Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil 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 Regular County Council December 12, 2000 The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Council Chair Marlene Dawson in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. Also Present: Dan McShane L. Ward Nelson Connie Hoag Barbara Brenner Sam Crawford Robert Imhof ANNOUNCEMENTS Absent: None Dawson announced there was discussion with Water Resources Manager Bruce Roll regarding WRIA decision support (AB2000 -132). There was also discussion with Senior Deputy Prosecutor Dave Grant regarding pending litigation (AB2000 -018) held in executive session. Dawson also announced that there was discussion regarding a proposed letter to County Treasurer Barb Cory and County Assessor Keith Willnauer, giving them direction in the collection of the flood tax in light of a recent state initiative. Nelson moved to send the letter. Motion carried unanimously. SPECIAL PRESENTATION PRESENTATION BY THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMMUNITY NETWORK (AB2000 -017) Joanne Ernst and Diana Dawn, Whatcom County Community Network board members, introduced themselves. Ernst stated House Bill (HB)2319 was enacted in 1994. It was called the Youth Violence Reduction Act. Part of the $8.7 million that was set aside was used to create 53 network systems throughout the state. Whatcom County became one of those networks. There is also a network in the Lummi Tribe and Nooksack Tribe. The first year, a comprehensive community needs assessment process was done. A ten -year plan was drawn up. The main criterion for all the network funding was to Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 1 1 reduce youth violence. The way they do this is through programs that strengthen 2 the family unit, whatever that family unit might be. Each network is unique. Their 3 board consists of 23 members. Thirteen of the members are community members 4 and ten are fiduciary from different agencies in Whatcom County. During the first 5 couple of years, various local agencies were funded, such as the Northwest Youth 6 Agency. Three years ago, the board decided to get a little more personal. All of 7 the board members went into the community and began attending Parent /Teacher 8 Association (PTA) meetings, block watch meetings, and neighborhood association 9 meetings all over the county. Out of that came the community mobilization plan. 10 They worked in the communities to help established programs. 11 12 The six neighborhoods they picked the first year were Nooksack /Everson, 13 Ferndale, the Roosevelt neighborhood, Acme /South Fork, Kendall, Paradise, and the 14 Happy Valley neighborhood. It has been an exciting three years. They've had a lot 15 of programs going on. The documented outcomes include reduced social isolation, 16 measured by the increases in numbers and kinds of community activities that are 17 now happening within those neighborhoods. They've seen an increase in healthy 18 family activities, measured by the numbers and kinds of family activities that now 19 go on on a regular basis in those communities. They've seen an increase in 20 individual and community empowerment, measured by changes in people's 21 attitudes and feelings that they can make a change in their neighborhoods. From 22 May 1998 to June 1999, these communities actually empowered themselves to add 23 an additional 140 percent match to the network in money, goods, services, and 24 volunteer support. In this last year of funding, the network has worked to sustain 25 the efforts and will add more communities in the oncoming years. The programs 26 work. She was proud to work with the people on this board. They are always 27 looking for people to serve on the board. She provided her phone number for more 28 information. 29 30 Dawn stated she has been on the board since the beginning. It has been an 31 interesting ride. The state and federal governments wanted to see that the money 32 was used in different ways, on a local level. They have funded everything from 33 chess classes for young people to mobilizing communities that have matched their 34 funds 140 percent. There have been great successes. Two of the successes are 35 from the east county. The first town they went into was Acme, because they 36 proposed an after school tutoring program. The network funded that program. The 37 following year, they wanted to continue that funding because it was successful, 38 measured by rising academic scores of the students in that program. Computers 39 were donated to the program. As the network decided to do community 40 mobilization, it did a survey of Acme residents. At a 10:30 a.m. meeting in Acme, 41 they had 35 people attend to get input on their community. The survey showed 42 that several things were needed. It showed that teenagers had nothing to do 43 because there was no public bus on the Mt. Baker Highway. Acme also had needs 44 for after school daycare because parents working in Bellingham don't get home 45 soon enough to get their kids from school. The network only had seed money to 46 start this up, so it organized a local committee. The Acme community fund was 47 broadened to include the South Fork area. That committee created a community 48 center out of the seed money. Within less than a year, they created an endowment Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 2 1 of $75,000 annually. The center is now actively running in the South Fork 2 neighborhood. 3 4 Another success story in the east county was in Paradise. There were 5 different challenges due to different ethnic groups and language barriers. They 6 brought the entire community together to see how they can enrich the eastern part 7 of the county. They have special needs, which are very different than the needs of 8 Happy Valley and Roosevelt. 9 10 The community network needs the support of the legislative bodies and the 11 citizens. They are all part of the network. 12 13 Brenner questioned how people hear about this when the network goes into 14 the community. Dawson stated that when they started the community 15 mobilization, they went to the communities where they'd funded local programs. 16 The network also contacted the active people of Acme, posted a flyer in the 17 businesses, and contacted the school districts. Now, the state Department of Social 18 and Health Services (DSHS) is very active in part of this, so they are coming on 19 board with resources and people to also fund and fuel the projects. 20 21 Brenner suggested that the network contact the Paradise and Peaceful Valley 22 area task force, set up by the Sheriff's Office. Those people are looking for positive 23 solutions for the community. Also, the Sheriff's Office knows some of the Russian 24 families in that area who are having problems. 25 26 Ernst stated that there is also a Paradise newsletter that is translated into 27 Russian. Another outcome has been reduced calls to the Department of Children 28 and Family Services (DCFS). 29 30 Pete Kremen, County Executive, stated the task force used to be out of the 31 Sheriff's Office, but has been administered through the Executive's Office for the 32 last couple of months. He would be happy to provide any information needed. 33 34 35 APPROVAL OF MINUTES 36 37 APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE FOLLOWING MEETINGS: SPECIAL 38 COUNTY COUNCIL (BUDGET WORK SESSION) FOR NOVEMBER 7, 39 2000; REGULAR COUNTY COUNCIL FOR NOVEMBER 14, 2000 40 41 Imhof moved to approve. 42 43 Motion carried 6 -0 with Hoag abstaining 44 45 Hoag stated she abstained because she had been out of town due to a death 46 in the family, and did not have a chance to review the minutes. In addition, she 47 would abstain from voting on any other items that she was not able to review. 48 Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 3 1 Crawford clarified packet page 393, line 19. The chip - sealed roads have not 2 at all hurt his children. In addition, his point was that they were talking about a 3 policy change. It was more of a policy issue for the County. 4 5 6 OPEN SESSION 7 8 9 The following people spoke: 10 11 Robert M. Lock, 2786 Birch Bay Lynden Road, Custer, stated he would read 12 from the Washington Administrative Code, which governs the procedures of the 13 Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC). 14 15 (Clerk's Note: Councilmember Dan McShane left the room because of his 16 service on the Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council.) 17 18 Lock read from the section of the Washington Administrative Code titled 19 Geology. He then read a section from the application. The information provided in 20 the application is incorrect. A comprehensive research of the record, including the 21 draft environmental impact statement, the application, and the transcript, shows 22 that the record is deficient in all respects as to that requirement. That is disturbing 23 enough, but it is also alarming in light of Dr. Easterbrook's recent disclosures 24 following a five -year geologic study of the Sumas area. Dr. Easterbrook identified 25 four distinct seismic hazards that would apply to the proposed electric plant. Those 26 hazards are offset, liquefaction, shaking, and avalanches. 27 28 Mike Kaufman, 1620 Huntley Road, presented a packet of information to 29 each councilmember. He's asked for a copy of any information in the record that 30 has to do with seismic information. He has also been gleaning from the draft 31 environmental impact statement (DEIS) any seismic information. All the 32 information just came together. That is the information in the packet he handed 33 out. There is also a brief statement from Dr. Easterbrook on some new 34 information, and a copy of a resolution he put together, which needs some 35 alteration. 36 37 Diane Petty, 1376 Van Wyk Road, submitted petitions of residents opposed 38 to the Sumas Energy 2 (SE2) project. There are approximately 30,000 residents, 39 including Whatcom County residents and Canadian residents. The Canadian 40 residents would be impacted greater than Whatcom County residents. 41 42 Dean Rogers, 1712 High Noon Road, asked the Council to pay attention to 43 the seismic information in the packet presented to the councilmembers. This is 44 new information. It is not something that was dug up from archaic research. He 45 asked the Council to use its influence as interveners for the residents and get this 46 information to the EFSEC. The residents think this information is very damaging for 47 the Sumas area. It needs the County's attention. 48 Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 4 1 Bo Bumford, citizen, stated the petitions were collected by the gas group. In 2 Canada, there are a far larger number of petitions. There are about 13,000 3 signatures in Whatcom County. 4 5 He appreciated the difficult and time - consuming work that the 6 councilmembers do for the county residents. He recognized that almost every issue 7 is complex and demands a lot of dedication. Their issue is no different. He thanked 8 the councilmembers for their attention. 9 10 He spoke as a concerned citizen and member of Generations Affected by 11 Senseless Power (GASP). This group was formed to discover the facts about SE2 12 and inform the community. They represent more than 40,000 people from the 13 shared airshed, and are formally asking the County Council, as interveners, to 14 adopt the resolution requesting the EFSEC to re -open the record for new 15 information that was not previously available. This information concerns the 16 immediate area where Sumas Energy 2 is proposed to be built. The new 17 information is about seismological hazard potential for the area, which was not 18 previously known to the EFSEC. EFSEC is responsible for making a 19 recommendation to Governor Locke as to whether or not the plant should be 20 permitted. The new study was developed by an eminent group of local geologists 21 and seismologists, Dr. Don Easterbrook and Dr. Dave Ingebretson from Western 22 Washington University and Dori Kovanen from the University of British Columbia 23 (UBC). The study has been undertaken for the last five years, and is just now about 24 to be published. It sheds new light on the two previously known faults in the 25 Sumas area. He summarized the salient features of their findings. 26 27 One of the seismic faults lies directly under the town of Sumas. The other 28 fault lies a few miles to the south, at the base of Vedder Mountain. Between the 29 faults is a dropped block, which has sunk down at least 1,000 feet. The fault to the 30 north not only underlies the town of Sumas, but would also be directly underneath 31 the proposed 660- megawatt facility. According to this new information, they now 32 know that these faults are bigger and more active than previously thought. Their 33 proximity to the plant creates serious problems for the storage of large amounts of 34 volatile and toxic chemicals and liquid fuels. In the past, it was believed that these 35 faults were relatively dormant. The new study shows that this is not the case. the 36 previous assumptions of inactivity were due to the short span of earthquake records 37 for the area, which dated back only to 1964. Because of displacement evidence in 38 the fault zone, the relatively short time for these movements to have occurred, and 39 the fact that the entire Sumas area is underlain by lakebed sediments, the risks of 40 shaking, amplification of shaking, and liquefaction are greatly increased. The 41 possibility of seismic activity on the faults is unusually high, and an instantaneous 42 displacement of many feet is possible, making construction of large facilities prone 43 to serious damage. 44 45 This information should be of concern to anyone in the area. It should be 46 taken into account before the construction of any industrial facilities, especially 47 those with the potential of toxic releases and flammables. EFSEC has some 48 information presented to them in the DEIS. Certain other oral testimony may have Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 5 1 been provided, but they have no record of it. However, the new revelations by Dr. 2 Easterbrook and Dr. Ingabretson have clearly never been a part of the record, as 3 their disclosures were first made public after EFSEC officially closed its record. The 4 summary of the DEIS clearly states that there are three areas of controversy 5 associated with this project; water supply, transmission lines, and air quality. No 6 where are mentioned the concerns of seismicity, which is a huge area of 7 controversy that was previously overlooked by EFSEC. EFSEC should be made 8 aware of this controversy. The Whatcom County Council does not need to make a 9 seismological judgement. That is EFSEC's job. He asked the County Council to 10 adopt the resolution, and forward it to EFSEC immediately, asking for a re- opening 11 of the record. The packet of information includes all the information found 12 concerning mention of seismicity on the EFSEC record. Included in that packet is a 13 copy of the resolution they want approved. It asks EFSEC to re -open the record. 14 Time is short for doing so. 15 16 Dr. Easterbrook assured him that no one at EFSEC, including Councilmember 17 McShane, has been made aware of this new study. Dr. Easterbrook is presently in 18 the audience and is available in for questions. 19 20 Dawson stated that the County Council met earlier, and is one step ahead of 21 them. They discussed taking intervener status and working with the Council for the 22 environment, part of the state's Attorney General's office, to present additional 23 information on the seismic activity. She suggested that the County Council's 24 attorney work on the proposed resolution. 25 26 Brenner asked if Dr. Easterbrook would be willing to sign an affidavit 27 regarding his comments and study at no charge. 28 29 Dr. Don Easterbrook, Western Washington University, stated the work he's 30 done is research as part of the university. The state does pay him, and he doesn't 31 plan on charging anyone for anything. 32 33 Nelson moved to support intervention regarding seismic activity and request 34 that EFSEC re -open the Sumas Energy 2 record. 35 36 Crawford stated he would not support the motion. He read the record that 37 was submitted. His concern was that there is a timeframe going on, and an 38 ongoing amount of information could be presented as needed. He'd watched this 39 EFSEC process very carefully, and participated in it, and was satisfied with the 40 information that was presented. 41 42 Motion carried 4 -2 with Imhof and Crawford opposed. 43 44 Candice Ambrosio, 1712 High Noon Road, thanked the Council for making a 45 prudent decision to try and get this into the record. If it is important, which it is, 46 they need to look at it. They are siting a power plant, and need to have all the 47 information. 48 Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 6 1 Hoag stated the attorney for Sumas stated earlier in the day that a lot of this 2 material had been covered. In looking at the information just submitted, she found 3 the same information just presented. The record says there is an absence of 4 known faults, they haven't been mapped or inferred within the project boundaries. 5 The expert that testified said he was not an expert on earthquakes. 6 7 (Clerk's Note: Councilmember McShane returned to the meeting.) 8 9 Bob Wiesen, 3314 Douglas Road, Ferndale, invited the councilmembers to 10 take the Black Mountain Forestry tour. Some of the comments he'd heard from the 11 councilmembers indicate that it would be helpful for them to see what is happening 12 on the ground. The Northwest Ecosystem Alliance is a special interest. They are 13 interested in stopping logging entirely. The councilmembers have to take that 14 information from them with that intent in mind. The councilmembers should also 15 ask the Omak mill workers about how they feel about the Loomis Forest thing. 16 Regarding the Natural Resource Committee presentation, it was interesting, but 17 they didn't keep it going. People were sitting in the audience waiting to have their 18 turn to speak. 19 20 Regarding the private and exempt wells, it is an issue that is very important, 21 but the process the Council is going through in representing the public is not very 22 representative. The councilmembers are not giving the public enough input. If the 23 Council expresses an opinion to the state, it should be sure the majority of the 24 county residents agree. He had no problem with Mr. McShane representing himself 25 about how he feels about those issues. 26 27 Regarding the large trucks, he didn't hear about the issue until just now. 28 Those large trucks are in Washington State. The national rate is 80,000 pounds 29 and five axles. That is a normal semi - truck. Or, there are double trailers, which 30 are two trailers on a tractor, still at 80,000 pounds. In Washington State, they 31 allow trucks that are allowed up to 105,500 pounds. The Milky Way trucks all run 32 down the road at 105,000 pounds. They're hauling products to market in an 33 efficient way. They are very safe and effective. The Council should be careful on 34 what kind of a stand it takes on that kind of an issue. This group, who presented 35 this information, is backed by the railroad. All over the country, the railroads are 36 backing them because the railroads can't compete. They are not doing their job. 37 The trucks are. All the states around Washington State allow triple trailers. Oregon 38 had an initiative several years ago to eliminate triple trailers, because the public 39 dislikes them. However, the trucking industry was able to convince the public that 40 it was more to the public's benefit to have those trucks than not to have them. 41 Most of the information presented was not accurate. In Oregon, the safety of the 42 triple trailers exceeds that of any other heavy -duty trucks. Triple trailers are safer, 43 double troubles are less safe, and semi - trucks are even less safe. The reason they 44 are safer is because the trucking companies want to use them because they are 45 super- efficient. The companies put their best drivers in them, and pay them more. 46 The best way to get additional safety on the road is to have better drivers in the 47 seat. Federal statistics show that the car driver causes 70 percent of the accidents 48 involving large trucks and fatalities. Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 7 1 2 Pat Alesse, 4825 Alderson Road, Birch Bay, stated he came to the County 3 Commissioners in 1996 and testified that the County's assessed valuation per 4 capita has been dropping for the past 30 years. At that time, he felt that the 5 commissioners should look at it and do something. For the year 2000, the wealth 6 per capita in the rural areas has gone up $4,356, which is an increase of six 7 percent. In the cities, the increase is $6,292, which is an increase of ten percent. 8 It is still happening. There is a problem in rural Whatcom County. The County 9 depends upon property taxes to give services to the people. If this trend continues, 10 the County will have a big problem. The simple answer is that the cities keep 11 annexing the areas. However, they are doing other things wrong in the County. 12 13 (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.) 14 15 Brenner stated she didn't understand. Alesse stated that it is traditional for 16 assessed valuation to be greater in the rural areas than in the cities. The County 17 needs the assessed valuation per capita, which is eroding. 18 19 Brenner suggested that he talk to the Growth Management Board. They 20 can't put in any economic development in the county anymore. Alesse stated that 21 might not be the problem. 22 23 Imhof questioned the problem. 24 25 Brenner stated the cities are annexing every bit of their economic 26 development. 27 28 29 PUBLIC HEARING 30 31 1. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 24.06, SOLID 32 WASTE DISPOSAL STANDARDS, IMPOSING LIMITS ON ACCEPTANCE 33 OF INFECTIOUS WASTE (AB2000 -024A) 34 35 This item was withdrawn from the agenda. 36 37 2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING 38 ORDINANCE, TITLE 20, SECTION 20.42.150 TO ALLOW PUBLIC 39 HEALTH AND SAFETY FACILITIES AND ROAD MAINTENANCE 40 FACILITIES WITHIN THE RURAL FORESTRY ZONING 41 CLASSIFICATION AS A CONDITIONAL USE (AB2000 -392) 42 43 Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, gave a staff reported and stated 44 this item was discussed thoroughly at the previous meeting. It adds a provision to 45 allow public health and safety facilities in Rural Forestry zones. The exact text is on 46 packet page 463. In Rural Forestry zones, emergency - related public facilities would 47 be allowed as a conditional use. They don't want to allow general public facilities 48 such as schools and libraries, but they do need to have fire stations and road Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 8 1 maintenance facilities. The wording is slightly different than the wording that the 2 Planning Commission recommended, so they have to have a public hearing. 3 4 Dawson opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public 5 hearing. 6 7 Imhof moved to adopt the ordinance. 8 9 Motion to adopt carried unanimously. 10 11 (Continued below, after discussion of Public Hearing item three.) 12 13 3. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING 14 ORDINANCE, TITLE 20, CHAPTER 20.80.730, LAND CLEARING AND 15 20.97, DEFINITIONS (AB2000 -391) 16 17 Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, gave a staff report and stated 18 that this was discussed in committee and held in committee during the afternoon. 19 It is to respond to the state Senate Bill (SB) 5714, which requires two things. One 20 thing is that counties have a process for imposing a six -year moratorium when 21 people violate the Forest Practices Act, and for lifting the six -year moratorium. 22 Also, the counties assume jurisdiction over class IV conversions. The County has 23 until December 2001 to deal with these issues, but she wanted to deal with them 24 now. Several six -year moratoriums have been imposed, and the County does not 25 have a procedure for lifting them. The procedure is proposed in the code. The 26 code has better standards now for forest conversion and land clearing permits. The 27 landowner has to maintain buffers, and there are criteria on development 28 moratoriums, how they are reviewed, and the exemptions. The criteria would be 29 that it would go to the Hearing Examiner for a public hearing. There are specific 30 criteria on restoring the land, paying fines, and reforesting if necessary. There are 31 other requirements for exemptions, such as allowing a single - family home. 32 33 The Planning Committee is about halfway done working on it, and continued 34 it to a work session to be held on December 19 at 11:00 a.m. She recommended 35 that the record to be kept open until then. 36 37 Nelson stated he wanted to find information on Whatcom County Code (WCC) 38 section 20.97.085. It is a definition of "conversion." 39 40 Crawford stated it is new. 41 42 Goodwin stated it is on packet page 234. It is a proposed new definition. 43 44 Crawford stated he asked that question during the committee meeting. 45 46 Goodwin stated they are proposing to renumber the section. It is not in the 47 code yet. 48 Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 9 1 Dawson opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public 2 hearing. 3 4 Dawson stated that the public hearing and the written record will be left open 5 until January 9, 2000. 6 7 Hoag referenced the ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM 8 COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE, TITLE 20, SECTION 20.42.150 TO ALLOW 9 PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY FACILITIES AND ROAD MAINTENANCE 10 FACILITIES WITHIN THE RURAL FORESTRY ZONING CLASSIFICATION AS A 11 CONDITIONAL USE (AB2000 -392) on packet page 453. According to her notes, 12 the Council voted 6 -1 to strike Finding seven, but it's still in there. Goodwin stated 13 her notes didn't say that the motion passed. 14 15 Hoag stated the motion failed in committee, but passed in Council. 16 17 Crawford stated the motion failed 1 -6 in Council. 18 19 Hoag stated it needs to be checked out to determine whether the vote was a 20 passing or failing vote. 21 22 23 CONSENT AGENDA 24 25 Nelson reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and 26 moved approval of items one, two, and four through seventeen. 27 28 Motion to approve items one, two, and four through seventeen carried 29 unanimously. 30 31 1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A 32 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND COLLEEN ROGERS, 33 MARY ANN SHAFFER AND JAN CARLSON TO PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL 34 SERVICES FOR JUVENILE DEPENDENCY GUARDIAN AD LITEM FOR 35 THE YEAR 2001 (AB2000 -412) 36 37 2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A 38 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND DANIEL S. MCGREEVY 39 AND BILL COATS, TO PROVIDE CONFLICT INDIGENT CRIMINAL 40 DEFENSE FOR CLASS A, B AND C FELONIES FOR THE YEAR 2001 41 (AB2000 -413) 42 43 3. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A 44 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE WHATCOM 45 DISPUTE RESOLUTION SERVICES, TO PROVIDE DISPUTE 46 RESOLUTION SERVICES FOR THE YEAR 2001 IN THE AMOUNT OF 47 $3,000 PER MONTH (AB2000 -414) 48 Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 10 1 Nelson moved approval with an amendment to reflect a correct amount of 2 $3,272.00, for a total of $36,000 for the year. 3 4 Motion to approved carried unanimously. 5 6 4. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A 7 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND MATTHEW ELICH, 8 MARILYN I. MCLEAN AND PAULA MCCANDLIS, TO PROVIDE 9 PROFESSIONAL LEGAL SERVICES FOR INDIGENT PARENTS FOR THE 10 YEAR 2001 IN THE AMOUNT OF $60 PER HOUR (AB2000 -415) 11 12 S. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A 13 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND MATTHEW ELICH, 14 WARREN J. PAGE, STARCK FOLLIS, DAVID A. NELSON, MARILYN I. 15 MCLEAN, ROBERT D. BUTLER, THOMAS H. FRYER, TOM LESTER, TONY 16 S. PARISE AND ROBERT E. OLSON TO PROVIDE LEGAL SERVICES FOR 17 THE YEAR 2001, FOR ALL CASES CONSIDERED TO BE CONFLICT OF 18 INTEREST CASES FOR THE WHATCOM COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER'S 19 OFFICE FOR CLASS A, B AND C FELONIES (AB2000 -416) 20 21 6. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A 22 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND BRIAN ZANOTELLI TO 23 PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL LEGAL SERVICES FOR THE YEAR 2001, FOR 24 CONFLICT OF INTEREST CASES FOR THE WHATCOM COUNTY PUBLIC 25 DEFENDER'S OFFICE FOR CLASS A, B AND C FELONIES (AB2000 -417) 26 27 7. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A 28 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND WIZARDS 29 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES TO PROVIDE SUPPORT 30 SERVICES FOR PORTAGE BAY AND DRAYTON HARBOR SHELLFISH 31 PROGRAMS IN THE AMOUNT OF $24,335 (AB2000 -418) 32 33 8. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A 34 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND RESOLUTION 35 SERVICES, LLC FOR FACILITATION SERVICES TO THE PLANNING 36 UNIT AND SUPPORT SERVICES TO THE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT 37 PROJECT FOR THE YEAR 2001 (AB2000 -419) 38 39 9. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A 40 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND CHAMBERS & WELLS 41 COUNSELING SERVICES TO PROVIDE SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT 42 SERVICES TO INDIGENT AND LOW- INCOME CLIENTS IN THE 43 AMENDMENT AMOUNT OF $77,750 FOR A NEW TOTAL CONTRACT 44 AMOUNT OF $355,033 (AB2000 -420) 45 46 10. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A 47 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY JAIL AND HOAGLAND'S Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 11 1 PHARMACY TO PROVIDE PHARMACEUTICAL SERVICES FOR THE JAIL 2 FOR THE YEAR 2001 (AB2000 -421) 3 4 11. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A 5 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY JAIL AND THE VISITING 6 NURSES PERSONAL SERVICES TO PROVIDE INMATE HEALTH 7 SERVICES FOR THE YEAR 2001 (AB2000 -422) 8 9 12. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A 10 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY JAIL AND ARAMARK 11 CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, INC. TO PROVIDE FOR FOOD SERVICES IN 12 THE JAIL IN THE YEAR 2001 (AB2000 -423) 13 14 13. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A 15 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY JAIL AND THE WHATCOM 16 COUNSELING AND PSYCHIATRIC CLINIC TO PROVIDE PSYCHIATRIC 17 SERVICES FOR INMATES FOR THE YEAR 2001 (AB2000 -424) 18 19 14. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A 20 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY JAIL AND DR. VON HANKS 21 TO PROVIDE BASIC DENTAL CARE FOR INMATES FOR THE YEAR 2001 22 (AB2000 -425) 23 24 15. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID #00- 25 108 TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE BIDDER, TSI ENVIRONMENTAL 26 FOR REMOVAL OF ASBESTOS IN THE COURTHOUSE BOILER ROOM, IN 27 THE AMOUNT OF $39,697.35 (AB2000 -426) 28 29 16. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID #00- 30 120 TO THE ONLY RESPONSIVE BIDDER, TMT- PATHWAY FOR THE 31 SUPPLY OF A ROAD PAINT STRIPER FOR USE ON COUNTY ROADS, IN 32 THE AMOUNT OF $283,176 (AB2000 -427) 33 34 17. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID #00- 35 121 TO THE SUPPLIER SUBMITTING THE LOWEST BID FOR THE 36 SPECIFIC MATERIAL ITEM NEEDED FOR THE YEAR 2001 (AB2000- 37 428) 38 39 40 OTHER ITEMS 41 42 1. REPORT ON PRESENTATION BY NORTHWEST ECOSYSTEM ALLIANCE 43 REGARDING TRUST LANDS (AB2000 -410) 44 45 McShane reported for the Natural Resources Committee and stated this was 46 presented and discussed. The presentation was an interpretation of the state 47 Constitution regarding trust lands and the potential reforming of trust lands. 48 Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 12 1 2. RESOLUTION TO STATE LEGISLATURE REGARDING EXEMPT WELLS 2 (AB2000 -411) 3 4 McShane reported for the Natural Resources Committee and stated he 5 submitted a substitute resolution to address all the concerns discussed in 6 committee. There was no committee recommendation. He moved to approve the 7 substitute resolution, with changes. 8 9 He suggested amending language, "NOW THEREFORE BE IT 10 RESOLVED... supports efforts by the Washington State Legislation to allow local 11 Water Resource Inventory ReseuFee Area (WRIA) planning to control the use of 12 multiple exempt wells in areas identified with the WRIA...." Also, the final 13 "Whereas" statement was added in its entirety from the previously proposed 14 resolution. His concern was that they tie it into WRIA quite tightly. 15 16 Dawson stated the substitute resolution supports local review and local 17 control for identified problem areas. On the face of that, she supported the local 18 control. They are opening up an opportunity for legal challenges that could put a 19 financial strain on the County. Nothing in the resolution addresses any financial 20 impact. For that reason, she would not support the resolution. 21 22 Crawford questioned whether the use of multiple exempt wells in Whatcom 23 County has been identified as a problem. 24 25 McShane stated the seventh "Whereas" statement states they may pose a 26 threat to local water resources. The resolution doesn't say that it is a problem, only 27 that it could potentially be a problem. 28 29 Crawford stated he was concerned about defining a local level of regulation 30 on an issue that is very contentious at the state level. He was opposed to efforts to 31 try to preempt the state legislature in resolving this issue. 32 33 Brenner stated this is a resolution and has no force of law. It would never 34 preempt state law. The County requests that the state respects the local planning 35 process. That would not preempt the state from being part of the decision. In 36 general terms, she supported the first resolution. The substitute is much better. 37 They are talking about allowing control of multiple exempt wells in the WRIA 38 process. That is very important. They've discussed problems with people putting 39 in multiple exempt wells for a project to avoid dealing with the 5,000 - gallon limit. 40 That is not what a private resident would be able to do with his or her own well. 41 Two sets of standards exist now. One standard is for the private homeowner who 42 can only use 5,000 gallons of water, but certain developers create so much water 43 usage that it could hurt existing users, including private well users. She knew of a 44 case near her where that happened. This is an excellent request to the state. 45 46 Hoag stated she also supported the resolution. It is important to send this 47 message to the state because the state has been making movements to clamp 48 down on exempt wells, both in the legislature and in the courts. She offered a Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 13 1 friendly amendment, "WHEREAS, Whatcom County warms supports to protecting the 2 use of..." 3 4 McShane accepted the friendly amendment. 5 6 Hoag moved to amend language, "WHEREAS, the misuse of exempt wells 7 per...." The way it is worded now, it sounds like exempt wells themselves may pose 8 a threat. An exempt well, under Title 21, is allowed one per five acres with a 9 maximum of 5,000 gallons per day. That is not a threat to local water resources or 10 endangered species recovery. She wanted to make sure the legislature gets the 11 message that the County is trying to target a specific problem. She didn't want to 12 take a shotgun approach to exempt wells, and clamp down on them. 13 14 McShane did not accept the friendly amendment. It is judgmental in their 15 interpretation of the Revised Code of Washington. 16 17 Motion failed 1 -6 with Hoag in favor. 18 19 Hoag stated that, regarding financial protection, this is just a resolution. 20 They are trying to send a message to the state. She was concerned that the 21 County would end up losing their exempt wells if it tries too hard to protect the use 22 of multiple exempt wells in areas where there is a problem. The Building Industry 23 Association (BIA) may be cutting off their nose to spite their face. There will be a 24 move to protect those areas. If the County doesn't send a message to look only at 25 that problem, and not exempt wells altogether, then developers may end up losing 26 the ability to develop anywhere with exempt wells. She asked that this be seriously 27 considered. It is important to send a specific, focused message to the legislature 28 that says they want to protect the use of private wells for private well owners. Any 29 moves made on the exempt wells should go through the WRIA process. 30 31 Nelson questioned whether the legislature would understand what multiple 32 exempt wells are, if this goes to the legislature. The resolution should clearly 33 define multiple exempt wells. 34 35 McShane agreed. 36 37 Dawson suggested adding language, "WHEREAS, the use of multiple exempt 38 wells per RCW...." 39 40 McShane stated the RCW doesn't ever mention multiple exempt wells. It just 41 says exempt wells. The problem is within that one paragraph in the RCW. It 42 creates the exempt well provision. In creating that provision, which was well 43 intentioned, it created a situation that has been abused and taken advantage of. 44 That is where he was concerned. A little legislative effort would still allow exempt 45 wells to exist, still allow them to be used, and still allow them to be used for 46 multiple exempt wells for large developments that have problems getting water 47 rights. At least it addresses the fact that there are places where they have some 48 water quantity problems. Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 14 1 2 Nelson questioned whether the intent was to say that the process and 3 decision - making through the WRIA process should be done at the local level. That 4 was the testimony the Council heard. The state legislature needs to recognize, if 5 they are going to put an emphasis on local control and decision - making, that it 6 should respect the County's ability to determine how it preserves its water and how 7 it provides for economic development in the rural areas. 8 9 McShane agreed. That is the entire goal of WRIA. This is a way to ensure 10 that the County's efforts in WRIA are not undermined in some locations. 11 12 Crawford questioned whether the "Whereas" statements should specify 13 Whatcom County or the Whatcom County Council. 14 15 Dana Brown - Davis, Clerk of the Council, stated it should specify the 16 Whatcom County Council. 17 18 McShane amended his motion to refer to the Whatcom County Council in the 19 "Whereas" statements. 20 21 Imhof stated that once they begin complaining about a situation, given the 22 makeup of the legislature as predominantly metropolitan, it becomes easier for that 23 portion of the legislation to completely disappear rather than be revised. That was 24 his concerned for this. It is a lot to understand. The differences between them are 25 difficult to communicate. He didn't think anything would happen. Thurston County 26 has been working on this issue for years. 27 28 Brenner stated it would be unfortunate if the Council didn't do this because it 29 doesn't have faith that the legislature will do something. She suggested a friendly 30 amendment to include a definition of multiple exempt wells. 31 32 Crawford stated every legislator knows what multiple exempt wells are. This 33 is a hot issue. 34 35 McShane spoke regarding the legislative issue raised by Councilmember 36 Imhof. He didn't ask for the resolution lightly. He considered it seriously to make 37 sure it was communicated to the legislature appropriately. From what he'd seen on 38 exempt well efforts in the past, it has been a scorched earth policy of getting rid of 39 them entirely. In the research he'd done, he did not come across anyone else who 40 had taken the approach of tying it into WRIA. WRIA is new. This will give the 41 legislature an idea that there is another way of doing this, besides the scorched 42 earth policy of all or nothing. It can satisfy a lot of the concerns they have, and 43 avoid the fight of the state Department of Ecology not granting water rights. They 44 do have a chair from Whatcom County that sits on the Ecology Agricultural 45 Committee, who is Kelli Linville from the 42nd legislative district. She is very much 46 responsible for WRIA and would take this seriously. She may take some action on 47 it. 48 Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 15 1 Regarding the financial issues, the Council does have a responsibility to 2 protect the financial interests of the customary users of water in the county, 3 including existing and potential future water users. 4 5 Finally, they are not trying to preempt the state. They are asking the state 6 to help the County in making its local water decisions. 7 8 Motion to approve the substitute resolution as amended carried 5 -2 with 9 Dawson and Crawford opposed. 10 11 McShane thanked the Council for its support. 12 13 3. PHASE II '"Y" ROAD LANDFILL ASSESSMENT (AB2000 -430) 14 15 Nelson reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and 16 stated this will be held in committee until further information is received. 17 18 4. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2000 BUDGET, REQUEST NO. 13 19 (AB2000 -408) 20 21 Nelson reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and 22 stated an amended substitute was approved in committee. The substitute was 23 amended to remove the $12,000 request from County Auditor Shirley Forslof, for 24 the countywide recount that was not necessary. 25 26 Nelson moved to approve the substitute ordinance as amended. 27 28 Pete Kremen, County Executive, asked the Council to reauthorize the 29 spending authority regarding the motion approved at the joint County /City /Water 30 District 10 Commissioners meeting three weeks ago. Councilmember Nelson made 31 the motion. It was approved on a 4 -0 vote. They don't have the exact wording or 32 budget authorization to make the expenditure in conjunction with the efforts and 33 the appropriations from the Water District 10 Commissioners and the Sudden Valley 34 Association. The ceiling that the Council set was in the vicinity of $36,000, with the 35 expectation that they would purchase 63 or 64 lots. As it turned out, they 36 collectively purchased 44 lots, so the price was reduced. The budget authority that 37 he needs is in the amount of $23,584.03. 38 39 Nelson moved to amend the ordinance to include the amount of $23,584.03 40 to purchase the Sudden Valley lots as was requested and which would come from 41 the general fund. 42 43 Brenner questioned whether the County has heard from the City of 44 Bellingham about making this decision. Kremen stated he has not heard from the 45 Bellingham City Council. 46 47 Nelson stated they want to take densities out of the watershed. They are 48 working on this issue. He was not sure when they were going to do it. Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 16 1 2 Brenner stated the City of Bellingham has more revenue than the County, 3 and this is very cost - effective. It was three weeks ago, and the County has not 4 heard yet from the city about an issue they are as interested in as the County is. 5 6 Dawson stated the city would get back to the County. 7 8 Kremen thanked the Council for making this a priority. The expenditure is a 9 very prudent expenditure when they consider how many lots they are taking out of 10 circulation. 11 12 Brenner asked what happened to the other lots. Kremen stated they were 13 purchased. 14 15 Motion to amend carried unanimously. 16 17 Motion to adopt the amended substitute ordinance carried unanimously. 18 19 S. REPORT ON DISCUSSION REGARDING SUPPORT OF SAFER 20 HIGHWAYS (AB2000 -409) 21 22 Brenner reported for the Public Works and Capital Projects Committee and 23 addressed Mr. Wiesen's comments. To say that companies put better drivers with 24 higher pay into triple trailers is very outrageous. If this is true, they should lobby 25 the state for more stringent requirements for all types of truck drivers. 26 27 Dawson displayed a picture of a triple trailer. She talked to a truck driver 28 who said he didn't want to see the triple trailers on the state highways. Regarding 29 the comment that it is the cars that cause the accidents, the trailers blind cars if it 30 is raining. 31 32 Hoag stated that Mr. Wiesen commented that the Milky Way trucks run at 33 105,000 pounds. She wanted to make sure that what is passed doesn't restrict 34 their current weight. The discussion in committee was about extending the federal 35 freeze that is in place. It is not impacting Milky Way at this time. She would never 36 want to see a triple trailer change lanes on the interstate. 37 38 Nelson stated he has driven large vehicles. The only time he's ever been 39 scared in a large vehicle is when the cars cut in front of him, and he has to put on 40 his breaks with a full load. There are more accident impacts from the public than 41 the truckers. He was also concerned about people with no experience driving large 42 vehicles getting a recreational vehicle (RV). They cannot specifically point to a 43 trucker as being a cause of accidents. There are significant issues in the resolution 44 regarding economic impacts. There is a great effort by the railroad industry to 45 contain and maintain their base for transportation. Whatcom County has no east - 46 west corridor. There are weight restrictions in Canada. They do want to protect 47 public safety, but there is an ability to reduce the amount of trucking on the road. 48 The amount of trucks on the road will rise because there is a shortage of ability to Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 17 1 transport freight. Either they must have different mechanisms to do it, or other 2 limitations will be imposed. 3 4 (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side 8.) 5 6 Crawford stated he was caught off guard about the Whatcom County Council 7 getting involved in this issue. They've heard a little bit of testimony from Mr. 8 Wiesen, who does have some expertise in trucking. He also has driven a large 9 truck before. This isn't a burning issue in Whatcom County that the Council needs 10 to address. He was confused in trying to sort through the literature of this 11 organization that approached Councilmember Dawson about who these people were 12 and what their possible motives may be. The literature is very sensational. Mr. 13 Wiesen's explanation of their motive is plausible. He was very strongly opposed to 14 spending this much time on this. 15 16 Brenner stated she was not concerned about their motives. When she deals 17 with legislation, she is concerned about the content and what it means to her. This 18 is an excellent opportunity to make a statement. They do it quite often on issues of 19 federal, state, and local importance. That is why it is a resolution instead of an 20 ordinance. It has no force of law. It is a position that the Council may or may not 21 take. The problem is that these trucks are already big and are an impact. She's 22 seen data that shows there are many incidents where truck drivers are tired and 23 drive very long hours. She didn't want to magnify the problem by allowing the 24 triple trailer truck. She understood that a weight restriction is not the same as 25 whether there is a double or triple trailer, but on the total weight. 26 27 Nelson stated the weight is based on the axle. 28 29 Brenner stated one could have a heavy load on a double trailer. This is a 30 good statement for the County Council to make. She's driven the little car next to 31 a big rig, and experienced being cut off and not being able to see due to the rain. 32 It is not fair to create more of a negative impact to the majority of people who 33 don't drive the big rig. 34 35 Imhof moved to table indefinitely. 36 37 Motion failed 3 -4 with Imhof, Crawford, and Nelson in favor. 38 39 McShane questioned the timeliness of this. The Transportation Equity Act is 40 before the 107th Congress. 41 42 Imhof stated it is not pressing. It is not going to happen in Washington 43 State. The federal government can't mandate what goes across state highways. 44 There is not a push in the state to allow triple trailers. 45 46 McShane stated Councilmember Nelson mentioned that support is associated 47 around Snohomish, King, and Spokane counties. The makeup of Alliance for Safe 48 Highways leaders is that half of the members are not from those areas. There were Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 18 1 some from Franklin and Benton counties, which are dependent on long haul 2 trucking because they are in isolated areas. 3 4 Dawson stated no one is talking about the issue because there is a 5 moratorium, but the moratorium is going to be lifted. That is what this whole thing 6 is about, getting the support out there so they can lobby not to allow these. 7 8 Motion to approve the resolution carried 4 -3 with Imhof, Crawford and 9 Nelson opposed. 10 11 6. REPORT ON DISCUSSION REGARDING DEVELOPMENT OF A TWENTY - 12 YEAR LUMMI ISLAND FERRY OPERATION PLAN (AB2000 -429) 13 14 Brenner reported for the Public Works and Capital Projects Committee and 15 thanked the Public Works staff and Lummi Island community who worked on this 16 plan. One of the concerns brought up in committee includes more evaluation of the 17 long -term probability of retaining a lease agreement with the Lummi Nation. Right 18 now they should investigate the probability of that before moving in any other 19 directions. That concern would be incorporated. The Lummi Island community has 20 been working hard on this. The Committee recommended unanimously giving the 21 Public Works staff direction on hiring a consultant to help with the first phase and 22 make some determinations. That comes forward as a recommendation. 23 24 Motion carried unanimously. 25 26 7. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING 27 ORDINANCE, TITLE 20, CHAPTER 20.80, TO INCLUDE ACCUMULATIVE 28 IMPERVIOUS SURFACE THRESHOLDS FOR STORMWATER SPECIAL 29 DISTRICT ON -SITE STORMWATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY FACILITY 30 REQUIREMENTS, AND TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL CLARIFYING 31 LANGUAGE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE PURPOSES (AB2000 -390) 32 33 McShane reported for the Planning and Development Committee and stated 34 this item was approved in committee. Changes will need to be made in the future, 35 but there is a timeliness issue. This was before the Council during a water 36 resources meeting. Anyone coming forward now for building more than 120 square 37 feet would have to have an engineer designed stormwater system. It is pretty 38 onerous and goes overboard. The proposed 500 square feet is a more reasonable 39 number. The committee recommended minor changes, but they will come forward 40 at a different time. If they don't do it now, they would have to schedule a public 41 hearing for changes, and people would still be required to have an engineer design 42 during the next month and a half. 43 44 Nelson questioned how he can be assured that it would come forward again. 45 46 McShane stated Councilmember Nelson could bring it forward if he wanted. 47 This relates to some of the work that the Technical Advisory Committee is doing Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 19 1 right now. The Advisory Committee wanted to know the thresholds for needing an 2 engineer design before working on the engineer designs that might be acceptable. 3 4 Hoag stated this would be back. The committee voted to approve changes to 5 it, but because the Technical Advisory Committee wanted it right away, the 6 Planning Committee decided that it would be pulled back for reconsideration in the 7 new year. There are important amendments that need to be made. Staff 8 recommends those amendments as well. 9 10 McShane stated the Technical Advisory Committee is going to look at the 11 best management practices, which are going to be when within the framework of 12 the thresholds on packet page 200. 13 14 Bruce Mills, Assistant Director of Engineering, stated that was correct. 15 16 McShane stated that right now, the Technical Advisory Committee doesn't 17 even know what the thresholds are. 18 19 Nelson asked if the Technical Advisory Committee requests changes now. 20 21 Mills stated the Technical Advisory Committee wants to work on the best 22 management practices (BMP's) for the middle category on the table. That is the 23 category for which the Technical Advisory Committee would develop standard, 24 cookbook designs that could be approved without having to hire an engineer. 25 26 Nelson stated that one of his concerns was regarding the fact that people 27 create drainage system impacts that cause impacts to other peoples' property. He 28 asked if that could be addressed by this issue. He also asked that the ordinance be 29 adopted with a sunset date in 90 days. Mills stated that they can do that, although 30 it would not give a great deal of confidence to the TAC to move forward with 31 developing these threshold BMP's if they think the thresholds would change. 32 33 McShane stated that if the Council is going to knock the threshold down to 34 1,000 square feet, for example, then the best management practices they would 35 propose would be different. 36 37 Nelson questioned what would come back to the Council. Mills stated that 38 the biggest thing to be looked at when it comes back would be Drayton Harbor to 39 exclude some of the large acreage there. 40 41 McShane stated the Planning Committee didn't want to impact someone who 42 had a five -acre parcel and is building a house. 43 44 Nelson stated he is being asked to vote on an ordinance that has to be 45 worked on later. Mills stated they would do some tweaking later, but would not 46 gut it. 47 Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 20 1 Nelson stated that was his concern. Mills stated that language in section 2 20.80.635(1)(f) is existing in the overlay protection zone. It was not changed by 3 the amendment. 4 5 Nelson stated subsection (f) does not address potential problems of drainage 6 patterns affecting neighbors. That problem occurs frequently in the community. 7 8 Dawson stated that anytime someone builds uphill, the people below will be 9 negatively impacted. 10 11 Nelson stated that is what he is trying to address. Neighbors should not be 12 impacted by drainage. 13 14 McShane stated this is an important issue. They should have a lengthy 15 discussion next time. 16 17 Nelson stated that if this is going to come back only for a cursory look, then 18 he wasn't interested in it. Mills stated this language has been in the code for a 19 long, long time. It isn't something new. They can certainly look at it. 20 21 McShane stated one concern is that the cutting of slopes in impervious areas 22 is not addressed very well. Cutting the slope intercepts shallow groundwater. 23 24 Mills stated he wanted to make sure that they are not going to have a lot of 25 significant changes to that. He didn't have a problem addressing the other issue. 26 27 Nelson questioned whether the Council would be able to address those 28 language changes. Mills stated they would address it at the same time it comes 29 back to the Council in a month or so. 30 31 McShane stated the question before Council now is whether anyone has a 32 problem with the thresholds now. 33 34 Nelson stated he didn't have enough information to make a determination on 35 it. He wanted to see the best management practices. 36 37 Hoag stated they are being asked to adopt amendments requested by staff 38 to clarify some of the issues raised, and then the Council will come back to the 39 ordinance in January to address some of the issues that they cannot address 40 without a public hearing. 41 42 McShane restated the motion to approve the ordinance as it is. 43 44 Motion carried unanimously. 45 46 Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, questioned whether this should 47 be scheduled again before the Planning Committee in January. 48 Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 21 1 The Council concurred to schedule it in the Planning Committee before having 2 a public hearing. 3 4 Goodwin stated the standards that the Technical Advisory Committee is 5 working on were intended to be development regulations for Chapter Two of the 6 County Development Regulations, which aren't even adopted by ordinance. There 7 is a process where the Council has a chance to review those regulations. The 8 development standards are not generally codified, just put in the book. The Council 9 has the option of amending them. 10 11 Hoag stated the current Planning and Development Committee is for the year 12 2000. That committee has unfinished issues on its plate. A new committee will not 13 meet until January 23. She questioned whether the existing committee could hold 14 meetings and take any action during January. 15 16 Dana Brown - Davis, Clerk of the Council, stated that the committee could not 17 meet in January of 2001. The 2001 committee begins on January 1. 18 19 Nelson stated that every councilmember has the right to make 20 recommendations and suggestions, so it doesn't make that much difference. 21 22 Hoag stated the current committee discussed trying to resolve some of the 23 issues before the new year. 24 25 Dawson stated it is the prerogative of the Council. 26 27 Brown -Davis stated they could hold a Council work session. 28 29 Hoag questioned Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor Dave Grant about whether 30 the current Planning Committee could meet in January. 31 32 Dave Grant, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, stated that the current 33 committee could exist until a new committee is appointed to replace it. 34 35 Hoag suggested that the current Planning Committee meet on January 9. 36 37 Dawson stated that the committee members could talk about that. 38 39 S. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING 40 ORDINANCE, TITLE 20, CHAPTER 20.89, TO CLARIFY THE LANGUAGE 41 OF THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) PROGRAM FOR 42 ADMINISTRATIVE PURPOSES, TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL PROGRAM 43 INCENTIVES, AND TO PROVIDE NEW MECHANISMS FOR 44 DESIGNATING ADDITIONAL TDR RECEIVING AREAS (AB2000 -407) 45 46 McShane reported for the Planning and Development Committee and stated 47 this item was held in committee. 48 Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 22 1 ADDENDUM: 2 CONSIDERATION OF HEARING EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDED 3 APPROVAL OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, FILED BY ALLIANCE 4 PROPERTIES INCORPORATED FOR "WILD ROSE HILLS" (PUD00 -0002 5 AND LSS00- 0003)(AB2000 -432) 6 7 This item was withdrawn. 8 9 9. APPOINTMENT TO THE NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL BOARD (AB2000- 10 326B) 11 12 Imhof moved to reappoint Wes Kentch. 13 14 Motion carried unanimously. 15 16 10. REQUEST CONFIRMATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPOINT 17 WILLIAM BACKER TO THE RURAL LIBRARY REQUEST, SUE BENNETT 18 TO THE DISTRICT 3 POSITION ON THE PARKS AND RECREATION 19 COMMISSION, AND BRUCE VAN GLUBT TO THE BELLINGHAM- 20 WHATCOM COUNTY COMMISSION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 21 (AB2000 -326C) 22 23 Imhof moved to confirm the appointments by acclamation. 24 25 Motion carried unanimously. 26 27 11. REQUEST CONFIRMATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO REAPPOINT IAN 28 BROOKE, JANET KLOC, AND TOM RICHARDSON TO THE MENTAL 29 HEALTH ADVISORY BOARD, PEGGY JEAN HINTON AND CAROL 30 OBERTON TO THE COUNTY APPEALS BOARD, JANET MCCRARY TO THE 31 DEVELOPMENT DISABILITIES BOARD, AND DAC JAMISON AND LARRY 32 JOHNSON TO THE SUBSTANCE ABUSE ADVISORY BOARD (AB2000- 33 326D) 34 35 Brenner moved to confirm the appointments by acclamation. 36 37 Motion carried unanimously. 38 39 12. APPOINTMENT TO THE DRAYTON HARBOR SHELLFISH PROTECTION 40 DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AB2000 -326E) 41 42 Imhof moved to appoint Janet Hansen. 43 44 Hoag stated that, when she served on the committee, Janet Hanson was an 45 invaluable member and very hard worker. 46 47 Motion carried unanimously. 48 Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 23 1 2 OTHER BUSINESS 3 4 Brenner stated the councilmembers sometimes get passionate during some 5 discussions. She was uncomfortable with comments that are personal and sarcastic 6 in nature. The last time this happened, there were kids in the audience, and people 7 were laughing. The audience wasn't laughing with the councilmembers; they were 8 laughing at the councilmembers. The councilmembers have a responsibility to not 9 laugh if someone does that, because it reflects badly on all. 10 11 Hoag asked that the chair gavel down inappropriate comments. She 12 questioned the status of the ordinance they approved earlier in the evening, 13 ordinance amending the official Whatcom County zoning ordinance, Title 14 20, section 20.42.150 to allow public health and safety facilities and road 15 maintenance facilities within the Rural Forestry zoning classification as a 16 conditional use (AB2000 -392). She also found grammatical corrections that 17 were not changed in the ordinance. 18 19 Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, stated they would check it before 20 they bring the ordinance back for signature. 21 22 Brenner stated it is improper for anyone to not vote, but have the vote 23 counted. People do need to vote if they want it counted. The councilmembers' job 24 is to vote one way or another, or to abstain. 25 26 Nelson stated that if there is confusion on the vote, then the chair could ask 27 for a vote by hand. Any councilmember can request that. Otherwise, the chair 28 announces the vote. 29 30 Brenner stated it is about a lack of participation. The public deserves to 31 know how the councilmembers actually voted. It is part of the democratic process. 32 33 34 REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS 35 36 37 Crawford thanked the Council and said it is enjoyable working with the 38 Council. 39 40 Brenner agreed. This year has been a positive experience. It has been great 41 working with the councilmembers and administration this year. The Council has 42 gotten a lot done. 43 44 McShane appreciated Councilmember Crawford's comments. 45 46 Dawson stated she felt honored to serve as chair during the last two years. 47 The diversity of the councilmembers makes it an interesting job. There are some 48 very exciting and dedicated people on this Council. Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 24 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 Hoag agreed with the sentiments expressed by Councilmember Crawford, and thanked the Council for sending her flowers. She's missed a few meetings lately because her father recently died of cancer. He was a wonderful man of honesty and integrity. She appreciated the Council's support during that time. Pete Kremen, County Executive, echoed the sentiments expressed by the Council. The Council and administration have accomplished a lot during the past year. He thanked the Council for the acquisition of 320 acres in the Lake Whatcom watershed, which will forever preserve and protect a significant amount of acreage in a critical area of the watershed from development. They are also going to be able to provide recreational opportunities for the area's residents. In addition, they acquired 44 lots in Sudden Valley. Lastly, the administration and Council worked together to put together a budget with no tax increase and included eight additional sheriff deputies. Over $2.5 million was allocated to water resource related issues and other noteworthy items. It was unanimously approved. This year has been the best of the five years he's served as the County Executive. He thanked the Council for the relationships and accomplishments over the past year. He also commended and thanked Council Chair Dawson. It is not easy being the chair of the Whatcom County Council. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 9:18 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 Regular County Council Meeting, 12/12/2000, Page 25