HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinance August 8 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
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Finance and Administrative Services Committee
August 8, 2000
The meeting was called to order at 12:00 p.m. by Committee Chair L. Ward
Nelson in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
Also Present:
Sam Crawford
Robert Imhof
Absent:
None
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2000 BUDGET, REQUEST # 9 (AB2000-
286)
Imhof moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried 2 -0 with Crawford absent.
3. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
AGREEMENT FOR POINT ROBERTS SUBAREA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
CONSULTANT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ORDINANCE #99 -084 (AB2000-
288)
Imhof moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
COUNCIL "CONSENT AGENDA" ITEM
1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT AMENDMENT BETWEEN THE WHATCOM COUNTY JAIL AND
QWEST CORPORATION TO PROVIDE INMATE PHONE SERVICES WITH
PROJECTED REVENUE TO BE $109,530 (AB2000 -289)
Nelson stated this is an amendment to revenue, not expenditures. The
revenue amount changes the contract from 38 percent to 42 percent. They
originally budgeted about $75,000 for this, and it has increased. They are
projecting about $107,000. With the increase, they project about $109,000. He
moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 8/8/2000, Page 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE
PURCHASE OF THE ANNUAL SUPPLY OF GUARDRAIL USING THE
WASHINGTON STATE CONTRACT LOWEST RESPONSIVE VENDOR,
CORAL SALES COMPANY, IN THE APPROXIMATE AMOUNT OF $75,000
(AB2000 -290)
Imhof moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
3. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND NORTHWEST EDUCATIONAL
SERVICES DISTRICT #189 TO PROVIDE REIMBURSEMENT TO
WHATCOM COUNTY FOR SCHOOL NURSE SERVICES FOR THE
MERIDIAN SCHOOL DISTRICT IN THE AMOUNT OF $16,800 (AB2000-
291)
Nelson moved to recommend approval.
Imhof questioned whether this service was in lieu of the district having its
own nurse.
Nelson stated the County does it for other districts also.
Kay Guirl, Personal Health Services Manager, stated the County provides the
service for only one district this year. Last year they provided the service for more
than one district.
Motion carried unanimously.
4. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT AMENDMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND WIZARDS ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSULTING SERVICES TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL SUPPORT IN
RELATION TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SHELLFISH CLOSURE
RESPONSE STRATEGIES, IN THE AMOUNT OF $14,500 FOR A NEW
CONTRACT AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $96,676 (AB2000 -292)
Nelson moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
S. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE WASHINGTON
STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY CONSERVATION CORPS TO
PROVIDE A SIX - PERSON CREW TO IMPLEMENT AND MAINTAIN
RIPARIAN RESTORATION PROJECTS, A CREW VEHICLE AND BASIC
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 8/8/2000, Page 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
TOOLS, FOR A DOE AMOUNT OF $94,000 AND WHATCOM COUNTY'S
SHARE OF $50,000 FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF $144,000 (AB2000-
293)
Paula Cooper, Special Projects Engineer, stated this was brought forward in a
work session. It is to maintain river and bridge plantings.
Nelson asked who is supplying the equipment. Cooper stated it comes with
the crew from the state Department of Ecology (DOE).
Imhof moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
6. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT AMENDMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE
ANVIL CORPORATION TO PROVIDE CLERICAL SUPPORT OF WRIA 1
STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,000 (AB2000-
294)
Crawford asked what this was specifically was for. Cooper stated they do
minute - taking for the Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) technical teams.
Crawford questioned whether the service was for the Planning Unit or the
individual technical teams. Several months ago, it was an issue as to whether they
would get clerical support.
Cooper stated it is for the technical teams.
Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated it is for the technical teams.
This was discussed before.
Nelson questioned whether the Council agreed to $50,000 for the technical
teams.
Desler stated that is what was discussed. Anvil would provide the service in
lieu of adding staff to the Water Resources Division. The actual business activity
would be supported through this contract.
Nelson stated they would hold this item until later in the meeting when Water
Resources Manager Bruce Roll arrived.
7. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE
SERVICES AND WHATCOM DISPUTE RESOLUTION CENTER FOR THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF MEDIATION AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION
SERVICES FOR WHATCOM COUNTY YOUTH AND THEIR FAMILIES, IN
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 8/8/2000, Page 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
THE AMOUNT OF $40,000 WHEREIN THE COUNTY RETAINS INDIRECT
COSTS OF $3,000 (AB2000 -295)
Nelson moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
8. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND DR.
GRANT DEGER TO PROVIDE MEDICAL SERVICES FOR PRISONERS IN
THE WHATCOM COUNTY JAIL FROM NOVEMBER 1, 2000 THROUGH
DECEMBER 31, 2001, IN THE CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $35,000
(AB2000 -296)
Dan Fitzgerald, Chief of Corrections, stated the contract is 14 months at the
same price as the County has been contracting for. The original contract ran for 12
months, but that doctor leaving in November.
Nelson moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
9. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND WASHINGTON STATE
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY TO PROVIDE 100% REIMBURSEMENT FOR
COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH INVESTIGATING SITES BELIEVED TO BE
RELEASING HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES, IN A CONTRACT AMOUNT OF
$115,559 (AB2000 -297)
Imhof moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
6. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT AMENDMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE
ANVIL CORPORATION TO PROVIDE CLERICAL SUPPORT OF WRIA 1
STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $50,000 (AB2000-
294)
(Clerk's Note: Continued from above.)
Bruce Roll, Water Resources Manager, stated the contract is to provide
clerical minute - taking for the technical teams and other stakeholder meetings, such
as the Marine Resource Committee.
Nelson questioned the number of technical teams. Roll stated there are
currently five teams. That number will escalate to two or three more.
no.
Nelson questioned whether Anvil also provides technical support. Roll stated
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 8/8/2000, Page 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Nelson questioned whether this went through the bid process. Roll stated it
went through the request for proposal (RFP) process. It originally came forward as
an item on which they needed to act quickly. They entered into a contract under
Executive authority for up to $15,000. This is to bring the contract to the $50,000
that they originally proposed in the supplemental.
Crawford moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
2. DISCUSSION REGARDING PUBLIC, EDUCATIONAL, AND
GOVERNMENTAL TELEVISION ACCESS (AB2000 -131)
Nelson stated one concern with Felix Anderson's proposal is that it has an
interlocal agreement with TCI, now AT &T, regarding government and education
broadcasting. The City Council made an agreement with AT &T regarding its
equipment and facility. The City desires that County enter into an interlocal
agreement at half the cost. They are appropriating $61,000. At this time, the
County is interested in providing public access for Council and Planning Commission
meetings and other services. That was agreed upon. They need to find out if that
access through AT &T is currently available as it has been.
Dan Crocker, AT &T Broadband, 777 W. Horton Road, Bellingham, stated the
public access issue started in 1996, when they negotiated the franchises with the
City of Bellingham and Whatcom County. Both entities' have consistent franchise
document throughout Whatcom County. There is some consistency difference
regarding public access. The intent when originally negotiated was, upon
completion of their system upgrade, to turn public, educational, and governmental
access over to a third party. The Cable Administrative Board was to find this third
party. They never found a suitable party. The City stated it wanted to take on
educational and governmental access. AT &T is building a new, secured facility. In
the future, AT &T can't offer public access television without acquiring another
facility. In 1996, when they adopted the franchise, AT &T could have started passing
the franchise costs on to subscribers because it was a requirement to provide public
access. AT &T, then TCI, elected not to do that until the completion of the upgrade
and resolution as to how the public access would be provided. They have tried to
initiate that. The City is only initiating educational and governmental access.
They've set up their own facility. He was not sure what the County wants to have.
The costs would be passed onto the consumer. The City increased its franchise fee
to pay for it. The County is at a four percent franchise fee and could go up to five
percent. That is one method to fund this. There are other methods. The City of
Anacortes initiated governmental access and asked AT &T to set up. There is a
notation on their subscribers' bill that a certain amount of the cable bill is to pay for
the cost of the community channel.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 8/8/2000, Page 5
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
They have wired a fiber - optics line from the City Hall Annex to their Ferndale
satellite center, where the signals are sent out. They can originate programming
from City Hall. They can originate programming from the satellite site also. At the
end of October, when AT &T moves into the new facility, They can originate
programming from there also. One of the big concerns with channel 10 is how to
schedule the channel so there is not a conflict of programming when they let users
use the channel. That is a big issue.
Nelson stated there is an agreement under section 6 of the franchise
agreement that the public, education, and governmental (PEG) access would
continue as it is currently operated. It is currently being operated so that Council
meetings and certain other governmental programs are aired. Those tapes are
being provided to AT &T. When the Council looked at expanding public access, the
recommendation never came through other than the rate increase. They have an
agreement for public access as it currently exists. He questioned whether AT &T is
able to take those tapes that the Council provides and provide that programming.
Crocker stated they could. The agreement was not to charge the consumer for that
until they complete the upgrade. At this point, if the County sent that letter and
said that it wants AT &T to fulfill that requirement, he would calculate the costs and
they would be passed on to the cable subscribers. That service is a cost that is
required by the franchise and could be a pass- through cost to the cable subscriber.
Nelson asked George Reid if that was his understanding.
George Reid, Information Services Manager, stated he wasn't aware of the
verbal agreement. In talking with Mr. Crocker and the administration, he
understood that additional costs would be incurred. He didn't know that the costs
should be passed on to the cable consumer because there has been no charge for
that service up until now.
Nelson stated that, before any terms or conditions of section six could be
modified, it must be mutually agreed upon by the County and AT &T. He was not
aware of any negotiations for changes of that agreement.
Crocker stated they used to operate PEG and absorbed those costs. When
they negotiated a new franchise, they negotiated getting out of the PEG business
and put it to a third party because they didn't feel they had the right to oversee
public access television. If they keep operating the service as prior to the 1996
agreement, they can charge for those services even though they haven't charged
for them before, through the Cable Act.
Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated AT &T made an agreement with
the City of Bellingham to transfer the service. The City indicated it would broadcast
the County Council meetings at cost. In order to avoid those extra costs, the
administration was looking at the franchise agreement, which clearly states that the
service is to be provided by AT &T. They are not asking AT &T to set up full PEG
access, only to broadcast the County Council meetings. It shouldn't cost much.
Crocker stated they can do technologically. They would have to purchase
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 8/8/2000, Page 6
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
equipment, such as the modulator, the videocassette recorder for playback, and
video switchers. Right now, channel 10 is being transmitted out of City Hall. Any
time that programming from the County came on, they have to interrupt that feed
through a video switcher and switch to the County feed. His concern is making
sure they don't interrupt each other's programming.
Desler asked if they have transferred equipment and assets to the City that
operated previously under the County's agreement, and whether Mr. Crocker was
asking the County to buy this again. Crocker stated no. This equipment that is
required at Ferndale to insert tapes is a different set of equipment. The City bought
its own equipment. He provided some of the public access, not educational or
government, edit bays. Those are at their facility. They purchased equipment to
make it technically feasible to operate the program from its facility.
Nelson stated that the proposal is, if the County goes in with the City of
Bellingham, the City of Bellingham is looking at $61,000. The County would incur a
portion of that cost if it went in with the City of Bellingham. The City of Bellingham
is running it. The County agreement is not with the City of Bellingham. It is with
AT &T. There are two different issues. This agreement with the City of Bellingham
has been done with AT &T, even though they have access to County residents
through County rights -of -way. That is a significant issue. He questioned whether
they are subsidizing more equipment on the backs of County residents for the City
of Bellingham, or whether the County residents still have the public access as they
previously had.
Desler stated it seems as if the current franchise agreement clearly states
that PEG access shall remain as it is currently operated by TCI, now AT &T. The
agreement that has been developed with the City is a completely different
mechanism. The County Council has not approved it as a franchise agreement
amendment. It is a concern because the County is taken out of the loop, and then
the County is being asked to come up with additional costs and work through a
different entity. The request appears to be inconsistent with the franchise
agreement. The service the County wants is the same service that has been in
existence over the last few years. The County wants to follow federal law and do
things that are as efficient as possible, in the context of providing the service. The
service the County wants is virtually the same service that has existed during the
last couple of years. Until now, the County has been told that would happen.
Crocker stated they have kept the County and City working on the same
timeframes and issues for the last few years. Different County staff members have
been sitting in on the meetings. Now, the City has stepped up to the plate. AT &T
has been asking what the County wants to do. From his perspective, it makes
more sense in the long -term for these communities that everyone have one
community channel that is locally originated and shows educational and
governmental access. Everyone shares the same cost. Right now, the City
increased its franchise fee by .8 percent to pay for channel 10. County subscribers
are not paying for that, but they get to see that same channel 10.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 8/8/2000, Page 7
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
Imhof stated that is per the agreement. The County Council has not changed
the agreement.
Nelson questioned whether Mr. Crocker is saying that, if the City of
Bellingham increases its usage of channel 10, then the County would have to pay
the same increase, no matter what agreement the County has. Crocker stated no.
He was only providing a suggestion of what would be the most cost - effective and
best for coordination in the long -term. The County has a right to say the access
should be operated prior to the 1996 agreement. He would figure out what that
operational cost is. The service is franchise - required. AT &T elected not to charge
the customers until now. That amount is larger than the amount the County would
pay if it contributes with the City.
Nelson stated he never remembered anything like that being mentioned. It
was only mentioned in regard to expanded public access. The County is not
expanding public access. He believed that Mr. Crocker is saying that AT &T is going
to charge the consumers more for the same service. Crocker stated they are going
to begin recovering their cost. So far, they've been doing it as a donation.
Nelson stated there is nothing in the contract that says it is donated. It is a
service that is provided within the agreement. Now, AT &T is saying they are going
to begin charging for that service.
Imhof stated he believed this was part of the cost of the use of the County's
rights -of -ways. Crocker stated the franchise allows them to use the County's
rights -of -way. The modified Cable Act says that if the franchising authority requires
the cable operator to provide services not normally operated by the operator, then
the operator can incorporate the cost into the FCC rate calculation or itemize it on
the bottom of the statement. AT &T could have done that when they signed the
agreement. Because they were upgrading the system and talking about getting a
third party operator, AT &T put the fee on hold to wait and see what everyone
wanted to do. AT &T has now finished the upgrade and they have to make a
decision.
Imhof stated they are still using the County rights -of -way. It seems that
supplying public access TV at the level they always have would be included as part
of the agreement to use the right -of -way.
Nelson agreed. They talked about increasing fees if the County wanted to
expand services.
Imhof stated this was part of the cost of the County allowing use of the
rights -of -way.
Desler stated one issue is that there are new requirements affecting the
franchise agreement. He will review that issue with the attorneys. The second
issue is to explore specifically the cost to air the County Council meetings through
the mechanism described, and then bring it back to the County Council.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 8/8/2000, Page 8
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
Crocker questioned whether he meant airing it through the facility. Desler
stated yes.
Nelson stated they initially said that the cost would be more than what the
interlocal agreement with the City would cost. Crocker stated that is correct. The
City has the administrative cost of paying staff salaries. That person could do
double -duty.
Nelson stated the cost is already more than $38,000, so either the County
eats it or they pass it on to the consumer. He hasn't had any of this information
until this moment, and Mr. Crocker is saying the agreement ends August 1. The
County Council has not been forewarned. The changes are happening without the
year of notification, as stipulated in the agreement.
Desler stated a third issue is to discuss the City's projected cost. In the
meantime, they can facilitate airing the County Council meetings for the public's
benefit, in advance of the legal and technical requirements.
Nelson asked that it be scheduled for the next meeting.
Desler asked if the Council wants the same level of service it's had to date,
and whether that should go on in the coming month, knowing the County Council is
not meeting and that there is no interlocal agreement with the City of Bellingham.
Crocker questioned whether the County Council received his letter in January
giving notification of the new facility. A copy of the letter also went to Executive
Kremen.
Nelson stated he wanted to get it resolved without impacting the citizens.
Desler stated that while the letter may have come, the last official meeting
that involved County and City officials indicated that the County's issue of
maintaining access would continue. It wasn't until the last two or three days that
they found out there are some new wrinkles on this.
Nelson stated he would address this at the full Council meeting, with no
recommendation from the committee.
Crocker stated they hired a new person, Mike Hudson to handle community
affairs. Mr. Hudson will help out on these issues. If he is not available, they can
talk to Mr. Hudson.
Mike Hudson, AT &T Broadband Community Affairs, stated he would work to
come up with some resolution. He understood the County's position of wanting to
not deprive the citizens of what they've come to expect over the years. They will
work hard to come up with a resolution to the problem.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 8/8/2000, Page 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 12:40 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
L. Ward Nelson, Committee Chair
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 8/8/2000, Page 10