HomeMy WebLinkAboutCommittee of the Whole October 27 19982
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Committee Of The Whole
October 27, 1998
The meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Council Chair Robert Imhof in the
Council Committee Room, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
Also Present:
Kathy Sutter
Marlene Dawson
L. Ward Nelson
Connie Hoag
Barbara Brenner
Absent:
Tom Brown
Dawson moved to go into executive session to discuss items one and two.
Motion carried unanimously.
DISCUSSION WITH CHIEF CIVIL DEPUTY PROSECUTOR RANDY WATTS
REGARDING PENDING LITIGATION (AB98 -020)
2. DISCUSSION REGARDING MASTER COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT
NEGOTIATIONS (AB98 -360)
3. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE LAKE WHATCOM JOINT MANAGEMENT
PLAN (AB98 -386)
Sutter questioned what is being done to deal with the stormwater runoff problem in terms
of fixing things, not just planning. Most people agree that retrofitting of existing development
will be essential in dealing with that aspect of the problem. There can be regulations for new
development, but existing development is responsible for the problem that exists today.
Sue Blake, Water Resources Planner, stated that the stormwater plan won't get going
until 1999, but it is being funded out of the 1998 work program. They are in the process of
finalizing the scope of work with the consultant. It will discuss what exactly will be done
regarding retrofitting. They are hoping to identify early action efforts that they can take in the
watershed. She did not assign funding to this. There may be a need for additional money for the
early action efforts. There is flexibility for using the $375,000 budgeted for 1999. They don't
know if it will fund those projects. The first thing to be done with the stormwater plan is an
assessment of the water quality and problem areas. Retrofitting will be more than $375,000.
Sutter stated that she is concerned with doing more assessments to determine where the
problems are. They already know where the problems are. No amount of gathering data is going
to solve the problem. There are limited resources that need to be put into actual projects instead
of studying the issues to death.
Committee of the Whole, 10/27/98, Page 1
I Blake stated that the assessment does not include more data collection. It identifies areas
2 in the watershed where they know problems are occurring that they can focus on.
3
4 Sutter stated that they already know where those problems are.
5
6 Blake stated that she can't specifically say where. Basin 1 and Basin 2 have stormwater
7 outfalls with high concentrations of different things. She can't say that is where the money
8 should be spent.
9
10 Imhof questioned the cost of the assessment. Blake responded that it is included in the
11 $375,000. The cost of the assessment will be worked out in the final scope of work. She
12 estimated it would be a small amount. It is important to do the assessment to pull things
13 together. It would be worthwhile to ensure they are targeting the problems that will make the
14 biggest difference in terms of water quality in the watershed.
15
16 Imhof stated that is what they have been doing through 1998. He does not want to spend
17 any more money on doing studies without seeing any results.
18
19 Sutter stated that there isn't much to spend. The longer it is studied, the worse the
20 problem gets.
21
22 Hoag suggested solving other problems while the study is being done.
23
24 Blake responded that is partly what they will be doing. They've tried to identify
25 activities that may make a difference in terms of the water quality issues. The suggested
26 approach is to reduce pollution from a variety of aspects, including at the source, education, and
27 stormwater treatment.
28
29 Brenner stated that retrofitting existing development is the number one problem. They
30 shouldn't wait to do that. Also, the County shouldn't pay to upgrade.
31
32 Dawson questioned whether a stormwater assessment is needed.
33
34 Sutter stated that they need to determine whether conservation or clean up of the water is
35 more important. Blake stated that is where the Council's direction is needed.
36
37 Brenner stated that no one has stated there is a shortage of water in the watershed.
38
39 Blake stated that there are conservation actions because the policy states it is unclear as to
40 how things may shift in terms of the City's water supply.
41
42 Imhof stated that if the status of the City's water supply changed, then they would deal
43 with it at the time. Now they need to deal with quality. The focus needs to be on quality. They
44 have to do retrofitting.
45
46 Sutter suggested redirecting resources that go to non - project activities. Conservation and
47 education are great things to have, but they are secondary to solving the problems that exist.
48
Committee of the Whole, 10/27/98, Page 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
Blake summarized that the Council did not want much time or resources spent on
conservation.
Hoag stated that there is a combination of a long -term view of what needs to be done to
protect the water. In the short-term, they need to determine what water quality projects need to
be done to fix water quality problems.
Blake asked for confirmation that actions identified under the urbanization section, goal
13, would be a high priority.
Sutter stated that review of zoning regulations for new development to make any
recommended changes is necessary.
Imhof stated that the City of Bellingham also needs to do the same thing.
Dawson stated that the zoning is fine, they just need to review the regulatory
requirements.
Imhof stated that they need to look at options for the transfer of watershed land into
public ownership. The use of conservation future funding to purchase property is a possibility
for specific areas of concern.
Brenner stated that in some areas, they could just purchase the development rights.
Blake stated that relates to the watershed ownership section. The County Council also
considers that a high priority.
Sutter stated that she would like someone instead of government to do education.
Blake stated that one of the education projects that has not yet been funded is related to
the work that Becky Peterson has been doing. They know that the process of development
impacts water quality. She sat down with members of the development community and stated
that the community needs the developers' assistance and input on how to make sure that their
activities protect the lake. The developers came up with a plan for various things they think
would be useful to help them do abetter job. Some of those things would cost money. A fact
sheet on different subjects was one suggestion. The hope is that the County can partner some of
the activities. Those are the kinds of things included in the education program.
Brenner questioned whether anyone has looked at the "Y" Road dump for evaluation.
Blake responded that is included in the plan.
Hoag questioned various projects on the plan, such as the Britton Creek coliform levels.
Blake stated that there is nothing specifically on Silver Beach creek for more evaluation. The
main mechanism for that area is education, since they know the problems aren't due to septic
systems.
Imhof asked how long the E -coli organism lives. Hoag responded that experts believe it
lives 32 hours.
Committee of the Whole, 10/27/98, Page 3
I Imhof stated that there is something in that creek that needs to be identified.
2
3 Blake clarified that the Council members would like to see further evaluation of the
4 source of the fecal coliform in that area.
5
6 Hoag suggested investigating the source instead of evaluating the source.
7
8 Imhof stated that they want to see some accomplishment in the water quality.
9
10 Sutter questioned the section regarding the sewer system. They should be working on
11 those projects.
12
13 Hoag stated that would be a high priority.
14
15 Sutter asked about the City's comments. Blake responded that they have no problem
16 with anything in the plan, so far. Their main concerns are that there isn't enough being planned.
17 They may want more actions taken in particular areas.
18
19 Sutter stated that she would like the City Council to prioritize, as the County Council has
20 done. Blake stated that would be useful.
21
22 Imhof stated that once the jurisdictions get into the projects, there are grants available
23 from the State Department of Ecology. They have to identify projects before they can apply for
24 grant money.
25
26 Brenner stated that there is grant money available to do evaluation of the "Y" Road
27 dump. It is something about hazardous waste. Regina Delahunt, Health and Human Services
28 Environmental Services Manager, will follow up at a future committee meeting.
29
30 Blake restated the priorities: 1. The watershed ownership projects, 2. Urbanization and
31 development issues, 3. The "Y" Road landfill, 4. Evaluation of Silver Beach Creek sources, and
32 5. Stormwater, specifically the retrofitting.
33
34 Hoag stated that if there are sources that are already determined, then they need to work
35 on those sources before trying to find any other unknown sources.
36
37 Sutter stated that conservation should be put at the bottom of the list.
38
39 Blake questioned whether they want to look at recreation. Sutter stated no.
40
41 Imhof stated that they can't spread out the $375,000 over the entire wish list. Take four
42 or five items and get them done. Deal with the high priority items first.
43
44 Blake asked about the education portion of the plan. The committee concurred that the
45 publication "Water Whys" should remain.
46
47 Hoag stated that she didn't want to spend a bunch of money developing programs to go
48 out and teach people. They really need to solve the quality issues.
49
Committee of the Whole, 10/27/98, 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
Sutter stated that task 3 of goal one could be put near the bottom of the list. Blake stated
that they are not requesting additional funds for that program.
Sutter stated that task 4 is also a low priority.
Blake questioned how the committee wanted to be kept informed. Imhof responded that
he addressed a memo to Becky Peterson. They preferred to be kept updated on the Internet,
through the County homepage. Also, they want quarterly updates at full Council meetings.
Hoag stated that some Council members expressed an interest in having information on
audiocassette.
Imhof stated that the boats on the lake are a problem. Blake responded that they don't
know whether or not it is an issue. Nationwide, there are not a lot of studies on boating impacts.
Kremen questioned what the overall quality of Lake Whatcom indicates.
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 7:00 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
These minutes were approved by Council on January 12, 1999.
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Robert Imhof, Council Member
Committee of the Whole, 10/27/98, Page 5