Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019/06/11 - Regular Packet MASON COUNTY TO: BOARD OF MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Reviewed: FROM: Jennifer Giraldes Ext. 380 DEPARTMENT: Support Services Action Agenda DATE: June 11, 2019 No. 4.1 ITEM: Correspondence 4.1.1 Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board sent liquor license application for Allyn Community Association held at Port of Allyn Waterfront Park 18560 WA-3, Allyn. 4.1.3 Jan Morris sent in application for Lodging Tax Advisory Committee. Attachments: Originals on file with the Clerk of the Board. WASHINGTON STATE LIQUOR AND CANNABIS BOARD - LICENSE SERVICES 3000 Pacific Ave SE - P 0 Box 43075 Olympia WA 98504-3075 FAX:360-753-2710 specialoccasions@lcb.wa.gov Fax: 360-753-2710 TO: MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MAY 30, 2019 E C HE]VE SPECIAL OCCASION #: 091035 JUN 03 2019 ALLYN COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION 220 E CRONQUIST RD Mason"County Commissioners ALLYN WA 98524 DATE: JULY 19, 2019 TIME: 5 PM TO 10 PM JULY 20, 2019 10 AM TO 10 PM JULY 21, 2019 10 AM TO 7:30 PM PLACE: PORT OF ALLYN WATERFRONT PARK (ENCLOSED) - 18560 WA-3, ALLYN CONTACT: BONNIE KNIGHT (DOB: 12. 10. 1942) 360-801-1064 SPECIAL OCCASION LICENSES * _Licenses to sell beer on a specified date for consumption at a specific place. * _License to sell wine on a specific date for consumption at a specific place. * _Beer/Wine/Spirits in unopened bottle or package in limited quantity for off premise consumption. * _Spirituous liquor by the individual glass for consumption at a specific place. If return of this notice is not received in this office within 20 days from the above date, we will assume you have no objections to the issuance of the license. If additional time is required please advise. 1. Do you approve of applicant? YES NO 2. Do you approve of location? YES NO 3. If you disapprove and the Board contemplates issuing a license, do you want a hearing before final action is taken? YES NO OPTIONAL CHECK LIST EXPLANATION YES NO LAW ENFORCEMENT YES NO HEALTH & SANITATION YES NO FIRE, BUILDING, ZONING YES NO OTHER: YES NO If you have indicated disapproval of the applicant, location or both, please submit a statement of all facts upon which such objections are based. DATE SIGNATURE OF MAYOR, CITY MANAGER, COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OR DESIGNEE Ilk V-U cc: CMMRS Neatherlin, Shutty&Trask Clerk -, plane *1854 � MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS JUN 0 3 219 411 NORTH FIFTH STREET MI►�COUNTY SHELTON WA 98584 C�MtsgtONERS Fax 360-427-8437, Voice 360-427-9670, Ext. 419;275-4467 or 482-5269 1 AM SEEKING APPOINTMENT TO 0`�X' ( I t U•.a w w ch n [.tc.e, NAME: f f 1 S ADDRESS: PHONE: CITY/ZIP: ggSqg VOTINI§PRECINCT: �(S� WORK PHONE: (OR AREA IN THE COUNTY YOU LIVE) E-MAIL: )an (� hLr�vdWQ�rf d SII�� 64}I-. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMUNITYSERVICE EMPLOYMENT: (IF RETIRED, PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE) (ACTIVITIES OR MEMBERSHIPS) COMPANY: T T1 r(,� wyre N yl i l YRS q ��,lAtln L (,l,�J�i�Q�✓t1r �.oDd �otn-oLYherw¢X� POSITION: QWNG� (,t,H(61 %4_f4,-gAg 5 WL 6k,2,� 1 f bt yf t<- COMPANY: IA)016►1 /rYRS Z cAk4 Yt,� CTi"I s a- 41 U 6yq�ix- POSITION: �T- e-� Prw- ---- - a----- --------- r ------ �� y4rws In your words,what do you perceive is the role or purpose of the Board, Committee or Council for which you are applying: 0 f4sea v"L a., fie- rr✓c�a>r. rt�a �i,< „�, G�,t rl�; 5�; s CL V1 P�i'fi(YG S What interests, skills do you wish to offer the Board, Committee, or Council? h s rvm" 116, fu y/ - rh�✓e l o a�:���� -w v z'- hz's of -4, NC A-uvoj a.,4- C�1 P 1 5, ��^( l► i kf�✓�� ��/V� � u��/I Yl^�il� l�J 4YYy 3� 19 0'n Please list any financial, professional, or voluntary affiliations which may influence or affect your position on this Board: (i.e. create a potential conflict of interest) LL e-e- C.WW cc a,�pa,ler Your participation is dependent upon attending certain trainings made available by the County during regular business hours (such as Open Public Meetings Act and Public Records).The trainings would be at no cost to you.Would you be able to attend such trainings? e- Realistically, how much time can you qNe4qthis position? 5'10 - /kw� fi `^ w'►` �'"� �rSs ,�surnivw�✓ Quarterly Monthl, Weekly Daily y�,� Office Use Only 3,2_0161 Appointment Date Sign ture Date Term Expire Date BOARD OF MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' PROCEEDINGS Mason County Commission Chambers, 411 North 5th Street, Shelton, WA May 7, 2019 1. Call to Order—The Chairperson called the regular meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. 2. Pledge of Allegiance—Chief Hanson led the flag salute. 3. Roll Call — Present: Commissioner District 1 - Randy Neatherlin; Commissioner District 2— Kevin Shutty; Commissioner District 3 — Sharon Trask. 4. Correspondence and Organizational Business 4.1 Correspondence 4.1.1 Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board sent liquor license applications for the following: North Mason Coalition of Churches and Community for an event at The Hub 111 Old Belfair Hwy Belfair; and Harstine Island Community Club at 3371 East Harstine Island Rd North, Shelton. 4.1.2 Gerald Frye sent in a letter regarding roads within the Lake Cushman Home Owners Association. 4.1.3 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) sent a Letter of Map Revision based on a Fill (LOMR-F) Determination Document. 4.1.4 Received a letter of interest from Kaye Massie to serve on Mason County Cemetery District #1. 4.1.5 Russell Sackett sent in an application for Mason County Historic Preservation board. 4.1.6 Jeff Bickford sent in an application for the Parks and Trails Advisory Board. 4.1.7 Forterra sent in Notice of conservation easement acquisition of property in Mason County (RCO application #19-1533). 4.1.8 William Bezanson brought in an application for Civil Service Commission. 4.2 Proclamation: National Corrections Officer and Employee Appreciation Week—Cmmr. Trask 4.3 Proclamation: National Police Week—Cmmr. Shutty 5. Open Forum for Citizen Input— 5.1 Monte Ritter once again spoke about the Public Benefit Rating System (PBRS) and the option to use funds from PBRS to help create trails. He then spoke about the Romance Hill connector for the Belfair Bypass and showed the Board some documents and maps. 5.2 William Ziegler spoke about the war on drugs and how it seems to be failing. 5.3 Sheriff Salisbury announced that the Law Enforcement Torch Run is coming up and also announced that there are t-shirts on sale for $20 and the full amount goes back to Special Olympics. 6. Adoption of Agenda - Cmmr.Trask/Neatherlin moved and seconded to adopt the agenda as published. Motion carried unanimously. N-aye; S-aye; T-aye. 7. Approval of Minutes-April 15th, April 22nd and April 29, 2019 Briefing Minutes Cmmr. Trask/Neatherlin moved and seconded to approve the April 15, April 22 and April 29 Briefing Minutes as written. Motion carried unanimously. N-aye; S-aye; T-aye. 8. Approval of Action Agenda: 8.1 Approval of the Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization (PRTPO) Interlocal Agreement (ILA). 8.2 Approval to post and fill a full-time caseworker position for Therapeutic Courts at a Range 10 on the pay scale. BOARD OF MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' PROCEEDINGS May 7, 2019 - PAGE 2 8.3 Approval to execute the resolution setting a hearing date with the Hearings Examiner for Wednesday, June 12, 2019 at 1:00 p.m. to consider public comment on the petition for vacation of a portion of an un-named alley in the Plat of Allyn. (Ex.A—Res.36-19) 8.4 Approval to set a hearing on Tuesday, May 21, 2019 at 9:15 a.m. to receive public comment and consider sale of the following parcels: 32021-56-02001, 32021-55- 02011, and 32021-56-02004. 8.5 Approval of the Public Safety Testing Agreement to provide promotional testing services for the Corrections Lieutenant position. The professional services agreement includes a Work Performance Rating and a Command Skills and Abilities Promotional Test. The amount of the agreement is $6,750, plus associated travel expenses as outlined in the agreement. 8.6 Approval of the Resolution of Intent to form a lake management district for Spencer Lake (LMD #3) for a 10-year period commencing in 2020 and setting a public hearing on Tuesday, June 11, 2019 at 9:15 a.m. pursuant to RCW 36.61.030. (Ex.B—Res.37-19) 8.7 Approval of Warrants &Treasure Electronic Remittances Claims Clearing Fund Warrant #s 8063848-8064053 $ 927,297.99 Direct Deposit Fund Warrant #s 58323-58698 $ 685,104.07 Salary Clearing Fund Warrant #s 7004376-7004402 $ 476,436.00 8.8 Approval of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Squaxin Island Tribe for Water Quality work within Shellfish Protection Districts. 8.9 Approval of a Resolution setting the amounts of bonds for Mason County officials, authorizing the Human Resources Department to obtain bonds for County Officials, setting a public officials position schedule bond and creating a Mason County Code. (Ex.C—Res.38-19) 8.10 Approval to appoint Carl Soper to the Mason County Board of Equalization as an alternate member, for a three-year term ending May 31, 2022. 8.11 Approval of an interim online privacy policy for personally identifiable information until superseded by countywide adopted or amended policy. 8.12 Approval of the resolution setting the salary of the elected Sheriff at 5% above that of the Undersheriff and the salaries of the Auditor, Assessor, Clerk, Coroner, and Treasurer (Elected Officials) to that of the highest paid Mason County Commissioner effective January 1, 2020 and thereafter. (Ex.D—Res.39-19) Cmmr. Shutty requested that item 8.12 be removed for discussion. Cmmr. Neatherlin/Trask moved and seconded to approve action items 8.1 through 8.11. Motion carried unanimously. N-aye; S-aye; T-aye. 8.12 Frank Pinter presented the proposed resolution. Auditor, Paddy McGuire opposed the pay raise for the Auditor. He spoke to the wonderful job done by his staff and the unfairness of him receiving the raise over his staff. Assessor, Patty McLean also opposed the pay raise and noted that this raise should go to her staff. An unknown gentleman said that the Sheriff should be making more than the deputies and is in favor of the raise. BOARD OF MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' PROCEEDINGS May 7, 2019 - PAGE 3 Undersheriff Adams spoke in support of the Sheriff receiving this raise. He gave a short history of pay raises in other counties noting this raise will be consistent with neighboring counties. Cmmr. Trask/Shutty moved and seconded to approve the resolution setting the salary of the elected Sheriff at 50/o above that of the Undersheriff and the salaries of the Auditor, Assessor, Clerk, Coroner, and Treasurer(Elected Officials) to that of the highest paid Mason County Commissioner effective January 1, 2020 and thereafter. Cmmr. Neatherlin voiced his opposition to this resolution noting that elected officials don't have to report to work as a normal employee and are not always held to the same standards. He stated that he believes no elected should be making over $100,000 per year. Cmmr. Neatherlin noted that the Sheriff increase will be a 39% increase which is the largest given to one person in Mason County. Cmmr. Trask noted that this was not a quick decision and spoke to her research within other Counties. She noted that this isn't about one person, but instead is about attracting qualified applicants as the County grows. Cmmr. Shutty said that this pay raise isn't for one person; it's instead for future growth. He noted the counties that have the Sheriff at 5% above that of the Undersheriff. Cmmr. Shutty then referred to comments made by Cmmr. Neatherlin. Motion carried. N-nay; S-aye; T-aye. 9. Other Business (Department Heads and Elected Officials)- None 10. 9:15 a.m. Public Hearings and Items set for a certain time— 10.1 Public Hearing to consider public comment on the sale of surplus parcel no. 32105- 50-23000. Staff: Frank Pinter Frank said this parcel is on E. Hyland Drive and currently has an offer of$65,000. No public comment received. Cmmr. Neatherlin/Trask moved and seconded to sell parcel 32105-50-23000 in the amount of$65,000. Motion carried unanimously. N-aye; S-aye; T-aye. (Ex.E— Res.40-19) 10.2 Public Hearing to consider approval of the resolution to submit a ballot proposition on the August ballot to enact the .3% Public Safety Sales Tax. Staff: Frank Pinter Frank Pinter explained that funds received from this tax would be used exclusively for criminal justice purposes such as additional corrections deputies, a jail improvement reserve, pre-trial court services, and public defense. No public comment received. Cmmr Trask/Neatherlin moved to approve the resolution to submit a ballot proposition on the August ballot to enact the .3% Public Safety Sales Tax. BOARD OF MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' PROCEEDINGS May 7, 2019 - PAGE 4 Cmmr. Neatherlin said he would vote in favor of this resolution to allow the people the chance to make the decision on whether or not to pass this item. Cmmr. Shutty noted that this is one of the options from the Citizens Budget group, and has been recommended unanimously by the Mason County Criminal Justice Working Team. Motion carried unanimously. N-aye; S-aye; T-aye. (Ex. F—Res.41-19) 11. Board's Reports and Calendar-The Commissioners reported on meetings attended the past week and announced their upcoming weekly meetings. 12. Adjournment—The meeting adjourned at 10:07 a.m. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: MASON COUNTY, WASHINGTON Melissa Drewry, Clerk of the Board Kevin Shutty, Chair Sharon Trask, Commissioner Randy Neatherlin, Commissioner BOARD OF MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' PROCEEDINGS Mason County Commission Chambers, 411 North 5th Street, Shelton, WA May 21, 2019 1. Call to Order—The Chairperson called the regular meeting to order at 9:01 a.m. 2. Pledge of Allegiance — Fire Marshal Jeromy Hicks led the flag salute. 3. Roll Call — Present: Commissioner District 1 - Randy Neatherlin; Commissioner District 2— Kevin Shutty; Commissioner District 3 — Sharon Trask. 4. Correspondence and Organizational Business 4.1 Correspondence 4.1.1 B. Dean Byrd, Kevin Swett, Patrick Tarzwell, Ted Drogmund and Theodore"Ted" Jackson sent in applications for the Civil Service Commission. 4.1.2 Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board sent a liquor license application for Mason General Hospital Foundation for an event at Alderbrook Golf&Yacht Club 330 E. County Club Drive, Union. 4.1.3 Martin Roswald sent in comments about Fireworks. 4.2 Presentation of Certificate of Good Practice Staff: Cmmr. Shutty 4.3 Proclamation- National Public Works Week Staff: Cmmr. Trask 4.4 News Release-Burn Restrictions Staff: Jeromy Hicks 5. Open Forum for Citizen Input— 5.1 Monty Ritter spoke about the Public Benefit Rating System and how it lines up with federal requirements. 5.2 Cheryl Williams announced a League of Women Voters meeting being held at the PUD 3 building tonight. 5.3 Ken VanBuskirk spoke about wildfire information and suggested one of the Commissioners attend a meeting in Kitsap County regarding fireworks. 6. Adoption of Agenda - Cmmr. Trask/Neatherlin moved and seconded to adopt the agenda as published. Motion carried unanimously. N-aye; S-aye; T-aye. 7. Approval of Minutes- May 6, 2019 Briefing Minutes; April 16, April 23, and May 14, 2019 Regular meeting minutes Cmmr. Neatherlin/Trask moved and seconded to adopt the May 6, 2019 Briefing Minutes; April 16, April 23, and May 14, 2019 Regular meeting minutes as presented. Motion carried unanimously. N-aye; S-aye; T-aye. 8. Approval of Action Agenda: 8.1 Approval to execute a resolution to close Harstine Bridge Road at milepost 0.00 to milepost 0.607 on Friday, June 14, 2019 from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. (Ex.A-Res 42-19) 8.2 Approval to authorize the Chair to execute a County Road Administration Board (CRAB) Rural Arterial Program (RAP) Contract for North Shore Road-Great Bend (CRAB project #2319-01) and Old Belfair Highway (CRAB Project #2319-02). 8.3 Approval for the Chair to execute the County Road Administration Board Rural Arterial Program Prospectuses Amendment No. 1, increasing RATA funding to $500,000, for CRP 1995, North Shore Road Cady Creek culvert replacement project. 8.4 Approval of a resolution for County Road Project No. 2020, Old Belfair Highway and approval to authorize the Chair to sign all pertinent documents and authorize the Public Works County Engineer to advertise, set bid dates/times and award contract. (Ex. B- Res.43-19) BOARD OF MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' PROCEEDINGS May 21, 2019 - PAGE 2 8.5 Approval of the resolution for County Road Project No. 2021, North Shore Road and authorize the Chair to sign all pertinent documents and authorize the Public Works County Engineer to advertise, set bid dates/times and award contract. (Ex.C—Res.44- 19) 8.6 Approval of Warrants &Treasure Electronic Remittances Claims Clearing Fund Warrant #s 8064195-8064886 $ 468,774.04 Direct Deposit Fund Warrant #s 58699-59082 $ 655,918.00 Salary Clearing Fund Warrant #s 7004403-7004439 $ 924,397.80 8.7 Approval to reappoint Lodging Tax Advisory Committee members for a term ending May 31, 2021. Generators: Jake Geist/Shaun Tucker as alternate; Nate Welch Spenders: Stephanie Rowland, Heidi McCutcheon, Duane Wilson 8.8 Approval to appoint Debra Braz to the office of Mason County Cemetery District No. 1 Board of Commissioners, Position 3, for a 6-year short and full term. 8.9 Approval to amend resolution 137-98, increasing the Harvest Permit Fee from $5.00 to $20.00 each and implementing a new service to laminate Concealed Pistol Licenses (CPL'S) for $2.00 each beginning July 1, 2019. (Ex. D—Res.45-19) 8.10Approval of the Oath of Inventory pursuant to RCW 36.32.210 and Mason County Code Chapter 3.56. � , 44-48 !1 n 14A f6T-CT�C--s7 qL—F ste fn 9•�/ •,•-/ lI••CC7T/ber-49 4;2048. 8.13Approval of the Mason County Park Host Contract with Nicholas & Brianna Halvorson for Mason Lake Park. This contract is good through December 31, 2020 and can be extended additional years with agreement from both parties. 8.14Approval to authorize Public Works to amend and allow the County Engineer to sign the agreements for cultural resource services. The amendment increases the maximum pay- out from $20,000 to an amount not to exceed $40,000. Ken VanBuskirk asked to remove items 8.2 &8.4 for discussion. Cmmr. Neatherlin/Trask moved and seconded to approve action items 8.1 through 8.14 with the exception of items 8.2&8.4. Motion carried unanimously. N-aye; S-aye; T-aye. Diane Sheesley, County Engineer spoke about the two projects listed in items 8.2 &8.4 noting that one is a culvert replacement while the second project is a .4 mile realignment. 8.4 Ken VanBuskirk asked about the proposed start date. Diane explained that funds would not be received until 2020. He then questioned why the area being realigned has a speed limit rating of 50 mph when the areas surrounding that portion are slower. Diane explained how Public Works decides upon construction while considering numerous variables. Ken passed out a map and asked that this project be delayed so monies could be spent on other areas within the Belfair UGA. On the map he said that the layer showing Courtney Creek is incorrect. BOARD OF MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' PROCEEDINGS May 21, 2019 - PAGE 3 Diane explained that the program from which they are requesting money is for rural arterials so it could only be used for areas outside the UGA. Cmmr. Neatherlin/Trask moved to approve the resolution for County Road Project No. 2020, Old Belfair Highway and approval to authorize the Chair to sign all pertinent documents and authorize the Public Works County Engineer to advertise, set bid dates/times and award contract. Motion carried unanimously. N-aye; S-aye; T-aye. 8.2 No public comment was received as it was previously addressed by Diane Sheesly. Cmmr. Trask/Neatherlin moved and seconded to approve the Chair to execute a County Road Administration Board (CRAB) Rural Arterial Program (RAP) Contract for North Shore Road-Great Bend (CRAB project #2319-01) and Old Belfair Highway (CRAB Project #2319-02). Motion carried unanimously. N-aye; S-aye; T-aye. 9 Other Business (Department Heads and Elected Officials)- None 10 9:15 a.m. Public Hearings and Items set for a certain time 10.1 Public Hearing to consider the sale of parcels 32021-56-02001, 32021-55-02011 and 32021-56-02001. Staff: Frank Pinter Frank Pinter noted that parcels 32021-55-02011 and 32021-56-02001 will not be sold as the buyers did not accept the counter offer. No public comment received. Cmmr. Neatherlin/Trask moved and seconded to sell parcel 32031-56-02001 to]eana M. Moore in the amount of$5,000. Motion carried unanimously. N-aye; S-aye;T-aye. (Ex. E—Res. 46-19) 11 Board's Reports and Calendar-The Commissioners reported on meetings attended the past week and announced their upcoming weekly meetings. 12 Adjournment—The meeting adjourned at 9:51 a.m. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: MASON COUNTY, WASHINGTON Melissa Drewry, Clerk of the Board Kevin Shutty, Chair Sharon Trask, Commissioner Randy Neatherlin, Commissioner MASON COUNTY AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORM TO: BOARD OF MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS From: Frank Pinter Action Agenda x Public Hearing Other DEPARTMENT: Support Services EXT: 530 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: June 11, 2019 Agenda Item# g I (Commissioner staff to complete) BRIEFING DATE:6/3/19 BRIEFING PRESENTED BY: Frank Pinter [ ] ITEM WAS NOT PREVIOUSLY BRIEFED WITH THE BOARD Please provide explanation of urgency ITEM: Voluntary Stewardship Program Contract Approval BACKGROUND: During the recent legislative session, the state legislature continued funding for the Voluntary Stewardship Program (VSP) into the next biennium (2019-21). Mason County opted-in to the VSP, and funding will be available beginning July 1, 2019. The purpose of the program is to provide funding to the County for the implementation of the work plan as required for the VSP, consistent with RCW 36.70A.700-760 and related statutes. BUDGET IMPACTS: Funding available for reimbursement under this contract is up to $240,000 for the entire 2019- 2021 biennium. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Request Approval from the Board of County Commissioners to have the Chair sign the agreement for the 2019-21 Biennium Contract No. K2016 between the Washington State Conservation Commission and Mason County for Voluntary Stewardship Program Implementation. Attachment:VSP Contract ��q,STR'tF•0� •n .t Lf R9 STATE OF WASHINGTON CONSERVATION COMMISSION PO Box 47721 • 01ympia, Washington 9$Stt4-7721 • X36$)44T-&ZE1E1 • FAX{360 407-6Z1 May 24, 2019 Board of County Commissioners Mason County 411 North 5th Street Shelton, WA 98584 Re: Continued Implementation of the Voluntary Stewardship Program Dear Board of County Commissioners During the recent legislative session, the state legislature continued funding for the Voluntary Stewardship Program (VSP) into the next biennium(2019-21). As a county who opted-in to the VSP, I'm writing to formally notify you funding will be available for the next fiscal year beginning July 1, 2019 for implementation of the VSP. The Commission deems this level of funding adequate funding to meet the implementation needs of the counties who have opted into VSP. This funding is the only funding available from the Commission for VSP implementation. Attached for your review is a contract for the VSP funding for the 2019-21 biennium. Once the county has signed the agreement and returned to the Commission,the Executive Director of the Commission will sign the contract. A fully executed contract will be returned to the county. The effective date of this contract will be July 1, 2019. However, delays without reasonable explanation on the part of the county in signing this contract past August 31, 2019 may result in the Commission denying any reimbursement during that time. If you find you cannot comply with signing this contract by August 31, 2019,you must contact Karla Heinitz at 360-407-6212 or by email at kheinitzRscc.wa.gov immediately. Also, I wanted to highlight some important provisions that continue from last biennia's contract into this new 2019- 21 biennium contract. Those include, but are not limited to: 1. Funding available for reimbursement under this contract will not exceed$240,000 for the entire 2019-2021 biennium. 2. Ten (10) percent of the contract amount will be retained by the Commission until after May 1, 2021, After May 1, 2021, or sooner upon satisfactory progress of the contract, this amount will become available to the county. 3. If the county assigns a VSP lead entity,the Commission will require a copy of any subcontract between the county and a VSP lead entity. WSCC Letter to VSP Counties Re Contract May 2019- Page 2 of 2 4. The County is required to provide to the Commission the most recent version of the county's VSP work plan, which includes-all attachments and/or appendices. This can be accomplished by sending to Alicia McClendon,the VSP Administrative Assistant, an electronic link which the Commission can use to download the plan, The link should be sent to amcclendon(cDscc.wa.gov.. 5. The Commission will require the county create an implementation budget to ensure all requirements related to VSP implementation are accounted for during this contract period, and to ensure the two-year and five-year reporting requirements will be met. The county must provide the budget to the Commission no later than 120 days from the date of signature of the contract by the County. 6. The Commission requires any VSP funds used by the county for cost-share projects abide by the Commission's Grant and Contract Procedures Manual. 7. Mason County's two year status report is due to the Commission no later than August 30, 2019. 8. Mason County's five year report is due to the Commission no later than November 24,2020. 9. The failure of the county to provide any of the following are explicit grounds for termination of the contract: a. To complete the scope of work in a reasonable time frame; b. To provide timely quarterly status reports; c. To provide an estimate of the final anticipated costs associated with the completion of this contract by March 1, 2021 (if this contract is not already completed by that date); d. To submit monthly invoices for reimbursement to the Commission's VSP Contract Manager; and e. To identify and keep current the responsible individual as identified in Appendix D— Responsible Individuals. Thank you for your continued engagement in and support of VSP. I look forward to working with you and your staff on program implementation. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Ron D. Shultz Policy Director Enclosure: VSP 2019-21 Biennium Contract between the Commission and the County cc: Frank Pinter Jan Sliva 2019-21 Biennium Contract No. K2016 BETWEEN The Washington State Conservation Commission AND Mason County FOR Voluntary Stewardship Program Implementation THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the Washington State Conservation Commission, hereinafter referred to as "COMMISSION"and Mason County, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY". IT IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS AGREEMENT to provide funding to the COUNTY for the implementation of the work plan as required for the Voluntary Stewardship Program (VSP), consistent with RCW 36.70A.700-760 and related statutes. THEREFORE,IT IS MUTUALLYAGREED THAT the COMMISSION will provide funding consistent with the terms of this contract,the policies of the COMMISSION,and the laws of the State of Washington; and the COUNTY will implement the terms of this contract with the funding provided consistent with the policies of the COMMISSION and the laws of the State of Washington. 1.0 PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE Subject to its other provisions, the period of performance of this agreement shall commence on the effective date of this agreement, which is July 1, 2019, and be completed on June 30, 2021, unless either extended by agreement of the parties or terminated sooner, as provided herein. 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK It is the intent of the parties that the COUNTY will perform its duties consistent with the timelines set forth in RCW 36.70A.720-735, subject to available funding,and subject to state contracting requirements.The COUNTY shall furnish the necessary personnel, equipment, material and/or service(s), or contract with third parties to accomplish the same, and VSP,2019-21 Biennium Contract Between the WSCC and County-Page 1 of 20 otherwise do all things necessary for or incidental to the performance of the work set forth herein. The COUNTY shall report in writing within 30 days any problems, delays or adverse conditions that will materially affect their ability to meet project objectives or time schedules stated herein. This disclosure shall be accompanied by a statement of the action taken or proposed and any assistance needed to resolve the situation. The COUNTY shall complete the work listed in APPENDIX B—SCOPE OF WORK, herein. 3.0 FUNDING AVAILABILITY AND COSTS The parties expect legislative appropriation for this work shall not exceed $240,000. Payment for satisfactory performance of the work accomplished under this agreement shall not exceed this amount. The COMMISSION'S ability to make payments is contingent on availability of funding. In the event funding from the state is withdrawn, reduced, limited or otherwise determined by the COMMISSION to be inadequate in any way after the effective date and prior to completion or expiration date of this agreement,the COMMISSION, at its sole discretion, may elect to terminate the agreement, in whole or part,for convenience or to renegotiate the agreement subject to new funding limitations and conditions.The COMMISSION may also elect to suspend performance of the agreement until the COMMISSION determines the funding insufficiency is resolved. Should the COMMISSION determine funding needs to be reduced, the COMMISSION will provide 30-days notice of an intent to reduce the amount of funding available under this agreement. 3.1 Eligible Costs The COMMISSION will pay the following costs, but only upon full COUNTY compliance with APPENDIX C—BILLING PROCEDURE: ■ Salaries and benefits, 20%indirect of salaries and benefits is allowed on COUNTY personnel or any subcontractor personnel designated by the COUNTY to qualify for indirect costs. ■ Travel, including mileage and per diem for program staff,consistent with state law. Travel and expenses paid directly to work group member participants is not allowed. ■ Meeting rooms and light refreshments for working meetings. Light refreshments are defined as: an edible item that may be served between meals, for example, doughnuts,sweet rolls, and pieces of fruit or cheese. A list of meeting attendees and an agenda are also required to be eligible for reimbursement. ■ Facilitation, reports, studies, research and document preparation,which may be accomplished through either staff efforts or qualified contractors. Contractor services shall conform to ordinary billing rates and overhead multipliers for the type and location of the services within the COUNTY. ■ Copy and printing costs. ■ Equipment. The COUNTY agrees and understands that pre-approval by the COMMISSION is required for equipment purchases over$1,000. All equipment VSP 2019-21 Biennium Contract Between the WSCC and County-Page 2 of 20 should be directly related to the activities of the watershed group and the implementation of the VSP. Equipment may include, but is not limited to, computers, data base software, and GIS software. 3.2 Cost-Share Programs The COUNTY may choose to offer a cost-share program to achieve the goals and objectives of the county work plan and RCW Chapter 36.70A. If the COUNTY so chooses to offer a cost-share program to VSP participants,the COUNTY hereby agrees that COMMISSION cost-share policies and procedures will be abided by, regardless of who is administering the cost-share program (the COUNTY or some other entity on behalf of the COUNTY). Further, the COUNTY must be in compliance with APPENDIX C— BILLING PROCEDURE and must also: • Consult with COMMISSION STAFF identified in APPENDIX C—BILLING PROCEDURE, prior to using VSP funds for a cost-share program, • Provide written documentation that the county work group has approved the cost share program, • Receive training regarding COMMISSION cost-share policies and procedures,from COMMISSION STAFF identified in APPENDIX C—BILLING PROCEDURE, prior to using VSP funds for a cost-share program, unless COUNTY staff or the entity or entities administering such a cost-share program have already received such training from the COMMISSION, and • VSP cost-share projects that are funded using any amount of COMMISSION VSP funds shall be reported in the five year report under RCW 36.70A.720 (2) (b) (i) and (c) (i). 3.3 Disallowed Costs The COUNTY is responsible for any audit exceptions or disallowed costs incurred by its own organization or that of its Subcontractors (such as consultants), and Assignees. If the COUNTY expends more than the amount of the COMMISSION funding in this agreement in anticipation of receiving additional funds from the COMMISSION, it does so at its own risk. The COMMISSION is not legally obligated to reimburse the COUNTY for costs incurred in excess of this agreement. 3.4 Insufficient Funds The obligation of the COMMISSION to make payments is contingent on the availability of state and federal funds through legislative appropriation and state allotment. When this contract crosses over state fiscal years the obligation of the COMMISSION is contingent upon the appropriation of funds during the next fiscal year. The failure of the legislature or federal agencies to appropriate or allot such funds to the program shall be good cause to terminate this contract and for the Executive Director of the COMMISSION to determine that the watershed has not received adequate funding to implement the program consistent with RCW 36.70A.735 (d). VSP 2019-21 Biennium Contract Between the WSCC and County-Page 3 of 20 3.5 Method of Compensation Payment shall be made on a reimbursable basis for costs or obligations. Eligible costs incurred by the COUNTY will be considered to have been paid by the COUNTY under this contract at the time the COUNTY seeks reimbursement from the COMMISSION. No payments in advance of or in anticipation of goods or services to be provided under this agreement shall be made by the COMMISSION. The COUNTY must fully comply with APPENDIX C- BILLING PROCEDURE to be eligible for reimbursement. 3.6 Retainage Notwithstanding the provisions of Sections 3.0 - 3.5 above, an amount equal to ten percent (10%) of the amount listed in section 3.0 FUNDING AVAILABILITY herein shall be retained by the COMMISSION. This amount shall be available to the COUNTY after May 1, 2021 or upon demonstration of satisfactory completion of this agreement,whichever comes first, provided that the COUNTY has maintained full compliance with the provisions of APPENDIX C—BILLING PROCEDURE. The demonstration of satisfactory completion of this agreement is defined as meeting all conditions set out in APPENDIX B—SCOPE OF WORK. 4.0 ASSIGNMENT The COUNTY may not assign this contract. The COUNTY may however, delegate the work to be completed under this agreement to an Agent. Any such Agent shall comply with the requirements of this agreement. Within any such delegation the COUNTY shall remain liable for any claim arising thereunder, and the COUNTY shall remain responsible for compliance with this agreement and RCW 36.70A.700-735, and with all applicable Federal, State and local laws, orders, regulations and permits. COUNTY retains the right to subcontract any portion or portions of the work as it deems necessary to complete the work. If COUNTY chooses to delegate tasks to a lead entity for VSP, a copy of the subcontract must be sent to the Commission's VSP Contract Manager identified in APPENDIX C—BILLING PROCEDURE as soon as the subcontract has been signed by both parties. 5.0 CONTRACT MANAGEMENT Each party shall assign a specific individual to be responsible for and shall be the contact person for all communications and billings regarding the performance of this Agreement. Those individuals will be set out in APPENDIX D—RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUALS herein incorporated by reference. If for any reason the individuals identified in Appendix D change, the parties agree to immediately identify and notify each other of another in writing of the new responsible individual for this agreement. 6.0 TERMINATION The COUNTY may terminate this agreement upon 30-days' prior written notification to the COMMISSION. If this agreement is terminated by the COUNTY,the COUNTY shall be VSP 2019-21 Biennium Contract Between the WSCC and County- Page 4 of 20 reimbursed only for performance rendered or costs incurred in accordance with the terms of this agreement prior to the effective date of termination. If this agreement is terminated by the COMMISSION,the COUNTY shall be reimbursed only for performance rendered or costs incurred in accordance with the terms of this agreement prior to the effective date of termination. If the COUNTY terminates this agreement prior to the work plan's approval, or prior to when the work plan's goals and benchmarks are met,the COUNTY may be subject to the requirements of RCW 36.70A.735 and related statutory sections. The COMMISSION may terminate this agreement upon 30-days' prior written notification to the COUNTY for cause, or for any reason or combination of reasons listed below, each of which constitute a breach of this contract in accordance with Section 7.0 BREACH: 6.1 Failure to complete the requirements of Section 2.0 SCOPE OF WORK and/or APPENDIX B - SCOPE OF WORK in a reasonable time frame, or for the reasons listed in 3.0 FUNDING AVAILABILITY above. 6.2 The failure to provide timely quarterly status reports are grounds for the termination of this agreement, at the sole determination of the COMMISSION. 6.3 The failure to abide by the conditions set out in Section 3.2 above, related to the administration of a cost-share program are grounds for the termination of this agreement, at the sole determination of the COMMISSION. 6.4 The failure to provide an estimate of the final anticipated costs associated with the completion of this agreement through June 30, 2021 to the COMMISSION's VSP Contract Manager, as set out in APPENDIX B—SCOPE OF WORK is grounds for the termination of this agreement, at the sole determination of the COMMISSION. 6.5 The failure of the COUNTY to fully comply with the provisions in APPENDIX C—BILLING PROCEDURE shall be grounds for termination of this agreement. 6.6 The failure of the COUNTY to submit monthly invoices for reimbursement to the COMMISSION's VSP Contract Manager, in accordance with APPENDIX C—BILLING PROCEDURE, shall be grounds for termination of this agreement. 6.7 The failure of the COUNTY to identify and keep current the responsible individual as identified in APPENDIX D— RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUALS, shall be grounds for termination of this agreement. The COUNTY or the COMMISSION may terminate this agreement upon 60-days' prior written notification for convenience, without any showing of cause. 7.0 BREACH The COUNTY shall not be relieved of any liability to the COMMISSION for damages sustained by the COMMISSION and/or the State of Washington because of any breach VSP 2019-21 Biennium Contract Between the WSCC and County-Page 5 of 20 of contract by the COUNTY. The COMMISSION may withhold payments for the purpose of setoff until such time as the exact amount of damages due the COMMISSION from the COUNTY is determined. In the event the COUNTY fails to commence work on the project funded herein within the timelines established under RCW Chapter 36.70A., the COUNTY shall be subject to the requirements of RCW 36.70A.735. 8.0 ENTIRE AGREEMENT AND CHANGES, MODIFICATIONS AND AMENDMENTS This agreement and the attached APPENDICES (APPENDIX A-D) contain the entire integrated agreement of the parties may be changed, modified or amended by written agreement executed by both parties. 9.0 EFFECTIVE DATE The effective date of this agreement shall be the last date of signature. This date shall be the"receipt of funds" date for purposes of RCW 36.70A.703 (9) and RCW 26.70A.725 (5) and (6). 10.0 ORDER OF PRECEDENCE Each of the exhibits listed below is by this reference hereby incorporated into this contract In the event of a conflict in such terms, or between the terms and any applicable statute or rule,the inconsistency shall be resolved by giving precedence in the following order: ■ Applicable Federal and state of Washington statutes and regulations. ■ Mutually agreed written amendments to this Contract. ■ Appendix B—Scope of Work ■ This Contract. ■ Appendix A—General Terms and Conditions ■ Appendix C—Billing Procedure ■ Appendix D—Responsible Individuals ■ Any other provision, term or material incorporated by reference or otherwise incorporated. VSP 2019-21 Biennium Contract Between the WSCC and County- Page 6 of 20 11.0 APPROVAL This contract shall be subject to the written approval of representatives of both parties and shall not be binding until so approved. The contract may be altered, amended, or waived only by a written amendment executed by both parties. The signatories to this contract represent that they have the authority to execute this contract. Washington State Conservation Commission Mason County Signature Signature Executive Director Date Title Date APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE WASHINGTON STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE VSP 2019-21 Biennium Contract Between the WSCC and County-Page 7 of 20 2019-21 Biennium Voluntary Stewardship Program COMMISSION and COUNTY Agreement APPENDIX A—GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS I. DEFINITIONS Terms used throughout this contract are defined below: "Agreement" shall mean the contract agreement to which these terms and conditions are affixed. "Agent" shall mean any entity to which the COUNTY has assigned responsibilities as allowed in the agreement. "Best management practice (BMP)" is a technique designed to protect the air, water, soil, animals, plants, and humans. BMPs must meet NRCS standards, or alternative practice designs approved by a licensed professional engineer. NRCS Practice Standards and Specifications are contained in the USDA NRCS Field Office Technical Guide (FOTG). SCC also maintains a list of approved practices eligible for cost share for special programs. "COMMISSION" shall mean the Washington State Conservation Commission, any division, section, office, including the Office of Farmland Preservation, unit or other entity of the COMMISSION, or any of the officers or other officials lawfully representing the COMMISSION. "Cost-share" is funding used to reimburse landowners for a percentage of the costs associated with the implementation of Best Management Practice(s) BMP(s). Examples of costs include, but are not limited to labor, materials, and permits. "COUNTY" shall mean the County receiving the funds as identified in the agreement that this Appendix is a part of, and is performing activities under this contract, and shall include all employees of the COUNTY. "Current fiscal year" shall mean July 1, 2019 through June 30, 2021. "Five year report" shall mean written report, provided not later than five years after the receipt of funding for a participating watershed and every five years thereafter, to the Executive Director of the COMMISSION and to the COUNTY on whether the COUNTY has met the COUNTY work plan's protection and enhancement goals and benchmarks, as described in RCW 36.70A.720 (2) (b) (i) and (c) (i). "Implement" and "implementation" shall mean to execute any requirements of RCW 36.70A.700-760 and associated statutes. "Project Officer" shall mean the specific employee of the COMMISSION that is assigned as the primary contact for purposes of the fulfillment of this agreement. VSP 2019-21 Biennium Contract Between the WSCC and County-Page 8 of 20 '"Two year report" shall mean the written report of the status of plans and accomplishments that shall be provided to the COUNTY and to the COMMISSION within sixty days after the end of each biennium, as described in RCW 36.70A.720 (1) 0). "Voluntary Stewardship Program" and "VSP" shall mean the program established in, and governed by, RCW 36.70A.700-760 and associated statutes. "Watershed group" means an entity designated by a county under the provisions of RCW 36.70A.715. "Work group participants" means those volunteer members of the county VSP work group designated by the COUNTY who are working to implement the work plan and fulfill ancillary VSP statutory requirements. "Work plan" means a watershed work plan developed under the provisions of RCW 36.70A.720. II. DISPUTES Except as otherwise provided in this contract, any dispute arising under this contract shall be decided in the following manner: By the Commission's Project Officer or other designated official who shall provide a written statement of decision to the COUNTY. The decision of the Project Officer or other designated official shall be final and conclusive unless, within thirty days from the date the COMMISSION receives such statement,the COUNTY mails or otherwise furnishes to the Executive Director of the COMMISSION a written appeal. An appeal of the Project Officer's decision shall be addressed by the COMMISSION's Executive Director. The COUNTY shall have the opportunity to meet with the Executive Director to be heard either in person or by phone and to provide documents in support of their appeal. The decision of the COMMISSION's Executive Director for the resolution of such appeals shall be final and conclusive and constitutes a final agency action for the purposes of the Washington Administrative Procedures Act, RCW 34.05. Pending final decision of dispute hereunder, the COUNTY shall proceed diligently with the performance of this contract and in accordance with the decision rendered. III. GOVERNANCE This agreement is entered into pursuant to and under the authority granted by the laws of the state of Washington and any applicable federal laws.The provisions of this agreement shall be construed to conform to those laws. The COUNTY and any Agent shall comply fully with all applicable federal, state and local laws, orders, regulations and permits. Any action brought to enforce the terms of this agreement shall be in the Superior Court for Thurston County. Except as otherwise provided in this agreement, in the event of litigation or other action brought to enforce contract terms,each party agrees to bear its own attorney fees and costs. VSP 2019-21 Biennium Contract Between the WSCC and County-Page 9 of 20 IV. CONTRACTING FOR SERVICES Contracts for personal services, purchased services/goods, and public works shall be awarded through a competitive process,-if required by State law. The COUNTY shall retain copies of all bids received and contracts awarded, for inspection and use by the COMMISSION. Retention of copies shall be consistent with time periods established herein. V. INDEMNIFICATION The COMMISSION shall in no way be held responsible for payment of salaries, consultant fees, and other costs related to the project described herein, except as provided in the scope of work through the reimbursement procedures described in this agreement. 11 To the fullest extent permitted by law,the COUNTY shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the State of Washington, agencies of the State and all officials, agents and employees of the State,from and against all claims arising out of or resulting from the performance of the contract.The COUNTY'S obligation to indemnify,defend, and hold harmless includes any claim by the COUNTY'S agents, employees, representatives, or any subcontractor or a subcontractor's employees. The COUNTY expressly agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the State of Washington and the COMMISSION for any claim arising out of or'incident to the COUNTY's or any subcontractor's performance or failure to perform the contract.The COUNTY's obligation to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the State of Washington and the COMMISSION shall not be eliminated or reduced by any actual or alleged concurrent negligence of the State or its agents, agencies, employees and officials. J The COUNTY waives its immunity under Title 51 RCW(Industrial Insurance)to the extent it is required to indemnify, defend and hold harmless State and its agencies, officials, agents or employees. The COMMISSION shall be responsible for any liability arising from its own actions. However, any liability by the COMMISSION shall not mitigate the COUNTY's duty to indemnify the COMMISSION for all claims arising out of its performance of the contract. VI. RECOVERY OF PAYMENTS In the event the COUNTY fails, through the failure to exercise reasonable diligence unrelated to the State's failure to fully fund the stewardship process,to perform obligations required of it by this contract,the COUNTY may, at the COMMISSION'S sole discretion, be required to repay to the COMMISSION any funds that were spent by the county without exercising reasonable diligence or a portion of funds disbursed to the COUNTY for those parts of the project that are rendered worthless in the opinion of the COMMISSION by such failure to exercise reasonable diligence. VSP 2019-21 Biennium Contract Between the WSCC and County-Page 10 of 20 In the event that the COUNTY fails to expend funds under this contract in accordance with state laws and/or the provisions of this contract,the COMMISSION reserves the right to recapture state funds in an amount equivalent to the extent of the noncompliance in addition to any other remedies available at law or in equity. Such rights of recapture shall exist for a period of two years following contract termination. Repayment by the COUNTY of funds under this recapture provision shall occur within 30 days of demand. In the event that the COMMISSION elects to institute legal proceedings to enforce the recapture provision,the prevailing party in any litigation for"recapture"shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees. VII. INELIGIBILITY The COUNTY certifies that neither it nor its principals are presently debarred,declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in transactions by any federal department or state agency. Vill. INDEPENDENT RELATIONSHIP The COUNTY or COUNTY's Agent(s) performing under this contract are not employees or agents of the COMMISSION. The COUNTY shall not hold themselves out as nor claim to be an officer or employee of the COMMISSION or of the State of Washington by reason hereof, nor will the COUNTY make any claim of right, privilege or benefit which would accrue to such employee under law. Conduct and control of the work outlined in the scope of work shall be solely with the COUNTY. Ix KICKBACKS The COUNTY and its employees and authorized representatives are prohibited from inducing by any means any person employed or otherwise involved in this project to give up any part of the compensation to which he/she is otherwise entitled or, receive any fee, commission or gift in return for award of a subcontract hereunder. X. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY Copyrights and Patents. Should the COUNTY or COUNTY's Agent(s)create any copyrightable materials or invent any patentable property in the course of the scope of work governed by this agreement,the COUNTY may copyright or patent the same but shall grant the COMMISSION a royalty-free, nonexclusive and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish, recover or otherwise use the material(s) or property and-to authorize others to use the same for federal, state or local government purposes. Where federal funding is involved, the federal government may have a proprietary interest in patent rights to any inventions developed by the COUNTY as provided in 35 U.S.C. §§ 200-212. Publications. When the COUNTY, COUNTY's Agent(s), or persons employed by the COUNTY use or publish information of the COMMISSION; present papers, lectures, or VSP 2019-21 Biennium Contract Between the WSCC and County- Page 11 of 20 seminars involving information supplied by the COMMISSION; use logos, reports, maps or other data, in printed reports, signs, brochures, pamphlets, etc., appropriate credit shall be given to the COMMISSION. XI. PROPERTY MANAGEMENT The COMMISSION'S Property and Records Management Policy,contained in the Commission's Grants and Contracts Manual, hereby incorporated by reference, and any updates thereto, shall control the use and disposition of all real and personal property purchases wholly or in part with funds furnished by the COMMISSION in the absence of state,federal statute(s), regulations(s), or policy(s) to the contrary or upon specific instructions with respect thereto in the scope of work. XII. RECORDS MAINTENANCE The parties to this agreement shall each maintain books, records,documents and other information which sufficiently and properly reflect all direct and indirect costs expended by either party in the performance of the services described herein.These records shall be kept in accordance with the provisions contained on the Secretary of State archives website,for records retention, hereby incorporated by reference, and any updates thereto. These records shall be subject to inspection, review or'audit by personnel of both parties, other personnel duly authorized by either party,the Office of the State Auditor,federal officials so authorized by law,and as provided by the state Public Records Act, RCW 42.56.All books, records, documents, and other material relevant to this agreement will be retained for six years after expiration and the Office of the State Auditor, federal auditors, and any persons duly authorized by the parties shall have full access and the right to examine any of these materials during this period. XIII. SEVERABILITY If any provision of this agreement or any provision of any document incorporated by reference shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this agreement, which can be given effect without the invalid provision if such remainder conforms to the requirements of applicable law and the fundamental purpose of this agreement, and to this end the provisions of this agreement are declared to be severable. XIV. WAIVER A failure by either party to exercise its rights under this agreement shall not preclude that party from subsequent exercise of such rights and shall not constitute a waiver of any other rights under this agreement unless stated to be such in a writing signed by an authorized representative of the party and attached to the original agreement. VSP 2019-21 Biennium Contract Between the WSCC and County-Page 12 of 20 XV. ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS COUNTY will remain current with Federal and Washington State accessibility standards and comply with 000 Policy 188—Accessibiiitylocated at https://ocio.wa.gov/policy/accessibilitv. VSP 2019-21 Biennium Contract Between the WSCC and County- Page 13 of 20 2019-21 Biennium Voluntary Stewardship Program COMMISSION and COUNTY Agreement APPENDIX B-SCOPE OF WORK The scope of the work to be performed by the COUNTY, or its contractors, under this agreement is the following: 1) Organize, convene, and maintain a watershed group. This includes providing necessary staff support and facilitation for the watershed group. Assist the watershed group in the implementation of the approved VSP work plan, including A. Working closely with the watershed group and technical service providers to ensure full compliance with the requirements and intent of VSP. B. Ensure that every effort is made to maintain effective communication between the watershed group, the technical service providers, the COUNTY, local stakeholders, and participating state and federal agencies and personnel. C. The COUNTY will organize members of a VSP watershed group .with representatives from a variety of stakeholder groups including but not limited to tribes, environmental groups, and agriculture. Organization of a vetted core watershed group comprised of a broad representation of key watershed stakeholders and, at a minimum, representatives of agricultural and environmental groups and tribes that agree to participate. The COUNTY will encourage existing lead entities, watershed planning units, or other integrating organizations to sere as the watershed group.. D. The COUNTY will develop and/or maintain watershed group meeting bylaws, rules, and/or policies. E. The COUNTY will provide facilitation for watershed group meetings or other actions of the watershed group. 2) Implement the VSP work plan, including implementing the requirements of the VSP and RCW Chapter 36.70A.700-760. Implementation includes: A. Identifying critical areas and agricultural activities within those critical areas. B. Identifying a public outreach plan to contact landowners. C. Identifying and designating entity(ies)to provide landowner assistance(voluntary stewardship plans). VSP 2019-21 Biennium Contract Between the WSCC and County-Page 14 of 20 D. Identifying measurable programmatic and implementation goals and benchmarks. E. Reviewing and incorporating applicable water quality, watershed management, farmland protection, and required species recovery data and plans. F. Seeking input from tribes,agencies and stakeholders. G. Developing goals for participation by agricultural operators conducting commercial and noncommercial agricultural activities in the watershed necessary to meet the protection and enhancement benchmarks of the work plan. H. Ensuring outreach and technical assistance is provided to producers and operators in the various watersheds of the county. I. Creating measurable benchmarks that, within ten years after receipt of funding, are designed to result in (i) the protection of critical areas functions and values and (ii)the enhancement of critical areas functions and values through voluntary, incentive based measures. J. Incorporating into the work plan any existing development regulations relied upon to achieve the goals and benchmarks for protection of critical areas. K. Establishing baseline monitoring for (i) participation and implementation of voluntary stewardship plans and projects, (ii) stewardship activities, and (iii) the effects on critical areas and agriculture relevant to protection and enhancement benchmarks. L. Developing timelines for periodic evaluations, adaptive management, and provide written reports of plan status and/or accomplishments to the COMMISSION. M. Coordinating monitoring programs with other state agency activities. ' N. Meeting any other requirement for the successful implementation of VSP in RCW 36.70A.720. Deliverables: 1) Organize, convene and maintain a watershed group that meets regularly and as necessary for implementation of the county VSP work plan. 2) Implement the VSP work plan, including implementing the requirements of the VSP and RCW Chapter 36.70A.700-760. VSP 2019-21 Biennium Contract Between the WSCC and County-Page 15 of 20 A. Two year reports. No later than August 30, 2019, provide the first written biennial report to the COMMISSION. The biennial report must provide the status of plans and accomplishments of the work plan to COMMISSION. The biennial report should include a summary of how plan implementation is affecting each of the following: 1) The protection and enhancement of critical areas within the area where agricultural activities are conducted; 2) The maintenance and improvement of the long-term viability of agriculture; 3) Reducing the conversion of farmland to other uses; 4) The maximization of the use of voluntary incentive programs to encourage good riparian and ecosystem stewardship as an alternative to historic approaches used to protect critical areas; 5) The leveraging of existing resources by relying upon existing work and plans in counties and local watersheds, as well as existing state and federal programs to the maximum extent practicable to achieve program goals; 6) Ongoing efforts to encourage and foster a spirit of cooperation and partnership among county, tribal, environmental, and agricultural interests to better assure the program success; 7) Ongoing efforts to improve compliance with other laws designed to protect water quality and fish habitat; and 8) A description of efforts showing how relying upon voluntary stewardship practices as the primary method of protecting critical areas and does not require the cessation of agricultural activities. B. Five year reports. No later than 11.24.20, and in conjunction with the county watershed group, facilitate, develop, assist and submit the five year status report to the director of the COMMISSION. See RCW 36.70A.720 (2) (b) (i) and (c) (i). At five year intervals from the date of receipt of funding, each county watershed group must submit a report to the director of the Commission and the COUNTY on whether it has met the work plan's protection and enhancement goals and benchmarks. The five year status report should include a summary of how plan implementation is satisfying the flowing plan elements through VSP implementation: 1) Develop goals for participation by agricultural operators conducting commercial and noncommercial agricultural activities in the watershed VSP 2019-21 Biennium Contract Between the WSCC and County- Page 16 of 20 necessary to meet the protection and enhancement benchmarks of the work plan; 2) Ensure outreach and technical assistance is provided to agricultural operators in the watershed; 3) Create measurable benchmarks that, within ten years after the receipt of funding,are designed to result in (i) the protection of critical area functions and values and (ii) the enhancement of critical area functions and values through voluntary, incentive-based measures; 4) Work with the entity providing technical assistance to ensure that individual stewardship plans contribute to the goals and benchmarks of the work plan; 5) Incorporate into the work plan any existing development regulations relied upon to achieve the goals and benchmarks for protection; 6) Establish baseline monitoring for: (i) Participation activities and implementation of the voluntary stewardship plans and projects; (ii) stewardship activities; and (iii) the effects on critical areas and agriculture relevant to the protection and enhancement benchmarks developed for the watershed; 7) Conduct periodic evaluations, institute adaptive management,and provide a written report of the status of plans and accomplishments to the county and to the commission within sixty days after the end of each biennium; 8) Assist state agencies in their monitoring programs; and 9) Satisfy any other reporting requirements of the program. 10)VSP cost-share projects that are funded using any amount of COMMISSION VSP funds shall be reported in the five year report. C. Provide a timely quarterly status report to the VSP Program Manager in a form and manner prescribed by the COMMISSION, and deemed reasonable by COUNTY staff. Reports are to be submitted online to the COMMISSION. Quarterly reports are here: https•//www.formstack.com/forms/?2221155- U3eHg44N8zh. VSP 2019-21 Biennium Contract Between the WSCC and County-Page 17 of 20 D. Quarterly reports are due quarterly for this Agreement: July 2019—June 2020: Period of July 1 —September 30, 2019— Due October 10, 2019 Period of October 1 —December 31, 2019— Due January 10, 2020 Period of January 1 —March 31, 2020—Due April 10, 2020 Period of April 1 —June 30, 2020—Due July 10, 2020 July 2020 - June 2021: Period of July 1 —September 30, 2020— Due October 10, 2020 Period of October 1 — December 31, 2020—Due January 10, 2021 Period of January 1 —March 31, 2021 —Due April 10, 2021 Period of April 1 —June 30, 2021 — Due July 10, 2021 E. Ensure that the COMMISSION has the most recent version of the COUNTY's VSP work plan by providing to the COMMISSION's Project Officer, identified herein in APPENDIX D— RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUALS, the most current version of the COUNTY's VSP work plan, which includes all attachments and /or appendices. This can be accomplished by sending the COMMISSION an electronic link which the COMMISSION can use to download the plan. F. Provide to the COMMISSION's VSP Contract Manager, no later than March 1, 2021, an estimate of the final anticipated costs associated with the completion of this agreement through June 30, 2021. G. Provide to the COMMISSION's VSP Contract Manager, no later than 120 days from the date this agreement is signed by the COUNTY, an implementation budget designed to ensure all requirements related to VSP implementation are accounted for during the performance of this agreement, and to ensure that the two year and five year reporting requirements will be met. VSP 2019-21 Biennium Contract Between the WSCC and County-Page 18 of 20 2019-21 Biennium Voluntary Stewardship Program COMMISSION and COUNTY Agreement APPENDIX C-BILLING PROCEDURE The COUNTY shall submit monthly invoices in the form and manner identified by the COMMISSION to the Commission's VSP Contract Manager: Karla Heinitz VSP Contract Manager Washington State Conservation Commission P.O. Box 47721 Olympia,WA 98504 Send invoices to: sccgrants@sccgrants.wa.gov For billing questions, contact: kheinitzPscc.wa.gov; phone: 360-407-6212 Invoices for payment shall be submitted monthly. An invoice shall be submitted regardless of whether work has been performed 'on the project, this is considered a "No Activity" Invoice. Quarterly billings are not allowed and will not be accepted. A time summary for staff costs, including compensation or billing rates, shall be attached. Individual time records will be kept available at the COUNTY for review,in accordance with the Secretary of State's document retention schedule of the Secretary of State archives. A copy of any contractor invoices, or other receipts will be attached to the billing. Payment to the COUNTY for approved and completed work will be made by account transfer by the COMMISSION monthly upon receipt of the invoice for reimbursement. A Statewide Vendor Number for payments needs to be sent to the VSP Contract Manager before the first reimbursement request to assure payments are deposited to the correct account. If payment is to be made directly to a lead entity(i.e.conservation district)the COMMISSION needs to be notified of the entity's Statewide Vendor Number for payments. If a county chooses to delegate tasks to a lead entity for VSP,a copy of the sub-contract must be sent to the Commission's VSP Contract Manager as stated in Section 4.0 Assignment. Payment will be made to the person identified at the COUNTY in APPENDIX D — RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUALS unless the COUNTY shall identify and provide contact information to the COMMISSION to the person listed in APPENDIX C - BILLING PROCEDURE herein. Final Request for Payment: The COUNTY must submit final requests for compensation during the current fiscal year no later than July 10th after the end of the current fiscal year. Failure to comply with this timeline may result in denial of any such claim. VSP 2019-21 Biennium Contract Between the WSCC and County-Page 19 of 20 2019-21 Biennium Voluntary Stewardship Program COMMISSION and COUNTY Agreement APPENDIX D-RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUALS The Project Officer for the COMMISSION is: Ron Shultz Policy Director Washington State Conservation Commission P.O. Box 47721 Olympia, Washington 98504 (360) 407-7507 rshultz@scc.wa.gov The responsible individual for the COUNTY is: NAME: TITLE: AGENCY: MAIL ADDRESS: CITY, STATE, ZIP: PHONE: EMAIL: The COUNTY Billing Contact (if different than the responsible individual for the COUNTY above): NAME: TITLE: AGENCY: MAIL ADDRESS: CITY, STATE, ZIP: PHONE: EMAIL: VSP 2019-21 Biennium Contract Between the WSCC and County-Page 20 of 20 MASON COUNTY AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORM TO: BOARD OF MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS From: Diane Zoren Action Agenda x Public Hearing Other DEPARTMENT: Support Services EXT: 747 DATE: June 11, 2019 Agenda Item # g �— (Commissioner staff to complete) BRIEFING DATE: June 3, 2019 BRIEFING PRESENTED BY: Support Services [ ] ITEM WAS NOT PREVIOUSLY BRIEFED WITH THE BOARD Please provide explanation of urgency ITEM: Approval to amend the income guidelines in the Veteran Advisory Board Policy for the Veterans' assistance program to reflect the annual income to be eligible is after taxes and medical premium deductions. Background: RCW 73.08.010 authorizes counties to establish a veterans' assistance program to address the needs of local indigent veterans and their families. The program is funded by the Veterans'Assistance Fund created under the authority of RCW 73.08.080. The Veterans'Advisory Board (VAB) was established under the authority of RCW 73.080.035 and they administer the veterans' assistance program. Pursuant to RCW 73.08.005 (b) the annual income to be eligible is after taxes and the policy needs to be changed to reflect this. We are also adding an affidavit of income verification form to be signed by the veteran and household members. These changes were presented to and approved by the VAB. Budget Impacts: The Veterans Assistance Fund has a cash balance of approximately $60,000 and YTD approximately $51,000 has been provided as assistance to Mason County Veterans. The annual limit to individual veterans is $1,200. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approval of the resolution amending the income guidelines in the Veteran Advisory Board Policy for the Veterans' assistance program to reflect the annual income to be eligible is after taxes and medical premium deductions. Attachment(s): Veterans Advisory Board Operating Policy MASON COUNTY VETERANS' ADVISORY BOARD OPERATING POLICY & PROCEDURES The Afasen County V�erans'Advisery Reard submitted amendments to the Voter-ans These Amendments are adoptedrJ 4isef xiivethis I1 that day of-A sa` 2019 andff ct ,, September-!,2018 Mason County,Washington -------------------------------------------- Raedy-Neathef4nKevin ShuU Chair -------------------------------------------- ATTEST: Kevin Shu Randy Neatherlin. Commissioner ---------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- Melissa Drewry, Clerk of the Board Teri,�'efSharon Trask.Commissioner Adopted^o�0!9 June 11,2019 MASON COUNTY VETERANS' ADVISORY BOARD OPERATING POLICY & PROCEDURES TABLE of CONTENTS I.Organizational Policies..............................................................................................................................3 II. Financial Policies.......................................................................................................................................3 III.Policy Establishing Board.........................................................................................................................4 IV.Eligibility Policies.....................................................................................................................................4 V. Referral to Other Services........................................................................................................................5 VI.Appeal and Resolution Policy..................................................................................................................5 VII.Application Procedures..........................................................................................................................6 VIII. Processing of Packet Procedures..........................................................................................................7 IX.Records,Files,Forms and Reports..........................................................................................................7 X.List of Attachments(Att.).........................................................................................................................8 Page 2 of 8 Adopted 08/21/2018 I.Organizational Policies a. All RCWs(Revised Code of the State of Washington)within Chapter 73.08 RCW VETERAN'S RELIEF,with other RCWs and Mason County Resolutions-will be used and referred to throughout this policy. b. The purpose of the Mason County Veteran's Assistance Fund(VAF)is to provide relief as set forth in RCW 73.08.010 to indigent and suffering veterans,their families and the families of deceased indigent veterans. c. Any honorably discharged veterans or veterans with a General Discharge under honorable conditions or a General Discharge with other than honorable conditions(Administrative Discharge),as outlined in RCW 41.04.005 and RCW 41.04.007,and meeting the criteria in I-b may apply. d. These policies and procedures are subject to review annually by the VAB. 1)If a revision is made,it is so noted and a narrative of revision is put in VAB minutes. 2)If no revisions are made,the date of review is noted,and put in VAB minutes. 3)Post Commanders will be advised concerning any revisions and reviews recommended by the VAB. 4) MCC has final approval of all revisions. e. The VAB will meet the second Wednesday of each month at 10:00am at the Memorial Hall on 2nd. and Franklin St,in Shelton,WA. C A quorum must be met to conduct any business that may come before the board. g. If a quorum Is not met,the Chair may contact other members via phone/text messaging or by e- mail. h. Upon reaching a member,and member agrees to be part of the meeting,thus creating a quorum,the Chair must remain in contact with the member throughout the meeting. II.Financial Policies a. The funds for creating a Veterans'Assistance Fund(VAF)RCW 73.08.080,is generated from a tax levied by the Mason County Commissioners(MCC),use of the fund is governed by same RCW. b. Approval of the one thousand two hundred($1,200)dollars for assistance shall be granted only for the following: 1) Past Due Rent or Mortgage 2) Past Due Utilities: I. Electric ii. Water iii. Natural Gas iv. Wastewater(sewer) 3.)Miscellaneous Items: 1. Necessity Items(refer to list-Attachment A) a. Single$150.00 b. Married$200.00 c. +$50.00 per dependent ii. Needed Fire Wood or Propane 4)Other Items I. Obtain state ID card(one time only) d.f_Exclusions will include,but not limited to alcohol,tobacco,lottery tickets. -- Formatted:Numbered+Level:1+ e.ILPurchases in excess of the amount written on the check are the responsibility of the applicant Numbering Style:a,b,c,...+Start at:3+ fig—No cash back will be given to the applicant if purchases are less than the amount written on the 0Al Snment:Left+Aligned at: 0"+Indent at: f check. &L-All requests for assistance will be approved by the Veterans Service Officer(VSO),with final -- Formatted:Indent:Left: -0.06",Numbered+ approval by the MCC. Level:1+Numbering Style:a,b,c,...+Start at:3+Alignment:Left+Aligned at: 0"+ Indent at: 0.25' Page 3 of 8 Adopted 08/21/2018 h:g_If it is determined an applicant is in need of assistance due to any event,catastrophic illness or other significant change in circumstance which comes into being unexpectedly and is beyond the applicants'management or control,the VSO may request in writing that Mason County consider approval of an amount not to exceed a one thousand($1,000.00)dollar lifetime limit per applicant h .. The intent of the VAF is not to replace assistance from any other agency,and assistance is granted on a"Case by Case"basis only. }a_The VAF is not intended to provide continuing assistance on a routine basis. lQ-The VAF shall not duplicate other available assistance for the purposes as noted in 11.(he) III.Policy Establishing Board a. RCW 73.08.035 states each county must establish a Veteran's Advisory Board(VAB),the board shall advise MCC on the needs of local indigent veterans,the resources available to local indigent veterans,and programs that could benefit the needs of local indigent veterans and their families. b. The VAB is comprised of veterans from the community"at large",and representatives from nationally recognized veterans'service organizations within Mason County.Per said RCW,no fewer than a majority of the board members shall be members from a nationally recognized veterans'service organization and only veterans are to serve on the board. Service on the board is voluntary. c. Mason County Resolution NO.05-15 allows for appointment of two members residing in Mason County from each Nationally Recognized Veterans'Service Organizations to be appointed to the Veteran's Advisory Board(VAB),and two members"at large". d. The VAB will consist of a ten(10)member board;members are appointed as follows: 1) American Legion(2 members) 2) Veterans of Foreign Wars(2 members) 3) 40 et 8(2 members) 4) Disabled American Veterans(2 members) 5) Two(2)Mason County resident veteran(at large) e. Commanders of these organizations will not be members of the VAB. f. Commanders will appoint the members from their organization to serve on the VAB for the purpose of overseeing the VAF. g. These members may be appointed or removed at the discretion of their commander. h. The first appointment of members shall be three(3)members for a three(3)year term,and four (4)members for a two(2)year term. L Thereafter all terms will be two(2)year terms. j. The MCC reserves the right to disallow VAB appointee for cause. IV.Eligibility Policies a. RCW 73.08.005 and other provisions in RCW Title 73 shall govern eligibility assistance to indigent and suffering veterans and/or families. b. The county defines"indigent and suffering"to mean the current poverty level as defined by the United States Department of Health and Human Services:(HHS)(A"-found-at https://asoe.hhs.aov/ooverty-euidelines c. Family members entitled to apply for assistance shall be defined as spouse or domestic partner, surviving spouse or surviving domestic partner,and dependent children of a living or deceased veteran. d. Applicants must be a resident of the Mason County for at least ninety(90)days. Page 4 of 8 Adopted 08/21/2018 e. Applicant and anyone over the age of 18 in the household must present proof of residency and Income.If no income,an affidavit must_be signed by both the veteran and household member.(A_tt. f. An applicant may use hotel/motel receipts as proof of residence,provided that: 1) All receipts show a minimum of a 90(ninety)day stay with in Mason County. 2) The 90(ninety)day stay must be continuous. 3) All receipts must be in the applicant's name. 4) All receipts must be original(no copies). g. Under the federally-established poverty guidelines,the gross income after taxes and deductions for medical insurance premum.including medicare of the veteran and all members of the household must be at or below 150%of the poverty guidelines established by the HHS{At B)- h. }h. Veterans making above the 150%and who do not have an emergency financial situation will not be eligible for assistance. I. An applicant may have a source of income above the aforementioned 150%and still be considered indigent on an emergency basis. j. Lack of funds because of bad financial management of an adequate source of income does-not make the applicant indigent. V.Referral to Other Services a. As per RCW 73.08.070 the county shall assist indigent veterans with burial or cremation costs of three hundred($300.00)dollars minimum or up to one thousand($3,000)dollars. b. The burial assistance is in addition to prior twelve hundred thousand($1,200.00)dollars limitation as outlined in II-)e. c. In an effort to maximize dollars and provide for as many as possible applicants,and when appropriate,the veteran may be referred by the VSO to other veteran services and to other community resources for services. VI.Appeal and Resolution Policy a. If an applicant has either by accident or on purpose falsely filed a claim,or has misused monies from the Veterans'Assistance Fund,the following will apply: 1)A letter is given to the applicant,from the County,denying further use of this fund,until the false claim is resolved. 2)A copy of that letter will be sent to the Veterans'Service Office,to be placed in the offending applicant's file. 3)The applicant's file will then be"Red Flagged",and denied further use until the problem is resolved. b. To resolve the claim,the applicant can clear their name by: 1)If applicant feels this is unjustified,they may appeal in writing to the Veterans'Advisory Board within fifteen(15)days of notification. 2)The appeal will be reviewed by the VAB at the next regular scheduled meeting and a decision will be made no later than the next regular scheduled meeting. 3)Approval or Disapproval requires a"Super Majority"vote by the entire VAB. 4)The applicant may file an appeal,in writing,with the Mason County Commissioners.A decision in regard to appeal may take up to 30 days. c. The applicant may repay any and all monies that have come into question,and may not have access to these funds for one(1)year after payment. Page 5 of 8 Adopted 08/21/2018 d. If the applicant elects not to do V1.b.or VI.c.there will be a two(2)year probationary wait period. After the wait period is over,the applicant must"in writing"request to receive these funds once more,a decision will be forthcoming. e. If it is found that the applicant has done this two(2)times,they will be permanently denied from using this fund. VII.Application Procedures a. Upon arriving at the VSO office the applicant will be asked to sign-in. b. The applicant is then screened about their assistance needs,residence,income,and their eligibility,an"Assistance Fund Application(AFA)(Att.C)and a Rental/Mortgage Verification"(Att. D)form must be filled out as part of the application process. c. If the applicant does not have all needed information or documentation,they will be given a form "Veterans'Assistance Fund Documents Checklist"(Att.E)to help them gather the needed information and return form to VSO. d. If an applicant cannot show proof of service,a"Standard Form 180"(Att.F)will be given to them to be filled out and sent in,they can also go to the VA at American Lake to get proof of service. e. If two or more applicants are sharing the same physical residency,then all income is considered as one. E Only one application may be used for any single physical residency. g. If an applicant has a"Sub-Lease Agreement",then VII(j)will apply. h. When an applicant has requested assistance for past due rent or mortgage payment,II.(be)(1),and has gone through the screening process.The VSO will call the landlord to inform them that the veteran has applied for assistance,and that a letter of"Recommendation for Payment"(Att.G)will be forthcoming. I. The applicant will then be given a form"Rental/Mortgage Verification"(Att.D)to be given to the landlord.This form must be filled out by the landlord or lien holder,notarized and sent back or taken to the VSOs'office.The VSO will then verify all information on the form. j. Shared Dwelling: 1) In the case of a veteran sharing a dwelling with another person who is not a family member as defined in Operating Policy item IV(c),the rental amount will be prorated by the number of people living in the dwelling. 2) In the case of a veteran sharing a dwelling with another person who is not a family member as defined in Operating Policy item IV(c),the utility expenses will be prorated by the number of people living in the dwelling. 3) In the case of a veteran sharing a dwelling with another person who is not a family member as defined in Operating Policy item IK-jc),the firewood/propane expenses will be prorated by the number of people living in the dwelling. IL When an applicant has requested assistance for past due utilities(electric,water or natural as)11 M(2),and has gone through the screening process.The applicant must have a"Past Due"pink slip(s)stating that service will be discontinued. 1. Some utilities companies,i.e.Shelton Utilities,do include garbage within the water bill,in this situation where the bill is"combined",the whole bill is paid. m. The VSO will call the utilities company to verify the current amount to be paid,and inform them that the veteran has applied for assistance and that a letter of"Recommendation for Payment" (AtLG)will be forthcoming. n. When an applicant requests assistance for firewood or propane and has gone through the screening process,the VSO will call a vendor to confirm prices and amount needed.The VSO will inform the vendor,the veteran has applied for assistance and that a letter of"Recommendation for Payment"(AtLG)will be forthcoming,VII Q)(3)also applies. Page 6 of 8 Adopted 08/21/2018 o. The VSO will then fill out a"Purchase Order"(Att.H)to be sent with"Assistance Fund Application" (AFA)(Att.C)for approval from MCC. p. When an applicant requests Miscellaneous Items or Other Items and has gone through the screening process,the VSO will,to the best of their ability,determine the needs of the applicant. q. The VSO will fill out the"Assistance Fund Application"(AFA)(Att.C),determine the amount,the vendor,and have the applicant sign the application with a full understanding of the request. r. Necessity Items check-(s)are issued in fifty dollar increments.The applicant will be given an itemized list of authorized items that may be purchased.(Att.A) s. After all needed information and documentation is gathered from the applicant and outside sources,the AFA is then completely filled out and the packet is complete. L It is the VSOs'responsibility to ensure all information in the packet is correct and verified. u. When the completed packet is sent on to MCC,it will have a copy of"Recommendation for Payment"as a cover sheet(Att.G)or"Assistance Fund Application"(AM C). v. The VSO reserves the right to refuse service to disorderly or abusive individuals.Service will be refused to individuals under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs.Applicants who are disorderly or abusive to Mason County employees or volunteers will be not be provided assistance and will be asked to leave the building. VIII.Processing of Packet Procedures a. Once the packet is received at the MCC office,it is date stamped and reviewed to ensure all information is correct and all supporting documentation is there. b. Applications submitted to the MCC for processing and have been determined to meet the necessary guidelines will have checks issued within three business days. c. Applicants who pick up his/or her check(s),must have proper picture ID,and must sign for check(s).Check(s)are sent out by mail the next business day following approval. d. Necessity Item check(s)that are issued will be stamped with: "No Alcohol or Tobacco","No Cash Back". e. Some delays may result if a legal holiday falls within the time period or if there are insufficient funds to release the check. f. A weekly list of"Approval of Expenditures"is sent to the VSO's office from the MCC office. g. A monthly list of"Approval of Expenditures"is sent to the MCC. IX.Records,Files,Forms and Reports a. It will be the responsibility of the VAB Chair,acting in concert with the VSO's to establish and maintain a record of each applicant requesting and/or receiving assistance from the VAF. b. The VSO will provide forms and reports of attendants,decisions,and record-keeping for clientele, e.g.,forms for vendors,initial applications,and VAB decisions. c. Each October,the VAB,acting in concert with the VSOs shall produce an annual report for the MCC, containing the following information: 1) The number of requests for assistance received during the calendar year. 2) The number of requests for assistance for which assistance was given. 3) The number of requests for assistance for which assistance was not provided and a narrative description of the reasons assistance were not provided. 4) The total dollar value of assistance provided on a monthly basis. 5) A narrative description of non-monetary assistance provided by the VAB. 6) Meeting minutes as an attachment. 7) A copy of appeals as an attachment. Page 7 of 8 Adopted 08/21/2018 d. If any section of these policies or procedures is determined to be in conflict with federal,state.or county laws,ordinances or directives,then said section will be void and the aforementioned laws, ordinances or directives shall prevail. X.Attachments(Att.) A.VAF Necessity Itemized List B. Affidavit of Income C.Assistance Fund Application(AFA) D.Rental/Mortgage Verification E.Veteran's Assistance Documents Checklist(S&S form) F.Request Pertaining to Military Records(Standard Form 180) G.Recommendation For Payment H.Mason County Veterans Service Office-Purchase Order Page 8 of 8 Adopted 08/21/2018 MASON COUNTY AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORM TO: BOARD OF MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS From: Jennifer Giraldes Action Agenda _X_ Public Hearing Other DEPARTMENT: Support Services EXT: 380 DATE: June 11, 2019 Agenda Item # (Commissioner staff to complete) BRIEFING DATE: BRIEFING PRESENTED BY: [X] ITEM WAS NOT PREVIOUSLY BRIEFED WITH THE BOARD Please provide explanation of urgency ITEM: Approval of Warrants &Treasure Electronic Remittances Claims Clearing Fund Warrant #s 8064654-8064766 $ 186,611.14 Direct Deposit Fund Warrant #s $ Salary Clearing Fund Warrant #s $ Treasure Electronic Remittance for May 2019 $ 435,330.23 Electronic Remittance Detail Macecom 5/6/19 $ 105,384.04 Mental Health 5/10/19 $ 74,175.47 Community Health &Social Services 5/10/19 $ 707.14 Current Expense to Comm. Services Health 5/19/19 $ 188,127.50 Mental Health to Clerk 5/9/19 $ 4,112.50 Mental Health to Juvenile Probation 5/9/19 $ 11,625.90 Mental Health to Public Defense 5/9/19 $ 29,172.88 Housing to Housing Authority 5/7/19 $ 1,352.80 Housing to Housing Authority 5/7/19 $ 20,672.00 Refund Interest Earned 5/31/19 $ 82.96 Background: The Board approved Resolution No. 80-00 Payment of Claims Against County: Procedure Authorizing Warrant Issue and Release Prior to Board Claim Approval. Mason County Code 3.32.060(a) requires that the board enter into the minutes of the County 4941Commissioners the approval of claims listing warrant numbers. Claims Clearing YTD Total $ 10,124,336.37 Direct Deposit YTD Total $ 6,796,822.26 Salary Clearing YTD Total $ 7,097,597.42 Approval of Treasure Electronic Remittances YTD Total $ 2,478,060.40 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approval to: Move to approve the following warrants: Claims Clearing Fund Warrant #s 8064654-8064766 $ 186,611.14 Direct Deposit Fund Warrant #s $ Salary Clearing Fund Warrant #s $ Treasure Electronic Remittance for May 2019 $ 435,330.23 Attachment(s): Originals on file with Auditor/Financial Services (Copies on file with Clerk of the Board) N, CoOffice of the Treasurer 411 N. 5th, Bldg. _w E P.O. Box 429 Shelton, Washington 98584-0429 (360) 427-9670, ext. 475 • Fax (360) 427-7267 A Belfair (360) 275-4467 • Elma (360) 482-5269 Elisabeth (Lisa) Frazier, Treasurer Payment approval of Macecom: aU3S333O, a� Account FUND # Remittance w- Macecorn 001.000000.300.300 $ 105,384.04 M-54249 $ - 5/10/2019 Payment approval of Mental Health: Account FUND # Remittance RECEIPT # MENTAL HEALTH 164.000000.000.000 $ 74,175.47 M-54389 $ - M- Payment approval of Community Health & Social Services Fees: 5/10/2019 FISCAL BOND AGENT FUND FUND No. ACCT. #'S Remiittance RECEIPT # Community Health & Social Services 637.000000.000.000 $ 707.14 M-54389 %19/2019 Account FUND # Remittance RECEIPT # CURRENT EXPENSE 001.000000.310.000 $ 188,127.50 M-54336 COMMUNITY SERVICES HEALTH 117.000000.000.000 $ 188,127.50 M-54337 5/9/2019 Account FUND # Remiittance RECEIPT # Mental Health- Budgeted Transfer 164.000000.100.000 $ 4,112.50 M-54342 Clerk 001.000000.070.000 $4,112.50 M-54333 5/9/2019 Account FUND # Remiittance I RECEIPT # Mental Health-Budgeted_Transfer 164.000000.100.000 1 $ 11,625.90 M-54330 Juvenile Probation 001.000000.170.220 1 $11,625.90 M-54331 Account FUND # Remiittance RECEIPT # Mental Health-Budgeted Transfer 164.000000.100.000 $ 29,172.88 M-54334 Public Defense 001.000000.240.000 $29,172.88 M-54335 7-May-19 Account FUND # Remiittance RECEIPT # HOUSING 117.000000.000.200 $ 1,352.80 M-54284 HOUSING AUTHORITY 666.000010.000.000 1 $1,352.80 M-54285 Account FUND # Remiittance RECEIPT # HOUSING 117.000000.000.200 =20,672.00 M54286 HOUSING AUTHORITY 666.000010.000.000 1 $20,672.00 M54288 5/31/2019 n � REFUND INTEREST EARNED Account FUND # Remiittance RECEIPT # CURRENT EXPENSE 001.000000.260.000 $ 38.29 Multiple Re ROAD DIV-CURRENT EXPENSE 001.000000.260.010 $8.61 Multiple Re Veterans Assistance 190.000000.000.000 $ 0.36 Multiple Re COUNTY ROAD 105.000000.000.000 $34.95 Multiple Re MENTAL HEALTH 164.000000.000.000 $0.751 Multiple Re Respectfully submitted by: Julie Richert,Chief Deputy Treasurer 5/31/2019 MASON COUNTY AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORM TO: BOARD OF MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS From: Diane Sheesley, County Engineer Action Agenda DEPARTMENT: Public Works EXT: 450 COMMISSION MEETING DATE: June 11, 2019 Agenda Item # BRIEFING DATE: June 3, 2019 BRIEFING PRESENTED BY: Loretta Swanson and Diane Sheesley [] ITEM WAS NOT PREVIOUSLY BRIEFED WITH THE BOARD Please provide explanation of urgency: ITEM: Road Vacation #398 — Set Hearing Date w/Hearings Examiner BACKGROUND: Public Works has received a request to vacate the south half of Olympic Avenue along the North side of Block 14, lots 6 through 11 in the Plat of Hoodsport from adjoining property owners Mark & Esther Cylwik. The Plat of Hoodsport was established and the streets dedicated in 1890. This portion of Olympic Avenue was never developed as a road nor maintained by Mason County. Mr. & Mrs Cylwik have requested this portion of Olympic Avenue vacated so they can construct a living structure on the adjoining lots 6 — 11 in Block 14 in the Plat of Hoodsport. The Cylwiks have maintained the grounds in this requested area for many years by mowing the grass. Further, the street is considered vacant pursuant to RCW 36-87-090 of Vacation by Operation of Law. Public Works is recommending the Commission formally vacate the south half of Olympic Avenue that lays north of block 14 Lots 6 — 11 in the Plat of Hoodsport. An Engineer's Report has been prepared for the Hearings Examiner and Public Works recommends the vacation as submitted, subject to retaining existing easements in favor of Mason County for PUD#1, the water service serving this area and any other utilities present in the vacated right of way. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Recommend the Board approve and execute the resolution setting a hearing date with the Hearings Examiner for July 10, 2019 at 1:00pm to consider public comment on the petition for vacation of the south 40 feet of Olympic Avenue that lays north of Block 14 Lots 6 - 11 in the Plat of Hoodsport in Mason County Washington. ATTACHMENTS: Engineer's Report Hearing Notice MASON COUNTY DEPARTMENT of PUBLIC WORKS 100 W PUBLIC WORKS DRIVE SHELTON, WASHINGTON 98584 MEMORANDUM DATE: June 5, 2019 TO: Mason County Hearings Examiner FROM: Phil Franklin, Right of Way Agent, for Diane Sheesley, County Engineer Cc: Loretta Swanson, Interim Deputy Director/Public Works SUBJECT: ENGINEER'S REPORT—ROAD VACATION FILE NO. 398 Vacation of the South half of Olympic Avenue, North of Block 14 Lots 6-11 in the Plat of Hoodsport Background: Mark & Esther Cylwik have petitioned for vacation of the south half of Olympic Avenue in the Plat of Hoodsport. The requested strip lays north of Block 14 Lots 6- 11 in the Plat of Hoodsport. Mr. Cylwik and his father own other properties in the immediate area and would like this area to be vacated since it has never been opened or maintained as a public road. They would also like to build on lots 6 - 11 and need the area of the old unused right of way to be able to build. The request to vacate is also to clean up the title of lots 6 - 11 since the Olympic Avenue was vacated by Operation of the Law which is RCW 36.87.090. The vacation would remove an encumbrance that would affect the owner's ability to construct a new structure on the property. The North half of Olympic Avenue is already vacated from a previous vacation request. The Plat of Hoodsport was recorded and the roads and alleys dedicated to Mason County in 1890. This alley was never maintained by the county or any other known property owner nor was it used as a roadway. Further, the alley is considered vacated pursuant to RCW 36.87.090 of Vacation by Operation of Law. This RCW states: Any county road, or part thereof, which remains unopen for public use for a period of five years after the order is made or authority granted for opening it, shall be thereby vacated, and the authority for building it barred by lapse of time: Provided, that this section shall not apply to any highway, road street, alley or other public place dedicated as such in any plat, whether the land included in such plat is within or without the limits of an incorporated city or town, or to any land conveyed by deed to the state or to any county, city or town for highways, roads, streets, alleys, or other public places. Per Mason County Code, this road is classified as a Class A road and the right-of-way is an easement. No compensation is required for Class A roads with the exception of the administrative costs of the vacation action. Page 1 of 2 In compliance with RCW 36.87.40, at the Board of County Commissioners and County Engineer's direction, Public Works Department staff examined the portion of road right-of-way requested to be vacated and solicited comments on the proposed vacation. Our findings are the following: 1. The road is classified as "Class A" per MCC 12.20.040 and no compensation for fee simple interest or appraisal is due prior to vacation. 2. The proposed vacation area is not deemed necessary to preserve for the County road system for the future. 3. Any utility easements located within the requested vacation area remain and the petitioners understand that access to any utilities will not vanish and that access be available at all times. 4. A driveway is located in the area of the vacation, but this driveway is used by the petitioner's father and any agreement for future use can be resolved between the applicant and his father if they choose to record an access agreement. 5. The public will benefit by this action, since it will clear title, add the vacated area to the tax rolls and relieve the county of liability. 6. The Cylwiks' have paid in full the required administrative fee of$500.00. Public Notice: Public notice has been provided as required by RCW 36.87.050, both by posting at the site and by publishing in the county official newspaper. Recommendation: Public Works recommends the vacation of the south half of Olympic Avenue that lays north of Block 14 Lots 6 - 11 in the Plat of Hoodsport as petitioned, subject to existing easements for ingress and egress for any other purpose, if any, and, in accordance with RCW 36.87.170, retaining an easement in favor of Mason County for any utilities present in the vacated right of way. Hearing Examiner Options: 1. Find that this vacation meets the standards established by state law and recommend the vacation be granted as petitioned and/or as recommended by the County Engineer. 2. Find that this vacation fails to meet the standards established by state law and recommend the vacation be denied. 3. Finding that only part of the vacation as petitioned or recommended by the County Engineer complies with the law, develop recommendations to grant the compliant portion and deny the other. Attachments: • Exhibit Al thru A4- Petition • Exhibit 131 thru 134—Maps, Property Picture and Aerials showing area to be vacated • Exhibit C—Legal Description of area to be vacated • Exhibit D1 thru D3 -Approval letters from Other County Departments Page 2 of 2 MASON COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS MUNIS VENDOR#1925 100 W PUBLIC WORKS DRIVE SHELTON,WA 98584 (360)427-9670 Receipt No 19866 Date: 11/16/2018 Payment Type. Check#672 Name: B.A.Cylwik Description Amount Road Vacation#398 500.00 TOTAL $500.00 Receipted by: Braakman,Amy EXHIBIT A-1 #3R MASON COUNTY PETITION FOR VACATION OF COUNTY ROAD TO: Board of Mason County Commissioners c/o: Mason County Public Works Department IW W.Public Works Drive Shelton,WA 98584 We, the undersigned,being owners of the majority of the frontage of the below-described county road,hereby petition the Board of Mason County Commissioners for vacation of the following described county road: Road Name: 0t_Y,(4 d/C ,�PE Road Number: i"15 yt� Description of road right of way to be vacated: J 2 70 � c T_nr � S t>l - x{22/2SD��DLO .r Plat Name: t�o o Recording Date: 1$aO Section: �_ Township: Range: _ Attached herewith is a map secured from the Mason County Engineer or from the Mason County Assessor. We have shaded the right of way herein petitioned to be vacated and have also shown the ownerships along said right of way. IN SUPPORT OF SAID PETITION,PETITIONERS ALLEGE: 1 That the undersigned are the owners of the majority of the frontage of the county road right of way petitioned to be vacated and said right of way is located in Mason County,Washington_ II That contact information,signatures and legal descriptions of the property owned by each petitioner on the right of way to be vacated are provided below: NAME/ADDRESS/SIGNATURE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PHONE PROPERTY/PARCEL# ;1 8 L k 14 -360 auz�l <v 3/ X Milonl r-4BL J X 2q > ?v7 X PETITION FOR VACATION OF COLWTY ROAD EXHIBIT A-2 NAME/ADDRESS/SIGNATURE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PHONE PROPERTY/PARCEL 9 3 X -4 X (Additional petitioners are listed on the attachment hereto.) III That. if the plat%vas recorded prior to N•Iarch. 13. 11M. and_ if the right of gray is not now in use as a public road, the following proof is provided that the road was never opened for public travel for five years following recording of the plat: - -le44yz 4 'J" &et, C c �Pt^ "9K) -4 2 2- S /cl 00 IV That such county road right of way is useless as a part of the county road system and that the public would be benefited by its vacation for the following reasons: V That this road vacation isrequestedfor the following purpose: VI That this petition is accompanied by a deposit in the sum of Five Hundred Dollars (ti51)0.00), payable to ivtasgn County Public Works,pursuant to statute,conditioned upon petitioners paying into the Mason County Road Fund the amount of all costs and expenses incurred in the examination, report, appraisal and all proceedings pertaining to this petition for the vacation of said road right of way. DATED this ���� dap of X)ey e/W Let— 0 PFTlllt)N FOR VACATION OF ON TMN ROAD 1> EXHIBIT A-3 �"�L"G=l ,�'lE"1 Gr_•rj .SE` lO�is %�.- � Via. .. Y. t g 89io /i � ' DECLARATION OF PARCEL COMBINATION FOR: Ad,Ol?J< 13. A- eS C Y[ W t k ©. 130x 93S- bW-VSPAe7,' W)A 9gS48 ECLARATION OF PARCEL COMBINATION OF: SCALE: AoopSPORr Otk /9 1-67.5 9-/3 ✓yC WILLOD RIAR AW(DPC-eo4-od) 1)iTi/ }�oonSPozT pt k IF, 1-67-5 ,Cors 4-f s VAC PROSPECT 4eF DT CDPc PARCEL NO.'S: D.P.C.tl 42.212 Sb ' /q,004SAND f} 2 212 ,yam l 9oo4) APPROVED: AFsAeL7 of FL DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT EXHIBIT A-4 Mason County WA GIS Page I of 1 Mason County WA GIS 0 N HARRIS AVE S e j�it Nt14TYiALLo k&dd, • 1 N HARRISON 70 N HARRISON AVE • 132 N HARRISON AVE � \ N'HA:ISDNAVE A0,N HARRISONA • 1 N HARRISON AVE REQUESTED VACATION AREA \ BLOCK 14 LOTS 6 - '11 14.6 IHARRISONAVE • 70 to i —1 '140 N OLYPdPIC AVE -- 5C I • i \ 131'N OLYMPIC AVE �\ •171 N OLYPJPIC AVE�\ \\ % 0I N OLYMPIC AVE I � i I I I EXHIBIT B- 1 t OOft h[tps://b1S.co.I11asoil.xva.Lls/Illasoii/ 4/30/2019 Mason County WA GIS Page l of I Mason County WA GIS limp • ,REQUESTED VACATION AREA BLOCK 14 LOTS 6 - 11 E " - s O E, IC b. . a EXHIBIT B - 2 1 00f ht(ps:Hgis.co.mason.wa.us/mason/ 4/30/2019 Cylwik Vacation RequestF — I-;:L�' { '' - ,�,�'a� Legend t: .' Write a description for vour map. `,/r ti '�f ,4• .� *" Area of Vacation 31 or '� 1��r •.,,I l � �;• ! a.J� i• � ii .I� �T T♦1 /,\ « f#. 1. - 40 1 ,Y` ••w •1 / . ., �, � r� , �' ,i' •• J�//,, 'f yam/�, y �,Gy.', 1 , `j�. 14 JA CO Iry r AIL `° 47 t Ilk AV sr. y y! EXHIBIT B-4 All that portion of "Plat of Hoodsport", per Plat recorded in Volume 2, Page 6, records of Mason County, Washington, described as follows: The south 40 feet of Olympic Avenue laying adjacent and North of Lots 6 — 11 of Block 14 in the Plat of Hoodsport westerly of Prospect Avenue, vacated, and easterly of Willard Avenue, vacated, as recorded on August 1, 1890 in the Mason County Auditor's Office Book of Plats, Volume 2 Page 6 EXHIBIT C Page 1 of'1 Phillip Franklin - Re: Hoodsport Vacation, # 398 Blase Cylwik and his son Mark From: Terry Conley To: Franklin, Phillip Date: 11/28/201812:58 PM Subject: Re: Hoodsport Vacation,#398 Blase Cylwik and his son Mark Phil, After reviewing this petition I don't have any issues with this vacation.All existing utilities will remain, and have the right to be accessed and be maintained. Terry Conley Mason County Road UtllitJes Specialist 100 W Public Works Drive Shelton, WA 98584 Office: 360-427-9670 Ext, 614 Cell: 360-463-7887 I I >>> Phillip Franklin 11/27/20181:40 PM >>> Terry, Mark&Esther Cylwik are petitioning for the county to vacate a portion of Olympic Avenue in Hoodsport. Mark is real busy so most likely, if you see someone or talk to someone, it will be Mark's dad, Blase. I have attached an image with three aerial maps or surveys of the area,the first map shows the requested area highlighted in pink,and the next two I just hatched in black marker to show the requested area to be vacated. Both Mark and his dad live right next door,so if they are home,they will probably come talk to you if you hang around the area very long. Blase is a really nice older gentlemen. Please send me an email and let me know if you have any questions or concerns about the area to be vacated. Thanks for your help, Phil Phil li-anlclin Right Of Way Agent Mason County Public Works (360)427-9670 ext.456 i I pdf@co,mason.wa.us r i i 1 EXHIBIT D - 1 I I r I file:///C:/Users/pdf/AppData/Local/Temp/XPgLpwise/5BFE90FEMasomnai11Q01753132... 11/28/2018 r Page I of 1 ; i ; Phillip Franklin - Re: Vacation f From: Brenen Profitt To: Franklin, Phillip Date: 1/29/2019 3:56 PM f Subject: Re:Vacation f i Phil, I have no issue with the vacation,that area requested to be vacated is not part of our county maintained road system. i As far as the correct street name to use, I have no opinion either way. F Thank you, Brenen Profitt Road Maintenance Supervisor Mason County Public Works Office-(360)427 9670 x528 Cell-Liffi 968 9036 >>> Phillip Franklin 1/29/2019 3:32 PM >>> Brenen, Can you please take a look at this property owner's request for vacation in Hoodsport and shoot me back an email letting me know your thoughts, concerns or comments for the Vacation. I included a picture that I went up and took of the area. The applicant,or applicants,are Mark Cylwik and his father Blase Cylwik.They own the Mobile and house that sit in close proximity. Mark works so if you need a contact,the best one to contact is Blase. Blase lives in the mobile home.A contact phone number is: 360-229-1007.Also could you give me your opinion on the correct street name to use here. He has lived there for a long time and he says that this is Olympic, but the address for his place is Harrison.What street do you think this should be. Let me know, in email please so I can put it in my file, what you think of the vacation. Thanks so much Brenen, Phil Phil Franklin Right Of Way Agent Mason County Public Works (360)427-9670 ext.456 pdf@co.mason.wa.us EXHIBIT D-2 ftte:///C:/Users/Pdf/AppData/Local/Tenip/XPgtpwise/5 C5077A 1 Masoiimai 1100175313212... 1/30/2019 Page I of 2 Phillip Firanklin-Re:Fwd:Vocution 6398 Cyhvik From: Michael MocSems To: Frarildin.Phillip Date- 4M0/2019 2:17 PM Sub*t: Re:Fwd:Vacation#398 C'yi%vik ir one. I lA4 Am=o- .; Kell Rowan I Planning Manager Mason Community Services ason.wa.us 360.427.967a ext 286 New wor air new 1wors;kiar.nmr:517W-4:30(f 00-/Z-00 >>>Michru:1 MwSems 4/30!30 19 11:23 A M>>> Kell, Shnil I tell Phil that the Planning Dept has no issue with this street vacation? Thanks, Michael >>>Phillip Franklin 413=019 9:18 AM>>> Michael, You did forward me this email some time ngo but I just want to make sure since I have not received any Follow tip email from yourself,Kell or Marissa. Are there any concerns,in your department,about this requested vacation? Please let me knove vim emit,so I call proceed with my final write Lip to present to the bocc, Thanks. Phil Phil Fraitkiln JUSW OfWay Agent Munn County We Warki (3601427A610 ext 456 >>>Michael MacSems 1/30/2019 11:47 AM>>> Kell and Morrisa, Can either of you think ofany reason why the Planning Dept would oppose this street vacation?On the map below,the location or this vacation appears to ran through the general location of the house on TPN 41212-RI-1900 1. Michael >>;>Phillip Franklin 1/30/2019 7.44 AM Michael, Here is another vacation requesl/petidon for it Mark Cyhvik in Hoodspam His Father Blase Cyhvik-is handling the vacation for him since Mark works and clad is retired. I have attached some aerials showing wlicre the request is.We do not maintain this area ofwhal Mr,Cyl%vik Is calling Olympic Avenue,nor has it ever been opened For public travel, A phone number,ifyou need to contact anyone,is:360-877-6131 or 360-229-1007 1 believe They are doing this because they kyalit to build a house on some adjoining lots flim Mark meals. Ofilse lives in a mobile home right next to the properly and his address is,132 N.Harrison Ave. I look forward to your response and anyone else who you pass it along to. IF you have any questions,please call or email me. Thanks and have a great day Michael. Phil Phi!Franklin Ribbi Of Way Agent EXHIBIT D -3 file:///C:/Useis/Pdf/AppData/LocaVfempWgrpwise/5CC85908Masonmail100175313213... 4/30/2019 RESOLUTION NO. VACATION FILE NO.398 NOTICE OF INTENT TO VACATE SETTING TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING ON SAID VACATION RCW 36.87 IN THE MATTER OF THE VACATION OF THE SOUTH 40 FEET OF OLYMPIC AVENUE THAT LAYS NORTH OF BLOCK 14 LOTS 6-11 IN THE PLAT OF HOODSPORT WHEREAS, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Mason County Public Works Department is requesting for the vacation of the following right of way: All that portion of"Plat of Hoodsport", per Plat recorded in Volume 2, Page 6, records of Mason County, Washington, described as follows: The south 40 feet of Olympic Avenue laying adjacent and North of Lots 6 — 11 of Block 14 in the Plat of Hoodsport westerly of Prospect Avenue, vacated, and easterly of Willard Avenue, vacated, as recorded on August 1, 1890 in the Mason County Auditor's Office Book of Plats, Volume 2 Page 6 WHEREAS, the Board of Mason County Commissioners did set a date for public hearing on the matter before the Hearing Examiner on the matter and directed Public Works to prepare notice thereof for posting and publication. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that said hearing has been set for Wednesday, July 10, 2019 at 1:00 p.m. in the Commission Chambers, Mason County Courthouse Building I, 411 North Fifth Street, Shelton, Washington, at which time and place any taxpayer may appear to hear the County Engineer's report, and be heard either for or against the vacation of said the south 40 feet of Olympic Avenue that lays north of Block 14 Lots 6 — 11 in the plat of Hoodsport. DATED this day of 12019. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MASON COUNTY, WASHINGTON ATTEST: Melissa Drewry, Clerk of the Board Kevin Shutty, Chair APPROVED AS TO FORM: Sharon Trask, Vice Commissioner Tim Whitehead, Ch. DPA Assessor Auditor Randy Neatherlin, Commissioner County Engineer Petitioner Post no later than (20 days prior to hearing at each terminus of the county road or portion thereof proposed to be vacated or abandoned.) Vacation File No. 398 JOURNAL—Publish 2t: — (Bill Public Works) MASON COUNTY BRIEFING ITEM SUMMARY FORM ,J TO: BOARD OF MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FROM: KELLY FRAZIER DEPARTMENT: Facilities Manager Support Services EXT: 519 BRIEFING DATE: 06/10/19 PREVIOUS BRIEFING DATES: If this is a follow-up briefing, please provide only new information It ITEM: Approval to place on the Action Agenda, June 19, 2019 contract with KMB Architects for architectural and engineering (A/E) services for the Mason County District Court Building #10 Renovation project. This contract is the first of three phases. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: KMB Architects submitted a proposal for architectural and engineering (A/E) services for the Mason County District Court Building #10 Renovation project. This Professional Services proposal and contract encompasses assessment, design bidding and construction administration services over multiple phases for the scope of work that was defined during the previous meeting with Mason County and KMB architects on April 29, 2019. This contract is the first of three phases. Programmatically the County anticipates that approximately 14,000 sf of the building will be renovated into the new District Courthouse. This renovation will include two (2) District Courtrooms, Attorney offices, District Court Probation offices, and District Court Clerk offices. The project will be divided into multiple phases. Phase 1 is to perform a building assessment of the Electrical, Mechanical and Structural systems as well as the building envelop. Additional KMB architects will work with County stakeholder groups to prepare a Space Program and develop a Concept Floor Plan for the initial 14,000 sf BUDGET IMPACTS This professional services fee request for forty-five thousand dollars ($45,000.00). This project is budgeted in REET 1. RECOMMENDED OR REQUESTED ACTION: Approval to place on the Action Agenda, June , 2019 contract with KMB Architects for architectural and engineering (A/E) services for the Mason County District Court Building #10 Renovation project. This contract is the first of three phases. ATTACHMENTS: KMB Proposal and Contract 906 Columbia Street SW,Suite 400 Olympia,WA 98501 360.352.8883 architects www.KMB-architects.com Proposal Memorandum Date: May 20, 2019 To: Frank Pinter Support Services Director Mason County 411 North 51h Street, Shelton, WA 98584 ffpi nterAco.cason.wa.us From: Bill Valdez, PE, Partner Project: MASON COUNTY—DISTRICT COURT BUILDING#10 RENOVATION Subject: Fee Proposal—Professional Services KMB Job. No.: TBD Copied to: Joe Doherty, KMB Business Manager,file Frank— KMB architects respectfully submits an amendment to our contract for architectural and engineering(A/E)services for the Mason County District Court Building#10 Renovation project. This Professional Services proposal encompasses design, bidding and construction administration services for the scope of work that was defined during the previous meeting with Mason County and KMB architects on April 29, 2019. Project Understanding Mason County recently purchased the Olsen Furniture Company Building located at 414 West Franklin Street, Shelton WA. This existing singe-story building is approximately 22,000 sf, constructed with storefront glazing system composing the majority of the southern elevation and masonry exterior walls on all other sides. The building includes long span glue laminated structural beams and steel pipe columns. There is a barrel-vaulted roof for about 1/3 of the roof surface and a flat roof for 2/3 of the roof surface.The County believes that the building RTU's have failed and will need replaced as part of the renovation project. Programmatically the County anticipates that approximately 14,000 sf of the building will be renovated into the new District Courthouse. This renovation will include two(2) District Courtrooms, Prosecuting Attorney offices, District Court Probation offices, and District Court Clerk offices. The project will be divided into multiple phases. Phase 1 is to perform a building assessment of the Electrical, Mechanical and Structural systems as well as the building envelop.Additional KMB architects will work with County stakeholder groups to prepare a Space Program and develop a Concept Floor Plan for the initial 14,000 gsf. MASON COUNTY—DISTRICT COURT BUILDING#10 RENOVATION May 20, 2019 page 2 would like you to evaluate the MEP systems and based on the expected renovation scope determine what systems need upgraded and what that scope of work would be. We need to understand what the replacement HVAC systems would be so we can determine what the effect on the structural system would be as well. Dan Munn with tk1sc is our Structural Engineer. Phase 1: (To start in June 2019 and be completed in 6 weeks) • 1 Site visit to determine existing conditions • Mechanical & Electrical: Systems assessment, prepare a conceptual report of systems,system upgrades and scope of MEP systems to support a 14,000 sf renovation, but building systems to support the full 22,000 sf building. • Structural: Systems assessment, prepare a conceptual report of vertical and lateral structural systems, system upgrades and scope to support the full 22,000 sf building. • Architectural: Building roof system assessment, prepare a conceptual report of remaining usefully life to roof systems and system upgrades for the full 22,000 sf building. • Architectural: Programming with stakeholders including District Court, Prosecuting Attorney, District Court Probation, District Court Clerk and County Facilities&Maintenance. Develop Space List and Staffing Program. • Architectural: Develop concept floor plans for the space program indicated above. Phase 2(To start in August 2019 and construction to be completed with approximately 12-16 weeks) • Fee to be mutually negotiated between Mason County and KMB architects following Phase 1. • Develop Contract Documents for the Building Systems upgrades including: • RTU and HVAC building system replacement if required • Electrical service upgrade if required • Building envelope&roof upgrades if required • Structural&Seismic upgrades if required. • Cost Consulting Phase 3(To start in August 2019 and construction to be completed within approximately 12 month) • Fee to be mutually negotiated between Mason County and KMB architects following Phase 1. • Develop Contract Documents for the approximately 14,000 sf Tenant Infill (TI)Renovation including: • Mechanical &Plumbing TI • Electrical TI • Architectural TI • Courtroom Technology TI • Security Electronics,Audio Visual, and Data TI • Cost Consulting The building will be vacated for full duration of design and construction. The anticipated Project Budget including of the Maximum Allowable Construction Cost(MACC), Design Services and Permitting Fees of each of the phases of the project is not yet known. Proposed Scope of Services—Phase 1 KMB architects' proposes to provide design services for systems assessment, programming and concept design.The scope of work for design services includes Architectural, Interiors, Structural, Mechanical, Electrical, and cost consulting. The following summarizes the proposed project team: A. Architects—KMB architects, Bill Valdez, PE, Partner B. Interior Design—KMB architects, Sharla Thiesen C. Structural Engineering—tk1sc—Dan Munn PE D. Mechanical (HVAC, Plumbing) Engineering—HultzBHU—Rick Hultz PE E. Electrical Engineering—HultzBHU MASON COUNTY—DISTRICT COURT BUILDING#10 RENOVATION May 20, 2019 page 3 F. Cost Estimating—KMB architects—Bill Valdez PE, Partner Basic Services A. Architectural fee $20,300 (Refer to attached KMB architects task-based tables for fee distribution by Phase) B. Structural Engineering $16,000 (Refer to attached proposal from tk1 sc) C. Mechanical/Electrical/Plumbing Engineering $6,000 (Refer to attached proposal from HultzBHU) D. Additional Services Consultant 10% Mark-up $2,200 Subtotal Basic $44,500 E. KMB architects team Direct Expenses Costs $500 a. Printing Costs $100 b. Meals $0 c. Travel/Mileage $300 d. Miscellaneous Direct Costs $100 Subtotal Basic Services $45,000 This professional services fee request for forty-five thousand and no($45,000.00). Draft Schedule The following is the anticipated schedule dates: • Programming, Concept Design&Field Verification Kick Off—June 11,2019 • Programming Meeting#1 with Stakeholders—June 13,2019 • Programming Meeting#2&Concept Design Meeting#1 with Stakeholders—June 25,2019 • Concept Design Meeting#2 with Stakeholders—July 9,2019 • Draft Report—July 23,2019 • Final Document Submittal—July 30,2019 Please do not hesitate to call me to discuss or if you have any questions regarding this Professional Services proposal. We're looking forward to work with you and your team on this great project for the citizens of the Mason County. Sincerely, KMB architects S* os��- Bill Valdez, Partner Attachments: tk1 sc Proposal HultzBHU Proposal KMB architects Task Spreadsheet Work Plan-Architectural May 22,2019 Task Task Description Schedule Subtotals Total Staffing Resources(see legend below) ID Hours PIC SPM PM CA I APM I CAD I PA $ 200.00 $ 150.00 $ 135.00 $ 135.001 $ 110.001 $ 95.001 $ 90.00 0.00 Programming&Concept Design Phase 0.01 Disciplines Interaction $ 1,070 6 4 2 0.02 Document Checking 400 2 2 0.03 Permitting Authority consulting&coordination 270 2 2 0.04 User agency data coordination(2 Programming Meetings) 2,680 16 8 8 0.04 Programming 2,940 16 12 4 0.05 Architectural Design 7,920 60 12 24 24 0.06 Facility Assessment 2,680 16 8 8 0.07 Report&Documentation 1,340 8 4 4 0.08 Cost Estimating 8004 4 0.09 Scheduling 200 1 1 0 30 Programming&Concept Design Phase $ 2070 131 55 0 52 0 0 24 0 1.00 Schematic Design Phase 1.01 Disciplines Interaction $ 0 1.02 Document Checking 0 1.03 Permitting Authority consulting&coordination 0 1.04 User agency data coordination 0 1.05 Architectural Design 0 1.06 ISpecifications 0 1.07 Materials Research 0 1.08 Cost Estimating 0 1.09 Scheduling 0 0 Schematic Design Phase $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.00 Design Development Phase 2.01 Disciplines Interaction $ 0 2.02 Document Checking 0 2.03 Permitting Authority consulting&coordination 0 2.04 User agency data coordination 0 2.05 Architectural Design 0 2.06 jArchitectural Specifications 0 2.07 Materials research 0 2.08 Cost estimating 0 2.09 Scheduling 0 0 Design Development Phase $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.00 Construction Documents Phase 3.01 Disciplines Interaction $ 0 3.02 Document Checking 0 3.03 Permitting Authority consulting&coordination 0 3.04 User agency data coordination 0 3.05 Architectural Design 0 3.06 Architectural Specifications 0 3.07 Materials research 0 3.08 Cost estimating0 3.09 Scheduling - 0 0 Construction Documents Phase $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.00 Bidding Phase 4.01 Bidding materials $ 0 4.02 Addenda 0 4.03 Bidding 0 4.04 Analysis of Substitutions 0 4.05 Bid Evaluation 0 4.06 Contract Agreements 0 0 Bidding Phase $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.00 Construction Contract Administration Phase 4.01 Architectural Construction Administration $ 0 4.02 Disciplines Interaction 0 4.03 Document Checking 0 4.04 Permitting Authority Consulting 0 4.05 Construction Administration 0 4.06 lConstrurtion Field Observation 0 4.07 IDocuments _ 0 4.08 Schedulin _ 0 4.09 lCost Accounting 0 Construction Contract Administration Phase $ 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 6.00 Project Closeout Phase 6.01 Project Closeout $ 0 6.02 Processing Record Documents 0 6.03 Operations and Maintenance Manuals 0 6.04 Warranty Period 0 Project Closeout Phase $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Basic Services $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.00 Reimbursable Expenses Allowance for printing 0 Allowance for mileage 0 $ 0 Total Reimbursable Expenses $ KMB Staffing Resources Legend Fee Summary Total PIC Principal In Charge Programming&Concept Design Phase $ 20,300 SPM Associate/Senior Architect/Senior Project Manager Schematic Design Phase $ PM Project Architect/Project Manager/Designer Design Development Phase CA Staff Architect/Project Manager/Designer/CA Specialist Construction Documents Phase - APM Assistant Project Manager Bidding Phase - CAD CAD Technician Construction Contract Administration Phase - PA Project Assistant Project Closeout Phase Total Basic Services $ Total Reimbursable Expenses - Total Architectural Fees $ tk1sc COLLABORATIVE May 13, 2019 Mr. Bill Valdez KMB Architects 906 Columbia Street SW, Suite 400 Olympia, Washington 98501 Re: Mason County Courts—Facility Assessment and Seismic Analysis Report Engineering/Consulting Proposal and Professional Service Agreement Dear Bill, Thank you for the opportunity to collaborate with your firm on this project. We are pleased to provide this proposal to furnish engineering / consulting services for the project referenced above. Please contact me if you have any questions and/or comments regarding this proposal. If you find the scope and fees acceptable please execute this agreement accepting the terms and conditions stated herein. If we are directed to proceed prior to execution of contract,the terms set forth in our proposal/agreement shall prevail until such time as an agreement is fully executed. This proposal will remain open for thirty(30)days from May 13,2019. Sincerely, tklsc Daniel Munn P.E.,S.E., LEED AP Seattle Office Leader 1:\Proposals\2019\p20190711 Mason County Jail—Facility Assessment and Seismic Analysis Report\p20190711 Mason County Courts—Facility Assessment and Seismic Analysis Report.docx 206.641.6016 1411 4TH AVENUE SUITE 1000 SEATTLE, WA 98101 tklsc.com THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK tk1sc COLLABORATIVE Mason County Courts—Facility Assessment and Seismic Analysis Report Engineering/Consulting Proposal and Professional Service Agreement May 13, 2019 Page 1 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT("PSA") Between tklsc (SUBCONSULTANT) and ARCHITECT/PRIME CONSULTANT(CLIENT) This Agreement is entered into effective May 13, 2019, to provide engineering/ consulting services for the project named Mason County Courts— Facility Assessment and Seismic Analysis Report described in Exhibit "A", between KMB Architects (Client) and tklsc. 1. Subconsultant will: a. Provide those Basic Services set forth in the attached Exhibit "C"/ "C(s)" and such other related additional services as the parties may mutually agree. b. Direct all Project communications to and through Client, unless Client indicates or directs otherwise. c. Assist as reasonably requested in Client's Project coordination. d. Subconsultant will maintain the insurance program set forth in Exhibit "D". 2. Client will compensate Subconsultant for Basic Services pursuant to Exhibit "B" and for additional services pursuant to Subconsultant's then current fee schedule,or as the parties may mutually agree at the time the services are undertaken. 3. This Agreement is subject to the terms and conditions printed on the following page. KMB Architects (Client)finds the scope and fees acceptable and by executing below has agreed to accept the terms and conditions stated herein. If tklsc is directed to proceed prior to execution of this professional services agreement,the terms set forth in our proposal/agreement shall prevail until such time as an agreement is fully executed by both parties. tklsc p KMB Architects(Client) Daniel Munn P.E.,S.E., LEED AP Name(Signature Above): Principal Title: WA Lic.#38727 Client Project No.: Attachments Professional Service Agreement/Terms and Conditions Exhibit "A"—General Project Description Exhibit "B"—Compensation Exhibit "C"—General Description of Project/Project Features Exhibit"C(s)"—Service Specific Engineering/Consulting Scopes of Work Exhibit "D"—Insurance Provisions 1:\Proposals\2019\p20190711 Mason County Jail—Facility Assessment and Seismic Analysis Report\p20190711 Mason County Courts—Facility Assessment and Seismic Analysis Report.docx 206.641.6016 1411 4TH AVENUE SUITE 1000 SEATTLE, WA 98101 tklsc.com tk1sc COLLABORATIVE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF PROPOSAL/PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT("PSA") Between tk1sc(ENGINEER/SUBCONSULTANT)and ARCHITECT/PRIME CONSULTANT(CLIENT) 1. Engineer will provide Prime A/E with monthly invoices accurately reflecting as appropriate the progress of the services and/or current expenditures of professional time,and reimbursable expenses which shall be reimbursed on the same terms as Prime A/E is entitled pursuant to the Prime Agreement.Each invoice shall be due and payable on the earlier of 30 days after Prime Consultant's receipt of related Project payments or 90 days after the invoice date. If Prime Consultant allows an invoice to become delinquent,then interest will accrue from the invoice date at 30%per annum,compounded annually,or the highest rate allowed by law,whichever is lower,with payments applied first to accrued interest. Engineer's fee shall be equitably adjusted in the event of significant changes in the Prime Agreement or the Project's scope or scheduling,or should Prime A/E expressly request expedited service. 2. At Prime A/E's direction or request,Engineer will provide the following additional services at its then current standard hourly fee rates or on such other terms as the Parties agree at the time the services are undertaken: (i)revisions to instruments of service where such revisions are inconsistent with prior Prime A/E approval or due to substantial changes in Engineer's instructions,or to amendments to or changes in the interpretation of the laws and regulations applicable to the Project or to conditions of which Engineer had not been timely informed;(ii)evaluating and responding to contractor proposals,substitution submittals,change order requests or the like beyond that fairly call for by the Basic Services;(iii)services necessitated by inadequate or improper contractor performance,unreasonable contractor requests and claims and/or construction accidents or losses;and(iv)such other services as the Parties may mutually agree. 3. Engineer's services will be performed in a timely manner consistent with good professional practice and the desire that Project proceed as expeditiously as practical,and Engineer will use its best efforts to meet any reasonable Project turnaround times or schedule;but in no event will Subconsultant be liable or responsible for delays beyond its reasonable control. 4. Toward the mutual goal of a successful project,Prime A/E shall make reasonable efforts to cooperate with Engineer including without limitation: (i) designating a single Project Manager with appropriate authority;(ii)providing appropriate information regarding Project conditions and requirements;(iii)responding to Engineers questions and requests for information and approval within a reasonable time; (iv) reviewing Engineers work for appropriateness and accuracy such as basic design,specific site locations,coordination and compliance with Project requirements, and promptly notifying Subconsultant of any problems or concerns;(v)refraining from authorizing or allowing deviations from Engineer's instruments of service or the use of Engineer's un- finalized instruments of service for cost estimating or otherwise without Engineer's knowledge and consent;and(vi) providing appropriate subconsultant coordination. 5. Engineer's services will be performed in accordance with generally and currently accepted engineering principles and practices as embodied in the standard procedures and protocols of Engineer and its subconsultants,and without warranties,express or implied.In particular,Engineer will use its best professional judgment in interpreting and applying the requirements of all laws applicable to the Project including without limitation laws concerning energy conservation,accessibility and functionality standards;but compliance with any law as it may be eventually be interpreted by others cannot be guaranteed. Further,the use of such terms as"certified,""warrant,""verify,""confirm,""make certain,""assure,"and"ensure,"or the like will not constitute a guarantee,but rather a representation of professional opinion or judgment. 6. Upon payment of related fees and costs,Prime A/E its client shall be granted a perpetual,royalty-free and transferable nonexclusive license to use the drawings,specifications,calculations and other instruments of service prepared by or on behalf of Engineer pursuant to this Agreement for any and all purposes consistent with the Prime Agreement.Any electronic documents that are provided will be in Engineer's standard formats and conventions with no guarantee of compatibility with any particular software or hardware,or of the absence of viruses or other harmful materials;and any use with or conversion to other formats or conventions,or with any particular software or hardware will be a the user's sole risk. In the event of a conflict between Engineer's signed construction documents and electronic files,the hard copy construction documents shall govern. 7. Engineer will undertake professional responsibility for only the engineering services expressly undertaken pursuant to this Agreement,and not otherwise. Engineer will not be legally liable for the providing of or the failure to provide environmental,acoustical or civil engineering services,or any specialty consulting services such as cost estimating,food service,kitchen,lab,hospital, industrial,LEED certification,data/communications or audio/visual consulting,even if information from others is incorporated into Engineer's instruments of service for ease of reference or otherwise. Further,and without limitation,Engineer will not be responsible for delays or other matters beyond its reasonable control;for inaccurate information provided to it by Prime A/E or other reasonably reliable sources or for unverified assumptions directed or accepted by Prime A/E; for site or other conditions of which it was not informed;for hazardous materials or toxic substances at the Project site;for the specification of products or equipment for purposes consistent with the manufacturer's published literature;for materials and equipment decisions made by others; for construction means,methods,techniques,sequences or procedures including without limitation safety precautions and programs;for the timeliness or quality of contractor performance;or for actions or inaction of others including utility companies,other consultants,contractors and governmental or quasi-governmental agencies. 8. In order to control the risks inherent in Engineer's professional undertaking pursuant to this Agreement,Engineer's services are intended to be performed fully and solely by and on behalf of Engineer. Unless this Agreement is terminated for Engineer's material breach,if Prime A/E prevents or frustrates Engineer's full performance of the basic services or any undertaken additional services,or without Engineer's express consent causes or allows recorded or unrecorded modifications to or deviations from the requirements or recommendations of Engineer's instruments of service or the use for any purpose of un-finalized instruments of service,then in addition to Engineer's common law rights,Prime A/E shall release and indemnify Engineer and its affiliated entities and individuals to the fullest extent allowed by law from and against any and all claims,costs,losses and/or liability concerning or related to the affected services or the use of modified,deviated from or un-finalized instruments of service. 9. Engineer will stand behind its services and indemnify Prime A/E and its affiliated entities and individuals to the full extent permitted by law concerning any claims or liability to the full extent caused by Engineer's active negligence or willful misconduct;and Prime A/E will indemnify Engineer and its affiliated entities and individuals to the fullest extent allowed by law concerning Project- related claims or liability caused by Prime A/E's active negligence or willful misconduct. In the event of any claim within the purview of these indemnification provisions,the indemnitee shall control its own defense,and at the time of claim resolution the indemnitor shall provide reimbursement for those attorney's fees caused by any legal fault by or attributable to the indemnitor. Also and in any event,Engineer's liability to Prime A/E shall be limited in the same manner and to the same extent as Prime A/E's liability is limited to others. 30. The Parties acknowledge that each is a business entity,and to the fullest extent allowed by law each expressly waives any right to assert any claim for damages or indemnification against the other's affiliated individuals concerning the Project and/or this Agreement.Also,the Parties hereby waive any claim for consequential and/or economic damages which either might have against the other or the other's affiliated entities and individuals concerning this Agreement or its termination. Further and in any event,Prime A/E agrees to limit the total aggregate liability concerning or related to the Project of Engineer and Engineels subconsultants,if any,and their respective affiliated entities and individuals,on any and all legal and equitable theories and concerning all kinds and causes of loss to the fullest extent allowed by law as to Prime A/E and all third parties to the lesser of(a)twice Engineer's professional services fee;or(b)the amount of the Engineer's applicable insurance proceeds then available at the time of claim resolution. 11. This Agreement supersedes all negotiations and prior agreements concerning the Project and is intended as a complete and exclusive statement of the entire agreement between the Parties concerning the Project. Neither Party may assign or transfer any interest in or right under this agreement without the written consent of the other. The Parties will strive to maintain a good working relationship throughout the duration of the Project;and because of the importance of a good working relationship,either Party may terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to the other provided only that such notice is given in the good faith belief that the working relationship is unsatisfactory. If Prime A/E allows an invoice to become delinquent,then Engineer may suspend its performance under this Agreement and withhold or withdraw any instruments of service or related licenses with no liability for so doing. No deductions shall be made from Engineer's compensation on account of problems or losses for which Engineer has not been held legally liable. This Agreement is being entered into in Orange County,California;and it shall be interpreted and enforced under and pursuant to the laws of the State of California. No failure to exercise or delay in exercising any right under this Agreement shall be construed as a waiver;and no waiver of a breach of any term of this Agreement shall be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or similar terms. In the event of any dispute or legal action concerning this Agreement,each party shall bear its own attorney's fees. In the event that this Agreement is for any reason terminated,then its indemnity and other risk allocation provisions shall remain in full force and effect. In the event that any provision of this Agreement shall be prohibited by law,then that provision shall not be void,but rather shall be interpreted as operating only to the fullest extent as allowed by law;and in the event that any provision should be invalid or unenforceable,then the remaining provisions shall remain valid and binding.This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties and their affiliated entities and individuals;but except as expressly provided herein,this Agreement is not intended to create any rights in any third parties. 12. Condo Conversion: If the Project is converted from an apartment project,as presently contemplated by the parties,to a project involving condominium or co-op ownership,then the other provisions of this Agreement notwithstanding,Prime Consultant shall to the fullest extent permitted by law,and even in situations involving actual or alleged"design defects"or"active negligence" by one or more indemnitees,release,indemnify and hold harmless Subconsultant and Its affiliated entities and individuals,and each of them,from and against whatever claims,costs,losses and/or liability may arise concerning the services performed or undertaken pursuant to this Agreement or concerning the Project;provided,however,that no indemnification obligation shall apply to any indemnitee concerning that indemnitee's sole negligence or willful misconduct.These provisions shall survive the termination of this Agreement;and in the event that any portion of these provisions shall be prohibited by law,then these provisions shall not be void,but rather shall be interpreted as applying only to the fullest extent allowed by law. --END-- tk1sc COLLABORATIVE Mason County Courts—Facility Assessment and Seismic Analysis Report Engineering/Consulting Proposal and Professional Service Agreement—Exhibit A May 13, 2019 Page 1 EXHIBIT A—PROJECT DESCRIPTION Description of Project Project Name: Mason County Courts—Facility Assessment and Seismic Analysis Report Address: 414 West Franklin Street City/State: Shelton,Washington 98584 Project Type: Government-County Square Footage: 14,000 Project Description: Existing retail shell building to be adapted for County Courts use. -----END----- tk1sc COLLABORATIVE Mason County Courts—Facility Assessment and Seismic Analysis Report Engineering/Consulting Proposal and Professional Service Agreement—Exhibit B May 13, 2019 Page 1 EXHIBIT B—COMPENSATION A. Compensation for the scope of services in accordance with the attached exhibit(s)shall be based upon the following fixed fee(s): Engineering/Consulting Services: $ 16,000.00 B. Reimbursable expenses are in addition to the compensation listed above and shall include costs for reproductions (copies, binding, blueprints, CADD plotting), mileage, parking costs, postage and messenger delivery charges, transportation (auto rental, taxi, bus, airfare), meals, and lodging, plus other expenses incurred in connection with out of town travel (must be approved by Client). Also, they may include costs associated with photographic production techniques, renderings, models, mockups, etc. (with client approval), plus any additional insurance coverage or limits, including professional liability insurance that is requested by Client in excess of that normally carried. Billing for allowed reimbursable expenses will be as follows:Cost plus 15% tk1sc COLLABORATIVE Mason County Courts—Facility Assessment and Seismic Analysis Report Engineering/Consulting Proposal and Professional Service Agreement—Exhibit B May 13, 2019 Page 2 C. For additional services, such as changes to the scope of work after commencement of Contract Documents or preparation of record drawings of existing conditions,the Client shall pay the Engineer on an hourly basis as follows: Hourly Hourly Technology Hourly Energy& Hourly M/E/P/S Engineering Rate Project Coordinator Rate Consulting Rate Sustainability Rate Designer $105 Project Assistant $95 Systems Designer $105 Analyst $105 Engineer 1 $125 Project Coordinator 1 $110 Systems Engineer 1 $125 Consultant 1 $125 Engineer II $140 Project Coordinator II $130 Systems Engineer II $140 Consultant II $140 Senior Engineer $160 Project Sr.Coordinator $145 Sr.Systems Engineer $160 Senior Consultant $160 Associate $175 Associate $175 Associate $175 Senior Associate $195 Senior Associate $195 Senior Associate $195 Director $210 Director $210 Director $210 Senior Director $230 Senior Director $230 Senior Director $230 Principal $245 Principal $245 Principal $245 Partner $265 Partner $265 Partner $265 Lighting Studio Hourly Commissioning Hourly Code,Life Safety,& Hourly BIM Hourly Rate Rate Fire Rate Rate Assistant Ltg.Designer $100 Cx Assistant $100 FP Technician $110 BIM Generalist $100 Lighting Designer 1 $115 Cx Technician $115 FP Consultant 1 $130 BIM Specialist 1 $120 Lighting Designer 11 $130 Cx Authority $135 FP Consultant II $150 BIM Specialist II $135 Senior Ltg.Designer $145 Senior Cx Authority $150 Senior FP Consultant $165 BIM Sr.Specialist $150 Associate $160 Associate $165 Associate $185 Senior Associate $180 Senior Associate $185 Senior Associate $205 Director $195 Director $200 Director $225 Senior Director $210 Senior Director $215 Senior Director $240 Principal $225 Principal $235 Principal $260 Partner $240 Partner $250 Partner $280 The above hourly rate schedules are firm for twelve months from date of execution of contract with an annual escalation of 5%thereafter. -----END----- tk1sc COLLABORATIVE Mason County Courts—Facility Assessment and Seismic Analysis Report Engineering/Consulting Proposal and Professional Service Agreement—Exhibit C May 13, 2019 Page 1 EXHIBIT C—ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING SCOPE OF SERVICES DESCRIPTIONS Professional Services We will provide facility condition assessment services. Engineering/Consulting Basic Scope of Services Options Based upon the indicated Professional Services, the following specific Scope of Services options are included in this scope. Scope Included Basic Engineering/Consulting/Design Service Description ❑ Mechanical Engineering services. ❑ Electrical Engineering services. ❑ Plumbing Engineering services. ® Structural Engineering services. ❑ Architectural Lighting Design services. ❑ Utility Company Coordination services. ❑ Power System Analysis services. ❑ Energy services. ❑ Code, Life Safety&Fire Consulting services. ❑ Low Voltage System Design services. ❑ Structured Cabling System Design services. ❑ Audio/Visual System Design services. ❑ Access Control Design services. ❑ Intrusion Alarm System Design services. ❑ CCN Security Camera System Design services. ❑ School Integrated Communications System Design services. ❑ Synchronized Clock System Design services. ❑ CATV/MAN System Design services. ❑ Nurse Call System Design services. Project Specific Scope Clarifications 1. As-built and seismic assessment evaluation report of the existing facility. As-builts will be limited to collecting as constructed information on the existing building with a visual review and measurement of existing systems that can be readily accessed and photographed.Seismic Assessment report will be based on ASCE 41,Tier 1 evaluation checklists and report. 2. Conceptual review and scope description for new HVAC systems support. Our scope will include coordination with the project Mechanical Engineer for a Concept plan for support of new AHUs at the existing roof. 3. Existing exterior awning condition evaluation. Our scope will be a review and estimate of remaining service life for front exterior fabric canopy structure mounted to front exterior wall. Engineering/Consulting Sub-Consultants Sub-consultants are not proposed for this project. tk1sc COLLABORATIVE Mason County Courts—Facility Assessment and Seismic Analysis Report Engineering/Consulting Proposal and Professional Service Agreement—Exhibit C May 13, 2019 Page 2 Engineering/Consulting Design and Construction Administration Phases Phases Included Phase Descriptions ® Feasibility/Programming Phase services. ❑ Schematic Design Phase services. ❑ Design Development Phase services. ❑ Construction Document Phase services(includes Building Department services). ❑ Construction Administration Phase services (includes Bidding services). Engineering/Consulting Design Phase Meeting(s) Design Meeting(s): One meeting(s) per scope exhibit. Construction Administration Phase Visit(s) CA Visit(s): None. Engineering/Consulting Permit Packages and Construction Phase(s) Number of Permit Package(s): None Number of Construction Phase(s): None CAD Record Drawing Drafting Services Although we can provide these services,this scope of work does not include any CAD drafting of as-built conditions. Service Clarifications Engineer's services will be performed in a timely manner consistent with good professional practice and the desire that the Project proceed as expeditiously as practical, and Engineer will use its best efforts to meet any reasonable Project turnaround time or schedule, which shall be extended only for reasonable cause or by mutual consent; but in no event will Engineer undertake responsibility for delays beyond its reasonable control. Engineer's services will be performed in accordance with generally and currently accepted engineering principles and practices as embodied in the standard procedures and protocols of Engineer and its subconsultants, and without warranties, express or implied. In particular, and without limitation, Engineer will use its best professional judgment in interpreting and applying the requirements of all laws applicable to the Project including without limitation laws concerning energy conservation, accessibility and functionality standards; but compliance with any law as it may eventually be interpreted by others cannot be guaranteed. Further, when used in conjunction with the providing of services pursuant to this Agreement, such terms as "certify," "warrant," "verify," "confirm," "make certain," "insure," "ensure," "assure," or the like do not constitute a guarantee, but rather a representation based on professional opinion or judgment. Unless expressly agreed otherwise in writing: (i) Engineer's investigation of existing conditions will be limited to visually reviewing the reasonably accessible portions of the existing facility to ascertain in general the accuracy of the Project's "as built" documentation, and will not involve detailed surveys, destructive inspections or equipment or material testing; (ii) Engineer's instruments of service will be tk1sc COLLABORATIVE Mason County Courts—Facility Assessment and Seismic Analysis Report Engineering/Consulting Proposal and Professional Service Agreement—Exhibit C May 13, 2019 Page 3 prepared in Engineer's standard format and level of quality and detail; (iii) Engineer's participation in Client's coordination of the Project's various consultants will be limited to following Client's reasonable and appropriate directions, and will not involve procuring, critiquing or otherwise being responsible for the performance of others; (iv) Engineer's submittal reviews will be pursuant to the industry-standard protocol set forth in AIA Document A201-2007; (v) Engineer will provide site observations for only the limited purpose of reviewing the construction for the extent of contractor progress and addressing any specific issues which may be brought to Engineer's attention by field personnel or others; and (vi) any "record documents" prepared by Engineer will reflect only any formal changes to the construction documents and the information provided to Engineer by way of a marked up set of the construction documents. Engineer will undertake responsibility for only the engineering services expressly undertaken pursuant to this Agreement,and not otherwise. Engineer will not be legally liable for the providing of or the failure to provide environmental, acoustical or civil engineering services, or any specialty consulting services such as cost estimating,food service, kitchen, lab, hospital, industrial, LEED certification,data/communications or audio/visual consulting,even if information from others is incorporated into Engineer's instruments of service for ease of reference or otherwise. Further, and without limitation, Engineer will not be responsible for delays or other matters beyond its reasonable control;for inaccurate information provided to it by Client or other reasonably reliable sources or for unverified assumptions directed or accepted by Client; for site or other conditions of which it was not informed; for hazardous materials or toxic substances at the Project site;for the specification of products or equipment for purposes consistent with the manufacturer's published literature; for materials and equipment decisions made by others; for construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, including without limitation construction safety precautions and programs;for the timeliness or quality of contractor performance;or for the actions or inaction of others including other consultants, contractors, utility companies and governmental or quasi-governmental agencies. Client's Related Responsibilities In conjunction with the determination of the particulars of Engineer's services,and as a material factor in the determination of Engineer's fee, Client shall make reasonable efforts to cooperate with Engineer including without limitation: - Designate a single representative with appropriate authority with whom Engineer can deal;and direct all communications to Engineer's project manager. - Directory of all other project consultants including company names, key personnel, addresses, telephone,fax, and email address. - Provide all relevant Project information to Engineer in a timely manner; and respond to Engineer's questions and requests for information approval within a reasonable time. - Provide appropriate coordination with and among the Project's various consultants. - Refrain from authorizing or allowing recorded or unrecorded deviations from Engineer's instruments of service, or the use of Engineer's un-finalized Instruments of Service for cost projections or other purposes without Engineer's knowledge and consent. - Operator manuals of design and facility standards, if applicable. - Project Schedule with key milestone dates and a critical path. - List of preferred vendors, if any. -----END----- tk1sc COLLABORATIVE Mason County Courts—Facility Assessment and Seismic Analysis Report Engineering/Consulting Proposal and Professional Service Agreement—Exhibit C(FCA) May 13, 2019 Page 1 EXHIBIT C(FCA)—FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT SERVICES A. Facility Assessment Services: 1. Review as built/ record documentation provided by Client where available. 2. Consultant will visually review the reasonably accessible portions of the existing facilities to ascertain in general the accuracy of the Project's applicable"as built"documentation,taking such photographs and preparing such documents for consultant's internal use as are in consultant's judgment appropriate and economically justified; but these services will not involve the preparation of detailed "as builts," nor any detailed surveys, any destructive investigation or inspection or any testing of materials or equipment. 3. Confer with the Tenant, Building Engineer and/or Property Manager to determine nature of condition of existing systems. 4. Prepare written report in the consultant's standard format and present to Client. Assessment report will be based on Checklists prepared to meet the following standard:ASCE 41—Tier 1. 5. Conduct load calculations to validate equipment sizing and conceptual strengthening approach. B. Optional Additional Services Available at an Additional Fee: 1. Construction documents and/or construction administration services. 2. Procurement of a testing agency for coupon testing or non-destructive x-ray of any existing building structural systems. 3. Procurement of a qualified subcontractor to perform Geologic Hazard assessment of subgrade soils in the area of the existing structure. C. Services Not Included: 1. Detailed Cost estimates—although estimate of probable seismic upgrade costs can be provided based upon our experience with past similar projects. 2. Physical inspection and inventory of any existing equipment and systems (a review of record documents and visual review of readily observable installation is included). -----END----- tklsc COLLABORATIVE Mason County Courts—Facility Assessment and Seismic Analysis Report Engineering/Consulting Proposal and Professional Service Agreement—Exhibit D May 13, 2019 Page 1 EXHIBIT D—INSURANCE A. Minimum limits and conditions of insurance required: 1. Professional Liability Insurance - Not less than $2 million each claim / $4 million aggregate, including limited contractual liability coverage. 2. Workers Compensation Insurance - As required by state law. In addition, consultant waives all rights against Architect and its agents,officers,directors,and employees for recovery of damages to the extent these damages are covered by the workers compensation and employers liability insurance obtained by consultant. 3. Employers Liability Insurance- Not less than the following: a. Each Accident $1,000,000 b. Disease-Policy Limit $1,000,000 c. Disease- Each Employee $1,000,000 4. Commercial General Liability Insurance a. Commercial General Liability Insurance (CGL) with a limit of not less than $1 million each occurrence and $2 million aggregate. b. Client shall be included as an additional insured underthe CGL policy using"blanket orspecific additional insured wording or attached to the certificate of insurance". Consultant's insurance shall be primary. 5. Commercial Automobile Liability Insurance a. Business automobile coverage will be written with a minimum limit of not less than$1 million for each accident. b. The automobile liability policy shall include coverage for owned automobiles (where applicable) as well as non-owned and hired automobile coverage's. B. Policies shall be written by an insurance company"admitted"to do business in the State of California with a minimum rating by A.M. Best&Company of A-X. C. Certificates of Insurance evidencing the above coverage's shall be provided to the Client. Each certificate shall provide a 30-day written notice of cancellation, except 10 days' notice for non- payment of premium. -----END----- HuLTz 7,. BHU e n g i n e e r s i n c May 14, 2019 KMB architects 906 Columbia Street SW,Suite 400 Olympia,WA 98501 Attention: Bill Valdez Subject: Mason County-Courthouse Renovation -Phase 1 Mechanical and Electrical Engineering Proposal Dear Bill: Here is our proposal to furnish mechanical and electrical engineering services for this project. Proiect Description Renovation of the Olsen Furniture Company Building, located in Shelton, into a new District Courthouse. The existing building is approximately 22,000 square feet,with the renovation expected to involve approximately 14,000 square feet. The renovation will include two new Courtrooms, Prosecuting Attorney Offices, Probation offices, and District Court offices. Project is planned to have three phases: Phase 1-Assessment of the facility; Phase 2-Contract Documents for building systems upgrades; Phase 3-Contract Documents for the renovation. Scope of Services This proposal is for Phase 1, an assessment of the facility. Our work would consist of an assessment of the building's mechanical (HVAC, plumbing), electrical (lighting, power distribution,fire alarm, low voltage),and fire sprinkler systems. Our review would note the condition of these systems and identify upgrades required to accommodate the planned renovation and possible future expansion. Our review will be based on our subjective experience with these systems. We will coordinate our review and findings with you and the structural engineer. Our deliverable will be a written narrative of the systems, with a summary of the condition of each system, and items noted which require improvements. We will list the approximate (order of magnitude) costs for recommended mechanical/electrical work. Proposed Fee We propose to provide these services on a lump sum fee basis,for: $ 6,000 Thank you for the opportunity to work with you and Mason County. Sincerely, Huultz I BHU Engineers Inc. Rick Hultz, PE Principal 1111 Fawcett Avenue, Suite 100 • Tacoma,Washington 98402 T 253.383.3257 • F 253.383.3283 • general@hultzbhu.com MASON COUNTY AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORM TO: BOARD OF MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS From: Diane Zoren Action Agenda Public Hearing X Other DEPARTMENT: Support Services EXT: 747 DATE: June 11, 2019 Agenda Item # )0. Commissioner staff to complete) BRIEFING DATE: May 6, 2019 BRIEFING PRESENTED BY: Support Services [ ] ITEM WAS NOT PREVIOUSLY BRIEFED WITH THE BOARD Please provide explanation of urgency ITEM: Public hearing to consider the application from Nickolas Opolsky to place parcel 52024-34-00030 into Open Space. Background: The Open Space Taxation Act, enacted in 1970, allows property owners to have their open space, farm and agricultural, and timberlands valued at their current use rather than their highest and best use. RCW 84.34 governs this Act. This is the only application for 2018 and the Assessor recommends that all 6.16 acres be placed into Open Space. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approval of the application from Nickolas Opolsky to place parcel 52024-34-00030 into Open Space. Attachment: Application APPLICATION NUMBER: CUOS03-2018 Parcel Number:52024-34-00030 Applicant's Name:Nickolas Opolsky Property Address: Discussion:This property is an undeveloped parcel of 6.16 acres.The applicant indicates that this is a greenbelt area,allowing this parcel into Open Space would be protecting a stream.This parcel is relatively steep on the eastern portion. RECOMMENDATION The Assessor recommends that all 6.16 acres be allowed into Open Space. Deparnnen2of Application for Classification or Reclassification Revenue WrlshingWM State Open Space Land Chapter 84.34 RCW File With The County Legislative Authority Name of Owner(s): Nickolas C OpolSky Phone No: Email Address: Address: 2071 W Highland Roa _ _ _ eon, MbM Parcel Number(s): 52024-34-00030 Legal Description: SE SW SUFvey 9/119,S33/180 Total Acres in Application: 6.16 Indicate what category of open space this land will qualify for: ❑ Conserve or enhance natural,cultural,or scenic resources ® Protect streams,stream corridors,wetlands, natural shorelines,or aquifers ❑ Protect soil resources,unique or critical wildlife, or native plant habitat ❑ Promote conservation principles by example or by offering educational opportunities ❑ Enhance the value to the public of abutting or neighboring parks,forests,wildlife preserves, nature reservations or sanctuaries,or other open spaces ❑ Enhance recreation opportunities ❑ Preserve historic or archaeological sites ❑ Preserve visual quality along highway, road,street corridors,or scenic vistas ❑ Retain in its natural state tracts of land not less than one acre situated in an urban area and open to public use on such conditions as may be reasonably required by the granting authority ❑ Farm and agricultural conservation land previously classified under RCW 84.34.020(2),that no longer meets the criteria ❑ Farm and agricultural conservation land that is"traditional farmland'not classified under Chapter 84.33 or Chapter 84.34 RCW,that has not been irrevocably devoted to a use inconsistent with agricultural uses,and has a high potential for returning to commercial agriculture REV 64 0021 (08/02117) 1 R J n { 4 ll I R �fiS 1. Des be the res nt se of the land. Sdreeno@ 'own home on adjoining 4.65 acre tract #52024-34-00000. Subject property has a large ravine,year around stream & over 70 year old Firs.Natural watershed. 2. Is the land subject to a lease or agreement which permits any other use than its present use? ❑ Yes (25 No If yes,attach a copy of the lease agreement. 3. Describe the present improvements(residence, buildings,etc.)located on the land. None 4. Is the land subject to any easements? ❑ Yes Q No If yes,describe the type of easement,the easement restrictions,and the length of the easement. 5. If applying for the farm and agricultural conservation land category,provide a detailed description below about the previous use,the current use,and the intended future use of the land. does not apply NOTICE: The county and/or city legislative authorities may require owners to submit additional information regarding the use of the land. As owner of the parcel(s)described in this application, I hereby indicate by my signature below that I am aware of the additional tax,interest,and penalties involved when the land ceases to be classified under the provisions of Chapter 84.34 RCW. I also certify that this application and any accompanying documents are accurate and complete. The agreement to tax according to use of the property is not a contract and can be annulled or canceled at any time by the Legislature(RCW 84.34.070) Print the name of each owner: Signature of each owner: Date Nickolas C Opolsky `"A;.' j ;� The granting or denial of an application for classification or reclassification as open space land is a legislative determination and shall be reviewable only for arbitrary and capricious actions.Denials are only appealable to the superior court of the county in which the land is located and the application is made. REV 64 0021 (08/02117) 2 MASON COUNTY AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY FORM TO: BOARD OF MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS From: Diane Zoren Action Agenda Public Hearing X Other DEPARTMENT: Support Services EXT: 747 DATE: June 11, 2019 Agenda Item # /0. Z Commissioner staff to complete) BRIEFING DATE: April 29, 2019 BRIEFING PRESENTED BY: Support Services [ ] ITEM WAS NOT PREVIOUSLY BRIEFED WITH THE BOARD Please provide explanation of urgency ITEM: Public hearing to consider moving forward with the formation of a lake management district for Spencer Lake (LMD #3) for a 10 year period commencing in 2020. Background: A petition has been received by the County with 35% of property owners signing in favor of creating the LMD for a 10-year period. There are a total of 185 parcels in the LMD. The petition states the formula of rates and charges that is to be used to establish the 2020 assessment for the LMD is 23 (twenty-three) cents per thousand valuation. One comment has been received from a citizen in the proposed district suggesting the funding be based on $0.60 per thousand of the fair market value of land. Pursuant to RCW 36.61.270 Imposition of rates and charges - ...The county legislative authority shall have full jurisdiction and authority it fix, alter regulate, and control the rates and charges imposed by a lake or beach management district and may classify the rates or charges by any reasonable factor or factors, including benefit, use, front footage, acreage, the extent of improvements on the property, the type of improvements on the property, uses to which the property is put, services to be provided, and any other reasonable factor or factors... . If the Commissioners choose to change the formula of rates and charges from the 23 cents per thousand valuation that was petitioned and noticed, the process would have to start over. If the Commissioners move forward with this process, a resolution would be adopted to send ballots to all property owners in the proposed LMD asking if the LMD should be established. Budget Impacts: The hard costs for the process will be paid by the Spencer Lake Steering Committee. Staff time is not reimbursed. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approval of the resolution adopting findings and determinations consistent with RCW 36.61.070 regarding the establishment of Lake Management District No. 3 for Spencer Lake, and submitting the establishment of Lake Management District No. 3 to a vote of property owners within the proposed district. Attachment(s): Resolution RESOLUTION NO: A RESOLUTION adopting findings and determinations consistent with RCW 36.61.070 regarding the establishment of Lake Management District No. 3 for Spencer Lake, and submitting the establishment of Lake Management District No. 3 to a vote of property owners within the proposed district. WHEREAS, the Board of Mason County Commissioners adopted Resolution No. 37-19 on May 7, 2019 setting out its intention to consider formation of Lake Management District No. 3 for Spencer Lake (LMD No. 3); and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on June 11, 2019 to consider formation of LMD No. 3 and the County Commissioners heard support from persons affected by the formation of LMD No. 3 and other comments regarding the proposed work program; and WHEREAS, a representatives from the Department of Ecology, the Department of Fish and Wildlife and Department of Natural Resources had the opportunity to make presentations and comments on the proposal. NOW, THEREFORE,THE BOARD OF MASON COUNTY COMMISSIONERS DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Board of County Commissioners adopts the following findings and determinations: 1. The formation of LMD No. 3 is in the public interest as evidenced by the Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan (Exhibit A) of lake improvement and maintenance activities, which is approved as part of these findings. The proposed LMD will: a. Manage noxious aquatic plants in Spencer Lake to meet recreational and aesthetic needs. b. Employ proven techniques based on environmental safety. c. Conduct inspections to determine areas of invasive species infestation and effectiveness of treatments. d. Investigate and promote the best management practices for treatment of noxious weeds. e. Monitor for occurrence of as well as emergence of other lake plants that have been identified by the State of Washington as noxious. f. Maintain a volunteer advisory committee of lakefront owner representative to direct the efforts and funds of the LMD. 2. The financing of the lake improvement and maintenance activities is feasible. The LMD will guarantee the fees needed to continue with control measures of fragrant waterlily and other noxious aquatic plants and the costs of permits, monitoring, printing and mailing. 3. Adequate provisions have been made to protect fish and wildlife. Aquatic herbicides have been approved for use by the US Environmental Protection Agency for the use in lakes and reservoirs used for human drinking water consumption. The herbicide will not harm fish or wildlife, and by eliminating the noxious aquatic plants, the native flora and fauna should be restored. 4. LMD No. 3 will exist for a period of 10 years, beginning in 2020. 5. The estimated amount that will be raised by the LMD rates in 2020 is $13,996. The total estimated LMD rate revenue for the 10 year LMD including a maximum 5% annual increase LMD—Spencer Lake— Resolution No. for inflation is $176,043. The annual 5% increase would only occur if approved by the LMD #3 Advisory Committee. 6. The proposed boundaries of the District are all properties with lakefront access to Spencer Lake in Mason County, Washington. 7. Annual Charge per Parcel: The formula of rates and charges that is to be used to establish the 2020 assessment for the LMD is 23 (twenty-three) cents per thousand valuation. Property owners within Lake Management District No. 3 currently enrolled in the Senior Citizen Exemption Program with the Mason County Assessor's Office will receive a reduction in their LMD rates &charges for the years in which they are entitled to the exemption with the County. In order to receive the reduction in any given year, property owners must have qualified on or before November 1 of the prior year. Section 2. The question of whether to form Lake Management District No. 3 for Spencer Lake shall be submitted to the property owners within the proposed district. The Support Services Department shall prepare the ballots for submittal to the property owners. Ballots will be received by the Office of the County Commissioners, 411 N. Fifth Street, Shelton, WA 98584 no later than 5:00 pm, July 17, 2019. Section 3. Ballots will be available for public inspection after they have been counted. Dated this 11th day of June, 2019. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MASON COUNTY, WASHINGTON Kevin Shutty, Chair ATTEST: Sharon Trask, Commissioner Melissa J. Drewry, Clerk of the Board Randy Neatherlin, Commissioner Approved as to form: Chief Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Timothy Whitehead J:\Lake Management District\Spencer Lake\LMD-Resolution to Form&send ballot#2.doc Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan Exhibit A SpencerLake Mason County, Washington l-rl- Prepared by Mason County Noxious Weed Control 303 N 4th Street Shelton, WA 98584 360.427.9670 Extension 592 hgp:Hextension.wsu.edu/mason/natural-resources/noxious-weed-program SPENCER LAKE INTEGRATED AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PLAN - 2018 Prepared for Citizens of Spencer Lake and Mason County Prepared by Mason County Noxious Weed Control 303 N. 4th Street Shelton, WA 98584 Phone: 360-427-9670 extension 592 Funded by Washington State Department of Ecology Aquatic Weeds Management Fund Grant Number WQAIP-2016-MasNWB-00013 June 30, 2018 Mason County Board of Commissioners Randy Neatherlin- Chair Terri Drexler Kevin Shutty Mason County Noxious Weed Control Program Patricia Grover Connor Cordray Brayden Raber Keith Reitz Kendall Carman Aaron Kirby Spencer Lake Community Steering Committee 2016-2017 Doris Zacher Steve Evander John Tolton Dave Mortensen Stephanie Brooks Bill Estep Diane Cox Patricia Grover 2018 Doris Zacher Tricey Kruger John Tolton Lynda Ring-Erickson Stephanie Brooks Jack Urstadt Diane Cox Patricia Grover Steve Evander Acknowledgement The Mason County Noxious Weed Control Program wishes to thank the members of the Steering Committee for their role in development of the Spencer Lake Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan. Members include Doris Zacher, Stephanie Brooks,Diane Cox, Steve Evander, Dave Mortensen, John Tolton, Bill Estep, Tricey Kruger, Lynda Ring-Erickson,Jack Urstadt and Patricia Grover. In addition, Mason County Noxious Weed Control Board staff, including Patricia Grover, Keith Reitz, Aaron Kirby, and Kendall Carmen participated in the process, completing surveys, compiling data and document preparation. Jason Wells of the Mason County Public Works GIS section provided GIS support. Thank you to Doris Zacher who offered her home for the Steering Committee meetings, Kristin Tolton, who provided the list of bird and animal species observed at the lake, and Stephanie Brooks for her information about the history of the Spencer Lake Community. Thank you to Lizbeth Seebacher for her administration of the project. Finally, special thanks to the Spencer Lake community. Their enthusiasm and commitment to improving the recreational opportunities,ecological integrity and aesthetic beauty of Spencer Lake will be the ultimate driving force of this plan. Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 SECTION 1 -PROBLEM STATEMENT 3 SECTION 2 -MANAGEMENT GOALS ............................................................................5 SECTION 3 -PUBLIC AND COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT 6 ...................................... SECTION 4 -WATERSHED AND WATERBODY CHARACTERISTICS 9 .................. WATERSHED CHARACTERISTICS 9 WATERBODY CHARACTERISTICS 17 BENEFICIAL AND RECREATIONAL USES 18 WATERQUALITY....................................................................................... -------------------------18 FISH AND WILDLIFE COMMUNITIES 21 CHARACTERIZATION OF AQUATIC PLANTS.............................................__-------------------24 NOXIOUS WEED SPECIES AT SPENCER LAKE 28 PAST MANAGEMENT EFFORTS 34 SECTION 5 -MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES 35 PURPLE LOOSESTRIFE (Lythrum salicaria) ---------------------------------------------------------------38 FRAGRANT WATERLILY(Nymphae odorata)--------------------------------------------------------------------40 YELLOWFLAG IRIS (Iris pseudacorus)_................................................................................41 SECTION 6—INTEGRATED TREATMENT PLAN 43 PERMITS 43 FRAGRANT WATERLILY (Nymphae odorata)---------------------------------------------------------------------44 PURPLE LOOSESTRIFE (Lythrum salicaria)-----------------------------------------_...............................45 YELLOWFLAG IRIS (Iris pseudacorus)--------------____......................................_------------------------45 SECTION 7—PLAN ELEMENTS,COSTS,AND FUNDING 46 COSTS OF THE PLAN 46 SOURCES OF FUNDING.............................................................. 46 SECTION 8—IMPLEMENTATION,MONITORING,AND EVALUATION 49 IMPLEMENTATION 49 MONITORING 50 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- EVALUATION 50 REFERENCES Appendices Appendix A: Public Notification,Agendas,Meeting Notes Appendix B: Best Management Practices Appendix C: Control Method Options Appendix D: Aquatic Herbicide Products Labels Figures Figure 1. Spencer Lake Vicinity Map.......................................................................................9 Figure 2. Spencer Lake Watershed Topography----------------------------------------------------------------------10 Figure 3. Soil Map of Spencer Lake area..................................................................................12 Figure 4. Lobelia dortmanna....................................................................................................14 Figure 5. Spencer Lake 1990 Aerial Photo...............................................................................15 Figure 6. Dike and outlet at southwest end of Spencer Lake--------------------------------------- __________16 Figure 7. Spencer Lake Bathymetric Map..............•--__--______________-------------_____________________----------_17 Figure 8. Spencer Lake Fish Report------------------------------------ ------------------------------------- -------- 22 Figure 9. Mapped locations of Lobelia dortmanna..................................................................27 Figure 10. Survey of fragrant waterlily-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------29 Figure 11. Fragrant waterlily survey results 2016--------------------------------------------------------------------30 Figure 12. Yellow flag iris survey results 2017........................................................................30 Tables Table1. Soil types------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------11 Table 2. Physical Characteristics of Spencer Lake and Watershed-----------------------------------------13 Table 3. Priority salmonid species documented for Spencer Lake or Malaney Creek__________13 Table 4. 2018 Listing for Lobelia dortmanna---------------------------------------------------------------------------14 Table 5. Average values for Spencer Lake Trophic Data--------------------------------------------------------19 Table6. Fish survey data-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------21 Table 7. Spencer Lake Bird and Animal List---------------------------------------------------------------------------23 Table 8. Aquatic Plant List for Survey August 03, 2016---------------------------------------------------------25 Table 9. Comprehensive Plant List, 1994-2016-----------------------------------------------------------------------26 Table 10. Summary of Permitted Aquatic Herbicide Use for Spencer Lake-------------------------34 Table 11. Summary of Management Alternatives___________________________________________________________________36 Table 12. Proposed Spencer Lake IAVMP Implementation Budget_____________________________________48 Executive Summary Spencer Lake is a 213-acre lake located in Mason County, Washington. It is located in Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 14, the Kennedy-Goldsborough Basin. It is approximately 7 miles northeast of Shelton and 1.5 miles east of Oakland Bay. Spencer Lake has a drainage basin area of approximately 1.7 square miles, no surface inlets and drains via Malaney Creek, which flows to Oakland Bay. Surveys at Spencer Lake and the surrounding shoreline document two Class B noxious weed species, purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) and Bohemian knotweed (Polygonum X bohemicum), and two Class C noxious weeds, fragrant waterlily (Nymphaea odorata) and yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus). An additional Class C noxious weed, reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea)is found at the lake margins but is not considered for control in this plan.The fragrant waterlily and the yellow flag iris infestations are well developed, however, several additional species from nearby lakes have the potential to spread to Spencer Lake. At Mason Lake, approximately 4.7 miles north of Spencer Lake, the community has been working to reduce the infestations of Eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) and grass-leaved arrowhead (Sagittaria graminea) since 1998. At Lake Limerick, approximately 4.5 miles northwest of Spencer Lake, efforts to control Brazilian elodea(Egeria densa)have been underway since 1996. Due to the close proximity of these lakes, plants from them have the potential to infest Spencer Lake by vectors such as wind, animals, humans, boats, and boat trailer movement. All three of these species,if introduced,have the potential to greatly hinder recreational activities,and decrease habitat and water quality at Spencer Lake. Several members of the Spencer Lake community brought their concerns about the expansion of noxious weeds,specifically fragrant waterlily,to the attention of the Mason County Noxious Weed Control program in October 2014. The opportunity to apply for an Aquatic Weeds Management Fund grant through the Washington Department of Ecology(Ecology)was sent to individuals who had expressed concern at a Mason County Noxious Weed Control booth at Oysterfest 2014. When contacted, those individuals supported the application. If the grant application was successful, residents were willing to volunteer time and materials for survey efforts and meeting requirements. Knowing that eradication will be difficult to achieve, Spencer lake volunteers are preparing for the long term effort that will be required and remaining vigilant of new introductions. This Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan(IAVMP)is a planning document developed to ensure that the applicant and community have considered the best available information about the waterbody and watershed prior to initiating control efforts. Mason County Noxious Weed Control program staff and members of the Spencer Lake community worked in partnership to develop this IAVMP. To address the task of generating community appreciation of, and action towards preserving the important ecological, aesthetic and recreational values of Spencer Lake, a core group of residents,along with the Coordinator for the Mason County Noxious Weed Control Board, formed an IAVMP Steering Committee. The Committee has worked to educate the community about the issues impacting Spencer Lake and developed a social media network for sharing information. In development of the IAVMP, control goals were prioritized, focusing on the control measures that could be accomplished based on funding and other resource limitations. The community ultimately agreed on an IAVMP plan that incorporates an integrated treatment strategy to address the three target plants listed in priority of control: purple loosestrife,fragrant waterlily,and yellow flag iris.Mason County Noxious Weed Control is working with several property owners to control Bohemian knotweed and residents are organizing to begin control measures for the yellow flag iris and remove the few purple loosestrife plants located during the survey. This 2018 IAVMP proposes to treat one quarter of the fragrant waterlily with glyphosate annually for the first four years (approximately 5 acres each year from 2019-2022). Each treatment will involve an initial treatment, with a possible second treatment a few weeks later. After four years, a majority of the waterlilies targeted for control will have been treated. Follow up spot treatment, or manual methods, will take place in year five and beyond. If waterlily root mats float to the surface,they will likely be towed to the WDFW access and hauled off. Control activities will be done by a combination of hired contractors, Mason County Noxious Weed Control staff, and Spencer Lake community volunteers. This IAVMP presents an overview of the aquatic weed problems, details about the community planning process, watershed and lake characteristics, a review of suitable control options, a management plan, budget and funding plans, and an implementation plan. The Appendix section contains background and supporting documents. Section I - Problem Statement Spencer Lake is a 213-acre lake located in Mason County, Washington. It is located in Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 14, the Kennedy-Goldsborough Basin. It is approximately 7 miles northeast of Shelton and 1.5 miles east of Oakland Bay. Spencer Lake has a drainage basin area of approximately 1.7 square miles, no surface inlets and drains via Malaney Creek, which flows to Oakland Bay. It has approximately 93 acres of wetland, a portion of which extends from the southwest portion of the lake surrounding the Malaney Creek outlet and another area that extends from the lake to the northwest. Surrounding ownership consists of 187 parcels, ranging from smaller, less than 0.5 acre lots to 10 acres. Over 80%of these parcels are identified as"developed"by the Mason County Assessor's office. The lake has a public boat ramp operated by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife,year round fishing and is used for boating,fishing, swimming,wildlife viewing and ecosystem processes. Two Class B noxious weed species purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) and Bohemian knotweed (Polygonum X bohemicum), and two Class C noxious weeds fragrant waterlily (Nymphaea odorata) and yellow flag iris(Iris pseudacorus)were documented in surveys conducted at Spencer lake in 2016. While the purple loosestrife and knotweed infestations are at their early stages of development, infestations of fragrant waterlily and yellow flag iris are rapidly expanding. Several nearby lakes are known to have infestations of several noxious weeds that are not yet documented at Spencer Lake. At Mason Lake, 4.7 miles north of Spencer Lake, the community has been working to reduce infestations of Eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) and grass-leaved arrowhead (Sagittaria graminea) since 1998. At Lake Limerick, 4.5 miles northwest, local community efforts have been undertaken to control Brazilian elodea(Egeria densa)since 1996.The close proximity of these lakes increases the potential for introduction of other noxious weeds into Spencer Lake by vectors such as: wind, animal, human,boat, and boat trailer movement. Eurasian watermilfoil has the potential to greatly hinder recreational activities, and decrease habitat and water quality at Spencer Lake.The outflow from Spencer Lake flows approximately 3.0 miles to Oakland Bay Purple loosestrife(Lythrum salicaria) is an emergent aquatic noxious weed that degrades native wetland plant communities. Purple loosestrife can quickly adapt to environmental changes and expand its range to replace native plants used for groundcover, food, or nesting material. This noxious weed species was not found in abundance at the lake, however it will certainly disperse further around the lake and into the wetland if not controlled. The plant threatens to lower plant diversity and can alter hydrologic dynamics through sediment accretion along the shoreline. This emergent weed fails to provide the same forage and habitat for birds, mammals, and invertebrates as provided by native plant communities. Purple loosestrife has not been observed along Malaney Creek. Historic stream survey data suggests that the creek supports two species of salmonids and the potential exists for purple loosestrife infestations to spread from the Lake to Malaney Creek. Purple loosestrife produces a prolific number of seeds (up to two million seeds per mature plant)that could easily be transported downstream to degrade this valuable resource. AquaticSpencer Lake Integrated Fragrant waterlily(Nymphaea odorata)is the species that was the community's call to action.It is quickly expanding its distribution in the lake.When uncontrolled,this species can form dense,monospecific stands that can persist until senescence in the fall.Mats of these floating leaves prevent wind mixing and extensive areas of low oxygen can develop under the waterlily beds in the summer. Waterlilies can restrict lakefront access and hinder swimming,boating,and other recreational activities.They may also limit the distribution of the native waterlily(Nuphar polysepala)which occupies the same niche and provides food and habitat for a variety of animals and fish. Residents report that the fragrant waterlily is rapidly expanding on Spencer Lake. Yellow flag iris(Iris pseudacorus) is an emergent aquatic noxious weed that grows in dense stands along the lake shoreline. The plant spreads through floating seeds and rhizomes, both of which spread by wind and wave action. Yellow flag iris,crowds out native species with impenetrable mats and is found in many areas along the Spencer Lake shoreline. The plant is very difficult to effectively control. Recently, the non-native species, swollen bladderwort(Utricularia inflata), has become more obvious at the lake. Many plants were observed in late May 2018 at the southern end of the lake. The native bladderwort, Utricularia vulgaris,was found during the aquatic vegetation survey of the lake conducted in 2016 for this IAVMP. Collectively,these invasive plants: ■ Pose a safety hazard to swimmers and boaters by entanglement. ■ Snag fishing lines and hooks, eventually preventing shoreline fishing. ■ Crowd out native plants,creating monocultures lacking in biodiversity. ■ Significantly reduce fish and wildlife habitat,thereby weakening the local ecosystem and degrading the wildlife and wildlife viewing opportunities. ■ Potentially impact water quality by decreasing dissolved oxygen under plant canopies and increasing water temperature from reduced water circulation and solar absorption. ■ Pose a threat to adjoining ecosystems. ■ Reduce property value. While individual landowners and the Mason County Noxious Weed Control program have initiated control efforts for some of these species, there has not been a coordinated effort to control the widespread infestations of fragrant waterlily or yellow flag iris. Immediate lake-wide action is necessary to control these invasive weeds. Without action, the lake will likely become more infested with aquatic weeds, severely degrading the lake ecosystem and making eradication difficult.Additionally,a plan which includes prevention and detection strategies is needed to reduce the potential for new plant invasions that could become problematic.The community is in support of this IAVMP and recognizes that the effort to control these species,and prevent the introduction of new species,will be a long term commitment. AquaticSpencer Lake Integrated Section 2 - Management Goals The overall management goal for this Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP) is the control of noxious aquatic weeds at Spencer Lake in a manner that allows sustainable native plant and animal communities to thrive, maintains acceptable water quality conditions, and facilitates recreational enjoyment(boating,fishing, and swimming)of the lake. The following objectives will be pursued to ensure success in meeting this goal: ■ Control of fragrant waterlily to reduce existing populations to reduce impact on recreational activities and ecological function of the lake. ■ Prevent the introduction of floating and submerged aquatic noxious weeds. ■ Control of regulated shoreline noxious weeds to reduce existing populations below the level of significant impact and to prevent spread. ■ Involve the Spencer Lake community in planning and implementation of the IAVMP. ■ Utilize the best available science to identify and understand likely effects of management actions on aquatic and adjoining terrestrial ecosystems prior to implementation. ■ Review the efficacy of management actions through monitoring. ■ Adjust the management strategy as necessary to achieve the overall goal. ■ Seek funding sources to continue long term control of invasive aquatic plants. ■ Maintain good water quality and prevent toxic algae blooms. With adoption of the IAVMP,the Spencer Lake IAVMP Steering Committee will coordinate initial aquatic vegetation management activities. Work plans will be developed annually for implementation of specific activities to further management goals. Spencer Lake Integrated . � Management Section 3 - Public and Community Involvement Community Commitment Support for aquatic vegetation management at Spencer Lake continues to grow. The IAVMP provided a catalyst for community members to come together and learn about the issues associated with noxious weeds. Several members of the Steering Committee have expressed interest in creating a Lake Management District to continue the momentum of the plan into the control phase. Steering Committee, Outreach, and Education Process October 2014: Work began to contact and meet with members of the Spencer Lake community about the opportunity to control aquatic noxious weeds at the lake through creation and implementation of an IAVMP. March 2015: Background research related to the Spencer Lake IAVMP began in March 2015,shortly after learning about receiving funding from the Department of Ecology. May 2015: The Agreement was fully executed on May 13,2015. February 2016: Several blue green algae blooms during the winter of 2015/2016 prompted action by local residents. On February 22,2016, 5 Spencer Lake residents met with Lizbeth Seebacher from Department of Ecology and Margaret Bigelow from Washington's Department of Fish and Wildlife. March 2016: Project planning begins;first informal meeting of property owners.Email messages and word of mouth about the first meeting provided an informal network of sharing information. Twenty-six community members and the Mason County Noxious Weed Control Board coordinator, Patricia Grover, attended a March 19, 2016 meeting held at the Zacher residence. Pat provided a brief presentation about noxious weeds at Spencer Lake,history of the grant request and the process for developing the IAVMP as written in the A Citizen's Manual for Developing Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plans. Consistent with the message received at Oysterfest in 2014, those in attendance were supportive of the process of developing the IAVMP. Attendees asked questions about the timeline and goals of the IAVMP and seven attendees volunteered to be on the Steering Committee. April 2016: The first meeting of the Steering Committee was held on April 09, 2016 at the Zacher residence. Doris Zacher volunteered to chair the committee with a request for a co-chair. The meeting followed the process outlined in A Citizen's Manual for Developing Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plans with development of a Problem Statement and discussion about the Public Meeting (See Appendix A for agenda and meeting minutes). June 2016: ■ The second Steering Committee Meeting was held on June 11,2016. ■ Agenda and meeting minutes can be found in Appendix A. ■ On June 24,2016, letters informing recipients about the plan and the public meeting were sent to 188 Spencer Lake property owners(Appendix A). The mailing indicated that the meeting would provide a community update about the plan and a discussion of the IAVMP planning process. In addition, steering committee members visited additional waterfront residences by boat to share information. ■ Information was sent to the local newspaper and radio and a social media page, Spencer Lake Aquatic Invasive Species,was created. June — July 2016: Arline Fullerton, an aquatic plant specialist and MCNWCB staff completed plant surveys. During these surveys, frequent contacts were made with local residents or lake users and the IAVMP was discussed. July 2016: On July 22, 2016, a public meeting was held at the Mason PUD 3 building with over 49 community members in attendance. Doris Zacher provided an introduction for the meeting. Arline Fullerton,local aquatic plant specialist and experienced surveyor of Mason County lakes and Katie Otanez, an environmental health specialist with Mason County Public Health,provided additional information. January 2018: Draft IAVMP provided to Co-Chairs. March—June 2018: ■ Steering Committee meetings were held on March 24,2018,April 14,2018 and May 04,2018. ■ Agenda and meeting minutes can be found in Appendix A. ■ On April 14, 2018, 160"Save the Date"postcards were sent to Spencer Lake property owners. ■ On May 11, 2018, a second public meeting was held at the Mason PUD 3 building with over 50 community members in attendance. After a brief introduction and power point presentation, the audience was invited to ask questions and provide comment. Those in attendance were also asked to complete a brief survey. The survey and results may be found in Appendix A. June 2018: ■ Completion of draft Spencer Lake Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan ■ Notification to meeting attendees and interested parties and posting of the management plan to the Mason County website. Appendix A contains the following"Community Involvement and Outreach"materials: ■ February 22, 2016 Meeting notes ■ March 19, 2016 Steering Committee agenda ■ April 09, 2016 Steering Committee agenda ■ April 09,2016 Steering Committee meeting notes ■ June 11, 2016 Steering Committee agenda ■ June 11, 2016 Steering Committee meeting notes ■ June 24, 2016 Letter to Spencer Lake property owners Public Meeting flyer ■ July 22, 2016 Public Meeting Agenda ■ March 24, 2018 Steering Committee agenda ■ March 24, 2018 Steering Committee meeting notes ■ April 14,2018 Steering Committee agenda ■ April 14,2018 Steering Committee meeting notes ■ April 14, 2018 Public Meeting"Save the Date"postcard ■ May 04, 2018 Steering Committee agenda ■ May 04, 2018 Steering Committee meeting notes ■ May 11, 2018 Public Meeting Agenda ■ May 11, 2018 Spencer Lake Community Survey ■ May 11, 2018 Spencer Lake Community Survey Results Section 4 — Watershed and Waterbody Characteristics Watershed Characteristics Location and Size of Watershed Spencer Lake is located in Mason County, Washington, approximately 11 miles northeast of Shelton. (Figure 1). State resource agencies frequently use a system of Water Resource Inventory Areas(WRIA) to refer to the state's major watershed basins. Spencer Lake is located in WRIA 14, which refers to the Kennedy-Goldsborough combination watersheds and includes Mason Lake, Lake Limerick and the city of Shelton. L Alln.v.q - r'nL ♦lilt It! B NM. s.li.li IIY t 3 qal r 11...1-I..•t 1 _ c un,r. E .alxln 6r;"-'.ice. tlyGn All•,11- Spencer mnl Lake IYsirvetbPn _ tr ens Pl ase Ial-.r ..I.Ir rLIh111.. 1J4:•J'...:ax,. t.. a NMI l I:Un1 Lal eaoo� A�-hi„d --F'.IILIJII-517 Saves Eul HERE.D.Larrr..Irbarrsp.irw•en•r¢P Cap. O VS.C4.N0.NPS.NP.CAN, l}> ti•.K?/,N.Q.r W NL.Ord--Sway.F,J p— Chir.fNanp Ir�^6!.rnifr Upp. MapmylrMis.C Op.,Gb—tM.p¢tirtwas,arra tlla GISYea Carrs ity 0 3 75 7 5 15 Miles N Vicinity Map A Figure 1 Spencer Lake map shows location of Spencer Lake and the cities of Shelton,Allen, and Tacoma, Washington Spencer • Plan 9 Spencer Lake has a drainage basin area of approximately 1.7 square miles,no surface inlets, and flows to Oakland Bay via Malaney Creek. Spencer Lake is controlled by a concrete outlet structure that is twelve feet wide and five feet tall; the concrete span poses no barrier to fish migration into and out of Spencer Lake. The drainage basin of Spencer Lake has been modified to varying degrees in the past. Some of the process modifications include: ■ Conversion of pervious to I Spenoa Wa impervious areas ■ Logging adjacent to the lake ■ Construction of an outlet control structure ■ Residential development along the shoreline ^s a i N • o: Figure 2 Spencer Lake Watershed Topograp{n Streams and Wetlands in the Watershed Spencer Lake has approximately 93 acres of wetland. A large wetland area extends from the southwest portion of the lake surrounding the Malaney Creek outlet. Wetland also extends from the lake to the northwest to E. Spencer Lake Road. IntegratedSpencer Lake Aquatic Geology and Soils There are 13 major soil types in the area surrounding Spencer Lake(Figure 3). The most common soil type is Alderwood gravelly sandy loam(Ab).This soil covers about 75 percent of the area and dominates the Spencer Lake shoreline. Table 1 —Soil Types Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in Area of Interest percent of AOI Ab Alderwood gravelly sandy loam,8 to 15 percent slopes 1,186.8 74.3% Ac Alderwood gravelly sandy loam,15 to 30 percent slopes 12.6 0.8% Be Bellingham silty clay loam,0 to 3 percent slopes 13.9 0.9% Ee Everett gravelly loamy sand,5 to 15 percent slopes 9.8 0.6% Ib Indianola loamy sand,5 to 15 percent slopes 12.8 0.8% Kb Kitsap silt loam,5 to 15 percent slopes 3.3 0.2% Kd Kitsap silty clay loam,0 to 5 percent slopes 3.9 0.2% Ke Kitsap silty clay loam,5 to 15 percent slopes 6.3 0.4% Mg Mukilteo peat,0 to 2 percent slopes 48.1 3.0% Ne Norma silt loam,0 to 3 percent slopes 1.9 0.1% Oa Orcas peat,0 to 2 percent slopes 18.2 1.1% Sb Semiahmoo muck,0 to 2 percent slopes 14.1 0.9% So Sinclair shotty loam,5 to 15 percent slopes 18.7 1.2% W Water 248.0 15.5% Totals for Area of Interest 1,598.2 100.0% s r . •� � k Y KAN JIL fik 1JJ JI Ma s$ gnaw, � f f t Kb KCI Ali # rif Y Wr Mg ,.0; BQ w•Ac Spencer Lake Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan I? Physical and Ecological Features According to the MASON COUNTY SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM UPDATE Inventory and Characterization Report(Mason SMP 2012), Spencer Lake at 213 acres constitutes nearly 55% of the 391.2 acres of the Spencer Lake reach.The land cover within the reach consists of 3%developed,49% open water,3%beach, 17%forest,6%wetland and 21%floodplain/riparian.There are no listed erosion or landslide areas identified in the reach. The elevation of Spencer Lake is approximately 174 feet(USGS)and,utilizing Shelton's climate data, receives an average annual precipitation—rainfall of 65.7 inches. Table 2-Physical Characteristics of Spencer Lake and Watershed Reach Area 391.2 acres Surface Area 213 acres Lake Volume 5,060 acre feet Maximum Depth 36 feet Average Depth 22 feet Shoreline Length 5.0 miles Critical or Priority Habitat and Species Multiple state and federally-listed priority salmon and trout species are documented in Spencer Lake or Malaney Creek. Malaney Creek drains Spencer Lake and fish occur in the creek. No barriers to fish migration are presented by the concrete span at the outlet(Mason SMP). Table 3—Priority salmonid species documented for Spencer Lake or Malaney Creek (Mason SMP, page 6-30) Common Name Scientific Name Habitat Use Federal ListinState g Listing Coastal cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus clarki clarki Migration/Spawning fall Chum salmon Oncorhynchus keta Migration/Spawning Coho salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch Migration/Spawning Concern Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss Migration/Spawning winter Steelhead trout Oncorhynchus mykiss Migration/Spawning Threatened 11 Spencer Lake Integrated Aquatic Spencer Lake has approximately 93 acres Lobelia dortmanna L. —� of wetland, a priority water lobelia , habitat,which includes Campanulaceae-harebell family 5 status: State Threatened,BLM strategic,usrs strategic -• palustrine emergent and rank:G4GS/S2 scrub shrub habitat General Oescxiptlanr Submerged aquatic perennial,hairless,up to 1 in tall,mr)thr IIna rest ence generally extending out of the water;%tam types.A large wetland usually solitary,hollow,mostly unbranched.Leaves cybndreal,hollow, In a basal rosette.Stem leaves few.Inconspicuous,reduced to area extends from the thrcadllrc bracts. _L geraA eharaRariat ins Raceme generally emergent;peolcels without e. southwest portion of the bractiets,Flowers few,1-2 cm long,pale blue or white.Corolla Irregular, lake surrounding the the 3-lobed lower lip halry at the base and needy as long as the tube; n atolls tube entire except fat a deep split above.Calyx lobes deltoid at Malaney Creek outlet. narrower,not sharply pointed,1.5-25 mm long. Pnllts:Capsules S•LO x 3.5 mm,the apes tree from the hypanthlum. Wetland also extends Seeds less than L mm long,roughened,with a prominent square base at ; one C.C.Flower%Jura to A ugu%1,wain most fruit Ing In July. from the lake to the %I W 9rua,In Lw.,rl,Yeraly, Idmrtificat Ion Tl L dortmalna flowers are sell-pollinated.Underwater encs snva%a,sw.snryr Tips: p no west to E. pencer flowers do not produce a corolla,remain closed,and their fruits open first.L.kdrulo has flat,linear to spatula-shaped leaves,pedicels Lake Road.No priority genersily with 2 bractlets near the middle,and seeds that are prnnted at both ends.Additionally,though the base'leaves generally remain wildlife species submerged,the sten,stem leaves,and flowers oft.Wrnh are emergent. Rarpe:Interruptedly cm umeweo beral:ri-thlem Purope,AK,mh ucof occurrences have been Canada,>nuth to northern OR,MN,WE,MI,PA,and M D. mapped in the vicinity Habitat/Ecology:Generally In snaliow water at the margins of lakes and ponds,but it can grow at depth%of S.10 feet.Associated species of the lake. The Include western qurlwort((sates arndentabs)and pondwoed (Potamngexon means).Itevatlons In WA:1-300 m(5-1000 R).This Washington State evergreen retains a living,reduced stem for at least 3 consecutive growing seasons.Individuals grow year round.However,those In the Natural Resources shallowest portion of a population's habitat may not dverwliter as well.L. dou'tmanna rs an indicator of ollgotroph:c takes,which possess (DNR)Natural Heritage exceptionally clear and transparent witters. tbnunents:Threat s Int tilde herbicides used to control aquatic weeds, Program(NHP)has %horriinr development,water pollution,and trampling.Thi%sper,rs is identified 28.5 acres of also rare In AK,OR,Alberta,Sask.,Manitoba,PA,NI,RI,and Prince Edward Island. water lobelia,a State References:S7me)a 1987a,1987h. Sensitive perennial plant species within r�.r.....an. Spencer Lake. :JePteo frxn I red olds h me Non,P"'t,a Way.,p:cvi 5�3tj1(5;444 5!f AN(,(ts� Figure 4.Lobelia dortmanna Washington State Department of Natural Resources,Natural Heritage Program A survey of Spencer Lake on June 19,2018 by Jenifer Parsons,aquatic plant specialist with the Washington State Department of Ecology,and Patricia Grover,coordinator for the Mason County Noxious Weed Control Board,documented several locations for the water lobelia. Table 4 — From 2018 Washington Vascular Plant Species of Special Concern Species Heritage State Federal Dist. County Eco- Managed Common Name Rank Status Status Pattern Region Area Lobelia dornnanna G4G5/S3 Sens Strat Sparse Clm,Kin,Mas,Saj, NC,PC,PT Moran SP water lobelia Skg,Sno,Whc Olympic NP Spencer Lake Integrated Aquatic VegetationPlan 14 Land Use Existing land use and ownership within the Spencer Lake reach is characterized as over half of the area (54%) classified as residential; 29% forestry; 16%vacant/rural; and Parks, Open Space and recreation areas accounts for 1%. There are individual docks/piers associated with many residences and a Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife ()ArDFW) public boat launch at the southwest end of Spencer Lake. Summary of Key Management Issues Key management issues for Spencer Lake: 1) protect and preserve lake water quality; for example through management of fertilizers, pet waste,and herbicides used on residential properties 2) protect in-water habitats and cold water sources for salmon including coastal cutthroat trout 3) control of invasive aquatic plant species,and 4) limit dock proliferation and construction of new overwater structures There is potential for more development as year round homes replace summer cabins. Residential development in the past 40 years may have resulted in increased water flow, in the form of runoff into Spencer Lake. Residents also report evidence of increased times of high water.This rise in levels may ,�; provide for leakage from old, residential septic systems and contribute to nutrient loading in the lake. (Discussion, March 2016) _1 1CO ... Figure 5.Spencer Lake 1990 Community History Stephanie Brooks provided the following information: History of the Lake Water Level: (This information was gathered from long-time residents,property owners in the area of the outlet/dike and from observations during January 2016). Spencer Lake in Mason County was the 2nd cleanest lake in the state for many years prior to the 1960s. It was the drinking water source for several families on the lake and the water didn't require any treatment. There was virtually no sediment at that time on the bottom of the lake while there is quite a bit now.This is a 220 acre spring fed lake. There is another very small spring fed pond just to the northwest that drains into Spencer Lake through a wetland area. There are no known storm drains that flow into the lake. During the mid-1960s,the WA state Department of Fish and Wildlife treated the lake with rotenone several times to purge the lake of all aquatic species so that it could be stocked as a pure trout lake for fisherman.As part of this plan,the state built a dike and concrete outlet structure at the southwest end of the lake to prevent fish from leaving the lake and other native species from coming back. The dike was constructed primarily of gravel and,as you can see in the google earth photo below,trees have grown in a line along the high ground/dike over the last 50 years but a low swampy/wetland area is still behind the dike.The entire south end of the lake was the drainage for this lake prior to the dike and outlet. The concrete outlet structure had a screen and a powered turbine type device �" ► intended to keep the screen from r getting clogged with vegetation. e• ''► '„ The screen and turbine were removed a number of years ago as the screen could not Figiue 6. Dike and ourler end u!11VfWer lake be kept clean by the turbine (more than 20 years ago according to residents). In addition to the dike and outlet,the state dug deep ditches to direct the water flow in Malaney Creek. I was told that the banks of this ditch were up to 5' high above the water in many places.From the information I was able to get from long-time residents, these ditches were located between the outlet structure and East Agate Road,but not necessarily that whole length.As a result of the installation of the dike and outlet structure,the level of the lake rose several feet over the following year or two. In the subsequent 50+years,the lake continues to creep higher every year with an estimated total increase in water level since the lake was altered of about 4 feet.The outlet,ditches and dike have not been maintained by the state in many years. Currently, as the lake level recedes in the summer months, there is no water flow through the outlet. It appears that sediment/rocks/sand have built up in this area preventing any water flow once the lake drops below a certain level. When the dike and outlet were first put in, water flowed through the outlet opening year round even with the lake level being lower from what I've been told by longtime residents.Before the dike and outlet went in,the lake also drained year round through the entire south end wetland(behind the dike). Currently, there are two natural "breaches" in the dike in a low area although the water flowing through these sections is only 2-3"deep and a few feet wide.These breaches are marked on the map above and are not very close to the outlet structure.Beaver dams have also blocked the water flow and historically have been removed by the state and residents. This is no longer permitted under Fish and Wildlife rules however there are certain possible alternatives if there is property damage or ecosystem damage occurring from beaver related high water. Waterbody Characteristics Spencer Lake is a 213 acre lake located in Mason County,Washington. It has a maximum depth of 36 feet N 8 and a mean depth of 22 feet. / It has an estimated volume of 5060 acre-feet. In 1' tI 0 _G SOC LOCO 1 500 '_000 Fre( oO O Figure 7. Spencer Lake Bathymetric Map SpencerAquatic Vegetation Management Plan17 Beneficial and Recreational Uses Spencer Lake supports a variety of beneficial and recreational uses. A wide variety of boaters recreate on Spencer Lake using motorized, electric, wind, and human propelled vessels. Many of the developed lake- front properties have boats at the shore ready for use,and small docks from which to experience the water. During warmer weather, swimming is a popular activity,mainly from private docks.Residents and visitors also use the lake for bird watching and wildlife viewing. Spencer Lake's one public boat ramp is located in the southwest part of the lake and managed by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife(WDFW). The boat ramp exists largely to facilitate recreational fishing on the lake. Public access to the lake is confined to the WDFW access. The lake is a popular local fishing destination and used by both visitors and lake residents. WDFW stocks Spencer Lake annually with rainbow and cutthroat trout. The busiest fishing time is in the spring, after the lake has been stocked. Spencer Lake and watershed support a variety of additional recreational uses. Many who live within the watershed and those who come from elsewhere utilize its resources. Water Quality Water quality data for Spencer Lake was collected by the Washington State Department of Ecology from 1990-1998. The data record for this period is largely complete with data missing for 1997. The assessment of biological activity,or trophic state,results in the classification of lake water quality into three general categories: oligotrophic, mesotrophic, and eutrophic. Lakes with low biological activity are considered oligotrophic, lakes with high biological activity are considered eutrophic. Lakes whose quality ranges between eutrophic and oligotrophic are considered mesotrophic.One of the most common measures used to calculate a lake's water quality classification is the numerical trophic state index(TSI)developed by Robert Carlson (1977). This index allows comparison of lake water quality by rescaling water clarity, phosphorous, and chlorophyll a along a trophic continuum based on a scale of 0 to 100 related to algal biovolumes. Average summer total phosphorus,chlorophyll a,and Secchi disk readings are each used to calculate TSIs. TSI of 0 to 40 indicates an oligotrophic,or low productivity lake,TSI of 41-50 indicates a mesotrophic, or moderately productive lake. TSI of greater than 50 indicates a eutrophic, or highly productive lake characterized by poor water clarity and high algae growth. The Lake was sampled in 1998(Bell-McKinnon)and was given atrophic status of OM(oligomesotrophic). This is atrophic state that is borderline between oligotrophic and mesotrophic. Spencer • Table 5-Average values for Spencer Lake Trophic Data, 1990 to 1998. Compiled from the Washington State Department of Ecology's Environmental Information Management System Year No.of Secchi Dissolved Specific * Total Persulfate .Temperature Ch1 a* TP oxygen pH Conductivity Nitrogen Samples (meters) (mg/L) (umhos/cm) (degree C) (ug/L) (ug/L) (mg/L) 11 3.35 1990 19 Z5 6.4 40 17.6 11.28 0.306 1991 11 4.47 1 0.218 11 3.51 1992 4 11 0.313 1.205 3.165 1993 18 7.0 7.1 32' 18.1 22.25 0.270 12 4.05 1 1.83jA 10 7.58 -� 1994 19 31.3 r 18.3 14.15 0.172 11 3.74 1.9 17 8.10 7.12 34.6 1995 4 12.45 0.242 12 4.18 1 2.5 18 8.98 7.03 30.17 16.8 10.3 0.219 1996 11 4.64 1997 No Data 1998 25 5.75 7.32 43 4 10 4.6 *Chl a=chlorophyll a,TP=total phosphorus f A% t. Alk \1 { r � Photos courtesy of Ben Legler Spencer Lake is included on Ecology's 303 (d) list of impaired waters for possible impairments related to the presence of big floating bladderwort (Utricularia inflata), otherwise known as swollen bladderwort, identified in 2002. Big floating bladderwort is a non-native, invasive aquatic weed that is freely floating, rootless and carnivorous.This aquatic weed is native to the southeastern US, primarily Florida. Fish and Wildlife Communities Spencer Lake and the surrounding terrestrial habitat in the watershed support a variety of fish, birds, and animals by providing nesting,forage, and cover. Fish Bluegill, brown bullhead, largemouth bass, pumpkinseed, rainbow trout, general sculpin, smallmouth bass and yellow perch are fish species identified during Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife surveys in 2012(Caromile 2012). Table 6-Species composition by weight and by number,from fish population surveys at Spencer Lake, Mason County,June and September 2012. We' yt Number S vz Range Species Kg %of'I'ohl it %of Total Mini. Max Spring 2012 Bit egill 0.6 0.6 14 0.6 97 190 Broin Bullwad 5.2 5.4 21 0.9 171 375 l-xWiwuth Bass 4.6 4.8 29 1.3 88 521 Pumpkinseed 5.7 5.9 141 6.2 84 127 Rainbow'l'rout 16.5 17.2 38 1.7 256 495 Sculpni, General 0.4 0.4 33 1.4 80 120 Sinaknouth Bass 2.6 2.7 31 1.4 87 405 Yelk)w Perch 60.4 62.9 1973 86.5 80 263 Fall 2012 Bkxg7l 2.6 2.9 105 6.5 80 165 Brown Bullhead 4.0 4.5 21 1.3 150 361 Cutthroat Trout 2.1 2.4 2 0.1 450 521 Largeinouth Bass 18.3 20.5 162 10.0 80 517 Pumpkinseed 8.4 9.4 235 14.5 80 175 RaD'iiow Trout 2.4 2.7 26 1.6 137 382 Sculpin, General 0.2 0.2 11 0.7 87 117 SinaWiyouth Bass 3.1 3.4 35 2.2 118 395 Yellow Perch 48.1 53.9 1026 63.2 81 285 In addition,residents report catfish and sunfish in the lake. AquaticSpencer Lake Integrated Spencer Lake is managed for recreational trout fishing. While coho and chum salmon have been found in Malaney Creek,as close as one mile from the lake,these species are not known from the lake. According to the WDFW's 2018 Trout and Kokanee Stocking Plan for Region 1, the stocking plan for Spencer Lake includes 12,644 Catchable rainbow trout in April/May,440 Jumbo rainbow trout in March, 4,400 Jumbo rainbow trout in October and 520 Jumbo cutthroat in February. Spencer Lake is a popular fishery and is open all year to recreational fishing. Spencer Lake falls under the General Statewide Regulations for limits and size restrictions set by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). .,.�,.:.,;,..,-.,_. �L.wl.ed L.4e. A'A' ,,,�-akc•s IM.ns.A..ae� Cast yourseereh... _� Q Lowland Lal.es by Courcy � Find Speaes Lowland Lakes_ Spencer Lake kr.asP.de.lre. wvpb�s Sp.nnr L",,,Tap•a.rmcl popular bout wwrn lb•m CbuMY Ilnan•a•ally and mia+prng Lake information plank of Hr P.-ianbo.aN fagpbnts M bi pr .-ktl rav�bw,m.knq itavery+M1ady Drodunr s.•n d.mg tM1e.wnMr nomns In.ddmm wbom Sp,—baa•+cellmtka.a and pesck bekmq LaM—9,21.1 a Eleva n.1PS Ieet Fishing Pwapects Calendar w•+aide wa�mgtm Itillan•q�.lm.T,ee Jan Fab Mar Api May Jun JW Aug Sep 0o Na. D., M.•dzpec.f Trp..rryka.c omlNcmlMoa O Spat FlsHrq Regulatlona BSexons lagmawutb ba+ O • .• Energmry NUM llpdaea Rd�barbou� • • /� O O 0 th—ghcbw�ezand e'E Rm kappen".siy 'k, �J `l anaugkoNthe Yea,Tk•ERul.s Meep ynuuPtodatr Y.INwpmi.li 0 • • 0 0 0 0 LEGEND lrl Locate this lake IW.ng Eap•maim•E.reienl OGood ®Fac •Poa NSRaun Wv.cNepererel b.a.m.lpe 3kdN oa D.eaeMmar�.t�eua�w.s to mal dna wt.arn;s fm;coca bao..a r do t e Ewl mann txn,nm Ind mar ml N won xk..s.l.urea n,e oes.diaa.ywl.acc.;s ypa pp.ru ry• 1, y ooppo r rknn n Pe+zm m.bmp.v mplete wePeM. gp.r.Ym pw rays r„I.a Two-Pole Fishing Allowed Access Sites I Boat Ramps on this Lake WDEwbaw A—SNB •Sp—Lex.(WDFw) oOeLak Awe •Sp•nca LW R.- Fish Plants a Stocking Reports Al.Nael Slecki,Sckemlke .a.,,:.- dr NatmeiY trpul Srocbng Fl, E►s+Y aaem•s awn •C•k Nabi,Trout pled w okty p•pM+ nnor.­ib .eq.dradJwaaae.n.o.r..pablic Laid. 70172018 Spat FisN ng Regulation Pammp"et SLOV SP11pflnaliY6 n.u,r.,a e.M lee vw r��iz•ney ar..ex.rr r.. O\�f4 8-..al Land Managamem(ELK mad Errcrgency F�sF�iny RWxs br Updae. Fore.Sen rte NSF57 •F.hing Regulation h.. Numbers Nakvnal Ppex S.rvr.•INPSI So.emev z'.4skingrpn lA•gwn-1 Fiskeq Nalne �� lMk.d sae+gmy Cprpz d Engm.wz(U54;Et Vnned sates Fm and YAtdNe S.rvrce(USFws) ' as. -i,. arae•Mir pee 1 j Figure 8. Spencer Lake fish report Spencer . Plan )2 Birds, Mammals, Reptiles and Amphibians A variety of mammals,reptiles and amphibians utilize the Spencer Lake watershed during various times in their life cycle. Birds are attracted to Spencer Lake due to the mix of forest, wetland, and open water habitats.A resident of Spencer Lake has generated a list of birds and mammals seen at Spencer Lake in the past several years (Table 7). This list includes six species of regulatory significance including the great blue heron, bald eagle, osprey, common goldeneye, hooded merganser, and bufflehead. Table 7 Spencer Lake Bird and Animal List" BIRDS Great Blue Heron Ban-tailed Pigeons Killdeer Mourning Doves Spotted Sandpiper Anna's Hummingbird Rufous Hummingbird DUCKS: Belted Kingfisher Canada Goose Red Breasted Sapsucker Wood Ducks Downy Woodpecker Gadwall Northern Flicker American Widgeon Steller's Jay Mallards Western Scrub Jay Northern Shoveler American Crow Northern Pintail Violet Green Swallows Ring Neck Duck Barn Swallows Lesser Scaup Black-capped Chickadee Bufflehead Chestnut Backed Chickadee Golden Eye Red Breasted Nuthatch Barrows Golden Eye Brown Creeper Hooded Merganser Robin Common Merganser Varied Thrush Ring Necked Pheasant European Starling Common Loon Cedar Wax wing Pied Billed Grebe Western Tanager Red Necked Grebe Spotted Towhee Chipping Sparrow MAMMALS: g P Song Sparrow Snakes White Crowned Sparrow Frogs Dark Eyed Junco Beavers Black Headed Gross Beak Squirrels Red Winged Black Bird Fruit Bats Brewer's Black Bird Raccoon Brown Headed Cow Bird Possum Purple Finch Deer House Finch Pine Siskin American Gold Finch Evening Gross Beak Bald Eagle Osprey Sea Gulls Cormorant "List compiled by Spencer Lake residents,John and Kris Tolton 2016 Characterization of Aquatic Plants Spencer Lake hosts a wide range of plants from emergent species to submersed species.Aquatic vegetation serves an array of ecological functions such as supporting food chains, providing habitat for a variety of animal species, intercepting sediments at the upland/water interface, removing toxic compounds from runoff,and providing erosion control/bank stabilization.Generally,native plants are considered beneficial, however they may become a nuisance when their growth is excessive and out of balance to the point of impacting the beneficial uses of the lake. As part of this IAVMP, a plant survey was conducted on August 03, 2016 by Arline Fullerton, a contract aquatic plant specialist and Keith Reitz,MCNWCB staff. The survey started at the public boat launch and proceeded clockwise around the lake. The lake was divided into 5 separate survey districts. Table 8 lists those plant species identified at Spencer Lake during the August 03,2016 survey,including 17 emergent types, six floating types,three free floating types and two plant like algae: ■ Emergents are plants that are rooted in the sediment at the water's edge but have stems and leaves which grow above the water surface. ■ Floating rooted plants are rooted in the sediment and send leaves to the water's surface. ■ Submersed plants are either freely-floating or are rooted in the lake bottom but grow within the water column. AquaticSpencer Lake Integrated Table 8 -Aquatic Plant List for the Spencer Lake Survey August 03, 2016 Plant Type Common Name Scientific Name Status Emergent Plants Bulrush Schoenoplectus spp. Native Common cattail Typha latifolia Native Douglas'spiraea Spiraeo douglasii Native Hairy-leaf rush Juncus supiniformis Native Mint Mentha spp. Native Purple loosestrife Lythrum salicaria Noxious Weed-Class B Purple(marsh) cinquefoil Comarum palustre Native Quillwort Isoetes spp. Native Rush Juncus spp. Native Sedges Carex spp. Native Spikerush Eleocharis spp. Native Water horsetail Equisetum fluviatile Native Water lobelia Lobelia dortmanno Native Waterpepper Polygonum hydropiperoides Native Western water-hemlock Cicuta douglasii Native Yellow-flag iris Iris pseudocorus Noxious Weed-Class C Floating Leaved Fragrant waterlily Nymphaeo odorato Noxious Weed- Class C Rooted Plants Grass-leaved pondweed Potamogeton gramineus Native Large-leaved pondweed Potamogeton amplifolius Native Thin-leaf pondweed Potamogeton spp. Native Watershield Brosenia schreberi Native Yellow pond lily Nuphar pol sepala Native Submersed Common bladderwort Utricularia vulgaris Native Free Floating Common waterweed Elodea canadensis Native Plants Whorl-leaf watermilfoil Myriophyllum verticillatum Native Plant-Like Algae Musk rass Chara spp. Native Nitella Nitella spp. Native The Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) has records of plant surveys on Spencer Lake dating back to 1994 (Ecology 2018). The following comprehensive aquatic plant list for Spencer Lake has been derived from the Washington State Department of Ecology's Lakes data. Table 9 includes the aquatic plant species found at Spencer Lake during the period 1994-2016. Of those species, four are classified as noxious weed species in Washington State and are included on the Washington State Noxious Weed List (WSNWCB 2018). Most of the remaining plant species are native species. Table 9 - Comprehensive Plant List, Spencer Lake Surveys 1994-2016 Plant Common Name Scientific Name Status Abundance Type 2016 American water-plantain Alisma triviole Native N/A Buckbean Menyanthes trifoliata Native N/A Bulrush Scirpus spp. Native N/A Cattail Typho spp. Native N/A Common cattail Typho latifolia Native 1 Creeping loosestrife Lysimachio nummularia Native N/A Dulichium Dulichium arundinaceum Native N/A Grass sedge or rush-like POOIeS spp. Native N/A Knotweed Polygonum Noxious Weed-Class B N/A Mint Mentha spp. Native 1 Naked-stemmed bulrush Schoenoplectus Native 2 Narrowleaf bur-reed Sparganium angustifolium Native N/A Purple(marsh)cinquefoil Comarum palustre Native 2 Purple loosestrife Lythrum solicorio Noxious Weed—Class B 1 Quillwort Isoetes spp. Native 2 Reed canary grass Phalaris arundinacea Noxious Weed—Class C N/A Rush Juncus spp. Native 2 Emergent Sedge Carex spp. Native 2 Plants Small fruited bulrush Scirpus microcarpus Native N/A Softstem bulrush Schoenoplectus Native N/A tobemoemontani Spike-rush Eleocharis spp. Native 1 Spiraea,hardhack Spiraea douglasii Native N/A Spirea Spiraea spp. Native 2 Swamp smartweed Persicario hydropiperoides Native 1 Tufted loosestrife Lysimachia thyrsiflora Native N/A Water clubrush Schoenoplectus subterminalis Native N/A Water gladiole,Water lobelia Lobelia dortmanna Native 2 Water horsetail Equisetum fluviatile Native 1 Waterplantain Alisma spp. Native N/A Water-plantain family Alismotaceae spp. Native N/A Water-purslane Ludwigia palustris Native N/A Western water-hemlock Cicuto douglosii Native 1 Wool-grass Scirpus cyperinus Native N/A Yellow flag Iris pseudocorus Noxious Weed—Class C 2 AquaticSpencer Lake Integrated Plant Type Common Name Scientific Name Status Abundance 2016 Fragrant waterlily Nymphoea odorata Noxious Weed—Class C 3 Grass-leaved pondweed Potamogeton gromineus Native 1 Large-leaf pondweed Potomogeton omplifolius Native 2 Floating-Leaved Pondweed thin leaf Potomogeton spp. Native 2-3 Rooted Plants Ribbonleaf pondweed Potomogeton epihydrus Native N/A Rocky Mountain pond-lily Nuphar polysepolo Native 1 Slender pondweed Potamogeton pusillus Native N/A Watershield Brosenia schreberi Native 2-3 Big floating bladderwort Utricularia inflato Non-native—Monitor N/A Bladderwort Utricularia spp. Native N/A Common bladderwort 1 Utricularia vulgaris Native 2 Submersed Plants Common elodea Elodeo conadensis Native 2 Sago pondweed Stuckenia pectinate Native N/A Water-milfoil Myriophyllum Native N/A Waterweed Elodeo spp. Native N/A Whorled watermilfoil Myriophyllum verticillatum Native 2 Plant-Like Algae Muskwort Chara slop. Native 3 Stonewort Nitella spp. Native 3 N/A-Species not recorded during 2016 survey A rare native species,Lobelia dortmanna is found at Spencer Lake. Water lobelia (Lobelia dortmanna), is a Washington State Sensitive species and is mapped at two locations within the lake. Water lobelia is an indicator of oligotrophic lakes, which possess exceptionally clear and transparent waters. The Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Natural Heritage program, which is the source of scientific information about rare plants and ecosystems of the state, + identifies herbicides to control aquatic weeds, shoreline development, water pollution, and trampling as threats to this species Figure 9. Mapped locations of Lobelia dortmanna Spencer • Aquatic Vegetation Noxious Weed Species at Spencer Lake Included in the table are four listed noxious weed species: purple loosestrife(Lythrum salicaria),fragrant waterlily(Nymphaea odorata),yellow flag iris(Iris pseudacorus),and reed canarygrass(Phalaris arundinacea). Bohemian knotweed(Polygonum X bohemicum)has been documented at several locations by the MCNWCB and is not included in this list. The term"noxious weed"refers to those nonnative plants that are legally defined by Washington's Noxious Weed Control Law(RCW 17.10)as highly destructive,competitive, or difficult to control once established.Noxious weeds have often been introduced accidentally as a contaminant,or as ornamentals.Nonnative plants usually do not have natural controls(i.e.,herbivores,pathogens)or strong competitors to control their numbers as they may have had in their home range. In Washington State, WAC 16.750 sets out three classes(A,B,and C)of noxious weeds based on their distribution in the state,each class having different control requirements: • Class A weeds are weeds that are limited in their distribution, and the goal is to prevent them from gaining a foothold in Washington. By law, all Class A noxious weeds must be eradicated. • Class B weeds are non-native, invasive species that are abundant in some areas of the state,but absent or limited in other areas. The statewide goal is to"draw the line"around and contain infested regions,to keep these noxious weeds from spreading into new areas. They are designated for mandatory control in areas where they have not yet invaded or where distribution is still limited.In regions where a Class B species is already abundant, control is decided at the local level,with containment as the primary goal. • Class C weeds are typically widespread in Washington,or are of special interest to the state's agricultural industry. The State Weed Board provides educational resources about these species but does not require control of them. The Class C status allows counties to require control if locally desired.Other counties may choose to provide education or technical consultation. The state also maintains a monitor list for certain plant species,which are weeds that are under consideration for future listing as noxious weeds. There are no Class A noxious weeds at Spencer Lake,there are two Class B weeds,two Class C weeds, and one plant on the state monitor list.The Mason County Noxious Weed Control Board has selected purple loosestrife(Lythrum salicaria),a Class B Noxious Weed, as a regulated noxious weed,meaning its control is required.Fragrant waterlily(Nymphaea odorata),yellow flag iris(Iris pseudacorus), and reed canarygrass(Phalaris arundinacea)are Class C noxious weeds and Bohemian knotweed is a Class B. Because of their widespread distribution in the county, control is not required for these species. Big floating bladderwort(Utricularia inflata)is on the State Monitor list. Recent surveys and mapping have documented the current location of the noxious weeds,except reed canarygrass at Spencer Lake. During the summer of 2016, MCNWCB staff surveyed Spencer Lake for purple loosestrife, fragrant water-lily, and Bohemian knotweed. In 2017 a survey was completed to map the distribution and abundance of yellow flag iris.This survey was conducted by Mason County Noxious Weed Control staff,Keith Reitz,from a kayak. Information was recorded utilizing Collector software and transferred to,and compiled in,the Geographic Information System(GIS)program ArcMap 10.2. x �_r ,r. ;a. ..l ati —Is JAM g Figure 10.Points and polygons were collected for fragrant waterlily and yellow flag iris infestations. Spencer Lake Integrated Aquatic29 v. �� I� "• '} ~ r♦r �♦ r r 44.fit As. 440 Y-f Spencer Lake Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan 30 Targeted Plant Descriptions Fragrant waterlily, purple loosestrife, and yellow flag iris are targeted for control in this 2018 IAVMP. Information about these plants and other aquatics can be found in An Aquatic Plant Identification Manual for Washington's Freshwater Plants(Ecology 200 1)or on the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board website at: hos://www.nwcb.wa.gov Fragrant waterfily(Nymphaea odorata) Fragrant waterlily is native to eastern North America. Its many subspecies and varieties may be found floating in ponds,lakes and sluggish streams just about everywhere in North America.It was introduced to Washington as a water garden plant and has since escaped into numerous natural lakes and ponds, often growing so densely that it negatively impacts recreation and habitat.Fragrant waterlily is affecting Spencer Lake, and is quickly expanding its distribution in the lake. When uncontrolled, this species tends to form dense,monospecific stands that can persist until senescence in the fall.Mats of these floating leaves prevent wind mixing and extensive areas of low oxygen can develop under the waterlily beds in the summer.Dense mats can also increase water temperature,and the warm,shallow stagnant water among them creates perfect mosquito breeding habitat.See appendix B for the Fragrant Waterlily Best Management Practices document that describes the plant in-depth and reviews control techniques. Legal status in Mason County,Washington Fragrant waterlily is a Class C noxious weed on the Washington State Noxious Weed List, first listed in 2002. In Mason County, it is on the non-regulated noxious weed list. Property owners are not required to control this species,however containment is recommended. Identification Leaves float on the water's surface and are nearly circular in shape. They are notched to the center and the leaf lobes are pointed. The leaves are on the top of long stalks that extend from long rhizomes in the mud. Fragrant waterlily flowers are showy,white to pink and aromatic. Flowers of unusual color and shape are characteristic of hybrid waterlilies. The stems are flexible so when the water level lowers,the plants don't stick up out of the water like they do with the native spatterdock(Nuphar polysepala). Habitat and impact This aquatic perennial herb spreads aggressively,rooting in murky or silty sediments in water up to 10 feet deep. It prefers quiet waters such as ponds, lake margins and slow streams and will grow in a wide range of pH. Fragrant waterlily spreads by seeds and by rhizome fragments. One rhizome can cover about a 15- foot diameter circle in 5 years. Waterlilies can restrict lakefront access and hinder swimming,boating,and other recreational activity.They may also limit the distribution of our native waterlily(Nuphar polysepala)which occupies the same niche and provides food and habitat for a variety of animals and fish.The fragrant waterlily has been expanding in patches on Spencer Lake and, as these patches connect, recreational activities have become more difficult. Fragrant waterlily can contribute to algal growth and water quality problems. It is currently found in many lakes and numerous ponds throughout Mason County. Growth and reproduction Usually flowers from June to October. After fertilization, the flower stalk curls like a corkscrew, drawing the flower underwater. The seeds float back to the surface and are spread through water movement. The thick, fleshy rhizomes can spread vegetatively when rhizome fragments break off. The plants die back in the fall and decay on the water's surface. Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) is an emergent aquatic noxious weed that degrades native wetland plant communities. Purple loosestrife can quickly adapt to environmental changes and expand its range to replace native plants used for ground cover, food, or nesting material. This noxious weed species occurs intermittently along the shoreline and has the potential to spread around the lake, into adjacent wetlands or along Malaney Creek if not controlled. The threat of infestation of these areas remains as long as the infestation at Spencer Lake exists. This emergent weed fails to provide the same forage and habitat for birds, mammals, and invertebrates as provided by native plant communities. Purple loosestrife produces prolific seed (up to two million seeds per mature plant)that could easily be transported downstream. See appendix B for the Purple Loosestrife Best Management Practices document that describes the plant in- depth and reviews control techniques. Legal status in Mason County,Washington Purple loosestrife is a Class B noxious weed on the Washington State Noxious Weed List, first listed in 1988.In Mason County,it is selected for control and is on the regulated noxious weed list.Property owners are required to control this species. Identification Purple loosestrife can reach up to 10 feet tall and 5 feet wide and has a persistent, perennial tap root and spreading rootstock. Flowers are densely clustered on a 4-16 inch terminal flowering spike. Flowers are showy and magenta with 5 to 7 petals. Leaves are alternate, opposite or in whorls of 3. They are 1.5 to 4 inches long, lance-shaped to narrowly oblong and sometimes are covered with fine hairs. Stems are herbaceous and upright, branched or unbranched and somewhat square with 4 to 6 sides. Each plant may have 30 to 50 stems with flowers that form at the ends. Seeds are in capsules. Habitat and impact Purple loosestrife occurs in freshwater and brackish wetlands. It is a successful colonizer and potential invader of any wet, disturbed sites in North America. Associated species include cattails, rushes, sedges and reeds. Purple loosestrife alters wetland ecosystems by replacing native and beneficial plants reducing nesting habitat for waterfowl, animals, and birds. Agriculture may also be impacted by a loss of wild meadows,hay meadows and wetland pastures. Spencer Lake Integrated Aquatic Growth and reproduction A mature plant can produce 2.7 million seeds. Water dispersal includes floating seedlings and floating ungerminated seeds. Purple loosestrife also spreads vegetatively. Adventitious buds with the ability to produce shoots or roots are found on buried stems.Disturbance to the plants,such as stomping and breaking underground stems, or breaking off stems or roots during incomplete plant removal, does initiate bud growth. Yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus) When flowering,yellow flag iris is unmistakable with its showy yellow flowers colorfully displayed along the edge of water and in wetlands. Yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus) was introduced as a garden ornamental and erosion control species and is the only yellow iris found in Washington's wet areas, but when not flowering it may be confused with cattail(Typha latifolia)or broad-fruited bur-reed(Sparganium eurycarpum).Look for the fruits in the summer,or the fan-shaped plant-base at other times of year. Because yellow flag iris is so prolific at the lake and difficult to control, the plant is not the target of this management plan.However, individual homeowners are encouraged to begin control of yellow flag iris on their own. See appendix B for the Yellow-Flag Iris Best Management Practices document that describes the plant in-depth and reviews control techniques. Legal status in Mason County,Washington Yellow flag iris is a Class C noxious weed on the Washington State Noxious Weed List,first listed in 2002. In Mason County, it is on the non-regulated noxious weed list. Property owners are not required to control this species,however containment is recommended. Identification Yellow flag iris is a perennial,aquatic,herbaceous plant which grows 2-3 feet tall along shores in shallow water. Rhizomes spread and form large clumps. Leaves are broad, sword-shaped and sessile. Stems are solid. Habitat and impact Yellow flag grows in temperate wetlands along the margins of lakes and slow-moving rivers. It is most commonly found in very shallow water or mud.It tolerates drying and anoxic sediment and is also tolerant of some salinity, and high soil acidity. It will sicken livestock if ingested,and is generally avoided by herbivores.Contact with the resins can cause skin irritation in humans. This noxious weed is well established at Spencer Lake, growing in multiple locations around the lake (Figure 12). In addition to threatening to lower plant diversity, yellow flag iris can alter hydrologic dynamics through sediment accretion along the shoreline. Yellow flag iris has not yet been observed downstream along Malaney Creek, however this species produces prolific seed that could easily be transported downstream to invade this area. Growth and reproduction Yellow flag dies back in harsh winter conditions,but the rhizomes will overwinter.In spring the long leaves and flower stalks regrow from the rhizomes and flower by late spring or early summer.The rhizomes spread to form dense stands that exclude native wetland species. Yellow flag spreads by rhizomes and seeds. Up to several hundred flowering plants may be connected rhizomatously. Rhizome fragments can form new plants if they break off and drift to suitable habitat. Past Management Efforts Noxious weed control history at Spencer Lake While noxious weeds have been an issue at Spencer Lake for many years, there has not been a coordinated control effort. While no lake-wide efforts have targeted submersed or floating noxious weeds at Spencer Lake, some individual land owners have targeted plants on their waterfront. Techniques employed by land owners have included cutting, raking and weed mats, all which can control submersed and floating plants but not eradicate them. See the Management Alternatives section later in this document for more details on these control methods. Aquatic herbicide treatments in Spencer Lake are permitted through the Washington State Department of Ecology's permit program. Only one documented treatment of aquatic plants was reported. (Table 10). Table 10-Summary of Permitted Aquatic Herbicide Use for Spencer Lake Date Target Plant Chemical Used Amount Acres Treated Permit Number 09-30-2006 Potamogetons Diquat 0.5 gallon 0.25 acres 994128 dibromide Additional management efforts include: 1) Mason County Noxious Weed Control has been treating Bohemian knotweed at multiple locations in the vicinity of Spencer Glen Homeowner's Association (HOA) and the WDFW boat launch since 2013. 2) Mason County Noxious Weed Control manually removed fragrant waterlily at Spencer Glen Homeowner's Association in 2016. 3) Release of the biocontrol agent, Galerucella spp., a loosestrife leaf beetle, has not been documented at Spencer Lake. Due to the scattered occurrence of purple loosestrife, use of the beetles would likely not contribute to control. These insects are most effective in large, dense, contiguous patches of the plant where remaining flower heads/seed heads are regularly removed. Spencer Lake Integrated Aquatic Section 5 - Management Alternatives A wide variety of control methods have been developed to address the general problem of aquatic noxious weeds. The methods chosen for aquatic plant control vary depending upon several factors, including: the species of aquatic plant targeted; whether the control goal is management or eradication; the cost of a method and availability of funds; the impacts to water quality and habitat; the safety and feasibility of a method; and support from lake residents. Control methods considered for Spencer Lake include: ■ Chemical treatments ■ Manual control methods ■ Mechanical control methods ■ Diver dredging ■ Bottom screening ■ No action All control options have been considered and evaluated for each noxious weed species as it relates to the conditions at Spencer Lake (table 11). This table provides a summary of each method considered, its advantages and disadvantages, and suitability for Spencer Lake. The discussion below describes control methods that warrant further consideration, both at the large scale (whole lake treatment) or small scale (private property waterfront)and those methods that are not applicable at Spencer Lake. Since control of Bohemian knotweed is well underway,control measures for this species are not included in the table. Full descriptions of each method,as well as advantages and disadvantages,permits,costs,and suitability for Spencer Lake, are summarized in Appendix C. Much of the information in Appendix C is taken directly from Ecology's Aquatic Plant Management website(Ecology 2016).This information,however, is no longer available on Ecology's website. In addition,Appendix B provides information prepared by King County Noxious Weed Control on best management practices for each target species. Spencer Lake Integrated Aquatic Tahle I I- Vunnnarr of Alanagenient Ilternatives—page I + + + + + + Effective in some Not practical for a large area, Hand pulling/digging YES situations,can be YES* can be useful for individuals YES* Effective in some situations, YES* + + part of an IPM to maintain open water in can be part of an IPM solution. + + ++ solution. small areas. Not practical for a large area, Diver hand pulling YES Not relevant no can be useful for individuals YES* Not relevant no to maintain open water in small areas. Raking YES Not relevant no Not relevant no Not relevant no Area of infestation Not practical for a large Not practical for a large area,can Bottom barriers too large Not relevant no area,can be useful for no* be useful for individuals. no* individuals. Water level drawdown Not possible Not relevant no Not relevant no Not relevant no When cut at the base at flower-drop,will Effective for short term Repeated cutting over several years + +r control of small areas,must may be effective. Cutting Cutting YES stop seed production. YES* YES* YES Will not eradicate. be done frequently. Will flowering plants will stop seed Can be part of an not eradicate. dispersal. Can't be done Effective for short-term Mechanical Weed around docks,logs Not relevant no control of large infestations. no Not relevant no Cutters and other in-water Expensive.Must be done obstructions. frequently. Difficult around docks,logs,and Not relevant no Will fragment rhizomes and "" Not relevant no Rotovators other in-water may spread infestation. obstructions. Diver dredging YES Not relevant no Not practical for a large area no Not relevant no Difficult around in- Can be effective.Causes water obstructions, severe short-term water Sediment dredge causes water quality Not relevant no quality disturbance. no Notrelevant no issues and fish Requires extensive permits. habitat degradation. Very expensive. Sediment agitation Useful around individual (weed rollers) YES Not relevant no docks,but not relevant for YES Not relevant no larger infestation control. *Starred methods can be employed by individual property owners for small-scale temporary control IntegratedSpencer Lake Aquatic VegetationPlan 36 Table 11-Summary of Management Alternatives—page 2. Compatible Broad control with Spencer Effectiveness for Further Effectiveness for fragrant Further Effectiveness for Further Method category Specific method Lake water purple loosestrife body characteristics Galerucella beetles for YES Not effective on no Not relevant no Not relevant to this species no purple loosestrife scattered populations.. Biological Control Methods Availability more limited than Galerucella beetles.Not currently Other biocontrol agents known on site.Would for purple loosestrife: YES take several years for no Not relevant no Not relevant no seed and root feeding populations to build up weevils to controlling levels. Needs to be combined with manual control of seeds Not desirable for purple Aquatic formulations can be hemica cnnro loosestrife control;it is methods Aquatic very effective when applied Aquatic formulations can be very non-selective and by a skilled contractor.Can Glyphosate formulations no YES effective when applied by a skilled YES are compatible monocots(cattails, result in dead,floating root contractor. grasses,and sedges) mats that may need to be may be damaged dealt with. Not desirable for purple Aquatic loosestrife control;it is Aquatic formulations can be very Imazapyr formulations non-selective and no Not recommended no effective when applied by a skilled YES are compatible monocots(cattails, grasses,and sedges)maycontractor. be damaged Aquatic Very effective,if properly applied. Not recommended Triclopyr formulations Selective:won't harm YES n0 Not relevant no are compatible monocots(cattails, grasses,and sedges) *Starred methods can be employed by individual property owners for small-scale temporary control IntegratedSpencer Lake Aquatic Vegetation Integrated Pest Management The preferred approach for weed control is Integrated Pest Management (IPM). IPM involves selecting from a range of possible control methods to match the management requirements of each specific site.The goal is to maximize effective control and to minimize negative environmental,economic and social impacts. IPM uses a multifaceted and adaptive approach.Control methods are selected that reflect the available time, funding,and labor of the participants,the land use goals,and the values of the community and landowners. Management of noxious weed problems will require dedication over a number of years, and should allow for flexibility in method as appropriate. Purple loosestrife(Lythrum salicaria) For more information on the following purple loosestrife control methods reference Appendix B—BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Purple Loosestrife and Appendix C—Control Method Options. Hand-Pulling or Cutting(only suitable for small areas or used in combination with other methods) Hand pulling or digging of purple loosestrife plants is possible in areas where plants are growing out of soft substrate and the root mass of the plants are reachable.The entire root mass must be removed,bagged,and disposed of. Plants that are growing in rock or riprap, in amongst large downed wood, or amongst woody vegetation may not be able to be completely removed using this method. Hand pulling is feasible in the small scale,and would be appropriate for the limited distribution of this plant at Spencer Lake. Cutting plants at the base when in flower may prevent seeding, but cut plants may continue to produce flowers. Sites should be consistently and regularly monitored until frost to cut and remove any subsequent flowers. Cutting will not kill the plants, and they will need to be controlled every year. Care must also be taken to properly dispose of root and stem fragments to prevent the growing of new plants. Cut plant parts must not be left on site, because root and stem fragments can root and form new plants. Using cutting to control purple loosestrife may work at Spencer Lake only if it is part of an IPM solution that incorporates several control tactics such as hand pulling, bio controls,weed mats, and selective herbicide use. Hand pulling or cutting to control purple loosestrife may work at Spencer Lake if it is part of an IPM solution that incorporates other control tactics such as long-term persistent cutting,weed mats,bio controls, and selective herbicide use. Bottom Barriers/Weed Mats(only suitable for small areas) The use of thick cardboard or plastic,staked down,and covered by six inches of mulch to cover closely cut purple loosestrife plants can prevent seed spread but will not eradicate the plant. Weed mats are an option where the terrain is flat, and not interrupted by logs, other vegetation, or rock. Weed mats need to be checked often because they can become damaged and will need to be repaired or re- installed.Using weed mats to control purple loosestrife may work at Spencer Lake only if it is part of an IPM solution that incorporates several control tactics such as hand pulling, bio controls, long-term persistent cutting, and selective herbicide use. AquaticSpencer Lake Inte-rated Biological Control(used in combination with other methods) Purple loosestrife population density and the number of flowering plants can be reduced, but there will always be some plants remaining when using biological control agents. Typically, biocontrol releases should be made only at sites where loosestrife infestations are large and immediate eradication of the weed is not the primary objective.Biological control can take up to six years to have a significant impact on the infestation. Currently,purple loosestrife is known from only a few locations around the lake. Release of the biocontrol agent,Galerucella spp,is unknown at Spencer Lake.(Jennifer Andreas,Integrated Weed Control Project Director, Washington State University Extensions, personal communication, 2018) The beetles, if present,need to be combined with the removal and bagging of plant flowers. By its nature, biocontrol methods may result in reduced infestation of the target plant but not result in eradication. Chemical Control For large infestations of purple loosestrife, herbicide use may be necessary for effective control. The application of herbicide to the emergent purple loosestrife is best conducted by manual spot applications. Control of purple loosestrife is most effectively achieved using a selective herbicide such as an aquatic approved version of triclopyr. Triclopyr-TEA in particular has been very effective in killing purple loosestrife plants and has the lowest human and ecological side effects. Selective herbicides also have the advantage of not harming monocot plants(cattails, grasses, sedges,etc). These aquatic herbicides must be used with a Washington State Department of Ecology approved aquatic surfactant. An experienced and licensed aquatic herbicide applicator can selectively target individual emergent weed species and limit damage to other species. This is especially true when infestations are small so that large areas with a diverse plant distribution don't have to be treated.Since the emergent noxious weed infestations at Spencer Lake are small and still confined to the shoreline,it should be relatively simple for the applicator to avoid off target damage and preserve the native plant community. Treatment of purple loosestrife will likely have to occur twice during the growing season in order to ensure that no plants were missed as the vegetative part of the plants can be hard to spot among other vegetation. In sensitive areas, or areas prone to erosion, careful spot-spraying will create fewer disturbances than manual or mechanical control. For several years following treatment, areas should be monitored for new plants germinating from the seed bank.In some cases several years of treatment may be necessary. Fragrant waterlily(Nymphaea odorata) For more information on the following fragrant waterlily control methods reference Appendix B—BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Fragrant Waterlily and Appendix C—Control Method Options. Hand Pulling or cutting(only suitable for small areas) Hand pulling and cutting can be used to temporarily control fragrant waterlily in a small area, such as around a dock, if repeated on a regular basis. Hand pulling will likely not eradicate the plant from a water body and is impractical for large infestations.While cuttings won't increase the spread of fragrant waterlily, all pulled or cut plants and plant parts must be removed from the water, and an HPA pamphlet permit is required. Several years of monitoring are needed for signs of plants growing from root fragments and from the seed bank. Fragrant waterlily can be composted on dry land or placed in yard waste bins. Bottom Barriers(only suitable for small areas) An opaque bottom barrier can be used to suppress waterlily growth in small areas such as a boat launch or around a swimming area. Barriers need to be regularly cleaned and maintained because plants will root in the sediment that accumulates on top of them. Bottom barriers are not practical for large-scale infestations such as the whole of Spencer Lake. Sediment Agitation (Weed Rolling)(only suitable for small areas) Weed rolling is a suitable way to temporarily control,not eradicate,waterlily in a small area such as at the end of a dock but is not suitable for any larger area. Weed rolling involves the use of a commercially available, low voltage power unit that drives an up-to-30-foot long roller set on the lake bottom through an adjustable arc of up to 270 degrees. A reversing action built into the drive automatically brings the roller back to complete the cycle.Fins on the rollers detach some plants from the soil,while the rollers force other plants flat, gradually inhibiting growth. Detached plants should be removed from the water with a rake or gathered by hand. Once plants are cleared from the area,the device can be used as little as once per week or less to keep plants from re-colonizing the area. The Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife pamphlet, 2015 Aquatic Plants and Fish limits the area of removal to "no more than two thousand five hundred square feet". Weed rolling is not applicable to a lake wide infestation. Chemical Control Chemical methods used to control fragrant waterlily can be very effective and are appropriate for whole lake treatments.The most effective herbicide and environmentally low toxic herbicide suitable is an aquatic version of glyphosate (see Appendix D for herbicide label). This aquatic herbicide must be used with a Washington State Department of Ecology approved aquatic surfactant.Glyphosate is applied directly to the floating leaves through precise foliar spraying by an approved aquatic herbicide contractor. Foliar application of the herbicide reduces the chance that the herbicide will come in contact with and affect non- target plants. Glyphosate also has the advantage of working through translocation whereby the chemical gets moved through the plant and kills the plant to the roots. Spencer Lake Integrated Aquatic Due to the extensive infestation of fragrant waterlily, treatment will need to occur multiple times over a four to six year period. It is recommended that treatments identify satellite populations and that large waterlily beds be treated gradually over the course of several years. This practice should minimize the development of floating mats since there are live rhizomes that should hold the mass down at the bottom to decay. If mats do float up, they are smaller and more easily managed. This could be accomplished by treating a strip around the edge each year, gradually working toward the center or making strips through the bed that gradually join over a few years (Parsons communication 2018). The control effectiveness of fragrant waterlily is easy to measure through visual surveys due to the floating leaves. A drawback of using herbicide to control waterlily is the potential for"uplifting"of mats of decomposing waterlily roots that can form floating islands in the lake after the plants have died. The infestation of waterlily at Spencer Lake consists of numerous newly formed, small, circular patches and several areas with large monospecific stands.The smaller areas may not generate floating sediment mats because of their size, but the larger areas would likely generate the floating mats. Natural decay of fragrant waterlily can also often create these floating mats. Removal of the mats from the lake is possible using manual or mechanical means(generally involving towing the mats to a take-out point and cutting them up with hand tools or larger machinery).At minimum,a Hydraulic Project Approval(HPA)permit from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife will be required to remove the mats. Other permits may also be required. Yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus) For more information on the following yellow flag iris control methods reference Appendix B—BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Yellow-flag iris and Appendix C—Control Method Options. Hand Pulling or cutting(only suitable for small areas) Hand pulling of yellow flag iris is a feasible option for small to moderate infestations.In damp or wet soils seedlings can be easily removed while mature plants may require the use of heavier tools such as pick axes, pulaskis, or saws. When removing plants, care must be taken to remove all rhizomes as any rhizomes left have the potential to sprout new plants. Manually cleared areas should be monitored for new growth. Emergent plants that are continually inundated can be cut below the waterline for effective control. It is recommended to cut them before flowering.Rhizomes can continue to grow up to 3 months without water so disposal of plant material must be done in dry locations. When removing yellow flag iris manually, care should be taken to protect the skin, as resins in the leaves and rhizomes can cause irritation. Bottom Barriers(only suitable for small areas) Small patches of yellow flag iris can be controlled using a heavy tarp weighted at the edges.The tarp must extend beyond the edges of the infestation and needs to be checked periodically to insure plants aren't growing up around the tarp.Materials such as landscape fabric and heavy plastic may not be study enough to effectively control the plants. Coverings must be left in place for up to several years. Chemical Control Chemical control for yellow flag iris can be an effective alternative and may be the only option for large infestations. Yellow flag iris is a monocot and only non-selective herbicides are effective. These non- selective herbicides can injure or kill any plants they come in contact with and special care must be used to minimize off target damage when using these chemicals.Glyphosate is the most commonly used herbicide for yellow flag iris control. It should be applied in late spring or summer and needs to be applied directly to foliage or fresh cut leaves and stems. Yellow flag iris may require higher concentrations so the label directions must be strictly followed. Imazapyr is also an effective treatment and may be applied in conjunction with glyphosate for good control.Imazapyr has been shown to have some residual soil activity so care must be taken to not spray the root zones of desirable plants or replant for several months. Both herbicides are most effective in combination with a surfactant such as Competitor(selected surfactant must be approved for aquatic use).Multiple treatments may be required for dense infestations and retreatment is generally recommended.All aquatic herbicides must be applied by a licensed pesticide applicator and label directions must be followed. IntegratedSpencer Lake Aquatic Section 6 — Integrated Treatment Plan Spencer Lake and its associated shoreline contain five listed noxious weed species whose presence has diminished the quality of Spencer Lake as an ecological and human resource. The goal of the treatment plan is to halt and reverse the degradation caused by the targeted plants.The two wide spread target species fragrant waterlily (Nymphaea odorata) and yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus) each require different treatment and monitoring techniques.Control efforts are underway for the Bohemian knotweed(Polygonum X bohemicum) and property owners with purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) are being encouraged to control this species.The infestation of reed canarygrass(Phalaris arundinaceae) is too widespread and not considered for control in this IAVMP(see: SECTION 5 -MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES).Although the four species considered for control at Spencer Lake are highly aggressive and difficult to control and eventually eradicate,the goal of control and reduced levels of infestation are reasonable for all of them and may be achieved within the 5 year timeframe of the project. All methods suggested combine to form an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) strategy that is a balance between target weed eradication and environmental protection. Permits Most aquatic weed control activities require permits. Many manual and mechanical control methods are covered under the "Aquatic Plants and Fish" pamphlet, a Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.This HPA pamphlet permit applies only to use by individual land owners,not the whole lake, and applies to some types of aquatic weed or plant control.Depending on the method you select to control aquatic noxious weeds or beneficial plants, an individual HPA may be required. A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit must be obtained before aquatic herbicides can be applied to natural water bodies in Washington State,including Spencer Lake.The Washington Department of Agriculture holds an NPDES permit for the management of noxious weeds growing in wet areas such as lake shores, freshwater wetlands, river banks, and estuaries. Licensed applicators can obtain coverage under this permit free of charge. For herbicide treatment of in-lake plants (floating or submersed weeds) the project will need an Aquatic Plant and Algae Management NPDES permit from the Washington Department of Ecology. This permit must be held by the herbicide applicator or the legal entity hiring the applicator,it must be applied for at least sixty days before beginning the aquatic plant control activities that will result in a discharge to waters of the state.The herbicide application, and a permit fee applies. Permit fees are set by rule in WAC 173-224-040. In 2018 the permit fee is $585.00 increasing to$618.00 in FY 2019. The schedule laid out below prioritizes fragrant waterlily control and is tentative. It will be reassessed each year depending on the density and distribution of fragrant waterlily found during surveys. Large or dense fragrant waterlily patches will generally be treated using herbicide,but when surveys indicate sparse coverage, diver pulling or other manual methods may be employed. IntegratedSpencer Lake Aquatic43 Fragrant waterlily (Nymphaea odorata) Control (years 1-5) A pre-treatment survey of fragrant waterlily is not necessary because the distribution of the plants was well documented during surveys in 2016. The expected abundance and distribution can be based on this survey and aerial interpretation. Initial control of fragrant waterlily will be accomplished using a broad-spectrum aquatic herbicide formulation of glyphosate (see Appendix D for herbicide label). Suitable formulations include, but are not limited to: Rodeo®,Roundup Custom®, and AquaNeat®. The herbicide will be applied by a licensed aquatic herbicide contractor,on a calm,dry day to ensure good herbicide contact with the plants. Treatment of waterlily will occur in mid-summer(July)when the plant is storing energy in the rhizomes for the next growing season. Treatment will be accomplished over a 5-year period. Small satellite infestations will be prioritized for treatment and large waterlily beds will be treated gradually over the 5-year period. Methods may include,treating a strip around the edge of larger infestations, gradually working toward the center,or making strips through the bed that gradually join over the multi-year period.Adopting this methodology may reduce the potential for mud mat formation. Follow-up control (years 5+) Treatment beyond the 5 year project will consist of spot herbicide treatments in July/August.After several years of herbicide treatments,the populations of lily will become smaller and cutting and/or hand pulling may become a viable option for remnant infestations. Floating mud mats When waterlilies die, often their root masses will swell with gas and rise to the surface,bringing up all the muck from the bottom of the lake around them.This is a natural process and will occur at the end of the life cycle of a water lily patch whether it died naturally or was controlled using herbicide. Occasionally these mats will sink again on their own, but just as often they will persist and become floating islands of vegetation. Many lake communities choose to leave them in place,but they can also be removed mechanically if desired.This plan provides for the removal of any mud mats that may form during the second and fifth years. If they do form as a result of the waterlily control,the community can assess their effect on the lake and decide at that point whether to remove them or leave them in place. Monitoring Surveys after the initial application are essential to determining the success of the effort, and will be used to determine what measures need to be implemented to complete the waterlily control in successive years. AquaticSpencer Lake Inte-rated Yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus), Bohemian knotweed (Polygonum X bohemicum) and Purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) Control(years 1-5) Control strategies are underway by the Mason County Noxious Weed Control program and engaged property owners for these three noxious weeds.The success of those efforts will be monitored during the 5 year duration of the proposed fragrant waterlily treatment. AquaticSpencer Lake Integrated Section 7 — Plan Elements, Costs and Funding Implementation of the Spencer Lake IAVMP is scheduled to span five years, at a total estimated cost of $48,000.00. Table 12 outlines the tasks and estimated costs of implementation on an annual basis. The budget is broken into five one-year segments. This partitioning will allow for more definitive budget strategizing in the short term and adaptive management in the later years of the project.It is anticipated that the majority of the costs would accrue in the first three years,the period of most aggressive treatment. As the project progresses, more funds are dedicated at detecting and controlling reintroduction of aquatic noxious weed species. Costs of the Plan Many of the planning costs have already been incurred through the creation of this IAVMP.Approximately 75%of the cost of surveys,researching,planning for and writing this management plan came in the form of a grant from the Washington State Department of Ecology's Aquatic Weeds Management Fund. The remaining costs came in form of salary match from Mason County Noxious Weed Control staff and volunteer participation by Spencer Lake residents on the Steering Committee. Total planning costs are estimated to be$32,000.00. Capital Costs There are no capital costs associated with this IAVMP. It is not anticipated that any equipment will need to be purchased. Operational and Maintenance Costs The majority of expenses associated with implementation of the Spencer Lake IAVMP are operational and maintenance costs. These costs include hiring of herbicide contractors,mapping and surveying, follow-up weed removal, community outreach, and project administration and management(Table 12). Sources of Funding Funding for implementation of the Spencer Lake IAVMP will come from a combination of sources that may change as the project progresses. Potential sources of funding such as grants, formation of a Lake Management District,and self-funding were all considered by the Steering Committee.The grant funding option depends on a blend of contributed funds, matching cash funds, and matching in-kind volunteer hours. Grants The Washington State Department of Ecology's Aquatic Weeds Management Fund(AWMF)is a potential source of funding for IAVMP Implementation.The Spencer Lake IAVMP has been developed to be consistent with all AWMF guidelines and requirements.The plan has overwhelming support from the Spencer Lake community and Mason County Noxious Weed Control is willing to work with the Implementation Committee on the application process. Matching Funds Awarding of the Ecology's AWMF grant requires matching funds.Requiring matching funds distributes the responsibility of funding between the state agency(Ecology)and the local stakeholders (Spencer Lake residents and the Mason County Noxious Weed Control Program). Both cash match and in-kind match are proposed to be used to fulfill this requirement. Cash matching funds are proposed to come from staff hours of Mason County Noxious Weed Control Program employees.The value of Mason County staff hours includes the total hourly cost of that employee's time. These total costs include:hourly rate,benefits,paid time off,and overhead. In-kind matching funds are proposed to come from volunteer labor and services/supplies provided by Spencer Lake residents. Table 12—Proposed Spencer Lake IAVMP Implementation Budget Task Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 TOTAL Year 4 Year 5 TOTAL TOTAL Years 1-3 Years 4-5 (5 years) Fragrant waterlily Management: Permitting,Public Notification. $8,000.00 $6, $4,000.00 $18,000.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $8,000.00 $26,000.00 Herbicide Application Waterlily mat cleanup 0 2,00(0 $2,000.00 $4,000.00 $1,000.00 $2,000.00 $6,000.00 Contractor management 5200.00 $200.00 $200.00 $600.00 $200.00 $200.00 $400.00 $1,000.00 Weed surveys 0 $1,000.00 $700.00 $1,700.00 $500.00 $400.00 $900.00 $2,600.00 48 Education and Outreach $200.00 $200.00 $200.00 $600.00 $100.00 $100.00 $200.00 $800.00 c (volunteers) w O Education and Outreach $200.00 $100.00 $100.00 $400.00 $100.00 $100.00 $200.00 $600.00 (Mason County staff) Project Administration and Report Writing $3,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $7,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $4,000.00 $11,000.00 subtotals $11,600.00 $11,500.00 $9,200.00 $32,300.00 $7,900.00 $7,800.00 $15,700.00 $48,000.00 =hired contractor =Mason County staff =Spencer Lake community volunteers Spencer Lake Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan -48 Section 8 — Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation Implementation The implementation of the plan will follow the process outlined below: Convene a project Implementation Committee.This group will most likely consist of members from the Spencer Lake IAVMP steering committee, other interested community members and Mason County Noxious Weed Control,acting in an advisory capacity.They will direct the implementation of the IAVMP. Identify Funding Sources. The most likely source for funds to support the implementation of this plan is the Washington State Department of Ecology Aquatic Weed Management Fund Grant (AWMF). Other local and regional grants may be pursued as well.The AWMF grant requires matching funds and time from the local agency and community and could fund the entirety of the plan. This type of grant requires that the local community works in conjunction with a local government agency (Mason County Noxious Weed Control). Issue a Request for Proposal for noxious weed control work. Select an Herbicide Contractor.An approved herbicide contractor will be selected by the Implementation Committee for treatment of the weeds outlined in this plan. Contract proposals will include costs for the permit application and annual invoices, herbicide applications, and notification and postings required by the permits. Public Education and Communication. The residents of Spencer Lake will be notified about any upcoming herbicide applications as determined by the requirements in the NPDES permit, the results of yearly monitoring efforts, and any major changes made to the plan via the Implementation Committee,the Spencer Lake Facebook page or by the United States Postal Service. Much of this communication will be carried out by active members of the community who are involved in the Implementation Committee. The Committee will take into account public feedback when making decisions about the plan. Application of Herbicide. Application of the herbicide will be completed as prescribed in this IAVMP unless consultation with the community, Ecology and/or the applicator leads to defensible changes in the plan and it is approved by the Implementation Committee and the Department of Ecology. Apply follow-up treatment if necessary. Long Term Monitoring and Maintenance. This will be done by Mason County Noxious Weed Control or professional contractors. Funding and timing of continued monitoring and maintenance will be determined by the Mason County Noxious Weed Control and Spencer Lake residents. Surveys will be done at the same time each year in order to get a comparable measure of the plants distribution and density. Members of the Spencer Lake community will evaluate the management of aquatic weeds and the effectiveness of plant management strategies. Residents will be encouraged to combine efforts, including manually removing aquatic plants. Manual follow-up. Each year in late summer,a few weeks after herbicide treatment occurs,community members will manually remove the reproductive parts of plants that were not treated. This will include removal of purple loosestrife flower heads, removal of any yellow flag iris seedpods, and gathering of any nuisance dead waterlily mats. Monitoring Yearly surveying and monitoring of emergent, floating and submerged aquatic noxious weeds will be conducted at Spencer Lake. These surveys will evaluate the effectiveness of treatment strategies, help guide noxious weed control efforts and provide a year-to-year baseline for progress towards weed eradication. The surveys will be done by professional contractors, Mason County staff, or possibly volunteers, using small boats. During the surveys, mapping of the aquatic noxious weeds will be done using aerial photos and/or GPS data loggers. Collected data will then be transferred to GIS. Change in the aquatic plant community will likely occur in response to any treatment.It is critical that frequent and thorough surveys be conducted to document these changes and to detect any new infestation of invasive plants. Subject to funding availability,a GIS survey and mapping effort may be performed as a regular component of the long-term management of noxious weeds at Spencer Lake. This survey effort will identify all plant species present in the lake and their relative abundance. The survey map will include past management areas for comparison to plant densities observed in previous surveys and assessment of management effectiveness. The plant surveys will also help provide guidance for aquatic plant management in future years. Evaluation The effectiveness of the plan will be evaluated yearly by Mason County staff and members of the Implementation Committee. Adaptive changes will be made as needed. Year-to-year comparisons of the monitoring data will be used to evaluate trends in specific target species abundance and distribution. The results of these comparisons will guide control efforts and may result in a change in future control strategies. Success of the plan will be measured by the reduction of the target noxious weed species. Spencer Lake Integrated Aquatic Long Term Sustainability The long term sustainability of this project is dependent on the commitment of the property owners and residents of the Spencer Lake community to undertake successive weed control and the ability of the staff of the Mason County Noxious Weed Control Program to communicate weed control techniques,strategies and priorities. In the absence of the Washington State Department of Ecology's AWMF funding, options will be re-evaluated by the Steering Committee. Through their participation in the development of this IAVMP, the Spencer Lake Community has demonstrated their desire to support this plan for the long term. Mason County Noxious Weed Control staff will be able to provide specific weed control strategies for situations as they arise in the future.Ideas introduced by community members for long term maintenance of the project's control efforts include: ■ members of the Community acquiring and using an aquatic herbicide applicators license ■ formation of a Lake Management District ■ community weed pulling work days ■ a new dedication by property owners to control noxious weeds on their property References DiTomaso,J.M.,and E.A.Healy. 2003. Aquatic and Riparian Weeds of the West. University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources. Publication 3421 Ecology. 1994.A Citizen's Manual for Developing Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plans.First edition. Washington State Department of Ecology,Water Quality Financial Assistance Program,Olympia,Washington. January 1994.Available online at: hqps:Hfortress.wa.gov/ecy/Xublication&/publications/93093.Rd Ecology.2001.An Aquatic Plant Identification Manual for Washington's Freshwater Plants.Publication Number 01-10-032.Washington State Department of Ecology,Olympia,Washington.June. Ecology.2015.Washington State Lakes Environmental Data. Washington State Department of Ecology,Olympia, Washington.Available online at: https://fortress.wa. og v/ecy/coastalatlas/tools/LakeDetail.aspx?ReachCode=17110019001181 Extension Toxicology Network(EXTOXNET). 1994.Pesticide Information Profiles:Glyphosate.Oregon State University.Available online at:hgR://pmeR.cce.comell.edu/profiles/extoxnet/dienochlor-glyphosate/glyphosate- ext.html Extension Toxicology Network(EXTOXNET). 1993.Pesticide Information Profiles: Triclopyr.Oregon State University.Available online at: hn://pmel2.cce.comell.edu/profiles/extoxnet/pyrethrins-ziram/triclopyr-ext.html Herrera Environmental Consultants,Inc.HICKS LAKE INTEGRATED AQUATIC VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PLAN—2017.Online at: hgps://www.ci.lacey.wa.us/Portals/0/docs/community development/planningand zoning/projects under review/H icks%20Lake%20IAVMP%20Final%20Draft.pdf King County.2011.Lake Desire Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan.Department of Natural Resources and Parks,Water and Land Resources Division,Noxious Weed Control Program. Seattle,Washington.Online at: haps:Hfortress.wa.gov/ecy/gisresources/lakes/iavmp reports/17110012000438 Desire.pdf King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks,Lake Sawyer Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan.2015.Online at: hgps://fortress.wa.p-ov/ecy/gisresources/lakes/iavmp reports/17110013000395 Sawyer 2015.pdf King County Noxious Weed Control program.2009 Best Management Practices Yellow Flag iris. Available at: http://,oy ur.kinecouniy. Zur.kinecouniy.gov/dnrp/libra King County Noxious Weed Control program.2010 Best Management Practices Fragrant Waterlily. Available at: https://your.kin cg ouniy. og, v/&M//libruy/water-and-land/weedsBMPs/fragrant-water-lily-control.12df King County Noxious Weed Control program.2011 Best Management Practices Purple Loosestrife. Available at: haps://your.king-coun ov/d=/library/water-and-land/weedsBMPs/purple loosestrife-control.pdf King County Noxious Weed Control program.2015 Best Management Practices Invasive Knotweeds. Available at: hos://vour.kin cg ouniy.p-ov/dnM/library/water-and-land/weedsBMPs/Knotweed-Control.12df Mason County.2018.Mason County Noxious Weed List 2018.Mason County Noxious Weed Control Board. Online at:b=s:Hs3.3W.wsu.edu/uploads/sites/2064/2018/02/2018 Mason-Noxious-Weed-List revised FINAL.pdf Mason County.2012.MASON COUNTY FINAL DRAFT SHORELINE INVENTORY AND CHARACTERIZATION REPORT.Online at: https://www.co.mason.wa.us/community-services/smp-update/inventory-characterization-report-102012.pdf United States Department of Agriculture(USDA). 2012. Web Soil Survey;National Cooperative Soil Survey. Natural Resources Conservation Service,United States Department of Agriculture. Available at: http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov/.Accessed 2018. Washington State Department of Ecology. Aquatic Plant Management. No longer available on-line Washington State Department of Ecology.Aquatic Plant and Algae Management General Permit.2016 Online at. https://ecologv.wa.gov/DOE/files/e8/e8ce4f84-6df5-4209-8199-9b24005 e655b.Rdf Washington State Department of Ecology.The Washington Lake Book. Pub.#97-10 Available at: hUs:Hfortress.wa. og v/ecv/publications/documents/9710.12df Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife.2015.Aquatic Plants and Fish.Online at: b=s:Hwdfw.wa.goy/publications/01728/wdfw0I728.Rdf (This publication may serve as the Hydraulic Project Approval(HPA)for some types of aquatic weed or plant control.) Washington Natural Heritage Program.2018 Washington Vascular Plant Species of Special Concern,Natural Heritage Report 2018-04.hos://www.dnr.wa.goy/publications/amp nh vascular ets.pdf?hwibud Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board.2018 Washington State Noxious Weed List.Accessed online at: hUs://www.nwcb.wa.gov/pdfs/2018-State-Weed-List Common Name-8.5xll.pdf. Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board. 1997. Written Findings of the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board: Lythrum salicaria. Available at: hos://www.nwcb.wa. ovg /images/weeds/LZhrum-salicaria- 1997.pdf Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board. 2004. Written Findings of the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board: Polygonum Bohemicum(Polygonum cuspidatum X sachalinense). Available at: hMs://www.nwcb.wa.gov/images/weeds/Polygonum-bohimicum-2004.12df Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board. 2012. Written Findings of the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board: Iris pseudacorus. Available at: hos://www.nwcb.wa. ovg/images/weeds/Yellow flag�iris.pdf Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board. 2013. Written Findings of the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board:Nymphaea odorata. Available at: hos://www.nwcb.wa. ovg /images/weeds/WF Nymphaea odorata June 2013.pdf Whatcom County Noxious Weed Control Board. Swollen Bladderwort, Utricularia inflate. https://www.nwcb.wa.gov/images/weeds/SwollenBladderwort "atcom.ndf Spencer Lake Estimated Budget EST TOTALS EACH YR Total YR TASK YR 0 YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YEARS 6-10 5-10 10 YR EST Avg/YR Fragrant waterlily Management:Permitting, Public Notification,Herbicide Application 9,200 6900 4600 4600 4600 29900 4400 22000 51,900 Waterlily mat cleanup 5000 5000 5000 3000 3000 21000 2000 10000 31,000 Contractor Management 200 200 200 200 200 1000 200 1000 2,000 Weed Surveys including lobela first 3 yrs) 2500 3550 3550 525 525 10650 525 2625 13,275 Education and Outreach(volunteers) 200 200 200 100 100 800 100 500 1,300 Education and Outreach(Mason County Staff) 2001 100 1001 100 100 600 1 1001 500 1,100 Project Administration and Report Writing Added$1000/yr for LIVID reporting 4000 3000 3000 3000 3000 16000 3000 150001 31,000 **Lake Management District Fees(Paid by Prop.Owners Upfront) 2500 Subtotals 2500 21300 18950 16650 11525 11525 79950 10325 51625 131575 13158 Total assessed value of Spencer Lake Property Owners for 2019 61,665,260 61,665,260 Annual Revenue at 23%per 1000 assessed value 23%rate 14183 Adjustments to original budget in Lake IAVMP: Fragrant waterlilly management increased by 15%for potential price increase by 2020 implementation.Original price est.received in early 2018. Waterlily mat cleanup increased as information from other LIVID with this issue have incurred larger cost than the original IAVMP budget estimated. Cost should decrease years 5-10. Weed survey cost for lobelia increased by$500 from estimated contractor proposal of$2000 for potential increase by yr 2020 and extended through yr 3 for contingency in the event Ecology requires more than 2 surveys. Balance of weed surveys increased by 5%for potential price increase by year 2020. Lake management fee of$2500 is NOT incuded in tax rate as that must be paid upfront. PLEASE NOTE: This budget reflects the current total assessed value based on actual 2019 data provided by the Assessors Office. February 15, 2019 I j E EIVED Mason County Board of Commissioners2 d Randy Neatherlin t Kevin Shutty &I.130n County Sharon Trask {;.[:rtruMasioners 411 N 5tn St Shelton, WA 98584 RE: Petition to Form a Lake Management District for Spencer Lake in Mason County Dear Commissioners: Residents of Spencer Lake desire to form a Lake Management District(LMD). The LIVID funds will finance efforts for the protection and enhancement of Spencer Lake in terms of noxious aquatic weed control,water quality and aesthetic value. The purpose of the LIVID is to: a. Manage noxious aquatic plants in Spencer Lake to meet recreational and aesthetic needs. b. Employ proven techniques based on environmental safety. c. Conduct inspections to determine areas of invasive species infestation and effectiveness of treatments. d. Investigate and promote the best management practices for treatment of noxious weeds. e. Monitor for occurrence of as well as emergence of other lake plants that have been identified by the State of Washington as noxious. f. Maintain a volunteer advisory committee of lakefront owner representatives to direct the efforts and funds of the LIVID. The boundary of the proposed LIVID is all property with lakefront access to Spencer Lake. We are seeking a duration of 10 years beginning in 2020. Background: Spencer Lake residents brought concerns about the expansion of noxious weeds in the lake to the Mason County Noxious Weed Control staff in 2014. A Grant from the Washington State Department of Ecology was granted in 2016 to develop an Integrated Aquatic Vegetation Management Plan (IAVMP)and is attached for your reference. The IAVMP will be a core guidance document for future management of Spencer Lake. With the completion of the Plan, research was done to identify methods to fund the stated purpose. Many of the lakes in Mason and surrounding counties use either LMD's or Homeowners Associations,and our constituents favored the formation of the LIVID as being more appropriate for the scope of our goals. We followed closely the example and process from Mason Lake. Recommended Revenue The recommended tax revenue is twenty-three (23)cents per thousand of tax evaluation. The estimated budget used to calculate this revenue is attached for review. Please note that the values used on the petition to gather signatures was based on an estimated 2019 total assessed value (received from the Assessors'office) prior to the final 2019 values. ($13,996 vs.$14,183) which is still within a valid range. Property Owner Support During the development of the IAVMP,a steering team of interested residents worked with various stakeholders to gather information and communicate activities. In addition,two public meetings were held. Please refer to the IAMVP for more detailed information. Subsequently, a Petition was developed,and signatures gathered this winter. We are providing signatures from property owners representing 56 parcels(from a total of 184 or 30%)and 67.4 acres (from a total of 243 or 28%),well in excess of the 20%required to bring this forth to the Mason County Commissioners. We would be pleased to provide any additional information you may require to move this process forward to the next step. Sincerely, Spencer Lake Steering Committee Doris Zacher,Co-chair John Tolton, Co-chair