Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources January 28 1997WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Natural Resources Committee January 28, 1997 The meeting was called to order at 11:05 a.m. by Committee Chair Marlene Dawson in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue. Also Present: Tom Brown SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS ELECTION OF COMMITTEE CHAIR (AB97 -021) Brown nominated and moved approval of Dawson. Motion carried unanimously. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION Absent: Sutter PRESENTATION FROM THE NOOKSACK INITIATIVE TASK FORCE AND THE WATER USERS STEERING COMMITTEE REGARDING THE FORMATION OF A WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT GROUP (AB97- 041) Dawson gave a brief history of this issue. Robin Dexter, Nooksack Initiative Task Force member, addressed committee and spoke to the present predicament regarding the water situation. He gave historical background on state water policy and spoke to the beginnings of the Task Force. The more local the problem, the more solvable it becomes. More work needs to be done by the Task Force. Two of the most difficult problems include the potential contamination of drinking water from dairy waste and failing septic tanks. He then briefly discussed funding and the caucus process. Finally, he stated much discussion needs to take place on this entire issue. Nelson inquired of Dexter how he would propose the process of balancing the Task Force. Dexter replied those Findings are "fuzzy" in order to promote discussion. Tom Anderson, PUD manager and Nooksack Basin Water Users Steering Committee chair, stated the reason for the formation of the Steering Committee was to pool resources. The Task Force began to transfer the process into a body with greater local control. The Nooksack Initiative Futures Committee, a subcommittee of the Task Force, undertook this project. The Natural Resources Minutes, 1/28/97, Page 1 decision was made to ask the Steering Committee to fill the role of the interim local lead for local control. Under state law, the state controls water resources. The Steering Committee had previously held closed meetings because the committee was primarily dealing with potential litigation. However, after some discussion, the meetings were open, and a broader spectrum of people were present. The Steering Committee was chosen because it was responding to requests from the Task Force, it already existed, had a funding mechanism, major local governments- -the city of Bellingham and Whatcom County- -were involved, and there was a major water user. In order to gain local control, there must be sufficient resources for staffing of the process. Anderson thought the resolution was somewhat premature, as there was no approval from the Steering Committee =s parent organization to more forward with any amount of funding for staffing for this project. However, the Steering Committee did agree to spend $7,200 for initial staffing to create a public process. The format needs to be established. Public input is needed to determine a sensible structure for the future group. The tribes, cities, and other local governments need to be involved before the structure is decided. Anderson requested Council moved forward with the process and have the debate on the structure. Local agreement on the structure is needed before going to the Department of Ecology (DOE) in order to take control and maximize local control. The goal is to generate input from local, federal, and state agencies in order to devise the structure of the process. Dawson stated this matter would proceed to the Finance and Administrative Services Committee. She was comfortable having the debate at the Steering Committee level. Ward Nelson, County Council, referred to a policy from the tribes regarding their input in the planning process. Anderson stated that getting the tribes involved can be difficult in a voting capacity. Brown stated he would like to hear the debate firsthand and would like it to take place in the Natural Resources Committee. Also, there has not been any input from the cities so far. Jim Kaemingk, Lynden mayor and a member of the Steering Committee, stated that there are three items to be introduced: the concept of forming a local water resource management board is being somewhat developed by the Steering Committee, which is supportive of that idea; the make up of any local water resource management board needs to be as inclusive as possible with representation from all water users in the County; and mayors and the County Executive should be included in the development and implementation of any such board so that input and support can be provided as representatives of the government bodies. It would be the Steering Committee =s decision regarding the make up of the Water Management Resources Committee. Nelson summarized that it is time for the communities to come together to present a plan to the state. The process is now ready for public input. It was not the intent of the Steering Committee to bring this process forward, as it was interim only. Bob Andersen, P.O. Box 3183, Bellingham, stated the resolution he drafted is based on principles he would like to see included in the process. The hub of the wheel must be local Natural Resources Minutes, 1/28/97, Page 2 elected officials making law and policy. (Clerks Note: Tape 1, side B) The function of the Oversight Committee was the elected representation at the local level, which is only one -half the necessary parts. The process has been tried in the Nooksack Initiative and discussed in Task Order #13, but local law and government must also be included. Water resource management is a very serious problem in the County. Skip Richards expressed concern regarding the flow chart from the Steering Committee. The broadening of public input needs to be included. There is the need for inclusion of more than just the local governments. There is still too much control by the Steering Committee. There has not been enough public process. Sally Sprague, Nooksack Salmon Enhancement Association, stated this organization works with voluntary cooperation with landowners. She wanted to see Council involved. People should be encouraged to work on the project as volunteers. Nelson stated that the County government has been involved in the process. Currently the County is bringing all the information together that will become the County's resource for water resources. Dawson moved to recommend approval of bringing this matter before the Finance and Administrative Services Committee. Motion carried unanimously. 2. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE CENTENNIAL CLEAN WATER FUND SPECIAL ON- SITE /SHELLFISH GRANT APPLICATION (AB97 -039) Dave Wareing, Executive's Office, expressed concerns regarding the manner in which this came before committee in that he was concerned about any allegation that would impune the actions of the members of the Health Department. Administration was given direction to pursue grant funding of this type and was assisted by the state. This grant deals with contamination of the surface water from failing septic systems, of which there are many. Drayton Harbor is an area subject to non - specific point pollution. Administration was able to get this grant at the direction of Council to protect the health and safety of the County citizens. Chuck Benjamin, Health Department Director, gave background of this issue since his arrival in Whatcom County. The grant is multi- faceted. One of the sources of contamination is sewage on -site systems; the goal is the protection of public health. Another goal is to provide funding to landowners who cannot afford to replace their failing septic system. Benjamin pointed out the grant application was a cooperative effort of many entities. Natural Resources Minutes, 1/28/97, Page 3 Regina Delahunt, Environmental Health, described the aspects of the grant. The legislature identified $1 million for this fund for specifically repairing failing septic systems in shellfish areas. The County met all criteria specified in the grant program. The grant could also be used for supplementing any loan program for failing septic systems, as well as to complete needed survey work in areas where shellfish are threatened. Of $252,000, 87% of funding was to actually pay for repair of failing systems. There are ten identified systems currently in Drayton Harbor. Some have been voluntarily vacated - -they are vacation homes. Some systems are on holding tanks and pumped on a regular basis; others are in the enforcement process. Another aspect of the grant included additional survey work to be done in the Drayton Harbor area by the Health Department. With the grant funding, the Health Department proposes to go into the areas of high priority with high fecal content count and survey the septic systems in those areas. There are approximately 120 residences in those areas. An additional 10 -15 failing systems are expected to be discovered. The area is characterized by poor soils, high water tables, and older residences. The next step is to negotiate a specific scope of work and contract with the Department of Ecology (DOE), which is willing to grant an extension of the grant until June 30, 1997 due to Growth Management (GM) requirements. Nelson asked when the process would begin. Benjamin stated the County has an obligation to match 25% of the grant amount, which would be covered by homeowners being charged 25% of the cost of replacing the failing septic systems. Because of the grant timeframes, there is a need to begin as soon as contracts are awarded. The Health Department does not feel it is appropriate to have GM compliance tied to this grant. Wareing stated that Administration just sent a letter to the DOE challenging linkage of GM to the grant. Administration agreed with the Freestones on this point. Dawson questioned the fecal findings in the Harbor. After spike periods and periods of heavy rains - -even new septic systems or sewers - -she wondered if those kinds of overflows exist. Benjamin replied that no, contaminated surface water washes toward the Bay during heavy rains. There will not be immediate run -off of surface waters to the Bay with working systems. Dawson also asked what measures are taken to ensure these are low income people receiving the funds. Benjamin stated that the formula of gross income towards mortgage payment, annual income, and size of household would all be taken into consideration. Dawson then asked if seagulls attracted to a processing plant can be a source of contamination. Benjamin responded that all studies have concluded that there are multiple sources of contamination. This grant only addresses one source. The Western study was broken into two phases: shellfish and surface water. The study was not addressing on -site system failures; however, that study does cite that source as a potential source for contamination along with other sources. Natural Resources Minutes, 1/28/97, Page 4 Brown stated that no one knows where the contamination is coming from, and it needs to be identified through DNA testing. There may be some failing septics, but they are not the main source of pollution in the Harbor. Also, one reason there are still septics in the area is because of the GMA issue. Some of the failing systems may come under a sewer system once GM becomes available. Benjamin replied that it is not a possibility for public sewer systems to cover the entire watershed. There is concern regarding all the systems that have been determined to be abated. Abatement systems are so marked because the property was vacated, not because the septic problem was fixed. These property owners also may apply for the grant money. Dawson requested clarification on whether the Health Department was asking residents to prove the system is failing. Delahunt explained the survey methods. Jean Freestone summarized the concerns regarding the grant. She believed the application is out of date and should be withdrawn. There were three documents listed in the grant application which stated there are failing systems which have since been fixed. It makes no sense to force homeowners to fix failing systems, which will be soon hooked up to sewer systems. Freestone questioned who benefits and who pays for this policy. Since the grant was written, the circumstances in Drayton Harbor have changed. Funds should be spent elsewhere where real environmental conditions exist. Michael Freestone clarified the date of the Western Washington study. Benjamin stated the memo given to committee addresses the Freestone =s concerns. The data listed in the grant application was not to list specific failures but a pattern of failures. The study further states that some of the contaminations are from septic systems. (Clerks Note: Tape 2, side A) Freestone pointed out the grant states there are specific systems that are going to be fixed; those identified sites have already been fixed. Benjamin stated the grant survey covers areas that have already been fixed. Delahunt noted some of the systems that are mentioned as abated in the survey are because the residents have vacated the house, not because the system has been fixed. Freestone stated that residents in the area may be more expansive in creating a ULID. Nelson asked if there were a way to better serve the problem by helping to fund hook -ups to sewer systems. Delahunt stated it is specified in the grant application the money cannot be used for sewer hook -ups, only to fix failing septics. Benjamin stated the studies have indicated there are multiple sources of contamination; on -site septic systems are identified in each study. Jean Freestone stated she spoke with Health Department staff and was told the houses Natural Resources Minutes, 1/28/97, Page 5 were already vacant. She doubted the homes stated in the study are higher income homes and would not qualify for funding help. Ray Wilkett, 780 Adella Street, Blaine, was opposed to the County accepting the grant. He stated that there are other sources of contamination which are responsible. Wareing stated it is a challenge to spend public money wisely. The problem of the septic systems are serious in the County. Government has an obligation to address these problems wisely. Administration has followed the policy direction of the Council to provide the best, most cost- effective way to handle the problem. Margaret Kardell, Drayton Harbor Shellfish Protection District Advisory Committee, stated she is pleased the Freestones have brought this problem to the public eye. The Freestones have not attended any Shellfish Protection District meetings. There is no sign of any solution to the problem. Blaine and Birch Bay have not asked the residents whom they want to provide their future sewer system. Kardell has seen free flowing sewage in the Bay. The County should have forced the sewer systems to come to the area. David Chapman, Drayton Harbor Shellfish Protection District Advisory Committee, stated he does not understand what the controversy is. After millions of dollars in studies, it has been shown there is not one specific source but several. Not taking advantage of the money to fix some of the problem is ludicrous. Andy Menzies stated the Freestones have done everything to undermine her husband's (Geoff) credibility. The Drayton Harbor Oyster Company is finished once the last oyster is sold and will not in anyway benefit from the grant. Her husband does work with a grant for clean water for farmers in the County. Muriel Ellis, Blaine, asked what the grant restrictions are for the property owners. Benjamin stated that the money has to be toward offsetting the cost of homeowners to replace failing on -site septic systems. Janet Hansen, Drayton Harbor Shellfish Protection District Advisory Committee chair, complimented Council on the Health Department staff. The Advisory Committee urges the Council to accept the grant. Benjamin stated this request for grant approval will come forward from the Council at a later date. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 1:30 p.m. Natural Resources Minutes, 1/28/97, Page 6 Elizabeth Bennett, Recording Secretary Jill Nixon, Recording Secretary ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk Marlene Dawson, Council Member Natural Resources Minutes, 1/28/97, Page 7