HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinance May 2 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
Finance and Administrative Services Committee
May 2, 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
DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL
1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2000 BUDGET, REQUEST NO. 5 (AB2000-
173)
Imhof moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
2. DISCUSSION OF LAND ACQUISITION PROJECT FOR HAZARD
MITIGATION GRANT APPLICATION (HMGP) (AB2000 -178)
Paula Cooper, Special Projects Engineer, stated hazard mitigation grant
funding is typically available after a disaster. This is from an old disaster. It is left
over money that wasn't used by whomever it was initially granted to. The Federal
Emergency Management Act (FEMA) is targeting the money to repetitive loss
properties. FEMA contacted the County because it was interested in four properties
in Ferndale. At a previous work session, she presented this concept to the Council,
who gave her the go -ahead to talk to those four property owners. Two of the four
property owners are interested in being bought out under a hazard mitigation grant
program.
Nelson asked if it is based on a fair assessment valuation. Cooper stated it
is. The two property owners have given the County permission to apply for the
grant funding on their behalf. When she initially talked to FEMA about this, they
asked for a cost assessment. Based on certain factors, her estimated cost is
$900,000. FEMA didn't bat an eye at that amount. When it became apparent that
two owners didn't want to participate, FEMA said the County could substitute other
repetitive loss areas. She looked at other areas on the repetitive loss list that have
a good damage -to- assessed value ratio. It is a substitute for cost - benefit. There
are a few properties in the Everson Road area they can justify from a cost - benefit
standpoint.
Brenner asked why they couldn't do this in Canyon Creek. Cooper stated she
asked that, and was told that this was a FEMA project targeting repetitive loss
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/2/2000, 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
areas based on flood insurance claims. None of the repetitive loss properties are
from Canyon Creek.
Brenner stated the County is not going to be responsible if the other two
properties flood out. Cooper stated they both have flood insurance.
Imhof asked what the County does with the property it purchases. Cooper
stated the County buys out the land at fair market value and demolishes the
structures. The County owns the property.
Imhof asked if the County could sell the property as farmland. Cooper stated
the County could lease it as farmland. It must have a deed restriction that says it
remains in open space. She was not sure how these parcels would do as useful
farmland. The land owned by the two property owners that said yes is residential
area. One is one acre in size and another is 13 acres in size.
Brenner asked about doing a property line adjustment for neighboring
properties if they want the land.
Nelson stated that if it floods they could file a claim.
Cooper stated the County could buy a structure and flood easement. An
owner could retain ownership. One 18 -acre parcel has five acres across the river
that the owner is interested in retaining.
Dawson stated that if the County buys only the development rights, it could
buy more property.
Nelson stated it is up to FEMA. It has to be on land that has had multiple
claims.
Cooper stated that may have been an option. It is not a lot of money.
Nelson asked how many parcels have had multiple claims. Cooper stated 15
parcels are left.
Dawson asked to look into it for the future. Cooper stated that if people are
selling a small parcel, the people are just interested in getting out.
Nelson asked if the County could use the money for preventative
maintenance. Cooper stated FEMA was restructured so that the money is for
acquisition only.
Imhof asked if there is a restriction on what the County can do, other than
retain the property in open space. Cooper stated she didn't think so.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/2/2000, 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
49
50
Imhof asked if the County could sell the property if someone wants to
purchase it. Cooper stated that in the draft of the buyout program that is being
introduced, the property has to be retained in public ownership.
Nelson moved to recommend approval.
Cooper asked if that includes the Everson Road area.
Nelson stated it includes the Everson Road area and all possible areas that
can use FEMA dollars to get people away from claiming flood damages.
Motion carried unanimously.
COUNCIL "CONSENT AGENDA" ITEM
1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BIDS
#00 -34, 35 AND 36 TO WILDER CONSTRUCTION, THE APPROPRIATE
LOWEST RESPONSIVE BIDDER, TO FURNISH, LAY AND COMPACT
ASPHALT ON ROADWAY SECTIONS FOR THE NORTH EAST, THE SOUTH
WEST AND THE SOUTH EAST AREA PRELEVEL PROJECTS IN THE TOTAL
AMOUNT OF $546,521 (AB2000 -179)
Imhof moved to recommend approval.
Brenner questioned what the lowest "responsive" bidder means, and asked
how the bids are set up. She has heard complaints that the bids are set up in a
way that precludes certain people from bidding.
Dick Prieve, Assistant Director of Administration and of Maintenance and
Operations, stated that isn't a problem. They are always fair and cognizant of all
contractors. In this type of activity, a lot of it is the County's work in adjacent to
batch plant locations. In the case of Wilder, they have two batch plants in this
county. Whatcom Builders have one. Associated's costs are always higher because
theirs is in Skagit County. That haul becomes a real issue.
Brenner asked if they try to do it close to a batch plant. Prieve stated the
County work dictates where they go. They try to put jobs together in specific areas
to lower the County's cost.
Imhof stated that is the yearly contract for asphalt. On the yearly asphalt
contract, the County looks at each batch plant that the different companies own
and the work that needs to be done within a certain radius of those plants. That is
how the County figures the cheapest rate.
Prieve stated there have been errors and contractors who couldn't get
bonding. Those contractors may have been the lowest bidder, but not most
qualified bidder.
Motion carried unanimously.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/2/2000, 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
2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO PURCHASE
WHATCOM COUNTY'S ANNUAL SUPPLY OF LIGNOSITE FROM SOLE
SOURCE SUPPLIER GEORGIA PACIFIC, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $55,000 (AB2000 -180)
Imhof moved to recommend approval and asked if this is less than they
usually use.
Dick Prieve, Assistant Director of Administration and of Maintenance and
Operations, stated it is higher. He was predicting a dry summer, but it hasn't
turned out that way. He would rather purchase more because the lignosite cost has
gone up.
Imhof asked how much road requires dust control. Prieve stated they have
64 miles of gravel roads in 322 locations. They don't put lignosite on all gravel
roads. Some people don't need it. A lot of folks call who are next to raspberry
farms or are worried about dust mites. The County forms the list. They make two
trips to Point Roberts. There is a regular list that they supplement when people call
in.
Nelson asked that they use the contract information sheet in the future.
Motion carried unanimously.
3. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING COUNTY ROAD PROJECT NO. 999013
AND THE AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE HANNEGAN CORRIDOR
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS, IN THE AMOUNT OF $497,967.25
(AB2000 -181)
Imhof moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
OTHER ITEMS
Nelson announced the strategic planning meeting next Tuesday.
Dewey Desler, Deputy Administrator, stated the meeting is at the ferry
terminal. County Executive Pete Kremen would not like to take requests for a
biennium budget this year because a significant source of funding is from state
legislature appropriation. They would like to line up the County's biennium budget
with the state's biennium budget as much as possible. They will lay out the
framework for that two -year budget. There are a lot of advantages to a two -year
budget. It forces people to do long -term planning. The strategic planning effort
will be built around examining what they've done to date. They want to look at it
again and determine the extent to which they should focus on key elements of the
strategic plan.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 5/2/2000, 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
In addition, they will submit a supplemental budget for water resources
changes. That will come forward at the next committee meeting. They will also
have some recommendations regarding the civic center building. They have gone
through a process of selecting a firm to do some planning. A committee has been
working on that. The appropriation for it and the architectural work is modest and
less than anticipated.
Brenner asked about request for Rydell Williams. Desler stated it is a legal
matter. They are pleased with the work of Paul Koontz and Associates.
Nelson asked where it is in the process. Brenner stated it is in court.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 12:22 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, 5/2/2000, Page 5