Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM082597 JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS District No.1 Commissioner: Daniel Harpole, Member District No.2 Commissioner: Glen Huntingford, Member District No.3 Commissioner: ___ Richard Wojt, Chairman /SON~, /x~--~o, 14.,<i,~; ,'\(:j;\ 'I.LJ! ..:~ \~\ ('"'( ~'~~I LTHE HEART OF THE\,~,") //OLYMPiC~~INS~:,!::fIj ~~ ',- -/ o~/ ~1JL@5/ Clerk of the Board: Director of Public Services: Deputy Director of Public Services: Lorna L. Delaney Gary A. Rowe David Goldsmith MINUTES Week of August 25, 1997 Chairman Richard W ojt called the meeting to order at the appointed time in the presence of Commissioners Glen Huntingford and Daniel Harpole. PUBLIC SERVICES BRIEFING SESSION: David Goldsmith reported that the PERC Committee is preparing for Spirit Week. Prizes are donated by managers and won through a lottery drawing for employees during that week. This year PERC also solicited items for the drawing from local businesses. The RCW prohibits a municipal officer or employee from soliciting or receiving direct gifts. The PERC solicitation indicated that it was from an employee group and that the prizes were not for a specific employee. Judi Morris, Chairman of PERC, who signed the letters, advised that she would take her name out of the drawing so there is no suggestion of impropriety. This is a lottery drawing and no one knows who will receive the prize. Gary Rowe suggested that if gifts are solicited that a maximum amount be established for the gift. Treasurer Ila Mikkelsen reported that the RCW states that a maximum amount of $50 is allowed for gifts to State employees. Commissioner Harpole moved that this solicitation of gifts be allowed to continue under three condi- tions: 1) Judi Morris remove her name from the drawing list, 2) the list of businesses solicited be kept confidential and 3) the gift be limited to $50 maximum. Commissioner Huntingford noted that this is an event that the PERC Committee does to recognize employees. He seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Public Services Director Gary Rowe reported that, as an outcome of the County Retreat last week, the results of the Employee Survey will be sent to all Departments. Kelsey Gray, who facilitated the Retreat, set up a list of objectives to follow-up on and will attend a Department Head meeting in the future to discuss this. Page 1 [ VOL 2:1 . j' 5t:t' ',tA;1 'I'" t1 (t~:~~\ (~~~i4 \~S'-_~"{Q~>i ,l[j~9-.' Treasurer's Resignation: Ila Mikkelsen submitted her resignation from the office of Treasurer effective September 30, 1997. Commissioner Harpole moved to have the Chairman sign a letter to the Republican Central Committee requesting a list of 3 names for possible appointment to the position of Treasurer until December 31, 1998. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of August 25, 1997 PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: The following comments were made: a request that the County make amendments to the subdivision moratorium so that people with two residences on one parcel of property can subdivide that property; if a resolution is passed to resolve the septic exemption issue, is that considered a change to the IGSO; the State Department of Community Trade and Economic Development Home Page on the Internet alleges that some of the actions of Jefferson County that allow development in rural areas are not in compliance with GMA; and a request for justification of why a property owners taxes increased $220 from last year. APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA: Commissioner Harpole moved to approve and adopt all of the items on the Consent Agenda as submitted. Commis- sioner Huntingford seconded the motion carried by a unanimous vote. 1. PROCLAMATION re: Jefferson County Employee Recognition Week; September 8 - 12, 1997 2. AGREEMENT Amendment #5 re: 1997 Consolidated Contract; Federal and State Funding for Public Health Services; Jefferson County Health and Human Services Department; State Department of Health 3. CONTRACT re: Bayshore Motel Night Manager for a Period of Six (6) Months beginning September 1, 1997; Jefferson County Public Works; Sandra Korjenewski 4. CONTRACT re: Supply and Install Portable Structure at Jefferson County Sheriffs Office; Jefferson County Public Works; Modern Building System, Inc. COUNTY DEPARTMENT BRIEFINGS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: The following items were discussed: · Commissioner Huntingford asked if the resolution regarding septic exemptions that staff developed, and the Prosecuting Attorney is reviewing, reflects the actions on the six scenarios that the Board has taken during the last year? Al Scalf advised that the Prosecuting Attorney has included one of the six scenarios in this resolution. Commissioner Huntingford cautioned that two separate Boards of Commissioners have voted on these scenarios several times. Commis- sioner Harpole noted that he assumes that whatever is brought forth from the staff and the Prosecuting Attorney will have justification for or against each of the scenarios. Commissioner Huntingford stated that he was assured by the Prosecuting Attorney's Office during a previous discussion that the actions that were taken by the Board will be included in this resolution. Page 2 !.YOL 23 ~:,r,r598 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of August 25, 1997 ''',,~~~,~,O , /IZ' ,,~\ (~ ',-X" .... '~~'(i \"- ~/ ~~Si5\jY · A review and discussion of "lots of record" will be scheduled next week. · Planning Manager John Holgate reported that three new contract positions in the Department are currently being advertised. · He submitted the weekly update and reported that the Planning Commission reviewed the Capital Facilities, Utilities, and the Transportation chapters of the draft Comprehensive Plan and representatives from the Port gave a presentation on the Airport Master Plan. · The work on the Comprehensive Plan is on schedule. · Bruce Laurie reported that the consultant is continuing work on the draft scope of work for the Glen Cove/Tri Area Studies. The draft scope will be in the Board's packet for review on September 2, 1997. · The Growth Management Steering Committee will meet on September 4, 1997. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR: The following items were discussed: · Klara Fabry asked that the Board take action on finalizing the job description for the Road Superintendent position and allow her to advertise "in house" to fill this position. The Board changed the title to Maintenance Superintendent and directed that this position also be responsi- ble for ER & R duties. Klara Fabry agreed with these changes. Commissioner Huntingford stated that he is concerned about the mechanics crew being supervised by the Operations Manager when they are not at the same location. The discussion turned to the best way for this coordination to take place. Commissioner Huntingford moved to approve the Road or Mainte- nance Superintendent position and to include under that position the Shop Foreman and the ER&R position. Commissioner Harpole seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Klara Fabry reported that she will advertise "in house" for this position. · Klara Fabry reported that 41 miles of chip sealing has been completed. It is hoped the chip sealing program can be completed by next week, including the Oil City Road which was postponed from last year. · The Old Gardiner Road construction has been put out to bid. · The stabilization of the Oil City Road requires an exemption to the Shoreline Permit. It is hoped that the work can be done in October. Commissioner Huntingford asked that timelines for the project be presented for their review. · A LIT meeting was held last week in Quilcene. The proposed flood plan was reviewed and is scheduled for approval at the next LIT meeting. Gary Rowe asked if the financing for proposed improvements will be included in the 1998 budget? Klara Fabry reported that the LIT will discuss financing of the plan at their next meeting. · There was one applicant from District 1 for the Transportation Advisory Board and the by-laws state that there should be two representatives from each District. They will advertise for two more weeks. Termination Point: Klara Fabry noted that in the Termination Point Plat resolution there is a requirement that the Public Works Director submit a letter reconfirming the action taken by the resolution. She asked what additional information the Board would like in this letter? Commissioner Harpole stated that it is his understanding that the County Engineer must review drainage plans before a Page 3 \'....., ~ .,.1 h"fi ,tit i 1*". '5n, 0 .,."'~,;... ~.., Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of August 25, 1997 ..A~~~?c:\ $~' ',',!;, (, ,,:,~lj;h \~::-. ,-~:",/~/ 1~~/ building permit can be approved. The letter would advise the County that these plans have been reviewed by the Public Works Director. Barbara Blowers, representing the property owner, explained that they have a Forest Practices Applica- tion, with an approved erosion control plan, and are scheduled to begin clearing lots. This is considered a land disturbing activity, but a drainage plan is not required. Chairman Wojt cautioned that clearing the land could alter the initial drainage plan that was submitted. Barbara Blowers added that the initial drainage plan for the plat took into consideration the clearing of these lots. Klara Fabry reiterated that she will submit a letter to the Board indicating that she has reviewed the drainage plan and found it to be satisfactory. The Board concurred that this is what they expect ofthe Public Works Director. Barbara Blowers asked if the Public Works Department will allow the owner to repair the culvert on the Ricky Beach Road before October in order to prevent more damage from occurring to the road. Currently, there is an issue about whether the road will be vacated or remain a public road. Klara Fabry will work with the Director of Community Development and Barbara Blowers to resolve this issue. Lisa Lantz, Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board re: Update: Lisa Lantz presented a slide show on noxious weeds in Jefferson County. State law mandates that noxious weeds be controlled. The 101 weeds on the noxious weed list are non-native, invasive plants, an~ are highly destructive, competitive or difficult to control. Plants that are on the weed list that are in Jefferson County include: Meadow Napweed - little forage value for wildlife or livestock and is very competitive. Can have an impact on wildlife habitat. Spartina (3 species) - grows in saltwater tidal areas. This plant grows where there is no native vegetation and completely changes the character of the beach. Poison Hemlock - resembles parsley and all parts of this plant are poisonous. Oak Bay Park is extensively infested with this plant. Thistle (Bull and Canada) - can limit access to recreational areas. Brazilian Elodea -- aquatic plant that grows very densely and can be spread by fragmentation. Washington State has a noxious weed law (RCW 17.10) which requires control (prevent all seed production), administration of a weed program (State & County Weed Boards and the State Department of Agriculture), and enforcement. Jefferson County is only one of four counties that has not activated a Weed Board. A County Weed Board would work toward voluntary compliance with State law. Regional Weed Boards are allowed, which include more than one County. If Jefferson County activated their Weed Board, they would appoint 5 voting members. Page 4 l vo~ 23, ,Ir~ 60D Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of August 25, 1997 ft~!OO% (~~~1 ~S!i<':(g~' ~~1J:!.9.../ The legislature changed the laws this year and a Weed Board could be activated by the State Department of Agriculture in a County where one does not exist. To activate a Weed Board a hearing must be held to determine if there is a need. If there is a need, the members can be appointed and a coordinator hired. The Weed Board can be funded through a tax or through the County's General Fund. Commissioner Huntingford requested more information about funding the Weed Board and an outline of the steps the County would use to authorize a County Weed Board. Lisa Lantz said she will send an information packet to the Board. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: A request was made that the term "lot" be defined before there is any discussion of "lots of record." BUSINESS FROM COUNTY DEPARTMENTS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Hearing Examiner's Findings, Conclusions, and Decision re: Conditional Use Permit #ZON96-0024; To Construct a Convenience Store, Gasoline Pump Dispensing Island, Traveler's Service Retail, Self-Operating Car Wash, and Espresso Stand; Located West of the Intersection of Teal Lake Road and Highway 104, Shine/Port Ludlow; Dean Reynolds, Applicant: Al Scalf explained that the Hearing Examiner reviewed this project and made a recommendation of approval to the Board on April 28, 1997. On May 12, 1997, it was on the Consent Agenda. The Board deleted it from the Consent Agenda and asked that staff bring it before them on May 19, 1997. On that day, the Board reviewed the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner, but did not take action. Associate Planner Jerry Smith reported that the Board has the following options on this recommendation: 1) accept the Hearing Examiner recommendation, 2) reject the Hearing Examiner's recommendation, 3) conduct their own hearing and make findings of fact, or 4) remand this matter back to the Hearing Examiner for further review. Al Scalf reported that the Board needs to make a decision so that this project can move forward. The discussion turned to the vesting of the project. James Tracy, the Attorney representing the applicant, stated that they have assumed that the Optional Consolidated Review Process (adopted in April 1996 Regulatory Reform Act) does not apply to this application. Ifthis ordinance does apply, then it is clear from the County's Ordinance that unless the Hearing Examiner's recommendation is appealed, the hearing process is complete. If this County Ordinance doesn't apply, then the Ordinance that applies is from 1992 and a decision from the Board is required to complete the process. He added that the proponent is willing to go forward with the Hearing Examiner's current recommendation. Commissioner Harpole stated that when this item was reviewed by the Board in May, there were three areas of concern: 1) to review the project history with the Planning staff, 2) to determine if the project Page 5 tvoc 23 ;'v,.601 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of August 25, 1997 :f:.~5i":h,~~.',,\ f~ ~'R,~~II \~ '-'~ %j ~~09' and the FEIS is consistent with the proposal as approved with conditions by the Hearing Examiner and, 3) to determine if the project would be considered developing a rural center. He stated that he has not received any information on these items. Jerry Smith explained that the Prosecuting Attorney sent two memos to the Board regarding these issues. Al Scalf reported that staff recommends that the Optional Consolidated Review Process apply to this review. James Tracy stated that if the staffs recommendation is applied, the Ordinance states that the Hearing Examiner's determination is final until it is appealed and there hasn't been any appeal. Commissioner Harpole stated that the Prosecuting Attorney advised in his memo that the Board does have the authority to remand this back to the Hearing Examiner for reconsideration. The meeting was recessed to allow time for the Planning staff, the applicant's attorney and Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Paul McIlrath to discuss procedural concerns regarding the decision on this project. After the recess, Paul McIlrath explained that, although there are inconsistencies in the County's Regulatory Reform Ordinance, he feels that the County Permit Administrator has the authority to determine if the Regulatory Reform Ordinance applies to this application. He added that he thinks the Hearing Examiner reviewed this project under the Hearing Examiner Ordinance and intended the recommendation to go to the Board for a final decision. Jerry Smith reported that the record the Hearing Examiner created was under the Hearing Examiner Ordinance rather than the Consolidated Review Process. James Tracy pointed out wording in the Hearing Examiner's report that indicates the project is approved. Commissioner Harpole moved to remand this project to the Hearing Examiner with the following requests: 1) The Hearing Examiner determine how Regulatory Reform applies to the findings, conclu- sions and recommendation for ZON96-0024, 2) all of the correspondence from staff and attorneys be incorporated into the file, and 3) a) that staff review the project history in a memo to the Hearing Examiner, b) that staff review the FEIS that was approved conceptually and make comment to the Hearing Examiner on how it relates to the proposed project, and c) that staff prepare a memo to the Hearing Examiner regarding any concerns about GMA issues (rural center or crossroad issues) and this project. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion. Commissioner Huntingford noted that he feels the Board is attempting to change the rules as this applicant goes along. He feels the comment period for the SEP A process has passed and it is unfair for the County to change the rules now. He feels the Board is stalling a decision and he feels the applicant has tried to do what he could to meet the County's requirements. Commissioner Harpole stated that he feels this action is to get answers to questions that were asked in May when the Board reviewed the Hearing Examiner's recommendation. Commissioner Huntingford noted that he feels this project was vested under the Hearing Examiner Ordinance and should be reviewed under the rules when it was submitted. Dean Reynolds, the applicant, asked the timeline for the additional Hearing Examiner review process? Al Scalf reported that staff would have to create a staff report and schedule it on the Hearing Examiner agenda for September 23. It could be put back on the Board's agenda on October 13, 1997. Page 6 !YOL' 23 ;~r,r602 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of August 25, 1997 .(?~:~~\ l~~~"r1 ,~,___>c~/ "~!J.~'\/ James Tracy reiterated that it is his interpretation that, if this matter is not subject to the Regulatory Reform Ordinance, then the Board needs to make a decision. They do not have the option to remand the proj ect back to the Hearing Examiner under the 1992 ordinance. If the proj ect is subj ect to the Regulatory Reform Ordinance, then the Hearing Examiner has made a decision on this that is final and it has not been appealed. Paul McIlrath stated that there are some significant questions about how the Hearing Examiner reviewed this application which would effect how the Board deals with the project. Commissioner Huntingford asked if the Hearing Examiner can review this for clarification without holding another public hearing? Al Scalf answered that the staff will have to prepare a new report with the additional information. He doesn't know ifthe Hearing Examiner can consider this without another public hearing. James Tracy asked if the Board will provide specific findings of fact and conclusions to support the action that they will take today? Commissioner Harpole stated that they would. Al Scalf added that they could provide specific findings of fact and conclusions based on the components of the motion. The Chairman called for the vote on the motion. Commissioner Harpole and Chairman W ojt voted for the motion. Commissioner Huntingford voted against the motion. The motion carried. HEARlNG re: Budget Appropriations/Extensions; Various County Departments: The Chairman opened the hearing on the budget appropriations/extensions requested by the following County departments in the Current Expense Fund: Assessor $9,166.50; Auditor-Elections $13,038.72; Community Development $77,348.00; Sheriff $398.68; Sheriff Stop Grant $1,967.89; and Treasurer $4,428.00. There was also a request from the Health and Human Services Fund for $108,645.00. Hearing no comments for or against the requested appropriations/extensions, the Chairman closed the public hearing. Commissioner Huntingford moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 100-97 ordering the appropriations and extensions as requested. Commissioner Harpole seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Discussion and Decision re: Country Ridge Road Improvement District: Will Butterfield, from the Public Works Department, presented additional testimony submitted by T.A. Foley and Virginia McIntyre, Steve Hockaday and Catherine Hendy, who are property owners in the Country Ridge Subdivision. He explained that the Board must make a decision today to approve or not approve the RID. If they approve the RID, they must determine the boundaries and the method of assessment. Once the cost is established, an Assessment Hearing will be held. He submitted a spreadsheet which identifies the range of values for the properties. Page 7 h VOL 23 i~~r603 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of August 25, 1997 6f~c~~-i\ 1~~'::J<f \f:.t'f21i ~{O)/ ""'~Jl'!R'~' Commissioner Harpole asked about the letter from Catherine Hendy which states that a "one to one" method of assessment was agreed to at a previous hearing. Tom Foley reported that he and Virginia McIntyre are going through the boundary line adjustment process for their lots and it should be completed by the end of the week. They do not care about having primary or secondary access on lot 16, they would like to have a secondary access on lot 18. They are opposed to the "one to one" assessment method, but they are not opposed to the RID. Mr. Foley reiterated that their two lots have access from a road outside the RID and they don't see that much benefit for their two lots if they have to pay two shares. Will Butterfield stated that there could be mitigation of the assessment for the one parcel that will be serviced by RID. Commissioner Harpole asked if the Board decides on the equal share assessment method today, can the assessment for anyone lot be mitigated at the Assessment Hearing? Will Butterfield reported that is correct. This hearing will be held after the final construction is completed. Commissioner Huntingford moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 101-97 the establishment of the Country Ridge RID #4, using the equal share project cost only or the equal share with right-of-way costs, whichever is most beneficial to the property owners. Commissioner Harpole seconded the motion. The Public Works Department will approach the right-of-way acquisition as a donation from all the involved property owners. Commissioner Huntingford amended his motion to approve the boundary of the RID as shown in Exhibit B. Commissioner Harpole seconded the amended motion. The Chairman called for a vote on the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. MEETING AD].QlJRWliO.. ~" ~ , '" " I r ". / '. ~ "s '0' -". . "Jl , .... ....., SEAL j ~ . · ~ '..1.,,"J'l : .f>i~"."" . i ~...." '.' \ f.:.... .',' .' ....' \ · ,~ ..,. . j ,.!. ,.~". I ~. ~ . '~iL~ . . ... j .., i llllt · . ... ., l ..ll':, "* . .\..:,.... ". - .~, ",.# \ .' .. .. . , .- .~: . " "'" '\ i 'T' \. .. ., ...r'" " .' ,. .... .\ '" ~ .. ," ATTEST: '~ . " r>l041ttL-1f&~ Lorna Delaney, CMC G Clerk of the Board Page 8 tVOL 23 :u,::604'