HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil March 23 19991
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
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Regular County Council
March 23, 1999
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: Absent:
Kathy Sutter None
Robert Imhof
L. Ward Nelson
Connie Hoag
Barbara Brenner
Tom Brown
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Dawson announced that Whatcom County Public Works Director Jeff Monsen and
Senior Deputy Prosecutor Karen Frakes updated the Council on Lummi water negotiations
(AB99 -018) and discussion with Chief Civil Prosecutor Randy Watts regarding pending
litigation (AB99 -018) during Committee of the Whole executive session.
Dawson also announced that there was discussion regarding Draft Wetland Mitigation
Banking policies (AB99 -119). This will be coming to committee for further discussion.
SPECIAL PRESENTATION
SPECIAL PRESENTATION REGARDING THE UNITED STATES 2000 CENSUS
(AB99 -084)
Meryl Tsukiji gave the presentation and stated that she was with the Partnership Program
of the Census Bureau. The very first census was taken in 1790 and mandated by the constitution.
The primary reason for the census is to determine the number of seats in the House of
Representatives. These days, the information is used for a lot of different reasons. In addition to
apportionment in the House of Representatives, it is also used for re- districting in the State
legislatures and funding. The numbers received from the census affect the allocation of funds
from the federal, state, and local governments. It affects community -based organizations who
rely on census numbers. In addition, school district boundaries look at census numbers. A lot of
education programs are based in part or whole on census numbers. In 2000, they will try to
count over 150,000 people in Whatcom County. They want to make sure everyone gets counted.
She asked for the Council's support. In all censuses, traditionally people get missed. This
particular census will try to count over 275 million people. The 1990 census missed about 2.3%
of the population across the nation. In Washington State, 2.2% was missed, and in Whatcom
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 1
I County 2.4% was missed. They will mail census forms out to everyone's homes. They have
2 been verifying addresses in the County. For those who receive mail through a post office box or
3 rural route number, census enumerators will be hired to hand - deliver the census forms. They
4 want to make sure that everyone gets counted.
5
6 Tsukiji continued to state that a couple of things will be different this year. One of them
7 is that they will be opening a local census office to serve Skagit, Whatcom, and Island County.
8 They are looking for 7,400 and 7,900 square feet of space on one floor. They will be hiring 300-
9 400 people.
10
11 Dawson questioned how long they would need the space. Tsukiji stated that the office
12 would be open from October until the end of census operations. April 1, 2000 is census day.
13 Beginning in May, they will begin knocking on doors. She estimated that they would be done in
14 June or July. Census jobs will be temporary and part-time.
15
16 Brenner questioned whether they lot check every home. She has never received any
17 census information in the time she has lived in her home. Tsukiji stated that she should make
18 sure she fills out a form. They hope to have sites in the communities where people can pick up
19 their forms.
20
21 Brown questioned how they know how many people that they missed. Tsukiji stated that
22 they go by address listing when they mail out census forms. This year, there was a law passed
23 down to require the postal office to release addresses. Everytime they do the census, afterwards
24 they do a post enumeration survey. They take sample areas to determine if they did in fact count
25 everyone in that area. Based on those numbers, they estimate how many they missed.
26
27 Tsukiji continued to state that there will be a short form and a long form. The short form
28 has seven questions and the long form will have up to 53 questions on 34 subjects. Some of the
29 changes in the long form are regarding racial group and grand - parenting. All of the questions are
30 linked to federal laws and designed to implement programs to collect data. For jurisdictions with
31 a population of less than 2,500, every other housing unit will receive the long form. They want
32 to put supports in place to work with communities to get people involved and create a positive
33 environment for the census.
35 Brenner asked how they answer to people who are concerned with having their privacy
36 invaded. Tsukiji stated that the census employees take an oath of office and sign an affadavit of
37 confidentiality. All are liable to a $5,000 fine and up to 5 years of imprisonment for disclosing
38 any individual census information. The census forms, when mailed in, are kept confidential for
39 72 years. The Bureau has been very strict about not disclosing information to agencies or
40 organizations that identifies any person or any set of people.
41
42 Nelson questioned whether there was any mechanism for citizens to enter information
43 through the Internet. Tsukiji stated that the short form will be on the internet. The internet site is
44 called http: / /www.census.gov.
45
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 2
I Brown questioned whether a household can choose which form to fill out. Tsukiji stated
2 that wouldn't work.
3
4 Brenner questioned whether filling out the census was voluntary. Tsukiji stated that Title
5 13 of the U.S. Code says that individuals are liable to up to a $500 fine for not filling out the
6 census form. The Census Bureau prefers not to do anything coercive. If someone doesn't fill
7 out their form, then census enumerators will go back to a residence up to six times to find them
8 at home. If they don't find them at home, then they will go to a neighbor to collect the
9 information. Information is much more accurate when someone does it himself or herself.
10
11 Sutter questioned how they control only one form being filled out per residence. Tsukiji
12 stated that has been a problem in the past. The undercount problems have been a net undercount.
13 It counts for duplicates and omissions. During this census, they will use optical scanners that
14 will scan in and match names and addresses.
M
16 Tsukiji continued to state that communities are being asked to form Complete Count
17 Committees. She extended the offer to Whatcom County. A Complete Count Committee is a
18 representative set of community members who include census in their normal activities. There
19 will also be questionnaire assistance centers. There is a census in the schools program. The
20 census form will be printed in five different languages in addition to English.
21
22 Nelson questioned whether she had presented to the Whatcom County Council of
23 Governments (COG). Tsukiji stated that she is on their agenda in April. One possibility is, if the
24 COG is willing to serve as a coordinating forum, then they might be able to bring all the cities
25 and the County together within a forum to help count people.
26
27 Nelson asked that Council member Sutter bring the issue to COG.
28
29 OPEN SESSION
30
31 The following people spoke:
32
33 Jack Swanson, 1200 Harris Avenue, Bellingham, asked the Council to reconsider the
34 Planning Committee's recommendation on item #1999 -L of A1399 -074 regarding the
35 Comprehensive Plan amendments. It is a proposed change on 80 acres from commercial forestry
36 to rural forestry. The Council should consider the following points. The land is not taxed as a
37 special forestry classification. The land's access is by a road that is improved to County
38 standards and is scheduled to be paved soon. The land is included in Fire District #4. These are
39 the location criteria, from the Comprehensive Plan, for designation to rural forestry. The land
40 adjoining it to the west is zoned rural. It has been divided into five -acre tracts. There are 16
41 five -acre tracts that have preliminarily been approved. Roads have been built. Wells have been
42 drilled. Power has been supplied. Phone has been supplied. One new house has been
43 constructed with people living in it. Soils have been tested and are suitable for sewage disposal
44 systems. There is going to be serious development immediately adjacent to this property. This
45 80 -acre tract is not especially well suited for long -term forestry production. It slopes away from
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 3
I the rural zone and the home sites. Logging activities on a commercial scale are not going to be
2 very compatible and will be disruptive to the 16 homes that will be sitting there. Rural Forestry
3 offers an appropriate buffer between incompatible activities on Commercial Forestry by allowing
4 for a managed harvest approach on 20 -acre tracts in the Rural Forestry zone that will preserve a
5 forested backdrop for the homes that are on the flatter land below. Much of the Commercial
6 Forestry in the County is buffered by Rural Forestry. There is the question that has been raised
7 of the legal authority to limiting logging activities by covenants in the Rural Forestry zone. It is
8 likely that is something that will be appropriate. His property owner felt that it would add value
9 to that property. They are asking only for an opportunity to get to a public hearing to present the
10 case in a more thorough and formal manner. The process is troubling the way it has been going.
11
12 Amy Mangum, City of Lynden Planner, 323 Front Street, Lynden, stated that she wanted
13 to speak regarding Other Items #6 regarding the WA -CERT resolution, and give the Council an
14 update on the infrastructure development in West Lynden. At this point, through the WA -CERT
15 process, they have initiated and been funded for engineering along West Main Street, which was
16 the first part of the project. They are also undergoing funding and development of signalization
17 improvements for both Birch Bay - Lynden Road and the Guide Meridian, and also the re-
18 alignment of Front Street and Tromp Road and the Guide Meridian. The next major project will
19 be the Tromp Road improvements, which will be the north /south portion of Tromp Road. It will
20 be the extension of water and sewer service from the Birch Bay - Lynden Road north to 100 acres
21 of land zoned industrial and within the city limits, urban growth area, and Comprehensive Plan
22 for industrial development. An economic development plan has been developed. She asked that
23 the ranking stay at least #2, if not number #1.
24
25 Bob Tull, 709 Dupont, Bellingham, stated that he represented Caitac USA Corp, who is
26 the proponent of a Comprehensive Plan change that is set forth in the docketed materials. It is
27 one that the committee recommends shouldn't go forward. He suggested that it be appropriate
28 that it go forward into the SEPA process, staffing process, Planning Commission process, and
29 into the joint review process that is called for by the Comprehensive Plan. Amendments were
30 clearly called for. Page 109 of the Comprehensive Plan recognized that landowners get to
31 submit petitions, and the entire process follows. That is a fundamental right that needs to go
32 forward. They have been doing a lot of analysis about the land supply and other related
33 information. They have to do more analysis before anything can happen. They are proposing a
34 multi -year, multi -phase planning, servicing, and development process. This is not a rezone
35 request where something will happen immediately. It is the beginning of a very complex
36 process. They are serious about being a receiver of transferable development rights (TDR).
37 Without that type of receiver, TDR programs are not going to go forward. Caitac is willing to
38 pick up the expenses through the normal process of working with the County staff to reimburse
39 for the entire effort. He asked that the Council add this item to the docket to go forward to the
40 Planning Commission.
41
42 David Davidson, City of Sumas Administrator, spoke on Consent Agenda Item #5,
43 regarding an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Sumas regarding annexation of property into
44 the City of Sumas. The 50 acres is in open space /agriculture and, if annexed by Sumas, the
45 County will lose $317 per year of road tax. There is an offer from a person to do an industrial
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 4
I development at that location. If something like that goes through, the County is looking at
2 receiving a substantial tax benefit. Another issue was about the amount of agricultural land that
3 would be consumed. He reminded the Council that is a settled issue. This 54 acres is in the
4 urban growth area and is not a long -term agricultural resource land.
5
6 Donna Macomber, Larson Road, spoke about the memo that Bob Tull submitted
7 regarding Caitac USA Corp. that said Caitac is willing to supply funding for an appropriate
8 period for additional staffing resources to the City of Bellingham and Whatcom County. She
9 didn't approve of that. In addition, the Comprehensive Plan was finalized in 1997. It is a slap in
10 the face to those who worked on it to throw it all away by opening up the process again so soon.
11 Adding 600 acres to the northern boundary of Bellingham is urban sprawl.
12
13 Fred Haskins, 4754 Aldrich Road, stated that he is located just south of the Caitac
14 property. It is premature to put the Caitac property on the Planning Commission docket. They
15 should wait for re- evaluation at the five -year point. The City is not hurting for more
16 development at this point.
17
18 Jack Petree, 2955 Sunset, Bellingham, stated that the Council received a letter from the
19 Bellingham Planning staff regarding Comprehensive Plan amendments. There are contradictions
20 between that letter and documents from the City regarding the land supply analysis. In addition,
21 the planning period is from 1995 — 2015. The five -year review period is up in the year 2000, not
22 2002. Honorable people can disagree. The point of the process is to bring these concerns
23 forward for discussion and then the Planning Commission can make a recommendation.
24
25 Ike Reimer, Lynden, questioned who authorized the increase in the flood tax and why it
26 is needed when there is $6 million in the flood budget and nothing has been done yet.
27
28 Dawson stated that 1/2 of the funds address flooding problems and the other 1/2 goes to the
29 Endangered Species Act. There have to be matching local funds to acquire State and federal
30 funds to address that issue. Otherwise, the County will have to use additional local money.
31
32 Reimer stated that there will be plenty of fish once the river is dredged.
33
34 Patricia Decker, City of Bellingham Planning and Community Director, stated that her
35 letter to the Council and proponent addresses several questions. She won't deal with the
36 County's fair share of population, because that is not an issue that has been contested lately. She
37 addressed the supply of land question. The 50% market supply factor was originally called for
38 by the County Council and the cities in the Countywide Planning Policies. That was something
39 that they had to put in. They indicated that those market factors had been based on historically
40 low population estimates by the Office of Financial Management (OFM). When the County
41 Council eliminated the Countywide Planning Policy that required a 50% market factor, the City
42 was forced to re- evaluate that. Whatcom County also got a revised estimate of population for the
43 County. That information is in the findings from the Bellingham City Council. That revised
44 population was much closer to the actual populations that they had experienced as a County.
45 Therefore, they could no longer justify the 50% market factor because it was overcome by new
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 5
I population projections that added about 30,000 more people to Whatcom County by the year
2 2015. Whatcom County developed its Comprehensive Plan within the range of figures
3 consistent with those numbers.
4
5 (Clerk's Note: End of Tape one, side A)
6
7 Decker continued to state that there was a question about the UR -Mix zone. In the City's
8 Comprehensive Urban Fringe Plan, they assumed only the base density of four units per acre.
9 They did not assume any increases in density from better design or transfer of development from
10 critical areas. That is established in the City Council's findings. They didn't know how to
11 estimate more than four units per acre, so they didn't attempt to do that. They felt that was a
12 flexibility factor. Regarding the Greenways issue, if the City goes from 10 acres per 1,000 to 25
13 acres per 1,000, which the City hasn't adopted yet, then the 9,000 people that the City would
14 take on as a result of the increased population projections from OFM would need another 15
15 acres per 1,000. That is about 135 acres. They are not talking about large amounts of acreage in
16 the near term resulting from Greenways. In addition, the City has 26% reduced amounts for
17 infrastructure. Some of the park increase is included in that amount. If the City finds in the five -
18 year review that is not enough, then they can deal with it at that time. The City raised questions
19 about how this would fit in Whatcom County's overall management of population growth. It is
20 difficult to justify taking the Caitac area when there is no new information until the year 2000
21 census. All the money spent in the meantime will not generate better information. If the County
22 Council wishes to initiate this at this time, she questioned what that says about the other areas in
23 Bellingham's five -year review area. Language in the Urban Fringe Subarea Plan says that there
24 will be a priority given to the five -year review areas, not just one five -year review area. They all
25 have to be reviewed at once. They just did that in 1997. No one in the City of Bellingham wants
26 to have an overly constrained land supply. The City Council recommended adding 700 more
27 acres of industrial land as part of the urban fringe subarea process. The City also accepted 9,000
28 more people and the residential development associated with that during the urban fringe
29 process. If they assume that Bellingham is going to absorb additional population, and therefore
30 need to add this area to the Bellingham urban growth area, but assume that the overall County
31 projected population is not going to change, then they need to determine which urban growth
32 areas are going to be pulled back. Those questions are the reason they have said that urban
33 growth area amendments should be done in a broad - ranging way, in a five -year process. Annual
34 plan amendment processes are a different kettle of fish. Urban growth area expansions of this
35 magnitude should not be done annually. They take too many resources.
36
37 Lesa Starkenburg, 115 Front Street, Lynden, stated that she is the Vice -Chair of the
38 Lynden Economic Development Team. They adopted the development plan, which has a
39 number of elements. One of the largest elements is anticipated industrial growth for Lynden.
40 The largest area that they've targeted is the area west of the Guide Meridian, which has a couple
41 of problems for development currently. The largest problem is infrastructure. Lynden would
42 like to be a contender for development from people looking to locate in Whatcom County. The
43 problem is that the infrastructure is often over and above what an individual company can take
44 on. At this point, there are two companies that are currently both within Lynden and looking to
45 expand. The west Lynden area is the area they are looking toward. The WA -CERT funds are an
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 6
I important element for growth in the West Lynden area. From the attachment to the amended
2 resolution, they are ranked as number two. They would like to maintain #2 ranking or move up
3 to #1.
4
5 Hoag questioned whether the #2 ranking has already been funded. Starkenburg stated
6 that part of the project that they are still working on is still under the #2 priority project. The
7 Tromp road project was split out under a separate application.
9
10 CONSENT AGENDA
11
12 Nelson announced for Finance and Administrative Services Committee and moved
13 approval of Consent Agenda items one through six.
14
15 Nelson also moved to include Council member travel expenses (AB99 -22C) to and
16 from Olympia for both Council members Sutter and Imhof, and also Brenner's request for
17 reimbursement for a conference and purchase of audiotapes. All Consent Items come forward
18 with a unanimous recommendation from committee.
19
20 Motion carried unanimously.
21
22 1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
23 CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES
24 DEPARTMENT AND WIZARDS ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES,
25 PROVIDING SERVICES TO ENSURE IMPLEMENTATION OF PORTAGE BAY
26 AND DRAYTON HARBOR CLOSURE RESPONSE STRATEGIES, IN THE
27 AMOUNT OF $70,000 (AB99 -112)
28
29 2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BIDS 99 -12
30 AND 99 -13, FOR CLASS G ASPHALT PRELEVEL PROJECTS FOR THE NORTH
31 CENTRAL AND NORTH WEST AREAS TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE BIDDER
32 OF EACH CONTRACT, WILDER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, IN THE
33 RESPECTIVE AMOUNTS OF $238,500 AND 311,373 FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF
34 $549,873 (AB99 -113)
35
36 3. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
37 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WALKER & ASSOCIATES
38 PROVIDING FOR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY AND TOPOGRAPHIC MAPPING OF
39 THE LOWER NOOKSACK RIVER FROM DEMING TO RITTER ROAD, AS
40 RECOMMENDED IN THE CFHMP, IN THE AMOUNT OF $38,700 (AB99 -114)
41
42 4. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
43 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH SAFETY- KLEEN, PROVIDING
44 FOR CONTINUED SERVICE TO CLEAN AND DISPOSE OF THE CENTRAL SHOP
45 WASTE OIL, INCLUDING THE IDENTIFICATION AND DISPOSAL OF
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 7
I UNIDENTIFIED SUBSTANCES WHICH PERIODICALLY ARE DISCOVERED
2 ALONG COUNTY ROADS OR REMOTE COUNTY LOCATIONS, AT A SUM NOT
3 TO EXCEED $30,000 (AB99 -115)
4
5 5. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
6 AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE TO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN
7 WHATCOM COUNTY AND THE CITY OF SUMAS, WITHIN THE URBAN
8 GROWTH AREA, CONCERNING ANNEXATION OF THE JAGER ANNEXATION
9 AREA (AB99 -116)
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
6. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING COUNTY ROAD PROJECT NO. 998022 AND THE
AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE STRUCTURAL PRE -LEVEL AND SHOULDER
WIDENING OF BIRCH BAY DRIVE /BIRCH POINT ROAD TO THE LOWEST
RESPONSIVE BIDDER, COLACURCIO BROTHERS GRAVEL & EXCAVATION,
INC, IN THE AMOUNT OF $506,665 (AB99 -117)
PUBLIC HEARING
ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING
ORDINANCE, TITLE 20, TO ADD A NEW CHAPTER 20.61 — SMALL TOWN
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (STC) AND AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM
COUNTY ZONING MAP FROM GC, NC, TC, RC, RR2, R2A, R5A AND R10A TO
STC; UR4 TO RR1; R5A TO RR2; RC TO RR1; AND RC TO RF (AB99 -106)
Sylvia Goodwin, Planning & Development Services Planning Manager, gave a staff
report and stated that this is a zoning text amendment to create a new zone, Small Town
Commercial, and would affect the zoning in Acme, Custer, Kendall, Maple Falls, Glacier, and
Deming. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on this item. Public notice was
mailed to property owners. There have been several community meetings and a lot of public
involvement. In the mailing, one property owner was missed, due to a change of ownership.
The locations were all designated as small towns in the Comprehensive Plan. There are policies
that support creating a new small town zoning for this area. There are also amendments to the
Growth Management Act that give more latitude for in -fill and expansion within existing
commercial areas. She read from the proposed addition on packet page 268. Residential uses
will still be allowed as a small town mixed use zone. There is some administrative approval
allowed of larger retail facilities up to 5,000 square feet, and light fabrication facilities up to
10,000 square feet. They envision a facility that is now in Glacier that creates exercise
equipment. It provides local employment, yet is still small and fits in within the existing
facilities. They are not looking at large retail or manufacturing. By conditional use, the
commercial and retail facilities could go up to 10,000 square feet and grocery stores up to 30,000
square feet by conditional use. There is a variety of requirements dealing with landscaping,
drainage, driveways, access lighting, and setbacks that are similar to the other commercial zones
in the County.
Amy De Vera, Planning Department Planning Technician, gave a slide presentation and
explained that they proposed the small town commercial be expanded in Acme to the west. For
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 8
I Custer, the proposed boundaries were extended to the north to cover the existing neighborhood
2 commercial zones. It extends up to Arnie Road, following the Burlington- Northern railway
3 right -of -way. The Deming boundary was extended to the west and to the north. It is mostly the
4 same area of the existing general commercial.
5
6 Brown questioned whether the Deming library was included in the proposed boundary.
7 Goodwin stated that they could not expand the small town boundary beyond where it was
8 designated in the Comprehensive Plan. To extend it across the highway requires a
9 Comprehensive Plan amendment. Libraries and post offices are allowed in rural areas anyway.
10
11 De Vera stated that the entire town of Glacier is zoned resort commercial. They proposed
12 that one large undeveloped parcel be rezoned to rural forestry and that the existing residential
13 and commercial areas of Glacier be rezoned to small town commercial. The existing area that is
14 primarily rural is recommended to be rezoned to rural residential one acre.
15
16 Brown stated that the area recommended for rezoning was set aside years ago for
17 potential development of a large recreational resort. He questioned whether there was any input
18 about that during the public hearing process. Debarra stated that he property owners did not
19 come forward.
20
21 De Vera continued to state that the proposed commercial areas in Kendall are primarily in
22 the central area. The small town commercial area in Maple Falls encompasses all of the existing
23 general commercial areas. It extends north around the school property.
24
25 Goodwin stated that the Planning Commission had a considerable amount of discussion
26 about the rezone in Maple Falls. The school, because it is closing, wants some flexibility to sell
27 the property. Commercial or community public uses are what they foresee the property being
28 used as. That is why the Planning Commission included that area. There is residential use
29 between the school and the highway, but it didn't make sense to leave out the existing residences
30 and have them surrounded by commercial. That is why they included the entire area.
31
32 Brenner questioned the neighbors' opinion on that. Goodwin stated that a couple of them
33 were happy with that. There was one citizen along the highway that wanted it to remain
34 residential. Most people didn't know it would be changed and that is why she recommended that
35 the Council hold a public hearing. They have been talking about it for about a year and there has
36 been plenty of public notice about the fact that they were looking at the zoning in Maple Falls.
37 The original staff recommendation was to not have the school and surrounding residential uses
38 rezoned commercial.
39
40 Dawson opened the public hearing and the following people spoke:
41
42 Jerry Hunter, Superintendent of Mt. Baker School District, stated that the District would
43 like to have all of its property included in the Small Town Commercial zoning, which was the
44 original proposal that came to the Planning Commission. It would allow the district as many
45 options and flexibility of future use of the property. It is not the property on which the new
46 school is located. It is on the other side of the highway and is adjacent to the fire station at
47 Kendall.
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 9
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
Brown questioned whether the property goes behind the fire station. Hunter stated that it
does. It is an L shape property.
Hunter continued to state that the Board of Directors approved a motion requesting the
County Council add this property back into the small town commercial zone as it was in the
original proposal.
Brenner questioned what the school district does with commercial property. Hunter
stated that they have not determined a use. They have been talking about that property for three
or four years. A possible use of a portion of the property would be to put a bus storage facility
there. If the district found it is in the best interest of the taxpayers to have it zoned small town
commercial, it would maximize the benefit back to the taxpayers.
Wayne Beech, 8702 Silver Lake Road, commended the Planning Department for making
changes that the citizens requested, and he supported the Small Town Commercial zone as
presented, at least for the Deming area. If he were to request any changes, they would be text
changes. One request would be to change churches from a conditional use requirement to an
outright permitted use. Another request, in the case of landscaping for the Small Town
Commercial zone, would be to remove the requirement for planting trees and the needed
landscaping area would be reduced.
Niela Stewart, 6483 Mt. Baker Highway, Deming, thanked the Council for their time and
effort through the Growth Management process. This will allow small towns to be created that
are large enough to support growth and provide a much needed increase in the rural County tax
base. In designating these areas as small towns, the Council is preventing the possibility of
urban sprawl.
Anthony Raab, 2834 North Shore Road, Bellingham, seconded the comments made by
Niela Stewart. The boundaries in Kendall, as recommended by the Planning Department and
with the requested change by the school district, are fine. In Maple Falls, the old elementary
school is being abandoned and declared surplus. Several local groups are trying to organize the
resources necessary to preserve and restore the old school building. As proposed by the Planning
Department, the school should be allowed within the Small Town Commercial area. Historic
buildings frequently fall into disrepair and destroyed. This is crucial for the school building.
Doug Campbell, 1401 Astor Street, Bellingham, stated that the Maple Falls water
association is working on their water system plan to accommodate the area that the Council is
considering for Small Town Commercial zoning. As their Water System Plan Engineer, he
assured the Council that they have adequate water and he supported the change.
Goodwin spoke regarding Beech's comment about allowing churches in the Small Town
Commercial zoning as a permitted use. Neighborhood churches are allowed. The larger
churches require a conditional use permit. These days, mega- churches are sometimes being
built. They can have a big impact on traffic and parking, and dominate a neighborhood if there is
not any review.
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 10
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
Sutter disclosed that she discussed this with Niela Stewart during a phone call. They did
not discuss anything of particular substance. She simply expressed her concerns about what the
County was going to do.
Hearing no one else, Dawson closed the public hearing.
Nelson moved to adopt the ordinance.
Brenner asked about people from Custer and questioned whether there was notification.
Goodwin stated that they were notified.
De Vera explained that one individual, a commercial business owner named Mark Ross,
represented the area. He is not from Custer and was the only person who spoke regarding
Custer.
Brenner questioned who in the Custer area was notified. Deberra stated that landowners
within 300 feet of the rezone and all of the subject property owners were notified.
Brenner questioned whether the C.U.S.T.E.R. group was notified. Goodwin stated that
they did not mail it to any organization, only to individual landowners. There probably were
some members of the organization that live in the area and received notification.
Imhof stated that the notice was posted in the window of the store.
Hoag suggested that this be put in committee for further text changes and to get some
questions answered.
Brown moved to include the Mt. Baker School District's request to include their land in
the Kendall area Small Town Commercial zone.
Nelson accepted Brown's motion as a friendly amendment.
Goodwin stated that the Commercial zone in Maple Falls does go to Silver Lake Road
from the school.
Nelson questioned whether it would be appropriate to include adult entertainment as a
prohibited or conditional use. Goodwin stated that it could be, or they could also do that when
they finish the adult entertainment issues that are on the docket. Right now, it is a moratorium
everywhere.
Sutter suggested that language in section 20.61.203 be amended to read, "Mini storage
with more than 2,500 but less than 10,000 square feet of floor area." Goodwin concurred.
Sutter questioned whether indoor commercial recreational facilities that are more than
5,000 square feet are outright permitted. Goodwin stated that they are not allowed.
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, 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
45
46
47
Sutter questioned the definition of a floor area ratio (FAR) as referenced in section
20.61.350. Goodwin stated that it is the ratio of the amount of buildings to the amount of land.
Sutter stated that the requirement in section 20.61.550 should be made of a commercial
building. Goodwin stated that was originally the recommendation. This was something that the
Planning Commission changed. They were thinking that if it were commercial, then it should be
allowed to go wall -to -wall, such as a zero lot line. In reality, the landscaping requirements of the
commercial zoning require that there be some impervious surfaces and some landscaping. This
is one the Planning Commission didn't want to be too restrictive by putting any imposition of
standards on commercial.
Sutter questioned whether non - commercial buildings, such as houses, would allowed to
only leave 10% of the lot in non - impervious surfaces. Goodwin stated that it doesn't make a
sense to put a requirement on non - commercial buildings, but it was a change done by the
Planning Commission. It originally said that 40% or 50% should be impervious and open space.
The Planning Commission changed it to 10% and restricted it to not apply to commercial.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side B)
Hoag moved to table in committee because there has been no committee review and not
all owners have been contacted.
Motion failed 1 -6 with Hoag in favor.
Hoag questioned why the Planning Department recommended a change from resort
commercial to rural forestry in Glacier. Goodwin stated that it is a large area that is heavily
forested and goes up a steep hill. It was originally zoned resort commercial because there was
going to be a ski lodge there. It is an alluvial fan hazard area, which isn't an area where they
want to encourage multi - family housing, which is allowed in resort commercial or commercial
development. There was enough other commercial land in Glacier along the highway that served
the needs of the area. It is most suitable for rural forestry.
Brown stated that rural forestry is what it has been used for.
Hoag questioned whether there was any testimony against that. Goodwin stated that
there was testimony on both sides of the issue, whether they should generally be more or less
commercial. The owner of that particular parcel did not comment either way. A lot of people
living in that residential area didn't want commercial. Others wanted to make sure that there was
plenty of economic development.
Motion to include the Mt. Baker School District area amendment carried unanimously.
Dawson restated the motion to adopt the ordinance as amended.
Sutter moved that Council packet page 271, section 20.61.203, be amended to read,
"Mini storage with more than 2,500 but less than 10,000 square feet of floor area."
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, 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
45
46
Motion to amend carried unanimously.
Hoag moved to amend section 20.61.550 to change language, "...non- commercial..."
Brenner suggested a friendly amendment to Hoag's motion, "...non eemme site..."
Hoag accepted the friendly amendment.
Brenner questioned the amount of open space commercial sites must have the way the
language is currently written. Goodwin stated that none is required. There are landscaping and
setback requirements, so in reality there would be open space.
Brenner withdrew her friendly amendment.
Hoag questioned whether the landscaping requirements would be more than 10 %.
Goodwin stated it is likely that they would, depending on how big the property is.
Hoag's withdrew her motion.
Imhof moved to delete section 20.61.550 from the ordinance.
Hoag questioned where in the Code the landscaping requirements are specified, and how
subject they are to change. Goodwin stated that they are in another section of Title 20. There
would have to be a public hearing and an ordinance to change them.
Brown stated that the landscaping requirements seem too large for a small town lot
requirement.
Motion to delete section 20.61.550 carried unanimously.
Motion to adopt the ordinance as amended carried 6 -1 with Hoag opposed.
OTHER ITEMS
1. RESOLUTION INITIATING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING
AMENDMENTS (AB99 -074)
Sutter reported for Planning and Development Committee and stated the
recommendations from committee were as follows:
Docket #•
1999 -A: approved for the docket 2 -1 and amended to allow Rural 1 dwelling per 10 acres.
1999 -13: approved for the docket 3 -0
1999 -C: approved for the docket 3 -0
1999 -1): approved for the docket 3 -0
1999 -E: removed from the docket 3 -0
1999 -F: approved for the docket 3 -0
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 13
I 1999 -G: approved for the docket 3 -0
2 1999 -H: approved for the docket 3 -0
3 1999 -I: removed from the docket 2 -1
4 1999 -J: approved for the docket 3 -0
5 1999 -K: approved for the docket 2 -1
6 1999 -L: removed from the docket 2 -1
7 1999 -M: approved for the docket 3 -0
9 In addition, there was a request for the Planning Commission to review devising
10 amendments to the Urban Fringe Plan for Map 1, the Marine Drive area and Map 6, the
11 Bakerview/I -5 interchange area, to eliminate ambiguities. That request was included on the
12 docket with unanimous approval.
13
14 Lastly, a request was presented prior to the meeting that will not come forward with a
15 recommendation because it was not addressed in Committee. The request is to revise the
16 existing Comprehensive Plan to include one additional industrial, multi -user pier to provide for
17 economic development while preserving the environmentally sensitive shoreline area and marine
18 life at the Cherry Point management area.
19
20 Brenner stated that the Cherry Point request should not be dealt with at this time because
21 it has had no review.
22
23 Nelson moved to amend the docket to include the request for one additional multi user
24 pier at Cherry Point. This has been an on -going discussion with the State Department of
25 Ecology, Department of Fisheries, and concerned citizen groups. There is a desire by the
26 community for assurance that this is the only additional pier. The only way that assurance can be
27 achieved is by adding it into the Comprehensive Plan.
28
29 Hoag stated that one of the proponents said that this had to be included at this meeting to
30 be considered by the Planning Commission. She questioned whether this item was a text change
31 that could be considered at a later time or a mapping change that had to be considered at this
32 meeting.
33
34 Michael Knapp, Planning and Development Services Director, stated that the interest at
35 having it done at this meeting is to have it recognized in the Comprehensive Plan. This would be
36 a text change. Those are considered in June, but they would move forward with those if the
37 Council chose to. He recommended that the Council include it at this meeting.
38
39 Karen Frakes, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, stated that Hoag was confusing zoning
40 text amendments with Comprehensive Plan amendments. Comprehensive Plan amendments
41 including maps and text, have to go forward at this meeting.
42
43 Hoag questioned whether the changes in June are just the Title 20 zoning text
44 amendments. Knapp stated that they are.
45
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, 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
41
42
43
44
Brenner explained that she was very upset about the process and the last minute inclusion
of the request. There was no due process.
Brown stated that the entire process of putting Comprehensive Plan issues before the
Planning Commission is due process. That is where the interested parties come together for
debate and to iron out decisions. They need to send these things forward for a fair hearing so
that the Planning Commission can forward information and a recommendation.
Hoag questioned whether the change is a zoning text amendment or a Comprehensive
Plan amendment. Nelson stated that it is a Comprehensive Plan amendment.
Hoag questioned what needed to be changed in the Comprehensive Plan. Knapp stated
that a new policy would have to be added to limit the area to one dock. What currently exists
would allow an infinite number of docks. It is a legislative policy decision that does not exist in
the Comprehensive Plan currently.
Hoag strongly objected to this item being brought forward at the last minute. There is a
process set up by growth management that allows for orderly planning and predictability for the
public and the project proponents.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape 2. Tape partially recorded.)
Hoag continued to state that she had not seen any evidence that all the interested parties
have approved of the request.
Knapp stated that there has been several years of discussion and planning. There was
sign -off on the request by everyone except the State Department of Natural Resources (DNR).
DNR has legitimate concerns that are being addressed in negotiations with the one pier.
Brenner stated that she was concerned about the process and questioned how long Knapp
knew that this would come forward. Knapp responded that he found out at 4:00 p.m. this
afternoon.
Brenner questioned why they didn't know until 6:55 p.m. Also, it is a cheat to people on
both sides of an issue when an item is thrown at the Council last minute. It hasn't gone through
the Council process at all. The issue is whether or not there will be a dock. It is premature to put
it on the Planning Commission docket because it did not go before the Planning and
Development Committee.
Frakes explained the background of the agreement negotiation. Whatcom County
approved a permit for a dock.
Hoag stated that she was familiar with the issue.
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 15
I Nelson moved that the language be changed, "revise the existing Comprehensive Plan to
2 include the consideration of only one additional industrial multi -use pier." This process is for
3 them to begin looking at this in a Comprehensive Plan fashion, to consider only one additional
4 dock. Right now there are no limitations to the number of docks that can be under consideration,
5 making it difficult in negotiations when people are looking at the Comprehensive Plan. This is
6 an approach to allow the discussions to come out of deadlock. His concern was that they achieve
7 what they already desire to have, which is the one dock.
8
9 Sutter stated that policy 2AA -7 would be changed. She read the current policy into the
10 record. If this was put on the Planning Commission docket, there won't be any decision made
11 until after the negotiations are over.
12
13 Brown stated that these items cannot be brought forward at any time. The
14 Comprehensive Plan amendments are initiated once per year through this process. If someone
15 doesn't get it in on time, then they lose out for an entire year. That is why someone should be
16 entitled to have a hearing.
17
18 Hoag questioned whether the dock would cost the County money if the Council initiated
19 it. Knapp stated that the Environmental Impact Statement was already done. There has been
20 review by all State agencies. There was considerable support by the State Department of
21 Ecology, Department of Fish and Wildlife. He did not believe it would cost the County any
22 extra money since most of the work has already been done.
23
24 Hoag mentioned that DNR has not moved forward on this was because the herring
25 spawning along the piers have genetic abnormalities. The source of those abnormalities has not
26 yet been determined.
27
28 Knapp stated that all of the environmental work addressed that issue. The concern by
29 DNR was that there would be multiple docks in the area. A single dock is what is needed.
30
31 Pete Kremen, County Executive, explained that this issue is basically driven by DNR. It
32 has been discussed with the Commissioner of Public Lands, Jennifer Belcher. The
33 administration did not bring this forward at the last minute. The issue is whether or not this is
34 good public policy. He believed it is.
35
36 Brenner stated that they could not have good public policy without good public process.
37 No one spoke to the Council about this because no one has known about it. Also, the policy
38 change would determine that an additional pier "will" be done instead of "may" be done.
39
40 Dawson stated that the reality is that it can't happen unless it passes negotiation.
41
42 Brenner stated that the issue is the way it has been done. Administration knew about this
43 and she didn't. She requested to be informed.
44
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 16
I Sutter stated that this isn't the language that is being suggested for the Comprehensive
2 Plan. She anticipated that the only change that would be made would be to work with other
3 agencies and industrial owners at Cherry Point to add a dock. She questioned Hoag about why
4 she was opposed to limiting docks to only one.
5
6 Hoag stated that "one" is better than "additional." But either way, they don't know what
7 the impacts are. The existing herring population is essential to salmon. They don't know what is
8 causing their decline, the abnormalities, or whether they can even tolerate one dock.
9
10 Brown called for the question.
11
12 Brenner moved an amendment that the wording be, "Revise the existing Comprehensive
13 Plan to include the consideration of only one additional industrial multi -user pier as necessary to
14 provide for economic development while preserving the environmentally sensitive shoreline area
15 and marine life at the Cherry Point Management Area."
16
17 Hoag questioned a second pier could be added if the language is changed to allow only
18 one additional pier. Knapp stated that the intent is not to enable even one pier. The intent is to
19 limit the amount of piers to no more than one.
20
21 Hoag questioned whether the word "additional" makes it clear that it refers to what exists
22 at this time and that the same language cannot be used at a later date to justify adding yet another
23 pier.
24
25 Motion to approve Brenner's amendment failed 1 -6 with Brenner in favor.
26
27 Motion to add Cherry Point to the Planning Commission docket carried 5 -2 with Hoag
28 and Brenner opposed.
29
30 Dawson moved to include the 1999 -L request on the docket.
31
32 Brenner stated that she would like it to go forward with the condition that the Planning
33 Commission explore the option of covenants on the properties that are going to be rezoned so
34 that they could do further protection on the watershed. The covenants would stipulate that clear
35 cutting would not be allowed for any sight bigger than ' /z acre or acre for the house only.
36
37 Imhof stated that this was premature. All that they are doing at this meeting was sending
38 it forward to the Planning Commission. The Council would make those amendments when the
39 item comes back to Council.
40
41 Brenner stated that it is important that it goes forward with that condition, otherwise this
42 is going forward as if she wanted more development in the watershed. She doesn't want that.
43
44 Brenner moved a friendly amendment to add conditions regarding harvest restrictions.
45
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 17
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
Brown stated that the committee heard that this area is surrounded by commercial
forestry. That isn't the case. R5A zoning goes right up to the property. It acts as a buffer now
between commercial and rural.
Hoag stated that she is opposed because it would put more homes in the watershed and it
lies between two creeks that drain into Lake Whatcom.
Nelson stated that he originally opposed increasing densities in the watershed. However
he has discussed the idea of conditional use harvest plans. It is appropriate to forward items with
requests that the Planning Commission takes certain things under consideration. One of his
concerns was in regard to buffering of commercial forestlands. He would like to see the
discussion encompass all forestlands, not just Lake Whatcom.
Goodwin stated that Brown was correct. The zoning immediately to the west of the
parcel is rural zoning. Commercial forestry is to the south and east.
Dawson stated that she would include Brenner's friendly amendment.
Motion to include 1999 -L on the docket, with the added language, carried 5 -2 with Hoag
and Imhof opposed.
Hoag spoke against sending 1999 -K forward at this time. The City of Bellingham spoke
against this and it is not appropriate that the Council put things in Bellingham's Urban Growth
Area (UGA) that they don't want. They said that they wanted to look at this during their regular
five -year review.
She moved that 1999 -K be removed from the docket.
Brenner stated that this piece flattens out a piece of land that sticks out of the boundary.
It is not a big area, only 7 acres. It makes sense to include it for consideration. The City can
always say no if they are not going to work on it concurrently.
Nelson stated that there were discussions during the Comprehensive Plan process, in
which that area was discussed. One of the concerns raised was the consideration of putting
residential development on a major highway around major intersections. There was also
consideration of established land practices.
Brown stated that another reason to include it is that they are making plans to widen the
Mt. Baker Highway. It makes sense to have this as a unit so that it can be planned for.
Motion to remove 1999 -K from the docket failed 1 -6 with Hoag in favor.
Sutter restated the main motion to approve the docket with deletion of items 1999 -E and
1999 -I, and the addition of the Warnik item, 1999 -M, and Cherry Point.
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 18
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
Hoag moved to remove item 1999 -A from the docket because it removed 259 acres from
agricultural zoning, changing it to rural.
Brenner stated that this site is very hilly and next to dense zoning and areas that are
already developed. Much of it wasn't good farmland.
Imhof stated that he supported the motion to remove it from the docket. Enough land has
been cut up in that area. He used to farm part of it and it is good farm ground.
Brown stated that he wouldn't support the motion because it won't be cut up into 10 -acre
lots because it all falls under the Agricultural Protection Overlay zone.
Motion to remove item 1999 -A failed 2 -5 with Hoag and Imhof in favor.
Sutter moved to forward the docket with the deletions of items 1999 -E and 1999 -I and
the addition of the Warnick item, 1999 -M and Cherry Point.
Main motion carried unanimously.
2. ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATIONS AND
TITLE 20 ZONING FOR THOSE FEE LANDS WITHIN THE MT. BAKER
SNOQUALMIE NATIONAL FOREST (AB99 -107)
Sutter reported for Planning and Development Committee and moved to adopt. This is to
finish zoning designations on reservation lands.
Motion carried unanimously.
3. BURKE OPEN SPACE FARM AND AGRICULTURE CONSERVATION
APPLICATION (AB99 -075A)
Sutter reported for Planning and Development Committee. This was sent back to the
Planning Commission for review of possible evaluation inequities. It came back with the same
recommendation for denial, however committee recommended staff's recommendation for
approval. Committee made their recommendation unanimously.
Sutter moved to approve the staff's recommendation to approve the application.
Motion carried unanimously.
Sutter stated that, before approving this application, they have to move to reconsider the
prior resolution #99 -007.
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 19
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
Sutter moved to reconsider resolution #99 -007. Council meant to delete this item from
that motion to approve the entire resolution. It wasn't done, so the application was denied. In
order to approve it now, there needs to be a reconsideration of the resolution.
Dawson moved to reconsider the vote just taken to approve the Burke resolution, as
scheduled for this meeting.
Motion carried unanimously.
Motion to reconsider the vote taken on February 9, 1999 to approve resolution #99 -007
carried unanimously.
(Clerk's Note: Motion to reconsider action taken on February 9, 1999 was not voted on)
Sutter moved to adopt the Planning Commission recommendations for all of the Open
Space applications in A1399 -075, except for the Burke application, which should be removed.
Motion carried unanimously to approve the Planning Commission recommendation for
all applications except the Burke application.
Sutter moved to approve the staff recommendation for the Burke application.
Motion carried unanimously.
4. RESOLUTION ADOPTING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 1998 OPEN SPACE
APPLICATIONS (AB99 -118)
Sutter reported for Planning and Development Committee and moved to accept the
Planning Commission recommendations.
Motion carried unanimously.
5. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY CHARTER, TO BE
SUBMITTED TO THE PEOPLE, REGARDING THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH OF
GOVERNMENT (AB99 -090)
Imhof moved to amend section 2.11 to read: "The County Council shall consist of seve
(7) five (5) full time members, selected as follows: For purpose of nomination of members of the
Council, the county shall remain divided into three districts so that each district shall comprise as
nearly as possible one -third of the population of the county and the existing council districts shall
remain as closely as possible for the purpose of nomination of candidates to the County. On
adoption of the charter,..."
Imhof also stated that there needs to be an additional section for implementation.
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 20
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
Brenner moved to table to committee.
Imhof stated that the implementation section could state, "On adoption of this
amendment, the existing Council members shall continue to serve in their present capacities until
all members run for re- election or election in November, 2000, the election is certified, and the
members sworn in on the first Tuesday of January 2001. They shall be paid at the rate of 40% of
the County Executive's salary for the year of 2000.
Sutter stated that there may be a deadline for getting this on the ballot.
Imhof stated that the deadline is 90 days prior to the ballot.
Sutter stated that she would like to see more discussion regarding the implementation.
She had a different idea. She would not be amenable to any amendment regarding the County
Executive position on this proposal. Those should come forward separately because this
shouldn't be passed or fail based on the other proposal. In 1993, that issue was defeated by the
voters 76% to 24 %. There is not enough time to work, support a family, and be a Council
member on the salary that is received, while still giving the taxpayers the kind of service that
they are due. Seven members are too many and three are too few. There needs to be a five
member Council whose members should be paid what they are worth.
Brown stated that he would like it to go into committee, but if there is no room for an
alternate proposal to go forward at the same time, then he won't support it.
Sutter stated that another proposal can go forward at the same time.
Imhof stated that they have to be two different ordinances.
Brown agreed with that suggestion.
Brenner stated that they need to ensure that two separate proposals need to go forward
together. Also, she requested clarification on Sutter's comments about action in 1993.
Sutter stated that, in 1993, there was a ballot measure, which provided for a charter
amendment to provide for a manager appointed by the County Council, instead of an elected
Executive. It was defeated by 76% of the voters. She didn't want to see the current proposal
defeated because of that old proposal.
Brenner moved to table to Public Works Committee.
Nelson stated that it is not a Public Works issue.
Imhof stated that it is a Finance and Administrative Services issue.
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 21
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
Brenner accepted the friendly amendment to assign to Finance and Administrative
Services Committee.
Motion to table carried unanimously.
6. RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION 97 -062 AND RE- PRIORITIZING
WHATCOM COUNTY PROJECTS FOR THE WASHINGTON COMMUNITY
ECONOMIC REVITALIZATION TEAM (WA -CERT) (AB99 -095)
Sutter moved to hold in Finance Committee. It has not been given adequate attention.
There are a lot of new projects and leaving the current ranking isn't appropriate. There isn't
enough discussion.
Imhof questioned the deadline date.
Dawson stated that the deadline was April 1, 1999.
Hoag stated that she preferred to hold the item in committee only if it would not affect
any financial deadlines.
Motion carried unanimously.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape three, side A)
Hoag questioned the details on WA -CERT.
Dana Brown - Davis, Clerk of the Council, stated that the deadline was quarterly.
7. APPOINTMENT TO THE DRAYTON HARBOR SHELLFISH PROTECTION
DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND THE PORTAGE BAY SHELLFISH
PROTECTION DISTRICT ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AB99 -063)
Dawson stated that there was only one name submitted for the Portage Bay District.
Imhof moved to appoint Oreiro to the Portage Bay District.
Motion carried unanimously.
Imhof, Sutter, Nelson, and Brown voted to appoint Hawkins to the Drayton Harbor
District.
Dawson voted to appoint Pickard.
Hoag voted to appoint Neily.
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 22
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
Brenner voted to appoint Goff.
INTRODUCTION ITEMS
Imhof moved approval of the Introduction Items.
Dawson stated that there was an addendum to the Introduction Items: Ordinance
Increasing Executive Authority to Sign Contracts for Watershed Planning Process (AB99 -
125)
Motion to approve all introduction items carried unanimously.
1. ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AN INCREASE IN THE PLANNING DIVISION
PETTY CASH FUND AND ITS TRANSFER TO ADMINISTRATION FOR THE
ENTIRE DEPARTMENT (AB99 -120)
2. ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AN INCREASE IN THE BUILDING SERVICES
DIVISION REVOLVING FUND (AB99 -121)
3. ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 97 -011, ESTABLISHING A COMMUTE
TRIP REDUCTION PLAN (AB99 -122)
4. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 1999 BUDGET, REQUEST #2 (AB99 -123)
ADDED:
5. ORDINANCE INCREASING EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY TO SIGN CONTRACTS
FOR WATERSHED PLANNING PROCESS (AB99 -125)
REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS
Dawson stated that they need to send a letter to the Washington State Association of
Counties to request the replacement of Commissioner Allison on the Government Council
of Natural Resources. A copy of the proposed letter was distributed to all Council Members.
Brown moved approval of the letter.
Motion carried unanimously.
Dawson moved to approve by acclamation the slate of Domestic Violence Commission
appointments presented by County Executive Pete Kremen.
Hoag requested that this item be held until the next meeting.
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 23
2 Pete Kremen, County Executive, stated that there are seven members that he would like
3 to have appointed. However, there was a question from Hoag and he would grant her request to
4 address her concerns at the next meeting.
5
6 Brown stated that there is a space on the commission for two community members -at-
7 large. There is a question about one of the community appointees.
9 Kremen stated that one of his community appointees is John Hooper, Whatcom County
10 Health and Human Services Department.
12 Brown stated that there wasn't an average citizen included on the list of
13 recommendations.
14
15 Imhof questioned whether they want an average citizen or a citizen that is aware and
16 involved.
17
18 Brenner stated that Hooper would be involved because he does a great job, but it was the
19 intent to fill the position with someone not involved in government.
20
21 Dawon withdrew her motion to approve the recommendations.
22
23 Sutter stated that there are seven positions to be appointed by the County. She questioned
24 the amount of applications the County received for those positions. Kremen stated that the
25 County did not receive that many. There may have been a total of seven or eight applicants.
26 Some were not selected because they didn't fit in a certain category. The issue brought up by
27 Council Members Hoag and Brown regarding having a diverse representation has some validity.
28 The rationale that he used was that Hooper deals with domestic violence on a daily basis and
29 thought that he might be a large contributor to the entire commission. There is a time issue.
30 They hoped the first meeting would take place on the next Monday.
31
32 Hoag stated that this came to the Council earlier in the day. She tried to phone Kremen
33 to ask questions. The original ordinance calls for different categories to be represented. That
34 representation was not included on the recommended list. When she discussed this with
35 Kremen, he indicated that he and others suggested names for the commission. It wasn't put out
36 for the public to respond to.
37
38 Kremen stated that it was put out to the public. There were several news articles written
39 about the creation of the commission. The Mayor of Bellingham was the person he had
40 discussions with. The Mayor was also appointing seven members. The reason that they
41 discussed the issue was so they wouldn't be selecting the same people. Also, some people
42 applied with the City, some with the County, and some with both. There has to be coordination.
43 The County needs to approve the slate, since the debate has already occurred.
44
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
Brenner stated that a news article regarding a commission will not encourage people to
apply for the commission. A lot of commissions are very specific and require specific
qualifications. Unless the County asks the public in general to apply, it is not fair to assume they
knew about it. She wanted to reach out to the community.
Kremen stated that the purpose of the commission was to reach out to the community.
Imhof moved to approve the slate of candidates by acclamation.
Hoag stated that she wanted to see the at -large positions filled with people that are only in
the community and not a part of the government structure, or advertised as vacancies.
Kremen stated that the only candidate employed by the government is Mr. Hooper.
Someone who belongs to the clergy is a member of the community at- large. The community at-
large includes everyone.
Hoag stated that a member of the clergy qualifies as a human service provider.
Brown withdrew his objection, and made it clear that he had no objection to Mr. Hooper
personally. He objected to the process itself.
Motion to approve carried 5 -2 with Hoag and Brenner opposed.
Dawson reminded the Council members that the Strategic Planning session was
scheduled for next Tuesday at the Bellingham Cruise Terminal. Also, on April 1 and 2, the
Washington State Association of Counties (WSAC) meeting is in Mt. Vernon.
Imhof reported on the Legislative Steering Committee Meeting and the Timber Counties
meeting. Recommendations from WSAC addressed transportation needs and finding funding.
Sutter stated that the Council passed an emergency resolution at the last meeting
regarding educational meeting facilities in rural forestry zoning. It should have been an
ordinance. It has been re- written as an ordinance and is coming back. They should not have to
rescind the resolution.
Sutter moved to adopt the emergency ordinance. It has the same language as the
resolution. It should say "Ordinance initializing Initiating an Emergency Text Amendment..."
As an emergency, it needs five votes.
Motion carried unanimously.
Hoag stated that the date was also a scrivener's error.
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 25
I Sutter stated that there was a presentation during the last Council of Governments (COG)
2 meeting by Alcon Transportation Group, who have a proposal for a facility to service
3 maintenance and refurbishing of public transportation vehicles.
4
5 Nelson stated that he received a resolution from the Regional Support Network (RSN).
6 They are dealing with an issue of a cut of 2% of mental health dollars, which amounts to about
7 $26 million. It would be a substantial impact to local caseloads. All mental health dollars are
8 based on medical eligible. People with mental health conditions that are under Medicaid are not
9 going to improve and come off of the Medicaid list. The numbers are still there, although the
10 appropriations have decreased. They are asking for a reconsideration of the funding to maintain
11 the current level only. He would like approval by the County Council to take to the RSN and
12 show Whatcom County's support. It would then be forwarded to the State legislators.
13
14 Dawson questioned the decrease in dollar amount. Nelson stated that there will be a
15 decrease in dollars because the number of Medicaid eligible have decreased.
16
17 Hoag questioned the 43% increase in caseloads. Nelson stated that was an estimate from
18 the Associated Provider Network (APN) regarding the impacts. The State's policy is to reduce
19 the number of in- patient care. That burden comes back to local communities to provide that
20 support.
21
22 He moved approval of the resolution.
23
24 Motion carried unanimously.
25
26 Hoag moved to reconsider the motion to hold the WA -CERT resolution in committee
27 because of decreasing WA -CERT dollars and concerns about missing funding deadlines. The
28 Black Mountain Forestry Center, for example, should be funded as soon as possible.
29
30 Motion to reconsider failed 3 -4 with Brenner, Hoag, and Brown in favor.
31
32 Brenner reported about a conference she attended on mental health in children. One of
33 the guest speakers and presenters was the head of the psychology department of a prestigious
34 university. He was a captain in the Marines. 30 or 35 years ago, he was diagnosed with
35 schizophrenia and spent 10 years in asylums. Through the use of medications, he has it under
36 control. People with mental illnesses can lead healthy lives by having the right kind of
37 medication and family support.
38
39 Brenner also moved to send a letter to the Governor and the legislature regarding the
40 support of funding to the developmentally disabled. She will draft a letter.
41
42 Hoag stated that opposing funding for developmental disabilities is like opposing
43 motherhood and apple pie. However, she had seen a lot of abuses in the system. There needs to
44 be a way to sort out the difference between people that can be assisted, but need extra help and
45 those that are just being babysat.
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 26
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
Brenner stated that is a different issue that needs to be fixed. However, if dollars are
reduced, the people who can afford it the least are going to suffer the most. This is not the place
to bring up those concerns.
Hoag stated that some of those dollars do need to be reduced.
Brenner stated that they don't need to be reduced, they need to be reallocated to people
who need them the most.
Dawson stated that there was majority support, with one objection, to send the letter.
Brown stated that some Council members, through error, did not submit their information
about the WA -CERT process. He requested that everyone send their WA -CERT lists to the
Finance Committee Chair.
A n-InI TR N
The meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
These minutes were approved by Council on April 20 , 1999.
ATTEST:
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk Marlene Dawson, Council Chair
Regular County Council, 3/23/99, Page 27