HomeMy WebLinkAboutCounty Council March 7 20171 WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
2 Regular County Council Meeting
3
4 March 7, 2017
5
6 CALL TO ORDER
7
8 Council Chair Barry Buchanan called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Council
9 Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
10
11
12 ROLL CALL
13
14
15 Present: Barbara Brenner, Ken Mann, Satpal Sidhu, Carl Weimer, Todd
16 Donovan, Rud Browne and Barry Buchanan.
17 Absent: None.
18
19
20 FLAG SALUTE
21
22
23 ANNOUNCEMENTS
24
25
26 SPECIAL PRESENTATION
27
28 1. VIDEO PRESENTATION TO PROVIDE INFORMATION RELATED TO THE
29 SUPREME COURT'S HIRST DECISION, FOLLOWED BY TIME FOR
30 COUNCILMEMBERS TO ASK QUESTIONS OF STATE AND LOCAL WATER
31 EXPERTS (AB2016 -309E)
32
33 Forrest Longman, Council Legislative Analyst, introduced the video presentation.
34
35 (Clerk's Note: Council played the video presentation, which can be found on the
36 County's YouTube page at lts :I/www. voutube.com /watch ?v =cTb-
37 kcm10rQ &feature= youtu.be &t=921)
38
39 The following panel experts answered councilmember questions:
40 • Tadas Kasalius, Attorney
41 • Bob Carmichael, Attorney
42 • Chuck Lindsay, Hydrogeologist
43 • Steve Jilk, Public Utility District (PUD) #1 Manager
44
45 Councilmembers asked questions from the panel members and discussed the
46 following topics:
47 • There needs to be a discussion on the basis for the Nooksack Basin instream flow
48 rule, which is simply a median average historical flow.
49 • The Court agreed with the instream flow rule, but ignored the part of the rule that
50 allows exempt wells.
51 • Ecology didn't conduct a maximum net benefit analysis when it set the minimum
52 instream flow.
53 • The legislature could fix the situation.
Regular County Council Meeting, 3/7/2017, Page 1
• Locally, they can come up with mitigation programs and create a task force to get at
some of these problems.
• The types of mitigation could open options right now.
• About 20 percent of 500 gallons of single family home indoor water use is
consumptive.
• An option for mitigation is the Ecology rainwater catchment program that would
remove someone from this issue by using it for drinking water or mitigation water.
• Another option for mitigation is getting water from a nearby water purveyor.
• Drawing water lowers the instream flow, but Whatcom County has a large
uninhabited area for surface water and a lot of rainfall available for aquifer recharge.
• The Supreme Court case law standard is that one molecule of impact to surface
water is considered impairment.
• The County must comply with Supreme Court decisions.
• The timing of the moratorium is legally debatable.
• Invalidity is worse than noncompliance, which allows time to become compliant
before a compliance hearing, which is scheduled in May.
• Whatcom County, as the named party to the case, is in a different position from all
the other counties.
• The decision referenced what the County must do when processing building
applications and subdivision applications, which influences the decision - making
process.
• The moratorium provided the County time to come into compliance.
• The Court concluded that it's the County's job to assess whether water is available
when issuing a building permit.
• Issuing a building permit doesn't prevent conflict between a senior water right holder
and junior water right holder.
• The consumptive use formula from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is between 10
and 20 percent of daily use.
• Water use needs to be defensible in a permit applicant's mitigation plan.
• No state law indicates rainwater catchment is legal, but exempt wells are illegal.
• Department of Ecology Policy 1017 says rainwater catchment is a viable option for
mitigation and for drinking water.
• The total number of gallons that must be mitigated by remaining undeveloped lots in
the county could be millions of gallons per day.
• The instream flow rule applies to most tributaries, not just the main stem of the
Nooksack River.
• Begin reviewing all the water that enters the county and manage it as an entire
system.
• Current water law doesn't allow the PUD to move its available water around the
county.
• The necessity of a water bank.
• There is uncertainty due to senior water rights that haven't been adjudicated.
• The County could make an effort to look at what the municipalities, water districts,
and water associations have through some kind of work group, referencing the
Coordinated Water System Plan.
• The Lower Nooksack Strategy included a component to identify water sources and
uses according to use, and tie the information to land management, but that
component was not funded or completed.
• The PUD is informally engaging in groundwater modeling, drought contingency
planning, and other water planning efforts.
• A challenge to creating a water bank is that mitigation must be at point of use.
• Creating a water bank using City of Bellingham water rights would be legally
possible, if there is the will to create it, since it's all in the same river system.
Regular County Council Meeting, 3/7/2017, Page 2
• Deep water aquifer that doesn't impact surface water can be used for mitigation.
• Barriers include the cost of infrastructure and water right holders who are hesitant to
open up their water rights to reallocation for fear of the rights being relinquished.
• The County has discretion in taking action on compliance.
• Counties not subject to this rule have taken the same action Whatcom County has
taken.
• Sharing water rights won't be a quick solution for anyone.
• Support efforts to have enough information on groundwater and surface water
resources, interconnectivity, and habitat needs to satisfy tribal claims and instream
flow habitat before new Ecology instream flow rules or a determination on tribal
water rights.
• The Lummi have two water rights: 1. A right from the Winters Doctrine for out -of-
stream consumptive right, and 2. A right to fish, which will drive the instream flow
requirements.
• Be proactive about determining the instream flow needs for fish.
• Include private well owners and the Planning Unit in any planning efforts.
• It would be tough for an attorney to successfully sue the County on behalf of a
client, given everything they know and if the client signed a waiver and had time to
consult an attorney.
• There seems to be a lack of trust among the stakeholders.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. ORDINANCE ADOPTING INTERIM AMENDMENTS TO THE WHATCOM COUNTY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND 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 (AB2016 -309D)
Mark Personius, Planning and Development Services Department, gave a staff report
on the format changes.
Buchanan opened the public hearing, and the following people spoke:
Dave Onkels submitted and read from his testimony (on file) and described the story
of a recent building applicant in performing a hydrogeologist review and the impact of the
Hirst decision.
Linda Twitchell, Building Industry Association of Whatcom County, stated she is
opposed to the interim ordinance because the County staff can overrule a hydrogeologisti's
report. Define the qualified technical review staff team who can throw out the study done
by a licensed professional report. The County should absorb the cost if it denies the
qualified study. Department of Ecology determined that 90 percent of water used from a
well is returned to the system.
Mary Kay Robinson, Whatcom County Association of Realtors, stated take care of the
people who are halfway through the process and have spent thousands of dollars on their
project. Don't restrict someone from enlarging their home by 50 percent. Identify what is
the financial assurance required by the mitigation plan, which is a problem for most people
who have to finance their projects.
Regular County Council Meeting, 3/7/2017, Page 3
Jim Hansen stated he is indifferent to this ordinance. State legislative action won't
add water to the streams. Begin developing options to make it easier for people to use the
water they have, do water conservation, and benefit farmers. The County should make
inspections mandatory, but provide a funding subsidy for financial hardship. Provide low -
and no- interest loans to pay for failing septic systems. Impose stormwater impact fees for
new construction.
Laura Sanderson stated the video presentation was biased. She spoke about a
recent building applicant who submitted a hydrogeologist review that was rejected and the
impact of the Hirst decision. Create the ability to transfer water rights.
Roger Almskaar, Citizens' Alliance for Property Rights, submitted and read from his
testimony (on file) and stated instream flow standards are not best available science. Allow
more housing to use groundwater for beneficial uses at reasonable rates as long as there is
adequate instream flow in tributaries for anadromous fish during migration. Put gauges in
the tributaries.
Zach Nutting spoke about his experiences trying to finish building his home without
the ability to get water. There is no loss of water according to Newton's Law. Water is
never consumptively used. It is transferred. The County legislators are supposed to guard
the safety of the citizens. The Council could have given citizens time to get their permits in
immediately. The County should fight the State decisions.
Karlee Deatherage, Resources for Sustainable Communities, stated she is indifferent
to the interim ordinance. If the science were improved, the rule would be more stringent.
She supports relief for those such as Mr. Nutting who are caught in the middle of the
process. It's an undue hardship. Create a comprehensive water budget for the Nooksack
basin.
Jay Markarian, Y- Squalicum Water Association Board Member, stated there is a
recalcitrant position of no growth in the county. The duty to provide service is being
squashed. His Board is willing to be a test case for allowing service with the right science to
support it.
Natalie McClendon stated she hasn't heard any information on the number of the
planned permit holders whose projects stalled because of the Hirst decision.
Jerry Peterson stated it's necessary to drill to prove adequate water supply. The well
site will have already been chosen before the County does a site visit. He is recommending
that his clients get a site approved before anything else. Rainwater catchment systems
should be allowed.
Patrick Alesse stated the goal is growth management, not water control.
Wendy Harris stated the Hirst decision simply upheld the law that already existed.
They must consider the rights of senior water right users and not allow junior water users to
take water from those senior users. There are inherent risks when buying property when
it's necessary to drill a well. Climate change affects the amount of available water. Focus
on ecosystem function and values. They must have a water budget and conservation.
Sue Croft stated banks won't loan on a rain catchment system because it's not a
reliable source of water.
Regular County Council Meeting, 3/7/2017, Page 4
Ed Kilduff stated variation in instream flow is mostly due to precipitation. When the
instream flow isn't met, they're expecting groundwater to make up for a fluctuation in
precipitation. The Postema decision indicates a conflict between modeling data and actual
field measurements. The Superior Court said the better set of data is the modeling data.
Hearing no one else, Buchanan closed the public hearing.
Browne moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion was seconded.
Mark Personius, Planning and Development Services Department, answered
questions about the number of people who were in the middle of a process to build a single
family home and the number of undeveloped parcels subject to the Hirst decision.
Brenner moved to add language to allow the several hundred people, who are in
the middle of the process and have gone to the County to apply for a permit exempt well, to
sign a waiver, not be affected by the Hirst decision, and finish their single family residence.
The motion was seconded.
Councilmembers and staff discussed the implication of such an amendment; why
they need a second hydrologist to verify the findings of the first hydrologist; defining the
steps in the process and the levels of work an applicant has done, so everyone is treated
equally; creating a threshold for challenging the decision of a licensed hydrogeologist; using
Donovan's proposed language from January to begin defining the process; whether
applicants have qualified under the new conditions; new applications submitted after the
Hirst decision are subject to the decision; flexibility for people who already have an existing
withdrawal; building permit applicants who have submitted their critical areas assessment
were vested to pre- Hirst; the difference between building permit vesting and subdivision
vesting; for subdivision projects filed prior to Hirst, a building permit submitted at a later
date still has to be reviewed pursuant to Revised Code of Washington 19.27.097 as
interpreted by the Court; and how they determine which projects and applicants are
considered "in the process."
Brenner amended her motion to adopt an emergency ordinance regarding
Whatcom County Code 24.11.060(A)(5) to add a new subsection (c):
c. A record that the project was substantively and recently active, prior to October
26, 2016.
Evidence that a project was substantively and recently active prior to October
26, 2016 shall include: The applicant paid fees to Whatcom County directly
related to advancing the project (including land disturbance permit fees,
project permit, etc.) prior to October 26, 2016; OR the applicant invested
funds on consultant services related to the proposal, OR the applicant has
records of meetings with Whatcom County PDS staff related to the project
within two years prior to October 26, 2016,
Evidence that a project was substantively and recently active prior to October
26, 2016 shall ALSO include some combination of the following:
1. The applicant has a designed, approved septic system installed on the
property prior to October 26, 2016;
2. The applicant has installed a functioning well on the property prior to
October 26, 2016;
Regular County Council Meeting, 3/7/2017, Page 5
1 3. The applicant has established that the well water is potable prior to
2 October 26, 2016;
3 4. The applicant has established a state approved private water system to
4 serve the property (and no more than 4 total properties) prior to October
5 26, 2016;
6 5. The applicant has completed a wetlands study for the property prior to
7 October 26, 2016;
8 6. The applicant has delineated wetlands and buffers prior to October 26,
9 2016;
10 7. The applicant hired an archaeological consultant and completed a study of
11 the property prior to October 26, 2016;
12 8. The applicant has completed a natural resource assessment.
13
14 iii.These permits apply only to applications for residential developments of no
15 more than [four] total properties that use, on annual average, no more than
16 200 gallons of water per day, per property.
17
18 iv. A permit issued under this section is conditional; The applicant may be
19 required to mitigate water use so as not to impair rights that are senior.
20 Mitigation may include water conservation, the use of low flow plumbing
21 fixtures, and other conservation methods.
22
23 v. A permit issued under this section does not grant the applicant water rights.
24
25 Brenner stated that if anyone has done any of the things in subsections (i) - (v),
26 then they are vested and can move ahead with their project.
27
28 Councilmembers discussed allowing people to decide whether or not they want to
29 take on the risk, the appropriate process for including this language in an ordinance,
30 whether or not an emergency exists to justify an emergency ordinance or emergency
31 amendment, not putting homeowners and landowners in the position of having to stop their
32 project mid - construction, make sure County changes are consistent with State legislative
33 changes, and defense of the County's approach.
34
35 Weimer moved to call the question on Councilmember Brenner's proposed
36 emergency ordinance. The motion was second.
37
38 The motion carried by the following vote:
39 Ayes: Mann, Sidhu, Browne, Buchanan, Weimer and Donovan (6)
40 Nays: Brenner (1)
41
42 Brenner amended and restated her motion to adopt an emergency ordinance
43 that states:
44 Anyone who has a single family residential project activated prior to October 26,
45 2016 will be allowed to continue and finish the project and evidence that a project was
46 substantively and recently active prior to October 26, 2016 shall include:
47 • The applicant paid fees to Whatcom County directly related to advancing the project
48 (including land disturbance permit fees, project permit, etc.) prior to October 26,
49 2016; OR
50 • The applicant invested funds on consultant services related to the proposal, OR
51 • The applicant has records of meetings with Whatcom County PDS staff related to the
52 project within two years prior to October 26, 2016.
53
Regular County Council Meeting, 3/7/2017, Page 6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
The motion failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner (1)
Nays: Mann, Sidhu, Browne, Buchanan, Weimer and Donovan (6)
Browne moved to amend the length of the interim ordinance to six weeks from the
effective date of the ordinance.
The motion was seconded.
Councilmembers discussed making changes within the next six weeks.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Mann, Sidhu, Browne, Buchanan, Brenner and Donovan (6)
Nays: Weimer (1)
Brenner moved to amend this ordinance, section 24.11.060(A)(5), to add
language:
Anyone who has a single family residential project activated prior to October 26,
2016 will be allowed to continue and finish the project and evidence that a project was
substantively and recently active prior to October 26, 2016 shall include:
• The applicant paid fees to Whatcom County directly related to advancing the project
(including land disturbance permit fees, project permit, etc.) prior to October 26,
2016; OR
• The applicant invested funds on consultant services related to the proposal, OR
• The applicant has records of meetings with Whatcom County PDS staff related to the
project within two years prior to October 26, 2016.
The motion was seconded.
The motion to amend failed by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner and Mann (2)
Nays: Sidhu, Browne, Buchanan, Weimer and Donovan (5)
Staff answered questions on the consequence of not adopting the interim ordinance.
The motion to adopt as amended carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Sidhu, Browne, Buchanan, and Donovan (4)
Nays: Brenner, Mann, and Weimer (3)
2. ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING CHARGES /FEES FOR PROVIDING ADVANCED
LIFE SUPPORT (ALS) AMBULANCE TRANSPORT SERVICES IN WHATCOM
COUNTY (AB2017 -086)
Buchanan opened the public hearing, and the following person spoke:
Karen Brown stated ambulance fees are excessive.
Hearing no one else, Buchanan closed the public hearing.
Mann moved to adopt the ordinance.
The motion was seconded.
Regular County Council Meeting, 3/7/2017, Page 7
1 Councilmembers discussed advanced life support services.
2
3 The motion carried by the following vote:
4 Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Sidhu, Browne, Buchanan, Weimer and Donovan (7)
5 Nays: None (0)
6
7 3. RESOLUTION TO SELL TAX -TITLE PROPERTY BY PUBLIC AUCTION, REQUEST
8 #TR2017 -01 (AB2017 -087A)
9
10 Steve Oliver, Treasurer, gave a staff report and answered questions on whether
11 there is an urgency to sell the property and if owning the property incurs costs to the
12 County.
13
14 Mike McFarlane, Parks and Recreation Department Director, answered questions
15 about whether this is useful for building the Kendall Trail.
16
17 Buchanan opened the public hearing, and the following person spoke:
18
19 Zack Nutting described the history of the parcel and stated the site is currently a
20 dump site, trees are leaning and threatening his property, and he would like to purchase
21 the property.
22
23 Hearing no one else, Buchanan closed the public hearing.
24
25 Brenner moved to approve the resolution. The motion was seconded.
26
27 The motion carried by the following vote:
28 Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Sidhu, Browne, Buchanan, Weimer and Donovan (7)
29 Nays: None (0)
30
31
32 OPEN SESSION
33
34 The following people spoke:
35 • Kris Halterman submitted a handout (on file) and spoke about the proposed
36 changes to the Cherry Point urban growth area in the Comprehensive Plan.
37 • Patrick Alesse spoke about the County purchasing a property in Birch Bay that
38 should be for public parking.
39 • Carole Perry spoke about the critical areas ordinance.
40 • Eddy Ury, Resources for Sustainable Communities, spoke about the proposed
41 changes to the Cherry Point urban growth area in the Comprehensive Plan
42 and the ordinance adopting interim amendments to the Whatcom County
43 Comprehensive Plan and Whatcom County Code relating to water resources.
44
45
46 OTHER ITEMS
47
48 1. REQUEST AUTHORIZATION TO GRANT THE WASHINGTON STATE
49 DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE AN EASEMENT ON PARK PROPERTY
50 LOCATED ON THE SOUTH END OF LAKE WHATCOM FOR THE PURPOSE OF
51 CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF A FISH HATCHERY AND STREAM
52 BANK ON BRANNIAN CREEK (AB2017 -091)
53
Regular County Council Meeting, 3/7/2017, Page 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
Donovan reported for the Natural Resources Committee and moved to approve the
request.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Sidhu, Browne, Buchanan, Weimer and Donovan (7)
Nays: None (0)
2. REQUEST APPROVAL FOR THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO ENTER IN TO A
CONTRACT BETWEEN WHATCOM COUNTY AND COMMODITY CREDIT
CORPORATION FOR A 50% COST SHARE FOR FOUR PURCHASE OF
DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS EASEMENTS THROUGH THE AGRICULTURAL
CONSERVATION EASEMENT GRANT PROGRAM, IN THE AMOUNT OF $593,020
(AB2017 -092)
Browne reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee and
moved to approve the request.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Sidhu, Browne, Buchanan, Weimer and Donovan (7)
Nays: None (0)
3. RESOLUTION INITIATING PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING
AMENDMENTS (AB2017 -083)
Buchanan reported for the Special Committee of the Whole meeting and stated this
item is held in committee.
COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES
1. APPOINTMENT TO PORTAGE BAY SHELLFISH PROTECTION DISTRICT
ADVISORY COMMITTEE, APPLICANT: MICHAEL SHEPARD (AB2017 -072)
Brenner moved to appoint Michael Shepard.
The motion was seconded.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Sidhu, Browne, Buchanan, Weimer and Donovan (7)
Nays: None (0)
EXECUTIVE APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES
1. REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF COUNTY EXECUTIVE'S APPOINTMENT OF
SONJA MAX TO FILL THE DISTRICT AT -LARGE POSITION ON THE PARKS
AND RECREATION COMMISSION (AB2017 -093)
Brenner moved to confirm the appointment. The motion was seconded.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Sidhu, Browne, Buchanan, Weimer and Donovan (7)
Nays: None (0)
Regular County Council Meeting, 3/7/2017, Page 9
1
2
2.
REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF COUNTY EXECUTIVE'S APPOINTMENT OF
3
KRISTI ROBERTS AND MATTHEW MCDERMOTT TO THE WHATCOM COUNTY
4
AGRICULTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (AB2017 -094)
5
6
Brenner moved to confirm the appointment. The motion was seconded.
7
8
The motion carried by the following vote:
9
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Sidhu, Browne, Buchanan, Weimer and Donovan (7)
10
Nays: None (0)
11
12
13
INTRODUCTION ITEMS
14
15
Mann moved to accept Introduction Items two through nine. Item one is held in
16
committee. There is a substitute for Introduction Item two.
17
18
The motion was seconded.
19
20
The motion carried by the following vote:
21
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Sidhu, Browne, Buchanan, Weimer and Donovan (7)
22
Nays: None (0)
23
24
1.
ORDINANCE AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RELATING TO THE
25
CHERRY POINT URBAN GROWTH AREA (AB2017 -063)
26
27
This item is held in committee.
28
29
2.
ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 2.27A TO
30
PREVENT THE RELEASE AND SPREAD OF AQUATIC INVASIVE SPECIES
31
(AB2017 -084)
32
33
3.
ORDINANCE AMENDING THE WHATCOM COUNTY UNIFIED FEE SCHEDULE
34
(AB2017 -085)
35
36
4.
ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE 2014 -075 (ESTABLISHMENT OF THE
37
COURTHOUSE BUILDING ENVELOPE FUND AND BUDGET) TO INCLUDE
38
ADDITIONAL FUNDING OF $2,427,809 TO COVER THE COST OF SCHEDULED
39
MAINTENANCE AND REPAIRS (AB2017 -095)
40
41
S.
ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2017 WHATCOM COUNTY BUDGET, THIRD
42
REQUEST, IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,104,121 (AB2017 -096)
43
44
6.
RESOLUTION AND REQUEST FOR A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING
45
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDING APPLICATIONS
46
(AB2017 -097)
47
48
7.
ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING INTERFUND LOANS TO FINANCE CASH FLOW
49
FOR STORMWATER CAPITAL PROJECT BUDGETS (AB2017 -098)
50
51
S.
ORDINANCE AMENDING WHATCOM COUNTY CODE 24.05, ON -SITE SEWAGE
52
SYSTEM REGULATIONS (AB2017 -053A)
53
Regular County Council Meeting, 3/7/2017, Page 10
1 9. ORDINANCE IMPOSING AN INTERIM MORATORIUM ON THE ACCEPTANCE
2 AND PROCESSING OF APPLICATIONS AND PERMITS FOR NEW OR
3 EXPANDED FACILITIES IN THE CHERRY POINT URBAN GROWTH AREA, THE
4 PRIMARY PURPOSE OF WHICH WOULD BE THE SHIPMENT OF UNREFINED
5 FOSSIL FUELS NOT TO BE PROCESSED AT CHERRY POINT (AB2016 -256B)
6
7
8 COMMITTEE REPORTS OTHER ITEMS AND COUNCILMEMBER UPDATES
9
10 Donovan reported for the Natural Resources Committee.
11
12 Browne reported for the Finance and Administrative Services Committee on the
13 following item:
14
15 1. PORT OF BELLINGHAM /ASSOCIATE DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION (ADO)
16 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT UPDATE (AB2017 -069)
17
18 Browne moved to request that the administration create a request for proposals
19 (RFP) for the designated Associate Development Organization (ADO) contract, given
20 changes to the Comprehensive Plan regarding economic development.
21
22 The motion was seconded.
23
24 Tyler Schroeder, Executive's Office, gave a staff report on the ADO designation
25 process and invited councilmembers to attend an Economic Development Investment (EDI)
26 Board meeting in which these questions will be discussed.
27
28 The motion carried by the following vote:
29 Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Sidhu, Browne, Buchanan, Weimer and Donovan (7)
30 Nays: None (0)
31
32 Browne moved to request that the Executive delay signing the letter that establishes
33 the ADO until the Council has determined the ADO agency for the next contract.
34
35 Schroeder answered questions about any ramifications from a delay in signing the
36 letter. He will have a conversation with the Council before making that decision.
37
38 Browne withdrew his motion.
39
40 Brenner reported for the Public Works, Health, and Safety Committee.
41
42 Resolution condemning the recent hate crimes in Washington and other
43 states (AB2017 -102)
44
45 Sidhu moved to approve the resolution.
46
47 The motion was seconded.
48
49 Browne moved to amend to add "Whereas members of some religious groups in
50 Whatcom County have felt under pressure to not practice their faith."
51
52 Councilmembers discussed keeping the language more generic.
53
Regular County Council Meeting, 3/7/2017, Page 11
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
Browne withdrew his motion to amend.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Ayes: Brenner, Mann, Sidhu, Browne, Buchanan, Weimer and Donovan (7)
Nays: None (0)
Councilmembers gave updates on recent activities and upcoming events.
ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 11:02 p.m.
The County Council approved these minutes on April 18, 2017.
.a�a��iP'r ► ►►
r G o ►����
ATTEST: «' • F A i
A C0.
m
Darin Brown -qp�' i cCconcil Clerk
ifs ... • ' � ���.
��f�' " ►► +rrrr st +�' �����
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
chantfn, Council Chair
Regular County Council Meeting, 3/7/2017, Page 12