HomeMy WebLinkAboutFinance June 30 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
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Finance and Administrative Services Committee
June 30, 1998
The meeting was called to order at 9:30 a.m. by Committee Chair Marlene Dawson in the
Council Committee Room, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
Also Present:
Connie Hoag
Absent:
Ward Nelson
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO APPROVE THE
PURCHASE OF LIGNOSITE FROM GEORGIA - PACIFIC, A SOLE SOURCE, FOR
USE ON COUNTY ROADS IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $60,000 (AB98-
230)
Hoag moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
CONSENT AGENDA
1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A JOINT
FUNDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR U.S.
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY AND WHATCOM COUNTY, SUPPORTING A
GROUNDWATER STUDY IN THE NORTH COUNTY AREA, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$18,030 (AB98 -243)
Dawson questioned what is considered shallow groundwater.
Regina Delahunt, Health and Human Services Environmental Services Manager,
explained that the aquifer in the north County has had problems. It is 20' — 30' deep.
Dawson questioned whether they would be considered shallow if they had a layer of clay
on top. Delahunt explained that in the area they will be studying, there is no clay layer. It is an
unconfined aquifer. It is the Abbotsford/Sumas aquifer.
Hoag explained that groundwater may be at that level, but not all wells are at that level.
The deepness of the well does make a difference. She also stated that the amount on the Agenda
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 6/30/98, Page I
1 Bill and the amount on page 19 of the Council packet are different. Delahunt stated that the
2 amount on the Agenda Bill was incorrect.
4 Hoag questioned which thirty wells were being discussed in objective #2.
6 Sue Blake, Planning and Development Services Water Resources Planner, stated that she
7 would get clarification of this.
9 Hoag stated that the first objective addressed analyzing nitrates. The second objective
10 addressed the fumigants and relating that to application data. She questioned whether they
11 would look at the sources of the nitrate levels. Delahunt stated that they would look at the
12 sources, but they are not going to have application levels on fertilizers.
13
14 Hoag questioned whether the Health Department could later look at establishing patterns
15 of use if high nitrate levels are found. Delahunt stated that they could work with the United
16 States Geological Service (USGS) on that.
17
18 Dawson questioned how long it would take to get their information. Delahunt stated that
19 they would be collecting data in October, and analyzing it early next year. Hopefully a report
20 will be available by early next year.
21
22 Hoag moved to recommend approval.
23
24 Motion carried unanimously.
25
26 2. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
27 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN CASCADES
28 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. AND WHATCOM COUNTY FOR
29 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REQUIRED BY PERMITS FOR THE DAVIS-
30 RIVERBERRY AND VANDELLEN PROJECTS ON THE NOOKSACK RIVER IN
31 THE VICINITY OF HOPEWELL ROAD, IN THE AMOUNT OF $86,429 (AB98 -244)
32
33 (Clerk's Note: The Chair skipped to item #3, then came back to item #2)
34
35 Dawson stated that this is the cost of the program for one year. The program is expected
36 to run for three years. It will come back annually. She questioned whether it would be possible
37 in the future to get State funds for the project.
38
39 Andreas Kammereck, Public Works Engineering River and Flood Manager, explained
40 that the County Council approved 100% payment for the Riverberry /Davis/Van Dalen sites. The
41 project was a pilot project. It only received its permits because it was treated as a pilot project.
42 Manditory within the permits was the monitoring plan. The monitoring plan was developed and
43 run through all the agencies for approval. They added in the entire scuba, aerial, survey, and
44 other habitat investigations. They could not get the pilot status without getting a monitoring plan
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 6/30/98, Page 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
as it is laid out. This is just the implementation.
Dawson stated that this coordinates with Endangered Species Act (ESA) activities. It
seems that there should be funding to go along.
Hoag questioned why they hope the amount would be lower next year. Kammereck
stated that, based on the items that are being studied this year, certain items would not have to be
studied the next year if they are already stable and don't need further evaluation.
Sutter questioned whether they are establishing a baseline the first year or it has already
been established. Kammereck stated that they did a survey of the site right after construction
was finished. That is considered the baseline. The initial part of the monitoring plan is to
replicate the baseline and see if it has changed.
Hoag moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
3. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING COUNTY ROAD PROJECT NO. 997014 AND THE
AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF SAXON ROAD BRIDGE
NO. 127A OVER THE SOUTH FORK NOOKSACK RIVER TO THE LOWEST
RESPONSIVE BIDDER ONE WAY CONSTRUCTION CO. INC., IN THE AMOUNT
OF $1,568,135 (AB98 -245)
Hoag stated that packet page 47 quoted the amount for what the contract was
being approved. Another page includes the engineering and right -of -way, for a total of $1.7
million. She questioned what they were approving.
Bruce Mills, Public Works Design/Construction Engineering Services Manager,
explained that they are establishing the road project with the resolution. They are not only
approving the contract amount to the bidder, but also project budget as well as the construction
budget.
Hoag questioned whether the $1.7 million should be listed on the first page.
Nasser Monsour, Public Works Assistant Director of Administration, stated that they like
to have a construction approved at $1.5 million. The resolution established the project, and lists
all of the costs. This is the way it is usually done.
Hoag moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
(Clerk's Note: The Chair moved back to item #2)
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 6/30/98, 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
4. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING COUNTY ROAD PROJECT NO. 996003 AND THE
AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF AUSTIN STREET,
FROM LAKE LOUISE ROAD TO CABLE STREET, TO THE LOWEST
RESPONSIVE BIDDER FRIBERG CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., IN THE AMOUNT
OF $618,857 (AB98 -246)
Hoag moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
5. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING COUNTY ROAD PROJECT NO. 997017 AND THE
AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF JACKSON ROAD,
FROM BROWN ROAD TO GRANDVIEW ROAD, TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE
BIDDER PARAGON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, IN THE AMOUNT OF
$299,685.10 (AB98 -247)
Hoag questioned why ARCO refinery contributed to this.
Bruce Mills, Public Works Design /Construction Engineering Services Manager, explained that
ARCO is very interested in making this an all weather road.
Hoag moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
6. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A
CONTRACT BETWEEN REBECCA PETERSON, D /B /A GENEVA
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, AND W14ATCOM COUNTY FOR THE
PROVISION OF PHASE II OF THE 1998 -99 LAKE WHATCOM EDUCATION
PROGRAM, FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $32,200 (AB98 -248)
Hoag moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
7. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO AWARD BID NO. 98 -75
TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE BIDDER LEN HONCOOP GRAVEL FOR THE
PURCHASE OF GRAVEL, CRUSHED, AND RIPRAP ROCK MATERIAL FOR THE
POINT ROBERTS LIGHTHOUSE PARK BEACH RESTORATION PROJECT, IN
THE AMOUNT OF $102,113.55 (AB98 -249)
Hoag questioned who the third bidder was and why they were they omitted.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 6/30/98, Page 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
Andreas Kammereck, Public Works River and Flood Engineer, explained that the third
bidder did not bid on all the items.
Hoag questioned whether the bid could have been broken up. She explained that it would
have been beneficial to break up the bid.
Roger DeSpain, Parks Director, explained that is difficult to break up the bid, and costs
go up, if you can get one bidder to do it without breaking it up, then they are only dealing with
one contractor.
Mills stated that the major item was the 5,000 tons of gravel. The crushed rock and the
riprap were also minimal items. For that, it was easier to keep one contractor.
Hoag moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
8. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
AGREEMENT BETWEEN RESOURCES AND WHATCOM COUNTY FOR
RECYCLING HOTLINE OPERATIONS AND THE 1998 -99 CLASSROOM
PRESENTATION PROGRAM, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $60,000 (AB98-
250)
Dawson questioned whether a tape could be used, instead of a presenter.
Ravyn Whitewolf, Public Works Solid Waste Engineer, explained that the interaction
with the presenter and the classroom is quality work, the presentation has been video taped for
anyone to review.
Brown asked how many calls come in on the hot line and how many records come in per
week. He believed that could be absorbed into a County function.
Carl Weimer, Resources, explained that the calls have varied a lot. It is up to 7,000
calls per year. Most of the calls deal with hazardous waste. Whitewolf explained that the
telephone log is broken down into categories and is provided to the County on a quarterly basis.
She also explained that, to have this operation in- house, people would call and get voice mail,
and other messaging services. There wouldn't be enough staff to handle all of the calls. Also,
some of the funding is done by a State grant.
Weimer stated that they charge the County 18 hours per week at $20 per hour.
Whitewolf stated that the contract amount for the hotline for one year is $24,000. The
County costs on that are $9,600.
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 6/30/98, Page 5
1 Brown asked for a copy of the records of calls coming in over the past year.
3 Dawson stated that she wanted to know whether the majority of the people that call the
4 hotline are businesses or individuals. If the people that call are individuals, it may be more
5 beneficial to change hotline hours to include the weekend.
7 Whitewolf stated that they have already advertised the hotline's current hours
8 extensively, and those are the hours that the people expect it to be open.
10 Hoag clarified that the contractor is available for calls for 40 hours per week, not how
11 many hours they are actually called or bill for. Whitewolf stated that was correct.
12
13 Sutter stated that they have never seen any reports that have been requested. She
14 questioned the measure of effectiveness of the education component. Based on the figures
15 given on the current hotline workload, it costs the County $3.40 per call, which seems like a lot.
16
17
18 Whitewolf responded that this is the first request that she's received for reports since she
19 worked in the Solid Waste Division, for the past year and a half. The first quarterly report when
20 she began working in that Division was distributed to the County Council members. In terms of
21 measuring effectiveness, the State has asked for the number of presentations, the number of
22 students that receive the presentations, and the number of materials that have been distributed.
23 They are hoping that the children take the materials home and change the behavior of the
24 parents.
25
26 Sutter questioned whether they are seeing any results of these efforts. Whitewolf stated
27 that they could do follow -up surveys.
28
29 Dawson agreed that this is a difficult area to measure.
30
31 Whitewolf stated that the actual recycling done is a way to measure the recycling rate. In
32 years prior to 1997, that would have been easy. With the demise of flow control in 1997, the
33 numbers have been rattled a bit. Recycling rate is a percentage of the disposal rate. After 1997,
34 all of the recycling that takes place in Whatcom County is being done by the consumer. The
35 programs have become more important than ever.
36
37 Brown stated that the major change in recycling is that people are not doing composting,
38 which was a major part of the County's recycling numbers. He questioned whether the County
39 had the rights to the phone system and the phone equipment, whether this is County phone
40 equipment, and if the County is paying the phone bills. Whitewolf explained that item number
41 11 of the contract explains the arrangement. The County is paying the phone bill. There are
42 costs relating to materials and overhead, which includes the phone bills, in the budgeted amount.
43 Also included is the time and labor spent when someone requests materials.
44
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 6/30/98, 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
Hoag questioned how the County determined the amount of $24,000 to spend on this
program. Whitewolf stated that they did a Request for Proposals, which outlined staffing a
hotline at 40 hours per week. ReSources was able to do this service at a much lower rate than
the other consultants, because they already have staff there doing other things related to the work
they do for the County. ReSources bid about 1/3 less than other bidders for the hotline services.
Hoag moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
9. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN
AGREEMENT BETWEEN MEUCCI CONSULTING AND WHATCOM COUNTY
FOR WASTE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING/HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS
WASTE OUTREACH AND PROMOTION SERVICES, IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO
EXCEED $35,000 (AB98 -258)
Hoag questioned the memo on page 122 and was not clear on why Meucci was chosen
over Resources.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A. The beginning of side B is inaudible and a
portion of the minutes were taken from the Clerk's notes)
Brown stated that only hazardous waste recycling opportunity is located in the City of
Bellingham and is open Monday through Friday. This restricts the access to County residents. It
seems unreasonable that the hours are not switched to include one day on the weekend.
Ravyn Whitewolf, Public Works Solid Waste Engineer, stated that they are working with
the City of Bellingham on that. There will be hours from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. on the first Saturday of
every month at no additional cost, beginning in August.
Dawson moved to recommend approval.
Motion failed 1 -1 with Hoag opposed.
10. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR PAYMENT OF COUNCIL MEMBER
EXPENSES AND /OR TRAVEL (AB98 -143D)
Hoag moved to recommend approval.
Motion carried unanimously.
OTHER BUSINESS
Dave Wareing, Deputy Administrator, spoke on the victim restoration program. The
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 6/30/98, Page 7
1 administration did research the issue and the State is willing to provide the same amount of
2 money and modify the grant to place this with an outside contractor. Steve Paus and Gary Wood
3 from Juvenile Court are available to discuss the issue today or during the evening Council
4 meeting.
6 Gary Wood, Juvenile Court Administrator, explained that this could be contracted, but it
7 would delay the service by several months. If the staff is an employee, then the County can
8 control the quality of the work. If the work is performed up to the State's expectations, then the
9 grant goes on for three years.
10
11 Steve Paus, Juvenile Court Probation Community Corrections Coordinator, stated that the
12 information contained in the memo has to do with the practicality of a person in this position
13 doing the best possible job for victims of crime. In order to do that, they need access to
14 information and access to the court system, including a direct pipeline to the judge, so they do
15 not make victims angrier. Some of the inquiries went to George Reid, Information Services
16 Manager, because the AS400 software is the means to keep track of restitution amounts for
17 victims. The AS400 software is confidential only to County employees. There is other
18 information that is also restricted. It is a burden to keep track of the cases because things move
19 on and off of the court calendar very quickly. When he wrote the grant, he had two choices. It
20 could have been applied for as the County government being the end user or as the County being
21 a pass - though funding agency for a contracted agency. He looked at the tasks and made the
22 decision that this kind of function would be more effective if someone was directly in the office.
23
24 Gary Wood stated that the person working on this would work with the victim assistance
25 coordinator in making sure that the victims know that they have a right to be in court and be
26 heard in court.
27
28 Hoag questioned whether the County could give access to the AS400 to a contractor.
29 Paus stated he didn't think that they could.
30
31 Wareing stated that, at this point in time, the only people with access to this information
32 are the courts and the law enforcement agency. It is a system closed to all but the law
33 enforcement system.
34
35 Wood stated that the system is closed by law. It is very well defined as to what
36 information can be exchanged on a regular basis without violating privacy.
37
38 Hoag questioned whether this legislation specifically prevented a contractor from having
39 access to this information. Paus stated that it did. King County has set up a victim mediation
40 program. The mediation is limited in scope to the issue.
41
42 Wareing stated that this is more of a coordinating, facilitating process where the program
43 coordinates with the victim to be in court and track what is going on.
44
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 6/30/98, 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
Hoag questioned whether there is any reason that an outside contractor could not access
the court calendar on -line. Wood stated that the court calendar is not on -line. It is created by the
Prosecuting Attorney in conjunction with the court's office.
Hoag questioned which information a contractor would not have access to. Wood
responded that it would be police reports and information on the kids' families.
Paus stated that they are trying to provide a system, which would allow them to get the
support that they need, including court time to speak to the judge and the juvenile offender. The
other piece has to do with cases that don't go to court. That is working with law enforcement
agencies and a community outreach effort for victims that need some assistance in helping them
deal with the emotional harm. They may not know whom, at that point, the offender is.
Dawson questioned whether Wood and Paus would come to the evening Council meeting
and discuss this and inform the full Council of the specific reasons.
Hoag asked them to provide specifically what a victim would need that an outside
contractor could not give them. Paus stated that information is in the memo.
Hoag questioned what specific information is in a police report that an outside contractor
would not be able to obtain and is needed to be of assistance to a victim. Paus stated that person
doing the worked specified in the grant would be classified by the Internal Revenue Service
(IRS) as an employee.
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 a.m.
Jill Nixon, Records' Transcription
ATTEST:
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Marlene Dawson, Council Member
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 6/30/98, Page 9
Finance and Administrative Services Committee, 6/30/98, Page 10