Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinance July 30 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 48 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Finance and Administrative Services Committee July 30, 2002 The meeting was called to order at 12:00 p.m. by Committee Member Dan McShane in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. Present: Sharon Roy Also Present: L. Ward Nelson Barbara Brenner Laurie Caskey- Schreiber Seth Fleetwood Absent: Sam Crawford COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL 1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2002 BUDGET, 8T" REQUEST (AB2002- 281) Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated the County Executive recommended an eight step action plan. One request was a net two percent reduction from all funds during the 2002 fiscal year. The administration asked departments to implement that request from either a reduction in expenditures or an increase in revenues. Proposals have come forward to the Council for action and approval. This will be the first among many steps to follow to put the budget in a well - balanced situation. McShane stated Council received a substitute ordinance. The committee will work from that document. Desler stated it looks as if they are going to find additional revenue to specifically support the things that had been proposed for reduction. If they don't do this, the administration would be faced with eliminating them from the original budget proposal in June, and bring back a request to supplement the expenditure and revenue portion later on. The administration has found other revenues. Leave the existing appropriation levels as they are. The administration submitted an amended non - departmental section. McShane asked if the Health Assistant Director position is the same as the Health Information Administrator, which is highlighted in the substitute ordinance. Desler stated there was a mistake in typing the name of the position. That's all it is. Brenner asked where the found revenue is from. Desler stated the administration has been working with Alcoa in making a contribution to the County. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 7/30/2002, 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 48 The Executive will be prepared to announce the results of that to the County Council. They are not ready to make the formal announcement yet. It will fix some things and do some enhancements. McShane asked if that is the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) money. Desler stated it is. It flows through Alcoa. Alcoa has a choice of how to use it. Alcoa has chosen to support the County government. Brenner asked about the substance abuse specialist position. It is the kind of position they are better off contracting. There are substance abuse specialists in the community. There is an overabundance of specialists in this community. They might be better off contracting. Desler stated that in many cases they can and should contract the service. Whatcom County has an assessment program for people who come through District Court. For many years, the Health Department has staffed that effort with one full -time and some part -time people. Recently, the Health Department decided there is a better and lest costly way to deliver the service. The administration talked about it with the Council previously. As a part of the cost savings that is being proposed, the District Court felt that they continue to need to operate that program directly. The judges and District Court administrator advocated that they transfer the staff from the Health Department to the District Court Department, and adjust the revenues received to support that program, so it covers the full cost of the program. Brenner asked to see the statistics to show that the County is saving money. Terry Hinz, Assistant Director, stated one of the things that is being done with that program is to increase the fee, which will help cover the cost. The process will also be automated more to make it more efficient. Desler stated they are trying to have the cost of the service covered by the cost of the fees. That is part of the effort to make the service more efficient and meet the requirements of the District Court judges and probation staff. Provide a quality service so the people who are receiving the service pay the cost of the service. Brenner stated it is more cost effective to put people on contract. She would rather have a pool of specialists than one staff person. She doesn't like the idea of raising the number of full -time employees. Desler stated the administration explored the issue of contracting out the service. The Health Department is saying it is not part of their mission for the future. The District Court judges want Whatcom County to continue to provide the service. The judges want the assurance that the assessment that is provided is independent of any decision that might be made for treatment. The District Court staff said it can provide the service with a lower subsidy from the general fund. The administration decided it is a cost savings measure it wants to implement this year. The viability of the assessment is why they decided to put that position in the District Court. The administration will continue to explore opportunities and possibilities for contracting when there isn't a conflict of interest. The person doing the assessment and Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 7/30/2002, 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 48 recommending action to the judges should not be the same person or partnership that would implement the resulting services for the individual. Brenner asked if there is language the County can put in a contract to prevent that from happening. The person would have to recuse himself or herself. Desler stated the District Court judges feel strongly about keeping the position in District Court. Nelson stated this has been an issue he's argued about for years. It's gone through the Public Health Advisory Committee. The District Court has had a long- time desire, primarily from Judge Ross, to maintain or retain that service in the courts. This is more of a political issue, not an issue of what is best for the County or the client. They will never get a definitive answer, other than a vague argument that there is a conflict of interest. There is no reason that those who provide assessment can't be separate from those providing treatment. That's how it's done in many counties. He shares Councilmember Brenner's concerns. His other concern is about raising the fee to cover the cost. Many of these people, who require substance abuse help, aren't capable of paying. The question becomes whether the County will subsidize their care. This issue warrants a worthy discussion. They shouldn't be discussing whether or not the judges want it this way. They should be looking to see if this is the best way to deliver a quality system to the citizens of this county. Roy asked if their task today is to look at the program issues or the budget. They are looking at an aspect that isn't in the paperwork, which is the fee. Desler stated most of this proposal could be dealt with without getting into this issue. The administration would provide the information the councilmembers request. The savings that accrue in the program is built into this section of the budget. They will increase revenues by this transfer. The administration debated whether or not to contract for this service or let District Court do it. District Court won the debate. Roy asked if this is the forum in which they should make a change in that if they want to. Desler stated the adjustments for the savings are in the paperwork. The administration can withdraw that matter and discuss contracting, but he will need to make adjustments. If they would like to discuss this service, the administration will engage in that effort. The District Court will also want to be involved. Nelson stated this could be done without worrying about policy. They can do policy at any time. These funds have already been appropriated in the budget. If the money goes out of the Health Department, he assumed District Court would have to pay for it. He assumed they would have to cut a portion of their budget. They can do this through the budget process. It is an issue they need to explore. Roy asked if this is the appropriate time. They are here to talk about budget matters. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 7/30/2002, Page 3 1 Brenner stated it is appropriate. They are talking about a new position of a 2 substance abuse specialist in the District Court Probation department. If they think 3 it is appropriate to have it in- house, then fine. If not, now is the time to question 4 it. The fee will not save the County money. They are building a bigger County 5 government. She agreed with making adjustment for County savings. They should 6 not do this in -house unless there is a significant cost savings. 7 8 Desler stated that there is a Health Department reduction of a substance 9 abuse specialist I position. The movement of the position is over to District Court 10 Probation. They are not adding a position; they are moving the position. 11 12 McShane asked if the substance abuse service charge is connected to this. 13 14 Regina Delahunt, Health and Human Services Department Director, stated 15 that is the revenue that would come into the Health Department. The person who 16 receives the service pays it. 17 18 McShane asked if it is consistent that they've been getting $48,000 per year 19 in charges. Delahunt stated they were not as successful in getting the revenue 20 they predicted. The County has been supplementing for the program with general 21 funds. Because of the rearrangement, the employee would be moved to District 22 Court, the revenues would be increased, and the payment method would change to 23 collect more revenue. There is a cost saving of about $60,000 to the County in 24 making the change. 25 26 McShane asked if the Health Department was servicing District Court for this 27 service. 28 29 Bruce Van Glubt, District Court Probation Administrator, stated the District 30 Court was using 95 percent the service provided by this position. 31 32 McShane stated the plan is now to move the service to District Court. He 33 asked how District Court would generate more money by the move. There is an 34 issue of doing this in -house instead of finding a contractor. Van Glubt stated the 35 system in Whatcom County is the envy of every probation department in the State. 36 It is the best system in place because it is very streamlined. They don't get conflict 37 by using a private vendor. There are problems with monitoring a vendor. They 38 had these problems in this County prior to this system being set up. The vendor 39 system works, but not as well. The evaluators and agencies that do that are under 40 a lot of pressure from defense attorneys and various interest groups that would like 41 to see a particular outcome in substance abuse evaluations. The majority is from 42 drinking and driving offenses. There is a lot of pressure because the outcome of 43 that treatment plan will have a huge impact financially on the defendant and on the 44 time and effort it takes to complete that program. By housing the service in the 45 County government and being a County employee, it is easier to fend off the 46 pressure. They aren't dependent upon referrals from particular attorneys to make 47 their living. All the court cases will come out of District Court and go to this 48 agency. They don't have to worry about whether or not they will be able to pay the Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 7/30/2002, 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 48 rent or make particular attorneys angry. There is more stability by having the service in- house. The law allows for assessment to be done in the probation department. The Washington Administrative Code (WAC) allows for it specifically. There are special provisions in terms of licensure issues. The quality they've seen is much better than the quality from private agencies. The judges are happier when a stable agency rather than a private vendor provides the service. Brenner stated she's been involved in mental health and substance abuse community the entire time she's been on the Council, and before. She doesn't believe that the quality of the service is better in- house. If that were true, they would have to eliminate a lot of consultant and contractor position. She asked for statistics to support that claim. She knows that the judges would rather have the service done in- house. There is always an argument for that. There is an abundance of substance abuse evaluators and specialists in the county. She doesn't like the service being done in- house. It is a political decision. They've got a tight budget. Anywhere they can have good quality services without a County position is good. The Council can deal with this at budget time. Nelson stated they need to explore this issue more fully during the budget process. It will not have a big impact on the budget because fees will cover it. He would like to see an analysis from District Court that the service providers cannot meet the objective adequately or efficiently as they did in the past. He would also like to hear from the Health Department about whether this is truly an envied system. His greatest concern is assuming that the treatment facilities operate the same as they did 20 years ago. McShane asked for a cost comparison and documentation on the efficiency of the system. Van Glubt stated he anticipates no cost to the County. It will be entirely self- supporting. Brenner asked if the senior planner position is to coordinate the open space programs. Desler stated it is not. Hal Hart, Planning and Development Services Director, stated this is specifically related to the Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) and some Forest Practices Act issues that the County hasn't yet taken care of. This person would focus on the implementation of the WRIA planning process. When that is done, it will impact critical areas and other things. They need someone from the beginning who understands all those issues. Nelson asked the cost. Hart stated a full -time equivalent (FTE) employee position of a senior planner costs approximately $55,000. Nelson asked how much of this could be funded from the Water Resource fund instead of through fees. Hart stated they are considering raising fees. There would be a more direct linkage in the first eight or nine months with the Planning Department. After that, they are talking about improved protection to critical areas through the WRIA process. He proposes to pay through a combination of funds. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 7/30/2002, 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 48 Nelson stated they may need to bifurcate this position, and identify the role of this planner, which is to initially work on water resource issues. He asked why they will take the funding from the Planning Department instead of funding from the Water Resources Division. Initially, the planner will work more directly with the Water Resources Division. Fund from the Water Resources Division to the point where the planner becomes an implementer. At that point, the funding will come from regular government service. Desler stated the County has a choice. It can use the permit fees or Water Resources fund if there is a direct connection to water resources. At this point, the argument would be made that the Water Resources Division has enough on its plate. A full commitment of resources has already been budgeted for that division. The Council desires a better connection between the Planning Department and Water Resources Division. The administration identified funding that connection through fee revenue from the Planning Department. Nelson asked Mr. Hart's preference. Hart stated keep it as simple as possible. Nelson stated he doesn't want to see the County Planning Department slow down on other issues. He asked if that would happen. Hart stated at the peak of the season, they are up 38 percent and are taking 4 Yz to 5 weeks for a single - family home permit, which is much longer than he'd like it to be, but it's better than it used to be. Desler stated the administration supports reexamining fees. Hal Hart is doing that now with representatives of the building industry. A proposal will come to the Council to reexamine how they use fee revenue and how they use it to pay for the Planning and Development Services Department. Mr. Hart supports the water resources effort with this particular revenue source. Brenner asked for an explanation of where the money comes from that goes into the Public Utilities Improvement fund. Desler stated eight- tenths of one percent of the sales tax is returned to the County for public facilities. The administration will be advocating the use of that fund for things that are critical to public facilities. It is different than the Public Utility District they just established. McShane moved to recommend approval of the substitute ordinance. Motion carried unanimously. COUNCIL "CONSENT AGENDA" ITEM 1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID NUMBER 02 -60 FOR NINETY PIECES OF LARGE WOODY DEBRIS FOR A RIVER FLOOD DIVISION PROJECT TO THE COMBINED BID FROM BARKERS CHIPPING /NW CHIPPING, IN THE AMOUNT OF $116,532 (AB2002 -286) Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 7/30/2002, Page 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 Paula Cooper, River and Flood Division Manager, stated this is for an area on the North Fork of the Nooksack River. There is erosion as the North Fork migrates laterally across the flood plain closer and closer to Kendall Creek. It is eroding the high ground that controls when the water leaves the North Fork and starts flooding over. The Kendall hatchery is in the area. This erosion could cause more frequent overland flooding and problems at the hatchery. (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.) Nelson stated he thought there was already some riprap in that area. Cooper stated there is nothing there now. The proposed project is a new project that involves a new technique. She proposes to adapt the habitat structures. There are complexes of large wood chained to large rock that they put on the bank. There is no impact to fish during construction, which makes it easier to permit. As the river erodes, it recruits the structure and creates great habitat. It will provide bank protection. McShane moved to recommend approval. Roy asked if there is public interest here. She asked if the road is going to go. Cooper stated that if they don't protect the high ground, the river will flood towards Kendall Creek. The project will protect the hatchery, provide fish habitat, and they will learn about this new technique. Motion carried unanimously. 2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID NUMBER 02 -64 FOR THE ANNUAL DRYDOCK, REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE OF THE WHATCOM CHIEF FERRY TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE BIDDER, FOSS SHIPYARD, IN THE AMOUNT OF $109,378 (AB2002 -287) Roy moved to recommend approval. Motion carried unanimously. 3. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT AMENDMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND SECURITY SPECIALISTS PLUS, INC. TO PROVIDE SECURITY SERVICES AT GOOSEBERRY POINT, IN THE MAXIMUM CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $51,520 FOR A TOTAL AMENDED CONTRACT OF $103,040 (AB2002- 288) McShane stated there is an amendment to change the maximum contract amount to $53,620 for a total amended contract of $105,140 for two years. He so moved. This will approve the contract through July 31, 2003. It will add 15 days to the contract and a total of $2,100. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 7/30/2002, 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 48 Motion carried unanimously. 4. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND GILMORE RESEARCH GROUP TO PROVIDE TELEPHONE SURVEY SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $31,160 (AB2002 -289) Brenner stated the State has already done this service. She doesn't trust telephone surveys. There isn't a huge difference in the causes of behavioral problems. If they want to get that information, go to those people who have those problems and work backward. Janet Davis, Community Health Manager, stated behavioral risk factor surveys are done nationwide and statewide. The Health Department did a county - specific survey in 1996 to see how Whatcom County compared with the rest of Washington State. There are always questions about whether Whatcom County is different than other areas in the state. They established a baseline in 1996. Now, they are trying to see if there has been any changes as a result of things the Health Department has been doing. The environmental health questions are specific to this area. There is also the piece regarding overall mental health questions for which it isn't easy to go to the person with mental health problems. It is the only methodology available to get county- specific information. Brenner stated the North Sound Regional Support Network (NSRSN) does that. She doesn't like the idea of the County doing random calls to residents. They can interview the families of people with those problems to understand background causes. Davis said that if they take the information from a larger population based survey, and there appears to be problems, then that would be the next step to take. They would be asking a lot of bigger - picture things. Brenner stated the Health Department could contact the Rainbow Center for that information. They will have trouble getting people to do a 20- minute survey on the phone. It is an intrusion on peoples' lives. Davis said this is the same methodology used statewide and nationwide. It is a way to compare information because it uses the same methodology. Brenner stated not everyone will give straight answers. Work with the mental health community. Davis said they are asking other health related questions. Roy stated the survey is to get a map of this age group and the issues with this age group to see how the issues have changed. It's not a matter of finding out risk factors from people who already have those problems. It is getting a snapshot of community issues in this age group. Delahunt stated this is a roadmap for the community to put health programs in place. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 7/30/2002, Page 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 Nelson asked why the cost is $36.20 for 20 minutes. Davis said that is what the contractor bid. They have a way of parceling that out. Nelson asked for a breakdown of the questions. Davis said she could provide the questions. Delahunt stated the survey is multiple choice. The issues they will ask about include smoke tobacco use, diabetes, diet and exercise, access to health care, insurance provider, and environmental health. Nelson asked how they maintain confidentiality. Davis said the survey is anonymous. Roy moved to recommend approval. Motion carried unanimously. S. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND NORTHWEST INDUSTRIES TO PROVIDE EMPLOYMENT SERVICES FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES, IN MAXIMUM ANNUAL AMOUNTS FOR SERVICES AS SET FORTH IN EXHIBIT C (AB2002 -290) McShane moved to recommend approval. Motion carried unanimously. 6. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE LUMMI NATION INDIAN BUSINESS COUNCIL FOR THE COAL MINE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, IN THE AMOUNT OF $53,260 (AB2002 -291) McShane asked where Coal Mine Road is. Bruce Mills, Assistant Director of Engineering, stated it is above the town of Glacier. McShane moved to recommend approval. Motion carried unanimously. 7. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL BOARD AND THE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY TO PROVIDE AN OUTREACH PROJECT REGARDING THE PREVENTION OF SPREAD AND IMPACTS OF AQUATIC INTRODUCED WEEDS ON OUR STREAMS, Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 7/30/2002, 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 48 RIVERS, WETLANDS AND LAKES, IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $49,000 (AB2002 -292) McShane moved to recommend approval. Motion carried unanimously. S. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING COUNTY ROAD PROJECT NO. 901005 AND THE AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR STRUCTURAL OVERLAY OF SLATER ROAD FROM BNSF RAILROAD TO INTERSTATE 5 IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $422,739 (AB2002 -293) Nelson asked if they just did this overlay. Bruce Mills, Assistant Director of Engineering, stated they did not. They went from the railroad tracks toward the west. They have not gone from the freeway to the railroad tracks. There are a few roads where they will dig out and do depth patching. There is significant truck traffic there. Nelson stated there is a high propensity for accidents. He asked if turnout lanes would be provided in the area for businesses. Mills stated the City of Ferndale would install a signal at the Rural Road intersection, just off the freeway. Also, there is property northwest of the intersection that is having turn lanes installed. They will look at including turn lanes in the future. Roy asked if there is a project being proposed next to this where concerns have been expressed about flooding issues. Brenner stated it is west of that location. McShane moved to recommend approval. Motion carried unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS 1. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE MULTI - JURISDICTIONAL NARCOTICS TASK FORCE PROGRAM (AB2002 -267A) Deane Sandell, Undersheriff, stated they've done this grant for approximately 15 years. The Northwest Regional Drug Task Force was started to take advantage of federal funds that became available to work on narcotics issues. One of the criteria to access the funds was to form a task force. The original task force included San Juan, Island, and Skagit counties. That was not workable. The task force transitioned into a Whatcom County task force. It currently includes the Sheriff's Office, the City of Bellingham Police Department, the Border Patrol, and the National Guard. There are interlocal agreements with Customs, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), and various county police agencies. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 7/30/2002, 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 48 Funding has gone down over the years. The original task forces are still the same players. Currently they compete with 19 other task forces in the state for this funding. This year, the Whatcom County Drug Task Force is eligible for $118,000. When they looked at the budget, it showed the entire budget as $690,000, with $491,000 being a match. The reality is that, of the $491,000 that is matched, it is basically from the drug fund. From the drug fund, $193,000 goes into the Sheriff's Office budget and $134,000 goes into the Prosecutor's Office budget. When they combine drug fund money and burn grant money, $533,000 of that is money from either of those sources. Of the remaining $76,000, about $24,000 of the Undersheriff's wages are included in that because he administers the task force. There is about $10,000 of the accountant's salary in that formula for the grant. When they take those out and the Bellingham match, the remaining $35,000 or less is current expense money from the original $690,000. They've done that from the beginning. They have funded the entire narcotic interdiction with very little impact to the general fund. This year, they will spend less than $35,000. The drug fund is made up of forfeitures and fines locally and federally. Currently, the task force is made up of six individuals. They have a boarder patrol agent, a City of Bellingham police officer, a unit sergeant, and three additional officers. One is from Customs and one is from the DEA. This is a joint effort in Whatcom County. Caskey- Schreiber asked what exactly the $533,000 goes toward. She asked if they are paying the salaries for these different agencies. Sandell stated the burn grant hires a deputy sheriff and Bellingham police officer. The drug fund funds a task force sergeant, task force deputy, prosecutor, and legal secretary. They may not designate those monies directly to those positions, because they prefer not to tie the drug funds to the folks working the cases. The folks who do the drug fund don't like to see that. Dave McEachran, Prosecuting Attorney, stated it is perceived as a conflict of interest. Those involved in the drug case are not directly funded from the drug fund. Roy asked if the drug fund is a federal program. Sandell stated it is mainly a state program. They also participate in federal asset sharing from federal cases. The bulk of the money is from state seizures and fines from local courts. McEachran stated the drug fund was set up in 1975. It relates to a statute in State law that allows them to set up a drug fund. Sandell stated that over the years, they have tried not to spend general fund dollars on this program. Nelson stated he supported it at the last meeting. He is concerned about whether or not they are winning the war on drugs. He asked if the war on drugs is Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 7/30/2002, Page 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 being affected with this tool. There is a high volume of drug trafficking in this community and there are impacts from border activity. McEachran stated there is no war on drugs or any other type of crime in this country. That was a term created by the media. They are doing well in drug prosecution. Drugs relate to businesses. These people are business people. The drug sellers are from Seattle because the Seattle market is saturated. They are marketing a product and want to get people in this community hooked. The cases they are handling are very successful. People prize their freedoms above anything in this country. This is similar to a war for any other crime, such as theft. It is a constant battle. They have to be vigilant. Nelson asked if there are statistics to show the effectiveness of this program. McEachran stated the only method they are using now is prosecution. There are statistics on how effective they've been this year. Brenner stated she appreciated Mr. McEachran. However, they can't compare it to theft. She heard Presidents Reagan and Bush Sr. call it a war on drugs. This is a political decision on what kind of abuses people can do to themselves legally. All theft is wrong. McEachran stated it is in the political arena that they create crimes. Caskey- Schreiber stated she voted no on this so they could have a conversation on it, like they are doing now. She understands now that it is not funded much from general fund revenue. The match required for the federal funds is the reverse of what the County spends. She asked if the County would be better off spending the money a different way. Sandell stated they wouldn't have to do this task force. It's more of a means to track the program and know exactly what they are doing. Roy stated she is interested in treatment. This is about arrest and prosecution. She asked if there is a treatment part to this. Sandell stated that is what the Sheriff's Office does. It is in their budget. The burn grant funds, of which they get a portion, go to treatment and other programs. Not all of the burn grant funds allocated in Washington State go to enforcement. More than half go to treatment and other programs. McShane asked if the $118,000 all goes toward arrest and prosecution. Sandell stated it does. McShane asked if they've received other burn grant funding in the county. Sandell stated he didn't know. McEachran stated they've received High Intensity Drug Traffic Act (HIDTA) funds, for which they've set up specialty courts to handle treatment. There is an impetus for people to enter treatments. It is not a part of this proposal. McShane stated he once lived in a community that chose not to fight the AAwar on drugs." It was not a pleasant place to live. Abuse was rampant and out of Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 7/30/2002, 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 control. They don't want to do that. He sees the impacts to the jail and defense attorneys. He asked if drug fund money could go to the defense and general fund. Because of the location to the border, there are higher drug issues here. McEachran stated they are getting in line to handle the jail issue. This money is a drop in the bucket. He's been lobbying to get more money for the system. Caskey- Schreiber stated they've gained $491,000 for the drug fund from seizures. (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side B.) Caskey- Schreiber continued to ask if that money is used outside of the Prosecutor's Office. McEachran stated it is. It is primarily used for enforcement. They can free some up for the drug court, which they've done. They don't give it to defense attorneys or jail. It is very specific about what they can use it for. Caskey- Schreiber asked if the County could demand more federal money by not prosecuting the federal cases. McEachran stated that is not a responsible way to handle it. They can work with the federal government. The federal government has given the southern border more money. He is making the same pitch to the Department of Justice. There is an incredible amount of drugs coming in now, with the enforcement that exists. Without any enforcement, the amount of drugs would be amazing. McShane moved to recommend the contract. Motion carried unanimously. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 1:30 p.m. Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription ATTEST: Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Dan McShane, Committee Member Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 7/30/2002, Page 13