Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil January 7 1993WHATCOM COUNTY Regular MeetiLa January 7, 1993 The meeting was called to order at 7 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 1000 N. Forest St., 2nd floor, by Daniel M. Warner, Chairman. Also present: Absent: Barbara Brenner Larry Harris Ken Henderson Bob Imhof Marge Laidlaw Dennis Vander Yacht READING AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes for September 8 and December 8, 1992, were approved as presented. PUTWIT"MOR 1. DECISION ON VACATION OF A PORTION OF COUNTY ROAD 131, FILED BY WESTERN WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY (AB92 -443) Warner opened the public hearing. Seeing no one, Warner closed the public hearing. IMHOF MOVED TO APPROVE THE ROAD VACATION The motion carried unanimously. 2. ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING ADDITIONAL REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS UNDER "GROWTH MANAGEMENT" (AB92 -468) Warner explained the proposed ordinance. Warner opened the public hearing. Cal Leenstra, 1805 Lakeside: Spoke against the implementation of the tax, stating that it is a regressive tax and many first time home buyers would not be able to afford the extra cost. The tax would be computed on the gross sales price rather than on the increase or profit. He continued by explaining how the tax would effect all home buyers and investment real estate. Council Minutes, January 5, 1993, Page I 1 Art Castle, 1301 Meadow Ave. #B -5: Spoke against the tax. Spelled out how high 2 the real estate taxes are currently. He referred to a letter written by Whatcom County 3 Treasurer Barb Cory to the Editor of the Bellingham HERALD when the City of 4 Bellingham instituted this same tax. 5 6 Art Hyatt, 2318 N. Shore Rd.: Spoke in support of the tax. No longer should 7 taxpayers have to support investors and developers. Those that gain should pay. Not only 8 should this tax be charged, but impact charges should be added to any development or 9 building in the County to finance meeting the impacts on infrastructure and schools. 10 11 Dick Skeers, 110 Samish Way: Spoke against the ordinance. Stated that if this tax 12 goes through, there will no longer be affordable housing in this area, and those in favor of 13 impact fees should realize that it is not the developer who pays, but the customer, meaning 14 that housing costs rise. If the Council passes this tax, it needs to be documented how the 15 money will be spent. Further, the tax is redundant, with excise taxes paid at each step of the 16 way, and it is inflationary. 17 18 Roger Almskaar, 1400 Broadway: Spoke against the tax. There is a real concern 19 about how this money will be spent. The extra money collected from this tax will come 20 mainly from the lower income property owner, and even if the seller is losing money on the 21 property, the tax is paid. As a sideline, he urged that the Council works hard to get the 22 maximum public input and involvement in its projects. 23 24 Sherilyn Wells, 1020 Geneva: Spoke in favor of the tax. She suggested that one 25 definite project that could be named for receiving these funds would be storm water controls 26 within the watershed. 27 28 Seeing no one else, Warner closed the public hearing. 29 30 HENDERSON MOVED APPROVAL OF THE ORDINANCE. 31 32 There was discussion on the motion. 33 34 Topics discussed: The possibility that the passing of the tax tonight may be 35 premature; problems that could come up by not passing this ordinance; the need for 36 infrastructure around Lake Whatcom; other cities in the county that have already adopted 37 the tax; delayed implementation clause in the ordinance; the need for the money; the need 38 to know what the extra money will be spent on; Capital Facilities Plan; alternative funding 39 sources. 40 41 Speakers: Brenner; Laidlaw; Henderson; Imhof; Harris. 42 43 The motion failed 5 -2 with Harris and Henderson in support. 44 45 3. ORDINANCE REORGANIZING WHATCOM COUNTY GOVERNMENT :6 THROUGH REPEAL OF CERTAIN EXISTING DEPARTMENTS, 47 CREATION OF NEW DEPARTMENTS, AND ESTABLISHMENT OF Council Minutes, January 5, 1993, Page 2 1 FUND AND COMMISSION (AB92 -391B) (NO FINAL ACTION ON THE 2 ORDINANCE WILL BE TAKEN AT THIS MEETING) 3 4 Warner explained the proposed ordinance and some of the changes that have been 5 made. Final action is expected on 1/12/93. 6 7 Warner opened the public hearing. 8 9 Frank Winslow, 433 17th St., N.W. Regional Council: Spoke in support of the 10 proposed ordinance. He stated that the Council should not follow the old statement of "if 11 it ain't broke, don't fix it" - he feels this the attitude of the Executive. He stated that County 12 government certainly needs change and improvement. He said he would like to see the 13 Executive position become one of a Council hired and supervised professional manager. 14 15 Will Roehl, 2737 Eldridge: Stated that he appreciates all the work being done on this 16 issue and the changes the Council has been willing to make in the ordinance. He feels that 17 the main concern now is the date of implementation. He stated that the implementation 18 date should be January 1, 1994; it coincides with the normal budget cycle, the changes are 19 substantial, the time could be well used to clarify and refine the changes. 20 21 Dick Skeers, 110 Samish Way: Asked about the issues involving Building and Codes. 22 Warner responded. Skeers said that he has a problem with the major structural changes this 23 will implement. He said he feels that the needs of the building industry must be taken into 24 consideration when passing this ordinance; the users are not comfortable yet with these 25 changes. 26 27 Frank James, County Health Officer: Stated that the language needs to be cleaned 28 up for better understanding of the proposed ordinance. Define the process. Encouraged 29 the Council to work closely with the Executive. He asked the Council not to take Sue 30 Blake's position out of the Health Department because the Health Department is short 31 staffed in water resource areas. 32 33 Art Castle, 1301 Meador Ave., B -5: Appreciates the opportunity to speak at this 34 open hearing. He asked that the Council put some performance standards and goal 35 statements relative to what the purpose is into this ordinance. Add some specifics so that 36 the ordinance is better understood. 37 38 Dick Skeers: Addressed the efficiency standards of Building and Codes. He says he 39 is worried about Building and Codes money being spent on the wrong areas. 40 41 Roger Almskaar, 1400 Broadway: Spoke to zoning issues and the cost of over - 42 regulation. He spoke about the time restraints and the attitudes of some of the people of 43 the Building and Codes Department. He spoke to the need for a clear mission and 44 function. Planning should only have an advisory vote in the permitting process. He said he 45 feels that implementation should take place within a few months rather that a year, but the '6 time frame should be slowed down some and more attention given to detail. 47 Council Minutes, January 5, 1993, Page 3 Warner clarified some of the issues addressed during the public hearing. Henderson. asked Almskaar to clarify his statement about the planning department's passive role in permitting. Henderson and Almskaar discussed their visions about the role of planners in the new department. Seeing no one else, Warner closed the public hearing OTHER ITEMS 1. DECISION ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION ON HEARING EXAMINER FILE NO. CU92 -22, FILED BY FRANCIS J. DUDECK (AB92 -368) LAIDLAW MOVED TO REMAND BACK TO THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF THE LOCATION OF THE SOLAR PANELS AND CLARIFICATION OF SETBACKS. The motion carried 6 -1, with Harris opposed. 2. RESOLUTION SETTING COUNCIL 1993 MEETING DATES (AB92 -471) IMHOF MOVED TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION WITH THE THIRD MEETING IN DECEMBER MOVED FROM DECEMBER 28 TO DECEMBER 21. The motion carried unanimously. 3. COUNCIL REORGANIZATION /ELECTION OF OFFICERS (AB92- 492) WARNER MOVED TO APPROVE THE ASSIGNMENTS AS LISTED IN EXHIBIT A (ATTACHED). Brenner stated that she would like to nominate Henderson as Vice Chair rather than Warner. She said she feels that there is a need for new people to get involved. For this reason, she would like to see the position of chair a one year rather than a two year position. Imhof stated that he would like to see Warner remain as vice Chair for his professionalism. Henderson supported the concept of having a chair serve for only one year; it causes the Council to work together as a whole unit rather than under a strong leader. He withdrew his name from nomination. IMHOF NOMINATED DAN WARNER. Council Minutes, January S, 1993, Page 4 Brenner volunteered to take Public Services and Solid Waste replacing Warner. Henderson volunteered to take Whatcom Transit Authority, replacing Laidlaw. The motion to adopt the slate with amendments passed unanimously. 4. APPROVAL OF WHATCOM DISPUTE RESOLUTION CENTER CONTRACT AND SERVICE PLAN (AB92 -441B) Warner explained the background on the resolution. HARRIS MOVED APPROVAL OF THE CONTRACT AND WORK PLAN. The motion carried unanimously. 5. ORDINANCE REPEALING WCC TITLE 8.04 REGARDING RESTAURANTS AND DRINKING PLACES (AB92 -430) IMHOF MOVED ADOPTION OF THE ORDINANCE. The motion carried unanimously. 1. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 1993 PATHS & TRAILS FUND BUDGET (AB93 -001) (REFERRAL TO FINANCE) 2. ORDINANCE TO APPROVE OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION SERVICES PLAN AND AMENDING 1993 CURRENT EXPENSE SUPERIOR COURT BUDGET, TO FUND DISPUTE RESOLUTION CENTER (AB92- 441C) (REFERRAL TO FINANCE) 3. RECEIPT OF APPEAL ON HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION ON HEARING EXAMINER FILE NO. SHS92 -23, SCU92 -4, CUP92 -3, NORTHWEST PIPELINE, FILED BY NORTHWEST PIPELINE, FILED BY NORMAN A. KIMES REPORTS AND OTHER ITEMS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS The Council discussed the Critical Areas Ordinance referendum (AB92- 058E). This was discussed earlier in executive session. HARRIS MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL DIRECT THE PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE TO SEEK AN INJUNCTION AGAINST THE STAY OF THE REFERENDUM AND TO SEEK A COURT ORDER DECLARING THE REFERENDUM INVALID AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. BRENNER MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO STATE THAT THE REFERENDUM BE PUT ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT. Harris asked that Brenner's amendment be made as a separate motion. Council Minutes, January S, 1993, Page 5 The Council discussed the possibility of putting Brenner's motion before Harris'; Brenner supports Harris' motion, but will not vote for it unless the referendum is allowed on the November ballot. Henderson expressed concern about the process; the rights of those who worked hard on the referendum should be respected, and the process should be defined for the benefit of all the parties concerned. Vander Yacht pointed out that the Council represents everyone, includingg those who brought forth the referendum, the challenge to the referendum should be made by someone else, not the Council. Harris said he feels that it is such an important issue is because this is the first such action against a Growth Management Act in the state and will be a precedent setting case. As such, it is vitally important not only to the County, but to the State. Laidlaw pomtedout that Council must take great care not to appear to be using the bureaucracy to roll over citizens and their concerns when that is not the case here. Harris' motion carried 4 -3 with Vander Yacht, Brenner, and Imhof opposed. BRENNER MOVED TO PUT THE REFERENDUM TITLE, WORD FOR WORD, ON THE BALLOT IN NOVEMBER. Bob Woods, Budget Analyst, clarified that the issue is a referendum; the language as it stands would not be appropriate on the ballot. Randy Watts, Chief Deputy Civil Prosecutor, clarified that the referendum wording would need to be chapged, however, the substance can remain the same. Brenner stressed that she wants the substance of the referendum to remain the same; specific language should be changed only because of legal constraints. Brenner agreed to change the wording of her motion, stating that the wording of the body.of the referendum could be changed as long as the substance of the referendum remains the same. She added that the referendum title must remain the same. BRENNER MOVED TO PUT THE SUBSTANTIVE LANGUAGE OF THE REFERENDUM =E ON THE BALLOT IN NOVEMBER AS BINDING ON THE COUNTY. There was further discussion on the motion. Watts further clarified the effect of the motion. Brenner pointed out the need to respect the public and its wishes, even when that goes against a Council Member's own personal feelings. Retaining public trust is ultimately important. IMHOF MOVED TO AMEND AND CHANGE THE WORD 'BINDING" IN BRENNER'S MOTION TO "ADVISORY." Iinbofs motion carried 5 to 2 with Brenner and Harris against. The amended motion to put the referendum on the November ballot passed 6 -1, with Harris opposed. Henderson restated the concerns of Developmental Disabilities about budget cuts on the state level. He also spoke about the Arlecho Creek issue and stated that Golden Phoenix has withdrawn their application and the land is once again up for sale. Laidlaw brought up the issue of a group in Canada dealing with air quality She suggested that Imhof, as representative to NWAPA, find out what that is about, work with the group, and report back to Council. Council Minutes, January 5, 1993, Page 6 She also asked about the change in the County -wide Planning Policies meeting, originally scheduled for Mt. Baker High School. The meeting is now scheduled for January 28 at Sehome High School. Bob Woods clarified the format of the meeting. Laidlaw asked about the January 30 Council retreat and the cost of it. The Council discussed other places to have the retreat. LAIDLAW MOVED TO HAVE THE RETREAT AT THE COUNCIL OFFICES BECAUSE OF COST CONCERNS. There was discussion on the motion. The motion carried 5 -2, with Warner and Henderson opposed. Brenner stated that she had received a call from Lee Sunderland, stating that she is concerned because she is in Bellingham's water service area. Ferndale, however, is slipping south and trying to force her association onto Ferndale water. Warner said he had talked to Ms. Sunderland, told her to put her concerns in writing, and when they were received, the Council would deal with them. Harris spoke to the Arlecho Creek issue. Warner passed the gavel to Laidlaw, instating her as chair. The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Bro vi As 's t Clerk Daniel M. Warner, Chair Agenda, January 7, 1993, Page 7