HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic Works August 11 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
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee
August 11, 1998
The meeting was called to order at 1:30 p.m. by Committee Vice -Chair Tom Brown in
the Council Committee Room, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
Also Present:
Marlene Dawson
Barbara Brenner
Absent:
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL
1. RESOLUTION DECLARING INTENT TO ESTABLISH ACADEMY ROAD, DELTA
LINE ROAD, HAM ROAD, MERTZ ROAD, TILBURY ROAD, AND VIEW HAVEN
LANE AS COUNTY ROADS, DECLARING THAT SUCH ESTABLISHMENT IS A
PUBLIC NECESSITY AND, DIRECTING THE COUNTY ROAD ENGINEER TO
REPORT TO COUNCIL UPON THE PROJECTS (AB98 -314)
Ed Henken, Public Works Director, stated that there are six County rights -of -way that
have not been publicly maintained roads. In the process of both residential and light industrial
development, people are in the process of bringing the roads up to public standards in
anticipating inclusion into the County road system. This is the first step towards inclusion. This
resolution will instruct the Engineering Division to do a report for each road right -of -way
regarding acceptance of the roads.
Dan Gibson, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, stated the language in the state Revised
Code of Washington (RCW) chapter 36.81 indicates that the request for inclusion can come
before the County Council by a petition of the area land owners or it can come from the County
Council. This resolution originated from the County, not by petition. The resolution requires a
declaration that it is a necessity to have the rights -of -way designated as County roads.
Engineering would then schedule a public hearing before the County Council.
Brown questioned whether the County would commit to a financial obligation by
approval of the resolution. Gibson responded that the only commitment is to the Engineer to do
a report and to create a notice for a public hearing.
Dawson stated that it would be better for the County's liability to have the roads up to
County standards.
Gibson stated that the County might not necessarily have a liability for privately
Public Works Committee, 8/11/98, Page 1
I constructed trails on county right -of -way. As travel becomes more frequent, the public interest
2 grows to the point that the County is prepared to take responsibility.
3
4 (Clerk's Note: Council Member Brenner arrived.)
5
6 Brown questioned whether the report would include information such as the length of the
7 roads and other roadway conditions and funding of the upgrades. Henken responded that
8 Academy Road might need repairs. The County is not paying for the costs. These upgrades are
9 all driven by the developer or adjacent property owner.
10
11 Dawson moved to recommend approval to the full Council.
12
13 Motion carried unanimously.
14
15 2. ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING A CHARGE TO PROVIDE REVENUE FOR THE
16 ACMENAN ZANDT SUB -ZONE FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT, SETTING A
17 DUE DATE FOR PAYMENT OF SERVICE CHARGES, AUTHORIZING
18 COLLECTION OF INTEREST AND PENALTIES ON DELINQUENT PAYMENTS
19 OF ASSESSMENTS AND ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR RECORDATION
20 AND FORECLOSURE OF LIENS RESULTING FROM DELINQUENCIES (AB98-
21 279)
22
23 (Clerk's Note: Brown turned the duties of the chair over to Committee Chair Brenner)
24
25 Brenner stated these next three items were in Council previously when Fred Polinder
26 stated the County needs to figure out a way to apply assessments. People outside of the flood
27 plain should not pay twice. They already pay the general flood tax. People make choices on
28 where they live. The County is helping to do its part with the general flood tax. She suggested
29 taking the budgets on all sub -zone districts and divide among properties among the flood plain in
30 the same way the County assessed properties in the general fund. There is a slight relationship to
31 assessed value.
32
33 Brown read from letter he wrote to Karen Frakes, Senior Civil Deputy Prosecutor, that
34 reflected his concerns. He also read from a ruling by the state Supreme Court regarding
35 Referendum 47, which stated that all taxes shall be uniform within a class. Tax uniformity
36 requires an equal tax rate and equality in valuing the tax. Gibson responded that the assumption
37 is that the assessment is different from a tax, for legal purposes. The Court's ruling applies to
38 taxation, not to assessment.
39
40 Brown stated that the burden is on the small landowner that cannot afford it. He
41 continued to read from his memo. He questioned how someone could be taxed a second time if
42 they are not receiving an increased benefit or contributing more to the flooding problems. This
43 started with the VanDalen- Riverberry issue and people should pay for part of the cost of the
44 benefits.
Public Works Committee, 8/11/98, Page 2
2 Dawson stated that everyone causes the flood in one way or another. Some people on the
3 river affect flooding even greater than others, just as people in the city contribute to stormwater
4 runoff.
5
6 Brown responded that everyone is paying the flood tax based on benefit received or
7 contribution to flooding. There has been no demonstration that people who are already paying
8 tax and not in the flood plain are contributing even more to the problem.
9
10 Brenner stated that if there are properties outside the flood plain that contribute noticeably
11 more to the flooding, such as a sewage treatment plant, they should be added to the assessment
12 role. Other contributors are generally incidental. If contributors are more than incidental, then
13 the County should levy a second assessment. She did not support the incidental contribution that
14 nature causes.
15
16 Dawson questioned situations regarding an upland timber holders. When trees are on the
17 property, the land is not assessed. Once the trees are cut, the land is assessed for a certain length
18 of time because it contributes more to flooding.
19
20 Brenner stated that cause would have to be proven and she relied on the sub -flood zone
21 districts to determine who the major contributors are.
22
23 Brown stated that when the assessment was established, the County Council was under the
24 impression that people in the areas knew what was happening. The public needs to be aware and
25 better notified when an assessment is proposed.
26
27 Dawson suggested that neighbors talk to each other and approach the County Council as a
28 community. She questioned whether the community could at some point request that the district
29 be cancelled and assessments stop. Gibson clarified that the County Council is also the Board of
30 Supervisors and determines whether the sub -flood zone district is needed and what the
31 assessments will be.
32
33 Brenner stated her support for ensuring the money is contributed fairly. In the past, she
34 did not support the general flood tax. The County knows which properties are outside of the
35 flood plain.
36
37 Gibson clarified that an assessment enables the County to assess state properties. 85% of
38 precipitation that causes flooding comes from above Deming, in the Foothills area.
39
40 Brown stated that flooding is a natural process. The same people are being taxed a second
41 time. He questioned how much work it would take to determine which properties are within the
42 flood plain. Keith Willnauer, Whatcom County Assessor, responded it would be fairly easy to
43 get the information if it was tied to the general assessment. The Assessor's office has been
44 helpful to the fullest possible extent. All the information that was requested can be provided.
Public Works Committee, 8/11/98, Page 3
2 Brown questioned the length of time necessary to get the information to the sub -flood
3 zone district boards. Willnauer responded that he would need to know what is expected before
4 deciding how long it would take.
5
6 Brenner questioned the length of time necessary to determine which parcels are in the
7 flood plain areas, then calculate the same assessments in the same proportion as the general flood
8 assessment. Willnauer responded that the information could be gathered almost immediately. If
9 administrative responsibilities are involved, such as notifying the County Treasurer of the
10 particular parcels to be assessed, it would take more time.
11
12 Barbara Cory, Treasurer, stated that she and Willnauer met with Bob Mitchell and
13 discussed existing issues regarding obtaining the parcel listing from the Assessor's office and her
14 deadline to the sub -flood zone district so that she can get the tax statements mailed. She
15 established a deadline for the sub -flood zone districts to get the taxes done. The deadline is
16 October 1. That deadline may have influenced why the sub -flood zone district boards have
17 chosen to assess a flat fee in the first year.
18
19 Brenner questioned whether the Assessor could provide the assessment information to the
20 Treasurer by October 1, given the parcel information. Willnauer stated that he could not.
21
22 Willnauer further stated that the responsibility to determine which parcels should be taxed
23 was the Public Works Department. The sub -flood zone districts are to be responsible for the role
24 of administrators. They then turn the role over to the Treasurer. He is providing information to
25 support the Public Works Department to prepare the role for the Treasurer.
26
27 Bob Mitchell stated that Lara McKinnon, the then Public Works staff member, met with
28 Willnauer and Cory. During that meeting, Willnauer said he could do things to delineating the
29 flood area and flood plain. He had a problem with parcels that have a water flow as a boundary.
30 There was a deadline for the Treasurer and Assessor. A decision was made to generate a role
31 and keep it within the Public Works Department because the Treasurer and Assessor did not
32 have time. The district board took the map and determined by personal knowledge which
33 parcels flood and which don't. The Public Works Department has the role as administrator.
34
35 Brenner clarified that the County knows which parcels are partially or wholly in the flood
36 plain. If a parcel is in the flood plain, either wholly or partially, then it should be assessed the
37 fee. The next step would be to determine the assessment valuation of each parcel. Willnauer
38 stated that the assessment valuation data is included in the information he provided. Henken has
39 that data at the Public Works Department.
40
41 Henken stated that the Public Works Department offered to maintain administration for
42 the flood assessment work. They have the information needed to determine the $2500
43 exemption. To change, it would require new ordinances and hearings, and this information has a
44 deadline to be submitted to the Treasurer. There is not enough time.
Public Works Committee, 8/11/98, 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
Brenner stated that it is disturbing that there has not been any consensus on the County
Council to move in this direction and explore the issues.
Henken stated that there is a misunderstanding that the County will leave the people in
the flood plain high and dry. The County is only trying to minimize the damage. That is why
the original tax was enacted.
Brenner stated that some parcels would have some protective measures for individual
properties, such as the Van Dalen farm. The overall flood plain will benefit the people living in
the flood plain.
Bob Mitchell, Everson, stated that it is possible to base the assessment on the countywide
general flood assessment. The residents of the sub -flood zone districts would pay an amount
equal to 30% of the general flood assessment, and those out of the sub -flood zone district would
pay an amount equal to 10% of the general flood assessment. The largest part of the production
was determining who resided in the flood plain. That work has been done. The Public Works
Department has to have the information timely to generate statements.
Cory stated that the deadline is October 1.
Dawson questioned whether the Council could expand the duties of a diking district in
some way and whether the people in a diking district are everyone residing in the flood plain or
just people that reside along the river. She further questioned whether overlap exists between
diking districts and sub -flood zone district.
Brenner responded that there is no connection, but the work is similar. They may be tied
in the future. Diking districts are assessed, not taxed, and the diking district commissioners are
elected.
Henken stated that there are four diking districts, which are strictly within the floodplain.
The sub -flood zone districts include the tributary area.
Ron Bronsema, Lynden/Everson Sub -Flood Zone District Chair, stated that there has
been a lot of stormwater runoff from the City of Lynden. Lynden also has a sewage treatment
facility and a composting facility. They are contributing more water down the hill. Lynden has
retarded the exit for the right bank overflow areas. Therefore, people living within the flood
plain are receiving more water and less benefit. Also, with Endangered Species Act (ESA)
regulations, the County can no longer protect the agriculture land banks through the 70 -30
program. The County is going to lose the farmland.
(Clerk's note: End of tape 1, side A)
Brown responded that it is inefficient and not a farsighted move to let that happen. In the
Public Works Committee, 8/11/98, Page 5
I long range, the land that is not important now will eventually be crucial.
2
3 Bronsema stated that there is no staff support to the flood section of the Public Works
4 Department.
5
6 Brenner stated that properties that can show significant contribution to the flooding
7 should be assessed. That information should be brought forward to the County Council.
8 Bronsema responded that it is just one or two parcels.
9
10 Brenner stated that the City of Lynden sewage treatment plant should be charged based
11 on the properties within the city limits for its contribution to the flooding. It would be a lot of
12 work to evaluate individual parcels.
13
14 Mitchell stated that it would be legally difficult to assess the entire city. One of the
15 reasons for establishment of the sub -flood zone districts is that the revenue generated from the
16 countywide general flood assessment would make capital improvements, and the revenue
17 generated from the sub -flood zone district would fund the maintenance on the capital
18 improvements.
19
20 Larry Williams, P.O. Box 2067, Bellingham, Whatcom County Flood Control Zone
21 District Advisory Committee, questioned whether the Flood Advisory Committee funding is
22 temporary. Brown clarified that the funding is reviewed every two years.
23
24 Brown stated he believed the purpose of the sub -flood zone districts was to include those
25 properties not located in the flood plain. He questioned why a diking district was not formed
26 instead. Mitchell responded that in a sub -flood control zone district, one has to either benefit or
27 contribute to be assessed, according to the RCW. It has always been the position that some
28 people contribute to flooding, so they should be responsible for a share, and other people benefit
29 from flood control work so they should also be responsible for a share.
30
31 Brown stated that he could not support equal assessment of lower and higher valued
32 properties. Last year he approved the one time funding until a system could be in place.
33
34 Mitchell stated sub -flood zone districts depend on the Board of Supervisors for direction.
35 The sub -flood zone districts cannot do major, long -term maintenance to structures.
36
37 Fred Nowicke, 3341 Berg Road, stated that residents met to chose whether to form a
38 diking district or the sub -flood zone districts. The people at the meetings chose to form the sub -
39 flood zone districts.
40
41 Brenner stated that not everyone knew about the meetings. Nowicke responded that from
42 2500 mailings, only 18 people showed up.
43
44 Brenner commented that they need to get the media involved to notify the public.
Public Works Committee, 8/11/98, 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
Mailings need to catch the eye of the people receiving them.
Nowicke stated that if there is a major flood, $5 million won't be enough to help. The
general fund was cut in half two years ago, so there is not the same money coming in as there
previously was. People need to be involved in community projects. The protection of Swift
Creek is necessary to protect people along the Sumas River. If the few people that took care of
Swift Creek in the past had not done the work, there would be larger wetland areas and more
drainage problems. Having the Sumas River dredged alleviated problems. There would be more
flooding problems than there are now.
Dawson stated that the sub -flood zone district is essential. She would like to see the
board members to the sub -flood zone districts elected. Henken stated that state law prohibits
election of the board members.
Bob Knutson, 6070 Saxon Road, Acme, Acme/Van Zandt Sub -Flood Zone District Chair,
stated that they posted notices everywhere, but only 19 people showed up. If people want to pay
attention, they will. The sub -flood zone districts need to look at the different sections in a
different way. The South Fork Valley is different than Lynden. Everyone in the valley is
affected.
Brenner stated that was the justification for the general tax.
Knutson stated that their share of the general tax and the assessments collected would not
be enough money to protect the valley. Fees need to be collected from timber corporations.
Brenner stated they can look at the timber applications for the scope of the larger timber
operations.
Knutson stated that the sub -flood zone districts were told they could not assess based on
percentages. Brenner stated she never felt comfortable with the assessment method of the
general tax.
Marian Beddill, 3600 Seeley, stated that she would not like to have the inequity of the
flat fee imposed. She questioned whether there is a distinct difference between the general flood
assessment and the sub -flood zone district assessments in how the monies are going to be used.
The assumption is that general assessment is for capital improvements, and the sub -flood zone
district assessment is for maintenance on the capital improvements. Because of the different
activities, the argument of "double- taxing" softens.
Tom Westergreen questioned the responsibility of the sub -flood zone districts. His board
wasn't sure when they developed their budget.
Henken stated the assessment would be $101 dollars in the Sumas Sub -Flood Zone
District.
Public Works Committee, 8/11/98, Page 7
I Westergreen questioned whether the burden should be put upon the neighbors. One
2 reason for the sub -flood zone districts was to widen out the base.
3
4 Henken stated that not every parcel is a large parcel. The majority of the single - family
5 parcels in Everson would also see the large increase. Brenner stated she did not want assess the
6 average amount, but to do the same equation that is used for the general assessment.
7
8 Willnauer revisited the issue of equity. He encouraged the committee to look at the
9 Assessor's data to determine equity in the sub -flood zone districts. Brenner stated that she
10 thought that was his job.
11
12 Willnauer stated timber parcels pay minimal flood assessment. The majority of timber is
13 in a property tax exemption program that has their assessments below $2500.
14
15 Brenner stated that sub -flood zone districts could put a fee on timber land that wouldn't
16 be in relationship to their assessed value.
17
18 Phyllis Harder, 606 Mead Ave, Everson, questioned why certain parcels have been
19 targeted for assessment. Out of 93,000 parcels in the County, 6600 parcels have been assessed.
20 She would rather have the entire County assessed at a few dollars per parcel.
21
22 Brenner does not want to raise the general assessment. Those outside the flood plain
23 should not have to pay the additional assessment.
24
25 Cory stated that one concern is that the tax statement is running out of room to list all the
26 assessments. Each assessment should be listed independently and not hidden. It was an error in
27 the Treasurer's office to not include a notice to explain the assessment. It was not an attempt to
28 hide the assessment. She is trying to restructure the tax statement.
29
30 Brenner stated that she was uncomfortable with the way it is and it should be sent back to
31 the drawing board to determine the most equitable assessment possible.
32
33 Beddill questioned whether someone could flag each parcel for location in the sub -flood
34 zone districts, and would the assessor be able to determine the assessment or get the information
35 to someone who could determine the assessment. Willnauer responded that he could provide the
36 determinations now, and it is even more possible if he only had to provide the information and
37 someone else made the determination.
Moc
39 Brown moved to recommend items 2 -4 on this agenda be sent back to the sub -flood zone
40 districts to calculate assessments based on parcel valuation within the flood plain or to major
41 known contributors/beneficiaries outside the floodplain.
42
43 Motion approved unanimously.
44
Public Works Committee, 8/11/98, 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
3. ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING A CHARGE TO PROVIDE REVENUE FOR THE
LYNDEN/EVERSON SUB -ZONE FLOOD CONTROL ZONE DISTRICT,
COLLECTION OF INTEREST AND PENALTIES ON DELINQUENT PAYMENTS
OF ASSESSMENTS AND ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES FOR RECORDATION
AND FORECLOSURE OF LIENS RESULTING FROM DELINQUENCIES (AB98-
280)
4. 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-
281)
OTHER BUSINESS
U IaEll
The meeting was adjourned at 3:00 p.m.
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
ATTEST:
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Tom Brown, Council Member
Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk Barbara Brenner, Council Member
Public Works Committee, 8/11/98, Page 9