Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM110600District No. 1 Commissioner: Dan Harpole District No. 2 Commissioner: Glen Huntingford District No, 3 Commissioner: Richard Wojt County Administrator: Charles Saddler Deputy Administrator: David Goldsmith Clerk of the Board: Lorna Delaney MINUTES Week of November 6, 2000 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Richard Wojt. Commissioners Dan Harpole and Glen Huntingford were both present. The Board met in Executive Session from 8:01 a.m. to 8:30 a.m. with the County Administrator, Deputy County Administrator and the Clerk of the Board about a personnel matter. Approval of Minutes: Commissioner Harpole moved to approve the minutes of October 9, 16 and 23, 2000 as presented. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. COUNTY ADMINISTRA TORS BRIEFING SESSION: Deputy County Administrator David Goldsmith, introduced Penny Smith, the new 4H/YIPPEE Coordinator. He also presented and reviewed a report developed by the E-911 Task Force on County E911 system technical issues, facilities, staffing, training, organization, and funding. The recommendations include: Technical: The Technical Committee will develop a prioritized report on necessary hardware enhancements. The report will be forwarded to the E911 Users Group for review and they will make a recommendation on funding arrangements. The Technical Committee will continue to pursue additional radio frequencies for use by the system. Facilities: The Dispatch Center needs to be separate fi.om the jail operations. This relocation is a priority. A short-term relocation strategy may need to be considered before the larger issue of expansion of the jail and Sheriff's Office administrative space is addressed. Staffing: The Dispatch Center needs a staffing level of 11 dispatchers. This can be accomplished by providing one additional dispatcher in 2001 and one additional dispatcher each year until there are 11 more dispatchers. Training: Continue with the training schedule as outlined by the Department. Call Taker I and II Training needs to be completed within the first two years of assigned duties as a dispatcher. Dispatch Center personnel needs to be knowledgeable about the contents of Emergency Medical Dispatch and begin moving toward proficiency in EMD as warranted. Additionally, the dispatchers need to meet with end users (i.e. fire and law enforcement) on a regular informal basis to discuss service delivery and the needs of each entity comprising the system. Page 1 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of November 6, 2000 Organization: A permanent E-911 Users Group will be established through an inter-local agreement. This will provide a forum for all entities involved in E-911/Dispatch Service to discuss operational issues and long term system needs, and to make recommendations to management and policy makers. Funding: Allocate the annual operational costs of the system to the users based on the previous year's call volume, plus an annual subscribers fee, with a first year basis per call of approximately $20.00 for Law Enforcement and $30.00 for Fire/EMS. The annualized allocation of operational costs would be adjusted each year based on the previous year's call volume and the systems approved operational budget. David Goldsmith has assured the Fire Commissioners of a $45,000 budget for 2001 and any income above that would be held over for future years and then adjustments could be made. The Fire Districts indicated they would support a ballot measure for jail expansion if it includes separating the Dispatch Center from the Sheriffs Office. The Fire Commissioners are appreciative of the efforts of the County and that their concerns have been heard. The next step is to draft a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which details all of the items suggested. County Administrator Charles Saddler noted that the staffing level of the Dispatch Center may be increased in 2001, but the Fire Districts' payments will stay at the agreed level. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: The following comments were made: A letter and petitions were submitted about the proposed DNR/Manke land exchange (#86-71937) and concerns were brought up about the loss of this land and the lack of notification about the transfer (Commissioner Harpole moved to direct the County Administrator to prepare a letter to DNR requesting postponement of this decision for at least a month in order to provide time for further review by the County. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote.); more petitions were submitted asking that the Bayshore Motel in Brinnon remain open; a packet was submitted to the BOCC about critical aquifer recharge areas in the UDC and how asphalt batch plants are addressed; when will the public be given a chance to comment on the seawater intrusion issue and memos?; when will the next County newsletter on the UDC be issued?; any answer to the question about the formation of a water district in the Tri Area? (Charles Saddler reported that there are County policies that address the formation of water systems); has the Coordinated Water System Plan been adopted?; have the new septic regulations been adopted?; and the Board was urged to adopt the UDC on the timeframe they have identified. Page 2 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of November 6, 2000 APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA: Commissioner Huntingford moved to approve all of the items on the Consent Agenda as presented. Commissioner Harpole seconded the motion which carded by a unanimous vote. 1. RESOLUTION NO. 85-00 re: Statutory Vacation of a Portion of Clover Street and a Portion of Cedar Street and the Alley Located in Block 56 in the Supplementary Plat of Captain Tibbals Lake Park; Steve and Tracy Craig, Tom and Kelli Parcher, and Martha Barrett, Petitioners 2. AGREEMENT, Amendment//6880-2 re: Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant for the HIV Special Project; Funding for Training and Statement of Work Regarding Syringe Exchange; Jefferson County Health and Human Services; Washington State Department of Social and Health Services- Division of Alcohol and Substance Abuse 3. AGREEMENT re: Professional Services; Data and Literature Review; Jefferson County Marine Resources Committee; David Thielk 4. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING re: Providing Information Systems for Child Profile Used by Health Care Providers to Share Immunization Data; Jefferson County Health and Human Services; Healthradius, Inc. 5. CONTRACT #00-64020-001 re: Community Development Block Grant Funding for a Child and Family Resource Center; Jefferson County Mental Health; Washington State Department of Community Trade and Economic Development 6. Concurrence and Authorization re: Proceed with Right of Way Acquisition Larry Scott Memorial Park Trail; Project No. CR1069; Bruce C. Rumage 7. Final Short Plat Amendment #SUB95-00086; To Vacate and Relocate the Existing 30' Access, Utilities, and Open Space Easement; Located off of Ridgeview Court, Port Townsend; Ron Oates, Applicant 8. Final Long Plat Approval #SUB95-00107; To Develop 5.01 Acre Parcel into 2 Residential Lots; Porto Long Subdivision; Located Off of Windridge Road, Chimacum; Tony and Susan Porto, Applicants 9. Reappoint Port Townsend Paper Corporation Representative and Alternate Representative to Serve a Term on the Jefferson County Solid Waste Advisory Committee; Term Expires 11/7/02; V. Alice McConaughy, Representative and Bryon Monohon, Alternate The Board met in Executive Session from 10:06 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. with the Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, Community Development Director, and County Administrator regarding potential litigation. Page 3 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of November 6, 2000 Jay Watson, Hood Canal Coordinating Council (HCCC) re: Update and Consideration of Incorporation Documents: Jay Watson, HCCC, explained that the Hood Canal Coordinating Council, which is made up of representatives from Jefferson, Mason, and Kitsap Counties, is applying for 501(c)(3) (non profit) corporation status. They have drawn up the papers and submitted them to the member counties to review. He advised that this will allow the Council to apply for private grant funding that is not currently accessible to them. The Council took action at their last meeting to proceed with incorporation. The by-laws and incorporation papers have been updated. Being a separate legal entity will provide for an outside audit also. Chairman Wojt reported that Jefferson County's Prosecuting Attorney and Risk Manager have reviewed the papers and advise that they are suitable for the County to sign. Commissioner Huntingford asked if the HCCC's liability insurance will provide coverage for any project they implement? Jay Watson advised that is correct. The Council has liability insurance and they are increasing the amount for the officers of the corporation. Commissioner Harpole moved to have the Chairman sign the necessary documents for incorporation of the HCCC on behalf of Jefferson County. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. HEARING re: Community Water System Franchise for Hiddendale Community Club: Terry Duff, Public Works, reported that this application is for a water system that is in place and has existed since 1955. There was an issue about the water line being too close to the surface. This has been repaired. Any future work on the water line within the right-of-way will have to be permitted. The Chair opened the public hearing. Terry Buhler, a representative of the Hiddendale Community Club, stated that the water system has been installed for 30 years and there were never any problems until recently. Hearing no further comments for or against the proposed franchise, the Chair closed the public hearing. Commissioner Harpole moved to direct the Public Works Department to develop the final non-exclusive franchise for the Hiddendale Community Club water system franchise. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. HEARING re: Proposed Budget Appropriations and Extensions; Various Departments: Commissioner Huntingford questioned the amount in the request for the Bayshore Motel under the "room" category? Public Works Director Gary Rowe explained that "room" means room rent. The Chair opened the public hearing. Hearing no comments for or against the requested appropriations and extensions, the Chair closed the hearing. Page 4 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of November 6, 2000 Commissioner Harpole moved to approved RESOLUTION NO. 86-00 ordering the appropriations/extensions as requested. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carded by a unanimous vote. HEARING re: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Application; Support For Activities Benefitting Lower Income Persons; Olympic Community Action Programs (OIyCAP): County Administrator Charles Saddler explained that this Community Development Block Grant is for funding for Olympic Community Action Programs to provide services to lower income persons and families. In Washington State, the Department of Community Development receives federal funds to distribute to local jurisdictions to allow community action agencies to provide these services. The Chair opened the public hearing. Hearing no testimony for or against this grant application, the Chair closed the public hearing. In response to a question from Commissioner Huntingford, Charles Saddler advised that the grant application is in the amount of $127,646. Commissioner Harpole moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 87-00 to submit a Community Development Block Grant application for public services funding, and to designate the County Administrator as the official to sign all necessary papers. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carded by a unanimous vote. WORKSHOP re: Unified Development Code (UDC): Commissioner Harpole directed that a complete UDC packet, including all revisions, staff recommendations, and comment letters be provided for next week's meeting. Planning Manager Warren Hart stated that staff is working on the Planning Commission's report and it will be on the Board's agenda next week. It will be distributed directly to the Board on Friday afternoon. A1 Scalf, Director of Community Development, reviewed the process for bringing the UDC forward. Four hours are scheduled on the Board's agenda next Monday to deliberate on what will be included, deleted or changed in the draft to produce the Board initiated ordinance that will be published for public hearing. Warren Hart reviewed Sections 7, 8, 9 and 10. Line in/line out copies of these sections were provided for review. He advised that there was very little comment from the public on Sections 7, 8 and 9. Section 7 is substantially the same as the Planning Commission draft. Page 5 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of November 6, 2000 Section 7 Changes: · The proposal to extinguish unimproved plats is being deleted from the draft. There are only 6 plats in this category and staff recommends that this not be pursued by the Planning Commission. Associate Planner Randy Kline explained that four of the plats are on Indian Island. Six plats have been fully or partially vacated and only six pre-1937 plats are in one ownership and undeveloped. Staff feels these plats will not have an impact on the rural character of the County. · A new binding site plan process with Administrator review was added. · Boundary Line Adjustments can be done to change the property line but not the zoning of a property. Section 8 Changes: · The changes in this section make the procedures for processing applications clear and delineate how SEPA will be done. Page 2, Table 8-1, clarifies the provisions that apply for each type of application. The permits have been action typed and each type is defined to tell applicants what is required (i.e. notice to adjacent property owners, public hearing). Table 8-2 defines the action types. · A1 Scalfpointed out that Type I actions are not appealable; Type II actions can be appealed to the Hearing Examiner; Type III actions can also be appealed; Type IV actions can be appealed to the Court; and Type V actions are legislative and can be appealed to the Heatings Board or the Court. This is an attempt to steamline the process. · There is a difference between conditional uses, but each type has to meet criteria in UDC. C(a) (conditional administrative) can be handled by an Administrator's decision. C(d) conditional uses require a public hearing. · Public Notice requirements have been reduced to the State statutory requirements. The noticing provisions will be integrated with SEPA requirements. The changes to Section 8 address the SEPA process. Currently the County requires that a Title Company prepare APO (Adjacent Property Owner) lists. However, since the County now has the ability to generate these lists and print the mailing labels, the UDC allows this service to be provided in house. · The UDC identifies variance requests as major or minor and defines a process for each. This will increase the flexibility of the Department to deal with these requests. Safeguards have been included in the UDC. The Board had no comments on Section 8. Section 9 Changes: · The UDC codifies a superior way to process Comprehensive Plan amendment applications. Site specific amendments to the Comprehensive Plan will be taken all the way through the process. Suggested amendments will be docketed. · The Growth Management Indicators have been codified. · Section 9.9 provides for amending the Comprehensive Plan and the UDC itself. Page 6 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of November 6, 2000 Deputy Prosecuting Attorney David Alvarez suggested that the Board consider a process similar to an initiative process for proposed Comprehensive Plan text amendments by requiring a certain number of voters or property owners (i.e. 150) to sign the amendment request. Staff recommends that proponents of site specific amendments pay a fee, but text or suggested amendments not be charged a fee. Warren Hart added that staff had a difficult time meeting the needs of all the Comprehensive Plan amendments that were submitted the first time. Section 10 Changes: The County will try to get written permission to access private property. If access is required because of a willing violation of health and safety regulations, the County can ask for a search warrant. David Alvarez explained that he has rewritten Section 10.24 to acknowledge that the County has concern for property owners' privacy. Al Scalfadded that if there is a "No Treaspassing" sign, staff will not go on the property without the property owner. If someone is aggrieved by an enforcement action, they could appeal the action at an Enforcement Board hearing. The thrust of the ordinance is to handle enforcement in the Department before taking it to the Prosecuting Attorney. The process gives the Administrator the authority to go through an administrative process or levy a fine. A1 Scalf advised that the Department tracks complaints through the database Permit Plan. The majority of complaints are "building without a permit" and most people come in to get their building permit when they are contacted. Chairman Wojt related that most people don't intentionally ignore regulations. Property owners shouldn't be treated as criminals. He would recommend any process that encourages compliance and keeps the County out of court. Commissioner Harpole urged that Section l0.7 be re-titled and that the words "Public Nuisance" be removed. Warren Hart advised that the language in Section 10 doesn't differentiate between violations (building permit or ESA.) The Department has the ability to assign priority to enforcement actions. Staff will work with the Prosecuting Attorney and the County Administrator on how to move forward with enforcement. Charles Saddler suggested an enforcement mechanism that uses a non judicial code enforcement resolution process. Staff works for voluntary compliance with property owner, but if an impasse is reached a Code Enforcement Board is called upon (This Board is made up of a Realtor, a Builder, an Attorney, a Planner, an Architect, etc.) This Board would hold a quasi-judicial hearing to develop findings of facts and conclusions of law. If no resolution is reached, they can impose a fine which is a lien on the property. Once the problem is resolved, the lien is expunged. This allows disputes to be heard by an impartial panel and Page 7 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of November 6, 2000 allows dispute resolution. Chairman Wojt asked if this type of system would be allowed in Washington State? There was continued discussion about this process andthe possibility of forming a Board of Adjustment that could resolve differences of opinion about Administrator interpretations. The Board concurred that the County needs to reach their goals through the most direct, least difficult route. David Christensen reviewed his paper on seawater intrusion which was written in response to comments to Planning Commission about that section being removed from the UDC. His paper outlines the process and conclusions regarding the BMPs for seawater intrusion. Staff recommends leaving some language in the UDC on seawater intrusion based on enforceable Best Management Practices and that the BMPs be used along the marne coastline and on the islands. Chairman Wojt reported that Ted Shoulberg felt that the Stipulated Settlement Agreement with the City of Port Townsend on their well head should be used as a guide. This agreement requires monitoring. David Christensen reported that the results of the monitoring are inconclusive. Some wells have shown an increase in chloride and some have indicated a decrease in chloride. There is broad data available to review; but it is inconclusive. An extended timeline is required to analyze data on water. The conclusion reached in the briefing paper was to eliminate the monitoring because of staff priorities. The BMPs were to be adopted by the County. County staff developed the BMPs based on the DOE study. The Planning Commission recommended against adoption and the Commissioners followed their recommendation. Since then the BMPs have been reviewed and some of them were found difficult to enforce and monitor. Limiting the instantaneous withdrawal rate to 3 V2 gallons per minute isn't within the County's regulatory authority. Commissioner Harpole said that the issue that Ted Shoulberg raised is compliance with the Stipulated Agreement. The County is required to honor the written Stipulated Agreement until the other parties recognize the changes. David Alvarez asked that the Board direct the County Administrator to prepare a letter to the City and the Shine Community Action Council which advises that the Board has read David Christensen's paper, agrees with the contents. Al Scalf asked how many known aquifers there are in Jefferson County and if they are identified? David Christensen answered that the only known aquifers are identified from the work that Pope Resources has done in the Port Ludlow Environmental Impact Statement and the work the City has done on the Spading well. He suggested that the citizens of Marrowstone Island that are concerned about seawater intrusion in that area petition the Department of Ecology. Page 8 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of November 6, 2000 Commissioner Harpole moved that the County Administrator draft a letter to the City of Port Townsend and the Shine Community Action Council regarding the County's concerns about the Stipulated Agreement of 1995, including an explanation about the UDC's provisions regarding seawater intrusion and requesting a written response. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Commissioner Huntingford asked that staff review how the Port Ludlow EIS came to be and how the Stipulated Agreement came about. He asked for a chronological list of events. David Alvarez explained that Ordinance No. 14-0626-95 required the County to adopt BMPs and that was never accomplished because the Board concurred with the Planning Commission's recommendation. MEETING ADJOURNED SEAL: ' ' · / ATTEST: ~' '~orna Delaney, CMC Clerk of the Board J EF F~F.I?,-~~UNTY Jrc~a~n Glen Huntingfo~/le~ber Dan Harpole, Page 9