HomeMy WebLinkAboutPublic Works March 21 20001
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee
March 21, 2000
The meeting was called to order at 1:34 p.m. by Committee Chair Barbara
Brenner in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington.
9
10
11
12
Also Present: Absent:
Marlene Dawson None
Dan McShane
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
DISCUSSION
1. DISCUSSION REGARDING PUBLIC, EDUCATIONAL AND
GOVERNMENTAL TELEVISION ACCESS (AB2000-131)
Brenner stated this item was withdrawn from the agenda. The Executive’s
Office could not get all the parties together until April 11. They will meet at that
date with all the involved parties.
2. DISCUSSION OF CONCERNS RAISED BY CUSTER CITIZENS
REGARDING WILLIAMS PIPELINE (AB2000-129)
Brenner stated there was a newspaper article that quoted a company
representative who said the meeting notice was too short. She contacted the
company three weeks ago and they promised to have someone there. A week and
a half after that, they called to say they couldn’t find a representative to attend the
meeting. She didn't schedule this until she had confirmation from them.
Dawson stated they met with her several months ago and asked about the
process for public involvement at the Council level. She informed them about the
process. They told her they would come to the Council after establishing where the
corridor is and after they talked with the neighbors. They are scheduled for April
18. After that, they want to discuss this with the community. She believes
Williams is not a local company.
Brenner stated they contacted Councilmember Dawson after setting up this
meeting with them. They have an office in town and there is a local representative.
That is a side issue to the problem. They’ve been out on people's property without
permission. Their letter will not stand up in court. If they don’t know about
trespassing laws, they should not do anything dangerous in the community. There
were packets of information given out months ago to certain, select people. She
never received one. As a representative of that area, she was offended.
McShane stated he did not know a lot about the proposal, but was interested
in the concerns about the pipeline and the role that the County would play.
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 3/21/2000, Page 1
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
Brenner asked for a staff report. She asked Roland Middleton to attend.
Custer residents contacted her about this problem. Mr. Middleton told her the
company has not applied for anything. She understood that the County has control
of location, if the location is changed. She asked for more information on this.
Roland Middleton, Land Use Manager, stated staff meets briefly with
consultants all the time throughout the region. They met with Williams consultants
three or more months ago about bringing a pipeline through Whatcom County that
would go to Vancouver island. No one on his staff has met with them since. There
is no application. The company would be required to get a conditional use permit
because it is a trunk utility line. The Office of Pipeline Safety is in charge of the
safety of pipelines. Because of Pipeline Safety Act, the County is preempted on
safety issues regarding pipelines. However, the attorney general makes it clear
that the County has authority on the use and where they go. There would be a
public hearing in front of the Hearing Examiner. Anyone within 300 feet of the
corridor would be notified. There would be notice in the paper. There would be a
staff report and State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA) review. It would go to
the Hearing Examiner for decision. The decision can be appealed to County
Council. The County Council decision could be appealed to Superior Court.
Dawson asked if they can condition it on their location and use. She
questioned whether that means they can condition delivery of the product.
Middleton stated that is commerce. The County has no control over that.
Brenner stated the County has control over where the pipelines are located
and its use. Middleton stated the County could place a condition on maintenance
timeframes and construction. The County could try to condition the location, and
most likely win.
Brenner stated people have been told by Williams that the County can’t do
anything. Middleton stated he's talked with Williams and TransMountain attorneys.
He's been doing this for twelve years. The County has always won. They’ve all
gotten conditional use permits (CUP). He has no concern about the County’s
jurisdiction.
Brenner stated they would apply for CUP to move to a different route.
Middleton stated they need a CUP even if they are in the same route with a
different pipe.
Brenner stated that even though they are a private corporation, the County
has a responsibility on things such as pipelines because the public understands that
if pipelines go through, the County allows it. The County has a responsibility to
protect citizen rights by not allowing those things to happen indiscriminately.
Middleton stated federal preemption is when the federal government is
preempted from local review. However, there must also be proper representation.
The U.S. Congress has federally preempted specific uses, such as construction of
military bases. Many federal projects do not have federal preemption. The County
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 3/21/2000, Page 2
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
staff, because of its experience with Neighbors Opposing Power Encroachment
(NOPE), found out about the County’s authority. It is the same with State projects.
Brenner stated they are not a federal project. Middleton stated they are not.
The federal, state, and local governments review them.
Marianne Reed, 8296 Valley View Road, Custer, stated she received a letter
dated January 12, 2000. The next Monday, Rex Johnson from Williams was on the
phone with her. After reading the packet, she realized that the company could not
have any right to do this because it is a Canadian product going to Canada by
crossing Washington State. She questioned why this is going through Washington
State instead of the existing Canadian corridor. Rex Johnson indicated 80 percent
of the county was in favor of this project and that he had already put notices in the
newspaper and held meetings. She did not believe the county was that supportive.
The ground in her area will sink and the water table is high. She did not approve
the surveying and her neighbor did not approve of the surveying, but they were
both on the surveyor's list. The surveyors had the addresses and names of the
residents, so they knew whose property they were on. If this pipeline was granted
permission to deviate from the corridor, then other pipelines could get permission
and it would create a new corridor. She questioned whether there exists a
regulation that limits the distance between pipelines. She questioned whether the
company could threaten eminent domain for a project from Canada that serves
Canada.
Middleton stated he highly doubted that they could claim eminent domain.
Dawson stated they are not a government.
Middleton stated the federal government would have to claim eminent
domain for the company.
McShane questioned how the pipelines got the rights-of-ways they have.
Middleton stated a lot of pipeline rights-of-way were purchased 30 or 40 years ago
for next to nothing. A lot of people didn't have a clue what was involved.
Dawson asked about the proximity of lines. Middleton stated there is no
County regulation. He didn't know if there was anything from the Office of Pipeline
Safety.
Reed stated the property values can be devalued. Their privacy will be
invaded. Forest animals will be threatened. They will have to live with the
constant threat of a hazardous spill, explosion, or fire.
Amy McDonald, 8300 Valley View Road, Custer, stated she received a letter
in mid-January requesting permission to survey on her property. The letter said
the surveys would begin mid-January. The company gave her two weeks to
respond, and said a lack of response would be considered permission to go onto her
property. She responded and denied access to her property. They came onto her
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 3/21/2000, Page 3
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
property anyway. When she came home from town one day, a survey stake was
blocking her driveway. She informed Rex Johnson that they were trespassing and
they were not to do that again. Her two main concerns are the danger and the
statement regarding eminent domain.
Cheryl Moore, 8290 Valley View Road, Custer, stated she believed she was
the subject of the Bellingham Herald newspaper article. She gave the surveyors
until 3:00 to get off her property and remove the stakes. She threatened to call
911. She was opposed to any deviation from the existing pipeline corridor. She
was concerned about the Williams project in particular because of the manner in
which they have approached her. Their credibility is very low. She talked with Rex
Johnson and gave him a fair chance to explain things to her. She was not that
happy with the answers she got. It was like pulling teeth to get a straight answer.
He talked to her like she was an idiot. She is in the industry and knows what gas
lines and installing culverts entail. He was not aware that she was in the industry.
She was concerned they did not write a formal letter to the County representatives.
It shows a terrible disrespect for the County's authority. She received a packet of
information in mid-January. She did not want them on her property. She was born
and raised in Custer. One of the reasons they target rural areas is to not have to
deal with as many people and normally the people are not as concerned about
losing an easement on their property, according to Mr. Johnson.
Brenner stated industry people also target rural areas because they find it is
harder to get people organized against them.
Moore stated it has been an obvious effort to mislead and to intimidate.
They assumed that they could walk onto her property if she didn’t respond. Her
home is posted every 100 feet against trespassing. At the end of February, the
stakes were near her property. Over the next few days, she heard many stories
from her neighbors that concerned her. There isn't normally anyone around her
home during the day. She heard that there were work crews that blocked her
driveway and worked around her home. Her home is set back from the road.
There is no reason for anyone to be near her home. One day her 18-year-old son
confronted the survey crew. The company pulled into her driveway and more than
one truck was parked on her lawn. Her son could not get into the driveway. Her
son was told the survey crew has full authority to be on the property, and the
company denied her son access to the driveway. The company continued to
trespass on her property every day for a week. They did not restrict themselves to
the survey location, but wandered all over her property. She contacted the survey
company who had a list from Williams that said she provided permission to access
her property. She is against pipelines and against corrupting the natural land. She
was against the possibility of corrupting the water table. They all have wells. The
pipeline would possibly ruin her water.
Dawson stated the company said natural gas is different than other products
carried in the pipelines, in terms of affecting the environment. She questioned
what natural gas does.
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 3/21/2000, 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
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Brenner stated she received background information on Williams Pipeline. If
her information is factual, one of the problems has been with underground
explosions from pipelines. Natural gas, if it leaks, can follow water and come up
through the tap without detection. Williams has had problems with leaks. One
could have the gas coming into the house without knowing it.
Middleton stated it depends on the geology, the type of leak, where it is
buried, and where water is running through it. Each gas can be generalized. Crude
oil handles differently than gasoline, which is different than the other gases. There
are even problems with water lines. They are conveying a tremendous amount of
material through an area. There are concerns, which is why there is the type of
review they have. He couldn't say what problems there may be with a well, without
knowing the geology of the area.
Brenner stated she's heard that the gas can follow the water route and come
into one's home. Middleton stated he used to be an activist against underground
gas storage. They have to know that it is different than a pipeline. They have to
know the geology.
Brenner questioned whether it can be a problem. Middleton stated it can be.
Moore stated they installed a larger mobile home on their property seven
years ago. They filled the ground and made it level. Now, her yard looks like a
roller coaster. The soil is sandy loam.
(Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.)
Moore continued to say she has an artesian water system that dumps into
Dakota Creek. It is a continuously moving underground water system with a high
water table. She was concerned that the pipes would not stay underground. She
had questions for Mr. Johnson, but he was unwilling to disclose much information.
She asked the reason for putting the line in Whatcom County. She was told that it
would create jobs for Whatcom County and because of the two co-gen projects at
Cherry Point. However, the company did not have any negotiations from those
projects. She does not trust the company. Also, she has never spoken to Mr.
Gregory, who made the comment in the newspaper. She didn't know how he got
his information.
Brenner stated a company representative, Mr. Rhodes, said they would never
go on people's property without permission. She also called Mr. Gregory, who told
her they have never trespassed on anyone's property. When she asked, he did say
they might not have gotten specific permission to go on all the properties they went
on.
Moore stated she was told she would be compensated for any use of her
property. She is the fourth generation on the property, and one can't be
compensated for that. She assumed she would still be liable for the property taxes
on property she cannot build on. She will have to disclose the location of the
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 3/21/2000, Page 5
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
pipeline if she sells it. The pipeline will devalue her property. She questioned who
would move on top of a high-pressure natural gas line.
Kelly Bell, 8302 Valley View, Custer, stated he received a letter from Williams
Pipeline. He had less than two weeks to provide notification of whether the
company was allowed on their property. If the company did not receive any
notification, it would assume permission was granted. He did not want them on his
property. He did not want any trees removed. The surveyors trespassed on his
property. They were in the area for about five days. He saw them on Cheryl
Moore's property for six days. They were hanging around her house and garage.
They were also blocking her driveway. He tried to get information from the
company website, but Williams changed its website location several times. The
company is trying to go behind everyone and be sneaky. Williams Pipeline has
been monitoring another of its pipelines without disclosing to the residents what the
problem is. The ground it has been monitoring has been completely torn up. The
company is not that concerned with safety. Williams is trying to get the pipelines
installed before any other laws and regulations are enacted.
Dawson stated she serves on the Whatcom Transit Authority (WTA) Board
and the WTA is able to go through eminent domain. Middleton stated the brochure
is correct that the federal government can declare eminent domain, but the
government would have to provide findings on the public benefit for the private
project. The Port of Bellingham has similar authority. It is not automatic and it is
not handed out to a private company.
Brenner stated the issue is public benefit versus risk to people.
Stan Schmidt, 8377 Stein Road, Custer, thanked everyone who was present.
He called Brenner about the newspaper article. She returned his call and told him
about this meeting. He was contacted, and he denied permission for the surveyors
to cross his property. He recommended that everyone keep a journal of all the
activity and discussions. He wrote to his congressman and senators. He received a
letter from Representative Doug Erickson, who explained the rights. He read from
the Williams letter requesting permission.
Brenner stated an attorney told her that this is a sleazy way that certain
companies use to cushion themselves against lawsuits for trespassing. They claim
ignorance of the law by putting out a letter like this. Even though Williams was
trespassing, it can argue that it wasn't intentional. The same attorney said that it
is a violation of the law when there are "no trespassing" signs.
Schmidt stated there were men in his field near his drainage ditch. He
assumed it was the County road department looking at the culvert. They did not
stop to talk to him or provide any information. He noticed a large white marker
had been placed in his field. He was appalled that both the gas line and the power
line from Sumas Energy 2 were proposed in his area. He wrote a letter to Mr.
Gregory opposing such a project on, near, or adjacent to his property. He mailed
that letter on January 15. He read the letter into the record (on file). He also read
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 3/21/2000, 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
from his journal of events (on file). After he denied access to his property, Mr.
Johnson showed him aerial photographs of where the gas line would be laid on his
property.
Representative Doug Erickson received his email about the pipeline and
responded with an explanation that corporations have the right of eminent domain
in the State of Washington. It is part of the State Constitution. The Revised Code
of Washington (RCW) 8.20 deals with this issue. Also, RCW 81.88.020 deals
specifically with his situation. That statute says that Williams Pipeline qualifies
under federal law because they are making the resource available to this area
because the company has made the opportunity to tap into the line at a future time
as need would dictate available to Cascade Natural Gas. The company can then go
through and do whatever condemnation it takes to go through ones property.
Carl Weimer, Safe Bellingham, 1155 N. State Street, Bellingham, stated Safe
Bellingham has been involved with the pipeline safety matters since the June
explosion. They are holding a national pipeline reform conference in Washington
D.C. in early April. In the last few months, they've been contacting people about
pipeline issues. State and national representatives from around the country are
coming to their conference. Williams Pipeline is trying to install a pipeline back
east. People have been fighting this for a long time. He has heard many stories
about trespassing and going through a person's mortgage banker to get a right-of-
way. Even the governor of New Jersey has been fighting this. New Jersey, Ohio,
and Pennsylvania have not been able to stop this because of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC) process. Many people in Bellingham have a low
opinion because of the federal Office of Pipeline Safety. If FERC decides there is a
need for the pipeline, they can ignore local counties. The people back east are very
well organized, and the federal people just keep ignoring them. There are people
on Vancouver Island and in the San Juan Islands that are concerned. As more and
more information comes out, they need to form a coalition.
Alan Bell, 8302 Valley View, Custer, stated they all need to realize that
natural gas, under pressure in a pipeline, is not just dangerous or flammable. It is
explosive. On the strength of the testimony and the letter, they have grounds for a
lawsuit against Williams. That is the only thing these people are going to
understand. Williams has used the fact that it is a multi-billion dollar company and
can do anything it wants. It is time to put a stop to it.
Don Nielsen, 6287 Siper Road, Everson, stated Williams is the country's
largest transporter of natural gas. It has in excess of 20,000 employees. It is also
known as Williams Natural Gas Telecommunication Company. He has been
involved in pipeline issues since the explosion in his neighborhood on February 8,
1997. Williams has two pipelines. The pipeline blew a 75-foot section out of a 26-
inch pipe. It takes the company forever to shut them down. The people from
Custer are on the right track to contact Mr. Middleton and the County's elected
officials. The gentleman who talked to an attorney should get one who understands
codes and exactly what the group can do to become better informed.
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 3/21/2000, Page 7
Public Works and Capital Projects Committee, 3/21/2000, Page 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Brenner questioned whether Middleton could do some research about the
eminent domain issue. Middleton stated he didn't know that this would fit in the
FERC criteria. He originally didn't think it would. FERC is for interstate lines. He
would research it.
Brenner stated she is working on a draft "bad boy" law that will hopefully
help with this. She asked for help from anyone with research experience.
ADJOURN 10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
The meeting adjourned at 3:00 p.m.
______________________________
Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription
ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL
WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON
______________________________ ___________________________
Dana Brown-Davis, Council Clerk Barbara Brenner, Committee Chair