HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil November 9 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
46
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Regular County Council
November 9, 1999
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Council Chair Marlene
Dawson in the Council Committee Room, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham,
Washington.
Also Present: Absent:
Kathy Sutter None
L. Ward Nelson
Connie Hoag
Barbara Brenner
Tom Brown
Robert Imhof
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Dawson announced the following items were discussed in Committee of the
Whole:
1. Whatcom Conservation District report on planning activities related
to the Whatcom County Critical Areas Ordinance (AB99 -017)
2. Resolution in the matter of adopting a salary schedule and policies
for unrepresented Whatcom County employees for the year 2000
(AB99 -442) (discussed in executive session)
3. Discussion with Whatcom County Public Works Director Jeff Monsen
and Water Resources Manager Bruce Roll regarding the WRIA 1
Watershed Management Project (AB99 -391)
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE FOLLOWING MEETINGS:
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE FOR AUGUST 3, AUGUST 10,
AND OCTOBER 12, 1999; REGULAR COUNCIL FOR JULY 27
AND AUGUST 10, 1999; AND SPECIAL COUNCIL FOR
SEPTEMBER 2, 1999
Imhof moved approval.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, 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
Motion carried unanimously.
OPEN SESSION
The following people spoke:
Alfred Allred, 2686 Grandview, Ferndale, stated several years ago the Council
voted to approve a license for a repair business on Grandview road. He is still
operating an illegal business. This is the first year the County issued two tickets for
operating an illegal business. He is still operating 24 hours per day. He runs three
tow trucks from that location. He is not State bonded or licensed, and does not
have a business license. Allred questioned why it takes eight years for the County
to close down an illegal business operation. They are wasting the taxpayers money
by letting him operate. A copy of the conditional use permit was given to the
Council.
Michael Knapp, Planning and Development Services Director, reported that
they are working on the problem and it will be taken care of in the near future.
Marion Beddill, 3600 Seeley, Bellingham, stated the Lake Whatcom
Watershed Protection Plan, Initiative Proposition One, failed at the polls by only two
percent. Almost 8,000 citizens of the City of the Bellingham, and therefore the
county, spoke loudly saying they want to do something more to protect the Lake
Whatcom watershed and are willing to tax themselves for that purpose. That sends
a strong message to the Council. These are citizens that will repeatedly speak to
the Council regarding the Lake Whatcom Reservoir Management Program, which is
under review by the City, the County, and Water District #10. It was designated as
a reservoir in 1992, by joint action of all three of the jurisdictions. A reservoir is
more than a lake. That is law and has not been challenged. That document also
established that protection shall be emphasized and encouraged over treatment as
a principal goal and general goal. That doesn't diminish the necessity for treatment
of stormwater. In reviewing this plan, tangible and achievable results are what
they need. Proposals and ideas are great, but they need results. That will be the
criteria that the citizens will use to measure and judge what the County decides to
do or not to do.
Janet Crook, 2317 Broadway, Bellingham, asked the Council to support Lydia
Place, a transitional housing for women with children. Currently they have seven
families at a time.
Dawson stated Crook was speaking about a budget item, which will have a
public hearing later in the meeting.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, 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
Paul Issacson, 204 Shallow Shores Road, Bellingham, questioned whether
the Council would be making a decision on the Water Resource Management Plan
and Transfer Development Rights (TDR) ordinances.
Hoag stated they wouldn't be making a decision on those items at this
meeting.
Sutter stated those items are still being held in committee. There will have
to be a public hearing on the overlay. They haven't started any work on the TDRs,
so they don't know if there will be a public hearing.
Isaacson stated he was opposed to the overlay protection zone as it stands.
In theory, it is a good proposal. He submitted written comments (on file). He
related a story about speaking to someone in California about regulation. The end
result of too much regulation drives the undesirable, the poor, and the children out
of the marketplace. His intent, as a large landowner in the Lake Whatcom
watershed, is not to prosper from too much regulation. However, there needs to be
balance. He hoped the Council could seek the point of balance as they move
forward through the regulatory issues.
CONSENT AGENDA
Nelson reported for Finance and Administrative Services Committee and
moved approval of Consent Agenda Items one through five.
Imhof moved to withdraw item number one.
Hoag moved to withdraw item number five.
Motion to approve items two through four carried unanimously.
1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD A
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR JD EDWARDS PROGRAMMING
ASSISTANCE TO THE ONLY RESPONSIVE VENDOR, SYSTEMS
MANAGEMENT, TO BE USED AS NEEDED SHOULD ANY PROBLEMS
ARISE, WITH COSTS POTENTIALLY EXCEEDING $15,000 (AB99 -437)
Nelson moved to amend to cap the amount at $20,000.
Motion to amend carried unanimously.
Hoag clarified that the motion was to not exceed $20,000 if the costs did
exceed $15,000.
Motion to approved amended request number carried unanimously.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, 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
2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID #99-
100 FOR THE ANNUAL LIST OF VENDORS AND RENTAL RATES FOR
VARIOUS TYPES OF CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT USED ON COUNTY
ROAD PROJECTS (MORE THAN $35,000 COULD BE SPENT WITH ANY
ONE VENDOR) (AB99 -438)
3. RESOLUTION ORDERING THE CANCELLATION OF WARRANTS MORE
THAN A YEAR OLD FOR THE JAIL INMATE TRUST FUND ACCOUNT, IN
A TOTAL AMOUNT OF $1,006.57 (AB99 -439)
4. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE AND
ACCEPTANCE FROM WORLDWIDE FIBER NETWORKS, INC., THE
ENTITY INTO WHICH PACIFIC FIBER LINK, L.L.C., THE ORIGINAL
GRANTEE OF THE FRANCHISE, HAS MERGED (AB99 -440)
S. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND EXIGENT COMPUTER
GROUP, INC. FOR THE ASSESSOR'S OFFICE COMPUTER IMAGING
SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION, IN THE AMOUNT OF $97,417 (AB99 -441)
Nelson moved to approve the Assessor's imaging equipment contract with
Exigent Computer Group. This has been in the planning stage for several years.
The committee felt that this is a part of the strategic planning with the
departments.
Hoag stated this is $97,417. In light of I -695 passing, she recommended
delaying implementation of this for at least a year. This is something that would
help to improve the system. She supported having the system. However, this is a
large amount of money and the County would be better served if the money was
used for more essential services.
Imhof stated they've been dealing with this for two years. It is finally time to
implement it. It has been budgeted for this year, and the Council should move
forward.
Motion to approve item five carried 5 -2 with Brenner and Hoag opposed.
PUBLIC HEARING
1. ORDINANCE REVISING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 24.05, ON-
SITE SEWAGE SYSTEMS (AB99 -421)
Dawson stated the Council would act on public hearing items one and two as
the Board of Health.
Hoag moved to convene as the Board of Health.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, 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
Imhof stated the Council did not need a motion. The Council can act in its
capacity as the Board of Health without a motion.
Chris Chesson, Health and Human Services Environmental Health, gave a
staff report and explained they presented an On -Site Sewage System Operations
and Maintenance Program Work Plan to the Council in April. At the September
Board of Health meeting, they brought forward the regulatory changes to
implement that work plan. The Board of Health recommended that the revisions be
recommended to the full Council for consideration. The regulatory changes
required for implementation of the work plan include a certification of the operation
and maintenance specialists, continuing education for all certified professionals, an
aerobic treatment unit, an enforcement component, and an appeal procedure.
Regulatory changes update on -site sewage system design standards to come into
conformance with current Washington State guidelines. The regulatory changes
also streamline the permitting process.
Brown stated that currently one has to hire a septic designer and then pay
the County to inspect the work of the licensed designer. If one has to hire a
certified specialist, they should stand by their work. One shouldn't have to pay for
another permit in which the County person okays the work from someone they
mandate is hired. He questioned whether people still have to do that with the new
plan. Chesson stated the County still mandates that a certified designer engineers
the system. The State mandates that the design be inspected.
Dawson stated that analogy is similar to not requiring an inspection on a
home that is built by a licensed contractor.
Sutter stated that the owner pays the designer to design the system.
Someone else can install it. The inspection is to ensure that the installer installed
according to the approved design.
Brown stated the inspectors check the work before the preliminary work is
done.
Chesson stated they are ensuring that the design meets the minimum State
and County sewage control regulations.
Hoag questioned the section regarding repair permits on packet page 567.
They are eliminating the definitions for minor and major repairs. She didn't recall
that coming up at the Board of Health meeting. Chesson stated it was in the
summary of proposed changes. It is called "OSS Repair Permits." These changes
were brought forward at the Board of Health meeting, but were not discussed.
Most of the discussion was regarding the Areas of Special Concern.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, 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
Dawson opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public
hearing.
Nelson moved to adopt the ordinance.
Nelson questioned whether they are assured there is available continuing
education. Chesson stated there is. There is Northwest On -Site Sewage Treatment
Facility in Puyallup.
Nelson questioned whether they are certified programs. Chesson stated they
are certified by the State for continuing education.
Nelson questioned whether the County has a way of reviewing any program
submitted. Chesson stated that was correct.
Hoag read the language being deleted regarding major and minor repairs.
By eliminating these definitions, they will be inspecting all repairs. That is
regulatory over -kill. The County might not have the resources to fund that.
Chesson stated they do that now. They feel that they should look at all systems
that go in the ground to ensure they meet the minimum requirements of the
permit.
Hoag questioned whether they've been inspecting the minor repairs, even
though the code says they don't have to require that. Chesson stated the permit
left it up their subjective ability to perform an inspection on a minor repair.
Motion carried unanimously.
IS. ORDINANCE RESTRICTING TOBACCO ADVERTISING (AB99 -379)
(ACTING AS THE BOARD OF HEALTH)
Dr. Greg Stern, Health and Human Services Public Health Officer, gave a
staff report. On October 19, 1999, the Public Health Advisory Board introduced a
proposed ordinance restricting tobacco advertising. The Board of Health accepted
the report and scheduled the public hearing. The ordinance was originally proposed
by Commit for a Tobacco -Free Whatcom County, a community -based anti - tobacco
coalition that is represented by several members, including Dr. Chris Covert -
Bowlds. The ordinance is based on similar ordinances from King, Pierce, Spokane,
and Snohomish counties. It is part of the public health response to the epidemic of
smoking. Over 400,000 deaths per year in the United States are the result of
tobacco use. Eight thousand of those deaths are in Washington State. Eighty two
percent of smokers start before age 18. The average age of beginning smokers is
12 years old. The key to stopping the epidemic is to keep children from beginning
to use tobacco, and to help those that have started smoking to quit. Tobacco
companies spend millions of dollars on advertising to glamorize and normalize
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, 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
smoking. Children are influenced by the colorful graphics and images used in
tobacco advertising.
The purpose of this ordinance is to restrict the exposure of children to this
type of marketing. The ordinance will prohibit publicly visible tobacco
advertisements, except for those with black text on a white background with no
color picture graphics or logos; outdoor tobacco advertisements within 1,000 feet of
a school, playground, or public park with a playground; billboard tobacco
advertisements within 2,000 feet of the same; and prohibit advertisements that can
be viewed from a school, school bus, bus stop, or a sidewalk regularly used by
minors to get to school.
The enforcement procedures and penalties are described in the proposed
ordinance. At the last Board of Health meeting, the councilmembers received the
proposed ordinance with the findings of the Public Health Advisory Board. He
submitted copies of the articles that were referenced in the report. He also
submitted two documents from the testimony of Richard Pollay, a professor of
marketing from the University of California, British Columbia.
Dawson opened the public hearing and the following people spoke:
Dr. Chris Covert - Bowlds, Ferndale, submitted additional documents for
submission into the record. He read letters into the record from citizens supporting
the ordinance. One letter was from a storeowner whose business was not affected
from the ban. There are many medical organizations in the community that are in
favor of this. Similar measures in California have reduced tobacco use by 12
percent and in Massachusetts by 30 percent. They are actively doing counter -
advertising with billboards, television, and radio advertisements. The measure has
a good track record. It has been challenged and twice upheld in court.
Mert Eastman, 1310 E. Maryland Street, Bellingham stated he was the owner
of a small smoke shop. He is concerned about youth smoking. Understands the
desire to stop young people from smoking. His business targets older, more
affluent, people. He is very careful to check identification of younger people
wishing to purchase from his store. There are a lot of reports about billboard
advertising enticing young children to begin smoking. Joe Camel is gone. There
are no tobacco billboards in Whatcom County, or anywhere else in the country.
They have all been taken down as a part of a tobacco settlement. They are going
to see small signs that will alert adult consumers about where they can purchase
the products. The red design on top of the Marlboro logo will not entice young
people to smoke. Any sign that is designed for people to look at while driving past
has less than once second to get its message across. Most of the tobacco
advertising images are going to be in media such as magazines and newspapers,
which can't be addressed by any County regulation. His location in the Mt. Baker
apartment building is near apartments. There is a bus stop a half block away. The
proposed statute removes his ability to even hang a business sign. He suggested
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, 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
the Council add language differentiating between a business sign and a product
sign. He questioned whether products sitting on a shelf would be considered a
tobacco advertisement. The Council should include language that specifies the
interior displays and shelved products are not considered advertisements. He didn't
want to board up and curtain the front of his store because a child may walk on the
sidewalk in front of his business.
Ann Mackie, 1338 Grant Street, Bellingham, spoke in support of the
ordinance. This is an opportunity for Whatcom County to join the other four
counties in Washington State that are acting responsibly. Those other counties are
responding to a very serious, growing epidemic of young people smoking in this
country. They all understand the power of advertising. They also know that young
people are susceptible of powerful advertising, images, and cartoon characters.
They also know, from research, evidence, testimony, and internal documents from
the tobacco industry that the power of advertising has worked to hook another
generation. The latest statistic in Washington State for high school students is two -
thirds of the seniors are smoking. The community has an opportunity to intervene.
She works with Commit for a Tobacco -Free Whatcom County and in the health
insurance industry, where she continually sees the long -term effects of tobacco
effects on health care costs. Most importantly, she is a parent raising kids in
Whatcom County. They are influenced by more than just advertising. This
ordinance alone can do what they are trying to accomplish, long -term. It is an
opportunity for the County to act responsibly. It allows parents to feel more
comfortable about the businesses the kids are going to. One of the important
cornerstones of the community is the local stores and mini - marts. It gives those
business owners an opportunity to act responsibly as well and not take advantage
of the glitzy advertising.
Brenner questioned where Mackie got her statistics about two - thirds of high
school kids smoking. Mackie stated those are reports they received through the
State Board of Health.
Brenner questioned whether that was nationally or in Washington State.
Mackie stated that in Washington State it is two - thirds of high school students.
Nelson stated he suspected the figure was for students who have tried
smoking.
Imhof stated regular users are different.
Mackie stated a lot of kids are trying it and experimenting with it.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 8
Stern stated that, by the end of high school, two of every three students
2 have tried smoking, and 42 percent of those are regular smokers. The report is
3 from the State Department of Health.
4
5 Laura Gillies, Lynden High School senior, 208 S. Garden Drive, Lynden,
6 stated she is a member of Teens Against Tobacco Use and supported the proposal
7 because she has two younger sisters that the advertisements would appeal to. She
8 wanted to protect the youth from the advertisements. The proposal would stop
9 colorful, attractive advertisements that appeal specifically to the young people.
10
11 Florence LaDeneLeader, 409 York Street, Bellingham, stated she is with the
12 Commit committee and is a patient of Dr. Covert - Bowlds that has emphysema due
13 to smoking and second -hand smoke. She has lost several family members due to
14 tobacco. Her son has been diagnosed with emphysema. Her daughter has
15 bronchial asthma from being exposed to second -hand smoke as they were growing
16 up. They have to protect the kids from the dangers that are there and to get the
17 parents out of the cigarette habit. The sooner they can do that, the better of the
18 future generations will be.
19
20 Debra Lacey, American Cancer Society Prevention Program Manager,
21 supported the ordinance. The American Cancer Society supported the ordinance to
22 restrict outdoor tobacco advertising. They believe that the most effective way to
23 regulate the tobacco industry is at the local level, where the political and economic
24 influence cannot easily penetrate a community's sense of social justice. The
25 evidence is overwhelming about the tobacco industry's tactics to use colorful and
26 fantasy -based imagery to seduce the children into believing that tobacco will make
27 them look glamorous, fit, healthy, and be popular. The industry knows the children
28 are the replacement pool. It must addict 3,000 to 5,000 children every day to
29 maintain industry profits. If advertising didn't work, the tobacco industry wouldn't
30 invest the astronomical amounts of money to drive its propaganda machine or
31 design state -of- the -art advertising campaigns to manipulate the children into its
32 addictive, deadly hold. The colorful images work on the youth, not on the adults,
33 who look primarily for price and location. The tobacco industry spends $100 million
34 in Washington State every year on advertising. The health organizations try to
35 battle this with only $2.5 million. The top three most heavily advertised brands,
36 Marlboro, Camel, and Newport, account for 86 percent of the illegal sales to minors.
37 In 1996, a study revealed that the tobacco industry merchandising representatives
38 displayed twice as much advertising in retail establishments near schools than
39 establishments away from schools. The industry also targets ice -cream parlors,
40 parks, and other child sensitive areas with strategically placed advertisements.
41 Pierce, King, Snohomish, and Spokane counties have passed ordinances greatly
42 restricting outdoor tobacco advertising. The advertising is a visual blight on the
43 communities of Whatcom County.
44
45 Patrick Alesse, 4825 Alderson Road, Birch Bay, spoke in favor of the
46 ordinance. Children are susceptible to becoming addicted to things like smoking,
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, 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
43
44
alcohol, and drugs because they are in the process of developing. They need to do
whatever they can to keep them from smoking. He used to smoke, and eventually
quit. The society is not very good at communicating to kids that this is not a good
thing to do.
Chuck Benjamin, Health and Human Services Director, stated there are a
number of pictures in the materials the Council received of local neighborhood
stores within 1,000 feet of schools. There are some of those signs that still use 'Joe
Camel.'
Hearing no one else, Dawson closed the public hearing.
Brenner moved to adopt the ordinance.
Brenner stated that she just got her son a subscription to Sports Illustrated,
which is targeted to young people who are athletically inclined. On the back of the
magazine there is an advertisement for cigarettes. She moved to amend the
ordinance so that any time someone sees a tobacco advertisement targeted to
young people, the Council sends a letter notifying the magazine or company that
the County has an ordinance limiting exposure of young people to tobacco
advertisements and that it is not in the best interest of the people reading the
people magazine to have that advertisement.
Dawson stated that would be a separate resolution brought forward at a
separate time.
Nelson suggested that Dr. Covert - Bowlds could pass that information on
through his computer network. The Council could pass a resolution of affirmation
that Dr. Covert - Bowlds passes that information along. Covert - Bowlds stated he
would be happy to implement that.
Brenner stated it needs to be a letter from the Council, not from the doctor.
Nelson stated he could pass that letter along, otherwise the Council would be
sending out a lot of letters.
Hoag stated the Council would go broke on the postage if they sent out a
letter for every magazine advertisement. She supported the idea of passing a
resolution and sending a letter to all of the magazines. It is important to get that
message to them. She thanked the task force that worked on this. It is obscene
that the tobacco companies are targeting the children for their product because
they know what it does to people. It has been needed for a long time and is well
thought out.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, 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
45
46
Imhof asked how implementation and enforcement would take place. In the
City of Bellingham, it might as well be a complete ban. There isn't a place in
Bellingham that is more than a mile away from any school.
Nelson directed him to page 683. There would be a response from the
Health Department and a notice to have the advertisement removed. Then there
would be a series of penalties associated with that notice, if it isn't removed.
Imhof questioned how they would determine how many minors would have
to walk along the road.
Nelson stated it would be within a certain distance from a school or a public
place.
Sutter stated she generally supported the ordinance. There is a weakness in
it. When she read the ordinance, she was thinking of tobacco company cigarette
advertisers. She wasn't thinking about businesses. She was a little concerned
when they start interfering with business. She didn't know if they could require
businesses to remove the word 'tobacco' from their business sign.
Dawson proposed an amendment to restrict advertisement of specific
tobacco brands. That is what they are trying to deal with.
Nelson stated it is already covered in the definition of tobacco advertisement.
Stern explained that the intent of the ordinance would restrict advertisement
of specific tobacco brands. It hasn't been applied to the business sign of a smoke
shop or a tobacconist. He was concerned about changing the language, because
this is the language used in the other counties. One of the risks of changing the
definitions would be that it would be another target for legal challenges.
Brown spoke against the ordinance. If they were only doing it around
schools, he would support it. This is the first step to create a tobacco -free county.
Targeting the children is one thing, but he hated to start a campaign to outlaw
advertising. They have to have some self - responsibility and supervision by the
parents.
Brenner would love to see outdoor ban on tobacco advertising. Kids are
everywhere. They are giving mixed signals to a kid when they outlaw certain drugs
and not others. She couldn't find any redeeming qualities in tobacco.
Nelson spoke about the effects of tobacco on health care costs on everyone.
Adults know where to buy tobacco. He questioned why they need to advertise it if
adults already know where to buy it. The advertising is to hook people who haven't
tried tobacco. He would even go the extra step to outlaw tobacco because of the
serious impacts he sees from young people with lung problems. Unfortunately, it is
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, 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
a legal product that people have the right to sell. The costs are great. He moved
to add, "WHEREAS, the Whatcom County Public Health Advisory Board unanimously
endorsed this ordinance."
Motion to amend carried unanimously.
Sutter stated the section on packet page 683, section 1(a), is inconsistent
with section 1(d). If a person is given 48 hours to take the sign down, they should
be given the same amount of time, not two weeks, to file a dispute.
Stern stated that two weeks would give the person time to file, if that is the
owner's intention.
Sutter stated they should have to apply for the dispute within 48 hours. She
suggested they strike the last sentence on packet page 683, section 1(d).
Hoag questioned whether this was language based on other counties' laws.
Stern stated he didn't remember which county this was based on. He advised
against striking the last sentence of the paragraph because, if they find in the favor
of the storeowner, then the County would be liable for replacing the sign.
Sutter stated they would have to let them leave it up for that two -week filing
period.
Stern stated that, if someone is given a notice, and they haven't taken the
sign down within 48 hours and are planning to file an appeal, then the County will
allow them to leave the sign up until there is a decision.
Hoag suggested they allow the owner to file intent to dispute within 48 hours
of the notice of violation.
Stern stated that other counties have not had a problem with compliance.
They should allow some flexibility rather than be totally consistent. If they start
having two -day limits for filing an appeal, it will make the County liable for
penalties. If they have a second step where they have to file an intent to appeal,
and then file an appeal, it adds another layer of regulation.
Sutter stated they need to put that language in the code. She moved to
amend the second to the last sentence in section (1)(a), "...to comply with this
regulation, unless the owner indicates an intent to file an appeal."
Brenner stated this is the same ordinance that is being used in other places
and is working. She would rather not use this as a sledgehammer, but as an
opportunity to educate people in the community and get rid of as much advertising
as possible. Even though it isn't perfect, she can live with it.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, 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
Brown stated he wanted the language to remain as it is, so someone doesn't
have to file an intent to appeal. That is cumbersome. If they are going to put that
in, they have to make the timeline exclusive of weekend and holiday hours. He
proposed a friendly amendment to include language that would exclude those
hours.
Sutter accepted the friendly amendment, "...Warning Notice, exclusive of
weekend and holidays, to comply with this regulation, unless the owner indicates an
intent to file an appeal."
Motion to amend failed 3 -4 with Sutter, Hoag, and Dawson in favor.
Hoag questioned whether other jurisdictions that have this regulation have
defined sidewalks that are regularly used by minors to get to school. Stern stated
the other jurisdictions use the language as it is. These aspects are going to be
complaint- driven. They can send staff to investigate complaints regarding signs
that are on routes used by minors.
Sutter questioned whether any other jurisdictions exempt business signs.
Stern stated there is no language exempting business signs. However, he was also
not aware of anyone issuing a citation for business signs.
Sutter stated that someone could file a complaint and it would be the law.
She moved to amend packet page 682, item five, line three, "...promoting the use
or sale of a brand name or generic tobacco product..." The intent is to limit the
advertising for the brands.
Nelson stated he didn't believe the language would be interpreted in that
way. They need an interpretation from administration to determine whether this
language bans business signs. Stern stated the Board could state its intent to
target advertisements that promote the use or sale of a tobacco product, without
meaning business signs.
Sutter stated she wanted the intent very clearly stated.
Brenner stated they should not promote tobacco use in a place where kids
frequent. It shouldn't have anything to do with whether it is a particular brand.
Hoag stated she was concerned about the legality. She questioned whether
the language comes directly from another ordinance. Stern stated it does.
Hoag stated that, because those regulations have been held up in court, she
would prefer to amend packet page 680, item B(1), "...cause to be maintained, a
corporate tobacco advertisement..." instead of approving Sutter's amendment.
Stern stated that language would target a corporate chain tobacconist or smoke
shop. They would still need to define what a corporate tobacco advertisement is.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, 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
44
45
46
The issue is whether a sign identifying a tobacconist or smoke shop would
constitute promoting the sale of a tobacco product. The staff interpretation would
be lenient, and would not include business signs.
Hoag stated the problem with that is the law would be on the books, and no
one would be aware of the intent. It has to be clear in the ordinance.
Sutter amended her amendment to include language in the ordinance, "BE IT
FURTHER ORDAINED that it is the intent of the County Council to exclude signs that
identify a business."
Nelson stated one would find a loophole. The definition of tobacco product
would not cover the tobacconist business sign.
Hoag stated it would, under the definition of tobacco advertisement.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side B.)
Sutter withdrew her motion.
Brenner moved to adopt the ordinance as written.
Motion to adopt the ordinance carried 4 -3 with Imhof, Brown, and Sutter
opposed.
9. ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE FINAL BUDGET OF WHATCOM COUNTY
FOR THE YEAR 2000 AND RESTRICTING THE EXPENDITURE OF
CERTAIN FUNDS THEREIN (AB99 -429)
Dawson opened the public hearing and the following people spoke:
Jessica Staten, WomenCare Shelter, 2217 Woburn Street, Bellingham, urged
the Council to adopt the budget as written. She asked for support for the portion of
the budget that funds human services in the community. With the passage of I-
695, the County's financial situation has become complicated. WomenCare has
greatly appreciated the County's support in the past, and hopes they can continue
to do so in the future.
Katy McLane, 860 Coho Way #8, stated she is vice - president of the
WomenCare Shelter Board of Directors. In the past, WomenCare has provided
5,000 hours of advocacy -based counseling to the residents and more than 1,200
callers on the domestic violence help line. As a result of working with the trained
advocates, 93 percent of the women who stayed with WomenCare chose to live
violence -free lives and did not return to their abusers when they left the shelter.
Since they are often the first step in a family's quest for a safe haven, the residents
rely on other agencies that will help them take their second, third, and fourth steps
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, 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
45
46
towards independence. Without the services provided by Whatcom County Crisis
Services, the Opportunity Council, Lydia Place, the YWCA, and other agencies,
victims of domestic violence could find themselves with limited support in pursuit of
their goal of a violence -free life. She requested that the human services portion of
the budget be approved by the Council.
Andrew Moquin, 1402 Chuckanut Crest Drive, Bellingham, asked the Council
to support the arts and the budget as submitted. He spoke for the Bellingham
Festival of Music. The festival brings economic benefits to the area in the amount
of over $400,000 annually. There are valuable child and adult educational
programs involved in the festival. Studies indicate the value of music and the arts
in the educational process. Many volunteers support this event, which creates civic
pride. It makes good business sense. The corporate world is attracted to areas
where the arts are vital. The small amount allocated for supporting the arts goes a
long way and is a sound investment, as they can see from the reasons he listed.
Over 9,000 people attend the festival and can add to his reasons.
Richard Gilda, Jensen Road, asked the Council to reduce the price of the
Council meeting tapes from $8 to $4, and from $4 to $2 if one brings in their own
tape. The cost discourages people from coming in and getting the tapes. He
supported videotaping the Council meetings. It is needed because the cost in
frustration to the public is outweighed by the knowledge they will gain. The local
media have failed to keep the public informed of what is going on.
Hoag stated the cost for videotaping is in the Council's budget for 2000.
Mark Taylor, Big Brother /Big Sister of Bellingham, 220 W. Champion,
Bellingham, asked the Council's support of Teen Adventure Program (TAP) of the
Parks Department. This program collaborated with his organization. They put their
resources into recruiting, screening, and training mentors. That leaves few
resources for the children after the match is made. It was a tremendous gift from
Council to have the TAP program available. On two occasions, TAP hosted and led
group activities for the big and little brothers and sisters. He received positive
feedback from the activities. This program creates a bonding that insulates and
protects children from substance abuse.
Brenner stated they have been getting a lot of good feedback about the
program. She questioned whether the County is using some of the revenue to pay
for kids who can't afford to go on some of the activities. Taylor stated that his
organization has a little bit of money to cover the small fees TAP charges to meet
their expenses for those children whose families cannot afford to pay. The little
brothers and little sisters in his program are not financially prevented from
participating.
Tom Opstead, Meridian Middle School Principal, asked for support for the
Teen Adventure Program. They combined students in the leadership programs with
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 15
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
the students in the at -risk programs. They have seen the rewards at the school.
Some of the students they considered at -risk are now tutoring some of the younger
students. He submitted a letter in support of the program from Whatcom County
principals. The program's potential, especially with youth from ages 11 to 15, is
tremendous. His school has a small fund that can pay for students who can't afford
to go.
Brenner stated her only concern was that the costs are not modest. For
people who don't have much money, it would be difficult for kids to go on these
programs. If the schools are willing to tap resources and provide for kids, possibly
on a sliding scale, it is a great idea.
Opstead stated most County schools have family resource coordinators that
allow funds to be available to low- income families to get services and resources.
There are lots of hidden resources they have to search for.
Imhof stated they are also approaching Rotary and other service
organizations to contribute.
Janet Crook, 2317 Broadway, Bellingham, Lydia Place Executive Director,
stated Lydia Place is a transitional housing program for women who have children
living with them. It is a six -month program. She asked the Council to reconsider
her request for $5,000. Domestic violence, substance abuse, and economics are all
contributing factors to homelessness. Right now, there are waiting lists for all
transitional housing programs and for permanent housing. Lydia Place is always
full. They are currently focused on the program. The building is paid for. The
people who started this program ten years ago made a commitment to get the
building paid for. Women need a lot of support. They are there for up to six
months, and then the program follows up for up to a year to ensure there are
resources available.
Brown questioned the amount of individuals that can be housed at one time.
Crook stated they can house up to eight families or eighteen individuals at one
time.
Scott Hinds, Whatcom County Parks Teen Adventure Program Coordinator,
stated he has begun a fundraising campaign to generate funds for scholarships for
the Teen Adventure Program. He has spoken with Lions Clubs, Kiwanis Clubs, and
other service clubs. Those organizations have contributed some money. In
addition, the private sector is now starting to make contributions. They have
already received over $600 in contributions this week from the private sector. They
don't want to exclude any participant based on socio- economic status.
Chris Navarre, 4239 Deming Road, Everson, stated he is a parent of a
fourteen - year -old son who has been involved in Teen Adventure Program in the
past year. In the summer, he and his wife try to find good activities for their
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
children while they are at work. As a parent, he has been excited about the
program. He comes back with a positive attitude. He hopes the program is around
for his ten - year -old daughter.
Seth Navarre, 4239 Deming Road, Everson, stated he is a participant of the
Teen Adventure Program. He had a very fun time on several of their trips. He
went with his friends, and they all had an enjoyable time. The instructors were
very easy to work with. He hoped the program keeps going.
Joy Keenan, 411 York, Whatcom Volunteer Center, stated they received
County funds and have been a partner with Whatcom County. It has allowed them
to provide extensive volunteer support in a variety of settings. The support has
enabled the County to be more effective in delivering County services to residents.
In 1998, 124,000 volunteer hours were provided countywide, which translates into
hundreds of thousands of dollars in value to Whatcom County. As the community
grows, the need for volunteers will grow. Twenty thousand volunteer hours per
year go directly to serve County departments. Within County government, the
volunteers serve in the offices of the Clerk, the Assessor, the Auditor, the Jail,
Juvenile Probation, the Law Library, the Sheriff's Office, and the Division of
Emergency Management. Whatcom Volunteer Center volunteers staff Hovander
Homestead Park during the tourist season. They also provide an ongoing presence
in the senior centers throughout the county. Volunteers also serve in every school
district in the county, in health service organizations, and in non - profit agencies.
Volunteers are providing a good return on the investment of taxpayer dollars.
Imhof requested to keep the public hearing open for two weeks and, due to
the impacts of I -695 and continuing and increased needs, he moved for the
enactment of one -tenth of one percent sales tax for criminal justice to be included
in the budget.
Hoag stated a lot of people aren't aware of the impact of I -695 on Whatcom
County's budget. It took $600,000 out of the criminal justice funds and $815,000
out of the Health Department's operations. The Council went through two weeks of
setting up the budget as it is. They now have to cut expenditures. However, this is
not the time to look at a sales tax increase. The County should first re -visit the
budget and cut expenditures. That may be a decision the Council will have to look
at after they review the criminal justice study. It is not appropriate right now.
Dawson stated that two years ago people believed the Council could cut the
budget, but they couldn't.
Brown stated there was money found, but the majority of the Council wasn't
willing to make the cuts. This is a very sudden thing. Once they get a review of
the criminal justice study, they will have to propose or find funding. This is not the
time to do this without a plan in place. It is an opportune time to pass a tax and
blame it on I -695. At this time, he would not support it.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, 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
46
Nelson stated this is a rough decision. I -695 removes funding abilities from
the County and local jurisdictions for criminal justice. It has another impact that
may not be held up in court. They may not have the opportunity to pass the tax
later. There are many people with needs that will face cuts. Departments have
worked as efficiently and as lean as possible over the last several years with no tax
increase. They continue to have price index increases and a continued need for
cost -of- living increases that they negotiate with the unions. It is time to take a
prudent step as a Council and be prepared to deal with the impacts, so they are not
impacting service levels and wrecking everything the County has worked hard to
create. This is a broad -scope tax that doesn't limit it to property, as does all other
taxation methods.
Dawson stated they have raised the property tax one time in the six years
she has been on the Council. The reason for that was to create a reserve so the
County could get a better bond rating. They have been extremely conservative.
This tax addresses the entire populace in the county, including tourists. It is the
fairest way to address this.
Sutter stated this tax spreads the funding for criminal justice to everyone
who may impact it, including people who don't live in the County. The funding
mechanism for the criminal justice study recommendations should be in place when
the plan comes forward. They know there are deficits in the criminal justice
system. This is the fairest way to find money. One -tenth of one percent is not a
lot of money for most people. It is $.10 for every $100. There are a lot of out -of-
county retail sales, and the County should get some money for those folks. They
do come in and use the service, including criminal justice, and have an impact on
the system. She supported the tax and did when they put it on the ballot. It
should have been done a long time ago.
Brenner stated the whole idea of bringing it up at this meeting was not in the
public interest because it wasn't scheduled on the agenda. If it were on the
agenda, people would speak to it. Getting it in under the wire before people have
an opportunity to vote on it is also not in the public's interest. This is not the time
to vote on the tax. She would not support it.
Brown stated the fact that it is a sales tax instead of a property tax is the
one selling point for him. However, they pay three - tenths of a percent for the
Whatcom Transit Authority and never see a bus. During the Finance Committee,
they mentioned there were $8 million in reserves. There is an ending fund balance
that will look good. They could easily carry the effects of I -695 for one year and
still have $6 million in reserves. This is just a time and opportunity to run this
through. There needs to be a plan for the tax.
Dana Brown - Davis, Clerk of the Council, stated the Council would need to
enact the tax by a separate ordinance, not through the budget.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, 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
45
46
Imhof amended the motion to create an ordinance to enact the tax.
Hoag questioned whether the ordinance would have to be introduced.
Brown -Davis stated it could be introduced on November 23rd and acted upon on
December 7 th
Hoag stated she didn't agree with the way this was brought forward. If
people knew this was under consideration, they would have had a lot of people
speaking to it. Even though they have the opportunity now, giving people two
weeks to prepare to argue against something they already voted down is not okay.
If the County determines it really needs the tax after looking at all the other
options, they can put it to a vote of the people. I -695 still allows that. She asked if
the tax would be taken away if the legislature changed the law.
The councilmembers stated it would not be taken away.
Sutter stated the motion was to direct staff to prepare an ordinance to bring
forward. They will get the ordinance prepared, it will be introduced in two weeks,
and it could be voted on two weeks after introduction. They are giving people at
least a month before the Council holds the hearing.
Hoag questioned when they would vote on the budget. They should know
the outcome of the tax before they approve the budget.
Sutter stated they can't do it.
Imhof stated they will do a budget amendment if they need to.
Motion carried 4 -3 with Hoag, Brenner, and Brown opposed.
Imhof moved to hold the budget hearing open for two weeks.
Motion carried unanimously.
2. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE WHATCOM COUNTY 2000 ROAD
CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM (AB99 -422)
Mike Roberts, Public Works Engineering Design Construction Manager, stated
he was available for questions.
Imhof moved to amend to add item 10B, the intersection signalization of
James Street Road at West Bakerview Road, in the amount of $320,000, of which
$200,000 is federal matching funds, and to increase the total program budget by
$320,000.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, 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
Motion to amend carried unanimously.
Hoag asked about the signalization of Smith Road at Hannegan Road. She
was told it would be done within a year. Roberts stated it is currently item number
eight.
Hoag questioned when that is scheduled for completion. Roberts stated it is
scheduled for the summer of 2000.
Hoag asked to move that schedule forward.
Brown stated that is a very short period of time.
Imhof stated that is the next construction season.
Brenner stated this season is over.
Brown stated they don't generally get out there in the middle of the winter.
Hoag stated there is construction work going on all over the place.
Brenner stated that is the State.
Dawson opened the public hearing and the following people spoke:
Robin Dexter, 3726 Broad Street, urged the Council to postpone
consideration until after the budget is adopted because they brought forward the
1/10 of one percent sales tax. The Council should postpone consideration until the
December meeting, pending the outcome of the deliberations of the sales tax and
the likely needs of the criminal justice system. The road budget seems a logical
place to look for some extra funds.
Dawson stated they couldn't do that. The road fund is a dedicated fund.
Dexter stated there ought to be a way to use some of those funds for the
County's liabilities regarding the Endangered Species Act. There are a lot of quality
problems that will be traced to roads and road runoff.
Brenner stated they will use money for related stuff.
Hearing no one else, Dawson closed the public hearing.
Imhof moved approval. He talked to people at the City of Bellingham about
the Slater Road connector from Northwest Road to the Guide Meridian. That was
on the list two years ago. Bellingham never decided where they wanted it to go.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, 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
45
46
He questioned whether the County can get the preliminary engineering done this
yea r.
Jeff Monsen, Public Works Director, stated the Slater connector has been in
the six -year road program process for some time to ensure the County has the
ability to step in when development occurs. That would enable the County to
participate in the process to make sure the link goes across. He didn't recall
whether there was a placeholder. They can add it as an alternative project. Should
it come up, the County could then bring it forward.
Imhof questioned the amount of the preliminary work. Monsen agreed the
preliminary amount would be $100,000.
Imhof moved to add the Slater Road connector, from Northwest Road to the
Guide Meridian, to the alternate projects lists, in the amount of $100,000 for
preliminary engineering work.
Hoag questioned whether Bellingham supported building that road.
Imhof stated they do, they just don't know where to put it. It also depends
on development of the Cordata area. They are going to be participants in the
project.
Motion to amend carried unanimously.
Brenner stated that project can go forward without development of Cordata
North.
Brown questioned whether there was any way to predict the timeframe for
completion of the projects on the list. Roberts stated the current intention is to get
all the projects that have a construction budget built during the next year.
Nelson stated he has received pressure from Lake Whatcom citizens. He has
held off in anticipation of the Lake Whatcom Management Committee
recommendations on traffic consideration. He moved to put the Lake Whatcom
connector on the list for $100,000 for engineering, if that should be an indicated
need from that committee.
Imhof supported the motion. Bellingham has finished the Samish Way
overpass. There is a nice road that goes east from that, and dead -ends into a cow
trail. This was probably planned to push through to San Juan Boulevard and over
the top.
Brenner stated the City doesn't have any intention of supporting a connector.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape two, side A.)
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, 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
46
Brenner continued to state that the County has better things to do with the
money.
Motion to amend carried 5 -2 with Hoag and Brenner opposed.
Hoag questioned whether the items listed are in order of completion.
Roberts stated not necessarily. It depends on the duration of the project. This
year, they received permit approval for several projects.
Hoag stated she really wanted the Hannegan -Smith Road signalization.
Traffic backs up for miles.
Brown stated it works well the way it is. He would rather see it like it is. He
questioned whether it would be possible for them to do Park Road, Mountainview
Road, and other roads simultaneously so the traffic signal won't have to wait until
the others are done. Roberts stated he would make sure it gets done first thing
when the weather permits.
Motion to approve the resolution as amended carried unanimously.
(Clerk's Note: Council took a ten - minute break at 9:25.)
14. RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE CURRENT WHATCOM COUNTY FLOOD
CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT FUNDING MECHANISM (AB99 -392)
Nelson stated the Finance Committee discussed this item and the next item.
The committee recommended the second version (AB99 -392A) two against one.
Brown stated he committed to a one -year continuation of the flood tax, but
he wasn't going to support it for three years.
Dawson opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public
hearing.
Imhof moved approval for discussion and vote.
Motion failed unanimously.
15. RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE CURRENT WHATCOM COUNTY FLOOD
CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT FUNDING MECHANISM (WITH AMENDED
EXHIBIT) (AB99 -392A)
Nelson stated the new assessment rate redistributes the rates. The rate
structure goes up to $1 million of assessed value, instead of only $400,000. This
was the proposal brought forward by Councilmember Connie Hoag.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, 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
Dawson opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public
hearing.
Imhof moved approval.
Brenner thanked Hoag for amending the rate structure; it is more fair, but
less legal. They cannot base a fee on assessed value. This new version is based
even more on assessed values than the old version. It is illegal to do this. She
believed there would be an executive session to discuss the legal ramifications, but
the majority of the Council didn't want to hear it. This is outrageous. The majority
of the Council knows this is an illegal fee. For the last four or five years, she has
said the fee would be fair if it were structured differently. She was not opposed to
a flood fee. It is very appropriate. She was very opposed to the way this flood fee
is structured. It is not a fee. It is a tax.
Hoag stated she understood Brenner's comments, but did not agree. She
supported Councilmember Brown's proposal that this extend the mechanism for
only one year instead of three years. She so moved. In the past, the mechanism
has been funded for only one year.
Nelson stated he didn't disagree with the concept of approving for only one
year. They can look at any fees at any time. The administration was trying to have
the ability to show consistency as they go into the process of dealing with the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) and associated water problems. Flood tax funding is
going to help solve those problems in Whatcom County. That is what the
administration was trying to achieve with the three -year program. For that reason,
he supported funding the mechanism for three years.
Dawson stated the three -year funding will create predictability and long -
range planning.
Brown stated the three -year funding doesn't give the public a chance to say
anything about it for three years. If it were one -year, it would undergo the public's
scrutiny next year. There is considerable concern about the amount of work getting
done with the flood monies. He would make a commitment for one year, but not
for three years. If the County would begin removing some gravel and using it for
dikes and berms, they would reduce the need for a lot of flood work.
Imhof stated that is a part of the long -range goal, as they deal with the
sediment management program in the river. Even if they did it for one year, the
people would not vote on it because it is not a new tax. Unless they increased it, it
wouldn't be voted on. It is the responsible thing to do. To do a long -range
program, they need long -range funding.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 23
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
Hoag stated the current Comprehensive Flood Plan says that gravel removal
will not be looked at as a comprehensive approach to managing the river. That is a
mistake. It is one of the things that needs to be looked at. The Council needs to
be educating the public and working on the agencies that are standing in the way of
that. It is a political decision, not a practical decision. In terms of the mechanism
not coming back for a vote, it is a resolution that the County extends each year. If
it is only for one year, it will come back the next year for a vote. Regarding
predictability, they change it anytime they want and still have predictability. If they
are able to change it at any time, then they are not getting predictability. It is
most appropriate that this comes back each year so it can have public input.
Sutter stated it is not so much a matter of consistency as it is commitment to
funding the water resource programs that the administration is looking for. She
supported approval for three years. They are going to be spending a lot of money
on water planning. They need to start extending that long- range.
Amendment failed 3 -4 with Hoag, Brenner, and Brown in favor.
Motion to approve the resolution carried 5 -2 with Brenner and Brown
opposed.
3. RESOLUTION EXTENDING CURRENT WHATCOM COUNTY FLOOD
CONTROL SUB -ZONE FUNDING MECHANISM FOR ACME /VAN ZANDT
SUB -ZONE (AB99 -423)
Jeff Monsen, Public Works Director, gave a staff report for all three sub -
zones, and stated this mechanism would collect the same amount of dollars as the
resolution approved last year. Last year, when these were adopted, they were
based on the previous year countywide assessment. The sub -zone committees'
requests were to generate the same dollar amount as they did in 1999.
Brown stated the Flood Control Sub -Zones Committees are still taxing a
portion of landowners outside the flood plain. Monsen stated the statute is written
so that it deals with the approximate drainage basin. Those outside the floodplain
are charged a substantially lower fee than those within the floodplain, and are
charged because they are contributors to the basin. That is why there is a charge
to residents outside the floodplain.
Dawson opened the public hearing for all three flood control sub - zones,
including the Lynden /Everson Sub -Zone and the Sumas /Nooksack /Everson Sub -
Zone. The following people spoke:
Bob Knutsen, Acme, Acme Flood Control Sub -Zone Chair, spoke in favor of
the tax. They need some stability to make plans. They don't get that much money
from the tax, and they need what they get. They have projects currently in the
south fork of the Nooksack River. The amount of tax they receive is used quickly
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 24
I when they begin doing larger projects. Regarding the people being taxed outside of
2 the zone, they've had two or three people that felt they had no business being
3 taxed. The committee looked at those properties and determined that those
4 properties shouldn't have been included. Those properties were removed. His
5 intent is to remove any properties that don't belong.
6
7 Ron Bronsema, 8135 Northwood Road, Lynden /Everson Flood Control Sub -
8 Zone Chair, also spoke in favor of the resolution. They wish to have a three -year
9 extension to the current resolution. In the Lynden /Everson Sub -Zone, they are
10 trying to build up a reserve fund for an emergency. There is critical infrastructure
11 they have to protect. There are two bridges, Hannegan and the Guide Meridian.
12 There is the Lynden sewage treatment plant and numerous county roads. They
13 have a serious problem with some very large levies that were overtopped in the
14 1995 flood. One blew out on the Dykstra property that cost over a quarter million
15 dollars to fix. If they have that same blow out today, with the Endangered Species
16 Act (ESA) and the fish problems, it would be considerably more expensive. With
17 the assessment, they are bringing in about $28,000 per year. That is not a lot
18 when they are liable for between 15 - 20 percent of a project on the river.
19
20 Nelson questioned whether they were using the dollars with the matching
21 flood control. Bronsema stated that was correct. It used to be the 70 -30 program.
22 Now it is 80 -20 or 85 -15, depending on the situation.
23
24 Nelson questioned whether that met the needs of the sub - zones. Bronsema
25 stated they've been lucky. There haven't been any projects. There is monitoring
26 going on at the Nolte Road, downstream from Everson. Upstream from that, on the
27 bank opposite of Stickney Island Road, there is an area of over 100 yards with no
28 bank protection, and is eroding. It is threatening seven homes. If there is a flood
29 event, there could be a serious problem.
30
31 Fred Nowicke, 3341 Bird Road, Everson, spoke in favor of funding the
32 resolution for three years. His sub -zone includes 15 miles of the Sumas River.
33 They also have the Nooksack River, Riverberry, the Everson park area, and a
34 number of other critical areas. They are trying to get the Johnson Creek project
35 going. The Sumas River, at the Sumas city limits, hadn't been done in 1992. It is
36 plugged up. They are having overflows with shorter amounts of rain. It is
37 overtopping the river. The Swift Creek project was done last year and was done
38 very well. They took out a small amount this year to protect from flooding. The
39 slide is worse that it has ever been. They were up there a month ago, and the
40 water is coming down in different ways than it previously was. The sub -zone funds
41 are swiftly being depleted. Some of the bank at Riverberry is already being eaten
42 out.
43
44 Brown questioned where it was being eaten out. Nowicke replied it is
45 between three and four. It's not being eaten out badly, but they haven't had much
46 water.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 25
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
Hoag questioned whether they installed ponds on Swift Creek that were to be
cleaned out regularly. Nowicke stated that is up above on private property. They
are having a problem up there trying to move the person to do more. He is taking
out about 8,000 cubic yards a year, which is a lot. It is helping the lower part of
Swift Creek. They are trying to do a fish mitigation project and create larger
holding ponds. They thought a lot of the material would go to a big project at
Sumas, but the project is being held up because of permitting problems.
Bronsema stated the sub - zones' assessments are attached to the countywide
assessment. He requested that the sub -zones assessment be amended to three
years, so that it would coincide with the countywide fee.
Hearing no one else, Dawson closed the public hearing.
Imhof moved to approve items three, four, and five, with the amendment to
extend them for three years.
Motion to amend all three sub -zones carried 5 -2 with Brenner and Hoag
opposed.
Brenner stated that people outside the floodplain, even in the sub - zones,
should not have to pay a second time. They are already paying a fee according to
their assessed value, because they get an indirect benefit from anything that is
done. That is the only fee they should be paying. She moved to amend so people
outside of the sub -zone floodplains and flood ways do not have to pay.
Brown stated they need a funding mechanism to help the people that were
being affected by this so they could work amongst themselves, and fund the old 70-
30 split. The County ended up okaying the sub - zones. There are people on one
side of the Mt. Baker Highway that are paying a fee. People on the other side are
not. The people paying are not contributing any more than the other people in the
county. The intention was to set this up so the people being directly affected had a
way to pool their resources. He supported Brenner's amendment. He can't
approve taxing people a second time for something they are not contributing to.
Nelson stated there are individuals that, if they feel do not have an impact or
shouldn't be in the zone, can appeal the mechanism. If people shouldn't be in the
zone, the committees are taking them out. It is fine to disagree with the process,
but they are going to have to draw the line someday. There will have to be a
system in which people can be assured. They have had an open hearing. He hasn't
heard a lot of testimony from constituents who are upset over the fee. If that is
the case, the County Council meeting is where they should be. If other
councilmembers are receiving complaints, they need to get those complainants to
write or come to the meeting. They need to maintain the process so there is some
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, 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
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
integrity and the Flood Control Sub -Zone Committees know what their revenues will
be.
Sutter stated some people think the tax should only be on those who benefit.
When they originally adopted the sub - zones, they were also concerned with people
who contribute. People are getting taxed twice. However, someone who doesn't
contribute and doesn't benefit already pays. They shouldn't have to pay the same
as someone who contributes to the problem. It is perfectly appropriate that anyone
who either contributes or benefits has some share in alleviating the problem.
Hoag agreed with Brenner's philosophy. Stormwater has a huge impact on
the flooding. People who contribute to it need to carry that cost. If they look at
what is happening at Swift Creek, logging was the problem, not the housing.
Different things occur upland that affect the land down below. Land within the
water basin contributes. According to a farmer living along the Nooksack River, the
high water now is a foot higher than it used to be, due to the stormwater.
Brown stated there is debate on the slide issue and logging as the cause.
Those banks are clay and are susceptible to erosion. There is a way to fix that and
let it heal itself. It is called renewing the angle of repose and re- vegetation. It will
eventually heal itself. It is time consuming and expensive, but will work. As they
talk about stormwater and the rivers being higher, the gravel is also higher than it
historically has ever been.
Brenner stated it is not accurate to say that people who are paying the
countywide fee are not contributing. The purpose of the regular fee is because
everyone contributes. The ones who gain the most from it are those in the
floodplain and the floodway. The contribution of people outside of those areas is
incidental and indirect. It is not nearly as big as what they can measure of the
people in the floodplain and the floodway. They should not be charging people a
separate tax if they are not contributing. They are taxing some people twice. The
committees have had years to set up a mechanism that is fair. She restated her
amendment to remove people from the sub -zones that are outside of the floodplain
and flood way.
Motion to amend items three failed 2 -5 with Brown and Brenner in favor.
Dana Brown - Davis, Clerk of the Council, asked that they approve each of the
items independently.
Motion to approve as amended carried 6 -1 with Brenner opposed.
4. RESOLUTION EXTENDING CURRENT WHATCOM COUNTY FLOOD
CONTROL SUB -ZONE FUNDING MECHANISM FOR LYNDEN /EVERSON
SUB -ZONE (AB99 -424)
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 27
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
(Clerk's Note: See the above item for discussion, motions, and
amendments.)
Motion to approve as amended carried 5 -2 with Brown and Brenner opposed.
S. RESOLUTION EXTENDING CURRENT WHATCOM COUNTY FLOOD
CONTROL SUB -ZONE FUNDING MECHANISM FOR
SUMAS /NOOKSACK /EVERSON SUB -ZONE (AB99 -425)
(Clerk's Note: See item three for discussion, motions, and amendments.)
Motion to approve as amended carried 5 -2 with Brenner and Brown opposed.
6. RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LOWER NOOKSACK RIVER
COMPREHENSIVE FLOOD HAZARD MANAGEMENT PLAN (AB99 -426)
Paula Cooper, Public Works Engineering Division, stated this plan came
before the Council in December 1997. Since then, they have gone through the
entire environmental review process under the State Environmental Policy Act
(SEPA). They have put it out for public review and done a draft and final
environmental impact statement. They did significant formatting revisions to the
plan, and some minor content revisions. Those revisions were to address
comments raised during the SEPA period. The major reorganization was to make it
more comprehensive. They will get a picture of the entire river and a picture of the
different strategies and how they are applied throughout. Within each chapter, the
plan is explained on a reach -by -reach basis. Chapter eight clarifies the program
and how it will be implemented. They've done a lot of clarification in terms of
explicitly saying they will set migration limits and develop a buy -out policy. A lot of
this has come out of the last year's worth of meetings with the Flood Control Zone
District Advisory Committee. The sediment management strategy is included as a
component of the plan in chapter eight. In October, the advisory committee
recommended the plan for approval by the Council. There is a State Department of
Ecology (DOE) review that fully supports the plan.
Hoag stated the previous drafts that she's seen had language regarding
gravel removal not being considered for flood control purposes. Cooper stated
gravel removal can be done in one of two ways. Full -scale dredging is not an
option because it would be hard to take all the water in the floodplain and put it
into a dredged out river. Also, with the Endangered Species Act (ESA), it is unlikely
that they will ever get anywhere and they wouldn't have DOE's support. Gravel bar
scalping is still an option for reducing bank stress on the opposite bank to avoid a
bank - stabilization project.
Hoag asked about reducing the level of the gravel bar to reduce the level of
the water. Cooper stated they could do it locally, but could not go in and clean out
the entire river.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 28
2 (Clerk's Note: End of tape two, side 8.)
3
4 Brown stated they often refer to dredging when they are looking at a way to
5 intercept and get the debris, including gravel, out of the river to keep it from
6 building up. He has very mixed feelings about this. A lot of work has gone into the
7 plan. They are throwing money down the drain. They are going to buy people out
8 and do all kinds of activities. In fifty years, the bottom of the river is going to be
9 up another two feet. Until they stop, or get rid of the gravel coming down the river
10 that is a natural process, the flood plan won't work. Eventually, they have to
11 control the gravel and get it out of the river. Cooper stated part of the
12 management strategy is to begin documenting what is really happening with the
13 river bottom. In the budget for 2000, she requested money to do cross - section
14 surveys so they can demonstrate the changes happening to the river bottom
15 profile. Whatever they do right now, they are going to have to have a lot of science
16 to back up the decisions.
17
18 Brenner stated she appreciated having paperwork to back up their plan, but
19 this has been going on for so long that they can have all the paperwork they want
20 and will still spend a lot of money in the meantime. By the time they have enough
21 paperwork to satisfy DOE and the federal government, it will be too late. At some
22 point, the County has to make a decision to do this. If DOE and the federal
23 government don't like it, then the County will cross that bridge. They are not going
24 to agree with the County, and they are wrong.
25
26 Hoag stated this would allow for a gravel bar to be removed if it reduced
27 stress on an opposite bank, however it also says gravel bar removal would have to
28 be above the level of the water and Cooper said they would look at the river
29 bottom. She questioned whether the plan allows the County to remove gravel if
30 they find that the river bottom and the river high water mark continues to rise
31 because of continued sediment deposits. Cooper stated this plan is a framework.
32 She sees the County adding appendices as they get more information from the
33 sediment management plan and policies are created for meanders and buy -outs.
34 This plan doesn't lock the County into any one action. Right now, they've identified
35 gravel bar scalping as an alternative they should consider in bank stabilization
36 projects.
37
38 Hoag asked if it only allows gravel bar scalping above the water line. Cooper
39 stated they can't dredge the river below the waterline. They can't get a permit for
40 that.
41
42 Hoag asked if the plan specifically allows gravel bar scalping only above the
43 waterline. Cooper stated the plan only says they will do a comprehensive sediment
44 management strategy. It only says they will look at how the river is changing, and
45 quantify it. She looks at gravel removal for two different things. One is flood level
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 29
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
reduction and one is bank stress. It identifies development of a comprehensive
sediment management strategy to look at the big picture.
Brenner stated her problem with the plan was that all the money they spend
on the comprehensive sediment management strategy is to study things that are
already known historically. It is taking money away from important things such as
buyouts and creation of the meander lines. They should not spend time and money
looking at something that is already known historically. The money should be going
to real protective projects.
Dawson opened the public hearing and the following people spoke:
Fred Nowicke, 3341 Berg Road, Everson, asked for the Council's help to take
on the Corps of Engineers, the Tribes, the Department of Ecology, and Fisheries to
extract the gravel. They can't do it alone.
Brown questioned whether Nowicke believed it needs to be done. Nowicke
stated that for many years he has believed it needs to be done. If the County
commits itself to take on these agencies, they might get something done.
Hoag stated she argues for that everywhere she goes.
Dawson stated there is a federal goal to reclaim wetland.
Ron Bronsema, 8135 Northwood Road, Everson, stated he is the Flood
Control Zone District Advisory Committee Chairman. He has been on the
committee from the beginning. Getting the plan before the Council has been a five -
year program. The committee had the same concerns as Councilmember Brown
regarding sediment. If they could have done some strategic gravel removal, they
wouldn't have had to spend any of the $1 million on Rive rberry /VanDalen.
Brown stated they would have only spent about $100,000, and then been
done.
Bronsema stated they couldn't get a permit to do it. If they look below the
Hannegan Bridge, there isn't any room for gravel removal. The river is narrowly
channeled. They are looking at a dredging situation. That area was thrown out
because it was not cost - effective. The river bottom at the Ferndale bridge is still
below sea level. They are not going to gain capacity in a flood. It will help in a
minor capacity. It would not do them any good in the area below Ferndale if there
were a major flood. It would cost $5 million or $6 million and would have to be
cleaned out every few years. That area wasn't cost - effective. The committee
supported gravel bar scalping upstream from the Hannegan bridge. The permitting
process frustrated the committee. The Army Corps of Engineers are a thorn in their
side. The DOE is more lenient toward sediment management plans. He urged the
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 30
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
Council's support for approval of the plan. It is probably not what anyone wants to
see, but it is the best they can do within the permitting environment that exists.
Brown stated the Council dealt with an issue regarding the river and the bay.
A person testified there is a logjam where he fished at the mouth of the river. One
can literally fish in the bay, and the river is backed up. He questioned whether
Bronsema was aware of the situation. Bronsema replied that was something that
was brought to the committee's attention. The Lummi Tribe has expressed a lot of
concerns. They looked at putting part of the Red River into Lummi Bay. That is
where the Nooksack River actually went until the 1850's when the big jam was
removed. Concerns have been expressed about the delta, because the water is so
shallow when the fish go out. The shore birds eat all the fry. There are
environmental, water quality, and flood concerns, but there isn't a lot they can do
about it.
Bob Knutsen, 6070 Saxon Road, Flood Control Zone District Advisory
Committee Member, stated they watch the bottom cutting of the south fork of the
Nooksack River. It has dropped eight to nine feet in the last couple of years. It is
going south to Everson and Lynden. They have tremendously big gravel bars. The
gravel is going downstream. If they could scalp the gravel bars during low season,
they would bring out thousands and thousands of yards of gravel that would not get
downstream. When the committee approved the plan, they felt it would be a living
document because things change. As time passes, they will be recommending
changes in keeping with what they can do. The federal regulations are a heavy
hammer. Some day that may change. Scalping the gravel bars will alleviate a lot
of problems to the south. They need the support to push it through to the other
agencies.
Brenner questioned whether Knutsen saw any problem with putting the
wording into the plan that they would do gravel removal whenever possible.
Knutsen stated the problem would be that Fisheries would jump on it immediately.
Hearing no one else, Dawson closed the public hearing.
Imhof moved approval of the resolution.
Dawson stated there is a federal strategy to reclaim as much lost wetlands as
possible. No one at the federal level will support gravel extraction in his or her
lifetime.
Nelson stated he wouldn't disagree, but they need to get the science
together as quickly as possible. The Nooksack is the most meandering river he has
ever seen. The reason it meanders is because it is bringing down the sediments
from the Cascade foothills. They need the data and to articulate the scientific
approach showing how the elevation increase causes flooding problems. The
County can get with Federal Emergency Management (FEMA) and asks how much
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 31
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
money they want to spend every time there is a flood, because the federal
government doesn't want to make their opinions known. The community knows
what is going on, but they have to put it on paper.
Brown stated the testimony given has a lot of bearing, but in reality most of
the councilmembers went on a Canadian tour last year. The Canadians
implemented a plan in which they tracked the debris coming down the river. They
knew approximately the amount of debris that came in, and then allotted that
amount to be removed. He hoped to do that type of a program, and go one step
further to lower things.
Hoag stated the federal policy is political. This river is surrounded by
farmland. The County needs to push at all levels for that policy attitude to change.
They need to protect wetlands, but there needs to be balance. They need to
protect wetlands where they can, but not at the sacrifice of productive farmland
that has historically been in production. Even though it might be an uphill battle,
they need to do it.
Motion carried unanimously.
7. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 2000 SIX -YEAR PHYSICAL PLANT AND
FACILITIES CAPITAL PROGRAM RELATING TO BUILDINGS AND
FACILITIES FOR WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON (AB99 -427)
Brown stated this is scheduled for Finance Committee.
Sutter stated it mistakenly was put on the Planning Committee agenda.
Dawson opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public
hearing.
8. ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF TAXES FOR COUNTY AND
STATE PURPOSES IN WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON, FOR THE
YEAR OF 2000, PURSUANT TO HOME RULE CHARTER, SECTION 6.10
(AB99 -428)
Nelson stated the Finance Committee recommended unanimously to keep the
levy rate as it is.
Dawson opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public
hearing.
Imhof moved to adopt.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 32
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
Hoag stated she wanted to delay adoption until they have considered the
budget. Until they know what funds they have available for different departments,
they shouldn't adopt this. She moved to hold in Council.
Imhof stated this is where they start. They set the levy and know what the
revenues are. They will set the budget accordingly.
Brown stated they need to go ahead with this. The one -tenth of one percent
sales tax increase will go through to help criminal justice. They are going to have
to deal with the other issues. The County has the finances available to do that.
There is no reason to pass this at this time.
Sutter questioned whether the Council is required to adopt by a certain
deadline.
Dana Brown - Davis, Clerk of the Council, stated in the past ten years, the
Council has always adopted the levy prior to adopting the budget.
Karen Frakes, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, stated the levy has to be
adopted by November 15.
Brenner stated she supported keeping the tax level where it is, since they
can't lower it.
Hoag stated she didn't support raising taxes unnecessarily, and her voting
record substantiates that. She usually votes to not spend money. She asked about
the deadline for adoption.
Frakes stated that the law requires it be adopted by November 15. She
didn't think there was a penalty if they don't do it. This is something they looked
into this afternoon.
Hoag withdrew her motion.
Motion to adopt carried unanimously.
10. ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE YEAR 2000 UNIFIED FEE SCHEDULE
(AB99 -431)
Nelson stated that the Finance Committee recommended that this go forward
for the public hearing. If the Council wishes, it can be held in committee.
Dawson opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public
hearing.
Brenner moved to hold in committee.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 33
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 carried unanimously.
11. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 20.82,
PUBLIC UTILITIES (PLANNING NO. 50- 98:ZT) (AB99 -377)
Sutter reported that the committee did not make a recommendation. Only
two committee members voted and the motion to recommend failed 1 -1. This item
is still in committee.
Dawson opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public
hearing.
Nelson moved to adopt.
Hoag moved to continue to hold in committee.
Motion to hold in committee failed 5 -2 with Hoag and Brenner in favor.
Hoag stated committee recommended her first amendment by a vote of 2 -1.
Under the section "Conditional Uses," there was language in the original code that
applied to all of the items listed, including trunk utility lines, electronic
communication structures, and water storage reservoirs. It said, "These shall
require a conditional use permit and shall be subject to a threshold determination in
accordance with the Whatcom County SEPA Ordinance." Staff divided that section
into eight different items, instead of one paragraph that contained all items. She
moved the recommendation that language to be placed:
20.82.030 Conditional Uses - The following uses shall require a conditional
use permit and shall be subject to a threshold determination in accordance
with the Whatcom County SEPA Ordinance.
Motion carried unanimously.
Hoag moved to amend packet page 234, section 20.82.030(1) that refers to
lines located outside of the Heavy Impact Industrial (HII), Light Impact Industrial
(LII) and General Manufacturing District zones. They will be conditional uses. The
committee's concern was that some of these districts border residential zones.
Staff recommended they remove the references to LII and General Manufacturing
zones, since those are the only ones that border residential zones. That
amendment was unanimously recommended by the committee, "...outside the
zoning districts classified as Heavy Impact Industrial, , and
Nelson stated some of the pipelines are currently in the ground in Light
Industrial Areas.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 34
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
Sylvia Goodwin, Planning and Development Services Planning Manager,
stated that if they are currently in the ground, they stay there as existing non-
conforming uses. If they were conditional uses, they are still approved uses. The
language only affects new ones.
Nelson stated pipelines are generally directed toward manufacturing or
industrial areas. He questioned whether that will remove the ability for the lines to
be placed in a Light Impact Industrial or General Manufacturing zone. Goodwin
stated those uses would require a conditional use permit. If they are within a
Heavy Impact Industrial area, they wouldn't need a conditional use permit.
Hoag stated this refers to transmission lines, not distribution lines.
Brown questioned whether that would effect the ability to maintain and
upgrade the lines. Goodwin stated that would be maintenance. Major
reconstruction of a new line would need a conditional use permit.
Motion carried unanimously.
Hoag moved to amend page 234, section 20.82.030(2), "...state utilities and
transportation commission and which are paFt ef the netweFk ef distribution lines
owned by the utility that provide natural gas service directly to county citizens and
business shall not be considered dTstFibutmen lines - and -rret regional transmission
lines." This would not apply to the distribution lines a utility owns. This was
unanimously recommended by committee.
Motion carried unanimously.
Hoag moved to amend packet page 234, section 20.82.030(3)(a), "...sewer
and /or water comprehensive plan and consistent with the Whatcom County
Comprehensive Plan." This was unanimously recommended by the committee.
Motion carried unanimously.
Hoag moved to delete section 20.82.030(3)(b). This recommendation failed
in committee. She brought it forward for consideration because there was no time
to discuss it fully in committee. The language of the section talks about things that
are permitted outright. Directly above language addresses all the new sewer and
waterlines installed by a public utility or a municipality with a state approved water
or sewer comprehensive plan. This section deals with waterlines that are not
installed by a public utility or municipality, or do not have a state approved sewer
and /or water comprehensive plan. It is not appropriate that they be permitted
outright. They should be conditioned to ensure that any concerns are properly
addressed.
Nelson stated these are all under conditional uses.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 35
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
Hoag stated the subsections under item number three are lines that are
bigger than eight inches that will be permitted outright, without a conditional use
permit. Item (b) doesn't place any restrictions on where the lines might go.
Nelson asked why one would go for a conditional use permit, when he or she
has already gone through a conditional process for the development.
Hoag stated the development and the line are in two different places. The
line goes to the development. The development has been approved. This is talking
about the sewer line.
Nelson stated the principal function is to provide service to the new
development.
Hoag stated that is not in the development. It is a sewer line going to the
development.
Imhof questioned who would be putting the sewer line in.
Hoag stated she didn't know.
Goodwin stated that generally a public utility or municipality would put in the
sewer line. They are the only ones that put in regional utility lines.
Nelson stated developments don't do water or sewer.
Hoag stated that a public utility or municipality is already covered under
section (a).
Sutter stated a new development has to provide for sewer before it can be
approved. Approval of the sewer is also done with approval of the development.
Hoag stated a proposed development only has to have a letter showing that
someone is willing to serve. It doesn't cover the route. Goodwin stated generally a
will -serve letter will not address the route. A related issue is that there are a lot of
cities, municipalities, and water districts that don't have approved plans because
the Health Department has been sitting on them.
Hoag stated her concern was that the County has no guarantee that critical
areas are being looked at if the County doesn't know the location of the routes or if
the lines don't go through a conditional use process.
Imhof stated it has to be done in a right -of -way.
Motion failed 2 -5 with Brenner and Hoag in favor.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 36
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
Hoag moved to amend packet page 235, section 20.82.030(7). This
recommendation did not come from the committee. She moved to remove the
strikeout, and reinstate the language, "Sewer and water treatment plant, sanitary
sewer outfalls." Sanitary sewer outfalls have been giving the county tremendous
problems with the shellfish beds. The location of those is critical to ensure the
currents don't carry those back into the harbors. They should be covered under the
conditional use permits.
Imhof questioned which sanitary sewer outfalls have caused major problems
in shellfish beds.
Hoag stated the one in Blaine caused the problem.
Sutter stated that hasn't been proven.
Imhof stated he hasn't seen the documentation of that.
Hoag stated he hasn't been on the shellfish committee. It was in the Natural
Resources Committee meeting.
Imhof stated it was never proven. It is speculation.
Hoag stated it has not been proven at this point. They have current
documents from the State that show where the currents go. They are going right
past the outfall and they are picking up very high numbers of fecal coliform.
Dawson questioned whether the State Department of Health approves all of
these. Goodwin stated there is a Federal National Pollution Elimination Discharge
permit and a Whatcom County Shoreline permit, which is approved by the same
hearing body as the conditional use permit. Staff felt it would be redundant to have
the same body hold two separate hearings for the same permit.
Brown questioned whether permitting sewer and water treatment plants
takes into account their method of disposal and location. Goodwin stated it would
generally be one process. There may be instances in which they would be
approved separately.
Dawson stated they are trying to streamline regulation, not add to it.
Hoag stated the treatment plants were already in the language. So were the
sanitary sewer outfalls. This is existing language they propose to strike. They've
ended up with outfalls that are in questionable locations already. They should at
least maintain what they have and keep it a conditional use.
Motion failed 1 -6 with Hoag in favor.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 37
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 adopt as amended carried 6 -1 with Hoag opposed.
12. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 20
(VARIOUS SECTIONS), REGARDING ADULT FAMILY HOMES AND
CHILDCARE FACILITIES (PLANNING NO. 63- 98:ZT) (AB99 -381)
Sutter reported for Planning and Development Committee and stated it was
moved out of committee on October 26. The committee recommended approval.
Sylvia Goodwin, Planning and Development Services Planning Manager, gave
a staff report and stated one amendment was made to take the daycare approval
by conditional use permit out of the agricultural zone. That change has been made
and is reflected in the current document.
Dawson opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public
hearing.
Motion to adopt carried unanimously.
13. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 20.34,
REGARDING LUMMI ISLAND RR -1 DISTRICTS (PLANNING NO. 66-
98:ZT) (AB99 -330)
Sutter reported for Planning and Development Committee and stated the
committee recommended approval.
Dawson opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public
hearing.
Sutter moved approval.
Motion carried 6 -1 with Brown opposed.
16. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 20,
REGARDING SITE SPECIFIC REZONES, MASTER PLANS, AND SITE
PLAN AMENDMENTS (PLANNING NO. 69- 98:ZT) (AB99 -331)
Sutter reported this item is held in Planning and Development Committee.
Dawson opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public
hearing.
17. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 20.83 AND
20.38, REGARDING LOT CONSOLIDATION AND NON - CONFORMING
USES (PLANNING NO. 54- 98:ZT) (AB99 -328)
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 38
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 reported this item is held in Planning and Development Committee.
Dawson opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public
hearing.
OTHER ITEMS
1. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 20, TO ADD
CHAPTER 20.71, WATER RESOURCES PROTECTION OVERLAY ZONE
AND AMEND OTHER SECTIONS PERTAINING TO LAND CLEARING AND
STORMWATER REGULATIONS (PLANNING NO. 61- 98:ZT) (AB99 -286)
Sutter reported for Planning and Development Services Committee and
stated this is held in committee.
2. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 20.80,
SUPPLEMENTARY REQUIREMENTS, BUFFERS AND BUILDING
SETBACKS (PLANNING NO. 48- 98:ZT) (AB99 -376)
Sutter reported for Planning and Development Services Committee and
stated this is held in committee.
3. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, TITLE 20.89,
DENSITY TRANSFER PROCEDURES (PLANNING NO. 70- 98:ZT) (AB99 -
386)
Sutter reported for Planning and Development Services Committee and
stated this is held in committee.
4. RESOLUTION ENDORSING AND SUPPORTING THE ACTION PLAN OF
THE FARM FUTURES TASK FORCE (AB99 -443)
Brown moved approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
S. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE A NEW
LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION FOR SEVEN LOAVES RESTAURANT
AND BAKERY, 9393 MT. BAKER HIGHWAY, DEMING, WA (AB99 -444)
Brown moved approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 39
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
6. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE A NEW
LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION FOR THE MT. BAKER SKI AREA
WHITE SALMON, MILEPOST 52, MT. BAKER HIGHWAY, GLACIER, WA
(AB99 -445)
Imhof moved approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
7. REQUEST CONFIRMATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE'S APPOINTMENT OF
TREVA COE TO THE CITIZEN'S ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR SALMON
HABITAT RESTORATION PROJECTS, FOR HER FIRST THREE -YEAR
TERM ENDING AUGUST 31, 2002 (AB99 -446)
Nelson moved approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
S. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING 2000 MEETING DATES FOR THE
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL (AB99 -432)
Brown moved approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
INTRODUCTION ITEMS
Imhof moved to accept the Introduction Items, with the amendment to
include an ordinance on the one -tenth of one percent sales tax.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape three, side A.)
Imhof continued to amend to set the public hearing for the sales tax
ordinance in two weeks.
Motion carried unanimously.
1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN, AUTHORIZING PROVISIONAL SHORT TERM PLANNING AREA
STATUS AND CONDITIONS FOR PERMANENT SHORT TERM PLANNING
AREA STATUS FOR THE DRAYTON HARBOR AREA OF THE BLAINE UGA
(AB99 -435)
2. ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 95 -001, ESTABLISHING
SERVICE FEES AND SETTING A FEE SCHEDULE RELATED TO
AMBULANCE SERVICE CHARGES (AB99 -447)
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 40
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
3. ORDINANCE REGARDING THE ADOPTION OF ADDITIONAL ONE
TENTH OF ONE PERCENT SALES OR USE TAX FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE
PURPOSES (AB99 -448)
OTHER BUSINESS
Sutter brought forward the Ordinance amending the Whatcom County
Comprehensive Plan text and Title 20 zoning text regarding adult
entertainment (AB99 -412) from Planning Committee. This ordinance was
recommended by the committee and has to be adopted at this meeting because the
emergency ordinance will expire before the next meeting.
Nelson moved approval.
Brown stated that this is more liberal than the tobacco ordinance. This is
only 1,000 feet from the schools.
Sutter stated amendments were made during committee.
Dawson moved to amend packet page 277, the last sentence in the
"Purpose" section, "...increased safety hazards created by adult businesses."
Motion to amend carried unanimously.
Hoag moved to amend packet page 278, the last sentence of policy 2AAA -5,
"...may be granted if needed to recoup investmen financial expenditures made in
the business."
Motion to amend carried unanimously.
Motion to adopt as amended carried unanimously.
Brown questioned whether they would need a public hearing.
Sutter stated there was a hearing on the emergency ordinance.
REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS
Sutter stated the Planning Committee established proposed boundaries for
the Drayton Harbor short -term planning area. It was introduced at this meeting.
Hoag stated she attended the Marine Resources Committee training session
that included all the committees from the different counties. It was very
informative.
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 41
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 11:07 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
These minutes were approved by Council on February 8 , 2000.
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Marlene Dawson, Council Chair
Regular County Council Meeting, 11/9/99, Page 42