HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil June 29 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
June 29, 2004
Council Chair Dan McShane called the meeting to order at 7:04 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 and negotiations update on
open collective bargaining agreements (AB2004 -260) in executive session
during the Committee of the Whole meeting.
McShane announced that at the previous Council meeting, the Council held
over a decision discussed during the Committee of the Whole meeting in executive
session, regarding a discussion with Public Works Director Jeff Monsen
regarding the acquisition of property (AB2004 -018).
McShane moved to approve the purchase of land on Lummi Island from the
Emberys near the ferry landing for ferry parking, in the amount of $495,000, plus
costs. He is against the expenditure.
Roy asked the arguments for and against the motion.
Brenner stated the argument against the motion is that they're paying more
than the appraised value for the property. That's not right.
Caskey- Schreiber stated the proximity of the property is close to where the
ferry lands. The slight increase from the appraised value is due to the fact that the
owners live at that location, and will have to relocate. She will vote for the motion,
but this is one more cost that the County subsidizes for the citizens of Lummi
Island. The more growth is allowed on Lummi Island, the more the County will
have to subsidize.
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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.
McShane stated he is against the motion because the proximity of the
residences on the island is walkable. The administration has been bringing forward
to the Council different options for purchase.
Nelson asked about the property up the road from this property.
Jeff Monsen, Public Works Director, stated the appraised value of the
property the County currently holds in the same area is just under $200,000. With
approval of this acquisition, the administration will dispose of that property to offset
this cost. The current property is about 1.1 acres. The new property is 1.7 acres,
and is immediately across the road from the ferry landing.
Nelson asked the cost.
McShane stated the cost is $495,000, plus related closing costs.
Nelson stated there's a house on the property. Monsen stated it's possible to
relocate the house onto the current parcel the County owns.
Nelson stated that would increase the value of that property.
Crawford stated the value is based on a bank - lending value. The $465,000
value appraisal is based on what a bank would lend. The $30,000 increase would
be the recommended asking price. There has been a recent pattern on Lummi
Island for that asking price over a bank appraisal. In this case, there is a difference
between appraised value and market value.
Nelson stated that if sold on the open market, the property and home would
start at a price of $495,000.
Crawford agreed. Home sales on Lummi Island have happened at or above
the asking price.
McShane stated it will also cost money to build the parking area.
Roy stated the County offered to help this family move in the past, but the
family declined. She asked the reason for the need for increased parking. Monsen
stated they want to acquire parking on both the island as well as Gooseberry Point
to increase walk -on passengers on the ferry. At Gooseberry Point, the County
leased parking space for more than 80 parking spaces, plus an additional 15 to 25
spaces. He is trying to match that amount or more at Lummi Island. The 1.1 acre
parcel would not have accommodated that number of spaces. The new parcel will.
Brenner stated that when the County bought that 1.1 acre parcel, she was
told it would more than suffice. That's why the County bought it. Now that the
County wants different property, it won't suffice. Everything is relative. Monsen
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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.
stated the existing 1.1 parcel is adequate to service the current demand for
parking. The County made a commitment to adjoining property owners because of
their concern with the location of that existing property. By relocating to this other
parcel, all the neighborhood concerns are addressed. The change is to deal with
community issues in addition to the number of parking spaces.
Motion carried 5 -2 with Brenner and McShane opposed.
McShane announced there was discussion with Senior Deputy
Prosecutor David Grant regarding BP (AB2004 -018) in executive session
during the Committee of the Whole.
Caskey- Schreiber stated they have an agreement with BP.
[Clerk's Note: Councilmember McShane left the room because he is a
member of the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC).]
Caskey- Schreiber stated the Council has reached an agreement with British
Petroleum (BP) regarding their co- generation facility that will address the Council's
concerns with noise and wetlands. She thanked BP for their patience in working
with the Council. She moved to accept the amended proposal that is currently put
forth to approve the BP co- generation operation.
Nelson stated he appreciated BP's efforts in working with the County and
citizens of the county. They want to be proactive with their industrial areas while
also recognizing the community needs and the sensitive environment. This
process demonstrated how the business and industrial, government, and public
sectors can work together.
Caskey- Schreiber stated the County will get some good science on wetland
mitigation from the agreement.
Motion carried 6 -0 with McShane abstaining and out of the room.
MINUTES CONSENT
(Clerk's Note: Councilmember McShane returned to the meeting.)
Fleetwood moved to approve the Minutes Consent items.
Motion carried unanimously.
1. SPECIAL COUNCIL (BUDGET RETREAT) FOR JUNE 8, 2004
2. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FOR JUNE 15, 2004
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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.
3. REGULAR COUNTY COUNCIL FOR JUNE 15, 2004
OPEN SESSION
The following people spoke:
Dennis Jones, 1487 Sudden Valley, stated they continue to improve
watershed plans that are in play. Two Sudden Valley board members have
resigned for personal reasons. He commended John Wolfe and Leslie McRoberts for
their participation on the board. The new board members are not all bad.
There is a draft of the community plan for Sudden Valley on the Sudden
Valley website.
There are funding resolutions from 1992 and plans from 1998 until now
regarding the watershed. There are three major areas. A minor area is recreation.
There is a lot of room to do stuff out there ecologically for humans and forestry.
The biggest worry is the private forestlands. Save those private forestlands close
to the lake, such as the Nielson Brother's land right on Beaver Creek that was
recently logged.
They all have plans for development out there. They are all getting along.
There is no panic out there. They know the environment is degrading, and they
have to change it. People who say they are lake stewards or organized for healthy
environments should be taken with a grain of salt. Watch out for people who call
themselves Lake Whatcom Stewardship Association. Become the Lake Whatcom
stewards. He will help keep a good number of power boats on the lake.
Jerry Landcastle, City of Ferndale Mayor, spoke regarding the Consent
Agenda item four (AB2004 -249). Support the request.
Wayne Schwandt, Trillium Corporation, stated he is in favor of the Birch Bay
Steering Committee's recommendation for the urban growth area (UGA) for Birch
Bay (AB2004 -121). There are many hours of discussion about this. Under the
UGA, the potential for good development and planning is best in the UGA, and not
in the five acre zone. Trillium projects that were done in the 1990's all went
through an environmental impact statement (EIS) process. That will be available to
these projects going forward. There will be opportunity to put constraints on those
developments.
Trillium has done a lot of work with geo- technical engineers looking at water,
runoff, and potential seepage through the bluffs. That work is available for the
Council to review.
McShane asked when the EIS was done. Schwandt stated there were two
proposals that were done in the mid- 1990's.
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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.
to Slivinski, 6163 Semiahmoo Lane, stated Birch Point does not feel
represented by the Birch Bay Steering Committee, especially about removing Birch
Point from the UGA (AB2004 -121). She urged the Council to remove Birch Point
from the Birch Bay UGA. Twenty -three of the 36 property owner households on
Birch Point support removal from the UGA. That's more than 65 percent of the
residents. She has more neighbors to contact. This represents the non - Trillium
property owners. Every time she talks to a property owners, she gets more
support. This proposal comes not from the people, but from the careful
consideration of the Council. She appreciates that.
Mary Dickinson, Building Industry of Whatcom County Governmental Affairs
Director, stated she submitted her testimony on the Birch Bay Plan earlier
(AB2004 -121). She conducted research into this subareas process. Respect the
process and the Birch Bay Steering Committee, and adopt the Birch Bay plan as the
committee designed it. The committee members actively involved the community
and desired public input. In some cases, they worked for four years. Whatcom
County has a diverse community. Respect the plan process.
Gary Tomsic, Blaine City Manager, stated spoke regarding the Blaine
Community Boardwalk proposal in Consent Agenda item three (AB2004 -248). He
thanked the Council and administration for their consideration. This is a good
program. Continue to support this program and the economies of the small cities.
Roy stated this is a wonderful project.
Nelson asked if the request is for the monies for all the phases of the project.
Tomsic stated the dollars they're talking about this evening deal with the first phase
of the boardwalk. The second phase of the project is not part of this request and is
to build a pedestrian overpass over the railroad tracks to the Port's boat facilities
and Marine Park.
Crawford stated this money will include the boardwalk portion without the
bridge. It does not include the buildings.
Nelson stated it's important that this create jobs. He asked what types of
jobs would be created. Tomsic stated small businesses will develop in anticipation
of the boardwalk's public draw. Parking is an issue they need to deal with. They
are attracting some larger businesses and also small businesses. Real estate in
downtown Blaine is very active. People want to invest in the downtown area
because they anticipate the boardwalk. It is their impetus for investing in the
downtown area. Most of the jobs will be related to retail and recreation and
tourism.
Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated the Port of Bellingham
Commissioner who was a member of the Economic Development Investment (EDI)
Board indicated strong support for the Port to continue this development.
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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.
Mike Abenhoff, BP and Birch Bay Steering Committee member, stated the
Council should consider the plan that the Birch Bay Steering Committee put
forward, which was done with a lot of effort and consideration by a lot of people
who have the best interest of the community in mind.
On behalf of BP, he thanked the Council and administration for working
together for the approval of the co- generation plant. They are paving the way for a
world class facility that can't be built anywhere else in the United States. The
Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) will hopefully go into deliberations
soon and come up with a positive recommendation for the Governor. Then BP can
get a permit issued and get this under construction. It will provide a true asset to
the community.
Lincoln Rudder, 8373 Semiahmoo Drive, stated urban growth areas (UGA's)
that are too large cost too much for infrastructure (AB2004 -121). The fastest
growing city in Whatcom County is not even a city. The case of Blaine is evidence
of how loss of control happens. The volume of Blaine's sewer system is inadequate.
When it rains hard, there are sewage overflows. The cost to fix this was recently
estimated at $37 million. This amounts to about $12,000 for every Blaine resident.
This is one of many infrastructure requirements for cities. His property tax went up
23 percent last year. The Planning and Development Services Department
designed six new taxes to pay for this excessively large UGA. However, the Growth
Management Act was designed to prevent urbanization of rural areas. It is exactly
9.2 miles between the Semiahmoo boundary to the sewage treatment plant in Birch
Bay. It costs more to transport sewage that far than to connect nearby locations
first. The City of Blaine municipal code states that the cost of a development's
infrastructure, such as sewer connections and capacity for processing, shall be
borne by the developer to not unduly burden the ratepayers. Reduce the size of
this UGA.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION 2003 -041, WASHINGTON
COMMUNITY ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION TEAM (WA- CERT), TO
PROVIDE ANNUAL PRIORITIZATION OF WA -CERT PROJECTS
(AB2004 -240)
Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, gave a staff report and stated they
work with the Washington Community Economic Revitalization Team (WA -CERT)
and a number of State and federal agencies that are interested in helping the
community with funding various projects. What matters to WA -CERT is the list, the
numerical priority, and whether the project is ready to go. He recommends that
the Council clearly prioritize the programs. It's one thing to be on the list. It's
another thing to be prioritized. There are few funding sources that require that a
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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.
project be in the top three on the list. The most notable is the community
development block grant (CDBG) planning grant.
McShane opened the public hearing and the following people spoke:
Duane Jager, ReUse Works Executive Director, asked the Council to amend
the resolution to make the number one slot a three way tie that includes his Jobs
from the Waste Stream. There is a potential income benefit to Whatcom County if
the Council promotes several number one projects. These projects are important,
but don't compete for the same State or federal dollars. Ties are allowable,
because at least three ties are on the list. His project is consistent with all the
County planning documents. It addresses the key goals of WA -CERT, the
Community Economic Development Strategy (CEDS), the County Comprehensive
Plan, and the Solid Waste Management Plan. The Solid Waste Management Plan
encourages the development of and funding for reuse programs. Support this
program and make it a number one priority for Whatcom County.
Earl Listebarger, Birch Bay View community spokesman, stated the
community would appreciate it if the County Council prioritizes it's needs on the
WA -CERT list. This is a project that has been brought up several times before and
failed because of the economic situation of the area. They badly need this WA-
CERT funding for the cost of the sewer.
Roger Brown, Birch Bay Water and Sewer District, stated he supports the
Birch Bay sewer installation project. There is a lot of community support for this
project. Failing on -site septic systems present a problem to health, the
environment, and the economy of the area. The Puget Sound Action Team and
State Department of Health Shellfish Program listed Birch Bay as threatened for
water quality a year ago. The sewer discharges are a part of the overall problem.
Last fall, the Council supported a resolution to submit an $850,000 CDBG grant.
They were not successful in receiving a grant from that source, but the CDBG grant
staff indicated that they like the program and it should be submitted to the
community investment fund, another kind of block grant. That source of money
requires that the project be included in the top three on the WA -CERT ranking.
One of the main items that the program staff noted was that the project is ready to
proceed as soon as they receive a letter of commitment from the community
investment fund. The district is prepared to proceed with the project. Funding has
been identified and is directly dependant upon the WA -CERT ranking. He requested
the Council's continued support.
Ray Scott, 5198 Mt. Baker Highway, stated he encourages support for the
North Fork Community Resource Center, previously known as the Kendall Resource
Center, as a number one funding priority. Over the last year, they have been able
to procure $74,000 in planning and feasibility grants. They are almost at the end
of phase one of that process. With the Council's and Executive Office's support,
they've moved forward with a consultant. There is strong community buy -in that
includes the Foothills Chamber of Commerce, Mt. Baker School District, and
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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
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.
multiple agencies in town that recognize the need for service delivery in the east
county. This is the start of infrastructure that will address the incredibly low socio-
economic reality in that area, the lack of infrastructure, and the need to access
education that will help residents become viable and employable individuals. As the
east county area grows, it will need a workforce to fulfill job opportunities that will
be created in that area. He asked that the Council maintain the number one status
for the North Fork Community Resource Center.
Hearing no one else, McShane closed the public hearing.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
Brenner moved to approve the resolution.
Nelson asked if the list in the Council packet is the list recommended by the
Economic Development Investment (EDI) Board.
McShane stated the EDI Board reviewed the projects and ranked them as
high, medium, and low. It then ranked the high projects specifically. He's on that
Board. His ranking as a councilmember deferred to the Board's ranking.
Roy stated she supports the project list as it is in the Council packet. The
top four that meet the criteria have lots of community involvement and additional
funding that will be available.
Fleetwood stated he supports the list also, with one change. Mr. Jager asked
the Council to include the Jobs from the Waste Stream project as a co- number one
project with the reasoning that the change wouldn't affect the two other number
one projects. He asked if that's so and, if it is, he would like to make that change.
Desler stated the Council should come up with a numerical ranking based on the
importance it places on these projects. The ranking is a statement that's made
about this community and the people who represent this community. He doesn't
know if the Jobs from the Waste Stream project will compete with the other
projects. The important role of the Council tonight is to rank the projects based on
how they should be represented to the other organizations in the community.
Fleetwood asked if Mr. Desler objects to the ties. Desler stated he
recommends that the Council rank all the projects individually.
McShane stated he is not speaking in favor of changing anything versus the
current ranking. The EDI Board's high ranked projects were essentially the same
as the Council's. That means the Board is doing a good job and is reflective of the
community as a whole.
Nelson stated he mostly agrees with the list, but that they don't want to
have ties. It doesn't send a good message, and demonstrates that the Council is
unsure of what it wants for the community. WA -CERT is looking to give grants to
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, Page 8
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.
communities that have definitive ideas on how they want to spend their monies.
The Council needs to send a strong message reflective of the community and the
Council. He moved to rank the Kendall Resource Center project number one and
the Birch Bay Sewer Installation project number two. The Kendall Resource Center
project is a project they've all lobbied for at the federal level. They need to help
the eastern area of the county. These dollars are specifically for the depressed
forestry communities.
McShane stated he agreed with the motion. They've been committed to this
project, and he'd like to see it through. This is the first year the Council has ranked
the Birch Bay Sewer Installation project highly, for very good reasons.
Roy stated being on the WA -CERT list doesn't guarantee any money for
anything. It's symbolic. It gives other funding agencies the opportunity to see how
this community ranks these projects. The ranking doesn't guarantee that a project
gets anything if it is on the list. The project proponents still have to go out and get
grants. Desler stated it's significant that the WA -CERT team would come to this
community to speak with community officials for hours on the higher priority
projects to determine how they can succeed. The list is very important and helpful
to these projects.
Roy stated she's talked to people who assume that money comes along with
this ranking, but it doesn't necessarily.
Caskey- Schreiber stated she supports the motion. That's not a negative
reflection on the Birch Bay project. It's a good project. The Council can rank those
two projects as one and two. She supports the Kendall Community Resource
Center because there are many entities involved, and they need to keep the
momentum going. It's an enormous, vital project that will create jobs, address
health issues for children, educate, and provide technical access for people. She
also supports the Birch Bay Sewer Installation project, which will be great for that
area. The original intent of WA -CERT was to create jobs for displaced loggers. The
Kendall project does that well.
Brenner stated the two projects are equally important. After listening to Mr.
Desler's recommendation to rank the projects individually so the Council doesn't
give the wrong impression, she will support the motion. The Birch Bay request is
equally important as the Kendall request.
Roy stated she agreed. The important thing for the Birch Bay Sewer
Installation project just to be in the top three. There is a letter guaranteeing
funding if in the top three. She agrees with supporting the Kendall Community
Resource Center.
Motion to amend carried unanimously.
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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
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 it's important that the Council do something to help farmers
in the community. They need processing. If they are going to be serious about
agriculture in Whatcom County, they need to do everything possible to support that
industry. He moved to rank the Whatcom Value Added Dairy Project to project
number two, and lower the Birch Bay Sewer Installation to project three. It will
keep the Birch Bay project in the top three. The Dairy project is only a half million
dollar project. The other projects are millions of dollars. Being ranked second will
give it attention right away. It's something that may be easy to do. Agriculture is
important to the state, as well.
Brenner stated she can't support the motion. The Birch Bay Sewer
Installation project is critical for the health of Birch Bay. They've heard for years
about the sewage leaking from the system. It has guaranteed funding she wouldn't
want to see the project moved down the list.
Roy proposed a friendly amendment to rank the Birch Bay Sewer
Installation Project number two and the Whatcom Value Added Dairy Project to
number three.
Nelson accepted the friendly amendment. He restated his motion to
rank the Birch Bay Sewer Installation Project number two and the Whatcom Value
Added Dairy Project to number three.
McShane stated he concurred, but the EDI Board discovered that the project
needs some fleshing out first. It's an up- and - coming project that will work it's way
higher on the list in the future. He hesitates moving it up on the list now.
Nelson stated he agreed, but fleshing it out is why they need the money.
It's a feasibility study, not a proposal.
Caskey- Schreiber stated she will support the motion. The project isn't that
much money that will be taken away from the Perpetually Affordable Home
Ownership project that is for $10 million. This purpose for her is about jobs. The
agricultural industry has a farmgate value of $287 million as of 2002. That's a $40
million increase in the last five years. This motion could boost the farmgate value if
they can process here.
McShane stated his comment about the project not being fleshed out was
about a similar program that occurred in Ireland.
McShane stated the motion would move the Perpetually Affordable Home
Ownership project to number four.
Motion to amend carried 4 -3 with Crawford, Fleetwood, and McShane
opposed.
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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
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 moved to amend the tied ranking in item seven so the City of
Nooksack Stormwater Program is project eight and the City of Everson Water
Facilities Manganese Treatment project is project nine.
Caskey- Schreiber asked the reason for the motion.
McShane stated it's a struggle for the City of Nooksack to deal with. The
manganese treatment is about drinking water. People can commit to making the
changes they will need to make. It won't make a difference from the standpoint of
job creation. They really need to drop the metal counts down if they are going to
get pure enough water to put in a power plant.
Motion to amend carried unanimously.
McShane moved to amend the list to prioritize the two projects in number
nine. Rank the ReUse Works Jobs from the Waste Stream project as number
eleven and the Economic Development Council Economic Development Name
Branding & Marketing Campaign project as number twelve.
Caskey- Schreiber stated she really liked the ReUse Works proposal. It really
addresses the waste stream problem of used appliances. The project needs so little
money. She asked if there is another funding source through the County that this
project could use, such as EDI funds.
McShane stated the EDI funds have to go to public facilities infrastructure.
Caskey- Schreiber asked if there is any money available from the Solid Waste
fund or the Executive's fund. The requested amount is $12,000 to $15,000.
Nelson stated they could use solid waste dollars if it's a non - profit business
for the public benefit and it's a recycling issue in the county.
Caskey- Schreiber asked how the proponent would apply for those funds.
Pete Kremen, County Executive, stated it's a worthwhile cause. The
administration needs to know the benefit the community will receive. If the Council
supports it and the benefit is clear, the administration can find limited funding that
is not from the general fund.
Crawford stated the Solid Waste Advisory Committee can put this issue into
perspective with the entire solid waste set of issues for the County. He suggested
the proponent take the project to the Solid Waste Advisory Committee.
Caskey- Schreiber stated Mr. Jager is a newly - elected member of the
committee.
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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.
Brenner moved to refer this project to the Solid Waste Advisory Committee
for a recommendation.
(Clerk's Note: This motion was not voted on.)
McShane's motion to amend carried unanimously.
McShane moved to amend the list to prioritize the two projects in number
eleven. Rank the Sustainable Connections Locals First Program as number 14 and
the Port of Bellingham's Aviation Capacity Development as number 15.
Brenner stated she would support the motion. When it came to a tie, it was
beneficial to the projects listed first on the tie list.
Roy moved to rank the Aviation Capacity Development as project 20.
McShane withdrew his motion.
Roy stated the Port is a taxing agency that gets a considerable amount of
public money for their projects. It should be separated from County projects,
issues, and funding. There are so many demands on County resources. There are
resources at the Port that can fund this.
Nelson stated that argument could be used for the cities of Lynden, Blaine,
Everson, and all the entities. He understands the concern, but these are not
County dollars. There are grant dollars that other agencies will look at. The
Council is only prioritizing these for importance to the community. The argument
that the Port has money isn't any different for any of the other entities making
applications. He is not in favor of the motion.
Crawford stated he agreed with Councilmember Nelson.
Brenner stated she can't support the motion, as an aviation enthusiast and a
husband who is a pilot, but he is not based in Bellingham.
McShane stated he supports the motion. The project is aimed at expanding
aviation capacity for corporate jets, not for the air traffic of regular folks.
Roy's motion to amend failed 3 -4 with Roy, McShane, and Fleetwood
in favor.
Brenner stated her husband is based out of Seattle, not Bellingham.
McShane moved to amend the list to prioritize the two projects in number
eleven. Rank the Sustainable Connections Locals First Program as number 14 and
the Port of Bellingham's Aviation Capacity Development as number 15.
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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.
Brenner stated she is opposed to the motion. She would like to turn them
around.
Motion to amend carried 6 -1 with Brenner opposed.
McShane moved to drop the last item on the list, the Water Transmission
Main Installation from Sandy Point Public Utility District 1. The EDI Board was split
on this issue. It's not appropriate to rank the project. The EDI Board removed the
project because it doesn't fit the job creation criterion of WA -CERT. It is a major
infrastructure investment, and there isn't any link to job creation.
Brenner stated it's ranked last. It's not going to get any funding. It would
be a slap to the proponents to take the project off the list completely. She won't
support the motion.
Nelson stated he won't support the motion. Several projects on the list are
from certain associations. Associations do have problems maintaining
infrastructure. They deserve the right of any other entity to have the opportunity
to be ranked. Don't be prejudiced to one and not the others.
McShane stated there are two water associations. One is Georgia Manor
that serves existing homes. The Sandy Point project would be to increase capacity
to serve new homes.
Motion to amend failed 1 -6 with McShane in favor.
Caskey- Schreiber asked if the City of Blaine Downtown Boardwalk
Construction project will lose any funding because they ranked so low on the list,
and if the City would rather have that project switched with its Water Reclamation
and Overflow Protection Facilities project, which is ranked higher.
Gary Tomsic, City of Blaine Manager, stated it doesn't matter to him as long
as (inaudible).
Motion to approve the resolution as amended carried unanimously.
2. RESOLUTION SELLING TAX -TITLE PROPERTY BY PUBLIC AUCTION,
REQ. #07 -04 (AB2004 -237A)
McShane opened the public hearing and the following people spoke:
Loretta Simpson, 1855 Marine Drive, stated she is interested in purchasing
the property.
McShane asked if she is the neighboring property owner. Simpson stated
she is. A bad presence has been forced out. A property across the street has
trees. If she owns the property, she will have control over it. She doesn't know
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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.
what she will do with the property. Now, the property is not bringing in any tax
dollars.
Brenner asked what the Council does when someone wants the property,
and the Council is going to put it up for auction.
Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated the County is obligated by State
law to use the public auction process to sell property. If approved, the resolution
will authorize the Treasurer to sell the property during a public auction at no less
than $547.04. The property would go to the highest bidder at the public auction.
Hearing no one else, McShane closed the public hearing.
Caskey- Schreiber moved to approve the resolution.
Motion carried unanimously.
CONSENT AGENDA
Crawford reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee
and moved to approve Consent Agenda items one through 15.
Brenner withdrew item 13.
Crawford withdrew item one.
Motion to approve Consent Agenda items two through twelve,
fourteen, and fifteen carried unanimously.
Motion carried unanimously,
13. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID #04-
41 TO THE LOWEST BIDDER, ENVIRO -CLEAN EQUIPMENT, FOR A
REGENERATIVE AIR SWEEPER, IN THE AMOUNT OF $137,099.41
(AB2004 -258)
Brenner stated a private contractor is available 24 hours per day to perform
this service. The County staff said it wants more flexibility than what the contractor
would provide. The County can't get more flexible than having someone available
24 hours per day, seven days per week. It's nice for the County to own toys, but
the County should use the private sector as much as possible. The notion was
brought up that the County would save money by moving staff around instead of
hiring someone. That's not true. First, if they don't need the person in one
position, remove that person or move that person elsewhere. During the budget
hearings, administration will ask for more staff in different areas. It's outrageous
to say this won't increase staff. The administration will request more staff. This
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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.
item takes business away from the private sector. Wherever possible the private
sector should do the business for the County.
Nelson asked about the need to find a facility for this equipment.
Jeff Monsen, Public Works Director, stated the Council already approved a
contract for architectural services to construct a heated storage building that would
service this and other equipment. The County does not currently have enough
heated storage to house this piece of equipment.
Nelson referenced a statement in the third paragraph of a June 17, 2004
memo from Mary Green and Mike Roberts to Brad Bennett, on Council packet page
188. They really haven't gotten a bid yet with these specifications. Monsen stated
he has always proposed that the County purchase one unit and use a contractor
also. The federal stormwater program may require as many as four units. At this
point, he is reluctant to make that expenditure, knowing that a certain amount of
work must be done. They must maximize the County's flexibility to respond to
needs. Also, the predictable work that is easy to bid would be contracted. This is
the start of that program. Once they have one to two years of experience with this
service, he presumes the County will expand the contract.
Nelson moved to hold this item in the Finance Committee until they know
what the heated storage facility will cost and when a final contract is brought
forward for Lake Samish and Lake Whatcom. Monsen stated the information
regarding the heated storage is in additional service request (ASR) 2004 -2400,
which was discussed during the budget process. He asked that the Council take
action on this item so they don't further delay work this summer. He hopes to get
the other contractor service underway before fall. During his meeting with Bayside
Services, they both learned information about the kind of effort required to perform
this work. Bayside Service agreed that a re -bid is appropriate. His ability to
estimate County operating cost improved. With the information available, the cost
is about the same. He doesn't propose that the County equipment be used for the
lowest cost activity. It will go toward the activities that are a highest cost. He will
contract for the service that has the highest predictability and is most competitive
for bidding.
Desler stated the appropriation for the building was for $200,000 to house a
waste truck and this sweeper unit. The building cost is built into the rates
compared to the private sector. It's part of a capital depreciation schedule.
Nelson stated he needs to see the comparison.
Monsen stated he doesn't propose a sweeping program that compares with
county services. The design of this program separates the kinds of sweeping,
which prevents staff from providing the Council a comparison. The on -call activities
is where the County will provide the service. The activities that sweep the
watershed regularly is suited for a contract.
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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
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 they could start with the contract service, see how that works,
find out what the on -call needs are, and then look at this contract in regards to a
contracted service. The Council can make an informed decision rather than buying
more equipment and adding more personnel. Monsen stated they are replacing
equipment and downsizing the fleet to shift away from using excavator -type
equipment to deal with stormwater to sweeping activities relative to stormwater.
That's why there is no staffing change. There is a reduction in equipment value.
He is doing exactly what Councilmember Nelson said. He is presenting a bid award
for the sweeping contract in the watershed. They found ways to save money
through a bid process. He can't offer both tonight. He doesn't believe they should
wait. He doesn't have a legal ability to simply go out and enter into a contract
service without going through that bid process.
Nelson stated it's not fair to the Council to make these decisions without
having information on the service if contracted. It would behoove the County to
consider contracting. If they are going to get rid of equipment, they would have
less need for equipment and personnel. Monsen stated that if they want to go to
that level of discussion of stormwater management, know that he is required to do
many activities. In this next budget process, they will have to decide where they
will place that effort and decide what activities the County will no longer do. If they
are going to simply sweep the Lake Whatcom watershed, the County's estimated
costs are between $213,000 and $240,000. The bid price received was about
$270,000. There is a way to offset that amount, but they don't know yet how.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side B.)
Nelson stated a private company can get started on a service a lot quicker
than the County, which has to buy the equipment.
Caskey- Schreiber stated the Council had a discussion about this years ago.
They saw the results of a street sweeping program, which would reduce pollutants
in Lake Whatcom. They were all enthusiastic about it. Having this equipment at
the County's disposal has value. She will support the request.
Monsen stated that to understand a likely bid price versus internal costs,
staff has already given notice to the equipment vendor. Any further delay may
impact the bid, but he's not sure. The vendor has said that to the County, but he's
not sure if that's true.
Motion to hold in committee failed 3 -4 with Nelson, Roy, and Brenner
in favor.
Motion to approve the request carried 5 -2 with Brenner and Nelson
opposed.
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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.
1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND
THE CITY OF BELLINGHAM FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2140
DIVISION STREET IN THE AMOUNT OF $873,000 (AB2004 -213B)
Crawford moved to approve the request, for the sake of discussion. He
asked about the extra information, a map and legal description, the Council
received today that addressed electrical, storm drainage, and gate easements.
Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated he thought the information is
from the City of Bellingham. He received a copy of it late this afternoon.
Crawford stated his concerns about easements weren't unfounded. He
assumes that the drainage easements can be moved because development of this
property will require re- engineering of the stormwater anyway. Once the County
has ownership, it will have an extra step to move the easements. That's not
critical. A concern is the gate easement. There is a sliding gate on the front of lot
B, at Division Street. That gate moves to the west. That is where they had
thought a driveway would go. The gate would have to be moved. This map shows
an easement for the gate. Desler stated he would ask the City to redesign the gate
so it would not impinge upon the six acres. However, if the gate were to remain, it
wouldn't be an impediment to the successful use of the site. Councilmember
Crawford is correct in respect to the storm drainage easements. The administration
intends to satisfy all the necessary requirements to provide proper drainage of the
area. They don't want drainage under buildings. If needed, they will reset the
drain lines. It's not costly to do.
Crawford asked the purpose of the electrical easement. Desler stated this is
the first he's seen of it. It can probably be adjusted to the County's needs.
Crawford stated the amount of area this lot line adjustment would incorporate
is about 47,000 square feet. It's about 1.1 acres, not 1.5 acres. During the
Finance Committee, he discussed the value of the Holly Street property, for which
they are trading. This bumps the price up to $6 per square foot. The appraisal on
the other parcel is $3.75 per square foot. He's not sure this rear parcel would be
appraised at even $3.75 per square foot because it doesn't have street frontage.
He won't support the purchase and sale agreement for all the reasons he discussed
earlier. There are a number of unresolved issues, including the easements and the
piles of dirt on the property. There is a verbal agreement to move those piles
somehow. If the Council approves this, stipulate that the dirt must be moved
before closing. Desler stated Deputy City Administrator Don Keenan has said three
times that the dirt will be moved. He expects it to be moved in the next three to
four weeks.
Crawford stated he would vote against this purchase and sales agreement for
all the reasons he stated earlier in the day. There is a lot of issues that need to be
cleaned up first. With the cooperation of the City, they can work toward a good
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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
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.
resolution. The City would have to probably extend the zoning circumstances
beyond June 30, which the City Council can do.
Caskey- Schreiber stated there is a window to July 30 to make sure this site
will work. She is comfortable the administration will resolve all of Councilmember
Crawford's concerns.
Brenner stated she wanted to support this. However, she was irritated that
the County spent a lot of time and money in good faith doing appraisals on a lot of
properties under the Mayor's assertion that the County would trade properties.
That changed dramatically. The County is paying $100,000 more for a property
than what it would appraise at. She would rather see the County tell the City it
wants a fair exchange. Don't pay more than the appraised value.
Nelson stated he will defer to the administration for its recommendation on
this issue.
Pete Kremen, County Executive, stated this transaction has been in the
making for nine months to a year. It hasn't been perfect or as expeditiously as he
would have liked. The County has a critical need for more jail space. The
agreement with the City of Bellingham, considering all things, is a fair deal that is in
the best interest of the community. He recommends approval.
Caskey- Schreiber stated it is a fair deal. The City is going to lose revenues
from giving up seven acres of industrial property. She's comfortable with a slightly
perceived advantage in the land trade. They are not losing money on the trade.
The County's trading property is a park. If they want to develop that park
property, the City would still have to permit it. The City wants to protect and have
that park area. With the additional 1.1 acre parcel on Division, the County will be
able to have stormwater mitigation that will allow the County to fully use the
parcel. The administration did a good job negotiating.
McShane stated he appreciates the administration's hard work and looks
forward to working on establishing a location for a more permanent jail. He hopes
the mayor of Bellingham and Bellingham City Council appreciates the significant
role they will play in that process, for the good of the City and County. There may
be some good lessons to learn from this effort.
Nelson stated he hoped the County Council realizes this isn't the final
solution.
Motion to approve the request carried 5 -2 with Brenner and Crawford
opposed.
2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND REGION 1
— SNOHOMISH HEALTH DISTRICT TO PURCHASE EMERGENCY
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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
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.
RESPONSE PLANNING EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES IN THE AMOUNT
OF $29,980 (AB2004 -247)
3. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INVESTMENT PROGRAM INTERLOCAL
LOAN AND GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND
THE CITY OF BLAINE TO SUPPORT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE
PEDESTRIAN BOARDWALK IN THE AMOUNT OF $436,667 IN THE
FORM OF A GRANT, AND A LOAN AMOUNT OF $873,333 (AB2004-
248)
4. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE
CITY OF FERNDALE TO PROVIDE $50,000 TOWARDS A NEW TRAFFIC
SIGNAL BEING CONSTRUCTED BY THE CITY AT THE INTERSECTION
OF RURAL AND SLATER ROADS (AB2004 -249)
S. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE
ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS FOR LEVEE REHABILITATION WORK ON
THE RITTER ROAD LEVEE LOCATED ON THE LEFT BANK OF THE
NOOKSACK RIVER EAST OF RITTER ROAD IN THE AMOUNT OF
$60,066, FOR A COUNTY COST SHARE IN THE AMOUNT OF $12,013
(AB2004 -250)
6. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE
ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS FOR LEVEE REHABILITATION WORK ON
THE SANDE- WILLIAMS LEVEE LOCATED ON THE RIGHT BANK OF THE
NOOKSACK RIVER IN THE AMOUNT OF $128,020, FOR A COUNTY
COST SHARE IN THE AMOUNT OF $25,604 (AB2004 -251)
7. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE
ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS FOR LEVEE REHABILITATION WORK ON
THE RIGHT BANK BERTRAND CREEK LEVEE IN THE AMOUNT OF
$176,715, FOR A COUNTY COST SHARE IN THE AMOUNT OF $35,343
(AB2004 -252)
8. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE
ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS FOR LEVEE REHABILITATION WORK ON
THE LEFT BANK BERTRAND CREEK LEVEE IN THE AMOUNT OF
$40,821, FOR A COUNTY COST SHARE IN THE AMOUNT OF $8,164
(AB2004 -253)
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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.
9. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE NATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE
FOUNDATION TO MANAGE KNOTWEED IN THE UPPER NOOKSACK
RIVER CORRIDOR IN THE AMOUNT OF $30,000 (AB2004 -254)
10. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
THREE YEAR SUBSCRIBER AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY
AND WEST PUBLISHING TO PROVIDE ONLINE AND HARDBOUND
LEGAL RESEARCH TOOLS TO THE WHATCOM COUNTY PROSECUTOR
IN THE AMOUNT OF $33,979 (AB2004 -255)
11. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING CRP NO. 998023 AND AWARDING THE
BID FOR THE SUNRISE ROAD WETLAND MITIGATION AT UPPER
CLARK PIT TO THE LOW BIDDER, COLACURCIO BROTHERS
CONSTRUCTION IN THE AMOUNT OF $129,980 (AB2004 -256)
12. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING CRP NO. 903009 AND AWARDING THE
BID FOR THE LAKE WHATCOM BOULEVARD AUSTIN CREEK BRIDGE
#116 REPLACEMENT TO THE LOW BIDDER, ONE WAY
CONSTRUCTION, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,197,268.87 (AB2004-
257)
14. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID #04-
52 TO THE LOWEST BIDDER, FOSS MARITIME, FOR ANNUAL
DRYDOCK OF THE WHATCOM CHIEF, IN THE AMOUNT OF $147,197
(AB2004 -259)
15. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
RENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY PARKS &
RECREATION AND CHRIS FULTON FOR REAL PROPERTY SITUATED ON
THE MAPLE FALLS TO GLACIER TRAIL, GLACIER, WASHINGTON FOR A
TERM OF FIVE YEARS COMMENCING ON JANUARY 1, 2003 AND
ENDING ON DECEMBER 31, 2007 (AB2004 -180)
OTHER ITEMS
1. REPORT ON COMMITTEE PRESENTATION BY THE LUMMI NATION AND
THE NOOKSACK TRIBE REGARDING THE SOUTH FORK
NOOKSACK /LOWER HUTCHINSON CREEK PROJECT (AB2004 -245)
Roy reported for the Natural Resources Committee. This is an interesting
concept, but there is more to the story and more will come forward about it.
McShane stated he scheduled this in committee because he was concerned
about all the councilmembers hearing from various individuals. He thought this
was something the Council should hear in committee.
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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.
Roy stated she got an idea that the County's River and Flood Division is on
top of the situation and has a sense of what is happening and what needs to be
done still.
2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2004 WHATCOM COUNTY BUDGET,
EIGHTH REQUEST (AB2004 -244)
Crawford reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee
and moved approval on behalf of the Finance Committee. He is against the
motion. If that additional property is 47,000 square feet and is appraised for the
full value of the remainder at $375,000, it would be a $104,000 difference in value
of the Holly Street property. Don't approve this request, and recommend a
reduction in this request from $296,000 to $192,000. However, the Council
already approved the purchase and sale agreement for an amount of $873,000.
It's probably incumbent on them to authorize that amount. However, the County is
overpaying by $104,000, and he won't support the motion.
Motion to approve carried 5 -2 with Brenner and Crawford opposed.
3. ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE BIRCH BAY COMMUNITY PLAN (AB2004-
121)
Fleetwood reported for the Planning and Development Committee and stated
the Council needs to have a discussion on whether Birch Point and Point Whitehorn
will remain in the urban growth area (UGA). There are many implications from that
decision. The Council will take a straw vote on that issue.
McShane stated the last straw vote of the Council, the Council took the
position of removing the Birch Point and Point Whitehorn areas out of the UGA.
The committee worked with that decision. How the committee proceeds depends
on the Council's decision in this matter. He moved to remove from the UGA the
Birch Point area and Point Whitehorn area west of Koehn Road and south of
Grandview Road.
The number one and two ranked projects on the Washington Community
Economic Revitalization Team (WA -CERT) resolution are both targeted at stand-
alone urban growth areas. UGA's outside of cities struggle with infrastructure. One
problem is already in Birch Bay with its sewer system. The other is in Kendall,
which doesn't have a community center. Birch Bay will also have issues with not
having a community center.
Another issue the Council should address is a Comprehensive Plan item that
should be addressed through an amendment. The issue is just how large the
stand -alone UGA's should be. They have been a struggle for this county for a long
time. The three area are Sudden Valley, Kendall, and Birch Bay.
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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.
He's comfortable with expanding the UGA in Birch Bay in the area toward the
west. Birch Point and Point Whitehorn are problematic for a number of reasons.
There are already sewer and water infrastructure issues. Second, the County is
dealing with significant stormwater and drainage issues. The County received
letters from the State Department of Ecology and the Puget Sound Action Team, of
which he is a member.
One of the issues he's working on with the Puget Sound Action Team is to
draft a recommendation to the State for nearshore habitat for salmon recovery. In
talking about it, his attention was drawn to the impacts of developing Point
Whitehorn, which is a conservancy shoreline area for Whatcom County and a
shoreline of statewide significance. The significance is for aesthetics, herring
spawning, eelgrass beds, juvenile salmon habitat, and other wildlife. Juvenile
salmon move along these areas as part of their acclimation process. They could
put in place a significant amount of stormwater protection, but they would still alter
the hydrology of the inter -tidal area, which are critical nearshore habitat for critical
and endangered species. Until and if they have a better understand of those
impacts, it's not appropriate to move forward with urban level development in
those areas.
If they do put in stormwater infrastructure for a large urban growth area, a
question is whether the County has the fiscal ability to manage an urban level of
stormwater. It will be problematic and expensive for the County. If Birch Bay
starts to have water quality problems, which it is, the County will inherit some
expensive things to deal with. He's not advocating that. In the future, they may
be able to add those areas to the UGA. However, the fundamental question is
whether the County should allow a UGA not connected to a city to remain large or
expand.
Roy stated she agrees about the nearshore habitat. The letters from the
Department of Ecology and Puget Sound Action Team talk about areas within the
bluffs and nearshore areas. All of Birch Point is a flat top bluff and nearshore area.
The sensitive bluffs of sand that shouldn't absorb water already have thousands of
feet of impervious surfaces and drainage systems. They've already compromised
the bluffs. A lot of Councilmember McShane's issues could be handled by the
recommendation of the steering committee to keep this area as a long -term urban
growth area. She'd like to see geological studies from neutral parties. There is
more to bluff stability than building houses in the middle of the point. There are
other issues they haven't addressed. The feeder bluffs have always sloughed off.
One way to address the issue is to keep the area in the long -term UGA.
This is a major downzone. That should be a last resort. Keeping the area as
a long -term planning area would give them time to get geo- technical studies they
can share. They can set up the protection they need. From those evaluations, they
could rezone to one house per five acres. There are a lot of opinions. Residents
from Point Whitehorn have said that the bluffs were sloughing a lot until they put in
sewer. The Council is making many assumptions without getting the information it
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, Page 22
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 needs. The reasons for taking this out assume that all this development would
2 happen tomorrow. Leave the area as a long -term planning area. Get some geo -
3 technical studies they trust. Look at stormwater. Look at these impacts. Then
4 decide about zoning.
5
6 Caskey- Schreiber stated she would rather err on the side of caution. When
7 they designate an area as a UGA, they give growth a green light. Previously, the
8 councilmembers were brought plans for development in Birch Bay. No one ever
9 distinguished between short- and long -term areas. They found out they were
10 approving development in long -term planning areas. Another Council might allow
11 development in the UGA, not considering the comments from the Puget Sound
12 Action Team, which strongly urged the Council to remove these areas from the UGA
13 because they aren't appropriate for groundwater infiltration. Their bigger concern
14 is the effect of steering the water to the beaches and that effect on the water's
15 salinity. It's a fragile area designated as a state significant shoreline. She's
16 disappointed that many community members think the councilmembers are siding
17 with one neighborhood versus another. Puget Sound is dying from a thousand
18 cuts. Every single action like this degrades nearshore habitat and leads to the
19 detriment of the ecosystem Sound -wide. It's irresponsible to give a green light for
20 growth when they know why this area is not appropriate. The Puget Sound Action
21 Team has top experts that they consult with. After they figure out how to mitigate
22 the effects of development, then they can allow it. She's not convinced that can
23 happen. She's worried they already have labeled this as a target growth area,
24 which is what a UGA is.
25
26 Brenner stated she voted to remove Birch Point last time. She took a trip to
27 the area, and has changed her mind. The problem comes from the houses already
28 built on the bluff. The Trillium property is extremely flat. If the area is in a long -
29 term planning area, the density won't be more than one house per five acres until
30 there is sewer in the area. Sewer will help mitigate the problems that already
31 exist. Someone said today that increased density can be a pro- environment
32 alternative. The best way to offset the damage that has been done is by installing
33 sewer in the area. The anecdotal information about Point Whitehorn makes sense.
34 She will vote for the information.
35
36 McShane stated about 80 percent of the work he does is geo- technical
37 reports on slop stability. Any geo- technical reports in those areas don't have to
38 evaluate the impacts to aspects of the entire environment, such as salinity in the
39 nearshore zone. The issue is not necessarily about slope stability. One engineer
40 submitted a report that indicated a problem with water infiltrating upland of the
41 Birch Point area that is causing bluff instability. One can deal with that easily. Put
42 in drainage systems to take all the water off the bluff. There won't be as much
43 bluff erosion. They could even reduce the bluff erosion, so the feeder bluff would
44 starve because it no longer will receive water. Water is the enemy of slope
45 stability. Urban levels of development on the top of the bluff will motivate the
46 stopping of bluff erosion because people hate watching urban areas collapse into
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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
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 bay. One or two houses aren't as big a deal because the properties are large
and they can move the houses back on the property.
The sewer line will address nutrient issues. It will do nothing about affecting
the salinity in the tidal zone. The science doesn't have a good handle on the
salinity and the impact of how critical the habitat may be for the fishing industry
and endangered salmon. There will be impacts to the salinity no matter what they
do to protect the environment.
If they want the area to be a UGA, reverse it. Take the area out of the UGA
until someone can prove that there won't be impacts to salinity and shorelines.
There is no way to get around the impacts.
Nelson stated future development isn't causing problems. Existing
development is. Opportunities lie with future development. He would rather err to
make sure the area is protected. The only way to protect the area is by leaving the
area in the UGA and putting in the necessary mechanisms. Even five -acre parcels
will have detrimental impacts, and the County will have no way to control it. The
Council needs to look at this comprehensively. Leaving the area zoned rural, one
unit per five acres (R5A) will take that control from the County. This is crucial to
protecting the nearshore environment.
The Council needs to be cognizant of local community planning processes.
This is their neighborhood. He would rather err with the neighbors.
Caskey- Schreiber stated it is the residents' neighborhood, but the area
affects the entire Puget Sound when they eliminate herring beds. She cannot
sanction an urban level of growth in a sensitive area.
McShane stated a bigger problem is that the UGA is too big for the
population projection.
Roy stated one of her concerns was with the population projections. If they
remove an area from the UGA, they have to redistribute density to other areas in
the UGA. In the letters from the Department of Ecology and the Puget Sound
Action Team, not one sentence mentions internal development. They're talking
about impacts to the bluff. She asked if the population redistribution is an issue for
Councilmember McShane.
McShane stated it's not an issue for him. They're not shifting growth from
those areas into other areas of Birch Bay. He would like to shrink the UGA even
more.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape two, side A.)
McShane continued to state that the stand -alone UGA's create problems for
the County in terms of managing and planning for them. Don't increase the density
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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.
in other areas of Birch Bay. According to the information from Sylvia Goodwin,
there is enough land base already for the population projection the Council selected
in January. The population projection for 2022 for Birch Bay, which is high, is
accommodated in the land base of Birch Bay without Birch Point and Point
Whitehorn. He agreed that the emphasis of the letters is on slope stability. That's
what's obvious to people. What's not obvious to people is the salinity impacts to
the nearshore area. It's not emphasized in the letter because it's a technical issue
that isn't getting through to people. The Department of Ecology shoreline program
is only 200 feet from the shoreline. That's not far enough when there are really
high bluffs.
Roy stated she appreciates the nearshore habitat. The illegal bulkheads and
pipes are awful. However, she would like to see a connection with the land in the
middle of Birch Point that has detention ponds. None of these letters and
Councilmember McShane's arguments is making the connection between that flat
land in the middle and the bluff stability. She would be willing to vote for a building
moratorium until they have that scientific information. What they've done to the
bluffs currently has damaged the bluffs.
Nelson stated during the discussions on downzoning Lake Whatcom and Lake
Samish, he asked a question about where the population density would go. Mr.
Hart said there are areas in Birch Bay. He asked if that is still true.
Hal Hart, Planning and Development Director, stated the debate now is
whether the long -term area should remain long -term at Birch Point. It is currently
in a short -term area at Point Whitehorn. There will be fewer impacts if the areas
are long -term planning areas. Growth that is coming is tremendous and focused on
this area.
Nelson stated that if the Council continues to remove areas where growth
will occur, there will be strains in other areas that they can't identify. Hart stated
it's the same issue with Bellingham. They need Bellingham to offer a diversity of
housing types so the R5A zone isn't the only alternative to folks.
McShane stated that as a scientist who understands the flow of water
through that area and any upland area, the bluffs have been damaged. Regardless
of the bluff damage, the fresh water enters the tidal area. They are going to alter
that flow of water.
Roy stated that will happen because of logging.
McShane stated logging will play a big role. It comes down to a policy
decision. He bases his policy decision on the fact that there will be impacts to
salinity on the shore, which will cause probable harm. They will not be able to
remotely maintain the hydrology moving through the tide flat area. It will be
changed.
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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.
Roy stated the north side of Point Whitehorn has been developed for 25 to
30 years. It's a healthy environmental area with many species. It is a highly
developed area. She doesn't want to defend development around marine areas.
She's arguing that they are over - reacting and taking things out of context. They
need to look at it. She asked an environmentalist recently about the harm of
putting restrictions on the area and making it a long -term planning area. The
answer she received was that there is no harm in that if that's really what happens.
McShane stated one can go to a sewage outfall and see tremendous wildlife
in a marine environment. There could be a lot of activity, but it may not provide
the habitat for rearing juvenile salmon using that shoreline area. They don't have
an answer to that question.
Caskey- Schreiber stated she spoke to a person from the Shannon Point
Marine Center in Anacortes who is doing a state study on herring. The person said
herring can tolerate a 50 -50 mix of saltwater and freshwater. That's probably why
that bed is so significant. There is lots of freshwater seeping out of the ground to
that area. If there is an increase in development, the question is whether
stormwater runoff will increase. They don't know. The risk they take with
development is whether they will impact that mix that herring need to survive.
This is one of the major herring habitats left in the Puget Sound.
Brenner stated herring are very important. It's not a debate about
supporting herring or not. Stick to their own opinions of what is best and don't put
opinions on other people. Herring is important.
Motion failed 3 -4 with Caskey- Schreiber, Fleetwood, and McShane in
favor.
4. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN TEXT AND MAP REGARDING THE BIRCH BAY URBAN GROWTH
AREA (AB2004 -122)
This item was not discussed.
S. APPOINTMENT OF CHERYL JOHNSON TO THE UTILITIES PLANNING &
ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AB2004 -246)
Nelson moved to appoint Cheryl Johnson.
Motion carried unanimously.
INTRODUCTION ITEMS
Nelson moved to accept Introduction Items one through four.
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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.
Motion carried unanimously.
1. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 6.04 ANIMAL
CONTROL (AB2004 -261)
2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2004 WHATCOM COUNTY BUDGET, 9T"
REQUEST (AB2004 -262)
3. RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR SUBMISSION TO THE QUALIFIED
VOTERS OF THE COUNTY A PROPOSITION AUTHORIZING A LOCAL
SALES AND USE TAX OF ONE TENTH OF ONE PERCENT FOR THE
PURPOSE OF PROVIDING FUNDS FOR COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH
FINANCING, DESIGN, ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION, EQUIPPING,
OPERATING, MAINTAINING, REMODELING, REPAIRING, RE-
EQUIPPING, AND IMPROVEMENT OF JAIL FACILITIES (AB2004 -263)
4. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE WHATCOM COUNTY SIX YEAR
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (AB2004 -221)
ADDENDUM:
S. ORDINANCE PLACING A BAN ON CARBURETED TWO- STROKE ENGINES
ON LAKE WHATCOM EFFECTIVE JUNE 21, 2005 (AB2004 -265)
Fleetwood moved to accept this Introduction Item.
Nelson stated he is against the motion. The public is addressing this issue.
He is not ready to vote on this issue yet, without having a further study on the two -
stroke engines.
Fleetwood stated there will be a public hearing on July 20 regarding a boat
ban. He wants to introduce this item because it seems this is an issue that will
come forward. He wants to consolidate the two issues so they can have one public
hearing on the issue of boats. This item gives the Council more alternatives to
consider at that time.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has urged the eventual phasing
out of carbureted two - stroke engines. The Lake Whatcom Management Committee
adopted the recommendations to phase out carbureted two - stroke engines. The
Lake Whatcom Motorized Watercraft Advisory Committee recommends the eventual
phasing out of carbureted two - stroke engines. This is something the Council will
have to deal with at some point. The advisory committees have made this
recommendation. Introduce the item.
Brenner stated she is against the motion. All these committees are political
committees that have made this opinion. They are going to be phased out anyway
because of the EPA regulations. Dr. Robin Matthews said development is the
problem, not boats. She is the expert.
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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
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 it is a well -known fact that carbureted two - stroke
engines contribute pollution. As they deal with the problems with Lake Whatcom,
recognize and address known pollution sources, of which this is one. Had Dr.
Matthews been asked about these engines, she would have said they are not a good
idea for the lake. If they wait for the EPA phase out, it will take about ten years to
remove these from the system. This will be a nice option to the all -out ban to
consider during the July 20 public hearing.
Nelson stated that given all the considerations for downzoning, stormwater
management, street sweeping in the Lake Whatcom watershed on water quality, he
needs to see what they will gain by riling up the community on this issue when the
Council will need the community's support on other issues that are really impacting
the lake.
Fleetwood stated they've all acknowledged the need for a multi- faceted,
comprehensive approach to protecting water quality on Lake Whatcom, which
requires a series of things including big picture things. Dr. Matthews mentioned
density reduction and stormwater. He hoped the Council addresses them soon.
They also need to deal with the smaller things, of which this is one.
Nelson asked if they will get rid of the geese, which have been identified as
the cause of the e -coli loading.
Roy asked the relationship between the mini - initiative and this item.
Fleetwood stated the Council adopts or rejects the substance of the initiative.
The Council will either adopt or reject a boat ban on July 20.
Roy asked how this ordinance prevents the County Council from having to
have two public hearings.
Fleetwood stated at some point, the Council is going to have to deal with the
issue of two - stroke engines. Given the masses of people that will come to the
Council and speak on the boat ban issue, bring this item forward now and include it
in the public hearing. They are related.
McShane stated he supports the motion. This was recommended to the
Council in March. The Council sat on it then. It's time to take some action on it.
The councilmembers have three weeks to find out as much information as it can on
these issues.
Caskey- Schreiber asked to talk about the format from that meeting, and the
possibility of limiting public comment to three hours of testimony so the Council has
time to discuss the issue and take action.
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, 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.
McShane stated the Council has historically been willing to take a lot of
testimony and go for a long time. It may be painful. He has discretion as chair to
limit testimony to three hours. He will encourage people to limit their comments.
At a certain point, they can cut off testimony if they decide to that night.
Nelson asked if they would have to have the hearings separately, if there are
two hearings scheduled.
McShane stated they would.
Brenner stated they could say at the beginning of the evening that the
hearing will last for three hours, so people will take time away from other people if
they aren't willing to limit their comments. It would be the most fair to stagger pro
and con comments.
Crawford stated the Planning Commission once, during a controversial issue,
asked the two sides to have 20 minutes at the start to make a prepared
presentation on the subject. This is not as simple as assuming there is a one -size
fits all issue. Both sides feel they have gathered evidence to support their cause. It
might help the Council to make its decision.
Motion carried 4 -3 with Crawford, Brenner, and Nelson opposed.
OTHER BUSINESS
Brenner moved to endorse the Friends of the Deming Library fundraising
project to expand the library. They're not asking for money, just to endorse the
concept. The project would be wonderful for the area.
McShane stated paper endorsement would be better. He asked
Councilmember Brenner to prepare a resolution for the Council to vote on. He'd
rather see a formal resolution come forward. There is not a timeliness issue.
Nelson stated a resolution would make the endorsement public.
Brenner withdrew her motion and agreed to prepare the resolution.
REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS
Caskey- Schreiber stated she's glad to have Councilmember Nelson back.
Roy stated her visit to China was wonderful. It was vibrant and exciting.
They accomplished an economic agreement between local officials and a Chinese
agreement. The local officials have agreed to promote a produce from their
Chinese sister county.
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, Page 29
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
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.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 9:52 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
The Council approved these minutes on July 27 , 2004.
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Dan McShane, Council Chair
Whatcom County Council, 6/29/2004, Page 30