HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinance May 15 20011
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
May 15, 2001
The meeting was called to order at 12:00 p.m. by Committee Chair Robert
Imhof in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
Also Present: Absent:
Sam Crawford None
Marlene Dawson
SPECIAL PRESENTATION
1. PRESENTATION BY DEPUTY FIRE MARSHAL WARNER WEBB
REGARDING DISCONTINUANCE OF DNR FIRE PERMITTING (AB2001-
164)
Warner Webb, Deputy Fire Marshal, stated that open burning regulations are
going to change July 1, 2001. One of the current users and providers for the joint
fire warden program, the state Department of Natural Resources, is pulling out. He
provided an outline of the current burning program, and what is on the horizon.
The Uniform Fire Code and Washington State Clean Air Act require permitting of
outdoor open burning. Whatcom County is currently involved in a joint fire warden
program. Around 1992, the Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Northwest Air
Pollution Authority ( NWAPA), Whatcom County, Skagit County, and Island County
created a fire warden position. The intent was to have one person that would be
the representative to issue permits, answer questions, and enforce the laws for
open burning. NWAPA provided $43,000, a vehicle, and a cellular phone. DNR
provided the employee and related costs. Whatcom County provided the gas and
maintenance for the vehicle, a desk, phone, and a pager. Around 1995, DNR said
that they have to provide the vehicle, gas, and maintenance for their employee for
insurance purposes. Whatcom County provided just a desk, phone, and pager. The
County was getting a good deal. The public was not getting a good deal, however.
County staff began to investigate other programs. The public was not getting a
good deal because the state employee would be pulled out of the county if there
was a wild land fire in Eastern Washington, for example, which left the citizens of
Whatcom County with no one to contact. Staff felt that DNR needed to step up to
the plate a little more and run the program. In 2000, the Whatcom County Fire
Marshal's Office came up with a program, and they also heard rumors that DNR
would pull out of the program. The staff looked at options and decided they wanted
local control and to provide a contact with the 911 center so the center would have
all active burning permits on file. With the new program, staff closed the window of
time that was available for burning. The original DNR permit allowed a one -year
burn permit. Staff originally dropped that time to six months. Since then, they
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/15/2001, 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
dropped it further to two weeks or just the days one intends to burn. There are
fewer complaints. People are burning faster and hotter, with fewer emissions.
Under the new program, the warden now has to visit the burn during the burning.
The price went from $20 to $50 for a permit, based on the unified fee
schedule for a special fire inspection. The price increase was in line with a fire
inspection cost. He submitted the rules and regulations handout provided to all
citizens (on file). It is a checklist of when one needs a permit or not. He provides
these to all the fire districts to make available to residents.
Under the new program, they issued approximately 488 permits and
generated about $24,000 in 2000. In 2001, as of May 7, they have issued
approximately 110 permits and generated about $5,500. There is currently a burn
ban in place for Bellingham, Lynden, and their urban growth boundaries. The new
program has taken away some of the permitting that the County would have been
done. However, the County will gain those permits back once DNR removes itself
from the program.
They've laid out two options. Option one is a tri- county permitting agency,
which closely resembles the current warden program they have, and operates
under the rules they come up with. It is funded by Skagit, Island, and Whatcom
counties, and NWAPA. The cost to Whatcom County is $40,000. The County could
get part of the money from permitting fees. The benefit of this program is that the
program will continue to be run. They will have more control. One person would
handle North Skagit County and all of Whatcom County. One person would handle
burn and smoke complaints, do education and enforcement, and they would not
have to ask for an additional full -time equivalent (FTE) employee. The cost is lower
than the other option. If Whatcom County doesn't like how this joint venture goes,
then it could do its own program. The problem is that they lose a bit of control, but
not much, and the permit fees do not cover the cost of the program.
Option two is to run a burn program from the County. He would ask for an
additional FTE. It would be funded by the County, with money available from
NWAPA. He estimated that the cost would be $75,000 to start up. There would be
$14,000 from NWAPA, $24,000 from permit fee collection, and $36,000 would be
unfunded. The County would have total control, and they would have to add staff
that could provide additional help to him. The problem is that they have to add an
FTE. Follow up on citizen inquiries and enforcement take time. The program goes
away within five years, or sooner.
They could discontinue inspections of existing occupancies, have the person
dedicated to run the open burning program, and then cut back to inspection only on
new occupancy. The problem is that it may be a problem with the serving rating
bureau, which sets the insurance rates. There is currently a letter of agreement
that NWAPA has put forth to the County.
Hoag stated the agreement was distributed (on file). She asked about the
program going away.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/15/2001, 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
Julie O'Shaugnassy, NWAPA, stated state rule says that NWAPA must look at
alternatives every three years and work with counties and local jurisdiction to
determine whether reasonable alternatives are available. If alternatives are
available, then the alternatives would ban that type of burning. If there are
reasonable alternatives, then there is no reason for the permitting program.
Webb stated he believed that in five years the other cities would be looked
at, and some of the county may be affected.
O'Shaugnessy stated that is the second stage of the phase out. At the end of
2006, cities with a population of 5,000 in their urban growth areas will be the
second stage of phase out of outdoor burning. There is a three - tiered ban planned.
Hoag stated a problem with option one was that one person would be further
away. Webb stated it depends on where the current fire warden is today. The
current fire warden can be in a remote Whatcom County location, and be just as far
away as Skagit County.
Crawford questioned what the county is doing beyond permitting. He
questioned why the County needs to do anything. The County has ordinances
about allowing fires. There are 18 fire districts in Whatcom County that would
provide oversight. Webb stated the local fire chiefs were being neighborhood
referees, based on a County permit. It is like asking the fire district to do building
inspections. Local fire districts don't want to be the bad guy for the County's
permits, because they have to ask those same people for money through tax levies.
The fire districts have complained about not wanting to respond to these things.
Also, the program cuts down on calls from the dispatch center, which costs the fire
districts money. Also, they would end up with different rules for each fire district.
Mac McDowell, Island County commissioner and NWAPA board member,
stated that in 1990, the legislature passed a law about burning. Starting this year,
all outdoor permitting has to be permitted. Also, the responsibility falls on the
NWAPA or the fire districts. If a county is going to volunteer to take over the
permitting, it has to sign an agreement with the air pollution authority. NWAPA,
without additional funds, says that the only permitting it can do is the eight day
rule burn. That is not a very good program. The NWAPA agreement doesn't
address the agreement between the counties. The details of the agreement
between the three counties would be left up to the individual counties. The person
hired by the three counties would be responsible for issuing the land clearing
burning permits. The individual counties would be responsible for deciding how to
issue permits for other types of burns that are not commercial burns. The counties
would have to develop their own rules for that. Each county would contribute their
share of the funds, no matter what fees they've collected.
Imhof questioned whether Island County and Skagit County have already
made their decision to make an agreement. McDowell stated not yet, but they will.
They would hire one person to oversee their two counties if Whatcom County
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/15/2001, Page 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
doesn't join. The savings advantage of one county doing the administration would
be the housing and slight administration costs. Skagit County is centrally located.
If the counties do go together, the unincorporated population of Island County is
right at 49,000. They would not have to permit the residential burns of less than
four feet across. Skagit County's unincorporated population is at 53,000, and
Whatcom County unincorporated population is at 74,000. The cost percentage
based on population would be approximately 2 /7t"'s, 2 /7t "'s, and 3 /7t "'s.
Hoag asked the deadlines that the County faces. McDowell stated DNR would
be out by July 1, 2001. Someone has to decide who is going to be the permitting
agency by then.
Jamie Randalls, NWAPA Director, stated he supports the prototype program.
NWAPA volunteered to take the program from DNR, but they would require
additional funding from the cities and counties. The counties want the flexibility to
run their own programs. As the overseer of the outdoor burning program, as
identified in the Revised Code of Washington, they've put together the
memorandum of agreement that levels the playing field for the three counties while
still providing flexibility to charge fees. A goal is to reduce outdoor burning to the
maximum extent possible. NWAPA and DNR would train the two fire wardens that
would be hired on air pollution and fire safety. It is important to cover the three
counties in this approach. If the counties don't do anything, then burn regulations
fall back to the eight -day rule.
Crawford asked why they want to reduce burning. Randalls stated outdoor
burning creates a host of pollutants, mostly fine particulate, of which there is no
known safe level. There are impacts at every level. Open burning adds to that
load. In addition, it is not a countywide issue. It is a regional issue, or a local
issue. One person burning can impact a neighborhood, if located in a valley. In
addition, outdoor burning is mandated by the Clean Air Act to be reduced as much
as possible. Every three years, NWAPA is obligated to go out and look for
reasonable alternatives. NWAPA will work with other programs that are reasonable
in nature. There are costs to outdoor burning.
Imhof stated they would hold this discussion and decision for two weeks.
Randalls stated they need ratification of the program soon. Timing is of the
essence.
Imhof stated the next Whatcom County Council meeting is on June 29.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2001 WHATCOM COUNTY BUDGET,
REQUEST #4 (AB2001 -154)
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/15/2001, 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
Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated the administration advocates
that $21,181.89 go to the Parks Department photovoltaic project to place solar
voltaic material on the roof to generate electricity. The resulting impacting on the
grid would go back to the County.
Imhof asked the payoff time. Desler stated the Parks Department staff was
not present to comment on that question. He heard that the payoff time would be
about 15 years, but it could be quicker. The administration proposes to support
that appropriation with money in the off -road vehicle (ORV) fund. There is $29,000
in that fund. They will close out that fund. This was funding that has been there
from the early 1980's or 1970's. The fund has no relevant use for the County.
Crawford asked who proposed the project. Desler stated it came from the
Parks Department and people who had the idea.
Crawford asked the merit of doing the senior center over other County
buildings. Desler stated that was their proposal.
Crawford stated he was trying to justify this project given all the needs of the
County. Desler stated it is the recommendation of the County Executive.
Dawson asked where the money came from.
Brad Bennett, Finance Division Manager, stated the money came from the
gas tax. A portion of the gas tax is still dedicated to ORV's, and a few ORV's are
funded. This money is from in -kind services that qualified for ORV money. The
County provided all the services necessary to receive the monies from the ORV
fund, but the monies were not transferred out of the program.
Desler stated another supplemental budget request is for $32,950 in grant
funding to the Health Department. A third item is $17,000 in grants to Planning
and Development Services from the state Department of Community, Trade, and
Economic Development (CTED) to support the Birch Bay Community Plan. The
County previously appropriated $12,000 in last year's budget and $10,000 in this
year's budget.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
Desler stated the Auditor and Executive recommend upgrading software for
the Auditor's office. The cost would be supported by the Auditor's fund. The last
item in the request is a program specialist for substance abuse issues. There is no
appropriation associated because it would be covered with existing fund sources.
This is important to respond to some of the objectives that need to be carried out.
Imhof stated the program specialist positions were 1.5 FTE's for 2001.
Then, it was amended to two FTE's.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/15/2001, 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
Andy Byrne, Human Services Manager, stated he had 1.5 FTE program
specialists representing three half -time employees when they began the year. The
Developmental Disabilities specialist became full time, so the total FTE's became
two. Now it is increased to 2.5 FTE's.
Crawford questioned whether these changes are the result of efficiencies in
the use of the state funds, and whether these are not County funds. Byrne stated
that was correct. They are not using County funds.
Crawford stated language says that the no one other than the vendor is
knowledgeable with the Auditor's Office system. He questioned whether they may
see more of these additional budget requests because the County is relying more
on the vendor.
Shirley Forslof, Auditor, stated she doesn't expect any more requests.
Crawford moved to recommend approval of the supplemental budget request
to the full Council, except the $21,181.89 for the solar panels. He would like a
better explanation. He is concerned about the future economics of the County.
Motion carried unanimously.
2. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE WHATCOM COUNTY ESSENTIAL
PUBLIC FACILITIES ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AB2001 -162)
Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated they are starting to conduct
efforts to do master planning. The County is required to prepare criteria. That has
not been done. The County is required to use a committee to construct
recommendations for the Council. The committee would prepare criteria to use
when making choices about the siting of essential facilities.
Imhof stated this is needed across the county.
Dawson moved to recommend approval.
Dawson moved to amend the resolution to include four citizen
representatives instead of two.
Crawford suggested a friendly amendment to make one additional citizen
representative from the development community, and one from business /industry.
He wanted facilities planning done from the standpoint of what makes sense and is
cost effective. He was concerned that this committee is all government people.
Dawson accepted the friendly amendment.
Imhof restated the motion to add two representatives from the business and
development industries. Desler stated the Executive would support the
amendment.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/15/2001, 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
Hoag questioned whether pipelines and power plants would be considered
essential public facilities that this committee would look at. Desler read the law,
which specifies airports, state education facilities, state or regional transportation
facilities, state and local corrections facilities, solid waste handling facilities, and in-
patient facilities. There is no reference to pipelines and power plants. The law
refers only to those facilities that are typically difficult to site.
Hoag stated the language says, "essential public facilities such as...." That
list is not inclusive. Desler stated the administration has no intent to apply that
function to this group.
Hoag suggested that three of the four citizens be from each Council district,
plus an at -large representative.
Imhof stated that might be difficult.
Crawford questioned whether the Executive or the Council would appoint the
members.
Pete Kremen, County Executive, stated he would appoint the members, and
the Council would confirm his appointments.
Motion to amend carried unanimously.
Motion to approve as amended carried unanimously.
COUNCIL "CONSENT AGENDA" ITEM
1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
PURCHASE OF LIGNOSITE FOR DUST CONTROL ON COUNTY ROADS
FROM NEW SOLE SOURCE SUPPLIER CURT MEENDERINCK, IN AN
AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $55,000 (AB2001 -159)
Dawson moved to recommend approval.
Crawford questioned what happens when this runs out.
Dick Prieve, Assistant Director of Operations, stated the County will have to
go further south for the product.
Motion carried unanimously.
2. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING COUNTY ROAD PROJECT NO. 998002
AND THE AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF PARK
ROAD, SOUTH BAY DRIVE TO SR -9 TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/15/2001, 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
BIDDER, COLACURCIO BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION, INC., IN THE
AMOUNT OF $3,086,786 (AB2001 -160)
Imhof moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
3. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE BIRCH BAY
COMMUNITY PLAN STEERING COMMITTEE REGARDING COMMUNITY
PLANNING FOR BIRCH BAY, WITH WHATCOM COUNTY PROVIDING
$22,000 (AB2001 -161)
Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manger, stated the agreement states how
the County would participate in the Birch Bay Community Plan. Birch Bay has a
good public involvement program. The County is going to administer the funds.
Several people are contributing funds. The total budget of $127,000 might have to
be pared down. They now have $106,000. If this was agreed to, the County would
enter into an interlocal agreement with each stakeholder. This is a good process.
The County's role is to be the facilitator and administrator of the funds. A
consultant would do much of the work.
Crawford stated that people spoke on the Jackson change from a long -term
planning area to a short -term planning area. He questioned whether those
speakers who opposed the change represented this group, and if this group looked
at that issue and made a decision. Goodwin stated this group has not yet looked at
it. The rezone came in when the group was forming.
Dawson moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
OTHER BUSINESS
RESOLUTION REGARDING STUDY OF MINERAL RESOURCES IN
EASTERN WHATCOM COUNTY (AB2001 -158)
Dawson reported for the Natural Resources Committee. The national forest
lands would be available for aggregate when other supplies have been exhausted.
That needs to be studied. The County would partner with the state Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) at a cost of $15,000 to hire a consultant to study the Mt.
Baker quadrant.
Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated funding may be applied to this
program. The money won't be available until October 1, 2001.
Imhof stated the County needs to move on this.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/15/2001, 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
Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, stated the Comprehensive Plan
study has to be done by May 2002.
Dawson moved to recommend approval of spending $15,000 for the
aggregate study of the Mt. Baker quadrant.
Motion carried unanimously.
Jeff Monsen, Public Works director, talked about the vandalism that occurred
to cars at the ferry parking lot. Fourteen cars were vandalized on the Gooseberry
side of the ferry landing. One of the cars was stolen, and was later found
destroyed. There are rumors going around, but it seems kids took advantage of an
opportunity to do some damage. During the budget process, the County talked
about installing secure parking. They are still working out issues with the Lummi
Nation. Because of this incident, the issue was brought forward substantially
sooner. Because of the delay, he had begun to look at cost alternatives and
providing temporary security in the area. The ferry delay is substantially longer
since people are no longer parking their cars. It seems worthwhile to move ahead
with security, while trying to finish the work with Lummi Nation. Even though the
incident is unfortunate, it raises the issue. If the County moves ahead with security
now, they are talking about one to two months of the service at least while sorting
through the financial side of it. Security will start at $3,500 per month. They
would contract with a security provider. He is looking for Council guidance.
Imhof stated it is a good idea.
Dawson asked if the County owns property there. Monsen stated the
location where the parking lot is now is associated with the lease. The lot the
County is looking at developing is owned by the Tribe. That is where they are going
to put over 80 parking spaces. Today, there are 20 marked and miscellaneous
spaces in the vicinity.
Dawson asked if the County is going to get reimbursement from the people
using the parking spots. Monsen stated they are looking at cost recovery. It
relates to what other service adjustments are warranted.
Dawson stated that once they start looking at all these costs, they may
determine that it might pay to get a bigger ferry. Monsen stated that previous to
the incident, there was local interest in having security, but there was debate about
who would pay for it. Now, having experienced the backups to the boat, everyone
is willing to pay for security.
Imhof stated that they should get the security out there right away, and deal
with the issue of who pays later. Advertise on the island that security is available,
and people can start parking their cars there again. Monsen stated that there is a
window of time when the security needs to be present during the day.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/15/2001, 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
Imhof stated Mr. Monsen should deal with the security people about that.
Desler stated the administration is looking at future budget requests for
potential legal action, higher- than - expected legal cost with arbitration issues, a
murder trial, conservation issues, and heating and ventilation systems. They are all
virtually one -time expenses.
Crawford asked what is happening with the Civic Center. Desler stated they
are moving forward with adjustments to the first and second floors. Work is being
done to provide Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) access. On the fourth floor,
they moved in the team working on the murder case.
Imhof asked how many attorneys are working on the case. Desler stated
two full -time attorneys, 1.5 investigator, and one clerk are working on the case.
The administration would tap into reimbursement from a state program for some of
those costs.
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
Robert Imhof, Committee Chair
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/15/2001, Page 10