Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil July 29 1997WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Regular Council Meeting July 29, 1997 The meeting was called to order at 7 p.m. by Council Chair Ward Nelson in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue. Also Present: Absent: Marlene Dawson Kathy Sutter Barbara Brenner Tom Brown Alvin Starkenburg Robert Imhof ANNOUNCEMENTS Nelson announced that two issues of pending litigation were discussed in the Committee of the Whole (AB97 -018). Direction was given by legal counsel. Nelson also announced that an appeal of the Hearing Examiner =s decision filed by Carruthers was discussed (AB97 -212) in the Committee of the Whole. Starkenburg moved to acknowledge that Planning and Development Services withdrew its request, and that Council uphold the Hearing Examiner =s decision. Motion carried 5 -1 with Brenner opposed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE MARCH 25 AND JULY 15, 1997 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETINGS AND THE JULY 15, 1997 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING Starkenburg moved approval of the minutes as presented. Motion to approve carried unanimously. Imhof moved to put the issue of the criminal justice tax on for discussion this evening. Motion carried unanimously. OPEN SESSION Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 1 The following people addressed Council: Doug Davis, 2988 Hopewell Road, Everson: Swift Creek and Nooksack River flooding (AB97 -275; AB97 -267) Butch Qualm, 3783 Hatton Road: Nooksack River flooding (AB97 -267) Bob Mitchell, 416 Garfield Street, Sumas mayor: Nooksack River flooding (AB97 -267) Harriet Nielson: Nooksack River flooding (AB97 -267) Genevieve VanDeilen, 6881 Nooksack Road, Everson: Nooksack River flooding (AB97 - 267) CONSENT AGENDA Imhof reported for Finance and Administrative Services Committee and moved approval of items 1 through 6. Motion to approve carried unanimously. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS FOR SUPPLY AND MAINTENANCE OF PHOTOCOPIERS FOR WHATCOM COUNTY DEPARTMENTS (AB97 -262) 2. AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE FOR STATE ADMINISTRATION OF SALES AND USE TAX (AB97 -263) 3. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING CRP- 995020, THE REPLACEMENT OF HILLAIRE ROAD BRIDGE NO. 6 OVER THE RED RIVER, AND APPROVAL OF AWARD OF CONTRACT TO THE LOWEST RESPONSIVE BIDDER, ONE WAY CONSTRUCTION CO., IN THE AMOUNT OF $298,938 (AB97 -264) 4. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH INTER- FLUVE, INC. FOR COMPLETION OF THE DAVIS- RIVERBERRY/VANDELLEN PILOT PROJECT ON THE NOOKSACK RIVER (AB97 -196A) 5. RESOLUTION IN THE MATTER OF APPLICATION TO THE WASHINGTON STATE INTERAGENCY COMMITTEE FOR OUTDOOR RECREATION FOR FUNDING ASSISTANCE FOR INDOOR RANGE BACKSTOP REPLACEMENT (AB97 -265) 6. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION FOR THE EXECUTIVE TO ENTER INTO AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH PIERCE COUNTY FOR THE Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 2 PURCHASE OF ONE USED SEWER JET IN THE AMOUNT OF $40,000 (AB97 -266) PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE AMENDING WCC 8.13, SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DISTRICT, AND ALLOWING FOR COLLECTION OF AN EXCISE TAX ON SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICES (AB97 -228) Jeff Monsen, Director of Public Works, gave a staff report. He proposed the following amendments: Amendment No. 1: packet page 143, lines 38 -40: ABE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that per Whatcom County Code 8.13.030, the Whatcom County Council hereby sets the excise tax rate at $8.50 per ton on disposal eharg°s Mlle solid waste collection and hauling services provided by certificated or franchised haulers.= Amendment No. 2: Exhibit "A ", packet page 148, lines 18 -24: Reinstate previous definition for "residential dwelling ". AH. A. "residential dwelling" shall include each single family house, apartment, houseboat, or the dwelling unit which is separately billed for waste collection service by a franchised or certificated hauler. Forest areas, farms or ranches that elect to use collection service shall be considered as residential dwellings for purposes of this chapter. Residents of apartments, hotel, dormitories, boarding houses, maritime vessels, or other housing units shall not be separately taxed if the landlord or some other pa . arranges for solid waste collection and pays for solid waste collection and the tax on behalf of tenants or residents.= Amendment No. 3 - Exhibit "A ", packet page 149, lines 4 -8 : 8.13.030 Excise privilege tax levied: Reinstate previous language of first sentence. AAn excise privilege tax shall be levied upon the charges paid for solid waste collection by each residential dwelling and nd by each business or institution in the district disposa=l. This excise privilege tax shall be levied on a per ton basis and be billed by certificated or franchised haulers of solid waste, all as authorized by RCW 36.58.140. This tax shall be equal throughout the district, and shall not exceed $8.50 per ton without the approval of all cities and town in the district. The county council shall set the level of the tax from time to time by ordinance.- Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 3 Nelson opened the public hearing, and no one spoke. Nelson closed the public hearing. Imhof moved to adopt the ordinance with the amendments proposed by Monsen. Starkenburg moved to change the rate from $8.50 to $6.50 per ton. There was discussion on the motion. Starkenburg amended his motion to state the $6.50 amount in the ordinance and have the Whatcom County Code (WCC) allow up to $8.50. There was discussion on the motion. Motion to amend carried 5 -1 with Brenner opposed. Motion to adopt carried unanimously. 2. RESOLUTION CREATING A DIKING DISTRICT IN THE VICINITY OF BERTRAND CREEK AND CALLING FOR AN ELECTION (AB97 -257A) Ed Henken, Engineering, gave a staff report. Tom Hayden, Engineering, also gave a staff report. He requested Council examine Exhibit A which addresses responsibilities and also explained the differences between a subzone flood district and a diking district. He explained that diking districts elect their own officers. For a subzone, the Council sits as the Board of Supervisors. (Clerks Note: Tape 1, Side B) Nelson opened the public hearing, and no one spoke. Nelson closed the public hearing. Imhof moved approval of the resolution. There was discussion on the motion. Motion to approve carried unanimously. 3. ORDINANCE 97 -033 EXTENDING THE INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE CHAPTER 2.24A ON A SIX MONTH INTERIM BASIS FOR THOSE FEE LANDS Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 4 WITHIN THE LUMMI RESERVATION AND WITHIN THE MT. BAKER SNOQUALMIE NATIONAL FOREST (AB97 -227) Michael Knapp, Director of Planning Division, gave a staff report. Nelson opened the public hearing, and no one spoke. Nelson closed the public hearing. Imhof moved to adopt the ordinance. (Clerks Note: Council voted on this but did not need to do so) Motion carried unanimously. OTHER ITEMS RESOLUTION PROVIDING WHATCOM COUNTY VOTERS THE OPPORTUNITY TO IMPLEMENT A SALES TAX FOR CORRECTIONS AND ADVISE THE COUNTY COUNCIL OF ITS DESIRE TO IMPLEMENT A SALES TAX FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SERVICES (AB97 -274) Imhof reported for Finance and Administrative Services Committee. Nelson moved approval of the resolution. Mic Moynihan, Whatcom County Superior Court judge, stated the need for an additional Superior Court judge and additional staff. Pete Kremen, County Executive, explained the need for the tax to fund better law enforcement and criminal justice services. Nelson explained that there are two separate taxes: one for criminal justice, the second for a jail. County Prosecutor Dave McEachran addressed Council. He explained that a Criminal Justice Working Group was formed and meets every two weeks. The group consists of all the criminal justice agencies in the County. He urged passage of the resolution. County Sheriff Dale Brandland addressed the Council; he supported the resolution. Jon Ostlund, Whatcom County Public Defender, addressed Council in support of the resolution. Patrick Alesse, 4825 Alderson Road, Birch Bay: Supported the resolution. Geri (sp ?) Payne, 3608 Vining Street: Wanted to know where the funds go from the city of Bellingham. Dave Wareing, Executive =s Office, explained that basically the city is repaying for services rendered (as a reimbursement) now and to the future for current services rendered. The expenses are from Current Expense, and the reimbursement goes into Current Expense also. Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 5 (Clerks Note: Tape 2, Side A) Art Anderson, 5326 Williams Road, Everson, Chair of the Blue Ribbon Panel: Supported the resolution. Bob Wiesen, 3314 Douglas Road: Asked if there would be a sunset date once the 1 /10th of one percent is imposed. Nelson explained that once bonding is complete, Council would have the ability to stop the tax. Fred Nowicke, 3341 Berg Road, Everson: Supported the resolution. Robert Shultz (sp ?), Sudden Valley: Supported the resolution. Motion to approve the resolution carried unanimously. 2. ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A CODE OF ETHICS REGARDING CONTRACT INTERESTS FOR WHATCOM COUNTY ELECTED OFFICIALS (AB97 -187) Brenner reported for Public Works and Capital Projects Committee and stated that this item was held in committee for further work (August 12 agenda). ADDED 3. DISCUSSION REGARDING FLOOD PROTECTION WORK ON THE SOUTH FORK OF THE NOOKSACK RIVER IN ACME (AB97 -267) (Clerks Note: A verbatim of the discussion and vote was done only for clarification purposes) Brenner: AMonsen brought forward a proposal for $122,000 to do some stabilization on the river by Betty Lou Close =s property, which really does have an effect beyond her property. It seemed very reasonable. We had a unanimous vote to support that, and I will move that as a motion to be voted on.= Nelson: AMotion is for approval of the $122,000 for ... - Brenner: AOh, I =m sorry. I wanted to add to that. We =ve also given direction for staff- - this is not a gift. We =ve given direction to staff to come up with a different kind of policy besides the 70/30. Seventy /thirty is fine when you =ve already got districts formed. It takes time to form districts, even subflood area districts. There =s another proposal that would be 100% /100% where the County - -if we feel that it =s important to a broader area - -that we would fund 100% of a project and then we, if people don---t have time to form their own diking districts or whatever, we can actually create the subflood control zone. A lot of that work is just about done to do that, so we would have the ability to do that. I =m definitely supportive Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 6 of that. But this needs to be done now. I hope people don--t think that we =re just giving a gift. Nelson: Awhile I appreciate your enthusiasm in your committee, etc., in giving direction to staff, don--t you think it =s important that these types of discussions come to the full Council and public so that we can decide whether or not this is the type of policy we want to instruct staff on as far as the 7/30, etc.?= Brenner: AOh, no. What we did is ask to do some kind of draft so we can bring it to the full Council and to committee.- Nelson: AOh. You said you gave direction to them as far as what you felt we should be doing.- Brenner: ANo. Actually, I misstated. What I =m saying is that we asked them to bring forward - -it =s already been done. There is a proposal that was worked on a couple of years ago to do this 100 % /100% split. It =s just that we don--t have anything definitive in front of us to look at ... = Nelson: ASo they--re bringing back information as far as ... = Brenner: AYes, that will come to the Council.= Dawson: Al might just explain it a little bit differently. In the criteria of the 70/30 split, we are allowed the 100 %, but there is no criteria established as to when. And so we =ve asked for them to bring some criteria.- Brenner: ABut it would only be for us to discuss and bring a recommendation forward to the Council. We =re not circumventing the Council here.= Nelson: ASo the motion is for approval of the money for the Close property. Any discussion ? - Starkenburg: AWell, I understand the enthusiasm and I understand that there may be a need but in no way can we have a committee meet and come up with what it takes and bring it back here without the other pieces being in place. And so, I think we really need to be looking at some control of committee work, paperwork, being brought forward unless they—re bringing it forward under the analysis that Ms. Dawson stated that you--re taking an exception here, but I =m hearing two different messages, and so I guess I =m asking for clarity. What are we actually acting on? Something in a singular fashion or is there something that the committee =s bringing forward and there =ll be more coming every week or every other week when we have Council meetings? I think we need to be aware of that. Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 7 I have sympathy for this particular one. This has been around for awhile, but still, we need to go through the same format; otherwise, we =re going to have such a mix -match of how people are treated.= Nelson: Al think you =ve heard from Mr. Mitchell from Sumas that both these have gone through -- correct me if I =m not mistaken -- through the Flood Control Advisory Board with a recommendation for approval of these - -and I assume the other project, Riverberry- -will be also included in this. So, this has gone through a process somewhat different than what perhaps we would like to see, and that =s something that, if my understanding is correct, Council member Brenner as well as Dawson, is referring to, that we get an idea how a process is formulated so that we don--t get individual projects coming each week on this, and that there =s a review process. How does this tie in with the whole river system ? - Brenner: ACan I just answer his question there? The other part of it is if we don--t approve this tonight, we will have lost our window of opportunity for this year. That was the only reason. In a perfect world, it would be great if we could have done all those things, and I agree with Alvin that I wish we had done it that way, but we haven =t, and time =s running out, and I still believe that we could get these projects done -- hopefully get them done this year - -and still create a policy that would make sure people understand this isn =t a gift.= Imhof: Al just think it =s a bad precedence to set when we start paying 100 %. I talked to the gentleman from the Nooksack fisheries and, you know, it =s sort of the analogy of your 16 -year old child who you give a car to and he goes out and beats the crap out of it. Well, if you make him pay 30 %, they =re going to take a little better care of it, they--re going to do the maintenance on it, and they--re going to do what =s required. I think that =s real close to what happens on the River. In the discussion earlier, Open Session, Mrs. Nielsen said - -she =s one of the neighbors in the Riverberry area - -said, well, they sat there for eight years and watched the land erode. Excuse me, the landowners have some responsibility, and after ... it would =ve been a small project eight years but they sat by for eight years and watched the land erode. I think that tells the insight of the people who own the land. They ... and if we give them 100% and there =s a ... are they going to manage it they way they would if they had some money into it? I don =t think so. And I think that =s why the districts have been set up, why we set up ours 40 years ago and why the new ones are coming online is because they want some say, and they =re willing to put some money in for that say and what happens on that River. And I think it =s a bad precedence to set both of these projects, the one in Acme and the one on the Nooksack.= Brown: AWell, let =s make it very clear. People can =t go in and do the repairs because they =re not allowed. We passed our own ordinances that restrict people from Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 8 going into buffer areas on the streams and everything else, so people just can =t go in and fix >em. And we should be working to make damn sure that they have the ability to go in and protect their property instead of trying to figure out how to stop >em from going in there. This situation is a little different. We aren =t, at Acme, we are not seeing the land float out into the Bay, but it does affect the whole community or the, basically, the community there at Acme. And it is my understanding that they are willing to form a subflood control zone or district so they can and will take over the responsibility for the maintenance of that which, in the long run, will more than pay their 30 %, and so it =s not a freebie.= Brenner: AWell, if I would take Mr. Imhof =s argument a step further, I would that the only people, then, who are ever going to be able to stabilize their property are people with the financial wherewithal to afford it, and I think that is extremely discriminating. The fact that we =re bringing forward a different kind of proposal that would, in effect, in the end have these people paying their fair share but not having to put out -of- pocket immediately up front is going to broaden it so everybody can be part of the solution. And I don--t understand what part of not a free gift isn =t understood here, but what we =re trying to do is create different kinds of policies for the people who can =t put these large amounts of money up front, especially on projects that affect more than their own private property. And I would like to say since that comment was just made that Mrs. Close in particular has basically, she =s used her whole pension, she =s out of money. She has put forward that 70/30 over the years, and she =s done one heck of a job in protecting that area, and this does affect the whole community, a lot of the community of Acme. I think that if we =re not going to try and set up systems that work for everybody, then we are just discriminating. Nelson: Al will be supporting both these proposals. We only have the one. I have the same concern Mr. Imhof has raised: what type of Pandora---s box are we opening? My hope is that this gets rectified. If there is clear delineation how this process occurs. I think that by evidence of the petition for Mrs. Close that there =s a community -wide support for this type of thing that is indicative of not just an individual project but a community concern and, therefore, I will support that. I also understand the concern raised for, Mr. Mitchell =s raised about the diking district or a subdistrict that will be formed. I think that if we do anything at Riverberry that does need to be protected, I hate to see investments go down the drain if there =s not a follow -up with those investments. So, I think those are community wide, community based, and that was the idea behind it-- community taxes to start doing some things. Whether or not these are the right things, at least they =re something.= Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 9 Starkenburg: AIn light of that, I think we need some assurance if we =re going to move forward on a $122,00 expenditure that there will be a subflood control zone district or something else formed there. So, we really should be hearing from Engineering or Public Works as to what work has taken, or what communication, has taken place out there and what the intent is. In the absence of that, it =s very difficult to make the decision to make that expenditure. And I echo the same concerns that I stated before and Imhof is raising. We need some consistency here. So specifically, the question is what is the intent of the people in this general area? Henken: AOur staff has been working with the group of people from the South Fork Valley. We =ve had one evening meeting in Acme. There =s another one scheduled for tomorrow evening. I can =t, of course, guarantee what their consensus - -if they can come up with a consensus - -is going to be. As a result of the first meeting, they were, in general, supportive of either a subflood control zone district or a diking district. But they wanted a general mailing to go out, which has gone out, to the entire people in the Valley explaining the difference between the two methods of doing something.- Starkenburg: ASo my follow -up would be that the only way I can vote for this is with that assurance that that would be following - -one of the two. And I think I would like to see us move it forward with that type of language with that indication that we would fund it with the provision that they form either of the two and that we have assurance that that expenditure will be maintained, etc.- Henken: AThe subflood zone district has to be established by this body - -you have to do that.= Starkenburg: Al know, but they have to understand then that we would do it.- Imhof: AIf they don--t do one, we can do the other.= Brenner: AYeah. That =s what I said initially, and I don--t mind putting that provision in that we give them the option of forming a diking district and if that doesn =t fly that we form a flood subflood control district because I think they just haven--t gotten there yet, and I think they will. And I think the other project will too, and I =d like to see that kind of wording. Do we have...? Nelson: AOkay. The motion would be for approval of the funding for the project and to include the requirement that either a diking district be formed or a subflood control zone district.- Brenner: AOr we form... =. Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 10 Imhof: Al don =t think that needs to be included in the resolution, or whatever it is. I think the intent of the Council is to form. You--re going to form it in six months or we will form it ourselves.- Starkenburg: AWe don--t know if the people are all united in the effort out there. There may be some that are and some that aren =t. So, I =d rather send that message with it so that they know that with the funds come the responsibility, and we =ve already taken the extra step by going to 100% financing in this particular case.= Nelson: AIs there any problems with doing that, Mr. Monsen ? - Imhof: Al think I can support it with that.= Nelson: AThe motion is before the Council. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed.- Motion carried unanimously. Nelson: AI =m sorry. The motion was to fund the Close project in Acme for $122,000 to include language in which would be requested the diking district be formed by that community or a subflood control zone district will be created by the Council.- # DISCUSSION OF SWIFT CREEK FLOODING CONCERNS (AB97 -275) Brenner reported for Public Works and Capital Projects Committee and moved to request Administration send a letter (to be drafted by Jeff Monsen, Public Works Director) to the Army Corps of Engineers to attempt to streamline the process. Motion carried unanimously. Brenner moved to write to the Canadian government requesting support for the above. Motion carried unanimously. # DISCUSSION REGARDING SAFETY OPTIONS FOR LAKE WHATCOM BOULEVARD (AB97 -272) Brenner reported for Public Works and Capital Projects Committee and stated direction was given to staff to examine various options discussed in committee and report back to committee with recommendations. Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 11 4. STATUS REPORT REGARDING RIVERBERRY BANK STABILIZATION PROJECT (AB97 -196B) (Clerks Note: A verbatim of the discussion and vote was done only for clarification purposes) Brenner: AAgain, I would like to see this, we unanimously voted to bring this forward for recommendation of approval. I would like to see the language in this one, too, that within a certain amount of time a diking district would be set up where we would form a subflood control zone district.= Imhof: AWhat =s the dollar amount on this one? Brenner: AIt =s around a $1 million ... we got a new ... $1,333,678.- Imhof: ADoes this do the backslope vegetation? Do this do the, all the pretty stuff?= Monsen: AJeff Monsen, Public Works. What I just passed out to those members of the Council that weren =t at the committee meeting this afternoon is the most recent estimate on the project. I need to mention specifically that in very general terms, the dollar amount for the project is the same as you saw actually a couple of weeks ago. We =ve actually added one item, and that is to remove some riprap that =s out in the River channel that =s actually directing the water towards the banks. That =s an additional $40,000. That is, by and large, is the difference- - even though if you compare the two, there =s plus and minus in various categories, as we =ve been come to refine the numbers. If you remove that one new item, then the dollar amounts would be almost identical to what you saw before. What I would ask as I described to the committee this afternoon is that this estimate— the $1,333,000 - -is an estimate with a 10% contingency built into it, the assuming being that there will be some on the ground adjustments needed to occur as this project moves ahead. My concern, though, that I would ask you to consider an additional 10% contingency is that as we are pulling more and more detail together to try and actually get this to work accomplished during the month of August that we will have a difficult time to provide any assurance that we can go to the lowest price because, in many cases, the lowest price either won =t be available or will have already consumed it and have to obtain more. I =m afraid of some of the purchasing issues that may come up and would request your concurrence on additional 10% contingency. That would bring it with a 20% contingency to $1,125,000.= Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 12 Starkenburg: AMr. Chair, would you state that again. I =m looking at contingency of 14 on the bottom and 79 on the top. So which are you putting in both of those? Monsen: AThis contingency that =s on this estimate is the contingency for on the ground adjustments and will likely need to occur on a day -to -day basis.= Starkenburg: AThat =s 79 ... and you want to double that one ? - Monsen: AWhat I =m asking for an additional 10% that very likely may need to be accessed to deal with purchases that won =t be at the lowest price because the lowest price just flat isn =t available any longer.- Starkenburg: AUnderstood. But I =m just trying to get ... are you also talking about the 10% contingency on the bottom of $14,520 being doubled ? - Monsen: AYes.= Brown: AWhat will the top contingency go to then? From $79,450 to what? Monsen: AActually, what I did was the $1,333,000 at the bottom, which is the total including the 10% contingency, I =m asking that additional contingency be applied that would bring the total to $1.125 million.... We talked about additional contingency this morning, but we didn =t get to the point of saying what the real number was.= Nelson: AQuestion. You already have contingency here of 10% cost overruns, I =m assuming, and now you--re asking for an additional. Could this not be handled as supplemental? Why? Monsen: ANo. We need to get this project completed. We need to place orders in the next two days for the majority of the materials we =re going to use. By the end of the week, we=ll have made a majority of the orders and scheduling for this activity if we move ahead....- Nelson: AMy only concern here is that you have put in, okay, but it will still will go out for a bid, correct? Monsen: ANo.- Nelson: AWell, then, we =re already telling the public we =re willing to pay 10% more than what we have here.= Monsen: AThe vast majority of this project, at least three - quarters of this project, will be Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 13 accomplished under normal bidding and acquisition procedures because of the bids we already have in place for materials and equipment. What we don-7t have normal bidding procedures available for are some of the unique elements. Somewhere between $100- 150,000 of this project we --11 actually need to waive bidding requirements in order to complete the project this month.= Nelson: AFor those types of materials, why would you add an additional 10% that you--re letting them know that you are paying, why don--t you say here it is, take it or leave it?= Monsen: AThe additional 10% contingency, the one example would be we know in order to complete this project at this point that it =s going to take at least ten or more trucks hauling rock for an entire month. We know that we can =t limit it to ten trucks for a month. It =s going to be a shorter period of time. We =re going to probably have to find 20 trucks. We know that we =re not likely to find 20 trucks in this County in the month of August. We don--t know how far we need to go at what price. We wouldn =t expect to see outlandish prices and wouldn=t accept outlandish prices, but we don--t know.= Nelson: AOf course, now we can =t asked Mr. Starkenburg to donate them, can we ?- Starkenburg: AAnd you could =ve.= Monsen: AI =m just saying as an example. I can =t stand here and tell you today that there are concerns relative to some of the acquisitions that we may not have enough resources in this community to do this project during this month.- Wareing: AMr. Chairman, I guess I have to rise to a point of order here. There are several elements that need to be taken into consideration here. The Administration initially endorsed this at a much lower level of funding because we felt that it was, in fact, a dire emergency, and it is our belief that this is still the case. As far as we =re concerned, this has to be the case. This has to be a dire emergency, and I guess I would question the mechanism by which this money is being spent. I think that there =s a requirement here that there be an ordinance that this be declared an emergency, and if you have an emergency ordinance if nothing less and this be taken care of in that fashion. And, again, we would have to indicate that this has to be a dire emergency for this situation to occur in this form. That =s one of the reasons why the exceptions that Mr. Monsen is talking about have to be available because once we start this thing, once you get on the ride, you--re there for the duration until it =s finished.= Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 14 Brenner: AWell, I think that =s a point well taken and unless something--s happened since our meeting, Mr. Monsen, there =s also, unless I misunderstood what Mr. Monsen said earlier, there is a slight possibility that even if we do it this way, emergency and all, we may not be able to do it because of lack of trucks or material or something, but if we don--t try, we know we =re not going to be able to do it, and I would move that we do it as an emergency ordinance and... .=— Wareing: AWell, we could help draft that.= Brenner: AI will move that it =s drafted as an emergency ordinance, that the language is in there the same as the Acme project, that a diking district will be created within a certain length of time or the Council will create a subflood control district.- Wareing: AThen I would reiterate the fact that this has to be an emergency and otherwise we cannot support this because it is a clear change of policy. And that =s one of the things that does concern us here and that our policy at this point in time all of a sudden is taking legs and is somewhat in limbo. And the only way this can be justified- -and I do think it has to be justified based on the utilization of the funds that are being used - -is that this is a dire emergency and does pose a real threat to public facilities and waterways and things such as that.= Nelson: AProcess ... and Council is now ... Ms. Frakes. Does the Clerk have any additional information that can enlighten us on this process. I have not in four years done an emergency ordinance.- Brenner: ADidn =t we do one on Critical Areas at one point? Frakes:AI am questioning whether this is appropriate for an ordinance. I have been listening to what you =re saying. Granted, I =m not that familiar with what you--re talking about. But this subject matter on first flush doesn =t seem appropriate for an ordinance. Were you planning originally before this talk of an emergency came up to do it by ordinance? Wareing: ASee, this was originally done by discussion. This was brought forward as a discussion issue. Now granted this has been moved forward on a fast track. I think what needs to be done ... my recommendation to the Council would be is that you request the Executive to declare an emergency in this situation, and we can follow up then with the necessary documentation. You can pass an emergency ordinance... .= Brenner: ABut it may not have to be an ordinance. It can be an emergency without....- Nelson: AWhy don--t we let the Administration come back with all the answers on that.- Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 15 Brenner: AThen, the motion will be to declare an emergency, and write it how it needs to be written.= Starkenburg: AIt =s been an ongoing emergency for some time then, and if we=re going to declare it an emergency, then I don =t know why we need to go in and spend $1.1 million plus to fix one small portion. All we have to do is fly it, walk it, look at the pictures. It only is the beginning of a huge project. We don--t have the funds for that. If we =re going to declare an emergency, let =s get in there and open up the channel where it used to be, cut right through, it =s pretty evident. Put the river right back where it was. When you get the channel cut and pushed up, well, let the water come and run on through it. It =s an emergency. If you want to take care of these types of things under emergency, that =s what you can do. So as far as I =m concerned, we =re taking money which is in that fund which I =m supportive of putting those funds to work, but I =m not too supportive of just dumping them in as we heard from the engineer that we are looking at something that =s a temporary issue. And we may be looking at a five to ten -year flood issue; it may not last that long. If this was the only issue, it =s no problem. All you have to do is look at that river. And I think we =ve got to get some other people to understand if an emergency is an emergency, we need to put that thing back to where it was. And so I would start, ask the Public Works to draft some engineering to open up that channel and to get it done. Nelson: Al would concur if everything is legal in doing it that way... emergency... and we are not the ones to declare the emergency, the Executive would be the one that would make the decision. We =re merely here for the discussion at this point of how to accomplish this task in a timely, as well as a legal way.- Brenner: AWell, first of all, I don--t mean to make light of it, but life is temporary. This is supposed to be a ten -year event, and I do, I feel very sure that there is way more work that needs to be done. This is a stabilization process so we can get on with more work, and we can keep debating on the best way to do it, but we don--t seem to be getting anything done. It =s time now to do it. It was brought up today by Mr. Davis if it doesn =t work, we =re going to learn from it what the problems are too. This is a new technique we =re doing.= Nelson: APoint of order. I =m going to recess. We have been in session now for quite some time, and we =re going to allow a break of five to ten minutes. That =11 give the Administration time to get information that they need, as well as allowing our Council to take care of....= (Clerks Note: A short break was taken. Tape 2, Side B) Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 16 Brown: Al guess I do believe that this is an emergency if you consider what =s happened. The fact that over the past year we have had to go to such drastic means as lot consolidation to conserve farm ground. We=ve stopped allowing the agricultural people the right to block off five acres, which they have had the right to do, and we sit here and we are going to take action, we have taken action, but we =re losing prime farm ground that can =t be reclaimed at any rate, and it is an emergency to Whatcom County because agriculture and agricultural prime soils are an intricate part of our economy, and we need to protect that at any cost. Once it gets into the Bay, I don--t know if we have control.= Nelson: AMr. Kremen, could you give us some enlightenment? You had a chance to meet with your staff. If you could help us in this regard...- Kremen: Al don =t believe you do have to declare an emergency. You may put in an emergency clause, but it is not necessary. In order for us to avert having to go through the bidding process, I would have to declare an emergency; otherwise, we would be bound by the regulation to go out to bid. If we did that, we would not be able to complete the project in a timely manner and, therefore, I believe that an emergency declaration from the Executive would be essential and necessary. I would do that, and that would not be up to the Council, but I appreciate the sentiment and concern.= Nelson: AThe motion, if I am correct, is for approval of $1,125,000, which includes the 20% contingencies, and also with the requirement of a diking or subflood control zone being formed.= Brown: AWith respect to that, I have to say, you gotta consider I think the people along the Sumas River are in a, already in some kind of a subflood control zone where they =re paying funds and they--re paying the County -wide fund, and so now we =re going to impose a third one of them for the same ... = Brenner: AThey =re going to consolidate ... = Brown: AWell, what I =m saying is let =s make sure that they--re not triple taxed here on ... I think we need to make sure that it =s on the record and that we were aware of that situation.= Nelson: AOkay. The motion is before us. Any further discussion? Council member Starkenburg. Starkenburg: Al guess I need to know what =s the rest of your motion. Is it a motion to declare Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 17 an emergency and to appropriate that, those funds? Nelson: AThat would be up to the Executive to declare the emergency because of the time constraints. We are merely moving the funding mechanism forward. Is that correct ? - Brenner: AWe =re approving the funding.= Nelson: AYes. And then if it requires a fast pace because of time constraints of an emergency nature, that =s up to the Executive. If not, then it would go through a bidding process for the contraction of those funds. Is that correct? (Clerks Note: Here Wareing commented but not into the mic. Nelson reiterated Wareing=s comment) Nelson: AMr. Wareing is concerned about, that there isn =t an ordinance in place to expend this ... = Brenner: AWell, my understanding is from what we did last time when we did the $300,000 was we gave direction to do it. There was no ordinance there, was there ? - Starkenburg: AIt was a resolution.= Nelson: ASo you have a resolution here ... - Brenner: AOkay. The motion is a resolution.- Nelson: AThis is a resolution for those expenditures. You would then have to do what you have to do to take care of the problem.- Imhof: AIf this was an emergency, this then would take five votes. Correct ? - Starkenburg: AMy amendment, my amendment to that motion would be to declare an emergency and to clear up that channel where the river was previously and to use that material for building the dikes on both sides and leave the river return to where it came from.- Nelson: AThat =s a separate motion then what was originally proposed. So I have to act on the first motion first. Council member Brenner.- Brenner: Al want ... I don--t think that will fly. We=ll be in a lawsuit with the Army Corps of Engineers, and ... - Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 18 Nelson: AI =m not even entertaining the motion yet, so ... = Brenner: ASo what are we entertaining? Nelson: AYou have the original motion.... I still would like to have clarification whether or not we are following the correct process. Mr. Wareing has raised some concerns. (Clerks Note: Wareing continued talking without a mic and so could not be heard.) Nelson: AMs. Frakes.= Imhof: AIt has to be, you can =t expend money on a resolution; it has to be an ordinance.- Nelson: AWe can direct Administration. Brenner: ANo. We =ve directed money without ordinances. What did we do with the $300,000? Was that an ordinance ? - Starkenburg: AIt was a resolution.- Imhof: AIt was a budget amendment.= Nelson: AWe are going into a realm of unknown, uncertainty.= Frakes:AMr. Monsen. I =m not familiar with this area at all. Mr. Monsen has informed me that never before in similar situations have they done anything. In fact, just a direction from Council.= Brenner: AAll we have to do is amend our original amount from $300,000 to $1,125,000. We =ve already done this. We =ve been there. So let =s just amend it. Make it as an amendment. It =s an amendment to our original directive, or whatever it was. And if it requires going outside the bidding process, that =s up to the Executive at a future point. That =s not a...= Imhof: AWe =re the Board of Directors. Monsen: AAs the Board of Supervisors, there =s adequate budget authority in the Flood Control Zone Fund to complete the work. It is a matter of a policy as far as whether or not this project would move ahead as it normally would in a grand scheme of things, 70/30, and if it were that case, it wouldn =t be before the Council. Because of the funding distribution is different than that is why the Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 19 discussion is here. Other than fairly small pieces of the Riverberry project, the County purchasing code will be abided with for all of this work. It =s only a couple of elements of that that we have a problem with from a time standpoint.= Brenner: AAnd we already did, we did this process. We =re amending it.- Starkenburg: AWith your permission, Chair, I =d like to ask Public Works a question or two. If we declare an emergency, can you go in and open up that channel ? - Monsen: AA declaration of an emergency doesn =t necessarily waive permitting requirements at state or federal. You can certainly, I think, have some impact on County issued permits but not necessarily state and certainly not federal.= Starkenburg: AIf we declare an emergency, would the Corps come in ?= Monsen: AWill the Corps come in? The Corps has a, the Corps standards for as when an emergency exists is when the river exceeds flood stage.= Nelson: ADoes that answer your questions ? - Starkenburg: AYes.- Nelson: AOkay. The motion is for approval, or the increase of the expenditure of the original proposal to ... - Dawson: AExcuse me. Could you clarify that again what you just, that last part about the flood stage.= Nelson: AThe federal, the Corps doesn =t come in to take over until after it has gone through flood...- Imhof: AUntil it =s too late.!---t Brenner: AThey won =t declare an emergency until then. The County Exec can about the money. We don--t need to with this. We =re not going ... - Imhof: AThe Exec can =t. We =re the Board of Supervisors. We =re the final...-- Brenner: ANo. He =s only doing it on funding. He =s not, our bid process, not on the project itself. - Monsen: AIf I might clarify. The discussion as far as and the use of the term Aemergency= broaden into a variety of issues. While there is certainly emergency situations Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 20 dealing with a flood event and any variety of issues, the emergency they were talking about for this project relates to the County purchasing code and whether to waive bidding requirements for certain elements of the completion of the project, not whether the situation is anything more than that. It is a time constraint to complete the work in that context of emergency in the purchasing code.= Kremen: AMr. Chairman and members of the Council, I =d like to recite the section that was just referred to by Mr. Monsen. In the event of an emergency when the public interest or property of the County would suffer material injury or damage by delay, upon an order, the County Executive, declaring the existence of such emergency and reciting the facts constituting same, the requirement governing competitive bids with reference to any purchase or contract may be waived pursuant to RCW 36.32.270.- Nelson: AThank you. Again, the motion is to extend, to increase the amount of the original proposal from $300,000 to $1,125,000 with the additional contingencies of the formation of either a diking district or the subflood control zone.= Starkenburg: AOne more question. If the property owners are willing to give that property where the channel came from to the County declared an emergency, can you go do it ?- Monsen: AIf I understand the question whether or not the property in the middle of the river... Starkenburg: AIf that was given to the County, the County had ownership of that property out there in the middle of that 3 -6,000 pit area, can the County go in under an emergency and clean it out? Monsen: AProbably not. One, I don =t think the County can gain ownership of that space because of the state interest involved as well as the federal statutes involved in this.- Nelson: AWe =re merely protecting what =s remaining of our property.- Dawson: AThe next question: would a fine ... well, considering the alternative cost of $1 million vs say, $100,000 to dredge out that, would a fine be the better way to go ?- Brenner: AWe had this in committee today, and we were told by Roland Middleton it =s not necessarily just a fine. There =s criminal actions that can be brought against the County, too.= Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 21 Wareing: Al rise to another point of order, I think, that a proper means has to be instituted through each proper goal here. I think that, I don--t think that we can contemplate violating the law and getting ourselves into trouble. One of the things I think we need to clarify here is that the reason that the Administration recommended this be done is because of the fact in the first place when this was back at $290, $300,000 was that this was a situation that required immediate action because of the threat to public facilities; to wit, the railroad, the road way, and potential for this to actually get into some lowland property there and head toward Sumas and ultimately toward Canada and, if that threat is not there as Council member Starkenburg indicates that that threat is not really there, then I think that you have to step back and question the ethicacy of what you---re doing here. You have the authority under the ordinance to change the percentage ratio of cost sharing. If you, I guess that means - -and Jeff can answer this - -you can change that to zero and 100% if you choose, but it was on the basis of the representation to us that this was moving so quickly that within a very short period of time that if we didn =t take action, and obviously time is waning. We have a short window of opportunity here, and if it =s going to go within the next couple of months to Canada or to the railroad tracks or some place else, then we need to do something. And that =s the premise upon which we made the positive recommendation that this is an emergency, an emergency situation that required immediate action.= Nelson: Al just need clarification. I =m not sure that in the next couple of months that we would see that type of activity. My concern is what would happen with the early rains of the season, as well as next spring, when we are unable to do any type of work on it. And we do have ...= Wareing: AWell, this is one of those excruciating dilemmas of life because certainly there are, there is a lot of ground going down the river. When you look at the photographs and you see how much ground was there and where that channel used to be, there =s been a horrendous loss of property there. And this is one of those things that I think in most of our minds needs to be dealt with in some manner. But I think we have to be careful that we don--t create a situation that we =re going to be compelled to follow the same footsteps through every situation that comes up since then. Like I said, we seem to have a policy now that =s been in effect. To my knowledge, it was an ordinance that established the way that we dealt with these and all of a sudden, we have, that =s taken legs and it =s in limbo now, and it =s floating around. And I think we have to have a stable policy that we can rely on in dealing with these situations or we, in effect, have no policy.= Nelson: AThis originally came from Administration. Are you changing your recommendation ? - Wareing: AI =m not sure that this originally came from Administration. I think it came Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 22 from Barbara--s committee.= Brenner: ARight. Tom Brown brought it up first. But I would like to answer that. We just talked to the Executive and our legal advisor, and we were told we don--t have to declare an emergency. The narrow focus of what an emergency is defined federally, and I =m not sure locally, is when the flooding is already occurring. What we =re talking about is this is something that can =t wait till next year. And I think that Mr. Wareing brings up a good point: we are talking about having staff come back with some ideas of doing this 100 % /100% thing stretched out over 15 years where we fund the project and of significant, and if it =s significant to a broader area, and then the district is formed one way or the other, and they do all the maintenance. They do 100% of the maintenance. And I think that =s the way that we need to work this if. We =re talking about an emergency at this point in the bidding process, possibly. We don--t even know if that =s sure, but if it is, and that =s up to the County Executive, not up to us. So I think the motion still stands the way it was that we =re not declaring an emergency. We are giving, mending either a directive or policy or whatever it was that we gave a few weeks ago.= Wareing: ASee, and what I would say is that if this is not an emergency then it =s not consistency with long -term established policy of the County in dealing with these situations. And it may not be positive, there may be people who are not happy to hear that, but we have, we =re compelled to state that. We =re compelled as government representing the people - -all of the people of this County - -to state the things that are right and appropriate and those things that are historical. And I think that you have to make these decisions from a reasoned and informed perspective. And so I think that =s what I talking about here.= Brenner: AThat isn =t correct. We say 70/30 or other means. We don =t say that we have to only do it 70/30. We can do this and still fall within the policy we have. It =s like Council member Dawson said, we don--t have the specifics, but it is allowed in the policy. I don--t understand why you---re fighting this.= Wareing: AAnd it =s allowed for certain circumstances. What I =m saying is that it =s not been a policy of the County in the past to make these kind of exceptions.= Brenner: AIt =s allowed in that policy.= Wareing: AIt =s allowed for emergent situations.= Brenner: AIt didn =t say emergency. It said it =s allowed, or other means.-- Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 23 Nelson: AAlright. It =s an important issue, certainly one that we do have to debate and make sure that we explore thoroughly. It =s getting late, and my concern here is that is this something that, you know, we if decide tonight, we =re going to be backing ourselves into a corner that we =re going to be remiss about. I don =t think so, but ... - Brenner: Al don =t either. If we don--t decide tonight, it won =t be done.2 Wareing: AAnd the bottom line is you, you have to make some kind of a decision, and I realize that. So we =re in a no win situation here, but I think that if you =re going, a $1.3 million is not something that a property owner like Mr. Davis or any of them, they can =t absorb that. I mean, that =s a horrendous cost. And I think that there has to be a clear, there has to be clear direction indicated by the Council that you are putting some stipulations on this and that there will be a district formed. And...= Nelson: AAnd this has been through the Advisory Board. It has come back to us with their recommendation for approval.-- Wareing: AI =m just making sure that you understand what we =re doing here because there, there are some things that you have to understand._-- Nelson: Al understand. Thank you.- Imhof: AYou look at the proposal and, you know, you think that, you think that roads cost a lot per mile, and you, and this is a Band -Aid. And you, we won =t get 15 years like we do out of a road out of this puppy. I think, you know, this is like the, like the guy, you know, sitting on the dike pissing in the river. I mean, he =s not, we =re making a very small contribution to this, to what =s going on here, and I just think that this, sending $1 million down the river, and I ... - Nelson: Al think it =s just the tip of the iceberg of what type of monies we actually are going to spending on flood control.- Starkenburg: AThat =s my concern. I acknowledge that we have a problem there. I =m sympathetic for the situation, but to do what =s been discussed is only the beginning. And that =s why I felt there should be every single effort made to try to get that channel opened up to bring it back again to where it came from because we =re going to spend money and spend money and spend money and spend money, and that =s why I think Dave Wareing is bringing up a good point: Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 24 which direction are we going to head? If we fund this one 100 %, what =s going to happen on the next one? And so it =s an ongoing thing, and that =s the difficult part. And 1, I believe we =re being held hostage by the people that are supposed to be working for us, namely the Department of Ecology, Fisheries, Corps. They ought to be working with us to get that river back to where it belongs. Instead of having to spend $1 million, we could be spending $1- 200,000. Out of sympathy for the situation for what we =re, what the people are involved in there, I =m more sure what choice we have as far as taking care of something, but I certainly want to make sure that from here on in, there =s going to have to be a cautiary situation. This thing hasn =t just happened just overnight. And so, no one seems to be appreciative of opening up that channel, legal or illegal, I guess, so I =d still do it.- Nelson: Al would urge you each to read these letters from Canada. There are ongoing meetings. Evidently, it =s still a major concern to not only the provincial government but the cities of Abbotsford. Their major concern is a lack of action taken by Whatcom County up to date of protecting not only Whatcom County but also the fact that it has impacts into the lower mainland of B.C. The city of Abbotsford is looking at forming a deflector dike, sending it right back to us. It =s already starting to get interesting. And I think it =s time that we have to take it seriously that these are conditions that the river wants to flow towards that Fraser Valley. We have significant communities that can be impacted by such an event. My concern is that I =m not willing to throw the dice saying that it isn =t going to happen or is going to happen. My concern is that this is even postulated, and it does happen what the ramifications are to this Council and this community.= Brown: AAlso, there is another unique aspect here that we could possibly recuperate some funds back into the Flood Control Fund if we take a look at all the plans that have been proposed for the river and river access over the years. The Nooksack River plan calls for access points for people to access for boating and recreation and to walk on the gravel bar, and there is definitely a lot of gravel bar down there. The Natural Heritage plan and all of these call for access points. We have a deeded easement right down through there, what =s left of it, and I think when this project =s done and then when the Corps= project =s done, that we will have preserved part of our easement going down there and, therefore, we may be able to make this as one of those river accesses and be able to reimburse part of the Flood Control Fund from the Conservation Futures Tax legitimately.- Brenner: AThat was discussed in committee, and we asked that we get some information back, a legal opinion on what percentage, if any, we could recoup from the Conservation Futures Tax. But I =m confused by Mr. Wareing =s comments about stipulating that this is not a gift and that there =ll be a cost sharing because I thought that that was part of your motion that they will either form a diking Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 25 district or we will form a flood, I mean, we =ve said this so many times, it =s like kind of hard to remember but, I thought that was part of the motion was that one or the other will be formed, which means we...= Nelson: ASo the motion is before the Council. All those in favor signify saying Aaye -. No ?= Motion carried 5 -1 with Imhof opposed. 3. CONSIDERATION OF THE APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER =S DECISION ON CUP97 -0002 AND CUP93 -0036, FILED BY ROBERT CARRUTHERS (AB97 -212) See AAnnouncements =. INTRODUCTION ITEMS Imhof moved to accept the introduction items. Motion carried unanimously. RECEIPT OF APPEAL OF THE DECISION OF HEARING EXAMINER ON FILE NO. PLS92 -0009 FILED BY J. MICHAEL AND CANDACE MCCORMICK (AB97 -182) 2. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FINAL ORDER OF VACATION OF JEFFERSON AVENUE, RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR =S FILE NUMBER 940324123 (AB97 -AB97 -258) 3. ORDINANCE ADOPTING A PERMANENT WHATCOM COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 16.16, CRITICAL AREAS, TO COMPLY WITH THE WASHINGTON STATE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT (AB97 -226A) 4. ORDINANCE ALLOWING FOR A BIENNIAL (TWO YEAR BUDGET) AS RECOMMENDED FOR LONG TERM STRATEGIC PLANNING (AB97 -268) 5. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE OFFICIAL WHATCOM COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE, TITLE 20, BY CREATING A NEW ZONE DISTRICT, URBAN RESIDENTIAL - MIXED (UR -MX) (AB97 -269) 6. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 1997 BUDGET, REQUEST #8 (AB97 -270) 7. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 1997 BUDGET, REQUEST #9 (AB97 -271) Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 26 8. ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A CODE OF CONDUCT WITH PROCEDURES FOR RESOLUTION OF ETHICS VIOLATIONS (AB97 -187D) 9. ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE URBAN FRINGE SUBAREA ZONING MAP UPDATE (AB97 -273) 10. ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE URBAN FRINGE SUBAREA PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT (AB97 -273A) ADDENDUM 11. ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A CODE OF ETHICS FOR WHATCOM COUNTY ELECTED PUBLIC OFFICIALS (AB97 -187E) REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS There were none. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 9:55 p.m. Marina Mason, Recording Secretary These minutes were approved by council on , 1997. ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Dana Brown- Davis, Council Clerk L. Ward Nelson, Council Chair Regular Council Minutes, 7/29/97, Page 27