HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil August 13 20021
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
August 13, 2002
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Council Chair L. Ward
Nelson in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
Present: Absent:
Barbara Brenner None
Laurie Caskey- Schreiber
Sam Crawford
Seth Fleetwood
Dan McShane
Sharon Roy
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Nelson announced that there was discussion during the Committee of the
Whole meetings regarding:
• Discussion regarding the 2002 Unrepresented Resolution (AB2002 -225)
• Discussion regarding collective bargaining negotiations (AB2001 -390)
• Discussion with Chief Civil Deputy Prosecutor Randy Watts regarding pending
litigation (AB2002 -018)
• Discussion with Chief Civil Deputy Prosecutor Randy Watts regarding the
stench at Recomp (AB2002 -018)
• Discussion with Civil Deputy Prosecutor David Grant regarding pending
litigation (AB2002 -018)
SPECIAL PRESENTATION
1. PROCLAMATION DECLARING AUGUST 12 -17, 2002 " "FARMING FOR
LIFE WEEK" (AB2002 -017)
Pete Kremen, County Executive, read the proclamation into the record.
2. RESOLUTION/ FRIENDSHIP AGREEMENT WITH DA SHI QIAO
COUNTY, CHINA (A132002 -310)
This item was withdrawn.
MINUTES CONSENT
Brenner moved to approve Minutes Consent items one and two.
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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.
Motion carried unanimously.
1. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FOR JULY 16, 2002
2. REGULAR COUNTY COUNCIL FOR JULY 16, 2002
OPEN SESSION
The following people spoke:
Bill Quehrn, Building Industry Association (BIA) of Whatcom County, made
suggestions regarding the seasonal clearing limitations in the watersheds
(AB2002 -222). He is very concerned that restricting site preparation during the
period between October 1" and April 30th threatens the economic survival of those
in the excavating profession. Their financial year, including payments on plant and
equipment is 12 months long. They cannot survive when a significant portion of
their opportunity to work is reduced to a matter of weeks. The BIA presented a
letter to the Council dated August 7, 2002. In that letter, he listed the additional
ramifications that would apply to builders, contractors, subcontractors, haulers, and
many others who are directly impacted by building sites. There would be additional
damage to the tertiary sectors of the building industry, including building supply
stores, paint and glass stores, hardware stores, engineering and design firms,
mortgage and banking services, and other services and businesses.
Employees of the local building companies could face layoffs or the possibility
of losing health care and other benefits when work is denied to them. The
construction trade employees have salaries to support their families, local grocery
stores, and other basic needs. They also pay taxes to support government
services.
People who have achieved the resources to build their own home will be
forced out of the market by the increased cost that this ordinance will add to the
price of the home, or the inability to secure the services of whatever professionals
are left to carry the entire load of the market demand.
He preferred that the Council rescind this ordinance immediately. The BIA
does not support uncontrolled building anywhere in the county, and certainly not in
areas where the drinking water resource could be unnecessarily threatened.
However, best management practices (BMP's) could lead to the creation of
environmentally responsible products.
Stormwater supervisors, after appropriate training and certification, could be
employed by contractors during the wet weather season. These people could assist
County staff and augment County services by doing site -by -site work. That
consultant would come to Whatcom County at the cost of the BIA.
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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.
Andy Lohrer, 652 Sudden Valley, Bellingham, stated he is a small electrical
contractor with three employees. This Council has a chance to reverse the interim
rules regarding seasonal clearing limitations in the watersheds (AB2002-
222). With regulations previously in place, they can control the soil erosion during
construction. Enforcement is the problem. Deal with those problems, not shutting
down an entire industry for seven months. The timing of the rules did not give
enough time to obtain permits and build by October. It takes a minimum of eight
weeks for the permit process. This will cost jobs. He will have to lay off three
employees by January 1 or sooner. It will affect thousands of jobs directly and
indirectly. There is a demand for affordable homes. Reverse this decision.
Leo Wegner, 3570 Haynie Road, Blaine, stated there is a Drayton Harbor
watershed problem. From Haynie Road to the Nooksack River, there is 16 feet of
pure sand. Everyone there has good drinking water and working septic tanks.
Sand is the best filter they can get. There is nothing anyone can do to affect the
Drayton Harbor watershed in the winter because of the sand. The Planning
Department should have consulted a soils map. Don't shut down his area for these
silly reasons.
Ann Mosness, 1081 Sudden Valley, Bellingham, spoke on the Atlantic
salmon fish farm resolution (AB2002 -202). She attended a Fish and Wildlife
Commission meeting recently. She is perplexed by the State agencies who are
proponents of a private venture industry. It is likely that the fish farms will be
offshore. They would be placed three miles off the coastline. Six hundred
thousand Atlantic salmon escaped from Washington net pens between 1996 and
1999. There have been a lot of reported catches of these fish. They have been
found in the Nooksack River, Puget Sound, and Vancouver Island. Those figures
are not reflected in the official reports from British Columbia or the Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). When they hear about the fish farms
industry employing 200 people, the salmon industry, recreational uses, and tribal
fisheries employ many times more than that amount of people. It brings in more
money than the farmed salmon industry. The Council's vote on this will indicate its
decision to protect the environment for the future.
Lisa Ramirez, Friends of the Earth, spoke on the Atlantic salmon fish farm
resolution (AB2002 -202). Her organization is a nonprofit organization with
members in Whatcom County and across the United States. Friends of the Earth
strongly supports the resolution against fish farms. She supports the Council's
recognition that salmon aquaculture poses a threat to wild salmon stocks, clean
water, and the local economy. She is pleased that this resolution will prevent the
introduction of transgenic or genetically engineered salmon into Whatcom County.
Do not stop with this resolution. Continue to work with concerned citizens and
other government agencies in other areas to introduce similar proposals. Consider
something stronger than a resolution to carry legal and /or regulatory weight.
Consider adopting zoning rules that do not allow net pens in this area.
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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.
Leonard Lindstrom, City, stated the animals cannot change habits because
they cannot talk to each other. They use fear to control and get the things they
want from each other. People can improve on this in the future.
Roger Clapham, Abbottsford, B.C., stated he is asking for the Council's help
regarding the nocturnal operation of an agricultural propane cannon just south of
the border near Lynden. It is used to discourage starlings from feeding on
blueberries. Nearly all the operators cooperate with good management and
common sense by turning them off in the evenings. However, one operator
persists in running the thing continuously. He believes the operator is a Canadian
who is renting land in Washington State, and doesn't live there. There are
interesting jurisdictional questions about this. He's asking for the Council's help
and advice.
Dave Grant, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, asked Mr. Clapham to call him or
contact a noise enforcement officer, who works with the Planning and Development
Services Department.
Darrell Pope, 3106 Edwards Street, Bellingham, stated he supports the
moratorium on fish farms (AB2002 -202). In the 1980's, there was a deer farm
in Acme. The Washington Department of Game shut that farm down because of the
possible tuberculosis contamination of the wild elk and deer in the county.
Colorado, Oregon, Eastern British Columbia, and Idaho have had problems with
tuberculosis, mad cow disease, and chronic wasting disease. The fish farms are the
same type of scenario. There are escapees intermingling with the wild salmon.
There have been problems in New Brunswick and Scotland where there are major
fish farms. It is a problem.
Charles Halbreak, Ferndale, stated he is opposed to the seasonal clearing
limitations in the watersheds (AB2002 -222). The economic damage to this
county will far outweigh the benefit they will gain from shutting down construction
for seven months. In Michigan, their Department of Natural Resources manages
the construction sites. They have zoning in place to help promote fishing and still
be friendly to the construction industry.
Jean Freestone, 3200 Vallette, Bellingham, stated she is opposed to the
seasonal clearing limitations in the watersheds (AB2002 -222). She owns
five acres of dry, sandy soil in Custer, which is located in the Drayton Harbor
watershed. The Drayton Harbor watershed covers about 52 square miles. It
extends from Blaine to North Ferndale and from the outskirts of Birch Bay to
halfway to Lynden. The seasonal clearing limitation covers the Lake Whatcom,
Lake Samish, and Drayton Harbor watersheds. About 150 square miles of the
county will be shut down from building for all but five months of the year. King
County has limited seasonal clearing legislation tied to specific areas measured for
slope and proximity to alluvial fans. It is not a blanket prohibition that ignores
specific topography and mini - climates.
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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.
The Drayton Harbor watershed is relatively flat. Drayton Harbor is not a
drinking water source. The justification for including Drayton Harbor is to protect
shellfish growing areas. However, there is no commercial shellfish operation there.
There is only a small, nonprofit, nonnative species oyster operation. The State
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) discourages shellfish harvesting because it
destroys eelgrass needed for herring spawning. Drayton Harbor has been one of
the prime eelgrass areas in this state. The apparent function of the oyster growing
operation seems to be to qualify the county for State shellfish protection funds to
upgrade Blaine's sewer. It may be a laudable reason, but hardly justifies the
terrible economic effects of this wildly overbroad ordinance.
The County Charter requires that they consider the effects of legislation on
property rights. Comprehensive Plan goal 11 -C states that environmental policies
must provide for protection of private property rights, economic opportunities, and
appropriate growth. This ordinance does just the opposite.
Charlene French, 5044 La Bounty Road, stated there is still a stench from
Recomp (AB2002 -284). Today's temperature was over 80 degrees, and she had
to keep her windows closed at home. She's called the Northwest Air Pollution
Authority ( NWAPA). Since June 17, NWAPA has received 68 complaints. She's
upset with the article in the paper that says the City of Ferndale receives frequent
complaints about the smell at Recomp, but hasn't had any calls in the last two
weeks. She and everyone in her neighborhood has called the City of Ferndale, who
tells her to call NWAPA instead. She called the Spokane County Air Pollution, which
also has an ongoing problem. Spokane County is fining their problem company
$10,000 per day. The Spokane County Air Pollution Authority respond to a call in
ten minutes. It takes NWAPA 40 minutes to respond. The County made an
agreement with Recomp, and she thought part of the agreement was to help with
the smell. It still stinks. They still need help.
Chuck Westfall, county resident, spoke on the seasonal clearing
limitations in the watersheds (AB2002 -222). He's owned a construction
company in this area for 13 years. He is involved in the manufactured home sales
industry. There used to be six home sales lots in the County. There is now three.
Now, the Council is going to take a substantial part of the land away from them.
Most of his work is done in Skagit and Snohomish counties now because he can't
survive in Whatcom County. There is too little work to survive on in the winter.
The Birch Bay area is a big area for him to work in. In this industry at this time,
the industry professionals know how to protect against erosion. Things can be done
that may cost more, but they won't cost as much as not having any work in the
winter. He asked the Council to be sensible and find things to do in the winter to
protect the watershed. Not working is not a protection for any of them.
Robert French, 5044 La Bounty Road, spoke about the stench from Recomp
(AB2002 -284). Over the last 30 years, his neighbors have suffered from health
problems, loss of property value, and have to put up with a degradation of their
lives due to the odors emitted by Recomp's mushroom composting facility. They
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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
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.
need to address the problem in dealing with the odor. There is an interim
agreement which contains specific things that Recomp was supposed to have done.
The interim agreement was supposed to deal with the odor problem. However, that
hasn't happened. He'd like the County Council to get involved again. The residents
need some relief out there. Encourage the Health Department to get more involved
until they know what the sources of the odor are. Whatever it is, they need to
analyze the health damages to the people who are actually breathing this stuff.
There are times when the odor leaves a residue in the throat, and it becomes
difficult to breathe. It is an ongoing problem. The interim agreement needs to be
revisited. The odor problem needs to be addressed.
Lavern Schnackenberg, 1460 Sunset Avenue, spoke regarding the stench
from Recomp (AB2002 -284). The smell has not gone away. Recomp was given
18 months to move its composting facility. Since then, the smell has gotten worse.
The City of Ferndale and NWAPA are still getting complaints. He can't be outside
his house. The windows and fans at his house have to be turned off because of the
smell. He's trying to sell his place. He's concerned that something like this will
stop the sale of his home.
Ron Reimer, R and R Excavating, Lynden, stated he works almost exclusively
in the watershed. It is difficult for those in the construction business to look at all
the information and studies about the lake. The studies that seem most credible
say that the water is in better shape than it ever was. He would like to see photos
of all the runoff that has gone on. He doesn't see any damage in the watershed.
He's in the watershed everyday. He takes steps to limit the damage. By doing this
ordinance, they limit the ability to build to four months. He will not be able to
schedule work. He doesn't want to see a quick fix. No one can back up this
moratorium with scientific proof that the excavators are causing a problem. Look
closely at the seasonal clearing limitations in the watersheds (AB2002 -222).
Rob Olson, Olson's Construction, stated the seasonal clearing limitations
in the watersheds (AB2002 -222) affects him greatly. He employs ten to twelve
subcontractors on the site daily. As construction closes in October, those folks will
have to find other work. They are striving to get young people into affordable
homes. They have been abiding by the regulations put in place two years ago to
control the silt, at a cost of about $2,000 per home site. The inspector has done a
good job making sure they keep on top of it.
Marion Beddill, 3600 Seely Street, stated she supports resolution opposing
salmon net pens (AB2002 -202). This is a special opportunity because no one is
doing the activity at the moment. Forbidding it from starting should be much
easier. The benefits are obvious.
There is a runoff problem in the Lake Samish watershed from a forestry
operation that is being considered in the upper Lake Samish watershed. The
Council should watch that activity. It is a proposal that is in process regarding
hazardous, sloping property.
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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
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.
Governor Locke is expected to give his decision on the Sumas Energy 2
(SE2) proposal within the next week. She is opposed to SE2. Send the message to
Governor Locke that they don't need a large polluting power plant on the Canadian
border in the impacted air shed of the Fraser Valley.
Kiera Derhgawen, 5075 Hendrickson Avenue, Ferndale, stated she supports
the resolution opposing salmon net pens (AB2002 -202). She hoped the
decisions made by the community would protect the salmon species and health of
the citizens.
Mark Larsen, stated he is a builder and contractor. For the last two years,
he's been working in Sudden Valley. That is primarily where he's been building
homes. Right now, he's trying to rush a plan through to meet the seasonal
clearing limitations in the watersheds (AB2002 -222). He's concerned about
shutting down construction in the watersheds. The County inspector has said he is
doing a good job on his jobsites. He's never seen mud running into the ditches on
his jobsites. He takes care of that kind of stuff. He doesn't know what to do if they
take away his job in January. He has to feed his family. The watershed is where
he has been building lately, and he is very concerned.
Greg (inaudible), stated he owns a business in Bellingham that would be
directly impacted by the seasonal clearing limitations in the watersheds
(AB2002 -222).
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
Speaker continued to state that he moved out of Whatcom County for a short
time. During that time, he realized that uncontrolled growth is one of the worst
things that can happen to a community. However, they have to look at all the
different laws and regulations that have been brought about in Whatcom County
that directly impact the building industry, which includes his business. There has to
be a point where they weigh the differences between building moratoriums and
building regulations. When a community is not growing, it is dying. Regulations
are being enacted fast and hard in this community, especially toward the building
industry. This community is not going to survive. This will create a lack of
building. There will be a sixty percent of construction in these watersheds, which
are an amazing portion of the building areas. They will end up with other people
coming in from other communities to do the work, and then leave the community
with their tax dollars. This will be a major problem for Whatcom County
Rita Foley, South Lake Whatcom, stated it's the people who create the
garbage. If there is a lot of building going on, there will be a lot of garbage. There
is plenty of runoff in the watershed. She knows the watershed very well. The
north shore is completely built over. Now they are trying to develop her end of the
lake. They have to preserve the environment, lake, and watershed. Whatcom
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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.
County is already over built. Apartment houses are standing empty. She supports
the seasonal clearing limitations in the watersheds (AB2002 -222).
The Park Road reconstruction (2001 -160A) is $1 million over budget.
They never had to spend this kind of money. She told the County to not
reconstruct the road. The reconstruction is not going to work. They could put
another $6 million in the road, and it will keep sinking.
Carl Weimer, Resources Executive Director, stated he supports the
resolution opposing salmon net pens (AB2002 -202). It is a valuable thing.
He also supports the contract for a recycling potential assessment (2002-
307). It has been on the solid waste management plan for years. It is overdue,
and the County needs to assess whether the garbage and recycling are being
picked up in an economical and efficient manner. He also supports the financial
support for Non - Municipal Water District Caucuses (AB2002 -306).
However, none of the other caucuses on the Planning Unit have been told that more
money is available. There should be a level playing field because the entire process
is built on trust. If this request is approve, then the Council should tentatively
approve the extra money for all the other extra caucuses. The Council also needs
to clarify what the money is used for. He understood that the money has to be
used to attract more members to the caucus and to provide educational outreach to
the caucuses. Now, he finds out that some of the money is being used to attend
the meetings and be part of the process. That is how the money should be used.
That's why he is in favor of this request. He assumes that, by voting for this
request tonight, the Council is telling the caucuses that they can use their money to
be part of the process also.
Tom Pratum, 2240 North Shore Road, stated he can see there are a few
builders that are upset about the seasonal clearing limitations in the
watersheds (AB2002 -222). He thanked the Council for approving the
limitations. He draws water directly from Lake Whatcom and drinks it. Those
seasonal clearing restrictions are quite reasonable. They are far from a building
moratorium. They just require builders to plan ahead for when they are going to do
their clearing and other work. That is quite reasonable.
Dennis Shannon, 1389 Roma Road, stated he owns Shannon Construction.
He understands that a lot of people from Whatcom County are from other places,
and moved here because it is a beautiful place. Whatcom County is his house. It is
rough when someone comes into his house and tells him that he can't work for
seven months. He builds one house at a time. In Sudden Valley, he has to have
about $30,000 for a foundation, $10,000 for a sewer permit, and other fees. He
can do one more house this year, but it will be done halfway through the
moratorium, and he will be out of work. Laws are in place to monitor the runoff.
He asked why that isn't being enforced, if that is the problem. That's where they
should put their efforts. He hasn't seen any runoff. No one has come to his job
site to show him how to put up a silt fence, even though they are supposed to.
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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
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.
Tom Iverson, excavation company owner, stated he has seven employees.
He does a lot of work between Blaine, Birch Bay, Ferndale, and Lynden. When he
heard about this, he called the councilmembers. One councilmember hung up on
him. Another councilmember couldn't tell him where the Drayton Harbor watershed
boundary is, and also said that Custer wasn't involved. He asked himself how
informed the councilmembers are. They are poorly informed. He is opposed to
seasonal clearing limitations in the watersheds (AB2002 -222) because it will
cause extreme economic hardship. He asked where he is supposed to put his seven
employees. He has machine payments to make. He uses protective measures on
his sites. He's never been in violation. The blanket limitation is overreaching.
Reverse the decision.
Bob Wiesen, 3314 Douglas Road, stated he represents the Black Mountain
Forestry Center. He invited all to a festival at the center. Also, there will be a
special Black Mountain tour. Besides giving tours every week, the center also
participates with the Farm Forestry Association in the student field day at the State
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) seed farm. The center gave a tour to
Japanese exchange students from the Whatcom Community College. The center
also hired Laura Jacoby, who gives presentations to the third grade classes in the
community on the history of natural resources in the county.
Regarding the seasonal clearing limitations in the watersheds
(AB2002 -222), the process used to develop the seasonal clearing limitation was
flawed. There was no public input. People feel like this was slipped through. The
construction industry is an important economic industry in the county. To shut
them down to that extent will have economic impacts on the entire community.
Barbara Call, Ferndale resident, stated she just found out she is in the
Drayton Harbor watershed. She just sold her home in Bellingham and bought
property in Ferndale. She is waiting for a permit she may not be able to get
because of the seasonal clearing limitations in the watersheds (AB2002-
222). She is now homeless. Contractors cannot get excavation, trusses, and
building permits in a short amount of time. There are too many steps required in
the building and code process. Cut out a lot of the work and time by having an
inspector come to the sites rather than making the builder fill out a lot of forms.
Her five acres is flat. Nothing that will be disturbed on that land will end up in
Drayton Harbor.
Chris Dillard, 1102 Kelley Road, stated he supports resolution opposing
salmon net pens (AB2002 -202). The federal legislators from Alaska, who are
very conservative, are leading the charge against the net pen industry in the State
of Alaska. He also supports the seasonal clearing limitations in the
watersheds (AB2002 -222). The majority of his professional life in Whatcom
County has been in the building industry as laborer and lead carpenter. He's been
in the position of putting up the silt barriers and other BMP's. In his experience,
they are a joke. He doesn't know any contractor who can honestly say they've
never seen runoff. He understands that the building industry is important in
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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.
Whatcom County. If they look at the future of this county, the water resources in
the long term are going to be more important. Whatcom County is fortunate that it
has a good supply of water. The mistakes they've made in the past are significant.
Make some changes.
Chris Weitzel, citizen, stated there was a flood around Lake Whatcom in
1983. Tons of mud slid into the lake. For about two years after that, there was a
logging operation going on around the lake. Hundreds of tons of soil went into Lake
Whatcom. The drinking water is the most important thing they have. During that
time, he kept getting fresh water. There is not scientific data that supports the
seasonal clearing limitations in the watersheds (AB2002 -222). This will
affect everyone. They can't take away 60 percent of a market and expect things to
go on as normal. Kurt Baumgarten is doing a good job for the County. He needs to
find a few more builders. Enforce the current regulations. The Sudden Valley
Community Association supports reconsidering the limitations. The community is
trying to do all it can to protect the watershed by implementing the best density
reduction program in the State of Washington. They've removed the ability to
develop hundreds of homes in the watershed. Affordable housing is something that
everyone wants, but this is counterproductive. Housing prices will go up. This is
also a matter of property rights. They are taking away peoples' property rights.
John Lee, Coach Corral Manufactured Home Sales Site Development
Manager, stated people are concerned that if building happens, people will come to
Whatcom County. However, it is preposterous to believe that any builder would
build unless there is a demand. They don't create growth. They respond to
growth. They are responding to a need in the community. It's important to
develop in a responsible manner. Everyone in the building industry knows that.
When he looks at the jurisdictions that he does business in, he's noticed a
difference between agenda -based science and real environmental science.
Environmental science has extremely specific statistical information. Agenda -based
science is not as specific. He asked the councilmembers to look at the Snohomish
County grading plan and model. Whatcom County has the personnel to do the job.
Lois Garlic, 3014 Lynn Street, stated she supports the seasonal clearing
limitations in the watersheds (AB2002 -222). The builders can plan their work
around limitation. Also the resolution opposing salmon net pens (AB2002-
202) is very important.
Doug Campbell, 1401 Astor Street, stated he is opposed to seasonal
clearing limitations in the watersheds (AB2002 -222). He asked the Council
to delay for at least one building season. There is no science regarding pollution.
There are legal problems. People are dealing with real damages. There are timing
and process issues. Even the County plans examiner is admitting to problems in
administering these kinds of regulations in terms of inspections. In Drayton
Harbor, there is no drinking water. If the Council is serious about this, it should
also restrict the Nooksack River area. Deal with the inspection issues. This is
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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.
happening under false pretense to perfect some political gain. This ordinance is
flawed.
Ron Haugness, Custer, stated he has been in the excavating business since
1969. He is opposed to seasonal clearing limitations in the watersheds
(AB2002 -222). If this goes through he and people like him will be out of
business. They do the best that they can with what they have. A lot of people,
who have been in the business for 30 years, understand about the drainage
problems.
Greg Kovicevich, 1516 Main Street, Ferndale, stated he supports the
resolution opposing salmon net pens (AB2002 -202). The net pens have an
environmental impact.
Brenner moved to rescind the ordinance or part of the ordinance regarding
the seasonal clearing limitations in the watersheds (AB2002 -222) and the
part about the months when clearing is prohibited.
Crawford stated the Council amended the land clearing portion of the water
resource protection overlay. He asked if Councilmember Brenner is moving to
rescind the amendments the Council approved.
Brenner clarified her motion to rescind the language that adopted the
seasonal clearing limitation from October 1 through April 31.
Crawford stated a motion to rescind would affect the entire ordinance.
Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, stated that legal counsel advised
that the Council has to rescind an entire ordinance, not just a section of it.
Brenner moved to rescind all of Ordinance 2002 -034 that was adopted in
June, which changed the land- clearing regulations. Tonight is a perfect example of
people making blanket statements on both sides of the issue. There wasn't
anything to back up some of the statements. Regarding the statement about no
pollution, she has personally gone out and seen silt fences that are not working.
One developer allowed a huge mudslide to come down over Lake Whatcom
Boulevard. When she voted for this ordinance, it sounded like a reasonable solution
at the time. The building industry was involved throughout the entire process. The
Council doesn't have the ability to make the media advertise something in big, bold
letters. The Council received a letter from the BIA on August 7. It made a lot of
sense to her. The BIA's proposal sounded reasonable to her, but she is not a
builder. She talked to the Planning Department Director and staff, who said they
could theoretically do it on a case -by -case basis during the wet season instead of a
blanket prohibition. This is a great opportunity. She's sorry people have to feel
fear and anger about this issue. She would like to resolve the problem so it can
work out for both sides. She's seen problems in the watershed, and doesn't want
to see problems again. However, she doesn't believe that this ordinance will solve
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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.
those problems. What will happen is that people will do things anyway, illegally.
One of the suggestions by the BIA is to certify excavators and engineers to be able
to sign off on this and make sure measures are done right. That should take some
of the stress and time off the County's own staff, so they can do what they are
supposed to be doing, instead of having to be spread out so thin.
By rescinding this ordinance, she is in no way saying that they don't need
protection from runoff. But, this is not the way to do it. They can do it a better
way that everyone can live with. Hal Hart told her the Council could have
something doable in place before November 1. She would like to see the Council
open this up in a way to show respect to all sides of the issue, without
compromising the watersheds.
Nelson stated that he would like to reconsider his original vote on this issue.
The councilmembers are always learning something new. Everyone is trying to do
the right thing. The Council's intentions are good, and does not intend to hurt any
business, family, or industry. They are trying to protect the environment and work
with people in the community. This problem has pulled them together more than
apart. He hopes the environmental community and the industry can work together
to solve the problem.
Caskey- Schreiber stated she is not in favor of rescinding the ordinance. The
ordinance needs amendments, which can be done without having to start over. An
interim ordinance is proposed to drop Drayton Harbor from this plan. She would
like to see it still pertain to certain areas. Make it more specific. Allow a grace
period before it takes effect. She would like to further refine the regulation for the
Lake Whatcom and Lake Samish watersheds to those lands that have a particular
slope or soil quality. It is not the Council's intent to put people out of business.
She hoped they can shorten the timeframe and identify the more vulnerable areas.
When they first discussed this, the BIA was a part of the process. There
wasn't a strong opposition to this. She previously heard that less than five percent
of the buildable permits for the entire county would be affected.
McShane spoke against the motion. He is not comfortable with what the
Council did previously. Corrections need to be made. There is an introduction item
that will come forward, but the Council can't act on it tonight, due to the required
process.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side 8.)
McShane stated the language would drop the land clearing period from the
Drayton Harbor area for this next winter. That is unfortunate. They might have to
wait awhile before that decision is made. He is not comfortable rescinding the
entire ordinance. There are a lot of very good things in it. When the Council
adopted this ordinance, there were a number of big items before the Council at that
time. There was a lot of focus in the Building Industry Association (BIA) members
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, Page 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
it
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.
who were more worried about those other items. The County staff said they
needed input on the land- clearing ordinance. He appreciated getting that input
tonight. He hoped that between now and September 10, the public would read the
ordinance being introduced and make comments. It will also go before the
Planning Commission, which will have a public hearing sometime in October. Let
the Planning Commission know what the public thinks. The more input and
knowledge the Council has, the better decision it can make. On a short -term basis,
they need a period of relief for land clearing, but that is a decision he's not ready to
make tonight. He doesn't want to throw out everything else that was well done.
Fleetwood stated the object is to have clean water. He supports whatever
means it takes to get there. He is inclined to look at Mr. Quehrn's suggestion. He
is not inclined to support rescinding the ordinance. They can relieve the concerns
of the public by amending the interim ordinance. The proposal to amend the
interim ordinance includes an exemption for the Drayton Harbor watershed. It also
extends the seasonal land clearing limitation by one month. It would buy them
time to further review the various proposals, including Mr. Quehrn's proposal.
Brenner stated they've talked about buying the Council time. She asked
about the time and work invested by the people who need to make a living.
Everything that is good in the ordinance can be put back in, after it's rescinded.
Leaving it like this leaves the industry people in limbo. It doesn't resolve the issues
and give the Council what it wants. It will cause hardship to the industry if they
don't rescind the ordinance. If they are going to make changes anyway, then start
over and use what's good in it now. She wants to put polluters out of business, but
the majority of the builders are not polluters. Please consider the effect on people
who want to build in the meantime.
Roy asked if the percentage of building permits that are in these affected
areas.
Hart stated it depends on how they measure it. last year, there wasn't as
much growth in the Lake Whatcom watershed as there is this year. This year, the
permits for single - family homes in the Lake Whatcom watershed and the Drayton
Harbor watershed total about 22 percent. There have been 79 out of 327 single -
family home building permits in the first six months of this year for Lake Whatcom.
The Birch Bay subarea is a lot larger, and includes areas of Birch Bay that are
growing very fast and that are outside of the Drayton Harbor watershed. He
counted about 37 single - family home permits in the Drayton Harbor watershed that
would be impacted. There is a substantial amount of home building countywide
that takes place in the Lake Whatcom watershed.
Roy stated she understands that most of the Drayton Harbor watershed does
not drain into Birch Bay. That is another watershed.
Roy asked the process if they rescind the ordinance.
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, Page 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
it
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 it is being introduced tonight.
Roy stated their goal is good. They need to not lose sight of that goal.
Obviously there are consequences and impacts to people that they need to mitigate
as much as they can. She is looking for a way to give people enough information
so they can make their plans. Her only problem with the introduction item is that
these people will still not know whether they can work during the month of October.
She wants to find a way for them to leave the meeting tonight knowing whether or
not they can work in October, without removing the entire ordinance.
Crawford stated he doesn't understand the problem if they rescind the
ordinance and work on better land clearing regulations. The Council, since the
autumn of 1999, has approved the most restrictive residential land clearing
regulations in the State of Washington for Drayton Harbor and Lake Whatcom.
They are not rescinding those. Through a very long and difficult process, they
have developed extremely stringent regulations. If the Council is being shown
evidence that the Council needs to make those regulations tougher, he doesn't see
the urgency to introduce something tonight. The community has had a wakeup
call. The community will participate in the process. Approve rescinding the
ordinance tonight. It provides predictability by maintaining the status quo. If
something comes forward, it will go through the normal hearing process.
Nelson stated he went through a building process in the Lake Whatcom
watershed during the summer months. He had 45 feet of sand and gravel, and
there is no standing water on his property, even in the winter. The issue isn't
about technical aspects of how they manage this. The issue these people are
bringing forward is that the Council is hurting their businesses and the community.
Government needs to recognize an issue of fairness. The Council has to deal with
the public fairly. The Council will be fair by rescinding this ordinance. The public
will understand that the Council needs to provide protection for water quality while
it also finds mechanisms that don't hurt the developers. The length of this
moratorium is significant in Whatcom County. Rescinding the ordinance will do no
harm. The Council will still work on the same objectives. They will still try to solve
the problem. He will support a moratorium if they can't do that.
McShane stated he is okay with rescinding the ordinance. The
councilmembers who are arguing for rescinding the ordinance are supportive of the
fundamental part of this. However, there is a piece missing. The Council needs to
hear from those who are involved in the industry. If they don't, the public may not
like what it gets in October. There are real problems in the industry. He's seen the
mud going into the lake. People have talked about the 1993 event producing a lot
of mud into the lake, and that the lake is still in good shape. The data for water
quality in the lake appears to have been skewed by the numbers of that sediment
that went into the lake. They are still dealing with it.
Dave Grant, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, stated that if the Council
chooses to rescind Ordinance 2002 -034, the result will be to put them back to the
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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.
law that existed prior to the adoption of that ordinance. Those portions of that
ordinance that affect things other than the moratorium on building and land
clearing would also necessarily be affected.
McShane stated the public needs to understand that as well.
Brenner stated that she has listened to builders say they will accept stringent
restrictions, but don't want to be restricted from doing their work at all. There is a
lot of incentive from the building community to work with the Council to come up
with rules that work. She is not concerned about rescinding the ordinance and
putting in what works. The biggest problem is the prohibition. She liked some of
the ideas that came from the BIA.
Caskey- Schreiber asked for clarification on the effect on rescinding the
ordinance.
Crawford stated the new rules were passed in November or December of
1999. They are very restrictive. This new ordinance was an amendment to the
1999 ordinance done in July. For example, the new ordinance cleared up language
about driveways. By rescinding the new ordinance, the County goes back to where
it was before the Council made changes in July. Prior to the July changes, the 1999
changes were the most restrictive land clearing rules for residential construction in
the State of Washington. That is what the community already has, and is what the
developers have been working with for over two years. If the ordinance is
rescinded, and the Council goes forward with new changes, it can take action after
this. The first thing they have to do is vote to rescind the July ordinance.
Caskey- Schreiber stated she agrees with Councilmember McShane. People
need to be involved in the process. She thought they were talking about five
percent of the building permits. Now that she knows it is different, she is willing to
rescind the ordinance so they can address the concerns and be more specific.
Fleetwood stated they are now proposing to rescind the July amendment,
and reinstate it on September 10 with everything that was in the July amendment,
except the seasonal land clearing prohibition. If there is commitment to having the
recommendations from the Planning Commission on the permanent land clearing
ordinance by November, he would support rescinding the ordinance today.
Motion to rescind Ordinance 2002 -034 carried unanimously.
OTHER ITEMS
3. RESOLUTION SUPPORTING A MORATORIUM ON COMMERCIAL
MARINE SALMON NET PENS AND SUPPORTING WILD SALMON
FISHERIES (AB2002 -202)
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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.
Brenner moved approval of the resolution.
Brenner moved to amend the resolution to add Ann Mosness's name as a
proposer. She brought the Council a lot of information single- handedly. They've
acknowledged people in the community before by putting their names on the
resolution as a sponsor.
McShane stated there are too many other people who worked on this. The
Marine Resources Committee worked on it and put a lot of effort into it. Ann
Mosness's organization includes individuals who have also come forward. Picking
her out individually would be a disservice to all those who also put effort into it.
Brenner stated the Council could list the others as well. Ms. Mosness has
spent more time on this than anyone else. She would like to acknowledge Ms.
Mosness.
Motion to amend failed 3 -4 with Brenner, Fleetwood and Caskey- Schreiber in
favor.
Crawford stated he is opposed to the motion. They have a report from the
federal government on this issue. The conclusion is that Atlantic salmon fish
farming is something that needs to be regulated, the current regulations are
effective, and continued study of alleged negative effects of the industry need to be
monitored. He is hard pressed to second -guess the judgment of that very
extensive study and assume that, locally, they have the resources and ability to
make a better judgment than the federal government.
Brenner stated absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. They are
talking about a potential. She has no idea whether or not there has already been a
problem. Her gut feeling tells her that, if there hasn't been a problem, they are
just lucky. The councilmembers read information from many people and sides.
She's so convinced that she and her family have stopped eating farmed salmon.
She hopes it's not too late. This is very little to ask of the Council. It's not even
happening right here. She is concerned about potential diseases and genetic
changes that could happen to their wild stock. She is also concerned about an
important industry in the community, the fishing industry.
Fleetwood stated that when they considered this issue, they were presented
with an enormous amount of credible scientific information that described the perils
of Atlantic net pens. He's convinced that Atlantic net pens in the waters and
protecting wild salmon work at cross purposes. He will support the resolution.
Nelson stated he opposed the resolution. This version of the ordinance was
cleaned up quite a bit from the original resolution. There are still fallacies in the
resolution. Wild stocks receive antibiotic treatments when they are reared.
Resistance is always a factor of antibiotic treatment. It doesn't mean they should
pick on net pens as a cause of resistance. There is an impact to the quality food
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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
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.
production that has provided quality food for the increasing population of this
world. They've had better luck with the uses of antibiotics than degradation due to
impacts from the use of those antibiotics. There is more research that shows there
shouldn't be as much of a concern as what has been raised.
Roy stated there are so many people in this community who are working
very hard to restore the native salmon runs. The Council received input from those
people. To support those people, such as commercial fishermen, environmental
groups, and tribes, she will support the resolution.
McShane stated the federal and State government have put the risks
associated with Atlantic salmon aside to a degree. There are two different scientific
opinions, and a question is how they are to choose. The description of how docile
Atlantic salmon are really struck him. Amongst that entire batch of hundreds of
thousands of fish that escape, there are a few that are bad and are not docile.
They swam all the way to Alaska. There is a certain percentage of the population
that doesn't behave the way it's supposed to. That percentage has been spawning
in rivers on Vancouver Island and producing viable offspring. They should not allow
these fish in their waters.
Motion to approve the resolution carried 5 -2 with Crawford and Nelson
opposed.
CONSENT AGENDA
Crawford reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee
and moved to approve Consent Agenda items one and six through eleven.
McShane withdrew item eight.
Brenner withdrew item nine.
Motion to approve Consent Agenda items one, six, seven, ten, and eleven
were approved unanimously.
1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID #02-
51 NORTH BELLINGHAM AREA CLASS B ASPHALT OVERLAY PROJECT,
TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE BIDDER, WHATCOM BUILDERS, IN THE
AMOUNT OF $192,453 (AB2002 -301)
2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND STEWARD +KING
PARTNERSHIP TO PROVIDE FOR MASTER FACILITIES PLANNING,
PHASE I, IN THE AMOUNT OF $94,375 (AB2002 -302)
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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.
Crawford stated items two through four were approved by committee. Item
two was amended on Council packet page 18, "Note: Article H: .... fffay will be
implemented in a later phase of facility planning." He moved to approve items two
as amended, three, and four.
Motion to amend carried unanimously.
Brenner stated she would not vote for these three items. When the issue of
purchasing the Civic Center came up, she asked that the County do a
comprehensive plan before buying the building. She was told at the time that the
County has been doing comprehensive facilities planning. This is one -third of a
million dollars to do more facilities planning. She is not confident that they will get
anything more out of it that what they've gotten from other planning processes,
such as the law and justice planning process. If someone wants to change the
plan, it can be changed whenever. They never get anything but insulated from
taking responsibility by doing this.
Crawford stated the Council had a presentation by two of the three
contractors this afternoon. He is 100 percent in favor of facilities planning in a
comprehensive way. To the best of his research, he has not seen any evidence of
past comprehensive planning to this level. It is time they do this.
There is an issue of funding this $350,000 planning effort. He suggested that
they would be hard pressed to have the resources available in the general fund to
pay for this at this time. They would have to readjust County priorities to some
degree. However, there is another funding mechanism, which they will discuss
later. Based on the information that has been presented to the Council, the funding
mechanism will go hand -in -hand with the approval of this motion.
Fleetwood asked what distinguishes this proposed facilities plan from what
has already been done.
Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated that there was an effort about
25 years ago to do a master facilities plan. It was fairly limited. It was in
cooperation with the City of Bellingham. All of the buildings, purchases, and major
decisions on buildings since then have not been made with the benefit of a clear,
cohesive plan. The Executive has put forward a proposal to lay out a master
facilities plan before they make any other major decisions on the investments in
buildings. The County could invest millions of dollars in its buildings. Some of the
money could be wasteful, and some could be well spent. This process will allow
them to make decisions that are done at the right time, on the right projects, with
the right amount of funds.
Motion to approve this item carried 6 -1 with Brenner opposed.
3. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND HDR ENGINEERING,
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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.
INC. TO PROVIDE FOR MASTER FACILITIES PLANNING, PHASE I, IN
THE AMOUNT OF $102,357 (AB2002 -302A)
(Clerk's Note: See item two for the motion to approve.)
Motion to approve carried 6 -1 with Brenner opposed.
4. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE OMNI- GROUP,
INC. TO PROVIDE MASTER FACILITIES PLANNING, PHASE I IN THE
AMOUNT OF $152,195 (AB2002 -302B)
(Clerk's Note: See item two for the motion to approve.)
Motion to approve carried 6 -1 with Brenner opposed.
5. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ADDITIONAL COUNTY ROAD FUNDS FOR
COUNTY ROAD PROJECT NO. 998002, PARK ROAD RECONSTRUCTION
IN THE AMOUNT OF $985,900 FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF
$4,845,900 (AB2002 -303)
Crawford stated the committee voted to recommend approval of the
resolution. He moved to approve the substitute resolution amending the Park Road
funds with an amended amount of $4,955,000. There was an unexpected increase
in the last couple of weeks of another approximate $110,000.
Motion to amend carried 6 -1 with Brenner opposed.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape two, side A.)
Caskey- Schreiber stated she is inclined to not support this request. It keeps
getting bigger and bigger, and nothing seems to be working. Maybe it will never be
fixable. However, she has safety concerns for the school buses. She asked if the
road is hazardous for school buses if they leave it as it is now.
Bruce Mills, Assistant Director of Engineering, stated it is. During the winter,
the school buses need the road striping when it is dark. If the road is left gravel,
they won't be able to stripe the road. If they vote against this item, then the
contractor will fold up the tent and go home.
Caskey- Schreiber asked if the road will withstand the long -term, and not
need more money if they invest another million dollars. Mills stated he cannot
guarantee that there will no longer be maintenance issues on Park Road, due to the
topography and drainage. However, most of the drainage issues have been
addressed and minimized by this project. If the winters have minimal drainage, no
work may need to be done. There may be other times when there will be some
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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.
slippage in a critical area, and the County may have to spend $20,000 to fix it.
They are not going to have any major costs like they have now.
Brenner asked if the County Executive supported the item. She is very
shocked at the overrun. She appreciated that Mr. Mills took total responsibility for
it. If she had known how much more they are talking about and how this may not
solve the problem with Park Road, she may not have voted for it.
Pete Kremen, County Executive, stated the reason his initials were not on the
agenda bill was for the same reason he has concerns about this project at this
point. When the agenda bill was before him, he asked whether this would be the
end of the project. He could not get a firm answer. Mr. Mills told him today that
the cost went up another $110,000. Because he was not convinced that they had
seen the end of this project, he was unwilling to put his initials on the agenda bill.
This is a policy decision. All he can do is provide the Council with the information it
needs to make the decision. This project has grown enormously in cost. Had they
known from the beginning that it would cost nearly $5 million, none of them would
have approved this project. However, it is difficult to say no when they are dealing
with the safety of school children. Five million dollars for a road that is not well
traveled is a questionable amount. Others in the area will ask if they can afford to
not do that. Given the fact that they've already expended a significant amount, it is
incumbent upon the County to complete the project the way it should be
completed, and provide the access to and from the people who reside in that
community.
Brenner stated that when this came up in the beginning, it sounded like the
project would resolve the problem. A lot of stuff has come up since then. She'd
heard that some of the soil sampling was not even done initially. She can only base
her decisions on the information she has. She would be willing to support this
expenditure. However, Mr. Kremen is not confident enough to support the
expenditure, and it's his staff that is bringing this forward. She's not confident
enough to support it. She's not sure it will solve the problem. She understands
that they have to do this for safety reasons. She doesn't know this will resolve the
safety issues. It sounds like the problems will keep happening.
Crawford stated he understood that the County Public Works Department
prioritizes road projects, with the best information available, for this Council to
consider. He understood the history of this project to be that it was a lower priority
the Council, not the Executive, made a higher priority. He will support the motion.
He asked if that history is correct. Kremen stated that is correct.
Crawford stated he would support the motion because the Council should
finish what it starts. The County, as an entity, got in over its head on this project.
The Council needs to finish what it started. He voted in the past for a prior
increase. He will take responsibility, as a councilmember, for the Council. The
Council has to continue what it started. They need to get the road paved, striped,
finished, and ready to go for this fall.
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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
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.
Kremen stated this project was not a high priority project, as deemed by the
Public Works Department staff. In circumstances similar to tonight, a large group
of individuals with a common cause to have a safe road for their children came
forward. A significant number of individuals were very emotional, emphatic, and
determined. As a result, the County Council significantly elevated the prioritization
of the Park Road project. They knew it was going to be expensive, in the amount
of about $3 million. They were all hesitant to spend even that amount on a road
that has such a low traffic volume. Because of the community support and strident
position, and because of the underlying fact that it was for the safety of the
children, the Council decided to go ahead and expend the $3 million, which has
grown now to $5 million.
Nelson asked if any portion of the $5 million is for areas that they don't really
need to do. Mills stated there is a portion. He is looking into that right now. There
are a few sections of guardrail that are not too critical. There are a few items in
which they can still save some money on. There is a little bit of fluff in the project,
but not a lot. They do not want to come back again.
Nelson stated he doesn't want to see something like a freeway viaduct that
goes nowhere. The Council is responsible. He commended Rita Foley for her
position on this. She deserves the accolade that she was right on this issue. He
would appreciate it if the County did not do any extras out there. Mills agreed.
Brenner stated Councilmember Crawford's position convinced her to support
it. In defense of the Council, they can only go on the information that they get.
She is not an expert. She will always support something that is a safety issue. If it
were $3 million, she would support it again. She had no idea it would escalate to
this. This is the last time she will support the money for this.
McShane stated they have to finish the project. It may be a learning
experience for the Council. Pay attention to geologists and engineers who don't
rank things highly. One serious issue is the pavement in front of the Park Store.
He understands that they used asphalt pavement, and there is chip seal going on
out there. He's not comfortable with how that decision was arrived at and why it is
being done. There is an implication to what is going on with the store currently. It
is a nonconforming use that is able to operate the way they are only because there
is a stay of enforcement. This isn't the time to deal with it, but he would like to
hear some answers from administration later.
Motion to approve the resolution as amended carried 5 -2 with Caskey-
Schreiber and Roy opposed.
Kremen stated that in spite of the fact that Mr. Mills missed one on Park
Road, this is his last County Council meeting.
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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.
(Clerk's Note: Mr. Mills received applause from the Council and audience for
his work as the County Engineer.)
6. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING COUNTY ROAD PROJECT NO. 902023
AND THE AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE SAMISH WAY OVERLAY
FROM INTERSTATE 5 TO THE BELLINGHAM CITY LIMITS, TO WILDER
CONSTRUCTION COMPANY AS LOWEST RESPONSIVE BIDDER, IN THE
AMOUNT OF $1,734,765 (AB2002 -304)
7. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONSULTANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND CES,
INC. TO PROVIDE PHASE 1 DESIGN TO REPLACE POTTER ROAD
BRIDGES NO.'S 148 AND 149, IN THE AMOUNT OF $82,510 (AB2002-
305)
8. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT FOR SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN
WHATCOM COUNTY AND CATALYST CONSULTING, TO PROVIDE
ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR CONTINUED ADMINISTRATIVE AND
COMMUNICATION SERVICES FOR THE NON - MUNICIPAL WATER
DISTRICTS CAUCUSES THAT SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE
WATERSHED PLAN IN THE AMOUNT OF $15,000 (AB2002 -306)
McShane stated they voted on supporting this before. They are going to see
how many caucuses will come forward asking for additional money. He looked at
the scope of work. A budget is provided to cover the administrative and
communication costs, such as telephone and fax. It is also intended to cover the
reasonable costs of facilities for caucus meetings. A bit of that time is paying for an
individual to go to the meetings. That is a broader issue. It creates inequality for
those who are volunteering a huge amount of effort. Suddenly, they are giving
money to one caucus and not the others.
Brenner stated an inequality was already created by this whole process. It's
not the fault of the smaller caucuses that don't have the financial wherewithal. We
all elected to run for office. She noticed that certain councilmembers go to the
water resources inventory area (WRIA) meetings, and they haven't read the same
packets of information that these volunteers are supposed to read. The
councilmembers can't absorb it all, but the Council is demanding that these people
volunteer to do this. The Council has forced them into this process. if any other
worthy caucus comes forward and needs this amount of money that is small
compared to the $8 million they are spending, then give it to them. She applauds
the caucuses for participating. She hoped the ones who need it come forward.
She won't support giving money to all the caucuses. There are caucuses that
are municipalities with paid staff who can attend these meetings. She's talking
about the little guys at the bottom of the heap. They owe it to those caucuses.
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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
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 6 -1 with McShane opposed.
9. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND CASCADIA
CONSULTING GROUP TO PERFORM A RECYCLING POTENTIAL
ASSESSMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE SOLID
WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN, IN THE AMOUNT OF $40,000 (AB2002-
307)
Brenner stated this is the kind of task that, if they had a solid waste
specialist in the solid waste specialist position, the person would be able to do it in-
house. The County had employed Jack Weiss, who was a true solid waste
specialist. This is exactly the kind of stuff he used to do. For $40,000, the County
could pay someone for full -time employment. They are contracting it out when
there is a position of a solid waste specialist. If the Council is going to support this
request, than it had better support eliminating the position of solid waste specialist
at budget time because they don't have a specialist. This should be done in- house.
Motion carried 5 -2 Brenner and Roy opposed.
10. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND EARTH
TECH TO ASSIST COUNTY STAFF AND THE LUMMI ISLAND PLANNING
COMMITTEE IN COMPLETING A DRAFT COMPREHENSIVE SUBAREA
PLAN FOR LUMMI ISLAND IN THE AMOUNT OF $30,000 (AB2002-
308)
11. RESOLUTION IN THE MATTER OF THE ELECTION TO RECEIVE
NATIONAL FOREST RELATED SAFETY -NET PAYMENTS UNDER P.L.
106 -393 (AB2002 -309)
OTHER ITEMS
1. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF THE GREATER
WHATCOM COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY TO THE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION (AB2002 -248A)
Crawford reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee
and stated there is no recommendation from committee. He moved approval of the
substitute resolution. He moved to amend the economic development strategy (on
file) as follows:
• Page VI -4, number one, "...Establish a process for prioritizing projects for
recommendation to the County Council for federal...." State law already
requires that the County Council makes those decisions. However,
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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.
someone reading this plan may not understand that. It clarifies the
process that the County Council has the final say.
Nelson asked if Councilmember Crawford's intention is for the Executive's
Office to still administer the Washington Community Economic Revitalization Team
(WA -CERT) process.
Crawford stated his intention is to start the process with the Partnership for a
Sustainable Economy. At this time, he's not addressing how they would take their
recommendation and process it internally. Through this, the Council is sending the
message to the Executive's Office that the Council would like the Executive to work
with the Partnership for Sustainable Economy, in terms of how grant applications
are solicited. Get that information to the Partnership for whatever process they
establish for review, and then use that information to get that back to the
Executive's Office or County Council to use for the Council's consideration.
Motion carried unanimously.
• Page VII -6, number eleven, "All economic development stakeholders
should recognize and define the the a lead marketing entity to...."
The Finance Committee expressed some concern due to the current
transition of the Economic Development Council (EDC). There was
concern about leaving it open as to who the lead marketing entity would
be until those issues can be finalized later.
Nelson stated the EDC is mentioned in this document several times as
performing certain tasks. He suggested that they go through the entire document
and not identify a specific group.
Brenner suggested that they make that change everywhere in the document
that mentions the EDC.
Crawford stated the EDC is mentioned in few enough spots that he would like
to let his motion stand and discuss each citation independently. He is an EDC
board member, although he hasn't attended a meeting in three months due to
scheduling conflicts. He is aware that there is a transition period. The EDC is
currently discussing its role in the community. He doesn't believe the EDC board
has taken a vote yet on whether or not it wants the EDC's sole role to be lead entity
for this purpose. He agrees that it is premature tonight to identify the EDC as the
lead marketing entity at this point.
Fleetwood asked if the Partnership had an opinion on that concern.
Crawford stated they did not object to it.
Motion carried unanimously.
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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.
Brenner moved to amend page VII -5, item five, "The EDC A lead marketing
entity and the Partnership...."
Motion carried 6 -1 with Crawford opposed.
Crawford stated there is a concern about number 18 on page VII -8. He
supports the concept, but is concerned about this third party document compelling
the County to finance the position when the Council hasn't had discussion about it.
However, he talked to Steve Jilk about it today. The estimated cost of this program
would be about $40,000. The idea is that the Port and County would each fund 50
percent of that cost. Mr. Jilk is also able to cite some examples where grant money
has become available once the documents are adopted, so the out -of- pocket
expense may not be anything. They won't know that ahead of time. There is a
potential for grant money to fund this. Because of that potential, he doesn't have a
problem establishing that the County would be a partner in establishing a finance
mechanism for this position. He moved to amend page VII -8, item 18, "Whatcom
County and the Port should partner to establish a finance mechanism for the
purpose of staffing of a circuit rider position...."
Brenner suggested a friendly amendment to change the "should" to "may."
Crawford accepted the friendly amendment, to amend page VII -8, item 18,
"Whatcom County and the Port sheuld may partner to establish a finance
mechanism for the purpose of staffing of a circuit rider position...."
Motion carried unanimously.
Crawford moved to approve the substitute resolution that includes two
points. The last whereas statement was inserted to require projects using rural
sales tax revenue must be contained in the County's overall economic development
plan. A project using rural sales tax revenue would be the facilities planning
process that the Council voted on earlier tonight. There is a plethora of other
projects that the County would like to fund with this. The substitute resolution also
resolves that the Council adopts the strategy as the County's interim overall
economic development plan.
Brenner asked for information from Steve Jilk on statistical corrections.
Steve Jilk, Port of Bellingham, stated the last sentence in the first paragraph
on page I -3 should identify the retail and wholesale trade being 26 percent of local
jobs.
Brenner moved to amend page I -3, first paragraph, last sentence, "...Retail
and wholesale trade is about 2 -56% of local jobs."
Motion carried unanimously.
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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.
Jilk stated a correction needs to be made to page I -9, regarding mineral
resources. River gravel extraction does not occur. He suggested changing that
language.
Nelson stated Cowden Gravel has a permit for river gravel extraction
currently.
McShane stated they can't go into the river and use it.
Brenner moved to amend page I -9, number three, second paragraph,
"...Historically, €extraction of river gravel had occurred primarily on the banks of
the Nooksack River between Deming and Lynden...."
Motion carried unanimously.
Jilk stated the table on page I -12 should be amended to clarify the statistics.
He provided an amended table.
Brenner moved to substitute the table on page I -12 with the new table
provided by Mr. ]ilk.
Jilk stated the statistics on page II -3 regarding Bellingham's population
density need to be corrected, "...causing Bellingham's density to grow from 3-.05
1,952 persons per square mile to 4.15 2,656 over the same period."
(Clerk's Note: End of tape two, side 8.)
Brenner moved to amend page II -3, last paragraph, last sentence, "...causing
Bellingham's density to grow from 3.G5 1,952 persons per square mile to 4-4-5
2,656 over the same period."
Motion to amend the density numbers carried unanimously.
Jilk stated the population age groups on page II -6 are accurate. There is a
slight increase in the age groups 25 to 44 and 45 to 64. There is a .6 percent
increase in the age group 20 to 24. Even though the numbers of persons aged 65
and over is increasing, the percentage of the total has dropped slightly.
On page III -3, there was a question on the percentage of wages versus
employment in the service sector. The numbers are accurate, but he suggested
changing the title of the table, "DistFibutieR Shares of Totals of Jobs and Wages."
Brenner moved to amend the title of the table on page III -3,
Shares of Totals of Jobs and Wages."
Motion carried unanimously.
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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
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.
]ilk stated the second paragraph under section three on page III -7, should be
amended, "...From 1930 to 1990, about 80 percent of the private land in the
Nooksack River watershed was harvested...."
Brenner moved to amend the second paragraph under section three on page
III -7, should be amended, "...From 1930 to 1990, about 80 percent of the private
land in the Nooksack River watershed was harvested...."
Motion carried unanimously.
Nelson restated the motion to substitute the table on page I -12 with the new
table provided by Mr. Jilk.
Motion to substitute the table carried unanimously.
Nelson stated the EDC has a revolving fund for loan applications. He asked if
the language would still be appropriate regarding their administration of that
revolving fund if the EDC were to merge or restructure. He assumed that revolving
fund would go to whatever entity is responsible. Jilk stated it is appropriate to
leave the language in the plan. As of today, the EDC does manage that fund. The
EDC is designated by the County Council as the Associate Development
Organization (ADO), which allows the EDC to process that revolving loan fund. If
the EDC doesn't look that way in six months, the parent organization would be
responsible for carrying it on.
Motion to approve the resolution as amended carried unanimously.
2. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 6.04, ANIMAL
CONTROL (AB2002 -285)
Crawford moved to adopt the ordinance. He asked what they are doing here.
Dana Brown - Davis, Clerk of the Council, stated the corrections are to correct
scrivener's errors in the code.
Motion carried unanimously.
INTRODUCTION ITEMS
Nelson stated two items need to be added to the Introduction Items. He
moved to add interim ordinance amending Whatcom County Code, Title 20,
Section 20.83.070 - Lot Consolidation (AB2002 -282) to the list of Introduction
Items.
Motion carried unanimously.
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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.
Nelson moved to add the interim ordinance amending Whatcom County
Code, Title 20, Chapter 20.71 - Water Resource Protection Overlay District,
Chapter 20.80 - Supplementary Requirements, Chapter 20.85 - Planned
Unit Development, and Chapter 20.97 - Definitions to provide additional
regulatory protection for sensitive watersheds (AB2002 -222A) to the list of
Introduction Items.
Fleetwood moved to approve all Introduction Items.
Motion carried unanimously.
1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2002 WHATCOM COUNTY UNIFIED FEE
SCHEDULE (AB2002 -298)
2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2002 BUDGET, 9T" REQUEST (AB2002-
311)
3. ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING AN AGRICULTURAL PURCHASE OF
DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS PROGRAM AND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
(AB2002 -312)
ADDENDA:
INTERIM ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 20,
SECTION 20.83.070 - LOT CONSOLIDATION (AB2002 -282)
INTERIM ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 20,
CHAPTER 20.71 - WATER RESOURCE PROTECTION OVERLAY
DISTRICT, CHAPTER 20.80 - SUPPLEMENTARY REQUIREMENTS,
CHAPTER 20.85 - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, AND CHAPTER 20.97
- DEFINITIONS TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL REGULATORY PROTECTION
FOR SENSITIVE WATERSHEDS (AB2002 -222A)
OTHER BUSINESS
There was no other business.
REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS
Crawford encouraged the councilmembers to attend the Black Mountain
Forestry Center World of Wood (WOW) festival.
Brenner stated she received a letter about a possible County purchase of
shoreline in Birch Bay. The appraisal is almost $300,000. There is $1.8 million in
the Conservation Futures fund. The problem is that there is a house, which is not
of value to the County, on the property. The County should look at any shoreline it
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, 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
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.
can purchase. She asked if the Council was interested. She will provide
information to the councilmembers.
Roy stated the Birch Bay community has spent a lot of time working on a
shoreline plan and community plan. This purchase is not particularly consistent
with those plans. There are other areas that would be more consistent.
Nelson stated he will be in Alaska, so he will not be able to attend the World
of Wood festival.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 10:22 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
These minutes were approved by Council on September 10 , 2002.
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
L. Ward Nelson, Council Chair
Whatcom County Council, 8/13/2002, Page 29