Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM122004 District No. 1 Commissioner: Dan Tltterness District No.2 Commissioner: Glen Huntingford District No.3 Commissioner: Patrick M. Rodgers County Administrator: John F. Fischbach Clerk of the Board: Lorna Delaney MINUTES Week of December 20,2004 Chairman Huntingford called the meeting to order in the presence of Commissioner Dan Titterness and Commissioner Patrick Rodgers. Discussion re: Planning Commission Alteration of Term Expiration Date; Philip Flynn (District #2) and Allen Panasuk (District #3): Deputy Prosecuting Attorney David Alvarez explained that these Planning Commission members would have to resign in order to be reappointed because they cannot serve more than four years without reappointment. Planning Commission member Philip Flynn was present and noted his resignation from the Planning Commission and David Alvarez stated that a written resignation isn't necessary ifthe minutes reflect Mr. Flynn's formal resignation. Commissioner Rodgers moved to accept Philip Flynn's resignation from the Planning Commission and to reappoint him to fill an unexpired term in District #2 that expires in 2006. Commissioner Titterness seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Mr. Flynn's new term will expire on March 17, 2006. The Board noted that there is still a vacant position in District #2. Later in the meeting: Commissioner Rodgers moved to accept Allen Panasuk's written resignation from the Planning Commission representing District #3 and to reappoint him to an unexpired term that will expire in 2006. Commissioner Titterness seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Mr. Panasuk's term will expire on March 17,2006. The Board noted that there is still an vacancy on the Planning Commission in District #3. The Board then interviewed Kathy McKenna who has shown an interest in being appointed to the Housing Authority Board and the Planning Commission. Housing Authority Board Appointment; Kathy McKenna: Commissioner Titterness moved to appoint Kathy McKenna to an unexpired term on the Housing Authority Board of Jefferson County. Commissioner Rodgers seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Her term will expire on July 7,2007. Page I Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 20, 2004 '..'"'''''' ; :.~ ~..r,, ..(.~.:'~ Planning Commission Appointment; Linda Swisher: Commissioner Rodgers moved to appoint Linda Swisher to an unexpired term on the Planning Commission representing District #2. Commissioner Titterness seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Her term will expire on March 17,2005. Housing Authority Board Appointment; Pat Teal: Commissioner Titterness moved to appoint Pat Teal to a two year term as a resident member on the Housing Authority Board of Jefferson County. Commissioner Rodgers seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. Her term will expire on December 20,2006. Marine Resource Committee Presentation: Several members of the Marine Resources Committee thanked out-going Commissioners Titterness and Huntingford for their support and presented them with a framed prototype of a poster regarding eelgrass that the MRC designed. Michelle McConnell updated the Board on the Olympia oyster restoration project. As oflast August, the MRC had placed 400,000 Olympia oyster seeds at six planting sites on private properties in Discovery Bay where the property owners are assisting as site hosts. There were 50 bags that were not opened and planted because the spat was too small and fragile. They will check them this spring to see if they have grown enough to spread out. They are focusing on the western shore of the bay because the seeding on the eastern shore ran into problems with sediment and high wave action. There has been a 69% survival rate from the planting over the last three years. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: The following comments were made: requests to delete the resolution on the Consent Agenda adding representatives from the IrondalelPort Hadlock UGA as voting members of the GMA Steering Committee and the Lumsden contract for 2005 regarding review of Ludlow Bay Village permitting and plat issues; the Olympic Peninsula Audubon Society is the 56th organization to publicly oppose the Pit-to-Pier project; a request that proposed ordinances not be approved that will restrict the incoming Board's future options; the new Board will face a serious recession that will eliminate high paying construction jobs; concerns regarding conditions and corruption at the jail; a request that data on County employees internet usage be electronically sorted; and employees shouldn't use County computers for personal internet use because they should be doing their work and not playing. APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA: Commissioner Titterness moved to delete Items #2 and #10 and approve the balance of the Consent Agenda. Commissioner Rodgers seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. 1. RESOLUTION NO. 81-04 re: HEARING NOTICE; Proposed Budget Appropriations/Extensions; Affordable Housing; Hearing Scheduled for Monday, January 3,2004 at 10:05 a.m. in the Commissioners Chamber Page 2 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 20,2004 -' ~1~ .,. 2. DELETED: RESOLUTION NO. 82-04 re: Adding Representatives from the lrondale and Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area as Voting Members of the Growth Management Steering Committee (Approved Later in Minutes) 3. HEARING NOTICE re: Community Development Block Grant; Housing Enhancement for South Seven Senior Village, Port Hadlock; Hearing Scheduled for Monday, December 20, 2004 at 2:00 p.m. in the Commissioners Chamber 4. AGREEMENT re: Public Defender Services for 2005-2007; Jefferson Associated Counsel 5. AGREEMENT re: Equipment Rental for Emergency Road Repair; Jefferson County Public Works; Bruch & Bruch Construction Inc. 6. AGREEMENTS (2) re: Community Wildfire Protection Plan Rapid Assessment Web Services; Secure Rural Schools Act Reauthorization (National Forest Counties); Association ofO&C Counties 7. AGREEMENT re: Professional Services for Central Financial Systems Replacement! Financial Consulting; Project Management for GEMS; Jefferson County Central Services; Anne Sears & Associates 8. AGREEMENT, Amendment No.1 re: Professional Consulting Services for the Review of Permitting and Plat Issues of Ludlow Bay Village in Port Ludlow; Jefferson County Department of Community Development; The Latimore Company, LLC 9. AGREEMENT re: Professional Consulting Services for 2004 for the Review of Permitting and Plat Issues of Ludlow Bay Village in Port Ludlow; Jefferson County Department of Community Development; Lumsden International, Inc. 10. DELETED: AGREEMENT re: Professional Consulting Services for 2005 for the Review of Permitting and Plat Issues of Ludlow Bay Village in Port Ludlow; Jefferson County Department of Community Development; Lumsden International, Inc. 11. AGREEMENT, Amendment No. 14 re: Consolidated Contract for 2003-2004; Jefferson County Health and Human Services; Washington State Department of Health 12. AGREEMENT re: Provision of Surface Water Management Activities; Jefferson County Public Works; Jefferson County Conservation District 13. AGREEMENT, Amendment re: To Extend Public Defense Contract for 2004 to January 31,2005; Clallam-Jefferson Public Defender 14. AGREEMENT re: 2005 Hotel - Motel Grant Funding for the Gateway Visitor Center; Port Ludlow Chamber of Commerce 15. AGREEMENTS (3) re: 2005 Hotel- Motel Grant Funding; 1) Jefferson County Historical Society; 2) QuilcenelBrinnon Chamber of Commerce; and 3) Port Ludlow Chamber of Commerce 16. AGREEMENTS (3) re: 2005 Community Services Grant Funding; 1) Economic Development Council; 2) Jefferson County Conservation District; and 3) Jefferson County Fair Association 17. Concurrence and Authorization to Proceed with the Real Property Negotiation and Right-of-Way Acquisition for the Larry Scott Memorial Trail, Segment 3, Project No. CRI069 18. Request for Pre-payment of2005 Conference Expenses/Dues from 2004 Budget; Various Departments 19. Advisory Board Reappointments; Jefferson County Ferry Advisory Committee; Albert M. Abrams, Fred Beck and Michael Cavett 20. Advisory Board Reappointment: Jefferson County Solid Waste Advisory Board Representing Port Townsend Paper Corporation; Two (2) Year Term Expiring November 7,2006; Kirstin Marshall and V. Alice McConaughy as Alternate Page 3 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 20,2004 .~'o'r, ~ "- 'to -... ':.."" 1.rlt'NÜ'( 21. Advisory Board Appointment: Gardiner Community Center Board of Directors; Three (3) Year Term Expiring December 20,2007; Tom Colvin Proposed Resolution Adding Representatives from the Irondale and Port Hadlock Urban Growth Area as Voting Members of the Growth Management Steering Committee: (See Item #2 on the Consent Agenda.) Commissioner Titterness explained that the proposed resolution sets a methodology for choosing representatives from the UGA for the Growth Management Steering Committee. Commissioner Rodgers noted that the Countywide Planning Policies state that once a UGA is established, representation on the committee from the UGA is required. Chairman Huntingford added that he feels the Port Ludlow Master Plan Resort should also have representation on the committee. Commissioner Titterness moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 82-04 to establish a methodology for adding representatives from the Irondale/Port Hadlock UGA as voting members ofthe Growth Management Steering Committee. Commissioner Rodgers seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. HEARING re: Proposed Budget Appropriations and Extensions; County Funds: Chairman Huntingford opened the public hearing. Central Services Director Allen Sartin stated that there are requests from six departments for final budget adjustments for 2004. He has reviewed each request and found them to be valid and there is sufficient cash available to fund them. The Chair opened the public comment portion of the hearing. Hearing no testimony for or against the budget requests, the Chair closed the public hearing. Commissioner Titterness moved to approve RESOLUTION NO. 83-04 approving the budget appropriations/extensions for various County funds. Commissioner Rodgers seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. HEARING re: Proposed Ordinance: Establishing a Formal Policy regarding the Use of Prior Years Unlevied Portions of the Maximum Property Tax Levy (known as Banked Capacity) when Setting the Ad Valorem Property Tax Levies: Chairman Huntingford opened the public hearing. County Administrator John Fischbach reported that he was asked to prepare a draft ordinance to address emergency and non-emergency uses of banked capacity. A simple majority vote from the Board would be required on a resolution to declare an emergency. Non-emergency uses would require a unanimous vote by the Board and a vote of the people. Chairman Huntingford opened the public comment portion ofthe hearing. Jack Westerman, Assessor, explained that banked capacity is the difference between the highest authority that a taxing district can levy for property taxes versus the amount that is actually levied. It allows the taxing district to take that difference in future years. It is a fairly large amount of money in the case of the current Page 4 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 20,2004 '..""'\ ; " '~..;.'::!, ~1;fll Nr,'I;(\"" Board because they have chosen to take only a 1 % increase since 1999. There is nothing that the Board can do to recapture the bank capacity from 1999 forward. They can only recapture it for future years. The County, the City, the Port, and the PUD chose not to take banked capacity in 2005 which would have cost taxpayers an additional $1.1 million. He stated that this ordinance would limit the free will of the future Board to take banked capacity in the future. David Sullivan, stated that he appreciates the Assessor's comments and he realizes that it is important to listen to the voters and keep the tax rate down. He campaigned on that issue. He asked why the Board hasn't decreased their own flexibility to take banked capacity during their terms rather than waiting until now? Not adding the 1% for Conservation Futures in 2005 only amounts to $1,633. This small amount is not worth the cost of a vote of the people. He asked that the Board amend the ordinance and remove the Conservation Futures Fund from the proposed ordinance. Phil Johnson, stated that he agrees with the comments made by the Assessor. Phil Flynn, Marrowstone Island, stated that the County has survived for several years with a fiscally conservative Board and he is not sure if he agrees with the Assessor. He thinks citizens should be allowed to vote on whether they want their taxes raised. Hearing no further comment for or against the proposed ordinance, Chairman Huntingford closed the public hearing. Commissioner Rodgers stated that he feels this ordinance is not about flexibility. A new Board could rescind it at any time as long as they went through the public process and explained why they didn't want the policy in place. This ordinance memorializes the current Board's policy for the past four years. Commissioner Titterness added that he appreciates the Assessor's position, but he supports this ordinance because it is the position that the two incoming Commissioners supported publicly during their campaigns. Chairman Huntingford noted that it might be better to let the new Board take action on this ordinance in 2005. Commissioner Titterness moved to approve ORDINANCE NO. 18-1220-04 adopting a formal policy regarding the use of prior years unlevied portions of the maximum property tax levy (banked capacity.) Commissioner Rodgers seconded the motion. The Chair called for a vote on the motion. Commissioner Titterness and Commissioner Rodgers voted for the motion. Chairman Huntingford voted against the motion. The motion carried. HEARING re: Proposed Ordinance: Establishing a Formal Policy Designating a Portion of the Community Investment Fund Revenue to the Design and Construction of the Tri Area Sewer System: Chairman Huntingford opened the public hearing on a proposed ordinance to establish a formal policy designating a portion ofthe Community Investment Fund to the Tri Area sewer system project. John Fischbach explained that this fund consists of .04% in sales tax monies from the State which is approximately $135,500 per year. Currently there is $439,000 in the bank with commitments for $300,000 for several projects that were already awarded funding. It is the intention of the current Board to honor the Page 5 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 20,2004 $."",'''\ - . ~.,-, ~'rJ'IiIN{·'~~ prior commitments. The proposed ordinance states that the funds provided to Jefferson County shall be dedicated in the amount of at least 50% to the Tri Area sewer fund for the planning, design, and construction of the sewer system. Commissioner Titterness stated that this would dedicate approximately $70,000 a year to the Tri Area sewer system proj ect and that amount of money would allow the County to bond for approximately $1 million. Chairman Huntingford opened the public testimony portion of the hearing. David Sullivan, Cape George, stated that he is the PUD Commissioner in District #2 and a past member of the Community Investment Fund Board. The ordinance that authorized the CIF Board had a sunset clause that was not acted upon in October, 2004. The RCW regarding the fund says that this funding is to be spent in consultation with cities and ports. The CIF Board had representatives from these local agencies, as well as, the PUD and citizen-at-large members and they actually discussed using some ofthe funding for the Tri Area sewer system project at their last meeting. The proposed ordinance doesn't mention the RCW requirement of consultation with other local entities. Public participation is important in this process. Jerry Spickerman, Port Townsend, stated that he was the Chairman of the CIF Board when it was in operation. The previous ordinance stressed that the funding be used for infrastructure for job creation. As a former member and co-chair ofthe Economic Development Council, he recommends that this function be included in the new ordinance. Phil Flynn, stated that a sewer in the Tri Area will create economic opportunities there. It will also help in the development of low cost, affordable housing. Dedicating a portion of the Community Investment Funds to the project will lock in funding to leverage grants. Jim Hagan, stated that he agrees with the last two speakers. The County qualifies for the funding from the State because it is an economically distressed county. The sewer system is designed to serve the commercial area, and therefore the funding will be used to encourage economic development. He endorses this ordinance. Jim Todd, Port Townsend, stated that he feels it is important to have some kind of consultation with the other governmental entities in the County regarding the use of these funds. Public participation is also important. He agrees with David Sullivan's comments. Hearing no further comments for or against the proposed ordinance, the Chair closed the public hearing. Commissioner Rodgers listed projects that Community Investment funds have been used for in the past including a stop light and water development along Sims Way in Port Townsend to aid in development at the industrial park and a water system for the Point Hudson area to aid development near the Marine Center. He thinks that the sewer system in the IrondalelPort Hadlock UGA is a top priority project and committing half of the future funds will provide seed money to leverage grants. The Tri Area needs economic growth and a better tax base. Page 6 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 20,2004 ..""".". ; ',--~ "1$ N("~~ Commissioner Titterness stated that he agrees that there should be input from the other governmental entities, but at the last CIF Board meeting, the members were in agreement and supportive of preserving a major portion of the CIF funds for the development of the Tri Area sewer system. He noted that there is $37 million in the State budget set aside for Community Development Block Grants which are dedicated for this purpose and they require a match. The CIF money can be a tool to access these grant funds. Chairman Huntingford acknowledged the sunset date of the original ordinance. The Board concurred that it is the prerogative ofthe incoming Board whether they want to re-establish it because a public hearing is required. Chairman Huntingford added that he thinks the County has done an excellent job of using the funds as they were intended to be used. Commissioner Rodgers moved to approve ORDINANCE NO. 19-1220-04 designating a portion ofthe CIF fund revenue to the design and construction of the Tri Area sewer system. Commissioner Titterness seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. HEARING re: Proposed Ordinance; Establishing a Formal Policy That Will Limit the Use of Conservation Futures Fund Monies to the Acquisition of Easements: Chairman Huntingford opened the public hearing for a proposed ordinance to establish a policy to limit the use of the Conservation Futures Fund to the acquisition of easements. John Fischbach explained that the Conservation Futures Fund was established in 2000 by ordinance for the acquisition of open space as identified in the Comprehensive Plan adopted in 1998. The revenues are provided by a special property tax. Under State law, the County has the ability to acquire property under fee simple title and to retain an easement on it for the necessary environmental protection. However, the County may sell the remainder of the property and it can be developed. Mark Dembro, President of Jefferson Land Trust, encouraged the Board not to pass this ordinance. By restricting the use of Conservation Futures funds, the County would lose important flexibility. In many cases, owning an easement on the land provides the best protection and the best economic use for the property. However, in other instances such as the Quimper Wildlife Corridor, it makes more sense for the Land Trust to own the land outright because of the smaller parcel size. Stewardship of the property is easier. The Conservation Futures Advisory Board carefully reviews the proposals and makes a recommendation to the County Commissioners. The Commissioners make the final decision. This ordinance restricts the use of future Conservation Futures funds. Barbara McColgan Pastore, Port Townsend, stated that she is the Chair of the Conservation Futures Advisory Board but is speaking as a citizen. The Conservation Futures Advisory Board hasn't had a chance to discuss the proposed ordinance and doesn't have an opinion on it at this time. The Conservation Futures Fund program is structured to favor leverage. Their worksheet for rating a project gives more credit to something that leverages funds and to easements. The Advisory Board has never recommended that the County purchase land fee simple in support of a project. However, they need the flexibility to look at projects that would require a fee simple purchase. She feels there is confusion in the wording ofthe proposed ordinance because fee simple read one way could mean that the County cannot buy a piece of property and hold it fee Page 7 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 20,2004 ...,,"" , . .""... ~ :: - ~ ~1d' '"ü~ simple. Interpreted another way, it might mean that the County won't award funding to permit someone else to hold a piece of property fee simple. The County's Parks and Recreation Plan, adopted in 2002, called for the application for, and use of, Conservation Futures funds to acquire prime open space to add to the County's open space inventory. She thinks that the Conservation Futures Fund ordinance should be left as is. Jim Todd, Port Townsend, stated that he agrees with the previous two speakers. Originally, he lobbied the Commissioners to have the Conservation Futures Tax adopted. He thinks that the proposed ordinance is too restrictive. Phil Flynn, stated that the proposed ordinance needs fine tuning. The ability for the County to purchase an easement rather than a parcel of property will keep most of that parcel on the tax rolls. The County already has a lot of open space. Jack Westerman, Assessor, stated that Commissioner Rodgers talked with him about a proposal to only purchase easements in order to protect the environmental concerns of a property. However, there may be cases where the property owner will only sell the entire parcel. He didn't think of the small parcels that are wetlands or in a wetland buffer. The value of this property would be minimal and it would be a waste of County time to appraise the remainder of the property and to try to sell it. The County Commissioners have final authority for awarding Conservation Futures funding. They could condition the award so that a property purchased fee simple requires a restrictive covenant on the environmental easement so the remainder of the property can be sold. David Sullivan, Cape George, stated that he feels the public comments on the proposed ordinance indicate that there is a need to keep flexibility in Conservation Futures Fund real estate transactions. The point is well taken about removing property from the tax rolls. However, when property is protected, it can increase the value ofthe neighboring property by increasing the environmental assets that so many people value. To assure that nearby land is protected can be a real asset. The process that is in place is working. It requires good judgement on the part of the Advisory Board and the Commissioners make the final decision. Owen Fairbank, Port Townsend, stated that he is a member of the Jefferson Land Trust Board. He asked if money that comes from the sale of the property would go back to the Conservation Futures Fund? Who would monitor the easements? When there are restrictions on property, the use ofthe property must conform to those restrictions. Ifrestrictions aren't being met, the landowner must be taken to Court and there isn't a process in the proposed ordinance. The National Land Trust has done studies on putting easements on properties and monitoring them in perpetuity and the cost is approximately $60,000 per easement. He recommended that the Board vote against the proposed ordinance. Hearing no further testimony for or against the proposed ordinance, Chairman Huntingford closed the public hearing. John Fischbach suggested the language revision in Section 4 to read, Retaining an easement over the portion of the property that fulfills the restrictions desired by the County. Page 8 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 20,2004 ..,""" :~ ''!. ~+è .- ~~< ,f1f'N{"'~ Commissioner Titterness stated that he feels several people think this ordinance is more restrictive than it really is. The ordinance states that ifit is not practical to sell the property, it won't be sold. He suggested adding the wording to Section 4 that says, Dispose of such property, if practicable, as soon as possible. This would make it more flexible and address people's concerns. He explained that easements are monitored regularly by the Department of Community Development. Chairman Huntingford asked Barbara McColgan Pastore about the criteria set up to evaluate Conservation Futures projects. She explained that the burden to follow through falls on the sponsor and their track record is evaluated when the project is evaluated. There is also a follow up system for at least three years. Chairman Huntingford noted that he is concerned about the testimony given regarding the Parks Plan and open space because the goal was to develop the 400 plus acres that the County already owns and not acquire more. Chairman Huntingford added that the Conservation Futures Fund process has been working fairly well. He doesn't like it when groups get together to purchase large parcels of property such as the property at Discovery Bay. This ordinance proposes looking only at environmentally sensitive parcels and creating easements. Commissioner Rodgers stated that there is a large percentage ofland in the County that can't be developed. The County has very few sources for the tax base and to have a program in place that removes whole parcels of land from the tax rolls is a concern. This ordinance was designed to protect environmentally sensitive areas only and to compensate landowners for wetlands and properties that couldn't be used for anything else. Commissioner Rodgers moved to adopt the ORDINANCE NO. 20-1220-04 as modified by Commissioner Titterness and the County Administrator, to establish a formal policy that will limit the use of Conservation Futures Fund monies to the acquisition of easement rights. Commissioner Titterness seconded the motion. The Chairman called for a vote on the motion. Commissioner Rodgers and Commissioner Titterness voted for the motion. Chairman Huntingford voted against the motion. The motion carried. Judi Morris, Treasurer re: Accepting the Use of Debit Cards and Credit Cards at the Jefferson County Solid Waste Transfer Station: Judi Morris explained that she has been researching alternative payment arrangements for County services. The current system is cash and checks for services. She has been working with the Bank of America to develop an electronic method using the bank's host site which can be connected to the County's database. A client can go to the internet, pull up their parcel number to find the amount of taxes owing, and pay either by an E-check, a debit card, or a credit card. This is considered a convenience to the client and a convenience fee can be charged. She would like to see this in place by July, 2005. She is also looking at the use of credit and debit cards at the Transfer Station, Public Works, the Health Department, and DCD. The Courts would only accept debit cards. She presented a spreadsheet showing the returned check history from the Transfer Station and explained that the number of returned checks is increasing and they are difficult to recover. She estimates that approximately 50% of the transactions at the Transfer Station would be done by credit card and, using the numbers for 2004, the fees would amount to approximately $10,000. This is a charge and not a convenience fee so it can't be charged back to the client. This amount would have to be paid to the bank. She asked if the Board will allow credit Page 9 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 20,2004 ..," "," ;,- ~.~ ~J"""l'~~ cards to be accepted ifthe departments can fund or absorb the charge? She would begin with Solid Waste, but expects other departments to follow. In the long run it will be cost effective. The Board discussed their concern about transactions where the County will have to pay the charges. The Treasurer noted that she will work with the Public Works Department to develop a process to improve the cost effectiveness of accepting credit and debit cards. Commissioner Rodgers moved to allow property tax transactions to be done electronically because the user would pay the convenience fee. Commissioner Titterness seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. HEARING re: Community Development Block Grant; Housing Enhancement for South Seven Senior Village, Port Hadlock: Chairman Huntingford opened the public hearing. Vanessa Brower, OlyCAP, presented a fact sheet on Housing Enhancement Program Grants. She explained that a hearing was held on the original grant application in October, 2002. The reason for this hearing is to amend the original application for $146,000. The amended application is for $238,834. The increase in development costs are directly associated with public improvements including a street, a sidewalk, two bus shelters, a connecting sidewalk system to Chimacum Road, and looping the water main toward Indian Island, through the South Seven property, around the jail property, and into a water line at Elkins Road. This will improve the water capacity and quality for the entire area of approximately 1,100 home. This would benefit the citizens of Port Hadlock at no cost to them. It is not a requirement but was a recommendation from the Property Vision Committee made up of people from the community and the church that is leasing the property. The property will be built out over time as other infrastructure is put in place. They have designed the onsite septic system to be abandoned and be used for stormwater management when the Tri Area sewer system is developed. Chairman Huntingford pointed out that the water main loop will cost quite a bit and he suggested that an agreement be put together so that people who build and hook into it in the future will pay their proportional share. Vanessa Brower replied that there are certain guidelines that must be followed when this type of grant money is used and she would have to check to see if any sort of reimbursement is allowed. Chairman Huntingford opened the public testimony portion of the hearing. Margaret Matheson, Port Hadlock, stated that she supports this grant. The Community has worked hard to provide a beautiful home for seniors who don't have a lot of money but still deserve a nice place to live. The grant money will be used to improve the surrounding community. These deserving citizens should have the very best. Allen Goodwin, Port Townsend, stated that he is a new member of the church and one of the things that attracted him was the fact that the church is using their land to match Federal funding to bring in housing in the area. He is in favor ofthis project and the Community Block Grant application. Hearing no further comment for or against, the Chair closed the public hearing. Page 10 Commissioners Meeting Minutes: Week of December 20,2004 ,jft" ~ Commissioner Rodgers moved to approve the amendment to the Community Development Block Grant for Housing Enhancement for the South Seven Senior Village project and to authorize the County Administrator to sign the necessary paperwork for the grant amendment. Commissioner Titterness seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. The meeting was recessed at the close of business on Monday and reconvened on Thursday. Chairman Huntingford and Commissioner Titterness were present. Commissioner Rodgers was absent. Authorization to Approve Minutes for December, 2004: Commissioner Titterness moved to authorize Commissioner Rodgers to review and give final approval for the minutes of December 6, 13, and 20, 2004. Chairman Huntingford seconded the motion which carried. This authorization is necessary because the terms for Commissioners Titterness and Chairman Huntingford expire on Dec~mber 31,2004 and two new Commissioners will begin their terms on January 1, 2005. . '. .. t~, ,,', ,~..__, ' f;t , MEi~'" .' ;dt~'bJ \. I ::, , CJ~, \~, ~, " ~ \ I... '\"~' SE1AL:; " '( j..~. i : CG i r~ '~..... I -<It , .' " _. " . .. J'\' "/ .. I \ . ' ..,,~- .. -- \:~,' ~.~.~I", ."~ l' / \._'" . ,-.' "i:"-, 'Of. / ATTEST:, .) J \ :. \ :' "./ JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Approved (See Attached wcument) Glen Huntingford, Chair ,:>/ILi"-l r'fr#fu~J< C /Y) C /~ /. '1ulie Matthes, CMC Deputy Clerk of the Board Approved (See Attached wcument) Dan Titterness, Member Page II 1820 Jefferson Street P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Dan Titterneaa, District 1 Glen Runtingford, District 2 Patrick II. Rod¡era, District 3 December 23,2004 Commissiog.cr.Tittemess moved to authorize Commissioner Rodgers to review and give final approval '[<;>1; the mi~uws of December 6, 13, and 20, 2004. Chairman Huntingford seconded the motion...,Th~~~d. / ð'~' ,~ ' '~~'_i:;,_', i .... 'I,' \-> '4f4 .?_. ~ ~... ... ~. t .;, I -. T A~ST:V/ ,It / .., iI€ 'i".. I _ /-,,~"ê .,; {:;·f,",·'· SEAt:' '. ,;';.¡¡;;.¡ ,/0 C~£i:i1eili£~vuf ~ Clerk ofthe Board ð ., Phone (360)385-9100 Fax (360)385-9382 jeffbocC@Co.jeffenon.wa.ua cr: +by-os ~ . .7 ~ J l.:Ãh/otj Leslie Locke Page I of 1 From: Glen Huntingford Sent: Monday, December 06, 2004 3:27 PM To: Leslie Locke Subject: FW: Banked Tax Capacity Ordinance. HEARING RECORD ------- From: AI Frank[SMTP:ALFRANK@WAYPOINT.COM] Sent: Monday, December 06, 20043:28:11 PM To: jeffbocc@jefferson.wa.us Cc: Glen Huntingford; Dan Titterness; Pat Rodgers; jeffco@co.jefferson.wa.us Subject: Banked Tax Capacity Ordinance. Auto forwarded by a Rule I support the adoption of the Ordinance regarding Banked Tax Capacity for a number of reasons: 1) I believe citizens strongly desire some level of accountability and affordability re: property taxes. In November, 200 l, 7l% ofPt. Townsend residents supported Prop. 1 which clearly stated asking for any tax increase over l%...meaning don't touch the banked capacity without a public vote. I believe Councty residents are even more adament about an affordable & accountable County Government. I think you all have done a fme job of limiting tax increases without a public vote. If citizens strongly believe in something like 9-l-l, they will support it if a clear case is made. 2) The County, City, School Districts do not function in a tax vacuum. If any public entity takes a huge tax increase without a public vote, it will clearly impact the ability of others when taxpayers see the increase. Our schools are especially vulnerable now with PT Schools seeing declining enrollment 8 straight years. With fixed overhead, further declines will mean teacher layoffs, programs gutted or cut, larger class sizes etc. Not what anyone wants for a "livable community". 3) Huge valuation increases are coming in PT and other areas. The State and other portions of many people's tax bill's will increase...no doubt. Your property inflating in value is only good when you want to sell it. Otherwise, it can push average folks out. 4) Taxes should approx. the average working people's ability to pay. As Pat pointed out, new construction has saved both the City & County from serious cuts.....by increasing the Property Tax Base, Permit income, Sales Tax, REET TAX etc. Without that benefit of growth, huge cuts would be inevitable. I am very concerned that our City & County are becoming one where you have to be a government worker, trust-funder, realtor or well-off retiree to live. The people that service the well-off continue to be pushed to the fringes. Major tax increase are the final kick. Thank you for thinking about this Ordinance. You stand on very solid ground in passing it. Sincerely, Allen Frank 303 Adelma Beach Rd. PT 385-0559 PS Unfortunately, I will be out of town on December 20th. I hope you pass this unanimously. 12/6/2004 Dee I? 04 03:46p Cit~ of' PT Admin (360)385-4290 p. 1 City of Port Townsend John Watts, City Attorney 181 Quincy Street, #201 Port Townsend, W A 98368 Telephone: (360) 385-5991/379-5048 Fax: (360) 385-4290 Our e-maü: jwatts@ci.port-townsend.wa.us busselman@ci.port-townsend.wa.us FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL COPY: r7:::~'\ r····, December 17, 2004 [2 Pages Total] ¡ LJ; J L~' !Tù i .r"'-·"") I L...^ f. Board of County Commissioners and John FischbacV lJ --.. - DEC 1 7 2004 Telephone: ,JEFFFrr..'/ê' . íJr)'-R"D -. t';;.J;0 . \.1-\'\ \ at:: C;.,; :.. , 'Uiì(;·\·~.1\·"'>~~t....,,\ ItJj!J;!Ù~)¡v!\jËt:{s " 11 DATE: ""- TO: FAX #: 385-9382 SUBJECT: Proposed Ordinance - Community Investment Fund/Tri-Area Sewer See attached. HEARING RECORD CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE The infonnation contained in this facsimile message is attorney/client privileged and/or confidential infonnation intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the Intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone and return the original message at the above address via U.S. Postal Service. Thank You. D@e 17 04 03:47p Cit~ OT PT Admin (360)385-4290 p.2 œA~) ~"'~;~( /'1. I/~I HEARING RECORD P d. ') (.;.,L ,?-. U'1 jl ~ . ,Ç-Å ) City of Port Townsend 1xD ~ Office of the City Manager Waterman-Katz Building 181 Quincy Street, Suite 20 I, Port Townsend, W A 98368 (360) 379-5047 FAX (360) 385-4290 December 17, 2004 -, DEe 1 7 2004 ,JEFFP)ç'r.. . GOARD OF~\::~,~;:i\ '" . J hn F' hb h, C dm" . CU1Vr\IL'".. o lSC ac ounty A Inlstrator Iv";;';':::'¡Uf\Ei'" P.O. Box 1220 . . , Port Townsend, WA 98368 r7-~·ì . I I I f,¿j ¡[11 f .,'~.. ì ' . :~! : '-" " ¡, . j n . I " (1-' Board of County Commissioners P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, W A 98368 RE: Proposed Ordinance - Community Investment Fund/Tn-Area Sewer Dear Commissioners and Mr. Fischbach: This letter serves as the City's request that the BOCC defer action at this time on the proposed ordinance designating Tri-Area Infrastructure as a priority project and dedicating at least 50% ofCIF funds to the Tri-Area Sewer Fund. The City's concern is that RCW 82.14.370 (providing for L T AC ftmding for public facilities in rural counties) requires that the County "shall consult" with the City to ensure CIF expenditures meet the requirements of state law, and there has been no consultation with the City on this proposed dedication of CIF funding. In conversation earlier this week with Mr. Fischbach, he advised me that the proposed ordinance does not affect the County commitment to fund previously recommended ClF projects, including, the Sims Way/Howard Street/McPherson Street improvements. Thank you for your consideration to defer any action on the proposed ordinance until the consultative process required by the RCW occurs. Please call with any questions. Sincerely, ').... r- ~-c-'. e.Þ I 1,-"':;" ""... =-J b¡r ~ David G. Timmons City Manager cc: City Council (enclosing copies ofthe proposed ordinance, and Ord. 11-1021-02) ." .........; - .'i.: .. .,. ~. ':. .. . . ... " .~ -f- ~~ _r .:..,.. )I ~ .~. ~...._ :,....... ....:. "t- '. .~: ..... ~- :-11:', '.' -,>:,.-; .... .;~: f'~~~~i.~¡¡'~¡f~i;\~t '. ,,;~~.:. '~: ~ ~:.'.'~.:- .~.:.' - ~ .~..::.~; ','I. ,!,,.r.'Ji.t .,... . ,~;. "='.., . . . ~. ~ ": ~l~1! ~.ï . :r- :" ~~-~ -::....... ..,~ '..,......" ";t.. . \::;":', ,!>._,:.' ::;:._.:,. ._'~'. .':. .;;~.~. . ~. ·-~:"->"·~·~1:;;,;:---~>-': :::'~~"t1;)j'''ft:;\;i;',,~ ~::: ~:,'. ~'..... - . . ..~ . "'.: J", .~_,.. -::.... . . ..- .. ~~. ~ :i';:~:'~:~" . '1,;. .~ ,~ ..1.;.".. ""-..- ..,' "':' T~, , .:.;.....- .. ." .... ',.. . . ..... "1"~ :'~ .~:; ~t· '{~'-: ,","," - . . .... '-. "_", ~,. ~.- on. -. ...... . '-' '\~ ,..¡t.;..},' - .. - = - -. - '::~ ..~:~ '!:~ t... :~.;"-~: ~; _.~ '.~~~' ..-c',>: -- A NATIONAL MAIN STREET COMMUNITY WASIIINGTON'S HISTORIC VICTORIAN SEAPORT c.L~ AvA ) Tf<:oS / ~<£J. )r<*\IO~ eft 'tcD Public Utility District #1 Of Jefferson County 16 December 2004 Board of Commissioners Dana Roberts, District 1 David W. Sullivan, District 2 Wayne G. King, District 3 Board of County Commissioners Jefferson County P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend Washington 98368 r--:--., r'7.:1 r,-', 1-::::;:¡ .f' '. r "J '! 11.".t., "f ¡'.I ". t '....-,;' i"'"::"'; I b.;, i(i' !: ,r<~i L:: L,.~,· !i Ii t., ...._ t.-~ -..'<1"""'''''', \C, '! C""", u;~ i¡ ,\ l!:..", DEC 1 7 2004 James G. Parker, Manager ~--R -.,....... ¡ (''J' ut""'v !r: r-Í"'i::,,;::¡\J¡'" ...,\ . 'J ¡ ! L~ ONrnn BOARD OF COMMISSI r.:r\L', Gentlemen: HEARING RECORD We received a copy of your draft ordinance reworking the Community Investment Fund and are requesting that you honor your previous commitment to support a public water system in Quilcene. While the PUD generally supports your efforts to promote construction of a Tri-area Sewer System, we need assurance that you are still committed to support those projects already depending on the Community Investment Fund. We particularly need those funds to make the Quilcene Water System an affordable reality. Without those funds improvements to the Quilcene water system improvements will not include fire flow. That absence would basically prevent any ability for commercial and economical growth for that area. Additionally, it was not clear whether or not you consulted with the cities, towns, and port districts in making your decision, per RCW 82.14.370. Should you decide to proceed with a Tri- area sewer system the PUD would be interested in working with you in the development of such a proj ect. Tnank you for considering our position on these matters of long-term significance to all of our citizens. Dana Roberts President /J ß/.,il , l¡1¿~~t~ David Sullivan Secretary (òaMtÅ~ 230 Chimacum Road I P.O. Box 929. Port Hadlock, WA 98339 (360) 385-5800 FAX (360) 385-5945 .. Jefferson Land Trust F.o.5ox 1610 10)) Lawrence Street Fort Townsend, W A 98)68-0109 Fhone )60.)19.9501 Fax )60·)19·9891 E.-mail jlt@saveland.org Web www. saveland.org 50ard of Dírectors Mark Dembro, F resident Kate 5urke Ellen Crockett Don D.'Jbc:ck Hc:ídi Eisc:nhour Owen Fairbank Stevc:n Habc:rsc:tzc:r Fat Hood Kc:es KolÇÇ E xc:cutivc: Director Stc:phanic: j. R.c:íth c:d@savc:land.org F rejects Mana!!:er Sarah Spac:th programs@savc:land.org Opc:ratíons Mana!!:c:r Nanc.'J Newman admin@savc:land.org OUUcachManal!:c:r Kristin Axtman jlt@savc:land.org Stc:wardshíp Coordínator Orion Shannon stc:ward@savc:land.org cc -~ riD &5'" iJ-ND'f HEARING RECORD '--;¡-r e c\..:..'?-, Helping flíe communít,y preserve open space, workíng lands and habítat forever December 13, 2004 r--~¡ !..f'11 Board of County Commissioners Jefferson County P.O. 1220 Port Townsend, W A 98368 OEC 1 6 2004 UOl\f~í.) OF RE: Proposed Ordinance to lirrút the use of Conservation Futures Fund monies to conservation easements Dear Commissioners Huntingford, Rodgers and Titterness: Jefferson Land Trust respectfully submits this letter in opposition to the proposed ordinance to lirrút the use of Conservation Futures Fund monies to the acquisition of easements. We feel that this change in the Conservation Futures program willlirrút the flexibility to respond to important conservation opportunities, and will hinder efforts to carry out the open space, habitat, and working land preservation goals the County has endorsed. Jefferson Land Trust has been working with Jefferson County, the City of Port Townsend, state and federal agencies, numerous local organizations, and community members to protect important habitat, open space, and working lands in east Jefferson County for more than 15 years now. We currently protect more than 850 acres, and have partnered with other groups in protecting over 200 additional acres. Most of the land that Jefferson Land Trust protects continues to be privately held and protected through conservation easements. In fact, conservation easements are the preferred tool that the national Land Trust community uses. We feel it is often the best tool, since it can allow for some development and protection of resources the public values at the same time, depending on the wishes of the landowner, and provides partnership opportunities for long'tenn stewardship of the conservation values. Jefferson Land Trust maintains a vigorous stewardship program for our conservation easements, and continues to build a stewardship endowment for, in part, legal defense of those easements should violations occur. Understanding that Jefferson Land Trust is in the conservation easement business, we are also very aware of situations where conservation easements are not the appropriate tool to realize protection of values the public is interested in on a given property. When properties are identified for conservation purposes that have negligible building potential anyway, or when the conservation values of the parcel would be compromised by any level of development, outright public ownership (or ownership by a non' profit conservation organization, as allowed under Washington law) of these parcels often makes the most sense. For example, Jefferson Land Trust ruled out the use of easements in the Quimper Wildlife Corridor area, recognizing that the parcels needing protection for habitat and stonnwater treatment are too small to allow for development AND protection. .- Page 2 Board of County Corimnssioners December 13, 2004 ;.-~ In addition, conservation easements would not be appropriate on parcels that are primarily floodplain habitat with associated riparian buffers, as is the situation with most of the properties in the Dosewallips project area. Under the proposed ordinance, the county suggests it could use Conservation Futures Funds to acquire property outright, and then, after placing an easement on the property, it would dispose of the property. This scenario poses several issues, namely: . If conservation goals dictate protection of the whole property, as is necessary in some cases, who will be interested in acquiring a fully encumbered parcel? Even if able to be sold, the sale of such properties would likely provide: minimal return to the County. . Who will hold the easement? Currently we are not aware of Jefferson County having an active conservation easement program that includes stewardship and legal defense. The national Land Trust Alliance and Land Trust community recognize stewardship and legal defense as critical components of a successful easement program. We want to assure the County that we believe very strongly that conservation easements are a critical tool in accomplishing the conservation goals of Jefferson Land Trust and Jefferson County, and in most cases easements are the best tool available. We also feel very strongly that there are situations where outright acquisition by a public agency or conservation organization is the best strategy. This is particularly the case when development of the property is likely to undermine the conservation goals that the public has deemed important. We encourage you to keep the Conservation Futures program as flexible as possible, in order to be able to respond to conservation opportunities in the most appropriate way. The County has a good program, an increasingly knowledgeable advisory committee, and has been successful in leveraging the limited Conservation Futures funds we have available. We hope the program continues to be successful, and look forward to building on our partnership to protect the important and special places of east Jefferson County. Sincerely, JEFFERSON LAND TRUST ~~ /Uð~ 'Þ~~ Mark Dembro President of the Board Stephanie J. Reith Executive Director