Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinance March 7 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 March 7, 2000 The meeting was called to order at 12:10 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 DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL 1. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 2.88, RENAMING THE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE TO THE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT WORKING GROUP AND CHANGING SCOPE AND RESPONSIBILITIES (AB2000 -110) Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, gave a staff report and explained why the change is needed. The current committee has proposed this. There are changes in the language that would bring them into consistency with the way the County Council has implemented the administration and organization of these functions. Administration recommends the change to the Council because it is an orderly way of how they currently handle these tasks. Nelson questioned whether this is currently an executive committee. Desler stated it is. Nelson moved to recommend approval. The motion carried 2 -0 with Imhof out of the room. 2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2000 BUDGET, REQUEST NO. 3 (AB2000 -111) Nelson moved to recommend approval. Dawson suggested that the first item, regarding the $15,000 for the Economic Development Council, be postponed for two weeks because Councilmember Nelson was going to be absent at this evening's meeting, and she wanted to make sure the votes would be there to move this forward. Imhof moved to table item one for two weeks. Motion carried unanimously. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 3/7/2000, Page 1 1 Nelson asked about item one from the Administrative Services Fund. Desler 2 stated the County did not, from his perspective, complete the removal of a 3 substantial amount of asbestos that is in the boiler room. There are unused 4 boilers in the room that need to be dismantled and removed. There are other 5 pipes and walls with asbestos that need to be removed. When they remove that 6 material, they will be able to say there is no more asbestos in the building and 7 they will be able to use the room for other appropriate purposes related to the 8 activities of Facilities Management. 9 10 Nelson questioned how they came up with this cost amount. Desler stated 11 there was a bid of $27,000 for a portion of the work. The remaining amount is 12 estimated. It is the old County boiler room in the old portion of the building. 13 There are rooms on both sides of the room that have a lot of activity. 14 15 Imhof questioned whether that room had ever been encased. Desler stated 16 he didn't think it had ever been encased. They are going to encase a chase and 17 not ever allow anyone in. They have been able to remove or seal off all asbestos 18 flooring. 19 20 Nelson questioned whether they looked at the air ventilation system to 21 ensure the employees in the courthouse are protected. Desler stated they would 22 carefully follow all Environmental Protection Act (EPA) and standards associated 23 with this. They will use an appropriate contractor for that purpose. 24 25 Motion to recommend approval of the supplemental budget request, as 26 amended, carried unanimously. 27 28 3. DISCUSSION OF OPTIONS RELATIVE TO CANYON CREEK ALLUVIAL 29 FAN AREA, REGARDING A REQUEST FROM THE FLOOD CONTROL 30 ZONE DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO ENACT A MORATORIUM 31 ON NEW DEVELOPMENT AND TARGET THE AREA FOR A VOLUNTARY 32 BUYOUT PROGRAM (AB2000 -114) 33 34 Paula Cooper, Special Projects Engineer, stated her memo outlined the 35 history of damages in the Canyon Creek area, as well as the cost of those repairs. 36 Since the 1995 event and within the last year, they have retained another 37 consultant, Inter - Fluve, to take a fresh look at the situation. They've analyzed six 38 alternatives. They looked at the different short -term and long -term costs, including 39 acquisition of the most at -risk areas. The tables on attachments C and D talk about 40 the short -term costs, the long -term maintenance costs, and the remaining risk to 41 the two portions of the fan area. The lower fan area is primarily The Logs resort. 42 43 These alternatives were presented to the Flood Control Zone District Advisory 44 Committee (FCZDAC). They recommended that the Council consider a moratorium 45 on development in this area until a voluntary buy -out program could be enacted. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 3/7/2000, Page 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 In addition, they recommended that the County inform the residents that they would no longer maintain the existing structures in that location. Nelson questioned whether the FCZDAC recommends option four. Cooper stated that was correct. Nelson questioned the total amount of property. Cooper stated there are quite a few total lots. Nelson questioned whether all the lots are now legal lots of record. Cooper stated they are. Nelson questioned whether the State Department of Transportation (DOT) was involved in this at all. Cooper stated they were not. The County informed the DOT of this option. Dick Prieve, Assistant Public Works Administrator, talked to someone at the DOT to let them know of the recommendation. Dick Prieve, Assistant Public Works Administrator, stated Ed Henken requested some monetary support from DOT some time ago. The DOT informed the County that they were not willing to participate financially in anything the County did on the dike. As a matter of courtesy, he called the DOT and talked to Bob Josephson to tell him of the proposal. Josephson's comments were that this is more suitable to the DOT because it would be a lot less costly to replace a section of a roadway than to replace a bridge. They still do not want to participate in any way. Imhof questioned the County's liability on these lots. There are many lots. Cooper stated the cost, from Inter - Fluve's estimates of assessed value and fair - market value, the short -term area cost would be $760,000. The long -term area for the entire subdivision would be $2.9 million. Nelson questioned whether the buy -out includes the cost of dike maintenance, or whether they are to assume there will not be any dike. Prieve stated there would not be a dike or any maintenance. Nelson questioned whether the DOT was willing to let that go and do road maintenance. Prieve stated they were. Imhof stated there has to be a bridge somewhere. Prieve stated their thought was to replace the roadway embankment. Nelson stated that essentially the eastern portion of Whatcom County is in jeopardy. He questioned whether this was discussed at the advisory board. Cooper stated the board had concerns that the DOT should be at the table. The DOT will look the other way until it is a problem or until it is in their right -of -way. Prieve stated the County gave the DOT ample opportunity to participate several times. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 3/7/2000, 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 Imhof questioned whether there is any Federal Emergency Management Act (FEMA) money available for buy -outs. Cooper stated FEMA money is typically available after a flood event. By targeting this area, it improves the County's chances to get mitigation money after a flood. It doesn't necessarily have to do damage in that area. Ron Bronsema, Flood Advisory Committee Chair, stated this is the third time they visited this area. They are skeptical that anything can hold structurally. The dike cannot be held. Anything short of a lined concrete ditch will not hold. There is concern by the residents who live in Glacier and in the Mt. Baker Highway area. The DOT couldn't care less. He questioned how much money the County wants to put in. Nelson questioned whether Bronsema felt this was the most economical method. Bronsema stated it is in the long -term. There is a liability of a voluntary buy -out. If this development was platted today, it would never happen. This is an alluvial fan hazard area. It is unfortunate the development went in when it did. Hoag questioned whether the FCZDAC looked at the six different options. Bronsema stated they did. Hoag questioned whether the FCZDAC preferred one option over the others. Bronsema stated they discussed the options and alternatives at length. They've been burned before and are very skeptical. There is much devastation. They didn't feel any of them were valid for the situation. The board has been through this before and doesn't believe there is a structural fix for the problem. Nelson stated the advisory committee picked option four. Bronsema stated that is correct. Imhof stated that is the appropriate option. They've dumped money into that area before. It is time to come to grips with reality and recognize that they aren't going to be able to fix it. Nelson urged the committee not to begin discussing this until they discussed it with legal counsel. Hoag questioned which option best protects the highway. Bronsema stated none of them do. None of them are adequate. Hoag questioned whether they would spend about $3 million and not protect the highway. Bronsema questioned how long she wanted to protect the highway. It is going to go. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 3/7/2000, 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 Hoag questioned whether Cooper also believed that. Cooper explained that option three would be the best one to protect the highway, from a structural standpoint. They looked at the alternative to relocate the dike to give the creek as much room as it has. By pulling it back, the velocity would decrease, which should decrease the shear stresses. Then, they could move rock. Imhof stated that is what they heard about the other rocks. Cooper stated they can't even place the 14 -foot rock. The consultant said they would have a hard time finding an engineer who would do that, with those kinds of velocities and with the smaller rock. Hoag questioned whether Cooper believed that option three would best protect the highway. Cooper stated that was correct. They would pull the dike back as far as they can. They would provide protection to the existing properties out there. That would put the creek back into the North Fork before it gets to the highway. Hoag stated Cooper's analysis was that would best protect the properties that are there and the highway itself. She asked about item number four. She questioned why there would still be a long -term threat from a minor flood, since that option was so expensive. Cooper stated that if they do nothing but buy -out the at -risk properties, there is no structural means. That dike will deteriorate over time. As it deteriorates, it gets to the point where it doesn't provide any protection. At that point, even during a minor flood, there could be risk to the highway. Cooper stated she did some quick calculations on the frequency of the 1989 flood that ate the houses. From a rainfall standpoint, it was a five to ten year flood event. Debris was jammed into a canyon higher up, which created a dam break flood. The dam break flood that resulted on the downstream side of that was probably a 1 in 10,000 year flood event. A five to ten year event could generate enough water to cause this. This is the alluvial fan hazard, which is very unpredictable. They can't even define a frequency of occurrence when they might expect this to happen again. They do know there is a lot of material up there that is available for movement. Nelson stated they are not anticipating the Nooksack rising, which can itself form a dam to the Canyon Creek coming down and creating pressure by trying to find another way out. He asked that question of FEMA, but they didn't have an answer. They are now finding out that it has an impact. These are sedentary soils. He questioned the type of process the County would go through if it gets involved in a buy -out. Cooper stated Roland Middleton, Land Use Manager, was present to answer any questions about what is currently happening with development in the area. Dan Gibson, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, stated it is all relatively uncertain. One option is to appropriate the land for a public purpose and exercise the power of eminent domain, which would force people to sell at a price that would Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 3/7/2000, 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 ultimately be set by the court. They could also do a voluntary buy -out. It should be obvious that unprotected property in that area has some factors that compromise its value, and offer enough to make it worth their while to get out. Another difficulty is that some may not choose to be bought out, so the County may have to decide what to do with those who chose to stay. One may have a rational reason to stay. The difficulty with that is that it leaves a portion of the population and the County somewhat vulnerable. The residents could sign a release saying they won't hold the County liable. However, they can't sign for their friends, relatives, and anyone who may be visiting. A rational approach is a voluntary buy- out with mixed results. Hoag questioned whether the County would still be in a position to protect people if there were people that would not leave. Gibson stated he didn't believe so. He didn't believe there is any legal obligation to protect people with whom the County does not have a contractual relationship, explicit or implicit. Hoag asked about the fact that the County originally platted the land and allowed them to build there. Gibson stated the folks have the access to the same maps the County has. He was not saying that the County is off the hook when push comes to shove. However, the County has good arguments to say the resident must assume the risk. The outcome of a lawsuit that might arise from horrific circumstances could bounce either way. The County has the strong arguments. The emotional factors that enter into something like that are unpredictable and often do not operate in favor of the County. McShane questioned whether it would help to have a buy -out program that is offered to all property owners, combined with statements to any property owners about the risk that would go with a volunteer buy -out program. Gibson stated he believed it would help. Those are factors that would help to reduce the exposure that could be attributed to the County. McShane stated he was contacted a few years ago to do a report for someone who wanted a building site out there. The person was a seismologist /geologist. The owner didn't know what needed to go into the report. He told the person he would not write the report for the site because he was not comfortable with the risk. The seismologist said he was comfortable with the risk. Imhof suggested asking the administration to develop a couple of different program options. The Council needs to look at the options. Hoag questioned whether the County would be required to purchase the properties that have been platted if the Council declared a moratorium. Gibson stated a moratorium is, by its very nature, temporary pending a solution to a problem for which they placed the moratorium. Nothing would compel the Council to purchase properties by placing a moratorium. Hoag questioned whether there is some way to prevent future structures from being built in that location on a permanent basis. Gibson stated they would Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 3/7/2000, 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 have a flat building ban. Under the current zoning, some people have a vested right to build under the laws that were in effect. The zoning angle doesn't take care of it because there would be vesting. It would have to be through a different mechanism. It would be difficult to achieve a flat ban on construction without some sort of buy -out possibility. Cooper stated the County could purchase the development rights of the lots. The assessed value of each of the undeveloped lots is only $6,000 to begin with. Hoag stated the highway is something they have to protect. Gibson stated that is a state location. Hoag questioned whether the highway is the County's problem. Gibson stated in a global sense, they all have an interest in having a road up to Artist Point and the ski area. Strictly speaking, it is not an obligation assigned to the County government. Hoag questioned whether the state would come to the County if the County allowed a dike to deteriorate and it took out the highway. Gibson stated the County doesn't have an obligation to proactively channel that creek so that it protects the state highway. The County may have some general interest in contributing to the stability of the highway. There is no legal obligation to save the highway for the state. Hoag asked about the effect all of this has on The Logs. She heard they are really not interested in selling. Given that, she questioned whether the County would suggest it is best that they give it up. Gibson stated he was not acquainted with the location of The Logs in relation to the stream. Roland Middleton, Land Use Manager, stated an appeal would be coming before the Council in the next few months regarding a development proposal and The Logs resort. Nelson stated that if they expand the area and the pressure would be reduced. He questioned who made the determination of how wide the area needed to be expanded. Cooper stated the consultants determined the most at -risk properties. Nelson questioned whether this has been fully evaluated and if staff was comfortable that the County could contain and maintain Canyon Creek more easily and less expensively within the green - highlighted long -term area outlined on the map. McShane stated most of the material of the fan was deposited 8,000 or 9,000 years ago, at the end of the ice age. For a very long period of time, the creek has probably been in the vicinity is in. The big issue with the highway is that the creek is not stable where it is. It wants to move to another location. If it were to flow Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 3/7/2000, 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 down one path, it would cut an 80 -foot chasm through the Mt. Baker Highway. At that point, it will probably not want to meander around much anymore. Nelson asked how many lots of record are in more than one ownership. He asked if they are all in a single- ownership. Middleton stated he didn't know which lots are owned by whom. Imhof stated this issue bears more research and suggested that the councilmembers pose their questions to the Public Works Department. He moved to hold in committee and get some more information from the advisory committee concerning the options with a voluntary buy -out program. Hoag would like to see more detail on option three because it is less expensive, offers protection for the houses and the roads, and has a low annual maintenance cost of $2,100. In the report, it mentioned the reason the creek was moving was due to a build -up of gravel. That is a difficult subject to address politically. She questioned whether any consultant suggested removing some of the gravel that is pushing the creek in the other direction. Cooper stated that was one of the conceptual alternatives before the consultant went to this level of an alternatives analysis. This is a Chinook spawning stream. The FCZDAC threw that option out in terms of the long -term. Hoag stated it is better for the fish when they come back if the gravel was removed when they are not there. Imhof stated the County would have to get an okay from the Department of Fish and Wildlife. That won't happen in this lifetime. Middleton stated there are also Bull Trout involved and other habitat issues in which the U.S. Fish and Wildlife, Lummi Nation, Nooksack Tribe, Corps of Engineers, and Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife all have a problem every time they walk through the stream. Hoag stated they should at least pursue that option. She wanted to see more detail on option three. She wanted to know its background and how long it would hold up. Nelson questioned whether the advisory board looked at option three. Bronsema commented on the sedimentation. In the Canyon Creek watershed there are numerous slides. If one of them let go, all that material will come down Canyon Creek and obliterate the alluvial fan. With the fisheries mitigation problems and the sheer volume of the material coming down, they didn't think it was feasible to look at. Option three may buy some time, but it isn't money well spent. Hoag stated she wanted to see the consultant report on that. Imhof stated he would send a letter to the administration with the committee's questions and concerns. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 3/7/2000, 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 "CONSENT AGENDA" ITEM 1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING REGARDING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL BOARD FOR THE LOCAL WORKFORCE INVESTMENT AREA (AB2000- 115) Imhof questioned whether they received the memorandum of understanding. Hoag stated they did receive it. (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.) Hoag asked about the board membership composition. She asked if it was the same composition that was on the Private Industry Council. Desler stated it is slightly different, but meets the same requirements of the Work Force Investment Act. This particular membership composition is already in effect. Hoag asked how it is different. Desler stated it is basically the same in terms of trying to get a majority of business, labor, and education representatives. Hoag asked for a list of the differences. Imhof asked if any of the other counties have voted on this. Desler stated he didn't think so. Nelson asked if the Executive would make the appointments or attend the council. Desler stated they anticipated there would be a local elected official group that would be responsible for making formal appointments and overseeing budgets and major programs. Imhof moved to recommend approval. Motion carried unanimously. 2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID #00 -15 TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE BIDDER, MCASPHALT INDUSTRIES, FOR THE ANNUAL SUPPLY OF ASPHALTIC EMULSIONS, IN THE APPROXIMATE AMOUNT OF $350,000 (AB2000 -116) Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 3/7/2000, Page 9 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 Imhof moved to recommend approval. Dick Prieve, Assistant Director of Administration, stated this is their yearly chip seal program. There is a big difference in prices. This is the second time they went out for bid. Motion carried unanimously. 3. REQUEST BY THE FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE (FCZDAC) FOR APPROVAL BY COUNCIL FOR AN ALTERNATE COST SHARE FORMULA FOR THE POINT ROBERTS LIGHTHOUSE PARK RESTORATION PROJECT WITH COST TO THE FCZD $102,065.21 (AB2000 -117) Paula Cooper, Special Projects Engineer, stated that there was a riprap structure used to protect the park. It was damaged during the 1995 event. The Parks Department received Federal Emergency Management Act (FEMA) money to repair it. The FEMA money was based on rebuilding the rock wall like the one that failed. County staff realized there was the likelihood that it will do the same thing if they put it back the way it was. The Parks Department requested help from the River and Flood Section. Staff retained an engineering consultant to do an analysis to see if that is the best approach, or if something could be built that would stick around longer. Nelson questioned whether they are involved in the flood control zone tax regarding the flood way. Cooper stated coastal areas have flood plains as well. Nelson stated they impose and additional tax to people who live on the rivers, but not to people who live on the coasts. He questioned whether this opens up a different avenue. Imhof questioned how they get flood money to repair damage from storm events from the ocean. Cooper stated flood plain areas are along the coast. People along the coasts are in the flood plain. They do flood permitting for coastal properties all the time. They are all flood plains mapped by FEMA. Nelson suggested having the advisory board testify. Ron Bronsema, Flood Control Zone District Advisory Committee Chair, stated they have dealt with this from the beginning of the flood issues. Beach erosion is something the County has historically done projects on. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 3/7/2000, Page 10 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 Nelson questioned whether the County has used flood control zone money for those projects. Bronsema stated it has. They've done projects at Point Roberts before. Nelson questioned whether any private citizen has requested assistance along coastal waterways. Cooper stated they had one request that was not funded. Nelson questioned whether they should have their own sub -flood control zone district. Bronsema stated the coastal flooding issue regarding assessments has been overlooked. No one has thought of it. There are some lowland areas along the water. If there is a major storm event, and the winds and tide are just right, there could be some damage. Nelson stated this should be a separate discussion. Cooper stated that this is County park land. Nelson stated they should discuss how this would work. If an evulsion event happens in which residents can come forward and request assistance, then there needs to be a process. Cooper stated they annually request project applications. As all the project applications come in, members of the project review committee take tours and look at all the different projects. Those projects are then ranked high, medium, or low. The criteria they use are whether there is a threat to human life or safety, a public transportation corridor, or public facilities. Further down the list would be private property. Nelson questioned which areas most of the money has gone to for protection. Cooper stated it has gone to the Nooksack River, which is a high threat to public infrastructure. Imhof questioned whether they should change the match. Cooper stated this situation evolved. This money is spent and the project is done. When County staff realized that a riprap repair was not the best solution, they requested that FEMA consider this as an alternate project or improved project. They approved the project, but didn't increase the dollar amount. Staff wasn't aware of the increased cost. When staff went out to bid, the costs came in a lot higher than anticipated because of the transport cost to Point Roberts. The money is spent. The initial damage survey report from FEMA was at $60,000. The actual cost incurred was $157,000. Given the 70/30 split, not including the money that FEMA contributed, the County Parks Department share was $31,000. Parks Department staff was not aware of the costs and was hit broadside with the cost. Nelson moved to recommend approval, on the advice of the advisory board. They need to look at the issue of the coastal waterways. Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 3/7/2000, Page 11 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 Imhof stated they need to make sure the people located in the coastal flood plains are funding the projects. Crawford stated they've spent the money and questioned what the request is for. Cooper stated they are changing the cost - share. Nelson stated they are helping the Parks Department. Imhof stated the Parks Department would otherwise have to come up with $31,000 instead of the $2,000 they estimated. Cooper stated the repair and maintenance plan of the flood district has a fixed cost -share that used to be 70/30. To vary that, they need Council approval. Crawford questioned where the Public Works Department got the money for their share. Cooper stated it came from the flood fund. Imhof stated the request is to get the money from the flood fund. Crawford questioned who made the decision to turn this into a project that cost $157,000. Cooper stated she understood that the staff changed the project from a riprap wall to the more expensive project. The hauling cost to Point Roberts exacerbated the increase in cost. Bronsema stated he would take the funding issue back to the advisory committee. Motion carried unanimously. 4. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AND THE EVERGREEN AIDS FOUNDATION TO PROVIDE FOR VOLUNTEER AND CASE MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR CLIENTS INFECTED WITH HIV AND /OR DIAGNOSED WITH AIDS, IN THE CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $21,000 (AB2000 -118) Imhof moved to recommend approval. Motion carried unanimously. S. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AND THE STATE OF WASHINGTON Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 3/7/2000, Page 12 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 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, TO SUPPORT NUTRITION EDUCATION CLASSES AT THE BELLINGHAM FOOD BANK, IN THE AMOUNT OF $15,520 (AB2000 -119) Kay Guirl, Personal Health Services Manager, stated the $15,000 would support extra hours for the part -time staff. They are not hiring additional staff. Imhof questioned what they are going to do. Guirl stated they have conducted focus groups around nutrition knowledge and understanding. Oftentimes the food that is available in the food banks is not the food that many people are used to using. There are lots of people who don't cook with legumes and beans. There are lots of beans available through the food bank. Part of the education is to educate people on what they can do with foods they would not normally use. Nelson stated this is a federal program. Guirl stated it is a pass- through. Imhof moved to recommend approval. Crawford asked what the challenges are. Guirl stated the challenge is that some cannot read and cannot use a cookbook. Nelson stated some are culturally unaware of how to cook these foods. For example, a Japanese exchange student he knew didn't know what to do with a potato. Guirl stated they also have to change peoples' attitudes about these things. Motion carried unanimously. OTHER ITEMS Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, discussed the Civic Center Building. The tenants will be leaving this year at some point, by mid- to late- summer. The administration would like to go forward with a request for qualifications (RFQ) to seek assistance from architectural, consulting, and engineering firms to do pre - design services such as the mechanical systems, American with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessibility, and other needs. The County has not yet engaged in examining the programming needs or the cost of making those adjustments. The County set aside some money in a fund to pay for some necessary adjustments. He was unsure of whether that money would be adequate. He would propose that the County engage a firm to determine its condition and serviceability, space requirements, code analysis, and electrical, mechanical and seismic constructional Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 3/7/2000, Page 13 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 analysis. Once that is done, they will ask for conceptual drawings that will allow the administration to determine what work needs to go on both in and around the building. They will do a preliminary cost estimate for the construction. All that information would be brought before the County Council. He predicted that this work would take 60 to 90 days. They are going to have a competitive process for the pre- design services. The architectural firm they select may be the one they would use during the constructional phase of the effort. He will come back for a supplemental budget request for the funds for that initial work. It would come out of the funds that they set aside. The appropriate committee to oversee this would be the Council Finance and Administrative Services Committee. Nelson suggested that the RFQ identifies that the applicant must have the ability to deal with large commercial buildings. They should also have engineering staff. Nelson asked about the Public Employee Retirement System (PERS) eligibility. Desler explained that all councilmembers are eligible for membership in the Washington State PERS. They have the option of applying for membership. If they apply for membership, then they need to pay into the system to cover their employee and employer contributions, plus interest, back to the first day of their current term. Some councilmembers have signed up and others haven't. The Department of Retirement Systems (DRS) will determine what that amount is, based on their service. The County, as the employer, may elect to pay the required employer contributions for an elected official back to the beginning of the point they started serving. Nelson questioned the administration's position at this time regarding the employers' contribution. Desler stated he would have to put that in writing to the Councilmembers. Crawford stated the County could take on the employer's financial responsibility if the County so deems. Desler stated the County pays the employer contribution for all employees of the County. Employees are automatically eligible. Crawford questioned whether regular employees have the option to join the program. Desler stated the employees are required to join the program. Crawford questioned whether the elected officials are the only ones that have the option to join. Desler stated that was correct. Crawford questioned whether it would set any kind of a precedent for the non - elected employees if the County were to pay the employer contribution for an elected official, back to the beginning of his or her service. Desler stated the Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 3/7/2000, Page 14 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 payments would have started from the first day of employment for all other employees. Nelson stated accomplishments were made during the National Association of County Officials (NACO) conference. They are looking at new, innovative technology approaches to help the County government work more efficiently. Mr. Desler will prepare a presentation to the departments. They will also look at resources at the state and federal levels. Desler stated they made contact with a NACO- certified firm that is setting up online payments of various taxes, fines, and fees. It creates a 24 hours per day, seven days per week option for consumers to take care of their business with the County. This particular option would be available to Whatcom County at little expense. People in the administration are excited about the opportunity to improve service to the citizens. Nelson questioned whether the individual would be available at a future meeting. Desler stated he would. Imhof stated the reason they are getting the service at a substantial decrease in cost is because the company is trying to get a few systems in place on the West Coast. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 1:30 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, 3/7/2000, Page 15