Skip to content

01/08/24 09 AM: BOCC Tackles Pool Repairs, SMP Aquaculture, Budget Approvals

BOCC Tackles Pool Repairs, SMP Aquaculture, Budget Approvals

Jefferson County BOCC addressed Healthier Together pool project transparency concerns, approved consent agenda and public health budget supplement, held open SMP periodic review hearing on geoduck aquaculture CUPs with divided public testimony, and shared commissioner updates/legislative priorities. No major votes except budgets; workshops/hearings planned.

Public Comment on Healthier Together / Mountain View Pool Project

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:01:24.250–00:35:04.749 (PART 1)
  • Categories: planning, budgeting, contracts

Summary

Public comment focused on the Healthier Together project and Mountain View Pool, raising concerns about withheld engineering reports (CGI dated October 30 and WTI dated September 8 estimating $4.1 million for repairs), discrepancies with a December 5 DCW report estimating $21 million, flaws in the Ballard King financial feasibility study (e.g., uncited data from King County on unemployment, wealth, rainfall, participation rates), lack of transparency in steering committee meetings, and risks of proceeding with a Department of Commerce review costing $18,000. Speakers urged halting submission to Commerce until revised reports incorporating the withheld studies are reviewed and approved by both city and county governments. Commissioners acknowledged receipt of the reports, expressed interest in full disclosure for the independent review, noted steering committee delays due to holidays, defended prior public engagement opportunities, and committed to further analysis, potential steering committee changes, and workshops.

Key Discussion Points

  • Unnamed woman: Questioned cost to repair existing pool, criticized staff claims of catastrophic failure, demanded withheld CGI/WTI reports, accused steering committee of secrecy and misfeasance.
  • Jim Scarantino (Growing All County Citizens Alliance): Cited Ballard King study flaws (uncited Mid-Atlantic data, King County metrics misapplied to Jefferson County), risk of "garbage in, garbage out" for $18,000 Hubby review; urged citations/references from Ballard King.
  • Tom Teersh: Cited two withheld reports totaling under $8 million for refurbishment vs. $21 million DCW estimate; urged brakes on project until steering committee analyzes reports and produces updated final report.
  • Julia Cochran (Winter Welcoming Center): Announced warming center operations starting Thursday through Tuesday due to extreme cold, sought donations (Facebook page, email: [email protected]).
  • Commissioners (Tina, Kate, Mark?): Reviewed reports ($4.1M math confirmed), questioned jump to $21M (includes expansion to regulation length), defended independent review's value despite data concerns, noted steering committee hasn't met post-reports, uncertainty in pool foundation, prior public input via surveys; staff (Kate?) clarified $21M includes expansion, steering committee to review reports.
  • Shelley: Expressed dismay at lack of surprise over withheld data, questioned city funding commitment.

Public Comments

  • Unnamed woman (room): Cost analysis withholding, transparency failures.
  • Jim Scarantino (room/online): Ballard King data flaws, feasibility review risks.
  • Tom Teersh (online): Withheld reports, halt project until analysis.
  • Julia Cochran (online, Port Townsend): Winter warming center needs.
  • Shelley (online): Dismay at data withholding justification, city funding reliability.

Supporting Materials Referenced

No supporting materials provided or referenced in discussion; transcript mentions city "Healthier Together" website with reports (not including new engineering studies), DCW December 5 report ($21M), CGI/WTI reports ($4.1M), Ballard King study.

Financials

  • WTI/CGI reports: $4.1 million pool repair (plus other costs < $8 million total).
  • DCW December 5 report: $21 million (includes expansion to regulation length).
  • Ballard King study: High-level market analysis; criticized for uncited data.
  • Independent feasibility review: $18,000 (Department of Commerce).

Alternatives & Amendments

  • Repair existing pool ($4.1M–$8M) vs. new facility.
  • Halt Commerce submission until steering committee reviews reports, produces updated final report approved by city/county.
  • Add public/County representation to steering committee (e.g., Heidi suggested).
  • Port Hadlock site exploration discussed informally. No formal motions.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: No action taken; public comments noted; steering committee to review reports; workshops/deliberations planned; hearing on ILA/Commerce review later.
  • Vote: N/A.
  • Next Steps:
  • Steering committee meeting to analyze reports (no date set; holidays delayed).
  • Mark to meet John Moore; request Commerce statement of work.
  • Potential workshops on process/steering committee changes.
  • Proceed with independent review but ensure complete data.

Consent Agenda Approval

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:35:04.749–00:36:59.215 (PART 1)
  • Categories: budgeting, ordinances

Summary

The BOCC approved the consent agenda unanimously without items pulled for discussion. Items included Housing Fund Board allocation to Caswell Brown, growth in the Kon fund, and movement of 25% nonprofit food permit discount to administrative action pending ordinance change in February.

Key Discussion Points

  • Limited discussion; Commissioner noted routine approval, praised Housing Fund to Caswell Brown and Kon growth; 25% nonprofit food permit discount to become ordinance (Apple tasked).

Public Comments

No public comment on this topic.

Supporting Materials Referenced

No supporting materials referenced.

Financials

No specific figures discussed beyond general praise for Housing Fund/Caswell Brown and Kon growth.

Alternatives & Amendments

No alternatives discussed.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: "I move to approve and adopt the consent agenda as presented today."
  • Vote: Unanimous (Ayes: all).
  • Next Steps: Ordinance for nonprofit food permit discount scheduled for February.

Emergency Supplemental 2023 Budget Appropriation - Fund 127 (Public Health)

Metadata

  • Time Range: 01:12:27.353–01:20:46.238 (PART 1)
  • Categories: budgeting, personnel

Summary

Public Health requested and BOCC approved an emergency supplemental 2023 budget appropriation for Fund 127 due to oversight on Q4 appropriation amid increased personnel benefits, insurance premiums, and professional services from salary increases and risk pool costs. Staff committed to monthly/quarterly reviews and better processes with new finance manager to prevent recurrence; no additional funds needed as revenue covers most, with balance from fund reserves.

Key Discussion Points

  • Apple Martine (Public Health Director), Jen Mitchell (Finance Manager): Administrative communication error; covers medical benefits/salary increases; new monthly reviews starting; Jen (July hire) improving budget tracking post-5-year vacancy.
  • Judy Shepherd (County Finance): First time; closer scrutiny on self-sustaining funds.
  • Commissioners supportive, noted Public Health budget growth (5M to 8M+), monthly finance check-ins beneficial.

Public Comments

No public comment on this topic.

Supporting Materials Referenced

No supporting materials referenced; screen shared summary of requests (personnel benefits largest, insurance increases).

Financials

  • Total Appropriation: $640,000 (Personnel Benefits $427,962; Insurance $141,668; Professional Services $70,370).
  • Revenue: $449,661 unanticipated (grants, fees); $190,339 from fund balance.
  • No new funds; authority to expend existing.

Alternatives & Amendments

No alternatives discussed.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: "Emergency 2023 supplemental budget appropriation for fund 127 personal benefits insurance professional services as presented" (Resolution).
  • Vote: Unanimous (Ayes: all).
  • Next Steps: No next steps specified; staff implementing monthly/quarterly reviews.

Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Periodic Review Public Hearing

Metadata

  • Time Range: 01:27:11.726–03:08:52.000 (PART 1)
  • Categories: land use, permits, planning, ordinances

Summary

Staff presented SMP periodic review amendments addressing Ecology comments, aquaculture (geoduck requiring standard/discretionary CUPs by environment), buffers (modest home/common line provisions clarified), and other updates; public testimony (~25 speakers, 2-min limit) overwhelmingly urged standard CUPs for all new/expansion/conversion geoduck aquaculture citing plastics/microplastics, eelgrass loss, ecosystem impacts, while industry defended jobs, low impacts per Sea Grant/NOAA, redundancy; BOCC took no action, kept hearing open, scheduled workshop (Jan 16) and deliberations (Jan 22) before potential Feb 12 ordinance.

Key Discussion Points

  • Lisa Grueter (Berk Consulting): Overview (Ecology-required changes, buffers, aquaculture table by type/environment); modest home (nonconforming lots, 30-ft min buffer, 80% enhancement); common line (conforming lots, 150-ft neighbors, hierarchy).
  • Amy Summe (Shannon & Wilson): Aquaculture (standard/discretionary CUPs by environment; table of requirements; aesthetics analysis if applicable).
  • Geoduck: Public (plastics 7mi/11tons/acre, liquefaction, eelgrass loss, estuary impacts); industry (ecosystem services, low impacts per Sea Grant/NOAA/USFWS, jobs, redundancy).
  • Commissioners: Questions on buoy/SDPs ($8,500 threshold), enhancement (vegetation), data for review; hybrid CUPs as compromise.

Public Comments

  • Lisa Carlton-Long (Brock Point Oyster): Align with state CUPs; geoduck rotates like crops.
  • Peter Guerrero (Sierra Club): Standard CUP for geoduck (ecosystem impacts).
  • Alex Scagliotti (Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe): Support as written.
  • Bruce Morris (Canal Environmental Council): Standard CUP for geoduck expansions/conversions.
  • Dave Fitzpatrick (Marblestone Island): Aquaculture benefits (filtering, carbon); eliminate redundancy.
  • Bernadette Clawson (Hood Canal Environmental Council): Standard CUP (plastics 43k tubes/acre).
  • Gordon King: Slim aquaculture section; revert to 2021 standards.
  • Lewis/Rose Gitelman: Industry jobs flexible.
  • Ernie Wald (Taylor Shellfish): No CUP for expansions per guidelines/Sea Grant.
  • Jonathan Davis (Thorndyke Bay): Redundant CUPs/visuals; ecosystem services.
  • Nell Swipple (Taylor Shellfish): Heavily regulated; invite farm visits.
  • Kim Thompson (Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers): Visuals subjective; no CUP per science.
  • Trisha Markey (Port Ludlow): Plastics pollution.
  • Bruce Case (Shine Road): Microplastics from covers.
  • Brett Veerhusen (Ocean Strategies): Polling supports shellfish (81-90% favorability).
  • Marsha Case (Shine Road): Plastics/oyster cages.
  • Sue Corbett (Shine/Churchill): Eelgrass non-recovery photos.
  • James Whitecamp (Port Ludlow): Standard CUP for input.
  • Anne Dutton: Oversight/transparency via standard CUP.
  • Michael Abramson (Shine Road): CUP for expansions consistent with neighbors.
  • Linda Lowe (Discovery Bay): Standard CUP; few jobs observed.
  • Celine Santiago: County oversight needed; standard CUP for voice.
  • Adam James (Hama Hama): Equity for farm conversions; farm tours.
  • Marcia Schwendiman (Port Ludlow): Eelgrass/fish habitat loss.
  • Jan Wold (Shine Road): Standard CUP; vast acreage risk.
  • Steve Dittmar: Standard CUP all categories; low local consumption/jobs.
  • Mike Patterson (Shine Road): Plastics ingestion.
  • Marilyn Showalter (Shine Road): Standard CUP not redundant; vast acreage.

Supporting Materials Referenced

Healthier Together website (reports, not new studies); Ecology 2022 comments; cumulative impacts addendum/checklist/SEPA DNS; story map with environments.

Financials

No financial information discussed.

Alternatives & Amendments

  • Aquaculture: Standard CUP all geoduck vs. discretionary for expansions/conversions (per guidelines/Sea Grant).
  • Buffers: Modest home (nonconforming, 30-ft min, 2,500 sq ft max); common line (conforming, 150-ft, 80% enhancement).
  • Buoy/SDPs: <$8,500 exempt from SDP (not variance/CUP).

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: Hearing opened/not closed; no action; ordinance drafting for Feb 12.
  • Vote: N/A.
  • Next Steps:
  • Workshop Jan 16 1:30pm.
  • Deliberations Jan 22 3:30pm.
  • Ordinance Feb 12 (public comment if changes).
  • Ecology review post-adoption.

Commissioner Updates and Legislative Priorities

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:36:59.215–01:11:51.454; 01:02:22.130–01:11:51.454 (PART 1)
  • Categories: planning, budgeting, personnel, public safety

Summary

Commissioners briefed on recent activities (Recompete grants coalition expansion, Housing Fund reappointments/allocation limits, AI policy/salon, Marine Resources Committee youth seat, ports updates, aging council, riparian workgroup, etc.); discussed legislative items (UGA swap SB5834, data sharing, senior nutrition, rewrap recycling, septage funding, trust land transfers, corrections training/Medicaid waiver, AI task force, ranked choice voting, PIF expansion).

Key Discussion Points

  • Updates: Recompete (coalition, coordinator posted, $500k Glen Cove), Housing Fund, AI salon/policy, food bank, ports (buoy tests), O3A, MRC youth seat, riparian (site-specific tree heights), transit advisory, Tribal Co-management, WASSAC, fairgrounds, Centrum.
  • Legislative: UGA swap (technical fixes needed), data sharing hearing Thursday, nutrition, rewrap, septage, trust lands (5 more funded), corrections $10M, Medicaid waiver, AI task force SB5838, producer responsibility, PIF nonprofits/land bank HB1987.

Public Comments

No public comment on this topic.

Supporting Materials Referenced

No supporting materials referenced.

Financials

Recompete $500k ($60k Glen Cove readiness/outreach); Housing Fund rollovers; corrections $10M; trust lands funding.

Alternatives & Amendments

No alternatives discussed.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: Informational.
  • Vote: N/A.
  • Next Steps: No next steps specified.

Background Materials

Contents

AI Information