Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinance May 7 20021 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Finance and Administrative Services Committee May 7, 2002 The meeting was called to order at 12:00 p.m. by Committee Chair Sam Crawford in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. Present: Absent: Dan McShane None Sharon Roy Also Present: Laurie Caskey- Schreiber COUNCIL "CONSENT AGENDA" ITEM 1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH COASTAL GEOLOGIC SERVICES, INC. TO PROVIDE FOR A PILOT STUDY OF SHORELINE REACH COASTAL PROCESSES FROM POINT WHITEHORN TO BIRCH BAY STATE PARK, IN THE AGREEMENT AMOUNT OF $22,370 (AB2002 -193) Paula Cooper, River and Flood Division Manager, stated this is a pilot study to evaluate coastal processes. The State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) requested the study. It's to look at the geologic process on coastlines to develop softer alternatives to bulkheads. The Flood Control Zone District Advisory Committee has taken a look at this, and recommends it because the methodology can be adapted to other coastlines. The advisory committee asked the consultant to provide a presentation of the final results. Roy asked if the area goes to the British Petroleum (BP) property. Brian Williams, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, stated they are looking at a discreet shoreline reach that is called a drift sector. The cell they are looking at is from Point Whitehorn north to near Birch Bay State Park. Roy asked if the study goes from the southern tip of Point Whitehorn toward the north. Williams stated that is correct. Roy asked how far inland they go. Williams stated they are trying to put together a comprehensive package to look at upland water management. They will study inland to at least a 200 -foot shoreline zone, and maybe further. They are looking for water management, wave energy, geology, erosion, and drift processes. They want to understands how a shore reach works within this drift sector. They Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/7/2002, Page 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. want to also understand where to use hard surface shore armoring, and where it is appropriate to use other materials. Roy stated the resources folks had a grant to train people to do a shoreline inventory. The Birch Bay community had a coastal zone management (CZM) grant. Some of that data may be usable. Williams stated he hoped this pilot would set the stage, and expand to the rest of the Puget Sound. Now, shoreline decisions for bulkheads are based on geology without considering upland water issues and wave energies. McShane stated there are eight to ten un- permitted bulkheads. Williams stated there are ongoing issues with whether or not bulkheads are legal based on when they were constructed in relation to the shoreline program. The real issues are the appropriate alternative when there are bulkhead or shore erosion concerns, whether the property is at risk, and whether the shoreline is critical to the health of that reach. McShane stated the project is a good idea. He is concerned with what they will do with the information. He asked what they will do with the information they find, and who will be responsible for any impacts they may identify. Cooper stated this project just came as a request for funding. The State Department of Ecology (DOE) and Planning Department have worked with Mr. Williams to develop this scope of work. They don't know what they will want to do with the information they find. They could develop a sub -zone. There are a variety of options. It will give the permitting agencies information on the correct fix for failing bulkheads, and whether bulkheads do cause harm. McShane stated his fear is that someone will think the County is subsidizing people who are already breaking the law by building un- permitted bulkheads and who did not spend the money on a geologic evaluation of the impacts to the shoreline. If the County does create a sub - district, make sure it is equitable. Williams stated this is a pilot project. They need to see what information it provides. They've contracted with Jim Johanneson, who is unique as a north sound coastal process expert in the area, and Hugh Shipman, who is the Department of Ecology's shoreline process expert. WDFW hopes to get feedback on whether softer approaches would be an acceptable or reasonable alternative to hard structures, such as bulkheads, in certain specific areas. If that's the case, they can talk about alternatives. People have their minds set on a hard structure. They want a guarantee that something will protect their upland property for 25 years. There are no guarantees with shorelines. When there are violators, WDFW has asked them to contact someone like Jim Johanneson to do this kind of analysis and look at alternatives. Property owners will refuse to accept the work that has been conducted, or they hire someone who doesn't have experience and who produces an unacceptable analysis. With the pilot, they are trying to set the study parameter by identifying the conditions that everyone should look at. They are also looking for a dialogue tool to begin talking about alternatives that may provide comfort to the property owner and health to the near shore beach environment. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/7/2002, 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 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Roy moved to recommend approval to the full Council. Motion carried unanimously. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION I. DISCUSSION REGARDING COUNTY EXECUTIVE PETE KREMEN'S ACTION PLAN FOR MAINTAINING A BALANCED BUDGET (AB2002- 169) Crawford asked if Congress decided on the amount of payment-in- lieu -of- taxes (PILT) funding. Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated Congress would make that decision in the fall of this year. There are three things to talk about today. One topic for discussion is their plans for future meetings on this issue. The second item to discuss is the rural sales tax. The third topic for discussion is about changes to the County buildings. The administration has been talking about budget challenges over the last few months. He hopes the Council and administration would focus on County operations, services, and those costs. Focus on results and performance targets. They are going to make choices on how to use the reserves, how to increase revenue, and how to decrease expenses. They are developing four classes of revenue over the next three or four years. They also want to develop a credible forecast of expenses. They are trying to focus on programs and services that may not be central to the core of County operations. There may be some things that are not as valuable to the citizens as they may once have been. There are a number of subsidies the County provides to people. The administration wants to look at how it might modify the budget and services in the future. Some services may become more like enterprises. They sell their services to people. That applies to some court operations, juvenile services, planning and development services, and parks services. They might want to look at managed competition for the services. The administration wants to look at performance management, set some performance goals, and ask County organizations to measure and report their results against the targets that are set. It may not be well received. Make services accountable to the Council and to the citizens. Those are some key issues they want to discuss. They also are going to try to reduce the expenses they have administrating the government. Modify the systems and activities to demonstrate compliance. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/7/2002, Page 3 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. 1 Crawford asked for an example. Desler stated the purchasing systems and 2 contracting systems is an example. Changes will be a time saver for administration 3 and the Council. The administration will monitor the performance over time. 4 Contracts up to a certain amount would be approved in the budget. They will 5 modify some if the County's business practices. They will use credit cards for 6 certain purchases rather than going through the purchase order process. 7 8 The administration will try to make better use of capital assets. They want to 9 target subsidies the County contributes to for many services. They want to 10 consolidate some operations. Look at consolidation as a vehicle for improving 11 customer services. They would like to see the justice system become more 12 effective and efficient. 13 14 The meeting next week will focus on accomplishments in the past and a 15 vision for the future. The presentation will be designed to build on the future based 16 on the successes they've had rather than focus on the problems. The following 17 week, the administration will set up a process for the Council to prioritize services 18 and set basic goals. 19 20 The next topic is the rural sales tax. Since 1999, the County instituted a 21 provision in State law that allows the County to take a rebate of the sales tax in the 22 amount of eight- tenths of one percent. Whatcom County Code chapter 2.10 allows 23 the County to use the rural sales tax money. The funds have been deposited in a 24 special County fund. They can only be used for public facilities, which the 25 legislature broadly defined. A recent attorney general opinion said that a project 26 must be broadly related to economic development, but the County has discretion 27 deciding how a facility will foster economic development, and may include many 28 different costs. Any public facilities they support need to be referenced in the 29 County's Economic Development Plan or the Comprehensive Plan. If a county 30 includes discussion or a reference to a public facility in it's economic development 31 plan or comprehensive plan, then the county has identified that facility as benefiting 32 the county's economy. The eligible costs for the rural sales tax funds may include 33 the cost of master facilities planning, rehabilitation, and construction of new 34 buildings. They have been constructing this viewpoint over the last few weeks. 35 The attorney general opinion provided a much broader view. The costs funded by 36 the general fund can be properly supported by this fund. The County can use this 37 fund as a way to pay for capital expenses. They plan to use this fund for civic and 38 criminal justice affairs of the community. In 2002, they identified $1.8 million in 39 capital projects for public buildings. As of April 30, 2002, the fund balance is $4.1 40 million. An additional $145,000 is credited each month. The fund balance will 41 stretch out another 23 years. The amount contributed will rise modestly each year. 42 It's not designed to pay for ongoing expenses. The economic activity of the 43 community is supported by things the County government does. People aren't 44 interested in moving into a community where things are not working. Given the 45 difficult times, look at what economic development means, and what it means to 46 make reductions in services. They have been focused on the use of certain kinds of 47 funds in a limited way. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/7/2002, Page 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Crawford asked if the $1.8 million in identified costs in the 2002 budget from the general fund are not new costs. Desler stated that is correct. The master facilities plan, which they planned to do in June, is an eligible expense. Because they lapsed some money from last year, the administration was going to ask for a supplemental appropriation to support that activity. They have not taken on yet some of the other projects they've talked about and that are in the budget. Crawford asked about issues surrounding the Civic Center building. Desler stated they can use this money or bond proceeds. Crawford asked how master planning for facilities is going. Desler stated they are negotiating with three firms to help the administration with many elements of how they address the future. They want to plan ahead 40 to 50 years, and lay out specific plans for the next 20 years. They will proceed with more detailed plans over next six to 12 years. The entire project and contract will come to the Council on June 4 for approval. The proposed contract will be for about $340,000. It begins to define the architectural work. If the County is going to spend tens of millions of dollars over the years, it should be based on a plan. The County has an aging infrastructure. The County needs to respond to how they address that in the future. Some of the structures have come to the end of their useful lives. They have to make a decision on what to do with them. (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A. This discussion was continued after the next item.) OTHER BUSINESS REQUEST FOR COUNCIL TO APPROVE OR MODIFY THE SCOPE OF WORK FOR A COMPREHENSIVE CONSTRUCTION AGGREGATE STUDY (CCAS) TO DOCUMENT THE SHORT AND LONG -RANGE AVAILABILITY AND LOCATION OF QUALITY MINERAL RESOURCES (AB2002 -192) Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, stated the Natural Resources Committee sent this item to the Finance Committee. It's about the 50 -year aggregate study. Councilmember McShane and Matt Aamot have been working on a scope of work. They need $30,000 to $50,000 for the study. Last year, the Council budgeted $15,000 for the study. The State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) was going to contribute $15,000, but they backed out. The study is mandated in the Comprehensive Plan to be finished by May 2002, which is not possible. They expect it will take about six months. The Council could change the Comprehensive Plan and say they are going to do the study in more than five year, or budget the money to do the study. The Port of Bellingham suggested that the County use the rural sales tax money to do the study, but she didn't think the study would be eligible for funding from that source because it's not a capital facility. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/7/2002, Page 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated the general fund would be the natural source of support, if this were important to the Council. It may not meet the elements of the rural sales tax requirements. Crawford asked about using the road fund or flood fund monies, since it is gravel - related. He is not inclined to use general fund dollars for this right now. The money doesn't exist in the general fund. They are talking about reserve fund dollars. Desler stated it would mean a transfer of reserves to pay for something like this. The road fund may be able to pay for part of it. It depends on the scope of the project. The key issue is whether the County wants to buy the kind of information that may come out of this study. If it does, then the administration can provide options for where the funding can come from. Crawford stated the information would provide considerable value to the planning process. They are talking about planning for the future of their mineral resources. They have already allocated $15,000. They may be able to justify funding another certain percentage of the cost from the road fund. Goodwin stated she can work with the Public Works Department to determine the percentage of the overall gravel in the County that is used on roads. The $15,000 was budgeted last year, but was not spent. The money lapsed at the end of the year, and went back into the general fund. It is not included in their budget for this year. Desler stated that if the study is a priority, the administration could rework the scope of work by this afternoon. Crawford stated he is comfortable allocating the original $15,000 to the project, but would want to find another source for the remaining amount. Roy stated that the Natural Resources Committee approved the scope earlier. There is Council support for it. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION 1. DISCUSSION REGARDING COUNTY EXECUTIVE PETE KREMEN'S ACTION PLAN FOR MAINTAINING A BALANCED BUDGET (AB2002- 169) (Continued from above.) Desler stated the administration, in advance of the master facilities planning project, has been trying to modify how they use some of their existing buildings and how to use the buildings more effectively. The master facilities planning will take ten to twelve months, there will be some architectural work done, and then the County will have to make some decisions. To make any significant changes, it will take two to four years. There are specific things the County can do to make things a bit more efficient. The administration desires to reduce the County's lease Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/7/2002, 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 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. cost. At the end of next winter, the current State Street lease will expire. Rather than seek to extend that lease, they prefer to use existing buildings in most effective way possible. The County has a building on Forest Street. The plan is to move some of Health Department staff from Girard Street to the top floor at Forest Street and move the Cooperative Extension programs downstairs to first floor at Forest Street. The Environmental Health Division and Substance Abuse Division will be at Forest Street. The third floor of the Civic Center is vacant. They will move other Health Department staff from the Girard and State Street buildings to that floor of the Civic Center. They would move all the Health and Human Services Department staff out of the State Street building. Terry Hinz, Assistant Director, stated the administration and some of the field nursing staff would move to the Civic Center building. They would not see the public at the Civic Center. The Women, Infant, and Children (WIC) program and clinical staff would be at Girard Street. Desler stated there are modest costs associated with modifying the third floor of the Civic Center building. There is an awkward situation with the Public Defender's Office. Some staff is on fourth floor of Civic Center building. The administration would like to bring that staff back into the courthouse on the second floor. They will modify space on the second floor to allow that to happen. The administration wants to move the Hearing Examiner's staff to the fourth floor of the Civic Center. The remaining space on the fourth floor would be another classroom for the Juvenile Justice Center. Crawford asked if the Alexander case is affecting the County. Desler stated the County is not in a position to add additional people for things. Caskey- Schreiber stated King County residents are paying more for their license tabs. She asked if that is an option for the Whatcom County. Desler stated there might be an initiative that would cap the license fees at $30. They will discuss the use of fees in more detail. McShane asked what has been planned for the rural sales tax money before now. Desler stated they hadn't devoted any time to plan for that money, other than to include an economic development section to the Comprehensive Plan. The Economic Development Plan will come to the Council next month. The Rural Sales Tax Committee will meet next week. ADJOURN Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/7/2002, Page 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. The meeting adjourned at 1:07 p.m. Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription ATTEST: Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Sam Crawford, Committee Chair Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/7/2002, Page 8