Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSpecial Committee of the Whole Open Session December 6 20161 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 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Special Committee of the Whole December 6, 2016 CALL TO ORDER Council Chair Barry Buchanan called the meeting to order at 1:50 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. ROLL CALL Present: Barbara Brenner, Ken Mann, Satpal Sidhu, Carl Weimer, Todd Donovan, Rud Browne and Barry Buchanan. Absent: None. COMMITTEE DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL 1. DISCUSSION AND FORMULATION OF RECOMMENDATION RELATED TO THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE'S VETO OF ORDINANCE 2016 -052 (LEVY OF TAXES FOR COUNTY AND STATE PURPOSES IN WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON, FOR THE YEAR OF 2017) (AB2016 -343) Jack Louws, County Executive, referenced his reasons for vetoing the ordinance as stated in his veto statement. He is not philosophically opposed to increases when necessary. However, Council's expenditure increases are more than its revenue increases. He answered questions about the amount the Council budgeted for legal counsel regarding its options for limiting fossil fuel exports. Councilmembers discussed the Executive's veto statement that indicated increasing the tax levy by one percent is connected to the budget expenditure for outside legal counsel regarding the County's options for limiting fossil fuel exports; budget reductions that councilmembers proposed, but did not approve, and; the Council and Executive working cooperatively rather than sending messages through the media. Mann moved to eliminate the budget requests for a facilities manager in two additional services requests (ASRs), the manager assistant as described in two ASRs, and evaluation of the financial software system as shown in one ASR, for a total of five ASRs, and to create a dedicated fund for the money saved by the emergency medical services (EMS) levy. He restated his motion to remove those five ASR's from the budget and forego the one percent increase. The motion was seconded. Councilmembers discussed the process for overriding the veto and rewriting the ordinance to indicate that the tax raise is to pay for necessary projects and services. Karen Frakes, Prosecutor's Office, answered questions on how to move forward with making amendments and whether they need another public hearing. Special Committee of the Whole - Open Session, 12/6/2016, Page 1 1 Mann withdrew his motion. 2 3 Weimer moved to recommend that the full Council override the veto of Ordinance 4 2016 -052. 5 6 The motion was seconded. 7 8 Councilmembers continued to discuss attaching a statement to the veto override 9 vote, whether or not they should approve a budget with a deficit, whether surplus funds as 10 a result of the EMS levy passage should be absorbed into the general fund or earmarked for 11 specific services, and the process for overriding the veto. 12 13 Dana Brown - Davis, Clerk of the Council, stated the options are to override the veto 14 or rescind the ordinance adopted on Nov. 22, and the budget will again be before the 15 Council. If there are substantive changes not previously discussed, a new ordinance would 16 have to be reintroduced and a public hearing held. 17 18 Councilmembers discussed the impact if they don't adopt the ordinance by the end 19 of the year and the process for overriding vetoes and amending ordinances. 20 21 The motion failed by the following vote: 22 Ayes: Weimer (1) 23 Nays: Donovan, Sidhu, Browne, Buchanan, Brenner and Mann (6) 24 25 2. DISCUSSION AND FORMULATION OF RECOMMENDATION RELATED TO THE 26 COUNTY EXECUTIVE'S VETO OF ORDINANCE 2016 -053 (FINAL BUDGET OF 27 WHATCOM COUNTY FOR THE BIENNIUM 2017 -2018) (AB2016 -198C) 28 29 (Clerk's Note: See the previous agenda item for discussion of this item.) 30 31 Mann moved to recommend that the full Council override the veto of Ordinance 32 2016 -053. 33 34 The motion was seconded. 35 36 The motion failed by the following vote: 37 Ayes: None (0) 38 Nays: Weimer, Donovan, Sidhu, Browne, Buchanan, Brenner and Mann (7) 39 40 Mann moved to recommend to the full Council that the Council rescind its vote for 41 Ordinance 2016 -053. 42 43 The motion was seconded. 44 45 The motion carried by the following vote: 46 Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Sidhu, Browne, Buchanan, Weimer and Donovan (7) 47 Nays: None (0) 48 49 1. DISCUSSION AND FORMULATION OF RECOMMENDATION RELATED TO THE 50 COUNTY EXECUTIVE'S VETO OF ORDINANCE 2016 -052 (LEVY OF TAXES FOR 51 COUNTY AND STATE PURPOSES IN WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON, FOR 52 THE YEAR OF 2017) (AB2016 -343) 53 Special Committee of the Whole - Open Session, 12/6/2016, Page 2 Donovan moved to recommend that the Council rescind its vote to adopt Ordinance 2016 -052. The motion was seconded. The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Browne, Brenner, Mann, Sidhu, Buchanan, Weimer and Donovan (7) Nays: None (0) Mann moved to recommend to the full Council that they adopt the levy that does not include the one percent tax increase. The motion was seconded. Councilmembers discussed the deficit in the proposed budget and the impact to revenue from fewer building permits and lower property values due to the Supreme Court's Hirst decision. The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Browne, Brenner, Mann, Sidhu, and Buchanan (5) Nays: Weimer and Donovan (2) 2. DISCUSSION AND FORMULATION OF RECOMMENDATION RELATED TO THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE'S VETO OF ORDINANCE 2016 -053 (FINAL BUDGET OF WHATCOM COUNTY FOR THE BIENNIUM 2017 -2018) (AB2016 -198C) Mann moved to recommend that the Council not approve additional services requests (ASRs) 5596, 5624, 5516, 5627, and 5588, for a total savings of $383,067. The motion was seconded. Councilmembers discussed the correct amounts approved in the ASRs, whether the costs of the additional facilities management positions would be made up through project savings, whether the existing staff can take on the additional responsibilities of all the pending capital projects, and the cost of needed infrastructure and capital projects. The motion carried by the following vote: Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Sidhu, Buchanan (4) Nays: Weimer, Browne, Donovan (3) Councilmembers discussed the process for making amendments to the budget. SPECIAL PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION 1. SPECIAL PRESENTATION AND COMMITTEE DISCUSSION OF A PROPOSED ORDINANCE ADOPTING INTERIM AMENDMENTS TO THE WHATCOM COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE WHATCOM COUNTY CODE TITLE 15 BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION, TITLE 20 ZONING, TITLE 21 LAND DIVISION REGULATIONS, AND TITLE 24 HEALTH CODE RELATING TO WATER RESOURCES, AND RESCINDING ORDINANCE 2016 -048 (AB2016- 309A) Special Committee of the Whole - Open Session, 12/6/2016, Page 3 1 Gary Davis, Planning and Development Services Department, submitted and read 2 from a presentation (on file) beginning with the Supreme Court decision, which indicated 3 that relying on the State Department of Ecology's measures to protect water resources does 4 not in itself protect water resources sufficient for Growth Management Act (GMA) 5 requirements. 6 7 Gary Stoyka, Public Works Department, continued the presentation with the Ecology 8 Map of the water resources inventory area instream flow protection status. The Instream 9 Resource Protection Program, known commonly as the Nooksack rule, covers water 10 resource inventory area (WRIA) 1. 11 12 Davis continued the presentation with the next group of slides on the Supreme Court 13 decision and the proposed amendments and next steps. 14 15 Stoyka concluded the presentation on the legal constraints. The one molecule rule 16 means that the law treats the water right for instream flow as the right to all the water in 17 the river. Not even a single molecule can be impaired. People have to look at how the 18 entire aquifer impacts instream flow, not just the aquifer under their property, despite how 19 much clay there may be. 20 21 Davis and Stoyka answered questions about a well taking groundwater that never 22 makes it into the instream flows, the definition of non - beneficial uses, why rain catchments 23 are problems, why small accessory dwelling units are treated differently than a home 24 expansion, where water banks work in other jurisdictions, whether they could approve a 25 well on the basis of an emergency, the difference between not having enough water and not 26 having the legal framework to allow creative water sources, using surplus water as a 27 mitigation strategy, transferring some of the excess water from the Public Utility District 28 (PUD) water right to the County to account for and allow exempt wells, vesting, issuing 29 permits with a condition on whether the well is hydrologically connected, and whether they 30 could allow a homeowner to truck in water. 31 32 Linda Twitchell, Building Industry Association, stated the Nooksack and other 33 instream flows were set as averages. She asked how to make county policies, given the 34 definition of instream flows, which means they can't meet the minimum flow for half of the 35 year. They may find that they can't meet instream flows because of its definition. 36 37 Councilmembers discussed the proposed resolution from Councilmember Mann and 38 the proposed letter to the legislators from Councilmember Browne. 39 40 Mann stated he will amend the resolution, which can reference the letter. 41 42 Tyler Schroeder, Executive's Office, stated the administration supports the 43 resolution. 44 45 Buchanan stated Councilmembers Browne and Mann will prepare a draft resolution 46 and a draft letter. 47 48 Mark Personius, Planning and Development Services Department, answered 49 questions about how long it will take to get information on the number of outstanding 50 permits affected by the Hirst decision and the process for amending the interim ordinance. 51 52 53 Special Committee of the Whole - Open Session, 12/6/2016, 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 COMMITTEE DISCUSSION COUNCIL COMMITTEE ROOM 1. DISCUSSION WITH SENIOR DEPUTY PROSECUTOR KAREN FRAKES REGARDING PENDING LITIGATION, HIRST ET AL V. WHATCOM COUNTY, GMHB CASE NO. 12 -2 -0013 (AB2016 -018) This item was not discussed. OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 4:55 p.m. The Council approved these minutes on February 7, 2017. `L����i.4V Vl i llf /lffl/Y A I- I'EST j Go (J f1! lrlr/ Dana Browny :Dd'vy , (�dVncil Clerk S H 1 ��'i' ` .• Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Barr c anan, uncil Chair Special Committee of the Whole - Open Session, 12/6/2016, Page 5