Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM032502District No. 1 Commissioner: Dan Titterness District No. 2 Commissioner: Glen Huntingford District No. 3 Commissioner: Richard Wojt County Administrator: Charles Saddler Deputy County Administrator: David Goldsmith Deputy County Administrator: Gary Rowe Clerk of the Board: Lorna Delaney MINUTES Week of March 25, 2002 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Richard Wojt. Commissioners Glen Huntingford and Dan Titterness were both present. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BRIEFING SESSION: David Goldsmith, Deputy County Administrator reviewed and requested the following: · Delete Item #8 on Consent Agenda (Memorandum of Agreement: Education Programs, Extension Agent/Chair, 4-H Program Assistant, Technical Support, and Water Quality Agent; Jefferson County Cooperative Extension; Washington State University) until language is added to state that if unilateral reductions occur in the future they will apply to this contract. · With regard to item #6 on the Consent Agenda (Agreement re: Stream Flow Monitoring; Jefferson County Health and Human Services; Washington State Department of Ecology) Commissioner Huntingford asked what will be done with the information? What about follow up over the next 20 years? Will the County be expected to do followup work? Dave Christensen answered that this funding is a supplemental appropriation to last year's State budget. The Department of Ecology keeps offering these funds for budget cuts, but the State hasn't cut them yet. The gauges meet government standards. The grant doesn't cover the purchase of the gauges, but DOE has already purchased 6 or 8 for the basins in Jefferson County. If the County takes this funding the gauges will go in next summer. Commissioner Huntingford asked why the County would want to take the $100,000 and do all the work to install these gauges for the State? Why doesn't the State just take the money and hire a contractor and install them? Dave Christensen explained that it is an advantage to the County to take this funding and do the work because the DOE only expects a commitment of a half time person. We'll get a person who is educated in hydrology to put in these gauges. This project would build local capacity for this type of work. Commissioner Huntingford asked if the gauges are permanent fixtures? Dave Christensen advised that the maintenance, and monitoring will be the responsibility of the DOE. The County needs stream flow data. There is historical data, but right now there isn't any recent or current information. David Goldsmith advised that these gauges could be tied into emergency management for flood warnings. Commissioner Huntingford stated that he is concerned about staffing levels and doesn't see why the County would take this on when the State has the funding to do it? Page 1 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of March 25, 2002 Dave Christensen reviewed the grants and contracts on the horizon: 1) gauging grant just discussed, 2) Noxious Weed Control Grant with Clallam County, 3) USFS Wildlife Habitat Grant, 4) Salmon Recovery Board Grant for North Bank (Quilcene) Acquisition, and 5) Chimacum agricultural process. In Summer/Fall there are 3 projects being considered: Channel Migration Zone studies, Property acquisition on Big Quilcene and Seawater Intrusion work. Item #9 on the Consent Agenda (Request from Public Works for approval to fill part time positions.) This is refilling these part time positions to keep the scales at the Transfer Station open and keep costs down. The part time flaggers are also used to fill in to cover workload. This is needed for safety. The final position is to help during the busy season for Memorial Field. He asked that the Board support the filling of these positions. There is an issue with secondary smoke from smokers who huddle around the back of the Courthouse during their smoke breaks. In order to move these people away from the building surplus bus shelters have been found to place in the back parking lot. The buildings are free, but need to be picked up from a location in Shelton. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: The following comments were made: There are some "what ifs" with regard to Tri Area planning in the future; Is there any reason the Tri Area planning group should make a decision?; the citizens in the Tri Area have been ignored by the County and the PUD; Can a planning process be set up that will work?; The Blue Book does not work; The planning process in the Tri Area and Brinnon did not work; A farewell to Charles Saddler and a thank you to him for his work here; Charles Saddler did a good job in negotiating with the WEC; a Sub-Area Plan is an exception to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process; with regard to the planning process the following expression seems appropriate "Bring them to their senses not to their knees". The flooding over the East Quilcene Road could be alleviated by removing the dike; several mothers with their babies expressed support for the Mom and family programs in the Health Department; the Health Department provides essential services for Moms and families; the Moms luncheon provides essential support for nursing moms and there are probably 30 more people who would be here if they could; it is very crucial to nursing moms to have the support provided by the Moms Luncheon; the contract for providing the County with asphalt should include a provision that the asphalt cannot come from the Cape George pit until that pit is fully compliant with County and State regulations; The County should not take Lakeside's word that their asphalt plant at Cape George is in compliance; there are a number of things that Lakeside should be doing to assure this plant is safe; About 150 people were present at the Planning Commission review of the Lakeside Batch Plant and about 90 of those spoke against it; the County should protect neighbors from the fumes produced by the Lakeside Cape George pit; the County should make sure that Lakeside is absolutely in compliance with the regulations; why is Lakeside's asphalt batch plant not charged taxes on their property as an industrial site?; the contract on the Consent Agenda needs to specify where the asphalt comes from and that it not be from the Cape George pit; the airport has increased in size by purchase of 23 acres next to it; and when Lakeside was applying for a conditional use permit they said they knew what the best management practices are for this site and they know what they need to do. Page 2 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of March 25, 2002 APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA: Commissioner Huntingford moved delete items 2, 5, 6, and 8 and he noted that he would like more information on item 9 to provide assurance that all of these position are needed, such as what other options were looked at and what are the impacts if these positions are not filled. Commissioner Titterness seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. 1. RESOLUTION NO. 22-02 re: Standard Road Vacation of a Portion of Grant Street in the Plat of Irondale Acre Tracts; William Galloway, Petitioner 2. DELETE Agreement re: Supply of Asphalt Concrete for 2002 Maintenance Projects on Various County Roadways; Jefferson County Public Works; Lakeside Industries (See item later in minutes.) 3. AGREEMENT re: Emergency Services and 911 Dispatch; Jefferson County Administrator; Reinke and Associates 4. AGREEMENT, Amendment #1 re: Professional Services to Assess Health Related Data; Jefferson County Health and Human Services; Christine Hale 5. DELETE Agreement #G0200225 re: Coordinated Prevention Grant for Solid Waste Enforcement; Jefferson County Health and Human Services; Washington State Department of Ecology (Approved later in Minutes.) 6. DELETE Agreement re: Stream Flow Monitoring; Jefferson County Health and Human Services; Washington State Department of Ecology (See item under County Administrator's Briefing Session & later in Minutes) 7. AGREEMENT, Intergovernmental re: Professional Services for Peer In Program; Jefferson County Health and Human Services; Jefferson County Community Network 8. DELETE Memorandum of Agreement, Appendix "A" re: Education Programs, Extension Agent/Chair, 4-H Program Assistant, Technical Support, and Water Quality Agent; Jefferson County Cooperative Extension; Washington State University (WSU) (Approved later in Minutes.) 9. Request to Fill Vacant Positions, Jefferson County Public Works: 1) Clerk Hire Traffic Controller (Flagger); 2) Clerk Hire Transfer Station Attendant; 3) Seasonal Park Maintenance Assistant 10. Request For Twelve (12) Month Extension of Preliminary Plat; Anderson Court Long Plat, #SUB94- 0093; Located off of Mason Street in Port Hadlock; Pete and Meg Anderson, Applicants 11. Accept Resignation of Jefferson County Marine Resources Committee Member; Barbara Nightingale 12. Accept Resignation of Jefferson County Civil Service Commission Member; Wes DePew AGREEMENT re: Supply of Asphalt Concrete for 2002 Maintenance Projects on Various County Roadways; Jefferson County Public Worlds; Lal~eside Industries (Item #2 on Consent Agenda): Commissioner Huntingford said that the Department of Community Development was asked for an update on the Lakeside Asphalt Batch Plant at Cape George and they advised that the site was substantially compliant. A1 Scalfreported that this site is not currently operating. He will be contacting George Peabody next week to set up a site inspection and go over the regulations. The Court issued a determination that this Lakeside plant is a grandfathered, non-conforming use. He will do the site inspections himself before operations are started. Commissioner Huntingford moved that a site inspection be done and that Al Scalfbring a report back to the Board before action is taken on this contract. Commissioner Titterness seconded the motion which carried Page 3 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of March 25, 2002 by a unanimous vote. Chairman Wojt asked what impact this will have on the Public Works work schedule? Aubrey Palmer, Public Works, Road Supervisor, advised that there will be a delay on the preparation for the chip seal program. AGREEMENT #G0200225 re: Coordinated Prevention Grant for Solid Waste Enforcement; Jefferson County Health and Human Services; Washington State Department of Ecology (Item #5 on Consent Agenda): Commissioner Huntingford moved to approve this agreement as presented. Commissioner Titterness seconded the motion. Commissioner Titterness and Chairman Wojt voted for the motion. Commissioner Huntingford abstained from voting. The motion carried. AGREEMENT re: Stream Flow Monitoring; Jefferson County Health and Human Services; Washington State Department of Ecology (Item #6 on Consent Agenda): Commissioner Titterness moved to direct staff to explore whether this work could be subcontracted to another agency in such a way that the County could make some money from having the grant and bring it back next week. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion. Commissioner Titterness and Commissioner Huntingford voted for the motion. Chairman Wojt voted against the motion. The motion carried. MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT, Appendix "A" re: Education Programs, Extension Agent/Chair, 4-H Program Assistant, Technical Support, and Water Quality Agent; Jefferson County Cooperative Extension; Washington State University (WSU) (Item #8 on Consent Agenda): Commissioner Titterness moved to approve this agreement with the condition that the Deputy County Administrator add language that if a unilateral budget reduction is applied to County Departments that reduction would also be applied to this contract. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Discussion and Possible Appointment of Two (2) Members to Serve on the Jefferson County Planning Commission Representing District #1: Commissioner Titterness moved to appoint H. Eileen Rogers (Term Expires 3/17/04) and Edel Sokol (Term Expires 3/17/05) to the Planning Commission representing Commissioner District No. 1. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion. Chairman Wojt stated that he is concerned that the Planning Commission members represent a broader spectrum so that all issues are heard. Commissioner Titterness stated that he has considered all applicants and these appear to be the applicants that will do their homework and do the job. Commissioner Huntingford and Commissioner Titterness voted for the motion. Chairman Wojt voted against the motion. The motion carried. Page 4 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of March 25, 2002 Quarterly County Timber Update; Department of Natural Resources: Charlie Cortelyou, Regional Manager of the Olympic Region, presented and reviewed the current report on timber sales. The $6 million board feet of timber sold should mean about $350,000 in revenue to the County. Jack Westerman, Assessor, asked questions about the information provided. The DNR will confirm what the expected revenues are for 2002 and get back to the County Assessor with that information. Commissioner Huntingford asked about the batch plant operations at Lakeside's Cape George pit. Does Lakeside have a reclamation plan for this pit and, if so, is it current? Mr. Cortelyou will check this out and get back to the County. Chairman Wojt initiated a short discussion of geoduck harvesting impact to the marine sanctuary. Commissioner Huntingford also asked for an update on the Mats Mats quarry project? DNR is still taking public comments until April 8, 2002. He also reported that Fred Hill Material is going through the permitting process on their site. Jean Baldwin, Health and Human Services re: Youth Prevention Projects: Jean Baldwin, Health and Human Services, advised that the Community Futures project is a multi-agency project in this community that has a propensity to violence, to look at needs and what can be done for families. Several issues have been discussed: 1) can the federal funding be extended to keep the crisis work going in the schools, 2) can donations be accepted from citizens to keep programs alive, and 3) should a levy be run for these services. If a levy is proposed and has this multi-agency approach (public, private, non-profit) it will need County oversight and support. A slide presentation on this project was then reviewed. Jean Baldwin, Health and Human Services re: Budget Reductions: Jean Baldwin advised that she needs direction. The County needs to be looking at the needs of the community, the level of service needs, and be clear on time frames and impacts. Regional and local partnerships are being reviewed. She has a contract with Clallam County to have one of her staff do data analysis. If this contract is approved the work that staff person is doing will have to be given to someone else in the department. There may also be some good opportunities to partner with Kitsap County on the bio-terrorism work. Do the Commissioners want these kind of contacts to be pursued? Commissioner Titterness asked if partnering with other counties will allow Jefferson County to better serve both communities for less money overall? Jean Baldwin answered that she is not sure. Commissioner Titterness feels it is good to find out if these partnering opportunities will work. Our goal in partnering is to provide better service for the same money or less money. Commissioner Huntingford added that we might want to take care of ourselves first. What is the advantage to us in partnering? We need to make due with what we have right now. These contracts are complicated and the impacts to the staff and the budget are complicated. Commissioner Huntingford suggested that Jean Baldwin discuss these opportunities with the Deputy County Administrator. Page 5 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of March 25, 2002 Discussion re: Brinnon Sub Area Plan Options for SEPA Review & Next Step in Process: Josh Peters, Associate Planner, reported that the Hearing Examiner issued a decision upholding the appeal of the Brinnon Sub Area Plan SEPA determination and is requiring that the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) be expanded. There is a bill before the Governor to extend the deadlines for the 2002 update of the Comprehensive Plan. A sub-part of that bill changes the procedures for the initial adoption of a sub-area plan which can still be done outside the amendment cycle, if it does not modify the policies and designations applicable to the subarea. This means that Jefferson County could not adopt the Brinnon Sub Area Plan outside the amendment cycle because it modifies the land use maps. The options would be to docket the BSAP with the other amendments that come in this year or to adopt the sections of the BSAP that don't modify a land use map and then the remaining sections would be adopted during the amendment cycle. Chairman Wojt asked what is it in this plan that would allow someone in Brinnon to do something that they can't already do? Josh Peters reviewed the 5 basic elemental changes made by the proposed Brinnon Sub Area Plan: 1) Re-visit the LAMIRD designation boundary in Brinnon (rural business center) using the criteria similar to that the County is using in the Glen Cove area. 2) A small scale recreation and tourist use overlay zone in the WA WA Point area would be created. This would change some of the specifications for these uses Countywide which can currently happen through a conditional use. 3) Home business and cottage industry provisions would be relaxed and be implemented like those in the West End. 4) Create a light industrial zone for 17 acres north of Dosewallips Road which is an area currently mapped as the boundary of the 100 year flood plain. 5) A conceptual Master Planned Resort (MPR) at Black Point would be created. The plan outlines what the Planning Group thought would be a good idea for that area if the land owners could ever come together and make an application. In reality someone could apply for an MPR in that area right now even if the Brinnon Sub Area Plan isn't adopted. If a Supplemental EIS is prepared on a portion of the Brinnon Sub Area Plan (BSAP), any appeal of it would go to the Superior Court and not back to the Hearing Examiner. A1 Scalf advised that: * A DNS was issued for a specific portion of the BSAP (1 lot in the LAMIRD.) * Land designated as Light Industrial The 1998 EIS was adopted on: The LAMIRD redraw because it had been reviewed in the past. The small scale recreation and tourist use overlay zone. Home Business and cottage industry provisions. The Master Planned Resort (MPR) Page 6 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of March 25, 2002 The DNS was issued by the Department because the UDC has in place the proper environmental protections. Commissioner Titterness asked if the Hearing Examiner understood what the staff was trying to tell him? A1 Scalf answered that he disagreed with the staff position. Chairman Wojt asked if we were to look at what the authors of the BSAP had in mind, what can't they do? Al Scalfreported that an MPR (#5) could be done today without the BSAP anywhere in the County. The Hearing Examiner directed that a Draft Supplemental ElS be done. The "No Action" alternative is contained in the UDC and the '98 Comprehensive Plan. A preferred alternative would be the draft sub area plan. Josh Peters then reported on the process used in Kitsap County to adopt the Manchester community plan. Chairman Wojt asked what can be done with this plan to make it reasonable and cost effective? He feels the LAMIRD is dead? Commissioner Titterness noted that the letter from OCD is contrary to that statement. It said if you wish to incorporate the new definitions then the boundary can be redrawn. Chairman Wojt stated that he doesn't feel there is anything to redraw. Al Scalfreported that the LAMIRD encompasses the core of downtown Brinnon. It can be redrawn, but it must comply with the criteria. Chairman Wojt asked if the plan were passed, what would be different regarding the small scale recreation and tourist area? Josh Peters advised that you would have to look at that specific section of the UDC, (4.35), require a conditional use permit and meet specific criteria. He believes that area could entertain a small scale tourist use for one of those parcels. The Planning Group felt that the conditional use would be a stigma that would discourage an application because you couldn't get funding from a secondary money market. Commissioner Huntingford asked what small scale means? Could a gas station/mini mart be put there? Al Scalfreviewed the list which is not exhaustive. He doesn't know about a gas station/mini mart, but a restaurant could be put there. Development standards must comply with Small scale tourist zones such as amount of parking, and number of seats, etc. Commissioner Titterness asked if a person currently owns a business in this area, could they expand that business? Al Scalf answered that an expansion could be done as a conditional use depending on the scale of the expansion. Chairman Wojt asked about the changes needed to implement the plan's home business/cottage industry provisions? Al Scalf advised that the UDC and the Comprehensive Plan would have to be amended to allow the use of the West End model in Brinnon. Al Scalfnoted that the same issues apply in Brinnon as they do in the West End. Maintaining rural character, maintaining compatibility with neighboring properties, impacts upon facilities such as water, sewer, etc. These were the OCD comments which expressed concern about the exemption from limits on non-resident employees, exemption from prohibition on automotive and furniture striping businesses, and exemption from limitation on growth of a business before it would be required to move to another zone. Al Scalfthen explained that the light industrial zone requires a comprehensive plan amendment. Historically this was a disturbed area in existence in 1990 that became a gravel pit. Josh Peters said that the Planning Page 7 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of March 25, 2002 Group came up with this designation because they saw a need for light industrial activities in Brinnon and in a place outside of the flood plain. Chairman Wojt asked how likely it is that this designation can be done? A1 Scalf advised that in order to do this it would only require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the map and then the light industrial section of the UDC applies. This could be a Board initiated Comprehensive Plan amendment. Commissioner Huntingford added that this light industrial request would give Brinnon an opportunity for them to do some things in their own community. The gravel pit will be there anyway. They may have to do a water system or meet fire flow, but they can look at that if they have the zoning. Commissioner Titterness stated that he feels items 1, 3 and 4 would happen with the BSAP and couldn't be done without it. Josh Peters explained that in item 2 there are more opportunities under the BSAP because the zone has been identified. Commissioner Titterness noted that there is a significant difference for the community and the people worked on it for a very long time. The community isn't as divided over the plan as they are over the process. Chairman Wojt stated that he didn't hear it that way. He feels the people are divided over the plan and that their concerns weren't addressed. Commissioner Huntingford suggested that the Board draft a plan, Commissioner Titterness added that the Board should hold a hearing to have people bring in their suggestions and then the Board can draft a plan. Chairman Wojt asked if the County is putting its resources in the right place? Commissioner Titterness answered that this is a treatment of the problem and the things Chairman Wojt is talking about are a treatment of the symptoms. We need to treat the problem. Chairman Wojt asked if we are doing good planning? Do we need to step back and take a look at our processes? The problem with the Brinnon Plan is that $20,000 to $50,000 is going to go into doing an ElS. Commissioner Titterness asked if there is a corrected number on that? Josh Peters reported that an estimate to contract the ElS work currently required to a third party would be between $25,000 to $100,000. If the DCD staff does the work on the ElS they can't work on other items, and they would ask to have a peer review done of their work. The peer review could cost approximately $10,000. Commissioner Titterness asked Chairman Wojt what he would do? Chairman Wojt explained that there is a lot of work for the Department of Community Development to be doing such as Glen Cove, and the Tri Area. We have two planners and if we take the cheap route and have them work on the Brinnon Plan then everything else will not get done. He doesn't feel the LAMIRD issue will be going anywhere because of the criteria being looked at for Glen Cove. Where anything can be done about the light industrial issue, if it isn't resource based, could also be a problem. The only changes left are in the home business and cottage industry sections that would give them a little more flexibility. Commissioner Titterness asked what Chairman Wojt thinks is a problem with the light industrial designation? Chairman Wojt answered that the problem is 17 acres in Brinnon without any specific project in site. Whatever we bring forward should be bottoms up planning and what are the opportunities in the Brinnon Plan and how is the County going to use its planning resources to look into the things that need to be done? There are bigger fish to fry with Glen Cove and the Tri Area. The people in Brinnon have been working on this for the last couple of years, Commissioner Titterness pointed out, that it is important to them. Page 8 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of March 25, 2002 A1 Scalf explained that the Brinnon Planning Committee worked from the 1995 plan and they did not change any of the critical area maps or work on the stream side buffers, the shoreline jurisdiction, the resource lands, or a change in the subdivision for density. The staff told them to make a list of their wishes and they would bring them forward. He is surprised there are actually so few changes suggested. He prefers that the Board deliberate, based on the record, and come up with a Board initiated plan and then a SEPA determination would be issued on that. If the threshold determination is still a DS (Determination of Significance) then the County would proceed with the environmental review. He is not keen on hiring another consultant because the County has already spent over $200,000 on one that the Hearing Examiner didn't agree with. Commissioner Huntingford added that the County has already spent a lot of money to get where we are now. Let's try and deal with the issues, get them resolved, and move forward. Chairman Wojt asked what it would cost if the Board tweaks the plan and puts it forward as a Board initiated plan? Al Scalf advised that this approach would take the majority of Josh Peters time for the next six months and cost approximately $50,000 for a supplemental ElS. The other piece that hasn't been discussed is legal review for the Department. David Alvarez can't represent the Department because of his attorney/client relationship with the Hearing Examiner, therefore, additional legal costs would need to be added to the cost estimates for this work. After more discussion on the cost to do the ElS required by the Hearing Examiner and whether that is the best way to proceed, Commissioner Titterness said that he supported the Comprehensive Plan when he served on Planning Commission just to get it passed to start fixing it, even though he didn't like some parts of it. He suggested to the people in Brinnon who opposed the plan that they bring forward ideas that they thought they could support to change the plan and make it better and none of them brought anything forward. He feels if they are unwilling to do that then the Board has to accept that the Plan was developed by a community effort. The only objections to it are by those people who are unwilling to suggest modifications that would make it better. This doesn't give them credibility for their suggestion that it wasn't done right to start with. He suggested that the Board hold another hearing and everyone give their suggestions to make the plan better. Commissioner Huntingford added that if the Board is going to do this then they need an atmosphere where the people can speak freely about what they think and they need to bring suggestions forward. Do we want to go back to Brinnon with the same plan and ask for comments on it again or do we want to have a workshop and get testimony on the 5 points with information on what can and can't be done. Then the Board could write a proposed plan or have a hearing on the Board's plan. He wants to have more information on the LAMIRD expansion. The small scale tourism proposal could give this area a few more opportunities. At this time, he doesn't support the home business and cottage industry changes. There need to be some parameters set around the light industrial area and he feels the County should step up and work with the community to get grants to put the infrastructure in to make it go. The MPR can already be put in anyplace in the County. Some support for that community is important. After we do that, we can look at the ElS issue. Chairman Wojt noted that the criteria for the LAMIRD expansion needs to be reviewed to determine what fits and what doesn't fit to define the boundary. Page 9 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of March 25, 2002 Chairman Wojt reiterated that there are a bunch of things on our plate and a limited number of staff to work on them. Public hearings are no way to get answers from the general public to the kinds of questions you want to ask about what people like or don't like or want to add or remove. We need to invite as many people as we can to look at items 1, 2,3 and possibly 4. Commissioner Titterness feels this is what was done during the planning process of the last two years. This is our work and our responsibility to do. Commissioner Wojt suggested that the Board set up a time line and work plan and determine how the Board is going to reach conclusions on the things they determine are most important to make decisions on in the next 37 days. A1 Scalf pointed out that the most significant environment impact would be from the MPR and then light industrial, then small scale tourist/recreation and then the redraw of the LAMIRD, and finally the home businesses. Commissioner Huntingford asked how a statement would be crafted for the community plan saying that an MPR is allowed anywhere in the County and if one was to be sited in Brinnon it would have to go through its own complete environmental review before they could proceed? Josh Peters reviewed the Board's options for dealing with this issue in the Brinnon Plan. Commissioner Huntingford stated that he feels the Board should have a workshop in Brinnon to go over what some of these issues really mean. He wants to continue the process and get this work finished. Commissioner Titterness directed staff to schedule a workshop in Brinnon for 4 hours minimum (5-9 p.m.) on a Tuesday or Thursday. The other Board members agreed. Al Scalf advised that the Chair of the Board will moderate the meeting prior. Josh Peters will develop a list of all the issues that have been brought up in addition to the 5 issues discussed today. The Board will then get back together to deliberate on all the comments that have come in and then make a final decision as to a preferred alternative. A SEPA threshold determination would then be made on that preferred alternative. Al Scalfwill invite other governmental entities such as the Port Gamble Tribal Council and the State Department ofFish and Wildlife. The Board met in Executive Session from 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. with the Prosecuting Attorney, Deputy County Administrator, Community Development Director and Associate Planner regarding actual litigation. The meeting was recessed at the conclusion of the scheduled business for Monday and reconvened with all 3 Board members present on Tuesday for the following business: Intergovernmental Meeting (County/Port/PUD/City) from 1:00 - 5:00 p.m. in the Commissioners Chambers. Page 10 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of March 25, 2002 MEETING ADJOURN, ED,""*"" .., ,. SEAL: " ',', , 5 ~ ~ ~, : . / . ~ ,.' Loma Delaney, Clerk of the Board JEFFERSON COUNTY ~~N~B~SSIONERS '~~.~ rDan T-ltteme-ss, Member Page 11