Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM080993 - c.h~ "'V r-::::..Oh": MINUTES WEEK OF AUGUST 9, 1993 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Richard W ojt. Commissioner Robert Hinton and Commissioner Glen Huntingford were both present. .~ Community Services Director David Goldsmith re: Elected Omcial's Request for Mid-Manaeers Salary Adjustments: David Goldsmith reported that the Elected Officials have submitted a request for a 2.5% increase for current expense mid managers. He explained that all mid managers were given a 3% raise at the beginning of 1993 and some, who were at pay rates identified as being below market, were given additional raises. He explained that UFCW Union employees are on a step system which provides salary increases over a three year period. When a Union employee reaches the highest step, the only raise they get is the negotiated yearly cost of living adjustment. He pointed out the following for the Board's consideration: 1) Giving the mid managers a raise right now may be used in the Union contract negotiations. 2) This request is only for current expense mid managers. There are mid manage- ment positions in other departments that should also be addressed. 3) When the UFCW contract was settled in 1990 longevity was included while it was not given to mid managers. Commissioner Hinton noted that he feels that until more information is received on the market value of the mid management positions and the establishment of a salary system for them, that no increases be given at this time. David Goldsmith explained further that with the Union employees getting longevity and the mid-managers not getting it, the salaries of some mid managers are less than Union employees in their departments. The discussion continued regarding the possibility of a performance based evaluation system for mid managers. Commissioner's Meetioe on Fifth Monday Week (Aueust 30. 1993): The Board reviewed possibly meeting on the fifth Monday in August and not meeting one week in September. After discussion, the Board concurred to leave the meetings as scheduled. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: The following comments were made: a request was made for a meeting with the Board regarding a law suit on the Shoreline Program Amendments, the State deadline for setting interim Urban Growth boundaries, and concerns regarding the County's participation in Washington Association of County VOL 19 f~[~912 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of August 9, 1993 Page: 2 Officials (WACO) and Washington State Association of Counties (WSAC) as brought up by the United We Stand group. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: Commissioner Hinton moved to approve the Minutes of August 2, 1993 as presented. Chairman Wojt seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA: Commis- sioner Hinton moved to delete Item 6 and approve the balance of the consent agenda as presented. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. 1. Reappointment of Lew Morello to the Stormwater Advisory Board; Three Year Term Expires July 16, 1996 2. CONTRACT No. 1-92-741-011 re: Community Development Block Grant; Skookum Project; State Department of Community Development 3. AGREEMENT re: Rural Arterial Program; Construction Proposal; lrondale Road; MP 00.00 to 00.65; County Road Administration Board 4. RESOLUTION NO. 66-93 re: Statutory Vacation of a Portion of Fifth and Cedar Streets; Plat of Irving Park Addition; James Carlson 5. Request for Reimbursable Work: Remove Gravel from Snow Creek Fish Bin; State Department of Wildlife 6. DELETE CONTRACT re: Oak Bay Road Culvert Replacement; CR01050; Seton Construction Inc. 7. Final Short Plat #SP1-92; Portage Bay View Short Plat; Port Hadlock; Demetrius Katsekapes, Applicant Advisory Board Reappointments/Vacancies: Commissioner Huntingford moved that all advisory Board positions be advertised when a current member's term expires. Commissioner Hinton seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. BUSINESS FROM COUNTY DEPARTMENTS PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT Mike Ajax re: New Laws; Contractors Reeistration and Owner Built Homes: Mike Ajax reported that the State law has just changed and now requires that the Building Department keep a copy of a General Contractors registration on file. It also requires that an individual that wants to build their own home has to either get a Contrac- tor's registration or they are only allowed to hire one subcontractor for the job. Mike Ajax reported that he will be meeting with the State Department of Labor and Industries and a person who is planning to build his own home, to discuss this law. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Request for License to Use Ri~ht of Way of Platted Colwell Street; James and Dale O'Brien: Public Works Administrative Assistant Eileen Simon reviewed the request from James and Dale O'Brien to use the platted Colwell Street right-of-way adjacent to their property. Commissioner Hinton asked if a license to use right-of-way is transferable? Eileen Simon reported that they are transferrable with written approval from the Board of Commissioners. She explained that in the past the procedure has been to revoke the old license and issue a new one when property ownership changes. The license VOL 19 rAΠ913 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of August 9, 1993 Page: 3 for the use of the right-of-way adjacent to the O'Brien's property that was issued to Bill Meyer, the previous owner, has not been revoked. Dale O'Brien stated that they only want to use half of the 60 foot right-of-way for access to their woodshed. Commissioner Hinton asked if the County has a policy for what the right-of-way can be used for? Public Works Director Gary Rowe reported that a license to use the right-of-way does not allow the building of permanent structures on the right-of- way. However, it can be used for removable structures such as woodsheds. These licenses can be revoked by the County. Ken Merritt stated that he uses the right-of-way for storage because it is one of the only dry places on that portion of his property. He explained that his differences with the O'Briens come from an inaccurate measurement from the centerline of the right-of-way by them. Dale O'Brien reported that they have measured from survey stakes and they are now having a survey done of their property. All they are asking is that Mr. Merritt move his truck and boat. She added that they want to install a fence to keep Mr. Merritt's items from being placed on their portion of the right-of-way. Commissioner Huntingford asked if the centerline of the right-of-way is portrayed correctly on the drawing? Gary Rowe reported that the County Engineer visited the site, but he had no way of confirming the accuracy of the right-of-way measurement. Dale O'Brien explained that she believes they have an accurate measurement on the centerline because it was based on where the waterline is placed. She said that if the license is granted and the survey shows the centerline, then they will run a fence down the centerline of the right- of-way. After further discussion, the O'Brien's reported that they would gladly move their woodshed and they will not build a solid fence over the waterline. Commissioner Hinton recommended that the Public Works Department revoke the previous license for use of the right-of-way. Once that is done there should be no problem with the County approving licenses for use of the right-of-way for both the O'Brien's and Mr. Merritt. The license approval would be contingent on the results of the survey being done by the O'Briens, and that each party move any personal property to their half of the right- of-way. Commissioner Hinton moved that the O'Brien's contact the Public Works Department when the survey is complete and the personal property is removed, then the Board will approve their license. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Memorandum from Public Works re: Drop Box Hauline: Gary Rowe reported that he sent the Board a memo regarding negotiations with Olympic Environmen- tal Waste Systems (formerly Olympic Disposal) to haul the drop boxes from County sites beginning September 1, 1993. The hauling rate is $110 per box plus $2.10 per mile for mileage in excess of 10 miles. The estimated annual savings for this would be $10,000. This is being done to reduce costs without reducing the current levels of services. Commissioner Hinton asked that the Public Works Department provide a narrative on the savings that are expected to be realized from the proposed transfer of the personnel. Staff Request; Advisory Board Coordinator: Chairman Wojt asked Gary Rowe if the Advisory Board Coordinator position is a new budget item? Gary Rowe stated that he believes that all of the staffing requests were part of the budget, but he cannot verify that. He added that he will have a recommendation on the how the recycling coordination can be changed to accommodate all of the work and how that will impact the staffing requests next week. VOL 19 f'~c~914 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of August 9, 1993 Page: 4 Workshop on Draft Critical Areas Ordinance: (planning) After discussion of the attorney client privilege regarding the Prosecuting Attorney's opinion on the draft critical areas ordinance, Commissioner Hinton recommended that this document be made public and a copy be provided to the Planning Department. The discussion then turned to whether or not the current draft document should be taken to public hearing or if the changes suggested by the Prosecuting Attorney should be incorporated into it first. The Planning Department will review the Prosecuting Attorney's opinion and meet again with the Board to discuss possible changes to the draft document. Sheriff Mel Mefford re: Local Option Sales Tax (LOST) for Law and Justice Departments: Sheriff Mel Mefford reported that he is representing the Law and Justice Council as well as the Sheriff's Department. The Law and Justice Council recommends that the County adopt a one tenth of one percent local option sales tax or- dinance to provide additional funding for law and justice departments. They request that the Board direct the Prosecuting Attorney to draft such an ordinance and set a hearing date as soon as possible. The projected estimate of funding received from this tax is $135,000 for the County and $58,000 for the City of Port Townsend. The Law and Justice Council has prepared a list of priorities for using this funding. For example in 1994 the Sheriff's Office will have to do traffic accident investigations on County roads because the State Patrol will no longer patrol or provide accident investigation services. Commissioner Huntingford moved to direct the Prosecuting Attorney to draft a Local Option Sales Tax Ordinance and to have the Clerk of the Board draft a hearing notice when the ordinance is prepared. Commissioner Hinton seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. CONTRACT re: Oak Bay Road Culvert Replacement; CROI050; Seton Construction Inc.: Commissioner Hinton moved to approve the contract with Seton Construction for the Oak Bay Road culvert replacement project as awarded. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. The meeting was recessed at the conclusion of the scheduled business and was reconvened on Tuesday morning. All three Board members were present for the following business. Workshop and Possible Decision re: SEP A Mitieation and Plat Approval Conditions; Adequate Provisions for Schools and Fire District; Inn at Port Ludlow Project; Pope Resources: Planning and Building Department Director Craig Ward presented a revised staff report on school mitigation options for the Inn at Port Ludlow. He explained that this revised report (dated August 10, 1993) includes a change on page 2 for the way school costs are calculated in scenario three. He then reported that the options he has developed are an attempt to analyze the information in the EIS as it pertains to several of the issues. He added that he did not analyze the testimony received in the hearing, but the Board is free to consider all the testimony received, at that hearing. He continued by explaining that the approach he used in developing the option scenarios examines two basic issues on schools: the difference in student generation rates and the financial impact of the number of students. The first two scenarios compare the impact of alternative generation rates, holding capital facilities costs per student constant at the rate in the EIS of $8,888. Scenario three considers capital and operating costs per student using the generation rates in the EIS and eliminates the share of these costs borne or subsidized by the State. The student generation rate in this scenario is held to the EIS constant. This scenario has been adjusted from what was presented dated August 5, 1993 to correct the State offset calculation. VOl 19 r~U 915 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of August 9, 1993 Page: 5 The EIS, Craig Ward continued, examined cumulative impacts related to schools and there are three sources of students generated by this project. The primary attention of the EIS is the number of students generated from the residences constructed for the project. There is also attention given to students generated by new employees of the project and students from temporary construction workers for the project. All of the figures in the EIS were adjusted for the actual number of units now proposed for this project. He reiterated that verbal testimony was received on these issues at the hearing and the record was kept open after that (until August 2, 1993) and written testimony was received and provided to the Board members. Commissioner Hinton stated that he feels reviewing scenarios and formulas for mitigation is premature. In the past week he has reviewed the testimony submitted by the School District, Pope Resources and others and there are a number of questions that he would like answers to prior to proceeding any further. He noted that he agrees with Susan Thomas' testimony (letter dated August 2, 1993, see attached) where she says "must we repeat the entire process undergone during EIS preparation . . . to reestablish the facts of issues long since settled?" He also referred to AI Boucher's memo (dated July 26, 1993, see information with minutes of July 26, 1993) where he stressed that the Board needs to develop standards and formulas. He then presented a list of 15 questions (see attached) that he would like answered before proceeding. Chairman Wojt asked with regard to question number one, if a voluntary agreement is ruled out? Prosecuting Attorney Mark Huth reported the fact that the two parties cannot come to a voluntary agreement between them, doesn't mean that they can't mutually agree with the Board and sign a voluntary agreement. The Developer is the one entering into a voluntary agreement and because it has to be based on how the money is spent, the agreements will involve the School District and the Fire District. The fact that Pope and the School DistrictlFire District couldn't reach agreement, doesn't rule out the subsequent voluntary agreement with the County. Question 2, Mark Huth continued, refers to RCW 58.17 (not 18) .110. The findings that have to be entered are that adequate provisions have been made for the various underlying services necessary to support the development that is proposed. Adequate provision is not an exact concept. The idea is, in order for the development to go forward, there needs to be enough basic services already in existence or proposed to be implemented as a result of the direct impact of this development. In the context of the School District, if the District is at capacity and the development means three more students must be accommodated, then adequate provision would mean that the School District be provided in some way for including those three additional students. A finding must be made for each of the services listed in this RCW. Chairman Wojt asked what services are included? Mark Huth answered that fire, sewers, open space and parks, schools and school districts, safe walking conditions for children to walk to school, transit and drainage are some of the services identified. Mark Huth noted that question three would be better addressed in Executive Session and can not really be answered by the County. Either the parties agree with the mitigation and the law suit is resolved or they don't agree and the law suit goes forward and the Court decides. Commissioner Hinton stated that he does not want to review these questions today, but urged the parties, in the interim, to continue to negotiate and resolve the issues within two to three weeks. He added that without a formally approved capital facilities plan, he believes any effort by the Board to establish appropriate mitigation would take a very conservative approach to the capital cost per student. Commissioner Hinton then moved to have the Board instruct the Planning Department, with the assistance of the Prosecuting Attorney, to provide valid answers to the questions submitted, prior to scheduling any further action on the determination of appropriate mitigation on this Pope Resources project. VOl 19 fAr,.; 916 Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of August 9, 1993 Page: 6 Chairman Wojt asked Commissioner Hinton for clarification, if his motion means that the Board is asking Pope and the School DistrictlFire District to get back together during the next two weeks? He asked how Pope's need to get on with their project is being accommodated and how the Board is dealing with the issue since the parties haven't come to agreement? Commissioner Hinton explained that he doesn't feel that anyone is trying to stall the process, but he feels that there are many questions that need to be answered prior to the Board making a determination on mitigation, and during the time necessary to get answers to his questions, he is suggesting that the parties work to resolve their differences. Mark Huth added that if the Board makes a determination and the litigation continues, nothing is completed. It could take up to two years to complete the litigation if it goes to the Appeals Court level. The possibility of negotiation is still available and should be taken up and will probably lead to a quicker outcome than any other method. Commissioner Huntingford stated that he has concerns related to the capital facilities plan. If the developer is supposed to make up the deficiencies (for the School District), there is no way to know what the costs will be without this plan. The discussion then turned to how an adequate impact fee can be determined and how it is imposed. Without the capital facilities plan, there is no way to know what a proportionate share of the cost will be and what a fair mitigation would be. Discussion continued regarding the best way for the Board to proceed, impact fees and how they are imposed, the significance of the Hillis Homes v Snohomish County court case on the voluntary agreement, options for determining a fair amount for impact fees, and how and when taxes are collected on new construction and then distributed to school districts. Commissioner Huntingford then seconded the motion. Commissioner Hinton asked each party present if they feel there is an opportunity to resolve the matter voluntarily in the next two weeks? Mark Huth directed that if the parties chose to answer that question, they not make any statements about why they have or have not reached an agreement yet, but just answer whether they are willing to negotiate further. Peter Eglick, representing the Chimacum School District said yes, anywhere, anytime. Rob Kasaguma, Attorney, stated that he will be assisting the Fire District in negotiations and because he might bring a new perspective to the discussions that have taken place, they feel confident they can reach an agreement. David Cunningham, Pope Resources, stated that they are willing to negotiate further, but they are not hopeful that it will be successful. He feels that putting this off is putting the responsibility on them, when it is his feeling that it is the Board's responsibility to resolve the issue. Mark Huth suggested that any hearings on other Pope Resources plats (i.e. Deer Hollow) be set after August 24, 1993, because the same issues are involved on those plats. Roy Rodebaugh, Fire District #3 asked if there will be a time that the Fire District can present information to the Commissioners generated from their meetings with Pope? Mark Huth answered that the only thing that can be presented to the County Commissioners at this point is an agreement or an indication that no agreement was reached. No further testimony will be accepted. The Chairman called for a vote on the motion. The motion carried by a unanimous vote. \/('1,' 1 0 n1"" Lt... ,f ~ ~ , , Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of August 9, 1993 Page: 7 APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: Commissioner Hinton moved to approve the minutes of July 26, 1993 as written. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. .".,...<'.:.........""........".... -', ,r D\t MEETING ADJOURNED "'I!t:"":~ ~cYVMa .Jf1Q~ Lorna L. Delaney, - (l Clerk of the Board VOL .19 fx~91~