HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil January 9 20011 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
2 Regular County Council
3
4 January 9, 2001
5
6
7 The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Council Chair Marlene
8 Dawson in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
9
10 Also Present: Absent:
11 Dan McShane Robert Imhof
12 L. Ward Nelson
13 Connie Hoag
14 Barbara Brenner
15 Sam Crawford
16
17 ANNOUNCEMENTS
18
19 Dawson announced that Bob Imhof is still in the hospital and is progressing
20 well.
21
22 Dawson also announced that there was Consideration of Hearing
23 Examiner's recommended approval of a planned unit development, filed by
24 Alliance Properties Incorporated for "Wild Rose Hills" (PUD00 -0002 and
25 LSS00 -0003) (AB200 -432) during Committee of the Whole.
26
27 Hoag moved to remand to Hearing Examiner. As the record is insufficient for
28 the Council to make a reasoned decision as to whether improvements are needed
29 to Lakeway Drive in order to provide for the safety of traffic entering and exiting
30 the project site from Lakeway Drive.
31
32 Motion carried unanimously.
33
34 Dawson announced that there was also a discussion with Senior Deputy
35 Prosecutor Daniel Gibson regarding pending litigation (AB2001 -018) in
36 executive session during Committee of the Whole. The issue was regarding
37 Initiative 722.
38
39 Nelson moved to ratify the prosecutor's actions in regards to Initiative 722 to
40 include Whatcom County in a class of counties regarding the litigation between the
41 cities of Burien, et al. versus King County.
42
43 Motion carried unanimously.
44
45
46 SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS
47
48 ANNUAL REORGANIZATION OF THE WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 1
1 (AB2001 -023)
2
3 Dawson opened nominations for the Council Chair.
4
5 Brenner nominated Ward Nelson.
6
7 Hearing no one else, Dawson closed the nominations for Council Chair.
8
9 Motion to appoint Nelson carried unanimously.
10
11 Dawson thanked everyone on the Council for the opportunity to serve as
12 Council Chair. She enjoyed it. This is a wonderful group of people who are very
13 conscientious and work very hard. She looked forward to next year.
14
15 (Clerk's Note: Councilmember Nelson assumed the duties of the chair.)
16
17 Hoag thanked Councilmember Dawson for her service as the Council Chair.
18 There have been many innovative ideas that she pursued, and she did a good job
19 keeping a cohesive Council and in steering the Council through some difficult
20 matters. She expressed her appreciation for the extra trips that she made on
21 behalf of the County. She did more as a chair than they've seen in a long time.
22
23 Nelson opened the nominations for the Council Vice - Chair.
24
25 Brenner nominated Crawford.
26
27 Hearing no other nominations, Nelson closed the nominations.
28
29 Motion to appoint Crawford carried unanimously.
30
31 Nelson opened the nominations for Executive Pro Tempore.
32
33 Brenner nominated Dawson.
34
35 Hearing no other nominations, Nelson closed the nominations.
36
37 Motion to appoint Dawson carried unanimously.
38
39 Nelson opened nominations to the Finance and Administrative Services
40 Committee.
41
42 Dawson nominated herself, Crawford, and Imhof.
43
44 Hearing no other nominations, Nelson closed the nominations.
45
46 Motion to nominate Dawson, Crawford, and Imhof to the Finance and
47 Administrative Services Committee carried unanimously.
48
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 2
1 Nelson opened nominations for the Planning and Development Committee.
2
3 McShane nominated himself.
4
5 Brenner nominated Crawford and Hoag.
6
7 Hearing no one else, Nelson closed the nominations.
8
9 Dawson moved to appoint McShane, Crawford, and Hoag, by acclamation.
10
11 Motion carried unanimously.
12
13 Nelson opened nominations to the Public Works and Capital Projects
14 Committee.
15
16 Brenner nominated herself, McShane, and Dawson.
17
18 Hearing no other nominations, Nelson closed the nominations.
19
20 Motion to appoint by acclamation carried unanimously.
21
22 Nelson opened nominations for the Natural Resources Committee.
23
24 McShane nominated himself and Hoag.
25
26 Brenner nominated Nelson.
27
28 Hearing no one else, Nelson closed the nominations.
29
30 Motion to appoint by acclamation carried unanimously.
31
32 Nelson stated there are other committee assignments for committees that
33 the councilmembers serve on in the community regarding many issues.
34
35 Bellingham International Airport Advisory
36
37 Nelson nominated Brenner.
38
39 Motion carried unanimously.
40
41 Council of Governments - 2 positions
42
43 Brenner nominated Crawford and Imhof
44
45 Motion carried unanimously.
46
47 Drayton Harbor Shellfish Protection District Advisory Committee
48
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 3
1 Dawson nominated McShane
2
3 Motion carried unanimously.
4
5 Economic Development Council
6
7 Brenner nominated Dawson.
8
9 Crawford nominated himself.
10
11 Nelson closed nominations.
12
13 Dawson voted for Dawson.
14
15 Nelson voted for Crawford.
16
17 McShane voted for Crawford.
18
19 Hoag voted for Dawson.
20
21 Crawford voted for Crawford.
22
23 Brenner voted for Dawson.
24
25 No one was appointed due to a lack of a majority. The Council will make the
26 appointment at the next Council meeting.
27
28 Forestry Forum
29
30 Crawford nominated Nelson.
31
32 Motion carried unanimously.
33
34 Health and Human Services Advisory Board - 2 positions.
35
36 Nelson nominated Brenner.
37
38 Crawford nominated Crawford.
39
40 Hoag nominated Nelson.
41
42 Nelson closed the nominations.
43
44 Dawson voted for Brenner and Nelson.
45
46 Nelson voted for Nelson and Crawford.
47
48 McShane voted for Brenner and Crawford.
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 4
1
2 Hoag voted for Nelson and Brenner.
3
4 Crawford voted for Brenner and Crawford.
5
6 Brenner voted for Nelson and Crawford.
7
8 There were four votes for each of the three nominees. No one was
9 appointed.
10
11 Hoag suggested deferring the vote until the end of the list.
12
13 The Council concurred.
14
15 Heath Department Advisory Committee
16
17 Dawson nominated Crawford.
18
19 Hoag stated that the next four committees are subcommittees of the Health
20 and Human Services Advisory Board, and the appointee to the subcommittees have
21 to be one of the two appointed to the Health and Human Services Advisory Board.
22
23 Regina Delahunt, Interim Health and Human Services Director, stated she
24 was confused about the differences between the Health and Human Services
25 Advisory Board and the Health Department Advisory Committee, as listed.
26 Councilmember Nelson is the representative on the Health and Human Services
27 Advisory Board.
28
29 Brenner stated she is also.
30
31 Delahunt stated that the Health Department Advisory Board is the one that
32 Councilmember Nelson serves on at this point in time. The two are not necessarily
33 connected.
34
35 Dana Brown - Davis, Clerk of the Council, stated that the mark before each of
36 the four committees and board on the list only means that they are part of the
37 Health and Human Services Department.
38
39 Delahunt stated that the Advisory Committee is not related to the Advisory
40 Board.
41
42 Hoag questioned whether that applies to the others. Delahunt stated they
43 are all separate.
44
45 Nelson stated the four are all mandated advisory boards. The Health and
46 Human Services Advisory Board is one the Board of Health set up, and is not a
47 required committee. He was more than happy to let Mr. Crawford serve on that
48 one. The Health Department Advisory Committee is the one he'd been serving on.
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 5
1
2 Nelson stated he opened nominations for the Health Department Advisory
3 Committee.
4
5 Dawson stated she nominated Crawford.
6
7 Nelson nominated himself.
8
9 Hearing no other nominations, Nelson closed the nominations.
10
11 Dawson voted for Crawford.
12
13 Nelson voted for Nelson.
14
15 McShane voted for Nelson.
16
17 Hoag voted for Nelson.
18
19 Crawford voted for Crawford.
20
21 Brenner voted for Nelson.
22
23 Nelson was appointed.
24
25 Health and Human Services Advisory Board - 2 positions
26
27 Nelson removed himself from the nominations. That would leave Crawford
28 and Brenner as nominees.
29
30 The Council concurred.
31
32 Developmental Disabilities
33
34 Brenner nominated Crawford.
35
36 Motion carried unanimously.
37
38 Mental Health Advisory Board
39
40 Brenner nominated herself.
41
42 Motion carried unanimously.
43
44 Substance Abuse Board
45
46 Dawson nominated Crawford.
47
48 Motion carried unanimously.
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 6
1
2 Intergovernmental Tribal Relations Committee - 2 positions
3
4 Brenner nominated McShane and herself.
5
6 Motion carried unanimously.
7
8 Law Enforcement Officers and Firefighters (LEOFF) Board
9
10 Crawford nominated Dawson.
11
12 Motion carried unanimously.
13
14 Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC)
15
16 McShane nominated himself.
17
18 Crawford questioned the mandate of this committee.
19
20 Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated it refers to the Emergency
21 Management Planning Committee that has representatives of various cities and
22 oversees the works of the emergency management operations center and its staff.
23 It meets two or three times per year. They will probably meet a little more given
24 some of the things they are being asked to do in the budget.
25
26 Hearing no other nominations, Nelson closed the nominations.
27
28 Motion carried unanimously.
29
30 Marine Resources Committee
31
32 Dawson nominated Hoag.
33
34 Motion carried unanimously.
35
36 North Sound Regional Support Network (NSRSN)
37
38 Brenner nominated Nelson.
39
40 Motion carried unanimously.
41
42 Northwest Air Pollution Authority (NWAPA)
43
44 Brenner nominated Hoag.
45
46 Nelson nominated Imhof.
47
48 Nelson closed nominations.
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 7
1
2 Dawson voted for Imhof.
3
4 Nelson voted for Imhof.
5
6 McShane voted for Hoag.
7
8 Hoag voted for Hoag.
9
10 Crawford voted for Hoag.
11
12 Brenner voted for Hoag.
13
14 Hoag was appointed.
15
16 Northwest Regional Council (NWRQ
17
18 Brenner nominated Nelson.
19
20 Motion carried unanimously.
21
22 Portage Bay Shellfish Protection District Advisory Committee
23
24 Nelson nominated McShane.
25
26 Motion carried unanimously.
27
28 Opportunity Council
29
30 Brenner stated the Council changed last year. They requested a County staff
31 person instead of a councilmember, so there would be some consistency. They
32 should hold this item to make sure that is the case.
33
34 Hoag stated she served on the Council prior to Councilmember Brenner. It is
35 a unique opportunity to serve. If someone is interested, she encouraged him or her
36 to volunteer, but she did recall what happened during the year. They had Kay Guirl
37 replace Councilmember Brenner. It is a good idea for a councilmember to
38 participate. She couldn't do it because it conflicts with another committee.
39
40 Dawson stated it is a bit of a time commitment because they are usually on
41 the committee and a subcommittee.
42
43 Brenner nominated Crawford.
44
45 Crawford stated he would be willing, depending on the schedule.
46
47 Hoag stated it meets on a Thursday night. They also have subcommittees to
48 serve on.
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 8
1
2 Crawford stated he would accept the nomination.
3
4 Motion carried unanimously.
5
6 Public Defense Advisory Board
7
8 Nelson nominated Brenner.
9
10 Motion carried unanimously.
11
12 Solid Waste Advisory Committee
13
14 Brenner nominated McShane.
15
16 Motion carried unanimously.
17
18 Whatcom Transit Authority
19
20 Nelson nominated Dawson.
21
22 Motion carried unanimously.
23
24
25 SPECIAL PRESENTATION
26
27 JOINT PROCLAMATION BY COUNTY EXECUTIVE PETE KREMEN
28 DECLARING JANUARY 2001 AS "ALZHEIMER'S AWARENESS MONTH"
29 (AB2001 -017)
30
31
32 Pete Kremen, County Executive, stated he and Mayor Asmundson agreed to
33 participate in a joint proclamation in honor of Alzheimer's Awareness Month. He read the
34 proclamation into the record (on file). He presented the original proclamation to the
35 Alzheimer's Society of Washington Executive Director Jocelyn Winslow.
36
37 Jocelyn Winslow, Alzheimer's Society of Washington Executive Director, stated
38 they had their first annual fundraising walk. They have raised awareness a great deal.
39 This year, there is a fundraising walk and run on January 27 to increase awareness.
40 They want people to not ignore Alzheimer's disease and see it as a medical problem that
41 people shouldn't ignore. She thanked the County Council and Executive Kremen. She
42 presented the official fundraiser T -shirt to Councilmember Nelson. Anyone who joins the
43 fundraiser will get a T- shirt.
44
45 Nelson asked how people could contact the Alzheimer's Society. Winslow stated
46 people could contact the office. The phone number is in the phone book in the social
47 services category.
48
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 9
1 Kremen stated that the Executive's Office is the contact for the Whatcom County
2 walk /run team.
3
4
5 APPROVAL OF MINUTES
6
7 APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE FOLLOWING MEETINGS:
8 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FOR NOVEMBER 28, 2000; REGULAR
9 COUNTY COUNCIL FOR NOVEMBER 28, 2000; SPECIAL WORK
10 SESSION (WATER RESOURCES) FOR NOVEMBER 21, 2000
11
12 Brenner moved to approve the minutes including corrections of minor
13 scrivener's errors.
14
15 Motion carried unanimously.
16
17
18 OPEN SESSION
19
20 The following people spoke:
21
22 Mike Kaufman, 1620 Huntley Road, Bellingham, stated he would discuss the
23 Sumas Energy 2 (SE2) project.
24
25 (Clerk's Note: Councilmember McShane left the room due to a conflict of
26 interest.)
27
28 Kaufman thanked the County Council for becoming an intervener in the case.
29 Chuck Martin, the vice - president, wrote a newspaper article that said he welcomed
30 information and would bring it forward. However, the briefs that they filed on
31 Friday were opposed to that information. It shows these people for who they really
32 are. Dr. Easterbrook is going to have to step forward and take some abuse on this
33 from them, but the community stands with Dr. Easterbrook and looks forward to
34 this.
35
36 In the environmental impact statement (EIS), they stated that the opponents
37 should have brought this information forward earlier, while the adjudicative
38 hearings were happening. If the EIS was allowed to take its course the way that it
39 should have, they may have had this information. It should have been part of the
40 draft EIS. The Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council ( EFSEC) is trying to bring the
41 EIS forward a week before they close deliberations, so they can say it was part of
42 the record and their deliberations. In fact, the community has had no time to see
43 it. It exposes the EFSEC and the fraud that they are manipulating with the EIS.
44
45 The NEB Board in Canada is considering the transmission lines going that
46 way. Almost 500 people signed up to be interveners in that process, the most
47 they've ever seen. This means that the electric lines for SE2 are probably going to
48 head back into Whatcom County. SE2 says they are going to be 115,000 volt lines,
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 10
1 when in fact the poles, insulators, lines, and the intent of the engineering and
2 construction is for 230,000 volts. From all his questions and research, he
3 determined that it is impossible to push 660 megawatts of power through 115,000
4 volt lines. It is like trying to push the water pressure of a fire hydrant through a
5 household tap. It can't be done. Regarding that statement, they may need to
6 impose a moratorium on the construction of all transmission lines in this county. It
7 would be in line with what they did regarding the pipeline. It would make things
8 more consistent across the board with all industries, and it would give the Utility
9 Committee a chance to work with the corridors.
10
11 Hoag spoke regarding pushing 660 megawatts through a 115,000 volt line.
12 She questioned whether SE2 proposed to have it go through two separate lines, but
13 330 megawatts was still supposed to be more than anything that's been done.
14 Kaufman stated he didn't know much about that, but it has to be a double circuit.
15 They don't split it particularly.
16
17 Hoag stated Mr. Kaufman mentioned the NEB hearings in Canada. Anyone
18 who wants to speak at the hearings on January 18 and January 19 has to register
19 by this Friday. It is a new thing that just came out. Kaufman stated he heard it
20 was in response to SE2's request to limit environmental input.
21
22 Hoag stated SE2 is also trying to limit what interveners can and can't do.
23 There are a lot of issues on the table.
24
25
26 CONSENT AGENDA
27
28 (Clerk's Note: McShane rejoined the meeting.)
29
30 Brenner questioned how this came from the Finance Committee.
31
32 Nelson stated this is the first time these are being addressed.
33
34 Nelson moved approval of consent agenda items one through five.
35
36 Hoag withdrew items two through four.
37
38 Nelson withdrew item one. Since that leaves only one item on the consent
39 agenda, they will take each item individually.
40
41 1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID #00-
42 122, FOR THE COUNTY'S ANNUAL SUPPLY OF MINERAL AGGREGATES,
43 TO THE RESPONSIVE BIDDERS AND SELECT THE APPROPRIATE
44 VENDOR AS DICTATED BY THE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE
45 PARTICULAR JOB, AT A TOTAL COST OF NO MORE THAN $35,000
46 (AB2001 -024)
47
48 Nelson stated that the title of this item is incorrect, and it should state, "...at
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 11
1 a total cost of f-e more than $35,000...." He questioned whether it was because the
2 cost of the mineral aggregates would probably be more than $35,000.
3
4 Dick Prieve, Assistant Director of Operations, stated that was correct. It was
5 a scrivener's error. When they usually go out for these materials, it is in an
6 emergency situation, and they do cost more than $35,000. He goes out every year
7 for the aggregates.
8
9 Nelson moved approval.
10
11 Crawford questioned whether there is one bidder that gets all of these, or
12 whether whoever bids the lowest in each category would win that category. Prieve
13 stated that is the one they look at. They also look at the haul distance from where
14 the job is and the amount of material that they have. There are other factors in
15 addition to the lowest cost.
16
17 Hoag questioned whether Mr. Prieve comes to the Council if it is not an
18 emergency. Prieve stated he does not.
19
20 Hoag stated this is just a blank check for all the mineral aggregates for the
21 County. Prieve stated yes, traditionally.
22
23 Brenner stated they do this every year.
24
25 Hoag stated she thought it was only for emergencies. Prieve stated it is the
26 low bidder list. He goes out once per year to all the vendors.
27
28 Motion to approve carried unanimously.
29
30 2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
31 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE
32 CITY OF NOOKSACK, PURSUANT TO THE INTERLOCAL COOPERATION
33 ACT, RCW 39.34, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT
34 ACT (AB2001 -025)
35
36 Kraig Olason, Senior Planner, gave a staff report and stated this is the
37 second to the last remaining interlocal agreement for the County. This is in line
38 with the general language they've had in previous agreements.
39
40 Brenner moved to approve.
41
42 Hoag stated the sales tax revenue sharing is listed on packet page 166. On
43 each interlocal that has come through, she's expressed the same concern, but is
44 told that it has to be that way because that is the way the state has it set up.
45 However, no one can supply her any state regulation that this is the way it has to
46 be. The County is getting a raw deal. When the cities annex the items that are
47 providing revenue to the County, the County gets .65 plus the 15 that it always
48 gets from the state in the first year, .35 in the second year, and .05 in the third
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 12
1 year. That is a nickel for every dollar in the third year. It is a really bad deal, and
2 she's objected to it on every interlocal that has come forward. She's talked to the
3 legislators about it and read the Revised Code of Washington on this issue. She
4 didn't see that the state requires the County to make this bad deal, and the Council
5 should not approve it. She knows that the Council will say that it has been done
6 with every other agreement. They shouldn't have approved the first agreement.
7
8 Nelson stated there were interlocal meetings during the Growth Management
9 Act process with the cities, water purveyors, and others about the annexation
10 concern. It wasn't easy to come up with the formulas for tax sharing, the roads,
11 and other items. Most of this came from those interlocal meetings between the
12 jurisdictions and the County. They went through weeks and months of trying to
13 hammer out an agreement. The cities didn't want to give anything because they
14 have to maintain services when it is annexed. These are the agreements that came
15 out of the process.
16
17 Olason stated the numbers are not mandated by the state. The state just
18 allows the transition.
19
20 Dawson stated that they had no comparisons when they started this. It was
21 a hard negotiation. She agreed that they could have done better, but this is history
22 and is difficult to change.
23
24 Hoag stated the other items in the agreement reflect a thoughtful process
25 that she agreed with. When it comes to the sales tax revenue sharing, the County
26 is getting ripped off. Every time she's brought it up each time an interlocal
27 agreement has come forward, she'd been told that it was because of a state
28 requirement.
29
30 Brenner stated she didn't like it. No one on the Council liked it. The County
31 doesn't have a huge hammer. It was the best they could do. The County needs to
32 lobby the state to change how taxation is done so the counties don't end up without
33 any funding. They can't expect a city to annex and keep providing the County with
34 revenue beyond a certain point. That isn't fair to the city. The issue is at the state
35 level.
36
37 (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
38
39 Brenner stated she wanted the Council to send a very strong letter to the
40 state about this because they are going to get to a point where they don't have any
41 revenue left.
42
43 Hoag stated both she and Councilmember Dawson have gone down to
44 Olympia to talk about it, and it seems to be falling on deaf ears. However, the
45 County is doing it to itself when the Council signs these interlocal agreements. She
46 wouldn't support this agreement and expressed her disappointment that she didn't
47 get correct information in the past.
48
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 13
Nelson stated they are going to deal with transfers of density. The
agreement deals with the city and the County working together on density
transfers. He moved to amend packet page 116, section 11.C, "...The City and
County should designate...." Since the County works with UGA's, it has to be a
participant. He so moved. Olason stated that when this is modified, they go back
to the city to sign all of this. The County has the authority within the UGA should it
decide to designate any area as a receiving area without the interlocal agreement.
He didn't know that it needed to be included.
McShane asked for a suggestion from Mr. Olason in the future of how they
could set the policy for urban growth areas, particularly regarding the zoning within
the urban growth areas, so the areas aren't zoned to a level until they actually
receive densities. Olason stated he could add additional detail to the urban growth
area Comprehensive Plan designation to identify specific areas. That would be one
way to do that so they could set limitations on up- zoning those sites before there is
a program in place. They haven't been able to get the density they've agreed to try
for, let alone getting into buying higher density.
McShane stated there has been recent interest in that from the
councilmembers. Olason stated it is something they could start working on.
Nelson withdrew his motion.
Crawford asked if there is any analysis in interlocal agreements when they
are looking at urban growth areas regarding costs of school district boundary lines
and the impacts that the potential annexation would have on a different school
district. Olason stated they are not doing that at the time they sign these interlocal
agreements. If one is looking at expanding an urban growth area, that is
something he or she should look at. There is a notification process for all parties
who would be affected by increased density when expanding an urban growth area.
Crawford questioned whether that would be a part of this agreement. Olason
stated it would not. This deals with what they need to look at when there is an
urban growth area and when they are going to do an annexation. Primarily, it is
handing over the reigns in a way that it is complete. They try to make sure that
other service providers in the area are notified. He requested that the City of
Nooksack do that. They sent out a notification, but didn't get many comments
back. Prior to bringing it to the County Council, they want to make sure that the
affected community has had an opportunity to look at it, at least.
Crawford stated there has been a problem in the annexation by the City of
Bellingham in the Cordata area. There is high density going in, adding more
students in the Meridian School District. The Meridian School District is part of the
Deer Creek Water Association, and they don't have the availability of more water.
He questioned how the school could accept more students when it can't build
because there is a lack of water. He wondered at what point they look at that. The
point seems to be when they are looking at urban growth areas overall.
Brenner stated another concern is when an urban growth area fills in and
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 14
1 takes students outside the urban growth area.
2
3 Motion carried 5 -1 with Hoag opposed.
4
5 3. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
6 AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND ERICSSON
7 ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE COUNTY'S
8 TELEPHONE AND VOICE MAIL SYSTEM IN THE AMOUNT OF $58,614
9 (AB2001 -026)
10
11 Nelson moved to approve.
12
13 Hoag stated the phones and voice mail system are fine. She wanted to make
14 sure this was only about the equipment, because she had concerns that there are
15 not enough phone lines. There are times when people call in to the County and get
16 a busy signal. She's reported the problem repeatedly and it's not been fixed.
17
18 Brenner stated she talked to George Reid about it, and he said they are
19 working on it.
20
21 Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated this is not related. The line
22 charge is through US West. This contract covers the regular and emergency
23 maintenance on all of the County's hundreds of telephones. They are working with
24 US West to increase the capacity.
25
26 Hoag stated it happens on both Bellingham and County numbers. The
27 problem is with the trunks, not the individual lines. Desler stated they have the
28 capacity to do some counts. He would prepare a memo to share that with the
29 Council.
30
31 Brenner questioned when that might be corrected. Desler stated there are
32 anomalies that occur every once in a while. He would check on that. He assumed
33 that it was complete.
34
35 Motion carried unanimously.
36
37 4. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE TREASURER'S LIST OF PROPERTY TAX
38 REFUNDS (AB2001 -027)
39
40 Nelson moved approval.
41
42 Hoag stated many of the items say "paid in error." She questioned how that
43 could happen.
44
45 Nelson stated he dealt with a constituent that had been assessed incorrectly
46 on the size of his house. He paid over a period of five years more tax than he
47 should have.
48
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 15
1 Hoag stated some are marked that they had a changed assessment. She
2 questioned why anyone would write out a check in error. She questioned what
3 sorts of things were covered by that.
4
5 Pete Kremen, County Executive, stated the Treasurer would have that
6 information.
7
8 Brenner stated a changed assessment isn't an error. However, if someone's
9 square footage wasn't assessed properly, that is an error. That was her
10 understanding.
11
12 Motion carried unanimously.
13
14 S. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
15 CONTRACT AMENDMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH AND
16 HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND BLACK FLAG — INDIVIDUAL
17 EMPLOYMENT, INCREASING FUNDING OF INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYMENT
18 SERVICES FOR AN INCREASED AMOUNT OF $13,304 (AB2001 -028)
19
20 Nelson moved to approve.
21
22 Motion to approve carried unanimously.
23
24
25 OTHER ITEMS
26
27 1. CONSIDERATION OF HEARING EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDED
28 APPROVAL OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, FILED BY ALLIANCE
29 PROPERTIES INCORPORATED FOR ""WILD ROSE HILLS" (PUD00 -0002
30 AND LSS00 -0003) (AB2000 -432)
31
32 See "announcements."
33
34
35 2. APPOINTMENTS TO THE COUNTYWIDE FLOOD CONTROL ZONE AND
36 SUB -ZONE DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE, SPECIAL DISTRICTS,
37 IMPACTED CITIES, AND ALTERNATES (AB2000 -326A)
38
39 Dawson moved to approve the nine applicants by acclamation.
40
41 Motion carried unanimously.
42
43 3. APPOINTMENT TO THE ADDRESS AND ROAD NAMING CITIZEN
44 APPEALS COMMITTEE (AB2000 -326F)
45
46 Brenner moved to appoint William Tarr by acclamation.
47
48 Hoag questioned why the position line on the application said "open."
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 16
1
2 Brenner stated there was one open position.
3
4 Motion carried unanimously.
5
6 4. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE A NEW
7 LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION FOR CASA QUE PASA, 7471 MT.
8 BAKER HIGHWAY, MAPLE FALLS (AB2001 -030)
9
10 Francine Kincaid, Executive Assistant, stated the concerns of the Health
11 Department would not impact the liquor license. They were fine with approval of
12 the liquor license.
13
14 Nelson questioned whether the problem was a permitting issue. Kincaid
15 stated that was correct. The restaurant just wouldn't open if they didn't approve.
16
17 Hoag moved to approve.
18
19 Motion carried unanimously.
20
21 S. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING
22 ORDINANCE, TITLE 20, CHAPTER 20.80.730, LAND CLEARING AND
23 20.97, DEFINITIONS (AB2000 -391)
24
25 Nelson explained this was a hearing that was left open from December 12,
26 2000, and this is a continuation of that hearing.
27
28 Kraig Olason, Senior Planner, gave a staff report and recommended deleting
29 section 20.80.730(4) on packet page 210 as it came forward from the Planning and
30 Development Committee, with the understanding that those things that don't
31 appear changed in this, the old language, aren't going to affect what is currently in
32 the County Code.
33
34 Brenner questioned whether or not they would be adopting something that is
35 new language. Olason stated they would not. He asked to go over both versions.
36 He showed the language adopted through Ordinance 99 -086, which mostly
37 addressed Lake Whatcom, and then what he proposed in the new clearing
38 ordinance that they've recently re- worked with the committee.
39
40 Hoag questioned whether the document did not include the changes that
41 were made to Lake Whatcom. Olason stated they worked on the old language.
42 They started with what was current, and it didn't stay current.
43
44 Olason stated that the language on packet page 210, section 20.80.730(4)
45 was substantially modified by Ordinance 99 -086. His recommendation was that
46 they should defer to section 20.80.730(4) in Ordinance 99 -086. Don't deal with
47 this. They are not going to affect current law. The purpose of adding the term
48 "special management areas" to the language in the proposed ordinance was to
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 17
1 direct the reader back to the old language that talked about special management
2 areas. That term has actually been changed to water resource special management
3 areas.
4
5 Brenner questioned whether the changes were mostly to the wording, not the
6 essence of what they are doing. Olason stated that was right. If they adopted the
7 proposed ordinance, it would change the essence of what the Council did the last
8 time, because it did a lot of work on that subsection.
9
10 Nelson stated he had a concern about using the language "special district."
11 It is somewhat vague. They identify Lake Whatcom and Drayton Harbor as special
12 districts. The Health Advisory Board is dealing with the same language regarding
13 septic systems. The discussion has been about why this isn't as important for Lake
14 Samish and other water bodies that have impacts, if it is so important for Lake
15 Whatcom and Drayton Harbor. He had this conversation today with Sylvia
16 Goodwin. They should designate all major water bodies. If it is important for Lake
17 Whatcom, it is important for all water bodies.
18
19 Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, stated that is not what they are
20 trying to do here. After she spoke with Councilmember Nelson earlier in the day,
21 she and Mr. Olason looked at it. They realized that the language on water resource
22 special management areas that had been altered for Lake Whatcom hadn't been
23 incorporated back into this earlier draft, so they added it. It still didn't address
24 Councilmember Nelson's concern. If they are really concerned about every water
25 body that could be impacted by land clearing activities, they would want to get rid
26 of the entire concept of having water resource special management areas, treat the
27 entire county the same, and have a higher standard for everything.
28
29 Nelson stated they could just identify the major water bodies. Goodwin
30 stated that every piece of the county is in some watershed. It is a matter of how
31 big of an area they want to cover. That is the issue they are having with Drayton
32 Harbor. By including the entire watershed, they've gone halfway to Lynden. They
33 should not deal with this as part of the timber section of the land clearing
34 ordinance, but in how they treat stormwater and land clearing in general in the
35 entire county. They probably would need a much more comprehensive review of all
36 the stormwater and land clearing regulations at some point in the future. This is
37 just saying that if an area has been designated as a water resource special
38 management area, the standard for land clearing is higher.
39
40 Nelson asked how this would be affected if they do away with the term at
41 some future time. Goodwin stated they'd have to amend this entire section again.
42 They would have to go back to one standard. She recommended that the Council
43 leave it as it is for now. They are looking at Lake Samish. If there are other
44 sensitive areas, they could add those areas as water resource special management
45 areas or stormwater special districts. Overall, the code for stormwater and land
46 clearing has gotten far too complicated. They may need to go to a different
47 system. If they designate Portage Bay, for instance, it is half of the County. Pretty
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 18
1 soon, they will have the entire county designated as a special district, and no one
2 would be left that isn't special.
3
4 Hoag agreed with staff's comment that it would make more sense to look at
5 the different water bodies individually to see what sort of attention they warrant.
6 She didn't want to do that at this point. She brought this up in committee because
7 she was concerned that this language wasn't in the ordinance. Staff added the
8 language "or special management areas" thinking it covered it.
9
10 Section 20.80.730(4)(x) in the handout, which is the current County Code, is
11 the same language on packet page 211, section 20.80.730(4)((b)(i) through
12 20.80.730(4)(b)(iii). If the Council adopts the ordinance in the packet, she
13 questioned whether that action would adopt the new sections 20.80.730(4)(b)(iv)
14 and 20.80.730(4)(b)(v). They have to add subsections (iv) and (v) form packet
15 page 211 under (4)(b).
16
17 Nelson stated this is the first time he's seen this, and it is getting confusing.
18 They may need to put it back in committee and clean it up so it's presentable.
19 Olason stated they could insert the correct language with the changes.
20
21 McShane moved to continue the hearing and refer the issue back to the
22 Planning and Development Committee on January 23rd to clean up the ordinance.
23
24 Hoag questioned whether they need to do a new hearing to incorporate this
25 language.
26
27 Brenner stated they are okay.
28
29 Goodwin stated the extra information is information the Council already
30 adopted a year ago. It wouldn't need any further notice because it has already
31 been adopted.
32
33 Hoag stated there were a number of items she discussed with Mr. Olason on
34 the phone earlier in the day. She questioned whether Mr. Olason could just insert
35 those changes in.
36
37 McShane stated they should do that in committee.
38
39 Motion carried unanimously.
40
41 6. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING
42 ORDINANCE, TITLE 20, CHAPTER 20.89, TO CLARIFY THE LANGUAGE
43 OF THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) PROGRAM FOR
44 ADMINISTRATIVE PURPOSES, TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL PROGRAM
45 INCENTIVES, AND TO PROVIDE NEW MECHANISMS FOR
46 DESIGNATING ADDITIONAL TDR RECEIVING AREAS (AB2000 -407)
47
48 Brenner moved to adopt.
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 19
1
2 Motion carried unanimously.
3
4 7. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING
5 ORDINANCE, TITLE 20, SECTION 20.80.220 TO ALLOW THE
6 LOCATION OF PROPANE TANKS WITHIN FRONT YARD SETBACKS
7 WITH PROVISIONS FOR AESTHETICS AND SAFETY AND
8 REQUIREMENTS OF THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE (AB2000 -343)
9
10 McShane stated this was discussed during the special Planning and
11 Development Committee on December 19 and moved to adopt.
12
13 Brenner stated she liked the staff report better than the Planning
14 Commission recommendation regarding screening. She would rather see that
15 screening is required rather than encouraged. They are moving this to accomplish
16 a certain thing. She wanted it to say that screening is required unless it is
17 impossible for some reason. There may be a reason that it can't be done.
18
19 In the staff report, it showed that this was to be done if necessary. That
20 wasn't in the Planning Commission report. She wanted to see that they do this
21 when it is necessary. There is a lot involved with the fire marshal. If they approve
22 her motion, they have to have a hearing.
23
24 Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, stated the screening is just a
25 matter of a decision on whether or not to require people to screen a propane tank
26 or just encourage them. The issue was that the big, white propane tanks in the
27 front yard could be considered unsightly. In some rural areas, people don't really
28 care. They are 500 - gallon tanks.
29
30 Nelson stated they are about eight feet long.
31
32 Goodwin stated they are not huge tanks. They are the standard small
33 propane tank that people have in their yard. They are generally in the back or side
34 yard now. She didn't think it would be a big deal to put a few shrubs in front of
35 them. The Planning Commission didn't think it was necessary to require people to
36 have shrubs, and they may even cause a fire hazard because they are combustible.
37 Encouraging screening is just as good as requiring screening.
38
39 Brenner stated she wouldn't mind if that was the only thing, but she liked
40 that it be done if it is necessary. She questioned how big the setbacks are.
41 Goodwin stated the setbacks are set in the zoning code, and are generally 20- to
42 25 -feet, depending on whether the street is an arterial or collector street.
43
44 Brenner questioned how close to the road the tank could be.
45
46 Hoag stated the closest the tanks could be is 10 feet from the road. She
47 wanted to request that the ordinance be referred to committee. It's not just a
48 matter of an eyesore. It's a matter of it being a hazard. There was a truck that hit
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 20
a front -yard propane tank last night that caused an explosion. These things belong
in back yards. She understand that this came up because the Building Services
Division had a problem with some locations that do not suit themselves to being in
the buildable area. The Council should fine -tune this language. If the available
land area is insufficient to allow siting within the buildable portion of the lot, then
they could do this. A change like that would require a hearing. It is important to
keep in mind health, safety, and the value of neighboring property. She moved to
refer to committee.
Nelson stated all discussion had to deal only with the referral to committee.
Hoag withdrew her motion to talk more about the issue.
McShane stated the fire marshal would determine whether or not there is a
fire hazard. Other than that, it is a matter of esthetics. He was okay with a 500 -
gallon tank in people's front yards. His concern about establishing and requiring
screening was that it puts a burden on County enforcement officers to make sure it
is being carried out and enforced. He wasn't sure the County was ready to enforce
gardening.
Dawson stated she was concerned about spending an inordinate amount of
time on aesthetics and the question of safety. The fire marshal addresses this. If
the fire marshal thinks that something needs additional safety measures, he or she
will require a non - combustible wall or fence. The Council is spinning its wheels and
is taking unnecessary staff time that could be spent elsewhere.
Hoag agreed with the comments about dedicating staff time on tank
screening. However, if the Council makes it code that the owner can have it in the
setback area, the fire marshal is not going to say no. Whether or not that is a good
public policy to pursue is a question that needs to be resolved at the Council. That
is why they should refer it to committee so they can discuss it. She didn't think it
makes good public policy because the tanks could be within ten feet of a road. If it
is a lot in which it is the only place a person can put it, she didn't have a problem.
If people have a better place to put it, the Council shouldn't change the code to
make it so they can all be within ten to fifteen of the road. That isn't good public
policy.
She used to live in a house that had a propane tank. The company wanted
to put it in the front yard because it was the easiest place for the truck to go. If
code allows it in the front yard, it's going to be in the front yard all over the place.
If that is not the safest location for it, then the Council is encouraging something
that is not safe, and there is no good reason. The problem brought to the Council
was that there are some lots that just aren't suitable for it. The Council is solving
that problem by lifting every restriction and allowing everyone to put them next to
the road. That isn't a good idea. Instead, they should just solve the problem and
allow them only in locations where there is a problem.
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 21
1 Nelson questioned whether there was a requirement that they couldn't be in
2 the front yard. Goodwin stated they can't be in the front yard setback. They can
3 still be in the front yard.
4
5 Nelson stated the front yard is usually the easiest access. His concern about
6 trying to put language in there was that staff would have to make interpretations
7 on each site. That is not an easy judgement call without facilities being
8 constructed. Now there is a fair and equitable manner in dealing with propane
9 tanks. He has not heard that there is an issue with propane tanks by the
10 community.
11
12 Hoag stated a truck hit a tank last night. Goodwin stated that was a very
13 large tank in an industrially -zoned area. It has nothing to do with the 500 - gallon
14 residential tank.
15
16 Hoag stated that a truck can go off the road and hit the big tank, it can go off
17 the road and hit these. It still places the tanks within the setback areas of the
18 roads.
19
20 Brenner questioned whether the fire marshal still has the ability if the
21 language from the staff report is taken out. Goodwin stated she didn't see anything
22 in the staff report that said the tank had to be necessary.
23
24 Brenner stated that language is on packet page 341 in section 20.80.220(2).
25
26 Hoag stated that section only talks about the walls and hedges.
27
28 Brenner questioned whether the fire marshal has the ability to make sure
29 that, if there is a tank located, that it is safe. Goodwin stated the proposed
30 language on packet page 338 says that it can be required to be isolated from other
31 uses by a non - combustible wall or fence. If it was on a corner in a high- traffic area
32 and the fire marshal was concerned about cars hitting it, there could be a non -
33 combustible wall or posts there to protect it. If there was a concern about it being
34 too close to the house, the fire marshal could require a non - combustible wall
35 between it and the house.
36
37 (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side 8.)
38
39 Goodwin continued to state that the fire marshal has some latitude. The fire
40 marshal can't say no because it would be more pleasing aesthetically in the side
41 yard. He doesn't have that authority. He only has the authority to look at the fire
42 issue.
43
44 Nelson stated there is a motion on the floor from Councilmember McShane to
45 approve the ordinance.
46
47 Hoag moved that the item be referred to committee. Let them have the
48 discussion in committee. The fire marshal can't determine that it should not go in
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 22
1 the front yard setback. This is just talking about that the fire marshal can put up a
2 non - combustible fence between it and other uses. Please don't do this. It is a step
3 back for Whatcom County. They are putting a hazardous use within a setback.
4
5 Nelson stated the motion is to refer. Discussion is limited.
6
7 Hoag stated limiting discussion is done on tabling an issue.
8
9 Brenner stated they can't talk on a referral.
10
11 Dana Brown - Davis, Clerk of the Council, stated that discussion is restricted.
12
13 Motion to refer to committee failed 1 -5 with Hoag in favor.
14
15 Brenner stated it sounds that the fire marshal can require a brick wall if it's
16 necessary.
17
18 Motion to adopt carried 5 -1 with Hoag opposed.
19
20 8. APPOINTMENTS TO THE HORTICULTURAL PEST AND DISEASE BOARD
21 (AB2000 -326)
22
23 Dawson moved to appoint the four applicants to the four positions by
24 acclamation.
25
26 Motion carried unanimously.
27
28 9. APPOINTMENT TO THE WHATCOM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
29 (AB2000 -326)
30
31 Dawson nominated John Belisle.
32
33 Hoag moved to hold nominations in order to allow other applicants to apply.
34 This is for her district. She just got the information earlier in the day. She spoke
35 to a number of people who are interested in serving on this commission. She didn't
36 realize that they would do nominations during this meeting. It wasn't on the
37 agenda.
38
39 Nelson stated the motion was to hold the appointment to allow other
40 applicants to apply.
41
42 Brenner stated she was for having as many applicants as possible, but this
43 went out a long time ago. The application she saw didn't just come in. Two people
44 have applied.
45
46 Crawford spoke against the motion. He understood that the process was that
47 the time they advertised for the Planning Commission applicants came and went.
48 The Council appointed all of the seats except for the one seat that no one applied
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 23
1 for in District 2. The seat remains open until applicants come forward, with no set
2 deadline.
3
4 Brenner stated the position was also re- advertised.
5
6 Crawford stated they now have two applicants, and he wanted to go ahead
7 and vote.
8
9 Hoag stated it has been advertised for quite some time. That was not her
10 problem. If she had known they were doing nominations at this meeting, she
11 would have gotten those people to fill out applications by this meeting. This was
12 just dropped in on them. That is the problem she has. She was not opposed to the
13 people who applied, but she knows people who are interested in serving and who
14 she wanted the Council to consider. Out of fairness to them, this should have been
15 in the agenda if it was going to be on the evening's meeting.
16
17 Nelson questioned whether applicants are able to apply for the position
18 during the period that it is open.
19
20 Dana Brown - Davis, Clerk of the Council, stated they've been waiting for
21 applicants and just received applications.
22
23 Nelson stated the opportunity has been there.
24
25 Motion to hold nominations failed 1 -5 with Hoag in favor.
26
27 Dawson restated her nomination of John Belisle.
28
29 Crawford nominated Philip Cloward.
30
31 Brenner stated she appreciated what Councilmember Hoag said, but they
32 always advertise. They didn't just come in today. This is exactly how they always
33 do them. When the applications come in, they are scheduled for the next meeting.
34
35 Hoag stated that, in the three years she's been on the County Council, the
36 applications have been in the Council packet unless an additional applicant comes in
37 at the last minute.
38
39 Hoag voted for Belisle.
40
41 Nelson voted for Cloward.
42
43 Dawson voted for Belisle.
44
45 McShane voted for Belisle.
46
47 Brenner voted for Cloward.
48
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 24
1 Crawford voted for Cloward.
2
3 No one was appointed because of a lack of a majority.
4
5 10. APPOINTMENT TO THE SOLID WASTE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
6 (AB2000 -326)
7
8 Nelson stated there is one vacancy with one applicant.
9
10 Brenner moved to approve Robert French by acclamation.
11
12 Motion carried unanimously.
13
14
15 INTRODUCTION ITEMS
16
17 Dawson moved to accept the Introduction Items.
18
19 Motion carried unanimously.
20
21 1. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 20.04.092,
22 REFUND PROCEDURES (AB2001 -029)
23
24 2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2001 BUDGET, REQUEST NO. 1 (AB2001-
25 031)
26
27 OTHER BUSINESS
28
29 Dawson moved approval of the resolution supporting the creation of a
30 strategic process for future delivery of emergency medical services in Whatcom
31 County.
32
33 Hoag stated she preferred to hold this item until the next meeting. She
34 believed the memo from the Executive said it had to be done by the end of
35 January.
36
37 Dawson stated it didn't matter to her, since they just received it. It seemed
38 like a no- brainer to her. She withdrew her motion.
39
40 Pete Kremen, County Executive, said he would wait until the next meeting.
41
42 Dawson stated that in consideration of the letter received from the Solid
43 Waste Executive Committee, she moved reconsideration of additional funds, the
44 Council previously approved regarding the engineering position, and send the issue
45 to the County Council Finance Committee.
46
47 Brenner stated she is getting material together that may make it a moot
48 point. It may fix the controversy so there isn't one. She requested patience from
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 25
1 the County Council until the next meeting when she would have that information for
2 the Council.
3
4 Nelson stated the concern from the Executive Committee was that there was
5 not a need for the increased funding to be appropriated.
6
7 Brenner stated she was going to get more information and would appreciate
8 their patience for two weeks until she gets that information. It would resolve the
9 entire issue.
10
11 Nelson questioned whether that was a problem from the Executive
12 Committee.
13
14 Pete Kremen, Solid Waste Executive Committee, stated it's up to the Council.
15
16 Brenner stated she was the one who made the initial motion for the
17 amendment to the budget.
18
19 Dawson restated the motion to, in consideration of the letter the Council
20 received, reconsider the additional funds the County Council approved as it pertains
21 to the engineering position for the Solid Waste Advisory Committee, and send the
22 issue to the Council Finance Committee for further consideration. She didn't think,
23 based on the letter, that the County needs to spend this kind of money for that
24 position. She wanted to save taxpayer money.
25
26 Monsen stated the issue is before the Council now because the language in
27 the interlocal agreement between the County and the cities says that the action
28 taken on the budget can't be implemented unless the Executive Committee agrees.
29 The matter here is to reconsider, move ahead toward some type of arbitration, or
30 for the Executive Committee to reconsider. The ball is in the Council's court to
31 determine whether or not it wants to hold their position as adopted in the budget or
32 to reconsider an alignment with what the Executive Committee has asked for at this
33 point.
34
35 Nelson stated the motion is for reconsideration.
36
37 Brenner stated she met with Executive Kremen. She asked him if she could
38 talk to the Executive Committee. She assumed that would be scheduled. She will
39 have other information ready within two weeks. She still wanted to meet with the
40 Executive Committee. She was not invited to the meeting and knew nothing about
41 the meeting. She has information that the Executive Committee needs to have.
42 She believed the Executive Committee would not turn it into arbitration. There is a
43 lot of room for negotiation without it. She wanted to do that without bringing it
44 forward through committee at this point. It would be better to do it this way.
45
46 Hoag questioned whether it would hurt to wait two weeks as Councilmember
47 Brenner requested, and refer it to committee if it's not resolved at that point.
48
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 26
Kremen stated that was up to the Council. He would rather have a decision
at this meeting.
Hoag stated she preferred to have more information, but wanted to make
sure it was not hurting anything to do that.
Kremen stated they would survive. There is not an immediate urgency, but
they would like to resolve the issue as expeditiously as possible.
Dawson stated that scheduling it for the Finance Committee would push the
resolution of the issue. They can always modify or change things based on what
happens between here and now. If they didn't put it into committee, it would
definitely require additional communication back, after Councilmember Brenner
meets with the Executive Committee. This is a more timely way to go, and doesn't
interfere with what Councilmember Brenner wants to do.
Brenner stated the issue may not need to go to the Finance Committee at all.
She really wanted to meet with the Executive Committee and present some more
information she had. The issue would be resolved.
Kremen stated that it would be prudent for it to go to the Finance
Committee. That would not preclude Councilmember Brenner from the opportunity
to address the Executive Committee or anyone else. If the issue is resolved in the
meantime, then it would be a moot issue.
Nelson questioned whether Executive Kremen spoke as a recommendation
regarding the additional funding that was approved in the budget, as part of the
issues that are going toward the committee. He questioned whether Executive
Kremen would consider leaving the issue of reconsideration of the vote for two
weeks. Kremen stated both issues would be dealt with because they are melded
together. That is something that the Council has to decide.
Nelson stated the motion is to reconsider the approval of the $25,000 at this
meeting. Councilmember Brenner has some concerns and wants to hold that
reconsideration.
Dawson stated the motion is also to send the issue to Finance Committee for
further reconsideration, which could be brought back.
Brenner stated the committee isn't the appropriate place to put it. If the
Council wants to put the issue in committee after she presents her information,
that's fine. The Council should allow her two weeks to see if they can work this out
without bringing it up to the committee at all. She was not trying to make a fuss,
but it isn't going to be pretty if it goes to committee. They can deal with it.
Dawson stated the motion was to reconsider the additional funding and send
it to committee. If things change between now and then, it can be considered
then.
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 27
1
2 Motion carried 5 -1 with Brenner opposed.
3
4 Hoag stated she wanted to see that it be pulled from the agenda if
5 Councilmember Brenner is able to resolve it before then.
6
7 Hoag asked for clarification from the clerk. The vote on the last motion was
8 to reconsider their action and put it in the Finance Committee for further
9 consideration. She questioned whether the action taken during the budget is
10 nullified or if it is still in effect until other action replaces it.
11
12 Nelson stated they are moving reconsideration as well as putting the issue in
13 the Finance and Administrative Services Committee. There will be a
14 recommendation from that committee to the full Council on whether to reconsider.
15
16 Hoag stated she only supports moving it forward for reconsideration. She
17 wanted to make sure the vote just taken hadn't nullified anything.
18
19
20 REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS
21
22 Crawford stated they are working on trying to bring everyone to the table
23 regarding water provision for the Meridian School District. The school district had
24 not approached him, but Tom Schoen, the manager of the Deer Creek Water
25 Association, has a concern. He's experienced frustration while working with the
26 state Department of Transportation (DOT). They would get together to talk about
27 that on Friday morning, with people from the Planning Department.
28
29 His heart goes out to the Imhof family. He hoped and prayed that Bob does
30 okay through this whole thing.
31
32 Nelson stated that Bob was taken out of intensive care and moved to a
33 recovery room. That is a good sign.
34
35 McShane stated he had been attending the Surface Mining Advisory
36 Committee meetings and is pleased with how the committee has been operating. It
37 is a good group of people. They've been looking at the draft report from the state
38 Department of Natural Resources regarding aggregate availability in the county.
39 They may be asking for some direction from the County Council on how it wants to
40 proceed. They are going to have a presentation from one of the committee
41 members, who is reviewing that document. He'd reviewed it and has some
42 opinions. How they handle it will be a contentious issue.
43
44 Dawson questioned whether it would come before the Natural Resource
45 Committee.
46
47 McShane stated he might just have a discussion in the Natural Resources
48 Committee about it to make people aware. It is something they will need to do
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 28
1 something about. They won't necessarily need to reopen the mineral resource
2 lands (MRL) issue, but may need to take a fresh look at it.
3
4 Brenner stated there was an interesting editorial in the Bellingham Herald
5 that reminded her of growth management, regarding power needs, whether they
6 really exist, and why the server farms are being allowed to go in all over the place.
7 The server farms suck up a lot of power and may cause a lack of power for people
8 and industry already there. She wanted to see the County work toward a lobbying
9 effort with the state that, as part of growth management, power availability be
10 considered. She asked that a letter be written saying that there must be adequate
11 power available for a company who wants to relocate to the State of Washington.
12 She considered a discussion in Natural Resources Committee.
13
14 Hoag stated they could also refer it to the Utilities Committee.
15
16 Brenner agreed.
17
18 Nelson agreed to refer it to the Utilities Committee.
19
20 Brenner stated they received information regarding an attorney general's
21 opinion that privately run jails are not allowed.
22
23 Hoag stated she gave everyone that information. It was out of the
24 Courthouse Journal.
25
26 Brenner stated she sent a letter to Doug Erickson. She believed it was an
27 instance of the state usurping the County's authority. She didn't think it was right.
28 The County Council has talked about the option of having either privately run or
29 publicly run jails, and they hadn't made that decision.
30
31 Nelson questioned the County's authority. The authority is granted by the
32 state to the counties.
33
34 Brenner stated the state couldn't usurp the County without having some
35 thing that allows that to happen. This isn't one of them. The County does have the
36 right to decide if it is going to go private or public. This sounds like a political
37 opinion rather than a legal opinion. The only way they can find out more is to have
38 the AG give an opinion.
39
40 Nelson stated he believed the AG has a right to make that announcement.
41
42 Brenner stated it is being appealed. They don't know what it entails for the
43 County. She asked Representative Erickson to ask for the AG's opinion regarding
44 the counties. This is a big change of course.
45
46 Dave Grant, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, stated he believed the opinion
47 was limited to code cities.
48
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, 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
Brenner stated the opinion was limited to code cities, but the article said
that, it could affect the counties because there is a Cities and Counties Jail Act.
Hoag stated it came out of the Courthouse Journal, which deals with
counties.
Hoag referenced the issue of power availability. When she went to California,
she got to see the other half of what's been going on with the power surges in
prices. During the last price surge, more than double the number of plants was
shut down in California for non - emergency maintenance than is usual for that time
of the year. Because of that, the plants that were online were able to sell their
power for so much money that some of them had 400 to 700 percent profits for
that time. However, they've bit the hand that fed them. Deregulation in California
took away the power generators from the major utilities. They forced the major
utilities to sell off their generators to these middlemen. Now, these middlemen are
turning around and playing these games. Because of that, the California utilities
companies are both facing bankruptcy.
Brenner stated there might be an initiative to re- regulate in California.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 9:08 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
These minutes were approved by Council on February 6, 2001.
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
L. Ward Nelson, Council Chair
Regular Whatcom County Council, 1/9/2001, Page 30