Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM062893 ¡. .. Ch~ <v ~ð~ MINUTES WEEK OF JUNE 28,1993 The meeting was called to Order by Chairman Richard W ojt. Commissioner Robert Hinton and Commissioner Glen Huntingford were both present. Public Works Director Gary Rowe and Prosecutin2 Attornev Mark Huth re: Lon2 Haul Contract for Solid Waste Disposal: Mark Huth reported that the company awarded the contract for solid waste long haul was required to submit documents to the County within 30 days, which included their insurance certificates. The insurance papers were then sent on to the Risk Pool for review. There were some problems with the insurance certificates and policies which have since been worked out. This process took longer than normal because the County needed the proper insurance paperwork in place before the contract could be signed. The contract will be on next week's consent agenda. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: The Board concurred that Patti Sullivan be allowed to take the kick plates off the bottom of the doors in the Courthouse, clean them up and replace them. The Soldiers' and Sailors' Relief Fund and how most of the applications approved are from the Port Townsend area; how the Hadlock and Brinnon Posts screen applicants for this fund and the Planning Commission and their review of the Critical Areas Ordinance were also discussed. APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA: Commissioner Huntingford moved for adoption and approval of the consent agenda with the exception of Item number 1 which needs to be reviewed by the Prosecuting Attorney. Commissioner Hinton seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. 1. DELETE Addendum re: Upholding a Final Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance and Lead Agency Status Issued April 29, 1993; Gary PhillipslPat Handly Large Lot Subdivision 2. Reappointment of William Michel to the Solid Waste Advisory Board; Two Year Term (Term Expires 6/15/93) 3. Recommendation for Small Works Bid Award; Pavement Markings #MT1094; To Apply-A-Line for their low bid of $55,525.00 4. No Objection to Transfer of Liquor License; From Old Alcohol Plant Lodge (port Hadlock Inn & Marina) to John R & Jeanne Hansen 5. Objection to Liquor License Application - No Application for Required Health Department Permits; Comet Cafe, Inc. Port Hadlock 6. AGREEMENT, Interagency; Health Department CPS Case Management; State Department of Social and Health Services 7. AGREEMENT, Grant re: Health Department Parent Education Program; Washington Council for Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect 8. Accept Resignation - Citizen at Large Position; Solid Waste Advisory Committee; Neil R. Vander Ven 9. AGREEMENT re: Intergovernmental Cooperation for Community Service Program Work; State Department of Corrections, State Department of Transportation, Clallam County, City of Forks, and the Olympic National Park \!U"L' f n 6'7. v ld P,~GE ,1 ·' Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of June 28, 1993 Page: 2 THE CONSENT AGENDA - Continued 10. AGREEMENT and Related Documents re: Grant No. G9300302; $500,000 for Closure of the Jefferson County Landfill; State Department of Ecology 11. Applications for Assistance from the Soldiers' and Sailors' Relief Fund; Two (2) from American Legion Post #26 for $500 each. BUSINESS FROM COUNTY DEPARTMENTS PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT Adoption of the Precisely Detailed Map; Airport Cutoff Road/State Route 20 Intersection Commercial Area: Mark Huth reported that the map of the commercial zone for the Airport Cutoff Road/State Highway 20 intersection is ready for adoption. The interim zoning change designation was adopted and was provisional until the SEP A review was performed. SEP A could not be done until the exact area for the zone change was established. The SEP A process has now been completed and the approval of this map is the last step in approval of this designation change. Any project proposed in this area will have to go through SEP A review itself. The discussion turned to the necessity of this zone change since this property has been an established commercial area for many years. Commissioner Huntingford moved to adopt the precisely detailed map for the Airport Cutoff Road/State Route 20 Intersection commercial area. Commissioner Hinton seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Membership of Community Plannin2 Committees: Commissioner Hinton noted that the question has come up regarding whether businesses whose owners operate from rented or leased facilities can serve on the Community Planning committee for the community where their business is located. The Board concurred that a business owner that rents or leases a facility in a community planning area can serve on that community's planning committee. Plannin2 Commission Memorandum re: Wetland Delineation Workshop: This workshop will be held July 9, 1993 at 9:00 a.m. The place has not been determined yet. HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES CONTRACTS (2) re: Health Department Pro2rams; Alcohol and Other Dru2 Services (#2115-91794) with the State Department of Social and Health Services and Primary Dental Care (#510-93-013) with the Washin2ton Health Care Authority: Commissioner Huntingford moved and Commissioner Hinton seconded the motion to approve the two contracts as presented by the Health Department. One is with the State Department of Social and Health Services for alcohol and other drug services and the second is for the primary dental care program with the Washington Health Care Authority. The Chairman called for a vote on the motion. The motion carried by a unanimous vote. FACILITIES MANAGEMENT BID OPENING re: Construction of a new Animal Shelter ACF947: Capital Project Manager Frank Gifford opened and read the bids received for the construction of a new animal shelter as follows: . VOL 1 9 rAGE 672 " Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of June 28, 1993 Page: 3 BIDDERS BID TOTALS 1. McClanahan Construction, Quilcene 180 calendar days to complete 2. Drury Construction, Bainbridge Island 185 calendar days to complete 3. Amtco Construction, Port Townsend Bid will be reviewed and a report made to the Board 4. TLC Excavating and Construction, Port Angeles 120 calendar days to complete 5. Fisher Construction, Poulsbo 180 calendar days to complete 6. Arborview Construction, Bainbridge Island 133 calendar days to complete 7. Olympic Western Construction, Seattle 180 calendar days to complete $335,395.84 350,000.00 Figures are incomplete 356,025.00 285,670.00 398,211.02 304,236.00 Engineer's Estimate 240,000.00 Frank Gifford reported that the Prosecuting Attorney will be asked to review the bid documents from Amtco to determine if their bid can be accepted. Commissioner Huntingford moved to have the Public Works Department review the bids for accuracy and make a recommendation for bid award that is to the best advantage of the County. Commissioner Hinton seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. PUBLIC WORKS HEARING re: Six Year Transportation Improvement Pro2ram: Public Works Director Gary Rowe reported that the six year transportation program is prepared annually to identify projects for the next six years. It takes between one and three years to get a project from the idea stage to the actual work stage. The second and third year projects are those with secured funding. The fourth, fifth and sixth year funding figures are estimates because the project has been identified, but there are no specific plans or cost figures. There are several sources of funding for these projects: the County road fund, federal and State grants, and the Public Works Trust Fund loan program. Projects are identified by an analysis of the physical features of the road, the use of the road (Le. traffic counts, use by mail carriers or school buses), and funding availability. Once the Board adopts the six year plan, it is forwarded to the Planning Department for review of comformance with the County Comprehensive Plan. Transportation Planner Scott Kilmer then reviewed the projects on the six year transportation plan as submitted: 1. Chimacum Road - right-of-way acquisition is currently being negotiated. 2. Irondale Road - from Moore Street toward SRI9. 3. Seventh Avenue - from lrondale Road to Swanee Road. 4. West End Bridge Rail Retrofit projects. This is to put guardrails on all the bridges. 5. East End Bridge Rail Retrofit projects. 6. County Transportation Plan - In conjunction with Growth Management. 7. West Egg and I Road - west of the West Valley Road. 8. Chimacum Road South - continuation of current project. 9. South Bogachiel Road Slide - right of way acquisition. 10. South Discovery Road - from City Limits to Cape George Road. 11. Annual overlay and chip seal project. 12/13. Safety and miscellaneous projects. When a project is begun a CRP (County Road Project) resolution is brought before the Board for approval which describes the scope of the project and the associated costs. Projects 14 to 16 are to start in 1995. 14. Paradise Bay Road. 15. Belle Street. 16. Dosewallips Road. 17. Upper Hoh Road - engineering study to determine the best location for this road. VOL 1 9 rAGE 673 " Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of June 28, 1993 Page: 4 18. Cook Avenue Extension - from Hastings Avenue West to the city limits. 19. 6th Avenue in lrondale. 20. East Moore Street, Irondale. 21. 5th Avenue, lrondale. The following projects are planned for the fourth, fifth and sixth years and are dependent on the County securing funding. 22. South Discovery Road. 23. Duckabush Road. 24. East Quilcene Road. 25. Mill Truck Route. 26. ISTEA Enhancement Grant Project. Chairman Wojt stated that because the ISTEA project has grant funding and because of the benefits of having this trail, he feels it should be moved higher on the list. The following projects are all related to County roads that have been turned over to the State in recent years. 27. Beaver Valley Road. 28. Beaver Valley Road. 29. Airport Cut-Off Road/SR20 Intersection. 30. Four Comers Road/SR19 Intersection - the cost is shared proportionally by use between the County and the State. Gary Rowe reiterated that there are certain criteria that determines a project's place on the priority list as well as limitations of time and staff to work on the projects. Chairman Wojt opened the public hearing and asked anyone giving testimony to identify themselves by name. Glen Gustavson reported to the Board that the East Quilcene Bay Road is deficient on all counts including safety. There is logging going on in that area which means logging trucks will be using it. There are home construction workers and school buses on the road. He reported that he sent petitions to 107 taxpayers and had returns from 60 of them. They are requesting that a grant be applied for and that the road be placed very high on the six year transportation program. They ask that if the County is going to do any oiling on the road this year that the whole road be oiled, one lane at a time. Hearing no further public comment the Chairman closed the hearing. Commissioner Hinton stated that he would like to defer any decision on this program until next week. Stamm~ Request to Replace Emplovee in a Funded Position; District Court: Commissioner Huntingford moved to approve the request from the District Court to hire a replacement for a Court Clerk who is retiring. Chairman Wojt seconded the motion in the absence of Commissioner Hinton. The motion carried. Letters to State Con2ressional Dele2ation re: Sponsorin2 Bills for Continuation of PILT Fundin2: Commissioner Huntingford moved to send letters to the State's congressional delegation asking them to support bills in the House and Senate on PILT funding. Commissioner Hinton seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. The Board met in Executive Session with Prosecuting Attorney Mark Huth regarding litigation from 3 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. HEARING NOTICE re: SEPA Miti2ation and Plat Approval Conditions; Adequate Provision for Schools; Inn at Port Ludlow Proiect: Commissioner Huntingford moved to set a public hearing for July 12, 1993 at 2:30 p.m. regarding the SEP A mitigation and plat approval condition for the Inn at Port Ludlow project concerning the adequate provision for schools. Commissioner Hinton seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. .VOL 19 rAc~674 .' Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of June 28, 1993 Page: 5 The meeting was recessed after the executive session and reconvened at 7:00 p.m. in the Superior Court Courtroom for the following hearing. All three Board members were present. PUBLIC WORKS HEARING re: Proposed Ordinance Establishin2! Fees for the Solid Waste Division: Eleven interested County residents were present when Chairman Wojt opened the hearing and explained the procedures. He then asked the Public Works Director to review the proposed solid waste fees. The Solid Waste Advisory Committee reviewed and made a recommendation to the Board on June 4, 1993 that the tipping rate at the transfer stations be raised to bring the revenues in line with the cost of providing the current level of service. A rate of $120.00 per ton ($114.72 plus tax) would bring monthly revenues and expenditures into balance. Without an increase, at the current level of service, Solid Waste would lose an estimated $326,000 for 1993 which would result in a year end deficit of $167,000. In order to payback the amount lost by the end of 1994 the tipping fee needs to be raised to $130.00 per ton. The Solid Waste Advisory Committee further recommended that the fees generate the amount of income necessary to pay for the anticipated increase in operating costs and planned improvements. There was no evidence presented to the SW AC that privatization would provide the cost savings indicated. Individual components of Solid Waste operations, such as drop box hauling, should be considered for privatization. A permanent transfer station should be designed and built as soon as possible. Bernard Pedersen explained that he is a native of Jefferson County, a registered voter and a taxpayer. He then asked: Q. Who wrote the Solid Waste Advisory Committee's recommendation? A. Gary Rowe reported that the SW AC wrote the document and he typed it up for them. He then gave Mr. Pedersen a signed copy of the recommendation. Q. What is Administrative Planning in the Solid Waste budget which is budgeted for $17,500? A. Gary Rowe answered that this amount is for the update of the Solid Waste Management Plan for waste reduction and recycling. The County is required to update this plan every five years. Q. Who does this work? A. Gary Rowe explained that some of the work is done by County staff and some is done by consultants hired by the County. Q. Why is the amount ($17,500) needed if these people are already on the payroll? Why should this amount be added as administrative costs when these people are already part of the administration? A. The costs that are identified between General Administration and Planning, Gary Rowe noted, are to identify categories of spending. Q. Is the Transfer Operations line in the budget for the cost of running the long haul operations? A. Gary Rowe reported that the transfer operations are the personnel and other costs related to the operations of the County landfill. Disposal costs are the costs for hauling the solid waste and disposing of it. Q. In the last proposed ordinance to raise the fees, the cost for disposal and long haul were listed at $786,000. This information indicates that the long haul costs at $650,000. What's the difference? A. Gary Rowe reported that the long haul costs are broken down into two components: 1) disposal costs - cost for disposal at the landfill in Roosevelt Washington, and 2) the hauling costs. When the previous information was developed in February the County was averaging 18 1/2 tons per trailer, which means the costs were estimated higher. Currently the County is averaging a little over 22 tons per trailer, so the hauling costs have been brought down considerably. Q. What is in the cost for drop box hauling and maintenance? A. These costs are for the truck and driver to haul the drop boxes to the landfill transfer station, Gary Rowe reported. The costs for hauling the drop boxes are determined by 1) the cost per ton disposed, and 2) the number of miles being driven. The cost is more to ,VOL 19 rAŒ675 ·' Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of June 28, 1993 Page: 6 haul from Clearwater if you look at the number of miles driven, rather than the cost per number of tons hauled. Bill Leavitt. Nelson's Landing Road, Port Townsend. He asked if the fee increase is based on continuing the current level of service? Gary Rowe indicated that is correct. Mr. Leavitt asked if the County has looked at lowering the level of service? Gary Rowe reported that he made a recommendation to the Board in March which included seven proposals for service reductions which included items such as: reducing the operating hours for the general public at the transfer station for an annual savings of approximately $15,000; closing the transfer station two days a week for a savings of $20,000; and closing the drop box sites for an annual savings of $65,000. The Solid Waste Advisory Committee reviewed these recommendations and recommended that the levels of service not be reduced. Bill Leavitt asked if the solid waste from Clearwater is brought to the landfill and then reloaded and sent to eastern Washington? Gary Rowe indicated that is correct. He added that the County is working with Environmental Waste Systems to have them haul the box at the Clearwater to Port Angeles and dispose of it there. Bill Leavitt added that People are being taxed to death and are getting fed up with every level of government. Everyone is going to have to make a sacrifice. The last time the rates went up there was garbage all over the County on roads and private property. He feels there are many alternatives that should be explored, for example using consultants. He suggested that the County get people that can do the work. Doug Simpson stated that he doesn't feel that people will pay $27.50 for disposing of one cubic yard of garbage at the drop box sites. That is a lot of money. He then questioned some of the figures on the information handed out by the Public Works Department. Gary Rowe explained that the figures on the operation of the transfer station indicate that the optimum weight for the trailers is now being achieved. The costs for the beginning of the year were on a higher per ton basis than they are now. The long haul contract has not been signed yet, but when it is the cost for disposal should be reduced by about $10 per ton. Doug Simpson asked if the 1994 estimates reflect increases in the BTU tax or a gasoline tax increase? Gary Rowe answered that the County is exempt from any federal gas tax, but that doesn't mean that there won't be any additional costs. He then asked what written documentation that the Solid Waste Advisory Board reviewed before they indicated that the privatization wouldn't provide cost savings? Gary Rowe answered that other Counties were contacted about privatization of their operations and what the related costs for those programs were. The Solid Waste Advisory Committee also reviewed information from the Solid Waste trade regarding the pros and cons of privatization. They found that in Counties where privatization has occurred, the County takes a risk that the service will continue to be provided at the same level. Most of the information from the counties was anecdotal. Two aspects of privatization that were reviewed were: 1) whether it makes sense for the County to be in the Solid Waste business and whether or not it makes sense for private enterprise to handle these services, and 2) if it would make the job of dealing with future solid waste problems easier for the County Commissioners. The Commissioners previously made a commitment that if privatization was to be done they would do everything possible to make sure employees did not have to fear losing their jobs. Chairman Wojt added that the Union contract provides some protection for employees. Doug Simpson then noted that many taxpayers have signed or supported Initiative 601 or 602 to place a cap on or rollback taxes. He feels it's unfair to expect the State to adhere to fiscal responsibility and not start it on the local level. He suggested that possibly an outside efficiency expert should be brought in to look at the operation of the Solid Waste Division to see where costs can be eliminated. The recycling program needs to be looked at to make sure that it pays for itself. He asked if any positions have been cut at the landfill or if there has been a hiring freeze? Gary Rowe reported that the Solid Waste Specialist quit at the end of April and that position has not been authorized for re-hire. Jim Westall. stated that Skookum has recently taken over the Bayshore contract for recycling. He explained that their Board has reviewed the recycling program budget. They feel Gary Rowe and Anne Sears have done an excellent and competent job for the recycling program and it has been a pleasure to work with them. Skookum will do everything possible to reduce the cost. He invited anyone that wants to meet and work with the Skookum Board of Directors about the recycling program to give him a call. . VOL .1 9 rAC~ 676 .' Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of June 28, 1993 Page: 7 Ida Severson, representing Coyote Found Candles gave a positive response to raising the Jefferson County tipping fee. They feel it will benefit them as a business and in their personal lives as well. The increase will create a better environment for recycling. The energy and time currently being put into recycling is good and needs continued support. More money means more education, something necessary to all environmental issues. Our County, at this point is losing money trucking trash to eastern Washington. Coyote (Found Candles) hopes to see an increase in the percentage of recycling funds come out of this. They are aware of problems in administration but feel it is necessary to fix them in small steps rather than huge cuts. Daniel Deane stated that he works at the Recycling Center. He reported that the information shows $110,000 for sale of recyclable in the 1992 budget and the projected budget as of April of 1993 at $75,000. He asked if this figure was lowered because of falling prices for recyclables? Gary Rowe reported that prices for recyclables are down. Mr. Deane added that the actual amount of recyclables diverted from the waste stream is way up from what it was a year ago. There is a smaller staff at the recycling center than there was a year ago and the costs are down. The small staff is a result of the sorting system that was installed last fall. As garbage rates go up, recycling rates go up. He reported that he has observed that the parking lot where the recycling bins are located is packed everyday, which was not the case in the past. The community bins are being filled more often. There is a percentage of the garbage that could be recycled, but is not. He suggested that recyclables be diverted before they go into the garbage trucks. Mr. Deane asked if the actual budget for recycling in 1992 was $140,000? Anne Sears reported that the $140,000 was the Bayshore contract. There were other costs included in the recycling budget for the operation of the building and the education program. Gary Rowe added that the total 1992 recycling costs were $198,000. The actual revenues for 1992 were $105,000, Mr. Deane noted. He said he doesn't feel that cuts can be made in the actual operation of the recycling center. More of the waste stream can be handled by the Recycling Center if it was made available, possibly after the garbage crosses the scales. This would be a win/win situation for the County because the tipping fee would have already been collected on it, but it would not have to be hauled away. William Michael, past Chairman speaking for the Solid Waste Advisory Committee stated that the Committee has reviewed the tipping fee every year for the last five years. There have been many things that have forced it to go up such as regulations and having to close the landfill and the black lagoon. We're a small County and we don't get any economies of scale. It costs us more than almost any other County in western Washington to recycle. We are a long way from the glass companies and paper mills that use what we generate. There is no magic formula to get all of management out of government. The SW AC and the finance sub-committee (of SW AC) looked at the figures real hard. The unfortunate reality is that garbage is going to cost more money even if services are cut. If you cut services you get a lot of littering along the roads. He concluded by noting that he is representing SW AC in supporting the $130.00 tipping fee. He doesn't see this as a tax, he sees it as a service in which you are getting something for what you pay for. Anne Sears, Accountant for Public Works and former member of the Solid Waste Advisory Committee, stated that she has been studying these numbers for a couple of years now. She agrees that Solid Waste costs need to be reduced. The fact remains that the County is forced to operate the landfill. She recommends that the tipping fee be increased to $114.00 per ton to allow time to look at costs and how to cut them. Commissioner Huntingford asked if she means the $130 recommendation? Anne Sears explained that the $130 would generate enough revenue to compensate for some of the 1992 losses. The $114 would cover the month to month expenditures. Chairman Wojt asked about the $180,000 debt caused because of the present tipping fee? Anne Sears reported that because there was money to begin the budget year, some of that money could be used for 1993. A certain amount of money is needed in the fund for cash flow, so you wouldn't want to spend all of the carryover. Bvron Swigart stated that he knows that everyone is concerned about taxes and efficiencies in government. He said that he was encouraged following the public hearing last February because it looked like there was going to be some reductions in cost, and because of statements made in the newspaper. The County approved a temporary rate hike from $80 to $95 a ton which was 50% of the original request. If you compare the $80 per ton to the proposed rate of $130, it's a 62 1/2% rate increase. The per can rate as proposed would be a 67% rate increase. These are pretty hefty increases. He then made the following observations: · The information presented does not show any comparisons for 1992 figures. There are no figures to look at for past experience. The public needs to know what the 1992 figures were. _ VOL 1 9 rAf,Ç 677 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of June 28, 1993 Page: 8 · The figures given out at the February hearing are different than what was handed out at this hearing and this creates a credibility issue. The figures are given with no narrative explanation. There are aspects of the Solid Waste program, beside recycling, that benefit all the citizens of the County and not all citizens are paying Solid Waste fees. He suggested that perhaps some of the Solid Waste deficit should come out of the General Fund. The public has the right to know what the fees in adjoining Counties are. · · · Mr. Swigart reiterated that he feels the County should cut costs before raising rates. He made the following recommendations after stating that he doesn't feel the County should raise the fees: · Take advantage of the commitment made by Skookum and work with them on the Recycling program. · Really look at the alternatives. · Look at ways to charge all the citizens for services that benefit all the citizens as a whole. · Have an independent review of the Solid Waste Division. Marel Harstad stated that many of the things being discussed today have been discussed in great detail at SW AC meetings. The SW AC meets the first Thursday of every month at 4:00 p.m. and she urged everyone to attend the meetings to learn more about Solid Waste issues. Dale Leavitt. Nelson's Landing Road, stated that when tipping fees are raised, garbage volume drops. She emphasized that there is a point of no return in raising the tipping fees to cover the costs. She suggested that the Board consider this anytime a tipping fee increase is proposed. The small recycling volumes are what get the County in trouble. Doug Simpson stated that he would like to see some cost cutting proposals presented at these hearings. Gary Rowe reported that in 1989 the County spent about $220,000 with Bayshore for recycling and there was $111,000 in income from recycling. The net cost was $109,000. In 1992 the cost for the Bayshore contract was $118,000 with $105,000 in revenue. This was a result of the hardware installed to efficiently sort recyclables. The discussion continued regarding how the solid waste and recycling programs are operated. Daniel Deane reported that the Recycling Center is being run currently with three full time employees and nine developmentally disabled people working 20 hours per week each. This is three staff positions less than two years ago. Bill Leavitt asked how many tons the trailers can legally haul at a time? Gary Rowe reported that the tare weight of the trailers is about 23 tons. The trailers have been within two or three tons of the legal limit. He explained that the trucking company is paid per trip. Jim Westall said that one issue is trust. He added that Gary Rowe is really trying to do what's best for the County. This is a hard and complicated issue. Everyone is truly trying to work on the problem. He added that he has a lot of confidence in the ability of Gary Rowe and Anne Sears and in the information they provide. Bernie Pederson asked if there are five funds for solid waste operations? A. Gary Rowe answered that there are five funds. The main fund is the Operating Fund which includes the annual day to day expenditures. This fund is expected to be operating in the red in August. There is a Closure Fund and a Capital Fund which are used for closing the landfill and the septage lagoon. There is a fund that the Bond proceeds go into and a Debt Redemption fund. Q. What is debt service of $123,000? A. Gary Rowe reported that the County borrowed $2 million to close the existing landfill and the septage lagoon and to build the transfer station. The debt service is the annual payment on the $2 million for the next 20 years. Q. Where does the money to pay the debt service come from? A. The solid waste fees have to generate enough money to pay those payments. Q. There is an ending balance in the budget for Solid Waste of $336,797.00 - where is that money? A. Anne Sears explained that the fund had a beginning balance of about $300,000. This balance is being eaten away by the costs for operating solid waste now. Gary VOL 1. 9 rA('~ 678 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of June 28, 1993 Page: 9 Rowe reported that there is no ending fund balance for solid waste anticipated at this time. They estimate that the fund will be $180,000 in the hole. Q. Why not hold up on the capital improvement? A. Chairman W ojt explained that the County cannot give up long hauling the garbage because it continues to come in. Q. What did the County find out about the long haul contract? A. Chairman Wojt reported that the County Prosecuting Attorney has reviewed the contract and advised that it can be approved. Q. What about the overpayments that the County made to the current trucking company? A. Gary Rowe reported that all of the information has been complied and sent to the company and the County expects to get a $3,000 refund. The discussion continued about the loading of the trailers, how portable scales would aid in loading the trailers, the most cost effective ways for loading, and the proposal and specifications for designing and building the transfer station. Commissioner Hinton asked what the cost of recycling education is? Gary Rowe reported that there are salary and benefit costs for the Recycling Coordinator and there are costs for the materials provided to the public, as well as costs for the people who do work around the recycling drop boxes. The total recycling education budget is $55,000. The Recycling Coordinator works on education, the update of the Comprehensive Plan for waste reduction and recycling, she attends the Solid Waste Advisory Committee meetings, and works with the schools, businesses and City customers on problems with recycling collection routes, etc. Anne Sears added that last year the Recycling Coordinator charged about 1,200 hours toward the education budget. Doug Simpson stated that he feels a good place to start cost cutting is to eliminate that position and along with not rehiring the Solid Waste Specialist position, the County would be saving almost $100,000. Gary Rowe reported that he made that recommendation to the Board in March for a savings of $35,000. The SW AC reviewed this recommendation and several other people have expressed concern about reducing or eliminating the recycling education because of the negative impacts it would have on continuing recycling programs. Commissioner Hinton asked what affect the elimination of the Solid Waste Specialist position has had on Public Works. Gary Rowe reported that the work that position did hasn't gone away and is being done by other staff members. Anne Sears added that a lot of that work isn't getting done. Bernard Pederson asked why there are two items in the budget labeled professional services? Gary Rowe explained the professional services budget breakdown: Of the $986,000.00 total, $7,000 was for management (to assist with general administration), $19,000 for monitoring and testing (laboratory costs for the monitoring wells at the landfill), $17,250 administrative planning (planning costs), $700,000 for transport and disposal, $185,000 for recycling contract with Bayshore, and $56,000 for the moderate risk waste project. The meeting was recessed when it was determined that there was no further public testimony from those present and reconvened at 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday June 29, 1993 in the Commissioners' Chambers. All Board members were present to meet with Charlie Earl, a budget consultant regarding services he could provide to the County Commissioners before the budget process begins. A scope of work will be developed by Budget Manager Gary Rowe and Charlie Earl and submitted to the Board for review at their next meeting. Bud Porter, Commander American Le2ion re: Soldiers' and Sailors' Relief Fund Application Approval: Bud Porter, Commander of the American Legion Post #26 came before the Board to discuss the application submitted for the Soldiers' and Sailors' Relief Fund that the Board deleted from the Consent Agenda on June 14, 1993. He advised the Board that once the Service Officer investigates the applicant's claim and approves it and either the Commander or Adjutant sign the form, it is submitted to the County and the County Commissioners must approve it. Chairman Wojt explained that the Board removed the application from the consent agenda because they had questions about it. Bud Porter stated that the Board should have discussed their questions with the Service Officer. . VOL 19 rAC,~ 679 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of June 28, 1993 Page: 10 Bud Porter then reported that the Service Officers were notified that there is not much money left in the fund and he asked that the Board transfer funds from the Current Expense Fund into the Relief Fund immediately. The discussion continued regarding the taxing limitations of the County, the need for more money in the Veterans Relief Fund and how the applications are processed and submitted to the County by the chartered veterans organizations. Commissioner Hinton moved that $3,000 be transferred immediately into the Soldiers' and Sailors' Relief Fund. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Bud Porter then reported that a representative from the State Department of Veterans Mfairs will be contacting the Commissioners' Office to set up an appointment to meet with the Board and all of the Service Officers from the County's veterans organizations. The Commissioners Office will notify the veterans organizations when the date and time is set for this meeting. Application for Assistance from Soldiers' and Sailors' Relief Fund: Commissioner Hinton moved to approve the application from the American Legion Post #26 in the amount of $167.03 as submitted. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. The meeting was recessed after the Board concluded the scheduled business on Tuesday and reconvened on Thursday July 1, 1993 at 7:00 p.m. at the Queets/Clearwater School for the continuation of the following hearing. All three Board members were present. HEARING re: Proposed Ordinance Establishin2 Fees for the Solid Waste Division: Chairman Wojt called the meeting to order in the presence of 14 interested west end residents. He explained the purpose of the hearing and explained that the proposed fees include a fee for the drop box site at Clearwater. Public Works Director Gary Rowe explained that the State law says that transfer stations (drop boxes) are required to pay for the cost of providing the service. The intent of that law is to insure that the County doesn't provide a subsidized service in competition with a private contractor. Gary Rowe explained how the County got to the point of this proposed fee ordinance. He explained that the landfill was closed on January 2, 1993 and the County started hauling waste to eastern Washington in trailers. It costs about $60.00 per ton to haul the solid waste away. The drop boxes were subsidized by the tipping fee at the landfill and that is not allowed by State law. The Solid Waste Advisory Committee that advises the Commissioners on solid waste issues, recommended that the rates be raised to make the drop boxes pay for themselves, including the Clearwater drop box site. The same rates proposed for the east side of the County are proposed for the west side. The east side drop boxes are going from $3.00 to $5.00 per can. The west side is going from no cost to $5.00 per can. There are many people who aren't residents of Jefferson County that bring their garbage to the Clearwater site. Bob Huesldonk asked if it is worthwhile to man the Clearwater site even with the new rate? Gary Rowe reported that the rate proposed would collect more money than is being spent on providing the service. This would not be the most efficient way to provide this service. The County is working on an agreement with Environmental Waste Systems to haul the boxes from the West end to Port Angeles. The disposal rate in Port Angeles is still better than hauling the garbage to Port Townsend and then reloading it and hauling it to eastern Washington. Bob Huelsdonk asked if a private service would be interested in competing with the County's proposed rate? Bob King the Manager of Environmental Waste Systems was asked to attend this meeting, Gary Rowe reported. Environmental Waste Systems (previously known as Olympic Disposal) has the franchise for garbage collection in the this area. Their franchise says that they have to charge the same rate throughout the geographic area. Pickup of one can every two weeks costs approximately $8.00. Gary Rowe added that he would like to see the West End residents have a recycling program also. Bob Huelsdonk asked if the County will address policing the people who dump indiscriminately? Gary Rowe explained that indiscriminate dumping is a problem all over the County. Many accesses to properties that were opened all year have been closed off because of this problem. Mr. Huelsdonk VOL 1 9 rAC~ 680 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of June 28, 1993 Page: 11 asked if there are any exceptions to the law regarding charging for drop box operations, especially for areas like the West End that are so remote and so different? Gary Rowe reported that there are no exceptions that he is aware of. There is a franchised hauler in this area that can provide service. The hauler is required to provide the service in their franchise area. They can ask that the service be provided to a specific area at a scheduled time. The property owner is required to take their garbage out to the end of their driveway or to the main road. The hauler does not have to drive up a private driveway. Chairman Wojt opened the public hearing and asked those present to state their name before giving testimony. Dale Roeder asked how the fees were determined? Gary Rowe answered that they estimated the cost of operating the drop box sites, including the time for a person to be at the sites, the electricity and a Sani-can for the number of hours they estimate that the site will be open. The Clearwater site will only be operated for the time needed to handle the amount of traffic coming to it, this could be two half days or on a schedule that the residents indicate is best for them. The Quilcene drop box site is operated four days and week while the site at Brinnon is open three days a week. The Clearwater site currently generates about 200 tons of garbage per year, but once people have to pay that amount will probably go down. Dale Roeder asked if the site could be opened two whole days? He explained that sometimes there are events held like a fish feed by the Lions Club. Gary Rowe stated that they are willing to work with the community to develop a schedule that makes sense for the residents. Ted McMannus asked if the location of the drop box site will stay the same? Gary Rowe answered that there is quite an investment in hardware (compactor boxes) at the current site, but there is the option of going to an open box which could be placed at another site that is· more convenient. Bob Huelsdonk asked about a cardlock system? Gary Rowe reported that such a system was investigated for the landfill. That configuration was estimated to cost about $20,000, but it included some improvements to the scale system which wouldn't be needed in the West End. The County can look into this system for the west end site. Dale Roeder asked what would happen to the drop box site, if a system was installed here and people then decided to have the private company pick up their garbage? This is a fear in the whole system, Gary Rowe explained. If rates are raised so that people stop using the system and the hard costs continue, then you're forced back into a situation where you have to raise rates again. Ted McMannus asked if the drop box site is closed what would keep the private company from raising their rates? Gary Rowe explained that these franchises are governed by the State Utilities and Transportation Commission. If service is not provided as promised, then a complaint can be filed with the UTe. There is more interest in this type of service today, and if the company doesn't provide good service to a part of their franchise area, they could lose their entire franchise. Howard Rotter asked if the County has any control over where the garbage generated within the County goes? This is an area without many people and if the Queets, the Lower Hoh reservations, and the Park Service aren't included in the system then the volume isn't enough to support the drop box. Gary Rowe explained that the National Park doesn't have to conform to State law. The County does have the ability to have a flow control ordinance which says that anyone that works within the system has to take their garbage to a specific location. This type of ordinance is to protect the investment made for solid waste collection in a specific area. The County will be looking into adopting such an ordinance. Dale Roeder asked if the UTC sets the price a franchise can charge for garbage collection? Gary Rowe answered that is correct. Dave Dixon asked if the County has found any carrier willing to provide this service to the West End? Gary Rowe explained that he has discussed this several times with Environmental Waste Systems and they have indicated they will provide the service. Commissioner Hinton asked who handles the garbage service for the Corrections facility? No one knew. VOL 1 9 rACÇ 681 ., . Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of June 28, 1993 Page: 12 Howard Rotter asked if there were two franchises in this area, if the County would subsidize them in any way? Gary Rowe explained that the County only pays for garbage pick up from County facilities. Environmental Waste Systems has the franchise for Jefferson and Clallam Counties. All the customers of the franchise subsidize the service. Dave Dixon asked if Olympic Disposal has to pay an extra charge to dump Jefferson County garbage at the Port Angeles landfill? The Port Angeles landfill has commercial rates and residential rates. The same rates charged for commercial dumpers in Clallam County is charged for Jefferson County wastes. Bob Huelsdonk asked what happens when the rate is imposed and people start dumping their garbage on private property? The Sheriff's Department will investigate calls about illegal dumping. Gary Rowe reported if something can be found that indicates who may have dumped the garbage the Sheriff has to decide if it is worth the time to prosecute the offender. They will try to prosecute, but the Sheriff has other important matters to take care of also. The County works with volunteer groups to pick up litter along the roads and they are allowed to dump the litter they clean up for free. If the community indicated that there were areas they would volunteer to clean up, the County would provide a box for it. Howard Rotter stated that the one thing that concerns many of the residents of the area is that the private timber companies, and the State will lock the gates to their property and the lifestyle of the area will change. Dale Roeder asked if this is the only meeting that will be held on this? Gary Rowe stated that it is up to the Board to decide what makes sense for Clearwater. The Board has indicated that they want to work with the community. Bob Huelsdonk asked the time schedule on this proposed ordinance? Chairman Wojt explained that the proposal is for a change in the tipping fee. If it were to go into effect the way it is written right now, the fee would go into effect in August. Gary Rowe added that it will take time to do the work necessary to start collecting a fee at Clearwater, and it will probably be on a different schedule. Chairman Wojt reported that written testimony will be accepted until Friday July 9, 1993. Fran Hansen asked if there is anyone from the West End on the Solid Waste Advisory Committee? Commissioner Huntingford reported that there is not. Bob Huelsdonk asked if there will be a recycling program on the West End? Gary Rowe offered to send the Recycling Coordinator to meet with people in this area to work on a program. Dave Dixon stated concern that at other dump sites, recyclable items are dumped free. Gary Rowe reported that is true at the landfill also, and the County can work on a system for the drop boxes at Clearwater. Another concern, Dave Dixon noted is there are a number of low income people who cannot afford to dump if there is a fee and being so remote it is easy to dump garbage along logging roads, etc. Gary Rowe agreed that is a problem. He noted that there is also a problem with people who come in the summer. Dale Roeder stated that he feels that because of the situation in the West End and because it has been free to dump garbage, that a $2 fee would be appropriate. He feels $5 is too much of a jump. Cliff Hav stated that the $5 equitable rate sounds good, but the West End does not get equitable services as far as parks, recreation, library and other support services the County has. If they are going to pay the same as the east side of the County then he feels they should have all the services they have. If the fee is raised to $5, there will be a whole bunch of roads full of garbage and no garbage going in the dump. He reported that less than half of the garbage taken at the Clearwater site is from Jefferson County residents. David Dixon asked if the site could be moved to the Correction facility which is more centrally located than the Clearwater site? Howard Rotter asked what is done with hazardous waste (such as batteries) and old stoves and refrigerators. Gary Rowe answered that the large items are set aside and when there is a load they will haul it out. Since there isn't a good way to handle hazardous wastes, the County tells people not to bring them to the dump sites. When you buy a battery you are supposed to take the old one in, but that doesn't always work. If they are taken to the landfill, they can be set aside and then possibly taken to Grays Harbor County. There is a rate for large items such as refrigerators. The VOL 1 n ~ BO? .. ~ I'M, O'd "I...... I... Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of June 28, 1993 Page: 13 County is working with the Port of Port Townsend to set up a facility to handle waste oil. If there is a garage or a gas station or facility that could handle waste oil in this area, the County would be glad to work to them. He suggested that if a community organization would be willing to help provide solid waste service, the County would be willing to work with them. Dale Roeder asked if the costs were figured on the rate of garbage collected at the site currently? Gary Rowe answered that the costs were based on 200 tons per year. If the fixed costs don't go down when the amount of garbage is reduced, then the County is in a dilemma because it is not reasonable to keep raising the rates. Bob Huelsdonk suggested that when this fee is first implemented, deputies should be brought out to do some extra policing. Gary Rowe reported that Grays Harbor County is reviewing the possibility of establishing a solid waste collection district which means that each household is charged a monthly fee for garbage collection rather than being charged at the disposal site. Clallam County is also looking into this type of system. Chairman Wojt noted that Kitsap County has gone to a system of curbside collection countywide. Cliff Hav suggested that the dump site be manned possibly half a day during the week and a day on the weekend, but don't charge a fee. Commissioner Huntingford suggested that the people from out of the County be required to pay and the people from the County continue to dump free. Gary Rowe asked that anyone interested in working on this issue let him know and he would arrange a meeting for more discussion and review. Hearing no further public comment the Chairman closed the hearing. Chairman Wojt said that because of the phase in time, the options for this area can be explored to see what will make sense for the citizens of the area. MEETING ADJOURNED ..:?~,~-=~~' .,', SEAL: ,<ç~;¡¡>,i,}V'C . 4r¡;>~,~! /.!.~.·:fi\....~.f':.ô'.... ....... .. '.. . .. ,.",/ \.... ic â Wojt, Chair ~!. .~ ..>.~!... . ð' I... ..t~~):<ci!\>'~ .~, \\ \~~~,Š~:i~~))~..~f-~~mber ATTEST: ~~.. ~é " ,I' ~'\:- -iii..~ c' _ .. .. . s~ .l,ji'- .'.~. ¡ 0" (, ~/.-:;/ ,. .---= d~'^- J. Ihe~ Lorna L. Delaney, Clerk of the Board . VOL 1 9 tV, 683