Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-December File Copy • Jefferson County Board of Health AGENDA MINUTES December 18, 2003 JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH • Thursday, December 18, 2003 2:30 —4:30 pm Main Conference Room Jefferson Health and Human Services AGENDA I. Approval of Agenda II. Approval of Minutes of Meetings of November 20, 2003 Ill. Public Comments IV. Old Business and Informational Items I. Washington State Nutrition & Physical Activity Plan 2. Budget Update 3. Medical Assistance Administration Strategic Planning Questionnaire V. New Business I. Group B Water Systems Project Report 2. Influenza Update • 3. Draft Policy Concerning Evaluation of Existing On-site Sewage Systems and Building Permits 4. 2004 Washington State Legislative Session Preview 5. Draft Ordinance regarding Methamphetamine Manufacturing Site Evaluation and Clean-up: Initial Briefing VI. Activity Update VII. Agenda Planning VIII. Next Meeting: January 15, 2004, 2:30-4:30 PM Main Conference Room Jefferson Health and Human Services • JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH MINUTES • Thursday,November 20,2003 1)14 4pr Board Members: Staff Members: Dan Titterness,Member- County Commissioner District#1 Jean Baldwin, Health &Human Services Glen Huntingford, Vice Chair- County Commissioner District#2 Director Patrick M. Rodgers- County Commissioner District#3 Larry Fay,Environmental Health Director Geoffrey Masci, Chairman-Port Townsend City Council Julia Danskin,Nursing Services Director Jill Buhler,Member-Hospital Commissioner District#2 Thomas Locke,MD,Health Officer Sheila Westerman,Member-Citizen at Large(City) Roberta Frissell,Member-Citizen at Large(County) Ex-officio David Sullivan,PUD #1 Chairman Masci called the meeting to order at 2:30 p.m. All Board and Staff members were present with the exception of Dr. Tom Locke. There was a quorum. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Huntingford moved to approve the Agenda as amended, moving New Business Item Evaluation of Existing On-site Sewage Systems Subcommittee Update to the beginning of New Business. Member Westerman seconded the motion,which carried by a unanimous vote. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Member Frissell moved to approve the minutes of August 21, 2003 and October 16,2003 as submitted. Member Buhler seconded the motion,which carried by a unanimous vote. PUBLIC COMMENT -None OLD BUSINESS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS Maternal Child Health (MCH) Update: Jean Baldwin reported that while this program recently lost some federal funding, other private sources are being sought. Public Health Nurse Quen Zorrah briefed the Board on the many programs under the MCH umbrella—Women Infant Children(WIC),Maternity Support Services, Case Management Programs,Nurse-Family Partnership program, Universal Newborn Screening and Follow-up, Breastfeeding Consultation/Tea, two contracts with Child Protective Services, and Daycare Consulting on Health and Behavior Issues. The current program goal is to offer services at *he level of need for each family,regardless of program boundaries. Some of the supporting data used to meet their team goals was included in the agenda packet—community assessment data and the State Public Health Standards. Also available for the Board were copies of a physician's study,which has HEALTH BOARD MINUTES -November 20, 2003 Page: 2 motivated Staff The Relationship of Adverse Childhood Experiences to Adult Health,which showed that a healthy brain structure is determined by the quality of relationship developed in the family within the first year or two years of life. Those families with the most severe and long-standing issues benefit most from long-term and high-intensive services. She talked about the data being collected under the Nurse- Family Partnership and noted that since they have increased the programs' intensity, their biggest referral source has been word of mouth. As she spends about 25% of her time on South County services and she has noticed a dramatic increase in the acceptance of home visits over the years. Part of broadening their program involved expanding their skills to include services that clients might not seek elsewhere—such as depression screening. The study's theory of how infants and children develop correlates with the roots of mental health and behavior problems has helped them sharpen their skills at identifying and working with these challenges. She reiterated the importance of building a long-term relationship with clients and their families. Cruise Ship Sewage Releases—Follow-up Letter from Department of Ecology: Larry Fay noted that the agenda packet included a November 14 update from Dr. Tom Locke. Various agencies are paying attention to this issue and the State Board of Health is interested in identifying public health issues and applying pressure to the respective agencies with jurisdictional authority. As directed last month, the packet also contained a letter from Dr. Locke to the Department of Ecology expressing the Board's concerns about infectious waste discharges in the coastal waters surrounding Jefferson County and offering his services (as a Health Officer in both counties)to sit on the committee negotiating a Memorandum of Understanding between involved agencies and the Northwest Cruise Ship Association. Dr. Locke has agreed to continue to keep the Board apprised on this issue. • Member Westerman asked for clarification on the third item in Dr. Locke's memo,regarding the State's investigation of its authority to adopt administrative rules related to cruise ship discharges. Mr. Fay responded that while the State Board of Health might have the authority to adopt administrative rules, given the conflicting jurisdictional issues in the Strait, they are still investigating whether such rules would be applicable offshore. NEW BUSINESS Evaluation of Existing On-Site Sewage Systems Subcommittee Update: Larry Fay reported that since the last meeting, Commissioner Titterness and David Sullivan participated in a subcommittee meeting to further consider the permit decision matrix. Linda Atkins reported on her evaluation of the 682 building permits issued in 2003. They determined that about 175 might be considered as needing an EES because they include additions, alterations, a plumbing increase or raising the roof(changing the square footage of the structure), change of use, decks and garages. Building permits not being considered as having the potential to need an EES were changing windows,re-roofing, the addition of propane and hot water tanks, and other mechanical improvements. These are therefore classified as"non-building building permits."They also considered the issue of land area to capture the highest risk. Only lots equal to or less than a quarter acre or within 200 feet of shoreline would have an EES for all of the above-referenced building permits(not including • the non-building building permits). Parcels greater than a quarter acre but less than five and more than 200 feet to the shoreline would need an EES if they are adding 120 square feet or more(based on the fact 1 ; HEALTH BOARD MINUTES -November 20, 2003 Page: 3 that you currently do not have to have a building permit for less than 120 square feet for a shed or small addition. Lots greater than five acres would only require an EES if they were adding plumbing. These criteria would potentially result in about 175-200 additional inspections a year. She said they would be modifying the table accordingly and would bring it back to the Board for its consideration. Based on the total number of households from Assessor's roles, less the number served by sewer in Port Townsend and Port Ludlow and the 900 currently under contract, the County would have to capture between 6,500 and 8,200 systems for future monitoring. At the current rate of inspection, it would take approximately 15-20 years to bring all those systems into compliance. Staff's experience is that we are moving at a better rate than most jurisdictions,which have between one in five or six of their systems in a computer database tracking system compared to Jefferson County's 6,000 of 9,000. Staff recognized the need to continue to educate to facilitate compliance. Some jurisdictions take a voluntary approach. A small community in Skagit County has requested designation as an area of special concern. Staff clarified that the State regulation required Counties to develop a system to ensure the establishment of periodic evaluations of all on-site septic systems by the year 2000,but it did not specify a deadline to have all septic systems entered. Member Westerman expressed her hope that the work could be done faster in light of the County's current rate of immigration and the fact that inspections would benefit both the property owner and the environment. Mr. Fay said that with this program the County would prevent future pollution problems by tracking immigration through sales and new construction. Member Westerman said her concern is the cumulative impact of new systems on top of the existing uninspected systems. Aek Linda Atkins noted that as part of the implementation of the State Department of Health's Early Warning System, there was an early warning of water quality issues for Lower Hadlock Bay. While the source of the problem(s)is still unknown, Staff has been working with the Planning Department on permit applications for new mooring buoys, signage, etc. in that area. Commissioner Huntingford said that with the increase in the number of liveaboards in that area, some type of pump out facility might be appropriate. EnviroStars Presentation: Melinda Bower was present to review the regional EnviroStars program (created in 1996),which certifies businesses for reducing,recycling and properly managing hazardous waste disposal and storage and gives consumers an objective way to identify environmentally sound businesses. After listing the qualification requirements, she talked about the measures taken by the five Jefferson County businesses—Circle and Square, Auto Works, SatchWorks,Jefferson Transit and Carr's Lube Express—to qualify for ratings of two to five stars in the auto repair/body shop industry categories. The other business receiving recognition was SOS Printing. She is also educating dentists regarding regulations under development by Ecology to require dentists to have amalgum separators to prevent mercury from getting into the storm water systems. David Sullivan mentioned that Circle and Square clean business practices are especially helpful because they are close to a well serving the Tri-Area. He asked whether the County considered giving breaks on sewer or storm water rates?Melinda said there are not yet financial incentives,but the new surface water management plan does mention recognition for those businesses that contribute financially to surface *water management. HEALTH BOARD MINUTES -November 20, 2003 Page: 4 Larry Fay noted that Circle and Square was also instrumental in getting the EnviroStars program started 4 in Jefferson County. He added that through the Solid Waste Enforcement Grant, Melinda Bower is able to do program promotion, general outreach, and individual visits with businesses to acquaint them with the program and ongoing audits. Benefits for the businesses include recognition and free publicity. Melinda's position is funded through solid waste enforcement grant, solid waste education grant, and an operational transfer from the Solid Waste fund to Environmental Health. Member Frissell talked about how proud the business owners were of this recognition of having done "the right thing." Bioterrorism Draft Plan: Referring to the progress report included in the agenda packet listing the County deliverables for the federal grant for bioterrorism preparedness, Communicable Disease Nurse Lisa McKenzie explained that there are also multiple layers of state,regional, and local activities. Jefferson County's activities are tied significantly to their regional partners, Kitsap and Clallam Counties, as well as in-County partners who are developing emergency preparedness plans (Jefferson General Hospital, the Department of Emergency Management, and EMS groups). This planning effort has increased communication and coordination efforts, so that it is an all-hazards or all-emergency planning. Influenza-A Season/SARS Preparedness: Since the packet came out, Lisa McKenzie said, there has been a new update. On Monday,the head of CDC announced in a media briefing that there are • indications of an early and possibly more severe flu season. One indicator is that one of the two Influenza-A strains toward the end of last year started changing a little, so there is not a perfect match now between the vaccine and the virus that is circulating now. The predominant H3N2 strain has drilled and tends to result in a more severe flu disease than other strains. The CDC has provided clinics and hospitals with the SARS Algorithms (included in the agenda packet)to increase preparedness in the event people come in with respiratory illness. Jean Baldwin reported that the CDC had last week targeted Washington as one of the most likely places for a SARS outbreak and began putting Staff in place in the State. By fall, Washington State will also have an electronic surveillance data system in place in each of its regions. Healthy Jefferson: Jean Baldwin reviewed that the packet contained notes from the May 13 meetings as well as a summarization into three main areas of focus generated during a successful prioritization session. Leaders of these three main work groups would meet December 2nd to decide on a framework for their individual groups, who would then meet in December and January. In order to be as inclusive as possible, she has decided to try to make these meetings open to the public and has solicited assistance from County staff member Barbara Bowen. The first group—Strengthen and Support Safety Net for Families With Children—would meet December 15. The goal is to have a report to the Steering Committee by February. HEALTH BOARD MINUTES -November 20, 2003 Page: 5 02 003/2005 Youth Yellow Pages Project Summary: Jean Baldwin noted that a copy of the Yellow Pages was included in the packet for the Board's information. ACTIVITY UPDATE/OTHER ANNOUNCEMENTS Jean Baldwin said the Department is in the process of redoing the web page to update member rosters for each Board, etc. Member Frissell said, concerning meth lab regulations, that a committee has been meeting and considering alternatives. There might be a presentation to the Board sometime in the next couple of months. Larry Fay reported that there has been a series of meetings with the BOCC on septic permitting issues. Staff is investigating administrative and procedural changes. AGENDA PLANNING/ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 4:13 p.m.The next meeting will be held on Thursday,December 18,2003 at 2:30 p.m. at the Jefferson County Health and Human Services Conference Room. JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH Geoffrey Masci, Chairman Jill Buhler,Member Glen Huntingford,Vice Chairman Sheila Westerman,Member Dan Titterness,Member Roberta Frissell,Member Patrick M. Rodgers,Member • • Jefferson County Board of Health OLD BUSINESS Agenda Item IV., • Washington State Nutrition & Physical Activity Plan December 18, 2003 • f .,.. • ,, ,,.„ ,,, I,,,m,,,o;‘,,„4..,, 1,,,, , ,, .,.. s • , , , �„ , �.. a ig 4 y+\, Gam+” \� h< .‘ 7-. ,,!!::,,4.7;:.,i..- , . .-.. -1'!--4.2,-;:f1.4.„-,,,,,,i f--.i.eZ -; , ,: ' ti ACTIVI \\ �' , � .` 'man. age; , , .., 4,,,..:?, t!..:: i:44i,w4,„, .1,„1,,,,,,•,,..rti, .,,z,„,104„,„4,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,„„iit,„ • • • a\a1 tet, i'� , ttlz.NriV;,iNit ' � x? °` • '�. � xz fro -.' t„t .4':: ter- ffi EN > \ :x T q li • EXECUTIVE Su "k ØHeU1th _ . . jurrE''2o0 *� `°mac ax- R3� • a ' TO BU ILDING HEALTH-PROMOTING COMMUNITIES DIETARY GUIDELINES Y� FOR AMERICANS • Aim for a healthy weight a ` • • x3 � • Be physically active each day • Let the Pyramid guide your food choices • Choose a variety of grains daily,especially whole g s a izs ', a 3�� �� grains •= 1.4,•-i• `� Keep food safe to eat together to build and support environments k that make it easier for Washingtorresidents • Choose a diet low in saturated fat and cholesterol to choose healthy foods anxcl kie44.iysica4y.r° and moderate in total fat aeti e Creating he ltli e ironme its ut • Choose beverages and food to moderate your intake comtxcurtities across the state wig . of sugars • Slow the increase in the projortion • If you drink alcoholic beverages,do so in adultswho are obese � h moderation ••.°I�eduee rates of chrorue rliSease "l Choose and prepare foods with less salt of •'Improve the quality cif life:, • Choose a variety of fruits and vegetables daily GOAL� • The ove Ching goals cl(it e „as taxr State Nutri PhyslcatActivityPlari axe to t increase the proportion of Washington State residents • • Whose lifest lkieflectgthe l ietarV � • uideli�ie for Am rt aris� ,; .� Who tet at least 30 mixiut of • oderate actiuit)oon days per TeeC z x a a g �y s ti • • PHYSICAL ACTIVITY GUIDELINES The recommended minimum amount of physical activity for optimal health is at least 30 minutes of 411 moderate activity on five or more days a week. ."�.. a\?. ...�.. n... : • A STATEWIDE PLAN FOR£ EA'T' 1 ,,7x,:.‘7:,1.!4 1 ,,.4,,..,:1i HEALTHY ACTIVE COMM, f, ,1 t„,',,':k,.,?,;.,..,,..,'..,<:.,6,.,is-„1, Obesity and overweight conditions are reaching emic levels across a ; 4I and in Washington State. This plan takes a bold std p : cdressing this crisis anatadv,„i--,,,,,:I,, N G, ,„,7,,‘7,,,7,.,.,„_,,7,°,,,:,,i,A,-4kT,,,,t4,,,,4.4,1's\.\,::,•:.,::\,0'-.,,,Z.,-.,.,„,i1i..--i..i-,,,,,.,,-i„:I:',s•,.$.'‘,.,,,i,1,,rt',64,,,,,4i,‘:,,z"l,,7:,-..,,r,',,:„-,0,,7iPl,,,'.4,;,,,'-l.6r::,,6,,it*',*.,:„+j,i,:-,:7,v,—:-4i7,:'.,,'.,z4„t,;-;1,,::•,,7A,„t;:i,,',I4,i''.t.7,l-„tS':A,',i.:'.6t,:',.;•#.'4,,‘.,,tt;'.,,-ik,-.,,,,,,,,:„,,,',,,,,'41,',,,,1,‘:,.:.,,,:,;, health conditions.” - axlne .MD,MPH Washington Stacyav ,, { - :: 'a'-, '- SFS . Th�' nderlying theme of the Washington State Nutrition �4 i T ,:` � & ysical Activity Plan is the need to. promote nutrition -� -� l °, 4 and`physical activity simultaneously at several levels- ,', � for individuals,for families,within nstitutions and 7 organizations,in communities,and through public policy. �` THE VISION INDIC '>TO1 S ? The vision for the 'O ANEPIDEN I Washington State Nutrition &Physical x, ' • Obesity rateehave doubled ave?tth?e last • Activity Plan is that ., decade . � Washington residents will l o tl an all Was ��� �� enjoy good nutrition, have �, rest ,encs art.).,be'or o e eig r :' active lives,and live In �: � �� • Rates,of chro* ,, ;'% e and dcs n ' . ,' health communities. y condition��tliat are ao s�oeratedw�th��oor �s l d et7a�an• 'It o exercise con e to ` a es�Ld e '° ryear The plan emphasizes building a strong foundation at the :,,::,,:ko:::,!,,,,i,:-T.::;,,t, Rocket t k 6 c i cost 6 obesity- institutional,community,and policy levels so that itwill related d 71,17: =p7utg Ias gtonbe easier for individualstochoose healthy lifestyles. � Stat ' + eaft •, � lth�care ct ver It establishes nutrition and physical activityobjectives ,,,,,,,,,,jt, „, '- The pol�„W� ver 65-years-.' m .>w to meet the overarching goals,and priority Washmgtoru�creasing faster than in t. - 4 4, t„ ., ..,,, ip----,- -- ,.., . ,,,f.-: . ' ,,,.T :,!'-.:: ---0-"”-' ,'`.; many� r stades. recommendations to achieve the objectives. These recommendations will serve as a guide for groups and institutions across the state as they join the effort to build W 44 health-promoting communities. �� its n Good nutrition and physical activity are part of the � ..,,� solution to the nearly epidemic public health challenges facing the nation and Washington State. The active support of state and community leaders is critical to .creating environments in which individual residents �� *< may improve their quality of life by living m healthy, � - active communities. PHYSICAL ACTIVITY OBJECTIVES • PRIORITY RECOMMENDATIONS INCREASE THE NUMBER OF PHYSICAL ACTIVITY OPPORTUNITIES AVAILABLE r TO CHILDREN I. ® t • Adopt school-based curricula and policies that L provide quality,daily physical education for all E students , ? Encourage policies that provide kindergarten L through grade 12 students with opportunities - ' for physical activity outside of formal physical INCREASE THE NUMBER education classes OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE • Provide opportunities to replace sedentary ACCESS TO FREE OR behaviors,such as H .-, , -x > LOW-COST watching television, -� m RECREATIONAL with physical 3 o ar •...-- t , OPPORTUNITIES FOR activity' . o PHYSICAL ACTIVITY E • Provide adequate funding for , a 1 + o. state and local recreation sites and facilities ),' a�-, • Develop model policies to t , I.27-'1;3'.,,,,,,'„:5;•;-?fr.2-;vi‘,,,:iii:Vii.,:x1::;7rit•w'''.4"41H.,,11.,,,,*7:54"': increase access to public facilities for physical activity • Increase the number of worksites that have policies that enhance activity opportunities INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ACTIVE COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTS 1 r a . BOOKSE t " • Utilize urban planning ' • approaches-zoning and landzi - '+ use-that promote physical 4`' 1 activity • Incorporate transportation ris- ;:d ti .l policy and infrastructure a - 14, changes to promote � ' r • N ®,. Y<n..r e, �� ry non-motorized transit 1,- 'k • Enhance safety and perceived I; safety to improve community 411 walkability and bikeability .;, • ..9,,,- . • , ',., ---'.,.i. :-.,`,--.",',';',,::',,-.":'-.- .''99'9-.-,-,:,'„9,-9,----.,',9'', -,,,f,,,-1 • NUTRITION OBJECTIVES ' 49g PRIORITY RECOMMENDATIONS Si ....- ..„ ...... - - -- ,,,,,, ..—....„ ........., , „.,..,... ..., ......, . , ACCESS TO HEALTH-PROMOTING FOODS • Increase the consumption oivf':.: ts., '.1 ,'" ,0 he ' • Ensureathulfthl foods odwe'snd ral(sitel;e4;rerg:' , V:' • Ensure that schools IdndergartenA,:-- , ,...; ; ,4,, through grade 12 provide ..,,'‘..„,T,,,,,,,:,.,,-, , ,.. ,.. , healthful foods and beverag .. ' „ ' ,, ,',.i'z• , ONGOING healthful 2 ,',, 4,-;;;. t,, ol.vikiTkN‘, -7,,t4 A--, op,..Tw$,...ac. i ti l'TOTKIPOPL,.....,•,.. .P.::.*Ti :::'„4-.:-.',47'„?.. •. ''', ,z---.ii,,,-,‘',.-1:`41'".,.',,.-7„`r7,.'2,.4it:1i,,4,,•.,..':.,'.;:,-'',,-''.",,' - :'1.','-..,.,,k,','-',3,,:-,,_,-,,.,.,,--<-:..,‘-,-4,',,,',,.it,,.,-...r,L'..WVEt,.;v1:!,:..:,,',T,--:,1R2„,„i ••', ' ,,I. t .' '-t° -,-TNUtr''ttl,, l4, '4 . ; 4'-•7, :.,',..4, ',,,1 will ' ,: ' : 'text: % - ,. hat, rtwor1 : 14' .'n'VY'S.25,44,413Y. -=2,4 : •,,r4Z,, :,,,, ,,,i,,tf;'- ,communication,-,culttra . 9 -'zte, i!,1,Z)t g).i.,e:'N,,N,-At- • '' ``''''''''n:•';,P;:•-.-11'.P a.F11, ersr-, : etileht., • :9-1-: :.4-t,. -!,,i--4-6''''''''''1‘kt”'1 :4('Z'f,77.:',. gA l . '-' ''''Z'-'''''''''''4' teric and suryei.11a4cei. ,s.„, '- ".- .?!..t,:a' -.441.1'""'„33t.V-*".,;,,e4,,,,'„,,,—,,,(.-:-7i-l.'7'.,,i';2;6"--"i • '''>-1-'14„'i,":.4'.i...,9,..11:r:' '..,,,,,:,•'‘,;,:,n4-'-:,-,*;,:;;,-7:,-,,,-1,-,e.-i-,,:. -,,iii,,i,v1,,,4 1..,,t4I , M....--:pzi..,"?.;1.,4 : ,,:k;,i',';::I-:----.-',.:4;51-';" ".---'' -:,'"::- ,:,,:::--_-..„,,..,,=,.:‘,,r;,.-:,,,,,;,i-y:,..-„,...:,- ';';,?,,;g,.;,,,pYlf„,c„;',,,>:,,,,,°,1 .-;..,,,, • ?--,,,,pt',,e,,,-;',°:f.''';;I:';',,t-;:::,1-'3';',4?1'4'3,... .''''''.'‘':',1-:'‘I',',•,,,„L":4';‘,:!:',,;''iy-°!i.1::.i771"'"t';47-°''',:°;‘,1.---- ':::('''':' ::::'''';:'!: '''''':':'j°%°4'4:'i'''''':'':':'i:;-V7''''1,:':':';:'o.,H''';::+t' '--°'--- °77....,;;4"1„.,P;',--,,.---,,'; . .-,'^-*:,-::,,,-,>,',';',''. .:'-'‘(,:',.:-.-f4::..0):ili.°„''';',',.4-.;,:••--.• ';';',;‘•.:-s ' ' 2,.:.t: --, ..:;,.,„ .r.7--. -,.:',-,i tfpga,::!:.,,a,--;: ;:.i v.°X°3t,-.•!. ..4,F;aVI,,,,t„.,,,,...'V.-„m,k,:tir.414td"I'Nt7teiiF:i5-iilg'. ',.:,''.4',:' ,, ''''' "'V.1°,44; ',egi,.. ...,,.,4.•,• ',,,,,".,-,:,,,---..<:-.z,,,,, ,..t?..„::-....).!. .4.t-.:.,,,. ...,..,,• •: „„.....::,,,,....;„", .....i.,,,i, ,;.:„..,,',.„‘ .,:,,,,I,.,:',4-6,i.L,,,,,,,ty.......-<1,;,i...n., ,,, ,..91144.firt programs .... ,,,,,.... . p1.4„t„,„--,1z,,,,--,1,,,,...1.,:lii,F.,,',4!,.. ,i:,rs,-„.:-".- „.'• .,,".,,. 1.,,,,,1,4,.•;„„,,-.0t5i'c' .• !,:" °'-',03,S%?::::1,-t44::: .,,,,',.ity ,...,,..,,..-,,i-..,'„,. ..,..,,,.-,.:.i.'"',..i's.-.A---?. K, '`4;•:,'-1, -7!..''''I., ',,i-E:;y,'..-.....v.i..:A 'ai.0-', ..;,1.,',,)'''4,-';-f.-'3.',`".,''',.:- '''''' '',..:',.. .,., .a.-..; ,1;•.'",z-ili,,,,,,,,,in, - -51'°--"n^:,--4,.':',.'k':,,,:a''?.'4,e'i:',I.-t-:4;•"-:,°ailt:591,i,::::::,'..!•Q 1-.,:t-T ---!,M4.4.,-,-;,*II,: ,,p,sir',1*--;,„,,.,:.„„!,::.,,,,7,,v4,,,,,,-,,,•,,-,,---„,..t,,,-, , vil;p-;°.•1".4i-iLi'•°:<•'' -f' ' :„,,,,°,,,.,,.,-;„:;,-,,I.,. .„,,sp°,41,2:6..; <-°:,;-'-'2.'';'i..:,t.°-.'::.•-'-=''°:,'''-‘-- ---‘:-.°„:„,,._„,,,,,i,,,„4,,,„.'!„..•-,„,,,,,-;.,-.k..i,k,;°,:;„t' '-:,•*.4!V' --',.-:,,,,,,:,,,,,:,i,,:,:,,,, --1'.1‘,11",13,.-;'•''',;;:.'°:''''',°2--;1''..,':; t',':''''''''''''''''''''ht:!-..'''-lit?--'-'0:',,ii-A;I: ':..'''''.'q:.:',-.••ik.'- ,,,-::::-.,,,-,ik,:-.-.;-ii,,...---.;:..fnli!,=.1z'4.:f-,:.•---,:';'°:-.,- ''''',:f:-'..`":"-:--:,''" ,'.--":-:::-,,..--.- ,i1,4,:ii,:itV„ ','„.-`ii4.1,7ki ''''-v.f.':),.174::.i,,,,,,,.,., ,-,:,::,,,-..:,;)::::-.,,i2ii,4-),15:--k-,,a,,,,-.--,,,,,,-if-:, '2,1'-(:::1-f.,,,.:-..'-',..1-!‘',';'''''',:',. .:,,,,:•.‘ii.':;:i.,:-...!-'1,-;',1 --. ,--, ,„, .... 4 ,.. , ., .. .. . ..,, . ,. ...... „..... ,, t . . ... . ... , . ., . ......,.. .... -,..-............. 41444 '4 '' INCREASE THE ',„1•X •,":',` :1'4•.- ,,-, '': PROPORTION OF WHOMOTHERS '''('-'''' •=,':•;''''' "MI `4..)3?:'''s-t,>1.4-4"'t•st-,.I'''''„"l'%-,,,,,,,,,, -,,,,-,j3r _I''.,..•,:' ',,,,;---„,",-:•;',"L'-'''''''''-',1:',' ''''' ‘...‘`' '''' . ''' '-''''f':',',li4„e;:''V'';''''-,lf,t't.''::;.:i4.,'s),:, ::A5.,, •,,f •,. '' ' .I. -,,,:,1•k';`,'",,4t:',,,s,1*.- .&,.,..,,,:t.t.,4,',,I,,,'`'.÷7.4zliii:;:-.1-.{,. ..., .4i:'.- ',, f ., 1•;',::,-,', -,,,,.--40- 4::,,e.—:7,42#1,,54:-= -,,,,,...,,,,k,,,;:y.,?:„,,,, ,‘,77'''::,;'.v,',i:%Itt?;. :...;:a,..-:,,f.1;-,Y,:.:1,1,41.,4:',:: .;LAit'-''-'`'I'' •:-.',V- -'W • x,. NUTRITION AND PHYSICAL • ACTIVITY ADVISORY GROUP The Nutrition &Physical Activity Plan is one outcome of a year of strategic planning by the Nutrition & Physical Activity Advisory Group. The 35-person group includes officials from state and local agencies, and representatives from advocacy organizations from across the state. The group brings together expertise from education, transportation, planning,nutrition, physical activity, agriculture, parks and recreation, economic development, and health care. Bryan Bowden,MS . Julie Mercer Matlick,BA National Park Service • Washington State Department Sue Butkus,PhD,RD of Transportation Washington State University : Jan Norman,RD,CDE Charlotte Claybrooke,MS • Washington State Department of Health Q. A-° Washington State Department of Health : Donna Oberg,MPH,RD,CD Cheza Collier,PhD,MPH,MSW : Public Health-Seattle&King County # f-*. ffi g ; f Public Health-Seattle&King County : Debra Ocken,MS,RD ak,a F Liz McNett Crowl,BA Nutrition Consultant Northwest Physical Activity Coalition : Eileen Paul,RD,CD,CDE Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound Barbara Culp,BA yy . h Bicycle Alliance of Washington : Mary Podrabsky,RD i $; a ": Senior Services of Seattle/King County d ' ,g �r' • Shelley Curtis,MPH,RD : A Children's Alliance : Wendy Repovich,PhD,FACSM Eastern Washington University Adam Drewnowski,PhD �I ,, ''_ University of Washington : Jennifer Sabel,PhD,RD - , Washington State Department of Health u. t Amira El-Bastawissi,MBCHB,PhD t£ �' ' ," ` `' Washington State Department of Health • Anne Schwartz,MN,CD ,; . 'e-k�".'' g • .r ., Elaine M.Engle,MS • Spokane Regional Health District ' a' e '@ = Spokane Regional Health District : Linda Schwartz,BA,MBAtit "" $ ,. • Bicycle Alliance of Washington - t � �� Becky Fitterer ),: ,- ,, k,g Washington State Department of Health : Caroline McNaughton Tittel,MPH,RD ,, University of Washington a % Mary Frost I i Washington State Department of Health Pamela Tollefsen,RN,MEd ��� " `�� g u Ted Gage,PhD,AICP : Office of Superintendent of Public :`" ;1 ,i{1 .- f ,® �.; Office of Community Development : Instruction - r � .`�'.��^' iT9iii-kAire._1 Dorothy Gist Kyle Unland,MS,RD,CD ala Washington State Department of Health Washington State Department of Health a t 4 tt 0 Juliet VanEenwyk,PhD fg , Chris Hawkins,BA ‘ Climate Solutions : Washington State Department of Health . ,0. e Bob Weathers,EdD Donna B.Johnson,PhD,RD Seattle Pacific University n University of Washington Jim Litch,MD,LM : Lincoln Weaver,MPA Washington State Department of Health Washington State Department of Health Patricia Manuel,MPH,MS,RD : Leslie Zenz,BA Public Health-Seattle&King County : Washington State Department . of Agriculture Eustacia Mahoney . ill American Cancer Society ::',' y Cover photo— :` .. �... _. Tricycle/walker.www.pedbikeimages.org/Dan Burden • Jefferson County Board of Health OLD BUSINESS Agenda Item IV., 2 • Budget Update December 18, 2003 • e DunVd David Goldsmith O�. g®AT C� � eti .- 1820 Jefferson Street L �4' 0o a 4. PO Box 1220 ec) Ay G� o Port Townsend, WA 98368 Ai n?4JNy 0 -_..,,,„„ ... e --Deren NG„,,,,, Pet- 2004 Jefferson County Board of Commissioners Citizens of Jefferson County RE: 2004 Budget The 2004 budget document is complete for adoption.This budget represents the collaborative effort between all facets of County government,Elected Officials and Department Heads,the accounting staff,the budget manager, and the citizens of Jefferson County who advocated for a specific program or responded to the"State of the County” survey. The 2004 budget spends down excess reserves to address one-time operational and capital needs. Excess reserves were also used as transitional financing to allow specific departments to scale back programming and/or find alternative funding in order to be fully sustainable(i.e.revenues matching expenditures)by years end. These departments include Health and Human Services and Community Development. While this budget is balanced it does represent significant challenges in meeting current and • expressed needs of the community. It will require vigilance to assure that projected revenues and expenditures remain as budgeted. Last year the County embarked on a new way to look at the budget called `Priorities of Government'. This process first asks what are the community's priorities and then focuses the budget process to `buying'results to meet those priorities from the resources available to invest. To understand the ability of the County to address priorities one must understand the nature of Counties as established in the Washington State Constitution and accompanying statutes.The County was created to carry out three distinct responsibilities. First,the County is an`Agent of the State',this responsibility includes all constitutional and statutory offices, such as Superior Court,Prosecution, Treasurer,Auditor,Assessor, Court Clerk,Commissioners and accompanying mandated services. The County's `Agent of the State'responsibility accounts for 55%of budget operating expenditures. The County's second responsibility is that as the `Regional Government'. This responsibility includes activities that provide mandated or required services and which overlap political jurisdictions such as E-911,Health and Human Services, and Solid Waste. The County's `Regional Government' responsibility accounts for 25%of operating expenditures. Finally,the County is also a `Municipal Corporation". This responsibility includes services that are exclusive to the County(i.e. those not involving overlapping jurisdictions);usually these services involve serving the needs of the unincorporated population,such as County Roads,Park and Recreation, Community Development,Flood and Stormwater Management, as well as the business functions of the corporation such as Information Services,Facilities Management, i Phone (360)385-9100 Fax (360)385-9382 dgoldsmith@cojefferson.wa.us co.jefferson.wa.us 1 County Administrator, Safety and Security, etc. The County's `Municipal Corporation' responsibility accounts for 20%of operating expenditures. • There are two main components in `Priorities of Government' that affect expenditure levels. First, which programs are to be delivered, and second,how much effort and resources(level of service)will be applied to any given program. This is the balancing process that accompanies the preparation of the budget. This past spring the County issued its first "State of the County"newsletter and survey. The results of the survey indicated that Law Enforcement,Roads/Transportation, Public Health,Parks and Recreation, and Youth Programs were among the priorities for those responding. This set of community priorities were included along with priorities for program services brought forward from community groups,regional partners,state mandates,elected officials and department heads during the budget process. The outcome of this process is the content of the 2004 budget. 50%of the cost of providing service is the cost of labor. The cost of labor is made up of two critical components,the total compensation paid to employees(wages and benefits) and the number of employee hours. The budget reflects labor contracts as are currently in place. With all of the County's labor contracts under negotiations or open in 2004,mid—year adjustments will be required once the contracts are settled. Of primary concern is the cost of health and welfare benefits as they continue to grow at double-digit rates. Shifts will be made to lower cost health care options and/or have • employees share in a greater percentage of the direct cost of their health benefit. Close attention will be paid to the sustainability of any contract settlement. The second factor in the cost of labor is the number of employee hours. In total the budget increases staffing by about 3%or 7.75 Full Time Equivalent(FTE).This change in staffing level reflects established priorities,new or altered mandates,and specific targeted initiatives aimed toaddress expressed community issues. 4.25 of these FTE's are fully grant supported and will be phased out when grant contracts are complete. User fees and contractual support by the City of Port Townsend fund's another position,the Building Official. Leaving a 2.5 FTE locally funded growth in the employment base to support the corrections facility, code enforcement,property assessment, and custodial services. Even with the increase in 11'E level,the budget did not fully support the Crime Victims Advocate position, and it eliminated the Safety Programs Coordinator position. The County budget is spread over 52 funds and totals$41,707,807 for 2004(not including capital bond money) and represents a 3%increase over 2003 spending levels. The current expense fund is the largest of the operating funds and includes all `Agent of the State'responsibilities. For 2004,this fund totals $11,468,036 or a 4%increase over the 2003-budgeted level. i 2 2004 Budget Priorities: . The 2004 budget seeks to complete many initiatives begun over past years, and addressing service delivery needs in several key areas. Capital Projects: Sheriff and Correction Center: In 2003,Jefferson County bonded for construction money to build the Sheriff Administrative Complex,retrofit the jail and significantly upgrade the Emergency Operations and E-911 Communications Center. These construction projects will be complete in 2004. Castle Hill Offices: In 2004 the County's administrative complex at Castle Hill will receive some much-needed structural repairs and space remodeling. Courthouse: Seismic and structural upgrades to the Courthouse remain a high priority as the County continues to seek outside resources to match local money to complete the necessary upgrades. Additionally, the Courthouse grounds,parking,and utility systems are all showing signs of serious deterioration and will be addressed as resources permit. Service Delivery: Code Compliance: The 2004 budget adds two technical resources in the area of development services, a code compliance coordinator and a building official. The code • compliance coordinator will assist departments and the office of the Prosecutor in addressing code compliance issues that continue to divert staff from their regular duties and frustrates the community who expect the rules to be enforced evenly and fairly. Building Services: The addition of a Building Official is necessary to implement the provisions of the state required international building code. This position will be shared with the City to offset costs and to assure a common application of this unified code. Drug Court: Begun in 2003,the drug court remains a positive alternative to incarceration. This court is operating without out any additional resources from the general fund through a high level of cooperation and dedication of treatment providers, County Substance Abuse personnel, Superior and District Court officials, the Sheriff's Office,the Prosecutor, and Public Defender. Emergency Management and Homeland Security: Following September 11,the County, with the help from Federal resources,has increased its capacity in responding to community disasters,man-made or natural. For the first time Jefferson County has full time emergency manager which has resulted in the updating of emergency response plans,increased coordination with the City and other governments, enhanced communication tools, extended community information and training,and a significantly increased disaster preparedness capability. • 3 Community and Economic Development: • Port Hadlock-Irondale UGA: All work will be completed for the formal designation of the Port Hadlock-Irondale UGA. Formal designation will allow the County and Port Hadlock-Irondale community to begin setting the stage for infrastructure development to serve business and community needs. EDC: The service contract with the Economic Development Council continues with the ombudsman's program for business expansion and new business siting, and directs the EDC to continue the review of County's development regulatory function in serving the needs of business development without compromising environmental protection or community assets. Internal Business Practices: GEMS Accounting System: The conversion of the County's accounting system from COMPUTEC to GEMS will be complete in 2004. This has been a major effort in moving to an accounting system that fully integrates all of the County's business transactions, decentralized financial activities,and provides greater management control and information. Performance Budgeting: With the completion of the GEMS conversion,work will begin on a performance budgeting system for the 2005 budget year. The budget framework will look to identify results to be achieved from the resources invested. The objective of • a performance budgeting system is to focus expenditures on objective outcomes and measurable results. Budget year 2004 will be a transitional year for Jefferson County as we move forward in reconciling the cost of doing business and the resources available. In this year we will refine the`Priorities of Government'process and establish level of service criteria from which to address service delivery options. The financial picture for year 2005 and beyond represents a challenge in making ends meet;however,with close cooperation between the citizens of the community and it's elected leadership,Jefferson County will be able to meet this challenge, focus on its mission, and maintain the high quality of services it delivers. It is my pleasure to deliver the year 2004 spending plan to you for adoption. ?Icerely, David Gdld"smith, County Administrator 411/ 4 • EXHIBIT 1 JEFFERSON COUNTY 2004 STAFFING SCHEDULE III Actual Actual Budget Budget Adds(+) Department 2001 2002 2003 2004 Deletes(-) Assessor 10.44 10.22 10.49 10.99 0.50 Auditor 7.44 7.56 7.63 7.63 0 Elections 1.91 2.00 2.01 2.01 0 Clerk 6.92 6.94 7.00 7.00 0 County Administrator 3.43 3.08 2.44 2.51 0.07 Commissioners 5.77 5.89 5.75 5.68 -0.07 Board of Equalization 0.19 0.23 0.15 0.21 0.06 Planning Commission 0.25 0.30 0.27 0.29 0.02 Safety&Security 2.20 2.36 2.00 1.72 -0.28 District Court 9.64 8.77 9.00 9.00 0 Juvenile Services 9.15 8.55 8.66 8.16 -0.5 Prosecuting Attorney 10.53 10.46 10.56 10.81 0.25 Sheriff 38.23 42.28 42.54 46.92 4.38 Superior Court 1.06 1.03 1.09 1.09 - 0 Treasurer 4.72 4.84 4.63 4/1 0.08 Total General Fund 111.88 114.51 114.22 118.73 4.51 Auditor's O&M 0.03 0 0 0 0 Boating Safety 0.27 0.27 0.25 0.25 0 Cooperative Extension Programs 2.21 2.14 2.60 2.80 0.2 Yippee Program 2.45 2.20 3.32 2.00 -1.32 0 Crime Victims 1.54 1.47 1.50 1.31 -0.19 E-911 JeffCom 7.29 7.98 11.39 11.04 -0.35 Health & Human Services 34.35 34.08 37.40 37.99 0.59 Natural Resources 0.88 2.85 2.95 2.78 -0.17 Animal Services 3.23 3.13 3.18 3.36 0.18 JC Community Network 0.49 0 0 0 0 Community Development 15.35 15.23 17.13 20.66 3:53 Treasurer's 0&M 0.08 0 0.22 0.15 -0.07 Brinnon Facility Fund 0.05 0.01 0 0 0 Parks &Recreation 7.35 6.66 7.02 739 0.37 County Parks Improvement 0.28 0.43 0.59 0.73 0.14 Special Projects 0.63 1.37 1.05 1.06 0.01 County Roads 54.93 53.06 53.51 53.40 -0.11 Facilities Management 5.94 6.20 6.48 6.98 0.50 Flood/Stormwater Mgmt. 0.03 0.28 0.58 0.55 -0.03 Brinnon Flood Control 0 0 0 0 0 Quilcene Flood Control 0.09 0.23 0.46 0.36 -0.1 Construction&Renovation 1.68 2.88 2.66 2.66 0 HJ Carroll Park 0.91 0.28 0 0.13 0.13 County Building Fund 0.19 0 0 0 0 Conservation Futures 0.02 0 0 0 0 Solid Waste 7.95 7.71 8.26 8.27 0.01 ER & R 7.12 7.14 7.12 6.98 -0.14 Information Services 6.15 5.46 5.94 6.00 0.06 Total Other Funds 161.46 161.06 173.61 176.85 3.24 4pTotal All Funds 273.34 275.57 287.83 295.58 7.75 U krfl k 0 \ 2 t _ s a c il 1, g — a— , n E � �c 4 § / ■ 2 i§ E g I g _ ■ g v 2 x k . & 2 • . ) ( § / ) .. 7 . \ •. .. .. .. .. . g ■ _ Nog ; g Is) 0 \ 2 § § G § � < � � n � . 1111111111111 1111111111111 • 1111111111111 111111111111111110 ¢ < 111111111111 � ; " � . � � \ \ • �| ^ m a a § � i II ( ■ < . m m o - © n m y o 03 0 • 2 e £ m c c \ k g § . _< < z R R k F = J � . x k / x q k k ) '2. A ( \ / > ■ o ® m k 2 | . ° o » ] q % k k g B U g < I z am ; E R m ® .. .. ` H 10110 11011111111111000 m a < 0 M■ 11111111111111111111111 0 II 1 1111011111111101111110 1111111111111111111111 1111111111111111011111 11111111111111111111 : o!IIII!I!I!I!I!m! ! 0w w & 0 A .13 \ / . ƒ 2 I $ m • Jefferson County Board of Health OLD BUSINESS Agenda Item IV., 3 Medical Assistance Administration IP Strategic Planning Questionnaire December 18, 2003 • A ': i'' : '' ., ...,, .,,, ,,..:„----,,, ;,-;:,,,,,- -,,:- ', ,,A,....:,,,,,,,i , :,,,,,.. :.,--, ., -i-, . , . .. .. . • . . . ,. „ . . A .... k . . , .. . .,. ..,-;, ...,., ..,,, F,,,,,,,t,..„0. .‘,..:._. ,. .e:44.t.c. 'pitir4-, .... itivifibroutip #10,..•. . - , , , � r : r � y' + 0 .§� w a , s € aa ',,,,„.----,-":2:—..:-';ataa , ree m .J8Y & . -'4 0111.1.,:;',119"111 rt ;!ice', W, 3q, fia r d r 1 a= r -8 a ...;x � � >- � '� Y .d l *a r 's° 14i4101 * y . =.. . i- :" BMX • -tj 'othitii**44tb- Ottlykoisk.***"17''..;":;--1*'- ' , ttiti- , , , ,..1, ,_,,tiro,iittlitit44.44*" 441,°.„'IS„,,,Or-i.,1 0 :,..,:,:— '.:patif#iirt ' ' .14.1.,'.-.'' ' '' '' 'taility : ate a '3�9.39� " dsi Syn 's 4 .�aA '. °4 -X,:z "0-1 . , : �. id A‘Atit .M - 014#,':--;',1-*"''''' axaTita aha ¢ et add ' 4-� a to `: het;; F- $ ,,fortvz306.44 Att. £.= : b"si-aa.b�a,4 4.x6- 1 • 111 1 0 marl* ^ ' , pso ' 9'f . 5 rri T T . 0 a t , - - h P . 404:210., `. amiiiikomment Tat. <{a _ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiiiiiiit 111.1111111.10100 3 t 4,6„.44444.40.44. „346 4.4 41.14,4I i .t 401010' , 0,40t1140*,—$100 0600044 '11 '1")44200044,02 64$°124)44460440.141444 4t1"1,4 I • i f'; € 10 et seiloptattatt, 84 04t41001*frial f Jefferson County Board of Health NEW BUSINESS Agenda Item V., � Group B Water Systems Project Report December 18, 2003 • �. jt_ -- dy. . .' Jefferson County Health &Human Services l J► 4 4 615 SHERIDAN • PORT TOWNSEND,WA 98368 • FAX 360-385-9401 Memorandum To: Jefferson County Board of Health From: Larry Fay, Environmental Health Director Date: December 2, 2003 Re: Group B Water System Final Report • During the 2001-2003 biennium the Washington Department of Health initiated aro e p � ct to conduct sanitary surveys of all Group B water supply systems in the state. The purpose of the project was to evaluate the current condition of these systems that have been largely ignored after receiving initial approval. In order to complete the project,DOH contracted with interested counties to have qualified staff conduct the surveys. DOH made significant efforts to tailor the contracts to meet the needs and capabilities of the contracting counties. DOH provided basic training and compliance support. Jefferson County Environmental Health chose to enter into the contract and conducted inspections throughout 2002 and into 2003. Of about 40 systems identified by DOH,we were able to visit 35. We were also able to provide updated information on a couple more. Susan Porto will be giving a short report summarizing the general findings of our efforts with comparisons to with the state. COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL NATURAL DEVELOPMENTAL SUBSTANCE ABUSE HEALTH HEALTH RESOURCES DISABILITIES &PREVENTION 360/385-9400 360/385-9444 360/385-9444 360/385-9400 360/385-9400 • Group B Project Report Safe Drinking Water For Small Communities November 2003 t • 9g' f r1 ! � C ..., i.-.....1,..,„iq.::1::::.!„,[:-....,,,,,,,--.,..4...,,,,,.::i ..„----.: - is),,,,,..:;L.,?,,,. ..,-...,...„.',..7-,.7.F7-„-E.--,.........-,,,,--...;;;:.:1.F.7,,,,„ ,::::°Y b '. ' _fe ry '6. ,:':i.,'„..•,:::'-h.... y .d Washington State Department of i 1 19 Health Dirision of Enriromnental 1-1en1tJ Office of Drinking Water DOH PUB.#331-243 III Group B Project Report Safe Drinking Water For Small Communities November 2003 "This program has been some of the best public health that we have been able to accomplish in the Group B program thus far. The one-on-one education that happens on-site with the operator, the providing of a current water system status report, the offer to assist folks in a preventative manner all add up to excellent public health." —Local health staff reflection *Health w�,grollstaxn�anmtof Division of Environmental Health ice of Drinking Wnler For more information or additional copies of this report contact: Training and Outreach Section Office of Drinking Water Department of Health PO Box 47828 Olympia,WA 98504-7828 (360)236-3164 Mary Selecky Secretary of Health Rich Hoey Acting Director,Office of Drinking Water The Department of Health is an equal opportunity agency. For persons with disabilities,this document is available on request in other formats.To submit a request,please call 1-800-525-0127(TTY 1-800-833- 6388). For additional copies of this publication,call 1-800-521-0323. This and other publications are available at www.doh.wa.qov/ehp/dw. III • Contents Director's Message 1 Background 2 Process/Timeline 2 Project Funding 3 Results 3 Water Facility Inventory Updates 3 Water System Site Visits 4 Lack of properly constructed and screened well vents(53%) 4 Inadequate water quality monitoring(45%) 4 Biological and chemical contaminants located within 100 ft. of source(31%) 5 Lack of proper sampling taps(30%) 5 Open storage reservoirs(-13%) 5 Other unsafe conditions 6 Challenges 6 Benefits 7 Recommendations from Local Health Jurisdictions 7 Next Steps 8 Conclusion 8 Appendix 1: LHJ Group B Project Update 9 Appendix 2: Letter to Group B Systems 10 • Appendix 3: Local Health Jurisdiction Observations and Comments 11 Miscellaneous LHJ Observations During Site Visits 11 Additional Benefits of the Project 13 Challenges 14 What worked well during the project 15 The drawbacks of the project 16 Recommendations for future funds 16 Areas of Improvement assuming funding 1.7 Systems not inspected 17 General observations for group B water systems inspected by one LHJ. 17 • • Director's Message I am pleased to present a summary of the outcomes of the first phase of the Group B Project Report: Safe Drinking Water For Small Communities. This report represents nearly two years of work with Group B water systems by 31 local health jurisdictions across the state. While serving only a small percentage of the state's population, small Group B public water systems generally have more uncorrected problems, and are most commonly implicated in waterborne disease outbreaks when such outbreaks are documented. This project funding enhanced the ability of local health jurisdictions to visit small water systems and have a higher level of involvement with the owners of these small systems. During the course of this project 3,612 Water Facility Inventory forms were updated and 3,230 site visits were conducted by local health staff. Many of these systems had not been visited in years,if ever before. The findings from these visits document significant problems involving very basic public health protection measures that were not in order, and very basic water quality monitoring tests which were not being done. The survey findings have resulted in many basic public health protection problems being corrected, and set the stage for prioritizing further follow-up actions and assistance to ensure customers of these small water systems have access to safe and reliable drinking water—which may not have been the case in • years prior to these efforts. Protecting the health of the people of Washington State by assuring safe and reliable drinking water is a cornerstone for public health protection for a healthy,viable community. We look forward to continuing our work with our local health partners across the state to ensure the provision of this basic health service for all residents of the state. Rich Hoey,Acting Director Office of Drinking Water Washington State Department of Health • 1 • Background Safe drinking water and good health are critically linked. The Center for Disease Control reported that between 1999-2000, there were 39 waterborne disease outbreaks in the United States: 2,068 illnesses, 122 hospitalizations,and 2 deaths. Eighteen of the 39 outbreaks were linked to water systems with less than 15 connections—not subject to the requirements of the federal Safe Drinking Water Act(SDWA). In Washington State, five million residents(84%of the state's population) are served by more than 16,800 public water systems. Most(82%)are served by 4,200 Group A systems,which are subject to the SDWA, and about 125,000 people, or 2%of the state's population,are served by 12,600 Group B systems,which are not subject to the federal SDWA. About 600,000 people(10%of the state's population)use private wells governed by local ordinances.No information is available on the remaining six percent. Group B systems serve between two and 14 connections. Though they are exempt from the SDWA,they are subject to state drinking water regulations and local ordinances.Assuring safe and reliable drinking water from all public water systems is a priority of the Washington Department of Health(DOH). However,the state and local governments do not have the resources necessary to fully regulate every water system with two or more connections in the manner envisioned in law.Based on that premise,the Washington Water Supply Advisory Committee submitted recommendations for defining and overseeing Group B water systems in its July 2000 report to the Department of Health titled "Washington's Drinking Water Program: Recommendations Regarding Scope and Funding." A key outcome of these recommendations was the department's budget request to the 2001 Legislature which resulted in funding for a two-year project to obtain accurate information on Group B water • supplies. A budget enhancement was received and$1.4 million was contracted to local health jurisdictions to collect information on the status of Group B water systems across the state. Activities focused on water systems with five or more connections and had three principal goals: 1) Obtaining accurate water system information on these systems via an inventory check, 2) Identifying public health risks and needed corrections through site visits and determining status and compliance with routine water quality monitoring requirements,and 3) Informing water system operators of needed corrections and required water quality monitoring requirements. This report summarizes the project scope and findings,and provides recommendations for future Group B water system oversight activities. Process / Timeline The DOH Office of Drinking Water,with participation by environmental health directors in local health jurisdictions(LHJs) around the state, developed a scope of work and a funding method to disperse funds to LHJs during the 2001-2003 biennium. Based on the amount of funding available and the need to make the scope of work manageable for our local health partners,the activities focused only on Group B water systems with five or more connections—about 3,379 systems. Of the 34 LHJs in the state at the time, 31 covering 36 of the 39 counties participated in the work(see Appendix 1). • 2 • The following timeline was established to take the program through the biennium: S • July 2001 -Developed action plan,funding proposal and contracting strategy.Met with Washington Environmental Health Directors'Water Committee. • Aug 2001 -Refined action plan and funding proposal. Finalized reporting requirements and performance measures. • Sept 2001 -Dec 2001 -Contracted with local health jurisdictions. • Jan 2002 -June 2003 -Work underway at local level. Quarterly reporting to DOH. • Jan 2003 –Presented an interim report to the State Board of Health(SBOH). • July 2003–Work on project completed. • October 2003 -Final report to Washington Water Supply Advisory Committee Project Funding The Office of Drinking Water used the department's consolidated contract process to transfer funds to LHJs. Since one of the main goals with this funding was to obtain accurate information on Group B water supplies in the state, LHJs were allocated a baseline amount of funding($5000) for each county in their jurisdiction. This baseline funding supported efforts to inventory water systems not currently found in the DOH drinking water database. Remaining funds were allocated to LHJs on a prorated basis,based on the number of targeted Group B • water systems in each individual county(per the DOH drinking water database). LHJs were expected to update Water Facility Inventory forms,conduct site visits,and submit reports to the Office of Drinking Water for each system on the list. Drinking Water provided a list of systems,a Group B site visit checklist, and a quarterly report form to each of the local health jurisdictions. Each quarter LHJs received$355.00 for each site visit conducted. Results At the beginning of this project,there were 3,379 Group B water systems in the DOH database with five or more connections. At the completion of the first task—checking the accuracy of our data—the number of systems increased to 3,497,but by the end of the project there were 48 fewer systems identified,bringing the total to 3,331.Reasons for the change were that some systems were identified as Group A systems, some no longer existed or had connected to a Group A system,had never been developed, or had fewer than five connections. Water Facility Inventory Updates LHJs submitted a Water Facility Inventory form for each water system to update the Office of Drinking Water's database with accurate information. During the project, 3612 updated Water Facility Inventory forms were submitted. Updates ranged from no changes in system information to extensive changes such as new system ownership or source information. Challenges:This task proved to be extremely time-intensive for staff due to constant changes in water system contacts. • 3 • Water System Site Visits LHJs contacted water systems on their respective lists,requesting to conduct a voluntary site visit. Site visits were instrumental in helping LHJs identify high public health risks associated with these water systems. The site visits also gave local health staff an opportunity to educate purveyors about water quality monitoring requirements and to offer technical assistance as needed. Over the course of this project,local health staff conducted 3,230 site visits—about 95 percent of the total number of systems targeted. About five percent,or 136 systems,either refused to participate in the site visits or could not be contacted by LHJ staff despite repeated attempts. The general trend observed during the site visits was that most systems had one or more deficiencies that pose a risk to public health.These were often related to the lack of operator knowledge of the operation and maintenance of the water system,or of the state/local regulations for Group B water systems. The following top six deficiencies were noted statewide: 1. Lack of properly constructed and screened well vents(53%) 2. Inadequate water quality monitoring(45%) 3. Biological and chemical contaminants located within 100 ft. of source(31%) 4. Lack of sampling taps at the wellhead(30%) 5, Open storage reservoirs(Approx. 26% of systems have atmospheric storage reservoirs-49%had unprotected openings.) 6. Lack of sealed well caps(21%) • Lack of properly constructed and screened well vents (53%) Proper venting is key to preventing contamination being drawn into the well. This deficiency coupled with the lack of sealed well caps (21%)means that a significant number of the `` targeted water systems in this project are subject to potential contamination of ,t , drinking , drinking water. w Inadequate water quality monitoring(45%) The high incidence of this deficiency is a significant finding since Group B systems are only required to collect a coliform sample once each year, and a nitrate sample once every three years.By failing to meet even the minimal monitoring requirements,45 percent of the systems statewide have very little indication of the quality of water they are providing to their customers. • 4 Biological and chemical contaminants located within 100 ft. of source(31%) • Potential sources of contaminants within 100 feet of a drinking water source pose a significant health risk to consumers through pollution of groundwater and ultimate contamination of drinking water. Frequently observed contaminant sources included manure piles, compost piles,livestock enclosures, grazing animals, septic tanks and drain fields, sewer lines,underground storage tanks,gasoline,propane, and diesel storage,liquid fertilizer,herbicides,pesticides,insecticides,and house paints. Lack of proper sampling taps (30%) Without a suitable sampling tap at the source, it is impossible to know the quality of water at the source and it is extremely difficult to track down and identify any potential sources of contamination. i Open storage reservoirs (-13%) Open storage reservoirs can be ready points of entry for contaminants(birds,bats,rodents, etc.) into the water system. While only 26 percent of the systems used non-pressurized atmospheric storage reservoirs, about 49 percent of these reservoirs had unprotected openings that could easily serve as points of entry for contamination. There have been cases of waterborne illness traced back to open storage reservoirs. In addition to unprotected openings, a wide variety of unacceptable storage tanks were found to be in use such as old wood tanks,preformed concrete tanks originally intended as septic tanks, and metal tanks that had not been intended for water storage • 5 r • Other unsafe conditions In addition to the deficiencies noted above, other unsafe conditions observed included: '` :SZ � ■ Unsafe sources such as: o switching from a groundwater source to a highly vulnerable surface water(lakes, etc) source without approvals o shallow dug wells o surface water from creeks o poorly developed or unprotected springs which were often unfiltered and had no disinfection o unapproved sources/treatment systems in place o old inactive sources that continue to be connected to systems • Absentee water system owners—no one in responsible charge of the water system gar ` • Lack of knowledge and experience of water purveyors. • Evidence of vandalism and a general lack of security • Hazardous conditions in pump houses such as bare electrical wires,blocked access to water system components, and rodent infestations • Known or obvious risk of wellhead contamination from flooding Challenges LHJs expended considerable efforts in contacting Group B water systems for inspections, and in some cases were unable to reach a water system owner/operator or were refused permission to conduct a site visit due to a lack of authority to conduct Group B site visits. This resulted in delays in meeting their contract obligations with the Office of Drinking Water. In some cases,The Office of Drinking Water sent a letter to the water system requesting that they allow the LHJ to conduct the site visit—which proved helpful in gaining cooperation by some systems but not all (see Appendix 2). • 6 Benefits • Many Group B systems had not received critical reviews and assistance in decades. Achieving our objectives and getting the results we needed—identifying common public health risks and working with operators to ensure safe and reliable drinking water to their customers—are the most significant benefits of the project.We've also gained more accurate information about the targeted Group B water systems and are better positioned to continue improvements with Group B water systems that could serve as a focus for future education and technical assistance. The funding for this project arrived at a very beneficial time as a number of LHJs considered discontinuing their drinking water program because of budget cuts. Two jurisdictions facing severe budget restrictions used the funding to continue drinking water activities for Group B systems. The following are some of the benefits we commonly heard from local health: • Improved ability to communicate public health concerns and requirements to operators • Establishing positive working relationships between local health offices and water system operators • Establishing contact with new owners/operators and educating them on state/local requirements • Ability to provide hands-on assistance and education to receptive water system operators • "Putting a face on government"during field visits was appreciated • Updating information enabled LHJs to be more effective with reminder postcards for water quality testing • Enhanced in-house expertise and capacity of staff • The reasons most often cited for water system deficiencies were: • Purveyors (often a homeowner association representative)with little or no water system experience trying to understand the operations,requirements,risks, and complexities of running a small water system. • Little comprehension by the water system owner/operator of the system design and history,or compliance obligations. Recommendations from Local Health Jurisdictions For most LHJs this funding is vital for them to maintain local capacity to ensure safe and reliable drinking water on Group B systems in their jurisdictions. Based on site visits and communications with water system owners/operators,LHJs offered the following recommendations: • Establish a stable funding source to support local drinking water programs. • Revise Chapter 246-291 WAC to include the authority for conducting sanitary surveys and increase monitoring requirements on inadequate sources. • Maintain the ability to: — Enable local health jurisdictions to develop a technical assistance,training and education program to help correct problems discovered during the site visits. 7 • — Incorporate a clearly defined compliance element/enforcement strategy to bring recalcitrant systems into compliance. Next Steps The 2003 Legislature appropriated$1.4 million for the 2003-2005 biennium to continue assessing the status of Group B water systems. In the second phase of the project,local health staff will be focusing on Group B systems with 3 or more connections. Of the 35 LHJs currently in the state,32 covering 36 of the 39 counties will be participating in the work. Activities will be based on similar goals to the first phase of the project: ■ Ensuring that water systems are properly inventoried; • Assessing current status and identifying critical public health risks through site visits; • Conducting follow up site visits and/or providing technical assistance in making improvements to address areas of critical public health risks; and ■ Informing system operators of routine water quality requirements and track compliance. Conclusion Group B systems,generally serving two to 14 connections, are subject to state law and local ordinances regarding water quality and operations. However,with over 12,000 of these systems statewide and budgetary restraints,many of these have been overlooked and in numerous cases have never been • reviewed. Subsequently,very little information was available on their condition and their ability to supply safe and reliable drinking water to customers. The outcome of this project was that the condition of Group B systems with 5 or more connections is better understood. A large number of systems were found with significant problems. Often these problems were the direct result poor operator knowledge and/or experience. If Group B systems are to be effectively regulated in the future, a number of issues need to be addressed. These would include increased resources for technical assistance,training,compliance,and potential revisions to the current WAC to clarify authorities for conducting sanitary surveys and increased monitoring requirements when needed. • 8 Appendix 1 : LHJ Group B Project Update • # County Total Bs Revised W �' a ,, ei, >=5 conn LHJ#s :.. 4,4t a (DWAIN) 4/01/02 ..„ V �� 7/01/01 Adams 19 21 19 100.00% 30 $11,745.00 A'. 'I . Benton/Franklin 83 55 62 74.70% 80 $32,010.00 $39,465.00 Chelan/Douglas 101 89 101 100.00% 102 $45,855.00 Clallam 82 82 67 81.71% 67 $28,785.00 1• < Columbia 0 0 0 44''''i,'-± J•�< $5,000.00 t t Cowlitz 30 28 29 96.67% 39 $15,295.00 ,, ,�_� t . „ Grant 72 67 65 90.28% 127 $28,075.00 '° .t_ 1 z t Grays Harbor 46 47 40 86.96% 41 $19,200.00 a Island 197 211 201 102.03% 244 $76,355.00 $74,935.00 Jefferson 43 51 41 95.35% 41 $19,555.00 $20,265.00 King 418 391 418 100.00% 492 $153,390.00r IP Kitsap 251 334 242 96.41% 242 $90,910.00 $9.4,105.00 Kittitas 44 49 44 100.00% 47 $20,620.00 i.p t Klickitat 17 17 14 82.35% 14 $9,970.007t , Lewis 125 151 124 99.20% 159 $49,020.00 k° .M Lincoln 12 12 12 100.00% 15 $9,260.00 2 6 Cc r,3 Mason 223 223 214 95.96% 218 $80,970.00 $84,165.00 Okanogan 95 113 76 80.00% 76 $31,980.00 $38,725.00 • NE Tri-County 43 44 42 97.67% 42 $29,910.00 t' * Pierce 553 552 552 99.82% 505 $200,960.00 - I San Juan 69 85 71 102.90% 82 $30,205.00 --,..f Skagit Skagit 52 49 44 84.62% .,1/4 .-,,,stavg,,,.: 56 $20,620.00 SW Wash. HD 98 96 91 92.86% 186 $42,305.00 $44,790.00 Snohomish 133 140 133 100.00% 142 $52,215.00 °t`., Spokane 55 55 44 80.00% 44 $20,620.00 $24,525.00 Thurston 242 271 230 95.04% 220 $86,650.00 I °t °'s ? Wahkiakum 4 3 4 100.00% 4 $6,420.00 �< v _ Walla Walla 20 18 17 85.00% 17 $11,035.00 t Whatcom 74 74 72 97.30% 72 $30,560.004.,V Ailijp Whitman 10 10 10 100.00% 10 $8,550.00 $8,550.00 Yakima 168 168 151 89.88% 198 $58,605.00 ';,,-.2i7K(WOCI' It 404 Totals 3379 3506 3230 95.59% 3612 $1,326,650.00 - 1 (33311* *3331 is the current number of Group B systems in Sentry because of systems that have been inactivated as they no longer exist or have been connected to Group A systems Appendix 2: Letter to Group B Systems March 10,2003 ,WA REF: Group B Oversight Program Dear The purpose of this letter is to request your cooperation in allowing the County Health (District/ Department) to conduct an assessment and records review of your Group B public water system. As the owner/ operator of a Group B public water system you are required under Chapter 246-291-240, WAC to provide an adequate quantity and quality of water to your customers in a reliable manner. As the department responsible for administering these rules, it is the Office of Drinking Water's responsibility to conduct periodic reviews of Group B water systems to ensure that customers are receiving a safe and reliable source of drinking water. One of the methods that we use to conduct these reviews are a water system assessment and a records review. • While the Office of Drinking Water has the ultimate responsibility to conduct these reviews, there are over 3,300 systems statewide to review. With such a high number of systems statewide to assess, we have delegated the responsibility of reviewing Group B water systems to a number local health jurisdictions. The department has a contractual agreement with County Health (District/Department) to administer specific roles and responsibilities for the oversight of water system requirements under Chapter 246-291-030,WAC. Part of this oversight is to conduct system assessments and record reviews. With this background, please contact the (name and phone number) at the County Health (District/ Department) to arrange for a system assessment and records review of your system. There is no charge to you or your system for this review and no follow-up or enforcement actions will be required. However, the failure to participate in these reviews could eventually result in your system being reclassified as inadequate under the provisions of Chapter 246-291-130,WAC. If you have any questions, concerns or need more information, please feel free to contact me at (360) 236-3158. Sincerely, Dennis P. Campbell,R.S. Office of Drinking Water Washington State Dept. of Health • 10 Appendix 3: Local Health Jurisdiction Observations and • Comments Local Health Jurisdictions were given the opportunity and encouraged to provide additional feedback when submitting their quarterly reports. The following is a compilation of observations and comments submitted during the project. Miscellaneous LHJ Observations During Site Visits • Loose fittings, gaps for wiring or unbolted caps providing the potential for unwanted access to many wells. • A well in danger of damage by heavy equipment as a new access road used by heavy equipment and transport trailers was found within a few feet of the well. • Buried and poorly sealed reservoir subject to potential contamination. • A well, redrilled after the February 28th earthquake, had no new pump test data or water quality tests. • Vandalized equipment unknown to operator. • Two systems constructed differently from the approved plans. Major deficiencies of public health significance found with both systems: o cross connections, o flooded control and operational equipment, o yard hydrants installed as sample taps, o coliform problems, and o a well pump failure. • System chlorinates prior to bacteriological sampling their dug well. Bacteriological samples were unsatisfactory. Storage was poorly protected. • Creek source with no filtration and no chlorine monitoring. • Dug well with poor setbacks,not current on bactis.,unmonitored chlorination and no filtration. • No monitoring information and no knowledge of the system. • System batch chlorinates prior to bacteriological sampling. Bacteriological sample was unsatisfactory. • Well and storage tank not secure from contamination. No bacti since 1993. • A second well was added prior to approvals. Water quality unknown. • Systems were not current for monitoring bacti or nitrate. • Added chlorination and filtration without approvals. Chlorinator nonfunctional during site visit. • The lack of current sampling and general maintenance were commonly encountered problems . • A well was of substandard construction,drilled by a non-certified driller,and located with significant infringements on the SCA had been drilled as a replacement source. Also,the system had installed an in-line chlorinator on the water supply. • Identification of an existing unutilized hand dug well next to a resort. The well was covered and a lock installed. Follow-up is ongoing in promoting decommissioning • Technical assistance was provided to a Group B system with a history of unsatisfactory results. Small lot sizes and setback concerns eliminated alternative well sites. The purveyors was 11 • convinced to bring in a well contractor and "rebuild"the existing dug well. There have been no detected coliforms since. • Absentee property owner, person left in charge had no knowledge/experience, or resources to operate water system. Numerous deficiencies noted: o evidence of vandalism or inadequately modified/repaired system components o pump deliberately runs 7/24. o high system pressures w/o relief valves, o leaking connections o potential cross-connections o Active source unprotected and vulnerable, and o Inactive well connected to system. • 13 active connections. original spring source & reservoir destroyed by landslide. Well source, and new storage system installed in 1996. No review or approval for new system sought by purveyor. No water quality sampling has been performed on new source. • The well head is less than 100' from public and private roads. Well house in poor condition, with one pressure tank rusty and empty,the other pressure tank waterlogged. Both the well house and well head infested with mice. • The well casing is buried with dirt under a water meter box. • Detached garage and a public road are less than 100 feet from well. Allowed by waiver approval of King County Water Review Board provided no contaminants are stored in garage, and is noted by covenant on property title. • Existing garage and house located within 30 feet of the well containing toxic materials. The • plumbing stub and sewer serving the house is less than 50 feet to the well. Well head and pressure tank are located in a concrete lined vault approximately 7 feet below grade. The vault has a tight fitting roof with no apparent leaks,but does not appear to have any drains. • Garage with chemicals, and septic system less than 100 feet from well. Structure location (existing)and septic system had reduced setback approved via waiver on 5/10/82. • Well head is 75 feet from the edge of a public road, 62 feet from the road right of way, and less than 100 feet to a private road. The well site was approved in October 1977 as the well head is located up-gradient from the public road. There is a spray tank with some unknown liquid stored in the well house less than 10 feet from the well head. • Tightline from RV dump station less than 100 feet from well head. Animal enclosure(horse)less than 30 feet from well head. • An inadequate surface water system serving 10 houses. Source is a year round stream via 2 collection boxes with some screens for primary solids removal. 2 "spa-like"chlorine tablets are added to the 2nd box on Wednesdays and Sundays. All homes are gravity served. The collection point is adjacent to (200—300 feet)a large sand and gravel pit on Hudson River. • Cans of fuel oil, gasoline and paint stored in many well houses. • Screened well vent broken off leaving an opening in the well cap. Also,a"quarter sized hole in an access lid in the buried reservoir with the lid being just above grade. • Water system connected to an adjacent Group A water supply and pumping water into a storage reservoir. The water wells originally serving this Group B water system have been capped off. Information sent to regional engineer for King County on intertie with this Group A system. i 12 Additional Benefits of the Project • • Established contact with new owners/operators of systems where ownership had changed. Provided the opportunity to educate and inform new operators of 0 &M and requirements. • Additional reminder to owners of systems previously surveyed about deficiencies still not corrected. Opportunity to assure corrective action for deficiencies of public health significance. • Updates of WFIs, files, and databases regarding ownership, system contacts, etc. Enabled LHJ to be more effective with quarterly"reminder postcards"of when water quality tests are due. • Opportunity to discuss well and water system security. • Able to purchase a digital camera and accessories to better document findings. • Education of operators,WAC 246-291 and other handouts were offered and given. • Able to provide assistance with a bacteriological contamination problem. • Able to provide assistance with a hydrocarbon contamination problem. • 2 systems were found to be a Group A systems,no bacti since 1995 • Education,WAC 246-291 and other handouts were offered and given. • Able to provide assistance with a bacteriological contamination problem. • Able to provide assistance with a hydrocarbon contamination problem. • Able to identify the correct system contacts, facilitate minor corrections to deficiencies identified, and create an awareness that these systems are regulated and expected to provide safe water. • Utilized a GPS in mapping the sources of water systems and tagging all wells not tagged at the time of the drill. Established a GPS generated database and map of the Group A water supply sources. IPAdding Group B wells resulted in a comprehensive assessment of the public water supplies in the County. Will enable a rapid and effective public health assessment of potential and immediate impacts of contamination events or of compromised groundwater quality. • Most water system representatives have been very receptive to the site visits. Continually heard the statement "putting a face on government" during the field visits. Helped to develop a positive working relationship with purveyors so they have a local contact when they need assistance • Site visits provided more water system data and provided water system managers with important information regarding proper management,water quality monitoring requirements,and other information to help provide safe and reliable drinking water. • Provided written material on regulatory compliance and water quality monitoring. Helped reduce a lot of confusion out and people were truly relieved when the requirements are clearly spelled out. • Raised the visibility and priority for conducting survey inspections of Group B water systems. • Many Group systems have not received critical reviews in decades. With systems existing for such long periods of time,the finding is that the current operators have assumed responsibility for reasons other than training, aptitude, or commitment. They may possess little comprehension of the system design and history, or compliance obligations. • Effected some improvements in water system construction • Provided an opportunity for information dissemination on Group B monitoring requirements,proper coliform monitoring, cross connection control, general wellhead protection,and additional sources of available assistance(Evergreen Rural Water;certified labs,etc.) • Updated information especially the contact and number of active connections • 13 • Assisted purveyors, sometimes homeowners with little or no water system experience,to understand the operations,requirements,risks, and complexities of running a small water system • Update of system records and computer tracking: WFI and WDOE well tagging • Bringing systems into compliance with sampling and testing • Updating GIS system: locating wells, service areas,and connection to the WFI information on the county internet site • Adding pictures to county files; helpful when diagnosing water quality problems over the phone ("see the missing vent; is there still an opening in the sanitary well cap?") • Added information to files concerning the current condition of the water systems. E.g.: two systems were found that were constructed substantially different from the approved plans. System components were installed in vaults subject to flooding, a likely cause of a coliform violations. The systems are being reconstructed per the approved plans. The info added to files is also helpful in making "adequacy determinations" for new connections (over connected, serious deficiencies, current contact persons, etc...) • Communication of public health concerns and operator responsibilities to water system operators ' during the surveys. Serious potential health concerns were shared with operators who were unaware of the problem(s), and this appeared to motivate the operator to correct the problem(s)where possible. • Updated records on Group B systems include a digital picture record of each water system for answering future questions on these systems. • Developed a sense of common problems associated with Group B systems that will help focus future • - education/training efforts with the operators. Enhancement of in-house expertise and capacity through completion of these surveys by staff. • Through the assessment process issues of concern could be identified and addressed. • Information from site visit is being utilized in a legal action against a non-certified driller. The ultimate results are a safe water supply for the users and a reduced potential for contamination of the local aquifer. Challenges • One system denied access to property for the survey even though they had poor bacteriological history. They noted we had no legal authority to require. • Experience indicates that dug wells and surface sources are inadequate sources. A campaign to move srom thr to a better source should to be implemented with Group B water systems state wide. It should include, at minimum, an increase in monitoring for bactis and chlorine but additionally a BCA-like document that puts conditions and moves them in a direction with the potential of some enforcement. • Old dug wells with UV treatment. • Arsenic 18 ppb • Chloride 214 ppm • As the project moves forward, less and less cooperative water system purveyors will have to be addressed. Although this may be caused for a variety of reasons it is anticipated there will be a significant population who are aware their system is not operating or managed properly. The staff 14 time which will result from working with these types of owners and looking for creative solutions • with little monetary support will be a challenge. • there is an amount of anti-government sentiment in this county. Being refused access to survey a PWS systems is a concern. So far it has only happened once,but I'm sure there will be more. • Outdated information on WFIs making contact with operators difficult. • Water sources observed during site visits that were not on WFIs. • 35%of the systems visited were obtaining water from springs. • Surface water sources used and inter-tied to system • Actual number of connections not updated on WFIs • Lack of protection of the SCA • As we move further in to the project we will be addressing less and less cooperative water system purveyors. Although this may be caused for a variety of reasons it is anticipated there will be a significant population who are aware their system is not operating or managed properly. The staff time which will result from working with these types of owners and looking for creative solutions with little monetary support will be a challenge. • Absence of proper monitoring in 60%of systems visited. What worked well during the project • An introductory letter explaining the purpose of the site visit and a copy of the checklist: these quelled fears of the program being compliance oriented. • Downloading GIS and property info prior to the site visit: we were able to easily record the well locations, service areas, and specific lots served directly onto GIS maps that were then sent back for entry/update of our GIS mapping and water system tracking(some of this is still in process). • We purchased dedicated time from a very competent support person. She sent the intro letters, prepared files for site visits,programmed a tracking/report system,entered data,prepared reports, printed and saved pictures,and put the water system files back in good order. • We were able to send a number of our on-site staff for training and then used some of these staff to do the site visits. The"cross-training"provides the department with more versatile staff. • We purchased another digital camera and a bunch of memory sticks. We shared cameras but kept our own memory sticks and forwarded them with reports to our admin staff for picture retrieval and printing file copies. • Review of the water file prior to site visits was helpful • Setting up appointments prior to site visits was best due to access and questions • GPSing all sources is a valuable tool for Environmental Health • Digital photographs of Group B water systems makes for excellent long term record of water system equipment, and to troubleshoot or answer questions from water system users. These photographs also become excellent communication tools for building support for the program from Board of Health, and King County Council,community groups, other agencies,etc. • Sharing of information with operators on conservation,purveyor responsibilities,and other handouts. • Additionally,the inspections became a way to build communication and rapport with Group B water system operators. The field visits helped show the operators who were are,and provided a contact 411 15 with them outside the regulator framework which made the operators more open and helped communication to go well. The drawbacks of the project • Essentially revolved around funding, as the funding is transitory it is difficult to staff the project with permanent staffing. It would be ideal to have dedicated funding to hire personnel to focus on the Group B water supplies. • The number of systems to be looked at was pretty high for the contract period. • It did not really allow for the time needed to fully review system improvements and on follow up. • Follow up to owners was not as good as could have been done(including tri-form to more easily provide copy of inspection to purveyor.) • Synopsis of needed improvements along with Group B literature would have been more helpful to users. (Canned form language?) • Set plan for follow-up for hand dug wells. • We were disappointed in the glitch with funding that we did not discover until near the end of the project. Even though the contract and scope of work stated clearly that we had the flexibility to perform the work according to our staff availability, DOH contracts refused to pay for some quarterly"under-billings"(fewer that 49 reports for a calendar quarter) and"over-billings"(greater than 49 reports for a calendar quarter). • There were a few systems that refused inspection and a few that obviously avoided contact. • Sometimes obtaining access to the Group B well for inspection was troublesome. We made efforts • to contact Group B water systems for inspections, and in some cases did not get a call back inspire of several messages. Some wells we did site inspections of unlocked well houses or happen to show up when the owner was there. The inability to always contact the operator made for some down time when we could not complete inspections and/or seemed to spin our wheels. • The key item checklist did not provide for as complete inspection of the water system as the comprehensive evaluation of the Group B water systems we have been doing for a fee or under local capacity funding. • Question number 19 part B could be rewritten to focus on the water system pump operation,pressure tanks etc. more directly. Sometimes the question was not answered because it appeared that part B focused on whether the ASME valve was properly working,and when there was not one present,the question was not answered as it appeared to be non applicable. Recommendations for future funds • Upgrade WAC 246-291 to provide authority for sanitary surveys • Upgrade WAC 246-291 to provide authority for sanitary surveys and to increase dramatically the monitoring of inadequate sources and an enforcement strategy to move them to the best available source via a BCA-like plan. • Upon completion of the assessments of the >5 connection water systems it is recommended that an assessments of systems with the <5 connection be pursued. Although 99% of the systems in the county are in compliance for Bacterial and Nitrate sampling requirements it is clear from the assessments there are still outstanding health issues associated with the water supplies. It is also recommended that the Legislature look at a funding mechanism to make public dollars available for small water system improvements. • 16 Areas of Improvement assuming funding • Establishment of funds for simple system improvements and training or contract for improvement i.e. G&O model lust for wellhead deficiencies. • Establishment of matrix for system designation to allow additional funding for working with grossly mismanaged systems or SMA requirement. • Better coordination with the contract, scope of work, and consolidated contract payment methodology. • More flexibility in the type of work to be funded in the next two year cycle. Systems not inspected • refused contact, did not show up for inspection • refused multiple calls&appointments • budget restraints(DOH would not pay due to contract/funding glitch; see"what did not work well" above) General observations for group B water systems inspected by one LHJ: • 35 approved; 36 provisionally approved; 23 Inadequate and 5 duplicate or abandoned Group B water systems were inspected this quarter with most of them being a ground water well source (90 Wells; 1 Surface source; 2 Springs; 1 Purchase source). • Most of Group B wells, springs and surface source were not chlorinated supplies. (92 versus 2). Even for those two systems that were being chlorinated, only one was being operated although it was impossible to know how consistent it was being chlorinated depending on the operator to place tablets of chlorine in one of the stream source boxes on certain days with possible fluctuations in the dosage of chlorine as the tablets eroded. • Approximately two thirds of the Group B water systems had atmosphere storage reservoirs(59 that had reservoirs versus 35 with out). Of those with storage,two thirds of them had adequately sealed reservoirs. (39 versus 14). • Most Group B water systems inspected were not current on sampling for nitrate(76 water systems),and bacteria sampling(57 water systems were not current,37 who were). • Most of the Group B water sources visited during the quarter were not located in a pit(86 versus 4);had a sealed well cap(81 versus 7);used pressure tanks in the system(88 versus 4); had an ASME pressure relief valve(72 versus 15);had the well casing at least 6"inches or more above the floor of the well house(72 versus 16);were not metered(72 versus 22); and did not have a biological contamination source with in the 100 foot radius(81 versus 10). Twice as many wells with chemical contamination concerns versus biological(22 versus 10). • 100 %of the Group B water systems that were wells were not subject to surface flooding of the casings. • A majority of the Group B water systems did not have source taps(50 versus 37). • 17 s Jefferson County Board of Health NEW BUSINESS Agenda Item V., 2 lb Influenza Update December 18, 2003 • /"> Washington S • • ea News Release For immediate release: December 5, 2003 (03-193) Contacts: Tim Church, Communications Office 360-236-4077 Donn Moyer, Communications Office 360-236-4076 Supply of flu vaccine in Washington varies between communities High demand a result of the early influenza season OLYMPIA—The early flu season has created an unusually high demand for vaccine in Washington and across the nation. According to the Department of Health, that demand is different from community to community, and the supply of influenza vaccine also varies. Flu vaccine is largely distributed via the private marketplace. "The good news is more people than usual are getting vaccinated against the flu in our state," said State Health Officer Dr. Maxine Hayes. "There is no more vaccine in production nationally, so people who want the flu vaccine should contact their health care provider soon." • According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention(CDC), nationwide more people received flu vaccine this October than ever before at that time of year, and that appears to be the case in Washington, too. The Department of Health,which provides influenza vaccine for high risk children, ordered 102,000 doses of vaccine for this season. So far, about 92,000 doses have been shipped to local health departments around the state, and the remaining inventory is expected to be shipped within the next couple of weeks. Manufacturers have announced that all supplies have been shipped to end users and other distributors, so the state is not expecting to receive additional stock this season. Influenza is widespread in Washington and is being seen in virtually all areas of the state. While this flu season arrived earlier than usual, there is no way to predict how severe the season might be. Typically, flu season in our state hits full stride in January and continues through March. With a limited supply of vaccine, the Department of Health reminds people that using good health manners is among the best prevention against many diseases, including influenza. Such manners include covering mouth and nose (with a handkerchief or tissue if possible)when --More-- Flu vaccine supply 12/05/03 Page 2 sneezing or coughing;washing hands frequently and thoroughly with soap and water after • sneezing or coughing; and staying home from work or school when you're ill. The Department of Health provides flu vaccine for toddlers and at-risk children to local health departments,which distribute it to health care providers. Health care providers and some local health departments also order and purchase flu vaccine for adults and healthy children. The Department of Health flu news Web site(http://www.doh.wa.gov/FluNews/default.htm)has details of influenza in Washington. The CDC flu Web site(http://www.cdc.gov/nip/flu/default.htm)has additional information. ### Visit the Washington Department of Health Web site at http://www.doh.wa.gov_for a healthy dose of information. • • • Press Release December 5, 2003 Lisa McKenzie Communicable Disease Program Coordinator Jefferson County Public Health 385-9400 Influenza Season Influenza A activity is widespread in Washington State. Cases have been confirmed in East Jefferson County, school absenteeism is in the 10-25%range. The predominant strain of Influenza A in Washington state is a variant of the H3N2 strains that has been in global circulation since 1977. Nationally, 71%of Influenza A isolates are similar to the A/Fujian strain which has undergone a slight antigenic "drift" from the A/Panama strain present in this years influenza vaccine. The current vaccine is expected to be protective for Fujian-type Influenza A. • Influenza is a highly contagious illness causing an average of 36,000 deaths and 114,000 hospitalizations per year in the United States;pneumonia is the most common complication in high-risk groups. Influenza, unlike the common cold, has a swift onset of severe symptoms beginning with two to seven days of fever,headache, muscle aches, extreme fatigue,runny nose and sore throat, and a cough that is often severe and may last seven days or more. Public Health Officials Stress the Importance of Influenza Vaccinations for: People over 50 years of age. Everyone 6 months and older with chronic diseases of the heart, lungs (including asthma) or kidneys, or diabetes. Anyone whose immune system is weakened because of HIV/AIDS or other diseases that effect the immune system. Children 6 to 18 years of age on long-term aspirin treatments. Residents of nursing homes and other long-term care facilities. Women who will be in the second or third trimester of pregnancy during the flu season. Physicians, nurses, family members, child-care workers or anyone coming in close contact with people at risk of serious influenza. Parents of otherwise healthy children, ages 6 to 23 months, should discuss getting a flu shot for those children with their health care provider. These children are at substantially increased risk for influenza-related hospitalizations. • The federal and state funded Vaccines for Children program that subsidizes the cost of children's vaccines at most health care clinics now includes funding for flu vaccine for certain children. Families may want to check with their clinic or physician about this program. • Precautions Recommended to Keep from Getting the Flu Include: Clean hands often with soap and water or with an alcohol-based hand cleaner. Avoid touching your eyes,nose or mouth. Avoid close contact with people who are sick, if possible. Get vaccinated for flu as recommended for your age and health conditions. Stopping the Spread of Germ If an Individual Is Sick: Cover your nose and mouth with a tissue every time you cough or sneeze. Throw the used tissue in a wastebasket. If you don't have a tissue, sneeze or cough into your sleeve,not into your hands. After coughing, sneezing or blowing your nose, always clean your hands with soap and water or with an alcohol-based hand cleaner. Stay home when you are sick. Do not share eating utensils, drinking glasses, towels or other personal items. For more information about flu visit http: www.doh.wa.gov/FluNews/default.htm For information about upcoming scheduled flu vaccine clinics call the Jefferson County Health and Human Services Information Line at 385-9429 or call your Health Care Provider. Many clinics are obtaining additional vaccine. • • • _ _ ___, .., , - -----, . . • - : ,,,, - - -. .,____ .._ bt2: -, 'i Jefjerson County Health e Human Services 'l jI tNet z 444, CASTLE HILL CENTER • 615SHERIDAN • PORTTOWNSEND,WA 98368 a, December 2, 2003 To: Jefferson County Health Care Providers From: Tom Locke,MD,MPH, Jefferson County Health Officer Re: 2003-04 Influenza Season Influenza A activity is widespread in Washington State. Cases have been confirmed in East Jefferson County, school absenteeism is in the 10-25%range, and the Jefferson General ER reports increased cases of pneumonia and respiratory disease hospitalizations. The predominant strain of Influenza A in Washington state is a variant of the H3N2 strains that has been in global circulation since 1977. Nationally, 78% of Influenza A isolates are similar to the A/Fujian strain which has undergone a slight antigenic "drift"from the A/Panama strain present in this years • influenza vaccine. The current vaccine is expected to be protective for Fujian-type Influenza A. Successful reduction of the morbidity and mortality associated with influenza outbreaks depends largely on preventive efforts—vaccination and optimal infection control practices. Antiviral therapy plays a relatively minor role in these control strategies but does have some specific beneficial applications. 4 antiviral drugs are licensed that have significant activity against influenza strains: amantadine, rimantadine, zanamivir("Relenza"), and oseltamivir("Tamiflu"). Amantadine and rimantadine are older drugs that inhibit viral replication of Influenza A. Zanamivir and oseltamivir are a newer class of neuraminidase inhibitors that interfere with viral penetration of cells by both Influenza A and B. All can be used for influenza treatment, if started within 48 hours of symptom onset,but efficacy studies have been disappointing. On average, antiviral treatment of influenza shortens the duration of illness by only one day. Multiple studies have failed to show significant reductions in influenza-related complications (e.g. bacterial pneumonia) or hospitalizations for any of these drugs. Three of the antiviral drugs are licensed for prevention of influenza infection: amantadine, rimantadine, and oseltamivir. Specific groups recommended for influenza chemoprophylaxsis are : • Persons at High Risk Who Are Vaccinated After Influenza Activity Has Begun. Persons at high risk for complications of influenza still can be vaccinated after an outbreak of influenza has begun in a community. However, the development of 0 antibodies in adults after vaccination takes approximately 2 weeks. When influenza vaccine is administered while influenza viruses are circulating, chemoprophylaxis should be considered for persons at high risk of influenza complications during the time from vaccination until immunity has developed. Children aged<9 years who receive influenza . vaccine for the first time can require 6 weeks of prophylaxis (i.e., prophylaxis for 4 weeks after the first dose of vaccine and an additional 2 weeks of prophylaxis after the second dose). • Persons Who Provide Care to Those at High Risk. To reduce the spread of virus to persons at high risk during community or institutional outbreaks, chemoprophylaxis during peak influenza activity can be considered for unvaccinated persons who have frequent contact with persons at high risk. Persons with frequent contact include employees of hospitals, clinics, and chronic-care facilities,household members, visiting nurses, and volunteer workers. • Persons Who Have Immune Deficiencies. Chemoprophylaxis can be considered for persons at high risk who are expected to have an inadequate antibody response to influenza vaccine. This category includes persons infected with HIV, chiefly those with advanced HIV disease. No published data are available concerning possible efficacy of chemoprophylaxis among persons with HIV infection or interactions with other drugs used to manage HIV infection. Such patients should be monitored closely if chemoprophylaxis is administered. • Residents of Nursing Homes and Institutional Care Facilities During Influenza A Outbreaks. Using antiviral drugs for treatment and prophylaxis of influenza is a key component of influenza outbreak control in institutions. In addition to antiviral medications, other outbreak-control measures include instituting droplet precautions and establishing cohorts of patients with confirmed or suspected influenza, re-offering influenza vaccinations to unvaccinated staff and patients, restricting staff movement 411 between wards or buildings, and restricting contact between ill staff or visitors and patients. When outbreaks occur in institutions, chemoprophylaxis should be administered to all residents,regardless of whether they received influenza vaccinations during the previous fall, and should continue for a minimum of 2 weeks. If surveillance indicates that new cases continue to occur, chemoprophylaxis should be continued until approximately 1 week after the end of the outbreak. Amantadine/rimantadine have significant CNS and GI side-effects. Neuraminidase inhibitors seem better tolerated but are not well researched for outbreak control. Doses must be individualized for each patient and the potential for drug interactions (especially with HIV infection)must be closely monitored. Summary: East Jefferson County is experiencing the early stages of an Influenza A outbreak. Vaccination of high risk individuals remains beneficial for the duration of the flu season. For maximum benefit, high risk patients receiving influenza vaccination should receive anti- influenza chemoprophylaxis for 2 weeks following vaccination. Antiviral drugs are also useful for other preventive and outbreak control indications. Detailed information on their use can be found at--http://www.cdc.gov/mmwripreview/mmwrhtml/rr5208a1.htm • • Jefferson County Board of Health NEW BUSINESS Agenda Item V., 3 Draft Policy Concerning Evaluation of • Existing On-Site Sewage Systems and Building Permits December 18, 2003 • • Memorandum To: Jefferson County Board of Health From: Larry Fay Environmental Health Director Date: December 10, 2003 Re: Draft Policy concerning onsite sewage system inspections and building permit application. Attached for your review and consideration is a second draft policy and associated matrix. The matrix has been revised with input from Board members Titterness and Sullivan. In the way of refresher to the Board, the onsite sewage system regulations adopted by the board in 2000 include provisions for periodic inspection or evaluation of existing onsite • sewage systems. The regulation takes a kind of risk-based approach to establish how frequently systems need to be inspected. The frequency varies from every six years for simple systems on large acreage to as frequent as annually for complex systems on sensitive sites. The challenge for the department and the Board was to figure out how to actually implement the inspection schedule. This is easy with new systems. We can simply condition the permit at the time of issuance. With existing systems there is a greater challenge. After long and careful consideration,the Board decided to begin implementing the program gradually by requiring an inspection when a property is transferred,when there has been an application for building permit or when the department and Board have identified an area as an area of special concern. Until now we have only been requiring inspection at the time a property is transferred. We feel we are ready now to move into the next phase, evaluation at the time of a building permit application. There are a couple of complexities with moving into the building permit phase. One is that in many cases we need more information about the system for a building permit application then we do for a sale or transfer. All we really need to know when the property transfers is whether there is indeed a system (We have identified several direct discharges) and whether the system is functional. With a building permit application we frequently need to know fairly accurately the system location, depth, and capacity and to • identify a reserve area. The second issue is that the regulation makes no distinction between types of building • permits applications. However, building permits are required for a number of building activities that have little or no potential to impact the onsite system. It is confusing for the public and we hear little support for requiring inspections as a condition of these types of permits. (As an informational matter, about 23%of the building permits issued in 2003 were for"non-building" activities or 154 of 682 permits.) The purpose of this policy is to clarify three things: 1) What kinds of activities will trigger the requirement for an evaluation. 2) What kind of evaluation is necessary 3) What happens after the evaluation. 12/11/2003 1st Draft JEFFERSON COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES • ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION POLICY STATEMENT PROGRAM — On-site Sewage Disposal SUBJECT— Evaluation of existing onsite sewage systems Effective this date the following procedure shall be adopted concerning when evaluations of existing onsite sewage systems (EES) will be required and by whom and how they will be conducted. PURPOSE Section 8.15.140 of the Jefferson County Onsite Sewage Code establishes that owners of existing onsite sewage systems shall obtain an initial inspection (EES) when the property that is served by the system is being sold and when an application for a building permit is submitted. The purpose of this policy is to provide clear direction as to when an EES is required, how an EES must be conducted, who can conduct inspections and what results from and inspection. • APPLICABILITY This policy applies to individual residential and commercial onsite sewage systems when a property is sold or an application for a building permit has been submitted. This policy is not intended to address EES required under other provisions of the onsite sewage code; community systems, areas of special concern or systems that were permitted with waivers GENERAL POLICY STATEMENT It is the policy of the Jefferson County Board of Health that all residences, businesses or other building where people work, live or congregate in Jefferson County not served by a sewage treatment system must be connected to an approved properly functioning onsite sewage system. It is further the policy of the Board that all systems must be maintained properly in order to reduce the frequency of failure and that all systems will receive periodic third party inspections or EES at the frequency established in the Onsite Sewage Code beginning when a property is sold or when an application for a building permit is submitted. 12/11/2003 1st Draft • SPECIFIC STANDARDS 1. Time of Sale: An EES conducted at the time of sale is intended to verify that there is an existing functioning system on the property. The inspection must include a visual inspection of the septic tank to confirm the construction material, structural integrity, and liquid capacity, sludge and scum depth as well as general condition with specific reference to inlet and outlet baffles. The general location of the drainfield must be identified and evaluated to verify that there are no direct discharges or surfacing effluent. Time of sale inspections may be conducted by Environmental Health staff, licensed O&M specialist, licensed designers or engineers licensed to practice in Washington. 2. Building Permit Applications: . Exceptions- An EES is not required for "non-building" building permit applications. Examples of"non-building" building permits include but are not limited to building maintenance related activities such as re-roofing and replacing or adding windows, wood or propane stove installation, above ground propane tank installation and interior remodels that do not include new plumbing or additional bedrooms. All other building permit applications will trigger the requirement to have an EES completed as specified in the attached table, appendix 1. 3. Who Can Conduct an EES: Basic operational checks (those inspections with the primary purpose to establish that there exists a functioning onsite sewage system) may be conducted by licensed onsite sewage system designers, engineers licensed to practice in Washington, environmental health staff and licensed O&M specialists. Inspections that are intended to establish the treatment capacity of a system and/or designate a reserve area may be conducted only by licensed designers, engineers or environmental health staff. • 12/11/2003 1st Draft • 4. Inspection results: Any inspection identifying a failure as defined in WAC 246-272 must be reported to Jefferson County Health and Human Services within 24 hours. Owners of failed onsite sewage systems will be required to initiate steps to correct the failure upon notice from the health department if they have not already started. Any inspection identifying maintenance deficiencies must be recorded in writing in the inspection report and submitted to Jefferson County Health and Human Services and the property owner at the first reasonable opportunity. If the EES is for the purposes of time of sale, it will be the responsibility of the seller and buyer to determine who will correct the deficiency. Deficiencies not corrected by the time of the next regular inspection will be considered a violation. If the EES is for the purposes of a building permit application, it will be the responsibility of the property owner to correct the deficiencies. Deficiencies must be corrected prior to final inspection and sign off of the • building permit. EFFECTIVE DATE This policy shall become effective on the date of adoption and remain in effect until amended or repealed by action of the Jefferson County Board of Health. Health Officer Date Chairman of the Board of Health Date • 0. v= O a) C O o 2 O 1-- p a) -..5 C o - ca • a) E E O (A >, es L E O C Q I- • +- a) C• Q a) C y O (o O C _c _ O > ` a) L L -C u) i 7 L O_ =as E C 4) O O a) Co l -§ , 0 > 0- O C E C O O >, C O Q C '.:T) C C N 0. L 0 ~ (o •— a) Q co O U CL O L y N c- U C 'C O f6 O 2 a) 0 m- 2 .cn O� a) C C ° aa) C C L 6 C Cl). i >_. O O Y• u) O O Oas u) > U O C 0) a) U O a) a) t N a) 0)' O � C C •� a c ca N 0 N '� 12 t� N Q C N a) C m co O 9 C• U o2 ea C -C co (o _c ! C N C o U f Q N I coo L ai E = E V E O `I fn O u) O 0 >. C 0 (o o C a) co a) y O c as >, =' cmz XXX L n a) ° ~ "C3 (o > .0 y (o EN m- a co a 0p a) p- N � � N CD U C O u) co co a L a) O - > •c a) E CT i G) a) E O C a) N Cl) U co fn I .'� a o E Cl) O i- 0 •g. 0 co C iXX X w •E .E 0 ago) aoo 0) c C Lo Lo - A S E W 70 co 3 0 ° u) ca a X it J L 7 06 (o N O cA ` E C LO u) m O .. w C C N a) O O O O jig ✓ E dc O C u) o �' >.. C a O G C v N `_ u) Q' C p N y 0 a) "O C CU N N Q a) N i C d O L p n N N Cl) U A a- L c c) X X N E c a) N H O C p N) U p) a) W Lco z Q C Q ' E N N N U A m O y Q = .O ED- �p C a) -0 N O (l) a) v) 0 a) N ) >- 1314-- fA O O. Q V)• O a) d y o CO L = O O C E a) E co N a) 'C3 W Oo c 35 a) UE E. a) u) . CD U O a) ;� •3 LO O N Q o a) E O as V en O < coo -- E U E °' U c� coag XX im � E cod a) -.-- • ' — LIJ II • C - d o) cN C - 2 -a ° 2 o A ° a H V J y O o C E C13 � L C -ti) a) • •� = L C 0 o 8 co ( o L N L E -O _c Co• w N 4a '�- N op Z L _c o o 0 N p ° E O a) O .. v- u) Cl) o O .0 E C 0 •C .n a) W 0. N N o d 0 p :,-, N O >+ N C cp O p ca 0 -rn N E fu u1 n) Z '' (0 V) L os � ,_ XX +� a) rn aco oc � o 0 co � ' f) C °) E * a0i - coo co v 0 O �>a, a) a) E oA (0 O y C Q O C m to C C X0 y L • L Cl) ... Z W p U a) I L o) co E Y u) O .c a) I— Q 0 LL m m 0 C -0 N a) N co 0 E0 >, L 0 °O Ld f, CU C OU CAO C 0"_' O C O• 7a) u) L! .-.E0 N O ..L c°V •)° 9. 2 u 0 _75 N nuc a) QO N - a • — Ecm5E O co EU ° 'er -m - w � CUa, m U. Q ` c � -,„— co Y � _o• N ° N O 6/1 n 'a L' oaC a) O NCD c y C Co A Na) O cs Ai . xa > cn oc � ccu _ • a) I-O > tea) -c ° Q ° ) Lca Q c IL 13. LU I Ce OIL QW (/) O ° -0 ,- co ci mM oa _U L. . A Case Study Illustrating ftleed for a M by Mike Corry, Chairman, NOWRA Model Performance Code Committee Following this commentary is a news article about implementa- The EPA voluntary management guidelines wisely suggest that tion of the mandatory system inspection program in a Wisconsin the level of management applied be tied to local risk(and unstated county. It has important lessons for us all to learn. —political)circumstances. The NOWRA code does the same. Background:The State of Wisconsin has required inspection While the Wisconsin onsite code sets a uniform statewide of most systems every three years, some more frequently,since standard for inspection,it is being implemented on the ground the 2000 code change. Ozaukee County is an urban bedroom in a manner close to that contemplated in NOWRA code community for the Milwaukee metro area and has poor soils for design. The difference is that there are more law breakers conventional systems. It is one of 2-3 of 72 counties that are (and contempt for the law)under the current Wisconsin code aggressively enforcing the code inspection requirement. The than would exist under the NOWRA policy choice model. remainder are either advancing implementation incrementally The growth of the inspection implementation will occur, as their political/financial situation permits or are ignoring the de facto in Wisconsin,and de jure under the Model Code, requirement. as there is a cultural shift towards accepting the need to keep sewage below ground and out of the drinking water supply. Installed system inspection/maintenance is a topic that the NOWRA code committee and most onsite professionals Interesting stuff! Yes? support. There is,however,a major political element in its execution. Many county administrators face risk of loss of their Hope to see many of you during the November 3 Model •jobs, and funding for their departments. County board members Performance Code Workshop in Franklin,Tennessee. ce the same job risk if the requirements are implemented. There are two lessons we need to learn from this scenario: 714 , YORK SI7RRTER, (1)keep costs(all types)as low as possible to the citizen,and ..-4s0. (2)apply performance/maintenance standards that are linked to =� = I NOT HARDER specific site risks. Otherwise we will fail politically. Regulators and others sometimes forget this. In most cases it is the county rlElJ DATA 17/1YDEV regulator who takes most of the heat from application of codes _ ® _ that are not supported locally because of the cost and lack of , g • ,_ RE�`7CTE 17C�71TORlIYG perceived risk,while the state staff is somewhat insulated. t g CPTIUPI t11F1 FR0/7 , r 'it.' SJE RNC17BUS Our goal in the model code is to provide policy choice options -`'`'''24-ie_': < to allow the adoption of rules that the local and state govern- u, ui ments are willing to enforce. The design of the code allows � - With its user friendly PDA interface and data logging(logs the determination of the level of output performance and inspec- tion/maintenance effort to be set for small geographic areas or last 4,000 system events)capabilities,you can set,check and trou- specific site conditions so that local officials can match site risk bleshoot your Data Minderesystems with ease! with the appropriate standards. The belief is that people will accept regulation if it is linked to clear risk reduction. TheywillThe NEW remote monitoring option(11F)allows the service provider to access the Data Mindere panel from a personal computer accept nutrient reduction in lake areas where they would not via a dedicated or shared telephone line. This allows you to trou- accept it in scattered rural farm areas. bleshoot your system prior to sending out service personnel to the site, A statewide standard that would require scattered farm homes to saving you time and money! The remote monitoring options comes complete with FREE data management software. NO intemet connec- install nitrate-reducing systems would be hard to pass and if tion is needed;NO monitoring fees required. Float or pressure trans- �passed would likely be ignored in these areas. Standards that are tricter than apparent local risk are either uniformly unenforced, ducer monitoring available. Call today for more information!selectively under-enforced(enforced at 30 ppm instead of 10)or t- 4 selectively enforced site by site—often onthe basis of high per- ceived site risk,low political power of the owner,or because the o N r R o s• owner offended the regulator or a politician in some way. 1-888-DIAL-S)E(1-888-342-5753) I Fax:218-847-4617 www.sjerbombes.com 6 REPRINTED FROM THE MILWAUKEE JOURNAL Septic s fees gall residents likew rules require owners to pay for regular inspections By DAN BENSON, dbenson@journalsentinel.com Last Updated: Sept. 17,2003 Wes Olmstead and his wife,Nancy, $145,000 next year as additional septic bought their Town of Cedarburg home QUOTABLE : systems enter the database. 12 years ago. It came with a septic system that was at least a dozen years About 9,500 septic systems and holding old at that time. '‘ Truth of the tanks operate in the county, he said. Roman Kaminski,Comm 83 program In all the years since,no one in county matter i• s I It manager for the State Department of government ever cared enough about the s g Commerce, said many counties,like septic system to inquire how it was doing. Ozaukee,began tracking new and That was,until three weeks ago when ripped ofd' I, replaced septic systems in the late '70s Wes Olmstead received notice from the and mid '80s. Systems installed before county that he needed to have his septic —Wes Olmstead, then might not show up in county data- system inspected, and that an inspection Town of Cedarburg homeowner bases. "Record-keeping was much more report must be filed with the county. spotty before that,"he said. Holschbach Oh,and send the county a check for$45— said a lot of staff time will be consumed in adding those older systems to the 10°p of the$245 it cost to inspect the Holschbach said. He noted,however, database. em. "Truth of the matter is,I got that more than 900 of those were sent out ripped off,"he said. just recently.Of those,600 have not Ozaukee appears to be progressing more responded. quickly than most counties in developing County officials say it is a user fee levied its database,Kaminski said. It also is against owners of septic systems through- The county corporation counsel has sent only one of two or three counties doing out the county to satisfy new state regula- out 47 letters to people who are at least so electronically,but that number is likely tions,known collectively as Comm 83. 30 days late in paying their fee to alert to grow,he said. It will take about three them to the fact that they face court fines years to complete the task in Ozaukee Under those rules,every septic system has if they don't pay. County,Holschbach said. But the fees to be inspected every three years;holding will likely continue. tanks have to be checked annually. Owners Holschbach said his office receives several have to pay for the inspection and make calls each week from"concerned"septic It's not just the fee that bothers Olmstead. sure the inspection report is filed with the owners, "a handful"of whom are angry On Tuesday, he wrote a check for$245 to county. The$45 the county wants is to about the fees. a septic maintenance company to inspect pay for software and staff time necessary and pump his tank. "This is the first time to update its database. The county has signed a seven-year con- it's been cleaned since we moved in. The tract with De Pere-based Carmody Data system is in fine shape." Told the county Some aren't paying Systems to set up the electronic monitoring is getting complaints from homeowners, But Olmstead isn't sure he's going to system at a cost of$84,000 this year and Olmstead said: "They should be getting a write a check out to the county, and he about$68,000 next year,Holschbach said. lot more as soon as people realize its may not be alone. Of 2,071 notices sent going to cost them$200 to$300 every out so far, 1,018 residents have not yet Holschbach said the county expects to three years and that they'll have their paid their fee,Planning,Resources and recoup about$93,000 this year in fee lawn torn up." Land Management Director Andy revenue, which will increase to about • 7 i Jefferson County Board of Health NEW BUSINESS Agenda Item V., 5 Draft Ordinance Regarding Methamphetamine Manufacturing Site Evaluation and Clean-up: Initial Briefing December 18, 2003 i S Memorandum TO: Jefferson County Board of Health From: Larry Fay Environmental Health Director Date: December 10,2003 Re: Draft ordinance addressing clandestine drug labs Attached for your consideration is a draft ordinance addressing clandestine drug labs. RCW 60.44 and WAC 246-205 establish reporting,cleanup and administrative responsibilities around clandestine drug labs,commonly called meth labs.Essentially the law requires that a police authority engaged in a raid or bust of a suspected meth lab must contact the local health authority.The health authority then has an obligation to initiate an investigation to determine whether the property containing the drug lab has been contaminated.If the health authority determines that the property has . been contaminated then the property must be posted and documents recorded with the property title advising that the property is unfit to occupy. It is the property owner's responsibility to arrange to have the lab cleaned up.Clean up is handled by licensed contractors who are responsible for developing a clean up plan that is submitted to the local health authority for review and approval.Once approved,the contractor may implement the plan.A final step includes sampling and testing to verify that the lab has been cleaned up to established standards.Upon final report and verification that the site has been cleaned up it can be declared fit for use. The existing laws and regulations provide pretty good guidance overall,however,there are two major gaps that cause problems.First there are no penalties identified for individuals who ignore the posting order and, second,there is not time frame established for completion of clean up. The primary purpose of this local ordinance is to establish some enforcement provisions around occupation of the property and for failure to clean up a property in timely manner.We are also proposing to include specific procedures for appeal and hearings.This draft is essentially the same ordinance that was recently adopted by the Clallam County Board of Health and was prepared with the assistance and guidance of Board Members Frissell and Masci. The Board is being asked to review and comment on this draft.Unless major issues are identified the draft will be forwarded for legal review and we will to begin formal adoption hearings in January or February. 0 JEFFERSON COUNTY HEALTH REGULATION No. , 2003 Contaminated Properties from Illegal Drug Manufacturing or Storage BE IT ORDAINED BY THE JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH Contaminated Properties from Illegal Drug Manufacturing or Storage SECTION I. AUTHORITY AND PURPOSE A. Authority. This Regulation is adopted pursuant to Chapters 64.44 and 70.05 Revised Code of Washington(RCW) and Chapter 246-205 Washington Administrative Code (WAC). All references to these RCWs and this WAC refer to the cited chapters and sections, as now or hereafter amended, and this regulation is supplementary thereto. B. Purpose. This chapter provides for the protection of the health, safety, and welfare of S the public by reducing the potential for public contact with hazardous chemicals associated with the manufacture of illegal drugs. This chapter: 1) provides procedures for enforcement of the Jefferson County health officer's determinations that property is unfit for use due to contamination from illegal drug manufacturing or storage, 2) establishes requirements for contamination reduction, abatement and assessment of costs, and 3) creates an appeals process for orders of the health officer issued to carry out the duties specified in Chapters 64.44 and 70.05Revised Code of Washington(RCW) and Chapter 246-205 Washington Administrative Code (WAC). 1 SECTION II. APPLICABILITY This regulation shall apply to any site defined as an illegal drug manufacturing or storage site in WAC 246-205-010. This regulation shall also apply to any property that is contaminated. This regulation shall not apply to industrial or commercial sites where a person's manufacturing process uses a hazardous chemical when licensed or regulated by state or federal agencies. SECTION III. DEFINITIONS When used in this regulation,the following terms have the meanings provided below. Definitions for other terms used in this regulation that are not defined below are provided in Chapter 246-205 WAC and Chapter 64.44 RCW. A. Approved: Approved in writing by the Health Officer. B. Board of Health: Jefferson County Board of Health. C. Environmental Health Division: The Jefferson County Environmental Health Division. D. Health Officer: The Jefferson County Health Officer appointed under 70.05.050 RCW or the Health Officer's authorized representative. E. Nuisance: Any act or omission that may be detrimental to public health. F. Property: Any site, lot, parcel of land, structure, or part of a structure involved in the illegal manufacture of a drug or storage of a hazardous chemical including but not limited to: 1. Single-family residences; 2. Units or multiplexes; 3. Condominiums; 4. Apartment buildings; 5. Motels and hotels; 6. Boats; 7. Motor vehicles; 8. Trailers; 9. Manufactured housing; 10. Any ship,booth, or garden; or 11. Any site, lot, parcel of land, structure, or part of a structure that may be contaminated by previous use. G. Property owner or owner: any occupant of property or person having an interest in the property as shown in the records of the Jefferson County Auditor or such other governmental licensing or recording body. 2 SECTION IV. CONTAMINATION REDUCTION A. Applicability. • The requirements in this regulation apply to contractors and property owners. The requirements in this regulation apply to property that has been found by the Health Officer to be contaminated and unfit for use pursuant to RCW 64.44.020 and 64.44.030, and WAC 246-205-540 including properties found contaminated and unfit for use by the Health Officer prior to the effective date of this regulation. B. Sampling. All sampling performed for an initial site assessment or following contamination reduction procedures shall be conducted by a contractor certified by the Washington State Department of Health under Chapter 246- 205 WAC or a Jefferson County Environmental Health Specialist using standardized sampling protocols and methodology. C. Decontamination or Disposal Required. 1. The owner of a contaminated property shall decontaminate or dispose of the property. The owner shall decontaminate the property in accordance with Chapter 64.44 RCW and WAC 246-205-570, or dispose of the property in accordance with state and local laws. The owner of the contaminated property shall submit a decontamination plan within forty five (45) days and decontaminate or dispose of the property within sixty (60) days of notification of contamination by the Health Officer, unless alternate deadlines are approved by the Health Officer. D. Decontamination Work Plans. 1. All decontamination activities performed by property owners, or contractors must have a Health Officer approved workplan. 2. All certified contractors and other persons approved by the Health Officer performing decontamination operations in Jefferson County shall use the Environmental Health Divisions Contractor Work Plan Template for the Cleanup of Illegal Drug Manufacturing Sites, as amended, or the Washington State Department of Health's Workplan Template,as amended. These Work Plan Templates may be obtained from the Jefferson County Environmental Health Division or Washington State Department of Health. SECTION V. ABATEMENT AND ASSESSMENT OF COSTS A. After all appeals have been exhausted or if no appeal is filed within the time allowed for filing an appeal as required in Section VIII, and the property owner or other persons to whom the order was directed have failed to 3 decontaminate a contaminated property as ordered by the Health Officer under this regulation, the Health Officer may direct or cause the property to be decontaminated, closed,vacated,boarded up, removed, disposed of or IDdemolished, and all costs thereof, including any actual administrative costs and actual attorney's fees and costs, shall be assessed against the property, the persons to whom the order was directed, or the owners of the property upon which the cost was incurred. B. Notice of the costs incurred shall be sent by first class and certified mail to the owners of the property upon which the costs are assessed or other persons against whom the costs are charged. The Health Officer may modify the amount, methods, or time of payment of such costs as he/she may deem just, considering the condition of the property and the circumstances of the owner. In determining any such modification, the costs may be reduced against an individual who has acted in good faith and would suffer extreme financial hardship. C. Any costs incurred by Jefferson County abating the condition of the property may be collected by any appropriate legal remedy and shall constitute a lien on the property and the lien may be foreclosed in the same manner as real property tax liens. Costs associated with the foreclosure of the lien, including, but not limited to advertising, title report, and personnel costs, shall be added to the lien upon filing of the foreclosure action. In addition to the costs and disbursements provided by law, the court may allow the • prosecuting authority a reasonable attorney's fee. D. Any amounts collected shall be distributed to any fund or source of funds for the program area from which payment for the work was made. SECTION VI. NOTICE AND ORDER TO CORRECT VIOLATION A. Issuance. Whenever the Health Officer determines that property has been contaminated and issues an order prohibiting use he/she may issue a written notice and order to correct violations of this regulation to the property owner or to any person causing, allowing, or participating in the violation. B. Content. The notice and order to correct violation shall contain: 1. The name and address of the property owner or other persons to whom the notice and order to correct violation is directed; 2. The street address or description sufficient for identification of the property upon or within which the violation has occurred or is occurring; 4 3. A description of the violation and a reference to that provision of the regulation which has been violated; • 4. A statement of the action required to be taken to correct the violation and a date or time by which correction is to be completed; 5. A statement that each violation of this regulation shall be a separate and distinct offense and in the case of a continuing violation, each day's continuance shall be a separate and distinct violation; and 6. A statement that the failure to obey this notice may result in the issuance of a notice of civil infraction and/or imposition of criminal penalties. C. Disposal Receipts. The notice and order to correct a violation may also include a statement requiring the person to whom the notice and order to correct violation is directed to produce receipts from a permitted solid or hazardous waste disposal facility or transporter to demonstrate compliance with an order issued by the Health Officer. D. Service of Order. The notice and order to correct a violation shall be served upon the person to 110 whom it is directed, either personally or by mailing a copy of the order to correct violations by first class and certified mail postage prepaid, return receipt requested,to such person at his/her last known address. E. Extension. Upon written request received prior to the correction date or time,the Health Officer may extend the date set for corrections for good cause. The Health Officer may consider substantial completion of the necessary correction or unforeseeable circumstances that render completion impossible by the date established as a good cause. F. Supplemental Order to Correct Violation. The Health Officer may at any time add to, rescind in part, or otherwise modify a notice and order to correct violation. The supplemental order shall be governed by the same procedures applicable to all notice and order to correct violations procedures contained in these regulations. G. Enforcement of Order. If, after any order is duly issued by the Health Officer, the person to whom such order is directed fails, neglects, or refuses to obey such order, the Health Officer may: 1. Cause such person to be prosecuted under these regulations; and/or 5 2. Institute any appropriate action to collect a penalty assessed under these regulations; and/or 3. Abate the health violation using the procedures of these regulations; and/or Pursue any other appropriate remedy of law or equity under these regulations. H. Written Assurance of Discontinuance. The Health Officer may accept a written assurance of discontinuance of any act in violation of this regulation from any person who has engaged in such act. Failure to comply with the assurance of discontinuance shall be a further violation of this regulation. SECTION VII. VIOLATIONS, CIVIL REMEDIES,AND CRIMINAL PENALTIES A. Violations. 1. Violations of this regulation may be addressed through a civil remedy or punished as a criminal act as provided in Sections VII. B. and C. 2. Each violation of this regulation shall be a separate and distinct offense • and in the case of a continuing violation, each day's continuance shall benay separate and distinct violation. 3. Any property that is declared contaminated or unfit for use is an public nuisance. 4. This regulation may be enforced by law enforcement officers,by the Health Officer, or by the Health Officer's designee. B. Civil Remedies. 1. The violation of any provision of this regulation is designated as a Class 1 civil infraction pursuant to Chapter 7.80 RCW, as amended. The Health Officer may issue a notice of civil infraction pursuant to Chapter 7.80 RCW if the authorized representative has reasonable cause to believe that the person has violated any provision of these regulations or has not corrected the violation as required by a written notice and order to correct violation. Civil infractions shall be issued, heard,and determined according to Chapter 7.80 RCW, as amended, and any applicable court rules. 410 2. Civil infractions under this regulation include,but are not limited to, the following: 6 a. Failure to Decontaminate: Any person who fails to decontaminate any property as required pursuant to this regulation,Chapter 64.44 RCW, or Chapter 246-205 WAC, has • committed a Class 1 civil infraction; b. Occupying or Permitting Occupation of Property Declared Unfit for Use: Any person who occupies or permits or authorizes the occupation of any property ordered vacated pursuant to this regulation, Chapter 64.44 RCW, or Chapter 246-205 WAC has committed a Class 1 civil infraction; c. Removing, Destroying, Defacing, or Obscuring a Notice: Any person who removes, destroys, defaces, obscures or otherwise tampers with any notice posted pursuant to this regulation, Chapter 64.44 RCW, or Chapter 246-205 WAC has committed a Class 1 civil infraction; d. Failure to Comply with Order: Any person who fails to comply with any order issued pursuant to this regulation, Chapter 64.44 RCW, or Chapter 246-205 WAC has committed a Class 1 civil infraction; e. Failure to Comply with a Written Assurance of Discontinuance: Any person who fails to comply with a written assurance of IIIdiscontinuance issued pursuant to this regulation, Chapter 64.44 RCW, or Chapter 246-205 WAC has committed a Class 1 civil infraction. f. Failure to Comply with Approved Workplan: Any person who performs decontamination activities not in accordance with the approved decontamination workplan has committed a Class 1 civil infraction. g. Failure to Report Contamination: Any person who becomes aware of contamination at a property is required to report the contamination to the Health Officer,within one (1) working day,upon gaining such knowledge. C. Criminal Penalties. The following are crimes under this regulation: 1. Failure to Decontaminate. Any person who has previously been found by a court to have committed a violation of section VII.B.2.a. of this II regulation, "Failure to Decontaminate," and fails to decontaminate the same property as required pursuant to this regulation,Chapter 64.44 RCW, or Chapter 246-205 WAC, shall be, upon conviction, guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be subject to a fine of not more than$1,000 or 7 to imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed ninety (90) days or to both fine and imprisonment. The court may also impose restitution. 0 2. Obstructing Employees or Agents of the Local Health Jurisdiction. Any person who obstructs any enforcement officer, employee or agent of the Local Health Jurisdiction or other governmental unit in the enforcement or carrying out of the duties prescribed in this regulation, Chapter 64.44 RCW, or Chapter 246-205 WAC shall be,upon conviction, guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be subject to a fine of not more that$1,000 or to imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed ninety (90) days or to both fine and imprisonment. The court may also impose restitution. D. Other Legal or Equitable Relief. Notwithstanding the existence or use of any other remedy, the Health Officer may seek legal or equitable relief to enjoin any acts or practices or abate any conditions that constitute or will constitute a violation of these regulations, or rules and regulations adopted under them. E. Imminent and Substantial Dangers. Notwithstanding any provisions of this regulation the Health Officer may take immediate action to prevent an imminent and substantial danger to the • public health. 0 8 SECTION VIII. APPEALS A. Appeal of an Order Prohibiting Use. • Any person required to be notified of an order prohibiting use under RCW 64.44.030 may appeal the order. Such appeals will be heard by the Health Officer. Any such appeal must be made within ten(10) cdays of service of the order and the appeal will conform to the requirements of RCW 64.44.030 and this regulation. The decision of the Health Officer regarding an order prohibiting use may be appealed to the Board of Health. Any action to review the Health Officer's decision must be filed within thirty (30) days of the date of the decision. The order prohibiting use shall remain in effect during the appeal. 1. Health Officer Administrative Hearing. Any person aggrieved by an order prohibiting use may request, in writing, a hearing before the Health Officer or his or her designee. The appellant shall submit specific statements in writing of the reason why error is assigned to the decision of the Health Officer. Such request shall be presented to the Health Officer within ten(10) days of the action appealed. Upon receipt of such request together with any applicable hearing fees, the Health Officer shall notify the person in writing of the time, date, and place of such hearing,which shall be set at a mutually convenient time not less than twenty (20) days nor more than thirty (30) days from the Mdate the request was received. The Health Officer will issue a decision affirming, reversing, or modifying the order prohibiting use. The Health Officer may require additional actions as part of the decision. 2. Hearing Procedures. Hearings shall be open to the public and presided over by the Health Officer. Such hearings shall be recorded. Hearings shall be opened with a recording of the time, date and place of the hearing; and a statement of the cause for the hearing. The Health Officer shall then swear in all potential witnesses. The case shall be presented in the order directed by the Health Officer. The appellant may present rebuttal. The Health Officer may question either party. The Health Officer may allow for a closing statement or summation. General rights include: (a) To be represented by an attorney; (b) To present witnesses; (c) To cross-examine witnesses; (d) To object to evidence for specific grounds. In the conduct of the proceeding the Health Officer may consider any evidence, including hearsay evidence, that a reasonably prudent person would rely upon in the conduct of his or her affairs. Evidence is 1111 not admissible if it is excludable on constitutional or statutory grounds or on the basis of evidentiary privilege recognized in the courts of this state. The Health Officer shall decide rulings on the admissibility of 9 evidence, and the Washington rules of evidence shall serve as guidelines for those rulings. • Inasmuch as any appeal to the Board of Health from a Health Officer decision is a review on the record, the Health Officer shall ensure that the record generated contains testimonial and documentary evidence supporting the Health Officer's issuance of the order prohibiting use. The Health Officer may continue the hearing to another date to allow for additional submission of information or to allow for additional consideration. Prior to closing of the hearing, the Health Officer shall issue its oral ruling unless the Health Officer determines that the matter should be taken under advisement. Written findings of fact, conclusions of law and orders shall be served on the appellant within fourteen days (14) of the oral ruling. If the matter is taken under advisement, written findings,conclusions and orders shall be mailed to the appellant within twenty one (21) days of the close of the hearing. The appellant shall bear the burden of proof and may overcome the order prohibiting use by a preponderance of the evidence. 3. Appeals. Any decision of the Health Officer shall be final and may be reviewable by an appeal filed with the Board of Health through the Health Officer. Any action to review the Health Officer's decision must be filed within thirty (30) days of the date of the decision. • B. Appeal of Notice and Order to Correct Violation. 1. Stay of corrective action. The filing of a request for hearing pursuant to this section shall operate as a stay from the requirement to perform corrective action ordered by the health officer while the hearing is pending, except there shall be no stay from the requirement for immediate compliance with an emergency order issued by the health officer or from the requirements of an unfit for use order prohibiting use. 2. Health Officer Administrative Hearing. Any person aggrieved by a notice and order to correct violation may request, in writing, a hearing before the Health Officer or his or her designee. The appellant shall submit specific statements in writing of the reason why error is assigned to the decision of the Health Officer. Such request shall be presented to the Health Officer within ten (10) days of the action appealed. Upon receipt of such request together with any applicable hearing fees, the Health Officer shall notify the person in writing of the time, date, and place of such hearing,which shall be set at a mutually convenient time not less than twenty (20) days nor more than thirty (30) days from the date the request was received. The Health Officer will issue a decision affirming,reversing, or modifying the notice and 10 order to correct violation. The Health Officer may require additional actions as part of the decision. • 3. Hearing Procedures. Hearings shall be open to the public and presided over by the Health Officer. Such hearings shall be recorded. Hearings shall be opened with a recording of the time, date and place of the hearing; and a statement of the cause for the hearing. The Health Officer shall then swear in all potential witnesses. The case shall be presented in the order directed by the Health Officer. The appellant may present rebuttal. The Health Officer may ask questions. The Health Officer may allow the opportunity for a closing statement or summation. General rights include: (a) To be represented by an attorney; (b) To present witnesses; (c) To cross-examine witnesses; (d) To object to evidence for specific grounds. In the conduct of the proceeding the Health Officer may consider any evidence, including hearsay evidence, that a reasonably prudent person would rely upon in the conduct of his or her affairs. Evidence is not admissible if it is excludable on constitutional or statutory grounds or on the basis of evidentiary privilege recognized in the courts of this state. The Health Officer shall decide rulings on the admissibility of evidence, and the Washington rules of evidence shall serve as • guidelines for those rulings. Inasmuch as any appeal to the Board of Health from a Health Officer decision is a review on the record, the Health Officer shall ensure that the record generated contains testimonial and documentary evidence supporting the Health Officer's issuance of the notice and order to correct violation. The Health Officer may continue the hearing to another date to allow for additional submission of information or to allow for additional consideration. Prior to closing of the hearing, the Health Officer shall issue its oral ruling unless the Health Officer determines that the matter should be taken under advisement. Written findings of fact, conclusions of law and orders shall be served on the appellant within fourteen days (14) of the oral ruling. If the matter is taken under advisement,written findings, conclusions and orders shall be mailed to the appellant within twenty one (21) days of the close of the hearing. The appellant shall bear the burden of proof and may overcome the notice and order to correct violation by a preponderance of the evidence. • 4. Appeals. Anydecision of the Health Officer shall be final and may be reviewable by an appeal filed with the Board of Health through the 11 Health Officer. Any action to review the Health Officer's decision must be filed within thirty (30) days of the date of the decision. • 5. Appeal of Administrative Hearing. a. Any person aggrieved by the findings, conclusions or orders of the Health Officer shall have the right to appeal the matter by requesting a hearing before the Board of Health. Such notice of appeal shall be in writing and presented to the Health Officer within thirty (30) days of the Health Officer's decision. The appellant shall submit specific statements in writing of the reason why error is assigned to the decision of the Health Officer. b. The decisions of the Health Officer shall remain in effect during the appeal. Any person affected by the notice and order to correct violation may make a written request for a stay of the decision to the Health Officer within five (5) business days of the Health Officer's decision. The Health Officer will grant or deny the request within five (5)business days. c. Upon receipt of a timely written notice of appeal, the Health Officer shall set a time, date, and place for the requested hearing before the Board of Health and shall give the appellant written • notice thereof. Such hearing shall be set at a mutually convenient time not less than fifteen(15) days or more than thirty (30) days from the date the appeal was received by the Health Officer unless mutually agreed to by the appellant and Health Officer. d. Board of health hearings shall be open to the public and presided over by the chairman of the board of health. Such hearings shall be recorded. Board of health hearings shall be opened with a recording of the time, date and place of the hearing; and a statement of the cause for the hearing. The hearing shall be limited to argument of the parties and no additional evidence shall be taken unless,in the judgment of the chair, such evidence could not have reasonably been obtained through the exercise of due diligence in time for the hearing before the Health Officer. Argument shall be limited to the record generated before the Health Officer unless the chair admits additional evidence hereunder. e. Any decision of the Board of Health shall be final and may be reviewable by an action filed in superior court. Any action to • review the Board's decision must be filed within thirty (30) days of the date of the decision. 12 SECTION IX. SEVERABILITY Should any part of this regulation be declared unconstitutional or invalid for any • reason, such declaration shall not affect the validity of the remainder. SECTION X. EFFECTIVE DATE The effective date of this regulation shall be date,2004. APPROVED this Day of 2004. JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH JEFFERSON COUNTY HEALTH OFFICER Geoff Masci, Chair Thomas H. Locke,M.D. IP III 13 • Jefferson County Board of Health MEDIA REPORT • December 18, 2003 • • Jefferson County Health and Human Services NOVEMBER — DECEMBER 2003 NEWS ARTICLES 1. "Fluoride supporters state case at forum",Peninsula Daily News November 18, 2003 2. "Quilcene teens spur adult talk on drugs",P.T. LEADER November 26, 2003 3. "PT to vote on $24.77 million budget", Peninsula Daily News November 30, 2003 4. "Flu creeping onto North Peninsula", (2 pages) Peninsula Daily News December 7, 2003 5. "Commissioners OK 1 percent tax increases",Peninsula Daily News December 9, 2003 • 6. "County has $41.7 million budget", P.T. LEADER December 10, 2003 7. "No more flu shots in county",P.T. LEADER December 10, 2003 • IA orthwest TUESDAY,NOVEMBER 18,2003 A3 Fluoride su orters • pp state case at forum PA community meeting featuresFluoridation foes appeal , ctY� 1 . as medical speakers 1impact BY BRIAN GAWLEY •BY BRiaN GAWLEY' state Environmental Policy PENINSULA DAILY NEWS ;'PENINSULA DAILY NEWS .Act checklist,which is part PORT ANGELES — Fluo- POR'I"ANGELES of the permitting process ridating the water supply is Several opponents of fluori- for the fluoridation plant. the one thing the city can do to 'dating'the city's public The appellants cite improve the community's den- water systemlave Munger,saying that fluori- tal health, fluoridation sup- appealed:aDepart- dation will harm his health porters said at a community , ment"of Conununity Devel- and cause him"anguish fluoridation forum Monday opulent ruling that the and stress." night. action will haveno signifi- Complaint cites costs "The dental and medical cant environmental impact. communities see a crisis in The appeal to the City Their appeal document Port Angeles, and we are Council was filedNov. 14: also states that fluoridation united,"pediatrician Dr.Steve NO'hearing date has been will cause increased main= Chapman told a group of set. tenance costs at Port about 50 people at the Port Appellants include Cla1- Angeles rental home in Angeles Community and lam County Citizens for which Kailin has an inter- Senior Center. Safe.Drinking;Water;Pro- est,thus reducing her "There's nothing that will ,tect The Peninsula's income from it. do as much as fluoridating theFuture;,Port•Angeles resi- Kadin,a physician,also • city's water supply." dent Barney Munger;and does not want to be The forum, titled "Some Sequim resident Dr."Eloise exposed to fluoridated thing to Smile About," fes- Kailin. water while "using" tured presentations by Dr. The City Council voted Olympic Medical Center in Tom Locke, Clallam County ,6-1 on Feb..18 to,accept a Port Angeles, the appeal health officer, Dr. Scott Washington Dental Ser- states. Kennedy, chief medical officer vices Foundation grant of The appeal document at Olympic Medical Center, as much as$260,000 for; asks that the city commu- and Dr. Todd Irwin, Olympic .in`staliation of A water fluo- pity development director Dental Society president. •:ridation system and Public issue a"determination of The forum countered a 'educationefforts. significance"and require forum organized by fluorida- The city Department of an environmental impact tion opponents last month. Community Development statement to address issues Many of the opponents ruled in late October that that will be presented at were in Monday night's audi- fluoridation of the city's the appeal hearing. ence. water supply did not pose a The appeal was filed by significant environmental environmental attorney Three doctors Gerald Steel of Seattle. =risk and did not require an Steel also is the attorney The three doctors answered environmental impact for Sequin)First,which is pointed questions from the statement. appealing two Sequim audience on the latest City officials said the regional retail develop- research on fluoridation, pos- decision was based upon a ments in court. sible adverse health effects, what form of fluoride will be added to the water, and the studies were conducted in central Florida, Locke said. It ethics of fluoridation without Sweden that showed some contains traces of arsenic, unanimous consent. connection between fluorida- which is a naturally occurring Locke said because of the tion and an increased number element, but only at 1/20 of Internet, the public is awash of hip fractures. the newly revised amount that in "bad science"and "ugly sci- is considered dangerous. ence."Quality research is rare Studies refuted Kennedy said rather than because it is expensive to con- duct, he said, but much is But those studies were questioning why water fluori- available from the federal refuted once researchers dation should be imposed on a . Centers for Disease Control adjusted the findings for peo- Population,he questioned why and Prevention, ple's weight and activity lev- its benefits should be withheld Fluoride is safe even for els, he said. from the public. The fluoride used in public Locke said the reason senior citizens who might be water systems is not"pharma- updated studies on fluoride- taking multiple prescription medications, Kennedy said. ceutical grade"because that is tion's effects show a much "I am not aware of any only found in pills,Locke said. smaller decrease in cavities is adverse drug interactions The compound is produced in that dental care has improved from fluoride,"he said, industrial quantities, he said. greatly since first studies were Locke said preliminary Such fluoride is mined in conducted in the 1950s. ›....,= ' ml ., o ° v -, 4 8 .� a s N N a.5 Ooo ., � •oo ' 2 . o C S ,h) 3N 3 01) ' aF3 b>, o a .c : a cti)> N . a v hilt ffl -1:5• 3 0.8 , K . :o o a � S a.. E.�' o a.a.S MICZU UWaira "' ` `�' �h ai N`��. e x.� � 3 d (1) °� :r ra 3 ' �'•° •y 1'2 ra a 0 ° a . .g 2E8N o 2 � 8' gig L- 5. > xx8 o 8 8.N t*� 3 ° g4— g " 3 aw „ N 131) . Y ° O n 'aEt e''., e W o OiL • Iffl9IWil V) O �� O U o 8�,8 S S E 0 WINN '� 0 V O O y Oa O E .`}.J > oFl ^ e8-' nv o a.2 a8i a, U E , ell U43 D °' C � ora cU N.S 0A t� 0U E .(10) o E ;0 v 0) 4.) 3 E o 04 0 ° - 0A o)6 o - LI) _ _ El. 1. I a WWI = .1 ao ' Si °MSA -2 •,8 a8 c o o o 0 u d rt cn �c 01 ,00 -).- .raOQ o g o E a g 0.. -.S ,9g o.� E E .p 0 o,v o o x o >. 8 3 C '4 ra 3 U u EI= IT: 4-) ,L),'- -0 E,g g . o b•E o . o vi 3 3 •ro "°5. o d -13n >+i3 0Ap; a a 'C aCi Ara - _o aCZ v o 5 o.av vi [ G 0 E o..6)ra pq Y o , * , ; g o1)U oo g .? 4 E: 1) a P o o 'c b , . = L..1 *Z", '' c2) 0 Ti baa -0 = i' C/i Oi-'1vv C os T.) U y. " U 0ci) .0 ' a.-0 U Qd d Q 0 U _ Z EES aa¢ c 0 > fin ClOn i = — '''' 'E o f.L,' A ., oo� a cl az �, 1)a ° - 0 N d O ^, Ao. ¢ Oa L H 13 1 ! IH eA o � o ., O 6 • N C b 4 . U -< d N0 0 ,3 -6 EM .0. N 0 $ <(141 j o _ og .. Et > ' awO • O CO3O 0. y h 'Oa '-, ' tiC O C d yw 0 G V • N / " b1)b N n OO,'NG <) 0 O 'd 0 • ,b d N 84 7 'b Or '5 . 0U 'ta • b3 FEcomcourrr pi = c oi ,153° h v E .S .'0a Z.^ •aa . • .- N .13CE - -,711La - c° Y �r,� A " 30 .. : E uoo d o9' Gao 'o E w8 § 6 .� a� .5e 0..-° -► o ' 13E .O • dWhyi= . U d 3 .i ,p N o V E SS 0 .• da o a e v; 3 g .12' vai ° ), Cn a 1'' A°' S ,O b'D co t'ed pOy . i 4, 0 0. LS Tya", h1 VD 000'C : 'O1p N ,4 ›E'.,90 ° 'O + °er O M wW0.w gO UdA O iipir F . 0) 5 -c)t N � „ • ,..1 o �A8� � c � �cx � 08° 0 a a �o a 5 vz ,ym �woo � 3 a E0-'-'..E� i Fa wo c°. aza -9 .a. x,-„9,4 a U-� W c $-8o ° m N c ° % d ° l o o JiIV• c a . a ab 8 g:t. "� m L '4A C U� 8.2 .1ct% °�"ro � „ ,„ z49,4 8op o E4 •4°- a 04 d ti • ,0 g. ,,_.)„, a.) ,,, 8 -, 1 1: +c13 -, g ° r -- 2. 0 :A)3gu' ' ''")"g""-0 F.• 8 a) 0 0 E 1 b ,,,„ ■ 0-2 75 by • aVS kllm y d,:A 11 0 ■� c° -s f� z A.-mE2 .5c�..q.8E° c oco ':'c (L) "MillU 61 o 'o tuj1 8 r o a� ,rte o .�:5 4Pil y .4.52 %4 4 °•o ao0 0m• 0 c oi 4--.) . �taa E U; �v9,SlgyR -'980 ° a� c w ° › 4Fp r g • ,•- 0 p oo cVakd o ,...4 dZo COINi '2d° a U •u ° 8a .ES .485 8ro 2,1 41--g.' is -63 , u0 ad . ag.s . x -, d • U( co N P "Er (1) ILA HUP,xb g_ 8 mrd-01-40 3U .No %a a4, oo "O8Mb OD a 4, � co ooddb jal .c2ch oa ,.0 cg-z' ,$)-- - vi c cisi ov o °m N, ci"000 u q. U o aa; ro ap$ m � 2 5a 2 -E2;°' o. 4.,- §.- ...',).yam'. D'a3. .> -o a) .ty d ❑ C1 O p°^� �a F �E" ��` AE'q � q uF $ p�� GmEA--' s 8 ■ � ■ .t-)i. § 8 ■ E,o o■'5 O 0.-rr • s �� Ey •°.5 c , 8c3 8 �3 8 8�x C .5 c ' 9 �b �o c c obe o0 c:„ g. a" Z1.,..'d `2. m .,, i RUoA �� 2 oS d. dI +^ ° am d m . ,-, .A 'De°' . xl o : 4) ne) c)Ai 81 rg'a' q clAz " ,-,530 73 - : o 0 CD - 0 -8 ° -0 . 12. g .1 . 3.,.,t-,_ ? >. m o ° Gw' o ob°n.og Wt'' o Ws .P> <° g aE'x 8. a8 w1 U a 9 0 Up,O, 6) C' CD.'' ''' 0 2 0 2. 2 E.2y800 ..n* N >� ' 8 � � cd,.88 z � I o . 41888 'a 0+� ci A' '0A iii.: Ifl!4 cU " „,2 .n, o c4 n-.- .T a .saq cn • am LgzHoo�4aOFit o °' ].C�i00T :z-4 A2w oa U $ 'W,:-.) f e'l CtS ,,'"a A •m -g d O� N 0... d C. .', EU a 1 - • = N " ° C a-+ $ 2as 40 z.n O.b y,,,c F • ,- , c �� d ° '0 ~ Ca) >(1) V. Q 0 0 0 "P, R 4-..-5 713 g! g 2 g.1.1 E 2, g t ° E eo a u 5.;.N rn a.� 'E d z■� °,5 g > � >. ,� v .9E� °. ° fill yaegfi2 -p . . ..--fi 0,,, C . 'c0 2 m W w� O E U.a t3 ci tlO� ° :a . -1 sc .vEg d CD 0 (/) 10,-;i4ot ..,,,...„.. ,,,,, ,.,, . . 0 0,. oi $fi . 1 F.c 4� --o, a. u . ., i -.5 0 :,-,„ , cp..-a' 4) ..q, r.... mia 4—) = T z t . 2 -1- ) v, Q.? a '.R. '‘g u 1, ig Oa! 0 i .F.: 0 (-) U >0._, .— K.tv. ..,-..> , Z t. � q E 0 o moo ; E ° vi N . L-00, 2 � ° ca) °„, " C.4....( E-,F U �' ❑ ° ° • OJ �.) g z O ° 1° oi U � w my W. z. ef .a G"5' �' m'4 ° F� ^ G 04 a- omy T °' s 5a% .a., cV mC W .0 2 us, _ t '"" �_��� r Q 3 ett � c m phi o Ol g '... ` m ..s a Clam 't'-'0 . a t- g E.E c t 5 FTD--F-c S°8-fi - " > 0 (,) c= cK CD -, ; cc-0 ci 2 'II c ' . A, §. }. _°o'r= . . ofc . cmm tieli (z, Cs) t,•.;., 0-Vis 0 -8 g V (A fid® o�> > a,• trtrt iHtig _ iii V.._,,,. a 1 • a 4, a 3-1 1 m ti �g'3 z=;,19.6` .. 1.,15-a ,Z: �7.. V to'm,"O,5) .•C', o c 1431,1 ,°e.Qcg IIui § o .....s.-`1111 Uflh llm i;g2 VHJflilfH ow 59 ms� s m we8m c c � E� qq E m � 2 .c o `°� �G°'cov.°b up w ill. aa�m� il?m �� Xoom mss '� » 'tlrcm °�m d $ `dm +. weo a.md 0. mE t .`' t 85 $-t 3m m s2E �a; o. LL •5c3 3Yi. $ '313m- m g y >>m� ,�U m 3 m £8 3 =av3E1�a Ea S -S $- c >, r ouo 1 sg �� a c> :0 q x o o.4w• 2Eo`g.$g s .8gi.§2�r861 :8 .4Y q mg 4.5. ga�� m y qq '-i d 8- 8 e. ra.4 m O.r". C.) iiga 3 0 3S r; momma m� Zwm' ¢>a:§ 0-LT- om E 3 a E3.° C g2>^O A""> 35 u� o f 3p m'� g� .2-§,3 • ,- >.2,a .6$ a -K8 v g=,c c m m °*« o.> > c4 �mm 2°,2 8. N L>.t m O,E $C m • m-4 p- O c m 1--g-5-...t--0.?-.@ 44 m.N- m Q ,2R O F- Cts q e e U -2 py U m m W C o: . U. ^ U^,5 .2.1"g•.O•T. > > P,� o O C N S L-0mT m n n A E g w r,c >. - m w n m m p c = b O O.,.. y (].m U 060.T.C Oe° m mwoo mEN $' >.mmc >+ cm m m .. CCUII w'� 0. °w;a p m.,r ¢' gag 1�mZi�mcavo a°a2•->'� fi2 ? mE3 cccm€ i 2cLL y.�.4 � ^d00E n' a Cm z� i S' 0 :9 8.a1 7-gq$F$L 8-415;l a1CNOVgcOi =t� aeam � mqm °Owe m9 SE'i� m mm w i OC �Z.c ?1o,m §c> a•,x V b a �I 0m p . �2•$3fif32owv 2� E�.c 'o c�3m +"O>y m � 2t11° y C .! ''m L3 ;2z Q ° fl ° -,4.-0 m w +4.C - a Wge ? osmo ♦+' $ 5.,c c °aa g= m 11 • ."'i .. . Soy mc :5 a "E z5 or t ui,., cm m 1•^ 7 M e.Cu mO�.+ �� g 5Fm c" o,;.2 :2a $ EQ cL�ntcm > w:.s c000F 3 'C 0 0 Y tl,0 >„- o m m_ m m a^ Lr g o e, ac eea • Q Lige m r r r m a m m a $r o o m E o c a n F c o w g o w gm i t _«O 2 M j - vi 6 w-a g_N D I V w ,,m I : m g m m m m 7. 0.c0 F. W O q d 4 y A �.�� e�� m wL � Ca1 a'n E.oc '' X10�.� �� om moc. m� oo� m c 'Ox ~ [ � .a 'x .14 x•D't7 p °= o sEgL.pc� m8 . `mom'��ca cL « ° ' aam1v $E ->.� u 0 ..rx•. -. ge2.`. 3�tvE . g.. xm . m seaE mfg n"� s- mc5o .$! >.m1O i°.w q �T: 0 'a 00 �� J a�+ c. ,.. 2 `-Dm `k ` aS oso at $ T. mcg a=. o 0.003 If 0 0. mm nm $ os m m a"2-6 mva n.. c£= o -' ?>. a>. 85!1."8D12 a a > > c o m ffir m m m m. 2 BE . o• 0-id44 QQ to a -r �oo >.` ":, § o- Sm2'" ' m 41 � `mvo �E{$ S �� � m �3a �m8 U$$ tSEvF>'nno�m-o � 1-9'1)-'1"-"°"' t--"?. y'O >.Eo��Opd � r.. y (� a d `� Qaa°ama ��`�ou m w 5 G,O 4 > O V g 1. N m m > m o., a • 200, - 0 . ..,a,-00..„. O I a L1mirg3c5o m 5 ag 2c a OL -sCg "0 a .g r>yU 4E m 0:I5 emc� Ea� m E.= . m �i tdE3mEm S Q'O.i o e m^g- ,,„...d oam- m =$v of-1g.- $ g e� o >sa om `� ttC mm i� oa� � cnm � H � e � OsomE.= �m o�'$ >•mL m .. o 0.�q•a °° o cd� �o.0 gqo - >. 33 2w7 n ; m ' w e wH o m m.qO 'ct D°O aO' p. m �2- 5E.Yi'-Lm g� 8--a2ci f (1) ›,'Elp• 6 4 o 1 'in 11 8 4 •• °• 011 D` g a i 8 o0. -. § ? � .fi b • in ' Ll. 88N. .49, iy. 04-0' . . . ,(1) .•x'7P1 0 0 11''5 eg 8 �� , 00' 3 _ 62 o AA esA0 1 0: uh • ';it'C-' e• °• cg' +a 1 °' 3 'a,o tip 14.• *El.2.-Fi (I) a It. 4) Z, 1=.rn cI El 8 g cl 0 cp.I .•f ":1 . R • •'.i . � C.J.0 . gg'EmE .5q • Nr44glA . "211.4° Abl . ii Ia. n o 5•o g. 8 $ 0ego f4 P� ° t., ry _ u xw m e.o elo 3' 0D m J. '5 I' L a9 6 2 0a ai. m . c: c - ig -9 m .mo .0 Cl) -i--' a'd mv•H 8 . ern .� o .9, - ' g .-) Ni' 8 a aA � • N O..) .„.... z . oA a d 7. . E ,0 4., . (It ,1,71 V, • Wednesday,December 10,2003•A 15 County 'has 41.7m�ll�on budget • By Barney Burke fished in 2000 to fund the acquisi- Brasfield's range is $59,295 to Leader Staff Writer tion of open space. Huntingford $74,019.The commissioners eam questioned whether the county had $53,107 to$66,295.The range for The only person who spoke at told residents that this levy might -, , , - , _ ' • , , assessor, auditor, clerk and trea- Monday's hearing on Jefferson grow annually when voters ap- • • • surer is$49,004 to$61,173. County property tax revenues for proved it. The number of full-time- 2004 was the man who is more A 1 percent increase in the equivalent (l�'I'h) staff is 295.58, familiar than most with the impact Conservation Futures levy up 7.75 from 2003's 287.83.The of property taxes, Assessor Jack amounts to about $1,600, ' actual number of employees in Westerman III. Westerman said. Rodgers agreed • 2002 and 2001 was 275.57 and "Seeing as I've got to go out in that this was a new issue and par- i the field and face these people," ticipated in the 3-0 vote to keep 473.34, respectively. However. • 4.25 of the new employees are Westerman said, he lauded the this levy at $158,770.53 with a Board of Commissioners for not zero increase. With a 1 percent grant-supported and will be ex- takingb phased out when those grants"banked" tax revenue ca- increase in 2004,the conservation pire,said Goldsmith. pacity saved from.prior years. levy would have been 5.75 cents Including the $11,468,036 Westerman estimated that the per$1,000 in assessed value; the county is collecting about state limit on this levy is 6.25 general orfund budget (up $740,000 less in property $458,191, 4 percent) and the taxes cents. •- $32,742,771 in other budgets(up than what it could be using the . Not included in the above fig- - $749,341, or 3 percent), the banked capacity, which does not ures are the revenues from new grand total of expenditures in require a vote of the people. construction, which Westerman employees(i.e.,middle managers, 2004 is $41,704,807, according One person who didn't vote on estimated as equivalent to a 2.6 department heads),enabling those to the adopted budget resolution. 2004 county budget is Corn- percent property tax revenue in- in the top grade to earn up to That's an increase of$1,207,532, ilk ioner Pat Rodgers, who was crease. The tax base grew by $84,261 annually, an increase of or about 3 percent. Not included sworn in on Nov. 19."It would be roughly$70 Million in 2003,a 20 $1,245. in these figures is$2,506,000 for inappropriate," Rodgers said, to pencentincrease which Westerman Another salary schedule ap- restoring the courthouse clock participate in the budget-related attributed primarily to residential proved this week makes Prosecu- tower; full funding for that votes because he was not present development. tor Juelie Dalzell the highest-paid project has not been secured. at most of the public hearings and County Administrator David elected official, with a range of (Contact Barney Burke at workshops. Goldsmith said his biggest con- $71,747 to$89,563.Sheriff Mike bburke@ptleader.com.) Commissioners Dan Tittemess cern about the 2004 budget is that and Glen Huntingford voted to all of the county's labor contracts take just the 1 percent annual in- are up this year. Huntingfordre- crease allowed without using sponded that the budget didn't banked capacity for the general seem to have funding for costs re • - fund levy and road levy. Those suiting from new contracts. increases amount to$49,922 and Most employee bargaining $28,318, respectively (properties groups are not getting a cost of liv- in the Port Townsend city limits ing increase this year,said Gold- are exempt from the road fund). smith. , However, the The item that dominated the commissioners approved the ad- Dec. 8 budget discussion was the dition of an eighth step in the sal- Conservation Futures levy,estab- ary schedule for unrepresented • III • i.1Jc:i more A 12•Wednesday,December 10,2003 flu e shotsFlu • shot: County tuns' out • in Continued from Page A 1 talking about bein ill iSchmidt said."The doctors have other years." g so n ped th"se are really healthy c oun people,"she said. 11 enough for their patients who According to the CDC,70,75 The flu outbreak°`is actually have already scheduled.with million Americans usually re- starting earlier than ever before," By Philip L.Watnett them"to receive vaccinations. ceive a flu shot in a typical year. said Lisa McKenzie,communi- Leader Staff Writer The influenza season began Manufacturers produced about cable disease program coordina- • earlier than anyone anticipated, 83 million doses of flu vaccine tor for the Jefferson County If you haven't already gotten a flu• and the flu has been more vire- this year,even though the United Health and Human Services De- vaccination here,you're out of luck. lent than in recent seasons, ac- States has never used more than partment.',We have information Nurses at Jefferson General Hospi- cording to both local health 80 million doses of flu vaccine from physicians and hospitals tal administered the last 210 shots avail- workers and the Centers for Dis- in a season. Manufacturers re- that they've been seeing more able to the general public in Jefferson ease Control and Prevention ported late last week that they no with flu-like symptoms earlier County on Monday,Dec.8.The public (CDC)in Atlanta,Ga. longer had any vaccine available this year than in other years;' hospital in Port Townsend had planned "I've seen some really sick to distribute. A flu shot doesn't guarantee to conduct flu clinics on Wednesday and people,and some who got the that people won't contract the Friday,but the high turnout Monday and vaccine have been sick too," Even healthy get ill virus.Dr.Katherine Ottaway of ingththe fact that no more flu vaccine is be- Schmidt said. "I work with The influenza outbreak has Olympic Primary Care said she e produced nationally meant the s e- about 150 people per week in struck inside the hospital as well, was recently hit hard by influ- sions had to be canceled,according to the exercise program [at the Schmidt said,infecting one of the enza,even though she had been hospital], and in talking with hospital's physicians, who was vaccinated. Wellness Programs Director Nancy Schmidt. them, they tell me how sick out for two weeks.A massage "The flu shot gets a good im- "We've tried every supplier we could they've been, their children therapist there also was ill for a mune response in 90 percent of nt find and there just isn't any more," have been,their grandchildren. week. I've not heard this many people "It's really lasting a long time, people, e not� t pr the other or10 notpepro- See FLU SHOT,Page A 12 fully protected or pro - See Ottaway said."Influenza also mutates each year.The vac- cc , Influenza,unlike the common cine is based on the strains that I Ve seen some symptomscold,has a begswinft ionget withof two to 0 were around last year and the beginning two to Centers for Disease Control's really sick people, seven days of fever, headache, muscle aches, extreme fatigue, best guess for which strain will and some who got runny nose and sore throat,and be around this year.Some years • the flu mutates more than others, the vaccine have a cough that is often severe and might last a week or longer, and this happens to be one of those years. I think that I have been sick too. partial Precautions advised protection because I The health de artmentrecom- haven't run the fevers of 102.8 Nancy Schmidt P [degrees]that my daughter ran.I director mends that people use precau- am still glad I got my flu shot" Wellness Programs tions to avoid contracting McKenzie said the flu vacci- Jefferson General Hospital influenza.These include: Clean hands often with soap and water nations are for the influenza A or with an alcohol-based hand strain known as H3N2, but the ing your actual virus has "drifted"from old the Washington.State Depart- eyes,nose or[mouth;d hand avoid that strain. ment of Health considers signifi- close contact with people who "What the CDC has said is, cant.County health departments . are sick,if possible. that in the past,when that major are required to report the staffs- To limit exposure of flu to type of flu[the H3N2 strain]goes tics when school absenteeism healthy people, those who are around,it's associated with more exceeds 10 percent,which it has already sick should:Cover your severe illness.There's that,then in Jefferson County. nose and mouth with a tissue ev- the other point is the specific "We're seeing high absentee- ery time you cough or sneeze, strain has drifted slightly from ism in the schools, but not ex- then throw the used tissue in a the strain in the vaccination." tremely high," McKenzie said. wastebasket;if you don't have i However, she said Chimacum tissue,sneeze or cough into your Schools see absenteeism Middle School had reported ab- sleeve,not into your hands;after McKenzie said local schools senteeism of 25 percent last coughing, sneezing or blowing have reported absenteeism above week. Port Townsend School your nose, always clean your 10 percent,which is the thresh- District Superintendent Carol hands with soap and water or Andreasen said absenteeism has with.an alcohol-based hand IP hovered around 9 percent in re- cleaner,stay home when you are cent days. sick;do not share eating utensils, McKenzie said influenza is a drinking glasses,towels or other highly contagious illness causing personal items. an average of 36,000 deaths and For more information about 114,000 hospitalizations per year flu visit www.doh.wa.gov/ in the United States;pneumonia F1uNews/default.htm. is the most common complica- (Contact Philip L.Watness at tion in high-risk ornnnc