MEETING: Commissioners Meeting at Mon, Dec 09, 09:00 AM

County Sources

Packet Contents

AI Information

JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING SUMMARY

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:00:18.000–00:30:15.000
  • Agenda Item: Not Stated (Opening, Public Comment, Consent Agenda)
  • Categories: operations, planning, public safety, contracts

Topic Summary

The meeting was called to order by Acting Chair Commissioner Eisenhour and opened for public comment. Public testimony overwhelmingly focused on the contentious recommendations and process surrounding the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) 2025 allocations. Following public comment, the Board unanimously approved the Consent Agenda, which included hearing notices and a canceled/rescheduled coroner program hearing.

Key Discussion Points

  • Commissioner Eisenhour noted that Commissioner Dean was remote and would be acting as Chair (00:00:41.000).
  • Consent Agenda Items: The agenda included hearing notices and a cancelation/rescheduling of a hearing regarding a new coroner program (00:29:55.000 - Commissioner Dean).
  • Motion: Commissioner Brotherton moved to approve and adopt the Consent Agenda as presented (00:29:45.000).
  • Secondary Motion: Commissioner Dean seconded the motion (00:29:48.000).

Public Comments

  • Tom Teers (00:01:22.000): Thanked the Human Resources manager for responding to an email regarding the appropriate use of the word "citizen" in official county documents, noting its sensitivity due to potential draconian deportation practices (00:01:43.000). Expressed concern over Commissioner Brotherton’s proposal to change the LTAC allocations, arguing it would delay funding for irritated grant recipients by two months (00:02:43.000). Argued that $20,000—the amount recommended for the Public Facilities District (PFD) market survey—is barely enough for a market survey, and suggested not wasting money on forming a PFD that may never be needed (00:03:29.000). Referenced a previous Port Townsend-centric "BK study" as a "joke" (00:04:19.000).
  • Dan Ventura (00:04:56.000): Expressed disappointment that the BoCC altered the Tourism Coordination Committee (TCC) wholesale and presented the TCC LTAC application without board input (00:05:13.000-00:05:27.000). Disappointed that tourism funding was "muddied with the desire for an aquatic center" and that the LTAC disregarded the BoCC's priority memo (00:05:51.000-00:06:02.000). Criticized LTAC members for voting on competing applications while their organizations were applying for the same funds, and lamented the loss of talent and experience due to the perceived "debacle" (00:06:12.000-00:07:35.000).
  • Debbie Wardrop (00:08:36.000): Representing Marsha Massey, echoed disappointment over the conflict, stating the community is at a "tipping point in the wrong direction" (00:09:30.000-00:09:40.000). Asserted that lodging tax dollars should bring visitors, arguing a pool is an amenity for residents, not tourists, and dilutes marketing funds (00:09:56.000-00:11:00.000). Cited organizational gaps, noting the county lacks: a Chamber of Commerce representing the entire county, a viable visitor center in Port Townsend, and faces peril at Fort Warden (00:11:09.000-00:11:29.000).
  • Diana Smeeland (00:12:08.000): Reiterated the LTAC board's collaboration on funding recommendations and asserted that $20,000 for a market study is appropriate for the proposed pool, which is "way too risky" to put marketing dollars toward (00:12:24.000-00:13:03.000). Expressed concern over conflicting legal opinions regarding the pool project and noted that the county attorney declined to seek an opinion from the Attorney General (00:13:48.000-00:14:06.000). Stressed the need to approve funding immediately to support small businesses with February needs (00:14:17.000).
  • Julia (00:14:59.000): Requested that a link to today's meeting be placed right on the front of the county website for easier access (00:15:23.000).
  • Andrew Schwartz (Brennan Resident, Northwood Canal Chamber of Commerce Member) (00:15:38.000): Echoed disappointment and observed drama/conflict around the LTAC funding cycle (00:16:13.000-00:16:55.000). Did not support the full Northwood Canal Chamber plan, especially regarding the Gateway Center (00:16:42.000). Disagreed with the assessment that the Chamber lacked experience to execute its technology plan (00:17:18.000). Cautioned against delaying funding for other organizations, fearing the delays would be blamed on the Chamber's actions (00:17:42.000).
  • Jim Friedman (00:18:45.000): Concerned that the county is taking on projects, like the PFD for the pool, without anticipating their long-term duration, citing the City of Pasco’s two-decade effort to fund an aquatic center (00:19:05.000-00:19:37.000). Advocated for an extensive plan for maintenance if the county invests in tourism technology like kiosks, noting the county's difficulty maintaining basic websites (00:20:09.000-00:20:30.000).
  • Shelley Yarnell (Brennan) (00:21:08.000): Stated the pool project has spent close to a million dollars without outreach to the community regarding the willingness to pay for it (00:21:16.000). Agreed that there is "absolutely no appetite for a tax increase" for the pool (00:21:43.000). Criticized the LTAC RFP process as fit for a class on "how not to handle this process" because a longstanding county institution (implied TCC/Chambers) was "thrown under the bus" (00:22:01.000-00:22:09.000).
  • Jean Ball (Quilcene) (00:22:29.000): Highly critical of the "premature creation of the PFD" and the attempt to override LTAC appropriations, fearing a preventable "train wreck" (00:22:42.000-00:23:09.000). Urged Commissioners to listen to the "wise voices" criticizing the process (00:23:35.000).
  • Steve, Caller ending in 006 (00:24:06.000): Applauded the LTAC committee's work and asked that their recommendations be followed (00:24:33.000). Warned that canceling the Olympic Peninsula Tourism Improvement Cooperative (Optic) funding jeopardizes Jefferson County’s support for the recently completed five-year tourism master plan (00:25:24.000-00:25:31.000). Cited the jeopardization of cooperative campaigns, such as the Hood Canal Bridge roundabout monument signage project, which relies on approved LTAC matching funds to secure a $50,000 regenerative state grant (00:25:38.000-00:26:12.000).
  • Maggie (00:27:13.000): Briefly suggested exploring saltwater, open water education opportunities involving the Coast Guard (00:27:13.000). Discussed an exhibit at the Health Department (next to QFC) and later the museum, listing topics like trauma-informed police training, urban rest stops, and trash collection for encampments (00:27:26.000-00:28:36.000).

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • The Consent Agenda included two Hearing Notices and a Call for Bids.
  • A previously scheduled hearing on the new Coroner Program was canceled and rescheduled, noted in the Consent Agenda.

Financials

  • No financial figures were discussed during this vote, other than the general context of the LTAC funding controversy cited in public comment.

Alternatives & Amendments

  • No alternatives discussed for the Consent Agenda.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: Approved and adopted the Consent Agenda as presented.
  • Vote: Unanimous (Ayes: Brotherton, Dean, Eisenhour).
  • Next Steps:
  • The rescheduled Coroner Program hearing is listed on the upcoming agenda.

Open Space Tax Program Current Use Application: Zuker & Allday (Continuation)

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:30:17.000–00:34:50.000
  • Agenda Item: Open Space Tax Program 2024 Current Use Application for the Zucker Al Bay property.
  • Categories: land use, planning, contracts, other (conservation)

Topic Summary

The Board held a continuation of the public hearing from November 18, 2024, regarding a Current Use Assessment (CUA) application for the Zuker & Allday property. The hearing was extended because the applicant was missing documentation related to significant fish and wildlife habitat areas. Following the submission and review of the required report, staff revised the recommendation, increasing the application score to the necessary 12 points. The Board approved the application, allowing the property to receive a tax reduction.

Key Discussion Points

  • David Wayne Johnson (Associate Lead Planner, DCD) presented the item (00:30:39.000), noting the hearing was a continuation from November 18, 2024.
  • During the previous hearing, a missing piece of information regarding "significant fish and wildlife habitat areas" for the Zuker application (CUA2024-00001) prevented the proper review (00:31:02.000).
  • The missing report was subsequently received and included in the staff report in the agenda packet (00:31:30.000).
  • The inclusion of the report qualified the application for an additional two points, raising the final score to 12 points, the highest level, which achieves the applicants' goal (00:31:45.000-00:32:05.000).
  • The first application, the Hood Canal Salmon Enhancement Group, was already approved (00:30:56.000).
  • Commissioner Eisenhower noted appreciation for the time taken to make the correction (00:32:46.000). Commissioner Dean concurred, stating appreciation for the "due diligence" (00:33:03.000).

Public Comments

  • No public comment was taken, as testimony had been closed at the November 18, 2024, hearing (00:32:55.000).

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • The newly received report confirming existence of significant fish and wildlife habitat areas was included in the revised staff report on page three (summary table) and page five (new detail) of the agenda packet (00:31:30.000-00:31:58.000).

Financials

  • Approval grants the property a reduction in market value assessment (implied 10% reduction associated with the 12 PBRS points).

Alternatives & Amendments

  • No alternatives discussed.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: Motion to approve CUA 20224-0001 (Zucker & Allday application) was passed.
  • Vote: Unanimous (Ayes: Brotherton, Dean, Eisenhour) (00:34:04.000-00:34:05.000).
  • Next Steps:
  • Signed tax agreements from the Zucker & Allday applicants will be submitted (00:34:12.000).
  • The signed agreement and the previously approved Hood Canal Salmon Enhancement Group agreement will appear on the Consent Agenda the following Monday (December 16th) for final BoCC signing and for recording by the end of the year, enabling adjustment to the first tax statements (00:34:17.000-00:34:43.000).

Discussion on Lodging Tax (LTAC) Funding and Tourism Policy

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:35:42.000–01:00:00.000
  • Agenda Item: Response to Public Comment / Unscheduled Discussion of LTAC Funding
  • Categories: budgeting, services, operations, planning

Topic Summary

The Board engaged in an extensive and heated debate following the morning's public comments, primarily centered on the LTAC recommendations and the future of county tourism. Commissioner Brotherton attributed the resulting "conflagration" to his dissatisfaction with the existing system's "cronyism," lack of oversight, and the ineffective visitor information center model. Commissioners Dean and Eisenhour expressed support for reform and the five-year tourism master plan but strongly cautioned against unilaterally discarding the LTAC recommendations due to process concerns and potential "collateral damage" to the volunteers and tourism professionals.

(Note: Discussion resumed later in the day, see LATER LTAC Discussion section.)

Key Discussion Points

  • Commissioner Brotherton's Perspective: Acknowledged starting the controversy ("conflagration") due to unease over the management and lack of oversight in the LTAC system, which he viewed as having "cronyism" (00:36:41.000-00:37:01.000). Argued the current structure (LTAC membership, visitor centers, marketing) functions as a "free tax funded marketing club" benefiting members, citing long-time, "static" organizational representation (00:37:39.000-00:38:00.000). Specifically called visitor information centers a "non-functioning model" (00:39:39.000). Criticized Optic marketing as potentially "counterproductive," arguing it often functions as an ad for Clallam County, especially West End marketing which draws revenue to Clallam County where employees reside and shop (00:44:32.000-00:45:22.000).
  • Brotherton's Proposed Pivot: Suggested taking advantage of the unfunded TCC and Gateway Visitor Center (GVC) positions to re-orient the GVC as a "South County meeting space" (for SWAC/Planning Commission) in addition to a visitor information system (00:42:09.000-00:42:47.000). Proposed experimenting with a modern "visitor information system" using AI/scripted web content via QR codes and Starlink at the Gateway entrance for better metrics (00:43:06.000-00:43:47.000).
  • Commissioner Dean's Response: Thanked Mr. Tirsch (Teers) for challenging the problematic use of the word "citizen" (00:46:04.000). Wished that tourism entities had been more willing to "come to the table" regarding innovation and changing the status quo, especially given the negative impacts of tourism (00:46:42.000-00:47:01.000). Defended the aquatic center advocacy, stating that "it's unfair to say that there is no support" for it or that no outreach has been done (00:48:31.000).
  • Commissioner Eisenhour's Response: Expressed "whiplash" and called the BoCC's handling of the LTAC proposals a "disservice to our longtime tenured volunteers" (00:50:48.000-00:51:11.000). Stressed the need to "slow this train down" and agreed that a market study for the aquatic facility is needed (00:53:04.000). Cautioned against throwing out the "baby with the bathwater" and urged sensitivity in changing direction, emphasizing that the five-year strategic plan had just gotten off the ground (00:51:59.000-00:53:38.000).

Public Comments

  • Discussion was a response to public comments (see 00:01:22.000–00:29:06.000).

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • The discussion strongly centered on the consequences of the LTAC funding recommendations detailed in the agenda packet.
  • Reference to the 5-Year Tourism Master Plan (00:36:23.000, 00:53:34.000) and the PFD funding in the LTAC materials (00:34:04.000) permeated the discussion.

Financials

  • Commissioner Brotherton noted concerns that marketing through Optic may be drawing local revenue to Clallam County (00:44:32.000).
  • Lodging taxes were noted to have "gone up precipitously" in the last decade due to more units, not necessarily the current marketing approach (00:55:32.000-00:55:41.000).

Alternatives & Amendments

  • Brotherton's Pivot: Advocated for re-orienting the Gateway Visitor Center as a mixed-use space (including a county meeting room) and developing a measurable, technology-driven Visitor Information System over the current staffing model (00:41:41.000ff). Suggested funding Optic while focusing on reforming the visitor information system (00:57:01.000).

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: Deferred the formal discussion and decision on the LTAC recommendations until 1:30 PM (02:02:05.000-02:02:12.000).
  • Next Steps:
  • Formal LTAC discussion rescheduled for 1:30 PM.

Road Name Change Petition: Mount Walker View Drive

Metadata

  • Time Range: 03:48:09.000–03:59:55.000
  • Agenda Item: Hearing on a petition to change a named road from Walker View Drive to one of three proposed names.
  • Categories: land use, public safety, services

Topic Summary

The Board held a public hearing to address a petition from a homeowner to rename the private road "Mount Walker View Drive" in Quilcene, as the name is misleading (Mount Walker is not visible) and causes delivery issues. DCD staff outlined the process required by JCC 12-20.150 and presented feedback from six partner agencies regarding the three proposed names (Bear Claw Ln., Starry Night Ln., Owl Ln.). Agencies overwhelmingly favored "Starry Night Place" due to existing road conflicts with the other two options. The board approved the name change to "Starry Night Place."

Key Discussion Points

  • Brian Tracer (Deputy Fire Marshal) and Dave Shepard (Community Development Tech) presented the item, noting the process to resurrect the road naming procedure was a "learning curve" because it happens infrequently (03:48:40.000).
  • Petitioner's Rationale: The current name, Mount Walker View Drive, causes confusion and issues because Mount Walker cannot be seen from the road (03:50:50.000).
  • Road Type Clarification: Staff determined that although the petition requested "Lane" (Ln.) as the suffix, the road technically qualifies as a "Place" (Pl.) under the E911 Ordinance definition of a "short dead end road with no intersecting roads" lacking a cul-de-sac (03:53:12.000-03:53:45.000).
  • Agency Review Summary: Six agencies (Jeffcom, Public Works, Assessor, GIS, Fire District, Undersheriff) reviewed the names for conflicts:
    • GIS, Assessor, and 911 Communications noted conflicts for Bear Claw Ln. and Owl Ln. with existing county roads ("Bear Road," "Owl Creek Road"), leaving Starry Night Pl. as the only acceptable choice across all agencies (03:54:08.000-03:54:54.000).
  • Commissioner Dean noted the strong preference from agencies for Starry Night Place (03:58:27.000).

Public Comments

  • Jim Friedman (via Caitlin) (03:39:11.000): Did not comment on the road name change, mistakenly using this period for PFD comment (see PFD section).
  • No other public testimony was provided.

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • JCC 12.20.150 (Road name guidance) was cited as governing the process (03:51:00.000).
  • Exhibits 1-6 detailed the preference and reasoning from Jeffcom, Public Works, Assessor, GIS, Fire District (Tim McKern), and the Undersheriff (03:54:08.000). A draft resolution suggested adopting "Starry Night Place."

Financials

  • The road name change petitioner paid an initial fee of $776.48, which covers administration and one red address plate (03:56:06.000).

Alternatives & Amendments

  • Proposed Names (Petitioner's Preference Order): Bear Claw Ln., Starry Night Ln. (changed to Pl.), Owl Ln. (changed to Pl.) (03:52:38.000).
  • Selected Name: Starry Night Place.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: Motion to approve a resolution changing the road name from Mount Walker View Drive to Starry Knight Place.
  • Vote: Unanimous (Ayes: Brotherton, Dean, Eisenhour) (03:59:36.000-03:59:43.000).
  • Next Steps:
  • The road name change is adopted via resolution (03:59:13.000). Staff to notify the post office.

Mid-Biennium Budget Review and Modifications (Hearing)

Metadata

  • Time Range: 01:15:51.000–01:56:44.000
  • Agenda Item: Hearing regarding the 2024-2025 Mid-Biennium Budget Review and Modifications.
  • Categories: budgeting, finance, operations, services, infrastructure

Topic Summary

The Board held a public hearing on the recommended mid-biennium budget review and modification, presented by County Administrator Mark McCauley. The presentation confirmed revenues for 2025 are static, but the budget incorporates significant cost increases due to inflation (20% over 4 years), substantial employee compensation increases (totaling 21% over 6 years), strategic staff additions (up to 331 full-time equivalents, the most ever), and reduced subsidy to the Road Fund. While the budget relies on historic underspending (6.39%) to balance 2025 expenditures, it projects maintaining General Fund reserves above the 15% objective through 2029.

Key Discussion Points

  • Mark McCauley (County Administrator) gave a presentation alongside Judy Shepard (Finance Director), Stacey Prado (Treasurer), and Brenda Huntingford (Auditor) (01:17:02.000).
  • Context/Financial Stress: McCauley noted that Jefferson County's budget woes reflected broad financial stress around the state (e.g., King County, Snohomish County, state-level $10 billion deficit) (01:18:13.000-01:19:26.000).
  • General Fund Pressure Points: Included higher than average inflation (20% over 4 years), substantial employee compensation increases (9% catch-up raise followed by two zero years, then 8%, 2%, and 2% raises for 21% total over 6 years) (01:19:57.000-01:21:12.000). Other cost increases included jail vacancy incentives, DCD reorganization, increased courthouse security (+$75,000 extra cost over previous EPC contract), and necessity of relying on grant-funded consultants (CWPP, EPLOS) (01:21:24.000-01:23:08.000).
  • Cash Position: McCauley displayed a chart showing cash balances have increased from $5 million (2018) to almost $10.8 million (October 2024), demonstrating maintenance of "sizable cash reserves" (01:25:34.000-01:26:05.000).
  • Sales Tax Revenue: Treasurer Prada noted that sales tax revenue is estimated for a conservative 4% increase in 2025, primarily due to ongoing large construction projects (sewer, fish passages, highway improvements) (01:45:28.000-01:47:22.000). Current 2024 sales tax increased by roughly 8%, credited to these projects (01:45:38.000).
  • Budget Risk/Fund Balance: The projected 2025 General Fund expenditures ($30.2M) exceed revenue ($26.8M) (01:30:52.000). Balancing relies on an average historical underspending rate of 6.39% (01:31:06.000). The 5-year projection shows $290,000 in unreserved fund balance remaining in 2027, maintaining the 15% reserve minimum (01:32:14.000-01:32:22.000).
  • Other Funds/Key Projects:
    • Sewer Project: Fully funded and under construction, expected functional by May of the next year (01:34:57.000-01:35:04.000). A $1 million transfer from the Capital Fund will be used to fund an emergency repair/replacement fund and to help support the initial PUD operation costs (estimated at $200K) (01:35:16.000-01:36:09.000).
    • Road Fund: Diversion to the General Fund will be reduced by $100,000 to $520,000 in 2025. The PILT contribution will raise the total to $750,000 (01:33:33.000-01:38:00.000).
    • Staffing: Full-time equivalent (FTE) staff reached 331, the highest ever for the county (01:52:30.000).

Public Comments

  • Jean Ball (Quilcene) (01:56:01.000): Expressed appreciation and gratitude for Kate Dean’s service and the thorough presentation, and thanked the Board for the South County Deputy allocation (01:56:09.000-01:56:22.000).

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • External document showing "Budget Woes by other local governments" (01:18:13.000).
  • Chart of cash balance growth from $5M to $10.8M (01:25:34.000).
  • 5-Year General Fund Projection model relying on 6.39% average underspending (01:30:04.000-01:31:06.000).
  • Agenda Packet listing all 2025 General Fund and Other Funds revenue and expenditure line items (01:44:41.000).

Financials

  • Inflation: 20% over four years (01:20:33.000).
  • Salaries/Wages: 21% increase over six years to remain competitive (01:20:49.000).
  • General Fund 2025 Revenue Estimate: $26,846,321 (01:30:52.000).
  • General Fund 2025 Expenditure Estimate: $30,245,152 (01:30:57.000).
  • Road Fund Diversion Reduction: -$100,000 (from $620,000 to $520,000 in 2025) (01:33:33.000).
  • New Staffing FTE: 331 (01:52:30.000).

Alternatives & Amendments

  • No specific alternatives were formally introduced during the hearing outside of the ongoing discussion of the Road Fund's structural deficit.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: No vote taken. The item was to deliberate on the presentation and prepare for adoption.
  • Vote: No vote.
  • Next Steps:
  • The budget ordinance is scheduled for adoption on the following Monday, December 16th (01:27:33.000).
  • The core financial team will meet weekly prior to Budget Committee meetings to monitor numbers and determine if the financial stress resolution actions need to be activated (01:32:46.000).

Comprehensive Plan and Uniform Development Code (UDC) Amendments (Hearing)

Metadata

  • Time Range: 02:02:38.000–02:21:52.000
  • Agenda Item: Hearing regarding the 2024 amendment docket for the Comprehensive Plan and the UDC.
  • Categories: planning, land use, infrastructure

Topic Summary

The Board held a public hearing on four critical amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and UDC that were unanimously recommended for approval by the Planning Commission. These amendments address development needs in Port Hadlock and Port Townsend. The four items included making implementation changes related to the Port Hadlock Tri-Area Sewer Project, expanding the Port Townsend Urban Growth Area (UGA) to include publicly owned parcels (like Casual Brown Village) for housing eligibility, clarifying rural housing rules, and expanding light industrial uses at the Jefferson County International Airport. The Board unanimously adopted the ordinance approving all four amendments.

Key Discussion Points

  • Josh Peters (Community Development Director) and Joel Peterson (Associate Planner) presented (02:03:10.000). Peters noted the Port Townsend UGA item is "historic" as it is the first time the county has tackled the issue since the Growth Management Act was established in the 1990s (02:04:22.000).
  • Four Amendments Recommended by Planning Commission: (02:04:54.000-02:05:48.000)
    1. Port Hadlock UGA Implementation: UDC/Comp Plan amendments for the newly sewer-enabled Tri-Area.
    2. Port Townsend UGA Boundary Modification: To include publicly owned parcels for public purpose use, specifically Caswell-Brown Village (02:05:18.000). Staff noted choosing "expansion versus a land swap" (02:06:52.000).
    3. Rural Housing UDC Amendments: Encourage dense rural housing, potentially congregate housing, with a new definition of family.
    4. Airport Essential Public Facility Expansion: Expansion of the Airport Overlay Three to allow light industrial manufacturing of non-aviation-related materials.
  • PT UGA Expansion Clarification (Josh Peters): The expansion only alters the unincorporated UGA boundary, not the Port Townsend municipal boundaries or city limits. The County retains land use control (02:14:51.000). The action was principally timed to be eligible for CHIP funding via the Department of Commerce to help fund sewer extension to Caswell-Brown Village (02:15:30.000).
  • Commissioner Brotherton Comments: Expressed excitement for all projects, noting the Airport expansion for the Co-op is a "great option" and that the housing amendments (UGA/Rural Housing) will facilitate "housing and shelter" (02:16:04.000-02:16:40.000).
  • Commissioner Dean Comments: Supported all amendments but apologized to the public regarding the "perfect storm" of difficulty accessing the materials (hundreds of pages, slow loading Laserfiche, no links) (02:17:59.000-02:18:41.000).
  • In response, Peters noted that DCD maintains separate dedicated web pages with materials in a more accessible format (Civic Plus, active links) outside of the Laserfiche system (02:19:40.000-02:20:07.000).

Public Comments

  • Scott Freeman (Leopold Freeman Forest Co-Manager, Jefferson Timber Cooperative) (02:09:19.000): Endorsed and requested approval of Amendment 4 (Airport expansion) to develop a local wood processing center, supporting "sustainable forestry, local prosperity wage jobs" and keeping logs in Jefferson County (02:09:54.000-02:10:30.000).
  • Aaron Berger (Port Townsend) (02:11:05.000): Thanked the commission for bringing the Airport item forward and echoed the request to pass it to create "excellent jobs at the airport" (02:11:13.000-02:11:25.000).
  • Cody Whalen (Co-founder, Jefferson Timber Cooperative) (02:11:59.000): Supported the Airport change (Amendment 4), stating it is a "really positive situation for local jobs and wood processing" (02:12:14.000-02:12:29.000).

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • Planning Commission recommendations included all four amendments for approval (02:06:13.000).
  • Draft Ordinance with revised effective dates (UGA expansion effective in 60 days).
  • Letter from the Mayor of the City of Port Townsend supporting the UGA modification (02:13:51.000).

Financials

  • No financial figures were discussed during the hearing.

Alternatives & Amendments

  • The UGA amendment was changed from a "land swap" to an "expansion" after consultation (02:06:52.000).
  • The effective date was changed: effective upon signing, except for the UGA expansion, which has a 60-day effective date (02:07:03.000-02:07:13.000).

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: Motion approved to adopt an ordinance approving all four Comprehensive Plan and UDC amendments as presented.
  • Vote: Unanimous (Ayes: Brotherton, Dean, Eisenhour) (02:21:46.000-02:21:49.000).
  • Next Steps:
  • Staff proceeds with implementation of the ordinance.

LTAC Funding Recommendations (Decision and Vote)

Metadata

  • Time Range: 02:22:26.000–03:22:43.000
  • Agenda Item: Discussion and potential action regarding the LTAC 2025 funding recommendations.
  • Categories: budgeting, contracts, services

Topic Summary

The discussion on the LTAC recommendations continued, with public comment taken on the impending motion. Despite Commissioner Brotherton's insistence that the system is "broken" and Commissioner Eisenhour and public commenters raising concerns about process integrity, Commissioner Dean moved to formally adopt the LTAC's recommended slate of funding allocations in full. The motion passed 2-1, committing to the $782,912 allocation and rejecting Commissioner Brotherton’s attempts to modify the awards due to legal and process ambiguity.

Key Discussion Points

  • Initial Stance (Eisenhour/Dean): Commissioners Dean and Eisenhour agreed that forcing the motion without better alternatives or collaboration would result in "too much damage done" and be an unfair process (02:48:53.000-02:59:38.000). They argued the LTAC demonstrated intransigence because the RFP criteria had already been published when the BoCC memo on new priorities was sent (02:38:12.000-02:38:44.000).
  • Brotherton's Opposition: Remained vehement against fully funding the list, arguing it rewards intransigence and maintains a "broken" system (02:53:47.000). Reiterated that the status quo uses tax funds improperly, funding the Gateway Visitor Center (GVC) despite his preference to develop it as an alternative use with meetings/QR codes/free Wi-Fi (02:54:19.000-02:57:01.000). Suggested zeroing out TCC and LTAC capacity funding, but fund Optic, as a compromise (02:44:42.000).
  • Capacity Funding Attempt: Brotherton noted that the recommended list left over $117,000 unfunded (03:18:00.000). He attempted to amend the action to include funding LTAC and TCC capacity/staffing (estimated at $97,472) by finding a "compromise from that side" (03:16:56.000-03:20:24.000).
  • Motion Clarification: Based on legal consultation during the subsequent executive session, the Board's options were confirmed to be limited to either adopting the motion (LTAC slate in whole) or modifying the awards (which triggers a 45-day review period back to the LTAC) (03:22:03.000).

Public Comments

  • Alexis (03:02:07.000-03:05:12.000): Sent a 15-page critique of LTAC a year prior. Applauded Commissioner Eisenhour's earlier outreach (03:03:38.000-03:03:56.000). Shared Brotherton's frustration but was "appalled to witness his conduct and lack of decorum this year," referring to him as "confrontational" and a "bull in a china shop" (03:04:04.000-03:04:20.000). Encouraged the BoCC to prioritize outreach, collaboration, and minimal damage (03:04:45.000).
  • Dan Ventura (03:05:20.000-03:06:57.000): Agreed that full funding leaves a "bad taste" in the BoCC's mouth but said not funding TCC or shuttering the GVC is a "big problem" (03:05:46.000-03:06:19.000). Reasserted that compromise is necessary to keep all professionals working together, or the conflict will continue (03:06:43.000).
  • Jean Ball (Quilcene) (03:07:09.000-03:08:51.000): Praised the "fascinating and rewarding" deliberative process (03:07:17.000). Argued that any change in process should be prospective, not retroactively applied "in the 11th hour," which created "friction and a pressure cooker effect" (03:07:41.000-03:08:00.000). Drew a parallel to a previous highly contentious issue where a commissioner was accused of brinksmanship (03:08:23.000).
  • Debbie Wardrop (03:09:02.000-03:11:17.000): Called the deliberation enlightening and noted that the original memo's approach was flawed but the "intent is worth considering" (03:09:27.000). Clarified that Commissioner Brotherton's assistance with the Hood Canal Bridge signage came at the request of the working group (03:10:10.000).
  • Diana Smeeland (TCC Chair, LTAC Member) (03:11:23.000-03:13:37.000): Explained the LTAC delayed priority changes because the RFP had already been delayed and applications were in process (03:11:55.000-03:12:09.000). Noted that the Gateway Visitor Center already uses QR codes for after-hours access (03:12:36.000). Stated Commissioner Brotherton had never talked to her directly about his concerns (03:13:02.000).
  • Shelley Yarnell (Brennan) (03:13:54.000-03:16:08.000): Claimed the RFP had been changed from what was initially submitted (03:14:09.000). Asserted the Gateway Visitor Center is ineffective ("see nobody there," 25 visits) and is not addressing the rest of the county's needs (03:14:18.000-03:15:23.000). Claimed the $50,000 awarded to North Hood Canal was "specified as a director's salary by the LTAC chair" (03:15:52.000), calling it unfair.

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • The LTAC recommends $767,861 for programs plus administrative costs, totaling $782,912, leaving about $117,088 unallocated from $900,000 available (03:02:45.000).
  • Commissioner Brotherton cited proposed additions to staffing capacity for TCC/LTAC ($97,472) (03:17:49.000).

Financials

  • Total LTAC amount awarded in the motion: $782,912.
  • The motion effectively denied Commissioner Brotherton's proposed $97,472 for LTAC/TCC capacity positions and his earlier plan to zero out destination marketing.

Alternatives & Amendments

  • Brotherton attempted amendment: To fund $97,472 for LTAC/TCC staffing capacity from the remaining funds and send it back to LTAC (03:16:56.000-03:20:24.000). This amendment was not formally approved before the final vote on the original motion.
  • Final Decision (Dean/Eisenhour consensus): Adopt the entire recommended slate to minimize damage and then pivot toward procedural reform for the next cycle (02:59:29.000).

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: Motion to approve LTAC's recommendation for funding in 2025 was approved.
  • Vote: Passed (Ayes: Dean, Eisenhour; Nays: Brotherton) (03:26:12.000-03:26:25.000).
  • Next Steps:
  • The $782,912 in LTAC funds will be dispersed as recommended by the LTAC.
  • Commissioner Dean agreed to initiate an annual review of the LTAC (bylaws, membership, mission) to address the systemic issues raised (03:27:07.000-03:27:13.000).

Public Facilities District (PFD) Formation Initiation

Metadata

  • Time Range: 03:27:53.000–03:47:58.000
  • Agenda Item: Discussion and potential action regarding formation of a Public Facilities District.
  • Categories: infrastructure, planning, financial, services

Topic Summary

The Board discussed and initiated the formal process for the creation of a Public Facilities District (PFD) to pursue the aquatic center project. Diane McDade, President of the Jefferson Aquatic Coalition (JAC), reported on private fundraising commitments (over $100,000 immediately) to replace the lost LTAC money and confirmed JAC is prepared to launch a professional survey in Q1 2025 to gauge public appetite and programming needs. Despite public testimony arguing that PFD creation is premature and should wait for market study results, the Board moved to direct the prosecuting attorney's office to draft the implementing resolution.

Key Discussion Points

  • PFD Purpose: Formation supports the aquatic center project via local tax and fundraising capacity, as recommended by the Healthier Together Task Force (03:28:33.000).
  • JAC Survey (Diane McDade): McDade confirmed the Jefferson Aquatic Coalition has developed a survey in collaboration with board professionals specifically to gather granular data on amenities and resident willingness to support a tax (03:29:42.000-03:30:17.000). She plans to distribute it widely, including via PUD utility bills, in a compressed 4-6 week period starting in mid-to-late January or February 2025 (03:33:05.000-03:36:19.000).
  • JAC Fundraising: To cover the funding gap created by the LTAC not providing the full $160,000 request, McDade has received initial commitments of over $100,000 from private individuals ("major donors") who would transfer funds to JAC and then to the PFD once legally established (03:32:00.000).
  • Timing Rationale (Brotherton/McDade): Commissioner Brotherton argued that PFD formation aligns with the Commerce report's timing recommendations (03:47:00.000). McDade noted that potential early donors are asking about PFD details (board composition, budget, work product) before donating (03:32:46.000-03:32:51.000).
  • Motion Clarification: Deborah Peterson clarified during public comment that the motion was only to ask the prosecuting attorney's office to develop the legal groundwork ("draft an implementing resolution"), not to formally create the PFD today (03:45:25.000).

Public Comments

  • Jim Friedman (via Caitlin): Reiterated that PFDs can take two decades or more to achieve funding (citing Pasco) (03:39:29.000). Argued that if the PFD fails an initial tax request, it should have an end-of-life mechanism rather than continually drawing county funds (03:39:42.000).
  • Tom Teers: Argued PFD creation is "very premature" without market survey results or determining viability (03:40:40.000). Highlighted that a PFD is an independent entity that incurs expenses (attorney, meetings, administration) which the county cannot absorb without interlocal agreements (03:41:13.000). Urged the Board to wait until viability is determined to create it "with a stroke of a pen" (03:41:45.000-03:41:55.000).
  • Jean Ball: Agreed PFD formation is premature but supported implementing the survey (03:42:15.000). Was concerned that the survey platform allowing only one IP address per survey could limit household participation (03:42:37.000-03:42:41.000) and suggested caution against biased questions (03:43:08.000).
  • Shelley Yarnell (Brennan): Agreed PFD creation is premature and restrictive (03:44:04.000). Called the JAC-led survey "skewed right there" and unlikely to be appropriately asked (03:44:23.000). Asked why there is a rush, noting the lack of "positive responses" coming in (03:44:46.000).

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • RCW 36.100 (Governing authority for PFD formation) was cited (03:28:29.000).
  • The LTAC requested $160,000 for PFD Seed Funding, but LTAC recommended only $20,000.

Financials

  • Diane McDade reported private commitments of over $100,000 raised for the PFD seed funding (03:32:00.000).

Alternatives & Amendments

  • No alternatives discussed. This motion focused purely on legal drafting.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: Motion to direct the Civil Prosecuting Attorney’s office to draft an implementing resolution creating a PFD per RCW 36.100 was approved.
  • Vote: Unanimous (Ayes: Brotherton, Dean, Eisenhour) (03:47:55.000-03:47:58.000).
  • Next Steps:
  • Prosecuting Attorney's Office to draft the implementing resolution.
  • Jefferson Aquatic Coalition to launch the community survey in Q1 2025.

Briefing and Calendar Coordination (Week Ahead)

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:58:41.000–01:15:45.000 & 04:00:11.000–04:16:20.000
  • Agenda Item: Commissioner Briefing and Calendar Coordination.
  • Categories: operations, planning, services, public safety

Topic Summary

Commissioners and the County Administrator gave updates on the past and upcoming week. Key organizational issues included staffing/leadership changes at Strait ERN, difficulties with public meeting logistics (hybrid audio/corridor meeting space), and progress on key land use/infrastructure projects (CWPP grants, sewer plant progress, forest health).

Key Discussion Points

  • Commissioner Dean (Briefing): Noted that the legislative session is focusing on public safety and may push for lifting the 1% property tax cap onto counties (01:04:40.000-01:05:15.000). Reported that a request from the Pen. Trails Coalition to switch 2024 LTAC funds for equipment purchases was denied by Legal as it deviated from the original grant agreement (01:06:35.000). Fort Warden PDA is in "existential crisis mode" after the receiver was granted until March (01:07:44.000).
  • Commissioner Eisenhour (Briefing): Disclosed that Kara Cardinal will not be the Strait ERN coordinator, necessitating another transition (01:09:46.000). Reported that the Behavioral Health Advisory Committee added a seat for transportation (Nicole Gauthier from Jefferson Transit) and housing (01:12:04.000-01:12:15.000). Expressed strong appreciation for the Jefferson Marine Resource Committee volunteers, who may form a derelict vessel subcommittee (01:12:45.000-01:13:19.000). Noted the county is pursuing a large federal Community Wildfire Defense Grant (01:13:53.000) and that there is a standing conflict with her NACO Steering Committee meeting and the Chickadee Forestry Committee (04:10:20.000-04:10:41.000).
  • Commissioner Brotherton (Briefing & Week Ahead): Was appointed Chair of the Water Utility Coordinating Committee (00:59:59.000). Met with ORCA, planning a Board of Health presentation to discuss their county work (01:00:38.000-01:01:12.000). Noted that EDC Team Jefferson welcomed a new board member, Brent Butler, HR Director of Townsend Paper (01:01:28.000). Expressed frustration that the Solid Waste (SWAC) and Parks & Rec meetings had been canceled due to lack of a quorum (01:03:05.000). His week ahead includes a public comment at the PUD board meeting (04:09:16.000) and a conservation announcement at the Hood Canal Vista Pavilion (04:09:59.000).
  • Mark McCauley (Briefing & Week Ahead): Reported that the new Chief of Staff for Randy Randall will be in D.C. on Tuesday (04:07:29.000). Noted the county is eligible for a waiver on the match requirement for the CWPP grant because it qualifies as a low-income community (04:06:36.000). Two upcoming septic code update open houses are scheduled: Tuesday evening at the Port Townsend Pavilion and the following Monday (Dec 16) in Quilcene (04:15:03.000-04:15:13.000).
  • Logistics Issues: Commissioners noted that the upstairs courthouse conference room for hybrid meetings had "horrible" audio and requested at least two hybrid-capable spaces in the courthouse (01:11:18.000-01:11:39.000). Commissioner Dean requested pursuing assisted hearing devices (02:21:09.000).

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • Reference to a Puget Sound Partnership Leadership Council meeting and NOLA meeting (01:08:49.000, 04:08:16.000).
  • DOH Consolidated Contracts for Public Health Services (04:00:49.000).

Financials

  • No financial figures discussed, as this was a coordination item.

Alternatives & Amendments

  • No alternatives discussed.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: No action taken.
  • Next Steps:
  • Commissioner Dean to meet with Mark McCauley and Stephanie from Strategies 360 to discuss the legislative agenda (04:08:00.000-04:08:02.000).
  • Mark McCauley will check on moving the forestry meeting to better accommodate schedules (04:13:42.000).
  • Two Septic Code Update open houses are scheduled for the community.

Generated On: 2025-11-07 14:06:45.636049-08:00 By: google/gemini-2.5-flash-preview-09-2025 running on https://openrouter.ai/api/v1/