MEETING: Commissioners Meeting at Mon, Apr 08, 09:00 AM

County Sources

Packet Contents

AI Information

MEETING DATE: 2024-04-08 16:00:38+00:00

Public Comment on Homelessness and Shelter Conditions

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:02:36.926–00:06:12.126
  • Agenda Item: Public Comment
  • Categories: services, public safety, human services, operations

Topic Summary

One member of the public raised concerns regarding the unsanitary and dangerous conditions at the local shelter, specifically citing non-functioning showers, a rodent infestation, and alleged misappropriation of funds. They argued that public officials serving on the Board of Commissioners (BOCC) and the Olympic Community Action Programs (OlyCAP) board constitute a conflict of ethics, hindering investigations. The commenter requested that homeless individuals, who are unable to use the shelter due to its poor conditions or discrimination based on disability/age, should not be arrested for sleeping, eating, or using the bathroom in public parks, noting repeat trespassing charges faced by unhoused residents.

Key Discussion Points

  • The shelter is claimed to have dangerously unsanitary conditions, including non-functioning showers and a rodent infestation, according to the commenter ([Unattributed Speaker/Maggie] at 00:03:25.084).
  • The commenter alleged misappropriation of funds at the shelter and cited a "conflict of ethics" because public officials like Greg Brotherton and Amy Howard serve on both County/City and OlyCAP boards, suggesting a lack of interest in investigating the alleged misuse ([Unattributed Speaker/Maggie] at 00:03:36.688).
  • The speaker asserted that homeless people unable to use the shelter due to unsanitary or discriminatory conditions should not be arrested for sleeping, eating, or going to the bathroom in public parks, as the shelter is "not a functioning filter" ([Unattributed Speaker/Maggie] at 00:04:19.229).
  • A homeless person reportedly told the speaker they had been trespassed 30 times in the past 3 years and advised by a public defender to "just plead guilty every time," despite allegedly doing nothing illegal ([Unattributed Speaker/Maggie] at 00:05:12.781).

Public Comments

  • [Unattributed Speaker/Maggie]: The shelter is unsanitary and inappropriate for habitation, leading people to public parks where they face repeated arrests for necessary activities. There is a "massive conflict of interest" and need to exonerate those charged merely for sleeping.

Supporting Materials Referenced

No supporting materials referenced.

Financials

  • No financial information discussed.

Alternatives & Amendments

No alternatives discussed.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: No action taken.
  • Vote: N/A
  • Next Steps:
  • - Commissioner Brotherton: Stated the County continues to address the issues and will offer an update. He will visit the encampment mentioned by Will Ferry.
  • - Commissioner Eisenhour: Requested a staff discussion on creating a coalition to manage the shelter.

Public Comment on South County Law Enforcement and Aquatic Center

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:06:12.126–00:10:09.655
  • Agenda Item: Public Comment
  • Categories: public safety, facilities, infrastructure, planning

Topic Summary

Two residents from Bremen (South County) voiced concerns over the severe lack of local law enforcement response times in South County. They formally requested that the new Sheriff's deputy position and vehicle, funded by the Pleasant Harbor Planned Resort development agreement, be exclusively assigned and located in the South County general area. Separately, one resident criticized the planned direction of the "Healthier Together Aquatic Center Task Force," arguing the current documents pre-determine the outcome toward an expensive "mega church pool" that the community cannot sustain through new taxes. They advocated for repairing the existing pool instead.

Key Discussion Points

  • Shelley Armel (Bremen) requested a formal acknowledgement that the sheriff/car paid for by the Pleasant Harbor plan (a contract requirement) be assigned "exclusively to South County" (Shelley Armel at 00:06:40.459).
  • Shelley Armel criticized the afternoon's scheduled pool document as a "pre written regurgitation of the past poor judgments and bad decisions" that have already failed, and noted it references previously hidden reports without stating who will present them (Shelley Armel at 00:07:27.425).
  • Armel stated that no public funds or tax increases should be considered for building a new facility, and the task force volunteers need to set their own agenda, not rely on information from the previous group seeking a pool that cannot be sustained (Shelley Armel at 00:07:53.848).
  • John Holbert (Bremen), a 25-year resident of South County, agreed, stating it has been "really difficult...to get a police presence" and joked that if you call the Sheriff, it takes "hours if they come at all" (John Holbert at 00:09:11.143).
  • Holbert noted the resort project is paying for a deputy but criticized the lack of designation that the deputy is guaranteed to be physically located down there (John Holbert at 00:09:37.985).

Public Comments

  • Shelley Armel (Bremen): Requests dedicated South County law enforcement funded by Pleasant Harbor. Opposes new taxes for a large pool facility and demands the Aquatics Task Force set its own agenda.
  • John Holbert (Bremen): Complains that South County citizens pay taxes but lack basic police protection, stressing the new deputy funded by the resort must be dedicated to the area.

Supporting Materials Referenced

No supporting materials referenced.

Financials

  • The Pleasant Harbor plan requires paying for one Sheriff's deputy and a car (Shelley Armel at 00:06:40.459).

Alternatives & Amendments

  • Repairing the existing pool was implied as the preferred alternative (Shelley Armel at 00:30:18.017).

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: No action taken.
  • Vote: N/A
  • Next Steps:
  • - Commissioner Brotherton: Stated agreement with the desire for a dedicated South County law enforcement officer and that the board is "looking for how we can make that pencil in the budget" (00:20:35.980). He agreed to start the conversation about formally dedicating the Pleasant Harbor-funded deputy to South County (00:19:49.636).
  • - Commissioner Dean: Noted that the request for an additional deputy originated from the Sheriff’s Office in the last budget cycle (00:47:28.300) and suggested exploring a written document with the Sheriff formalizing the South County patrol area (00:48:04.270).

Public Comment on Unpermitted Encampment and Code Enforcement

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:10:43.350–00:12:52.249
  • Agenda Item: Public Comment
  • Categories: land use, public safety, public health, planning

Topic Summary

A property trustee complained about a "terrible and sizable unpermitted homeless camp" on Jefferson County property at the end of South Second Street. The speaker detailed unsanitary conditions, including exposed human/animal feces, garbage, a massive rat problem, and unpermitted electrical work strung through trees. He requested that the Commissioners and County Administrator visit the site to witness it firsthand and take action.

Key Discussion Points

  • Will Ferry identified the encampment at the end of South Second Street in a statutory county road right-of-way (Will Ferry at 00:11:03.588).
  • The conditions include dwellings under tarps, strewn electric cords powering the camp from a service pole on county property, and evidence of unpermitted structures, no health/safety inspections, and no required permitting (Will Ferry at 00:11:17.079).
  • The site suffers from human and animal feces, garbage, and a thriving rat population (Will Ferry at 00:11:58.262).
  • The situation is preventing neighbors from improving their own properties (Will Ferry at 00:10:54.692).
  • Ferry thanked the County for the recent cleanup of a separate encampment on Jacob Miller County Road but asked for equal treatment for his neighborhood (Will Ferry at 00:12:37.529).

Public Comments

  • Will Ferry (Trustee, South Second Street): Detailed the appalling conditions of an unpermitted homeless encampment on county property, citing public health and safety concerns, and requested immediate County intervention and a site visit.

Supporting Materials Referenced

No supporting materials referenced.

Financials

  • No financial information discussed, though the speaker noted the significant man-hours and costs dedicated to the previous cleanup on Jacob Miller Road (00:12:41.502).

Alternatives & Amendments

No alternatives discussed.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: No action taken.
  • Vote: N/A
  • Next Steps:
  • - Commissioner Brotherton: Committed to visiting the encampment to "come out and see it" (00:19:06.291).
  • - Commissioner Dean: Noted that the Code Enforcement Division has over a hundred active cases and that this site "needs to be a priority" (00:49:15.471).

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:14:10.894–00:16:05.204
  • Agenda Item: Consent Agenda (Items 1, 2, 5)
  • Categories: operations, land use, infrastructure

Topic Summary

A member of the public provided several specific technical comments regarding items 1, 2, and 5 of the Consent Agenda. They questioned the removal of County Landfill Road and Critter Lane from the County Road Log, arguing that the receiving departments (Solid Waste and the Humane Society) may be unqualified and lack funds for maintenance. Most critically, they urged the Board to pull Item 5 regarding the EV Charging Stations, arguing the proposed Level 3 chargers use "obsolete connector standards" and are "underpowered" eight-year-old technology supplied by a company trying to offload old inventory.

Key Discussion Points

  • Tom Teersch questioned Item 1 (Landfill Road) transfer and Item 2 (Critter Lane) transfer, expressing concern that the Animal Shelter (Critter Lane transfer) already suffers from a lack of money (Tom Teersch at 00:14:20.801).
  • Teersch argued that item 5 (EV Chargers) must be pulled because the equipment is "obsolete," "inadequate," and "way too small" for current standards, suggesting the county needs "technically qualified" people to review the proposal before accepting the contract (Tom Teersch at 00:15:23.629).
  • The Chargers are said to be based on obsolete connector standards and are underpowered given future needs (Tom Teersch at 00:16:04.202).

Public Comments

  • Tom Teersch (Online): Opposes the transfer of road maintenance for Landfill Road and Critter Lane. Demands Item 5 (EV Chargers) be pulled from the Consent Agenda for technical review due to obsolete technology and inadequate power levels.

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • Adjustment of Official County Road Log: County Landfill Road (County Road No. 626009)
  • Adjustment of Official County Road Log: Critter Lane (County Road No. 625709)
  • Site Host Agreement for Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Infrastructure

Financials

  • The Animal Shelter is noted as having "any money to begin with" (00:14:31.652).
  • No financial information specific to the EV charge contract cost was mentioned publicly, but the speaker strongly implies the proposed equipment is not a good value.

Alternatives & Amendments

  • Teersch recommended pulling Item 5 from the Consent Agenda for review by technical experts (00:15:43.055).

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: Item 5 (EV Charging Stations) was pulled from the Consent Agenda for further discussion.
  • Vote: N/A
  • Next Steps: Commissioners decided to hold a deeper discussion on the EV chargers, focusing on future-proofing the infrastructure (00:23:56.663). Central Services Director Tracy Coleman was invited to respond in real-time.

Commissioner and Staff Responses to Public Comment (Part 1 - Human Services)

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:17:07.756–00:19:27.879
  • Agenda Item: Public Comment Responses
  • Categories: human services, governance, legal, operations

Topic Summary

Commissioner Brotherton addressed the direct accusation of a conflict of interest related to his dual service on the BOCC and the OlyCAP board. He cited an Attorney General's office review that determined this arrangement is not illegal but is actually required by the legislation governing community action programs (CAPS). He provided an update on the shelter conditions and the unmanaged encampment mentioned by Will Ferry, reiterating the County's ongoing efforts to ensure the shelter is functional.

Key Discussion Points

  • Commissioner Brotherton stated that the Attorney General's office reviewed his service on the OlyCAP board during an audit and found it is not a conflict of interest (00:17:30.582).
  • He clarified that having elected officials on community action programs (CAPS) is required under the Lyndon Johnson-era legislation to ensure public interest guides policy direction (00:17:42.578).
  • Addressing the shelter, he noted that he has been told the two showers "both showers do work" though one takes a while to warm up (00:18:08.517).
  • He stated the goal is to keep the shelter open until the County can secure "the gap funding to build a permanent shelter" (00:19:37.469).

Public Comments

  • N/A

Supporting Materials Referenced

No supporting materials referenced.

Financials

  • No financial information discussed.

Alternatives & Amendments

No alternatives discussed.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: No action taken.
  • Vote: N/A
  • Next Steps:
  • - Commissioner Brotherton: Following Will Ferry's comments, he committed to inspecting the unmanaged encampment on South Second Street (00:19:06.291).
  • - Commissioner Eisenhour: Suggested a "field trip" to inspect the shelter conditions due to lack of firsthand knowledge (00:43:34.867).

Commissioner and Staff Responses to Public Comment (Part 2 - Law Enforcement)

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:19:45.000–00:21:13.056
  • Agenda Item: Public Comment Responses
  • Categories: public safety, governance, contracts

Topic Summary

Commissioner Brotherton acknowledged the request for dedicated South County law enforcement, particularly the new deputy position tied to the Pleasant Harbor development. He agreed that dedication sounds logical but could only commit to starting the conversation, noting that the Sheriff's Office already requested funding for a dedicated South County officer last year. The Board noted the Sheriff is an independently elected official, complicating contract demands regarding patrol area allocation.

Key Discussion Points

  • Commissioner Brotherton agreed with the request to dedicate the Pleasant Harbor-funded law enforcement unit to South County, stating, "I think it makes a lot of sense to me" (00:20:00.462).
  • He noted the Sheriff's Office already presented a plan "to make a dedicated South County officer last year" (00:20:35.980).
  • Commissioner Dean noted that funding for an additional deputy was committed in the last budget setting process (00:45:01.826).
  • Dean noted the difficulty in ensuring geographic allocation because the Sheriff is an independently elected official who "has say over how his staff is allocated" (00:46:52.295).
  • Commissioner Dean suggested the Board could condition an additional deputy on a certain patrol area and stated that a written document formalizing the arrangement would be necessary and likely supported by the Sheriff's office (00:48:04.270).

Public Comments

  • N/A

Supporting Materials Referenced

No supporting materials referenced.

Financials

  • No specific financial figures discussed, but funding a dedicated deputy position was tied to the mid-biennial budget review (00:45:41.298).

Alternatives & Amendments

  • Exploring alternative funding mechanisms that might defray the costs of an additional officer or prosecutor (00:46:26.874).

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: No action taken, but intent established to formalize the request.
  • Vote: N/A
  • Next Steps:
  • - Board/Staff: Pull the Pleasant Harbor development agreement to review the trigger for the law enforcement obligation (00:45:52.628).
  • - Commissioner Dean: Coordinate with the Sheriff's Office and staff to draft a written agreement formalizing the South County patrol commitment (00:48:04.270).

Discussion and Clarification of EV Charging Station Contract

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:22:18.516–00:32:44.683
  • Agenda Item: Consent Agenda Item 5 (Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure)
  • Categories: contracts, grants, infrastructure, technology

Topic Summary

The Board discussed the EV Charging Station contract pulled from the Consent Agenda due to concerns over obsolete technology and rates. Central Services Director Tracy Coleman provided clarification: the County is merely a "host site" under a state grant and is paying for none of the infrastructure, maintenance, or equipment. The proposed technology is what the grant provides. She clarified that the $0.05/kWh refund to the County is a revenue share, not a markup on user fees. The Board ultimately decided to pull the item from consent to allow more in-depth discussion and contact the vendor to explore possible technology upgrades.

Key Discussion Points

  • Tracy Coleman (Central Services Director) clarified that Critter Lane road maintenance is shifting to Central Services, not the Animal Shelter, and the road will continue to be maintained (00:25:30.476).
  • Coleman stressed that for the EV Charging Stations contract, the County is acting as a "host site" awarded a grant, and the County is not paying for the electrical infrastructure, charging stations, or maintenance for 10 years (00:26:27.739).
  • The County's options are to accept the grant as offered or decline it entirely (00:32:25.965).
  • Coleman confirmed that the rebate is paid out of the charger's total revenue (not an additional charge to the customer), with the County receiving 5 cents per kilowatt hour (00:30:03.755).
  • Commissioner Brotherton expressed concern that the proposed technology (Level 3 at 150kW and Level 2 at 7kW) is "obsolete [and] inadequate" and may not be functional, especially the slow Level 2 charger at the Gateway Visitor Center (00:23:56.663, 00:37:49.681).
  • Coleman corrected herself, stating the Port Townsend Community Center site, covered by the federal grant, is slated to receive a Level 3 charger (00:40:03.006). She pledged to verify the minimum kilowatt rating with the grant administrator (00:40:12.496).

Public Comments

  • None during this discussion, but preceding comments from Tom Teersch drove the initial action.

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • Adjustment of Official County Road Log: Critter Lane (County Road No. 625709)
  • Site Host Agreement for Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Infrastructure

Financials

  • County receives a revenue share of $0.05 per kWh purchased by users (00:29:47.492).
  • The project is fully grant-funded, with no cost to the County (00:26:20.185).

Alternatives & Amendments

  • Alternative 1: Decline the grant (00:32:25.965).
  • Alternative 2: Attempt to negotiate with the contractor (EVCS) for different charging units, though staff suggested success is "slim to none" (00:36:39.518).

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: The item was pulled from the Consent Agenda for further negotiation and information gathering.
  • Vote: N/A
  • Next Steps:
  • - Tracy Coleman: Contact the Grant Administrator for confirmation on the minimum Level 3 kilowatt rating (00:40:12.496).
  • - Commissioner Dean/Staff: Secure technical expertise and try to negotiate an upgrade, potentially offering county financial contribution (00:42:31.336).
  • - Board: The item will be brought back to a later meeting (00:42:26.018).

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:52:13.382–00:53:26.578
  • Agenda Item: Consent Agenda Approval
  • Categories: operations, land use, infrastructure

Topic Summary

Following the substantive discussion resulting in the removal of Item 5 (EV Chargers) and clarification regarding items 1 and 2 (road log adjustments), the Board moved to approve the remaining Consent Agenda items.

Key Discussion Points

  • The Board confirmed the removal of Item 5 (00:52:21.578).
  • Commissioner Brotherton questioned the road log changes, confirming that removing Landfill Road and Critter Lane from the log means taking down the "county road" signs (00:52:52.478).

Public Comments

No public comment on this topic.

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • Adjustment of Official County Road Log: County Landfill Road (County Road No. 626009)
  • Adjustment of Official County Road Log: Critter Lane (County Road No. 625709)
  • Lower Big Quilcene Floodplain Acquisitions Grant Extension (Amendment 5)
  • Amendment 3 to Nurse Family Partnership Agreement with Kitsap Public Health
  • Cultural Resources Agreement for SR 19 Rhody Drive Ped-Bike Improvements
  • Lease Amendment: Public Health Water Quality Office Space

Financials

No specific financial information discussed.

Alternatives & Amendments

  • Amendment: Item 5 (EV Chargers) was pulled by subsequent discussion (00:53:12.200).

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: Motion to approve the Consent Agenda for April 8, 2024, minus Item 5, was approved.
  • Vote: Unanimous.
  • Next Steps: Staff will proceed with the administrative tasks outlined in the approved items.

Letter of Support for East Jefferson Fire and Rescue CARES Program

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:53:37.447–00:55:35.280
  • Agenda Item: Letter of Support (EJFR CARES Program)
  • Categories: services, public health

Topic Summary

The Board considered and approved signing a letter of support for the East Jefferson Fire Rescue (EJFR) FIRE CARES Program, which assists the aging population with non-emergent needs to reduce pressure on the 911 system. A minor correction regarding the grant year was required before final approval.

Key Discussion Points

  • An administrative correction was made to the grant years listed in the letter, changing them from "2023 through 2024" to "2024 and 2025" (00:53:52.032).
  • Commissioner Dean shared a recent personal experience of needing non-emergent help from EJFR following the passing of her mother and expressed deep gratitude for the CARE team's support (00:54:41.107).
  • The program targets the large aging population with non-emergent needs to reduce 911 system overload (Supporting Materials: Support Letter for East Jefferson Fire Rescue (EJFR) CARES Program).

Public Comments

No public comment on this topic.

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • Support Letter for East Jefferson Fire Rescue (EJFR) CARES Program

Financials

  • The program is seeking additional AWC funding to sustain operations (00:53:52.032).

Alternatives & Amendments

  • Amendment: Correction of grant years from 2023–2024 to 2024–2025 (00:53:52.032).

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: Motion to approve signing the letter of support with the date modifications was approved.
  • Vote: Unanimously approved on voice vote (00:55:26.157).
  • Next Steps: None specified.

CDBG-CV Contract Closeout Hearing (Caswell-Brown Village)

Metadata

  • Time Range: 01:18:50.984–01:39:00.861
  • Agenda Item: Community Development Block Grant-Corona Virus (CDBG-CV) Contract Closeout
  • Categories: grants, human services, housing

Topic Summary

The Board held a required public hearing for the closeout of the CDBG-CV grant, which amounted to over $321,000. These funds were largely reallocated to homeless services and proved instrumental in establishing the Caswell-Brown Village, transitioning residents from the fairgrounds encampment. Staff and Community Build volunteers highlighted the successful relocation, the creation of safe and respected spaces, and the positive impact on residents' stability. Federal funding is actively being sought to close the $2.5 million gap needed to construct the permanent shelter planned for the site.

Key Discussion Points

  • Amanda Christofferson (Grants Administrator) stated the initial $321,548 grant (introduced in 2020) was originally slow to be used for utility and mortgage assistance but was successful after reallocating $196,454.56 to homeless services beginning in August 2022 (01:19:48.125, 01:21:31.092).
  • The funds paid for early engineering, site clearing, waste, and hygiene facilities, enabling the creation of Caswell-Brown Village (01:21:19.119).
  • Robin Pangborn (OlyCAP Shelter Manager) emphasized the transition from an undeveloped "landing pad" at the fairgrounds to a safe community with consistent operating procedures at Caswell-Brown Village (01:22:16.488, 01:23:43.486).
  • Debbie Steele (Community Build Leadership Team), whose team built tiny shelters for the village, lamented the inability to secure funding to construct a "bath house" for sanitary washing/dishes (01:27:33.940, 01:27:47.019).
  • Commissioner Brotherton emphasized the successful effort to create 50 spaces for the unhoused population, calling it "transformational and not enough" (01:31:49.687).
  • Commissioner Dean noted the $2.5 million funding gap to build the permanent emergency shelter at Caswell-Brown, stating that the County has applied to all three federal delegation members for congressional directed spending (C.D.S.) to fill this gap (01:36:10.121).

Public Comments

  • No public comment received during the hearing (01:34:13.354).

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • Community Development Block Grant-Corona Virus (CDBG-CV) Contract Closeout (Reported a total of $321,450.11 expended, 327 persons served.)

Financials

  • Total CDBG-CV Funds Expended: $321,450.11 (01:38:29.443-01:38:39.192).
  • Permanent Shelter Budget: Total estimated cost is $8 million (01:36:51.179).
  • Funding Gap: $2.5 million needed to build the permanent shelter (01:36:10.121).
  • Existing Funding: $5.5 million secured from the state (01:37:09.311).
  • The grant period ended and $97.89 was de-obligated (CDBG-CV Contract Closeout Report).

Alternatives & Amendments

No alternatives discussed; the item was a review of past actions.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: No decision was made; item was a required closeout hearing. The County Administrator signed the Contract Close Out Report (01:38:29.443).
  • Vote: N/A
  • Next Steps:
  • - Board: Continue pursuing federal funding to meet the $2.5 million gap for constructing the permanent shelter (01:36:19.302).
  • - Commissioner Brotherton: Explore the creation of a transitional and workforce housing capacity to act as a "launching pad" for Caswell-Brown residents (01:33:40.246).

Discussion of Future Emergency Shelter Operations

Metadata

  • Time Range: 01:39:44.099–01:48:40.108
  • Agenda Item: Operations Discussion (Emergency Shelter)
  • Categories: operations, human services, budgeting

Topic Summary

Commissioners discussed the imminent end of OlyCAP's contract to manage the American Legion Emergency Shelter (June 30) and the need for the County to lead a coalition to keep the shelter operating until the permanent facility at Caswell-Brown Village is complete (estimated 18 months). The discussion focused on securing funding, potentially hiring a dedicated County staff member (a "shelter czar"), and the political/governance structure for managing operations.

Key Discussion Points

  • The American Legion has indicated willingness to negotiate continuing the lease with the County (01:43:59.410).
  • The operational cost currently runs around $30,000 per month (01:44:34.376).
  • The board has $27,000 remaining in the housing fund budget for emergency shelter operations that must be spent by the end of June (01:40:03.663).
  • New State Funding Source: New state appropriations meant to backfill recording fees will be available for very low-income services, providing another funding source (01:41:58.625).
  • Staffing Model: Commissioners considered hiring a single staff member ("housing czar") to manage volunteers and monitors, potentially housed within Public Health or within the BOCC department due to the political/nimble nature of the role (01:46:10.911).
  • Timeline: The permanent shelter at Caswell-Brown Village will not be ready until late 2025 at the earliest, requiring the temporary shelter to operate for roughly 18 months more (01:40:55.347, 02:08:25.932).
  • The underlying goal is to keep the shelter running year-round (02:12:25.311).

Public Comments

No public comment on this topic.

Supporting Materials Referenced

No supporting materials referenced.

Financials

  • Operational Cost: $30,000 per month (01:44:34.376).
  • Current Available Funds: $27,000 in the current fiscal year housing fund (01:40:03.663).
  • Housing Fund Board revenue will see an increase due to a state appropriation backfilling housing recording fees (01:41:58.625, 04:01:09.465).

Alternatives & Amendments

  • Alternative: Hire an external entity to run the shelter (currently OlyCAP). The American Legion finds the County the "most palatable option as the negotiator of the lease" (01:44:03.588).

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: No action taken. Commissioners agreed on the general approach to secure new funding and staff support, with the underlying goal of maintaining year-round shelter coverage.
  • Vote: N/A
  • Next Steps:
  • - Commissioner Brotherton: Talk with OlyCAP about rebalancing grants to quickly spend the remaining $27,000 by the June fiscal year end (01:48:40.108).
  • - Commissioner Brotherton: Start establishing the coalition of faith-based/city partners to support management (01:45:24.549).
  • - Commissioner Brotherton/Dean: Develop a job description for a County Housing Lead/Shelter Manager, potentially creating a new Housing Czar-type role tied to the BOCC office (01:46:40.544).
  • - Board/Staff: Explore having the coalition operate as an ad hoc committee of the Housing Fund Board for governance purposes (02:13:43.799).

Public Hearing: Ordinance on Rules for Legislative Actions (Continued)

Metadata

  • Time Range: 01:48:51.791–02:06:01.777
  • Agenda Item: Ordinance Adoption of Rules for Legislative Actions (Ordinances, Resolutions, Motions)
  • Categories: governance, legal, ordinances

Topic Summary

The Board opened a public hearing on a proposed ordinance that establishes formal, clear rules for the adoption of BOCC and Board of Health (BoH) ordinances, resolutions, and motions, aiming to increase transparency and efficiency. Chief Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Philip Hunsucker presented the draft, noting that it reflects existing practices but clarifies requirements such as single-subject rule and mandatory legal review before public hearing notice issuance. The Board received late public comments from a former attorney and decided to continue the hearing to the following Monday to allow time for the comments to be reviewed by the legal team and incorporated if appropriate.

Key Discussion Points

  • Philip Hunsucker (Chief Civil Deputy Prosecuting Attorney) noted the ordinance standardizes the process and adopts "what we've been doing in the past" (01:51:52.671).
  • The ordinance formalizes the chain of review, requiring approval by the Prosecuting Attorney and County Administrator before posting a hearing notice to ensure legality and prevent procedural delays (01:57:55.657).
  • The proposed ordinance restricts legal review only to formal ordinances and resolutions requiring a public hearing, satisfying the Board of Health's desire to maintain flexibility for proclamations (02:01:59.083).
  • Commissioner Brotherton noted receiving relevant comments from a former county attorney (David Alber) and requested these comments be formally entered into the hearing record for legal review before the vote (01:59:11.887).

Public Comments

  • No public testimony was provided during the hearing (02:03:18.554).

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • Ordinance Adoption of Rules for Legislative Actions (Ordinances, Resolutions, Motions)

Financials

  • No financial information discussed.

Alternatives & Amendments

  • Alternatives: The final ordinance addresses an issue raised by the Board of Health by limiting mandatory legal review only to resolutions requiring a public hearing, rather than all resolutions (02:01:59.083).

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: No action taken. The public hearing remained open but was continued to next week.
  • Vote: N/A
  • Next Steps:
  • - Philip Hunsucker: Review the late comments received (02:04:08.552).
  • - Board: The hearing is continued to April 15, 2024, at 1:30 p.m. (02:05:08.570).

Adoption of Moratorium on Short Term Rental Applications

Metadata

  • Time Range: 02:22:49.657–02:29:44.442
  • Agenda Item: Ordinance to Adopt Moratorium on Short Term Rental Applications
  • Categories: ordinances, land use, housing, public safety

Topic Summary

Following an executive session, the Board adopted an emergency ordinance enacting an immediate one-year moratorium on accepting and processing new applications for Short Term Rental (STRs) permits in unincorporated areas. The moratorium targets Transient Residences and Transient Guest Houses to prevent a rush of applications under outdated code, allowing staff to study the impacts on affordable/workforce housing and finalize new development regulations.

Key Discussion Points

  • The moratorium establishes a pause on new applications for one year (Ordinance No. 01-0408-24).
  • The BOCC is acting in anticipation of many new applications "vesting" before a proper regulatory framework can be implemented (02:23:18.757).
  • Rationale: The County is ranked as the second-least affordable in Washington State, and unpermitted STRs impact housing availability (02:24:39.330).
  • The moratorium will not stop the underlying work; the Planning Commission is scheduled to meet on May 1 to begin drafting code changes based on recent community input (02:23:48.634).
  • The moratorium does not change code compliance priority: complaints about unpermitted STRs generally remain low priority, unless a life safety/septic issue is involved, which remains a high priority (02:27:24.922).
  • The County is required to hold a public hearing on the moratorium itself within 60 days of passage (02:26:35.989).

Public Comments

  • No public comments were received on this motion (02:27:55.120).

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • Moratorium on Short Term Rental Applications (Ordinance No. 01-0408-24)

Financials

  • No financial information discussed.

Alternatives & Amendments

No alternatives discussed.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: Motion to approve Ordinance No. 01-0408-24 was approved.
  • Vote: Aye (Unanimous, 02:29:06.365).
  • Next Steps:
  • - Staff: Publish a press release and make the ordinance available on the county webpage (02:29:28.498).
  • - DCD/CSO: Continue the public planning process with the Planning Commission on May 1 (02:28:16.546).
  • - Board: Schedule a required public hearing on the moratorium within 60 days (timeline not specified).

Port Hadlock Sewer Project: Connection Plan and Voucher Program Workshop

Metadata

  • Time Range: 02:29:52.242–03:01:45.382
  • Agenda Item: Port Hadlock Sewer Plan and Voucher Program (Workshop)
  • Categories: infrastructure, facilities, planning, finance, contracts

Topic Summary

Public Works briefed the Board on the active construction status of the Port Hadlock Sewer Project and presented the detailed plan for connecting existing developed properties (over 135 grinder pumps needed) via a phased "staging" approach. To address the difficulty of connecting the new county-owned grinder pumps to unique property electrical panels, staff proposed a $2,500 maximum voucher program funded by ARPA money. The program would cover the cost of electrical work required by the property owner to bring 240V/30amp service to a "disconnect box" installed near the pump.

Key Discussion Points

  • Samantha Harper (Wastewater Project Manager) reported construction status: the treatment plant is one month into construction, and the collection system construction begins April 20/21 (02:31:00.709, 02:31:41.353).
  • The project is divided into four stages plus the B&R Mobile Home Park and Wooden Boat School, prioritizing high-water users first (Stage 1 properties are in green on the map) (02:33:03.410).
  • The County will own and maintain the grinder pumps and street infrastructure, an arrangement necessary for using public grant funds on private property (02:45:00.187).
  • The primary complexity is the electrical connection: the County proposed a voucher up to $2,500 to reimburse the property owner for bringing the required 240V/30amp service to the disconnect box, simplifying the process (02:37:32.904).
  • The $300,000 ARPA budget is anticipated to cover vouchers for all approximately 135 properties slated for connection (02:41:25.719).
  • Commercial businesses, especially restaurants, will incur additional costs for mandated grease interceptors, which are on the business side of the line and will not be covered by the voucher program (02:51:33.711).
  • Public Works Director Mark McCauley requested Board guidance on whether the voucher program needs to be formalized by a resolution or whether publication by Public Works is sufficient, also asking for legal review (03:00:25.853).

Public Comments

No public comment on this topic.

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • Port Hadlock Sewer Project: Initial Connection Plan and Voucher Program (Total Construction Cost for Stages 1-4, B&R, and WBS is $5,403,408.)

Financials

  • Voucher amount: Up to $2,500 reimbursement for licensed electrical work (02:37:32.904).
  • Voucher Funding Source: ARPA money dedicated to the project (02:47:36.800).
  • Voucher Total Commitment: Approximately $300,000 (02:41:40.900).

Alternatives & Amendments

  • Proceeding with the voucher program or returning with a different reimbursement scheme (02:59:48.011).

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: No formal action taken, but Commissioners indicated support for the voucher program as an "appropriate use of resources" (02:52:04.221).
  • Vote: N/A
  • Next Steps:
  • - Public Works/Legal Staff: Submit the program details to the Prosecuting Attorney's office for review to ensure there are no "gifting" clause violations (03:01:14.744).
  • - Public Works: Begin planning dissemination of information via pamphlet/flyer (03:01:02.973).

Healthier Together Aquatic Center Task Force Selection and Methodology

Metadata

  • Time Range: 03:02:46.217–03:36:40.389
  • Agenda Item: Healthier Together Aquatic Center Task Force Selection and Methodology (Workshop)
  • Categories: facilities, planning, governance

Topic Summary

The Board proceeded with selecting the members for the Healthier Together Aquatic Center Task Force, aiming to seat a body of 8 members (two per district, plus two at-large members chosen by the Jefferson Aquatic Coalition [JAC]) to study alternatives, costs, and financing options for an aquatic center. The Board selected its 6 appointees and moved a unified slate of 8 appointments for a vote. A public commenter challenged the governance, arguing the task force is subject to the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) and requires formal OPMA training, not voluntary compliance. The task force is expected to meet for 8 sessions, roughly every other week.

Key Discussion Points

  • Selection: Commissioners moved a slate of 8 appointees, balancing technical expertise, geographic representation, and community involvement (03:25:33.554).
  • District 3 (Greg Brotherton): Adele Govert and Lynn Hove (03:08:15.433).
  • District 2 (Heidi Eisenhour): Jim Scarantino (noted for prior research/work on the project) and Celeste Schoenthaler (noted for health expertise/facilitation skills) (03:09:40.298).
  • District 1 (Kate Dean): Todd McGuire (engineering/site planning expertise) and Nancy Speser (decades of aquatic center operations experience) (03:12:07.921).
  • JAC At-Large: Craig Henry and Mary Rothschild (residents of District 2) (03:07:34.577).
  • Governance Plan: The initial methodology proposed Commissioners serving as facilitators, but the Board agreed to have Commissioner Brotherton facilitate all sessions for consistency and have Kerry assist with administrative logistics (03:20:00.601, 03:24:01.040).
  • OPMA Compliance: Public commenter Tom Teersch argued that because the task force's work is a "mandatory prerequisite" for the BOCC's future PFD decision, it is mandated to follow all OPMA rules, including mandatory training (03:27:41.063).

Public Comments

  • Tom Teersch (Online): Task Force is subject to OPMA because its work is a prerequisite for the BOCC's decision on a PFD. Demanded training be required, not optional. Warned that circulating member applications (bios) may violate Public Records Act confidentiality (03:28:46.256).
  • Shelley Armel (Online): Clarified she supports a pool but opposes the proposed $50 million "mega church pool," demanding the task force incorporate opinions from a broad public on affordability and size (03:30:00.750).

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • Healthier Together Aquatic Center Task Force Selection and Methodology

Financials

  • The estimated budget for the project criticized by Shelley Armel is $50 million (03:30:00.750).
  • Funding for the Task Force is limited to staff time for administrative support (Supporting Materials: Healthier Together Aquatic Center Task Force Selection and Methodology).

Alternatives & Amendments

  • The work plan includes explicitly studying alternative construction methods (Sprung/Myrtha), costs, and Port Hadlock site options (03:15:27.332, 03:31:10.967).

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: Motion to approve the slate of 8 recommended candidates for the Task Force was approved.
  • Vote: Aye (Unanimous, 03:36:29.310).
  • Next Steps:
  • - Commissioner Brotherton/Kerry: Begin scheduling the first meeting, aiming for the next two weeks (03:37:54.149).
  • - Commissioner Brotherton: Address OPMA compliance, specifically clarifying the need for the Task Force to be noticed as a "special meeting" if Commissioners are to participate consistently (03:22:29.376).
  • - Commissioner Brotherton: Finalize the proposed methodology document, incorporating the new facilitators and reviewing the OPMA compliance requirement (03:34:04.339).

Continued Discussion: EV Charging Station Contract

Metadata

  • Time Range: 04:03:26.607–04:32:00.646
  • Agenda Item: EV Charging Station Contract (Continued)
  • Categories: contracts, grants, technology

Topic Summary

Commissioners resumed the discussion on the EV charging contract, joined in real-time by EVCS consultants Charles Botsford and Lori McKay. The core concern regarding technology standards (150kW Level 3 and 7.6kW Level 2) was addressed: The 150kW speed is appropriate for light-duty vehicles and complies with the WashDOT grant requirements. The consultants provided assurance of reliability (97% uptime guaranteed via the WashDOT contract) and noted EVCS's commitment to supporting legacy chargers (ChaDeMo/CCS) during the transition to the new J-3400 standard (Tesla-based). The Board resolved to place the item back on the consent agenda after receiving written confirmation of the answers provided.

Key Discussion Points

  • Reliability/Uptime: Charles Botsford (EVCS) stated the WashDOT contract requires a 97% uptime guarantee for the chargers, which is significantly better than other performers (04:08:32.607).
  • Speed (150kW vs 350kW): Botsford stated 350kW is unnecessary for light-duty vehicles and 150kW (actually 180kW planned) is appropriate and meets the WashDOT grant standard. He called 350kW a "tweener" that doesn't fit well (04:12:20.295).
  • Technology Future-Proofing: The technology standard is currently transitioning (J-3400/Tesla is coming by mid-2025), but EVCS will continue to use the current CCS and ChaDeMo connectors to support legacy drivers (04:15:09.762).
  • Level 2 Charger Speed: Botsford affirmed the 7.7kW (32 amp) Level 2 standard for plug-in hybrid drivers is normal and suggested the County's best option is to leave it as is for consistency with repair protocols (04:25:46.056).
  • Pricing: The standard DC fast charge rate is discussed to be around 49 cents per kWh, competitive versus home charging (the cheapest) (04:20:01.805). Subscription rates are available for high-mileage drivers (04:20:16.806).
  • Revenue Share: Commissioners discussed foregoing the 5 cents/kWh revenue share to ensure lower prices for users, though they did not take action on this (04:30:39.487).

Public Comments

  • None during this discussion.

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • Site Host Agreement for Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Infrastructure

Financials

  • EVCS Standard DCC Fast Charge Rate: ~49 cents per kWh (04:20:01.805).
  • County Revenue Share (forego option discussed): 5 cents per kWh DCFC (04:30:39.487).
  • EVCS's bulk expense for power and demand charges is estimated at 30 cents per kWh (04:21:41.255).

Alternatives & Amendments

  • The County agreed not to pursue modifying the Level 2 charger speed or changing the 150kW Level 3 standard (04:30:50.529).
  • Commissioner Brotherton suggested exploring external local ordinance options to cap EV charging rates for all private providers (03:38:51.239).

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: The item was not approved today but will return to the Consent Agenda next week for a vote after the Commissioners receive written confirmation of the technical details (04:31:55.584, 04:30:16.287).
  • Vote: N/A
  • Next Steps:
  • - Lori McKay/Charles Botsford: Provide written responses to clarify the technical details and timeline commitments (04:30:16.287).
  • - Board: Item will be placed back on the Consent Agenda for April 15, 2024.

Generated On: 2025-11-07 14:03:22.932141-08:00 By: google/gemini-2.5-flash-preview-09-2025 running on https://openrouter.ai/api/v1/