HomeMy WebLinkAboutCommittee of the Whole December 12 20001
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
Committee Of The Whole
December 12, 2000
The meeting was called to order at 6:15 p.m. by Council Chair Marlene
Dawson in the Council Committee Room, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham,
Washington.
Also Present: Absent:
L. Ward Nelson None
Connie Hoag
Barbara Brenner
Robert Imhof
Sam Crawford
Dan McShane
1. DISCUSSION WITH WATER RESOURCES MANAGER BRUCE ROLL
REGARDING WRIA DECISION SUPPORT (AB2000 -132)
Bruce Roll, Water Resources Manager, stated one of the pieces they are
pushing through the Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) technical assessment
portion is the decision support system (DSS), which is a computer based modeling
system that incorporates all the data and components of the WRIA assessment
pieces into a system where they can run different scenarios. Their ability to
develop a DSS that meets their needs is dependent upon the process developing
the specific questions that need to be answered related to the WRIA so the
corresponding models could be generated and data could be collected. The Council
received an example of the DSS worksheet that they are working with in all the
caucuses, so they can identify the specific expectations or questions they wanted
answered by the DSS. The County Water Team is meeting the next day to begin
putting together ideas, based on the previous data that has been collected through
the other WRIA initiatives, so they can bring the ideas back to the Council in
January for consideration. This is only for their information. The Council can
expect the staff to have some drafts from the team in early January. Their goal is
to flush out the areas where they commonly agree that the DSS needs to address.
John Sproul, Watershed Program Specialist, handed out the worksheet that
was passed around to the caucuses and other agencies. The idea of the solutions,
which have to come up in the next year, will come from the watershed
management plan to make recommendations for those solutions. The DSS is going
to be a major tool. They will speak into the microphone of the smart computer,
which will come up with some recommendations that might be appropriate in the
plan.
Nelson questioned who programmed the computers. Sproul stated the Utah
State University (USU) people would do the modeling and integrate all the different
pieces. They will be the structural modelers and programmers.
Committee of the Whole, 12/12/2000, 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
Roll stated the goal in having a DSS administer, requested through the
budget's additional service request (ASR), was to work directly with the USU people
during the development of this DSS. It would add a local resource that could
sustain the DSS once it is developed. USU is charged to develop and deliver a
product. At the same time, he is working to make sure there is a resource that can
sustain the system in the long haul.
Nelson questioned whether the DSS would go through the Planning Unit
before it is unveiled. Roll stated it would.
(Clerk's Note: Councilmember Imhof arrived.)
Sproul stated the pieces that are part of the DSS tool are going to help them
make recommendations that are incorporated into the Watershed Management
Plan. Those tools will be built by USU, but has to incorporate all the information for
all the questions that they want to ask. All the caucuses and Planning Unit will use
the worksheet to determine what the issues and possible solutions are. Each
worksheet would address a particular issue and possible solutions. The questions
need to be structured in a way that the programmers could put them into the
computer.
Brenner asked if structuring the questions could force them to alter the
direction. Sproul stated it forces them to be disciplined in what the priorities are.
It is an adaptive management process, and they can make revisions as they go.
Roll stated the DSS would be a version one. Other versions will be added as
more questions are asked. In this initial exercise, corresponding models may need
to be developed.
Nelson questioned how specific the model would be. Roll stated it can be
very specific.
Sproul stated there are numerous models.
Nelson questioned how specific the model could work geographically. Sproul
stated it could be very specific.
Nelson stated it depends on the data inputted. He questioned whether USU
would develop the program to allow data input that is very specific. Sproul stated
they absolutely would. That is a critical point. This exercise is to let the Council
know that the Water Team is looking at a history of water issues over the last ten
years, as they've been articulated. The DSS worksheet guide is the details of what
each component means. There are four parts:
1) description of the problem. This identifies the description of the problem
and who the decision - makers are.
2) management alternatives, specifically what is happening now and what
the influences are.
Committee of the Whole, 12/12/2000, 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
Nelson questioned whether there will be regulations in section one. Sproul
stated yes. Regulations might go into Part II, the management alternatives, where
it describes the initial conditions and background conditions. Management
alternatives ask what specific actions can take place to resolve a specific question.
Brenner questioned whether it would be possible to come with eighteen
programs, one for each caucus. Sproul stated there would be eighteen sets of
questions and worksheets.
Brenner stated there might be commonalties.
Nelson stated that was the intent.
Sproul stated they are hoping to have a prioritization where there is a
general consensus among the caucuses. They can't do everything, everywhere in
the first two or three years. If they can get some commonalty about where and
what to address first, it would be a win -win situation. That is what this exercise is
trying to do.
Nelson asked for an example of a problem. Sproul stated one example
might be insufficient water in a particular region for industrial development.
Solutions could be proposed and developed. The computer would also be able to
recommend who would be affected, who the decision - makers would be, and
associated costs. There is a wealth of information that is already out there.
Hoag questioned what the staff is asking from the Council right now. Sproul
stated it is a brief.
Hoag questioned what the Planning Unit had to say about the amended
stage II water rights review. Roll stated the Planning Unit accepted the
amendment and brought it forward. It was passed unanimously. He will forward
copies of the final document. They accepted all the suggestions brought forward by
the County Council.
Sproul stated the last two pieces include:
3) assessment needs, which include the performance measures and the
details on how they would evaluate the success and effectiveness.
4) model choices, which is not something that the staff can do. It comes
from the technical recommendations from Utah State University, as it
relates to what models would be most appropriate. The DSS would bring
all the models together.
The computer is not artificial intelligence, but it is more than just a normal
computer. It integrates the relational databases, geographical information
systems, and complex models in a way that is very interactive and fairly
complicated.
Committee of the Whole, 12/12/2000, 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
47
48
Nelson questioned whether it would operate on a normal personal computer
(PC). Sproul stated it would service through on a normal PC. It would have a
database center that it would draw from. It could be networked.
Nelson questioned whether it could be distributed community -wide. Sproul
stated it could.
Roll stated initially, they had a long discussion about the type of program.
The initial preference was to use a Microsoft Access backbone to drive the process.
The beauty of that is that they will have the ability to modify the program as they
need to. He anticipated that in a few years, they will need to modify the program
to go to a different type, such as an Oracle -based system, which are much larger
and capable of using vast amounts of information. Initially, it would be a user -
friendly system that is capable of using the existing data. In a few years, the data
may become so large that they have to go to a different program.
Nelson stated they could have dual programs.
Hoag questioned whether this is already funded. Sproul stated it is.
Sproul stated other caucuses are pursuing the same exercise. The
facilitators have been interfacing with the Planning Unit and have built a trust.
They've been invited to the caucus meetings. The Council will also see thoughts
from the County staff and Water Team in January.
Roll stated some water resources contracts are up for renewal. One is
related to coordinating the shellfish, while they hire a new position. The second
one is the facilitator contract for the coming year. He was available to answer
questions.
Hoag stated Chris Woodward is currently coordinating the shellfish efforts.
She questioned whether the contract before the Council at its evening meeting is
just an extension to May. Roll stated that, technically, it is not. They had to
change the funding sources from the Health Department to the Water Resources
Division. They had to change the contract to a Water Resources contract. Ms.
Woodward is still the contractor, and it is a continuation, but technically it is a new
contract.
Hoag questioned whether Ms. Woodward is the shellfish coordinator
currently, and if she would continue to be the shellfish coordinator. Roll stated the
intent of the contract is to bridge the time interval that is needed to hire that
position that was approved. This contract is to provide continuity between now,
which is the end of Ms. Woodward's contract, and the point in time when they
would hire that resource.
Hoag questioned whether the duties of the hired shellfish coordinator would
assume the same duties that Ms. Woodward is responsible for now, and if Ms.
Woodward would become a candidate for the position. Roll stated that would
Committee of the Whole, 12/12/2000, 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
depend on the hiring process. A job description will be created, and Ms. Woodward
has the opportunity to apply for the job. In some ways, much of the work Ms.
Woodward does would be integrated with that position. The ASR clearly spelled out
his expectations and objectives that they want this position to have for this year.
There is going to be a renewed emphasis to address them in the context of water
resources and the larger marine issues.
Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated the hiring process would be a
competitive process.
Hoag stated she wanted to find out if they are looking for the same job to be
done, or if they are looking at an expanded role. Roll stated there have been two
job descriptions he's had to work on, and he hadn't gotten to that job description
yet.
2. DISCUSSION WITH SENIOR DEPUTY PROSECUTOR DAVE GRANT
REGARDING PENDING LITIGATION (AB2000 -018)
McShane moved to go into executive session at 6:38 p.m. for approximately
20 minutes to discuss this item.
Motion carried unanimously.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 7:05 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
Marlene Dawson, Council Chair
Committee of the Whole, 12/12/2000, Page 5