURCE LANDS
(AB2004 -400)
Roy reported for the Natural Resources Committee and stated this item was
held in committee.
OTHER ITEMS
15. RESOLUTION DECLARING THE POINT ROBERTS PUBLIC HOSPITAL
DISTRICT ELECTION AS A VOTE -BY -MAIL ELECTION (AB2004 -377A)
Brenner moved to approve the resolution.
Motion carried unanimously.
17. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY
SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, SECTION 23.100.20.57,
AQUACULTURE REGULATIONS (2004 -456)
Brenner moved to approve the resolution.
Crawford asked what the emergency is. It sounds like one can't really do
aquaculture within 12 miles of any shoreline in Whatcom County. He asked if the
salmon bearing streams count.
McShane stated it's only the Nooksack River.
Crawford asked if a fish - farming operation is being proposed.
McShane stated there are inquiries around Puget Sound, the Strait of Juan de
Fuca, and the inlets in Jefferson County. The Council passed a resolution to
implement an ordinance for the shoreline program. The County is in the process of
updating its shoreline program, but it will take some time to get the updates
adopted. This will be done on an emergency bases. An interim ordinance will have
to be done within 61 days.
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 31
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
Crawford asked the permitting process if an aquaculture farmer could find a
place to farm more than 12 miles from the mouth of the Nooksack River. He asked
who controls those waters.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape three, side 8.)
McShane stated there are a variety of permits that would have to be
obtained. One of the permits would be a County shoreline permit. There are
several aquaculture requirements.
Crawford asked if there is a farming activity near the Columbia River.
McShane stated there is not. There is a net pen in Cypress Island in San
Juan County. There are others south of Puget Sound. Currently, the aquaculture
farms are being permitted.
Roy stated she supports the motion. They should consider at some point
farms for fish other than salmon.
Caskey- Schreiber stated this is a placeholder to let the County draft
regulations if it does want aquaculture. She would like to see regulations on where
it would be allowed, which should be away from any tributary.
McShane stated the aquaculture section of the shoreline program is lengthy.
Thinking about other species can be done through the shoreline program update.
Crawford stated they need to make sure they are objective and open -
minded. Get good testimony on both sides of the issue.
Motion carried 6 -1 with Nelson opposed.
INTRODUCTION ITEMS
Caskey- Schreiber moved to accept the Introduction Items.
Motion carried unanimously.
1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 2.108
WHATCOM COUNTY COMMISSION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
(AB2004 -452)
2. ORDINANCE ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE WHATCOM COUNTY
ZONING MAP ESTABLISHING TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS
SENDING AREAS AND AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING
ORDINANCE (TITLE 20) CHAPTER 20.89 DENSITY TRANSFER
PROCEDURE (AB2004 -453)
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 32
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
DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee
minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they
are not the final approved minutes.
3. RESOLUTION LIMITING THE SIZE OF ALL VOTING PRECINCTS TO
LESS THAN 200 REGISTERED VOTERS EACH, THUS ALLOWING THE
COUNTY AUDITOR TO DESIGNATE ALL WHATCOM COUNTY
PRECINCTS AS " "VOTE BY MAIL" (AB2004 -454) (HEARING TO BE
SCHEDULED)
4. RESOLUTION AFFIRMING THAT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AMENDMENTS REVIEWED AND ADOPTED IN 2002, 2003, AND 2004
COLLECTIVELY CONSTITUTE COMPLETION OF WHATCOM COUNTY'S
SEVEN -YEAR REVIEW AND UPDATE OF THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM
COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PER RCW 36.70A.130 (AB2004 -455)
OTHER BUSINESS
Roy nominated Councilmember Nelson to resume his representation on the
North Sound Regional Mental Health Board.
Nomination carried unanimously.
REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS
The councilmembers thanked each other and Dave Grant for work
contributed during the year and wished everyone a happy holiday.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 11:22 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
The Council approved these minutes on January 11 , 2005.
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Dan McShane, Council Chair
Whatcom County Council, 12/7/2004, Page 33