Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil July 14 19981 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Regular Council Meeting July 14, 1998 The meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Council Chair Robert Imhof in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue. Also Present: Absent: Kathy Sutter None L. Ward Nelson Connie Hoag Barbara Brenner Tom Brown Marlene Dawson ANNOUNCEMENTS Imhof announced that during Committee of the Whole executive session the Council was briefed by legal counsel on an appeal of the Hearing Examiner's decision (on remand) of conditional use permit CUP94 -0014, filed by James West (AB98 -114) Brown moved to uphold the Hearing Examiner. Motion carried unanimously. Imhof also announced that during Committee of the Whole executive session the Council was briefed by legal counsel on an appeal of the Hearing Examiner's decision APL98 -0001, filed by Michael Rosser (AB98 -142) Hoag moved to hold in committee for two weeks for more discussion on the information. Motion carried unanimously. Imhof read a letter into the record from Health and Humans Services Director Chuck Benjamin which responded to Council Member Brenner's comments to the Bellingham Herald regarding the Health Department. Imhof asked Council Members to address specific concerns regarding the Health Department directly to Mr. Benjamin and requested a copy of any concerns be addressed to him. Regular Council Meeting, 7/14/98, Page 1 I OPEN SESSION 2 3 The following people addressed Council: 4 5 Rita Foley, S. Lake Whatcom, addressed several isues: l.) The Planning Commission 6 should be more balanced instead of all members being property rights advocates. 2.) The owner 7 of a gravel pit off of S. Bay Drive has caused a lot of problems with people's water supplies. 8 The issue will be coming before the County. 3.) It is difficult to understand that County 9 Ordinance 97 -031 gave a property owner on Chuckanut Point Road the right to install a mud 10 room when the state Shorelines Hearings Board would not allow it. The owner is within the 75 11 foot conservancy on the shoreline. This item will be appealed. The house in question sits on 12 solid rock. Holes were drilled in the rock to install a deck. These things are destructive to 13 shorelines. 4.) Trillium is trying to buy an easement down to S. Bay Drive. The roadway is 14 already dangerous. The easement would widen the roadway from 40 feet to 60 feet to allow 15 David Syre to build more houses in the area. This is a travesty of justice. 5.) The County is not 16 enforcing violations and the fines are not big enough. Fines should be large enough to deter 17 someone with a lot of money from violating the law. 6.) All County departments should be 18 better coordinated. 19 20 Brenner stated that Council staff is looking into the issue surrounding the approval of 21 Ordinance 97 -031 by the State Department of Ecology. 22 23 Michael Rosser, Box 158, Pt. Roberts, requested a chance to speak regarding the Hearing 24 Examiner appeal procedure. Imhof refused to allow Rosser to speak, as this was a quasi-judicial 25 matter before the Council and allowing additional testimony was illegal. 26 27 Lois Garlick, 297 Chuckanut Point Road, thanked Sheriff Dale Brandland for the beach 28 clean -up at Cherry Point. It has been fantastic. The squatters are out. She also requested the 29 Council extend the contract to Resources for recycling education services. 30 31 Marian Beddill, 3600 Seeley, concurred with the recommendation to continue the 32 contract with ReSources. This decision should be judged on technical merit. Also, the Council 33 has scheduled an emergency meeting to discuss possible salary adjustments for Public Works - 34 Engineering personnel. She urged the Council to look at all circumstances and solutions. There 35 may be more going on that is influencing the circumstances and the functionality of the 36 department. This is a critical moment in Whatcom County's development and consideration of 37 water management problems. Of the four positions supporting the Flood Hazard Management 38 Committee, three are vacant or soon will be vacant. Such a situation is not in the best public 39 interest. O. 41 Imhof stated he appreciated her comment on the County's Memorandum of 42 Understanding and requested she outline concerns on this subject for his review. 43 44 45 Regular Council Meeting, 7/14/98, Page 2 I Joe Elenbaas, 600 E. Smith Road, stated he has always been a law enforcement supporter. 2 However, it bothers him when he reads an article about 20 sheriff vehicles mobilizing against 3 fireworks stands when they claim they don't have enough resources for other services. He stated 4 that Whatcom County has too many sheriff vehicles. He was given a list that shows that there 5 are 91 vehicles assigned to the department. That is too many. The cost includes the price of 6 purchase in addition to the cost to outfit the vehicles. Also, the population of the incorporated 7 portion of the County is within 20 percent of what it used to be when there was only one sheriff 8 and one part-time deputy sheriff staffing the department. Also, currently there exists a request 9 before the Whatcom County Prosecutor by his attorneys filed to report, in the appropriate 10 manner, documentation as of January 1986 requiring that they respond. From time to time he is 11 appreciative of County employees who do their job and, as a result, write a glowing report of 12 their efforts. He requested the Council Members not misconstrue his appreciation as an 13 indication that he is satisfied with the rest of County government. It is sad that when good work 14 is done, someone needs to make a point of it and it is considered odd. 15 16 Sheriff Dale Brandland spoke regarding the number of sheriff cars at the Nooksack tribe 17 fireworks stands. He was told there were 25 — 30 angry people that refused to leave. He initially 18 approached that group with four deputies. When it was determined one member of the group 19 would be arrested, more deputies were brought in. One can't go into potentially dangerous 20 situations understaffed. He will not jeopardize the safety of the staff so that he can avoid the 21 appearance of overstaffing. Public safety and officer safety is more important than that. 22 23 Nelson questioned how many officers were actually there. Brandland stated he did not 24 count the number of law enforcement personnel. The fire marshal and the State Patrol were also 25 present. 26 27 Hoag asked for clarification about Brandland's comments regarding the number of sheriff 28 deputies on the scene. Brandland responded that he went out with a contingent of deputies to 29 handle 25 - 30 angry people. He staged them at the Mt. Baker High School, then drove to the 30 scene with three deputies and determined that arrests were going to be made and evidence would 31 be seized. He then called in the additional deputies. 32 33 Hoag questioned whether it was 20 officers or twenty patrol cars that responded. 34 Brandland stated that he didn't believe the number of patrol cars was 20. Hoag requested that 35 Brandland let her know exactly how many patrol cars responded. 36 37 Brenner questioned whether it is common that many deputies are called in any time there 38 is going to be an arrest. Brandland stated that if there is the potential of a mass arrest, then 39 several deputies are called in. 40 41 Brenner questioned the source of the information concerning the angry crowd. 42 Brandland stated that he personally saw the crowd when he and a deputy drove by the scene. 43 44 Hoag requested Brandland provide her with information on the number of vehicles 45 assigned to the Sheriff's Department. Regular Council Meeting, 7/14/98, 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 CONSENT AGENDA Dawson reported for Finance and Administrative Services Committee and moved approval of items 1 through 11. Brenner requested to remove item #8. Imhof clarified that the resolutions regarding the sale of tax title property are only to set the hearing dates. Motion to approve items 1 through 7 and 9 through 11 carried unanimously. 1. RESOLUTION SETTING THE HEARING AND NOTICE OF HEARING ON THE SALE BY PUBLIC AUCTION OF TAX TITLE PROPERTY, REQUEST #98 -1 (AB98 - 261) 2. RESOLUTION SETTING THE HEARING AND NOTICE OF HEARING ON THE SALE BY PUBLIC AUCTION OF TAX TITLE PROPERTY, REQUEST #98 -2 (AB98 - 262) 3. RESOLUTION SETTING THE HEARING AND NOTICE OF HEARING TO SELL TAX TITLE PROPERTY BY PUBLIC AUCTION, REQUEST #98 -5 (AB98 -263) 4. RESOLUTION SETTING THE HEARING AND NOTICE OF HEARING TO SELL TAX TITLE PROPERTY BY NEGOTIATION, REQUEST #98 -6 (AB98 -264) 5. RESOLUTION SETTING THE HEARING AND NOTICE OF HEARING TO SELL TAX TITLE PROPERTY BY NEGOTIATION, REQUEST #98 -7 (AB98 -265) 6. RESOLUTION SETTING THE HEARING AND NOTICE OF HEARING TO DECLARE PROPERTY AS SURPLUS, REQUEST #98 -8 (AB98 -266) 7. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID 98 -76 FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE ANNUAL SUPPLY OF CONCRETE CULVERT TO ALL THREE RESPONSIVE BIDDERS, CHOOSING THE APPROPRIATE SUPPLIER ON A PER JOB BASIS, BASED ON LOCATION, COST OF FREIGHT, AND AVAILABILITY, IN A TOTAL AMOUNT OF APPROXIMATELY $200,000 (AB98 - 267) 8. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE NORTHWEST REGIONAL COUNCIL IN ORDER TO INITIATE A LAW AND JUSTICE SYSTEM STUDY (AB98 -268) Regular Council Meeting, 7/14/98, Page 4 I Brenner stated that she was concerned about spending this amount of money for the kind 2 of study proposed. She expressed skepticism about increases in violent crime in the County. It 3 is a good idea to improve efficiency and cost effectiveness, but that is an internal problem and 4 should be solved internally. She does not support hiring outside people to do a study that should 5 be done in- house. This activity has to do with the management systems as they currently exist. 6 7 Nelson moved approval of the request. He stated that the campaign for tax increases 8 failed because there were no answers to the question of whether the County was capable of 9 funding the needed changes in the criminal justice system without the tax increase or if the 10 County could revamp the system to make it more efficient. Also, it would be a conflict of 11 interest for the department to evaluate their own workload. The current staff does not have 12 enough time to put into a study of this magnitude. 13 14 Sutter stated that the Northwest Regional Council (NWRC) will not only do research, but 15 will also draft a law and justice plan for the County. 16 17 Brown stated that a grant provided a considerable amount of the funding. The study 18 would give the County direction. 19 20 Brenner stated that during budget time, the money was allocated through the budget. 21 There may also be grant money, but a portion of the funding comes from the County. 22 23 Motion carried 6 — 1, Brenner opposed. 24 25 Dawson stated that another item was discussed during Finance Committee regarding the 26 Executive request for authorization to enter into an agreement between Resources and 27 Whatcom County for Recycling Hotline Operations and the 1998 -99 Classroom 28 Presentation Program (AB98 -250). The committee recommended a motion to bring the issue 29 back to the table for discussion. 30 31 Imhof stated the procedure would be for the Council to move to rescind action of a 32 previous meeting. 33 34 Nelson raised a point of order and stated the issue was scheduled in Committee, which 35 would not require a motion to rescind. 36 37 Imhof stated that the item had not been re- introduced and a motion to rescind previous 38 action is necessary. 39 40 Dawson moved to rescind the previous action. 41 42 Brenner questioned the point of order and how much time must elapse before an item can 43 be re- introduced. 44 45 Imhof clarified that the item could have been introduced at this meeting. Regular Council Meeting, 7/14/98, 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 Hoag clarified that the motion in committee was to bring the item forward for a vote of the Council. Imhof stated that a 2/3 approval to rescind the decision is required for additional discussion to occur. Motion to rescind failed 3 -4 with Nelson, Hoag, and Brenner in favor. Nelson stated that he wanted to bring the item forward to discuss significant issues with the contract. He is not in favor of the continuation of the contract with Resources. The County does need a recycling program and an evaluation of the program. The current recycling program is 10% less effective since the end of flow control. There needs to be an effective mechanism to continue education in the public school systems as the County does with health issues or other issues of public concern. If this item will not go forward, the dollars should be utilized for similar services. Nelson moved to have the County develop an interactive video program and/or computer program for the classroom so that teachers can be facilitated and the County can achieve uniformity on recycling. Imhof suggested putting the item in Committee. (Clerk's Note: This motion was not voted on.) Hoag stated that the Council's action leaves the County without a hotline to answer questions from the public. There is not an alternate plan. The education portion should have been continued. Brown clarified that items recycled before flow control was rescinded could not legally have been recycled. Therefore, recycling isn't deteriorating. Nelson moved to continue funding for the hotline so the public has the ability to receive information about disposing of materials in Whatcom County. Imhof stated that he would not support the motion. The private sector should take on the service. The recycling and disposal industry has staff to take on this service and information. Brenner stated that the average citizen does not know to call the various places for answers. These places may not give objective answers because they are financially invested. This is an insult to the public. Hotline and educational efforts are not a waste of time. The County owes it to the public to keep the programs going. Hoag pointed out that there was a study done by Western students to compare the effects of educational programs on the students in the community. There was a vast difference in knowledge from the students in Whatcom County who received recycling education as opposed to the students in Skagit County that received no recycling education. It saves the County money Regular Council Meeting, 7/14/98, 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 because there is less need for a landfill. Brown stated that private industry would not give out misleading information. During committee, it was clarified that there were 2 -3 calls per hour on the hotline. Also, Skagit County does not have the school staff that is dedicated to recycling. The County should take a look at their own figures on recycling efforts in Whatcom County. Recycling activity has continued while funding has declined. The current program is a very effective program that can stand on its own feet and no longer requires a government subsidy. Brenner stated that there is no incentive for a private business that deals with one aspect of garbage or recycling to be informed on other aspects of the issue. (Clerk's Note: Tape I side B) Brenner continued to state that there are programs that cannot stand on their own, especially education and the hotline. They will not make money in the private sector. Government funds programs that benefit the public that cannot create funding on its own. Nelson stated that the motion is to reinstate the hotline. Further discussion should be dealt with in committee. The private sector may be able to provide the services, but no one has stepped forward to provide the hotline service. Hoag stated that the rise in recycling activity discussed by Brown was with the existence of the hotline and education. The hotline should be reinstated. The motion carried 4 — 3 with Brown, Dawson, and Imhof opposed Nelson clarified that the intent of the motion is for administration to negotiate a package for hotline services with Resources. 9. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND F.A.C.E.S. NORTHWEST IN THE AMOUNT OF $15,400 (AB98 -269) 10. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT FOR CONSOLIDATED JUVENILE SERVICES WITH DSHS /JUVENILE REHABILITATION ADMINISTRATION TO PROVIDE SERVICES FOR YOUTH AT RISK IN THE AMOUNT OF $165,511(AB98 -270) 11. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR PAYMENT OF COUNCIL MEMBER EXPENSES AND /OR TRAVEL (AB98 -143E) Regular Council Meeting, 7/14/98, Page 7 I OTHER ITEMS 2 3 4 1. ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 2.28, CREATING THE 5 WHATCOM COUNTY HORTICULTURE PEST AND DISEASE BOARD (AB98 -237) 6 7 Brenner reported for Public Works and Capital Projects Committee and stated that there 8 is a substitute ordinance being presented to Council, which included a scrivener error amendment 9 to section 2.28.030, to strike "...if available one stieh member- shall be engaged in the pr-ediiefi 10 of eeFtif' °a organ e pr-e uee, ..." and add in the same section, "...product or products, one of 11 whom shall be engaged in the production of certified organic produce, if available. Such 12 appointed members..." The original wording would not require the organic farming member to 13 be a resident of the County. 14 15 Brenner moved approval of the substitute ordinance with the scrivener error correction. 16 17 Sutter moved to amend section 2.28.060 regarding the owner's duty to control pest and 18 diseases to state, "possession including the holder of a lease of greater than one year's duration." 19 She was concerned that anyone with a lease on property for longer than one year has rights on 20 the property that give him/her equitable title. An owner does not have effective control. 21 22 Brenner stated that language regarding equitable title is already included. Under law, the 23 owner is ultimately liable, no matter what the lease agreement states. Sutter responded that this 24 language is just a clarification of responsibility. 25 26 Hoag questioned whether the language change would add the lessee to the responsibility 27 list along with the owner or instead of the owner. Sutter responded that it would add the lessee 28 to the responsibility list along with the owner. 29 30 Hoag questioned legal counsel whether the language regarding the lessee is included in 31 the equitable title portion of the ordinance or in state law. Frakes stated it is included, but it 32 would not a be problem to include the proposed language. If the motion were approved, the 33 definition would not be modified, only clarified. 34 35 Brenner questioned whether it is the owner's responsibility to have an agreement with the 36 lessee if there is a problem. Imhof stated that language is in standard lease agreement language. 37 38 Brenner stated that she believed the language is modifying the state definition, not merely 39 clarifying it. Frakes responded that safest route would be to stick with what the state law says. 40 41 Motion failed 3 -4 with Sutter, Hoag, and Brown in favor. 42 43 Dawson moved to amend section 2.28.070 to change the number of unsuccessful attempts 44 from two attempts to one attempt and delete language regarding two separate days. The Regular Council Meeting, 7/14/98, Page 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 language would state, "after making �we one unsuccessful attempt which includes leaving..." The current language would put an undue burden on volunteers Brenner stated that the fear is that someone will violate private property rights. Two attempts is not an undue burden for volunteers. Hoag clarified that she received many calls on this issue and does not support the motion to change the number of attempts. Nelson stated that he received calls on the ordinance and requested Council Members let other Council Members know if calls have been received on an issue. Hoag stated that she would like to create an ordinance that does not give people the right to abuse their powers, even if the Council doesn't think they will abuse their powers. That is the reason for the language requiring two separate attempts on two separate days. Motion failed 3 -4 with Dawson, Nelson, and Imhof in favor. Motion to adopt carried unanimously. 2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY CODE, CHAPTER 16.08, STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA), AS REQUIRED BY THE NOVEMBER 10, 1997, AMENDMENTS TO THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY SEPA RULES (AB98 -253) Sutter reported for Planning and Development Committee and stated that this ordinance will bring the County into compliance with the new amendments to the state SEPA regulations and to also eliminate redundancy in County regulations regarding shorelines. Roland Middleton, Planning and Development Services Land Use Manager, suggested the addition of item D to section 16.08.120 on page 181 of the Council packet, to read: "D. The SEPA responsible official, or designee, shall administer and have signatory authority for all Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) banking accounts." The ordinance currently does not specify who can sign the checks. The bank wants it clearly stated who the responsible officials will be. Sutter moved Middleton's suggested amendment. Brown asked for clarification of who the authorized persons would be. Middleton responded that the Planning and Development Services Director, the Land Use Division Manager, and the deputy SEPA official would be the authorized individuals. Motion to amend carried unanimously. Regular Council Meeting, 7/14/98, Page 9 I Middleton stated that scrivener's errors on Council packet page 174, section 16.08.045, 2 regarding capitalization of titles, would be corrected. 3 4 Middleton stated that Council Member Hoag questioned what amendments were 5 specifically recommended by the Environmental Review committee as opposed to including 6 state law into the ordinance. All the proposed amendments are to incorporate the state law 7 except the exemption levels on page 177. This portion of SEPA, Title 16 of the Whatcom 8 County Code, was brought forth in 1984. At that time, it was determined that SEPA must look 9 more carefully at certain areas of the County. That was before the County enacted all other land 10 use regulation standards, such as critical area standards and development standards, among 11 others. Since that time, new regulations are now on the books. State law allows either the level 12 of exemptions listed on Council packet page 177 or stricter exemptions. 13 14 Hoag clarified that the state guidelines are for anywhere in the County and are stricter in 15 areas covered by the Critical Areas Ordinance. Roland responded that the guidelines are 16 established for the entire state. The current proposed guidelines are for the entire county as 17 opposed to special areas. The lower exemptions are tied to activities, not to the impacts of the 18 activities. County regulations, such as Title 20 and the Shorelines Management Act, look at the 19 impacts to the resource or the environment. The Environmental Review Committee felt it would 20 be redundant to have additional review. Current regulations don't add more protection, but only 21 add more to the process and cost more money. 22 23 Hoag stated that the State Department of Community, Trade, and Economic 24 Development ( DCTED) reviewed Critical Areas Ordinance and Shorelines Management 25 programs and said that Whatcom County does not have any building setbacks specific to, for 26 instance, wetlands. She stated that she asked Dan Gibson, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecuting 27 Attorney, about this and his response was that the restriction is that there are no activities 28 allowed within a certain radius. Buffers were considered separately. Building setbacks are 29 considered in another section. She is concerned with the discrepancy about DCTED's 30 interpretations and the Critical Areas Ordinance. 31 32 Middleton stated that the DCTED report is inaccurate. 33 34 Michael Knapp, Planning & Services Director, requested a copy of the DCTED report. 35 36 Sutter stated that the letter may be referring to setbacks in the absence of a buffer. A 37 buffer is a setback. 38 39 Brenner stated that the report refers to wetlands. The County deals with critical areas. 40 41 Middleton stated that in the County Critical Areas Ordinance wetlands include Lake 42 Whatcom. The shoreline setbacks along Lake Whatcom went from 45' to 100'. Regarding the 43 exemption levels, putting up a 20,000 square foot agricultural building and requiring SEPA 44 review of the building will require a permit which will not be affected by whether or not there 45 are buffers or setbacks. There are already laws that establish that the location would have to be Regular Council Meeting, 7/14/98, 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 set back 100'. These types of permits already follow regulations that require certain setbacks and buffers. The additional need for a SEPA review and a Determination of Non - Significance (DNS) is an added procedure and an added cost to the permit process. Sutter questioned whether the report indicates that the County is at fault for not having setbacks and buffers, or if it is only a report on which counties have setback and buffer requirements. Hoag stated the report is on all counties' current regulations, and also states that the Department will be looking at the counties individually. Knapp stated that he will go on record that Planning and Development Services has those buffers. DCTED is wrong. Middleton stated that there is a myriad of different activities that effect a wetland. The Council made a determination to use the 100' setback. Hoag moved to table the issue until confirmation is received on the accuracy of the DCTED report. Motion failed 6 -1 with Hoag in favor. Sutter moved to adopt the ordinance as amended. Brenner expressed her support because staff has stated for the record that they are correct. Motion to adopt carried unanimously. Hoag stated the letter was addressed to the commissioners and there is a request for action by the County. Planning and Development Services should look at the requested actions outlined in the report. 3. CONSIDERATION OF THE APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION ON APL98 -0001, FILED BY MICHAEL ROSSER (AB98 -142) See "Announcements." 4. CONSIDERATION OF THE APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION (ON REMAND) OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP94- 0014), FILED BY JAMES WEST (98 -114) See "Announcements." 5. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPOINT LESLIE HAMILTON TO HER FIRST FOUR -YEAR TERM ON THE WHATCOM COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION (AB98 -271) Regular Council Meeting, 7/14/98, 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 Nelson moved approval. Motion carried unanimously. 6. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO REAPPOINT JIM WIGGINS TO HIS SECOND TWO -YEAR TERM ON THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AB98 -272) Brown moved approval. Motion carried unanimously. 7. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPOINT TIM ROOS TO FILL A VACANCY ON THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) COMPLIANCE COMMITTEE (AB98 -273) Nelson moved approval. Motion carried unanimously. 8. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO SIGN AN APPLICATION FOR A LIQUOR LICENSE FOR THE WORKSHOP PUB, 7876 BIRCH BAY DRIVE, BLAINE, WA (AB98 -274) Dawson moved approval. Motion carried unanimously. 9. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO SIGN AN APPLICATION FOR AN ADDED PRIVILEGE TO A LIQUOR LICENSE FOR MILANO'S, 9990 MT. BAKER HIGHWAY, GLACIER, WA (AB98 -275) Brown moved approval. Motion carried unanimously. Wareing confirmed that the application requests an upgraded class of license. 10. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO SIGN AN APPLICATION FOR A LIQUOR LICENSE FOR BACHMAN MANOR, 776 "H" STREET ROAD, LYNDEN, WA (AB98 -276) Dawson moved approval. Motion carried 6 — 1 with Hoag opposed. Regular Council Meeting, 7/14/98, 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 11. APPOINTMENT TO FILL VACANCY ON THE DRAYTON HARBOR SHELLFISH ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AB98 -157A) Hoag nominated Martin John DeLange Motion carried unanimously. INTRODUCTION ITEMS Imhof announced the addition of three items for introduction. Brenner moved to accept the Introduction Items. Motion carried unanimously. 1. RECEIPT OF APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION ON FILE NO. CUP 98 -0003, FILED BY SHERILYN WELLS (AB98 -222) 2. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 1998 BUDGET, REQUEST #7 (AB98 -277) 3. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF TAX TITLE PROPERTY BY PUBLIC AUCTION, REQUEST #98 -1 (AB98 -261A) 4. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF TAX TITLE PROPERTY BY PUBLIC AUCTION, REQUEST #98 -2 (AB98 -262A) 5. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF TAX TITLE PROPERTY BY PUBLIC AUCTION, REQUEST #98 -5 (AB98 -263A) 6. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF TAX TITLE PROPERTY BY NEGOTIATION, REQUEST #98 -6 (AB98 -264A) 7. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF TAX TITLE PROPERTY BY NEGOTIATION, REQUEST #98 -7 (AB98 -265A) 8. RESOLUTION TO PLACE A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT ON CERTAIN SUDDEN VALLEY PARCELS (AB98 -265B) 9. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF COUNTY SURPLUS PROPERTY, REQUEST #98 -8 (AB98 -266A) Regular Council Meeting, 7/14/98, Page 13 I ADDED ITEMS: 2 3 10. ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING A CHARGE TO PROVIDE REVENUE FOR THE 4 ACMENANZANDT SUB -ZONE FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT, SETTING A 5 DUE DATE FOR PAYMENT OF SERVICE CHANGES, AUTHORIZING 6 COLLECTION OF INTEREST AND PENALTIES ON DELINQUENT PAYMENTS 7 OF ASSESSMENTS AND ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR RECORDATION 8 AND FORECLOSURE OF LIENS RESULTING FROM DELINQUENCIES (AB98- 9 279) 10 11 11. ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING A CHARGE TO PROVIDE REVENUE FOR THE 12 LYNDEN/EVERSON SUB -ZONE FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT, 13 COLLECTION OF INTEREST AND PENALTIES ON DELINQUENT PAYMENTS 14 OF ASSESSMENTS AND ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR RECORDATION 15 AND FORECLOSURE OF LIENS RESULTING FROM DELINQUENCIES (AB98- 16 280) 17 18 12. ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING A CHARGE TO PROVIDE REVENUE FOR THE 19 SUMAS/NOOKSACK/EVERSON SUB -ZONE FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT, 20 SETTING A DUE DATE FOR PAYMENT OF SERVICE CHARGES, AUTHORIZING 21 COLLECTION OF INTEREST AND PENALTIES ON DELINQUENT PAYMENTS 22 OF ASSESSMENTS AND ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR RECORDATION 23 AND FORECLOSURE OF LIENS RESULTING FROM DELINQUENCIES (AB98- 24 281) 25 26 27 REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS 28 29 Brown requested a straw vote be taken to determine whether Council Members would be 30 in favor of audio taping executive sessions and then having the tape(s) sealed. There has been 31 discussion regarding the sewage lagoon and he would like to review testimony from time to time. 32 The tapes could only be unsealed during executive session, before the other council members. 33 34 Imhof questioned whether tapes could be subpoenaed. Frakes stated that they could be 35 subpoenaed, but so could council members. 36 37 Brenner stated that the office already produces confidential memos and tapes would be 38 kept just as confidential. The council members have too much information given to them in 39 executive session. It would be in all fairness to the council members to listen to tapes in 40 executive session. She supported the idea. 41 42 Hoag supported only accessing the recording in executive session. That process would 43 bring accountability for what was told to Council during executive session. 44 Regular Council Meeting, 7/14/98, Page 14 I Nelson cautioned the Council Members that information discussed in executive session is 2 not only for the protection of the Council, but also to protect the Council attorney's ability to 3 bring pertinent information forward. There may not be enough security. 4 5 Brown called for a straw vote because the issue shouldn't be discussed if there is not 6 enough interest. 7 8 Brenner stated that as long as everything is legal in executive session, there's nothing to 9 worry about. 10 11 (Clerk's Note: Tape 2, side A) 12 13 Sutter stated that the Council, in executive session, is also protecting the confidentiality 14 of the people who are being discussed. Several issues are recorded on each tape. If a tape is 15 subpoenaed for a particular issue, the confidentiality of another issue would be jeopardized. 16 17 Imhof suggested Brown discuss the issue further with staff. Brown stated he would ask 18 the Council attorney to give an opinion of the ramifications of such a procedure. 19 20 Brenner announced that at the last Council meeting she asked the state auditor to do an 21 independent audit of the Ferndale sewage lagoon (AB98 -260) situation. Without resolution to 22 the questions, the Council will be doomed to repeat the same mistakes. Since this issue was 23 brought forward, a consulting firm that worked on the property stated that they understood the 24 materials would be removed. They talked to the Health Department and attempted to talk to the 25 county prosecutor. Also, a neighbor that is a professional in the sewer business stated that 26 regrading, which was recommended by the county prosecutor, was not done. Instead, only tile 27 was installed, which now causes water to drain to the neighbor's private property. It is time to 28 get an independent audit to determine whether there were problems in the procedure and to 29 ensure the problems will not happen again. 30 31 Imhof stated that he asked the prosecutor the same questions. Council reiterated the 32 policy. Nothing else can be done about the situation. Given the correct information originally, 33 the same work would have been done. The scope of the project would not have changed. 34 Administration is auditing the bill and Council should wait until that is done before asking any 35 further questions. He would not support a request to get an opinion of the state auditor 36 37 Brown stated that he didn't get to ask questions of the prosecutor because of lack of time. 38 The Council needs to find out to what extent the law has been violated and request 39 administration to take any appropriate action or advise the Council of any appropriate action that 40 should be taken. None of those questions have been answered. 41 42 Hoag gave her support to Brenner's request. Questions were not answered satisfactorily. 43 Citizens are concerned that the Council does not have adequate legal representation. The 44 Council must make sure they are competently represented because of the amount of exposure the 45 County will have due to the upcoming Endangered Species Act listing, groundwater Regular Council Meeting, 7/14/98, Page 15 I contamination, and other issues. Also, a contractor involved in the issue was told by the bank 2 several months ago that the sludge had to be removed. There is a large expenditure of public 3 funds that should not have occurred. 4 5 Brenner stated that the Council is given the task of protecting the public purse. That 6 power was taken away from the Council on this issue. It is not a question of whether or not the 7 work would have been done. The question is whether laws and policies have been violated and 8 what can be done to ensure that this doesn't happen again. 9 10 Imhof stated that Randy Watts, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, took responsibility for 11 overstepping the policy. Brenner disagreed and stated that Watts put the blame on a County 12 Health Department employee. 13 14 Imhof restated the motion to require an audit. 15 16 Dawson stated that requiring an audit is throwing good money after bad. Watts has 17 already accepted responsibility. The remedy is obvious to reprimand or fire Watts, which is 18 beyond the ability of the Council 19 20 Sutter stated that Council needs to wait and see if administration comes up with answers 21 to the questions of how it happened and how it can be avoided in the future. If administration 22 can come up with those answers, then the Council does not need to involve the state auditor. 23 24 Brenner agreed with Sutter, however some questions were brought up and not answered. 25 The answers she has received so far don't make sense. A cost of the audit would be a small 26 amount of money compared to the total cost of the project so far. 27 28 Kremen stated that administration can come up with a policy and procedure regarding 29 this situation to minimize risk that this would happen in the future. 30 31 Nelson stated that everyone would agree that there has been a great deal of difficulty 32 created by decisions that were made. He was more interested in preventing this situation from 33 happening again. Council needs to give the administration an opportunity to determine how to 34 prevent this situation from happening again in the future. 35 36 Hoag stated that there was already a policy in place to prevent this sort of thing from 37 happening. That policy was not followed. She requested administration answer the questions 38 posed to the state auditor by Brenner. Several questions were read into the record. 39 40 Kremen stated that it was the Council who twice authorized Mr. Watts' actions. He 41 agreed to work with the Council to see this does not happen again. 42 43 Brenner stated that a "catch 22" exists. The Council authorized the actions, but only on 44 the advice of the attorney. Only an independent investigation can determine who violated the Regular Council Meeting, 7/14/98, 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 law. If Council was at fault, then she is willing to take responsibility. She wants an audit to determine what laws were violated and by whom. Hoag again asked if the administration would be able to answer questions posed to the auditor. Kremen questioned whether the administration received the letter to the auditor. Brenner responded that the letter was addressed to the state auditor. She was asked by the Council Chair to research the issue. Kremen responded that administration would be willing to look at the letter. Motion failed 3 -4 with Hoag, Brenner, and Brown opposed. Imhof directed the letter be forwarded to the administration so they may answer the questions. Hoag announced that the Natural Resources Committee voted to forward the Building Industry Association's Lake Whatcom Watershed Run -Off Management Plan (AB98 -278) to the Whatcom County Planning Commission for their review and comment and so moved. Motion carried unanimously. Hoag announced a special meeting on July 21 in Lynden to gather public input on the proposed Manure Management Ordinance (AB98- 254A), which was discussed in committee. Sutter announced that she attended a meeting of the Nooksack Recovery Team to get information on a Geographical Information System (GIS) system to track restoration projects throughout the County. The program has been established through the Nooksack Recovery Team (NRT) in association with the Lummi Tribe. She will request a presentation before the Council. Nelson will miss the next regularly scheduled Council meeting in two weeks. Imhof announced that he attended the County Road Administration Board (CRAB) meeting in Mt. Vernon. The Council should appreciate the County Engineering Department and people working in the Road Department. Other counties have given back state money because they did not have the staffing to do the projects. Whatcom County has not had to return state money. Imhof also commended Jeff Monsen for his election as the Washington State Association of County Engineers president - elect. Imhof reminded everyone of the meeting scheduled for Thursday, July 16 at 4:00 p.m. Regular Council Meeting, 7/14/98, Page 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Jill Nixon, Recording Secretary These minutes were approved by Council on , 1998. ATTEST: Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Robert Imhof, Council Member Regular Council Meeting, 7/14/98, Page 18