Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM062200S SPECIAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL MEETING CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT #1 OF JEFFERSON COUNTY PORT OF PORT TOWNSEND JUNE 22, 2000 DRAFT I. CALL TO ORDER A special intergovernmental meeting was held on Thursday, June 22, 2000 at 12:00 noon in the PUD Offices, Port Hadlock, Washington. PUD Commissioner Tittemess served as Chair. This being the first meeting, there were no minutes to approve nor reports from standing or special committees. Present at the meeting were: City of Port Townsend Councilmembers GeoffMasci and Joe Finnie Jefferson County Commissioners Dan Harpole, Glen Huntingford, and Richard Wojt Public Utility District #1 Commissioners Bob Krutenat and Dan Tittemess Port of Port Townsend Commissioners Bob Sokol, Herb Beck, and Conrad Pirner u. DEVELOPMENT OF PROCEDURES/ ACTION ITEMS Representatives reviewed the Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Port Townsend, Jefferson County, PUD#1 of Jefferson County, and the Port of Port Townsend. There was a request to modify Item 5 related to staff participation in the meetings and Item 6 related to public testimony. A. Item 5 - Staff Participation in the Meetings. This item states that "No staff will participate in these meetings, however the hosting government will provide for taking minutes of the meeting. " Although it was understood and supported that the purpose of this meeting is for a discussion among elected officials, it was suggested that the language be revised to reflect that staff participation is limited to answering questions as directed by elected officials. Commissioner Harpole agreed to take responsibility for creating a draft with this recommended revision and presenting it to the other entities. For this meeting, representatives agreed that it would be appropriate to access staff for questions. B. Item 6 - Public Testimony. This item states "Public testimony will not be pennitted. It is the responsibility of the participating governments to subject agenda items to the public process, if necessary; prior to placing them on the agenda of the Council." It was recommended that there be a limited public comment period at the beginning to allow the public an opportunity to bring information to electeds prior to discussion as well as at the end of the agenda for additional comments. Public testimony is important to ensuring that elected officials hear from the public. There was agreement to establish a meeting format with brief public comment periods (limited to 3 minutes each speaker) at the beginning and end of the agenda. There was discussion about whether it is important for participants to have the authority to take action should they reach agreement. There was general consensus that, although this meeting can be a forum for good discussions and support of each other, each entity would make decisions as dictated by their own processes. There was agreement that this council is a discussion body only and although there may be agreements in principle, there would be no formal actions taken at this meeting. There was discussion of other items in the Memorandum of Understanding as follows: C. Item 2 -- Responsibility for hosting meetings. It was understood that the hosting government would chair the meeting. It was requested that the next meeting be scheduled as soon as three months ahead to avoid scheduling conflicts. The Port of Port Townsend agreed to host the next meeting and establish a meeting, date possibly the 2nd Thursday in October. D. Item 4 - Agenda. It was suggested that a shorter period be listed for submission of agenda items instead of the stated 45 days. Following discussion, there was agreement to revise the language to reflect that "The agenda items shall be submitted to the hosting government twenty-one days prior to the meeting, .... " INTERGOVERNMENTAL MEETING June 22, 2000 Page 2 E. Item 5 -- Staff participation in the meetings (continuation). There was agreement that the language would be changed to read "Staff will not participate in the round table discussion during these meetings. However, staff is considered an important resource for the participants and can be called upon as needed. " The hosting government will provide for taking minutes of the meeting. F. Item 7 - Distribution of Minutes (new item). It was recommended that a new item be added stating that The hosting government will provide for the distribution of minutes to participants following the meeting. It was recommended this document be revised and distributed for review prior to the next meeting. Ill. DISCUSSION TOPICS A. Port/PUD Topic: Airport Fire Flow Project - Status Several airport construction projects were approved under the condition of providing fIre flow. The County has indicated that permits would be difficult to obtain until there is ftre flow compliance. In an effort to comply, the Port, the City and the PUD have been working to resolve whether the City or the POO has jurisdiction in serving this area. The PUD has done preliminary engineering and submitted a project report to the DOH regarding the water system and the PUD has obtained a DOT permit for crossing the airport cutoff road. The PUD has requested a Public Works Trust Fund loan to assist in the construction of a 250,000 gallon water tank and installation of approximately 6,000 feet of 8~10 in. mains. Provided the loan is approved as anticipated, the likely construction start will be May 2001. Although a two-year extension was requested in May 1999, the County granted only one-year. No formal request was submitted for granting the original extension of June 2001. Now that the policy struggle between the PUD and City has been resolved, the goal is to get funding and move on with the project. If the loan is not approved, the PUD and Port have a funding agreement and construction will continue. The County recommended that the Pert request, through the County Administrator, a one-year extension on the project. They clarifted that an issue that remains unchanged is that until there is a sub-area plan for the airport, development is reserved to airport-related activity. The POO asked if the City would be interested in transferring customers and the portion of the water system at the Snagstad Road serving line area at the airport to the POO under equitable circumstances. If these are transferred to the PUD, the booster pump will no longer be necessary. Councilmember Masci noted the request. There was a discussion of the infrastructure funding resulting from the 6094 legislation. The County is holding an eight tenths percent rebate on sales tax. The funds were intended to help provide infrastructure to help fuel rural economic growth. The County agreed to ask County Administrator Charles Saddler to begin the process of getting the appropriate parties at the table for discussion. The RCW spells out what entities are to be involved B. City Topic: Recreation for Children in Jefferson County Councilmember Allen Frank, who was not present at the meeting, requested this item be added to the agenda. - County comments were that there is also a strong and growing community interest in an aquatic center as well as interest by the YMCA in coming to Jefferson County to provide recreational activities. It is expected that in order to support an aquatic center, a population base of 20,000 is needed and would need to include all East Jefferson County in a Park and Recreation service area. A feasibility study would include siting to serve this broader community. The last two surveys by the City and County indicated the public wanted hiking and walking trails among other recreational activities. The County is embarking on a master nonmotorized trails plan and a group of residents is nearing agreement with DNR and ORM for a possible trail from Anderson to Gibbs Lake. The Port commented that the boat ramps provide for'recreational activity, such as the youth sailing program and there is a lot of beach activity in Quilcene. The Port does have attractive property, owned by the citizens of the County, at Kah Tai Lagoon that is in controversy currently about a skateboard park. INTERGOVERNMENTAL MEETING June 22, 2000 Page 3 That property is zoned for recreational activities, is centrally located, and is on the transit route. The restroom on Larry Scott Trail at the west end of the boat haven is close to being complete. City comments were that the City's Park and Recreation Committee is working on both skateboard and aquatic center ideas. The Parks and Recreation summit will flesh out the wants and needs. Affording our needs will precede affording our wants. City and County representatives recognized the need to discuss creating a mechanism for a sustainable funding source, such as a taxing district or recreational service area. They also expressed an interest in scheduling the Parks and Recreation Summit. The intent of the summit is to include all parties providing recreation activities and begin to look at efficiency gains and new funding strategies. C. County Topic: Public Comment During Meeting For today's meeting, there is a public comment period at the end of the meeting. Included in follow up agendas will be public comment periods scheduled at the beginning and at the end of the meeting. D. PUD Topic: Support for PUD Power Authority The PUD briefed their Resolution No. 2000-002, outlining the process of placing a question on the November ballot requesting authority to retail electricity. The question to be placed before the voters is whether the PUD shall construct or acquire facilities for the generation, transmission, or distribution of electrical power. Their desire is to fulfill their mandate to supply cost-based utility service to people of the County. Cost-based or market-based power can be obtained from Bonneville Power Authority (or other sources depending on Bonneville's purchasing azT3l1gements) and retailed to people of the County. They want the opportunity to explore some needs and benefits of distributed generation in the rural communities in Eastern Jefferson County. The PUD is also interested in the operating electrical facilities on the Indian Island Naval Facility. In order to begin exploring the possibilities, electrical authority is needed. They requested that the County, City and Port provide resolutions of support and include the PUD in any franchise discussions with the current electrical provider. The PUD would need to be given a franchise authority to use the infrastructure and wholesale power. The text of the resolution is part ofRCW 54, a copy of which was distributed. They have engaged a contractor to study the issue of infrastructure. They suggested the County review the Comp plan to ensure that the PUD is included as a potential utility supplier of electricity. They described the difference between investor-owned utilities (IODs) and public power. The PUDs represent a market threat to other utility suppliers in the County. The County agreed to follow up on considering a resolution and will look into and provide feedback on the Compo Plan question. Commissioner Wojtjoined the meeting at 1:30 PM. E. Port Topic: Comprehensive Scheme of Harbor Improvements (Information Item) The purpose of this topic is to give notice of the process of updating this plan. Because the Port has facilities in the City and County, the Comprehensive Scheme touches all agencies and has implications for the Joint Growth Management Committee. The Comprehensive Scheme has been in existence since the Port began in 1926 and was last updated in 1982. There are many references in the document that need updating, such as references to the railroad transfer span which the City now owns and the rail line from the Mill which is now the Larry Scott Trail. What was once envisioned is now to a large extent a reality, with usage exceeding projections. The scheme talks about improving the ability to haul out larger vessels and refers to a marina expansion which is remarkably similar to the plan the Port is looking at with the Corps of Engineers. The public process may result in additional changes. Other areas to be addressed in this scheme include an update of the airport master plan originally created in 1994 (not a sub~area plan) and the Port regaining management control of Point Hudson. Break at 1:40 PM Returned at 2:00 PM. City Councilmember Finnie joined the meeting. lNTERGOVERNMENT AL MEETING June 22, 2000 Page 4 F. County Topic: UGA Status in Glen Cove and Tri-Area The County outlined their latest thoughts concerning the designating of UGA status for the Tri-Area and Glen Cove. The County Commissioners no longer believe that these two issues should be addressed simultaneously. The Tri~Area UGA issue is developing at a faster rate and should be addressed without waiting for Glen Cove to develop the same level of maturity. Both communities have issues that will impact the County, City and PUD. When the BOCC gave direction to staff that these are going toward UGA, the Commissioners realized the need to do sub-area plans and nine parameters around resolving the community issues. It became apparent that the Tri-Area had more pressing issues than Glen Cove. The light industrial manufacturing is a particular concern that the County has been made aware of through :frustrated citizens trying to develop business opportunities. It seems the most appropriate venue for this topic is the Joint Growth Management Steering Committee. The County recommends focusing limited resources on the Tri Area, while opening up the tight line boundary northward, including about 75 acres for light industrial and manufacturing. Then follow with a limited strategy in Glen Cove. They clarified that there have been no modifications to the Comp Plan regarding the designations of the Tri Area or Glen Cove. A public hearing process is needed to modify the Comprehensive Plan to expand the tight line boundary because of the existing utility infrastructure. There was a question about the status of the Glen Cove, Tri-Area study. The County responded that of the six components in the original scope agreed to through the Joint Growth Management Steering Committee, the majority of steps one through five were completed. Part of the conclusion was that there . are somewhere between 200 and 300 additional acres needed for commercial development. The Board discussed alternative scenarios and agreed that the Tri Area is looking and developing like an Urban Growth Area. The City lobbied the County and said they wanted a closer look at Glen Cove as a future urban growth area. Still to be addressed in a sub"area planning process for the Tri-Area are how to address the traveled ways, the corridors, issues of getting and getting rid of water, and the capital facilities element. The County indicated that if the Joint Growth Management Steering Committee partners agree with this concept, the County can initiate a Compo Plan amendment toward that direction. The County is under a big workload to get the Unified Development Code (UDC) done this year. Following that work will be efforts on SB 5019 which says that if a manufacturing business wants to come in, by law they must first look in the UGA. If the UGA does not have room, they can request zoning somewhere in the county to plot down a light industrial manufacturing campus. This bill requires that a public strategy be adopted. There was a question about what is being done for South County. The County reported that the Brinnon sub-area plan is underway and the entire plan from Walker mountain south is scheduled to be completed within 14 months. Until the Quilcene community gets together with the PUD to get a water system, there is not much the County can do. The PUD commented that through negotiations the forest service may become more amenable to working with the PUD and allowing them to develop a small system in the downtown core area. G, City Topic: Joint Growth Capital Facilities Planning The City has decided to add a fifth standing committee called the Capital Facilities Committee. The intent is to assess the current value of all of the City's real estate holdings. A filter process would determine the mandated and most appropriate uses of the facilities, including selling the asset, with the monies going into the City's general fund. In support of this, the Council passed a surplus property ordinance and are now authorized to determine a course of action on these assets. Through this prework, the City will be better able to predict their needs and reenter dialogue with the County on joint facilities. The County commented that they signed a joint resolution with the City. They also prepared a scope of work for the City to consider using the County's contracted consultant to bring together the City's information and needs description similar to the County's. They asked if the contract will be brought up for consideration again and how long they will need to wait. The City responded that the vote against the proposal spurred the creation of the capital facilities plan because the Council needed some data. There is interest in revisiting the consultant proposal. The Capital INTERGOVERNMENTAL MEETING June 22, 2000 Page 5 Facilities Committee will also provide the County Administrator a schedule of the topics that come before the monthly capital facilities discussion. H. Port Topic: JCIA Noise Overlay Ordinance The Port reviewed the history of two policies that deal specifically with the airport: an airport overlay zone and the noise overlay zone. The County Commissioners Resolution 71-98 committed to creating this zone within 120 days of Compo Plan adoption. The original draft was fraught with problems. The ordinance was rewritten after a Port workshop identified problems. It is the Port's understanding that because the Planning Commission recommended the redraft be put on hold until adoption of the Glen Cove Tri~Area study, the second draft did not make it to the Planning Commission. The Port would like to bring out the draft ordinance with a revised plan to address as many of the objections as possible. The Port would also like to address the misunderstanding that this zone is just for new, buildable lots. It would be for any property that changes hands. They distributed a brochure detailing its good neighbor policy (noise abatement procedure). The Port feels it has done all it can do. The County asked if notice to title is the best approach and whether the County could adopt a noise abatement ordinance and reference the area. The County is often accused of stepping in and trying to notice every community conflict and many feel that conditioning the title devalues property. The Port said the airport by definition is an essential public facility. The noise overlay district is intended to establish an area within which property owners will be informed of potential noise impacts associated with normal flight and ground operations at JClA. It does not have to be notice to title although it may be more effective. The Port read an article about Washington leading the way in addressing aviation noise concern, requiring public entities that own or operate airports to make provisions for the airports in the Comprehensive Plan to discourage incompatible land use around them. The program has stopped the dangerous trend of Washington losing one airport per year. The County agreed to bring the draft up for review. I. PUD Topic: Eastern Jefferson County Telecommunications At a recent EDC meeting, the PUD raised the concern that Bonneville Power has not advanced fiber optic cable to Jefferson County. Northwest Open Access Network (NOA Net) will meet in Portland, OR on June 27-2Sth, where it is expected that more information will be available. Jefferson and Clallam County POO staff are near agreement on asking NOA Net to site two points of presence on the north Olympic Peninsula and the EDC agreed to forward a grant request from the POO. The PUD wants next to discuss assistance ITom the 0.8% infrastructure money for cost abatement during construction. The PUD believes this cable will provide economic growth opportunities with low environmental and visual impact. The County announced that a telecommunications inventory is underway to identify gaps in available services and infrastructure. It is hoped that once the gaps are identified that part of the 0.8% infrastructure money might go to fill the gaps. The City was supportive of beginning negotiations today for stringing cable and to begin making legislative changes in community development to allow certain uses in residential zones. The PUD said they will be petitioning for a point of presence with or without the grant. They are also given serious consideration to entering into a purchase agreement for fiber optic cable. J. City Topic: Sleep Parking Issues (Information Item) This topic came through the Transit Authority where they were addressing citizen needs relative to sleep parking (peoples whose homes are on wheels). Some residents Jive on land as people live on the ocean -- they live in campers or vans and have a mobile lifestyle. They work, shop and are citizens of our area. There are not many provisions if any throughout our region for those folks to be able to sleep park. Camping facilities are often cost prohibitive. This topic is introduced for information and to begin dialogue. As the gap widens between the rich and people of lesser means, there may be more people choosing this lifestyle. The response may be as simple as providing an inventory of facilities that have adjacent sanitary facilities and a solid waste disposal facility. The Port commented that they currently have daytime parking problems and have had serious problems with people living up on their boats in the boatyard. Conf1icts have arisen with the people who work INTERGOVERNMENTAL MEETING June 22, 2000 Page 6 during the day in the boatyard and there are vandalism problems to the public restroom facilities. They differentiated between people who live in the boatyard and "liveaboards" in the marina who pay fees for their slip and comply with rules and regulations. The Port would prefer providing an economic base where jobs are available so people can afford to live somewhere rather than in their cars. They also believe that for many people, such as those in the boatyard it is a lifestyle choice. There was discussion about whether another jurisdiction has taken action on this issue. Questions were regarding enforcement, sanitary and public health issues, and insurance concerns. A comment was made that although some may choose it as a lifestyle, increasingly there are people that are going to be forced into this situation. IV. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD Michelle Sandoval: She believes that it had been discussed that the appropriate time to address the noise overlay zone was once the sub-area or master plan for the airport was put forward. The references to the Tri-Area/Glen Cove sub-area plan were for other than airport uses. Once the Tri-Area/Glen Cove study was complete, it was expected that information would be available on how many acres were needed for additional light industrial, etc. Commissioner Sokol noted that the County sent a letter to the Port Commission dated March 18, 1999 concurring with the Planning Commission that the noise overlay zone should be postponed until both the Glen Cove Tri-Area study and the aÎIport master plan have been developed. The Port is moving forward with the airport sub~area plan, but no timeline has been established. Related to car parking, an obvious issue no one mentioned is the lack of affordable housing. If the infrastructure goes in for the high-tech industries, she believes what comes under question is how much infrastructure and how much light industrial area is going to be needed. If we are going to put money into Glen Cove infrastructure then we may want to spend the money on the fiber optics that will provide the higher wage jobs and a cleaner sort of industry. And yet, they may be placed other places and not in Glen Cove. Nancy Dorgan: Related to Kah Tai, she asked everyone to consider how easy it is not to develop something. Discussed today were, what she would consider to be, incompatible uses for that beautiful space. She urged people to leave the area alone and let it give the people ofthe County what it is already. Guy Rudolph: Although he is pleased the County is fmally going to be doing the sub-area plan for the Tri Area, he is about ready to tell the government to leave them alone and stay the heck out of the area. This has been discussed since 1994 when the City appealed the Compo Plan for the interim UGA. The opportunity to build a real community has gone by the wayside. There is not a great deal of help in State funding for studies. It is increasingly hard to become a new city and that is what the UGA is -~ a city controlled by the County. Pat Rodgers: The 200-300 acres that you talked about that might be necessary for future commercial and light industrial development are numbers from the notorious Trottier report and are incorrect. Even if you were to take the 200-300 acres, those are descriptive, not prescriptive. The concept is that you absolutely need to set aside that many acres minimum. He advised taking a hard look at 200-~00" acres. Mark Beaufait: He thinks this meeting is a good start for getting issues out on the table. One important thing is to pay attention to the lead times because a lot of the issues get back to the inftastructure tax which means the process for appropriating that should be drafted now. Get started now on multi-input component. Janet Folliard: She explained she is the one who approached the transit about park sleeping. The attitudes expressed today are typical - making jokes and making light of it - treating these people like third-class citizens. The attitude is totally out of line. Hundreds of people in this county live out of their vehicles and we need a piece of land put aside so that people have a safe place to go and park. Lifestyle or otherwise, it does not matter. There is no affordable housing here. There is a woman in her 70s that lives on her retirement out of INTERGOVERNMENTAL MEETING June 22, 2000 Page 7 a station wagon and you make jokes about it. Santa Cruz, California recognized the need for this and has set aside land for sleep parking. Michelle Sandoval: In regard to the PUD vote about power, she asked if information will be available to the public prior to the vote. She is confused because the resolution talked about the right to begin to research it, but the actual vote is for the right to proceed to do it. The PUD responded that the vote is for the authority to plan and develop. The fIrst step in planning is study, but it is authority for all of it. There will be a booth at the County Fair with some demonstrations and information. Guy Rudolph: He read a draft article he is going to publish as follows: It is not a secret there is a disenchantment with the political system. There is very little public confidence in our political system. Local public officials are better at maintaining institutions of government than they are at building communities. Our political system has come to the point of disregarding the capabilities, talents and intelligence of everyday citizens. Public officials would do a lot better if they viewed citizens as having an important role in helping them do their jobs. Remember that they the government do take an oath of office to represent. He sees that government has put the Tri Area in a place where every time we have tried to bring something forward to them, they have stuffed the law up our nose in the community. We have tried to come in and discuss these things and haven't gotten anywhere. You want to expand Glen Cove and not put the commercial area back where it was back in the 1990s for the Tri Area. You cannot do one and not do the other one. You are just moving further away from us. And the same way with the water system. V. UNFINISHED BUSINESSINEW BUSINESS Commissioner Sokol thanked the PUD for hosting the meeting. He feels it was a good forum for discussing issues. VI. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 3:30 p.m. The next meeting will be scheduled by the Port of Port Townsend and is tentatively scheduled for the 2nd Thursday in October. c.c ; tpQ. 1/1 d..- CO 11 July 2000 ~~(C~~~~lQ) JUL 1 2 2000 MEMO FOR SEE DISTRIBUTION JEFFERSON COUNTY SUBJECT: Minutes for the June 22, 2000 Intergovenunental Meeting BOARD OFCOMMtSSIONERS 1. The purpose of this memo is to forward the minutes of the 22 June 2000 Intergovernmental meeting held at the PUD#l of Jefferson County's Office. 2. Please distribute the inclosed minutes to your elected officers. They should review the minutes and be prepared to present any changes at the next meeting. We will not attempt to change the minutes prior to the meeting as that would require a never-ending iterative cycle of changing and reissuing draft minutes. 3. According to the minutes the Port of Port Townsend will sponsor the next event, which is tentatively scheduled for the 2nd Thursday in October. 4. Joanna Sanders took the minutes for us. She also does the minutes for the WUCC, and any other PUD sponsored function requiring official minutes. If you wish to take advantage of her services, you should coordinate with her early. She can be reached at 3792877, fax 3854928 or sanders@wavpt.com 5. Michelle Sandoval asked to receive a copy ofthe minutes and Mark Beaufait asked to receive notice of future meetings. Because the minutes have not yet been approved, I did not send a copy to Michelle, but that would not preclude anyone else fTom doing so. 6. POC this memo is Jim Parker, 385-5800 Distribution City Manager County Administrator Port General Manager PUD Commissioners SPECIAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL MEETING CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT #1 OF JEFFERSON COUNTY PORT OF PORT TOWNSEND JUNE 22, 2000 GUEST SIGN IN SHEET: Larry Crockett, Port of Port Townsend (385-0656) John Watts, Port Townsend City Attorney (379-5048) Michelle Sandoval, 686 Roosevelt St., Port Townsend, W A 98368 (385-9344) Nancy Dorgan, Citizen Port Townsend (385-9287) Philip L. Watness, Peninsula Daily News (385-2335) Guy Rudolph, Tn-Area Community Club, PO Box 454 Chimacum, W A 98325 (385-3338) Pat Rodgers, Brinnon (796-3022) Charles Saddler, Jefferson County (385-9158) Al Scalf, Jefferson County (379-4493) Kate Jenks, Citizen, Port Townsend (385~4026) Janet Folliard, Citizen Port Townsend Mark Beaufait, 914 Washington #6, Port Townsend, WA 98368 (Please send meeting notices)