Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil February 26 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 February 26, 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: Barbara Brenner Laurie Caskey- Schreiber Sam Crawford Seth Fleetwood Dan McShane Sharon Roy ANNOUNCEMENTS Absent: None Nelson announced that there was discussion regarding collective bargaining negotiations (AB2001 -390) and discussion with Senior Deputy Prosecutor David Grant regarding three cases of pending litigation (AB2002 -018) in executive session during the Committee of the Whole meeting. Direction was given on all three matters. MINUTES CONSENT 1. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FOR FEBRUARY 12, 2002 Brenner moved approval. Motion carried unanimously. 2. REGULAR COUNTY COUNCIL FOR JANUARY 29, 2002 Brenner moved approval. Motion carried unanimously. OPEN SESSION Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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. The following people spoke: Bob VanHouten, 4145 Blue Canyon Road, spoke regarding the resolution for a rezone for the Park Store from neighborhood commercial to tourist commercial. He is one of the owners of the Park Store. He asked the Council to vote yes for the resolution. Al Needler, 779 N. Lake Samish Drive, stated he is a member of the Concerned Neighbors of Lake Samish. He's been a resident of Lake Samish for 21 years. It's evolved as a rural community. He is a regular participant in the wide range of recreational activities afforded by this unique and pristine environment. Recreational activity by residents and nonresidents, as taxpayers and voters of Whatcom County, is the reason he supports downzoning from suburban enclave to a more rural zone. In 1998, the use of the Lake Samish park facility totaled 43,000 people. Over 5,000 people visited Camp Lutherwood in 2001. The public boat launch statistic exceeds over 25,000 visitors in six months. The greater Bellingham running club has a membership of approximately 500 people, and they use Lake Samish as one of their summer loops. The Mt. Baker bike club has over 100 members and uses the 6.5 mile circuit of the lake. There are motorcycle clubs, the Whatcom Independent Mountain Pedalers, the Whatcom Association of Kayak Enthusiasts (WAKE), the Bellingham scuba diver club, and the Bellingham and Whatcom County Parks and Recreation Departments, which organize events at Lake Samish. As urban -like development moves into the area, recreational access becomes more limited and less viable. The recreational needs and rights of the citizens of the county should be brought into focus and given fair consideration. Lake Samish is a placid, beautiful southern introduction into the City of Bellingham and Whatcom County. It is a rare gem of the environment. The fate of this gem is in the County Council's hands. Judy Tilly, 1650 Galbraith Lane, spoke regarding AB2002 -084 (Comprehensive Plan amendment 2002 -C). This proposal request a change in zoning from rural, one unit per five acres (R5A) to urban residential, four units per acre (UR -4) and inclusion in the Bellingham urban growth area. She opposes the request because it would destroy the rural character of the surrounding community. This is counter to the intention of the visioning section of the growth management plan, which states that rural areas should retain their rural characteristics. A corollary to this concern is that the Growth Management Act (GMA) dictates that cities contain sprawl and infill where there are existing infrastructures to support denser urban population. Specific issues that need to be addressed include effects upon the eastern portion of Lake Padden park. This is an old second growth forest that has more diversity than an urban park such as Cornwall park and Fairhaven park. Consider the impact to domestic animals, people, and their activities. Another issue to address is law enforcement. The Bellingham Police Department currently patrols Lake Padden park. It's most eastern entrance is one mile away from the proposed island of suburbia. Increased density produces the Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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. potential for an urban crime level. They are currently adequately served with fire protection by volunteer fire fighters and emergency medical technicians (EMT's) located one mile away. Another issue is the city utilities such as sewer and water. The previous owner of this parcel bemoaned the inadequate domestic water supply. These services need to be extended from one -half mile to three - quarters of a mile, blasting through Chuckanut sandstone. A natural gas line would have to be extended from Sandstone Way. The area has heavy snowfall, and she questioned whether the City of Bellingham would plow beyond its current responsibilities. Rainfall is more prevalent in this area. She questioned where the excess runoff would go when there is more density and a consequent cover of concrete. Wetlands are a feature of the landscape of this property. They should not be destroyed. Possible clear cutting would remove noise - dampening vegetation and increase freeway noise. It would also negatively impact Lake Padden's eastern portion by exposing peripheral trees to predominantly southerly winds. Also, she questioned whether southside schools could absorb the children from a development of this size. The proposed zoning is out of proportion to the rural and resources zoning. The proposed change would be forty times the current density. Most properties are wooded. The residents enjoy the rural lifestyle of raising horses, goats, chickens, and bees while cultivating large gardens, orchards, and pasture. Urban density would not allow for this rural way of life. Pete Nelson, 6415 Vista Drive, Ferndale, stated he is a teacher at Whatcom Middle School and a freelance writer. He supports a vote in favor of the rezone of the Park Store property from neighborhood commercial to tourist commercial. Jennifer Corn - Leach, 132 Alger -Cain Lake Road, Glenhaven, stated she worked for Georgia- Pacific for 21 years, and is now a fulltime student. Vote yes on the resolution regarding the rezone of the Park Store. Almost two years ago, this Council received one complaint, and immediately ordered the Park Store to close. Since then, the Council has played ping -pong with the owner's livelihood. The Planning Commission said the Park Store was okay. Twice, the Hearing Examiner determined that the Park Store met the criteria for its zoning. The Council did not agree. This is a small business that most of the councilmembers have not seen. She is a recreational motorcyclists who has been riding the Blue Canyon area for more than 20 years. The owners have revitalized this historic Park Store. They do serve and support their neighborhood by selling convenience items, local jewelry, clothing, and wind chimes. They also sell motorcycle parts by catalog items and install bolt on motorcycle parts. The owners work hard to accommodate their neighbors. They don't open until 10 a.m. and they close at 6 p.m. They don't sell cigarettes and alcohol. Their customers are not an undesirable element, but are doctors, grocers, and neighbors. This Council has caused two years worth of undue stress and financial strain on this small business with its biased and Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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 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. unsubstantiated directives. The Council now has a chance to correct the past. Start the process of a rezone with a yes vote tonight. Heather Wolf, 709 Dupont, stated she represents John Templeton. She is pleased that they have been included in the five -year review process. The City of Bellingham supports inclusion of this area to be considered in the five -year review process for expansion of the city's urban growth area (UGA). Regarding the utility issues, the City regulates water and sewer service, and requires developers to pay for any extensions. That will be the developers' responsibility when they get to that point. Also, developers are required to pay impact fees for other services, such as schools and fire. Consider this as a viable option for expansion of the UGA. There are no environmental constraints. The area is easily serviced, and would provide an adequate land supply. Brenner asked if those people currently living along the line where the utilities would be extended would be forced to hook on to the utilities. Wolf stated the property abuts Lake Padden and Samish Way at Interstate 5. There aren't any property owners who are in between. Rebecca O'Brine- Wilson, 921 W. Lake Samish, thanked the Planning Committee for voting to docket the Lake Samish review. The amount of work that the County staff can do is always a concern. This is the only docketed item that requests a downzone versus an upzone. One issue is a change in conditions. The Council will always look at a change in conditions when it wants to docket something. The knowledge that they've gained regarding the impact of high - density residential build -out on water sources should be considered a change of condition. Second, there was an error in the original designation in the Comprehensive Plan. When the plan was developed, it was based on an arbitrary decision. Someone looked at the density and decided that it is a high- density area. That's true right next to the lake. However, there are 1,025 acres that were zoned rural residential, two units per acre (RR2). The total actual density is below one house per five acres. They could have just as easily defined the entire area as rural instead of as a suburban enclave. The original plan was in error. That is a reason to docket this item for review. Lesa Starkenburg - Kroonte, 115 Front Street, Lynden, spoke on the resolution initiating the Comprehensive Plan zoning changes (AB2002 -084). Support the Natural Resources Committee's recommendation on which items should be docketed his or her case. If an application is not initiated, the applicant doesn't have the opportunity to give the Council the information needed to make a decision. The mineral resources land (MRL) application submitted by Mr. and Mrs. Killam would allow the Council to consider additional land for designation as an MRL. The changed conditions include the recent Department of Natural Resources (DNR) study of significant mineral resources reserves, which warrants the County to look at additional MRL areas. Docketing this request this year will allow the Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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. Council to parallel consideration of this property with the additional study that the County is doing on that same issue. Also, the Planning Committee voted to deny docketing item 2002 I. That request involves a mistake that was made at the time of the original designation. A zoning boundary splits a building down the middle. Councilmember Brenner had asked what would happen if this was put off for a year. This is one of the easier requests that they have to look at. The applicants indicated that they would scale down the request to remove the additional acreage beyond their acreage that was intended to make a straight zoning boundary. The information needed to move it forward will be easy to come by. It is one of the businesses that provides jobs and economic stability in the county. Dave Chesson, 4950 Pacific Highway, Ferndale, stated he supports the resolution regarding the rezone of the Park Store property. The owners are operating legally now, and there is no need for a rezone for them to conduct business as they have been doing for some time. The owners are outstanding citizens of the community that, at great financial and personal expense, restored the only remaining store in Park, Washington. He asked why the County is harassing his good friends, whether there is an agenda by someone, and if this has to do with the motorcyclist image as an evil biker dressed in black renegading through the countryside. He is a biker who holds a job, pays taxes, and volunteers in his community. A report two years ago examined the demographics and buying habits of motorcycle owners. The study found that women were buying bikes in record numbers. The average income of those women was around $58,000. About 40 percent of them had college degrees. That average income now is about $70,000. This room is filled with motorcyclists who are business owners, employees of Whatcom County, veterans who have faithfully served the county, and members of the Christian motorcycle club. A business that sells motorcycle clothing and Bolt -On accessories; does not do any fluid changes; sells candy, milk, and soda; and refuses to sell cigarettes and alcohol is an asset to the entire community, not just the neighbors who live in the area. He supports the rezone. Brian Bentley, 8210 W. 30th Crest, Custer, stated he is a fourth generation native of Whatcom County. He has been touring the roads of the Deming area since he was a child. Logging trucks have pulled into that store to get bailing -wired back together. In the old days, he saw a lot of beer - drinking going on outside that garage where they worked on tractors and lawnmowers. Many people owned that store. As a national Sergeant -At -Arms for the Combat Veterans International, it is his job to be aware of his surroundings, because Combat Veterans International does not hang around where there are any drugs or alcohol. He has never seen anything of that nature. It is a positive, healthy business working in this community. He supports the rezone of the Park Store property. This is about America being free and having the right to an opportunity. A business has existed there since the beginning of time. Many businesses there have collapsed. This one hasn't. With the support of the community, it can keep on working because it does a good job. Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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. PUBLIC HEARING 1. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF COUNTY RIGHT -OF -WAY TO THE STATE OF WASHINGTON FOR THE GUIDE MERIDIAN WIDENING PROJECT (AB2002 -093A) Bruce Mills, Assistant Director of Engineering, gave a staff report and stated this is an opportunity for the Department of Transportation (DOT) to purchase a small piece of right -of -way for their Guide Meridian widening project. The parcel is 15 feet wide by 40 feet long. It's a ditch that runs east -west, east of the Guide Meridian, halfway between Axton and Smith Roads. They are offering an administrative settlement of $1,000. It has been through the Property Management Committee. He recommends approval. Crawford stated the Deer Creek Water Association said that for any right -of- way that is privately owned, the State would help compensate the association. If right -of -way is owned by the state, then the association would have to pay to put in new pipes. He asked if this action would increase the cost to the Deer Creek Water Association. Mills stated the Deer Creek Water Association has the responsibility to move the portions of the existing Deer Creek water lines that are within State rights -of -way now. The DOT would have to compensate the association for moving any portions that are outside of their existing right of way. This existed before DOT started this process, and would not increase the costs for the Deer Creek Water Association. Nelson opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public hearing. Crawford moved to approve the resolution. Motion carried unanimously. 2. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 10.34, FERRY RATES (AB2002 -114) Jeff Monsen, Public Works Director, gave a staff report and submitted a memo (on file). There are two elements to this issue. The first hearing is on the definition of a senior /disabled discount program. In his memo, he suggests a slight change in the definition as it deals with property tax exemptions. The amendment would add a few more individuals who are qualified because of particular disabilities. He also included information on the number of parties who may be eligible through the Medicaid program. He proposed amended language for the County Code that would indicate qualified individuals for property tax exempt status and Medicaid recipients. He asked the Council to consider the amended language in his memo. Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, Page 6 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 2 Nelson questioned whether the amendment is needed to include people who 3 are Medicaid - eligible. Monsen stated it is. 4 5 The second issue regarding the next item on the agenda is regarding punch 6 card discounts and quarterly passes. The Council had asked him for a financial 7 analysis of discontinuing the quarterly pass in favor of increasing the punch card 8 discount rate. He recommended that the Council not implement the discount rate 9 change from eight percent to 15 percent for a punch card, because it consumes the 10 majority of the financial cushion built into the rate adjustment. It goes too far. 11 There are still a number of issues regarding the quarterly passes. Because that 12 issue is unresolved, he recommended that the Council move toward reinstating a 13 quarterly pass consistent with the language he suggested a month ago. The rate 14 for a quarterly pass would equal five full fares per week. That is a change from 15 $160 for four full fares per week per quarter to $260 for five full fares per week per 16 quarter. That is his recommendation. They also need to improve some of the 17 administrative troubles they've had in the past implementing these programs. He 18 suggests that the Council move away from issuing quarterly passes to vehicles, and 19 instead issue a quarterly pass to individuals. For this hearing, accept the amended 20 definition for °senior /disabled." In the second hearing, do not approve the rate 21 change, but offer direction and support for reinstating the quarterly pass. 22 23 Brenner asked if they are recommending a punch card with an eight percent 24 discount, not a 15 percent discount. Monsen stated that is correct. That does not 25 require any action by the Council. 26 27 Crawford asked the general reason for switching to an identification card 28 from a vehicle sticker. Monsen stated they've had some administrative challenges 29 in dealing with the stickers that must be affixed to the windshield. The challenge is 30 that it implies that the vehicle is the commuter instead of the person driving the 31 vehicle. He suggested that they move toward issuing an identifying card to an 32 individual without requiring them to drive the same car every day. The individual 33 commuter should benefit from a commuter pass. 34 35 Caskey- Schreiber asked if the discount punch card could be kept as it is, and 36 offer the quarterly pass to keep the ferry viable. Monsen stated that is correct. 37 With an increase in the number of people eligible for a senior /disabled discount, it 38 will eat into the reserve a little bit. By offering a quarterly pass, it will offer some 39 financial impact, but it may not be a very big number. The numbers aren't nearly 40 as significant as a shift to a 15 percent discount. 41 42 Nelson opened the public hearing to include this item and the following public 43 hearing. The following people spoke: 44 45 Nancy Ecklund, 3321 Sunrise Cove, stated making the cost of the ferry 46 prohibitive is not an appropriate way to control growth. The regular working class 47 residents are being squeezed off the island. Working families are heavily impacted Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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. by the commute. She asked the Council to reinstate the quarterly pass. A discount is appropriate for families who are trying to survive on this island. The disabled people are already exempt from taxes. The working poor are being overlooked. There are people who don't use the ferry often, and the fare doesn't impact them as heavily as those who need to use the ferry everyday. Art Thomas, 2620 Island View, Lummi Island, stated he agreed with the previous speaker. He supports working families and individuals. Reinstate the quarterly pass at a rate lower than $260. The working crew and their families are privileged under the bargaining agreement. They aren't any different than his family, except they are employees of Whatcom County. As fulltime employees, they receive free passes. Collectively, these working families receive over 500 free roundtrips every year. He is not asking the Council to give him a free ride, however it's not unreasonable to ask the Council to reinstate the quarterly pass at $220. All families can be accommodated, and not just County employees. Wade Martin, 1442 Seacrest Drive, Lummi Island, asked the Council to reinstate the quarterly pass. It worked well. As a parent working off the island, it is necessary. It appears that the cost of maintaining the ferry has fallen on the shoulders of the working people of Lummi Island. That is somewhat unfair. It also appears that the County wants to force people to park at Gooseberry Point. The cost to pay for that was not on the walk -on passenger, but on the people who commute. Students used to go back and forth free during the school year. It costs $2 for their car. It now costs students $4 to drive back and forth. High school - aged kids who are active in after school activities do not ride the bus. (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.) Martin continued to state that the County has now unfairly charged students double what it used to be. Travel trailers used to be fairly reasonable at $8. It's now $16. That is unfair. It hits a few individuals who end up paying for it. The quarterly pass worked before. Make the increases across the board, and not just on the working man. Ria Nickerson, 2307 Tuttle Lane, Lummi Island, asked the Council to reinstate the quarterly pass. The rising cost for the commuter pass ought to be more in line with the other rate hikes, which were in the neighborhood of one - third. This is considerably more than that. A quarterly pass of $220 is a fairer increase. Over the last 25 years, there have been two major restructurings of the rate schedule. Both of them were to the benefit of tourists and part -time residents. Ten or fifteen years ago, the rates were changed. At that time, the punch card represented a 40 percent savings over the cash price. That restructuring left the cash price alone, and brought the punch card up to the cash price. An eight percent discount is not enough. Reinstate the commuter pass at a reasonable rate. William Lee, 2171 Tuttle Lane, Lummi Island, stated he is sensitive to the arguments that have just been given about the costs of transportation to Lummi Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, Page 8 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. 1 Island. However, another problem is the limitations of the ferry. No matter what 2 fare is set, the ferry has a limit. A good part of the year, it is filled close to that 3 limit. The one problem with any commuter pass is that it is an instrument to 4 provide a potentially unlimited number of trips at a fixed rate. That is not fair 5 either. More people want to use the ferry at certain times of the year than can use 6 it. 7 8 Lyne Morris, 4065 Sunny Hill Lane, Lummi Island, stated there is a delicate 9 balance facing the ferry system on Lummi Island. It needs to support a balanced 10 community without putting an undue hardship on low- and moderately low- income 11 families. That is shifting on the island. That will not be healthy for the island in the 12 long run. It needs to encourage conscious use of the ferry. With increased weights 13 and a growing population, islanders need to consider alternative ways to use the 14 ferry by increasing walk -ons and carpooling. It needs to maintain a healthy ferry 15 system that pays for itself and funds needed amenities, such as the recently 16 established secure parking at Gooseberry Point. Given that the Council is not 17 reducing the rate on punch cards, she supports the quarterly pass. Low - income 18 users need to be addressed. This system needs to be reviewed on an ongoing 19 basis. She recommended that it be reviewed in six months to see if the quarterly 20 pass is indeed addressing the low income needs and whether the budget is in 21 balance, so they can continue to maintain and improve the ferry. 22 23 Wynne Lee, 2171 Tuttle Lane, Lummi Island, stated she has concerns about 24 the quarterly pass. Mr. Monsen has done them a service by focusing on issues of 25 fiscal responsibility and not suggesting dropping the pass card. She is concerned 26 about fiscal responsibility all the way along. If they stop paying for the ferry, none 27 of them will have it at all. She does not support what is practically a fixed price of 28 unlimited trip passes for anyone. She is in favor of maintaining the diversity of 29 people on the island, but she's not convinced that is the best way to achieve what 30 they need. There is another problem of traffic congestion on the island. No matter 31 how many times a person would like to go across with a car, waiting in line for two 32 hours makes it impractical. Discourage people from using their vehicles to make 33 trips and from having lower costs associated with more vehicle trips. That is good 34 policy in the long run. She suggested alternatives to helping people with a 35 relatively low income. One suggestion is to have a punch card with a lower number 36 of trips, using the same rate. Many people with low incomes currently pay full rates 37 because they don't have enough money to buy an expensive pass. A ten -trip 38 punch card may not be as much of a problem. It could be administered without 39 any administrative hassle of making sure the appropriate people are using the card. 40 It doesn't help in terms of financial cost. A better alternative would be to have a 41 heavily discounted or subsidized card with a means test. If they want to have a 42 program to help low income people stay on the island, they need a way to measure 43 its effectiveness. If they do not know who is using the quarterly pass, there is no 44 way to tell if they are achieving the goal of helping low income residents. 45 46 Hearing no one else, Nelson closed the public hearing. 47 Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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. Brenner moved to adopt the ordinance. Brenner moved to strike the current language in Whatcom County Code (WCC) section 10.34.020 and add, "Eligibility for a special 'senior /disabled" discount is available to all Lummi Island Residents who currently hold property tax exemptions as defined under Revised Code of Washington (RCW) Chapter 84.36.381 and the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Chapter 458 -16 -020, and as these may be hereafter amended. Eligibility for a special "senior /disabled" discount is also available to all Lummi Island Residents who also qualify for medical assistance within the Medicaid Program." She asked who falls under the tax deferred program. She would like to include a tax deferred category, because they don't have much more money than those who are tax exempt. It is a tax deferred program through the Assessor's Office. Someone can get a property tax exemption based on a senior's ability to pay. There is another State law for residents who make slightly more money than the maximum income allowed in the tax exemption program, but less than a certain amount. That is a tax deferred program. One other category of need is for seniors living on Lummi Island who have low incomes and don't own property. She would like to provide a discount for those people also. She amended her motion to add those who qualify for a tax deferral and another category of need based on a means test, which would be that the person be required to show proof of their age with a driver's license and proof of their income with an income tax statement. The discount for this category would be the same discount that is offered to the senior disabled folks. The maximum income for this category could be 10 percent above the poverty level. Federal and State agencies have already determined those levels. McShane asked how someone qualifies for the property tax exemption. Monsen stated the property tax exemption is based on a particular income level for those who are over a particular age or meet the disability requirements. McShane questioned whether there would be a way for a person to demonstrate that eligibility for that program, regardless of whether or not the person is enrolled in the exemption program. Monsen stated he recommends that individuals who are enrolled in the property tax exemption program exercise their ability to receive a discount on ferry rates. The Public Works staff receives a list annually from the Assessor's Office of people enrolled in the program. That is better than the Public Works Department creating another mechanism for eligibility. McShane stated that someone who doesn't own property wouldn't be on the list. Monsen stated that is why they included the Medicaid eligibility option. Nelson questioned why the staff's suggested language for WCC 10.34.020(]) specifies those who qualify for medical assistance in the Medicaid program. There are people who are qualified under the Medicaid program who don't necessarily receive medical benefits. Monsen stated the staff is trying to understand some of the key terms for qualified individuals regarding the Medicaid programs so they Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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. don't misstate eligibility. He can't provide clear definitions of medical assistance versus other Medicaid programs. Nelson stated the Medicaid program provides medical assistance for those who are under a certain income level. He questioned whether that would address Councilmember Brenner's concern. Monsen stated staff tried to identify a program in which they could use a list from the Assessor's Office of tax exempt program enrollees and, in the case of Medicaid, an individual's proof of living on the island and being in the Medicaid program. The staff would not evaluate a person's eligibility status. The staff would simply accept records that exist. Crawford questioned how many seniors have taken advantage of this program in the past. Monsen stated there are currently 28 eligible property owners. Of that population, close to half have exercised the opportunity. Crawford asked what the property tax exemption program is. Monsen stated a person's income and senior /disabled status can excuse them from paying certain elements of the property tax. Crawford questioned whether or not those who qualify get a discount on the road tax. Monsen stated he understands that they do. Crawford stated the County is giving them a discount on the road tax, which is 45 percent of the cost of the ferry. Now, they are suggesting that they receive more of a discount. Monsen stated this discount program has existed for the past 17 or 18 years. The County is not creating a new program. Crawford stated he is questioning a program that less than 20 people are taking advantage of, when those people are already getting a discount. He is opposed to the motion. They ought to eliminate the senior /disabled proposal entirely. Roy asked Councilmember Brenner to separate the two parts of the motion. Brenner withdrew the portion of her amendment regarding seniors who don't own property because Councilmember Nelson has assured her that the Medicaid program would cover those people. Brenner stated the people in the tax deferral program ends up paying the tax back eventually. Roy stated she was pretty sure that the tax deferral program is not tied to income. It's tied to age, not income. Keith Willnauer, County Assessor, stated the income level for the exemption program is $30,000. The income level for the deferral program is $34,000. There are about 6,000 exemption participants in Whatcom County. There are about 35 deferral participants. It's not a widely used program. Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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 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 that it's easy to say that a person who qualifies for a tax exemption already gets a discount, but most people who qualify live with very little money and don't have as many opportunities to do something about it. The County needs to respect the fact that it has always offered discounts. This is a big step in ensuring the diversity on the island. Lummi Island is different from other County roads. There is no other way on or off the island. Willnauer stated there are three levels of senior citizen /disabled exemptions. It is based on income. The highest level of exemption is for seniors with an income between $24,000 and $30,000. They do not receive any break on either the County current expense levy or the County roads levy. For the lower income brackets of the senior exemption, below $24,000 annual income, they also begin to get a reduction in assessed valuation, which means a lower tax bill supporting current expense and roads. All seniors receive a tax break on voter - approved levies. Brenner amended and restated her motion to add a discount for those who are seniors /disabled in the tax deferral program, and to strike the current language in Whatcom County Code (WCC) section 10.34.020 and add, "Eligibility for a special "senior /disabled" discount is available to all Lummi Island Residents who currently hold property tax exemptions or deferral as defined under Revised Code of Washington (RCW) Chapter 84.36.381 and the Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Chapter 458 -16 -020, and as these may be hereafter amended. Eligibility for a special "senior /disabled" discount is also available to all Lummi Island Residents who also qualify for medical assistance within the Medicaid Program." Motion to amend the ordinance carried 6 -1 with Crawford opposed. Motion to adopt the ordinance as amended carried 6 -1 with Crawford opposed. 3. ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 2001 -054, THE 2002 WHATCOM COUNTY UNIFIED FEE SCHEDULE (AB2002 -115) (See the staff report given for the above agenda item for a discussion of this agenda item. Also, the previous public hearing included testimony on this agenda item.) Jeff Monsen, Public Works Director, stated this ordinance raises the discount rate on a general punch card from eight to 15 percent. He recommended against the rate increase, however this is an opportunity to re- create a quarterly pass. A comment about the ferry crew and punch cards came up during the previous public hearing. As part of the compensation package of the collective bargaining agreement, there is a dollar amount available to each crewmember for the purchase of punch cards. It's negotiated compensation as part of their pay that Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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 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. they can put towards the purchase of a punch card. The County can't give away punch cards. Caskey- Schreiber questioned whether the County can offer a discount punch card with ten rides, so a person without a lot of money up front can still partake of some kind of discount. Monsen stated they could. The focus of this hearing relates to the discount rate of punch cards. He recommends reinstating the quarterly pass. Nelson opened the public hearing, and, hearing no one, closed the public hearing. Crawford moved to adopt the ordinance. Crawford moved to eliminate punch cards and reinstate the quarterly pass at a rate of $220, which is $7 higher than payment of a full fare for four days per week, for 13 weeks in a quarter. This would reinstate the quarterly pass at a rate commensurate with the overall rate increase. The method of administration is to be determined by Mr. Monsen. It would be an unlimited use pass. Brenner stated she supported the quarterly pass at $220, but does not support eliminating the punch card. She also doesn't support the quarterly pass the way it was presented by Mr. Monsen, although she appreciated that Mr. Monsen brought it before the Council. She doesn't support it with an identification. It sounds as if all four people in a family would have to have a quarterly pass. The quarterly pass should be on the car. Crawford stated that a quarterly pass includes a car and one driver. Historically, the extra passengers in the car would have to pay. Monsen stated the quarterly pass is meant for a car and driver. They are simply changing the method by which a person proves eligibility. Rather than affix a sticker to the car, identify the driver. The previous rate structure separated the driver from the vehicle. They have now combined the driver with the vehicle in all rates. Each additional passenger would only pay the passenger rate. Brenner stated an example is that a family with two children of driving age would have to have a quarterly pass for each family member if all four family members drive the car at different times. Monsen stated that is true. Brenner stated that is not going to work. She disagreed that it would promote use. The ferry line itself dissuades people from taking more trips than they have to. Her bigger concern is that families have to get places. The County is creating a huge burden if everyone in the family has to have his or her own quarterly pass. Crawford amended and restated his motion to reinstate a quarterly pass at the rate of $220 per quarter, with a method of administration to be determined by Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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. Mr. Monsen. They don't need to solve the issue of the sticker and identification card tonight. Brenner stated that she would not support the motion unless it is a quarterly pass per family or car. Monsen stated that if it is the Council's wish that the quarterly pass supports the same type of use as it did historically, he will look for ways to carry out that directive, while still looking for ways to improve the administration of the pass. Brenner stated the quarterly pass should be on the car, without making everyone in the family have their own quarterly passes. Monsen stated he wouldn't expect everyone in a family who can drive to have a quarterly pass, unless they are driving their own individual cars. Caskey- Schreiber questioned whether the County can still afford to offer the eight percent discount punch card if the Council approves the lower rate for the quarterly pass. Monsen stated that historically, they have not had a heavy use of the quarterly pass, so a shift from $260 to $220 may not undo his financial projects. Crawford asked how many people have historically bought quarterly passes. Monsen stated less than 20 in any given quarter. Caskey- Schreiber stated a ten trip punch card would benefit those folks who can't come up with a lot of money at once to invest in a 25 trip punch card. Crawford stated his motion is not about the punch card. He restated his motion to reinstate a quarterly pass at the rate of $220 per quarter, with a method of administration that preserves the historical nature of how the County treated the quarterly pass, to be determined by the County administration. Motion to amend carried 6 -1 with McShane opposed. Caskey- Schreiber moved to offer a ten -trip punch card and a 25 -trip punch card, both offering eight percent discounts. Nelson asked the fiscal impacts of the motion. Monsen stated he could not provide a firm number, but it isn't likely that a number of people would shift from cash payment to the punch card. Purchase of a ten -ride punch card instead of a 25 -ride punch card has no financial impact, because the discount is the same for both. Motion to amend carried 6 -1 with Crawford opposed. Crawford stated Mr. Cameron from Lummi Island brought to his attention an issue about ferry rate language adopted last fall. He read the language in WCC 20.34.020(I). Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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. (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side B.) Crawford continued to state that the language in WCC 20.34.020(I) seems to contradict the next -to -last sentence in WCC 20.34.030. Monsen stated the sections don't contradict. The 55 percent excludes dock maintenance and operation. The excess revenue beyond the 55 percent can be applied to any enhancements to the system, including the dock. The excess revenue is not meant for maintenance and operations. It is meant for enhancements in capital investments to improve the system. Crawford asked if there are any areas that could be both maintenance and enhancement. He's thinking about the walk -on docks when the ferry is down. He asked if that is a maintenance issue or an enhancement issue. Monsen stated this language was not meant to be severely restrictive. Staff will not propose that the excess money be shifted to a maintenance activity. Pete Kremen, County Executive, stated that excluding dock maintenance reduces the amount of money that totals 55 percent of operating costs. Crawford stated people on Lummi Island are concerned that the County will use the money meant for capital improvements on maintenance instead. Kremen stated the Council intended that those who use the system would pay 55 percent of maintenance and operation. When the County excludes the maintenance and operation of the dock, the amount that the users have to pay is less. Monsen stated that prior to adopting this language, the goal was to recover approximately 55 percent of the operational costs. If the County recovered 65 percent, it all went to operations in the past. In this case, the County is creating a restriction so it cannot use the excess funds towards operations. It is intended for enhancement of the system. Motion to adopt the ordinance as amended carried 6 -1 with McShane opposed. 4. ORDINANCE CREATING A WHATCOM COUNTY PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT (AB2002 -116) Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, gave a staff report and stated the County Executive proposes to create a public facilities district as defined in State law. It is an independent taxing district lead by a five - member board designed to provide funding mechanisms for Whatcom County to build and operate something like a convention center, exhibit center, cultural facility, or sports facility. The board that the County Council creates through the adoption of this ordinance would be responsible for constructing or remodeling certain eligible facilities with some discounted money that has already been collected and is designed to go to the Department of Revenue. If adopted, a board would be appointed and would have Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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 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. access to these revenues for a period of 25 years. Key elements of the ordinance include the fact that the County Council is responsible for adopting the ordinance. It is a separate municipal corporation run by a five - member board that is appointed by the County. He listed the board's responsibilities. The ordinance protects the County from any action because it is a separate municipal corporation. The ordinance was reviewed and approved at the Council Finance Committee meeting two weeks ago. Brenner asked for clarification that the County is not setting up a taxing district to tax the residents of this county. Desler stated they are not. As a separate municipal corporation, the State law allows the board to submit a modest sales tax increase to the public for voter approval. Brenner stated the ordinance should allow the vote to be taken only at regular election time. Special elections are a sneaky way to get things through. She doesn't approve of it. Desler stated he believes that the Council could make that restriction. Nelson opened the public hearing, and the following people spoke: Mauri Ingram, 2225 "A" Street, Bellingham, stated she is the director of the Downtown Renaissance Network. She works with both the public and private sectors to improve and revitalize downtown Bellingham. She encouraged the Council to support the formation of the public facilities district. It's a unique and time sensitive opportunity that allows the County to capture some tax revenue that exists at the State level for local use. Given the current State budget issues, they won't see this opportunity again. The City of Bellingham already formed a public facilities district. The two districts working collaboratively will create the ability for them to enhance and expand existing cultural and arts facilities, if they choose to do that, for the community, which are located in the City of Bellingham and are supported, used, and enjoyed by all citizens in Whatcom County. Hearing no one else, Nelson closed the public hearing. Brenner moved to adopt the ordinance. Brenner moved to amend the ordinance so that any requests for tax increases by the board would only be done during a primary or general election. Nelson stated he would agree with the amendment, but wants to make sure the County can impose that restriction. The State Revised Code of Washington (RCW) allows the County to do this, and outlines the requirements of the district. Desler stated that is correct. Any election requirements are operated under a set of laws and standards about which he is not prepared to answer questions. The law indicates that the legislature authorizes this board to call for a vote if they choose. He is not familiar on whether or not the vote should only be done during a primary Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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. or general election. The administration does not recommend that the Council restrict the board. Nelson restated the motion to require that any vote to increase the tax be held during the general election in November of each year. Roy stated she doesn't feel comfortable supporting the amendment when she isn't familiar enough with the statute to change it. She will vote against the amendment. Nelson stated he would support the amendment. If the County can't do it, they can't do it. One problem with County government is the cost of elections. It is an issue the State needs to address. The total cost of doing business is going up and up. Part of the problem is the small taxing districts that require elections at various times of the year. They hear from the Auditor during budget time that she cannot afford the election costs. It would be prudent for the County, if it's able, to begin having elections at one time. Roy stated her question is whether or not the County is able to do that. Desler stated that any votes submitted to the public have to come to the County Council for approval. Brenner withdrew her amendment. Motion to adopt the ordinance carried unanimously. CONSENT AGENDA Crawford reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and moved approval of Consent Agenda items one through four and six through ten. Motion to approve Consent Agenda items one through four and six through ten carried unanimously. 1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID NUMBER 02 -12 FOR THE ANNUAL SUPPLY OF BRIDGE MATERIALS TO THE LOWEST QUALIFIED BIDDER, PSR, IN THE AMOUNT OF $47,858.95 (AB2002 -118) 2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID NUMBER 02 -14 FOR THE ANNUAL SUPPLY OF LARGE SIZE ALUMINIZED AND GALVANIZED CULVERT TO THE SOLE BIDDER, WASHINGTON CULVERT, IN THE AMOUNT OF $154,607.55 (AB2002- Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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 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. 119) 3. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND NAHKEETA NORTHWEST WILDLIFE SERVICES TO PROVIDE ON -CALL SERVICES FOR BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT WORK FOR COUNTY ROAD PROJECTS FOR THE 2002 -2003 BIENNIUM, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $70,000 (AB2002 -120) 4. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AND LAKE WHATCOM RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT CENTER TO PROVIDE PARTIALLY SUBSIDIZED LIVING RESIDENCES FOR MENTALLY ILL CONSUMERS IN WHATCOM COUNTY, IN THE AMENDED AMOUNT OF $71,070 FOR A TOTAL AMENDED CONTRACT AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $141,105 (AB2002 -121) 5. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE A CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND NORTHWEST REGIONAL COUNCIL FOR LAW AND JUSTICE COUNCIL SUPPORT SERVICES IN THE BUDGETED AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $92,720 (AB2002 -122) Crawford stated this will be held in committee for two weeks, so someone representing the Law and Justice Committee can make a presentation to the committee, if possible. Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated he spoke to the chair of the Law and Justice Council. They are pleased to attend the Finance Committee meeting in two weeks to present information. 6. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN AMENDED CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND WHATCOM COUNSELING JAIL PSYCHIATRIC SERVICES TO PROVIDE MENTAL HEALTH CARE FOR INMATES IN THE JAIL, IN THE AMOUNT OF $20,460 FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMENDED AMOUNT OF $40,920 (AB2002 -123) 7. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN AMENDMENT TO A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AND ST. JOSEPH HOSPITAL — RECOVERY CENTER TO PROVIDE CASE MANAGEMENT SERVICES TO LOCAL RESIDENTS WITH CHRONIC CHEMICAL DEPENDENCY PROBLEMS, IN THE AMENDED AMOUNT OF $19,694 FOR A TOTAL MAXIMUM CONSIDERATION NOT TO EXCEED $32,823 Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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 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. (AB2002 -124) 8. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN AMENDED PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM-COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AND ST. JOSEPH HOSPITAL — RECOVERY CENTER, TO PROVIDE SUBSTANCE ABUSE CRISIS INTERVENTION SERVICES, IN THE AMENDED AMOUNT OF $82,656, FOR A TOTAL MAXIMUM CONSIDERATION NOT TO EXCEED $165,312 (AB2002 -125) 9. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AND ST. JOSEPH HOSPITAL — RECOVERY CENTER, TO PROVIDE SUBSTANCE ABUSE SERVICES TO COUNTY RESIDENTS IN THE WHATCOM COUNTY JAIL AND /OR ALTERNATIVE CORRECTIONS CENTER, IN THE AMENDED AMOUNT OF $20,000 FOR A TOTAL MAXIMUM CONSIDERATION NOT TO EXCEED $33,330 (AB2002 -126) 10. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AND SUN COMMUNITY SERVICES TO PROVIDE MENTAL HEALTH TRANSITIONAL HOUSING SERVICES IN AN AMENDED AMOUNT OF $96,302 FOR A TOTAL MAXIMUM CONSIDERATION NOT TO EXCEED $178,004 (AB2002 -127) OTHER ITEMS 12. RESOLUTION INITIATING A ZONING MAP AMENDMENT FROM NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TO TOURIST COMMERCIAL FOR PARK STORE (AB2002 -117) Fleetwood moved to approve the resolution. Brenner stated she didn't think the Park Store is illegal now. They are operating completely within the requirements of the neighborhood commercial zone. She is sorry that the Council is even going to spend the time on this because staff already said they are overloaded. It's a waste of public money. However, she would support it because they need to do something to allow the Park Store to do what it does within the law. Caskey- Schreiber asked if the Park Store is operating illegally in the zone it is in now. Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, stated it's the Planning Department's opinion that the Park Store is not a hardware store or a neighborhood Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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 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. grocery store. The Hearing Examiner found that the Park Store was legal, but the County Council found that the Park Store was not legal. It would be legal in the tourist commercial zone. Brenner stated it was the Council majority that found the Park Store to be illegal. She did not support the Council majority. Nelson stated no one on the Council has an opinion against a business. The concern that has been raised is about the use in a certain zone. That is what they are addressing, not whether or not it's a motorcycle shop. The issue is whether the business is a legal business in that particular zone. A second issue is whether this is the way they deal with rezoning, and whether the Council should initiate a rezone for the benefit of a business. A rezone would be well and good for this business. However, there are many businesses that would benefit from a rezone. Crawford stated the Council initiates rezones for the benefit of the community. This is a good example of benefiting the community. Brenner stated the Council majority initially made a political decision to overturn the Hearing Examiner, which required this resolution. If the Council hadn't done that, it wouldn't be here now. McShane stated his decision was not political at all. His decision was based on his interpretation of the law. To question that and to question other councilmembers who are not here now is wrong. Brenner stated the councilmembers are not attorneys, so their decisions are political decisions. Roy asked for an explanation of the difference between a tourist commercial zone and a neighborhood commercial zone. Goodwin stated the neighborhood commercial zone is intended to serve just the neighbors in the surrounding area within a mile of the business. The tourist commercial zone is intended to serve the traveling public. If there were a lot of motorcycle riders from throughout the county or elsewhere in the county, they would visit an establishment in a tourist commercial zone. That is the purpose of the zone. A neighborhood commercial zone is intended to serve neighbors within walking or bicycling distance to stop by and get milk or bread, for example. Brenner asked if the Council is sure that everything zoned neighborhood commercial around the county is serving only the neighborhood. Goodwin stated they are not sure of that, but the purpose of the zone is to, "serve persons residing within the neighborhood trade or service area." Brenner stated the Park Store does that. Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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 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. Goodwin stated the specifically allowed uses are a food market, hardware store, stationery store, drug store, bakery, or a barber shop. A motorcycle shop is not any of those allowed uses. Brenner stated it is not a motorcycle shop. Goodwin stated that is a decision that has already been made by the Council. Motion to approve the resolution failed 3 -4 with Fleetwood, Crawford, and Brenner in favor. 1. REPORT ON COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION REGARDING WRIA MANAGEMENT PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK (AB2002 -085) McShane reported for the Natural Resources Committee and stated the committee recommended approval of two scopes of work. He moved to give direction to the Water Resources Division to support the two scopes of work at the Planning Unit meeting. Brenner stated she can't support the motion. It's time for them to pause and make sure the County staff explains this to the councilmembers in a way that they can understand. This is the first time since she's been on the Council in ten and a half years that there is something she really doesn't understand. She's read it over and over again. Other councilmembers have said they are having trouble understanding it. She would support sending this forward with no recommendation. They are talking about a lot of money. It is $700,000 over budget. McShane stated that the committee discussed concerns about lack of understanding a very complicated issue. One area he is concerned about is the modeling of nitrate contaminant transport. He's not convinced that it's a good idea. Overall, with that exception, the Council should support the scope of work. He hoped the staff would do a better job of getting the Council primed, and the councilmembers may need to put a little more effort into it to understand what they are creating. Nelson stated when the Council looks at these types of issues, it needs to have assumptions and facts. Sometimes they don't have all the information they need. They are trying to fill all the gaps to make sure they can make good decisions. Regarding the nitrate loading, his question is how the nutrient loading affects Portage Bay. It may not affect Portage Bay. They need to have criteria to judge which elements will be useful. Those are the elements that will come back weighted so they can make a decision. Bruce Roll, Water Resources Division Manager, stated he is not at a point in the process where he can provide all the criteria, show how all the management options have gone through the criteria, and then go into the development and the decision support system (DSS). Over the next three to four months, they will take Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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. those mini - management options that have been proposed in and outside of the process, run them through the criteria, and feed them into the DSS and model development. One solution may be that Council consider a checkpoint, which has been identified, as a point in time when he comes back to the Council at the end of June or early July to discuss which models they are specifically using, which management options have been fed into the criteria for assessment in the management plan, and how they relate to the RCW and the DSS worksheets. Now, there is a series of work and workshops over the next four months. There is an opportunity at the end of June for the Council to reevaluate and amend the scope and consider funding issues. That is a possible solution to this dilemma. Brenner stated she appreciated the offer. It would be a good idea. The problem is that she doesn't understand it right now. She can't approve something that she doesn't understand. Motion carried 6 -1 with Brenner opposed. 2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2002 WHATCOM COUNTY BUDGET, REQUEST #2 (AB2002 -110) Crawford reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and moved approval. Motion carried unanimously. Crawford stated the Finance Committee had an interesting discussion with the administration regarding any mindset the Council may have about maintaining the status quo when it comes to budget issues like this. This is a contract in which they are effectively duplicating the previous year's contract. It comes out of the general fund. The Council needs to be extremely conscious and cautious regarding how it is going to approach these expenditures next year. The Finance Committee will look at all of these issues in a very careful way. The full Council will get feedback along those lines as the year progresses. 3. ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 24 OF THE WHATCOM COUNTY CODE TO INCLUDE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR AN ADEQUATE WATER SUPPLY AND MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR THE SELLER TO PROVIDE INFORMATION TO THE BUYER CONCERNING THE WATER SOURCE WHEN SELLING DEVELOPED PROPERTY (AB2001 -369) Brenner reported for the Public Works and Capital Projects Committee and stated this item is held in committee. They are moving along very well and are making progress. They are going to end up with a product that everyone is comfortable with. Nelson asked if the committee is getting input from realtors. Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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. Brenner stated they've received input from realtors, the Building Industry Association (BIA), private well owners, and well drillers. She's been working most closely with Paul Chudek from the Environmental Health Division of the Health and Human Services Department. He's been an incredible help. 4. RESOLUTION INITIATING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING AMENDMENTS (AB2002 -084) McShane reported for the Planning and Development Committee and the Natural Resources Committee from two weeks ago: 2002 -A The Planning Committee recommended docketing unanimously. He moved to docket this item. Motion carried unanimously. 2002 -B McShane stated there was no committee recommendation. The five -year review would have to occur first. Crawford moved to docket this item. Motion failed 2 -5 with Crawford and Nelson in favor. 2002 -C McShane stated there was no committee recommendation. The Council passed a resolution that this be considered in the five -year plan. Crawford moved to docket this item. Motion failed 2 -5 with Nelson and Crawford in favor. 2002 -D McShane stated the Planning Committee recommended docketing. Nelson moved to docket this item. Motion carried 4 -3 with Caskey- Schreiber, Roy, and McShane opposed. 2002 -E McShane stated they have to docket this item no matter what, because it is brought forward by the City of Sumas. The Planning Committee also recommended docketing. McShane moved to docket this item. Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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. Motion carried unanimously. ?nn ? -F McShane stated the Planning Committee recommended docketing this item. He so moved. Motion carried 6 -1 with Nelson opposed. 2002 -G McShane stated the Natural Resources Committee recommended docketing this item. He so moved. Motion carried unanimously. 2002 -H McShane stated the Natural Resources Committee recommended docketing this item. He so moved, even though he would vote against the motion. This area is forestry land. The Council is being asked to carve this area up into ten -acre parcels. That is not a very good zoning designation. It puts houses in close proximity to commercial forest activity. The scoping committee for mineral resource lands and the Surface Mining Advisory Committee are concerned about a shortage of aggregate in this county. They need to study the aggregate resources. This rezone falls in an area where there is high quality bedrock, which is rare in Whatcom County. A County -owned rock quarry that has not been used in many years is immediately adjacent to this parcel. By changing the designation to R10A, they may take the area out of consideration for a source of aggregate in the future. Brenner stated she would like to be assured that would happen. She understood that there could be property in an R10A zone with a mineral resource overlay. She didn't think that was a problem. Some of the best cared for forestry lands are where people live in close proximity to commercial forestry. They are losing the small forestry landowner more and more. Include covenants or restrictions on the property to require forestry maintenance. She liked the idea of smaller parcels for people to take care of that. That is one way to ensure a diversity of species. The smaller property owner tends to do that. (Clerk's Note: End of tape two, side A.) Nelson asked if the access was across the quarry. Crawford stated it was. Nelson asked the surrounding zoning. Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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 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 surrounded by rural forestry. Nelson stated the stronger argument is about whether or not they are protecting forest practices in the community. That is one of the biggest concerns brought to the Forestry Forum. As the County rezones land to smaller lot sizes, it provides a tremendous impact on foresters who live next door. This occurred in his own neighborhood. They do have to protect and buffer the forestlands as much as possible. Putting this zone in the middle of forestlands would not be an ideal buffering mechanism. Crawford asked if there is a request for a fee waiver. Goodwin stated no fee waiver was requested. A Comprehensive Plan amendment fee is $400. A rezone fee is an additional approximate $2,000. Crawford asked about the staff's workload. Goodwin stated the fees for this request would probably pay for the processing. Crawford stated he would support the motion. Valid concerns have been expressed here. The Planning Commission is very pro- forestry. He doesn't give this request much hope. However, since the fees will pay for the processing, let the applicant take his chance in front of the Planning Commission. Caskey - Schreiber stated that if they allow housing in a forestry area, they have to be prepared for noise complaints. It opens up a can of worms. McShane stated the bedrock mining there would require blasting. Brenner stated she wouldn't support the motion because the area is surrounded by rural forestry on three sides. Motion failed 2 -5 with Crawford and Fleetwood in favor. 2002 -I McShane stated the Planning Committee recommended not to docket. He moved approval, even though he would vote against it. The zoning line divides a property and goes through a building. To resolve the problem, the applicant proposed a rezone from R2A to general commercial for their property plus a property to the south. Caskey- Schreiber stated she lives near this location. The owner is arguing that the chicken coop is cut in half by zoning, and failed to mention that the building is enormously long and low. They propose to tack on eight acres to solve a problem with the building, which won't ever be used as any kind of office. If they really want more general commercial zoning on the Hannegan Road, they should just have included their own acreage without the additional eight acres. She is very opposed to the proposal. The applicant can come back next year with just the area Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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. that they truly want to have zoned as general commercial, and not include the additional acres. Motion failed 3 -4 with Nelson, Crawford, and Fleetwood in favor. 2002 -J McShane stated the Planning Committee recommended docketing this item. He so moved. Motion carried 6 -1 with Crawford opposed. 2002 -K McShane stated the Natural Resources Committee recommended docketing this item. He so moved. Motion carried unanimously. 2002 -L McShane stated the Natural Resources Committee recommended docketing this item. This item was before the Council last year, and the applicant pulled the application at the last minute to join with the neighboring Killam property. This is an area of significant deposits that should be explored. In reviewing this and the next proposal, it will provide data that will contribute to the County's understanding of its aggregate supply. He moved approval of 2002 -L and 2002 -M. Roy asked if this is agricultural land. Goodwin stated it is zoned R10A, and it's subject to the agricultural protection overlay. Motion carried 6 -1 with Roy opposed. 2002 -M (See Item 2002 -L for motion of approval.) Caskey- Schreiber stated this property has two pipelines going through it. She asked if it's possible to safely extract gravel, and not leave pipelines exposed to erosion conditions that would leave the pipelines exposed. Goodwin stated it is possible if the excavation is kept far enough from the pipeline. Caskey- Schreiber asked if the County could require that. Goodwin stated the County could require that. The boundaries were modified to add an additional buffer along that one pipeline. Motion carried 6 -1 with Caskey- Schreiber opposed. 2002 -N McShane stated he would step aside from participating in this because he brought this forward as a councilmember, not a consultant. There is no financial Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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 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. conflict for him at all. He was contacted as a consultant, so he will abstain from voting on it because he's given his indication on where he is on it. Brenner stated she would support docketing this item. It would be helpful for the councilmembers to work together on these things so Councilmember McShane could vote. Mrs. Jordan contacted her about a year and a half ago about this. She passed out a notice to councilmembers saying she was interested in this. She didn't feel comfortable unilaterally bringing it forward because she wanted to vote on it. She's glad Councilmember McShane brought it forward. No one from the administration was interested in bringing it forward. She moved to docket this item. Motion carried 6 -0 with McShane abstaining. 2002 -0 McShane stated the Planning Committee recommended docketing this item. He so moved. Motion carried unanimously. Brenner asked how the Council can appropriately bring something forward for docketing. Goodwin stated that anytime there is a zoning issue, the Council has to approve a resolution to put it on the docket. Then, the Council can waive the fees. The Council can assist an applicant in filling out the application form, or the Council can request that the administration assist the applicant with filling out the form. Crawford stated the Planning staff submitted a list of options to deal with the workload. The Council just approved all but two items for docketing. He moved to go ahead with option 2 from the Planning Department workload list. It would extend the schedule by six months, to the middle of 2003. The State will accept a resolution with a schedule completing the five -year update for June 2003. He talked to both of the attorneys for the urban growth area (UGA) proponents, Caitec's attorney and Templeton's attorney. Both attorneys agreed that the extended timeline would be acceptable. There is more on this docket than what the staff can handle practically. The staff will have to sacrifice quality in order to get the quantity of work done. Brenner moved to refer Councilmember Crawford's motion and the options to the Finance Committee in two weeks. Motion to hold in the Finance Committee carried unanimously. Fleetwood stated he supported docketing all of the items not necessarily because he supports all the items, but because he will benefit from the process by looking at the issue in detail. (Continued below.) Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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. S. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, UTILITIES CHAPTER, WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 20, AND WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 21, TO ADD AND CLARIFY LANGUAGE RELATING TO THE REGULATION AND OPERATION OF UTILITIES, PARTICULARLY NATURAL GAS AND HAZARDOUS LIQUID TRANSMISSION PIPELINES, AND TO INCLUDE SITING CRITERIA FOR TRANSMISSION PIPELINES AND OTHER TECHNIQUES TO PROMOTE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND PUBLIC WELFARE (AB2002 -109) McShane reported for the Planning and Development Committee and stated this was held in committee. 6. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 20, TO ADD A NEW POINT ROBERTS TRANSITIONAL ZONE (TZ) DISTRICT, CHAPTER 20.37, TO IMPLEMENT THE 2001 POINT ROBERTS SUBAREA PLAN AND MAP (AB2002 -107) McShane reported for the Planning and Development Committee and stated this was held in committee. 7. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 20.72, POINT ROBERTS SPECIAL DISTRICT, TO IMPLEMENT THE GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROJECTS OF THE 2001 POINT ROBERTS SUBAREA PLAN (AB2002 -108) McShane reported for the Planning and Development Committee and stated this was held in committee. 4. RESOLUTION INITIATING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING AMENDMENTS (AB2002 -084) (Continued from above.) Nelson moved to approve the resolution with the approved docketed items. Motion carried unanimously. S. REQUEST CONFIRMATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE'S APPOINTMENT OF BEVERLY PORTER AND DWIGHT HINTON TO THE MENTAL HEALTH ADVISORY BOARD (AB2002 -128) Brenner moved to confirm the appointments. Motion carried unanimously. Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, 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 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. NOTIFICATION TO THE COUNCIL OF THE NOMINATION OF DAN BILSON AS A DESIGNATED REGIONAL REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE WHATCOM COUNTY MENTAL HEALTH ADVISORY BOARD TO THE NORTH SOUND REGIONAL SUPPORT NETWORK REGIONAL ADVISORY BOARD (AB2002 -129) Nelson stated no action is needed. It is for information only. 10. REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE EXECUTIVE'S APPOINTMENT OF GORDON SCOTT AND JOHN RADONSKI TO THE SALMON HABITAT RESTORATION CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AB2002 -130) Brenner moved to confirm the appointments. Motion carried unanimously. 11. NOTIFICATION THAT THE EXECUTIVE WILL DENY APPROVAL OF THE NEW LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION FOR ROSA'S MEXICAN RESTAURANT LOCATED AT 5974 GUIDE MERIDIAN AS THE PROPOSED FACILITY DOES NOT MEET THE REQUIRED STANDARDS (AB2002- 131) Pete Kremen, County Executive, stated he only wanted to let the Council know that he denied the application. INTRODUCTION ITEMS There were no introduction items. OTHER BUSINESS Crawford asked for Council guidance regarding a Mt. Baker Community Steering Committee agenda item regarding their need for formal recognition by the Whatcom County Council. This is a group that has been facilitated by the Port of Bellingham. They are searching for recognition that they have a purpose. The Council has created and appointed a variety of committees and commissions to deal with land use issues, economic development issues, and other issues. They would like formal recognition to strategize and formulate strategy, and that their work would be seriously considered by the County Council. He questioned whether this is something the Council feels it should have. Brenner suggested that they bring a presentation to one of the committees. Nelson agreed that the steering committee should bring forward a request, and the merits of the request could be discussed. Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, Page 29 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Crawford stated that the Council guidance is to formally request something in writing, provide an outline of what they are looking for, and make a presentation to the Council. The Council concurred. REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS McShane stated the scoping committee for coming up with the aggregate study met. They are trying to narrow down the focus. They are trying to not think of the political considerations. They will hopefully have one more meeting to come up with the scope. He appreciated the administration's support. McShane also reported that the Resource Advisory Committee meeting was held recently on the Title II and Title III issue. This Resource Advisory Committee makes recommendations on Title II money, which is only Skagit County's money. The committee is up and running. Projects are being brought forward. He really liked some of the projects. Hopefully, they can work with it. He will have some kind of presentation later in the Natural Resources Committee because the Whatcom County Council will again have to make a decision on how it should divide its Title II and Title III money. Brenner stated she is taking a course to make her more effective as a councilmember, especially regarding watershed issues. She thanked Councilmember McShane, who is going to trade committee times with the Public Works Committee. Nelson stated he is going to Washington, DC on Thursday with the County Executive, Dewey Desler, and Councilmembers Crawford and McShane to attend the National Association for Counties (NACo) Conference. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 9:54 p.m. Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription These minutes were approved by Council on March 26 , 2002. ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, Page 30 1 2 3 4 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. Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk L. Ward Nelson, Council Chair Whatcom County Council, 2/26/2002, Page 31