HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil January 25 20001 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
2 Regular County Council
3
4 January 25, 2000
5
6 The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Council Chair Marlene
7 Dawson in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
8
9 Also Present: Absent:
10 Dan McShane None
11 L. Ward Nelson
12 Connie Hoag
13 Barbara Brenner
14 Sam Crawford
15 Robert Imhof
16
17
18 ANNOUNCEMENTS
19
20 Dawson announced that there was Discussion regarding open collective
21 bargaining agreements (AB2000 -062) and Discussion with Whatcom
22 County Prosecutor Dave McEachran (AB2000 -018) in executive session during
23 Committee of the Whole. There was also Discussion with Deputy Administrator
24 Dewey Desler regarding Whatcom County's Law and Justice Plan (AB99-
25 463) during Committee of the Whole.
26
27
28 APPROVAL OF MINUTES
29
30 APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE FOLLOWING MEETINGS:
31 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FOR OCTOBER 26, NOVEMBER 9 AND 23,
32 1999; REGULAR COUNTY COUNCIL FOR SEPTEMBER 28, NOVEMBER 9
33 AND 23, DECEMBER 7, 1999
34
35 Imhof moved to approve.
36
37 Brenner withdrew the minutes for November 9 and 23 and December 7,
38 1999.
39
40 Motion to approve Committee of the Whole for October 25, November 9 and
41 23, 1999 and Regular County Council for September 28, 1999 carried 5 -0 with
42 McShane and Crawford abstaining.
43
44
45 OPEN SESSION
46
47 The following people spoke:
48
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 1
1 Mike Brennen, Bellingham /Whatcom County Chamber of Commerce, gave a
2 presentation on the Ski to Sea Festival. The County supports Ski to Sea through
3 the lodging tax fund, which is specifically appropriated for tourism development.
4 Ski to Sea is very successful. This year, they filled all the available lodging in the
5 county, Burlington, and Mt. Vernon. There was a national television broadcast of
6 the race this year. The councilmembers were presented a framed poster and tee
7 shirts. The dollars that are taken from the County are invested in a graphic
8 presentation. They present this graphic presentation to the International Festival
9 and Events Conference every year. This year they were awarded the Pinnacle
10 Award, which is the highest possible award from that organization for the graphics
11 component.
12
13 Nate Kronenberg, 2351 E. Pole Road, stated it has been three years since he
14 last spoke to the Council regarding the Whatcom County Comprehensive Plan. He
15 returned because of urgent concerns. Last time he spoke, it was to urge the
16 Council to heed the request of a large number of rural residents to apply adequate
17 regulatory control over the surface mining industry. The basis for this request
18 came out of the proposed Comprehensive Plan and its protective elements for rural
19 landowners living near gravel pits and quarries. The citizens' requests were
20 ignored. Throughout the planning process for the draft plan, recommendations by
21 local residents were not given the same consideration as the surface mining
22 spokespersons. The appearance of fairness was not present. These actions
23 resulted in massive costs to the County for outside attorney fees in order to
24 respond to the Growth Management Hearings Board challenge to the final plan. It
25 is time to correct the imbalance by implementing the plans, develop the regulations
26 to reflect the growing awareness of past omissions, and listen carefully to residents
27 who have been impacted by these deficiencies. It is also imperative to recognize
28 the pressure brought by this industry to expand in ways that do not reflect the
29 greater interest of the citizens of Whatcom County. The specific recommendations
30 are missing pieces that were rammed through the planning process and were never
31 completed as required by both the state's Growth Management Act and the
32 County's Comprehensive Plan. These are complete development regulations, an
33 ongoing advisory committee consisting of representatives of diverse interests, and
34 correction of the administrative approval process to allow appropriate notification of
35 all parties of record. He asked for a moratorium on approval of surface mining
36 permits until the corrections are made.
37
38 Dawson suggested he talk to the Planning Department and the County
39 Executive.
40
41 Fenton Wilkinson, 7101 Goodwin Road, Everson, asked the Council to honor
42 their commitment to the citizens of Whatcom County, which is embodied in the
43 Comprehensive Plan. The County government has spent millions of dollars in
44 taxpayer money creating the plan and hundreds of thousands of dollars defending
45 the plan. The Comprehensive Plan recognizes the benefits of mineral resources and
46 the surface mining industry to the economy. One of the two goals of the natural
47 resources section of the Comprehensive Plan is to sustain and enhance the
48 Whatcom County mineral resources industry. However, the plan also recognizes
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 2
1 the nature of the surface mining activities, which have inherent significant adverse
2 impacts on the environment and neighboring land uses. Therefore, the second goal
3 of the mineral resources plan is to ensure that the mineral resources industries do
4 not adversely impact the quality of life in Whatcom County. Recognizing the
5 difficulty in balancing and reconciling these diverse interests, the action items in the
6 Comprehensive Plan require that an implementation of a surface mining regulatory
7 program, consistent with all the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and that
8 address conflicts with other land uses, be enacted. It also directs an ongoing
9 citizen advisory committee be established that represents a diverse interest to
10 guide and mold the plan. Since the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan in 1997,
11 there has been no action taken with respect to the development of a regulatory
12 program for the surface mining industry. There has been no ordinance passed that
13 addresses action item five of the mineral resources part of the Comprehensive Plan.
14 The citizen advisory committee has not been formed. Their failure to do so is not
15 only a breach of commitment made to the citizens of Whatcom County, but is also a
16 breach of Washington State law. The Growth Management Act requires the
17 counties to adopt a plan and also implementation regulations for the plan. In light
18 of that, he formally requested that the citizen advisory committee be formed, that
19 the regulatory program be developed forthwith, and in the interim, that a
20 moratorium on the issuance of surface mining permits be enacted. Without
21 regulations in place, there is no way that a proponent of a proposal can
22 demonstrate that their proposed activities are consistent with the goals and policies
23 of the Comprehensive Plan. He requested that this be referred to the Natural
24 Resources committee to look into the statements of fact and law presented.
25
26 Dawson stated this item should be in Planning and Development Committee.
27
28 McShane stated it should start in Natural Resources Committee, but may
29 eventually go to Planning and Development Committee.
30
31 Jamie Berg, 1032 Sudden Valley, asked for the Council's support in
32 approving a resolution for the current legislation that is in the state Senate and
33 House of Representatives. She provided a copy of the recommendations for the
34 Lake Whatcom Advisory Committee that was a result of Senate Bill (SB) 5536. She
35 asked for Council support in the form of a resolution.
36
37 Bill Wallace, State Department of Natural Resources Northwest Region
38 Manager, Sedro - Woolley, stated the work over the past several months with the
39 Lake Whatcom Advisory Committee has been a rewarding experience. The
40 committee did an outstanding job in their work and had very thoughtful
41 recommendations. The department is in the process of finishing its review, making
42 recommendations, and providing its analysis to the Board of Natural Resources. He
43 brought forward items for consideration regarding the proposed resolution. There
44 is a cost as well as benefits associated with the recommendations. There is a cost
45 of additional funds and revenue the department will need to implement these
46 recommendations and occasionally accelerate their recommendations to
47 supplement their existing funds. An example is road maintenance. There is also a
48 potential cost in lost revenue to the trust beneficiaries if the trusts are not
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 3
1 compensated. The one significant example of that is the requirement of the ten
2 meter buffers for type five streams. While there may be a benefit to water quality,
3 currently there is no law or policy that requires a buffer to be left on the streams.
4 Current law requires that the trust be compensated for that. If the trust were to
5 assume that cost in favor of water quality, it has to be taken up by the trustees of
6 the various trust beneficiaries. That includes two bodies, the Board of Natural
7 Resource who represents the specific trust beneficiaries, and the legislature. The
8 questions to the Council is whether they support either the reduced revenues to the
9 trust or the legislative appropriation to supplement current DNR funds to expedite
10 the activities embodied in the recommendations.
11
12 Brenner stated it is the legislature's duty to change the equation. They are
13 pitting one group against another, needlessly. She questioned what is going on
14 with the legislature. Wallace stated he has not been down there during this
15 session. Legislation has been introduced. That is being discussed now with the
16 Commissioner of Public Land Jennifer Belcher, Senator Harriet Spanel, and other
17 legislators. There will be a further discussion with the Board of Natural Resources
18 next Tuesday, when they are making a presentation of the committee's
19 recommendations. They can incorporate many of the recommendations today with
20 existing polices and resources, but there are some that require additional funds and
21 policy direction from their trustees.
22
23 McShane questioned whether Wallace has a position he is taking regarding
24 the DNR recommendation to the trustees. Wallace stated the response to the
25 recommendations is coming out in written form. Certainly they will get copies to
26 the County Council in the near future. The recommendations can be implemented,
27 but issues of funding and policy changes will have to be addressed by the
28 legislature and /or the Board of Natural Resources. If those trustees say that they
29 are going to do that, implement the changes, and provide the additional funds, then
30 certainly they will be implemented in full force.
31
32 Crawford stated the resolution asserts that logging will begin if the legislature
33 doesn't approve Spanel's bill, and the resolution the Council could adopt will give
34 some strength to that legislation. He questioned whether logging will begin July 1 if
35 that legislation isn't approved and whether the recommendations are for nothing.
36 Wallace stated that under SB 5536, which established the moratorium and the
37 committee, the harvesting moratorium would be lifted as of July 1 if nothing is
38 done. Discussion with the legislature about whether there should be an extension of
39 that resolution to these recommendations are all under the purview of the
40 legislature if they want more time to consider.
41
42 Crawford questioned whether the DNR would continue with its logging if the
43 moratorium is lifted. Wallace stated they would consider beginning their plans that
44 have been on hold, but it will take the feedback of the trustees, the Board of
45 Natural Resources, and the legislature to determine how they are to proceed. He
46 expected some feedback from those two bodies.
47
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 4
1 Dawson questioned when the earliest harvesting time would be. Wallace
2 stated the moratorium officially lifts July 1, subject to change. As of today, they
3 are able to begin selling additional timber on that date, but they have no plans to
4 do so. Some of their plans to sell timber are several months out.
5
6 McShane stated the Board of Natural Resources would not have an opinion
7 from the Whatcom County Council for their deliberations on February 1 if the
8 resolution is not approved. Wallace stated that was true. He wasn't suggesting the
9 County Council not pass a resolution. It is in the Council's interest to express its
10 interest on the resolution. He was only trying to help the Council understand that
11 there are elements of funding and the potential of less revenue to the trust
12 beneficiaries. The Council is very aware that the trust beneficiaries in Lake
13 Whatcom include the school construction funds, universities, and the County. The
14 County receives a Forest Board transfer trust. Those revenues are distributed to
15 the junior taxing districts, the County, and the state general fund. Requiring
16 buffers along the type five streams, without compensation to the trust, would
17 reduce the revenues to the County.
18
19 Imhof stated that the hearing on February 1 is only the beginning of the
20 process, not the end of the process.
21
22 Hoag stated the bill has to be out of committee by February 4. The County
23 Council doesn't meet again until February 8. The legislature generally makes most
24 of the changes and recommendations in committee. They are better off responding
25 during this meeting.
26
27 Dawson stated they would discuss this further during Other Business.
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 -024)
34
35 Imhof asked to explain to the public the result of the conversation held
36 during Committee of the Whole. That way, the public would know what the
37 Council's focus is.
38
39 Dawson asked for a comment from Prosecutor Dave McEachran.
40
41 Dave McEachran, Prosecuting Attorney, stated that, in consultation with the
42 Council, they discussed where the County is regarding the ordinance that is before
43 the Council and dealing with infectious waste. Looking at the issues that are raised,
44 there are legal questions that have come up that may be something that should be
45 reviewed prior to the effective point of this ordinance. The concern that has been
46 raised is whether or not this is in violation of the interstate commerce clause. As
47 they discussed the legal issues, if it is found to be invalid it could harm the County
48 if enforced. After looking at this question and the Council proposes and adopted
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 5
1 the ordinance, it would not be effective until a court could determine the
2 constitutionality of this ordinance.
3
4 Brenner explained there are amendments to the proposed ordinance. On
5 packet page 536, lines 9 through 20 have been deleted from the proposed
6 ordinance. In addition, language has been recommended for the amended
7 ordinance, beginning on line 9, "BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that this ordinance shall
8 not be enforceable until it is determined to be constitutional by a court of law."
9
10 Dawson stated they are proposing to adopt the ordinance, but to refrain from
11 any enforcement until it has been addressed in a court of law.
12
13 Brenner stated that the firm of Riddell, Williams, specifically Paul Kundtz and
14 his partner Loren Dunn, will be deputized to defend the County on this ordinance.
15
16 Imhof stated the reason they looked at it in this vein was to minimize the
17 County's liability. If the County enforced an unconstitutional law, it would have a
18 potential for liability. By adopting the ordinance in this way, they are pushing it
19 into court and still minimizing the County's liability for damages.
20
21 Dawson stated the Council was acting as the Board of Heath and the hearing
22 was before the Board of Health. She opened the public hearing and the following
23 people spoke:
24
25 Dick Covington, 3000 Daniels Court, Bellingham, stated he was concerned
26 and appalled that they were not allowed to view the ordinance in terms of its legal
27 implications until after the public voted for it. He hoped the ordinance retains its
28 original status and is not depleted in any way.
29
30 Al Hanners, 3007 Plymouth Drive, Bellingham, stated he was present to
31 support the ordinance. His principal concern is with dioxin. He didn't closely follow
32 the concerns with I -99, but he was one of the voters who voted for it. The reason
33 he was concerned about dioxin was because he has followed the information
34 concerning its toxicity for many years. His concern was not for the bio- medical
35 waste, but the plastic that would be disposed of. Plastic has chlorine in it. When
36 chlorine is burned, dioxin is created. He was concerned about the huge quantity of
37 plastic that will come into the county from all over the country. That is a hazard to
38 the people here. He didn't want anyone to suffer. It isn't right. He didn't think the
39 plastic would end up going to a landfill, but that it would end up being burned at
40 Recomp. He wanted to stop it now.
41
42 Dawson stated that Recomp no longer incinerates. The waste will be
43 disposed of in an autoclave. There has been a lot of confusion about what Recomp
44 does. She was impressed that the Bellingham Herald did a front -page article with a
45 picture of the autoclave. The waste is basically pressure- cooked.
46
47 Hanners asked what happens to the plastic after the autoclave.
48
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 6
1 Imhof stated it is landfilled.
2
3 Dawson stated that technically there are no dioxins.
4
5 Brenner stated it is not being incinerated, it is being autoclaved, which is
6 steam sterilization.
7
8 Gary Vodopich, 1419 - 34th Street, Bellingham, stated the Council should
9 fulfill the wishes of the voters in Whatcom County who voted for I -99. They wanted
10 to limit the amount of waste that is handled. He wanted the waste limited to
11 Whatcom County waste.
12
13 Brenner stated the initiative makes no reference to the origin of the waste.
14 It only limits the amount treated to the amount that Whatcom County produces.
15 No matter where the waste comes from, the risk is proportional to the amount of
16 waste the community generates. By federal law, they cannot limit the origin.
17
18 Chuck Benjamin, Health & Human Service Director, read from the memo he
19 distributed earlier in the day that clarified the role of the Medical Waste Task Force
20 in relation to Initiative 99 (on file) and stated the Task Force did not consider the
21 issue of placing limits on the quantity of biomedical waste that could be processed
22 in Whatcom County.
23
24 Forest McElroy, 8635 Golden Valley Drive, Sumas, stated he voted for the
25 initiative, as did the majority of the citizens of Whatcom County. The Council
26 should stand firm against the pressure that has been brought to bear on them, and
27 represent the people they are supposed to be representing, rather than dilute the
28 ordinance. They should resolve the issue to the benefit of the people.
29
30 Susan Cole, 2175 Washington Street #20, Ferndale City Councilmember,
31 urged adoption of the I -99 ordinance. The Ferndale City Council endorsed I -99 by
32 resolution and the citizens of the community overwhelmingly supported the
33 initiative in the November election. It is the Council's responsibility and legal
34 obligation to listen to the message and pass the ordinance.
35
36 Flip Breskin, 2518 Cherry Street, Bellingham, stated the Council is caught
37 between the constituents and a corporation. They have agreed to care for the
38 community as a whole. She encouraged the Council to put back the language
39 about "vigorously pursuing and defending" their interests. If nobody wants it in his
40 or her backyard, then they need to look at where the waste is generated and pay
41 attention to what the Medical Waste Task Force is looking at. It might interrupt the
42 creation of the waste stream in the first place.
43
44 Beth Marsau, 6162 Aquarius, Ferndale, stated that their effort to have a
45 healthy environment is being questioned on a financial standpoint instead of a
46 safety issue. They are talking about the risks of liability because a corporation
47 might sue the County for doing what they don't want the County to do. Perhaps
48 the councilmembers' lives, and the lives of their children and grandchildren, might
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 7
1 be in jeopardy. That is pretty off -scale when they compare that to liability. This
2 message can't be repeated enough. They don't want medical waste inappropriately
3 destroyed in Whatcom County. She was glad to hear Mr. Benjamin say the Health
4 Advisory Board was working on it. As a citizen, mother, and a potential
5 grandmother, she asked that the Council please be responsible to the people in this
6 county.
7
8 Wayne Larson, 3096 Thornton Road, Ferndale, stated the voters voted for
9 the initiative. They have had public hearings before and evidence was brought
10 forward that the autoclave was not doing the job and was too large. He sneaked
11 into the Recomp facility to look and it is a mess. He went to the Ferndale City
12 Council over the years. Recomp brings in their attorneys from Denver, Colorado
13 and say that the facility is state -of- the -art. Their composting was supposed to be a
14 good deal, but it is dead. They are dumping stuff in the gravel pit on
15 Mountainview. The things they have done and the way that they're operating
16 doesn't reflect an operating procedure.
17
18 (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
19
20 Larson continued to state that the people have spoken and the Council
21 should listen.
22
23 John Friber, 2628 Thornton Road, Ferndale, agreed with Wayne Larson. He
24 asked the Council to do what the citizens of the county have asked them to do by
25 adopting the ordinance. They will take care of Whatcom County's waste problem,
26 but they don't have to take care of anyone else.
27
28 Win Wilson, 3015 Arnie Road, Custer, asked the Council to please adopt the
29 ordinance. He was disappointed that the ordinance has the contingency for legal
30 review prior to its enactment. He was concerned because he attended a meeting in
31 Ferndale years ago regarding the autoclave. At that meeting, there was a research
32 scientist who said that when one puts a combination of products into an autoclave,
33 one wouldn't know what is going to come out. That is the problem. An autoclave is
34 designed to dispose of a specific amount of a given product. This process is not a
35 proven process. The least the County could do is enact the ordinance to cut down
36 on the quantity.
37
38 Marianne Elgart, 5336 Poplar Drive, Ferndale, stated she is also a Ferndale
39 City Councilmember. She brought a letter from the City Council to the Executive
40 and Board of Health, and read it into the record (on file). The letter asked for the
41 Council's support of the ordinance. The citizens of Ferndale overwhelmingly
42 supported I -99 in anticipation that it would be applicable within Ferndale. This
43 issue has been around for a long time. There has been a lot of opportunity for
44 information. The people have clearly spoken. If the legislation and the rules are
45 not enforced, the law means nothing. She viewed many situations on site at
46 Recomp that were and are gross violations of the existing health laws. She asked
47 that the Board of Health please do its duty and adopt the ordinance, and
48 encouraged the Board not to be afraid of litigation.
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 8
1
2 Clarence Bob Sr., 2524 Michigan Street, received a letter from BFI that
3 appalled him. He and many others are concerned voters. One of his concerns
4 about this has to do with the workers. He questioned whether they are qualified.
5 He called to see how many workers were temporary workers from an employment
6 agency. One agency sent three workers to the facility in 1999. Only one of them
7 was qualified to handle hazardous waste with past experience. The other two
8 received in -house training. He questioned the quality of in -house training. In
9 addition, he wanted to know how many current councilmembers have received
10 campaign money from Recomp.
11
12 Imhof, Nelson, and Dawson responded that they have received money from
13 Recomp.
14
15 Brenner stated that she had not received any money from Recomp.
16
17 Christopher Smith, 8528 Custer School Road, Custer, asked the members of
18 the audience who were present and in support of the ordinance to stand. All but
19 three audience members stood. He then asked those who opposed the ordinance
20 to stand. Three people stood.
21
22 Brenner stated those three people work at Recomp.
23
24 Smith stated the voters overwhelmingly passed I -99. Any member of the
25 Council to vote against their wishes should not run in the next election. Every once
26 in a while, a politician should stand up and do the right thing.
27
28 Jake Creasey, Custer, stated they have put up with enough just driving on I-
29 5 with the Canadian traffic, let alone take care of their waste.
30
31 Brenner stated that the initiative limits the amount. It will mean fewer
32 trucks, but they have no control over where it will come from.
33
34 Richard Hallmark, stated the people are misinformed about what goes on at
35 Recomp. He has worked at Recomp at for 7 Y2 years. He runs the incinerators and
36 all the mechanical systems. They put in $1.5 million in to filtrate the air. They do
37 everything top -of- the -line. He lost his job because of his government. After 7 1/2
38 years, his retirement was down the tube. Now he is out there trying to run a good
39 system and a professional autoclave. He was hired as a facilities supervisor. They
40 don't do anything. They have health inspectors at the facility all the time. They
41 send spore samples to Bellingham once per week. They are just trying to make a
42 living. He questioned what happened to an America with free trade. They are
43 trying to do it right. He is 50 years old and healthy as a horse. He wouldn't want
44 to hurt his family, children, or grandchildren. He wouldn't work somewhere where
45 he thought he was endangering their life. All the people present are misinformed.
46
47 Charlene French, 5044 La Bounty, stated she is the neighbor next to Recomp
48 who gets the smell, smoke, and odor from the facility. She called people to remind
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 9
1 them to attend the meeting. Everyone already knew what the initiative was.
2 People are not misinformed. The facility stinks, the trains run all night, and her
3 grandchildren won't go outside. They can't take care of what they have now, and
4 now they want to do the autoclave. Canada had the autoclave before Recomp.
5 She questioned why they didn't they keep it.
6
7 Robert French, 5044 La Bounty, Ferndale, stated they are not trying to put
8 anyone out of business. They do need limits. The citizens have spoken, and he
9 was glad to hear the Council agreed. There has been a lot of press that has been
10 the opposite. He hoped the Bellingham Herald gives the Council much - deserved
11 credit for getting behind this and putting forth its best effort. He lived adjacent to
12 the Recomp /BFI site for 30 years. A major portion of the years has been spent
13 trying to minimize the effects of the facility on their personal lives. There are still
14 odors and there is still a lot of noise. It doesn't seem as if BFI / Recomp has been
15 willing to address these problems. It would make it easier on everyone if they
16 would. They would be a lot more trustworthy and viewed as corporate citizens if
17 they take care of what goes on in their neighborhood. These are small details that
18 haven't been taken care of over the last ten to fifteen years. He was glad the
19 Council was addressing this. There are records that show the complaints about
20 Recomp to the Northwest Air Pollution Authority (NWAPA) and the City of Ferndale
21 from the residents in the neighborhood. The voters of Whatcom County are
22 informed people. There is a lot of emotion and intelligence present.
23
24 Bob Hughes, 6895 South Pass Road, Maple Falls, stated the fact is that the
25 people voted on it. They probably should take a look at the constitutionality of it,
26 but the ordinance is what the people want. Whether it is good or bad is only
27 academic.
28
29 Jonathan Franklin, 353 Viewcrest, Bellingham, stated he is a physician on the
30 Medical Waste Task Force and a citizen. Mr. Benjamin had already expressed his
31 concerns. The Medical Waste Task Force never dealt with limits on volume. They
32 knew it was an issue that would be dealt with by I -99. He was upset when he
33 received notifications from BFI marketing in the last week trying to have him sign a
34 letter stating that there was probably an error in how the task force
35 recommendations may conflict with I -99. Mike Woodruff was a hired facilitator for
36 the task force. He was not a spokesperson. There may have been a problem in
37 translation. There was no conflict. The task force dealt with its issues in trying to
38 set up guidelines. The populace voted in I -99.
39
40 Brenner questioned whether Dr. Franklin, as a medical doctor, supported I-
41 99. Franklin stated that he did.
42
43 George Astler, 4815 Alderson Road, Birch Bay, stated there are many
44 implications that are involved. He respected the Recomp employees' position in
45 that they have worked hard for many years. What they do, even though the
46 autoclave may not be totally perfect, works. He didn't think they have ever
47 mentioned the generated risk involved in the autoclave. They can't stop it from
48 coming into the county, but they can limit the amount brought in. He displayed a
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 10
1 diagram of trucks turned over along Interstate 5 from California to Canada. The
2 BFI employees may be doing a great job, but if a truck is turned over and hit by a
3 school bus, there is a problem transferring the infectious waste to the community
4 and the watershed. Whoever generates the waste should autoclave their own
5 waste. It has also been stated that the ordinance could not be legally overturned
6 because Ferndale is not in Whatcom County. That concerns him. He supported the
7 Recomp employees, but they need to think about this from the standpoint of risk
8 and transportation.
9
10 Julie Potter -Marx, 5948 Longdin Road, Ferndale, stated she wanted to
11 reinforce what the voters have told you. They share a concern for where they live.
12 They turned out as voters to reach a decision on the direction of the quality of their
13 lives. She appreciated the County administration, the councilmembers, industries,
14 and communities working together and demonstrating concern.
15
16 Emily Jackson Weaver, stated she is a former County Councilmember. She
17 served on the Solid Waste Advisory Committee (SWAC) for four years. She sat in
18 at all the hearings regarding medical waste from Pierce County to Canada to find
19 out about the impacts of this facility. Her father was in the garbage business. Her
20 parents would have liked to see this issue handled while they were still alive. This
21 has gone on for too long. Fred Furman is her relative. He almost lost his life at the
22 facility while working at the facility. He had to move away from this facility to
23 regain his health. She has seen that facility improperly handle medical waste in the
24 past. To say that it can be handled without incidence in the future is unrealistic. It
25 is what the voters want. The councilmembers who have received funds from
26 Recomp should consider conflict of interest and appearance of fairness. When the
27 voters have clearly stated their message, they can put conflict of interest and
28 appearance of fairness aside and vote the will of the people.
29
30 Splendora Pappetti Huizenga, 5481 Dinkel Road, asked the Council to deal
31 with this expediently. She guessed the litigation could go on for years. This has
32 gone on for a long time.
33
34 Judy DeMeyer, 5223 Graveline Road, stated that Recomp is practically in her
35 backyard. It does stink, and is there occasionally black smoke. The people have
36 voted. They should take care of the community. Lawyers should not come in from
37 out of the area and defeat the ordinance.
38
39 Maggie Hanson, 206 Bayside Place, Bellingham, stated she supported the
40 adoption of the ordinance. The citizens voted for I -99, and the councilmembers
41 need to back up the voters. They would do the initiative process a huge disservice
42 if they back down now.
43
44 Hue Beattie, 2104 Mackenzie Road, Bellingham, stated it seems that the
45 initiative process works well at the county level. If there is an initiative at the state
46 level that is going to go on the ballot and the legislative body doesn't think its right,
47 they are capable of putting together an alternative to put on the ballot. If the legal
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 11
1 department doesn't think it's right, they should put something together that is
2 right.
3
4 Frank Winslow, 433 - 17th Street, stated this subject is not familiar to him,
5 but the process is familiar. He has heard too many times about issues being
6 deferred by the threat of liability.
7
8 Judy Russi, 605 Clark Road, stated she was proud of Barbara Brenner and
9 her hard work to educate the people. The people who did know what they were
10 signing read the initiative and came back to sign it. She talked to health
11 professionals who said it is safer to do small autoclaves. She didn't know what was
12 going on because she lives in Bellingham. There are many environmental issues in
13 Whatcom County. This is just one thing, and there are other things the County
14 needs to work on. The citizens voted for it, so the Council should support it.
15
16 Al Levine, 6336 Portal Way, Ferndale, stated he is a Ferndale City
17 Councilmember. He supported the electorate.
18
19 Hearing no one else, Dawson closed the public hearing.
20
21 Brenner moved to adopt the amended ordinance. She stood out with that
22 initiative seven days a week, at least three hours per day and up to seven hours
23 per day. It is very important to her, and it always has been important to her, to tell
24 the truth. She wouldn't let people sign the initiative if they didn't understand the
25 issue. She was upset that the information went out at the very last minute. She
26 was upset the Bellingham Herald allowed an editorial the day before the hearing
27 from the Browning Ferris Industries without notifying anyone to present the other
28 side. She was upset that Recomp /BFI made untrue statements. There is no way
29 that anyone said to her that they wanted to put Recomp out of business. The
30 medical waste portion of Recomp's business is a very small portion. This initiative
31 affects a small portion of Recomp's medical waste business. They are talking about
32 a small percentage of the small percentage. It talks about the infectious portion of
33 the medical waste, which Recomp has already stated is less than 15 percent of its
34 medical waste stream. There are many things that Recomp and generators can do
35 to reduce the infectious portion and make it easier on everyone. This encourages
36 that. The last thing she wants to do is put Recomp out of business, because then
37 they will have a monopoly again. She didn't want monopolies. It is very important
38 that they don't have monopolies. She has been personally misrepresented and
39 slandered by Recomp and BFI for many years. Her comments have been
40 specifically about the increased risk from all the infectious waste that is being
41 treated. They have no say about where the waste comes from, but they can say
42 how much risk the community is willing to take. It is important that people who
43 are concerned about liability also be put at ease. She supported the amended
44 ordinance because she has been promised that this thing will be done efficiently
45 and quickly. Recomp has had three months since this was passed to go to court
46 and get an injunction. She resented the misrepresentations from the newspaper
47 that this would put them out of business. If Recomp goes out of business, its
48 because they have bad business practices. They have a right to a safe community.
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 12
1 She believed the large amounts of infectious waste couldn't be treated safely. The
2 top expert in this field says that statistically large amounts of infectious waste
3 produce a greater risk for the workers and the community. If they keep the
4 quantity down, they will keep the risk down. Department of Health officials told her
5 that, no matter the source of infection, including infectious waste, the bigger the
6 dose, the bigger the risk. This is merely a limit and they are within their
7 constitutional rights to do this. She will put all of her salary into an account until
8 this is decided, if the County deals with this in good faith. If they lose, all her
9 salary will fund land projects to save the County money. This is the right thing to
10 do.
11
12 Dawson stated Brenner is very dedicated to this issue. It is a very emotional
13 issue for everyone. She realized the commitment Brenner had for this ordinance.
14 In addition to the substitute ordinance that addresses the County's liability, she was
15 confident that this initiative is legally sound. She would support the initiative.
16
17 Hoag stated the she and the other councilmembers feel it is constitutional.
18 They didn't wait to look at it until now. It has been reviewed legally. Because
19 these issues have been raised and because taxpayer money is involved, they are
20 going to pass it but want to have the court judgement saying it is constitutional.
21 With that judgement, they can enforce it without risking taxpayer money. One
22 person who commented stated that people's health shouldn't be weighed against
23 money. She agreed with that comment. She supported this and wanted to protect
24 the public's health. If it is not constitutional, they can't protect public health, so
25 they have to address that question. If it is found to be unconstitutional, the Board
26 of Health should come up with a substitute that will accomplish the will of the
27 people. They are doing this because it is important in addressing the amount of
28 infectious waste. The amount of infectious waste that is being treated in this
29 county exceeds their ability to handle it safely. The Council needs to protect the
30 citizens of the county.
31
32 Nelson thanked Councilmember Brenner and all who helped her for all their
33 hard work, as well as the Medical Waste Task Force. He also thanked Chuck
34 Benjamin and the Public Health Advisory Board, who helped to ensure there are
35 regulations in place to protect the workers, as well as Whatcom County.
36
37 Imhof stated he echoed Nelson's sentiments. Councilmember Brenner has
38 done a good job. They will move forward and see what happens in the court case.
39 Hopefully, they can do what needs to be accomplished.
40
41 Hoag asked McEachran what the time frame would be if a suit were filed.
42 McEachran stated going to court will not happen immediately. It can be taken to
43 court quickly. They will be asking special counsel. He is appointing a special
44 deputy, Loren Dunn. The timeframe depends on when it can get on the docket in
45 federal court.
46
47 Brenner stated another case was argued and decided within three or four
48 months.
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 13
1
2 Loren Dunn, attorney, stated this would go on the regular court calendar. A
3 summary judgement motion would get the court's attention quickly. It is not going
4 to be a complicated matter with a lot of discovery involved. He anticipated around
5 six months for the court to attend to it.
6
7 Motion to adopt carried unanimously.
8
9 (Clerk's Note: The Council took a short break. End of tape one, side 8.)
10
11 CONSENT AGENDA
12
13 Imhof reported for Finance and Administrative Services Committee and
14 moved approval of items one through eleven.
15
16 Motion carried unanimously.
17
18 1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
19 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN
20 SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL AND HEALTH
21 SERVICES TO PROVIDE FEDERAL AND STATE FUNDING FOR
22 OUTREACH LINKAGE, VACCINE FOR CHILDREN AND INTERPRETER
23 SERVICES, FOR A CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $1,400,000 INCLUDING
24 UNANTICIPATED MEDICAID CLIENT OUTREACH MONEY IN THE
25 AMOUNT OF $14,506 (AB2000 -052)
26
27 2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
28 CONTRACT AMENDMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH AND
29 HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND WHATCOM CRISIS SERVICES,
30 TO SUPPORT THE COMMISSION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, IN
31 THE AMOUNT OF $60,000, WITH WHATCOM COUNTY PROVIDING
32 $30,000 (AB2000 -053)
33
34 3. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
35 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN
36 SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND BLACK FLAG EMPLOYMENT SERVICES —
37 INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYMENT, TO PROVIDE INDIVIDUAL SUPPORTED
38 EMPLOYMENT, INCLUDING PLACEMENT AND FOLLOW -UP SERVICES
39 NECESSARY TO ASSIST INDIVIDUALS WITH DEVELOPMENT
40 DISABILITIES, IN THE AMOUNT OF $17,087, FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT
41 AMOUNT OF $30,299 (AB2000 -054)
42
43 4. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
44 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE
45 BELLINGHAM / WHATCOM CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY
46 TO PROVIDE PROMOTIONAL ADVERTISING SERVICES, IN THE
47 AMOUNT OF $25,000 (AB2000 -055)
48
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 14
1
S.
REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
2
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND WHATCOM
3
VOLUNTEER CENTER, TO PROVIDE PARTIAL FUNDING FOR THE
4
PROVISION OF VOLUNTEER SERVICES UPON REQUEST OF THE
5
COUNTY, IN THE AMOUNT OF $30,000 (AB2000 -056)
6
7
6.
REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
8
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE CONVENTION AND
9
VISITOR'S BUREAU, TO PROVIDE VISITOR INFORMATION SERVICES
10
AND TOURISM DEVELOPMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $75,000 (AB2000-
11
057)
12
13
7.
REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
14
CONTRACT AMENDMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH AND
15
HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND THE OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL,
16
TO CONDUCT COMMUNITY OUTREACH ACTIVITIES THAT RESULT IN
17
ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS AND FAMILIES APPLYING FOR MEDICAID
18
AND ENROLLING IN A HEALTH OPTIONS MANAGED CARE PLAN, FOR
19
A TOTAL AMOUNT OF $71,000, INCLUDING THE STATE FUNDED
20
AMENDED AMOUNT OF $11,000 (AB2000 -058)
21
22
8.
REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
23
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND
24
WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY TO IMPLEMENT THE INTEGRATED
25
PEST MANAGEMENT EDUCATION AND RESEARCH PROJECT TO
26
DEVELOP, PRODUCT AND CONDUCT RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL
27
EFFORTS TOWARDS ACCEPTANCE AND ADOPTION OF INTEGRATED
28
PEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES IN WHATCOM COUNTY, IN THE
29
AMOUNT OF $75,000 (AB2000 -059)
30
31
9.
REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
32
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND
33
WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY, TO IMPLEMENT THE NUTRIENT
34
MANAGEMENT EDUCATION AND RESEARCH PROJECT TO DEVELOP,
35
PRODUCE AND CONDUCT RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL EFFORTS
36
TOWARDS THE ACCEPTANCE AND ADOPTION OF IMPROVED
37
NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT PRACTICES IN WHATCOM COUNTY, IN THE
38
AMOUNT OF $63,000 (AB2000 -060)
39
40
10.
REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
41
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND VISITING NURSE
42
PERSONAL SERVICES TO PROVIDE FOR NURSING SERVICES IN THE
43
WHATCOM COUNTY JAIL, IN THE CONTRACT AMOUNT OF
44
$293,170.50 (AB2000 -061)
45
46
11.
REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
47
PURCHASE OF SPECIAL SOFTWARE BY THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, TO
48
CONNECT THE WASHINGTON STATE ACCESS SYSTEM VIA THE AS4001
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 15
1 WITH THE SOLE SOURCE VENDOR BEING NEW WORLD SYSTEMS, FOR
2 A TOTAL AMOUNT OF $43,120 (AB2000 -026)
3
4 OTHER ITEMS
5
6 1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2000 BUDGET, REQUEST NO. 1 (AB2000-
7 047)
8
9 Nelson reported for Finance and Administrative Services Committee and
10 moved to adopt.
11
12 Motion carried unanimously.
13
14 2. RESOLUTION CONDITIONALLY APPROVING BIRCH BAY WATER AND
15 SEWER DISTRICT COMPREHENSIVE SEWER SYSTEM PLAN (AB2000-
16 044)
17
18 Brenner reported for Public Works Committee and moved approval.
19
20 McShane stated it was a very complicated plan and required complicated
21 review. He had concerns when he began reading the plan. Staff addressed his
22 concerns extremely well.
23
24 Motion carried unanimously.
25
26 3. ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 99 -087, AMENDMENTS TO THE
27 WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING TEXT TO REVISE PROCEDURES FOR
28 TRANSFERRING DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS AND DESIGNATE THE LAKE
29 WHATCOM WATERSHED AS A SENDING AREA (AB2000 -43)
30
31 Hoag reported for Planning and Development Committee and stated this was
32 before the Council because they inadvertently left out an exemption of Sudden
33 Valley for six months when they adopted the transfer of development rights with
34 the Development Regulations last year. The Planning Commission approved the
35 exemption and it was supposed to come to the Council for consideration. The
36 committee approved this item and made the following amendment on page three of
37 the ordinance. She so moved.
38 "Section 3. WCC 20.89.021 is amended as follows:
39 .021 Development Rights. The residential building rights permitted
40 to a lot, parcel or area of land under the base density of the Whatcom
41 County Comprehensive Plan and the Official Whatcom County Zoning
42 Ordinance (Title 20, WCC), measured in maximum dwelling units per
43 developable acre. Where the land is impacted by critical areas, as
44 defined in Title 16, development potential shall be demonstrated by
45 the landowner with consideration given to opportunities for cluster
46 development. In the event of any conflict between the Comprehensive
47 Plan and the Zoning Ordinance, the density standards of the
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 16
1 Comprehensive Plan shall control. It is not the purpose of this section
2 to create any such potential which would not otherwise exist."
3
4 In addition, the current Section 3 of the ordinance shall become Section 4.
5
6 Motion to amend carried unanimously.
7
8 Motion to adopt the amended ordinance carried unanimously.
9
10 4. ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING SITING CRITERIA AND DEVELOPMENT
11 STANDARDS FOR WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES
12 (AB2000 -048)
13
14 Hoag reported for Planning and Development Committee and stated it was
15 unanimously recommended with two changes. She moved to amend language in
16 the ordinance, the first sentence in section 20.13.100 on packet page 322,
17 "...administrative approval permit, except where a conditional use permit is required
18 in WCC 20.13.080 and 20.13.070, and shall be processed...." If a facility is to be
19 located with an existing building, it can have an administrative approval permit.
20 However, a new structure must have a conditional use permit. This amendment
21 clears up that process.
22
23 Brenner thanked Sylvia Goodwin and the people in the Planning Department
24 because the councilmembers received many telephone calls from the public. Many
25 people wanted to build cell towers in Whatcom County because other counties had
26 development standards and Whatcom County had none.
27
28 Motion to amend carried unanimously.
29
30 Hoag stated there was also a change that was suggested by staff. She
31 moved to amend section 20.13.020, the definitions, "(14) "Site. For the purpose of
32 this chapter, site means a building, structure, leased area in compliance with the
33 provisions to Whatcom County subdivision regulations (Title 21, WCC), site
34 easement area or lot of record upon which a wireless communications facility is or
35 will be located." This language will clarify the lease language.
36
37 Motion to amend carried unanimously.
38
39 Hoag stated the ordinance accomplishes setting priorities for cell tower
40 location siting. They are in descending order, with new residential structures being
41 at the bottom of the priority location list. The ordinance was nicely done. She
42 moved to adopt as amended.
43
44 Motion to adopt as amended carried unanimously.
45
46 S. APPOINTMENTS TO THE WATER CONSERVANCY BOARD (AB99 -389A)
47
48 Hoag nominated Buzz Strickland for the two -year position.
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 17
1
2 Imhof nominated Joseph Kirkman for the two -year position.
3
4 Hoag stated Strickland is the constituent they've been dealing with on the
5 Ritter Road flood project. They've had quite a bit of contact with him. He has
6 incredible contacts regarding water rights and water knowledge. He also helped
7 with the litigation regarding the Yakima water rights. He has inundated her with
8 water law from all over the country. He is a farmer. It is important to have a
9 farmer represented on this board.
10
11 Brenner supported Strickland. He gave the Council a wonderful tour of the
12 Ritter Road project and an education on the problem and why they needed to move
13 ahead. He did a lot of work showing the Council the problems.
14
15 Council approved Strickland 4 -3 with McShane, Imhof, and Dawson opposed.
16
17 Hoag nominated Robert Barker for the four -year position.
18
19 Council appointed Robert Barker unanimously.
20
21 Imhof nominated Doug Clark for the six -year term.
22
23 Council appointed Doug Clark unanimously.
24
25 6. APPOINTMENTS TO THE FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT ADVISORY
26 COMMITTEE ALTERNATE MEMBER LIST (AB99 -375A)
27
28 Brenner moved to appoint David Hunter and Don Redman by acclamation.
29
30 Motion carried unanimously.
31
32 7. APPOINTMENT OF LARRY MCCARTER TO THE WASTE COLLECTION
33 INDUSTRY POSITION ON THE SOLID WASTE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
34 (AB2000 -051)
35
36 Brenner moved to appoint Larry McCarter to represent the waste collection
37 industry on the Solid Waste Advisory Committee.
38
39 Motion carried 5 -2 with Imhof and Nelson opposed..
40
41 S. ORDINANCE RESCINDING THE ORDINANCE RESTRICTING TOBACCO
42 ADVERTISING (AB2000 -042) (COUNCIL AS HEALTH BOARD)
43
44 Imhof moved to adopt.
45
46 Chuck Benjamin, Health and Human Services Director, stated it is with deep
47 regret that his department and the Public Health Advisory Board forward this
48 ordinance to rescind the tobacco advertising ordinance. The good news is that this
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 18
1 may be a short -lived rescission of the ordinance. He is in close contact with
2 Tacoma and Pierce County on a weekly basis. The latest report is that the State
3 Department of Health, the State of Washington, and other states who have similar
4 ordinances are going to fight the latest decision. However, Civil Deputy Prosecutor
5 Randy Watts recommends that the County still rescind the ordinance because they
6 will not be able to enforce it. Hopefully some day in the near future he will be able
7 to come back to the Council and resubmit this ordinance.
8
9 Hoag stated that they would temporarily rescind the ordinance since they
10 have to. Depending on the outcome of the appeals, she would like the Board of
11 Health to find other ways to address this if this is found unconstitutional.
12
13 Imhof stated they should look at it in the meantime and not wait for a court
14 decision.
15
16 Hoag stated that if the Council proposes something different, she would like
17 the state to allow them to use tobacco funds to defend it if it becomes necessary.
18 That is what that money is there for.
19
20 Brenner thanked Benjamin and everyone who brought the tobacco
21 advertising ordinance forward. Even though it didn't turn out this time, she was
22 pleased they did it. The only way they ever get things changed is by pushing the
23 limits.
24
25 Motion to adopt the ordinance carried unanimously.
26
27 9. REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE EXECUTIVE'S APPOINTMENT OF
28 DAVID DAVIDSON TO HIS FIRST FOUR -YEAR TERM AS A MEMBER OF
29 THE PUBLIC HEALTH ADVISORY BOARD (AB2000 -063)
30
31 Nelson moved to confirm the appointment.
32
33 Motion carried unanimously.
34
35 10. REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE EXECUTIVE'S APPOINTMENT OF
36 BEN DENSON AND JANET LUTZ -SMITH TO THEIR FIRST FULL THREE -
37 YEAR TERM AS A MEMBER OF THE SUBSTANCE ABUSE ADVISORY
38 BOARD (AB2000 -064)
39
40 Nelson moved to confirm the appointments.
41
42 Motion carried unanimously.
43
44
45 INTRODUCTION ITEMS
46
47 Imhof moved to accept the Introduction Items.
48
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 19
1 Motion carried unanimously.
2
3 1. RESOLUTION INITIATING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING
4 AMENDMENTS (AB2000 -065)
5
6 2. RESOLUTION VACATING A PORTION OF 5T" STREET, A.K.A.
7 TELEGRAPH ROAD (AB2000 -066)
8
9 3. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2000 BUDGET, REQUEST NO. 2 (AB2000-
10 067)
11
12 4. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE CHAPTERS 20.83
13 AND 20.38 REGARDING NONCONFORMING LOTS AND LOT
14 CONSOLIDATION (AB2000 -075)
15
16
17 OTHER BUSINESS
18
19 Dawson brought forward the resolution that was proposed during the open
20 session.
21
22 Imhof stated he would not vote on something for which he has not seen the
23 text that is going before the legislature.
24
25 Dawson stated there was some language that dealt with setbacks and
26 buffers. As was stated this afternoon, the Council deals with function. That would
27 add some complexity to the issue. This ordinance deals with setbacks.
28
29 Imhof stated he wanted to see what he would be voting to support.
30
31 McShane stated he understood the councilmembers' hesitancy to vote on
32 something they haven't had time to look at. The recommendations were given to
33 all councilmembers today. They were also dropped off earlier than today. This
34 committee was comprised of a group of citizens and agency people. The
35 recommendations were made on December 13, 1999. The State Department of
36 Natural Resources (DNR) has not responded. The state legislature didn't act.
37 These recommendations couldn't go public until very recently. It has created a
38 difficult situation. There is a short period of time in which the state legislature must
39 look at this and a short period of time because the Forest Board will look at this on
40 February 1. Therefore, they are not going to have any input from the County
41 Council as a whole unless the Council says that these people looked carefully at the
42 drinking water from the lake. They may have gone around the Forestry Forum
43 because they didn't feel that they were getting the response they needed. They
44 needed to bring about a change in state law. They successfully did that. The state
45 law said last year that they should bring forward recommendations. He hoped the
46 Council would recognize that these are things that are going to protect the lake. It
47 is important that DNR hears from the Council as a whole. They are certainly going
48 to hear from him as an individual. He moved to approve the resolution as it is.
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 20
1
2 Nelson stated this was a committee that was created as a result of state
3 legislation. It was appointed because of State Senator Harriet Spanel and her
4 concerns regarding a forestry cut. That forestry cut had been before the Forestry
5 Forum on many occasions and included DNR. The Forestry Forum is a citizen's
6 group in the Lake Whatcom watershed that contains the citizens that live in the
7 watershed, the groups of loggers that participate in the watershed, participants
8 from DNR, and any member of the public who wants to attend. This document has
9 not been before the Forestry Forum at all. Neither has the presentation of their
10 recommendations been brought before the Forestry Forum. Probably 98 percent of
11 the resolution is good material. Much of DNR's effort is taking place and
12 encompasses the concerns that are probably addressed in the resolution. This is
13 not a group that was created by the County Council and has not come before the
14 Council early on. If the Council wants to support the group's efforts, that is fine.
15 But to support the group's recommendation, the Council has to be careful because
16 they have not had any public scrutiny.
17
18 Hoag stated the resolution does not address a future bill. The only bill that it
19 addresses is the one that was passed last year and that created the committee.
20 The resolution says the County Council supports clean water, endorses the Lake
21 Whatcom watershed advisory committee's recommendations, and requests that the
22 Washington State legislature pass legislation and policies that will implement these.
23 The recommendations from the committee were dropped off at the Council Office
24 last week. She had an opportunity to review them. For anyone who didn't, the
25 Council can take a short break. It is only three pages and the recommendations
26 are very straightforward. It recommends development of a sustainable yield model
27 that is specific to the Lake Whatcom watershed. Type five streams should have a
28 designated riparian management zone. The recommendations are very cut and
29 dried. They recommend that Lookout Mountain Road must be brought into
30 compliance with forest practice standards as soon as possible and independent with
31 timber harvest plans. They also recommend that DNR develop a comprehensive
32 road construction maintenance and abandonment plan to include all existing and
33 orphaned roads. When legislation moves through Olympia, it moves very quickly.
34 She asked Jaime Berg, who brought this to Natural Resources Committee during
35 the morning meeting, to check with the people in Olympia to determine the
36 timeframe they have before possible approval. It is supposed to be out of
37 committee by February 4. The Council doesn't meet again until February 8. It is
38 important that the County Council have some input on this because they are
39 charged with dealing with Lake Whatcom. They are part of the joint Lake Whatcom
40 Management Committee. They have been dealing with all this. She questioned
41 who would be better to represent the constituents on this issue. If the
42 councilmembers don't support the recommendations and the resolution, then they
43 can vote against it. However, the County Council should be taking action on this
44 tonight.
45
46 Brenner stated she read the resolution and recommendations last week. It is
47 not complicated. She didn't have any trouble with it. She saw it as a push forward
48 to protect the watershed. She was concerned about getting this information at
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 21
1 such a late date. She respected the Forestry Forum and their work. If time wasn't
2 so critical, she would rather postpone it, but it is important that their voice is heard.
3
4 Nelson stated he had a lot of questions regarding this. Many questions were
5 raised at past meetings of the Forestry Forum when they discussed Austin Flats,
6 which is the particular cut that has created this issue from the two citizens involved
7 in the committee. Whatcom County has had a process in which these items go
8 through the Forestry Forum. The Forum has addressed this issue for several years.
9 All of a sudden, a legislator has decided they need a different process. Now, they
10 are asking the Council to make a recommendation without review by the Council's
11 advisory groups or citizen involvement. They are being told to go by the word of an
12 advisory group that was formed to deal with this particular issue. There are
13 concerns that DNR has raised regarding impacts to the community. There have
14 been issues regarding road vacations that cost money and have impacts that have
15 not been reviewed. The Council is voting on something that has a long history and
16 a long development in process. However, they haven't heard a presentation from
17 DNR or the citizens who will be impacted. The Council needs to take a careful look
18 at this. He was in favor of doing everything possible to protect the Lake Whatcom
19 water quality, but they can't jump into the fire because the frying pan is hot.
20
21 Imhof stated it is a bit premature. They are addressing legislation by
22 approving this. They are sending comments down to a committee that has drafted
23 documentation and legislation. He wanted to see what that documentation and
24 legislation is before he sends a recommendation to them. He had a few concerns
25 about some of the recommendations that are made in the resolution. They still
26 have time. The bill's sponsor, Harriet Spanel, will receive the Council's concerns at
27 that time. There are eight weeks left in the session. They need to move quickly,
28 but prudently.
29
30 Nelson stated he wanted to take this to the Forestry Forum. If the Forestry
31 Forum gives its recommendation, they will have more input.
32
33 Imhof stated it would look better.
34
35 McShane stated that the Forestry Forum has provided a great service.
36 However, this came about because the concerns about DNR's practices came before
37 the Forestry Forum. There were concerns that the DNR was using the same rules
38 they use everywhere in a drinking water reservoir.
39
40 Nelson stated that wasn't true.
41
42 McShane stated the Forestry Forum was not able to bring about any change,
43 so this is what has resulted from that. There is a limit to how far the Forestry
44 Forum can go. It has no legislative authority whatsoever.
45
46 Hoag moved to amend language on the first line of the proposed resolution,
47 "Lake Whatcom is the sole drinking water source for half of the residents of
48 Whatcom County..."
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 22
1
2 Motion carried unanimously.
3
4 Hoag moved to correct a scrivener's error, "...The Council fully endorses the
5 Lake Whatcom Watershed Advisory Committee's recommendations; a-f:14.."
6
7 Dawson stated that was a scrivener's error and didn't require a vote.
8
9 Motion to approve failed 3 -4 with McShane, Hoag, and Brenner in favor.
10
11 Hoag requested that the resolution go into the Council packet and be
12 scheduled for the next meeting.
13
14 Dawson questioned whether it was appropriate to schedule the item when
15 they have already voted on it.
16
17 Hoag stated some of the councilmembers may have voted against the
18 resolution because they felt it was premature and there was a lack of public
19 process.
20
21 Dawson agreed.
22
23 Imhof stated it would have to be reconsidered.
24
25
26 REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS
27
28 Hoag stated things happened regarding the power plant in Sumas. She also
29 attended the climate change summit that was held in Canada. It was very
30 interesting. They brought up a lot of scientific evidence. She brought back
31 information. They discussed the effects of the Gulf Stream. They don't talk about
32 global warming anymore because everyone gets the impression that the earth will
33 all turn into California. Instead, they are talking about climate change and they are
34 dealing with specific things. For instance, New York had to be sprayed for Nile
35 Fever, which they have never had to do before. It is because the range of the
36 mosquitoes has extended because the climate has warmed to that point. They said
37 that 1998 and 1999 were the hottest years on record for the last 1,000 years.
38
39 Dawson stated there was a presentation on this issue during one of the
40 committee meetings. They questioned the science.
41
42 Hoag stated it was interesting, but that presenter did not have much
43 information.
44
45 Nelson stated they discussed the Shoreline Master Plan in the Natural
46 Resource Committee. The comment period goes until March 1.
47
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 23
1 McShane stated he would be making an effort to take notes of the meeting to
2 come up with a list of concerns. If anyone wants to add their concerns, they should
3 let him know. This does have an impact. They are talking about influencing things
4 at the state level. The first draft incorporated tremendous changes from what they
5 heard from different commissioners, councils, and other groups.
6
7 McShane also reported that the EFSEC process didn't go for early
8 interveners. The adjudication process won't begin until after they submit their draft
9 environmental impact statement. If anyone has any interest in that, people can
10 become interveners at the time the draft environmental impact statement comes
11 out.
12
13 Brenner stated she talked to the Opportunity Council. They are concerned
14 that there is not a lot of continuity on this council. It is very complex. They
15 suggested that Kay Guirl, Personal Health Services Manager, be the representative
16 for the County. Guirl said she would love to do it, and Chuck Benjamin, Health and
17 Human Services Director, agreed to appoint another staff person when she leaves
18 the County later this year. Brenner relinquished her position in favor of having a
19 more knowledgeable person.
20
21 Hoag stated she sat on that council for two years. They talk about the need
22 for continuity, and then they appoint someone who will be leaving in a year.
23
24 Brenner stated it is not just Kay Guirl who has a lot of experience with the
25 Opportunity Council. The entire Health Department has worked very closely with
26 the Opportunity Council. Cindy, from the Opportunity Council, called her and
27 requested a representative from the Health Department because the Health
28 Department has been so actively involved.
29
30 Brenner stated she and Sam Crawford went to the foothills this past weekend
31 to look at the recreational vehicle (RV) mess at Peaceful Valley and Paradise Lakes.
32 It is shocking. If they had done enforcement on violations when this started
33 happening, it wouldn't be so overwhelming right now. If they enforce the
34 regulations they have, the residents would be happy.
35
36 Brenner also stated that the Treaty Day Celebration was excellent. She
37 requested a copy of the play script.
38
39 Dawson stated four councilmembers attended that celebration. There was
40 good representation.
41
42 Crawford stated there has been a noticeable deterioration of the situation at
43 Paradise Lakes in the last two years. It is not a stable situation, and is getting
44 worse. There will be a meeting with several County officials to discuss options the
45 Prosecutor's Office has to remedy the situation because they are overloaded with
46 the criminal caseload and don't want to do this. They need to do something. There
47 are public health hazards and a deteriorating socio- economic situation. It would be
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, 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
irresponsible to neglect that. The meeting will be on February 1 at 3:00 p.m. at the
County Executive's Office. He and Councilmember Brenner will attend.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
These minutes were approved by Council on March 7 , 2000.
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Marlene Dawson, Council Chair
Regular County Council Meeting, 1/25/2000, Page 25