Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM091393 '. c...t~ 'c;;:? ~o~ MINUTES WEEK OF SEPTEMBER 13,1993 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Richard Wojt. Commissioners Robert Hinton and Glen Huntingford were both present. Commissioners' Briefin~ Session: Prosecuting Attorney Mark Huth reported that the County provides Coroner services to the Olympic National Park. The County would like to have an agreement with the National Park Service for this work which would define the protocol and procedures and make these situations easier. He gave the Board a copy of a letter he sent to William Pierce, Chief Ranger for the Olympic National Park and asked that they discuss this with the representatives of the Park Service when they are here later today. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: City of Port Townsend Police Chief Jim Newton explained that the City is honoring Commissioner Robert Hinton by retiring his badge. He then presented Commissioner Hinton with a plaque commemorating his years of service to the City as a Police Officer and as the Chief of Police. Dave Phinizy, representing the Discovery Bay Planning Committee requested, on behalf of the Committee, that the County provide signs to be placed at the entrances to the Discovery Bay planning area which would advise people that there is a planning committee and when their meetings are held. He also asked if the Assessor's Office could provide a mailing list of property owners in the planning area and if the County could provide funding for the mailings that will be necessary to develop a plan. There was also discussion about the. consulting services approved by the Board for evaluation of the Public Works Department. I) APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: Commissioner Hinton moved to approve the Minutes of September 7, 1993 as corrected. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA: Commissioner Hinton moved to delete item #2 to allow time for a volunteer group to form, review the plans, and look into private grants for the animal shelter project and services. He then moved to approve and adopt the balance of the items as presented. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. 1. RESOLUTION NO. 77-93 re: The Statutory Vacation of a Portion of Spruce Street in the Plat of Irving Park Addition 2. DELETE Call for Bids re: Construction of new Animal Shelter Project #ACF947; Bid Opening Set for 2:00 p.m. on October 11, 1993 VOL 9 r~.CE 00 1.232 " " Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of September 13, 1993 Page: 2 THE CONSENT AGENDA - Continued: 3. Application for Assistance from the Soldiers' and Sailors' Relief Fund; $500.00 from AmVet Post #6 4. Request for Payment of Third Quarter Allocation $5,000; Jefferson County Conservation District 5. CONTRACT, Extension; Personal Services; Dennis Pownall 6. No Objection to Special Occasion Liquor License; September 24, 1993; Port Ludlow Recreation Center; Port Ludlow Arts Council 7. Request for Confirmation of Fort Worden Advisory Board Member and Alternate; Chairman Richard Wojt (member) and Commissioner Bob Hinton (alternate). PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT Approve Findin~s of Fact. Conclusions and Decision; Adequate Provisions for School and Fire Services; LP-02-91; "The Inn at Port Ludlow" AND LP-02-93; Ludlow Point Villa~e Division 4; Pope Resources: Prosecuting Attorney Mark Huth reported that the changes in the findings discussed last week have been made. He reviewed them for the Board. Commissioner Huntingford moved to approve the findings, conclusions and decision on LP· 02-91 and LP·02-93. Chairman Wojt seconded the motion and called for the vote. Commissioner Huntingford and Chairman Wojt voted for the motion. Commissioner Hinton voted against the motion. The motion carried. The Board members went to lunch at the Port Townsend Cafe with Maureen Finnerty, Superintendent and Roger Rudolph, Assistant Superintendent of the Olympic National Park for an update on Park issues. HEARING re: Proposed Ordinance Imposin~ Additional Sales and Use Tax for Criminal Justice Fundin~: Sheriff Mel Mefford, representing the Jefferson County Law and Justice Council, reported that four years ago the State provided law and justice funding to counties which would sunset and then counties and cities would have to pick up the on- going program costs. In 1993 the State legislature passed legislation to continue the law and justice funding at a reduced level, but the legislation included a provision for a local option sales tax to generate additional funding for these programs. The Jefferson County Law and Justice Council recommends that the Commissioners adopt this ordinance to impose the one tenth of one percent sales tax in Jefferson County. Without this additional revenue, the County and the City will be unable to provide the current level of services without shifting funds from other essential governmental services. Prosecuting Attorney Mark Huth reported that he feels having this funding coming from a sales tax is reasonable because of the impact to these services from tourist and out of County residents. The Law and Justice Council has developed a spending plan for this funding which identifies as immediate funding priorities: two additional Sheriff's Deputies, one additional staff member for District Court, and one additional staff member for the Juvenile and Family Court. He urged the Board to pass this ordinance. Commissioner Hinton asked if the City needs to pass their own ordinance to receive this funding? Mark Huth reported that by the County passing the ordinance, the tax will be collected and apportioned between the City and the County. Chairman Wojt opened the public hearing. John Clise. Mavor of Port Townsend. reported that 'the City Council passed a resolution supporting the County's adoption of this ordinance. VOL 1 9 PAGE 00 1.233 , , Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of September 13, 1993 Page: 3 Jim Newton. Police Chief for the City. stated that this funding will allow the City to increase the number of staff to provide the necessary services to City residents. The number of staff in the Department has not increased since 1980 even though there has been a 23% increase in the population of the City. Herb Beck. Ouilcene resident. stated that the response time of deputies to Quilcene can take as long as 45 minutes. He feels that more manpower to cover this area is needed and would be appreciated. The sales tax in the County is currently 7.8 percent and this would raise it to 7.9 percent. He supports this sales tax increase. Sue Dillingham. Office Supervisor District Court. stated that with the increased population in the County, the work for the Deputies and the District Court is increasing. She supports the recommendation of the Law and Justice Council. Barbara Carr. Adult Probation Services. indicated that she also supports this tax. David Grove. City Clerk. stated that in working on the budget projections for the City for the coming year it is evident that there is a clear need for. this funding. Hearing no further comments for or against this proposed ordinance, Chairman Wojt closed the hearing. Commissioner Hinton stated that the only opposition he has heard on the implementation of this tax in other counties has been regarding the way the funds will be used. Mel Mefford then reviewed the Law and Justice Council's spending plan for these funds. Commissioner Hinton moved to approve ORDINANCE NO. 09-0913-93 imposing an additional one tenth of one percent sales and use tax in Jefferson County for criminal justice funding. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Hirin~ and Promotion Freeze for the Remainder of 1993: Commissioner Hinton moved that a hiring and promotion freeze be imposed for the balance of 1993. Currently advertised positions and step increases for Union employees are not subject to this freeze. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. John Lee. Assistant Director Field Services Division. State Department of Veterans Affairs and Service Officers and Representative of the County Veterans Or~anizations re: Soldiers' and Sailors' Relief Fund: John Lee, Assistant Director of the Field Services Division of the State Department of Veterans Affairs introduced Mark Nasco, Program Director for the Pierce County Veterans Assistant Fund and Jerry Quintas, Veterans Benefit Specialist from Olympia. He explained that they have met with the Commanders of the Jefferson County veterans organizations and are here to discuss concerns and issues about the administration of the Veterans Relief Fund for Jefferson County. He reported that the Jefferson County veterans organizations are asking for the following: · An update on the status of their draft proposal submitted toward the end of last year. · An update on the request submitted last week for increasing levy for the Veterans Relief Fund. The issues identified by the Jefferson County Commanders are: · The current system to provide emergency funds is not timely. They propose that the Commissioner's Office work with the Veterans organizations to establish a voucher system and centralize the voucher system. · The Commanders understand the need of the Board to oversee and monitor expenditures from this fund. The law specifically awards that responsibility to the Commissioners, however, the authority to àpprove the expenditure of the money is given to the chartered veterans organizations. . VOL 1 9 HC' 001234 \ '.l Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of September 13, 1993 Page: 4 · The Commanders feel that veterans receiving funds have a right to privacy. The Commanders feel there is an arbitrary and capricious amount of checks and balances for this fund. The Commanders wonder if the Commissioners have concerned that these monies are given to people who do not deserve it. The Commanders do not know how much money is allotted for this fund. · · · Chairman Wojt noted that most of the requests for these funds come from the Port Townsend area. Mark N asco reported that is true in many counties. Rob Spafford added that this may be because the Service Officers for the veterans organizations out in the County aren't available as much as those who live in Port Townsend. Commissioner Huntingford asked how much money would be needed to support the voucher system being suggested? John Lee answered that just a small amount would be needed for start up monies for this system (purchasing voucher forms, etc.). The discussion continued regarding how veterans are determined to be indigent and what constitutes an emergency. Chairman Wojt stated that it is his understanding that the levy for the Veterans Fund falls under the levy limits imposed on the County. Mr. Nasco reported that is correct. John Lee reported that there isn't any County in the State that has imposed more than two mills in levy for the Veterans Relief Fund. Commissioner Huntingford asked if the State Department of Veterans Affairs would provide assistance to the veterans organizations with budgeting and the voucher system? John Lee reported that his department does provide assistance to the veterans organizations. Chairman Wojt stated that there is no doubt that the Commissioners want to meet the emergency needs of the County's indigent veterans. There is a question on occasion on whether applications submitted for payment are really for an emergency. John Lee answered that the voucher system being proposed will not only meet the needs for these funds, but it will also allow the Board to meet and discuss their concerns with the veterans organizations. Commissioner Hinton stated that he feels the voucher system proposed has some merit. He noted that the need for dealing with these applications on an emergency basis is not necessarily shown by submitting past due bills. Commissioner Huntingford asked that the Veterans groups get together and develop a proposal for a voucher system and submit it to the Board. Chairman Wojt added that he would like to see specific eligibility criteria for these funds developed also. Commissioner Huntingford agreed that he would like to see criteria developed, as well as guidelines for the amounts to be provided for specific items (rent, utilities, medical expenses, etc.) and a budget for each type of assistance. The Board asked that the proposal be submitted by the end of the month. The meeting was recessed at the conclusion of the scheduled appointment and reconvened on Tuesday morning at 8:30 a.m. All three Board members were present to interview Bill Perka for possible reappointment to the Solid Waste Advisory Committee. HEARING re: Appeal of Final SEPA Threshold Determination; LL-II-92 Discoverv Bav Rid~e Lar~e Lot Subdivision #4 and #5; Pope Resources. Appellant: Chairman Wojt explained the hearing procedures and asked the following questions of the Board members: Q) Do any of the Commissioners have an interest in this property or issue? A) All three Commissioners answered no. Q) Do any of you stand to gain or lose any financial benefit as a result of the outcome of the hearing? A) All three Commissioners answered no. . VOL 19 PAC>: 00 1_235 " , Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of September 13, 1993 Page: 5 Q) Can you hear and consider this in a fair and objective manner? A) All three Commissioners answered yes. Q) Has any member of the Board engaged in communication outside this hearing with opponents or proponents on the issue to be heard? A) All three Commissioners answered no. Associate Planner Jerry Smith reported that the final mitigated determination of non- significance was issued August 9, 1993. On August 17, 1993 an appeal was filed. The packet of information given to the Board for this appeal includes the following: The environmental checklist, the preliminary plat map, numerous correspondence from agencies, the initial mitigated DNS and a copy of the final MDNS. The appellant (the project proponent) submitted comments during the 15 day comment period after the initial threshold determination and a response was made to those comments in the final threshold determina- tion. Commissioner Hinton asked if the Port Townsend School District was sent a notice of this action? Jerry Smith reported that is correct and the School District did not respond to that notice. Commissioner Hinton asked if this project is vested under the old subdivision ordinance or the current ordinance? Jerry Smith reported that this project is vested under the Interim Large Lot Subdivision Ordinance. Commissioner Hinton asked how the interim ordinance differs from the current Subdivision Ordinance? Prosecuting Attorney Mark Huth explained that for this particular plat there is not a lot of difference between the two ordinances, but one difference is that the Health Department does not have to analyze each lot for sewage disposal capacity during the plat approval process. Mark Huth reported that the SEP A checklist does not address provision for schools. It is just an identified environmental element that should be addressed by environmental review. If an impact is identified it must be mitigated. The final mitigated determination of non- significance on this project includes a mitigation that addresses provision for school bus turnaround area, school bus loading and unloading facilities, sidewalks, and accommodations for additional students generated by the proposal. Commissioner Hinton noted that there is a statement regarding the community drainfield not receiving written approval from the State Health Department, while at the same time there is a letter from the State Department of Health approving the system. Jerry Smith explained that the letter from the State (dated March 16, 1992) makes reference to phase four of the project. This application is for Division 4 and 5, which has led to confusion regarding what exactly the State's approval covers. David Cunningham, Pope Resources, introduced Linda Mueller, Land Use Planner and Ron Buyers, Vice President of Marketing. He explained that this project is located between Cape George and Adelma Beach. This application is for a large lot subdivision with an average lot size of approximately six acres. This application was made 14 months ago. He then reviewed the specific issues on which the appeal of the MDNS was filed: · Mitigation 1: Storm water runoff and soil erosion. This mitigation has a reference to designing stream bank erosion provisions. There are no stream banks on this property and they would like the last sentence in that mitigation deleted. · Mitigation 2: Road improvements to be performed to Public Works standards. They have no objection to designing roads to County requirements, they just want to be sure that the County requirements are those that are officially adopted by the County and not something that Public Works makes up as they go along. They suggested that the first sentence be changed to read It. . . be performed to the officially adopted standards of the Jefferson County Department of Public Works." · Mitigation 3: Agreement with Port Townsend School District: There is nothing in the record and no indication from the Port Townsend School District that there is an adverse impact on the School District. When there is no response from an agency, the WAC regulation is clear that the responsible official is to assume that there is no adverse impact. The Port Townsend School District recently passed a bond levy which will make it's VOL 19 PAGÇ 00 1.236 r' , Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of September 13, 1993 Page: 6 capital facilities more than adequate (excess capacity) by 1995. If this project generates .4 students per lot that would mean 14 students. The project's contribution toward the Port Townsend bond levy is about $11,000 per year. At that rate, in nine years this project will have paid for all of the capital facilities it requires. The County can make a finding that adequate provision had been made for schools and school grounds. Pope Resources is asking that this mitigation be deleted. · Mitigation 4: Fire District written approval prior to final plat approval: This mitigation lists items which the Fire District must agree with. There is no where in the SEP A record that the Fire District has a particular issue with this project. There are no special adverse effects that the project will create. Pope Resources feels that this mitigation should be deleted. In the plat approval process, a standard condition from the Subdivision Ordinance says that the applicant must provide written evidence that the subdivision complies with the Uniform Fire Code. Pope Resources feels that is adequate. · Mitigation 5: Notice to potential purchasers regarding on-site sewage system permits: David Cunningham explained that this mitigation has to do with the community drainfield. This project is not served by individual septic tanks and drainfields on each lot. The lots are served by individual septic tanks that are piped into a system which includes a community drainfield. Linda Mueller reported that since this is a community septic field the State issues the approval on it and that approval has been received. The mitigation says that the septic fields, soils, etc. have to be approved by the local Health Department which does not apply to this community system. Pope Resources has worked with Environmental Health Director Larry Fay to develop new wording for the notice on the plat which says "The lots, parcels , or tracts contained herein will be served by a larger, on-site sewage system consisting of individual septic tanks, pressure effluent sewer, and community drainfield. Individual lot, parcel, or tract owners may be required to obtain a permit from the Jefferson County Health Department prior to installation of septic tanks and/or pump chambers." Mark Huth asked for clarification of the State's approval of the community drainfield? Linda Mueller explained that phase four of the community drainfield will serve up to 49 lots which is large enough to serve Divisions 4 and 5 of the plat. Mark Huth noted that he has heard reports of problems with the community drainfield. Ron Buyers of Pope Resources reported that there were some problems in the first year, but they have been worked out. The community drainfield system was built to the required specifications. If there is some concern that the community drainfield is adequate for Divisions 4 and 5, David Cunningham suggested that a condition could be place on the threshold determination to indicate that the State approval be verified. With regard to road standards, Mark Huth reported that the Public Works Department has a set of adopted road standards. David Cunningham agreed, but indicated that they would like the mitigation to say that. There is a difference between standards and policies, Mark Huth continued. The policies are in the Subdivision Ordinance while the standards, which are the methodology for implementing the policy, are not required to be adopted by ordinance. The standards must be written and adopted by the Public Works Department, which has been done. Mark Huth explained that the Uniform Fire Code has been changed to address items such as road width, fire flow, etc. and the County no longer relies on the Fire District for this information any longer. David Cunningham reported that fire flow standards are also contained in the Uniform Fire Code. He asked if it isn't cleaner and simpler, given the nexus required under SEP A, that the mitigation require compliance with the Uniform Fire Code? Mark Huth agreed that makes more sense. Commissioner Huntingford asked if there is reason to include the last sentence regarding the stream in mitigative measure number one? Jerry Smith reported that this was a typographical error and should be deleted. Bill Perka stated that he feels that Pope Resources has addressed the issues in an ordered manner and he agrees that extra, unnecessary wording should be deleted from mitigation measures. VOl. .19 rAG~ 00 1-237 \ .., , , Commissioners' Meeting Minutes: Week of September 13, 1993 Page: 7 Hearing no further public comment, the Chairman closed the hearing. Commissioner Hinton stated that he supports the requested changes submitted by Pope Resources. Mark Huth stated that the word "officially" should be deleted from the wording Pope Resources suggested for mitigative measure number two because of the legal meaning of the word officially. This measure would then say "adopted standards" instead of "officially adopted standards." Commissioner Huntingford moved to: · Mitigation 1 - Delete the last sentence · Mitigation 2 - Change the wording of the first sentence to If. . . be performed to the adopted standards of the Jefferson County Department of Public W orles Mitigation 3 - Delete Mitigation 4 - Delete MitigationS - Change the wording to that developed by the Environmental Health Director and Pope Resources To rescind the final mitigated determination of non-significance issued on August 9, 1993 Issue a modified final mitigated determination of non-significance Have the Planning Department write the findings and conclusions to support that decision. Commissioner Hinton seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. · · · · · · Letter to City re: Proposed Shoreline Pro~ram Amendments: Commissioner Hinton moved to approve and sign the letter to Mayor John Clise and the City Council regarding the proposed amendments to the Shoreline Program. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Re-Appointment to Solid Waste Advisorv Committee: Commissioner Hinton moved to re-appoint Bill Perka to another term on the Solid Waste Advisory Committee. His new two year term will expire August 12, 1995. Commissioner Huntingford seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. ~ \ ATTEST: JEFFERSON OARD OF C Lorna L. Delaney, . Clerk of the Board VOL 1 9 PAGE 00 1238