Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM022108JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH MINUTES Thursday, February 21, 2008 2:30 PM - 4:40 PM Board Members Staff Members Phil Johnson, County Commissioner District #1 Thomas Locke, MD, Health Officer David Sullivan, County Commissioner, District #2 Jean Baldwin, Public Health Director John Austin, Chair, County Commissioner, District #3 Julia Danskin, Nursing Services Director Chuck Russell, Hospital Commissioner District #2 Michelle Sandoaval, Port Townsend City Council Sheila Westerman, Vice Chair, Citizen at large (City) Roberta Frissell, Citizen at large (County) Chair John Austin called the meeting of the Jefferson County Board of Health to order at 2:30 PM in the Pope Marine Building, Port Townsend. He explained that this was a regularly scheduled meeting, not a public hearing, and that public comments would be welcome at the end of the meeting. He called for a round of self introductions of board members and staff. Members Present: John Austin, Roberta Frissell, Phil Johnson, Michelle Sandoval, David Sullivan, Sheila Westerman Members Absent: Chuck Russell Staff Present: Jean Baldwin, Dr. Thomas Locke, Veronica Shaw, Neil Harrington, Gail Bernhard (Recorder) A quorum was present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chair Austin asked for a change to the written agenda to move the public comment period to the end of the meeting. Sheila Westerman moved to approve the Agenda, as changed, which was seconded and approved, all in favor. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 17, 2008 Approval of Minutes January 17, 2008: Sheila Westerman noted that the list of attendees was not consistent with her recollection of who was present at that meeting. Although it states that all members were present, she noted that Phil Johnson had not attended. Also, Veronica Shaw was present, but is not listed as present. Julia Danskin is listed as present, but did not attend. She also noted that she had asked for clarification on whether, procedurally, there had been sufficient members present and voting at the January meeting to approve the minutes for the previous meeting of December 20, 2007. Dr. Locke said he had checked and found that some members may have abstained. Sheila Westerman said that two members had abstained from approval of minutes because they had not been present at the December meeting. Dr. Locke Jefferson County Board of Health February 21, 2008 Page 1 of 13 confirmed that there had been a quorum present. Procedurally, since a quorum was present and a majority of those voting were in favor of approval of the minutes, that approval stands as valid. o-5 amev Jed Sheila Westerman moved for approval of the minutes of January 17; the motion was seconded and approved, with one abstention. OLD BUSINESS Influenza Season Update Dr. Locke reported widespread activity for both types of Influenza A and a small amount of activity for Influenza B this year in Washington state and nationally. He said we are likely to be at the peak or very close to the peak for this season. Based on past seasons, the peak period lasts for two or three weeks; then drops off. The timing for this year is very similar to the previous year, when the influenza season peaked in February as well. He noted, however, a difference this year in the match up between the strains used for the vaccines and the strains presently circulating in the population. There are three components to the vaccine: two types of Influenza A and one type Influenza B. He said the match up is very good for one of the A strains, but only about a 13% match with the other type of Influenza A. The match up with the B strain is about 7%. The result is that the vaccine will offer protection for about half the strains that people are likely to encounter. Dr. Locke said that because the efficacy is lower than usual, the proposal is to completely reformulate the vaccine for next year. He explained that although this international statistical forecast as to what strains will be circulation is usually quite accurate, this year was an exception. However, he added that those who are vaccinated should still be at lower risk for the flu; there is partial protection rather than complete protection. In response to a question about the number of strains world wide, Dr. Locke said there many different strains of influenza worldwide. Strains that have caused outbreaks in multiple locations are selected for the vaccine for the next year. One of the problems with Influenza A is that the surface proteins are continuously mutating, a process known as "antigenic drift". Chair Austin asked if the number of local cases is tracked in any way. Dr. Locke said there is not a system to track or monitor cases or even to tally the number of vaccinations. He said there are rapid lab tests to identify type A, but they are not reportable to health authorities. The best statistics are for hospital admissions for influenza complications. Mortality rates for influenza are clumped together with pneumonia, which together are the I I leading cause of death in Washington State. Methamphetamine White Paper Jean Baldwin said that the Meth Action Team (MAT) is working on draft recommendations for methamphetamine treatment and outreach to identify use patterns in the community. The MAT, comprised of law enforcement, courts, social services, child protective services, the hospital, and Health Department, reports to the BOCC and has been meeting for about four years. She explained the relationship to the Mental Health Oversight Committee and the recent County ordinance to increase funding for co-occurring disorder treatment. The State Office of Financial Jefferson County Board of Health February 21, 2008 Page 2 of 13 Management has awarded counties some funding for treatment programs. The Meth Action Team is coming forward with recommendations on identifying individuals for methamphetamine treatment and how to possibly augment treatment efforts. She said the Health Department's role is as a facilitator and as liaison between the Substance Abuse Board and the BOCC. She also mentioned the statistical analysis, Methamphetamine Use Patterns in Jefferson County. She noted that this can be found on the Jefferson County web page and more information will be added in a few days. Meth labs are decreasing in Jefferson County and decreasing in Washington State, but the substances are coming from elsewhere. She said that 7 to 8% of Jefferson County youth report having used methamphetamine in their life times, which is higher than the state average. One percent of lower income people report having used methamphetamine in the past year•, nine percent report a life time use. That is much higher in the lower socio-economic range. She also said that with regard to publicly funded treatment admissions, our system appears to be working. The only data available is for people who go into treatment with public funding. Where methamphetamine is identified as the primary drug use, the publicly funded treatment rate for Jefferson County is among the 8th highest in adults and 4th highest in youth. She noted the use is very high, but that people are getting into treatment and that figure is rising. The white paper will be available at the next BOH meeting. In response to a question from Commissioner Sullivan, Ms. Baldwin clarified that the Meth Action Team is not the same as the internal work group associated with the Hargrove Bill. However, the reports/recommendations will be coming out at about the same time. NEW BUSINESS Board of Health Discussion: Proposed Revisions to Jefferson County Septic Code 8 15 and Associated Fee Schedule Member Westerman opened the discussion with the question of how a stakeholder committee might be established and how it would function: How would membership be determined and how many members are appropriate?; What would be the source of funds for providing meeting locations and facilitation? She said she believes there is adequate time, but believes a defensible policy for choosing members is critical to ensure public support for recommendations that eventually emerge from the committee. In addition, administrative support is needed, and funds are extremely tight at this time. Member Sullivan said he had been considering the idea of an addition to the code for a Home Owner/Operator Designee. For this role, a person designated by the home owner would need to be recorded with JC Public Health to perform the operation and maintenance inspection for the home owner. The designee would need to meet the same guidelines and have the qualifications already proposed for the homeowner. He noted that this approach could decrease the cost of training. Member Sullivan added that the training program and information could be made very accessible and convenient, with a test of some kind at the completion. He said the main goal is to increase the number of inspections and get the preventative maintenance done. One obvious incentive for the home owner is to save money by avoiding a system failure, which would be very costly. He noted that while it is necessary to comply with state law, there are options in the ways to get that done. Jefferson County Board of Health February 21, 2008 Page 3 of 13 Commissioner Austin said that, based on the last meeting, it was clear to him that certain provisions need to be reworked and revised. He mentioned the instance of a citizen who owns several mobile homes, and the ambiguity of the proposal regarding the number of certificates needed. He also questioned why a person would need to take a full course on how to inspect a system every three years and suggested that a much simpler method could be effective. Member Sandoval explained that she had a series of questions after reading the proposed code. She said Chair Austin had touched on one of her questions. For conventional systems, an inspection is required every third year. The inspector certification, allowing a person to inspect their own system, is required every three years. Therefore, a class is required prior to each inspection. However, the continuing education requires them to take an updated class one year prior to the inspection timeline. As written, this requires a continuing education class in the second year and a full class in the third. Member Austin agreed that did not make sense. Member Sandoval agreed that it seemed quite cumbersome that a separate certificate would be required for each property, and suggested there should be some easier way to deal with that. She also noted that the document was challenging to read and required several re -readings to understand the intent. She referred to the underlined portion of page 28, item Key. She suggested some language clarifying that "authorized person" or "inspector" can include the homeowner. On page 29, item I refers to "systems consisting solely of a septic tank and gravity drain field". She noted that identifying that as a "conventional system" would be clearer. Under letter B, annual professional O & M inspections, there is a list of triggers for inspections. She asked, "How does a homeowner know that and how will be they be notified if they fall into these areas, such as critical areas or shorelines jurisdictions, etc?" She said that the information under 7 C is very confusing, and seems to be written much more clearly in item 10 on the following page. She asked if both of those sections are dealing with the same content and if both are needed. Member Westerman noted that the headings are different: one is the Operations and Monitoring Agreement (7) and the other Professional O & M Inspection required (10). Ms. Sandoval said that item 7 does not make it clear whether the professional O & M inspection is required because the system is out of compliance. If so, it should say, " ....inspection required by a professional...". She also noted the use of the word "lot" in several places where "parcel" or "parcel number" would be appropriate: top of page 9, number 4 and page 2, Accessory Dwelling Unit. She suggested that clarification is needed throughout the document among the terms: lot, parcel and property. She said she had other questions that she would hold until others had a chance to speak. Member Johnson said that he had spoken with a representative from the Environmental Heath Department in Clallam County. They had created a stakeholder committee whose meetings were sometimes attended by as many as 200 people. He noted that Jefferson County would need to find suitable meeting locations. Member Johnson said that Clallam County is basically headed in the same direction as Jefferson and are still working on how to create the classes or workshops to certify residents. They are considering allowing certified homeowners to inspect other similar systems on a voluntary basis — because the primary goal is to ensure properly working systems. He said he would like to see a stakeholder group but is uncertain of the best way to do that. Jefferson County Board of Health February 21, 2008 Page 4 of 13 Member Sandoval suggested that the BOH should specify the types of stakeholders and experts needed on the working group and limit the number to a maximum of twenty. There was further discussion with support for the stakeholder idea, but with concern about the logistics and staff support. Member Westerman noted that if the BOH could be responsive to citizens' concerns and amend the ordinance to address fees, clarify language and make compliance simpler, perhaps the stakeholder group would not be needed and everyone would be better served. She said she had prepared a list of issues, based on public comments. She discussed the possibility of reduced fees for low income households (indigent and infirmed), cautioning that the actual costs are then born by everyone else. Additional administrative process is needed to qualify and implement such a policy. She also described another issue: identification of non -documented systems. She believes that a strategy for locating those systems should be a priority because these systems are the most likely to be in need of attention. A third issue was finding a less expensive and less time intensive certification process. Can the classes be taught by County employees or provided online? Member Austin and Sullivan spoke in favor of effective, but simpler and cheaper, classes or training. Member Sullivan added that there is system for finding the septic systems. He said that septic systems must be in good operational order as a requirement for home sales and permits. The average house turnover is 7 years. He said the other incentive is having a system in good working order, and heading off system failure. To maintain property value, homeowners must deal with problems and maintenance. He said that the current staff is able to deal with the present flow of new systems and those associated with home sales/permits. He said this is a good way to maintain an even workload over time until the new process and trained people are in place to deal with all these systems. He said most of the requirements are fixed by the State, but the training/certification is more flexible. Member Westerman said she wished to address the issue raised by a number of citizens that the County should challenge the State and refuse to implement this law, speaking strictly for herself and not the entire BOH. She recalled the experience of the City of Port Townsend twenty years ago in defying the State and refusing the installation of a secondary sewage treatment plant. She said that the City eventually lost and that many more resources were expended in the long run because of that action. She said she did not wish to make a similar mistake, particularly since the intent of this law is noble, i.e. to protect the public health and the environment. She urged finding a way to implement this while educating people about the intention and the desired outcomes. Member Sandoval added that the higher than average cost of sewer rates in Port Townsend today are due to those decisions twenty years earlier. She said she had other questions and concerns about the proposal document, which could be taken offline depending on the usual protocols regarding document revisions by the BOH. Member Westerman explained how revisions are typically done. Board member Frissell noted that a copy of the revised code (adopted in July of 2007) had already been sent to the State for their approval. She said that in the draft revisions Jefferson County Board of Health February 21, 2008 Page 5 of 13 only the Homeowner portion is brand new. She said that after listening to all the testimony, she was concerned that some people do not seem to understand the reason for these ordinance revisions. She said that when her family inspects its septic system, it is not to look for a failure. It is to identify small or potential problems, so that they can be corrected early. Member Frissell said that 90 — 95% of the public comments, written or oral, were with regard to Homeowner Operations and Maintenance. She said she agreed that a $200 charge is outrageous, and that is an example of the portions of the ordinance that should be revised. She said that the public had been heard and their suggestions and comments were being taken very seriously. She thanked everyone who had spoken at previous hearings and submitted written comments. Member Frissell asked staff how grants may fit into the plan. Member Sullivan mentioned the $10,000 PUD monies. Referring to the O & M costs, Jean Baldwin said that when the shellfish beds were originally closed and two others were threatened, the proposed Clean Water District Plan (with a parcel tax) included the O & M costs. In this proposal, all the staff costs were covered, including homeowner education and outreach. However, that plan was not adopted, and those costs have to be funded from a different source. The $40,000 for education by WSU; $200,000 for the Conservation District, and $85,000 for O & M (septic system education) were part of that plan and are now gone. Regarding start up grants, she said that multiple grants are funding various Environmental Health activities. Neil Harrington, Water Quality Manager added that he was currently working under 12 or 13 grants related to Water Quality. Ms. Baldwin said that looking for new grants is a continuous process. The highest priority has been cleaning up shellfish areas and marine recovery issues and staff will continue to seek additional grants. She noted that Clallam County is doing a pilot project on homeowner O&M, with a large citizen committee, and that it may be well to track its progress and copy what is useful. She said that Jefferson County staff had been attending their meetings and other representatives could be invited as well. Sheila Westerman supported the idea of sending staff to the Clallam meetings to learn from their project. Member Sullivan summarized: restructure the training to cover what is necessary, including administrative compliance with the ordinance and care of the septic system, as well as the inspection procedure. He suggested that a way should be found to keep the fees low and affordable for everyone, so that this need not be totally grant dependent. He said that some of the implementation of the ordinance could be dealt with separately from the ordinance itself. Member Sandoval added, that as the document now reads, each certification for each of a homeowner' properties involves a fee. Member Sullivan suggested that staff needs philosophical direction: Is there support for the homeowner designee concept and is there support for the designee being named on the certificate, similar to a tax preparer/client relationship? The homeowner would have the option of doing it himself or using designee services; major permits or property sales would require the work to be done by a professional. Member Westerman asked if there was agreement that the proposed self or designee inspection process would be limited to the conventional systems, and to those outside of critical or shoreline areas. Member Sullivan said he thought that individuals need to be trained/certified for the systems they monitor. Member Westerman then asked if the County would arrange the training for the non -conventional systems. She said she was less comfortable with the concept of Jefferson County Board of Health February 21, 2008 Page 6 of 13 homeowner/designee monitoring and inspection for non -conventional systems, as listed in the ordinance. Member Sandoval raised another question about older systems that may not have reserve drain fields. She said she did not see any provision for how the County would handle an instance where that is newly reported, in the absence of any obvious problems. Dr. Locke said those situations typically arise in permit processing; the information triggers certain actions by staff and alerts potential buyers. He said it was not uncommon to have a situation where no reserve has been designated, even though there is an area available for it. In those cases, the staff "urges" them to designate a reserve area and definitely not to build there. Since it is not a failed system, it does not require any type of enforcement action. Member Sullivan added that in the absence of a reserve field or land suitable for a reserve, the monitoring and maintenance was all the more important. He noted that in many areas of the county, soils/drainage are not appropriate for drain field sites. Member Johnson said that he did not know what training is required to inspect a non - conventional system, but he would not wish to preclude that option. Member Sandoval noted that the trend is moving toward upgrades of systems to more complex ones. Chair Austin said that his sense is that the issue needs further research and consideration, and that the BOH was "no where near approval of this draft ordinance". He asked for Board comments on the options of continuing discussion at a later date, or enlisting staff to refine the draft. Dr. Locke said the proposed revisions fall into three general categories. The first are "housekeeping" changes: clarification of definitions and making them consistent with State or building code definitions; he said he had not heard any public concerns raised in this category. The second category related to incorporating current policies into the ordinance. He said there seemed to be one or two concerns dealing with triggers for sanitary surveys, building permits, and land transactions. They are in existing policy and enforceable now, but should be integrated into the on-site ordinance. The third category concerns homeowner operation and maintenance; he believes there must be greater specificity and a great deal more consideration on these revisions. He recommended that staff come back to the BOH with a revised draft dealing with the first two categories. He said it may take a year or more to work through the homeowner O & M issues using stakeholder groups and the efforts of other counties working on similar proposals. Member Sandoval asked whether or not research had already been done on projected training costs. Jean Baldwin briefly described the private vendor RFP process done in July 2007, and the low bid of $200 per homeowner. Dr. Locke noted that that was a "Cadillac version", and acknowledged that a "leaner option" would take time to develop. He said he preferred doing so on a regional or state wide basis rather than having each county expend time and resources independently. After a brief discussion, Member Sandoval asked if a subcommittee/stakeholder group could work on category 3 while staff makes category 1 and 2 revisions, rather than table it. Member Westerman stated that the whole committee -should do this. Member Frissell said that more information is needed. Chair Austin noted that staff is open to questions along the way. Jefferson County Board of Health February 21, 2008 Page 7 of 13 Dr. Locke said he had a sense of what the Board wants, but would welcome a motion directing further revisions of the septic code. He said language clarification, definitions and policy consistency are the most immediate priorities. Developing a system of homeowner system inspection that is flexible and inexpensive will be difficult but should be achievable. He also invited everyone to look at the O & M plan, requirement of the State, adopted last summer (County website), noting that this ordinance is only a part. The plan is based on County responses to a long list of questions posed by the State. He said it discusses the methods for identifying and characterizing all the septic systems; there are components on public education and marine recovery areas. Member Sandoval asked if the property assessor flags properties where structures exist but do not have permitted septic systems. She was told those cases are researched further on a case by case basis. She suggested that they be among the first to be addressed. Chair Austin suggested that the Board accept the recommendation of Dr. Locke on how to proceed. He advised those with additional questions to consult with the staff. Phil Johnson reminded that there is a resource available for those with septic problems or failing septic systems: Shore Bank Cascadia Loans. They can provide long term, very low to zero interest loans or no pay back until the property is sold. 2008 Legislative Update: Bioremediation, Thimerosol Ban and other Public Health Issues Dr. Locke reported that the proposed bill banning Thimerosol did not pass out of its committee of origin and was unlikely to be enacted this year. The bill was of concern to public health officials because it would restrict vaccine use in pregnant women who are at high risk for influenza complications. He reported that the Bioremediation bill did pass the Senate, unanimously. This bill seeks to exempt a particular on-site sewage technology from State review and permitting. Dr. Locke reminded that this Board had taken issue with variations of this bill in the past. The bill has since gone through certain modifications at the suggestion of local health authorities. He said, "In concept, this is something we are opposed to — the Legislature exempting review by the Department of Health." However, one of the issues is that review is expensive, and since the Department of Health has no funding source, it has not been eager to "step into the fray". The Bioremediation bill is now moving into the House. Member Westerman expressed her concern that the DOH had not educated the legislators. Jean Baldwin and Dr. Locke clarified that the Washington Association of Public Health Officials had testified for several days and were successful in getting amendments to the Senate bill. In its first draft, it exempted these systems from any type of local review. There are two categories: for improving the functioning of existing systems and as a repair solution. The latter is of more concern since they are as yet unproven as a repair technology. There was a brief discussion about the origin and impetus of this bill. Dr. Locke explained that the manufacturers have argued that state testing and proving process for biotechnology is too slow. Local health agencies do not believe the testing and certification should be done at the Jefferson County Board of Health February 21, 2008 Page 8 of 13 level of the local county health departments. He said that a letter could be sent on behalf of the Board. Member Westerman cited the lack of funding assistance for people with on site septic, noting that this would impose additional burden on the County. Dr. Locke said that this is not a mandate, but this bill would permit a product that has not been subject to the usual testing and certification. Member Frissell recalled that representatives for this type of product had requested BOH agenda time last fall, which had not been granted. Dr. Locke noted the additional factor now affecting the legislature — decreases of $423 million in revenue forecasted by state economists. He said that some of the modest increases in funding for school nurses, school health initiatives and the like will face struggles as the legislatures tries to trim down spending. Sheila Westerman moved that the BOH send another letter to the Legislature requesting that the Bioremediation bill not be passed. The motion was seconded and approved, all in favor. Green Business Designations Jean Baldwin reported that the Quilcene School District is the most recent organization to qualify for this designation, which is awarded based on outstanding recycling and green business practices. Also, a copy of the January 31, 2008 recognition letter to Ravenstone Tiles is included in the meeting packet. Public Health Heroes Jean Baldwin noted that April is Public Health Awareness month. Local Heroes nominations are taken from the community to recognize local heroes, persons or organizations that promote public health in their daily lives. She recalled that past awards included: Glenn Gately from the Conservation District and Main Street's Girls Night Out — Fight against Breast Cancer. She suggested that perhaps this could become an annual event and requested Board support. Member Westerman expressed her support for making this an annual event, and Roberta Frissell offered to help with this year's plans. City of Victoria Sewage Discharge, Request for Board of Health Letters Dr. Locke noted that the Victoria situation is the ultimate lesson in the cost of delaying sewage treatment; opening bids for a secondary system are in the neighborhood of $1.2 billion. He received a request from a waste water treatment advocate in Victoria, which had been directed to state and local boards of health asking for support. The province is requiring Victoria to implement wastewater treatment and the process is moving forward, but there is considerable opposition. The Clallam County BOH has directed Dr. Locke to reiterate their position the Victoria implement a modern wastewater treatment facility. After a brief discussion, Sheila Westerman proposed that the Jefferson County BOH respond with a letter of support signed by each individual member. The motion was seconded and approved, all in favor. Jefferson County Board of Health February 21, 2008 Page 9 of 13 Activity Update Jean Baldwin reported that Jefferson County was awarded a small grant to do a planning project with Chimacum and Port Townsend School Districts to start a school based health clinic. She said there have been initial discussions with Jefferson General and the school districts about providing primary care in the schools with Public Health staff and Jefferson General staff. She said that if this comes to pass, it is a tremendous gift for our schools. AGENDA PLANNING Member Sandoval mentioned the special committee at the City level looking at homeless issues and related public health issues. She said she would like to discuss the possibility of having that committee meet with the BOH. Board members voiced their support for that suggestion. Member Westerman mentioned the Royer Group and Jean Baldwin confirmed that the report would be finalized by the time of the next meeting. Dr. Locke also noted that the DOH Air Quality Health Assessment is expected to be completed by the end of February. Jean Baldwin added that the year end performance measures deliverables are always included in the March packet. The next BOH meeting is scheduled for Thursday, March 20 from 2:30 to 4:30 PM at the Pope Marine Building in Port Townsend. PUBLIC COMMENTS Chair Austin asked for a show of hands for those who wished to speak. Based on the response of 10 individuals, he said that speakers would have three minutes each and explained the green, yellow, red light timing protocols. He asked that each person, when called, stand and state their name/address before expressing their comments. Dave Bergeron, Brinnon, mentioned that the Chimacum Grange has seating for 50, is heated, and is generally available on Thursday afternoons. Fee is $25 plus $15 per hour. He expressed support for the BOH "moving in the right direction" on the OSS issue. He also urged them to foster more citizen involvement, including formation of a stakeholder group, which he believes would be able to easily deal with finding meeting rooms and meeting schedules. He was in favor of having training for many local trainers and believed this could be done very inexpensively. He stated the previous citizen comments urging the Board to "go back to Olympia" did not intend that a great deal of staff resources be expended; it could have been a letter to the State BOH and legislature requesting that the issues be revisited. He thanked the Board for the public meeting process and expressed anticipation of working with a stakeholder group, if formed. James Fritz, 271 Crutcher Road, Port Townsend, said that he agreed with everything the Board had said and thanked them for it. He also noted that when attempting to pick up a copy of the 53 Jefferson County Board of Health February 21, 2008 Page 10 of 13 page draft ordinance, he had been told by staff that no one was in charge of it. He said that without parameters or oversight, a "Cadillac system" emerged. That was a bad start, and the current meetings should have been done from the beginning. Mr. Fritz said that normally one figures 70% education, 20% incentives and 10% enforcement (for those who won't abide by the rules). The real problem is the mechanical systems which can fail at any time, even immediately after inspection. Even more important than inspection is educating people what materials can and cannot be placed in the septic system. Henry Rogers, 150 Old Ferry Road, Port Hadlock, said he was not in favor of having homeowners inspect their own systems. He believes staff should do the inspections, even if more staff must be hired. He also urged the BOH to select a "blue ribbon committee" from the large pool of qualified, smart and willing County citizens, to help solve problems. The committee would receive assignments and report to the BOH Chair. Dennis Schultz, Port Townsend, urged the BOH to require education on the alternative septic systems. He described the difference in his biofilter system from conventional systems: an artificially created mound rather than trenches, gravel and pipes underground, and a pumping system with a mechanical timer. He also said that since he has never signed any agreement or license agreement with the designers of the system, he is not bound by any agreement the County may have made with them. Inspection of this system required only 30 minutes, including removing all the covers, checking components, cleaning the filter and observing that everything was working correctly. He said that inspection was not difficult or complicated, and yet it was much more thorough than anything done previously by the PUD. Norman MacLeod, 241 Sand Road, Port Townsend, said he wished to thank everyone for identifying why the draft is "not ready for prime time". He said that while he can appreciate concern about the possible expense of convening a citizen's panel, he would more sympathetic to that concern if the County were not so ready to collect hundreds of thousands of dollars from citizens every year. He said that one paragraph in the WAC could be changed to reduce the requirements in terms of timing for inspections. He said the door has already been opened by the Legislature. He also said this is not the same as the point source effluent from the Port Townsend water treatment facility from years ago. In his opinion, "we really don't know how much of a problem we have". He said he would appreciate having more thinking and some well informed citizens working on this. He also suggested the use of the large meeting chamber across the street (from Pope Marine) as an alternative meeting location. He added that he had observed that the County is operating open pit toilets within 100 feet of the saltwater tide line within County Park locations. In one case, there may have been leakage of sewage due associated with storm damage. Herb Beck thanked the Board for its consideration of the issues raised and the decision to continue working on this draft ordinance. He conveyed his experience with a previous large stakeholder group at the Port, and recommended that a stakeholder group be formed in this case. He said the opportunity to participate is important in itself, and will lead to a better outcome, although it is likely to be a compromise for everyone. He said that with 10,000 systems, the cost would need not amount to more than a few dollars per system. Jefferson County Board of Health February 21, 2008 Page 11 of 13 Teren MacLeod, 271 Sand Road, thanked the BOH for the process that is in progress. She urged that the unique characteristics of Jefferson County be given consideration when looking at other counties' groundwork and experience. She added that while grant monies are being used to look at what types and where onsite septics are located (and possibly failing), some sourcing of contamination should be done as well. She said there is every reason to believe that wildlife is responsible for a portion of the problem. She said it would be helpful to know where the problems are and where they originate. Roger Short, 1720 Center Road, Chimacum, said that he had a problem with earlier statements about grants and the implications that delaying a project results in higher costs in the long run. He said that often the early adopter has the highest cost, because there are more unknowns and a steeper learning curve. He is also opposed to implementing rules that are unneeded, regardless of grants. He agrees that State mandates must provide the funding needed, as well. He suggested: retaining the current permit driven inspection; putting some focus on the small number (0.25 -0.5%) of easy to identify problem systems, and "the rest of us will follow suit and do a better job". Roger Pitt said that he has an alternative system near the shoreline. He said that as a conscientious person, he checks his system frequently. He would like to know where his situation fits in the context of this state law now. He mentioned that he had had a contract ($50) will the PUD. He urged the BOH to consider inclusion of alternative systems in the education and homeowner inspection process. What is the interpretation of the State law for people like him? Denver (last name inaudible) said he did not support charging $200 per person where large numbers of people could be trained in another way for a much lower cost. He suggested that County staff educate themselves or be trained, then produce a tape from which citizens can learn the inspection techniques. He described a situation involving a permit denial for a friend's septic system, which led him to believe that Health Department staff cannot be trusted to be fair and unbiased. Roseanne Oldson, Brinnon, described a long standing situation on Seal Rock Road that she said had been reported to County officials on several occasions, with no resolution. A single family dwelling was converted to a tri-plex, and the septic system was under the garage. She reported seeing exposed sewage there. She estimated that at least seven nearby homes pump out into Hood Canal. She noted that the PUD had done inspections for her home in the past, but that she recently discovered that the alarm system had never been hooked up for 10 years. She urged the BOH to enforce the health code for existing properties before approving the Blackpoint Resort. Michael Belenski stated that Health Department actions are arbitrary, capricious and inconsistent. He described his experience with helping a neighbor fix his septic system so that the family could stay in their house, and the lack of help from the Health Department regarding information about low interest loans. He described his negative impression of the Health Department and staff. He described his understanding of the role of the Health Department and the power of staff to apply regulations in whatever way they choose. He explained that he has, therefore, never allowed an inspection of his septic because he anticipates that staff will "create a violation" and put him in the same financial and emotional hardship as has been done to many Jefferson County Board of Health February 21, 2008 Page 12 of 13 other citizens. He said that it is illegal to withhold permit approval because a homeowner has refused staff access to his property. Dana Roberts, Jefferson PUD Commissioner, District 1 said he was impressed with what the BOH had done. He thanked David Sullivan for mentioning the $10,000 the PUD has put toward effectuation of the policy. He said the intention was to focus on making the education available. He asked that as expenditures of the program are reviewed, it would be well to keep the cost of education per person as low as possible. He said he had learned a great deal from the meeting process and wished the BOH luck in working through the remaining issues. Chair Austin adjoined the meeting at 4:40 PM. Next Board of Health meeting is April 17, 2008 JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF HEALTH IU Wor'-, A�b JoAustin, Chair L: 41�a Roberta Frissell, Member Phil Joh'hs�on, Member �'YK� AA-0-� Michelle Sandoval, Member Sheila Westerman, ,Vices �Chair Excused Chuck Russell, Member David ulliv em er Jefferson County Board of Health February 21, 2008 Page 13 of 13