HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil May 30 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
May 30, 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
Barbara Brenner
Sam Crawford
Robert Imhof
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Absent:
Connie Hoag
Dawson stated that during Committee of the Whole there was Discussion
with Deputy Administrator Dewey Desler, Sheriff Dale Brandland, and
Councilmember Ward Nelson regarding the planning of new institutions -
jail facilities (AB2000- 201A). In the next month or so, the County Council will
receive the comprehensive recommendations from the law and justice consultants.
Looking at new jail facilities will be a part of their recommendation.
Dawson also announced that there was Discussion regarding Walla Walla
Ordinance No. 219, an ordinance coordinating county, federal, and state
government actions affecting land and natural resources use (AB2000-
201) during Committee of the Whole and stated that this item will go into
committee.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE FOLLOWING MEETINGS: BOARD OF
HEALTH FOR APRIL 25, 2000; SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING (WATER
RESOURCES WORK SESSION) FOR APRIL 11, 2000
Imhof moved to approve.
Brenner moved to hold in Council so corrections can be made.
Motion to postpone carried unanimously.
Regular County Council, 5/30/2000, Page 1
1 OPEN SESSION
2
3 The following people spoke:
4
5 Tom Cowan, Northwest Straits Commission, thanked the Council for its
6 resolution on the Northwest Straits Marine Conservation Initiative, which was
7 approved last year and formed the Marine Resources Committee for Whatcom
8 County. It is a voluntary initiative. There are seven eligible counties. In each
9 county, the legislative authorities unanimously approved joining the initiative. That
10 is a strong statement for protecting the marine resources. He also thanked County
11 Executive Pete Kremen for his endorsement. They have been doing a number of
12 training programs and offering technical training to the Marine Resources
13 Committee. They have also established a number of grant projects. They allowed
14 seven grants to protect and restore marine resources, such as shellfish, wild
15 salmon, bottom fish, and their habitats. He came to the Council meeting to give
16 the County a $25,000 grant to conduct a shoreline inventory for marine habitat.
17
18 Executive Kremen thanked Mr. Cowan for his work. This will help conduct
19 the inventory process, which help protect the habitat and the resources in the
20 marine areas.
21
22 Robert Marconi, Colacurcio Brothers representative, spoke to the award of
23 the Yew Street Road contract for improvements. Colacurcio submitted a bid on a
24 Public Works project. He believed that, under the rules established by the bid
25 documents, an altered bid must be rejected. He read from the bid documents.
26 There was discussion about waiving bid formalities. One section of the bid
27 documents described the circumstances in which the County can consider waiving
28 the requirements, however they don't apply because this is an altered bid situation.
29 When a bid is altered, it is very clear that the bid will be rejected. If there was any
30 ambiguity regarding the bid rules, the bidders were all put on notice in the bid
31 documents that they were required to contact the County to seek clarification.
32 Colacurcio, like four of the other bidders, understood the bid requirements. Anyone
33 who read all of the bid documents understood that one doesn't cross out an
34 estimated quantity. When the bid documents are clear, and the bidder made a
35 mistake and didn't seek clarification. Under those circumstances, the award of the
36 bid should go to Colacurcio instead of Friberg. It was interesting during the
37 committee meeting that a third bidder from Wilder Construction came forward and
38 spoke in favor of following the rules. The recommendation was made by Public
39 Works to award to Colacurcio Brothers, and said the County would best be served
40 by applying the rules in a simple, straightforward fashion. The benefit is that all
41 bidders will understand that the rules mean what they say and what will happen.
42
43 Steve Minkham, Friberg Construction representative, stated Friberg is the
44 bidder who requested that their bid be corrected. Item number three on schedule A
45 indicates traffic control labor at 4,600 hours at $27 per hour. The footnote at the
46 bottom of the page references the minimum bid requirements under traffic control
47 labor in the special provisions. Friberg responded to that. The special provisions
48 indicate that the contractor must bid the same unit price amount for the traffic
Regular County Council, 5/30/2000, Page 2
1 control labor in both schedules A and Schedule B. It indicates the same unit price.
2 Friberg went to schedule number B, which does not refer the contractor back to the
3 special provisions, but instead says that the amount bid for this item shall be the
4 same amount as in schedule A, item three. The amount bid for this item shall be
5 the same. Friberg changed the bid quantity because that was the amount bid in
6 schedule A. The unit price stayed the same, as set forth in the special provisions.
7 The bid amount, $124,000 as set forth in item three of schedule A, remain the
8 same. The question is whether the County can change and correct the bid. The
9 answer to that is a resounding yes. The specifications allow the County to do that.
10 It talks about consideration of the bid. The critical aspect of this bid is the unit
11 price. If there is any difference or problem between the extended price and the
12 unit price, the unit price controls. The County has the option to make that change.
13 Initially, the County awarded the bid to Friberg. On that basis, Friberg proceeded.
14 In the County's revised recommendation, it references the misinterpretation of a
15 footnote. There is no misinterpretation of a footnote. The footnote specifically says
16 the amount of the bid needs to be the same as in schedule A. The revised
17 recommendation also says that a straightforward reading of the specification denies
18 or rejects the alteration. However language says the County can correct the bid.
19 He requested that the bid be awarded to Friberg Construction.
20
21
22 PUBLIC HEARING
23
24 1. ORDINANCE PROPOSING REVISIONS TO WCC 24.06, SOLID WASTE
25 RULES (AB2000 -194)
26
27 Chris Chesson, Environmental Health Supervisor, stated the major impetus
28 for this rule revision was the Medical Waste Task Force recommendation that they
29 implement biomedical waste handling regulations for Whatcom County. Pursuant to
30 that recommendation, the Health Department drafted changes to Whatcom County
31 Code (WCC) 24.06. The draft was presented to a work group of several
32 stakeholders including a dentist, hospital representatives, a veterinary clinic, and
33 others to review the biomedical waste section. Their comments were incorporated
34 where appropriate. The draft was presented to the Public Health Advisory Board,
35 the Solid Waste Advisory Committee, and the Board of Health. Their comments
36 were also incorporated where appropriate. A State Environmental Protection Act
37 (SEPA) determination of non - significance (DNS) was issued. This rule was
38 introduced at the May 16 Council meeting.
39
40 He discussed some of the highlights in the draft. A new biomedical waste
41 section has been added pursuant to the Medical Waste Task Force
42 recommendations. The existing WCC 24.06 has an extensive section on the
43 handling of bio- solids in the County. The state Department of Ecology (DOE)
44 recently adopted its own bio- solids management rule, Washington Administrative
45 Code (WAC) 173 -308. As a result of this regulation, bio- solids are no longer
46 considered to be a solid waste, so they were removed from the solid waste rules.
47 However, there is a memorandum of agreement with the DOE, which exists to
48 ensure that Health and Human Services does implement WAC 173 -308. They are
Regular County Council, 5/30/2000, Page 3
1 assuring that bio- solids are managed in an appropriate manner, consistent with
2 that regulation in Whatcom County.
3
4 They revised the public hearing section. Public hearings will still be held for
5 all new facility applications, but will only be held for existing permit renewals,
6 modifications, or variance requests if a request for a hearing is received. They
7 spent a large amount of time in the public hearing process, and no one showed up.
8 If there is a request for a hearing on a variance request or permit renewal, one will
9 be held. They will still have public hearings for all new facility applications.
10
11 The Health Department has historically issued an annual solid waste permit.
12 Pursuant to changes in the RCW, the local health officer has the option of issuing a
13 five -year solid waste permit. They propose issuing a five -year permit for some
14 types of facilities, not all types of facilities.
15
16 The appeals section of the code is also changed. During a recent review of a
17 Hearing Examiner appeal of a solid waste permit revocation, it was discovered a
18 conflict exists between the appeals process designated in the RCW and the process
19 in the existing County code. The Hearing Examiner concluded that the RCW was
20 the applicable appeals process. All further solid waste permit decisions will be in
21 accordance with the existing RCW.
22
23 The existing County code does not include an enforcement section, which
24 they've added. It incorporates and references the applicable components of WCC
25 24.07, regarding administrative notice proceedings, civil penalties, and abatement.
26
27 The ordinance also adopts several state WAC's by reference. WAC 173 -304
28 is the minimum functional standards for solid waste handling. WAC 173 -351 is the
29 Washington State regulations for municipal landfills.
30
31 Brenner stated WCC section 24.06.06(1)(b) on packet page 394 was not the
32 understanding. This was brought up at the previous Board of Health meeting. It
33 was her understanding that there would be public hearings scheduled every year for
34 the major facilities such as landfills. That is not what the proposed language says.
35 The Board of Health decided that it would take out moderate -risk waste facilities
36 from the yearly permit requirement. This is not acceptable. She mentioned
37 Recomp specifically at the Board of Health meeting and was told their permit would
38 be required to have a public hearing on an annual basis. They are an existing
39 facility.
40
41 Regina Delahunt, Environmental Health Supervisor, stated the wording is
42 exactly the same as what was presented to the Board of Health. There are two
43 things. There are permit renewal extensions, which can range from one to five
44 years. For facilities such as Recomp, it would be a one -year permit.
45
46 McShane questioned whether yearly notification would still be sent out.
47 Delahunt stated that is correct. If there is no response, then no hearing would be
48 held. If there is a response, then a hearing would be held.
Regular County Council, 5/30/2000, Page 4
1
2 Brenner stated Mr. Chesson indicated the impetus for this was the Medical
3 Waste Task Force. The Medical Waste Task Force is made up of a lot of diverse
4 interests. What the task force came up with is already a compromise. Dr. Barnes
5 made a motion that all stocks and cultures, level two and above, be treated on site.
6 The compromise was compromised by diluting the motion down to only level three
7 and four stocks and cultures. She appreciated that measles, tuberculosis, and
8 varicella were added. Her concern is that there are highly infectious level two
9 organisms that should be treated on site. It was not the intent of the Public Health
10 Advisory Board or the Board of Health to leave out infectious diseases. She moved
11 to insert language on packet pages 385 -386, section 24.06.04(2)(d), "...Such
12 cultures include infectious agents associated with diseases that include, but are not
13 limited to, tuberculosis, measles, and varicella. Bio- safety level two stocks and
14 cultures, which contain highly infectious organisms, shall be treated on site. Stocks
15 and Cultures...." That way, they won't force anyone to treat all level two stocks and
16 cultures on site, only the ones that are highly infectious.
17
18 Imhof questioned who would make that determination.
19
20 Dawson asked for examples.
21
22 Brenner stated there are easy ones, such as staphylococcus, streptococcus,
23 and salmonella. Those would be ones treated on site. Others can be discretionary.
24 Right now, highly contagious level two stocks and cultures should be treated on site
25 like tuberculosis, measles, and varicella are. There are new strains of these
26 organisms that are highly resistant to antibiotics. There is a new drug out, but it
27 may or may not take care of the problem. Until they know for sure, they should
28 include this language.
29
30 Dawson opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, Dawson closed the
31 public hearing.
32
33 Dawson stated salmonella is found everywhere.
34
35 Brenner stated it is in much higher concentrations when on stocks and
36 cultures. It can be very devastating. If tuberculosis, measles, and varicella are
37 treated on site, then other organisms can be treated also.
38
39 Nelson stated salmonella and streptococcus are in the community and can be
40 spread through many mechanisms. He questioned the benefit of this. If
41 streptococcus, salmonella, and staphylococcus were being grown in large cultures,
42 he could understand.
43
44 Brenner stated this language didn't come from her. It came from a staff
45 member at the Center for Disease Control (CDC) and a consultant and former
46 employee of the CDC.
47
48 Imhof moved to adopt the ordinance.
Regular County Council, 5/30/2000, Page 5
1
2 Brenner stated those two people stated to Wayne Turnberg, who is one of
3 the top experts in the country, that all level two stocks and cultures should be
4 treated on site. She is trying to compromise by only requiring that highly infectious
5 level two organisms be treated on site. Whatcom County has a regional facility.
6 Stocks and cultures contain the most concentrated levels. A person may or may
7 not catch those diseases from someone who has the disease. She restated her
8 motion to insert language on packet pages 385 -386, section 24.06.04(2)(d),
9 "...Such cultures include infectious agents associated with diseases that include, but
10 are not limited to, tuberculosis, measles, and varicella. Bio- safety level two stocks
11 and cultures, which contain highly infectious organisms, shall be treated on site.
12 Stocks and Cultures...."
13
14 Nelson stated they are not highly infectious. An individual can get
15 streptococcus from contact and salmonella from eating certain uncooked foods. He
16 was unsure what Councilmember Brenner wanted to regulate.
17
18 Brenner stated something that is highly infectious to humans is something
19 that is easily contagious to human beings. Those particular diseases affect the
20 young, infirm, and those with compromised immune systems. It can even effect
21 healthy people. There are new strains of all three of those particular organisms
22 that are highly antibiotic - resistant. They should be treated on site.
23
24 Crawford questioned whether they would send this back to the Public Health
25 Advisory Board to look at.
26
27 Brenner stated no.
28
29 Imhof stated the Public Health Advisory Board already made its
30 recommendation.
31
32 Brenner stated the Medical Waste Task Force also made its recommendation.
33
34 Motion to amend failed 5 -1 with Brenner in favor.
35
36 Brenner stated it is disrespectful to put together a lot of respectable people
37 and disregard their recommendations and compromises. The Medical Waste Task
38 Force spent a supermajority of their time on this. This was its recommendation.
39 The County Council should respect their input.
40
41 Motion to adopt carried 5 -1 with Brenner opposed.
42
43
44 CONSENT AGENDA
45
46 Nelson reported for Finance and Administrative Services Committee and
47 moved approval of Consent Agenda items one through seven and nine. Item ten
48 was not an action item. It was just for discussion.
Regular County Council, 5/30/2000, Page 6
1
2
McShane withdrew item numbers one and two.
3
4
Motion to approve items three through seven and nine carried unanimously.
5
6
2.
REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID #00-
7
32 TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE BIDDER, VALLEY FREIGHTLINER,
8
INC., FOR THE PURCHASE OF A FIVE YARD 4X4 DUMP TRUCK IN THE
9
AMOUNT OF $89,769.37 (AB2000 -204)
10
11
Nelson moved approval.
12
13
Motion carried unanimously.
14
15
1.
REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
16
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY
17
AND STEWART AND KING PARTNERSHIP FOR PREPARATION OF A RE-
18
DESIGN STUDY FOR HEALTH CENTER BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS IN
19
AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $21,000 (AB2000 -203)
20
21
Nelson moved approval.
22
23
Motion carried unanimously.
24
25
3.
REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID #00-
26
47 TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE BIDDER, HARDWARE SALES, INC.,
27
FOR SUPPLY OF ADS N -12 CULVERT, IN THE AMOUNT OF $39,005.85
28
(AB2000 -205)
29
30
4.
REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID #00-
31
53 TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE BIDDER, WASHINGTON CULVERT,
32
FOR SUPPLY OF GALVANIZED CULVERT, IN THE AMOUNT OF
33
$59,032.30 (AB2000 -206)
34
35
S.
AWARD OF BID AND AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER
36
INTO A CONTRACT WITH THE BELLINGHAM HERALD AS WHATCOM
37
COUNTY'S OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER (AB2000 -207)
38
39
6.
RESOLUTION SETTING A HEARING AND NOTICE OF HEARING ON
40
SALE OF COUNTY TAX TITLE PROPERTY (AB2000 -208)
41
42
7.
RESOLUTION TO CANCEL THE UNCOLLECTIBLE WELCOME CEMETERY
43
FLOOD CONTROL ASSESSMENT FOR PARCEL NO. 390527 400102
44
0000(AB2000 -209)
45
46
8.
RESOLUTION APPROVING COUNTY ROAD PROJECT NO. 992224 AND
47
THE AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE YEW STREET ROAD
48
IMPROVEMENTS (AB2000 -210)
Regular County Council, 5/30/2000, Page 7
1
2 Nelson stated this came out of committee with a 1 -1 vote. He moved to
3 award the bid to Colacurcio Brothers.
4
5 Imhof stated there is a bit of ambiguity in the bid. In the special
6 instructions, it does say that the unit price must be the same, which it was. He is
7 not going to support the motion. Also, they need to amend the bid to give the
8 Executive the power to award the bid should the award of the bid be contested in
9 court.
10
11 Dawson stated that they are going to have to be strict in the interpretation of
12 the bid to maintain a position of leadership and respect for the bidding process. He
13 will support Councilmember Nelson's motion.
14
15 Brenner stated this bid is no more or less ambiguous than other bids. There
16 is a section that requires bidders to ask about any ambiguity. Also, Friberg has
17 contracted with the County in the past. This would set more of a precedent that
18 the County could show favoritism one way or another. The entire section about
19 waiving informalities should be taken out, but it is a part of state law. The bid was
20 altered. She would support the motion.
21
22 Imhof suggested a friendly amendment to allow the administration the right
23 to award the bid if this is contested in court.
24
25 Nelson agreed to allow it as a separate amendment.
26
27 Motion to amend to allow the administration the right to award the bid if
28 contested in court carried unanimously.
29
30 Motion to award the bid to Colacurcio carried 5 -1 with Imhof opposed.
31
32 9. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
33 CONTRACT AMENDMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH AND
34 HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND WHATCOM COMMUNITY
35 HEALTH PARTNERSHIP FOR DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION
36 OF COMMUNITY HEALTH IMPROVEMENT INITIATIVES AS DELEGATED
37 TO THE LOCAL HEALTH DISTRICTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $37,500
38 (AB2000 -211)
39
40 10. ANNUAL REVIEW OF WHATCOM COUNTY FERRY RATES (AB2000 -212)
41
42
43 OTHER ITEMS
44
45 1. ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 2.130,
46 CREATING THE WHATCOM COUNTY RURAL COUNTY SALES AND USE
47 TAX ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AB2000 -195)
48
Regular County Council, 5/30/2000, Page 8
1 Nelson reported for Finance and Administrative Services Committee and
2 moved approval.
3
4 Imhof stated this is the ordinance to set up the advisory committee for the
5 sales tax that used to go to the state, but which the County reclaimed last July.
6 Part of the requirement is to set up an advisory committee to make
7 recommendations on how the tax should be spent. There are limited parameters
8 on how it should be spent.
9
10 Dawson stated the County Executive would chair the committee.
11
12 Imhof stated this committee will come back to the Council with
13 recommendations on how to use the funds.
14
15 McShane moved to amend packet page 68 under section 2.13.020, "The
16 committee is created ... to invest in capital public facility projects..."
17
18 Dawson stated the County could have a partnership.
19
20 Imhof stated it can be broader than just that.
21
22 McShane stated the "Whereas" statements emphasize public facilities. He
23 wouldn't have a problem with a partnership, but there has to be a public portion of
24 a partnership.
25
26 Imhof questioned who created the ordinance.
27
28 McShane read the first "Whereas" statement on packet page 66. He was
29 concerned that public facilities is the purpose of the Revised Code of Washington
30 (RCW).
31
32 Imhof stated the same language is in the third "Whereas" statement.
33
34 Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated the Council could indicate that it
35 is capital projects consistent with the state legislation. He questioned whether that
36 is the Council's intention.
37
38 McShane stated that is his intention. Mr. Desler's suggested language is
39 preferable, and he amended his amendment to say, "The committee is created ... to
40 invest in capital projects, consistent with RCW 82.14.370, that further...."
41
42 Brenner questioned whether that legislation is only for public facilities.
43
44 McShane stated he is not sure of that. He hasn't had a chance to look at the
45 RCW.
46
47 Desler stated that is what it's for.
48
Regular County Council, 5/30/2000, Page 9
1 Brenner stated she would then like to make it clear and just say it is for
2 public facilities.
3
4 Pete Kremen, County Executive, stated section 2.130.050(B), on packet page
5 69, states the projects must be public facilities in nature, and shall be defined as
6 publicly owned facilities that generate economic benefit to the citizens of Whatcom
7 County. If the Council wishes to have further clarification or repetition in the
8 purpose, the administration doesn't have any problem with that.
9
10 McShane stated it is needed for consistency.
11
12 Kremen suggested adding language to section 2.130.020, "The committee is
13 created ... to invest in capital projects, as defined in RCW 82.14.370, that further...."
14
15 Dawson questioned whether sewer lines would be considered publicly owned
16 facilities. Kremen stated they would. It is clarified in the state legislation. This is
17 strictly an advisory committee.
18
19 McShane restated his motion to add language to section 2.130.020, "The
20 committee is created ... to invest in capital projects, consistent with RCW 82.14.370,
21 that further...."
22
23 (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
24
25 Motion to amend carried unanimously.
26
27 McShane moved to amend packet page 68, section 2.130.020. He is
28 concerned about prioritizing and what the committee should look at. "...that further
29 the goals for promoting the ongoing operation of business in Whatcom County:
30 promoting the expansion of locally owned businesses in Whatcom County;
31 promoting the expansion of existing businesses in Whatcom County;...." He wanted
32 locally owned businesses to be a higher priority.
33
34 Nelson stated he liked the concept, but it seems discriminatory. Some
35 businesses provide jobs to the county citizens. For instance, Intalco is not owned
36 in Whatcom County.
37
38 McShane stated those businesses would still be helped, but he wanted the
39 language mentioned.
40
41 Nelson stated he wasn't sure it was necessary. They are going to look at all
42 businesses in Whatcom County, and try to ensure it is done in a way that is
43 beneficial to the citizens of the county. He didn't want to include those types of
44 constraints.
45
46 Dawson stated this wasn't written in a way to prioritize the efforts.
47
Regular County Council, 5/30/2000, Page 10
1 Brenner stated the Council has said in the past that it wants to prioritize
2 locally owned and operated business. This language doesn't eliminate helping other
3 business. Whatcom County is losing many locally owned businesses to a lot of
4 mega- stores that are coming into the county.
5
6 Nelson stated that is due to economic factors.
7
8 McShane stated he wanted to promote the expansion of existing businesses;
9 he wanted to leave that language in there. He only wanted to add his language to
10 raise the consciousness level to promote locally owned existing business. Revenues
11 generated by locally owned businesses are more likely to stay in the county. A lot
12 of the profit generated by Intalco leaves the county. There is an added benefit of
13 keeping the revenue in the county if they promote locally owned businesses,
14 particularly small -scale businesses.
15
16 Brenner stated businesses have come into the county, and local government
17 provided the funds for infrastructure, only to have some of the businesses back out.
18 The infrastructure now exists in one particular location, which is now worth more
19 money. The property is now for sale for a lot more money.
20
21 Motion to amend failed 3 -3 with Brenner, McShane, and Dawson in favor.
22
23 McShane moved to strike item numbers seven on packet page 69, section
24 2.130.040(A) regarding the membership.
25
26 Brenner stated she supported the motion. The direction the Economic
27 Development Council has taken is not consistent with helping locally owned and
28 operated businesses. It has been moving in a different direction and she does not
29 support what they are doing.
30
31 McShane stated he is concerned the Economic Development Council has not
32 shown any interest in rural economic development, only areas that are not
33 depressed.
34
35 Kremen stated the legislation does not mandate this group of individuals.
36 This was something that was proposed by local entities, the small towns, the Port of
37 Bellingham, and others. In the legislation, it says that the County will work in
38 partnership, collaboration, and consultation with the Port, Economic Development
39 Council, and cities.
40
41 Dawson stated the County has to also coordinate its actions with citizen
42 groups.
43
44 Kremen stated fulfilling the state mandate was the intent of the group's
45 membership. The County Council will make the final determination of where the
46 funding will be spent. This is strictly an advisory committee that will put forward its
47 recommendations. The committee has no rule- making authority.
48
Regular County Council, 5/30/2000, Page 11
1 Nelson stated he couldn't support the motion. They have to include all the
2 players who are responsible in the community, whether or not the County
3 participates with them. The Economic Development Council is a member of the
4 community, has membership with individuals in the community, and its board
5 consists of existing businesses.
6
7 Crawford stated he couldn't think of a more appropriate group to include.
8 The president this year is the Gateway Pacific developer, who is tied into the
9 creation of jobs. The president last year was the owner of a large construction firm
10 that employs hundreds of people in the county. The kind of person that group
11 selects for its presidency is very representative of people who have a local, vested
12 interest in long -term economic development.
13
14 Brenner stated she didn't support the director as a member, but would
15 support the board president as a member.
16
17 Motion failed 5 -1 with McShane in favor.
18
19 McShane moved to amend packet page 69, section 2.130.050(C) regarding
20 organization. Within this ordinance, they are looking at what they want to
21 prioritize. Instead of waiting until after getting advice from the committee, the
22 Council could provide some direction to the committee regarding things the Council
23 wants to prioritize. He came up with three different items, and would make
24 separate motions for each. One of the three items is location of where public
25 facilities should be done, relating to areas of rural economically depressed areas of
26 Whatcom County. These areas include the Foothills area, Blaine, Everson,
27 Nooksack, Sumas, and Ferndale. He so moved.
28
29 Brenner suggested including Point Roberts.
30
31 Nelson suggesting identifying economically depressed areas by establishing
32 certain criteria. He suggested only specifying rural, depressed areas, and leave it
33 up to the committee to determine which areas qualify.
34
35 McShane accepted Nelson's suggestion. He wanted the committee to think
36 about the rural areas.
37
38 Crawford stated he is not excited about the locational criteria. He sees so
39 much of economic development being tied to jobs. People tend to live in various
40 parts of the county. Providing living wage jobs doesn't mean the people will live
41 where those jobs are located. Much of the public facility ordinance is regarding
42 infrastructure. It gives the County a chance to look at such areas as Cherry Point.
43 Cherry Point will provide jobs and economic benefit, but people will not live at
44 Cherry Point. He is concerned about including locational criteria.
45
46 Brenner stated she agreed with Crawford, but areas such as Cherry Point
47 have a lot of money being funneled that way to begin with. Many people, especially
Regular County Council, 5/30/2000, Page 12
1 in the Foothills area, would stay where they live if there were jobs. She wanted it
2 prioritized.
3
4 Imhof suggested that the policy direction be set after the committee has
5 been formed and the committee has had a chance to meet and set some of their
6 own priorities.
7
8 McShane stated the County has inherited population centers where no jobs
9 are available. People are choosing to live in those areas because there is
10 economically affordable housing. There are no jobs that go with the housing. On
11 the short term, the people can afford the housing they have, but the price of
12 commuting is high, and the price to the community for people to commute is also
13 high. Creating jobs in those areas should be a priority. There is no reason why the
14 Council can't send to the committee the areas that the Council wants to prioritize
15 for economic development, so the committee can think about those areas.
16
17 Motion to amend failed 3 -3 with Brenner, McShane, and Nelson in favor.
18
19 McShane stated he wanted to consider projects that would enhance
20 economically sustainable jobs and businesses, including jobs in agriculture,
21 fisheries, and timber production. He moved to amend packet page 69, section
22 2.1360.050(C) to include that priority.
23
24 Motion carried 4 -2 with Nelson and Crawford opposed.
25
26 McShane stated he would not propose his last amendment.
27
28 Nelson suggested he send the ideas to the committee. They are good ideas.
29
30 Desler asked the Council to consider an amendment to packet page 70,
31 section 2.130.060 regarding committee staffing, "The Whateem Geunty Planning
32 .
33 The County Executive shall designate the staffing for the committee."
34
35 Imhof so moved.
36
37 Motion carried unanimously.
38
39 Motion to approve the amended ordinance carried unanimously.
40
41 2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2000 BUDGET, REQUEST #7 (AB2000-
42 196)
43
44 Nelson reported for Finance and Administrative Services Committee and
45 moved to adopt.
46
47 Motion carried 5 -0 with McShane abstaining.
48
Regular County Council, 5/30/2000, Page 13
1 3. DISCUSSION WITH POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF
2 THE FLOOD CONTROL MAINTENANCE PROGRAM IN COASTAL AREAS
3 (AB2000 -202)
4
5 Nelson reported for Finance and Administrative Services Committee and
6 explained that staff will bring options to the Council at a later date.
7
8 4. DISCUSSION REGARDING REPLACING THE WHATCOM COUNTY FERRY
9 (AB2000 -200)
10
11 Brenner reported for Public Works and Capital Projects Committee and stated
12 this item was discussed.
13
14 Nelson suggested asking the Coast Guard to inspect the Whatcom Chief. The
15 last inspection was ten years ago.
16
17 S. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 12.56, VICTIM
18 MEMORIAL SIGN PROGRAM (AB2000 -197)
19
20 Brenner reported for Public Works and Capital Projects Committee and stated
21 this item was unanimously approved in committee. She so moved.
22
23 Motion carried unanimously.
24
25 6. ORDINANCE ADOPTING NEW WHATCOM COUNTY LAND DIVISION
26 REGULATIONS (TITLE 21), REPEALING THE EXISTING WHATCOM
27 COUNTY SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS (TITLE 21), AND MAKING
28 MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO TITLE 2 AND TITLE 20 (AB2000 -160)
29
30 McShane reported for Planning and Development Committee and stated this
31 was held in committee. This item will probably require a public hearing when the
32 committee is done with it.
33
34 7. RESOLUTION CREATING A LAKE SAMISH CITIZEN'S COMMITTEE FOR
35 WHATCOM COUNTY (AB2000 -176A)
36
37 McShane reported for Planning and Development Committee and stated this
38 was approved, with the addition of a Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
39 representative on the membership list. DNR is one of the major property owners in
40 the area, and they oversee a lot of the forestry uses. This deals with substantial
41 areas of rural forestry and commercial forestry within the Lake Samish watershed.
42 He has heard from DNR staff that it is something they are interested in.
43
44 Nelson made a friendly amendment that DNR not be a regular member of the
45 committee. DNR doesn't like to belong to committees, but likes to be involved in
46 providing information and input. This is a problem the Forestry Forum had. The
47 DNR wants to participate, but not be identified as having to belong as a member.
48
Regular County Council, 5/30/2000, Page 14
1 Imhof stated it is a citizen's committee.
2
3 Nelson suggested allowing the DNR to be involved and participate, but not
4 necessarily as a member. He suggested they be involved in an advisory capacity.
5
6 McShane declined the friendly amendment. The DNR is a major property
7 owner in the area. He would be afraid there would be a citizen group doing things
8 that the DNR is not happy with if it is not a voting member and fully engaged.
9
10 Imhof stated the DNR participates in an advisory capacity in the Lake
11 Whatcom watershed. The DNR is very active because of its responsibilities in the
12 watershed. He was sure they would take an active role with Lake Samish.
13
14 McShane moved to include DNR in the membership.
15
16 Motion to amend carried 5 -1 with Imhof opposed.
17
18 Motion to approve the ordinance as amended carried unanimously.
19
20 S. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 3.08.100, SETTING
21 REQUIREMENTS FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL OF CONTRACTS (AB2000-
22 184)
23
24 Nelson moved to adopt the ordinance with option b in Exhibit A.
25
26 Nelson moved to amend Exhibit A, "The County Executive, pursuant to a
27 declaration of the emergency, shall submit the contract to the County Council for
28 informational purposes at the next Council's next regular or special meeting."
29
30 Motion to amend carried unanimously.
31
32 Motion to approve as amended carried unanimously.
33
34 9. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPOINT PAM
35 HOLLADAY, KEN LARSON, FRANCES ARMINTROUT AND ALLISON
36 HAHNEL TO THE DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES ADVISORY BOARD
37 (AB2000 -213)
38
39 Imhof moved approval.
40
41 Motion carried unanimously.
42
43 10. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE A NEW
44 LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION FOR BIRCH BAY SEAFOOD
45 RESTAURANT, 7829 BIRCH BAY DRIVE, BLAINE (AB2000 -214)
46
47 Imhof moved approval.
48
Regular County Council, 5/30/2000, Page 15
1 Motion carried unanimously.
2
3
4 INTRODUCTION ITEMS
5
6 Imhof moved to accept the Introduction Items.
7
8 Motion carried unanimously.
9
10 1. RESOLUTION TO SELL COUNTY TAX TITLE PROPERTY (AB2000 -208A)
11 (HEARING TO BE SCHEDULED)
12
13 2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING
14 ORDINANCE, TITLE 20, TO ALLOW FLEXIBILITY IN THE R AND RF
15 ZONES FOR THE TEMPORARY USE OF RV'S, REVISE RV STANDARDS
16 IN THE UR AND RR ZONES, PROVIDE RV STANDARDS IN THE URM, R,
17 RF AND RC ZONES, AND DESIGNATE ADDITIONAL AREAS IN POINT
18 ROBERTS WHICH ARE APPROPRIATE FOR THE TEMPORARY USE OF
19 RV'S (AB2000 -215) (HEARING TO BE SCHEDULED)
20
21
22 OTHER BUSINESS
23
24 Brenner presented an Emergency Ordinance imposing a moratorium on
25 the acceptance of Conditional Use Permit applications for regional
26 transmission pipelines of petroleum, petroleum products, and natural gas;
27 and declaring an emergency (AB2000 -216). She moved to adopt the
28 emergency ordinance as amended in committee and read it into the record. She
29 worked on this at length with County staff. She recognized County Executive
30 Kremen for allowing her to work with staff and take up their precious time. She
31 also recognized Planning Manager Sylvia Goodwin, Land Use Manager Roland
32 Middleton, Senior Planner Kraig Olason, and Senior Land Use Specialist /Deputy
33 SEPA Official John Guenther.
34
35 Pete Kremen, County Executive, stated the collaboration is an illustration of
36 doing good things for the community when the administration and the Council work
37 together. He commended Councilmember Brenner for asking his cooperation in
38 allowing staff to work on this ordinance.
39
40 Crawford questioned the time the moratorium will be in effect.
41
42 Brenner stated it is a 60 -day moratorium that can be extended twice, for a
43 total of 180 days.
44
45 Motion to adopt carried unanimously.
46
47
Regular County Council, 5/30/2000, Page 16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS
McShane stated the Natural Resources committee received an update on
the Drayton Harbor Shellfish Protection District Advisory Committee staff
report and water recovery plan (AB2000 -188), and he will work on an
ordinance.
Brenner stated the ordinance establishing the Utilities Planning and
Advisory Committee (AB2000 -177) will be scheduled for a hearing in four
weeks.
Brenner also stated the ReStore is hosting a tour of recycled homes on
Sunday, June 11 from 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Her home is on the tour. She
invited everyone to go on the tour and see her home.
Crawford stated the Black Mountain Forestry Center grand opening was last
weekend. He encouraged everyone to visit the center. It is moving forward with
momentum, enthusiasm, and community participation. There was a very good
turnout, even though it rained.
Crawford also stated he and Councilmember Brenner attended a surprise 80th
birthday party for Muriel Terry. It was a nice tribute to a lady who has been quite a
community activist and has done a lot for her neighborhood.
Brenner stated the most wonderful part of Muriel Terry is how unassuming
she is.
Dawson stated her husband anticipates that the Black Mountain Forestry
Center will become like the Deming Logging Show. The potential is tremendous.
The memorial to Wayne Beech is phenomenal.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
These minutes were approved by Council on June 13 , 2000.
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Marlene Dawson, Council Chair
Regular County Council, 5/30/2000, Page 17