HomeMy WebLinkAboutM100404
District No. 1 Commissioner: Dan Tltterness
District No.2 Commissioner: Glen Hunttngford
District No.3 Commissioner: Patrick M. Rodgers
County Administrator: John F. Fischbach
Clerk of the Board: Lorna Delaney
MINUTES
Week of October 4, 2004
Chairman Glen Huntingford called the meeting to order in the presence of Commissioner
Dan Titterness and Commissioner Patrick Rodgers.
Letter Regarding Quilcene Grocery Liquor License Application #363002-IQ; Washington
State Liquor Control Board: Commissioner Titterness moved to have the Chair sign a letter to the State
Liquor Control Board withdrawing any objections to issuing a liquor license for the Qui1cene Grocery.
Commissioner Rodgers seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote.
HEARING re: 2005 Budget: (General Government: Assessor; Auditor; Elections, Auditor's
o & M; Commissioners; Board of Equalization; Civil Service Commission; Veterans Relief; County
Administrator; Non-Departmental; Treasurer; Treasurer's 0 & M) County Administrator John Fischbach
reviewed the schedule for the public hearings on the 2005 budget proposal. The departments are grouped as
follows: General Government, Public Works, Public Services, Internal Services, and Law & Justice. He
reported that the preliminary budget has been available to the public since September 20 and is a work in
progress. Changes will continue to be made. Suggestions from the public are welcome. Although it isn't a
requirement, another hearing will be scheduled in early December.
The County Administrator noted that the economy continues to struggle which has negative impacts on
government and consumers; and Washington voters have aggressively pursued initiatives that the County is
still trying to address. Though the economy continues to suffer, new construction in the County is
increasing at a high rate which brings in more revenue, but also increases the demand for service delivery.
Several items in the budget are still being reviewed:
· UFCW Local 100 I has adopted a new health plan.
· The Assessor estimates that new construction will add approximately $60,000 to property tax
receipts.
· The UGA sewer funding costs are still being developed.
· The Health Department budget is still being reviewed. The goal is to not cut services except as a last
resort. Options for Natural Resources and Animal Services are being reviewed.
· The Recreation budget has been adjusted for 2005 by reducing support from the General Fund by
20% and replacing it with Roads funding.
Page I
Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of October 4, 2004
!i:.''''';.'~
., ~
1$1/'1"(;1:"
· There is approximately $250,000 in additional labor costs that will need to be incorporated into the
budget due to union contract negotiations.
· The State Legislature is considering an increase in pension costs to the County that could be as much
as $260,000 a year.
On July 19, the Board approved Resolution No. 34-04 which outlined the 2005 strategic budget objectives.
Priorities are as follows: 1) invest in community infrastructure that encourages economic opportunity; 2)
protect and enhance natural resources; 3) support local law & justice programs; and, 4) address locally
identified and defined public health problems.
The fiscal budget objectives include:
· The final budget will be balanced within available resources. In addition to annual fiscal resources,
efforts need to be made to review future long-term service needs.
Growth in General Fund property taxes will not exceed 1 % plus taxes collected on new construction.
Growth in Road Fund property taxes will not exceed 1 % plus taxes collected on new construction.
Any increase in the Road Fund property tax will be set aside in the Road Emergency Fund.
Transfers from General Fund to other operating funds will be kept at 2004 levels. There are a few
special funds that will be adjusted to the 2004 level plus 2%.
Maintain personnel costs, salaries, wages, and benefits within projected growth of recurring and
sustainable revenue.
A minimum reserve of 10% shall be maintained for all operating funds. A minimum reserve of25%
shall be maintained for all non-capital expenses of the Road Fund.
Revenues collected in excess of the reserve shall be held for one-time special purpose needs that
fulfill the strategic objectives ofthe County.
·
·
·
·
·
·
The following efficiency and effectiveness objectives are also being followed.
· Continue to partner and work with local agencies to develop opportunities to work together on
service delivery.
· Begin work to establish a performance management structure in the budgeting of public resources
which sets clear priorities in public expenditures, establishes a baseline to measure costs, creates
measurable outcomes in service delivery, and public accountability for results achieved.
Chairman Huntingford opened the public hearing.
Assessor's Office: Assessor Jack Westerman stated that there is an additional $60,000 in tax receipts for new
construction which amounts to approximately $165,000-$170,000. With the decrease in medical costs, his
budget is actually lower than the 2004 base but this could be offset by the possible increased cost in the
pension plan.
Auditor's Office: Deputy Auditor Karen Cartmel explained that there is a slight increase in the Auditor's
budget because of the GEMS (new financial system) implementation. The vote tabulator needs to be
upgraded in 2005 and it is partially grant funded.
Page 2
Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of October 4,2004
'.'OS","
... ;::.-<
,t:$f1fN(>~
County Administrator John Fischbach noted that the budgets for the Commissioners, Board of Equalization,
Civil Service Commission, Veterans Relief, and the County Administrator did not have any significant
changes.
Non-Departmental: Central Services Director Allen Sartin stated that there have been some increases in
liability insurance that are reflected in the budget.
Treasurer's Office: Treasurer Judi Morris reported that revenues are estimated at $5,325,000 which is an
increase of $59,400 over June estimates. Sales tax has increased but does not include the sales tax from the
Hood Canal Bridge project which is being kept separately. It appears that there will be additional revenue
received from law and justice and motor vehicle excise tax. Higher rates from investment income are
expected because interest rates have increased. The revenue picture will be better than is currently
projected. Expenses for the Treasurer's Office show an overall reduction of $4,000. In 2005, she plans to
purchase a payment processing computer that accepts both the check and payment coupons and compiles the
information on a spreadsheet. Software will link the information to the AS400. Currently the payment
processing is done manually. To allow the Treasurer's Office to take credit and debit card payments, $8,000
was added to the budget to pay the necessary fees. Currently, she is negotiating with the bank to get the fees
lowered. The fees on the foreclosure process have been raised because the title companies raised their fees
and this affects the Treasurer's 0 & M budget.
Chairman Huntingford opened the public testimony portion of the hearing. Hearing no comment for or
against the proposed 2005 budgets listed above, the Chair closed the hearing until the Public Works budget
was scheduled to be reviewed.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: The following comments were made: last week a quarterly
report was released by State Labor & Industries showing open retro years and the County should request a
copy to review; a question about a constituent being appointed to the WSAC committee that deals with L &
I issues; Fred Hill Materials is continuing to mine on the eastern face ofthe Saddleback Ridge because of
delays on the MRLO designation; they may continue to pursue mining in the Wahl Lake area and they plan
to pursue the Pit-to-Pier project; FHM has the right to mine within their operation zone as set forth in case
law; material from the Shine operation is now being used in the Port Townsend area; FHM has always
operated in good faith; did two of the Commissioners have a secret meeting at the DCD Office on June II?;
questions about the latest resolution regarding the Commissioners' vehicle allowance, the methodology that
the Central Services Director used for arriving at the amount, and a review of the Commissioners' schedules
and mileage for the past several weeks.
Page 3
Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of October 4,2004
~.'O'.(""
... ,.",-<
~J' ,,,û'1.<?~
APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA: Commissioner Titterness
moved to delete Item #2 and approve the balance of the Consent Agenda. Commissioner Rodgers seconded
the motion which carried by a unanimous vote.
1. RESOLUTION NO. 50-04 re: Jefferson County/City of Port Townsend Natural Hazards Mitigation
Plan (See also Minutes of September 27,2004)
2. DELETE: RESOLUTION re: Adopting the Cost Allocation Plan for Fiscal Years 2004 and 2005
3. AGREEMENT, Amendment No.1 re: Evaluation Training and Moderator for Grantmaker Forum;
Amending Scope of Work, Payment and Period of Performance; Jefferson County Health and
Human Services; Michelle M. Maike, M.A.
4. AGREEMENT, Amendment No.1 re: Provide Educational and Therapeutic Services to Children
Birth to Three Years and their Families; Amending Payment and Period of Performance; Jefferson
County Health and Human Services; Concerned Citizens of Forks
5. AGREEMENT re: Community Access Services for Individuals with Development Disabilities;
Jefferson County Health and Human Services; Concerned Citizens of Forks
6. AGREEMENT re: Establishing a Big Brothers/Big Sisters Mentor Program in Jefferson County as
Part of the Raising a Healthy Community Program; Jefferson County Health and Human Services;
Big Brothers/Big Sisters of King and Pierce Counties
7. AGREEMENT re: Acquisition of Property for the Quimper Wildlife Corridor Using Conservation
Futures Tax Funds; Jefferson County Health and Human Services; Gordon Papritz
8. AGREEMENT re: Refrigerator Hauling Services; Jefferson County Public Works; D & M Disposal
9. AGREEMENT re: Solid Waste Transfer Station Scale Maintenance and Certification Services;
Jefferson County Public Works; Mettler Toledo
10. AGREEMENT re: Structural Design and Geotechnical Services for Barlow Bridge, Oil City Road
and Clearwater Road; Jefferson County Public Works; Shearer Design, LLC
11. Grant Application for Funding the Jefferson County Courthouse Clock Tower Rehabilitation Project;
U.S. Housing and Urban Development, Economic Development Initiative, Special Projects Program
HEARING re: 2005 Budget: (Public Works Department: County Roads/Construction &
Administration, County Roads/Maintenance, Brinnon and Quilcene Flood Control, Flood/Stormwater
Management, County Parks Improvement, Parks & Recreation, Solid Waste) Chairman Huntingford
explained that this is a continuation ofthe public hearings on the proposed 2005 budget.
County Roads/Construction & Administration, County Roads/Maintenance: Public Works Director Frank
Gifford explained that County Roads has a budgeted amount of $7,273,515 overall. They have met their
reserve goal of25% of all non-capital. They will be doing the annual component of the 6-Year
Transportation Plan next year, and there is $1.6 million in construction planned. As actual construction
increases, a part time person may need to be hired. The regular road maintenance program includes ditching
and mowing. The chip seal program will be upgraded next year to improve the base quality of the roads.
The culvert inventory is almost completed and they will be working on some of the higher priority culverts
next year.
Page 4
Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of October 4,2004
" ~o.)N (@,
~ '~-<
-+:J' If\I~\~
Brinnon and Quilcene Flood Control: Currently, there aren't any projects using the Brinnon Flood Control
funding. Most of the work is being done in the Qui1cene flood plain. Two major projects are property
acquisitions and the Linger Longer Study to remove some barriers and potentially redesign the mouth ofthe
stream. A large portion ofthe Linger Longer Study was grant funded.
Flood/Stormwater Management: The Department took some time off from the Stormwater Plan this year to
work on the Tri Area UGA and the stormwater plan. The Stormwater Plan is funded by a DOE grant and
will be completed in 2005.
Parks Improvement: This budget is capital funded. They are working on the following projects:
· A master plan for the Qui1cene campground and the park at the Qui1cene Community Center. This
includes resurfacing the tennis court, redoing the picnic shelter, and purchasing playground
equipment.
· A lease agreement for the south end of Indian Island.
· A grant application for an Off Road Vehicle (ORV) feasibility study.
· Replacement of a gate at Memorial Field.
· Replacing fire rings and picnic tables at various parks.
· Some work on the challenge course at Gibbs Lake.
· The Park's Advisory Board community park grants.
Parks & Recreation: The transfer from the General Fund into the Parks and Recreation Fund has been
reduced in 2005 by 20%. The County Roads Fund will fund some of the maintenance on the Larry Scott
Trail as a non-motorized/recreational trail combination. All the goals for providing services were met in
2004. In 2005, a strategic plan will be developed based on input from community focus groups around the
County. This will help to determine the types of recreation programs to be delivered and the location of
those programs because the programs need to be self-supporting. The budget proposal for 2005 is at the
same funding level as 2004, but the input from the focus groups for the strategic plan will result in a new
way of running the department in future years. They are able to continue the practice of reducing fees for
families with multiple kids.
Solid Waste: There is a $350,000 increase in this budget which is mostly capital investment from the
Equipment Reserve Fund. They had planned to use some of the additional funding for the scale shack
improvement project, however they are reassessing that project to find more economical ways of achieving
similar results. Tipping fees and services will stay at the same level. Part of the funding will be used to
purchase a recycling bailer and for acquisition of an existing well.
Commissioner Rodgers noted that $550,000 was budgeted for the Gateway Visitor's Center. Frank Gifford
replied that the Department will be scheduling a workshop with the Board to discuss the current plan for the
Visitor's Center. They will also review a modified plan or whether to drop the project altogether. This is a
special project that the Board originally requested.
Chairman Huntingford opened the public testimony portion of the hearing on the Public Works budget.
Hearing no comments for or against the proposed 2005 budget, the Chair closed the hearing until the
scheduled time for the Public Services budget.
Page 5
Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of October 4, 2004
~ON C
¡ ".~
«:'(f 1t<C>~~
HEARING re: 2005 Budget: (Public Services: Cooperative Extension; Weed Board;
Community Services; Conservation Futures; Hotel/Motel; Marine Resource; 4H After School Program
(YIPPEE) Chairman Huntingford noted that this is a continuation of the public hearings on the proposed
2005 budget.
Cooperative Extension: Allen Sartin stated that Cooperative Extension is changing their workplan for next
year and they have added about 2 FTEs based on grant revenue. They realize that if they don't get the
grants, they won't get the positions.
Weed Board: The Weed Board is consistent with past budgets.
Community Services: This budget was reduced slightly because of a long term plan to reduce County
funding for several organizations. This fund will become part of the General Fund in 2005 rather than being
designated as a special fund.
Karen Bednarski, Accountant, stated that the Auditor's Office does not think that this fund should be moved
into the General Fund because it is not a "cost of doing government." It is moving history and it will be
more difficult to track.
Conservation Futures: Allen Sartin stated that the County is collecting the Conservation Futures funding at
the same rate, and $200,000 has been requested to fund projects in 2005. The County Administrator will be
working with the Conservation Futures Committee to determine the status of approved projects and any
ongoing expenses before the $200,000 is awarded.
Hotel/Motel: John Fischbach reported that the Board received a memo last week regarding the request to
fund $10,000 for parking fees at Fort Worden State Park. The Lodging Tax Advisory Committee met and
chose not to approve the request for funding from the Hotel/Motel Fund. The Board had asked for a
recommendation from L T AC.
Marine Resource: Karen Bednarski stated that this is part of the Cooperative Extension budget.
4H After School Program (YIPPEE): The $85,000 for this program is funded by Title III Forest Funding and
this is the same level of funding as in the past. Chairman Huntingford mentioned that the counties are
encouraging the Federal Government to maintain Title III and if they don't, other funding sources will need
to be found.
The Chair opened the public testimony portion of the hearing.
Nora Porter, Port Townsend, stated that she gave a presentation on the request for Fort Worden parking fees
at the LTAC meeting. She is disappointed in the response. The LTAC member who represents Port Ludlow
was not present at the meeting, and would have supported the request because last spring in a conference
call, she noted that events at Fort Worden fill up hotels andbed and breakfasts in Port Townsend and people
book at Port Ludlow. The 178 jobs provided at Fort Worden are worth the $10,000 that is requested and it
is a huge investment in tourism for the whole County.
Page 6
Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of October 4, 2004
~-<
-~
J' It<c.'\~
After a brief discussion about the parking fee funding request, the Board concurred with the LTAC's
recommendation.
HEARING re: Proposed Ordinance Amending the Brinnon Sub-Area Plan, the County's
Comprehensive Plan and the Unified Development Code (UDC) in Order to Achieve Compliance with the
June 23, 2004 Compliance Order of the Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board
(WWGMHB): Chairman Huntingford opened the public hearing. Deputy Prosecuting Attorney David
Alvarez reviewed the background on the Brinnon Sub-Area Plan. The Board amended the plan to designate
a (d)( iii) LAMIRD (Limited Area of More Intensive Rural Development) of21.6 acres north ofthe Rural
Village Center which is a (d)( i) LAMIRD. The Growth Management Hearings Board found that a (d)(iii)
LAMIRD (Small Business/Cottage Industry - SBCI) must be isolated from other LAMIRDs and that the
designation was non-compliant with the GMA. The County's deadline for addressing non-compliance was
September 21, 2004; but permission was granted by the Hearings Board to conduct this public hearing.
The proposed ordinance before the Board reverses the June, 2004 ordinance which created the SBCI on the
21.6 acres. It changes the map and removes language regarding the SBCI from the Comprehensive Plan and
the UDC. This acreage can only be used for rural residential purposes.
Chairman Huntingford asked how many issues regarding.the Brinnon Sub-Area Plan were actually
appealed? David Alvarez answered that there were 12 or 13 issues. The SEPA and the original idea of
having a light industrial LAMIRD on the 21.6 acres were the two issues that were reversed and all the other
issues were upheld. The SEP A reversal was based on a finding that there was not enough interaction with
State agencies on critical habitat areas. The County met with the agencies and the Tribes to determine the
necessary information. It was submitted during the last compliance cycle in June, 2004.
Commissioner Rodgers pointed out that many people have felt that all the original facts were not made
available on this issue and once findings of fact are done, it is difficult to go back and change them. This is
the only area in Brinnon that has a history of industrial use. It is a gravel pit which can't really be used for
anything else. No one would want to have a residence there. At some point in the future, the County needs
to look at the zoning ofthis property again.
Chairman Huntingford opened the hearing for public testimony. Hearing no comments for or against the
proposed ordinance, he closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Rodgers moved to approve ORDINANCE NO. 11-1004-04 amending the Brinnon Sub-Area
Plan, the County's Comprehensive Plan and the Unified Development Code (UDC) in order to achieve
compliance with the June 23, 2004 Compliance Order of the Western Washington Growth Management
Hearings Board. Commissioner Titterness seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote.
HEARING re: 2005 Budget: (Public Services: Community Development; Planning
Commission; Public Health; Natural Resources; Animal Services; Watershed Planning) Chairman
Huntingford noted that this is a continuation of the public hearings on the proposed 2005 budget.
Page 7
Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of October 4, 2004
-."-
".i
~rltltJ.C>~
Community Development: Allen Sartin explained that the Community Development budget shows an
increase in 2005 due to a proposed increase in staffing. There are 4 additional positions that have been
requested: 1) Code Compliance Officer; 2) Assistant Planner; 3) Development Services Manager; and, 4)
Clerk Hire. The additional space that will be required and the remodel of the offices in the Castle Hill Mall
was discussed. The non-personnel, operating budget was reduced by 11 % by utilizing staff instead of
contractors. There is no capital budget and the interfund transfer is a 2% increase over last year's budget.
Planning Commission: The Planning Commission is the same budget as 2004 with a 2% increase.
Public Health: Health Director Jean Baldwin stated that the submitted budget is in keeping with the 2004
budget plus 2%. They are not able to meet the 10% carry forward because many of the grants and contracts
don't allow it. When the budget was adopted last year, they were approximately $250,000 short in carry
over because the County went from cash to modified accrual and the Department's facility and the computer
equipment rental rates increased. It is a priority to rebuild the reserve. They are decreasing the number of
positions and turning back some of the contracts which will decrease funding by $400,000. The Department
has tried to maintain their programs and services and most of the cuts have been in administration services.
This could be a problem if there are audits or complicated contracts, and it limits their ability to write grants.
A series of Board of Health meetings will be required if they have to cut programs and services. Most ofthe
County funding goes for administration and provides the infrastructure for the Department to apply for other
grant funding. Rent and benefits are decreasing next year. Funding for Substance Abuse has been removed
from the budget although the contract with DASA has not been severed yet. Animal Services is still in the
budget, but that may be moving to another department. They are assuming that the City of Port Townsend
will continue to contribute their portion of the funding.
Commissioner Rodgers asked if they also submitted a budget showing the 15% decrease? Jean Baldwin
stated that the Board of Health was involved in choosing priorities. They reduced another clerical position
in the Environmental Health Department, another nurse, more reductions in Natural Resources and some
programs were reduced that included: WIC, footcare, immunizations, and communicable diseases. There
were 6 pages of adds and deletes for the 2005 budget. They have gone as far as they can go without closing
down sections of the Department.
Natural Resources: Since the Natural Resource Manager resigned in September, Jean Baldwin has been
overseeing the department. Veronica Morris-Nakano, Office Manager, noted that a 2% increase was
requested from the 2004 base budget. They are combining Environmental Health and Natural Resources
supervision. They will continue with stream gauging, instream flow, and providing technical assistance to
DCD. A flood plain acquisition project was added, but it is grant funded and is a straight pass through.
Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney David Alvarez has been very helpful with the property acquisition
process. There are two new employees in the department that are doing a good job.
Chairman Huntingford suggested that the Conservation District may be able to take over the grant for
monitoring the stream gauging and do the work.
Page 8
Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of October 4, 2004
..,0' ~"
-. ,...<
~ *
".
Animal Services: Veronica Morris-Nakano explained that this was a difficult budget to do this year because
Animal Services may be overseen by the Sheriff s Office in the future. The FTEs remain the same in the
2005 budget. The building rental and the interfund transfer were reduced.
Watershed Planning: The original watershed planning was done in several phases. It is now completed
and the final funding has been received. The plan is to do instream flow in 2005.
Chairman Huntingford opened the public testimony portion of the hearing.
Maria Larocque, stated that she isn't sure why the Community Services Fund has been moved into the
General Fund and the amount has been reduced to $4,000. Where did the $160,000 in revenue go?
Allen Sartin replied that in 2004 the Community Services Fund was a special fund. In the 2005 budget, the
special fund is zeroed out and shows in the General Fund. The increase is less than in 2004 because of
activities that the County is no longer funding. The amount that is actually budgeted is $158,000. The
Community Services Fund has historically been funded by an interfund transfer from the General Fund. By
putting it in the General Fund, the transfer will no longer be necessary.
Jill Buhler, stated that she is member ofthe Board of Health and a Hospital District Commissioner. Public
health is one of the most important elements of the community. She urged the Board to keep their budget
intact. The Department is doing all they can to keep their costs under control and further cuts mean cuts in
services. The Hospital District and the BOH work closely together to share services and avoid duplication.
Cuts in services would be counterproductive. Poor health in a community is economically
counterproductive.
Eleanor Frissell, stated that she is also a Board of Health member. It is very important to maintain the base
funding for the Health Department as requested.
Nora Porter, questioned the 4 positions to be added next year in the Department of Community
Development. It appears that most of them are supervisory in nature. Will fees for permits be raised to fill
those positions? Will the Code Compliance Officer be shared with the City?
The County Administrator stated that the current activity level at DCD is up and may be enough to fund
those positions. Fees would not be raised. Allen Sartin added that the Building Official will be a shared
position with the City. The Code Compliance Officer will be an internal position to do the first steps in
code compliance actions.
David Sullivan, PUD Commissioner and Board of Health member, stated that as a BOH member he urged
the Board to keep the Health Department budget the same. It is important to maintain the current service
capacity in the community. This is crucial if there is an emergency. He encouraged the Board to see the
watershed planning through because the information is needed for future planning.
Hearing no further comments for or against the proposed 2005 budgets listed above, the Chair closed this
portion of the hearing until it was time for internal services department's budgets to be reviewed.
Page 9
Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of October 4,2004
'::.t'\;~
~'.r !Ú«'iSS
HEARING re: 2005 Budget: (Internal Services: Facilities; Construction and Renovation;
Capital Improvement; Courthouse Improvement; Equipment Rental & Replacement; Information Services;
Safety & Security) Chairman Huntingford noted that this is a continuation ofthe public hearings on the
proposed 2005 budget.
Facilities: Allen Sartin explained that the new Sheriffs Administrative Offices required that 1 FTE be
added to the facilities staff on July 1 of this year. They aren't asking for increased staff in 2005. Some
increases in repair and maintenance and utilities are proposed. The price of gasoline and oil products has
gone up considerably this last year and they put in an increase of 6%. Facilities provides services to 28
County buildings, although not all ofthem are full services. The Castle Hill complex is 14,500 sq. ft. The
DSHS building is about 8,000 sq. ft. and the County does not provide services there. Ifthe State moves out
next year, some work will be required.
Commissioner Rodgers asked if there is funding set aside for major repairs like roofs, heating, cooling or
plumbing? Allen Sartin replied that there aren't any funds to take care of major repairs. The Construction
Fund is guided by a long range plan and this is an approach that is commonly used in local governments.
Commissioner Rodgers added that having some funding set aside would make it easier if something needed
replacing. A true cost of occupying space includes capital improvements.
Construction and Renovation: The Construction Fund dropped dramatically from 2004 to 2005 because the
County borrowed $4.5 million in March, 2003. A considerable amount of this money went toward building
the Sheriffs Administrative Offices, and a number of other projects have been identified where the
remainder of the funds will be spent. Projects budgeted in 2004 that are currently in progress were not
budgeted in 2005 although they may not be completed until next year. They will continue to replace the
windows in the Courthouse. A Courthouse card access system is also planned. Some money is set aside for
miscellaneous projects that come up. A roof replacement schedule for eleven facilities is included in the
plan and the roof on the DSHS building is scheduled to be replaced in 2005. The Clocktower Fund is a
separate fund. It has $1 million in bond money that is to be used to leverage grant funding for Phase 1 of
that project.
Capital Improvement: This fund receives the revenue for capital projects. Debt service is also paid out of
the fund. Any unused funds flow to the Construction Fund. Next year approximately $741,000 will pay the
debt service out of a total of $900,000 in revenue. Two bonds and one contract are currently outstanding.
The earliest payout is 2012 and the longest is 2020.
Equipment Rental & Replacement: The only significant change in the ER & R Fund is $300,000 that was
added to replace some facilities on the West End. If the staff workload permits, the projects can be
. completed next year. There are 52 light vehicles, 6 heavy vehicles, and 23 pieces of heavy equipment. They
run a storage operation for the Road Department where they inventory the big rocks and they buy the oil for
chipsealing.
Page 10
Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of October 4, 2004
<1'.'''''
<0; ,.
... ;::-:
.. . it.
"..
Commissioner Rodgers mentioned that he is pleased that the County has recently contracted with the State
Department of General Administration to do engineering and design work on a project. Allen Sartin stated
that sometimes the State's bidders list can also be used but they try to hire local contractors. Commissioner
Rodgers asked about having the Public Works Department bid on some of the projects? Allen Sartin
explained that he met with the Public Works Director last year and Frank Gifford indicated that he didn't
have excess resources available.
Information Services: This budget is slightly higher than last year due to equipment replacement. Staff feels
it is important to be able to maintain the current operating environment and some ofthe older equipment
dates back to 1989. Some machines aren't capable of handling the today's software. Allen Sartin explained
that his goal is to minimize labor and not get into the "computer repair business." The internet
environmental creates more demands on computers and it is important that they operate effectively.
Safety & Security: John Fischbach reported that a mobile van (mobile command center for emergency
operations) was budgeted last year and it is not in the budget for 2005. A Homeland Security grant has been
submitted for the van.
Chairman Huntingford opened the floor for public testimony.
Maria Larocque, stated that the drop in the Safety and Security Fund was $81,000. Was that how much the
van cost? The cost for Information Services equipment replacement seems inflated. There are a lot of older
vehicles that the departments rent and a lease of $950 a month seems outrageous.
John Fischbach replied that the van was estimated at $81,000. He also discussed the need for depreciation
built into the system to replace the vehicles.
Nora Porter, explained that repairing the clocktower is a large project. Other public entities bond when they
have to fund this type ofproject. She asked about the $20,000 budgeted for the card access system for the
Courthouse? Would that implement a system? How much will the roof replacement at DSHS cost?
Allen Sartin stated that the card access system would be used before and after hours. It is efficient at
tracking the use ofthe building. The $20,000 would install the card access system. The roof replacement at
DSHS is estimated at $20,000. There was a discussion about when DSHS will be moving out ofthe
building and why the County doesn't plan to use it permanently. Allen Sartin explained that all of the
County operations dealing with development probably wouldn't fit in both buildings at Castle Hill Mall.
The options for the building have not been fully evaluated at this time.
Maria Larocque, mentioned that Jefferson Transit buses are never full and it seems like a lot of money is
spent on maintaining large buses, especially with the current gas prices.
Page 11
Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of October 4, 2004
,-
~~~
,"0
Chairman Huntingford explained that the County doesn't have control over this because Jefferson Transit is
their own taxing authority. However, the Commissioners sit on the Transit Board with City representatives.
He said that the appropriate venue for addressing her concerns would be a Transit Board meeting. A
percentage of the sales tax goes toward funding the Transit. With the rising cost of fuel, ridership is
increasing on the buses.
Hearing no further comments for or against the proposed 2005 budgets listed above, the Chair closed this
portion of the hearing until it was time for the law & justice department's budgets to be reviewed.
HEARING re: 2005 Budget: (Law and Justice: Clerk; Law Library; Superior Court;
Juvenile Court; District Court; Prosecuting Attorney; Coroner; Crime Victims; Drug Fund; Sheriff;
Jeff Com) Chairman Huntingford noted that this is a continuation of the public hearings on the proposed
2005 budget.
Clerk and Superior Court: Superior Court Clerk Marianne Walters stated that these budget requests were
tentatively accepted and she has nothing else to add.
Law Library: Marianne Walters explained that the Law Library budget has gone down considerably because
they have gone fully electronic. The filing fees for both Superior Court and District Court are enough to
fund the law library. They pay a monthly fee for all of the services.
Juvenile Court: Juvenile Court Director Barbara Carr stated that it appears that her budget was also accepted
as submitted.
District Court: No representatives were present.
Prosecuting Attorney: Prosecuting Attorney Juelie Dalzell stated that she doesn't have any comment except
that she is having difficulty filling a soon to be vacant Deputy Prosecutor position because of the low salary.
Coroner: The Coroner Budget has always been underfunded. They will continue to do the best they can.
The doctors at the hospital have been willing to help out because ofthe limited budget.
Crime Victims: The Stop Grant is out again and positions have been rearranged in the office to handle it for
now.
Drug Fund: Prosecuting Attorney Juelie Dalzell stated that she didn't have anything to add.
Page 12
Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of October 4, 2004
~.'O":' <
to
J'11,t<1(o
Sheriff: Sheriff Mike Brasfield stated that there were some minor requests in his 2005 budget that were
removed in the preliminary read of the proposed budget. There are some personnel related issues that will
impact the budget. There is a proposal for reclassification of the Code Enforcement Officer from a civilian
position to a sworn position which would require an increase in the salary level. An upgrade for the
Correction's Supervisor is being addressed during the labor negotiations. There will also be a final
settlement on the deputy and correction's contract. Another issue is whether Animal Services will be moved
from the Health Department to the Sheriff s Office. This would impact the General Fund.
Jeff Com: The JeffCom Director's pay structure is being reviewed. Allen Sartin explained that the results of
the vote on Proposition #1 on the ballot for the General Election will have an affect on this budget. Ifit
passes, the loan will be repayed by revenues received. If the proposition fails, each member agency on the
J effCom Board will be required to pay their proportionate share.
Chairman Huntingford opened the public testimony portion of the hearing.
Nora Porter, asked the financial impact to the County if Proposition #1 fails?
Allen Sartin replied that he is not sure ofthe exact amount that the County would pay, but the County would
have to pay a portion ofthe $157,000. Sheriff Brasfield added that the revenue can only be used for radio
equipment upgrades and replacements.
Hearing no further comments for or against the proposed 2005 budget, the Chair closed the public hearing.
JEFFERSON COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIO
A TTES"f~:'"
Q;UIU_-fJO!ll,-,-,:y)~, JI-r.:'
,){íhe Matthes, CMC . U
L Deputy Clerk of the Board
J)an Titterness,Mell1ber
~~
Page 13
C, Dé () _ 10. t(. 0 t(
October 4, 2004
HEARING RECORD
Jefferson County Board of Commissioners
Re: Diii LAMIRD Repeal:
Dosewallips Small-scale Business and Cottage Industry Overlay District
r;::;~'''<~
:;1 1 í rè ,.;'1,;
t "~""'..."
\
Commissioners:
n;"""\-r f1 ¡J 2
'j\.J1 t)'.!. 004
The proposed ordinance repealing the SBCI states:
"Section Three:
The 21.6 acres that were the location of the non-GMA compliant SBCI overlay
zone shall have a zoning designation of Rural Residential."
This section is redundant because the underlying zoning of the SBCI was never changed to
commercial in the ftrst place. It remained Rural Residential 1:5. According to Finding of
Fact no. 30 in the original adopting ordinance:
"Adoption of the Small Business-Cottage Industry (or "SBCI") Overlay
district for the 21.6 upland parcels does not change the underlying GMA-
derived zoning designation for those parcels; they remain Rural Residential
12". [Emphasis added]
The use of "overlays" that don't change GMA-derived zoning fÌ'om residential to
commercial is not a proper GMA designation process. It is a misuse of GMA's diii
LAMIRD designation option. Creating unregulated new rural commercial areas in
undeveloped areas and giving them official-sounding titles like "over lily diftricf' is not a
proper GMA process, especially when high-intensity growth within such districts occurs
via Administrative permit without legal notice or public participation. Such districts are
new patterns of rural development known by the old name of sprawl. They violate the
intended purpose of diii LAMIRDs and violate GMA's public participation requirement
for commercial zoning designations, and they are inconsistent with LNP 5.1:
LNP 5.1
All rural commercial lands shall be designated based on the provisions of the
Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A).
1
10-04-04 BOCC Hearing Comments - Nancy Dorgan
Repeal of Dosewallips Small-Scale Business/Cottage Industry Overlay District
The Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan has not chosen diii LAMIRD commercial
zoning to recognize existing businesses outside existing commercial areas. These
businesses are considered expandable, legal, confonning uses and were not mapped in the
CP as distinct commercial diii LAMIRDs. Policies exist in the CP allowing new residential
cottage industries via a conditional use permit process, but those policies will be radically
relaxed this year if the BOCC adopts the Planning Commission's rewrite of the CPo
After five amendment cycles, the CP still does not have any specific countywide policies
regarding diii designation as a tool for new isolated, small-scale commercial/industrial
development. There are no CP policies to guide UDC regulation of new non-residential
commercial/industrial diii "overlay districts" or single-business diii's: How many diii's
should be allowed throughout the county? How much total rural land may they occupy
without hindering proper growth within the two existing UGA's? How much land can each
diii occupy? How big may the structures be and still be considered "small-scale"? How far
apart should diii's be spaced from each other and from existing rural centers, both urban
and rural? How many separate businesses may site within a single diii designation? What
setbacks and buffers are needed to protect rural character and adjacent rural residential
properties? What types of uses should be allowed in diii's?
This language is not yet in the CP, because in 1998 the local choice for additional rural
commercial development was infill in existing di-designated commercial centers and a
possible second UGA. The local choice was not new commercial "overlay districts"
scattered at random throughout the county. Before this pro-development County
Commission starts down the diii route again, answers to the above questions need to be
worked out in a public process because diii' s are a major change in policy, especially diii
"districts" .
Properly-designated diii's that are real zoning changes with GMA public participation are
allowed by Statute and can serve a useful purpose here under certain conditions, but only if
we know what those conditions are ahead of time. The CP policies below refer broadly to
GMA implementation and the options available for rural development in Jefferson County,
but there is much GMA homework to be done before specific diii' s are attempted again:
LNP 1.4
Modification of designations and boundaries may include the designation of
Urban Growth Areas and/or full implementation of the criteria provided in
1997 amendments to the GMA under ESB 6094.
LNP 4.7
Commercial land use designations and boundaries may be modified with the
policies of this Plan and the criteria provided in the RCW 36.70A.070 (5)(d).
2
10-04-04 BOCC Hearing Comments - Nancy Dorgan
Repeal of Dosewa/lips Small-Scale Business/Cottage Industry Overlay District
With the repeal of the SBCI district, the only diii reference left in the CP is LNP 12.4,
which was the only one in the CP before adoption of the SBCI district. LNP 12.4 refers to
the conversion of several designated di-LAMIRDs into re-designated diii LAMIRDs, but
even that policy first requires adoption of new regulations developed in a public process
before the re-designation can occur.
LNP 12.4
Existing forest resource based industrial uses and activities shall be recognized
as areas of more intensive rural development under RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(i).
These Resource-Based Industrial Zones should be allowed to accommodate
conversions and/or an intensification of these uses and activities under
regulations to be developed in a public process under the provisions contained
in RCW 36.70A.070(5)(d)(iü).
For the additional aspects of non-compliance cited in the Hearings Board Order, it is
appropriate that the SBCI district be repealed in the proposed ordinance.
Respectfully,
~O~
Nancy Dorgan
Port Townsend
3
10-04-04 BOCC Hearing Comments - Nancy Dorgan
Repeal of Dosewallips Small-Scale Business/Cottage Industry Overlay District
Page 1 of2
Lorna Delaney
From: David Alvarez
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 3:14 PM
To: 'Nancy Dorgan'
Cc: Lorna Delaney
Subject: RE: Brinnon Compliance Record
Hi Nancy.. Just wanted to clarify that your letter is definitely in the County's record whether or not it is listed as an
Addition to the Index of Exhibits with the Hearings Board. Lorna Delaney confirmed that the Clerk to the BoCC
got your letter before the hearing.
David Alvarez
From: Nancy Dorgan [mailto:ndorgan@waypt.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 06,20041:55 PM
To: David Alvarez
Cc: Cheryl Halvorson
SUbject: Brinnon Compliance Record
David,
Did you have a copy of my letter at the time of the hearing? It contained a specific, relevant criticism of the
proposed ordinance even though it supported repeal of the diii. My letter is quite appropriate to the County's
record and should be so listed.
Nancy
- Original Message -
From: David Alvarez
To: Nancy DorQan
Cc: mark@markrose.orQ ; Cheryl Halvorson
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 1 :22 PM
Subject: RE: Brinnon Compliance Record
Nancy.. . Your letter doesn't disagree with adoption of the Ordinance and thus is not necessary right now for this
Compliance process. It would be a pertinent comment if the County did decide to go ahead and legislate (dXiii)
zoning districts.
You are free to file an "Addition to the Index" with your letter if you choose to do so.
I do not know ¡fthe BoCC received your letter or not. You should call them at 385-9100.
David Alvarez
From: Nancy Dorgan [mailto:ndorgan@waypt.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 06,2004 1:09 PM
To: David Alvarez
Cc: mark@markrose.org¡ Cheryl Halvorson
SUbject: Brinnon Compliance Record
David,
I just received the Brinnon compliance package from your office. Your cover letter stated that "not a single
citizen commented"...did you mean in person at the hearing? I hand-delivered my written comments to Erin in
the Clerk's Office about an hour and a half before the hearing. Did the Board not receive my letter? Would you
please send out another Additions to the Index to the Record and include a copy of my letter?
10/6/2004
Page 2 of2
Thanks,
Nancy
10/6/2004