Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM021304S REGIONAL'lNTERGOVERNMENT AL MEETING Friday, February 13, 2004 10:00 AM CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS City of Port Townsend Port of Port Townsend Public Utility District #1 of Jefferson County Jefferson County Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance The meeting was called to order at 10:05 AM by City Councilor Michelle Sandoval The following representatives were present: City of Port Townsend Councilmembers: Michelle Sandoval, Laurie Medlicott, Frank Benskin Port Commissioners: Bob Sokol, Herb Beck, and Conrad Pimer PUD Commissioners: David Sullivan, Wayne King, and Dana Roberts Jefferson County Commissioners: Dan Tittemess and Glen Huntingford Changes to the Agenda There were no changes proposed to the agenda. Minutes Minutes ofthe September 25 and November 18, 2003 meetings were approved unanimously. Announcements Dana Roberts noted it might be useful to make certain all of the bodies represented at the meeting agree to encourage the Forest Service to take the best approach to divesting the Qui1cene water system; he added he would like the Forest Service to also be encouraged to review the cost alternatives to cost plus interest. Dan Tittemess gave a elF (Community Infrastructure Fund) update. He said that the CIF Committee recommended approval of maximum funding for all the applications, including the PUD's purchase ofthe Quil water system. With the exception ofthe Port's request, which was funded entirely by a grant, all other projects were funded 50% by loan and 50% by grant. Regional Intergovernmental Meeting Page 1 February 13, 2004 Wayne King provided further information on his tour of the Qui1cene water operation. Ms. Sandoval suggested that the Capital Infrastructure Fund Committee write a letter to the Forest Service encouraging them to transfer ownership of the water system to the PUD. Mr. Titterness offered to call the committee chair, Jerry Spieckerman. Mr. Huntingford suggested that the elected officials draft a letter from all entities showing support for the transfer. Mr. Titterness stated that County staff will be asked to draft the letter for representatives of each entity to sign. Dana Roberts added that an alder mill looking at locating in Qui1cene found one problem was that adequate fire flow was not available; having the Quil water system would eliminate that sort of difficulty for businesses locating in the Quilcene area. Public Comment There was no public comment. Meeting schedule/or 2004 The proposed meeting schedule for the following three quarters is: Second quarter: PUD Third quarter: Port Fourth quarter: County Consensus was that meetings will be scheduled by each host group at a time which fits schedules the best. Final MOU Establishing Regional Intergovernmental Meetings Additional changes suggested to the MOD included: Understanding #3: Each participating government may bring eftly a maximum of three items to the agenda for each meeting. Understanding #4: The agenda items shall be submitted to the hosting government fe#y- !P.<e twenty-one days prior to the meeting, for distribution to the other governments at least tftH:ty fourteen days prior to the meeting. On the signature page, signature ofthe PUD representative should read "Chair" not "President." Draft Economic Development Strategy: Regional Intergovernmental Meeting Page 2 February 13, 2004 Ms. Sandoval introduced Interim EDC Director Marty Gay. Mr. Gay stated he is interested in understanding what the intent of the larger group of government entities is with regard to the EDC strategy which was produced through a contract between the County and the EDC. Mr. Titterness noted that, generally speaking, the strategy meets the County's goals and added that it would help ifthe other government entities agreed to support it. Mr. Gay stated that the County has a strategic plan. He said that at some point everyone wants to be on the same page about these issues; the last time the elected officials group met, it was decided there would be a discussion of the definition of "sustainable" and that could take a great deal of time. He expressed concern about how quickly a consensus can be achieved for an economic development plan. He said the County document was Whatcom County's model plan which was created for an economic development agency in order to funnel funds from the Federal government to their county. An important part of the process was buy-in from community and he stated it would be possible to initiate a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) process where Jefferson County could be in line for this type of funding. He also noted the value of this process in creating as much buy-in from stakeholders all over the diverse parts of the county as possible. Whatcom County developed an overarching umbrella partnership which included community meetings and those who took part mentioned there was real leadership on the part of electeds who said everyone had to get on the same page and quit the sniping about what economic development is. He urged the entity representatives to get on the same page, talk about issues important to people and create some definitions so people know what they are talking about. He added that all must also be willing to change the document when necessary, in response to new information and changing perceptions. Mr. Gay stated that EDC is willing to be the lead on the process but all the government entities involved need to develop a shared vision. Mr. Sokol noted that the report listed one of the challenges to unified economic development as differing value systems of leadership among the government entities. Port Commissioner Herb Beck noted that the government has limited methods for raising money and must create some way to subsidize tax money; he believes developing within the community would be the method. He stated that now there are 100 million dollars a year leaving the county and if development is encouraged and assisted, that money could be recaptured. He noted the Port is like a corporation - the more value is has, the more goods and services it can provide. Port Commissioner Conrad Pimer agreed that there is nothing the government can do to raise money but impose property or sales taxes. Regional Tntergovernmental Meeting Page 3 February 13. 2004 Mr. Titterness stated that he believes the leadership for this project is sitting at the table today. Jefferson County took leadership action and asked for the development of a strategy. He added that the organization at the table today is perfectly capable of being the access point for the public and community and another committee is not needed. He stated the community elected leaders are out there every day listening to constituents to find what the issues are. He said that an analysis was done, and showed that the Whatcom strategies are parallel to servicing Jefferson County's needs. He recommended that this organization as individual entities could approve the EDC outline and say that strategy number one is goal number one for us and move forward. Mr. Sokol stated that the definition of "economic development" is like the definition of "sustainability" and will have many different meanings to different people. He stated the County is way over the state average in the number of sole proprietors conducting business. He added it is not clear from the study whether these are businesses such as bed and breakfasts which employee 1.5 - 2 full time equivalent employees; at another point, reference is made to the state definition of small business, which is fewer than 500 employees - by that definition, nearly every business in the County would be a small business. "Economic development" can mean numbers of jobs, income levels, employers, telecommuters, shops, licensed or unlicensed businesses. There are many ideas of what economic development is and a definition must go back to the basis and foundation of what we are talking about when we use the term. Mr. Gay noted that the definition of economic development should be based on what the community decides is economic development; therefore mission and vision is needed. Mr. Titterness said that a public dialogue has been ongoing for several years now and that the Commissioners think Strategy #1 is something that each ofthe agencies agrees is something we need to do. He stated his recommendation that each of the elected officials encourage their own entities to adopt that as a goal for the group. Ms. Sandoval stated she does not necessary disagree with the development strategy, but that the Sommers report contains strategies very specific to Jefferson County. She suggested looking at the strategies from the EDC study and the Sommers study in conjunction. She recommended taking a step back before coming to any agreement on the development strategy. She agreed that small businesses are predominant because that is what is available to us at this time. She suggested that the EDC plan be evaluated to see if any of the strategies from the Sommers assessment are missing from it. She stated that strategy #1 regarding provision of infrastructure is in action and stated people are quite aware that we can't have more jobs or affordable housing with that basis. Mr. Huntingford said he agreed to a point but also believes that if we don not concentrate on infrastructure the entire process will slow down while re-examining the two studies. He said we should get ahead of the game to start with and keep the intergovernmental group on track, supporting each other. He related a conversation with a citizen, who was Regional Tntergovernmental Meeting Page 4 February 13, 2004 surprised when told the many ways in which the city and county do work together. He said the more we stay together and support each other (ie if city, county and port support the PUD in their Quilcene water project) it goes a long way to build community. He stated the biggest challenge is to encourage growth and development; and anticipate events that could take place, such as the bottom falling out of the housing industry. He stated that he doesn't care ifthe two strategies are merged somehow, but still believes infrastructure is the key, and if it is not in place, everything else slows down. Mr. Roberts commented on the differing value systems of leadership; he said he thinks it is important to be able to expand tolerance in mind, even ifit doesn't line up too closely. If everyone is not able to tolerate some ofthe particular values that push something into the mix, then each will have more trouble promoting their own issues. He stated that what he liked about the Sommers report was that they dealt in a small way with the retail leakage issue, identifying the real problem as the isolation of the county. Jefferson County is forced to look at niche businesses, which are not as dependent on costs of transportation, etc. There are elements and features due to this isolation that are attractive for some activities but which do not provide the economies of scale necessary for many larger enterprises. Ms. Sandoval noted that certain factors continue to come up in the various studies and surveys and these are that people who are running small businesses don't have the skills, such as marketing skills and technical assistance, to make their businesses work. According to one study, 60% of the businesses in the county have said they wanted to grow and what was holding them back was tack of technical expertise. She stated we should help figure out how to give these skills to people in that situation. She would like to see that strategy worked in. A discouraging result was that small business owners didn't feel they had community support for their small businesses. She believes strategies including incubators, skills centers, etc. are critical. Mr. Huntingford said that if you have people who don't know how to help themselves, how much of this problem is tied to a climate where governments aren't willing to help them grow. He stated it is not that we are intentionally getting in their way, but there are many times when potential business people run up against the process. He asked how can we change and say that we, as governments, are business friendly; he stated the atmosphere up front must be changed somehow. Mr. Sokol stated that we can say we are open and accessible, but you must have a track record which shows you are open and accessible. There are challenges and some resources that people just don't know about. The ClF is a start; however he noted that many more people come and look at the area than we ever know about. We talk about an unskilled work force, but many are skilled enough to go to the other side of the Sound and find jobs. He also cited a lack of high speed access to the internet and a lack of affordable retail space. He stated the County has an interesting list of challenges, but not necessarily ones which can't be overcome. Regional Tntergovernmental Meeting Page 5 February 13, 2004 Ms. Sandoval stated what she likes about the Sommers strategies is the specific steps which are laid out, for example organizing networks like the marine trades. She stated these strategies should be used to help us foster an economically viable, business friendly county. She suggested that the documents be merged, and perhaps EDC could merge the documents. She added that people become frustrated with a lack of action. Mr. Huntingford stated we need something to implement the strategies; he added that the BRFSS study is also an excellent document, showing the relationship between economic factors and the health of citizens in the County. He stated he does not want to sit on the economic development study and not move forward with implementation strategies. Mr. Gay stated he was not suggesting a full blown community process, but that the study must be taken to the community and adjusted according to their input. The intergovernmental group needs to be that entity ofleadership and come out with the commitment that we all understand the importance ofthese strategies. He stated that EDC will help develop those objectives; he acknowledged hearing questions about the priority of the EDC. He said that no matter how we define economic development, it is not any single priority but all elements must be in place. He added that the County Infrastructure Fund will be very successful and that success needs to be measured. There should be agreement on a document which will put everyone on the same page. Ms. Medlicott asked that a representative from each entity describe what they would do it they heard of a business or industry wanting to come to Jefferson County to locate. Mr. Roberts stated he would let the person know where the PUD has water and other related service and say there is a process and a board who will listen to proposals; it is difficult to say we will just "fix you up." Mr. Tittemess stated that ifthe County were approached, via the staff building & development department, the director would give the best information available regarding zoning, etc. and initiate a process which would include communications with other agencies. He stated that the County currently addresses these inquiries in regard to economic development, through a contract with the EDC. He stated that he didn't know ifthere are restrictions in state law that would prevent the EDC from actually being under the direction of a government entity. Mr. Huntingford stated that in the last few months, an interested business person would have been directed to the EDC. He added that the County has asked the EDC to put together an inventory of all lands available in county and city so we know what the zoning is, what utilities are available, etc., so that wherever potential business people are directed, they get the same information. Mr. Beck stated that when a business entity comes to him, her refers that party to the Executive Director, who is then able to contact the city manager, and county administrator. He stated that he would not deal with it personally and that the Regional Intergovernmental Meeting Page 6 February J 3, 2004 administrators have a better handle on the process involved than the electeds and they need to be given the opportunity to do their job. Mr. Pimer added that a Port Commissioner alone is powerless - the group itself has power; he concurred that the issue would be forwarded to the executive director. Ms. Sandoval noted she often has frustration with the process and lack of action and stated the goal here today was to identify and discuss a strategy; one task ofEDC is they need to have a strategy but can't bypass this agreement. She stated we want to get a process in place and get it done soon but need to discuss strategy. Mr. Beck stated that the process that hurts us the most is water and we need to let the PUD do their job. Ms. Sandoval stated that the main difficulty is infrastructure, of which water is one element. It is going to be a huge issue in the future for the peninsula, both in terms of how to get it and how to keep it. Mr. Tittemess stated his recommendation is to go back to each entity and say we would like to direct the EDC to meld these plans and move forward with something more than a strategic plan, more like a technical or action plan and bring forward action items that meet the goals and recommended prioritization - so it would be a directive from the respective agencies. Ms. Medlicott stated she believes the immediate priority of this group is to agree on a plan of action. Mr. King stated one of the biggest issues is to hold the next meeting when business people are able to attend, in the evening. He stated the Sommers assessment is a good job and there needs to be more emphasis on helping small businesses expand as that is the quickest boost to economic development. He added that EDC needs to be pro-active in assisting businesses. Mr. Huntingford said he has no objection to merging the documents, but he would rather not wait until the next intergovernmental meeting to have the issue resolved. He suggested tasking the EDC and managers to get together and take on the project. There were no objections and consensus was to have the meeting take place as soon as possible. Mr. Beck asked for an explanation of the difference between "light" and "heavy" industry. It was decided to have staff weigh in on that discussion. Public comment There was no public comment. Regional intergovernmental Meeting Page 7 February 13, 2004 Adjourn There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11 :30 p.m. Minutes submitted by Pam Kolacy Port Townsend City Clerk Regional Intergovernmental Meeting Page 8 February 13, 2004