County Commissioners: Wm. L. McDowell; Mike Shelton

Elected Officials: Tom Baenen; Mike Hawley

Staff: Cathy Caryl; Diana Vaughn; Chris Nelson; Stan Bradshaw; Dick Toft;

Others: Bill Thorn, Commissioner-elect; Mary K. Doody, Whidbey Reporter

Grant Lawrence Term expiring January 1, 2001

Valerie Marsh Term expiring January 1, 2001

William Enger Term expiring January 1, 2001

CHANGE IN DESIGNATION )

OF COUNTY EMERGENCY ) ORDINANCE NO. C-166-98

SERVICES DIRECTOR AND )

AMENDMENT TO SECTION )

9.24A.050 ICC )

WHEREAS, state law requires each county to have a local organization for emergency management with a director appointed by the Board of County Commissioners; and

WHEREAS, Island County’s emergency management department was previously established and in 1991 the Island County Sheriff was designated as the director of emergency management for Island County rather than having a separate county official be the director due to then existing county budget limitations; and

WHEREAS, the county’s budget limitations from 1991 have been remedied and the Sheriff has requested that his position now be relieved of the additional work and responsibility of being the director of emergency services; and

BE IT HEREBY ORDAINED that Ordinance No. C-172-91 adopted December 16, 1991 and ICC 9.24A.050 are amended to read as set forth on Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Underlined material is added to the existing code and lined through material is deleted.

Reviewed this 7^th day of December, 1998, and set for public hearing on the 28^th day of December, 1998 at 1:45 p.m. in the Commissioners’ Hearing Room.

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

Tom Shaughnessy, Member

Margaret Rosenkranz

Clerk of the Board

Ordinance C-166-98 is adopted this 28^th day of December, 1998 following public hearing.

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

Mike Shelton, Member

David L. Jamieson, Jr.

Deputy Prosecuting Attorney and

Island County Code Reviser

• Contract #HS-01-99, Island County/DSHS HEP B Vaccine Injection

• Contract #HS-09-98 Mini Grant, Island County and Catholic Community Services, $2,500

• Contract #99-340 (Date Change), Americorps Ropes Challenge Program position, $3,000

• Amendment #2 to Agreement for Professional Services with Keith Dearborn, extending date to December 31, 1999 and adding $150,000;

• Amendment #2 to Agreement for Professional Services with Bogle & Gates extending date to

December 31, 1999 and adding $50,000;

• Island County/Solid Waste Management of Skagit County, Contract Extension #2, regarding recycling services on Camano Island extending contract to 12/31/99.

WHEREAS, it appears that an emergency (legislative definition) exists in the 1998 Island County Mental Health Fund budget that could not be foreseen when that budget was adopted, and

WHEREAS, funding for increased Millage subcontracts has been determined necessary for this budget year from unrecognized funds in the Mental Health

Fund, and

WHEREAS, funds need to be recognized in the amount of Twelve Thousand Four Hundred Forty Two dollars ($12,442) to cover these expenditures, and

WHEREAS, RCW 36.40.140 requires that a public hearing be held at which any person may appear and be heard for or against this proposed emergency appropriation, NOW THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED, that a public hearing be held at the hour of 1:55 p.m. on the 28th day of December 1998, at the usual meeting place of the Board in Coupeville to consider this proposed emergency appropriation to the 1998 Island County Mental Health Fund.

ADOPTED this 14th day of December, 1998.

IT IS HEREBY APPROVED AND ORDERED that the amount of Twelve Thousand Four Hundred Forty Two dollars ($12,442) be appropriated and distributed as shown within the 1998 Island County Mental Health Fund budget.

ADOPTED this 28th day of December, 1998.

Attest: Margaret Rosenkranz

Clerk of the Board

As prepared and presented by the Budget Director, the Board by unanimous motion, adopted Resolution #C-172-98 establishing salaries for non-bargaining unit employees [excluding elected officials] for 1999.

Attest: Margaret Rosenkranz

Clerk of the Board

By unanimous motion, on submittal from the Auditor’s Office, the Board accepted Application #OT-3-98 for referral to staff for review at Staff Session on January 6, 1999, and to come back with a recommended date and time for setting a public hearing if appropriate.

As part of the Woodland Beach disaster repair under the FEMA program, Larry Kwarsick, Public Works Director, recommended the Board’s acceptance of a construction easement per conditions including compensation in the amount of $208.00, from Ramona Snowden. The Board by unanimous motion accepted the Construction Easement from Ramona Snowden, Lot 20, Plat of Woodland Beach, associated with repair of Woodland Beach, and approved compensation in the amount of $208.00.

The Chairman opened a public hearing on Ordinance #C-160-98 (R-62-98), continued from the meeting of December 21, 1998, to consider adopting Island County Comprehensive Stormwater and Flood Hazard Management Plan. Approximately 25 members of the public were in attendance at the time of hearing.

Larry Kwarsick, Public Works Director, gave a PowerPoint presentation lasting about one-half hour on the Comprehensive Stormwater and flood Hazard Management Plan, which began a few years ago sponsored primarily by the Flood Assistance Account program. One of the issues he noted as far as the surface water management was some of the anomalies he observed.

Al Pike, 4282 Witter Road, one of 29 having a condominium located on Shore Meadow Road, advised about a huge water problem with surface and storm water. He referred to his handout for today’s hearing and the record, and provided specific information regarding the property in question. Page 2 shows the old FEMA map, on which Mr. Pike has shown in green highlight the drainage coming from the north down through and across Bush Point road. The "green crosslines" show s a valley that in 1996 and 1997 had 4’ of water, also the year when apparently the culvert underneath the road was plugged and flowed over the road. His handout provided an enlarged map, and he noted some draining in the area of some 4,000 to 6,000 acres, going past Trillium’s 2,000 acre clearcut and past Classic Road, the whole situation becoming unbearable. He asked for this to be included in the list in order to get some help. He suggested the culvert going through the property to the beach at the east side where there is another drainage ditch, if extended into the salt water would relieve the problem quite a bit.

Mr. Kwarsick pointed out that the fact that this project is not currently in the manual did not mean it could not be considered as part of the County’s six year surface water program and annual budget commitments. Mr. Pike’s submittal is part of the record and should be part of the County’s consideration as it deliberates on what kinds of programs and projects it should pursue and what funds are needed. This is an area where there was some fairly large non-conversion forest practices occur that changed the nature of the landscape within that large watershed.

John Graham, South Whidbey, President, Citizens for Sensible Development, thanked Mr. Kwarsick for the new document, and thought, along with the other documents on this subject adopted in September and with the Capital Facilities Plan, the County now had a far more comprehensive approach to the problem. The main problem he thought that had been the concern of CSD and The Coalition was the perceived lack of commitment by the County to create the funding in order for some of these things happen.

For example, page 1-1 of the new plan states: "the purpose of this plan is to mitigate the impact of development on the existing stormwater drainage system as funding becomes available" which to CSD is a loophole. In CSD’s view there is not enough of a commitment to adopt the key recommendations by the Surface Water Advisory Committee, which when taken together propose a much more tough approach. For example, the Advisory Committee recommended policies that the County shall implement projects based on priorities, shall establish policies for funding and implementing the Surfacewater and Flood Hazard Management Plan; the Committee provided recommended actions: implement a funding mechanism for a surfacewater management program and adopt and implement a standard drainage problem evaluation and prioritization procedure. The Committee went on to identify drainage problems, with costs totaled at 2.198 million dollars for the problems identified plus $150,000 more each year for maintenance. The Committee on page 6-82 states: "implementing the above capital improvements will be difficult if not impossible without a permanent dedicated drainage funding source as recommended in Chapter 7". In Chapter 7 the Committee recommended funding polices with a county wide surfacewater utility clearly their first choice. Page 7-23 states that the Board of County Commissioners rejected a surfacewater utility n March of 1997 and that "in conclusion, the Advisory Committee and the County Staff recognize that without a dedicated and adequate funding source Island County will continue to experience flooding and damage to private and public property from increased surfacewater runoff".

Mr. Graham stated that the key issue was money; the Committee identified 2.2 million dollars of problems that existed 1-1/2 years ago; now the County’s Comprehensive Plan proposes to allow 43,000 more people over the next 20 years, and Mr. Graham wondered what there was to take care of infrastructure needed for all of that. The Capital Facilities Plan for 1999 has $313.6 million entirely from REET and Road Funds, and others, with a total of almost $800,000/year; however, as pointed out by Mr. Kwarsick 2/3 of that is for maintenance, leaving only $250,000 - #$300,000 for new construction of infrastructure to deal with 2.2 million dollars worth of problems identified a year and a half ago plus all the problems to accommodate 43,000 more people. To CSD that was grossly inadequate and they believe needs to be much more serious intent on creating funding mechanisms, and he added, that was absolutely at the core of the Coalition’s appeal of this issue. There are good processes set in motion, but far too little money to pay for them; no prioritization and no established funding mechanism and no commitment to establish the county wide surfacewater utility which the Committee repeatedly said is by far the best way to do, and CSD agrees.

In terms of jurisdiction, Mr. Graham noted a related problem. Exhibit A, the Island County Road Department Drainage Policy, states: "the county does not accept administration and maintenance of drainage control facilities as a county responsibility except for ditches lying within dedicated rights-of-way accepted by the County…since many existing drainage problems occur outside the county right of way a stormwater utility would be a means to address them".

He noted a question of enforcement. He thought there should be more focus on "property wrongs", i.e. when a neighbor’s actions upstream send dirt and mud cascading down on property what is the mechanism for redress. The Comprehensive Plan deals with it by going in the exactly the opposition direction by decreasing enforcement procedures, reducing maximum fine from $5,000 to $1,000. He urged that the Board not adopt the plan without making the following commitment: prioritize the issues brought up by the Committee; establish a funding mechanism; and make sure the key element of that mechanism is a county wide surface water utility.

Harry Scott, 3831 Driftwood Drive, Central Whidbey, explained his property location as one of the RAID sites, a development of over 35 years of age. Last December 31^st he walked up the hill and discovered two 12" culverts from the County roads above. At that time, Commissioner Shelton visited on-site. He has struggled for the last two years to keep the water off his property. With RAID designation, without plans for protection of the infrastructure he is concerned this will condemn them. Driftwood Drive is a private road; Driftwood Lane a public road. There are some $300 to $400 thousand dollar homes being built in slide areas and he sees this as a lack of regard for drainage and forgetting to look at septic systems right on the bluff. His community spent 1.2 million dollars in the last ten years for upgrades to the water system and they currently have a moratorium. The community spend $150,000 to clean the roads last year. Some 90-% of the people live there full-time are middle to lower middle income.

Steve Erickson, Langley, representing WEAN, faxed comments for last week’s hearing and provided a copy of that letter to the Board dated 12/20/98 for today’s record as well.

In answer to Mr. Erickson’s question about the rainfall figures shown in figure 2-2 of the Stormwater Manual, Mr. Kwarsick stated that all the isopluvial maps that are used for design of systems are produced by the Federal government. He realized that WSU and other entities are also collecting data but the County uses published data from NOAH.

In that case, Mr. Erickson believed the design standards were fatally flawed because essentially it would be designing stormwater detention systems based on rainfall of as little as 80% of what actually occurs on South Whidbey. Typical rainfall on South Whidbey ranges from 30 up to 50" and those rainfall figures shown in figure 2-2 are far below that.

Mr. Erickson pointed out that the Plan does not identify a funding mechanism. The Plan as a whole does not deal much with major changes in land use occurring which individually and cumulatively are causing these problems. The County is doing nothing proactive regarding deforestation. There is no requirement for retention of native vegetation at all for any kinds of developments except in cases of PRDs . The County does not take lead agency status for conversions of forest land to pasture land which also increases runoff . He suggested the new regulations adopted by the County even reward developers for clearcutting and logging without a permit by allowing those lands to be subdivided, which in his opinion is a violation of State law.

The definition of major development seems to exempt land disturbing activities of 2 acres or more not associated with construction of a single family residence or associated with a Class 4 forest practice permit or a conversion option harvest plan and its associated grading permit. Logging without a permit is exempt and many other kinds of land disturbing activities are exempt as long as those activities are not for class 4 conversion permit or SFR. [Page 5, Chapter 11.03, Exhibit A #C-91-98]. Exempt from almost all the requirements of the Stormwater Manual are developments [page 24 of the Stormwater Manual] on parcels 2.5 acres or larger unless within a critical drainage area or potentially impacting critical area. It is unclear if exempt at which stage and how the county would determine whether there is a potential for impact to a critical area.

Mr. Kwarsick clarified that the Plan itself contained exhibits, which are in the adopted Manual and the adopted Storm and Surface Water Regulation. Most of the comments in Mr. Erickson’s letter will be responded to, although most address the Manual and the Regulation, not the Plan itself. The Stormwater Manual has already been adopted as has been the Drainage Regulations concurrently with the Growth Management Regulations.

Mr. Erickson stated that the Stormwater Manual on Page 28 apparently allows discharge into natural wetlands. He reminded that there needed to be a "no degradation of natural surface waters provision" [no net loss of function of surface waters]. On Page 27 of the Manual natural drainage systems prohibits changing the entrance of water into a natural drainage system on other properties but does not prohibit changing it on the same property where the development is occurring, and he suggested that the prohibition should include the property on which the development is located and water quality treatment. There is a section on water quality but it was not clear to him what triggers that and he also felt it unclear as to whether the regulations are consistent with DOE’s model stormwater ordinance. The Plan should contain a prohibition on clearing trees and natural vegetative buffers as the Stormwater Manual allows on page 32. There needs to be a no degradation clause for critical area functions, clearing trees and natural vegetative buffers; same with discharge of stormwater into wetlands, changing location. Also there should be a clear prohibition in the Plan that streams potentially fish bearing, that any new culverts in those streams should have to be fish passable.

Ray Gabelein, Sr., South Whidbey, Diking District No. 1, thanked the committee who worked on this, something he felt was needed and long overdue, going back twenty-five years. Everyone should either join a Diking district or get rid of drainage so it is not dumped on neighbors. His property at the end of the district has been in 4’ of water. He suggested what was needed was that the Commissioners put every watershed as a district and everyone who drains into those watersheds pay a little and the whole watershed can be served. There are about 1200 acres in the district but only 460 pay into the district and today with all the homes [18 homes built last year just in one development] being built everyone needs to be apart of it and pay small amount. He suggested reviewing what other counties do.

Chairman McDowell acknowledged his resistance to a county wide surface water utility, noting this issue having been turned down by a prior Board in 1992, and again by the Board in 1994 in which he participated, and important to note that at both of those meetings, the public input received had been negative enough such that the Commissioners did not adopt a county wide fee for a stormwater utility. Relating to Resolution #C-160-98 adopting the Island County Comprehensive Stormwater and Flood Hazard Management Plan, he suggested the following amendments be included:

In explaining his rationale, the Chair commented that the County already spends dollars for stormwater control, mostly for maintenance, and he did not want a new fund started, only to stop spending the funds that now go towards stormwater control. He did believe that if new money is collected for this purpose it should be spent in that specific area from which the funds are collected. Having four geographic areas [four surface water utilities] would be a reasonable size, and money collected in each of those areas should be spent in that area.

Commissioner Shaughnessy agreed with the two suggestions the Chairman recommended, although he was not sure four utilities was the right number, thinking perhaps it should be a few more, but if created, need to serve those specific areas. The last thing he wanted to see was the creation of a county-wide surface water utility, and very strongly felt that any funds levied and collected in one area should be spent in that area. He suggested a third amendment be included in the Resolution:

• that Chapter 7, County Administrative Options of the Plan have added: " The creation of any surface water utility larger than a drainage basin shall be enacted only after an advisory vote of that drainage district area, and said vote is to be held at a special election as outlined per RCW 29.13.010(2).".

Commissioner Shelton thought this ideally would be done on the basis of drainage basins or watersheds, and agreed that the example of the Marshall Road utility district was not a practical solution. He acknowledged that most of those speaking today were from South Whidbey, which he thought was because there had been rapid development, lots of rain, and because larger problems existed in South Whidbey than most other areas of the County. While he wanted to make sure the County pursued every effort within the existing County budget, one of the things he was committed to was being able to issue building permits with the knowledge same would not adversely affect the people downstream. In terms of the Critical Drainage Ordinance the County has already adopted, the County is on record recognizing the need to resolve storm drainage before continuing to issue permits. He believed this was a good start to address the problem, but he was aware that the stormwater issue would not be resolved without a verifiable funding source, some of which may be within the existing county budget, but suspected a larger portion would not be so readily available.

As far as other amendments, Mr. Kwarsick reminded that during last Monday’s hearing, some

modifications were handed out by Julie Buktenica that are now incorporated in the document, with the intent that the Board’s adoption today would include those modifications: adding two projects, one at Terronda, Central Whidbey, and another at Green Road on North Whidbey, and eliminating projects that have been completed.

Additionally, there are two other amendments to be acted on by the Board today, read by Mr. Kwarsick as follows:

1. West Camano Drive

Page 6-66 of the Plan referring to West Camano Drive, the statement: "Additional stormwater and snow melt continued flowing north on West Camano D rive (downhill). Near culvert #4, the runoff flowed over the bank and damaged three beach cabins. At culvert #2 above the County expended over $50,000 to remove debris resulting from the December 1996 storm event and to install a temporary outfall pipe to limit further erosion.", the word "damaged" should be changed to "destroyed" to reflect actually what occurred.

2. Forest Practice Amendment

"Forest Practices

Citizens, County staff, and Advisory Committee voiced several concerns about forest

practices in Island County. Their concerns focus primarily on the following issues:

• The County typically does not exercise its 6-year moratorium authority to limit

Recommended Action

• As described in the North Whidbey Watershed Nonpoint Pollution Prevention Action

Mr. Kwarsick confirmed his understanding that the lifting of the moratorium was for the purpose of siting a single family residence and not for the larger development, and he suggested it would be appropriate to insert in the second bullet under recommended action, dealing with the moratorium: " lifting the moratorium for single family residences".

Commissioner Shelton moved approval by the Board, with the correction of adding "lifting the moratorium for single family residences" and correcting the spelling error, of the forest practice amendment as read by Mr. Kwarsick. Motion, seconded by Commissioner Shaughnessy, carried unanimously.

On motion of Commissioner Shelton, seconded by Commissioner Shaughnessy, the Board unanimously approved for inclusion in the Plan a correction to the West Camano Drive section on page 6-66, to read: "Additional stormwater and snow melt continued flowing north on West Camano D rive (downhill). Near culvert #4, the runoff flowed over the bank and destroyed three beach cabins. At culvert #2 above the County expended over $50,000 to remove debris resulting from the December 1996 storm event and to install a temporary outfall pipe to limit further erosion."

Commissioner Shelton moved approval of the recommendation of Chairman McDowell to include the following amendment: "Chapter 7, Funding Options" of the plan have added "Any new moneys collected for the purpose of stormwater control shall not supplant the five prior years average annual amount of county dollars spent for stormwater control/ maintenance within the area where the new money is collected". Motion, seconded by Commissioner Shaughnessy, carried unanimously.

Hearing no motion from Commissioner Shelton or Shaughnessy, the Chair moved approval of an amendment to Chapter 7, Surface Water Utility of the plan to add: "Any future surface water utility created shall be no larger in geographic area than a single school district and all moneys collected within that district shall be spent within that district.". Motion was seconded by Commissioner Shaughnessy and carried by majority vote; Commissioner Shelton voting opposed.

Commissioner Shaughnessy moved an amendment to be included: that Chapter 7, County Administrative Options of the Plan have added: " The creation of any surface water utility larger than a drainage basin shall be enacted only after an advisory vote of that drainage district area, and said vote is to be held at a special election as outlined per RCW 29.13.010(2).". Motion, seconded by the Chair, carried by majority vote; Commissioner Shelton voting in opposition.

With those amendments having been adopted, Commissioner Shaughnessy moved approval of the Comprehensive Stormwater and Flood Hazard Management Plan and Resolution #C-160-98 [R-62-98] as revised this date. Motion was seconded by the Chair; motion carried unanimously.

Commissioner Shelton explained his vote in the positive in this case was because he felt it absolutely critical that the Board adopt the Plan. He did not disagree with most of the amendments, with the exception of the last two.

WHEREAS, RCW 86.12.200 authorizes county governments to adopt comprehensive flood control management plans "for any drainage basin that is located wholly or partially within the county," and

WHEREAS, the Washington State Department of Ecology’s Flood Control Assistance Account Program grants maintenance project funds, as established by RCW 86.26, to jurisdictions that have adopted a comprehensive flood control management plan, per WAC 173-145-040, and

WHEREAS, the Island County Comprehensive Stormwater and Flood Hazard Management Plan fulfills the requirements for a comprehensive flood control management plan, and

WHEREAS, the Island County Department of Planning and Community Development issued a SEPA DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE for the Island County Comprehensive Stormwater and Flood Hazard Management Plan, and

WHEREAS, three public forums were held to obtain public input in South Whidbey, Coupeville and Camano Island as part of the public participation requirements of FCAAP Grant No. G9600244 received by Island County Public Works to produce the CSFHMP, and

WHEREAS, Washington State Department of Ecology must approve the Island County Comprehensive Stormwater and Flood Hazard Management Plan and the Island County Public Works Department has submitted the Plan for approval, and

WHEREAS, the Island County Stormwater Management Advisory Committee and the Public Works Department recommended to the Board of County Commissioners that the Island County Comprehensive Stormwater and Flood Hazard Management Plan be adopted consistent with the process established under RCW 86.12, and

WHEREAS, the Board of Island County Commissioners concur with the findings and Recommendations of the Island County Stormwater Management Advisory Committee; NOW THEREFORE,

IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the Board of Island County Commissioners that the Island County Comprehensive Stormwater Flood Hazard Management Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A is approved.

REVIEWED this 23^rd day of November, 1998, and set for Public Hearing on the 21^st day of December, 1998, at 10:15 a.m., continued to December 28, 1998 @ 2:15 p.m.

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

William L. McDowell, Chairman

Mike Shelton, Member

Tom Shaughnessy, Member

ATTEST: Margaret Rosenkranz, Clerk of the Board

APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 28^th day of December 1998, after public hearing, with the modifications that section "Chapter 7, Funding Options" of the plan have added "Any new moneys collected for the purpose of stormwater control shall not supplant the five prior years average annual amount of county dollars spent for stormwater control/ maintenance within the area where the new money is collected" and section "Chapter 7, Surface Water Utility" of the plan have added "Any future surface water utility created shall be no larger in geographic area than a single school district and all moneys collected within that district shall be spent within that district; and Section "Chapter 7, County Administrative Options" of the plan have added " The creation of any surface water utility larger than a drainage basin shall be enacted only after an advisory vote of that drainage district area, and said vote is to be held at a special election as outlined per RCW 29.13.010(2).".

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

William L. McDowell, Chairman

Tom Shaughnessy, Member

Mike Shelton, Member

ATTEST: Margaret Rosenkranz, Clerk of the Board

At 2:45 p.m., the Board was scheduled to conduct a public hearing, as scheduled and advertised, for the purpose of considering Ordinance #C-169-98 [PLG-044-98] Amendment to Policy #6, County Wide Planning Policies. Due to the length of the public hearing that began at 2:15 p.m., said hearing actually

was held at 4:15 p.m.

Vince Moore, Planning Director, presented Amendment to Policy #6 of the County Wide Planning Policies. The Amendment to Policy #6 relates to policies for county wide transportation facilities and strategies, and the amendments consists of adding item #6 as follows:

Steve Dernbach, Mayor, City of Oak Harbor, thanked the Board for the County’s cooperation with the City over the past three years in particular, enabling such cooperative actions such as the City being able to continue its operation with the Court; solid waste operations; help with the senior center from the County in recognition that 50% of its use is from County residents. The Mayor took this opportunity to express his appreciation to Commissioner Shaughnessy for his sound fiscal management of Island County during his tenure as County Commissioner.

Mayor Dernbach thought the CWPP’s had gone very well too. At the December 8, 1998, Oak Harbor City Council meeting, the Council approved the County Wide Planing Policies, including amendment to Policy #6. Since that time, the City received a copy of the letter from the City of Langley in opposition, which he did not understand since Policy #6 applies to transportation and asks everyone to cooperate. He confirmed that the City of Oak Harbor was solidly behind the amendment to Policy #6 of the CWPP’s as written, and the County Wide Planning Policies overall, other than after the cited RCW 36.70A, instead of "and" the correct language should be " as amended by".

Commissioner Shelton moved adoption of the addition of item number 6 under Policy Number 6 as read by Planning Director Moore, with the exception of replacing the word "and" after RCW 36.70A with "as amended by" by SHB 1487, to read: "…RCW 36.70A as amended by SHB 1487.". Motion, seconded by Commissioner Shaughnessy, carried unanimously.

6. All jurisdictions within Island County will cooperate with each other and the State of Washington in coordinated planning for State Highway and Ferry facilities with respect to current revisions to RCW 36.70A as amended by SHB 1487. This coordination recognizes that the State Department of Transportation will be primarily responsible for establishment and maintenance of the level of service for these facilities.

By unanimous motion, the Board scheduled a Special Session to conduct public hearings on February 1, 1999, at 3:00 p.m., at Terry’s Corner Fire Station located at 525E North Camano Drive, Camano Island, to consider the following:

Taken as a consent agenda, the Board, by unanimous motion, approved the following, noting all items having been previously discussed and reviewed at staff session:

Resolution #C-173-98 (R-59-98) – In the Matter of Closing Island County’s Completed County Road Projects and Miscellaneous Projects

WHEREAS, R.C.W. 36.77.070 requires the publication of the true and complete costs, and a brief description of all County Road Projects where the day labor, either estimated or actual cost, exceeds twenty-five hundred dollars. NOW, THEREFORE,

BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that the following County Road Project(s) and the total costs as shown on the attached sheet(s) are hereby approved and those C.R.P.'s with day labor in excess of $2,500 be published in the local newspaper.

NUMBER WORK ORDER NO. NAME

96-01 85 Ault Field/Langley Blvd Traffic Signal

NOW BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the projects on the attached sheet(s) are completed and therefore are closed to all charges as of  December 23, 1998.

APPROVED this 28^th day of December 28, 1998.

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS