Pledge of Allegiance

Roll Call

Review and Approve Agenda

Public Comment on topics which are not listed on the Agenda

Approval of minutes

Announcement:  Funds are available through DDES to remove junk cars.  Citizens should notify Holly Sawin if they are interested in removing junk cars. 

7:10 PM - Sheriff’s Precinct-Level Community Involvement Program

Major Dave Germani

There were not any citizen issues, and because of this Peter asked about financial resources for the Sheriff’s department.  Six years ago Major Germani was responsible for 900 square miles, but through annexation he is down to 740 square miles.  Because of the reduction in size, he’s lost 12% in terms of calls.  He still has the same number of districts, and the population has gone up.  He also has five contract cities, and he said that we can still go to bed at night safe and sound.  Major Germani said, “Can we give the same level of service as six years ago or today?”  No.  The Dare program is gone at the precinct, and they respond to many 911 calls.  Major Germani said that he now has a handful of drug detectives and a small drug unit with currently 13 vacancies to fill.   

The Sheriff’s department is facing a ten million dollar budget cut, and this is the first budget cut where we will actually give people pink slips.  He will lay off two people, and reassign others.  He is concerned about the layoffs, but is more concerned about the citizens.  The Blue Ribbon panel brings out deficiencies in the Sheriff’s department, and those reforms out of the blue ribbon panel are going away.  The department is faced with cutting 13 administrative positions and 20 deputy and detective positions for 2009.  Sue Rahr will be looking at 45 additional positions to cut in 2009.  The budget cuts will not directly affect their contracts, and currently 50% of the budget is returned in contracts.  The money goes back into King County’s general fund.

These are the tentative areas that he will cut:  Major Germani will be closing two store fronts.  Four Creeks and Fairwood will be closed.   The Community Service Officer, CSO will be eliminated, and Major Germani is helping with outplacement.  Currently Major Germani has three clerks who complete more concealed weapons licenses than the other areas combined.  He has three civilian staff, and he will lose one.  His junior clerk will be let go, and sick calls will impact staff.  One drug detective will be going to patrol.  His FTO Sargent will be working patrol as well as running the training program, and sometimes she has 6 deputies at a time in training. 

The question was asked about levies.  Sheriff Rahr has researched levies and citizens are not interested in levies at this time.  If things don’t change, eventually there will be thresholds set where complaints will be investigated or not.  Major Germani suggested that if citizens want more details, to go to the website.  The budget is broken down in detail.

Thea Severn, Planning and Communications Manager

Kevin Kiernan, Division Director with King County’s DNR Solid Waste Division

Their plan is for 37 cities, and Unincorporated King County with the exception of the City of Seattle and Milton.  Their vision is a 20 year plan with a focus on the next six years.  Bill Beck a local citizen and former GMVUAC member has been on the committee for 10 years.  There is a Solid Waste Advisory Committee (SWAC), and the cities have the Metropolitan Solid Waste Management Advisory Committee (MSWMAC).  They work with stakeholders, advisory committees, and draft a plan.  They hope to have the plan completed by the end of the year.  There is a 120 day review of the plan, and it is sent to the cities and libraries as well as on-line for citizen review.   Peter asked that the GMVUAC be notified when the plan is released.  The plan has to be adopted by the 37 cities and the King County Council.  The facilities will have a lot more space for recycling, however, there are fewer facilities available now than in 1984.  They are putting more compactors in the facilities, which saves on fuel and staffing.  They are also looking at reducing trips by one-third.  The question was asked as to why we subcontract out recycling.   There is a proposal to bring recycling in house, and the King County Council is looking at it.  They are proposed upgrades to the Cedar Falls drop off by Rattlesnake Lake, and they know there are service gaps in our area and in the Snoqualmie area.  They are also looking at improving the bulky drop-off.  An example of a bulky drop-off is a person that has a sofa and not a truck. 

Cedar Hills gets about one million tons of garbage a year.  Trash is down in tonnage by 6.8 percent, which can be linked to the economy. The current life expectancy at Cedar Hills is through 2016.  It may be possible to extend the life expectancy, and extending the life of Cedar Hills is the least expensive disposal option.  Both Seattle and Snohomish County ship their garbage to large land fills in Eastern Washington, and this is a lot more expensive.  Waste incineration is an option, but it is much more expensive. They will look at the environmental impacts and SEPA in terms of changes and expansion of Cedar Hills.  A question was asked about methane extraction.  Currently they burn the methane in flares.  They are looking at injecting the methane into the Williams pipeline.  A question was asked about core samples in the area to see if things are really decomposing.  This is looked at all the time.  There are 400 points that are monitored for environmental control at the landfill, and the recycling in this area has extended the life of the landfill by 9 years.  There is no landfill shortage in this area.  Some of the areas are more expensive, but there isn’t a shortage. 

Waste prevention and recycling is set at the State level.  It’s a great way to conserve our landfill space.   About half of what goes into the landfill can be recycled.  Cans, bottles, and paper are still thrown away.  Food is ¼ to 1/3 of what is in people’s garbage.  Scrap metal and clean wood are also in the garbage; however, very little yard waste is in the land fill.  They are looking at goals that would have us recycle at least 55% of our waste by 2012, and 70% by 2018.  A question was asked about educating the public on how to decrease the amount of garbage.  Thea gave an example of a neighborhood that was challenged to reduce their waste.  She is hoping to expand the project to other areas.    They are looking at embedding the recycling fee in the garbage fee, and adding the bulky waste collection to this Comprehensive Plan.  They are looking at who has the best curbside recycling model in our area, and collection frequency.  Renton is looking at collection every other week.  They had very few people complain, and people disposed of less.  The savings in fuel is significant.  Solid waste is not part of the general fund, and they are funded through fees that are paid by users.  93% of the budget comes from the transfer stations.  The money that comes in can only be used by the Solid Waste Division, and fees are based on tonnage.  They pay into the general fund, but they don’t take out.  They are putting out their first draft soon, and it will be looked over by the advisory committee.  They will add us to their email list. 

Richard Gelb, Performance Measures Manager

Matt Kuharic, Program Manager of Climate Change Initiatives, King County DNR

Matt’s job is to look at reducing energy and fuel usage, and therefore reduce expenses.  He is also looking at Cedar Hills and the feasibility of injecting methane into the natural gas pipeline.  This increases revenue for the County, and reduces carbon emissions.  There is a serious discussion on having some of their suggestions mandated.  Giving citizens cash money for preserving their land is being seriously looked at.  It is currently a voluntary system because there is no government mandate.   

Carbon sequestration is a way to collect and store carbon dioxide from escaping into the atmosphere and accelerating climate change.  The question was asked about what is capturing carbon.  Preservation, planting new trees and soil amendment to add more carbon to the soil captures carbon.  King County is looking at ways to encourage landowners to designate portions of their property to improve carbon sequestration.  Matt commented that the current market value could be a couple thousand dollars per acre.  Putting credits on the open market has been discussed, however, is more complex.  What is simpler is if the County is in the role of providing credit for sequestration and bio-diversity.  

Hay fields hold a lot of promise for carbon sequestration because the microbial activity is sequestering carbon under ground.  We need to find out how to inventory the carbon, and look at carbon sequestration, water conservation, and soil amendment, and other actions that foster ecological good.   Their department is not limiting what can be compensated, but they are still working out the details.  They still need to find out some of the legal and accounting issues.  One thing that they are urged to consider is expanding this to property that is below the regulatory mandates, which currently dictates a need to preserve 65% of a persons land.  People will be interested if the benefits are thousands of dollars as opposed to hundreds.  An idea was brought up that maybe neighbors could bundle their land together in order to receive financial benefit from their land. 

The GMVUAC commented that King County needed to get the word out, and town meetings don’t necessarily reach everyone.  Newspapers are a way to get the word out and many members of the GMVUAC think that the rural people will support some kind of program to designate their land carbon sequestration plans in order to benefit the environment.  The use of remote sensing may prove to be a necessary step.  As they put their plan together, the GMVUAC asked that we be a part of it. 

Peter summarized the process we used for reviewing the King County Comprehensive plan for the third time.  We are going to tell you what the recommendations are, and prepare our recommendations.  Our comments are due by September 29.  We agreed to most of the plan.  There were a couple of exceptions that we wanted to discuss as a committee.  Chapter 3 (we agreed with it), however, rural amendment 3 we have a question on.  The question was on large schools in a rural area in relationship to having sewers.  There is concern about impacting the rural citizen with putting in sewers.  The GM&NRC made the document less stringent on greenhouse gases in 2050 than the Executive.  We felt that Chapter 6 was fine as well as Chapter 9. 

The GMUAC voted to support the Growth Management & Natural Resources Committee recommendations with some specific exceptions taken on 3 Amendments and 2 Area Zoning/Land Use maps as described below. 

Transportation Amendment 2 proposes a new set of Transportation Concurrency provisions including travel sheds, mobility areas, etc. The Area Council believes that the overall goal of Transportation Concurrency should be to stem unsustainable growth in areas with insufficient infrastructure. Unfortunately, the proposed new system appears to violate this goal and the Area Council encourages the King County Council to ensure proposed Transportation Concurrency provisions recognize and further the goal to stem unsustainable growth in areas with insufficient infrastructure, i.e., the Rural Area.

Transportation Amendment 4 proposes that transportation projects that address existing capacity needs in unincorporated King County shall also be given priority consideration. We questioned what “capacity needs” means. Does it only mean more roads? Does it include more transit? Results from the May Citizens’ Transportation Forums show a strong desire from the public for more transit--both routes & frequency. Once again, the Area Council emphasizes that the Rural Area does not want to see unsustainable growth and, therefore, opposes this amendment.

Area Zoning/Land Use Map Amendment 9 proposes to add 59 Rural Area acres to Covington’s Urban Growth Area. Following annexation this would effectively stretch the Urban Growth Boundary. The Area Council strongly opposes this proposed amendment as it sets a dangerous precedent that could affect any part of the Rural Area. 

Hobart Food Market is proposing to move the gas pumps to the side of the building, and the GMVUAC supports this as the store has been a landmark in serving the community.  Warren Iverson did not vote.