Good morning everyone. Can you hear us? Yeah, you can hear me again, yeah. And we
can see you recording in progress. You don't look sick. I like that the improved
your appearance, you know right? You've got a bit of a halo though.
Yeah, filter. Yeah. No, it's fine. Mhm. My quota
isn't actually too bad but rico got it really badly and so I'm just afraid it might
have that direction. And I don't want any of you to be out like he was for three
days. Okay? Example, sick stay home. Well, sorry, sorry, you're not with us kate,
but I'm glad you're here on zoom. Um It's 9:00 is a V up and running.
I'll call this September 19, 2022 Meeting of the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners
to Order. And as I won't forget public comment this week like I did last week, as
we do every monday morning, we start the day off with public comment. If there's
anybody who's joined us via zoom who would like to make a public comment this morning?
You can use the raise hand button at the bottom of your zoom screen. There's nobody
on the phone so I'm not gonna give those instructions. Um anybody with us this morning
who has something they'd like to chat about what the commissioners. I see a hand
went up can
Okay.
Yes, except the promotion of panelists state. Um He did.
Good morning Stephen. You'll need to um mute And then you have three minutes, three
minutes for comment. Ok, thanks. Look um I wanted to ask about a few things. One
is the big about this but my I remember seeing that the health department that a
new districting districting level is being added at the beginning of next year. Uh
There's various aspects of it adding a you know a native american representation.
Um The current health board is being combined with other uh local health boards into
a district. And so I just wondered if any of you all knew about this and to clarify
what the real world impact this is. Is this replacing our existing health board or
is adding a new layer? And if it's adding a new layer, how would this new layer be
interacting with the existing local health boards? I'd just be curious about any
information you provide about these changes. Second the protective free press had
a story that appeared on saturday uh regarding how May of this year. There was
$9999 consent agenda um uh contract with use
you S. A. W. A. I think for uh anti racist literacy training.
And the reason for this or large reason for it was to reduce vaccine. Hesitancy.
And then in august there was an amendment to that to add another $5000 contract.
And so I just was wondering if you could clarify, I mean having the having the contact
me for $9999. Seems like the intent was to skirt the spirit of the
$10,000 open bidding requirement for anything after that level. And so by having
a $1 less. That sort of scourge that. But then um adding another $5000 to an amendment.
I mean that almost seems like that is actually violating the law of it. But I really
don't. I really don't know. And I just wondered if staff or um you know, if you all
could just clarify your your take on all of that. And also in the main meeting there
was an additional $45,000 contract given to not show again for to increase vaccine
uptake. So um look, uh you know, you probably can guess my opinions about the
safety and blackjack cassie of the vaccines and things have been sort of, you know
what I mean? The various tests, you know the various stuff has got 30 you know, tens
of thousands of deaths, hundreds of thousands of serious adverse events. Uh It's
very, very bizarre that these numbers are so much higher than for any previous vaccine.
In fact, it's like more than the total of all other vaccines over the past 30 years.
So this is definitely a concerning safety signal. Um, you know, one could say this
is all just a coincidence and there's no causality. However, there recently something
came out of Israel Stephen. That's three minutes. Have I? Sorry, Sorry, thank you.
Thank you. Um, will respond to those questions at the end of public comment here.
Is there anybody else who's joined us this morning who wishes to make a public comment?
I've seen a few other people join us. Is there anything that any of you out there
on the attendee list would like to chat with the county commissioners about? Um use
the raise hand button at the bottom of your zoom screen and nobody's on the phone
so anyone wishing to make a public comment?
Okay, not seeing any other hands go up. I will leave public comment open. Um does
anyone wish to respond to stevens questions first?
I could respond to the question about the reorganization of the board of health since
I've been largely a representative on that issue. Um so in the 2020 legislative session
there was uh they'll have still 1152 which called for really originally very comprehensive
overhauls of our local boards of health And I've got quite a bit of pushback from
a number of audiences. Um Dr. Locke and I were both involved in a workgroup that
helped to shape that bill into something that was much more reasonable and what ultimately
passed in which we have been in the process of implementing at the local level. We
were required to have it implemented by July one of this year. So A couple of changes
to that. It did change are the composition of our board of health a little bit. We
were one of the first boards of health to allow us to expand our board to include
community members over 20 years ago. Um and so many boards of health in the state
were still at just three county commissioners or maybe a representative from the
city. Um so we've already done much of that expansion. 1152 did require us to change
those roles a little bit. So instead of just at large community members, we instead
were required to have a consumer and public health joined the board, a stakeholder,
someone perhaps a business that is regulated by the public health department um and
a tribal member. So we um we're able to fill those positions and we have now had
two meetings with our new board of health members are tribal representative was just
assigned to us has not yet been approved or appointed by the american indian health
Commission, but we'll be doing that soon. Um Paul Cunningham will be joining us from
the Jamestown tribe Shortly. The only other significant change um that came about
with 1152 was that a regional health officer was was added to the system
and there were 44 regions created throughout the state and a additional health officer
was added. That position has not started yet. I was told that it was appointed, the
person has been hired. Um But our region is pretty much all of western Washington,
it's called the western region and it's um it's funny I was at a board of health
training on this very topic um a couple weeks ago in Spokane and they pulled out
the map Department of health, pull up the map of the new regions and anybody who
doesn't live basically in in King County just kind of burst out laughing like to
think that we have one new health officer to support the entire I five corridor.
Um and the entire olympic finish is um it's just kind of laughable. So you know,
we hope they will provide some added capacity. And Department of health is saying,
well King County won't need the help as much because they have a much larger and
robust staff but we're not sure hopefully that will provide some added benefits because
uh funny that's actually come up with dr barry is gonna need to be scaling her hours
back because of the end of the Governor's state of emergency. So we will have her
for a few hours and could use for example some epidemiologic uh support um locally.
So perhaps that regional officer can help provide some of that. But that is um update
on the board of health expansion and the other two. I'm gonna need to rely on staff
to help out with those contracts. I don't have an answer for those.
Okay, thanks kate um Gregor Mark, do you have anything you would like to add? I don't
know Mark wants to start, I don't have a lot about the contract with SIA um whether
I don't believe staff would amend a contract. Um, I know our procurement ordinance
um, says that if you have a contract exceeding 10,000 that um
Under 10,000 you can dispense with competitive bidding. And then above between 10
and 50 you can use the consultant roster. Um, But if you begin it an amount
below 10 and then you subsequently amend a contract to go above 10. Um, R. C. W.
I believe is silent on that as is our local code. And so it's a good question and
it's one that I'll have to research. Okay. Thanks mark. We'd appreciate a response
on that. When you find out more information. I'm wondering if I could just call it
that. I started poking around. I didn't find that Nacho, which is a funny acronym
for the National Association of Community Health Organizations. Um, anyone's been
able to pull that out? I'm guessing that was funding from Nacho to us I think Mr.
Thought that it was the other way around but typically they would be funding um,
class but I'm not positive about that. Has anyone been able to find that one yet?
Okay. Have fun. That was on the same day. He said,
oh, it's like Bonnie has her hand up. She might be able to speak to both of those.
We're gonna bring Bonnie over. She might have more information about these contracts.
Good morning Bonnie,
Good morning. Um, Yes, the National Association of County and City Health
um officials awarded me a grant. And so that is
money coming to us? Great
questions about that. Do you want to describe what those subject for please? Uh so
that is to increase vaccine uptake among marginalized populations in jefferson
County marginalized and defined but not limited to parameters around race,
ethnicity, ability, um rural location, etcetera. So
Bonnie was that was that grant? Did we obtain that grant after the contract was awarded?
No. The grant allowed me to hire a consultant to conduct diversity
equity and inclusion training the thought being, we need to know how to reach
out to these marginalized populations in a skilled way before moving forward to deepening
our relationships with those communities. So did did it explicitly pay for the the
contract with Osawa? So it was a no, nothing out of the general fund for that contract
or anything? It was grant funded?
Great, thank you. That's not surprising. Did not look at it of course this weekend,
but but saying that it's the author is the same person that made the kind of specious
complaint about my conflict of interest. It is not surprising.
Alright, thank you. Thanks for the additional information Bonnie. We appreciate having
a clear picture of what the issue is. So, thanks for being here. Thanks for being
here. Um Are there is there anyone else with us who's joined us on zoom this morning.
Who would like to make a public comment? You can use the raise hand button at the
bottom of your zoom screen. Anyone else with us this morning wishing to make comment?
If not, I'll leave public comment open For now until 9:30
and we can consider consent agenda if that works for my colleagues. We have
a pretty short consent agenda this morning. Um are there any items that you guys
would like additional information on? I was looking past me back to today's agenda.
No, it just looks like public works has been busy as usual. Yeah, I'm happy to to
move that. We approve and adopt the consent agenda as presented 2nd, all in favor.
Hi. Um okay, well, we still have
half an hour until we are joined by dr barry. So is there um anything for the good
of the order that you guys would like to talk about now? Um or we could just do calendar
briefing and then calendar ring if we can get to that,
anyone interested in starting off with briefing?
Oh, I can start, let's see. Looking back at last week.
Um of course we're all together on monday. Um have the tourism coordinating council
on Tuesday. They wrote a letter, I think we all got a copy of to the wash dot about
the bridge closures that are, we're gonna happen this year and we're going now, we're
going to happen next year, kind of reinforcing some of the festival days and I would
love to consider maybe sending a similar, a similar letter. So maybe I'll, I can
bring that draft um to us later. I don't think it's super timely thing, it doesn't
have to get rushed out or anything, but maybe for next week. That sounds great. I
was, yeah, I have that sitting on my desk so um hey Greg, I think because also check
in with marty, he has some, some specific talking points um that might be good to
incorporate and I know that largely because of our outreach to wash that they have
been in touch um on this issue. Um but I would suggest checking out the public works
and we, you know, we did send a letter at the beginning of this year to wash out
regarding um the cumulative impacts, especially on festival weekends with ferry and
bridge. Um so it could be something of a follow up just as a reminder that we did
send a similar one earlier this year. Yes, I agree, Monte has a lot of insight into
some of the impacts and yeah, was critical in getting so more of the public works
throughout the peninsula included in the process. So, no, no rush. But yeah, maybe
send that one to monty went down to the ports, lovely Pavilion building, which has
excellent acoustics to check out for future hybrid meetings for the board of health
seemed like a little bit of a heavy lift for the advantages it offered over our own
chambers. So I made a different recommendation at the board of Health meeting on
thursday that I'll get to, um, Orca on Wednesday, the olympic region clean air
Agency talked a lot about the, the smoke and the, and the bolt fire. That was really
heavy the week before and uh, everything's going great with Orca and a new executive
director is going gangbusters, a lot of strategic planning going on updating tech
and we're paying off the last, the building itself will be paid off and, and the
organization will be debt free as of december and um, yeah, it's, it's moving along
well, morale is very high as well. So that's going great. We had a call in period
for the, the RFP for the 1 48 and 1 49 funds, the housing funds and homeless funds
for the housing fund board had one written question and, and a a couple couple questions
and call but addressed all of those. I think people are already and um, the RFP is
open until the end of the month and then I think we split our efforts and I went
down to habitats, Landis street groundbreaking. Um, it was great. They had already
broken ground. You can see the shape of the uh, of the houses, but um, talk to a
lot of the people that are actually getting some of the houses, whether these or
other habitat houses, I'm not sure, but, you know, it's workforce housing and it's
a lot of work force that that we work with is getting house because of this project.
So it was really exciting. Derringer was there Mayor Faber and um it was a lovely
event. We had our recap board meeting in the evening and uh everything's moving well.
They're getting ready to apply for um the letter, the Commerce
for permanent kind of purpose built emergency shelter at Kaswell Brown. And uh feeling
optimistic about that. Let's see. Um thursday, I could not
get into the Cosmo Brown meeting. I had an old lake. I don't know did you go to that
meeting? Mark thursday? The Cosmo Brown meeting on thursday? Yeah. Okay. I'll make
sure, I'm not sure. I haven't, I haven't been in the loop for a little bit. So I'll
catch up on that. We have the Board of Health meeting. Good meeting ended up recommending
that we do hybrid meetings in the chambers here with the existing A. V. Capture technology
so we can add transparency. We had a couple robust conversations, you know, both
about the harmonization with the a lot of legal record work the D. C. D. Is doing
and I think environmental public health has been working hard on that. Uh this past
couple of weeks as well as, you know, uh how we should do our meetings. And one thing,
you know, talking about kind of the training that this is all a contract was was
uh is to help work. It's it's great to have, you know, someone that deals with chronic
illness on the board of health kind of point out sometimes when we are eager to get
back in person and uh putting out the equity issues to make sure that we don't
mandate in person presence. You know, that for some folks, the
the endemic situation that we're in with now, I'll say with with Covid is still a
real threat and their transportation issues and other things. So we'll always maintain
a virtual option. But we're gonna try to have our our next board of health meeting
in the chambers here using our existing technology. Um, and uh the I. C. G. Meeting
was canceled. And let's see on friday, we had the sailors
behavioral health administrative service organization grant. I did ask about the
the opioid settlement award and how that was going to be used and there's still rulemaking
that's happening. So by december, they should know kind of how they're distributing
that that that money or what the RFP process will be at any rate. Um, I think I
told you about the unfortunate situation with discovery behavioral health and the
employee that went a little rogue. Um, so we dealt with that and there were some
concerns, Members of the public that made some public comment but really satisfied
as is the leadership of the B. H. A. S. O. At how D. B. H. S. Has managed this process,
had a community center meeting, you know, Holy Cap manages the tri area, the Quill
scene and Brennan community centers. There is some talk in the community about trying
to compete for that contract, which comes up at the end of the year. So I participated
uh, with the, with the managers of the meeting with the executive director of the
Cap and the managers of the community centers on friday. It was a busy busy weekend
too, with lots of events. You know, the great cuisine fair was was um, great. And
they had opened their new uh, CTE outdoor learning area. So it was kind of the unveiling
of that, which is just stunning. And it's amazing what the volunteers, students,
the, you know, the contractors who were going to build the building if the bond had
passed, volunteered their time and came out every weekend from Seattle and it looks
fantastic. The fair board did a great job. Excellent new signage. The parade was
a lot of funds. Uh, representatives Fahringer and chapman were out there and, and
uh, yeah, a great time. And then did a little bit of farm tour stuff over the weekend
as well. And, and uh, yeah, just a lovely weekend. So revitalizing and ready for
another big week this week. And that was my last week, busy week kate. How was your
week? I got a really busy week last week too. And although I say, I feel like I
spent the entire week talking about federal funding and learned a lot and we hope
to have an opportunity to interject a number of things I learned throughout the week
um in our meeting today or an upcoming weeks. Um so is that the partnership
Leadership Council meeting on Tuesday and Wednesday in Oak harbor. And a lot of that
meeting was dedicated to talking about federal funding in part because a lot of the
federal and state agencies are attend those meetings. Um and you know, there's, I
just generally a real concern that agencies have that they're gonna be able to get
these dollars out and everybody wants this, the number of bills that kind of total
package of trillions of dollars to be successful in, you know, both in building infrastructure
and then also making some pretty radical changes to our economy and our particularly
around energy. Um, but the, you know, there just hasn't been enough lead time to
get projects ready to go. Um and so it's a little distressing and
hopefully, and it sounds like the White House and agencies are hearing consistently
that in order for this to be a success that um you know, governments like ours need
technical assistance, we need capacity so we bring storms some ideas for how we might
be able to um you know, even make it possible to for us to to seek these funds. We
don't have the staff to to take on additional projects And it's really such a once
in a lifetime opportunity. And you know, many, many governments are feeling like
we are like it's just gonna be very hard to be able to take advantage of it. So I
think this is something we should continue to dig into and look for opportunities
to send this message that uh we we need more help. We want to be partners in making
this a success. But it's it's very challenging. A couple of things I learned, um
For example, the bipartisan infrastructure package, 5% of all of the funds
included, and that went to the inspector general to um increase oversight for increased
accountability on those funds, which is of course understandable, but the we can
expect recording requirements to be even higher. So right now the E. P. A. Has to
report monthly to the inspector general instead of quarterly on the funds that they
are putting out. And so that that same increased scrutiny is going to be passed on
to project proponents, making it even harder um to for for us to have the capacity
to be able to get and manage these grants. So just a lot of structural challenges
that um um it sounds like there's a consistent voice going to the
administration. Um, but you know, we have a limited number of years to do this so
um to be continued, but you know, I think we should still be really,
oh, you froze, can you hear us kate? She said she hoped her internet would be reliable
this morning and I guess it's not,
which was a very photogenic frame to stop on the at least halfway in a word holding
her glasses. I'll text her that we lost her
while you're doing that. I'll just follow up one other thing from the board of Health
was that the director Apple talked a lot about the significant
impact that the solid training was having with with staff that was there. It was
challenging and very rewarding for for staff as they're developing new skills and
new ways of looking at situation. So reinforcing it is, it is work that they're doing
there and I'm glad they're doing that work.
Um Well I can, I can start up with briefing and then if kate comes back um I did
text her and let her know that we lost her. Um Let's see. So last week I was here
on monday of course um Tuesday morning I joined the Jefferson
County Human Services um roundup that's organized by the Y. M. C. A. Navigator, Tanya
Barnett and jen Kingfisher at the Community Foundation. That is always a huge group
with a robust kind of a lot of input in a short period of time. So it's a good place
to get an update from folks. Um later that morning I had a conversation
regarding the and I wish kate was here to hear this but um the straight E. R. N.
Local integrating organization, um fiscal sponsorship. Um there have been some
issues with uh you know, D. C. Taking over fiscal sponsorship of that contract. But
I think we figured out a pathway forward and I am in the process of interviewing
and serving the other steering committee members of the straight here in and getting
their input on our coordinator, who has traditionally been a contracted coordinator,
becoming a staff member of N. O. D. C. Um So still working on that and it's just
involving a lot of conversations and kind of logistics. But um in the afternoon we
had our behavioral health advisory board meeting. Mark joined me on that call and
we talked about the funding level for next year and beyond and beyond, yep. And
also the ability to use behavioral health funds to cover the um
therapeutic court coordinator position that was added recently. So we're moving forward
with that and coming up with a long a long term strategy for covering that capacity
that will make our courts much much more efficient and collaborative. Um And that
is also another large table with a lot of good input from from vendors in the community
and behavioral health board members Wednesday morning I had the encumbered Lands
working group meeting. Second of probably five. It's gonna be um it's an
interesting set of commissioners from rural districts and it's you know, me still
being in my uh you know, early years as a commissioner learning a lot about the challenges
that other commissioners face in um pacific and mania and Callum counties so
you know kind of aligned in terms of issues and um but also we're learning what our
differences are and it's been a really valuable conversation to be a part of
had lunch with a planning commission member on Wednesday just to talk about her experience
with the Planning commission and D. C. D. And how she sees things going. And it was
a really productive conversation. Um And then went down for
for my first groundbreaking as a commissioner. I've had my first gold shovel for
the point Hudson jetty groundbreaking and I have been around point Hudson most of
my life and I was afraid I was going to break out into tears but I didn't and it
was a great just a great moment because we've been anticipating it for so long that
we would be able to rebuild the breakwater down there. So yeah yeah
lots of golden shovels. Um So I was glad that my first uh golden shovel event was
one that I have deep history and and care for. Um and it will be really fun to watch
that project unfold and they were moving stuff over our heads with the crane as we
were digging the dirt down there. So um that was a great event
thursday morning, I met with Mark to do agenda prep and then um had uh put together
the a survey and poll for straight er en steering committee members asking if they
supported our approach of transitioning the coordinator role at the straight to a
staff person of an O. D. C. And told folks if they wanted to have a follow up conversation
to let me know if I had the pole. So a few people have. So today in the minutes between
our conversations I'll be having those conversations with some of the steering committee
members. So but in general so far everyone is supportive of that approach
for managing the coordinator role at the straight. Um And then
because Greg was chairing the Board of Health I went to the timber counties caucus
meeting and can honestly say um there are things about that meeting that I don't
want to say in open session and it won't probably say it all but it was extremely
frustrating. I see kate grinning um meeting I felt like the timber industry had
kind of control of the meeting and and um anyway so I found that interesting and
didn't find it to be a very valuable form for a conversation amongst counties who
are facing similar issues but more of a grandstanding kind of event. So
um then I don't even know what this was. Oh so then on friday
I spent the whole day digging myself out of that depression by joining my colleagues
on the M. R. C. At the straight um, the northwest straits Commission, annual conference
for marine resource committees and um, it was really fun because it kind of was a
full circle moment for me because during my entire campaign, um, one of my best friends,
Caroline Gibson kept saying to me once you're elected, she just figured it was a
foregone conclusion. Um, we'll be able to go to these conferences together and they'll
be inspiring and fun. And so it was inspiring and fun for me to be there. But her
face was with me all day and um, and with everyone else's there, there was a lot
of remembering Caroline which was made it especially good that I was there. Um, and
then saturday there was a whole bunch of things I could have done as a commissioner,
but I spent all day at spring rain farm helping them with farm tour because they
didn't, Um, they wanted help and it was busy. There were like 250 people that came
to the farm on Friday or Saturday. Sorry. And then sunday I did things I haven't
done for the last six weeks. So um, And Kate do you were at
9:35. I'm gonna close public comment. I don't see any more hands have gone up, nope
closing public comment and gonna let kate finish up her briefing because she, we
lost you for a minute. Yeah, sorry. And I, the internet is not reliable even with
lots of upgrades in the last two years. Um So if that happens again just now that
I'll come back on as quickly as I can. Um So um talking about being at the Leadership
council and getting some some good kind of insider knowledge intel about um infrastructure
funding. Um Maybe I mentioned this already but you know, 11 example that the E. P.
A, which is usually an $8 billion agency has $100 billion to give out in the next
few years, it's just massive um kind of change to how they have to operate. Um So
it's just unprecedented and I think we need to continue to position ourselves well.
Um Heidi in relation to the L IOS because the L. I. O. S, you know, kind of the local
fall under the partnership model. Um One of the solutions we did talk about was because
the puget sound partnership is building up some capacity to help L IOS receive um
receive some of this federal funding. Um they're gonna be hiring staff to do that.
That this is really at the request of the E. P. A. Saying. Um you know, so much of
this funding is for fairly traditional infrastructure that um you know counties and
cities can be increasing their their capacity by by participating pretty fully in
the L. I. O. S. And ensuring, you know, so if we have projects that fit in but we
don't quite have the capacity for the L. I. O. Could be kind of a conduit to the
partnership. Who is going to have that capacity so long as projects have benefits
and both infrastructure and some environmental improvements which a lot of the programs
are explicitly um asking for those kinds of benefits. Um and so I think there is
an opportunity just to continue to overlap more maybe with the L. I. O. To get some
capacity support from the partnership and securing funds, but that's but that's not
separate than our current approach of moving the coordination contract to a staff
person it in D. C. Right now. Okay. Not at all. I did have an Nrdc meeting last week
and we did talk about that also our support. I've been moving forward. Great as well.
Um Let's see, I had a couple couple meetings on child care
project that is moving along well and Um so right now the school
district will be posting soon, they lease land um they need to do a 45
day notice to the public so um if the school board still has to approve that final
notice but that will be kind of going going more public um noticing that before the
board can vote on a final approval of that site, being the designated site for child
care facility. Um Let's see thursday is an Nrdc meeting um talked a
lot about federal funding and infrastructure in that meeting as well. There is some
interest in the region um putting together we compete grant application, that's the
$10 million for 10 years, $100 million for 10 communities um across the country.
And uh Representative Kilmer wrote that into the chips act and very much with this
region in mind. So um NBC is interested in moving ahead with that but so the rule
writing is done um little little premature but starting to think about what would
the components of, about the probably it's really about prime age increasing prime
age employment. But could there be some connection with maritime blue? Perhaps there
should be some some innovation. Um so certainly open to ideas and brainstorming um
could be a pretty massive investment in um in our local economy um and what we want
that to look like. So more to come on that as well, kate. Can I ask one question
about that uh lost her again. Can we bring the other photo back up
another photo last time when she crashed? It was a better shot.
Oh
I let her know putting a coin in the meter. Yeah,
she should probably dial in for the audio allow her to not lose her connection. Well
maybe whilst we're waiting for kate to come back. I'll just finish up with saying
that last week. We also not on the calendar but threaded throughout the week some
conversations about the um septic bill. Um we're working with Pinky and
Jamie at Wasatch to develop a policy proposal for um a budget
proviso for next legislative session to write a capacity um study into
the um budget for the state to do a regional so western Washington
cept Ege capacity study. And this is something that Pinky and I have been working
on with. I see Amanda is with us on um at least on the attendee list um from Good
man sanitation. But she's been working with us on that as well because there's a
growing need to increase the capacity of our region to deal with solid septic solids.
And um uh the state uh moi sack folks are hearing from more counties than
just us. And we've also been coordinating with more counties than just us. So there's
thurston and kids app and pacific specifically right now are needing to increase
their septic capacity. So we're moving moving forward with that with the help of
wa sack, which is great to have their help
kate. Do you wanna? Oh good. You're on the phone now to want to wrap up your
briefing. Sure. Can you hear me? All right, sorry about this. Yes, I will. I will
stay joined by phone. So even if I lose internet and continue to hear you and participate.
Let me get back to my calendar from last week. Um Have you heard you talking about
some legislative um work that was the other kind of primary um theme of last
week's number of of legislative um meetings largely preparation this week.
Both Nola meets to uh talk about our legislative agenda. Um a pretty pretty
short list of items for consideration. Um We have a uh compiled list of
housing topics that a number of providers in column and jefferson um as well as a
small committee of Lindsay shove in war win john morrow and I came up with. So um
we have that compiled list. We have a number of items that are separate lists of
items that largely earlier. Uh court of P. A. And B. B. C. Compiled for kind of barriers
for business um on the olympic peninsula, legislative ideas that the group will be
taking a look at. It might be more like, you know, just know uh lobbyists will support
um Support those efforts as they come up more than kind of taking the lead on them.
And then we have two issues carried over from last year that I think are more likely
to be lead issues Granola, which is the .09. Um sales cats rebate
from the state, expanding that deadline and then also the electrician apprentice.
Um So we're now at a crunch point this year um apprentices in in rural
areas like ours, They're not enrolled in a state apprenticeship program, which almost
entirely union run, which we have none, nothing like that here will no longer be
able to work um on any commercial projects. Um And it will be almost impossible for
them to get their hours. And it really just cuts out an entire section of the workforce
career ladder for um electrician. So really problematic for not just for the people
running those businesses but also for all of us who need electricians on something
of a short notice which most businesses and homes to at some point um that those
are the issues that they're likely to take up and then come up with some supporting
um Uh
number of other. Great so let's let's pause there because Dr. Barry has joined us
and it's 9:45 and then we can pick up where we left off after. Okay
awesome. Good morning dr barry. Um Good morning everyone. Nice to see you. Yeah.
Nice to see you. Um Mhm. Do you want to just kick off your go ahead
and go for it? Full disclosure. I have a guest at home with me today. Daycare is
closed. We may have a tiny guest join our feed at some point. I'll turn off my camera.
That happens but you might see her voice. I hear her voice on the covid front. Uh
By and large. The news is good nationwide cases are down 29%. Hospitalizations are
down 12% and deaths are down 6%. However, we are still seeing over 400 deaths a day
due to covid 19 nationwide. 464. As of yesterday In the state. Overall cases are
down 12%. Hospitalizations are down 21% and deaths are down 8%. In Jefferson County,
our case rates are actually slightly picking up this week compared to last with diagnosed
5,785 cases for our case rate of 360 400,000, with a
9.5% positivity rate, which puts us roughly a 50% case ascertainment rate. We have
no one currently hospitalized for a total of 150 hospitalizations. One person was
hospitalized last week, but they have been discharged at this time. Uh, there have
been no new deaths to COVID-19. It's a relatively small uptick and we're not really
seeing it anywhere else in our wastewater surveillance is continuing to downtrend.
So I'm not sure that we're really looking at a trend yet. I really want to see that
week over week and I anticipate this will be relatively short list. In Cloud Island
County. We have diagnosed 15,509 cases of covid 19 for a case rate of 186 per 100,000
with a 7.5% positivity. We actually are looking at about a 50% case after attainment
rate there as well. The lower percent positivity, but we also get lower Home Test
reported in County, but that actually does put Clown County in the moderate risk
zone as far as COVID-19 transmission, which does decrease some of the masking recommendations
in public. We give to recommend masking and close, close proximity places. There
are lots of people around that you don't know there are vaccine status but in smaller
groups in indoor spaces or spaces where you know that everyone is vaccinated, it's
reasonable to go in county at this time. In Jefferson County, we are still in the
high risk range. So hopefully we will see that down transform in Clown County. We
have two people currently in the hospital for COVID-19 for a total of 439 hospitalizations
and no new deaths for a total of 124 deaths in neighboring Clown County at this point,
the biggest news is what we talked about last week that the crown specific booster
is available in our community. We have three mass vaccination schedule for that particular
booster. They did fill up very quickly and then we expanded more slots and most filled
up as well. Um The only one that's still available right now is South County and
closing and we really are trying to keep that one for South county residents. So
if you live anywhere else in the county and you're looking for access to the booster,
we do have it at many of our local pharmacies Safeway try area pharmacy and cloud
county pharmacies also receive a relatively large distribution. So if you are able
to travel to swim, it's perfectly acceptable to come to swim uh to access vaccinations
because there's such a demand in jefferson county. Um We do you are eligible for
it if you have completed your primary theories, regardless of the number of boosters
you've gotten, as long as your last vaccine or infection with at least two months
ago really, you're gonna get your best bang for buck if you have had your last vaccine
or infection four months ago. So unless you're in a very very high risk group, like
someone who's immuno suppressed or someone who's very elderly and has multiple underlying
chronic conditions waiting that four months since your last vaccinia infections.
And to get the most benefit from that vaccine on the MTV front, we still have no
documented cases in Jefferson county and only one confirmed case in Cleveland county
with two suspect cases um that have not completed testing at this time. We have uh
537 cases diagnosed in Washington state with over 23,000 diagnosed nationwide. We
are really certainly the case with slow down in Washington state, which we are very
hopeful about. We think the primary driver of that really is increased access to
vaccination as well as a lot of good messaging in the L. G. B. T. Q. Community to
really reduce transmission. Um but if you are eligible for the vaccine, which is
the HPV vaccine know that we do have an available in jefferson and county if you
are a gay or bisexual man or a transgender person who had sex with men, you are eligible
Virginia. You can call the health department. We will get it for you. Um if you have
had an FBI in the last year, you are also eligible Virginia. Or if you inject drugs
that also makes you eligible Virginia. So if you're in any of those groups, please
give us a call or if you have any questions and you're interested in the vaccine,
but you're not sure if you're eligible, you have an active waitlist definitely give
us a call or sign up online and we can make sure and get you vaccinated as well.
And so with that I'm happy to take any questions from our commissioner.
I have one question um you might notice is coming dr barry. But uh there was uh President
biden over the weekend. It seems like kind of declared the pandemic over. And that
it I mean are we in the endemic phase now or can you can you kind of talk about his
comments and your interpretation of them? Sure. So President biden was asked about
the pandemic and because the pandemic is over. I think this is one of those moments
where um President biden probably didn't take his work quite as clearly as we would
have love. How old are you joining the video. But
I think what was probably a better way to characterize that is we are truly transitioning
to a different phase in the pandemic. Um moving to this endemic phase of the virus.
And what does that really mean? I mean the virus is with us. We are still seeing
a lot of transmission in our communities. And the fact that we're seeing over 400
deaths in the United States everyday tells us that this is still a very dangerous
virus. But what really has made a huge difference is how many of us have gotten vaccinated
um and our update on our vaccines that's really decreasing the severity of the infection
for the vast majority of us. Um and we know that hybrid immunity immunity from vaccination
as well as a breakthrough infection does provide good protection as well. And so
between the number of us that have gotten covid and the number of us that have been
vaccinated for covid. We really are seeing um decreased decreased severity of illness
and that's what's allowing us to transition to a different phase in the pandemic.
I call this for the background that you might be hearing. My daughter has a necklace
but she's having fun playing with. We can't hear it so fine. So good.
So that's all to say that I think it is appropriate for our response to transition
to a different way of responding. We all aren't in the space where we were seeing
hospitals overwhelmed, critical infrastructure overwhelmed. And that's really what
we mean when we say we're transitioning to a different phase doesn't mean the virus
is gone, doesn't mean that it's not dangerous. It just means that we are because
of all of the work that's been done, able to transition to a different phase in our
response. Thank you. And and just to follow up on that a little bit. Um, you know,
I continue to see folks that are especially vulnerable for one reason or another
really. Um, being very careful and a lot of a lot of folks have a lot of fatigue
over, you know, even even masking. And I guess I'm wondering if you can talk about
the really disturbing number of the 400 deaths per day in the United States still.
And what are the demographics that you know about that just to inform our response
to this? So we can protect our loved ones. Sure. No, that's a really good point.
So the of those who are dying, you're still seeing that disproportionately among
people who just never got vaccinated. Um, and so the most important thing is to get
vaccinated and to be up to date on your vaccines. That's the best thing we can do.
That looks closely. That's the best thing that we can do to reduce our risk of severe
did Due to COVID 19. But I think it is important for all of us to always remember
there are individuals in our community who cannot be properly protected by vaccines.
So those who are immuno suppressed either through medication or cancer therapy or
because of the genetic immunodeficiency, no matter how well vaccinated they are,
they're still at risk. And the biggest reason why we still masking in your spaces
when there's lots of people around is to reduce is to protect those populations.
And so if you're in the grocery store and the best thing to do is to mask for the
people around you. But if you see someone who has a, you know, has still has an n
95 on and you're saying like, hey, we're in a different phase of the pandemic, notice
that that person might have a medical condition that you can't see, um, or have someone
in their home that has a medical condition that you can't see. And that's um, that's
why that's why they're taking those extra steps of perception. And that's why I really
encourage all of us to still be thoughtful in public spaces where you don't know
the status of the people around you, we take these steps so that we can protect everybody
around them. And so the most important steps are getting back to being up to date
on your vaccines, getting the booster as soon as you are eligible, we are still recommending
prioritizing all across specific booster to those at highest risk for the next couple
weeks. But in about two weeks, if you should be able to get it regardless of your
age or risk factor status. And it's a good thing to do to protect your neighbors
wearing a mask in indoor spaces is still something we recommend to protect your neighbors.
As long as we're seeing this high risk of transmission. Great thank you. And one
last question and I swear I'll be done. Um, as we move into more vaccine availability
of the macron specific vaccine. I mean I'm thinking about travel in november and
thinking well I should probably get it in, you know, the middle of october to make
sure that I'm I'm I'm re protected by by the time that I'm getting on an airplane.
And I'm wondering if there's any other triggers that would that darling,
any other triggers that should prompt folks to uh get to the head of the line after
our most vulnerable are vaccinated.
Yes, I would recommend we I would recommend to go ahead and get vaccinated. Um, once
the most vulnerable are vaccinated. If you if it's been, you know, 2 to 4 months
since your last inspection. Um, as far as duration of protection, it's still hard
to know exactly how long we can expect the omicron specific booster to last. But
we have some good reason to believe that it will last longer than the things that
came before. The primary reason for that is that it is specific which is really the
variant that we are seeing persistently circulate in our community. And also based
on the trials that we saw of the Pfizer and moderna vaccine. The data we have on
this vaccine actually comes from Pfizer and Moderna trials looking at by violent
vaccine with wild type and be a one which isn't even circulating anymore. And what
they found was they found neutralizing antibodies not just against the A. One but
also against the A. Four and B 85 which didn't even exist when that vaccine was created.
And so we're seeing greater neutralization from a bio valent vaccine for a longer
period of time. So that gives us good reason to believe that this vaccine is gonna
give us a duration of protection against symptomatic disease much longer than anything
that came before. Great, thank you kate. Do you have any questions?
I do not thank you.
So my only question was in response to an email we received last
week about um rescinding our emergency declaration and um kind of how we move forward
into that time where October 31. It's recommended that we re send the emergency declaration
and it just makes me think about the logistics logistics. We can um plan for between
now and that time including I think we get a little bit less of your capacity. So
um maybe we need to do this offline but I just want to put a pin in needing to have
that conversation.
Yeah, I think it's something to think about. I think the change away from orders
makes a lot of sense. Um as we transition to this new phase of the pandemic, but
it does affect things like uh funding mechanisms, the ability to rapidly access materials.
So if we did get a big surge in uh in cases of severe disease um it would be harder
to respond to without emergency declarations. And so that's something we need to
plan for. And certainly the Health Department, we're making a lot of plans around,
particularly the loss of funding. A lot of the work that we have done in the last
year was funded by federal funds that are exclusively related to Covid and the emergency
declaration. And so we are having to shift our work while still putting on mass vaccinations
and so finding ways to pay the staff um to do the kind of work that we need to do
to protect our community. Yeah. Thank you. And I think that our committees who have
been dealing with this emergency response will probably take up kind of the logistics
of how we get there. But um just wanted to underscore the need to start doing that
planning before the end of next month. Um I think I was just gonna say as a
part of all of this, I think it's always important to remember that hopefully we've
learned from the last couple of years. Um And I think we all have agreed that the
public health system was underfunded understaffed before this happened and so as
we move in in this next phase trying to think about what we want our public health
system to look like moving forward. I don't think it's going back to the way things
were before. It's just the best move. What can we do to make sure that our public
health system is better able to respond to whatever? Um yes with that, I'm happy
to move into some KPCC questions. We had a lot of very detailed questions today um
kind of getting into the nitty gritty um and I'm happy to dig into that for. So one
was from a listener who has um has Ottawa meeting before. Um and they were wondering
about the vaccines in the context of auto music season. And so I wanted to speak
a little bit about vaccination and autoimmune diseases broadly and then get into
this person specific questions. So those with autoimmune diseases are actually at
higher risk of severe disease due to Covid 19. 1 of the biggest drivers of severe
disease, Hospitalization and death due to Covid 19 is actually this uh inappropriate
activation of your immune system. So in the early days, one of the biggest things
that was actually killing most folks want their immune system over responding to
vaccine. And so if your body already over responds to things, um, it's even more
important to be protected against Covid 19. So that's why all of the various immunological
societies recommend that you get vaccinated, even if you have autoimmune diseases.
And actually in particularly in particular if you do because Covid 19 is over scheme
Now those with autoimmune diseases often experienced flares of their underlying illness.
Think of things like multiple sclerosis, things like that whenever their immune system
is activated and so that can be from any infection or it actually can happen due
to vaccine. However, we actually have been studying this since the COVID-19 vaccine
came out thankfully. So many people have gotten the COVID-19 vaccines that we have
a pretty large data set that we can look at. And what we have seen is among individuals
who have underlying autoimmune disease is about 40% of them were very concerned.
They would have a flare when they got vaccinated, but only about 5% of them did.
So the risk of a flare after vaccination is not zero, but it is relatively rare,
much rarer than most people think. Um, but if you You are if you do have an underlying
autoimmune disease and you have questions about your vaccine, definitely talk to
your primary care provider and they can talk to you about any changes they might
need to make your regimen or what to prepare for around your vaccination. But it
is recommended because COVID-19 is so dangerous. If you have an underlying autoimmune
disorder. Um, it's also there's no data to support the idea that Covid 19 vaccines
actually cause autoimmune disorders. We haven't seen that happen. What we have seen
is that we think part of what drives long Covid is actually activated autoimmune
disorders in response to the back, not to the virus itself, not for the vaccine.
So we we think some of long Covid is actually new automobile disorders in response
to the virus. We have not seen that from the vaccine. Um This person's particular
question um in the context of auto immunity that they've been having relatively prolonged
reactions to their vaccine. Generally, most people's reactions to the vaccine last
a day or two is very difficult for them to last longer than a week. But it sounds
like this person has had that happen. And so in your individual case, if you had
more severe reactions to the vaccine and average, that's really something I would
want me to talk to your primary doctor about, who knows all of the details of your
life and all the details of your medical condition because it may adjust what they
recommend around your vaccine because of your particular case. So it's more about
your own personal history and how you responded to prior doses that would affect
that recommendation. Not really the underlying autoimmune diseases and stuff. Um
And we don't generally recommend taking immuno suppressive drugs around your vaccines
unless that's specifically recommended by your doctor because that's gonna make you
respond less to the vaccine. Uh The next question was about the B. A second.
Do you want to come here? Thank you. Very beautiful. Um This next section was about
the D. A. 4.6 variant of um there's a lot of news coverage about be a 4.6 and concerned
that that might be the next large variance that we would see us back. Um thankfully,
even though there's a lot of concern about that, we're not really seeing that play
out. Um Be a 4.6 was first diagnosed in Washington state in May of this year and
has consistently done less than 5% of cases since that time. We've never really seen
it overtakes being five which is our dominant area right now. Even though it sounds
scary it has some scary possibilities. And we've seen um it take it become a larger
proportion of cases in other countries. We just really haven't seen that shake out
in the United States and we definitely haven't seen that shake out in Washington.
So I was saying it's not a strong concern for me at this time. We just haven't seen
it overtake the A. Five. Nothing has been able to do that. Um at this point the a
five is 90% of the variant diagnosed in Washington State. We have not yet had any
diagnosed in Jefferson County but of course the only sequences small proportion of
our cases. So there may be some that we don't know about but it's not the dominant
variant by anything. Um That's the main questions they had their o the other questions
that they had was about. Protection from heavy shells. So, heavy shell for a reminder
is an injection for people who are immuno suppressed um to reduce their risk of severe
disease from COVID-19 is a really good option in that group who can't fully respond
to the vaccine itself. Uh this person was wondering about whether or not we've seen
decreased efficacy from view shells to be a 4.6. We haven't really had large scale
trials looking at that. But looking at the monoclonal antibodies for treatments that
make up a few shells, we have seen decreased efficacy there. And so there's a possibility
kind of theoretical possibility that we see decreased efficacy against the A 4.6
there. But again, it's still not the dominant variant by a long shot. And so if you're
eligible for every shell, that would still recommend that you get it. And right now
we recommend it every six months if you're in that group. Um they did also ask if
the monoclonal antibodies that we currently use for treatment called is still maintaining
efficacy against the a 4.6. And it is um it's the only thing that actually has shown
strong to see against the so for those of you who don't dig this much in various
a lot of numbers and probably doesn't matter too much to you the world. The story
is the A five is the current dominant circulating variants. That is what is in that,
that is what our current specific vaccines are against. And so that's part of why
we really want you to get that vaccine. Uh This next person asked kind of another
variant question which is if they had covid in april, how likely was it omicron if
it was omicron, do we still need the omicron specific booster? So if you had covid
in april yes, it was almost certainly omicron. It was also almost certainly be A
two which is not the current circulating variants. Um that was really the dominant
variant at the time. Um Currently the A five is the current of in a sub variant and
you're not seeing as much good protection from B. A. Two against be A five. So if
you got Covid in april you can count it out april may june july august for over four
months since your vaccine. So go ahead and get the omicron specific booster. If you're
in a high risk, just get it right now. If you're not in a high risk group, get it
in a couple of weeks. Um Next question the next person asked if we could talk a bit
about super immunity. Um this idea when vaccinated people have a breakthrough infection,
they have stronger immune response. Is that a real thing? How long will it last?
And do these people need the vaccine anyway. So super immunity are commonly in in
our world referred to as hybrid immunity um is an idea that really came out in the
winter of last year based on the paper out of O. H. S. U. What they found was that
individuals who were fully who got covid 19 and then got fully vaccinated had much
stronger immune response than people who either just got covid incident and vaccinated
or only got vaccinated and hadn't had a breakthrough infection. They actually tested
in both ways they saw and they saw a very strong immune response for people who had
co And then got vaccinated or who had vaccinated who were vaccinated and then got
a breakthrough infection. In both cases they found that those individuals developed
more antibodies to COVID-19 and draw our antibodies. So they found that they had
better protection about against subsequent variants. Even if that wasn't what they
got in their infection or in their vaccine. The downside of that data is that it
was all on Delta. So we don't have any of that data on the omicron some variant of
the virus. So we don't know how well it applies to the current circulating variants.
There's good reason to believe that it does. But I don't think we can rely on immunity
from an infection to DELTA to protect us against. We're just it's such a different
variant of the virus that if that's when you last got infected we can't really count
on that hybrid immunity. Getting um if that really helps. Um but the extent to which
it helps for omicron is much less clear. We have good reason to believe that if you
are fully vaccinated and got omicron you likely have better hybrid immunity against
omicron. Very some variants but we don't really have to be for it yet. Um So
if you have hybrid immunity from any of the variants do go ahead and get vaccinated
because you don't it's hard to know specifically what some variant you've got um
depending on when you got your infection but it spends four months and more go ahead
and get you across the booster is a good thing to do. Uh And last but not least also
a question about the vaccine, what benefits can we expect from the new by violent
omicron vaccine? How long will the benefits last? The primary benefit we expect from
this besides prolong protection against severe disease is that we do expect better
protection against symptomatic disease at all from the specific booster because it
is updated to which is really the variants circulating now and that variant is so
different than what came before. This is the first time. We have a vaccine that's
really targeted against the variants that are currently circulating um first time
in a long time. And so we expect to see more prolonged protection against any symptomatic
disease from that booster and that's based on that cross reactivity we talked about
in the beginning of the program. Um So I do recommend it. I think it's a really good
vaccine and I think it can really help us move to successfully and safely to the
next phase where we can really actually camped down transmission and get many more
individuals in our community space both through our own protection and I really had
a chance to make over to other people. I see that Mark got vaccinated. Thank you
for yourself and others. Um And certainly I'm not in a very high risk groups from
waiting a couple of weeks but then once we get past a couple of weeks and absolutely
gonna get mine
Put a plug in for safeway. Their drive through on Sunday there was no wait in the
afternoon. I got my flu shot and the ο booster at the same time. It took 10 minutes.
Yeah I can say my mom got her the same day. The drive through was really good um
and well received by the community. So it's a good option for for locals if you live
in the area go ahead and do it safely or if you live in county are safe way is also
back. I'll just put my standard plug in for the tri area pharmacy. I my mom went
there last week and got her booster with friends and they got there early and by
the time they left the line was long. So there's a little local intel about the tri
area pharmacy, get there early or a little before they open or start doing their
vaccinations um if you don't want to wait in line but the line does move quickly
so um any other questions for dr barry this morning? Do we not have willy today?
Oh okay. Well he's on vacation. I'm saying that out loud. Alright, well I mean if
we've got time to kill I guess um Doctor but I'm wondering if you can just, I asked
you about this at the board of health meeting but just talk about, you know, mass
vaccination modifications we're doing to try to make sure that you know, folks that
live remotely can access those more remote mass vaccination clinics. Yeah. So initially
we opened vaccines up to everybody without kind of zip code cover to figure out where
you are living. Um And what we found was all three field that's immediately and most
of the folks who build up the South County vaccine actually lived in North County
um in the port Townsend area because there's some demand in that area. But health
County really has very few resources for vaccinations. They don't have pharmacies
that are doing vaccinations and many people struggle with transportation and so what
we did was we open up more slots in the North county um vaccinations and folks up
in the North county vaccination. Um And so we are we do still have left in the closing
clinics. So if you want to sign up, but we're really trying to hold that for South
county residents. The other thing that we are doing is we do home visits vaccine.
So if you don't have access to transportation, um, or is someone in your family wouldn't
tolerate a mass vaccination setup, particularly people with developmental disabilities
often don't tolerate the big gymnasium vax nations that we do. We can bring vaccine
to you. Um, you can sign up online or you can give us a call and we'll make sure
and bring vaccines to your home. We're happy to do that. The other big thing in South
County is we're vaccinating the whole family regardless of age. So if you have, uh,
if you have kids who haven't yet, they're vaccinated or not gotten their boosters
will have all the formulations of the South county vaccine, the vaccination site
so that we can catch both of um, if you're living in North County and wondering why
we don't do that there. It's just because the north end of the county has so many
more resources to do that And then south can either really aren't those things. So
we want to make sure if there's any kids that haven't had a chance to get vaccinated
yet. So we can catch them up too. Well that's your whole family if you tell them,
thanks so much any other questions kate.
I know I am, I'll just say I'm working from home today with a cold and you know,
really appreciating that we have this option and you know, the world really has changed.
I wouldn't have thought twice about coming in with a new cold to work, you know,
2.5 years ago and I was like, all right. I will spare you all getting this virus
And yeah, appreciating that can still take part um, from the comfort of home
without around. Well, we appreciate that kate. Thank you for doing that.
So I spent much of friday and driving with a former driver for the, for jefferson
transit and I was just wondering if we've used dialogue ride at all to get people
to vaccination clinics or vaccination sites. Um, I don't, I don't know Transit would
do that. But it just seemed like a way to get somebody was having a really hard time
getting to a vaccination clinic or vaccination like the trier pharmacy or some other
site. How do we, how do we deal with those? Um, did you know extremely difficult
situations where people have logistics in their way. You know, I'm not sure if we
have used, but we are happy to bring vaccine to anyone regardless of where you are
in the county. If you can't, if you don't have transportation. So we've been doing
home visit for over a year. Um, and so we'll do, we'll do home visits for anyone
in the county who doesn't have access to transportation, but one other option to
bring folks um, to, to our site. So if that's an option for you, that's just one
other way to get vaccinated. But don't let transportation be a barrier to you. We
will, we will bring it back. That's great. I don't have any other questions. Um
uh, it's 10 17. We can let dr barry get on with her day. Her she saved a few minutes
for herself here. Um, And maybe we'll take a short, do we want to do calenda ring
or do we want to take a recess before we have our 1030 closed session?
I'm fine either way too. So
maybe we can hear from Mark about his past week. Yeah. And I wasn't sure that kate
was done because I kind of nipped in the bud there. So okay, any last briefing items
from last week? Why don't we let mark go? And then if there's time I'll jump back
in. Yeah, I can three minutes or less. Um, so the 12th, all day with the
board on the 13th public-sector cabinet and 18, both of those were canceled because
um, Aaron and Kevin couldn't make either one of those meetings at the last minute.
We did have a behavioral health advisory committee meeting that I thought went quite
well, we secured agreement with with the board to fund um, therapeutic courts on
an ongoing basis, which is a relief. So that's good Then on the 14th,
the big thing that day was with chuck Boyd from the risk pool. Um since I was officially
appointed as a risk manager, I had to take training from the pool. So I've got that
out of the way. I have one more training requirement to to complete and then I'll
be fully qualified Thursday was an open day, so I got to deal with a number of personnel
and budget issues. And then um on Friday we had the Jefferson County coordination
meeting, the COVID-1 and that was a pretty good meeting. Um and I've got a
couple of things to share about that meeting. We did talk about the end of the Governor's
emergency proclamation. Um and we had a general discussion, but Sarah Melanson um
kate and Philip Hudsucker, we're not president at that meeting. And so we didn't
talk a whole lot about the temporary covid policy. I think we're on number 12. Um
but we're gonna have to issue another or maybe uh reason number 12, but we'll talk
about that at the next meeting. Um there there was some sentiment that even after
the um emergency declarations are lifted that um there's some demand for an ongoing
monthly meeting um that we would invite all three board members to just sort of like
the quarterly that we have with electives and department directors, but this would
be open to anybody who would want to attend. And then there we would put an agenda
together, but we have a round table and anyone attending the meeting could bring
up any subject and they just feel that that would knit us together more completely
than we are now. Um because having an opportunity to to speak with you three on a
monday, typically Mondays are orchestrated, there's not that much opportunity for
free ranging conversation. And so I'd like the board to take that under advisement.
And uh when we have our next coordination meeting, we can talk about that further.
But certainly in this forum, if you want to give me feedback right now on that idea,
I'd certainly be receptive to receiving it. Um and then regarding covid updates,
you know, with with dr barry scaling back down to eight hours a week after the declaration
is lifted, then maybe we could um rather than a weekly, maybe a monthly with dr barry
or every two weeks. Or maybe it's not always a health update. I feel like it could
be a different kind of update to if we have other work that we're working on or something
if K P T Z is down with that. Right? So this whole pandemic and and, you know, the
meetings we put together to to manage the pandemic certainly can continue to be a
value as they morph and serve a different purpose. Yeah, and I'm absolutely in favor
of more face time with with staff and and and learning about their um how, how it
is on the ground. So I'm all in favor of open public meeting, stakeholder community.
Okay. And you know, staff and Caroline's right there. She'd have to notice it every
week or whatever. Or we could notice the full year's worth of meetings if it's once
a month. Much like Stacy does with her finance committee meetings and the budget
committee, we say here's when they are. And so that covers the notice requirement
for the full year. I think that's good because it provides people the opportunity
to be aware of them if they know what all those states are ahead of time. And it
also has a great community, um, outreach, an education opportunity for us and it
will further the public's understanding of what we do here and how we work together
to meet the needs of the community. So, um, okay, so we'll, we'll talk about that
some more, but thank you and you know, kate, do you have input on that? I think it's
a great idea. Um, we would appreciate more time with directors and fellow like this.
Um, you know, I think that finding a time that works for everyone is going to be
difficult. So, you know, we were able to do that for the color coordination meeting
and um, the reason I didn't attend last week is because as a result of that meeting,
I've been neglecting to other boards, Probably three other boards that I just haven't
been going to the meeting thinking that the covid emergency would end. And so eventually
we stopped having those on friday. So um yeah, I said it's his favorite is gonna
be a challenge to find a time that works for most folks. Um but certainly open
to it and support the concept.
Anything else from last week? Mark lost my way just a little bit. Let's see. Uh
huh. No, that was it. Great. Um
this reading glass thing, a couple more things I wouldn't mind mentioning from last
week. Great, we've got time for you. Yeah. So um since
uh like everybody is trying to come up with their legislative agenda these
days. Um so the meeting this week with legislative steering committee.
Um and it's interesting, we we the board hasn't actually done a legislative agenda
in the past and I don't know if that's the thing we want to think about things like
with our um voice is being used in other places and the work that we do
through a number of organizations and other boards that felt less um critical to
me, but but it is probably a discussion we should have whether we want to take that
on. Um in fact, maybe maybe we should put a placeholder in an agenda soon to look
at various uh the outcomes of some of these legislative processes that we're doing
with partners, both at counties and the peninsula here and then we can further that
discussion if we want to take on other issues ourselves. That sounds like a really
good idea. Yeah, yeah. Cause I, I know there probably for three things you're working
on, the idea that it would be good for me to know about. Two that might not come
up to the watch that level or most mostly accepted issues honestly for
me.
Okay. So Mark, maybe if we could add that at a legislative update to an upcoming
monday session. Yeah. Um, a couple other quick things
um, attended an event on, I don't know, some evening last week in Seattle with my
husband that ends up being much of a much greater benefit to me than to him uh
housing providers there that works nationally um and works in a number of rural communities
and there are a number of folks who who managed kind of complex housing deals. Um,
it was really, really great. Just everybody took a lot of interest in little Jefferson
County and their nonprofits that handle um, you know, new market tax credits and
low income housing tax credits and you know, has just gone through this with sort
of pavement project. Um, and I know that it's a ton of work and that um, they have
learned a lot, but you know, often there is a consultants or an organization that
helps do some of that work and um, it was great like four different people sat down
with me and talk to me about the challenges of world, but the opportunities there
and I get a lot of contact numbers of um something to do this work. And so um it
was, I learned a lot and I think I feel like I have a lot more resources and if we
are to um you know, I identify any any other potential husband projects and sub
super useful and look forward to bringing some of that the housing fund board and
um already connected with john morrow. Evan's sister is probably the project's most
um you know, kind of in the pipeline already benefit from something like that. So
we're gonna follow up with some of those contexts, um kind of municipal Research
service center board meeting on friday. And I was really pleased to hear that the
electronic bidding system that's going to be online soon. So we as members will be
able to use that if we still wish um be talking to monkey about it later this week.
But um you know, this is a system whereby we could we could put out this um and we
received electronically, you know, we had that situation recently where a regional
bitter got held up at the hunting operation, didn't get their bid here on time, you
know, just by a few minutes. And this um you know, we have a pretty old fashioned
bidding system and M. R. S. C. Was uh hired basically by the legislature to figure
out how to do this electronically. So that will be unrolled soon, which I think is
gonna be a great um assets should we choose to use it. Um And yesterday
I was asked to speak kind of from a rural county perspective at the um Washington
wildlife and recreation program, um annual events. And it was really well attended
by legislators and nonprofits in the conservation world. And good conversation about
kind of um challenges. You know, we're all companies like ours that want to do a
lot of conservation, but our system is set up to disincentivize that and some of
the challenges associated with it. So um good conversation and hopefully some follow
up will come from that. So that was my week. Perfect timing. Um
It's 10 29.5. So um We have
a 1030 closed session. When the clock turns to 10.30. I will do my preamble to
that and we will move to our closed session. We're checking to make sure David 14
hours here. Okay.
I thought he was going to be in the room physically has instructions of how to get
in there. Dave is already in the room. Is he joining us remotely? Yeah, we're
using the other our you guys can leave and I will, it's 10.30. So I am
going to announce that we are going into a closed session with our county administrator,
human resources director, our sheriff are undersheriff and our jail superintendent
to discuss collective bargaining, professional negotiations or grievance or mediation
proceedings or to review the proposals made in negotiations or proceedings while
in progress not, this is not subject to the open public meetings. Act as outlined
in our C. W 42.30 dot 1 40 parentheses for parentheses. B. We're going in
now at 10 30 we will be back with you at 11 a.m. See you then.
Okay. Recording stopped
not extending
recording in progress.
Okay, waiting to see if kate comes over.
Okay, We're all back here together and I will just um say we are coming out of closed
session and we are not taking action. So back to the irregular
business of the county. Um, were we, were we all done with briefing or did anything
else come up that folks wanted to share from last week? Okay. Anything else from
you kate? No, no. Okay. So do we wanna do calendar ring now? Oh yeah. My
proclamation um, I will start my, this this agenda item off with an apology.
Um, this proclamation is way overdue. It was intended to be for the last week of
august and um, it's the local local month and I just feel like it's important to
um recognize it while we're still in the month and coming off of a successful farm
tour weekend for our farmers. Um, just this last weekend and a busy summer for our
farmers markets and I can say firsthand, I know how hard our farmers have been working
this summer. The season's been odd at best, started out cold and it's extending longer
than anyone expected. So everyone's um, was nervous at the first and now it's working
longer than they probably expected. So um, I am, I have to find it, but I'm happy
to start or someone else can start reading you. I can't get there.
Are you ready though? I don't want you. Well I can't, I'm not there yet. Let's see.
Here we go. Maybe it'll open this way.
Okay, I've got it now.
Um, so apology to our farmers for being late with this, but
we, we appreciate you and to proclaim this month, september as eat local month
and I will start off, whereas the Sailor Sea region has provided a rich bounty of
local foods from both the water and the land, which is Stuart, which has been steward
by the people and other visiting tribes since time and Memorial. And whereas jefferson
County Washington is home to clean streams, shellfish beds and marine waters as well
as fertile valleys and lush forests in a temperate climate, all of which contribute
to the diverse and abundant wild and cultivated foods available here. And whereas
since the 19th century, this region has been home to many farms producing a wide
range of crops for local consumption as well as for sales throughout the puget sound
region and beyond and whereas jefferson county Washington residents seek locally
grown produced and harvested food products for many reasons, including good nutrition,
to live in a more sustainable way for our environment and to support our local economy
and communities. And whereas myriad local organizations have worked together for
16 years under the umbrella of the jefferson Land Works collaborative to preserve
hundreds of acres of prime farmland, support environmental restoration assistance,
sustainable business planning and encourage local investment. And whereas Jefferson
county Washington has seen ongoing economic growth in the food and farm sector, which
provides employment and keeps more more dollars recirculating in the local economy.
And whereas local food production leads to greater resilience and food security and
reduction of the carbon footprint of our food supply. And whereas eating more, jefferson
County grown food helps preserve Jefferson County's rural working landscape in the
way of life we cherish, and whereas Jefferson county Washington strives to ensure
all of our residents have access to healthy local food regardless of income. And
whereas supporting farmers, markets, grocers, restaurants and institutional buyers
who support Jefferson County's local farmers, producers and fisheries also helps
contribute to all of the above. And whereas Jefferson County's 20th annual Farm Tour
is september 16th through 18th 2022
now therefore, the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners proclaimed september
20 to 22 as local month further proclaimed that the Board of Commissioners urge all
citizens to join them in encouraging residents and visitors alike to join in celebrating
the first eat local first olympic peninsula local month campaign and hereby proclaim
september 2022 jefferson County local month proclaimed the 19th day of september
2022. Thanks everyone.
Um,
second all in favor. Hi again, I apologize to our farmers and local food producers
that were tardy with us, but um, no shortage of heartfelt
support for your work. Absolutely. Can I make one? Yeah, I think so.
We should maybe next year also address those who grow their own food. I think that's
quite addressed in here, but a big part of eating local and part of the splendor
of our area is that many people can and do have, you know, it doesn't take a very
large garden plot to, to grow up a significant part of your own own calories and
they're all always healthy calories. So really encouraged everyone to get into it,
get their hands dirty, including your three commissioners. We all grow our own some
of our own food.
Yeah. And I thought in the middle of the night last night when I wake up with these
thoughts, I was like, maybe we can um, and if a deal is listening or Caroline can
pass along that maybe we put these in our agenda planner for next year. Okay,
okay, great. Um, okay, so we are here with time. It's,
it's just after 11 and our next um timed item on our agenda is not until 1 30 this
afternoon. So we do have time for cal injuring and we may break for lunch early and
um, so anyone ready to start off with their week or big items on their agenda in
the weeks ahead. I can, I can start, let's see uh, today have
the North Hood Canal Chamber of Commerce Board meeting after this. I'm gonna have
to rush out ASAP down in Brennan today. Everyone is welcome at the Britain community
center and uh, then campaign forum also in Brennan uh, tomorrow talking to
new organization down in, in quill scene about kind of the advantages and challenges
of nonprofit status. Looking forward to that. Then I am doing a meeting with thurston
county joining their new homelessness task force uh, group to kind of share um,
how, how we've been managing it and how we set ours up. So I love it when jefferson
County is a model for the larger counties around. Um, then I will see
meeting with the cuisine food bank with the jefferson County food bank about the
quilting construction project that I think is underway now building their own bespoke
food pantry down in quilting, then have the harm reduction in south county meeting
on Tuesday afternoon as well. And then oops, I went to different,
sorry, I lost my calendar from uh, then on Wednesday have the developers meeting
for seventh Haven and have an exit, the audit exit conference for olympic agency
on aging and then we have our housing fund board, One of the committees that we have
is the community conversation uh committee and we're looking to kind of duplicate
some of the meetings and robust conversations with lots of stakeholders that our
um our old task force had and was and we actually heard from a lot of the housing
vendors that they're ready for a talk as well. Some some so well, including them
in that conversation to see how we can't amplify their emissions. And then on thursday
20 seconds we have a Jeff calm meeting that's I think maybe going to be all zoom
though, it's listed at the port ludlow Fire and rescue, I think we're gonna move
those meetings in the future. The hybrid meetings to the fire station. We have a
solid waste advisory committee thursday afternoon and then um friday is
pretty open, so nothing on there, but you know, busy times. And then of course this
weekend I'll be going to the accordion festival at Finn Rivers as well as the film
festival in Port Townsend. So um love this time of year, in, in, in jefferson county
and that's my week.
Ditto to levy this time of year um kate, what's your week look like?
They also have a busy week um in a meeting this evening with a group of community
folks who are interested in helping out with the trump tracks projects at the fair
grounds. So I'm really grateful that community members are stepping up the project.
Um Tomorrow I have uh Economic Development Council Finance committee meeting followed
by a uh I'm trying to think of the acronym chai
uh climate and health, the state statewide department health, um
uh State Department of Health, Public Health and Climate Initiative. Um just a three
hour meeting in the middle of the day tomorrow, followed by the North olympic Legislative
Alliance steering committee meeting where we will be refining our legislative agenda
and a high school girls soccer game tomorrow evening at memorial Field. Anyone interested
in coming to cheer among the rivals? Combined team Wednesday. I have a Washington
Sea Grant steering Committee retreat, although I just got an email that might need
to be rescheduled, which would be way easier for me. Actually, timing isn't great,
but it sounds like they also have a nasty cold going around Washington sea Grant,
so that might be canceled. Um That does beg the question
of um you had were thinking about attending the council annual
meeting.
Yes. Which would be, it would be great if you were um able to be there in my place.
So that conflicts with the grants annual meeting. But I haven't been able to get
clarification if um if we are alternate for each other, there's always, you know,
every board is different of, you know, could you be there in my place my alternate,
which I think you could, I think that's how we do the coordinating council. Um but
I haven't been able to get clarification yet. So I am I am I am available to
attend. I'll miss the empowered teams coalition meeting um by attending that. But
then immediately after that too I have a um MRC subcommittee meeting but I can if
I can do it virtually I can attend the entirety of the Hood canal coordinating council
meeting and I'll just let Andrew know that I'm missing empowered teens tomorrow.
Okay, well I am sorry that I don't have some uncertainty about that, but I will let
you know as soon as I get the answer on both of those whether my secret meeting is
canceled and if you can be an alternate, which I am quite sure you can just want
to verify. Okay, great. If not um then I will leave the
secrets leaving early to at least vote on the subject of the annual meeting of the
coordinating council. So it's pretty important to at least lay eyes on the agenda.
Um So thursday. Um I should say that the secret of that
goes well into the evening on Wednesday. Uh thursday I have a legislative steering
committee retreat in ellensburg. Um So the out of the office that day
Um Friday has Olympic consortium board, so workforce development oversight board
on Friday morning than out Friday afternoon for a medical equipment, then back later
in the afternoon for more legislative work. Talk about the .09 bill with our crew.
Um Let's try to be that in time for the Caroline memorial scholarship award.
Um And then looking forward to the second. Great. Um
So tomorrow uh well actually today I probably will not attend Wasiq I don't know
if we noticed that, I don't even know if we did that, but I need to do some phone
calling for straight er en questions. So um not planning to attend Wasatch today.
Um I tomorrow and participating in interviews for our Central Services director candidates
with Mark and Sarah and others. Um And that will be much of the day from 9 30 to
2 30 ish. I have blocked out and then in the afternoon I'm gonna do some work
preparing for a meeting with Mallory on Wednesday on Wednesday we have a straight
er en legislative agenda setting, mostly confirming the priorities. We've already
set um Wednesday morning first thing and then a meeting with Mark and Mallory to
talk about the updated chickadee scope of work. I'm gonna go out in the early afternoon
or the very middle of the day to the Sheriff's office and do some virtual reality
training audit with Brandon just cause I'm curious what what it is and haven't spent
enough time out there, I don't feel like so I'm looking forward to doing that. And
then as we just discussed will attend the hood canal and canal coordinating council
annual meeting and board of directors meeting for kate if she gives me the high sign
for that. Um And then if not I will attend the beginning of the power teens coalition
meeting and then um leave that for joining the Marine Resource
Committee, derelict vessel committee that I'm part of on thursday. I have
a meeting with my trust land transfer conservation advocates um and I have a gender
prep with Mark. I had the N. O. D. C. Monthly meeting on there just in case it I
needed to go for around the straight er and stuff. But I think kate you'll probably
be there right at the N. O. D. C. On thursday. No.
Oh maybe that's why it's mom. So that's why it's on my calendar. Okay so I'll attend
the beginning and the end of that meeting but not most of it because I'll be doing
a gender prep with Mark unless we can shift that later. But I'll talk with Mark about
that. Um thursday evening finishing my tamale prep for the in person straight er
n meeting on friday which will be my first in person straight er en meeting and this
time I'm going whether it's just me and care there or not which last time it was
I think Cara and maybe one other person there and I didn't go but this time I'm going
to join her and um and then come back in the afternoon for the Caroline Gibson memorial
scholarship recipient presentations at the maritime center and then on saturday I
fully had attend intended to attend accordion festival, but we got our invitation
to the Spencer Forest Products open house and forks where they're gonna show
the new mill site that just came this morning. So that was one thing I was like,
do you want to go to this being closer to your district than mine or? Um anyway,
they are doing a open house at the allen mill site for spencer Forest products, which
and it's an exciting development with people taking, taking up ownership of mills
that have long been closed or mothballed in our community and this is the first invitation
or opportunity I've seen to go out and see what spencer forest products is planning
to do there. So Greg or I will be arm wrestling for accordion
festival slash mill tour accordion player there. Yeah, but then sunday the
accordion festival does continue. Yeah. Um so that's
my this week and I won't go into next week, although I feel like next week there's
a lot, quite a few really chunky meetings, like big long long meetings and just
putting a pin in the fact that I will be out of office october 6th and seventh And
celebration of my anniversary, 22 years and
counting. Um Thanks for the reminder Heidi, I
should say, I will also be gone maybe this way. And let's see, I'll be in Minnesota
with a couple of health um Speak of service. Thanks
seven maybe 56 77. Um We will not have a quorum
in county if we needed it. F. Y. I
do we is that a problem? It's at the end of the week it's October
six and 7th. We won't have a Thursday and Friday. I can zoom in. Generally not a
problem. Although then you know that's when the road washes out, we can zoom in.
Yeah, we can assemble a virtual pretty quickly. And Heidi This is in Jefferson County
This one. It is yeah, it's in jefferson County but it's in your district. That's
why I was bringing it to our attention and trying to decide who wanted to go think
over lunch. We can talk after lunch. Um So yeah that's I think that's it for um calenda
ring anyone have any other big chunky things on the horizon when they're gonna be
gone.
Yeah, I'll be out of town that work in the I think
19th through 21 October in Ocean Shore's but still able to work.
Okay,
Well um it's 11.20. Any other items for the good of the order that people
want to cover? What about you, mark? What does your schedule look like the next week
or so. I know you're in central services interviews with me tomorrow. Right. And
should should we wrap that up early enough. I'll attend the 18 meeting with Aaron
Kevin and John and then there's the um Washington county administrators
association monthly check in. That's a wah wah sack affiliate. I haven't done that
in quite some time. So I will definitely join that one uh when today is pretty open
except for the meeting with Mallory in the morning. And then on thursday and my
periodic meeting with Brent butler and then Jeff calm admin board and then the public
sector cabinet check in with Cindy brooks with the D. C. And so Greg you're gonna
take Caswell brown on thursday. Okay great. An agenda prep with with Heidi in the
afternoon and then friday I've got some company coming in from out of town. I gotta
pick them up in Port Angeles in the afternoon. So I'll be taken for four hours of
PTO on friday friday. Also just for the good of the order note that our our team
of um Caroline a deal and julie will all be out of office on friday at the clerk's
conference, which I want to go with but we were just
maintaining your credentials right. Yeah, we definitely need to keep up points is
going for a certified municipal clerk. So I'm going to my master municipal clerk
and this year we thought we'd bring julie with. Great, awesome. Okay. Any
other calendar items for the good of the order from anyone Greg kate, Mark
Caroline? No, should we, one thing with Caroline. Um this
thursday. Are you in the office? Okay. Right. We're trying to do agenda planning
for housing fund board has to be kind of hi 30 or 4:30 for
15:20 minutes virtually because life chair is uh travel. So
you any and yeah I'll bring into that conversation. Great thank
you. So if there's nothing else we you have.
Oh you're muted we can't hear you. Sorry about that. I just noticed that f Y I um
owl name is still set to executive session. You might want to fix that and I
can't remember what else I was gonna say that maybe I'm a little brain dead from
the cold and wouldn't mind breaking early. Yeah that's what I was gonna suggest that
we recess now and we will reconvene at 1:30 and which we will have a staff DCD staff
presentation on the legal lot of record issue. So you have a couple of hours to do
your homework for that one. Okay. Okay. Rest up. Thanks everyone.
See you at 1:30 PM.
Recording stopped.
Yeah. You hear matt should be brought over. Um
I'm no longer a co host. I had to leave for the exact,
okay. Okay I bet you it's up and running. I'll call us back to order. Oh there we
go. 1 31. It's a. V. Is back up and running. So I'll call us back to order. Um It's
1 30 we have our workshop this afternoon with our colleagues from D. C. D. And the
planning commission. Um This is a workshop on legal, lots of record, we're gonna
review the planning commission and staff recommendations and that will include any
revisions made to the initial proposed ordinance. So I don't know who's leading this
off but yeah this is a follow on from last week and its preparatory to hear a public
hearing next monday. So I'll turn it over to the D. C. D. Team. Thank you thank you
madam. Chair and members of the commission, my name is Brent Butler and I serve at
the pleasure of the commission as the community Development director. Um We've had
an extensive amount of community outreach. Some 1700 unique. Um
or I should say 1700. Oh yeah uh
1700 inquiries into our story maps we created uh just wanted to make sure that the
community is aware of the extensive nature of the outreach that we conducted in addition
to a story map which is essentially an online presentation of of the development
regulations and the concerns. Um We did a mailing to all of the affected um community
members parcel owners so that they were aware that this was going before the board
for consideration. Um We do have an assigned planner. Um And his name is brian Benjamin.
Um And um I'm gonna pass the baton first to our planning commission are planning
um manager. Mr josh Peters and then he'll introduce uh the planner of the day, the
planner who has been really responsible for these regulations working in conjunction
with,
I wonder if I should I press it no. Okay there's a
matter of inches. Okay. Um I hesitate to say all that again but in a nutshell we've
got notice of public hearing before the board which is scheduled for next monday
september 26th. The planning commission meanwhile continued to consider the proposal,
continued a public hearing until last thursday finished collecting testimony from
interested parties discussed the proposal, agreed to consider some additions that
D. C. D. Staff had worked with together with environmental, public health on the
implementation aspect of the proposal since we're both developing the policy and
determining exactly how to implement it on day one and developed a recommendation
which brian is going to present to you essentially to cut to the chase. It was a
unanimous recommendation from participating commissioners that evening to to support
the proposal with a couple additions and a statement about process and so he'll show
you that exact statement. And again, the Vice chair of the Planning Commission is
here to talk about the proposal as well as a sitting planning commissioner. Um and
so at that point we have a just to summarize, we have a work, we have this workshop,
we can answer any questions stay as long as you wish the hearing next monday and
then scheduled time right now on the first monday of october for the board to continue
discussion and to perhaps take action in conjunction with the scheduled expiration
of the moratorium, which would be that Tuesday october 4th, so that's in a nutshell,
the summary and unless there's any questions were at the battle, turn it over to
brian with a set of slides just run you through where we're at right now and some
um lingering questions and subjects, right? We have a question, we have a member
of the public has raised their hand. It might be Commissioner Coker or it might be
Liz Coker, who I know is given um testimony, I don't know uh I guess my big question
for the chair, we don't we don't have public comment listed on this, but we don't
have any other items after this, we add public comments after this. If there are
people that want to give comments,
um I was just noticing another comment in the in the notes there, that it may be
kevin Poker, who's on the Planning commission? Okay.
Public comment would be after the presentation by staff because then we have a
quorum of the planning commission if we have five. Okay, I guess to to Liz Coker,
do you mind if we have a public comment that we would have done after the staff presentation?
Yeah, okay, so I guess if if it's uh kevin Coker from the planning commission wanting
to be in on this, Keep your hand raised otherwise, um we're gonna try to add public
comment after the workshop at the end of the workshop. Alright, looks like it wasn't
kevin.
Sorry brian
just kinda upload the power point and share my screen.
Mm
mhm.
Good to go brian. Alright thank you one second here. I just want to test my
slides, make sure you can see them move back and forth. Great. Hey good afternoon
Chair Eisenhower and members of the board for the record. I am brian Benjamin assistant
plan of the Department of Community Development and today's presentation will provide
a summary of the proposed legal audit director regulations and communicate public
outreach results.
First I will provide some background information for some context to the proposed
regulations and then we'll we will review public outreach results to communicate
feedback DcD has received from the public but also review the staff recommendation
and finance commission recommendation and after that we can break into discussion.
Excuse me
this presentation is information heavy. So while I'm happy to answer clarifying questions
about content along the way, I would recommend holding discussion basic questions
until the end of the slides
on the background information. So before addressing the specific changes proposed
in the ordinance, it's important to take our 1000 to view the changes and answer
a basic question why is the county changing its approach to legal, out of record
determination processes. What is the purpose of these new regulations First This
ordinance responds to an emergency moratorium that restricts development and historic
subdivisions throughout Canada moratorium responded to three development permit applications
proposing and mass development within historic plants without process moratorium
created restrictions on development within historic subdivision to prevent high density
development recurring Canada's world area. The proposed regulations will replace
the emergency more important and implement permanent regulation
as a part of these regulatory changes. Proposed ordinance implements the standards
of state lock primarily the Growth Management Act and R. C. W. 58 17 governing class
and subdivision. The ordinance proposes standards to preserve rural character, protect
environmentally critical areas and control impacts to natural resource lands as expected
by DNA, as well as ensuring that development within historic subdivision meets the
health welfare and safety standard outlined by a state provision.
Additionally, the regulations ensure that development throughout the county means
watershed of resource inventory, areas or wiring provisions and considers potential
water quality impacts generated by the development of substandard loss.
The overarching goal of the ordinance is to allow development of substandard loss
where environmental, water quality and natural resource impacts can be avoided or
mitigated and where existing higher densities are already located. The ordinance
proposes to processes by which lots may either be accepted from conforming to zoning
standards and be granted reasonable economic use of the property will address how
they will address those processes later and for now we'll discuss other important
background information.
The amendments proposed in the ordinance include a new chapter of the unified development
code chapter 1812 And identifies corresponding changes to do existing chapters chapters
1835 and 1810 which respectively amend boundary line adjustment provisions in the
UTC definition Based on the new processes and protocols in 1812. In addition, the
site, the proposal also introduces a site development review process To chapter 1840.
That accompanies the legal out of record determination.
D. C. D. Issued a determination found significance where DNS for the proposed amendment,
the DNS found the proposed changes to the U. D. C. Were unlikely to have various
environmental impacts and relied on secret documents adopted by reference to make
this determination
review of the 2018 Comprehensive Judges and county Comprehensive Plan B. C. D. Staff
on the proposed you to see amendments were in conformance with the variety of comprehensive
plan goals and policies. Three goals and five policies were identified showing that
the amendments meet the plan's vision for environmental protection, housing and land
use in rural areas. Most prominently. The proposed D. D. C. Amendments meet expectations
for D. C. D. To complete a research task identified by speaking land use
policy. L. U. Dash P. Dash 20.3 which defines that. The department should analyze
historical subdivision in jefferson County to define processes for legal lots of
records certification and define ballot plaques in rural and urban heritage.
There's also a fundamental change to the ordinance from the moratorium. The pre 1971
date will no longer be the bright line in determining legal out of record status
for historic PCD determined that post august 11th 1969 subdivision
regulations at the state level. We're not substantively different from the september
7th 1971 regulations that were implemented at the local ethical and was implemented
in the more as a part of the more.
I mean, excuse me, identified as part of the more for me. Thus post August 11, 1969.
Plants are presumed to substantially meet all requirements outlined for the 1971
regulations. This reduces the total number of class affected by the permanent regulation
by a total of eight.
All right onto public average over game. So as a part of our public engagement process
for this project, we had a number of communication items that we had identified in
our communications plan. The first was to develop educational resources that took
the form of a story map, which was published online for the end of the line. We
also conducted outreach to 13 homeowners associations associated with
historic plants. We conducted focus groups, sent a postcard mailer
to run 1960 property owners that we identified as being particularly
impacted by this ordinance or potentially impacted by this ordinance. Uh these were
homeowners in historic subdivisions that owned vacant, were not residential, developed
parcels for lots. We did a number of press releases, issued a community
survey, attended community events. We attended both the towns and and confirms markets
and provided a series of updates to PCBs.
So we've got approximately 1850 views of the story map that's updated from Brent
1700 views which we developed last week. So we've seen really continuous access to
the story map throughout the process since it was published on July 29. We're
engaging continuing to engage with homeowners associations. We've got productive
communication with one H away the olympic canal tracks and discussing the flat wide
assessment process that's been posed as part of this ordinance. We hosted two focus
groups. Actually offered 12 focus group opportunities but didn't get enough respondents
to sign up. We were only able to host two And we have 108 responses to the community
survey. As of one p.m.
Community survey will remain open through the end of the week.
The community survey identified emergent community priorities. This list is in order
of priority as indicated by the survey. The first priority for legal out of record
regulations was to protect water quality. The second was to avoid impacts to environmentally
critically environmentally critical areas. The third was to allow continued development
in historic subdivisions. The force to achieve health welfare and safety standards
in historic plants. The fifth conserve natural resource areas and the sixth to prevent
residential from the purpose of this question. It was a ranking exercise to help
D. C. D. First understand where the community's priorities are and to guide our development
of the ordinance.
And this is a screenshot of the survey results from the analysis tool and the survey
instrument. You can see the margin by which these results were prioritized affect
water quality has a fairly substantial blue lead ahead of the other priorities where
avoiding impacts to critical areas and allowing continued development are roughly
neck and neck and uh were considered as being balanced. That is the visualization
of that prioritization data.
The community survey also provided respondents with an opportunity to represent and
record any additional considerations that the ordinance should make or our analysis
should consider. two trends were evident in these open ended responses. First
respondents were concerned for the fairness of restriction. Blanket restrictions
were largely considered to be unfair and the community affirmed that regulatory framework
adopted should consider the situation of each lot on a case by case basis. Again,
these responses were submitted prior to um to the ordinance being available for the
community to the community to review and the responses help guide our regulatory
approach. So the ordinance is structured in a way to review each lot on a case by
case basis and offers property owners an opportunity to show that their parcel can
meet expected health welfare and safety outcomes as a part of the determination process
for legal law of record status.
The other common question we received. We have received. Excuse me, it's how the
proposed regulations affected affordability in the county, especially considering
existing on affordability issues within the community survey respondents that removal
of development eligibility was a cause for concern.
So I think at this point um ask for some assistance from josh and Brent. But
essentially our response to this is that development of small lots will continue
where it is practicable and safe to do so and we don't anticipate that our regulatory
changes will result in a substantial reduction in the number of lots available to
developing community that. Again, the proposed policy recognizes substandard lots
so long as development as possible. And moving into the future, we have ongoing
work on policy, housing policy and actions that can coordinate with this ordinance
and we can continue to revisit how this determination process can fit into those
affordability frameworks in the future. So josh and Brent will give you an opportunity
to speak here if you like. I think you've covered it uh sufficiently. I don't think
I need to add anything at this point.
Thank you.
Alright, Let's move into the stack proposal for 1812. Before we really jump
into the regulatory approach, there are two key terms that should be clarified a
little bit further. The first term lot of record and then another term legal record.
These terms derived from state law and appear similar but mean two different things.
A lot of record refers to any lot created in compliance. The subdivision regulation
at the time of its creation and which has been recorded approved, recognized by local
government essentially its creation is verifiable. The purpose of establishing whether
or not there's a lot of record is to ensure that property is both legal and available
conveyance of property that was created in violation. A subdivision mom is illegal,
illegal Out of record in the proposed ordinance refers to a property that has been
deemed eligible for development, meaning that the local government has evaluated
a variety of factors affecting the property and has determined whether it can legally
be built on. Local governments have the ability to define criteria by which lots
can be considered legally eligible for development in the determination of legal
status, allows the property owner to submit development permit applications to the
property in these terms are defined by the coordinates but not explicitly required
by state law. Um Different jurisdictions handle these implementation protocols differently
and this is our solution to distinguish between property that was created legally
and is convertible and loss that are legal loss of record that can be developed so
that distinguish Mint is really originating out of the proposed language of this
ordinance and we're using state terms To distinguish between two. Can I ask
a clarifying question, brian uh I guess your your definition of legal lot of record
here requires the site the site development review. Is that, is that right? I guess.
What's that looks like the definition of a of a parcel that's gone through development
review. Site development review. So there there's a little bit of the nuance there.
Side development review is an on the ground build ability analysis And our legal
lot of record process sometimes requires the build ability analysis as a part
of the determination of eligibility. That's for the reasonable economic use process
of 1812 080. A site development review is required and
embedded in that analysis and only for those parcels requiring reasonable economic
use is the site development review determining eligibility For conforming lots
to zoning or for lots that the exception standards of 1812
07074. Um this site development review process of companies this
answer to to legal eligibility. So the exception, say it is a legal out of record
is eligible to be applied for development and we're including a build ability analysis
as a service to the applicant to show where build ability is, I think best
practice or where further regulatory requirements. Shoreline permitting, conditional
use permitting would be requirement would be required based on site conditions. So
sometimes the legal out of record determination includes site development review
prior to the determination being made. That's for last going through the reasonable
economic use process. And sometimes those determinations are uncoupled, meaning you
don't need side development review to determine eligibility, but it's a service that
accompanies that eligibility. So a legal lot of record is eligible for development
but not necessarily buildable.
That's true. And that's why we're offering service of site development review to
make sure that we're giving a clear picture of build ability prior to the applicant
contracting with their architect or septic designer to
create and spend money for design. Thank you for the clarification. Yeah, Cynthia
has a question. You got to come to the microphone. Cynthia. No one else can hear
you. You can put that at the podium if you,
I know you asked to hold questions But I wanted to point out in this moment that
your question is pointed at an issue that the planning commission had. Which is that
this terminology, there's actually two more terms the build ability, what does that
mean? And then investing, Which would mean you really can build. So when brian was
describing this, he said that illegal lot of record is a lot that's been termed that
has been determined or a lot that can be built on, which is not necessarily true.
And the Planning commission asked the Border County Commissioners and our recommendations
that you have received or are receiving today, that you re examine that terminology
because our fear is while those the regulations that we did agree to put forward,
which we think are substantially good um uh are in danger of confusing the
public where somebody might walk away and say my lot is buildable, which doesn't
mean they can build on it and and that's that's a pretty big point of confusion when
you're talking about, can a lot be built on or not? So I wanted to point that out
while you were asking the question, thank you, Thank you.
Any other questions before we move on or any response needed for me not.
Okay.
Right.
Second bearing,
Okay. 1812 outlines when a lot of record can be considered a legal
market record first, the lot can be considered eligible for development if the lot
needs zoning standard. So a lot within the rural residential one. To find zoning
designation. That is at least five acres in size would meet criteria for legal, out
of record standing. In essence, it would be granted legal lot of records then a substandard
lot meaning any lot is smaller than the size, lot size indicated by its zoning designation
May still be considered eligible for development if it meets the exceptions identified
in 1812 07074. Or the criteria of the reasonable economic use
processes identified in 1812 080.
Let's take a closer look at both of this. Subsection 1812 07074
offers exceptions from the reasonable economic use process on a variety of criteria.
Yeah, the parcel meets the minimum land area requirements for septic. So at this
stage, as we're determining whether a lot meets the exception criteria, the Department
of Environmental Public Health will review the site along with the C. D. To ensure
that minimum land area requirements for accepting can be met. If the minimum land
area perceptive can be met, a lot of record, um can be seen. Legal lot of records
status can be granted according to the following creativity. So a lot of record that
was properly planted on her after August 11, 1969 will be considered a legal lot
of record. Any lot that has already been improved by the county. So its configuration
for its received development permit approvals for the property.
A lot that is part of the neighbor will be considered a legal lot of records provided
that it can meet both sewage disposal and water quality standards according to the
Department of Environmental Public Health. Similarly lots located within the iron
nail or have you G. A. Will be given legal out of record status Under these exceptions,
if lots can meet environmental health requirements, pursuit disposal and water quality
and then an owner of continuous substandard lots and aggregate or combined lots to
meet zoning standards to the greatest extent possible. Can I ask? Yeah. Oh no I finished
I didn't mean to interrupt you when you're done. So for example a property owner
owns. Um six lost that total five acres and they're in river road residential 1-5
zone. They'll need to aggregate those blocks to reach the five acre status. Similarly,
property owner winning six contiguous lots. Equating one acre would be required to
aggregate those lots to reach one acre. So depending on where they are and how much
property they own they'll be required to aggregate brian. I have a question about
the Iron Delport Hadlock U. G. A. Um That's the entire U. G. A. Not the phase
one sewer boundary. Right? We're granting legal lot of record status
to the entire U. G. A. So within the entire Eugene boundary the rural
residential standards will apply according to phasing for the sewer project. So in
some parts of the U. G. A. Urban standards will apply and others rural standards
will apply and will be considered as a part of site development review.
Right. But the loss will be granted a lot of record status regardless of their face.
Thank you. I did receive that question since last week. Sorry my my question on this
too. Just to make sure I'm understanding clearly the second bullet point any lot
that has already been approved by the county? That means any lot that has had an
approved building permit receptive permit on. Is that what that means? Yeah the ordinance
defines it a little more clearly. But it's any residential permit that's been approved
residential septic system that was approved and the approval is still good that hasn't
expired or was approved and constructed. And then any building permit application
for residence. Gotcha. And then the oh sorry go ahead. And then there's sort of an
additional nuance here where um other situations where the county may have improved
a lot for residential use and a good example of this is approval of
large on site septic system, hookup availability. So if a lot has has access and
the property owner can demonstrate legally established access to a large on site
septic system. They have that community facilities available to them to connect to
that is a type of consideration. Different type of family approval for the law for
residential purposes. Thank you. And then my my second question is on the first bullet
point, a lot of record properly planted on or after august 11th 1969. So does that
allow nonconforming lots that might have been planted somehow? A two acre rural residential
1 to 5 land as a lot of legal record. If it was planted after 1969 yep. So if it
was legally created and meet minimum land area per septic, then it will be accepted
as a part of this subsection. But that doesn't necessarily mean that it's buildable.
It just means that it could be a lot of legal record, yep, it's a legal out of record
and can receive development permit applications on it. And again, we've created the
site development review process to address any potential conflicts. So where the
legal eligibility question ends, the legal lot of record determination. The site
development build ability analysis begins where we actually demonstrate the site
conditions affecting that property today. But the site development review isn't going
to take into account things like nonconforming status of the size relative to the
zoning, right? So if I've established a lot of legal record, it's too small. But
my site review isn't going to say, oh it's too small cause it's not five acres. It
will say, oh you have enough room for your septic, but there's no room anywhere for
a drain field. So it's not buildable or so or or something something like that. Right?
The site development review is based on site conditions and these exceptions except
a lot from meeting to meet conforming conformity with the zoning designation. So
this is recognition that, you know, legally recorded plat a lot within that flat
at two acres or happen acre in size can be developed. It means the minimum land
area perspective and we will then demonstrate side conditions affecting that. Thank
you.
Yeah, they're clarifying questions before I move on.
Doesn't look like anyone has any. Thank you.
So 1812 080 defines to other processes defining reasonable economic
use provisions available to applicants. So if your lot doesn't meet the exceptions
here, let's say you have a quarter acre lot that was planted prior to August 11
1969 and doesn't meet any of the other exceptions. Then you can move forward
through a reasonable economic use process or alternatively, um, you don't automatically
meet minimum land area for something as a part of that. First step, the first tested
the minimum land area perceptive. Then you can go through the reasonable economic
use process for a property. We go through the recent economic use process. It's important
to note here that the reasonable economic use process is both a site condition analysis
and a project specific analysis. So as a part of this, the project proponent would
be bringing either preliminary design or an entire design forward for the department
to review. But in that sense, the reasonable economic use processes are available
to individual property owners and for a review of a single law or for the
determination of an entire plan. Were part of the plan. Mhm. The
two processes share similar approval standards which include Department of Environmental
public Health confirmation that proposed sewage disposal and water supplies are adequate,
not cause degradation, water quality. The property is surged with adequate ingress,
ingress, ingress, egress. The property has added a drainage facility, the lot is
directly adjacent to existing development.
The proposed development does not adversely affect public safety and welfare. The
proposed development will not increase risk of flooding, degradation of critical
areas or species or degradation of natural resources. The proposed development is
the minimum necessary to allow police life and use of the property that's in reference
to the minimization standards of the shoreline master Program and critical areas
ordinance and the procedure for reducing and avoiding impacts to critical areas and
their buffers and the recognition of loss would not impact forestry resources
And that applies prescriptive buffers from forestry parcels to residential parcels.
It's 1815, chapter 1815 J. c. c.
To the staff recommendation is to require the determination legal out of record determination
prior to all development permit applications in the county that would include um
all processes for expansion of residences essentially. So not just new
development but redevelopment and expansion and then to add a sighted on review process
to provide some assurance that the development eligibility and build ability are
coinciding. That is kind of a direct response to the concerns we've heard from the
planning commission and the public to make sure that our process doesn't leave a
situation where eligibility is granted. The answer that legal question is it eligible
to be built or not and then cited conditions affecting build ability are not different
or if they are that we're identifying it through the service that we're providing.
I have a question here to Ryan as I say, huge. You can go back 11 slide. Sorry. Um
huge fan of the site development review process as I said, but requiring a determination
prior to all development permit applications in the county. So if I've already got
a house on my property and I want to build an A. D. You that would be a development
permit application but don't I have de facto a lot of legal records status already
by having built a house already. So do I have to go through another, you know, set
of fees to to prove that my obvious a lot of legal record is a lot of legal record.
Sure, I understand your question and the first answer that I have is that
we do need to review each development proposal. So we still need to review it. You
may meet an exception but we still need to review each development proposal first
to identify whether the lot was legally created permitting development on illegally
created lots is not permissible by the state subdivision provision. So we need to
at least have that level of review. We expect that by and large. The answer to that
question is going to be yes. The vast majority of lots of the counties were created
and we're ensuring just for future for improvement process and for future purposes
that were not permitting development illegally created. So that's one aspect that
we will need to review even if a lot has development on it. It's possible that the
county permitted development on a lot that was not legally created in the past. So
first we're reviewing that and then to meet the exception for
07074 that includes previously improved
parcels or residences or residential development. We still need to determine
whether the property meets minimum land area requirements for septic according to
today's standards. So in order to meet that exception, we still have to review with
Environmental Health Department of Environmental public Health input to make sure
that the subject expansion that would be required for the A. D. U. Um is a common
can be accommodated based on the block side. So there are a couple of things that
we need to review but again, we expect that most situations like that. Most situations
where some kind of expansion is being proposed or redevelopment. Additional garage
addition of an 80 you. That kind of proposal is going to move through the process
relatively quickly but it does need to move through the process to at least check
out those first two boxes. make sure it was legally created, the was created and
to make sure the lot means minimum land area. Perceptive by today's standards, josh,
josh had his hand up. You have something to add? Yeah thank you.
So I would say that right now development goes through land use review
except what happens sometimes is that people start with septic permit applications
and then they're eventually routed to D. C. D. For that review. And that has caused
some issues in the past both with the process and the result really because people
may have done work clearing land or digging test pits in places where they shouldn't
have according to our critical areas ordinance. And so we're really just moving that
process to the front. But our goal is to have it be faster eventually for everyone
and to have it be at least cost neutral if not cheaper both in terms of permit expenses
and hopefully actually cheaper In terms of people's actually um all the expenses
they go through when they hire people design things for them. Right. So what we're
thinking in a case like that where it would be relatively simple process, assuming
you have enough land area for this or the septic already accommodates the A. D. You.
It would be relatively simple. We'd be charging a a modest charge up front for that
service and then you move quickly through the next step of the process, which would
be to apply for the building permit. Whereas now we still charge for that service.
We just charge later when it happens when it comes to us. And we're always we always
charge more for those complex cases that require more work, whether it's a site visit
or reviewing a special report, like a wetland delineation or what have you. So in
this case, in a simple case um just like today it's simpler to develop simple parcels
that don't have a lot of trouble. Um The problem is right now sort of procedurally.
Sometimes those simple permits are getting caught up on the stack of permits that
are on each planners desk and and we're working on that triage right now to identify
those simpler ones to move them through the process. This is going to help us we
think with that process. So you'd be paying again a modest charge that you'd be paying
anyway later upfront. And then the charge later would be would be less. There'd be
fewer hours to do any additional checks And early depends on on if their stormwater
management concerns or if a number of years have passed since you went to the site
development process. And what have you. The other thing I would say is the reason
why one of the reasons why we keep talking about these two separate processes that
are connected is that we wanted to offer a service to customers just to do the legal
lot of record determination, maybe someone wants to buy property, sell property what
have you and they don't want to do the site development review yet. We are making
it or we're proposing to make it a prerequisite to apply for a building permit or
a septic permit, but they may want to do that later. So we just offer the, you know,
a one hour is what we're thinking for that charge. A one hour service to do the legal
lot of record determination if it turns out that it's gonna be more complicated than
that. Well, it's gonna take more processing challenging parcels today are going to
be challenging in the future. It's just a matter of when you ask those questions
and try to resolve those issues for a simple one. Then really it's the most customers
would do both the league, a lot of records termination and the site development review
at the same time, one application form, they come in, they do it. We charge, we're
trying to decide whether it's two hours plus an additional maybe our from public
health, we're working those details out here as we, as we get ready to implementation,
but that is where we're leaning again, it's a three hour charge for consistency review,
which happens during a building permit application. So we have, in a sense, those
three hours to play with. We're thinking two hours up front and then one hour when
the building permit comes in of a charge just for the stormwater aspects and just
to make sure that it's still consistent. So it's just a matter of moving those charges
in the process and that's how we're, that's how we're talking about doing it. So
in your case it would just be one application form. We're leaning towards the two
hour charge if there's no additional review needed. Um you know, except excuse me,
public health may have an hour charge, but they charge anyway for potable water review
and subject reviews. So we're just kind of meshing those and trying to provide that
service all up front. So it's a one stop shop. You come in our door first, you you
get this form, you do this, we coordinate with environmental health for this review
and then you're on your way as soon as you get that legal lot of determination slash
the results of your site development view. Then you can apply for the building permit
when you're ready to do so that makes a lot of sense. Thank you. 11 follow up, I
guess I think in our previous talk you talked about a site development review being
good for two years or some, you know, period of time and legal lot of record. Is
that good? I mean, I'm not sure if you answer this already, but how, how long is
a legal lot of record designation? Um Good for. Right. And this kid's come up before
because the site specifics um may change with time.
So one reason for a change is we may get new fema maps. So the flood zone may change.
Another reason for a change is that your adjacent property owner may put in a well
and there has to be a certain amount of different distance I believe 100 ft. And
if you submitted plans that envisions your septic to be near that well and that well
has already gone in. Your septic planning is no longer valid. But that site development
review, I'm talking about legal lot of record. How long does I mean whether or not
it's buildable. A legal lot of record should uh how long does that last? Thanks.
This is josh again. Um legal lot of record determination is a one time thing. Great.
You won't have to do that. Again, assuming of course that you have legal lot of record
status when you leave that process. The site development review will not have a time
specification. It will be a snapshot in time. Now you may have noticed that there
was a section in our unified development code code called site plan approval, Advanced
determination or bad. And we're actually replacing that section with this new site
development review section one of the reasons why this bad we know is no longer,
there is a lot of confusion around vesting, how how long was that good for um, a
series of occurrences and issues resulted from trying that process and there was
some good out of it. I think I think some, some folks in the realtor community for
example appreciated that process and we're trying in a sense to recreate it, but
in a different way and so it's not so it's less specific, it won't be a site plan
with exact specifications of where you're building footprint is, but more like a
building envelope type of idea. Where we're saying all these are all the spaces that
you're essentially free and clear to propose development. Um, and for most parcels
or many parcels that'll be simple for others to be more complicated. So, but it won't
have, won't have the ability to vest. And I think that's to to what Cynthia said
earlier about the confusion on the different definitions. Our response to the planning
commission when this came up was that some of these terms are strictly legal terms.
You know, they come from the subdivision act. Um others have a certain legal component
to them. We have to be precise and the way we describe them and it's difficult under
it's understood that it's difficult in some ways to translate it into regular language
if you will, but that's the same for the code altogether and we do want to talk about
tools and materials and guidance and instructions for people and we even offer to
come back to the planning commission for advice on how best to describe these things.
But one of those things is if you look at the definition of lot comma buildable as
we propose to define it. It's it's it's clear that
once the once the site development review is done and it's determined to be quote
unquote buildable, the only guarantee to build is to apply for the permit and vest
according to Washington State law, we can't offer vesting or a guarantee to do something
unless someone applies for that permit. So if people are ready to apply next the
next day, the next week, they're coming in with the permit. If they want to wait
234 years there's a certain risk involved in that because state health codes could
change and other aspects. So um in fact the planning commission added the word guaranteed
in front of a right to develop, its guaranteed right to develop. That was one of
the things that brian will get to in a moment. Thank you
back to the slide. We're oh Cynthia has a question or something to add
Cynthia's to remember her comment now that she waited longer. Um I may have to sit
down. Oh um the one additional note to what josh
said, I don't disagree with anything he said was that there would be a note to title
if the determination was that your lot is a lot of record and legal, lot of record
if the determination is positive. In other words it is you would be asked to um
record that to your title. If the determination is that it is not, The department
would uh make that uh note to title and staff can let me know if I have that
right.
We're gonna wait, we're gonna wait for staff and planning commission comments and
then we'll take public comments. You're you're on the fine line. But but yeah,
I think you can continue brian
any other clarifying questions before I move on here. And we're just going to describe
a little bit we've got samples prepared for when the legal lot of record determination
could conflict with the side conditions. So and a currently drafted language
illegally created parcel that conforms to zoning standards would automatically be
considered a legal out of record and certified as eligible for development against
a legal question and eligibility to receive permit application of the
property but that lot may or may not actually be developable or rather
buildable based on site conditions. There may be a very large wetland or tsunami
innovation zone or a variety of cloud or channel immigration conditions on site that
would prevent development from occurring and the result of the default
legal lot of record determination would be an applicant for L. O. R. Determination
walking away saying great my site is eligible for development. I'm gonna give my
permanent applications in order I'm gonna have my subject pits dug and we're gonna
do some land clearing and the return with applications to find that based on shoreline
conditions and channel migration conditions, that development of the site is actually
prohibited under the SMP or something like that. So we're recommending the site development
review process to account for situations where the legal eligibility for development.
That permit application based question is paired with a build ability analysis through
site development review so that the applicant is walking away in hand with both illegal
questions answered and site conditions today identified and in the future, say they
weighed 5, 10 years before they're ready to develop they purchase the property and
would like to develop a a retirement home for themselves or to build a vacation home
or whatever the situation would be. They can come back for another site development
review to account for any regulatory changes. So there's no limitation on whether
you can revisit the site development review, you can have it done multiple times.
It would person years to give an accurate picture for today as you prepare your permit
application process. But it would be required at least months with the legal out
of record determination to account for the potential discrepancy, precise conditions
and the answer to the question.
Thank you brian. We've also prepared a visualization of the process. It's kind of
our sink e diagram flow chart. The nice thing about this diagram format is that we
have a coded ability develop the code to produce this chart. And as we keep track
and monitor our applications, we can actually show numerically the proportion of
applications that go through this process. So we can say we had this many applications
one year. This many were conforming went through site development review process,
et cetera. So this can be updated as a monitor tool as well as a process identification.
But we start with development uh legal lot of record applications required for all
locks and make a lot of record determination here in light blue area, which determines
whether it's a lot of record or an illegally created a lot. As we get to a lot of
record determination, we're assessing whether the lot two forms to zoning standard
in terms of side and whether and if it doesn't, it's determined to be a substandard
lot does not mean zone extended, conforming lots will go through the site development
review process to identify building envelopes available on that conforming parcel
And some standard locks will be assessed according to the exception tradition of
1812 07074 During this area. To see whether a lot is
accepted. We will review the history of the lot and conditions of the lot to assess
whether it meets this criteria. I think most importantly, we're going to be reviewing
whether the lot with environmental health, health, whether the lot meets minimum
land area requirements for Septic and then the rest of the provisions under 1812
07074. It doesn't mean the standards. It will go through the reasonable economic
use process. And if it does, it'll again be granted legal lot of record status
and go through cited on review As we review against 1812-00
here to see whether the proposal not just decided whether the proposed residential
structure for the proposed use of the property meets the regional Economic use
standards will come to a conclusion and either rent legal out of record status to
that site or identify whether the parcel or lot cannot meet those
standards. So they're really primarily health, welfare and safety standards according
to the subdivision provisions of the state. And that won't be granted lee a lot of
records status. Again, it will have by this point, a lot of records status so that
block will retain the ability to be conveyed so it can be purchased and aggregated
and surfer, but it may not be independent and developed. That's our processes. It's
identified coordinates. There's any questions about how that works or what's happening
in these different phases of the review. I'm happy to answer clarifying questions.
No, that makes sense. And you shared that last week as well. So hey brian, hey, this
is Mark, I've got questions about the reasonable economic use. Um to me that that
conjures up, um visions of somebody having a property and they want to run a business
out of that property. Is that what is that what that means? No, it's reasonable economic
use um specifically to review for residential development.
Um and
okay, that the label for me doesn't fit. Um It seems incongruous. I'm not sure if
we have our council with us today who might weigh in on this subject, but the concept
really comes from taking the law as derived nationwide, like from U. S. Supreme Court
decisions and what's a reasonable economic use expectation of any given parcel. Sometimes
that expectation results in the ability to do residential development by the way.
Another part that's hard to say about build ability and it goes to that minimization
term is to build a castle or to build a shack. You know what I mean? But anyway,
so some parcels, for example, that are alongside a river, like in a channel migration
zone, do not have enough space for a septic and a well next to that high risk channel
migration zone. The reasonable economic use result would be really some other use
besides building a house. It would be, for example, a recreational use or something
like that. So, all of that all of those concepts are woven into that term. Perhaps
it's not the best term of art, which is why maybe these materials come along that
we can help describe that in other language, but I do believe that the term itself
comes from takings looks like Barbara
um reasonable you. This is the actual legal standard
under the undertakings law, state law and federal law, and
that denotes, you know, any sort of use available to the property, whether it be,
you know, camping site growing strawberries is another one that often comes up those
sorts of things that just sort of a minimal amount of use that can be made in the
property um to avoid taking the property. And that's not really what we're talking
about here. This term, reasonable economic use is derived, you know, it's a term
that's come into usage by other counties in Washington, to note um the ability to
put a single family home on a on a substandard lot, and that's really what it was,
it's designed um to mean, you know, that the terminology may not be
um you know, it probably could be better. It's just something that has developed
over the years in various counties as sort of translating into you can put a house
on this lot. Um And so, you know, it's not anything that is required by law.
Um The reel um constitutional issue is reasonably used property under the
14th Amendment, that sort of thing. Um So, um
so using the term reasonable economic use in our updated code, is that gonna cause
confusion down the road in your opinion? I don't think so, I there's a lot of
jurisdictions that use it. It's fairly one thing that's good about it is that developers
who develop here, but also in other places would easily recognize the term, think
Great, thank you. Can you live with that mark,
Is it defined? Did you hear that question? I don't believe it is to find you could
add a definition if you'd like. Yeah, I think it would help a lot of people Probably
it's also worth noting that we have a similar reasonable economic use provisions
in the critical areas, so not only is it something that other jurisdictions do, but
we have the same as a similar provision is a part of residential development for
lots impacted by the CIA. Great thanks for that.
Um Okay, what next? What's next brian, do you have further presentation?
Okay,
So we've now arrived at the Planning Commission recommendation that we have at least
two planning commissioners here, so we may elaborate um but the Planning
Commission adopted a recommendation at the special meeting on September
15, 2022. Planning mission proved the draft ordinance with modifications. Planning
commission recommended that we change language in the lot buildable definition of
J c c 18 10 to include a guaranteed right versus language that exists
now a just says a right to develop that is that's at the end of the definition, last
sentence of the definition. So, adding a word for clarification. Planning Commission
also recommended that we changed mistaken reference to scads
In JCC 1844 16, that's just a carry over from reviving
article seven Of that process in 1840. So we're
reinstating Article seven that was formerly to describe Hispanic process. We had
some carryover language from when we made those edits and created that language.
Um and so we've removed all the Planning Commission recommendation and changed the
language to instead refer the site development review instead of a site plan approval
for advanced determination. And then our last uh Planning commission recommendation
was to continue public engagement for this ordinance. Um That there is a potentially
some concern that not everybody who's going to be affected by these regulations is
aware that the regulations are being rolled out and currently being developed and
that we should continue public engagement as a part of adoption.
Thank you brian
and leave an opportunity here for members of the Planning commission to elaborate
or I can move on, I can say something. Um I think the commission speaks for
itself through its recommendations. Uh We thought about every word that we
recommended changing and uh and we also every word that we included in the letter.
Um I believe the language we used was concern
that to make sure everybody fully understands the proposal. I mean, I think we can
all relate to how um there are barriers to understanding the proposal. It's complex.
I think that the entire commission agrees. Speaking for myself, I think this is a
fair estimate that the entire commission agrees that this is uh very congruent with
the overall streamlining of making it easier to get permits, making it easier for
people understand what's going on consistent with all of that. And uh that's why
we voted to approve it with a couple of modifications, which are quite specific.
And I want to especially thank the staff for what I think is a remarkable achievement,
not just in creating us, but in in presenting it. And despite any concerns we have
about the outreach, it's difficult and um it's important to note that the average
was uh extremely significant, and hopefully precedent setting in in terms of
directly reaching people through the mail. And I know that a lot of people found
out about it that way. There are also stakeholders in the broader community that
don't know about this. And so, well, I believe it's consistent with our comprehensive
plan, which the public does support do feel that it's important for everybody to
understand what's going on, and it's it's going to be a a constant endeavor to make
that happen. It's not a reflection on on what the staff has done so far, it's been
valiant in my opinion. So, thank you, everybody. Thanks matt. I see that Kevin has
his hand raised um in the attendee list, so let's bring him over for comment. Kevin,
Coker is also a member of the planning commission bringing, and then we'll go to
Brent
we are okay, It's I wanted to be sure that uh everyone
understands, I've got several problems portions of this and I'll go into more in
a written format but understand that lot buildable. Um What we did on the planning
commission was say that it is a not it's not guaranteed to be buildable. So the there's
several things in the terminology that I think um is going to confuse the public
and create a lot of turmoil um In effect I think that
what the D. C. D. Is proposing is trying to capture those few lots that were pre
1969. Now we've got all of the lots injection county included in this that I
appreciate josh's comment that this additional step in application is trying to mitigate
costs. There will also be time involved. We have a D. C. D. Department that's understaffed
to deal with a lot of load that's going on and we're adding another permanent application.
Um Step in all of this that currently um any of my clients who have a lot that we
want to determine if we can build on it or expand. We go through can process where
we review all of those elements. So in my mind some of this is adding a lot more
um work and cost and time to all individuals who are
developing in the county and so I just I'll put it again this in a written format
that's a little more clear but do understand that lock the little does not mean you
can build um that's a confusing element that I think we ought to work on. Thank you.
Thank you kevin. I just wanted to go back to um the statement that the vice chair
made prior to the Planning Commission's action. We did go ahead and also provide
um an article for the Peninsula Daily News. Um really we were really trying to ensure
that In addition to the mailers that just the general public was aware that the Planning
Commission was going to be deliberating on the recommendations last Thursday. So
I just wanted to make sure that wasn't captured in um the slide that talks about
public outreach on slide 14 and I just wanted to add that to the record
any more questions or comments from commissioners staff.
This is D. C. D. Staff, Mark anyone josh.
And I'm not quite certain whether brian has another slide. If you do brian you can
move it to the next one. But I just wanted to be clear about the Planning commission
recommendation and when you're gonna see the details that we have an agenda request
that's due tomorrow for next monday's public hearing. And in that agenda request
you'll have the full Planning Commission recommendation including all the findings
that are made relative to the comprehensive plan and it will include the exact language
of the motion that was made to talk about this public engagement piece. So you know
we've just summarized it here and you'll see the exact wording. I also wanted to
clarify what is meant by approved draft ordinance with modifications because The
initial ordinance that we advertise that we made available to the public on August
24, um staff came to the Planning Commission with some additions that had been derived
from conversations with public health, principally about the implementation side
of the ordinance and we presented what we had on Thursday to the Planning Commission
which absorbed those recommendations into their proposal. So essentially the Planning
commission recommendation is the latest greatest part draft of the ordinance as of
thursday evening. Lo and behold we're still working on that implementation piece.
Again, back to that sort of challenge because of the moratorium timing of developing
all the tools that we need to be ready on day one if this were to be adopted on october
3rd. And so um we've looked in some additional things. I mean, even Mark brought
up an idea about, well what about if someone was just doing inside that something
inside the house, one of those over the counter permits that deal with plumbing or
water heater replacement, I think is the example you gave us Mark to think to wrestle
with. And so when we went back with our environmental public health colleagues and
our building staff, we went in and took another look and this was on friday and it
lasted all day. And so we came up with some other ideas um and and we're hoping that
those ideas wouldn't mean that we necessitate language change in the order itself.
But again, alas um so when we provide our recommendation tomorrow to you, the staff
recommendation it will include some additional features um really about the implementation
piece and I would say that it's not that the planning commission disagrees with those
because they never saw them. So to be fair to the planning commission there's no
disagreement at this point but they were unable to see these changes that we will
submit to you tomorrow. So you'll have the ordinance is approved as recommended by
the planning commission, the full staff recommendation um and any other accessory
information in your packet that will provide tomorrow. We'll put in the the laser
fish directory that's available to the public then we'll have the public hearing
on monday. You can choose to close that hearing or you can choose to continue that
hearing to the next week. That would be your choice and Joshua brian the planning
commission recommendations here. I guess specifically the definition of buildable
lot the staff support that the adjustment to the definition that the planning commission
recommended. So all the recommendations are supported by staff but there's been a
few more changes and for with environmental health on actual implementation. Thank
you. Even add that we might look at the uh input of the county administrator regarding
reasonable use should it that definition be included um Is it consistent with the
other definition of reasonable use? So we'll take a quick look at that too. Okay.
And does anyone actually permit changing a water heater? Really? Are you supposed
to permit changing the water heater? Yes, there's a requirement for water heaters
to be earthquake strapped. So we have to verify that the strapping is in place. Okay.
Yeah, wow. Okay. Learn something. Oh
yeah, sorry, I guess another example. Sorry,
but a better example, maybe it would just be an interior remodel that doesn't change
the footprint of the structure. In other words, it doesn't have an expansion and
it doesn't have land disturbing activity associated with it and thus and thus wouldn't
require site development review, right copy.
It's just that it's so difficult in some instances because even if you are doing
internal renovations and they're significant in scope and your properties in the
flood zone, it could trigger the substantial improvement provision that says other
regulations apply, such as ensuring that the bottom of the lowest floor is one ft
above the floodwaters in that 100 year flood. So, so these are types of things. When
we make one change, we have to look throughout the code to see if there are other
areas that of change that would be necessary.
Yeah, thank you josh. And Brent for affording me and presenting those changes that
some notes on them as a part of this slide. And really the last slide is just to
restate the timeline for adoption. Uh, make sure that any members of the public here
understand what our timeline has looked like. We have this september 15th Planning
Commission special meeting Which was a continuation. The September seven public hearing.
We've got today's workshop next week's hearing And then uh
potential to extend the hearing to October three. You know, we've said that already
made a number of times, but here it is in writing for anybody to reference. It's
also in our communication plan on the website. You can find a link to that at the
end of the story, man
and that's all that I have and we can jump into discussion. I had one question
relative to kevin's comment. Um, I'm wondering if his comment about the definition
of lot buildable is related to the definition that is included here today, which
includes the statement that a right to development of a lot can only be established
once a development permit application or building permit application vest pursuant
to j c c 18.40 dot 3 20 kevin. Do you are you still listening?
You're Yeah, I'm just wondering clarifying that. Your comment is relative
to the current version included in our packet. That that's not um, there's
still concerns about
um just to comment, it's what we did at the Planning commission in order to try and
make that definition work. Was that we added the person. This is not a guarantee
which in my opinion is an oxymoron we're calling it a lot buildable, not guaranteed
to be built. Were built on it just there's something not working there. In my opinion
that is going to confuse the public. That ought to be rectified. Well, maybe you
could qualify it by saying under existing conditions because I've heard staff say
that changes in. What have you might reverse the decision on
whether it's buildable, right? There's no guarantee until I was mentioned by the
staff. You come in with a permit and actually apply that can guarantee that at that
time you apply. All of the rules have been met and you can build. So it's it's a
difficult um position there. Um and I certainly think that um as we discussed, for
instance, economic use, we might, it may be defining critical areas, but we ought
to have it somewhere out front so that people understand what reasonable economic
use entails because a lot of people who have these types of lots are gonna be searching
for lifelines that allow them some kind of use of their property. That was at the
time it was created was under the current state rules. So in my mind, it was a legal
lot at the time that it was created. However, we've got this determination between
water record and legal lot of record that starts to whether or not it was an illegal
lot. Um, you know, all of those terms are getting very confusing in my
mind and I come from the building industry and running permits through all the time.
Like general is going to just build our hands up and get frustrated. I think we are
trying to. So you're, I'm I'm I'm really attached to your comments. So um a
right to development of a lot could only be established once a development permit
application and building permit application vests. Isn't that what happens now when
a builder is hired to build a house that you, you have to go and get a permit, apply
for a permit and it has to be granted. So how is this different than what's happening
now? Or is this just part of the definition? In my opinion, it's not different than
what's happening now where when I have a client approach me, they want to build a
house on a lot of the first things I'll do is go have a camp with the county to determine
land use, environmental health, public works because road approach sometimes can
be history. All of those things can be determined through can be used with the county.
Um, what this process that involved, um, lots that were
created and then after that fact zoning was created that then them into being too
small. Even if they did meet environmental health and all these critical areas. Um,
they don't meet the zoning. So the whole reason we got into this as I understand
it is that because there wasn't a public hearing on the fact that the zones were
changed back when they uh Created 1 - five. And yet I only had a one acre lot
is why we're doing this is why this whole exercise has been going on. However, in
the process we've now captured every other locked in the county and said everybody
is involved in this. And in my opinion, I think we're adding time and costs in a
environment where we've been discussing the fact that, you know, building isn't affordable,
we're losing the workforce housing using the full work housing. So just it's still
concerned and I know DCD has that in mind. The staff is trying to, you know, come
up with a way that this additional step and permitting, which requires, you know,
professionals getting involved in applications being involved in the rest of it.
Yeah, the DC decided it may be, but I think we already have the steps enabling us
to determine through the camp process whether I can design something for a client
that can then be built. Now we're recreating an application process for this. That
I think it's gonna have time and money to every project. I think I'd like to hear
from staff regarding how many people apply for a septic permit prior to determining
whether or not the lot buildable. So um when people retain a professional to help
guide them through the process of building a home. I think I might agree with you
um that you would have a cam but there are a lot of folks that I think they know
what they're doing. So they apply for a permit and subsequently find out that they
can't build.
I think that'd be a question for staff. I don't know what the numbers are as far
as that would probably require research. Right? Yeah. We couldn't answer that right
now, but that is a problem that we've identified. And I want to say that I'm glad
that our planning manager identified that we had some past processes in place to
address specifically an issue like that. And over the years it was removed. Um and
so um we're trying to solve all those issues and we'll um look with a fine tooth
comb um at Commissioner Coker's comments. If there's anything that we can do that
final version will incorporate that. Are there any other comments or questions from
staff? Can I see kate has her hand up kate. Yeah, I just want to feel a little bit
on what kevin was saying, um Which is that um And I would say I'm also I also like
the idea of the the site development review process, is that the pregnant um
I like that, but I do wonder if all projects need to go through that or if there's
uh some sort of process improvement where that is uh you know, a part of the existing
permitting process where, you know, you checked a couple of boxes, you know a bit
of a sensitivity test in the permit and if if a project potentially meets the
needs for site development review then it goes in that pipeline but not that all
projects go in that pipeline because it's probably most don't need to. Um So it's
more processed maybe than ordinance but I I do I think it's a valid point that if
indeed we're talking about a limited number of parcels that this applies to. Do we
need to put all properties through it. Um or could we have some process whereby those
are identified early in the permitting process and then get channeled appropriately
into that process.
Thank you Commissioner Dean. Um What I'll do is our team will look at this to see
if there's any revisions that we could make that will address specifically that that
comment um and josh I'll let him wait. Yeah, thanks for cueing that up. So again
um back to MArc asked about numbers and as Brent said, you know, I don't have the
numbers with us. If we had perhaps environmental health with us today, maybe we'd
have numbers but as Brent said we can prepare more um either as part of the general
request tomorrow. More realistically a portion of the conversation whenever you want
it during the public hearing next monday. So I would say this though about the anecdotally
what I've experienced. Um even just in my short time back so with the county that
is which is since june so I can think of a maybe a dozen cases already where
either information that someone received at a customer assistance meeting or by virtue
of the fact that a septic application was applied for without land use review. We've
encountered problems. Um Sometimes people say well I heard I was told at this meeting
I could do X. Y. Z. And then I go to the staff and say you didn't tell them that
did you? And they said no of course not. We said the caveats that you know they weren't
able they show up to a half hour meeting. They provided some they basically walked
people walk people through information. You mostly can get on the internet by looking
at maps and such. Maybe a few extra notes, hustle to provide those notes and then
that improves the process like Commissioner Coker said but it's not flawless and
if anything if we abandon this idea and go in a different direction definitely will
still have to revisit the cam process to see what improvements we could possibly
do to that to provide a different kind of service up front. Now I realized that lots
of things have happened like camps used to cost money and then they were offered
as a free service with some kind of budget transfer to D. C. D. And I don't know
all about the details there but I will say that it is a challenge for the development
review planners to both do the cams and process permits. Which is one of the reasons
I would say why permits are lagging right now is because they still have to do the
cam process which doesn't bring in revenue at least not directly so and results in
a process where you get a set of notes from that customer assistance meeting. But
that's it. Um And what we're talking about here is solving a variety of problems.
Another problem that public health and they can speak more to this um encounters
is that they're used to working with a fairly discrete number of septic designers
in our community. Um And those folks are well trained for the most part except they're
well trained in designing septics mostly and not so much on some of the other aspects
like the land disturbing activity or wetland identification or some of the other
things. And and also when they are supposed to provide a site plan to public health,
it's part of their application. It's supposed to identify all these environmentally
sensitive areas which are supposed to be able to get off this publicly available
information on the web. Sometimes that works great most of the time there's a back
and forth or it gets routed over to us and then we have to send it back to the applicant
because the site plan wasn't right. What we're talking about now is this again asking
the right questions at the right time and upfront service where the planner basically
does that work. Okay planners. The person probably arguably with the most experience
in recognizing those features and so forth, provides that analysis, provides a map
and some notes. Here's your blueprint for development in your case. You even if that
were the best wetland in the world in that corner, you can be 305 ft away and you're
all set with that regard. Here's some other things to keep in mind. Go for it and
apply for your septic development permit or your or your building permit by the way,
that lot buildable. The definition would be a lot. That's a legal lot of record that's
gone through the site development process to vest, then you have to for that guaranteed
right? You'd have to apply for the permits. So, so in that case, no problem. In other
cases, well, you're on the shore line. If you really want to build that close, that's
what you wanna do. You're gonna have to apply for a different process, like a shoreline
variance or um whatever the case may be, you're gonna have to but you're gonna have
to actually delineate that wetland if you want to get closer to it because your site
is so constrained that if we were to assume that's a class one like the best wetland
in the world. Um you're not gonna be able to build. You need to build closer. So
you need to actually delineate where the line is and assess what type of wetland
because then we can find out what the exact buffer is according to the code and then
there's a 25% of that administrative variance process that the administrator can
do. Otherwise you're now into a process where you're seeking a critical area variance
to get as close as possible. Or maybe for example if you found out that that wetland
is a class four and it only has a has a much smaller buffer than the biggest buffer
we have, then. Oh great. So now you found that out now you can dig test pits in these
other areas right now what we have are people sometimes, you know and again I don't
I can't say what percentage of times it happens. I just mean that it's pretty typical
that people dig. Test pits, they punch in the driveway. Sometimes they installed
curtain grain on the property to try to dry out a portion of it to see whether there
could be a septic system which actually that might be in what's actually factually
a wetland and so forth. And what we're saying here is that that's kind of how we've
done things and now that we're taking care of this legal lot of record question,
let's also focus on this question of asking the right questions first and so D. C.
D. Is the first door you come in? We provide the service we set you up for success
we also remind, you know it could also involve forest practices. That would be the
next step in my book is that we go to D. N. R. And we talked about taking over class
four general for practices which are when you convert from a forestry use to a non
forestry like residential development. That's another thing we could take on. It's
another actually way to speed up that process. Someone wouldn't have to go to D.
N. R. To do a class for general forest practices application. So that's just the
next step. And in order to do that this site development view is part and parcel
of that whole program that whole direction. And by the way I think I can speak for
environmental public health by saying that they completely support this process because
we've been trying to work with them and I think for how many years now I wanna say
20. Um on just some of the issues with the two departments doing different things,
routing stuff back and forth. Who's charging what, who's dealing with the customer
first And all of those questions and now we're both of the same mind that this process
coming in one door first um will rectify many of those issues. Sure. Is there going
to be a transition process. Yes there will be the wrinkles along the way that will
have to iron out indeed. But we're all working on a fairly large team right now,
um, on this issue and, and moving forward. So again, it's a proposal and you can
do with it what you will, I'm really excited about it. I think that this, you know,
while dealing with lots of legal record issue, this really puts the horse in front
of the cart maybe for the first time and a lot of our land use. So, you know, I know
that there are some problems and we should process all through this. I guess I have
a question for matt. I was wondering just what the tenor, I was unable to attend
the hearing at the planning commission and how, how can can you just give us a narrative
about how many, how much testimony you received and what was the general tenor of
the testimony?
Um, we received some testimony not alive. Um, and some of it was
from
impacted landowners say for example, was one on the west end, um, who were concerned
about thoroughly understanding what was involved. They wanted to, they felt they
were surprised to get a card in the mail that seem about such an important issue.
They found out about it. They had difficulty figuring out exactly what was going
on, which is not a surprise. I mean, it's complex. Um, and they were just
hoping to be able to understand it better and generally, uh,
in those cases grateful for people explaining things and, but at the same time it's
uh, you know, there are people that are really small lots and environmentally
sensitive areas who are, we're concerned about it or curious about what, what it
means for them or um and it's different in every case. So there's not really like
an answer for these comments. It's just kind of points more back towards how do we
let everybody know what's going on and and make sure that that input is received
as best as possible. And how do we keep figuring out other ways to outreach? How
do we figure out ways to explain it better even in the actual code. Um, and yes,
and then there were other comments and you know, comments from commissioners such
as uh what you've heard here. Um, I hope that helps. It does. And I guess I was also
wondering, I guess brian, what was the criteria for sending folks cards and how many
cards? I'm not sure if you already said this, I missed it. Yeah, about 1960 member
service. 1966. But um the criteria for developing that list of
property owners was to look with central services support at permitting history and
develop a list um vegan lots and not residential development
plots and to send and then to reduce the number. So we took, we identified all of
those lots be doubled for lots that were owned by the same property owner, just isolated
the property owner as the factor and got their mailing address and sent it out to
all of those property owners. So we follow um initially there was a proposal for
a Countywide mailer for everybody in the county and I think we then reduced to say
who needs to receive this the most and it's the people who um don't make the moratorium
exceptions and the people who own loss that were perceived to be most
acutely affected by the proposed ordinance kate. I see your hand up.
Yeah, I can't really go back to what josh was saying because I I appreciate that
this illuminates the mm can I, I don't know, I
don't want problems may be too strong words, the issues associated with the cam process.
Um and you know, I think, I think the hard part is that if we have one process for
every type of application that, you know, some are going to be very simple and uh
site development review process might be too complex. Some are really complex and
the camp is not uh thorough enough to address them. Um and so I just wanna say that
I I recognize that the cam process which we might not have made any easier by making
free to the public um is um you know, if this is an opportunity to think about how
we do that differently. I support that too. I realized at a time, the tight timeline.
Um, so that that might not be possible to do right now, but it seems to me that that's
the problem is that treating uh interior remodel through the same process that we
treat a application for uh septic insult for new development. So there's very different
things and they need different levels of review. So how, you know, how we do that,
that is in your obviously not mine. Um but I, I just want to say appreciate that
complexity and um if this is an opportunity to help fix that, great, but I also know
that this might not be the time giving the chinese frame Ron. I also got a little
snagged when you started talking about cams and realizing that there may be a schism
and public understanding between what a cam achieves and site development review
achieves and I was wondering if there was an opportunity to play scams on that flow.
I forget what brian called it, but it looks like a flow chart to me um with the different
rivers coming together at the end, but it is a cam at the very beginning of that
process or you know, where where do cam's fit into the process that you're um clarifying
right now. If I might take a first stab at answering that question, maybe adding
a layer of nuance to understand, you know, where cam fits in generally and what it
accomplishes versus the depth of information that can be provided during the site
development review process. I think a good example um is that cam comes can come
before everything. So before you're submitting legal record determination application
to the county, you can start with, you can you can get your picture off the fly in
a 30 minute meeting, what critical areas might be on site. What are the prescriptive
regulations that apply to them? And how can I start to develop a conceptual design
for this property based on cam information? For instance, especially for short line.
This is an area that we have at this giving the anecdote that this is an area that
I have reviewed a number of times is during a camp will state you're in shoreline
jurisdiction and there's a 150 ft critical area buffer from ordinary high watermark.
There's a 10 ft development set back from the 150 ft mark and then there's a 200
ft jurisdiction mark for short line and we can convey that those
different lines will be set back from ordinary high watermark inside of that half
hour can meeting. But we can't necessarily provide an accurate ordinary high watermark
representation. So when we get the permit application in after the can ordinary high
watermark that's determined by the architect or subject designer or whoever has contributed
to this to the site plan may not be accurate. So the site development and then we
engage in a back and forth and we have to involve Department of ecology and say this
is this ordinary high watermark determination accurate by the septic designer or
so and so and so we can provide a depth of information during site development review
and go through the process for our shoreline properties to identify an accurate ordinary
high watermark. And we can collaborate with the Department of ecology. We need to.
So the depth of information that we can provide is a part of site development review
for more complex, complex cases is better than what we can offer during the 30 minute
camp. And that means the result back and forth and adjusting site plans doesn't happen
as often
to answer your question. Yeah, I think it gets at it, but I still think we need to
be clear in letting the public giving some public guidance on what comes when or
if you have any questions, schedule a cam or you know, just having that on a website,
web page printed, you know. Um So I'm glad that we didn't have anything else scheduled
this afternoon. I'm wondering if there's any more comments or questions from staff.
And then I see we still have a member of the public here to make a comment. So I'm
not gonna forget that. Um and there may be others on who are on with us on the attendee
list who want to make a comment today? Go ahead Brent. Um and staff can come back
and schedule a workshop just to provide an overview. Now we've had camps for nine
months that were for free and so we could come back to the board and provide an overview
of how that process has been going um and also um provide information about what
we're providing the public on the web pages about caMS and you can look at the materials
and and so we can schedule that. I can work with the county administrator to get
a workshop um in this quarter, in in in the coming quarter. I think I'm, what I'm
more interested in seeing is just how cam's inter relate with this process that we're
outlining now, other than knowing how many people have done cams in the last three
months I'm more interested in, you know, how are we gonna thread cams into this process
so that it's clear. I see, josh has his hand up. Yeah, I know, I realize we've been
talking about this for a long time, so I appreciate your patience and so I'll be
brief. That is absolutely something we're considering Commissioner Eisenhower's,
how to uh morph the cams into something else or just think about how to integrate
it more into this new process. So I would say that in my mind the cams would be still
an opportunity, still an option um we may move to a format where we have more of
a planner of the day, which is what it used to be versus scheduling appointments
will have to think about that a bit. Um But really the questions would be more about
assistance with understanding applications, how to apply if you have questions before
you apply those kinds of things. Um that could be parcel specific to a certain degree
but as brian was suggesting perhaps less specific about each individual parcel because
we have this other process which is how you get those questions answered together
with a result you know rather than just sort of a set of notes or a conversation
that one planner has with you and then you come in later. That's another thing that
we get and we're working on this we have a lot of new staff, a lot of training um
potential there. Um But one thing we hear what we heard clearly and I'll actually
bring up something specific that we heard from Arlene consultant about the housing
Solutions Network survey about community development. And there was a expression
that, well there's an expression that is frustrating when you hear one thing from
one department, another from another. So there's that and we're working on that with
environment health but also that you know we came to D. C. D. We got directions,
we thought we followed them but then when we went back we were told to do something
we had to do something else something different and again I think that's part of
that sort of discombobulated communication loop that happens sometimes and that we're
focusing on developing a process that you're getting those questions answered upfront
in a way that you can then rely on that information. Again If you act swiftly after
you get the information you have a better chance of being able to get that vested
right to get to develop when you have a complete permanent application um and so
if you wait 10 years then um out bets are off sort of but um I guess the issues that
were that's part of what we're thinking about, what is the balance between the services
that we offer through the site development view versus what we do in normal customer
assistance meetings or other types of guidance like Brent just mentioned our permit
instructions or web presence and and the like thanks josh and I'd love to see when
you guys do come you know just kind of going through the process with inter government
too because I see that as a real opportunity to streamline the process and you know
that the complaint that you talked about is probably the most common one that I get
to that you know I went and they told me one thing and someone else told me something
different and then I had this problem with this contractor and then the landscape
changed again so um you know I love to learn if and how inter gov can help streamline
that and you know as I say I think this is this, this ordinance is specifically the
site development review is really a step in the right direction and making that process
more logical and step by step in a way that progresses each project rather than having
some, you know, uncomfortable delays,
any more comments or questions from commissioners planning commissioners staff,
I really appreciate your time and all the work. I know as matt said this has been
quite a lift and thank you for you know, queuing to a pretty pretty strict deadline.
I know it's a big lift. Um Okay, we did not have a public comment period as part
of this agenda item but as you know, I have, my penchant is for more public dialogue
and hearing more from our constituents. So we haven't been privy to all of the conversations
that you guys have about this issue and um there are people here who would like to
make comments and I would very much like to hear from them. So if you are online
with us um and in the zoom room and would like to make a comment on the conversation
we've been having this afternoon, please use the raise hand button at the bottom
of your zoom screen. Um I think I don't see anyone just on the phone so um and then
I know Liz sanur here as a member of the public and interested in making a comment.
Yeah, come on up, gotta grab the mic though,
you can slide it into that little cubby back there and we'll stay. Okay.
Um Okay so hi Liz Coker a lot of hats. We won't go into them today. But let's
start with a couple of issues that I have. And I do want to point out that um I have
been running a building forum every month with the building officials from the county
for the last year and a half to which the city and county have been sending people
all the time in Brett's in quite often. Um So this has come up many many times. So
I was a little surprised when I saw the direction that this took and I'm gonna go
over this with you. First off a legal lot of record versus a lot of record. Do you
know why a lot of records is illegal? Lot of record because it's conveyed. I believe
you said it. It's sold it's transferred. So it has to be recognized by the R. C.
W. In Washington as a legal lot. Now there are lots registered with Jefferson county
that are not legal. Lots. And they occur when high do you want to leave a little
piece of your land to a nephew or a niece? You can go in and just tell them to do
that and they'll split it. It's not a buildable lot. It's not a regular side may
not even be a regular maybe 300 square feet. Doesn't matter. You're allowed to do
that in the state of Washington and they will split that and that will be a tax partial
and that will be taxed. That is never going to be a legal lot. You think of those
2500 ft, very familiar with. However, however, those I believe were planted
And made. So if a lot was split before 1969, I believe it's August seven is the date
you gave us. It is recognized in the state of Washington as a legal lot of record,
not a lot of record. So we're getting into a really dancing area where we say, here's
a legal lot and now here, here's a lot and now we're gonna decide if it's legal.
I admit reviewing it to see that it wasn't one of those lots. I just described as,
you know, an inheritance or something. That's an illegal lot. Get it. And again,
now we're into another area altogether. So, um, I sent you all, I believe you got
it. The Clark County legal lot of determination. I want you to know all I did was
go in and do Washington State of Washington legal lot of records. This was at the
top of the list. It is not what you all received in the Planning Commission earlier.
I don't know why this was done in 2016. It was reviewed by the Attorney General's,
it was reviewed by many attorneys in Clark County. And actually across the state
to be honest. And this was found to be a really solid piece of work. Um, I want to
point out to you that what they say is this a legal lot of record is a parcel of
land that is consistent with the zoning and planning laws that were in place when
it was originally created. Well, if those laws were 1940, that's whatever, there
weren't a lot of them where they probably weren't a lot of planning rules in 1940
or 1880, but whatever they were, they are. So I have serious concern that in this
new document that you have to go through and be approved to be a legal lot of record
and the references for after 1969, it'll be approved as a legal lot of record. No,
I'm sorry, everything prior to 1969 is a legal lot of record and that has to be the
check box one. So I realize this is a lot of information. I did send it to you before.
I do want to say this came up in our conversations. Um, this isn't new to the county.
So I was really a little surprise that there was this big split. Um, and I really
think that we need to address this before you go further as far as the buildable
versus the non buildable. I see the red light. I'm sorry. Um, if I can beg just another
moment, I think that there's an understanding of, can you build on a lot? Yes, there's
a there's a whole bunch of rules that tell you whether you can build on a lot and
you use that to find out whether you're basically in the zone or whether you're a
lot is even possibly buildable. Going in and get invested means you put in an application
and the time is not a complete but a substantially complete application is how R.
C. W. Reads, I believe, which means that you didn't miss checking a box on page 42.
Right? I mean, no one's trying to dog you because you missed one box or one teeny
sheet of paper, R. D. C. D. Is very nice. They call you and they go, hey, come on,
send it in. That's not what's going on here. We want to make sure that people investing
reinvesting laws, those are protected. Understanding that you can build on a lot
that is already illegal. Lot of records such as several of these very small lots.
Their legal lots of records. Are they buildable? No Heidi they're not. Unless the
environmental health says you've got, I believe it's 15,000 square feet now for subject.
So if you've got a 16,000 square foot lot because you put two lots together And there's
no damage to his water and environmental and all that other stuff. Then our county
needs to allow that to be built on and saying what was before 1969. I'm not gonna
allow that. Whoa. You know that that's not helping with affordable housing. Nor is
it helping that most of these lots belong to older people who want to have family
living next to them. And that's what they're using this for. So I didn't see that
exception which Brent gave us in the moratorium that families would not be affected
by doing this and and the very exception that he went back and gave us immediately
and thank you for that way back a year ago. I'm afraid that got lost because I'm
not hearing that at all about when a family wants to break off and sell to an immediate
close family member because a lot of people can't go to a nursing home anymore. They
can't, Who wants to go to one after COVID, let's be honest. You want a family member
to move into the lot next to you and build on it. That was your plan 40 years ago.
And now you're 80. We should not ever attempt to take that away from the people in
this county. And again, I don't have to tell you, we have the third oldest county
in the nation, the oldest county in Washington. So we need to protect all those.
Yeah. People say that I've got to because we've got other people raising their hand
now thank you. Thank you Roseanne. Um, Okay, so someone did figure out the Star Nine
thing without me saying it, which is great. Um So the caller ending in 489, let's
bring them over and you have three minutes for public comment.
It's a lisa Hayes Brooke from jefferson County Public health, environmental, public
health. And I have linda Atkins. Just wanted to let you know, we do have staff from
environmental health here but our link doesn't allow us to to raise the doing things.
Okay. Thanks so much.
I just like to make the comment that we really appreciate working closely with the
planning department and staff on the really figuring out these finessing the details
in the actual process specifically regarding those kinds of um remodels that might
be minor or in the case of septic system repairs were all very conscious of water
quality. And we want to make sure that we're not limiting the ability for folks to
repair existing septic systems with a process that inhibits that. And so we've been
working closely with them on getting those details worked out. Thank you linda. So
just letting folks know that these comments are not part of the hearing record. The
hearing is next week. These are just early comments. And if you want your comments
to be part of the record, you need to come and speak at the hearing or provide written
testimony, which I know some of you have. Um Is there anyone else who's joined us
this afternoon online who would like to make a public comment. You can use the raise
hand button at the bottom of the zoom screen Or Press Star nine If you're on the
phone, anybody
else want to make a comment this afternoon?
Okay. I'm not seeing any other hands go up. So I'm gonna close public comment. Thank
you for your comments. And um I don't know if we want to respond.
Okay. Kate's got your hand up. Sorry, I had too many screens open kate. That's okay.
I was just wondering if um I don't know if it would be Barbara or grant um or maybe
josh will address the kind of legal rationale for why we are interpreting um
the question of legal lot differently. And I am looking at the Clark county um uh
documents that uh 1000. I'm assuming we are interpreting something differently and
we just love to hear more about that.
Barbara, do you have a response to kate's question? Yeah, I mean we've looked at
that and I think brian also has has researched this quite a bit um lot
of record is intended to encompass all those lots out there that were
created through legal processes such as testamentary provisions where you
know someone divides up their property and gives it to other um devices in order
to allow them, you know with the hopes that they could build etcetera. But you know,
a lot of times those things happen and they're not um lots of conform with zoning
and the courts have made clear that even though um testamentary provisions is
exempted from the subdivision act, it's not buildable. Um It's not necessarily buildable,
I should say because you know, if the lots don't conform with the zoning for example,
there's a lot that's created that is all critical areas, those sorts of things. Um
Cities and counties still have the obligation to enforce their their zoning laws
on these lots. Um So they are available though. And that's the difference. You know,
you could have a completely illegal lot that was illegally created that's not available,
that's a violation of the subdivision act. But there is a category of lots that are
that can be conveyed but may not necessarily be buildable. And so the idea with the
ordinance was created term that would capture that subset of lots and
identify them. Um And that being, you know, whether or not it was legally created
is a first step In determining whether it is eligible for development. So the second
step is going through the legal lot of record process which is 1812 essentially
0708 uh to determine whether the lot is eligible for development. Um we have
coupled onto that site development review process because we realized that um it's
really hard to make a sort of essentially paper determination of when a lot is eligible
for development without looking at some of the site characteristics. So um
legal lot of record is a term that comes directly out of the Washington administrative
code. And that is actually the code having to do it on site septic. And there's
a exception within those rules that allows any lot that's a legal lot of record to
be um to get septic. Um just placed upon it if it's
been determined by the county to be a legal record. And this was one of the original
reasons. You know, when I first came to work here in july of 2021 Phil told me this
is my first assignment was to work on this legal lot of record determination because
you know, environmental health needed clarification on what a legal lot of record
was. So um that's why we use that terminology and you know, I
think there there isn't a requirement that you use those terms in the ordinance.
We could change them if you wanted to, but we thought it was important to identify
the subset of lots that are available but not necessarily buildable. Um and then
also have a determination for those that are eligible for development. I hope that
answers your question.
Kate, does that answer your question? Yeah. I mean I just because I like their
stuff. I'd like to dig a little further and better understand. Um You know, just
do you think that it just basically how differently clark county interpreted the
what I'm guessing is that same whack you just mentioned. Um You know, it says planning
standards specify the type of county review process required to legally create new
laws. Um, so I want to answer that where we're saying like, you know that, that,
that that was never completed on some of these and so therefore those are not, we
lost anyway. It's very, very different. Starkly black and white. How to county,
um, interpreted vastly differently. Well, there are policy choices to be made on
this stuff. You know, like I said last week, you know, the G has looked at these
issues, difficult issues to determine how to treat these old class. No, I did not
really all that familiar with Clark county system, but it looks like they have a
less rigorous task for how, what lock can be developed. Um, and that's okay. You
can do it that way. Um, we look at a lot of factors including, you know, the issues
of water quality and the way our own environmental health currently administers
the code and we tried to create an ordinance that was growing with that. Mm. Yeah.
Okay. Thank you Philip. Did you wanna? I saw your camera. Come on. Welcome, welcome
back. I hope you had a restful break. Oh, you're muted. You got your microphone up
up around, pull it down, nope. That's not it.
I know a week. Two weeks gone. He's lost his all his zoom skills. Volume three weeks.
Okay, fair. I lose it too. Is it volume? No,
can't hear you.
Yeah, no go. We still can't hear you Philip not a word. No. Maybe
just unplug the headset and go with you.
All right. If you the heart of the problem that Barbara was talking about is in this
definition of log record that's in the ordinance that we were changing. Okay. So
if you look at the definition log record, what's stricken out is what Barbara was
talking about. It's the reference to uh that's not legal. Lot of record in the
old code and doesn't comply with farmers in chapter 58 17 of the R. C. W. And
that's where that administrative term that Barbara was talking about comes from is
from the whack that implements chapter 58 17 R. C. W. So at least proposed something
like the kid sap ordinance or for legal lot of record information which is much more
like Clark county ordinance. Environmental public health. Wait a minute. You've got
all these little bitty lots up into the bush. Uh And the Wallops River. Where if
those become legal lot of records without any thought about environmental quality,
then you're gonna have a water quality problem up there that's gonna be made worse
by doing that. And so that's why we got on this discussion that we're that we're
in. Now that also balances um environmental quality with these issues. And if you
remember from the from the presentation that that Bryant did the number one concern
is uh water quality about what we're doing with this organs. So I think that's why
it's important that the individualized and that this process being adopted because
we have water quality issues that are also being addressed. When you look at that
definition that I was just talking about the old definition of legal lot of record.
I call it the stupidest definition our code repeatedly. Um just to be blunt about
it because it specifically was not addressing the question of uh
of lot size and lot visibility build ability for purposes of the alternative way
that you can figure out what a lot sizes. And so this approach uh considers
that that's the big difference. That's why it's important, it satisfies the water
quality issues that were considered in the ordinance for the Clark County board.
Thank you, Philip
any other questions, comments. That's Brent no
kate any follow on questions to that. No it's I think it's I think it's good to be
explicit about that And you know we are making policy choices um based on criteria
and values and weighing criteria and values and we will get to do all this all over
again next monday. I guess I thought I have one question about this kind of following
up on this last week. Forget it's in the exception that the 1937 date to the
1969. And there was some uh I was under the impression we were
That we had to do this and obviously Clark County is you know, would allow these
1890 plat maps to be good and you know, if there's water quality issue, this isn't
the only way to to skin that cat to to address any water quality issues. And you
know, this is right that we are in a housing crisis right now. So I guess I just
want to understand the decisions that are in front of us that are defendable in these
ordinances that
I don't know what what I guess what is the decision point and what where, where can
we make this choice? I mean this 1969, the subdivision, the subdivision rules from
August 11, 1969. I mean Clark County is doing something very different and if it's
defendable, I guess has it been considered or it was until environmental public health
said we've got some, I don't know, I guess they I've got more questions than when
I started. That's what I'm saying.
There wasn't a question there. I know it's just a kind of just expressing ennui
can you fix that for me Phil trying to So we did we did consider something like that
in the process. Uh we started looking at, I mean this, I've been looking at this
for about two years when when pinky came to me and said we need a legal lot of record
ordinance and I think she said it really fast and I wasn't, it sounded like a lot
of records. I'm like, what did you say? You all know that I did not know that have
the greatest hearing in the world world. But um and so I just I did the same, same
thing that Roseanne did. I googled it only I got the kid sample not the park county
ordinance and said, well here you go, here's the answer. Uh so we've been talking
about this fix with environmental, public health at least since I think almost
two years. And uh and and uh you know, and Barb was right, that is I put
that as her number one priority when she went to work with county because we weren't
moving forward on it and we had to consider a bunch of different policy choices when
we were going through the process. I think that's the difference between an approach
like uh like Clark County or and the one that was ultimately chosen in this
process. We're making choices how that's going to affect affordable housing. You
can't know that I suspect that it's going to make, make it possible to have lots
that are available now that will be developable because of this ordinance because
now you don't have, you know, the the ability to do the kind of analysis that you
can do and uh and and approve lots that you wouldn't have if you have a clark county
type or county organ. So to me this makes good policy because it
considers a bunch of choices and balances all of them.
And it sounds like I didn't attend the planning commission meetings, but it sounds
like that's a main reason why the planning commission like this approach to. Well,
maybe matt can talk about that.
Yeah, I would I would say yes. I mean, I would say that, you know, there's a lot
of concerns about the policy decisions that we're talking about. And um I guess I
mentioned that my earlier comments in terms of Congruence with the Comprehensive
Plan is one way of looking at those environmental considerations. Um that's kind
of the benchmark that we use on the Planning Commission to look at something like
this and, you know, besides our what we hear from our constituents and our in our
own hearts. So yes, I would say. Yeah.
So I I have one, I wrote a question down a long time ago, but I heard you guys in
your presentation talk about um a priority of continued public outreach. And I wonder
what that looks like, Is that just like forever. We do a better job of promoting
um The code changes that we're making or is there a specific
public outreach that we want to do between now and say next week? Or October three.
And I noticed in brian's presentation the outreach to homeowners associations and
focus groups. I'm just kind of wondering if someone could characterize those efforts
to me, those outreach efforts like what did that, did we send a letter to the homeowners
associations or did we sit down with them or in the focus groups? Who were who are
we? Who were the focus groups Brian? Yeah. So the we identified
13 homeowners associated and some of them had email contact available. Most of them
were telephone numbers. So we left voicemails and communicated with homeowners associations,
especially we could through phone numbers. Um frankly, we didn't get a lot of response.
Again, I know we only have one continuing conversation happening with homeowners
Association out of olympic canal tracks. They're actually interested in using the
flat wide lot of record determination that we've identified the code interested in
that process as part of their uh utility planning and potential for creating a local
utility district, um coordinating that effort. That determination with beauty. Um
so we had some success, but low response rates. Again, we heard back from one that
we reached out to um and then Focus groups sign ups. There were 12 focus group sessions
that were made available. Um Since july at the end of july, We did not have enough
responses from the community except to fill two. We had 30 people record their information
as interested about 30, that might have been 34, something like that, about about
30 people who were interested in attending, and only six people who actually did.
Thank you.
And I would point out that, as I indicated earlier, we did have um public um um
notification of the planning commission's deliberations and I, and it was not only
in the peninsula Daily News, I just verified that it was also in the Port Townsend
Leader. Um and so we did, that was supplemental to what was just stated. Um and I
think one other component that I think it's important to note is that um leading
up to this, we did have um uh fairly regular meetings with a group of brokers in
the county um and uh that helped us see some of the concerns and helped us in informing
that outreach strategy. Thank you, josh.
Quick note specific Heidi to your question, jenny mccracken, our county mik mak in
why did I say that? I just looked at it to make. Yeah, our our community information
person attended the last planning commission meeting because she had helped write
those pieces that we sent to the P. D. N. And the leader and some people showed up
actually because they read those articles that they specifically said that at least
a couple anyway. And so we could work with Jeannie on another piece. So just sort
of an immediate thing is work on another piece, both in conjunction with the board
hearing next monday, which is coming right up, but also the decision on in early
october so that's the first obvious step. Then the second step again would be things
that were already working on, which would be to prepare the new application materials,
the guidance, the web presence, the statements and all of that that goes with the
transition process. If this were to be adopted, all of that work and then your broader
question. I think there's always room for improvement and outreach. But as was mentioned,
I don't, I don't personally remember a time when we sent out 1700 postcards, but
you know, there's an expense associate with that. But it worked for this particular
meeting and to a certain degree, but a lot of things are just Countywide thing. So
we just have to come up with innovative ways to reach the public. You know, my mom
got one. She's like, that's the first time I've ever received a postcard from the
county, that was great. So it was appreciated at least in my very near family. Um,
and I do notice that genie is with us. She's been with us most of this afternoon
as part of this discussion. And I also see the leaders been auditing the discussion
as well. So, um, maybe we can consider them, get them hooked up with the
conversation. Um, okay. Anything else? Anything else?
Anyone online wants to make a public comment? Oh, I already closed public comment.
I'm so bad about that Caroline should be texting me any second. So yeah, okay. Um,
well if there's nothing else this afternoon. I appreciate all the time. And I'm like
I said earlier, I'm glad we did not have anything else on the agenda? I looked at
the agenda last week and I said Mark, this looks lame, we look lame, but he said
I think we're gonna have a long discussion in the afternoon. So um yeah, so I appreciate
everyone's time and know how valuable it is and welcome back Phillip, it's nice to
see you. Um and yeah, yep, I
wanna have some of that rub off on me and brian, we really appreciate your clear
presentation. I just really appreciate the way that you present very clearly and
completely and come back to kind of wrapping things up at the end of a slide and
saying where we're at and where we're going next. So um appreciate your extra work
on this and josh and Brent solid work. Thank you guys and now we have the hard work
ahead but we'll see you next monday for the public hearing so I will um we
can call this agenda item done. And is is there anything else kate or Greg that you'd
like to discuss this afternoon, Mark, I'm exhausted after that
you don't look exhausted. Actually, I find it energizing. Let's talk about some more
code kate. Anything from you. I'm trying to think if
anything else to cover today.
You're not seeing anything. There was one thing that I touched base with Mark on
earlier being still being the new girl commissioner is um just confirming, is it
is it a standard practice for the county to close between christmas and New Years?
We did that last year and I've had some requests for my time so but I don't want
to make a plan of anything. Um Unless we're all in agreement that that's the plan
because it looks like the december 26th two at the end of that week. I mean it kind
of those two weekends are holidays. Yeah the county definitely doesn't close. No.
No I mean but yeah. Okay well I
might plan on not being here that week just saying you guys can go ahead without
me though. Um Okay well if there's nothing else, I'll adjourn our meeting for today
and we'll see you around the courthouse and then next monday. Alright. Thanks. Bye.
Thank you. Thanks everyone. Yeah we're done.
Oh great.
Oh