HomeMy WebLinkAboutM091012District Vo. l Commissioner: Phil Johnson
District Nn. 2 Commissioner: David W. Sullivan
District No. 3 Commissioner: Joha Austin
Coun[y Administra[ar: Philip Marley
Clerk of the Board: trio Lundgren
MTNT"TF.S
Week of September 10, 2012
Cottunissioner
order at the appointed time in the presence of
Ph'BLIC CO:W;TIGNT PERIOD: The followvtg is a summary of comments made by
citizens in attendance at the meetin_ and retlcct their personal opinions:
• 'two citizens spoke against the spraying o1 herbicides on County Kights-of-W'ay:
• A citizen noted the Chairman has the authority over what is scheduled on the agenda and asked
that a noise ordinance be scheduled on a future agenda:
• A citizen stated a local candidate Rm[m will he held on ~~ ednesday at the Chimacum Grange: the
activities between Iran and Israel were reviewed;
• A citizen stated he volunieercd tier the Jefferson County 1\oxious ~Vecd Control Board pulling
weeds last weekend:
• .A citizen staled a wheat farmer in Nashingnon sprays his 9.000 acres of farmland with roundup
each year: and
• A citizen stated giving your name and address at the beginning of speaking during public
cotntnent period is optionaL• dtc Count.• !\dministrator catducts serial meetings with the Board:
why hasn't the Board discussed an investigation regarding the County :\dministrator and
destruction of records?
APPROVALAIVDADOPT70:~'OFCO:1iSF.;'~'TAGF_.'~'DA: Commissioner Sullivan
noted that the agenda initially posted showed an incorrect contract amount liar consent agenda item no. 4
and has now been corrected to reflect $14,931.10. Commissioner Sullivan moved to approve all the
items un the Consent Agenda as presented. Commissioner ,lohnson seconded the motion which carried
by a unanimous vote.
1. RESOLUTION NO. i4l2: Creating a Count. Prgjcct Designated as CK1913: Uuckabush Koad
Pavement Preservation
2. AGREEI\lENT, Supplemental Nn. 2: Port Hadlock R'astewater Faci]ity Preliminary Ucsign
Services; Completion Date Extension; JctYcrson Cotmir Public Works; 'hctra'1'cch
3. AGREE114ENT NO. LA-6323, Supplemental No. 4: L<arrr• Scott Memorial I7ai1 Segment 4,
Acyuisition Project No. 1069; Ke-Allocation of Ponds in the Amowrt of $5.000; Jefferson
County Public Worlts; 1Vashinanon State Department of Transportation
4. AGRF.EAiF.NT: Larry Scott Trail. Project 1\0. CK1069. County Koad \o. 360100: MP 6.0 to
MP 7.3; In the Amount of S 144.931.10; Jefferson C'otmri~ Public Works. Seton Constmction
5. AGI2EEA4ENT: Birth to Three (3) Years Program; In the Amount of 56.36-t:.Iefferson County
Public Health; Chimacum School District
J-°l' .
Conunissioners ~lcetin<~ Minutes: Week of September 10. 2012 a
~j.
'~:
6. AGREEM1IEN"I' NO. 016887, Amendment No. 4: 2012-2014 Consolidated Contract;
Additional Amotmt of $>;.408 liar a Total Amount of 5730.701:.leffcrson Cotmn Public ITealth;
\\'ashington State Deparunent of Health (llOIT)
7. :1GREEMF.NT: Joint Plan of"Responsibility for Kesulation of \Vater Recreation Facilities; No
Dollar Amount:.lefferson County Public Hcaltlt; \\ ashinonon State Depanment of Health (DOII)
8. AGRF,F.MENT NO. 1263-52714, Amendment 1\0. 1: Lady Inter<ention Program (EIP);
T,anguage Change Onlv: ,Tell'erson County Public health: Washington State Deparmcnt of Social
and Health Services (DSHS)
9. AGRF,F.~IF.NT NO. 1263-52712, .Amendment tin. L• L'arl}~ Pamily Support Services (F.FSSj;
Language Change Only; Jefferson Cowity_ Public Health: Washington State Depatment of Sucial
and Health Servioes IDSHS)
10. ACRF.F,~IF,NT NO. 60800055, Amendment No. 4: Hood Canal Clzan Water Project; Amount
Reduced by 541.871.64; Jefferson County Public Health; Washington State Department of
Ecology (DOE )
11. AGREI;~fENT: School 13ascd I Iealth Center: Tn the Anunmt of 56.000; JctTersott County
Yublic TTeahh:.fefferson \lcntal health Scrvioes
12. AGRELAITNT NO. 1263-43173, Amendment No. 1: 2012-2013 Consolidated Contract:
Supports Supervision of ~9oderate to Iligh Risk Offenders; .Teflerson County .htvenile Services:
\V'ashington State Department of Social attd health Services (DSHS)
13. AGREEMENT \O. IAA1303.>, Interagency: Coun-:\ppointc:d Special Advocates (CASH)
Grant for (iuazdian ad Litem Progr:mr in the .Amount of 52,300: Jefferson County Juvenile
Services; 1\~ ashington State Administrative Oftice of the Courts
14. AGREEb1ENT NO. IAA13070, Interagency: Process f3GCL'A Bill Programs and Services: In
the ;lmount of 342.694; .Iel'ferson County Juvenile Scn ices: \Vashington State Administrative
Oft7cc of the Courts
1 ~. Payment of Jefferson Cvunh Payroll Warrants: llatcd September i, 2012 Totaling
583.911.40 and A'P R arrants Done by Payroll Dated September 9.2012 Totaling 5802.949.38
Apprcnml nf:Llinrdes: Commissiater .lahnson moved to approve the meeting minutes of
August 20.2012 and August 27. 2012 as presented. County :ldtninisu~ator \4orlec stated last week hvo
corrections were suggested for the minutes of August 20, 2012 and at his request the [notion to approve
the minutes was tabled. I Ie stated the suggested corrections were incorrect and the minutes were
accurate as presented on September 4, 2012. Commissioner Sullivan seconded the [notion which carried
by a unanimous vote.
C0:1I:11LS.SIO.~ERS BRIEFL~YG SESSION: 7~hc Commissioners each provided
updates on the following items:
Chairman Austin attended a meeting with \1'ashington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
staff and an Olympic Peninsula Coalition meeting last tveck.
Commissioner Sullivan attended an Olympic :\rca Agency on Aging meeting and spoke about the
Chimacum Creek Gauge.
Commissioner Johnson stated the Parks and Kccrcation fundraiser at the \\ ooden Boat Festival did well
and he is working on an education prgjcet regarding air quality.
Pose 2
Commissioners Afeerng \~finutes: ~'cek of September 10. 2012
_\~
~.....
fhe meeting was recessed at 9:54 a.m. and reconvened at 10:01 p.m with all three
Cvmmissioners present.
HEi1RLNG: a~ysten~ Brry~ Almrubement Plmr: Department of Communit• Development
Planning Manager Stacie 1loskins introduced lL'ashineton State Dep~triment of Health staff Mark To}'
and Washington State Department ofNautral Resources (D?~R) staff Brach Scott and Marrowstone
Island stakeholder ASark Ilazen +vho are present to answer questions durin, the hearing, y4s. 1loskins
stated staff'has not received am ++Titten hearing comments.
Chaimtan Austin opened the hearing for public testimony.
1learin~= no
staff hvo ++eeks ago. He
the Board adopt it. It is
et staff to prepare a resolution adopting the \~fystery Bay
mson seconded the motion. Discussion ensued rcgardin the
in this project. Chairman Austin called li>r a vote on the motion
vote.
IIEARI:'~rG: Snuth Port Townsend Bnt• alrurngenreut Plun: Ms. Hoskins stated the
number of boats is not at the maximum capacity and this plan will help cite ne+v moorin~~ buoys in order
to avoid problems in the futures The adoption oY'thc pian the is first step in order to enact enforcement
to ensure compliance.
liar public testimony.
Richard Broders: Ile has shellfish beds in the southern portion of Pvrt To+ansend Bay and is concerned
about this issue. [ Ie ++as invoked in the draft plan and it appears to be unintrusive to the boaters and
seems to be enforcing existing laws. He supports the adoption of the South Pvrt To+vnsend Bay
Management Plan which will ensure the existence of dte current shellfish business located in the area in
the future, which has been t:•trnily owned for 70 nears.
Bill Miller: l le supports the adoption oFa resolution to implement the South Port Townsend Bay
Management Plan. The list of stakeholders is similar to that ol'the Mystery Bay Management Plan. He
asked if the moratorium would nu loner he in effect when the plan is approved' The plan is
commendable and makes him pleased to be livine in Jefferson County.
Hearing no further testimony. Chaimtan .Austin closed the hearing.
Commmissioners Meeting il~linutes: 1\`eek of September 10. ?012 !~
_Ris. FIoskins stated there was s moratorium that was renctvcd Slav 7. 2012 which expires on December
i, 20]2. f:pon adoption oftlte plan, the moratorium will end so implementation and permitting can
begin.
Commissioncr Sullivan moved to direct staff to prepare a resolution adopting the South Port'I'ownsend
Ray Management Platt. Commissioncr Johnson seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous
vote.
The meeting was recessed at 10:39 a.m. and reconvened at 1:14 p.m with all three
Commissioners present.
COC :YT'Y'AU.177,YTSTRATOR BRIEFL~\'G SESSION; Count•~ Administrator Philip
Morley reviewed the followin<, with the Board.
Pore Hadlock Wastewater (Sewer) S}'stem Project LPdate: Public. \\ orks Lead Associate
Plamter Joel Peterson handed out a prgject sunnnan and schedule to the Board. He stated the
preliminary design Ibr the wastewater facility has bccn completed. The cost estimate of the updated
design is accurate to the allotted pktttning estimate of the project. Afrer the preliminary design
documents were completed, a contract for a vahte engineering study was done. The cost to conduct the
study was $1 10.000. and in the process of the study. $l.~ million life cycle savings have been identified.
There are a number of additional recommendations that need to he explored by TetrtTech. ~+hich may
result in more savings.
A special benefit feasibility analysis has bccn contracted to be donor 7'he assignment is to analyze the
estimated range of probable increase of propertq value in the lust phase of a Local Improvcatcnt District
(LID) using a cost versus benefit factor. Commissioner Sullivan asked if that study was available'? Mr.
Peterson replied a prepared report has not been completed. but the general cost of the improvement
distrct would be 512 million. Properties with similar characteristics will be analyied and the results
will he combined to<~ether for broad eeneraliration. The LID area has a bracket of a S 12 million cost on
an estimated amount of property value at S 16 to S22 million. The study teas done to shoe the need to
move forward on the T_iD. As progress is made. more individual spccitic propcm assessments will be
made.
Land acquisition of live parcels have bccn purchased which totals an estimated amount of forty five
acres to accommodate the wastewater facilit• . Currently, the purchase of three parcels is bein~_
negotiated for the infiltration pond area. "fhe value engineering study showed different configurations
for the infiltration pond so there are options available in the event the purchase of more property cannot
be negotiated.
A biosolids agreement with the City of Pon Townsend to accept the solids from the Port Iladlock
wastewater facility is also being dune negotiated. Solids will be transferred to the Port'fownsend facility
lbr ihrther processing. County ;ldministrator Morley stated that there is an interlocal agreement in place
with the Cii< of Port Tatvnsend that efforts the City to use County Iand for composting in exchange for
excepting biosolids. Discussion ensued regarding options for transportation of biosolids.
Page ~4
Commissioners Meeting
h4inutes:
1','cek of Se
ptember 10.
2012 /,-%
i'
~
\~
>
Chairman Austin asked if the Pon Hadlock facility would he able to handle items like phazmaccutical
products? Vfr. Peterson ans+acred the Best that can be designed fctr pharmaceutical and personal care
products will be installed via the membrane process.
Mfr. Peierson stated a letter of intent has heen received from Public Utility District (PL1D) No. 1 to nm
the ++aste+aator facility and discussion continues that with that eniity.
rent liar S 10 million has been approved. Ctnrently Public
million as part of the 2014 legislative biemtium cycle. A
~P) C;rart from the ~~'ashington State Department of Ecology is
Poster Pepper has heen
while community outreach
continues.
the facility benchmarks and the LID process. Four main items that are
the end of 2012: 1) final facility design; 2) contracting with ~QBR vendors;
?rational L•nvironmental Policy Act (NEPA) review. The IdD resolution
is a benchmark that is currenih being worked on by staff.
Letter from i{'ashin,;ton State Deparhnent ojCcolo,>Lt' (DUEJ re: Shoreline
Master Program (S.'~IPJ: Deputy Prosecuting Attorney David Alvarez stated the only legally defensive
position is to allow in-water net pens (marine net pens) aquaculture. Three apes of industries arc a
protected status under the Crrowth Management Act (G\I:1), extraction ot""minerals. the harvesting of
trees and the harvesting of agriculriuz products. There are no legal remedies Idr the adjacent rural land
owner, therefore. giving those three industries an exalted status. There are categorizes in thr Shoreline
Management Act (SN1A) that are preferred uses. marine net pens included. Preferred uses in the SNIA
arc water dependent uses. Marine ret pens are a water dependent use as fish need water to survive. DOE
considers upland net pens as a scpara[c water dependent use compared to in-water net pens, neither
+yhich can be legalh banned. 'there is no case law on water dependent uses.
Commissioner Sullivan asked if both types of net pins (up land and in-water) are considered water
dependent uses. and if the upland water dependent use is allowed, can rep=ulations against in-water net
pens be implemented by the C'ounty' Mr. Alvarez stated that both types ol'water dependent uses must
he allowed. Commnissioner Sullivan asked where DOF, derived the delinitions for both water dependent
uses? He catutot find it in the R AC or RCR'. .\ir..Ah arez stated it's not in the RC~\ or \'~ .AC but
having separate water dependent uses makes sense because they are different.
~4r. ,Aharez stated to allow one upland +a~ater dependent use dots not free the Cotmty from prohibiting a
distinct water dependent use nor does the Counh have sufficient scientific evidence to support the
conclusion that it is not possible to authorize marine net pens without also suffering a net loss of
the shoreline jurisdiction. The County cannot prove that marine net pens
County Administrator ~torlcy stated that the Roard cannot prove that marine net pens will cause harm
attd that there is a risk of harm and there is no evidence supporting that no harm will happen. The
burden to regulate would require showing necessary harm cannot be prevented ar mitigated which is a
legal hurdle the County is not able to succcssfullyjump.
Commissioner Sullivan stated the risks that arc invoh ed with in-water net pens are net acceptable and
he has not seen any conditions that ceould make the risks acceptable.
J4r. Alvarez stated that if the County does not respond to I)OF by the October I , 2012 deadline, the
County will he in violation of the statutory duty to have a compliant Shoreline Master Platt. Rulemaking
by DOF. could occur throueh the Administrator Procedures Act which would make the process go on for
one or nvo more years. Rulemaking could change all of the other policies that the County has changed
in ihr revised draft SMP, a cost henelit analysis may have to be done and more hearings are likely. Once
the County resumes control over the SMP, the County can adopt the SMP that is in compliance with
DO).
ht addition to rulemaking. a superior court lawsuit may be filed before the C3rcnvth Mlanagemcnt
Hearings Roard against the County because of the prohibition of marine net pens. There has to be a
nexus bcnvccn the identified public problem (1PP) and the regulation. 1 he regulation has to be roughly
proportional to the IPP that it was created to mitigate. Nexus cart be resolved because according to
RC\\ 90.58,020 the shoreline is of the most valuable and fragile of natural resources. great concern
throughout the State rotating to their utilisation, protection, restoration and preservation and
necessitating increasing coordination of the management and development of the shorelines of the State.
Coordinated planning is necessary to protect the public interest associated cvitlt the shorelines of the
State, at the same lime protecting private property rights consistent with the public interest. L'ses shall
be preferred which are uniyue to or dependent on the uses of the State shoreline. Industrial and
cotnntercial developments are also preferred which arc particularly dependent on or the uses of the
shoreline of the state. A prohibition on marine net pens will unlikeh be founded as a identified public
The contents of the Shoreline iA~tanagement Act states no net loss
line jurisdiction. There is an absence of evidence that a marine
net pen
catutot
net loss.
A prohibition on marine net pens leaves the County vulnerable to a lawsuit alleging regulatory takine.
The Roard may he reluc[am to send llOE a S\'lY that includes net pens as a conditional use. but State
lava forces the Roard to do so.
Commissioner Sullivan stated the law forces the Roard to submit an SMP allowin~~ net pens under
certain conditions, but what are those conditions?
the County could require would be more
were tv take place.
tier net pens according to the conditional uses and use standards liar
tl use approach, staff would analyze what sites would be limited
concems.
llOL ~s letter is not asking for the Board to adopt the S~1P but ut communicate whether the Board +vi11 be
adopting a SJ-IP which is allows in-water fin tish +vith a conditional use permit or adopting a S'v1P with a
prohibition of in-water net pens. M)F. has stated if [he S;v1P +vith the prohibition is adopted, they would
dcnv the SivtP and the County could appeal through the ~Vestem Vb'ashimton Growth Management
Hearings Board. !mother option would be tv adopt an S\4P and approve a moratorium vn in-water net
pens ftrr further analysis.
~4s. Iloskins reviewed the Board concems rc,arding perfomtancc standards relating to conditional uses.
Cowtty Administrator Morley stated if DOE found the conditions acceptable. DOF. would take the lead
on defendau it based on the science and substance. should the County ,'c[ challen,cd. A4r. Alvarez
stated he has not confirmed their role in that situation but llOE could possible he a co-defendant.
Chairman !mstin asked if a conditional use +vould include net pens being a certain distance away from
marinas due to boating activity? \~is. Hoskins answered yes, it has to be a certain distance fiom
recreational uses. but the specific distance will need to be determined. Chaimtan Austin asked if it
would have to be a certain distance Isom commercial shellfish'? Director Carl Smilh stated that
protective buf~'er zmtes have to be established for wildlife habitats. but it could be applied to commercial
shellfish and language could be added to streng8ten that regulation.
Discussion ensued where in-water net pens could possibh be located and the water bowtdaries of
Board`s option must be decided. County Administrator \~forley stated since
of harm by in-water net pens. conditions should be made for the permitting
Commissioner Johnson stated a catdition should be made that llOE agrees to assume all financial and
Iegal responsibility in full for any and all ccolo;ical legal damages made by in water net pens to
Jefferson County. '~4s. Hoskins stated that the land owner is responsible for all catastrophes that occur
on their land. Washington State llcparmcni of natural Resources (DVR) representative Scott Brady
stated if someone were to have a lease with llvK. insurance. bonding and financial securities are
required. A lease from Washington State Department of Varitral Kesourccs would be granted aflcr a
permit is issued from the County, the Army Corp of Engineers and ~'~ ashington State Department of Pish
and «'ildlife.
Commissioners Meeting :~4inutes: \Vicek of September 10. 2012 ~2
~;~~%,
~4s. Hoskins reviewed how not having an approved SHIP has impacted the Dzpartment of Community
Development Iinancialh' and the majority of public opinion.
The Board concurred to schedule this as a Ihture agenda item to make a decision en which option the
County will pursue.
The mceting was recessed at 3:+31 p.m. and reconvened at 3:46 p.m v«th all three
Commissioners present.
COC;~`TYAD:1.1Lh'ISTRATOR BRIEFLVG SESSION (Continued):
- Miscellaneous Items:
• Discussion with Depanmznt of Community Development Staff and
Deputy Prosecuting :lttorncy Alvarez re: Boulton Farm Boundary Line
Adjustment
• Possible Goa[ Cheese Farm in Kural Kcsidcntial Lone
- Calendar Coordination:
• The Board ~a ill be participating in the Quilcene Parade scheduled for
.~uaust 15. 2012
• Commissioner Jokmson and Commissioner Sullivan ~~~11 be attendine a
local candidate fonun on September 10. 2012
- Budget Update:
• Sales 1 ax
• Real testate Excise 'fax
- Future Agenda Items:
• Possible Executive Session on September 17, 2012
• Possible Shorzline Master Program discussion on September 17. 2012
:~`OTICL OE'ADJOL'R.'~:•yJF..'~'T: Commissioner Sullivan moved to adjourn the meetin,
at 4:10 p.m. until the next regular meeting or special meeting as properh noticed. Commissioner 4
Johnson secgnded the motion which carved by a unanimous vote.
MEl`I'LV~ et7r ,6r~~I~ JliPPEKSOV COl!V fY'
~ a ' BOAKll OF CO\'IMISSlO1\EKS
~- ' . •4 = ~
n ~ t ~•~ ~ r
• ~' John :'1u iit, Chair
• .~
~. ,...
r1TTEST: ~ ~ Phi John. ::4ember
;,%~
~' .
~~~h"~ °-•---~
Raina Randall Davi Su tv _ ember
Deputy Clerk of the Boazd