HomeMy WebLinkAboutCommittee of the Whole June 27 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
49
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Committee Of The Whole
June 27, 2000
The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Council Chair Marlene
Dawson in the Council Committee Room, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham,
Washington.
Also Present:
Dan McShane
L. Ward Nelson
Connie Hoag
Barbara Brenner
Sam Crawford
Absent:
Robert Imhof
Dawson stated the committee would also discuss the I -99 litigation issue in
executive session.
Brenner moved to go into executive session for 45 minutes to discuss the
first item on the agenda.
Motion carried unanimously.
1. DISCUSSION WITH CHIEF CIVIL DEPUTY PROSECUTOR RANDY
WATTS REGARDING PENDING LITIGATION (AB2000 -018)
2. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE COUNCIL'S REIMBURSEMENT POLICY
(AB2000 -017)
(Clerk's Note: The first two to three minutes of this discussion were not
taped due to audiotape malfunction.)
Brenner stated a councilmember can make local calls in the office or at
home. She questioned the amount of the bill.
Dana Brown - Davis, Clerk of the Council, stated the amount of the phone bill
is approximately $140.
Hoag stated she gets 1,000 minutes for $50. If she ran up a bill of $140, it
means she was on for a long time.
Imhof questioned what a councilmember talks about for that many minutes.
Hoag stated she already pays for so much of what she does as a
councilmember. If she is conducting County business, her family shouldn't have to
pay for it. She can make her long distance calls on the SCAN card when she is at
Committee of the Whole, 6/27/2000, 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
49
50
51
home or in the office, however, when she is on the road, it doesn't do her any good
to put it on the SCAN card.
Nelson questioned how much money Councilmember Hoag spends on the
SCAN card.
Imhof stated Councilmember Hoag needs to manage her time.
Hoag stated she has no idea how much money she runs up on the SCAN
card.
Brown -Davis stated the SCAN bill averages $10 to $15 per month for each
councilmember.
much.
Hoag stated she is sure her SCAN bill is higher than that.
Nelson stated Councilmember Hoag is not even using the SCAN card that
Brown -Davis stated she can pull the bill and look at it.
Hoag stated she is using the SCAN card at home all the time. Her
constituents aren't long distance. If she is calling constituents and is conducting
County business, and the cellular phone can help her use her time wisely to be an
effective councilmember, she questioned why she should not be reimbursed.
Brenner stated that if all the councilmembers spent $150 per month, they
would end up spending a fortune. When they discussed this a year ago, they
agreed that they would use the SCAN card for anything that is long distance.
Hoag stated it wasn't about long distance.
Pete Kremen, County Executive, stated there are no long distance charges on
cell phones.
Dawson moved to limit the reimbursement for cell phones to $10 per month.
Crawford clarified that the motion was the phone part of the expense
reimbursement is capped at $10. It does not include use of the SCAN card.
Dawson stated that is correct. After $10, the cost comes out of personal
expenses.
Imhof suggested taking it all out of personal expense. When a
councilmember uses up his or her $1,500, he or she is done.
Hoag stated that means she can't go to as many seminars because she is
speaking to her constituents.
Nelson told Councilmember Hoag to prioritize.
Committee of the Whole, 6/27/2000, 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
49
50
51
Imhof agreed with Councilmember Nelson.
Hoag stated there is a difference here. They are discriminating against
anyone who lives out in that part of the district. They are saying all she can do
when she spends that time driving is just sit there.
Brenner stated that isn't true.
Hoag stated that it takes the other councilmembers five or ten minutes to
drive to the office.
Brenner told Councilmember Hoag to do her long distance calls while driving
in and out, and do the local calls when she gets to the office and at home.
Hoag stated she doesn't have long distance calls half the time.
Dawson stated that any cost over $10 per month for phone use would come
out of each councilmember's travel account.
Imhof stated they have seven people, multiplied by $10 per month. That is
$70. Multiply $70 times 12 months.
Brown -Davis questioned how many councilmembers use a cell phone.
Nelson stated he uses a cell phone, but he pays his own bill.
Hoag questioned whether the councilmembers have to submit their bills or if
it is just $10 that is handed out.
Brown -Davis stated they have to be submitted.
Imhof stated he pays for his own cell phone bill.
Nelson stated the County pays him a certain amount per year. He uses that
money for County business. He gets paid to do County business.
Hoag stated the total she pays for her gas, cell phone bill, and everything
else is more than she gets paid.
Nelson stated he has to drive to Mount Vernon twice per month.
Hoag stated she doesn't bill for the phone, only the calls. She gets the
County a good rate on the calls because 1,000 minutes for $50 is a heck of a deal.
Brenner stated it is not a good rate for local calls. Local calls are free.
Imhof called for the question.
McShane stated he didn't understand the motion and the amendment. He
wanted to hear the amendment first.
Committee of the Whole, 6/27/2000, 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
49
50
51
Imhof moved an amendment to the motion to take all costs submitted out of
the travel fund, and change the name of the fund to travel /expense fund. The
phone and travel would come out of that fund. When a councilmember's fund was
empty, then he or she is done for the year.
Dawson stated she did not accept Imhof's friendly amendment.
Hoag questioned who pays the cell phone bill for people in County
departments.
Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated the County pays the cell phone
bill for cell phones that the County owns. If people want to apply for their own
phone for their own use, then they need to apply for that and get approval from the
department.
Dawson asked the average bill. Desler stated he didn't know what the
average bill is.
Brenner stated it isn't about what the average bill is. This will end up being
expensive if they all did that.
Hoag stated they don't have the drive.
Brenner stated she understood that. They can't do everything.
McShane called for the question.
Motion to amend carried 4 -3 with Hoag, Dawson, and Brenner opposed.
Kremen suggested that the fund be renamed to travel and office expenses.
OTHER BUSINESS
Dawson stated they would discuss the I -99 litigation issue for five minutes to
decide whether to appropriate another $35,000 to the attorney. She didn't know
what other options there were. She questioned whether there were any other
options.
Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated the Council originally approved
$50,000 in expenditure authority and contractual authority to Riddell Williams for
legal fees in conjunction with I -99. They have a proposal from an attorney, Paul
Koontz, who indicated that it would cost about $35,000 more than the $50,000
already approved to complete the work and defend the County against some
counter - claims filed against it by Recomp. That will take them through some
judicial hearings by the middle of the summer or early August, unless they go into
some discovery actions that would be more extensive and the County calls in some
depositions that might affect members of the Council. If that is the case, they are
encouraging Koontz to not let that happen, then they can contain the cost to under
$85,000. If the court takes it to another phase, then they are looking at more
expenditures and budget adjustments.
Committee of the Whole, 6/27/2000, 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
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
Brenner questioned whether it is up to the judge.
Dave McEachran, Prosecuting Attorney, stated the motion now is for a
summary judgement, which should decide things one way or another. Recomp can
ask for discovery to support their motion or cross - motion for a summary
judgement. Paul Kundtz indicated that he would object to that. He anticipates they
will be able to avoid discovery. Discovery would involve taking depositions to
support the motion for summary judgement by Recomp. Recomp raised 17 issues.
Initially, they thought it would be about five. They are trying to get the motion for
summary judgement scheduled before the court.
Brenner stated that Loren Dunn made his comments to the Council based on
five issues. At that time, he said they would deal with the five issues. Brenner
stated this should be discussed in executive session.
Imhof stated this discussion is only whether to appropriate the money for the
attorney. It has nothing to do with the lawsuit.
Desler stated he would recommend that the Council adjust the budget
document today to allow the addition of $35,000.
Hoag moved to go into executive session. She is not comfortable with this.
Brenner stated the councilmembers may have questions.
Hoag stated the earlier executive session was about money. This is about
money.
Nelson questioned whether the Council needs to go into executive session.
McEachran stated they do if they are going to talk about anything related to
lawsuit strategy.
Kremen questioned whether they are in executive session.
Brenner stated they are not. Councilmember Hoag made a motion to go into
executive session.
Hoag stated the documents just handed out are confidential. If they want to
discuss anything on the document it should be executive session.
Motion to go into executive session carried.
(Clerk's Note: The audiotape of the vote count was unclear. Council Chair
did not announce the vote count.)
(Clerk's Note: Prior to going into executive session, the Council announced to
the audience for the regular meeting that it would immediately go into executive
session to discuss this item.)
Committee of the Whole, 6/27/2000, Page 5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
These minutes were approved by Council on July 25_, 2000.
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Marlene Dawson, Council Chair
Committee of the Whole, 6/27/2000, Page 6