HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil September 15 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
September 15, 1998
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Council Chair Robert Imhof in the
Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
Alcn PrPCPnt• AhsPnt-
Kathy Sutter
Marlene Dawson
L. Ward Nelson
Connie Hoag
Barbara Brenner
Tom Brown
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Brenner stated that the Council Members received a letter from Health and Human
Services Director Chuck Benjamin regarding her comments in the Bellingham Herald about
infectious waste. His memo stated that her comments were incorrect, and requested clarification
from Brenner. She wished to respond on the public record. Regina Delahunt, Environmental
Services Manager, told her that she would have two weeks to respond to Recomp's assembling
and start-up of an autoclave which would bring in over 300 tons of infectious waste per month to
be processed at their facility. Her comments in the newspaper were that the Health and Human
Services Department seemed to be under political and financial pressure to look the other way.
She requested information about whether Recomp was going to change their mode of operation.
She also requested that she be notified if Recomp was planning to do anything different with
infectious waste processing. She was not notified of their plans. Last March, they applied for a
change in their operation and she still was not notified. Delahunt told her she would have two
weeks to respond in writing, however she was just informed that Health and Human Services
would be approving the request to autoclave infectious waste this week.
Imhof stated that this is an administrative approval process.
Brenner stated that Whatcom County does not have infectious waste standards.
Imhof told Brenner to bring her concerns to the Board of Health meeting. Brenner
responded that they were not told of the plans during the recent Board of Health meeting.
Nelson stated that Chuck Benjamin, Health and Human Services Director, should have an
opportunity to respond to Brenner's comments and the public has a right to know. He
questioned whether the County had followed the state, local, and federal processes regarding
Recomp's autoclave permit.
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, Page 1
I Chuck Benjamin, Health and Human Services Director, stated that his department
2 complied with all regulations regarding the autoclave permit. Recomp filed an amendment to
3 their plan of operation. State mandates do not require a public hearing. Mandates do require
4 Recomp comply with all state regulations, which they have done.
5
6 Nelson questioned whether there is a concern for any health hazards to the community
7 and/or the Recomp employees. Benjamin responded that there are no concerns at this time.
9 Dawson asked the definition of autoclaving. Benjamin explained that autoclaving is a
10 process in which the waste is put under pressure at a certain temperature and for a certain amount
11 of time. There is no incineration. The plan of operation is to long -haul the medical waste after it
12 has been autoclaved.
13
14 Brenner stated that the company is planning to refrigerate body parts for two weeks prior
15 to autoclaving, as part of their plan of operation. They do not have a permit to store infectious
16 waste. As the Board of Health, Council Members were not told that Recomp would be doing
17 autoclaving and storing infectious waste.
18
19 Nelson requested that Brenner put her concerns in writing so he can review them. The
20 state has laws that are being complied with, and they've gone through their permitting process.
21
22 Brenner stated that the state does not regulate infectious waste any differently than solid
23 waste. She wanted the approval to be postponed until her concerns could be put in writing.
24
25 Brown agreed that Brenner had some legitimate concerns, and suggested scheduling a
26 special Board of Health meeting to discuss the issue. Some of his concerns are that boxes
27 containing infectious waste could leak and the only required remedy is to tape the boxes back
28 together. He felt that there are issues that would be good for a public meeting.
29
30 Nelson questioned whether anyone had inspected Recomp to determine whether their
31 plans included the activities outlined by Brenner. Brenner stated that it is in their plan of
32 operations.
33
34 Benjamin stated that Recomp complied with the state regulations in their amended plan
35 of operation. In addition, he has also taken into strong consideration the allegations of increased
36 cases of meningitis. His staff has done an analysis from 1983 or 1988 to the present around the
37 geographic area of the Recomp facility, taking into consideration the prevailing winds. The
38 conclusion of the report is that there is no correlation between the meningitis cases and the
39 handling of medical waste at Recomp. The rate of meningitis cases is no different than
40 anywhere else in the state.
41
42 Nelson asked whether there was a concern with increased cases of Hepatitis C, a
43 bloodborne pathogen, and leaking containment. Benjamin responded that there is a concern if it
44 is not handled properly. His understanding was that the plan of operation addresses leaking bags
45 and that the protocols that are established should be followed. They have no documentation that
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, Page 2
I the protocols are not followed. Staff thoroughly reviewed all the documentation and has been
2 ready to approve.
3
4 Nelson questioned whether there would be inspections that would allow the County to
5 ensure that there is not an outbreak of hepatitis or any other bloodborne pathogen that could
6 survive longer than an hour. Benjamin stated that they continually monitor all reportable
7 diseases in Whatcom County. Currently, there is no reporting mechanism for Hepatitis C,
8 however the new state regulations, if approved, will require the reporting of Hepatitis C.
9
10 Hoag questioned whether Mr. Benjamin would be able to delay the decision to approve a
11 week, so Council Member Brenner could prepare her response. Benjamin responded that if the
12 Council wanted to give that direction, he would wait. The Council needs to take into
13 consideration that it is an administrative decision. Recomp met all the state requirements. A
14 concern would be what liability the County would incur if they don't comply with the state
15 regulations. He has to take into consideration all impacts. Even if approval is granted, they
16 would still accept comments and take them into consideration.
17
18 Hoag questioned whether Benjamin could delay the decision a week on the basis of
19 Delahunt's assurance that there would be a response period. Benjamin stated that it would be
20 difficult to withhold approval when they have been ready to approve.
21
22 Hoag questioned whether there is a timeline in which the permit would have to be
23 approved. Benjamin stated that there is not a timeline.
24
25 Hoag requested a week's delay in the approval of the permit to consider the additional
26 information.
27
28 Benjamin stated that it is a Board of Health issue, however there is a County ordinance
29 that established a Public Health Advisory Board. He has repeatedly stated that the purpose, by
30 County ordinance, of the Public Health Advisory Board is to review and process concerns of the
31 Board of Health so they can make recommendations. The change to autoclaving is not new to
32 Whatcom County or Recomp. At anytime it could have been requested of the Public Health
33 Advisory Board to review the process.
34
35 Hoag responded that no one on the Council / Board of Health knew that it was under
36 consideration until the recent Board of Health meeting.
37
38 Nelson stated that he knew of the request. He looked at the facility.
39
40 Hoag stated that because there are risks to public health and there is a document under
41 preparation, there should be a delay to take into consideration the additional information.
42 Benjamin stated that he would review the request with the County administration and County
43 attorneys.
44
45 Sutter stated that she would like to know whether incineration or autoclaving is safer for
46 public health.
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, 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
46
Imhof announced that the Committee of the Whole discussed collective bargaining
agreement negotiations (AB98 -020) and pending litigation with Senior Deputy Prosecutor
Karen Frakes (AB98 -020)
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 on file
nos. APL98 -0005 and APL96 -0002, filed by Jonathan Sitkin, Attorney at Law, for Enviro-
Chem / Keith Scheffer (AB98 -240) and an appeal of the Hearing Examiner' decision on file
nos. APL98 -0005 and APL96 -0002, filed by Jonathan Sitkin, Attorney at Law, for F.L. and
Betty Smallwood (AB98 -233). These are the same item with two different peoples' names.
Dawson moved to remand to the Hearing Examiner to decide the timeliness issue.
Motion carried unanimously.
GENERAL BUSINESS
COUNCIL TO APPOINT ONE MEMBER TO CANVASS THE REGULAR, SPECIAL,
AND QUESTIONED ABSENTEE BALLOTS FROM THE SEPTEMBER 15, 1998,
PRIMARY ELECTION. CANVASSING MEETINGS WILL TAKE PLACE ON
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 24 AT 9:00 A.M. AND FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 25 AT
1:00 P.M.
Sutter volunteered to canvass on the 25th at 1:00 p.m.
Hoag volunteered to canvass on the 24th at 9:00 a.m.
Michael Knapp, Planning and Development Services Director, stated he would
reschedule the tour of the Planning and Development Services Department that was scheduled
for the 24th at 9:00 a.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE — AUGUST 11, 1998;
REGULAR COUNCIL — JUNE 16 AND JULY 28, 1998
Sutter moved approval of the minutes.
Motion carried unanimously.
OPEN SESSION
The following people addressed the Council:
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, Page 4
2 Lois Garlick, 297 Chuckanut Point Road, requested that the 60 day public review period
3 for Ordinance # 97 -031 be extended. It was first advertised on July 18, 1998 and again on
4 August 22, 1998.
5
6 Hoag questioned whether Planning and Development Services could give clarification as
7 to whether the state or the County designates the review period. This is regarding the Shorelines
8 Management Act. Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Division Manager, stated that the Council adopted
9 the ordinance and the Clerk of the Council advertised the changes. Planning and Development
10 Services re- advertised the notice, creating two 60 -day comment periods, which is the minimum
11 established by the state. The County Council may be able to establish another comment period
12 beyond the two 60 -day periods. The state requires the comment period be done after adoption.
13 County staff could research whether or not the deadline could be extended.
14
15 Garlick stated that the Department of Ecology (DOE) requires the 60 -day review period
16 for the public after they accept it.
17
18 Sutter questioned whether the second publication is an error. Karen Frakes, Senior Civil
19 Deputy Prosecutor, and Goodwin stated that it wasn't an error, it was a redundancy. Frakes
20 stated that it may be an appeal period, not a comment period.
21
22 Brenner moved to extend the comment period to 60 -days from the last time it was
23 advertised in the newspaper.
24
25 Goodwin confirmed that it is an appeal period, not a comment period.
26
27 Frakes stated that it is an appeal period that is set by state law. The County does not have
28 any authority to change the appeal period.
29
30 Hoag requested clarification on whether the appeal period extends until the expiration of
31 the second notice.
32
33 Imhof stated that Frakes would review the situation and extend the appeal period, if
34 possible.
35
36 Dan McShane, 1451 Grant Street, Bellingham, provided a map of the Canyon Creek area.
37 There are three hazard zones. If he had to write a critical area report for any area within zones 1
38 or 3 over the last three years, he would have to tell people he could not write a report for them.
39 He believed their homes would be in jeopardy of being destroyed. There may finally be some
40 progress in repairing a levy that was constructed. He was never comfortable with the levy
41 because, during the first winter after it was constructed, some of the rocks came out of it during a
42 mild flood event. He encouraged the Council to try and speed along the repair of the levy. If the
43 levy is being maintained, he would be comfortable saying that any of the homes in zones 1 and 3
44 could be built. There are serious fish issues further downstream. When the levy was
45 constructed, they used large limestone blocks, then ran out of money and used smaller rocks. The
46 levy broke where the smaller rocks are used.
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, Page 5
2 Hoag requested clarification on the location of the fisheries impacts and the work that
3 needs to be done. McShane responded that the idea was to bring the levy down almost to the
4 Nooksack River. That confines the creek so much that it has a tremendous sediment load. Even
5 with the large blocks, it will fill the channel in, top over, and affect The Logs.
6
7 Brown commented that this was discussed in committee. The proposal is to give it a
8 wider flow path and move it away from the creek.
9
10 Brenner stated that the committee recommended the letter be sent. This is a higher
11 priority than the Ritter Road letter.
12
13 McShane stated that the letter should emphasize the upper part, which would not have the
14 fisheries impacts of the lower part.
15
16 Kremen stated that a draft of the letter had been written. This was requested just a few
17 hours ago.
18
19 MaryLee Rustand, 1641 Baker Creek Place, Bellingham, thanked the Council for
20 allowing Security Specialists Plus (SSP) to handle animal enforcement for Whatcom County.
21 They have been open one year. The facility will be expanded to double the size of all kennel
22 runs and cat holding areas.
23
24 Sherilyn Wells, 1020 Geneva, Bellingham, stated that, regarding growth management,
25 gossip and rumors are masquerading as fact. She heard that the Growth Management Act
26 (GMA) decision is appeal -proof. It is not. There were major procedural errors made in the
27 conduct of the trial. She had eight attorneys call her on the day of the decision who stated that at
28 least two precedents are waiting to be set in the appeal. They want to be a part of the appeal.
29 Also, she was not fined for filing a frivolous appeal. The allegations went before the Skagit
30 County Superior Court. The motion was denied. The court upheld her point of view. She was
31 fined because her attorney came on board late in the game. Because time was short, everyone
32 was notified by fax. The County attorney told her that faxing is not legal service and they did
33 not have ample notice. The same thing happened in Whatcom County, and the attorney did not
34 ask for sanctions, responded, and appeared in court fully informed. The County was given
35 warning early on.
36
37 Neil Kudsk, 4041 Tarte Road, Blaine, spoke about the agricultural protection overlay
38 zoning. He objected to the zoning. He purchased 20 acres five years ago. It was zoned R10,
39 and they were able to divide the property into two 10 -acre parcels. Originally this property was
40 one 40 -acre piece. The previous owners divided it into two 10 -acre parcels, which is the western
41 part of the 40 acres. These parcels were sold and now have homes on them. The piece he
42 purchased, which was the remaining 20 acres including the home and outbuildings, is still zoned
43 R10. He and his wife tried to sell the property recently, but no one wanted the responsibility of
44 maintaining such a large piece of property. They decided to divide the property into two 10 -acre
45 parcels, and people have expressed interest. The agricultural protection overlay zoning is
46 penalizing his family from obtaining additional income for their retirement. He was told that the
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, Page 6
I only approach to the land division would be to short-plat with one parcel being four acres and the
2 other parcel being 16 acres. A four -acre lot is not large enough to put in a well. He requested an
3 exemption for his property. It has not been used for commercial farming for over 20 years. A
4 soil sample would show that 50% of the property does not have the type of soil suited for prime
5 agricultural use. The land is too wet for use in the winter. This area is only attractive to a hobby
6 farmer.
7
8 Sutter questioned whether he'd made an application for exemption with the Planning and
9 Development Services Department. Kudsk stated that Brenner told him to write a letter to her,
10 which he did. Sutter stated that he needed to put in an application with the Planning Department.
11
12 Brenner stated that there are a lot of problems with the agricultural overlay protection
13 zone. That is why she suggested he come in and talk to the Council. She also referred him to
14 Sylvia Goodwin, Planning Manager.
15
16 Rita Foley, South Lake Whatcom, stated that Kudsk should put his land in forestry. Also,
17 Ordinance #97 -31 should not have been passed. The Shorelines Hearings Board disallowed the
18 addition of a mudroom to a house along the shoreline at Chuckanut Drive. Roland Middleton,
19 Planning and Development Services Land Use Manager, approved the permit when the appeal
20 was pending in Superior Court. The County needs code enforcement to protect the watersheds.
21
22 Brenner stated that the committee acknowledged all the information Foley provides to the
23 County.
24
25 Rob Roy Graham, 5161 Mosquito Lake Road, Deming, requested an amendment to the
26 Right to Farm Act that would state specific guidelines a person could follow when filing a
27 complaint with regard to the nuisance clause of the Act, which is Whatcom County Code
28 14.02.030. He has been trying to get someone from the County to visit his neighbor's property
29 to determine if they are in violation of the Act with odors emanating from a pig farming
30 operation. He has been in contact with the Planning and Development Services and the Health
31 and Human Services Departments, and has been referred to the Northwest Air Pollution
32 Authority.
33
34 (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
35
36 Graham continued to state that Council Members came to his site and confirmed his
37 belief that no one should negatively impact neighbors, as this farmer is doing.
38
39 Nelson questioned whether he had contacted the Conservation District regarding best
40 management practices. Graham stated that he contacted everyone that he has been told to
41 contact. He has not contacted the Conservation District. Sylvia Goodwin, Planning and
42 Development Services Planning Manager, mailed him the Right to Farm Act, with information
43 on whom to contact. However, every time he calls he doesn't get any information returned to
44 him.
45
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, Page 7
I Brown stated that this is not an agricultural zone, so the Right to Farm Act doesn't apply.
2 However, he found information that he will provide to Graham after the meeting.
3
4 Brenner clarified that the Right to Farm Act applies to any area that people can farm.
5 Also, the Grahams lived at the location before the operation began. The property in question is
6 20 acres, but most of it is steep slope. The intention was not to overstock one area to cause
7 problems. The intention was that there would be a reasonable amount of crop /livestock on an
8 entire piece, not congregated in one area near neighbors.
9
10 Skip Richards, 1911 "C" Street, marked the significance of Judge Moynihan's decision
11 on the Growth Management Act upholding the County's appeal of various rulings of the Growth
12 Management Hearings Board. The credibility of the Hearings Board and the petitioners should
13 be reduced to zero. Because the County was upheld on virtually every point, there would be no
14 doubt that the Board and the petitioners were wrong on the land use issues alone. In addition to
15 challenging land use decisions, the petitioners have conducted a smear campaign full of fraud
16 and deceit against Council Members, the administration, and local citizens. One of these
17 "clowns" (petitioners) made a ludicrous assertion that for a private citizen to advocate taking the
18 board to court might or should be a criminal act. These people, after losing the 1993 elections,
19 began a hate campaign against some of the Council Members and private citizens. They have
20 also blamed the County of wasting taxpayers money to defend itself in court. Rather, it is the
21 frivolous appeals that cost the taxpayers money. The issue is whether a minority of bitter,
22 frustrated, die -hards can dictate the future of the County, despite having the legal basis and little
23 popular support.
24
25 Hoag requested that Richards refrain from calling names and using derogatory comments
26 to people who do not share his opinion. That is requested from all speakers.
27
28 Nelson stated that the purpose of Open Session is to allow people to vent, as long as they
29 are not directing it at individuals.
30
31 Richards responded that his understanding was that open session was to vent. This has
32 been a long time coming.
33
34
35 CONSENT AGENDA
36
37 Dawson reported for Finance and Administrative Services Committee and moved
38 approval of items 1 -3, 7, 9, 10.
39
40 Dawson requested that items 4, 5, 6, and 8 be removed.
41
42 Motion to approve items carried unanimously.
43
44 Dawson first gave information on item 8.
45
46 1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO RENEW THE
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, Page 8
I INSURANCE POLICY ON THE WHATCOM CHIEF FERRY (AB98 -323)
2
3 2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO RENEW THE
4 INSURANCE THROUGH WASHINGTON COUNTIES RISK POOL (AB98 -324)
5
6 3. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD RFP 98 -104,
7 INTERNET APPLICATION SERVER IMPLEMENTATION, TO THE LOWEST
8 RESPONSIVE BIDDER IBM, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $75,000 (AB98 -
9 325)
10
11 4. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID 98 -102,
12 EXTERIOR INSULATION AND REFINISH AT NW ANNEX, TO THE LOWEST
13 RESPONSIVE BIDDER NORTHERN MARINE AND GENERAL CONSTRUCTION,
14 INC., FOR THE TOTAL BID AMOUNT OF $161,700 (AB98 -326)
15
16 Imhof moved approval.
17
18 Motion carried unanimously.
19
20 5. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
21 CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH EMCON TO PROVIDE ON -CALL SERVICES
22 NOT TO EXCEED THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $30,000 (AB98 -327)
23
24 Jeff Monsen, Public Works Director, stated that in 1996, EMCON provided a broad -
25 based consulting service dealing with environmental issues. They were on -call for unknown
26 things that might arise. All activities have been small and cost only a few thousand dollars each.
27 A contract was entered into at the beginning of 1998 to again have that resource available,
28 should events arise throughout the year. That original contract was for $10,000. Through July
29 1998, they carried out tasks relating to solid waste activities at the Cedarville Landfill and soil
30 sampling on Cable Street. Those services totaled $8,000 of the $10,000. Regarding the soil
31 testing at the Whatcom County Central Shop, EMCON estimated that the initial investigation
32 work would be approximately $5,000. He asked the Executive to execute an amendment from
33 $10,000 to $15,000, knowing they would have to come back for more to finish the work. That is
34 what is before the Council. It accomplishes two things. One is to finish the work through this
35 consulting service to finish clean -up efforts and site review at the Central Shop because of the
36 recent events. The other is a $5,000 cushion for future unspecified on -call services.
37
38 Brenner stated that amendment one is regarding increasing the compensation to oversight
39 soil sampling and laboratory testing at Central Shop. Amendment two is for oversight soil
40 sampling for removal of diesel and/or heavy oil contaminated soil. That seems to be an overlap.
41 It isn't efficient and a wise use of money to cushion for future unspecified costs. At any point,
42 the administration has the right to enter into a contract for $15,000. If it is put in the contract, it
43 will be spent. The contract should be very specific. She doesn't like the overlap and the lack of
44 information on Amendment No. 1 to the contract.
45
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, Page 9
I Monsen stated that Amendment No. 1 is very similar to what is currently before the
2 Council. The original contract is written so that there is a contractual limit that cannot be
3 exceeded. No task can be entered into unless there is a specific dialogue as far as an assignment,
4 estimate, and indication to proceed. EMCON cannot perform work without specific direction.
5 The administration does not give specific direction without at least a reasonable estimate and
6 scope of services. Regarding the Executive's ability to contract for up to $15,000, that applies to
7 new contracts that are entered into. This is a continuation of services beyond the initial $15,000.
8 Administration doesn't have the ability to simply write another contract. It requires an
9 amendment to the current contract. Regarding duplication of activities, when EMCON dealt
10 with oversight soil sampling in early August, that was the initial investigation and testing. The
11 $5,000 as noted in Amendment No. 2 is to oversee the excavation of the remaining contaminated
12 soil. That is something that would have had to be done.
13
14 Hoag questioned whether the contract originally went out to bid. The rates are very high.
15 The County is also paying travel time. The company is traveling from Bothell. Monsen
16 responded that a Request for Qualification process was done in 1996 to select a consultant with a
17 broad range of skills available in that service, because we didn't know what type of
18 environmental services may be needed. There was a resource they could draw on for small tasks.
19 The selection process for these services was done according to state law. Bidding is not allowed
20 for this kind of a service. In the context of state law, when hiring architectural engineering
21 services, one shall go through a selection process to determine who is most qualified, and then
22 negotiate a reasonable fee for those services. All other firms that responded were also from the
23 greater Seattle area.
24
25 Brown agreed that there is a lack of these types of firms available in the local area. He
26 questioned whether it would be possible to inform the County Council Finance Committee if the
27 $5,000 cushion was to be used. He understood the concern for spending the money. When one
28 begins chasing contamination, it sometimes costs much more than anticipated. Monsen stated
29 that the committee could be notified.
30
31 Brenner stated that she believed the clean up at Central Shop would only cost a few
32 thousand dollars. There is no specific information on how the money has been spent so far.
33
34 Brenner moved to table until it is determined that costs are not being overlapped.
35
36 Motion failed 1 -6 with Brenner in favor.
37
38 Nelson moved approval.
39
40 Motion carried 6 -1 with Brenner opposed.
41
42 6. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
43 CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH WHEELER ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. FOR
44 PUBLIC COMMENT AND CLARIFICATIONS TO THE DRAFT CFHMP
45 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT IN A TOTAL AMENDMENT
46 AMOUNT OF $29,980 (AB98 -328)
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, Page 10
2 Jeff Monsen, Public Works Director, stated that the question may be why there is
3 potentially so much money in the amendment. This project was for the Environmental Impact
4 Statement (EIS) for the flood plan, identifying only the activities that must be accomplished.
5 This amendment addresses specific comments that were received relative to the EIS. The
6 comments are substantial enough to do additional EIS work as well as additional and
7 supplemental work amending the plan.
8
9 Hoag stated that she requested copies of the original contract, which she received, but did
10 not have time to read them. She questioned whether the issue could be tabled. It is not clear
11 why the County needs another $30,000 to address public comment. She also questioned the
12 scope of work of the original contract and how much the contract would be expanded.
13
14 Ed Henken, Public Works Department Engineering Division Manager, stated that
15 addressing public comments was not included in the original contract for the reason Monsen
16 mentioned. They didn't know the extent of the public comments that would be forthcoming.
17 They planned to come back and request additional funds to address those comments, if enough
18 comments were made. The bulk of the scope of work was for the preparation of the draft EIS.
19
20 Sutter stated that the original contract was for the draft EIS and the public process. This
21 amendment covers the final EIS preparation, after completing the public process. This is step
22 two.
23
24 Hoag moved to table.
25
26 Motion failed 3 -4 with Hoag, Brown, and Brenner in favor.
27
28 Nelson moved to approve.
29
30 Motion carried 5 -2 with Brenner and Hoag opposed.
31
32 7. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
33 CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH WHEELER ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. FOR
34 REVISION OF THE EXISTING CFHMP DOCUMENT FOR A TOTAL PAYMENT
35 NOT TO EXCEED $62,095 (AB98 -329)
36
37 8. RESOLUTION ORDERING THE CANCELLATION OF ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE
38 FOR SERVICES RENDERED BY THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT, IN A TOTAL
39 AMOUNT OF $18,649.78 (AB98 -330)
40
41 Dawson stated that the Health and Human Services Department brought forward an
42 amended list of accounts receivable to the amount of $17,034.53 because the 1998 Medicaid fees
43 can be reimbursed, and moved approval of the item as amended by the department.
44
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, Page 11
I Hoag stated that she would prefer the items be sent to collections instead of being written
2 off. The Health and Human Services Department has stated they will be sent to collections in the
3 future.
4
5 Chuck Benjamin, Health and Human Services Director, stated that the County Treasurer
6 has a collection agency under contract that they can utilize. 95% of the accounts receivable are
7 Medicaid clients which cannot be turned over to collections. Services rendered are from 1995 —
8 1997.
9
10 Nelson stated that if the state rejects a Medicaid claim, they are not Medicaid eligible and
11 can be turned over to collection. Benjamin responded that he would work with the County
12 attorney regarding that definition.
13
14 Brenner moved to amend to say that all accounts that can be turned over to collections
15 will be, from this date forward.
16
17 Hoag requested clarification from Nelson regarding whether Medicaid accounts could be
18 sent to collection.
19
20 Nelson responded that not all items are covered by Medicaid. When such an item is
21 submitted and rejected by Medicaid, those are dollars that have to be collected from the patient.
22 If the Medicaid coupon isn't in the provider's possession, Medicaid eligibility can't be proved.
23 It is common practice in the medical field, particularly after this period of time, to write off the
24 accounts payable. It costs more to research the item in preparation for turning it over to a
25 collection agency, and it doesn't give a return because rate of collection is typically low. More
26 tax dollars would be spent by the Health and Human Services Department on the workload
27 trying to put together enough information for the collection agency, and the chances of return are
28 very low.
29
30 Benjamin explained that when he arrived in Whatcom County in July of 1996 there were
31 not records to go back to for proper billing. Since he became Health and Human Services
32 Director, he implemented proper documentation of financial eligibility of the patients as they
33 come in for services.
34
35 Imhof stated that the discussion is a policy item, and the resolution is not the place for the
36 procedure. It should be routed through the Health Advisory Board for their determination on
37 which claims should be collected.
9H
39 Nelson proposed a friendly amendment to say that all those items that the Health
40 Department feels are appropriate for collection be forwarded to the collection agency.
41
42 Brenner accepted Nelson's friendly amendment.
43
44 Motion to amend carried unanimously.
45
46 Motion to approve carried unanimously.
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, 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
The Council moved to Consent Agenda item 4.
9. RESOLUTION ORDERING THE CANCELLATION OF WARRANTS MORE THAN
A YEAR OLD IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $6,262.72 (AB98 -331)
10. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A GRANT
WITH THE STATE OF WASHINGTON FOR THE MULTI - JURISDICTIONAL
NARCOTICS TASK FORCE PROGRAM NO. F98- 37498 -019, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$128,069 (AB98 -340)
PUBLIC HEARING
1. ORDINANCE IN THE MATTER OF ACCEPTING ACADEMY ROAD AS A PUBLIC
ROAD (AB98 -314A)
Ed Henken, Public Works Department Engineering Division Manager, stated that the
staff report is included on Council packet page 434. As an update, the construction work is
substantially complete. There are a few minor items remaining to be done.
Brenner questioned how much time until it is complete. Henken stated that they have a
few holes to patch, due to recent hot - rodding activity. It would be completed this year.
Brown questioned whether the County would accept the road before everything was
complete. Henken stated they would not.
Imhof opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public hearing:
Dawson moved to adopt the ordinance.
Motion to adopt carried unanimously.
2. ORDINANCE IN THE MATTER OF ACCEPTING DELTA LINE ROAD AS A
PUBLIC ROAD (AB98 -314B)
Ed Henken, Public Works Department Engineering Division Manager, stated that the
road is substantially complete. The only work that is remaining is the striping. This is the dead
end portion of the Delta Line Road running north off of Grandview Road, east of Vista.
Imhof opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public hearing:
Brenner moved to adopt the ordinance.
Motion to adopt carried unanimously.
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, 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
3. ORDINANCE IN THE MATTER OF ACCEPTING HAM ROAD AS A PUBLIC
ROAD (AB98 -314C)
Ed Henken, Public Works Department Engineering Division Manager, stated that the
road is not complete and will not be completed this year. The Council could pass the ordinance
with the condition that it be completed and certified by staff as being in compliance with County
standards by October 1, 1999, or the ordinance would be null and void. Since they have not
moved forward on it, he would not have a problem if the Council instead choose not to act on the
ordinance. If they do meet the standards, they can always come back with the ordinance to be
accepted.
Brenner questioned why the County would consider something unless there was a
timeline in mind. Henken responded that developers sometimes want an indication that the
County will accept it if it is constructed to County standards. It is not the case in this situation.
Imhof opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public hearing:
Brown moved to adopt the ordinance.
Hoag stated the County should not accept the road at this time because it gives the
County more to keep track of. She would rather wait until the road is ready before acceptance.
Motion to adopt failed 1 -6 with Brown in favor.
4. ORDINANCE IN THE MATTER OF ACCEPTING MERTZ ROAD AS A PUBLIC
ROAD (AB98 -314D)
Ed Henken, Public Works Department Engineering Division Manager, stated that the
road is complete to County standards. This was a combined project. The first part was a
maintained gravel County road. The rest is new road. The developers are interested in having
the first section paved at their cost, then extending the road.
Imhof opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public hearing:
Dawson moved to adopt the ordinance.
Motion to adopt carried unanimously.
5. ORDINANCE IN THE MATTER OF ACCEPTING TILBURY ROAD AS A PUBLIC
ROAD (AB98 -314E)
Ed Henken, Public Works Department Engineering Division Manager, stated that the
road runs south off of Limestone Road, on the backside of the Paradise Lakes/Peaceful Valley
developments. It is totally complete.
Imhof opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public hearing:
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, 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
Brown moved to adopt the ordinance.
Motion to adopt carried unanimously.
6. ORDINANCE IN THE MATTER OF ACCEPTING VIEW HAVEN LANE AS A
PUBLIC ROAD (AB98 -314F)
Ed Henken, Public Works Department Engineering Division Manager, stated that the
road was delayed due to the US West strike. Utilities could not be shifted. They anticipate that
the road would be completed in two or three weeks. There is language that if the road is not
completed, the ordinance would be null and void. It would not be accepted until it is up to
County standards.
Imhof opened the public hearing and, hearing no one, closed the public hearing:
Dawson moved to adopt the ordinance.
Motion to adopt carried unanimously.
7. ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 97 -054, AUTHORIZING A CHARGE TO
PROVIDE REVENUE FOR FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT SUB -ZONES
(AB98 -316)
Brenner explained that the intent of the ordinance is to refund $25 to parcel owners who
are not in the flood plain.
Imhof opened the public hearing and the following people spoke:
Phyllis Harder, 606 Mead Avenue, Everson, spoke.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side B)
Harder questioned how this came before the Council. Imhof responded that people in the
flood plain requested the sub -flood zone.
Harder questioned why the County isn't doing their job of taking care of diking rivers.
Imhof stated that there is not enough money to do it.
Hoag questioned Harder whether she was aware of the 70/30 program. Harder responded
that she is aware of the program and questioned the purpose of the $25. Hoag responded that it
is the money to pay for the improvements that are made within the sub -zone to collect the money
for the 30 %.
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, Page 15
I Brenner stated that the Council was told that the assessment might not be fair, but it had
2 to be done quickly. Everyone in the flood plain receives a different benefit. The County should
3 not be taxing people outside the flood plain twice.
4
5 Dawson stated that, in some of the sub - zones, people outside the flood plain contribute to
6 the flooding and run-off. Upland timber companies create run -off when they log. It is the effect
7 to the people in the lowlands that is the reason for assessing people outside the flood plain.
9 Harder stated that the County should do its job in taking care of diking the rivers.
10
11 Sutter stated that the County is trying to do their job, but doesn't have any money to do
12 the work. The County relies on taxes.
13
14 Elizabeth Whitman, 710 Judson Street, Lynden, stated that it is unfair that she has to pay
15 $25 while she lives far from the river when her neighbor across the street doesn't have to pay.
16 Everybody should have a vote on the assessment and everyone in the County should have to pay.
17
18 Dawson stated that people working on the sub -zones have had very professional people
19 give input on which properties provide impacts. There is an inability for property owners to
20 appeal the decisions. The Council is looking at creating an appeal process that would begin with
21 each of the Boards and eventually come before the County Council.
22
23 Brenner stated that the committee told the Council that it was time critical. They have
24 not investigated all of the properties. Council stated last year that if the sub - committees come up
25 with any properties outside the flood plain which they could show contribute measurably to the
26 flooding, then those properties would be included.
27
28 Jack Whitman, 710 Judson Street, Lynden, stated that he is already paying more than
29 $4.00 per month to Lynden for stormwater. This is a double tax.
30
31 Rick Tjoelker, Everson, stated that he understood the need for more money, however if
32 run -off is a factor, everyone in the County should be included in the assessment.
33
34 Imhof stated that sub -flood zones were created for specific watersheds where there are
35 specific affects to the watershed. Area residents voted to establish the sub -flood control zone
36 districts.
37
38 Brown stated that the Flood Control Zone District Sub -Zone Board was not elected, but
39 appointed by the Council. There was very little public participation in the process.
40
41 Sutter commented that the public needs to be better informed of the nature of the sub -
42 zones, the use of the money collected, their benefit, and the procedure for appeal.
43
44 Bob VanWeerdhuizen, 7026 Noon Road, Everson, agreed that there should be more
45 research regarding the neighbor of the previous speaker who lives on Judson.
46
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, Page 16
I Hearing no one else, Imhof closed the public hearing.
2
3 Brenner moved to adopt the ordinance. It is very significant that these people are not
4 saying that everyone should not contribute. They already do contribute through the general flood
5 tax. It is not fair to tax people twice for the exact same types of services when they are not in the
6 flood plain.
7
8 Brown stated that everyone in the County pays for the flood tax. That takes care of the
9 70% of the costs. That is assessed because everyone benefits or contributes in some way. He
10 intended that the people living within the flood plain be allowed to form a pool of money and
11 accomplish the work that needed to be done, without each person having to pay 1/3. What has
12 happened is that some people are paying for the assessment and some are not. It is fair to give a
13 credit to the other property taxes to the people outside of the flood plain.
14
15 Nelson questioned whether anyone knows how much money would be returned. There
16 would be enough in the flood control tax fund to pay the assessment. He was concerned that the
17 sub -flood zones have begun projects and used the money to begin work on the flood control
18 problem. The County needs to support that effort. There is a difference between those that live
19 in the flood plain and those that don't.
20
21 Nelson moved to amend by stipulating the refund be paid from the flood control tax. He
22 questioned whether the Council, acting as the Flood Control Zone District Board, has the ability
23 to authorize the payment. It is not fair that the sub -zones would have to determine funding each
24 time a project needed to be done. There needs to be an equitable solution. Not everyone in
25 Whatcom County pays the same portion from impacts. The Council will have to find a formula
26 that works best and that the public participates in and has a clear understanding and agreement
27 to.
29 Imhof stated that this was a one -time fee to get the zones going. The Council is working
30 up a different method of assessing different people for different amounts. For each $25, it would
31 cost the County $10 to return the money. Much of the money is already spent. $25 is minimal
32 for the impact.
33
34 Hoag stated that she does not agree that a $25 is not much of an impact. This is
35 something that was already passed, implemented, and distributed. This is not the point at which
36 the County takes the money back from the districts. She questioned whether the Council could
37 legally do Nelson's recommendation. If not, she does not support the refund. The sub -zone
38 districts have already been given the money. Also, she recommended in committee that the sub -
39 zones include all parcels within 200 yards of the high water line of the river, in addition to those
40 within the flood plain. There are a lot of parcels along the river that are directly impacted by the
41 projects that are done, but are not included in the flood plain.
42
43 Imhof moved to table to the Public Works Committee to determine if it is legal to refund
44 the money from the flood fund.
45
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, 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
Brown stated that if it is tabled, then also determine whether a credit could be given
instead of a refund.
Brenner stated that if it cannot be refunded from the flood fund, it should come from the
County's general fund.
Motion to table carried unanimously.
OTHER ITEMS
1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH MICHAEL
BOBBINK FOR HEARING EXAMINER SERVICES FOR 10/1/98 THROUGH 9/30/99
(AB98 -317)
Dawson reported for Finance and Administrative Services Committee and moved
approval.
Brenner spoke about concerns that the Hearing Examiner works too many other jobs. He
should be available to do this job adequately for the Council. She sat through some of his
hearings where he seemed unprepared and hadn't done site inspections. Furthermore, she
received complaints from people who have come before him, and they had to present material to
him that he should have already read. If he is spread too thin, Council should consider what to
do.
Imhof stated that the measure of his effectiveness is the few appeals the Council has
received, compared to what they used to receive before he became Hearing Examiner. Brenner
responded that one of the reasons there are few appeals is that some of the things that were up for
debate have been clarified. She requested information on how many other jobs Bobbink has and
how much time per week he devotes to this job.
Nelson stated that this came up in committee.
Brown questioned whether Bobbink can sub - contract these services to others. Dana
Brown - Davis, Clerk of the Council, stated that three other attorneys sub - contract for the services.
Bobbink pays for those attorneys from his contract.
Brenner questioned how many times Bobbink has sub - contracted the work this year.
Brown -Davis responded that she would research all of the Council Members' questions if the
issue is tabled.
Hoag also expressed concerns about the lack of site visits which staff encouraged the
Hearing Examiner to do.
Brenner moved to table to get questions answered.
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, Page 18
2 Motion failed 3 -4 with Hoag, Brenner, and Brown in favor.
3
4 Dawson moved to approve.
5
6 Motion carried 5 -2 with Brenner and Hoag opposed.
7
8 2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR PAYMENT OF COUNCIL MEMBER
9 EXPENSES AND /OR TRAVEL (AB98 -143G)
10
11 Dawson reported for Finance and Administrative Services Committee and stated that
12 Council Member Sutter added two items to the request. The first item is for the American
13 Water Resources Association conference on the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in the amount
14 of $95. The second item is for the Watershed Planning Conference in the amount of $15.
15
16 Brenner stated that she tried to get the information off of the Internet, but could not do it.
17 That is why she ordered the tapes from the State Senate office.
18
19 Dawson moved approval.
20
21 Motion carried unanimously.
22
23 3. ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 16.28, MANURE
24 AND AGRICULTURAL NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT (AB98 -254A)
25
26 Hoag reported for Natural Resources Committee and reported that the recommendation
27 is that this ordinance be changed to an emergency ordinance, and would have a 60 -day effective
28 period until the permanent ordinance could take effect. State Environmental Protection Act
29 (SEPA) review had been overlooked. A substitute ordinance had been distributed to the
30 Council Members. Those changes include the emergency language in the title of the document
31 and the addition of findings 9 and 10. In addition, changes have been made as suggested by the
32 Dairy Federation and the Health Advisory Committee.
33
34 Hoag recommended approval of the document that came out of committee.
35
36 Nelson questioned whether the annual review included nitrate testing by the Northwest
37 Indian College. Hoag stated that testing was for fecal coliform. There was discussion in
38 committee about whether nitrate data should be included in the review. The amount of data on
39 nitrates available is very great. It is already available to the public. The Dairy Federation is
40 interested in the fecal coliform counts.
41
42 Imhof questioned whether the State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) would be
43 able to take on enforcement. Hoag clarified that there is still discussion about whether or not
44 the State Department of Ecology (DOE) would be able to enforce the County ordinance. The
45 County Planning and Development Services Department enforces the Critical Areas Ordinance.
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, Page 19
I Planning and Development Services, who can draw up a memorandum of understanding with
2 DOE for inspections, would direct enforcement of this ordinance.
3
4 Imhof questioned why Planning and Development Services would direct enforcement
5 instead of the Health and Human Services Department.
6
7 Sutter clarified that the Planning Department will not enforce anything regarding
8 bacterial contamination. The ordinance covers the inappropriate application of manure, which
9 is a land use issue.
10
11 Brown stated that this is not an emergency, but an effort to rush it along. The County
12 does not have a demonstrable increased risk to human health or property. There is time to go
13 through the SEPA process, which takes approximately 30 days. It should be voted on
14 separately to determine whether or not it is an emergency. He would not support the ordinance
15 with the current fines in place, but would support it if only warnings were issued until April 1,
16 1999. Also, a large part of the dairy farmers that will be affected do not drain into the Portage
17 Bay district. The State Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), DOE, and others can write
18 fines for water contamination by manure. There is no hurry to get this in effect with fines.
19 Lastly, if one drives down the freeway, one would see signs giving advance notice to the public
20 about upcoming change in the legal blood alcohol level from .1 to .08. This is advance notice
21 of upcoming regulation is of immediate health and safety risk. The state did not implement the
22 law right away, but gave the public time to consider and become aware of the regulation.
23
24 Brown moved to amend the ordinance that only warnings will be issued, not fines, until
25 April 1, 1999.
26
27 Hoag read the new findings 9 and 10 into the record. If there was not an existing
28 problem with a closed shellfish bed, the County would have the luxury of gradually letting
29 people know what is coming. The County does not have that luxury. State law requires the
30 County ensure best management practices are being followed. They are the same best
31 management practices that have been around for ten years. Included in the substitute ordinance
32 is a change in the effective date for 1998. This change was done to accommodate the farmers'
33 request. Data shows that as soon as the fall rain begins, manure near ditches on bare ground
34 will add to the problem.
35
36 Dawson stated that this was postponed for one month so the affected farmers could
37 provide input to the ordinance. This is being forwarded with the farmers' approval.
38
39 Brenner stated that she agreed that it is an emergency that needs to be enacted before
40 more spreading can happen. If not, there will be more of a measurable problem. Farmers that
41 use best management practices will not at all be affected. Regarding the state notice about the
42 change in the blood alcohol level, it is a change from the current legal standard. This is not a
43 change from the current best management practices that farmers should have been doing all
44 along.
45
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, 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
Sutter stated that the state regulation does not cover non -dairy applications of the spread
of manure.
Brown stated that no matter what happens, it takes 30 consecutive positive tests, which
would take is 2 '/2 years to remove the shellfish listing. This is not something that will happen
overnight.
Michael Knapp, Planning and Development Services Director, stated that his department
is willing to take on the responsibility of enforcement, however he does not have staff to
enforce the ordinance by October 1. He can attempt to move it along as expeditiously as
possible.
Motion to amend failed 1 -6 with Brown in favor.
Motion to adopt carried 6 -1 with Brown opposed.
COUNCIL REQUEST TO SEND A LETTER TO THE WASHINGTON STATE
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE REGARDING EROSION ON THE
NOOKSACK RIVER NEAR RITTER ROAD (AB98 -342)
Hoag stated that another item came forward during committee about a dam repair project
that had been turned down twice by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife. The Flood
Advisory Committee requested that the County Council send a letter to the director of Fish and
Wildlife explaining that this is a very urgent situation. It needs to be fixed before the flood
season. All of the engineers and hydrologists that have looked at this location have stated that
the next flood event will take out the bank. There is productive farmland and four homes
behind the bank.
Pete Kremen, County Executive, explained that his office has already sent letter on the
request of a constituent, Mr. Strickland. Council Members will receive a copy of the letter
tomorrow. Also, the Council should have received a draft letter to the State Department of
Fish and Wildlife regarding concerns with Canyon Creek. If Council Members wanted to
recommend changes, they should be done as soon as possible so the letter could be sent
tomorrow.
Brenner questioned which road problem Kremen was addressing. Kremen stated that he
addressed both issues. They are both on the same subject matter. The letter regarding Canyon
Creek is still being drafted.
Hoag moved to approve the request to send a letter regarding Ritter Road.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape two, side A.)
Brown requested that a phone call be made to make the agencies aware that a letter is
coming. Imhof agreed to make the call.
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, 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
Hoag clarified that the request was that both the Council and the Executive send letters
regarding Ritter Road. Jeff McGowen stated to Hoag during a phone call that they would
entertain doing something about the hole, but they weren't interested in having trees removed
for 1200'. He is trying to get their head hydrologist together with the Council to meet.
Kremen stated that the appropriate person to receive the letter is the acting director,
Larry Peck.
There was discussion on clarification regarding whom the appropriate person is to
receive the letters.
Sutter questioned Buzz Strickland about a map that shows where the blowouts are
happening, and whether there was a levy between the river and the houses and the cornfield.
Strickland responded that there is a levy.
Sutter stated that the immediate, emergency concern is about the levy breaking, not the
bank falling in. The letter needs to be changed to reflect that the immediate danger that would
impact the houses is a blowout of the levy.
Brown stated that the levy is sand and it will go in on top.
Brenner stated that the levy and the bank are part of each other. Imhof stated that he
will write the letter appropriately.
Hoag stated that she and Strickland already wrote the letter based on his concerns.
Brenner stated that at least three Council Members toured the area. The levy is part of
the bank. It is all sand. The levy can't be separated from the bank.
Motion to send a letter to state Department of Fish and Wildlife Acting Director Larry
Peck regarding Ritter Road was approved unanimously.
Brenner moved to send a letter to Peck from the Council regarding Canyon Creek.
Motion carried unanimously.
4. RESOLUTION APPROVING VAN WYCK ROAD ASSESSMENT
REIMBURSEMENT AREA AND ASSESSMENT (AB97 -413C)
Brenner reported for Public Works and Capital Projects Committee and stated that the
recommendation is to accept option #3 as outlined on Council packet page 263 regarding the
application of credit to the current owners. The Public Works Department proposed this as an
option. Public Works and the property owners are in agreement about this option.
Brenner moved approval of option #3 regarding application of credit.
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, 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
46
Motion carried unanimously.
Brenner also reported that the recommendation is to accept option #2 as outlined on
Council packet page 263 regarding the County's financial share. Originally the County
promised to pay $81,500, which included the property owners maintenance of the road without
the County including it into the road system. Brenner outlined the three options put forth by the
Public Works Department. Option #2 is a compromise between the County and the property
owners. Everyone is in agreement.
Brenner moved approval of option #2 regarding the County's financial share.
Motion carried unanimously.
Motion to approve the resolution carried unanimously.
5. ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 97 -045, ESTABLISHING A CODE OF
ETHICS FOR ELECTED PUBLIC OFFICIALS (AB98 -194A)
Brenner reported for Public Works and Capital Projects Committee and stated that the
recommendation is that the definitions of "conflict of interest" and "private interest" are
synonymous. That definition will be the same as the state's definition, which is, "A legislator
has a private interest if he or she will derive a direct monetary gain or suffer a direct monetary
loss by reason of his or her official activity. Unless the benefit or detriment does not accrue to
the legislator as a member of a business, profession, occupation, or group in any greater extent
than to other members of such group."
Brenner moved to adopt with the change is the definitions as stated.
Brenner stated that Council Member Hoag wanted the definition of immediate family
expanded. The committee discussed the concern that there would be a problem about knowing
what an absent relative's financial interests consist o£ The state law includes all dependent
relatives living in a household.
Hoag stated that nepotism does not apply only to people within one's own home.
Council members should not make any decisions that would benefit their parents, siblings, or
children whether or not they live in the same household.
Brenner moved to amend the ordinance to include in the definition of "Immediate
Family," non - dependent parents, children, brothers, and sisters if their financial relations are
known.
Hoag proposed a friendly amendment to not extend to all relatives. Immediate family
means parents, siblings, and children. That circle, whether in the household or not, should be
included.
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, 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
Brenner did not accept Hoag's friendly amendment because there are many cases in
which people have no idea of the financial interests of members of their immediately family.
Brown stated that the Council couldn't include other relatives because one can't know an
adult sibling's financial interests. That is the reason the state law is written as it is. One can't be
held accountable for something they know nothing about. He did not support the amendment.
Dawson stated that adult siblings are extremely private about financial interests.
Sutter proposed a friendly amendment and moved to amend the definition to state,
"Immediate Family means the spouse, dot children, and other dot relatives-14
living in the household-, with a known relationship of any such official."
Brenner accepted the friendly amendment.
Motion to amend failed 2 -4 with Brenner and Hoag in favor and Imhof absent from the
room.
Brenner moved to amend and stated that the recommendation is that the definitions of
"conflict of interest" and "private interest" are synonymous. Those definitions will be the same
as the state's definition.
Motion to amend carried 6 -0 with Imhof out of the room.
Sutter moved, on page 278 of the Council packet, section 4.1 to state, "...which may be
made for the benefit of his or her office, or accept, directly or indirectly, any compensation,
gratuity, or reward in connection with approval of such contract from any..." This issue has to
do with approving contracts. A Council Member would be prohibited from interest in any
contract forever.
Brenner responded that the timeline is covered elsewhere in the ordinance.
Sutter withdrew her motion.
Sutter moved, on page 279 of the Council packet, section 4.2, to replace the language to
state, "...similar records of the County prior to the formation of vote on the contract..."
Hoag commented that the interpretation is that one won't be held responsible if the
interest occurred before the contract was created.
Sutter stated that the interpretation of the section is that if there is disclosure prior to the
formation of the contract, conflict of interest would not apply. However, if one is not aware of a
proposed contract until it is presented to the Council for action, disclosure prior to the creation of
the contract cannot occur.
Motion carried 5 -1 with Hoag opposed and Imhof out of the room.
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, Page 24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
Brown moved to approve the ordinance as amended.
Main amended motion to adopt carried 6 -0 with Imhof abstaining.
(Clerk's Note: Council took a short break. End of tape 2, middle of side B)
6. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE ADOPTING DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
RELATING TO GROWTH MANAGEMENT AND LAND USE DEVELOPMENT
FOR THE PURPOSES OF REGULATORY CONSISTENCY WITH THE OFFICIAL
WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (AB97 -169E)
(Clerk's Note: Beginning of tape three, side A.)
Sutter reported for Planning and Development Committee and moved to adopt the
ordinance. At the next regularly scheduled Planning and Development Committee, the
permanent development regulations will be on the agenda. The County has been waiting for the
outcome of the Supreme Court decision before moving ahead with the permanent development
regulations. The decision has been rendered.
Brenner stated that there are major problems with the agricultural protection overlay and
mineral resources. She does not support the ordinance.
Motion to adopt carried 5 -1 with Brenner opposed and Hoag out of the room.
7. EMERGENCY ORDINANCE ADOPTING ZONING OVERLAY MAPS TO
IMPLEMENT THE SHORT TERM PLANNING AREAS DESIGNATED IN THE
OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (AB97 -170E)
Sutter reported for Planning and Development Committee and moved to adopt. This
ordinance has been held under the same circumstances as the development regulations, pending
the Supreme Court decision. It will come forward on the September 29 agenda.
Motion to adopt carried unanimously.
Sutter clarified that the permanent development regulations and the permanent zoning
overlay maps ordinances were before the Council, then tabled pending the outcome of the
Supreme Court decision. Those items will not be re- introduced. They will be brought off the
table for consideration at the next meeting.
8. ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 20, THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY
ZONING ORDINANCE, TO ELIMINATE THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE
REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES IN THE RURAL DISTRICT (AB98-
318)
Sutter reported for Planning and Development Committee moved to adopt.
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, 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
46
Motion to adopt carried unanimously.
9. REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF MDP89- 0001 /A, YAMATO DEVELOPMENT
CANADA, INC. FOR COMPLETION OF THE POINT ROBERTS GOLF & COUNTY
CLUB (AB98 -320)
Sutter reported for Planning and Development Committee moved approval. This comes
forward from the Hearing Examiner recommending approval. The reason for the delay is
because of litigation the company was involved in.
Motion to approve carried unanimously.
10. RESOLUTION INITIATING ZONING MAP AND TEXT AMENDMENTS
ESTABLISHING SMALL TOWN COMMERCIAL AND CROSSROAD
COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS (AB98 -333)
Sutter reported for Planning and Development Committee and moved to forward to the
Planning Commission. It should be inserted in the appropriate place on their agenda.
Motion carried unanimously.
11. CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION ON
FILE NOS. APL98 -0005 AND APL96 -0002, FILED BY JONATHAN SITKIN,
ATTORNEY AT LAW, FOR ENVIRO -CHEM / KEITH SCHEFFER (AB98 -240)
See "Announcements."
12. CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER' DECISION ON
FILE NOS. APL98 -0005 AND APL96 -0002, FILED BY JONATHAN SITKIN,
ATTORNEY AT LAW, FOR F.L. AND BETTY SMALLWOOD (AB98 -233)
See "Announcements."
13. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPOINT AUSTIN
XIOFENG HUANG TO THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TECHNICAL
ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AB98 -334)
Nelson moved approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
14. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO SIGN A NEW LIQUOR
LICENSE APPLICATION FOR MYKONOS GREEK & ITALIAN RESTAURANT,
1650 WEST BAKERVIEW ROAD, BELLINGHAM, WA (AB98 -335)
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, 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
Imhof moved approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
ADDENDUM:
REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE EXECUTIVE'S APPOINTMENTOF
DR. GREGORY H. STERN TO THE POSITION OF WHATCOM COUNTY
HEALTH OFFICER (AB98 -019)
Chuck Benjamin, Health and Human Services Director, introduced Dr. Stern, a
local physician that he recommended be appointed to the position of Health Officer. He
comes with the unanimous approval of the interview team, which comprised of Interim
Health Officer Dr. Gass, Community Health and Wellness Manager Kay Guirl, Joan
Brewster of the State Department of Health, and Mr. Benjamin.
Dr. Stern thanked the County Council for the opportunity to serve Whatcom
County. He appreciated being able to work with the Health Department Advisory Board
for the last 4 1/2 years.
Hoag stated that she just read about this in the newspaper and has not had an
opportunity to find out anything about Dr. Stern. Given that this is a very important
position that the County recently had a problem with, she moved to table to find out more
about his views and practices. She requested an opportunity for the Council to interview
Dr. Stern.
Pete Kremen, County Executive, stated that all the Council Members were sent a
memo, a resume', and a press release. They were also invited to address concerns and
questions last week. Hoag responded that the invitation to address concerns was dated
September 10.
Kremen stated that he has not received a call from any member of the County
Council expressing any concern.
Hoag stated that the Council has no information on the selection, yet they have
been asked to confirm the appointment.
Kremen stated that it would be helpful for Council Members to express their
concerns prior to the meeting. Council Members were sent information on the selection.
Concerns should have been conveyed to the administration.
Dawson stated that any concerns should have been expressed before the meeting.
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, 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
Hoag stated that she received a 400+ page packet the same time she received the
administration's information. The Council ought to have more than a weekend to
consider an important issue.
Imhof stated that Hoag should have brought the question up before it came to the
floor, during the day. Hoag responded that the item wasn't scheduled for any committee
meeting.
Dawson stated that she should have simply called the Executive's office.
Brenner stated that she has heard positive things about the nomination, however
the previous executive took the time to give the Council an opportunity to meet with the
nominee ahead of time. She would like to have a personal interview with Dr. Stern. She
questioned whether postponing the confirmation would create any problems.
Dawson stated that a request to interview the nominee should have been made to
the Executive at the beginning of the process.
Sutter stated that the Council knew long ago that the County would being hiring
this position. If a Council Member had a desire to interview the applicants, they could
have made that known a long time ago. She questioned the purpose of waiting until a
candidate was chosen.
Hoag stated that the United States President appoints someone to different
departments for approval, and Congress takes the time to figure out whether or not it is an
appropriate nomination before confirmation. At the time the Council knew there was
going to be a vacancy, they didn't have any information about the person. She has not
had a chance to determine whether this was someone she wanted to confirm.
Sutter questioned why Hoag did not express to the Executive her desire to have
information on the selected individual. Hoag responded that she did not have an
opportunity.
Hoag stated that there used to be a research position with the Council, with Bob
Woods. That position was let go with the condition that the administration would supply
the Council with whatever information is needed. She requested more information on the
nomination. Since she did not have the opportunity to request the information earlier, she
would like the confirmation tabled.
Brenner stated that in the past, the Council was allowed time to meet with
nominees of other appointed positions.
Nelson called point of order. There was a motion to table.
Motion failed 2 -5 with Hoag and Brenner in favor.
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, Page 28
I Brenner stated that this has been rushed through.
2
3 Kremen stated that neither Council Member Hoag nor Council Member Brenner
4 contacted him, knowing the administration had been in the search process for the last
5 several months. Hoag and Brenner have not contacted him to express any concerns or
6 suggestions regarding this matter. Kremen continued by stating that it is unfortunate that
7 there is a distinguished individual who is willing to serve the County as the Health
8 Officer, yet he is treated like this from the beginning. It is a bad example and not an
9 indicator of a good relationship. He hoped things would soon improve.
10
11 Nelson apologized to the Executive and Dr. Stern. He also had a concern about
12 choosing a Health Officer. He contacted Benjamin and asked to be included in the
13 process of selection. He was involved in the initial selection process, but not the final
14 selection process. He was familiar with all the applicants and was allowed the materials
15 the Executive's office had. Benjamin was eager to provide assistance. He did not have a
16 problem with voting on the issue because he took the time early on to be involved and
17 know who was being selected and how the process was working.
18
19 Hoag stated that she did not contact the Executive early in the process because she
20 did not have any concerns about a general application. She is being asked to confirm a
21 specific person and she did not know anything about the person other than where he went
22 to school and where he last worked. She requested a chance to get specific information.
23 The Council does not rubber stamp issues. Because the Council is asked to confirm
24 individuals, they should look at whether or not the individual is appropriate for the job.
25 She has no basis for determining that. All of the other items on the agenda are asked to
26 be submitted two weeks prior to the agenda, not the weekend before.
27
28 Brenner stated that this is no personal affront and has nothing to do with who the
29 person is. It is about process. Council does not move into something as critical as this by
30 rushing it into the Council a few days before the meeting. They are not allowed to do
31 that. Council adds items as addenda only if there is an emergency. Never do they do it
32 otherwise, if there is not some emergency reason. If there is an emergency reason to
33 make the confirmation now, she would support it. She does not know of an emergency
34 reason. She wanted to get to know who the person is.
35
36 Sutter called for the question.
37
38 Motion to confirm Dr. Stern carried 5 -0 with Brenner and Hoag abstaining.
39
40 Sutter stated that there was one other item in Planning and Development Services
41 committee regarding multiple complaints about surface water run -off problems
42 (AB98 -321) from one piece of property to another. The committee requested that the
43 Technical Advisory Committee review the issue and then send their recommendations to
44 the Planning Commission, who would forward to the County Council.
45
46
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, 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
INTRODUCTION ITEMS
Dawson moved to accept the Introduction Items.
Motion carried unanimously.
1. ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 98 -019, WHATCOM COUNTY CODE
CHAPTER 16.20, REGARDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY SHELLFISH
PROTECTION DISTRICTS (AB98 -099)
2. ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 97 -073, AUTHORIZING EXCESS CASH
IN CERTAIN FUNDS TO BENEFIT SAME (AB98 -336)
3. ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 84 -22, TO BRING WHATCOM COUNTY
CODE 2.09 INTO CONFORMANCE WITH THE WHATCOM COUNTY CHARTER
(AB98 -337)
4. ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING A CHARGE TO PROVIDE REVENUE FOR THE
ACME/VANZANDT SUB -ZONE FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT, SETTING A
DUE DATE FOR PAYMENT OF SERVICE CHARGES AUTHORIZING
COLLECTION OF INTEREST AND PENALTIES ON DELINQUENT PAYMENTS
OF ASSESSMENTS AND ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR RECORDATION
AND FORECLOSURE OF LIENS RESULTING FROM DELINQUENCIES (AB98 -
279A)
5. ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING A CHARGE TO PROVIDE REVENUE FOR THE
LYNDEN /EVERSON SUB -ZONE FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT, SETTING
A DUE DATE FOR PAYMENT OF SERVICE CHARGES AUTHORIZING
COLLECTION OF INTEREST AND PENALTIES ON DELINQUENT PAYMENTS
OF ASSESSMENTS AND ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR RECORDATION
AND FORECLOSURE OF LIENS RESULTING FROM DELINQUENCIES (AB98 -
280A)
6. ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING A CHARGE TO PROVIDE REVENUE FOR THE
SUMAS/NOOKSACK/EVERSON SUB -ZONE FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT,
SETTING A DUE DATE FOR PAYMENT OF SERVICE CHARGES AUTHORIZING
COLLECTION OF INTEREST AND PENALTIES ON DELINQUENT PAYMENTS
OF ASSESSMENTS AND ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR RECORDATION
AND FORECLOSURE OF LIENS RESULTING FROM DELINQUENCIES (AB98 -
281A)
7. ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 15.24, MANUFACTURED
HOME INSTALLATION (AB98 -338)
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, Page 30
I REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS
2
3 Nelson stated that the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) regarding the Nessett
4 Farm (AB98 -301A) has been created. He would like to hear of any concerns or additional
5 comments. Brown responded that the MOU does not address the concerns of the John LaMonte
6 letter concerning access to the farm across their property.
7
8 Hoag stated that she talked to LaMonte and assured him that it was not changing that part
9 of the easement. He was happy with that. The language does not change that portion.
10
11 Brown stated that when he toured the property, he was told that buses would be able to
12 come in that way. Hoag stated that they were told it would be used as a service road by the
13 County and nothing more. The public would not be allowed to use it as access.
14
15 Nelson stated that Brown is correct, that there will be buses using the road, but only for
16 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessibility. He will bring the concern forward.
17
18 Brenner moved approval of a Resolution requesting Washington State Governor
19 reinstate Susie Schaefer as Regional Administrator for Washington State Department of
20 Social and Health Services, Division of Developmental Disabilities, Region 3 (AB98 -341).
21 The Developmental Disabilities Board found out that the regional administrator for the State
22 Department of Social and Health Services, who has been with the community for 20 years, has
23 been reassigned. She does not want the reassignment. There is a letter from the Advisory Board
24 chair stating that the Board passed a unanimous resolution requesting her reinstatement to the
25 community. There is also a letter from John Hooper, Whatcom County Health and Human
26 Services Department Human Services Manager, also requesting her reinstatement. The Board
27 asked the County Council to send the same request. She read portions of the letter into the
28 record.
29
30
31 Motion carried unanimously.
32
33 Chuck Benjamin, Health and Human Services Director, stated that he supported the
34 resolution. Since his arrival to the County, Susie Schaefer was a tremendous help and is a
35 tremendous asset to the community. If she is reassigned, it will be a loss to the community and
36 its developmentally disabled citizens.
37
38 Hoag stated that the County telephone number is always busy. If the Countywide toll -
39 free calling will not begin right away, the County should consider adding another County line.
40 The County is not providing a good service if the citizens cannot reach the County.
41
42 Dana Brown - Davis, Clerk of the Council, clarified for Dawson and Hoag that their items
43 which were on for introduction were also in committee. The changes made in committee will be
44 included in the next packet.
45
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, 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
Michael Knapp, Planning and Development Services Director, questioned whether
October 1 would be an acceptable date for the department tour.
Brenner stated that the time is okay, as long as it doesn't interfere with a re- canvassing.
Knapp stated the time would be from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 10:25 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
These minutes were approved by Council on October 27 , 1998.
ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk Robert Imhof, Council Member
Regular Council Meeting, 9/15/98, Page 32