Commissioners Present: Benye Weber, Bruce Bryson

Others Present: Jim Patton (Executive Director), Molly MacLeod-Roberts (Edwards & Associates), Tom Baenen (GFMG President) and Michael Stansbury (GFMG Treasurer)

Call to Order: The Workshop was called to order at 5:00 pm by Commissioner Weber in the Board Room of Whidbey General Hospital in Coupeville, WA.

PURPOSE OF THE MEETING:

The purpose of the Workshop was to determine the process for developing the Master Site Plan for the Greenbank Farm. The Comprehensive Plan 2007-2026, adopted by the Board on May 9, 2007, identified the Master Site Plan as one of the Port's most important projects for the immediate future. This Plan is expected to take more than one year to complete and will incorporate the input of the public to the maximum extent possible.

The public was invited to this workshop, but public input was limited to suggestions for the planning process.

Weber said she attempted to get the notice in the Whidbey News-Times, the South Whidbey Record and the Whidbey Examiner, but it was too late for the Examiner. Patton said that Justin Burnett of the Whidbey Examiner had called him and apologized for being unable to attend this meeting. His editor felt it was more important to cover the meeting of the Island County Commissioners. Patton said Nathan Whalen of the Whidbey News-Times had told him the same thing. Weber said that was completely understandable; that is a very important meeting.

Workshop schedule: Weber said the Board's Comprehensive Plan calls for the Master Site Plan process to start immediately after the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan. She said she would like to set some ground rules. The first is to limit the workshop to two hours, and the second is to plan and schedule another workshop for the following week or two weeks if at all possible. Weber said that would give the Board time to absorb what was discussed at this first workshop. She is looking at this workshop as a no decisions, some information sharing and some fact finding session. After this meeting, the Minutes can be given to Commissioner McDonald for her to study. Executive Director Jim Patton said at this time the Board is working on the budget for 2008 as well. He said the Board is legally responsible to review and approve the preliminary budget at the next regular meeting on September 12th. The Board will also have to schedule a special meeting on October 2nd to consider and adopt the final budget. Because of all the budget activity, Patton asked the Board to consider scheduling the second workshop on the Master Site Plan for some time after October 2nd. Weber said to limit additional meetings, perhaps the workshop could also be held on October 2nd, but in the afternoon or evening. She said if possible it would be most convenient for their constituents if the workshop was held in the evening so they could attend, and suggested 5:00 p.m. Michael Stansbury, GFMG, asked if it would be good to have a little break between the intense budget activity and the workshop. Bryson said he doesn't think having both meetings on the same day would be good. Weber said she didn't know why not. Bryson said some of them had other things scheduled and Tuesdays were especially busy for him. Weber said she had made herself available for the previous two weeks for this meeting and had cancelled quite a few things. She said this was a priority that the Board needed to take care of and they need to get this scheduled. Weber asked Bryson to tell her when he was available. Bryson said he was pretty much available any day other than that day for two meetings. He is available for the special meeting for the budget approval, but has other things scheduled both before and after that meeting. Weber said she understands and that she just wants the Board to get this done so they can get it to the press and make the public aware of what is happening. Bryson said he could do an evening meeting any other day that week. Weber said that Thursday, October 4th, would be better for her because several interested parties are Lions Club members whose meetings are held on Wednesday nights. Bryson said Thursday should work for him. Weber said they would tentatively schedule the 2nd workshop for Thursday, Oct. 4th, at 5 p.m. and they would see if that date worked for McDonald. Patton asked if the workshop could be at the same location (the Board Room of Whidbey General Hospital), and the Board agreed. Weber asked Patton to contact McDonald about the 2nd workshop schedule and remind her of the special meeting for the budget and he agreed he would do so.

Commissioners' recommendations of volunteers: Weber said she would like each of the Commissioners to begin thinking of names of individuals that they would like to appoint as volunteers for the different committee functions.

Board discussion regarding selection of the Coordinator for the Master Site Plan (MSP): Weber said she had come up with several names, but she had not contacted any of them. She asked Patton if he had contacted the individual whose name she had shared with him and Patton said that he had. Weber asked if a ball park estimate of the cost for the position had been determined, and she noted that, per the Comp Plan, the Board had 18 months to finalization and they would need to know what was affordable.

Weber asked Patton to share the information he had at this time. Patton said it seemed the logical place to begin looking for the Master Site Plan Coordinator would be the group of eight Comprehensive Plan advisors. Five of them have full time jobs or are otherwise not available or not suited. The remaining three are Rob Harbor, Mike Diamanti and Lindy Kortus. Patton asked each one of them if they would consider taking on the role of Master Site Plan Coordinator and what they would expect for compensation. Harbor and Kortus each responded that they were not prepared to take this on. Diamanti sent a page and a half of his appreciation of the job, including 15-month duration period of Oct. 1, 2007 - December 31, 2008, and a graduated fee schedule that would be lower for the first few months and increase when the organization was in full swing. Weber said that after her brainstorming session with Patton, she had thought of another individual but she has not contacted that person either. Weber said they could also advertise the position and see what prospects came forward through that before making a decision. New Candidate: Patton said he had just gotten a new name, that of Donna Keeler, who has returned from Brazil. He said he would prefer to ask her to consider doing the job of Asset Inventory. As written in the Comp Plan, the procedure is to begin with an Asset Inventory which is essentially a description of the Greenbank Farm and its various resources. It is a clinical rather than an emotional approach, and the idea of having the fresh eyes of a person that is not affiliated with the Port or the Greenbank Farm Management Group in any way and did not participate in the development of the Comprehensive Plan has some appeal. Patton said he had not yet approached Keeler because he only heard of her availability today. He said that in his view there are not a lot of individuals on the Island with the skills and ability to complete the inventory in a reasonable period of time, in a credible way and for a reasonable cost. Patton said he was open to suggestions. He said he had approached Sarah Schmidt, who has a long history of consulting and similar work and who Patton has worked with before on the Environmental Health Assessment Team. Schmidt agreed to take a copy of the Comp Plan to review and said she would get back to him. Patton said he intends to give Keeler the same opportunity. Weber said the other person she had come up with was Sheila Byler. Weber said it was good that they had generated a list of so many people with skills in the area. She said Baenen and Stansbury might have some ideas as well. GFMG comments: Stansbury said he had some comments and thoughts to share. One was that they have started the process of trying to canvass people who are currently or have historically been active at the Farm to generate names. Stansbury asked the Board if the GFMG should direct any suggestions they have to Patton, who would then contact the individuals if they seemed reasonable. Weber agreed and added that is what the Board does. Patton said he would contact those suggested. Stansbury thinks the GFMG may have some useful suggestions and by pooling all of the suggestions, there will probably be a good deal of overlap with names. He said it's probably good that the next workshop will be on October 4th because that will give the GFMG time to do their work, getting the information to Patton and go through the personnel element.

Baenen asked if it was imperative that both the Asset Inventory person and the Coordinator be accepted at this point, because the Plan says the first thing to be done is the inventory. He said Schmidt was an excellent suggestion; he is familiar with her work and he would endorse her if this was an endorsement situation. If the selection of an inventory person is the first step and the Board can do that first, Baenen said it might be better to get that taken care of up front and then have a little more time to gather input, etc. regarding who will do the assemblage of the information and the compilation of the actual report.

Advertising for the Master Site Plan Coordinator: Baenen recommended following Weber's earlier suggestion to advertise for the position of Master Site Plan Coordinator. He said the Farm is a very public body and the Master Site Plan is a very public project. Baenen said that although the property being looked at is the holding of the Port of Coupeville and is leased to the Greenbank Farm Management Group, it is in effect an Island County-wide treasure and piece of property. He said by running at least one advertisement, public criticism could be avoided. Baenen said the Board does have the time and is not under pressure. He said the Board could begin the process and take care of Step 1 (Asset Inventory person) and then Weber said she knows all of the individuals named this evening and their qualifications, but they may not be interested and there may well be someone else out there that the Board doesn't know about so she said she was all for making it public and advertising the position. Patton asked if that could be put in the form of a motion for him to act upon and initiate advertising immediately. Weber said no decisions were to be made tonight as discussed earlier and decisions are to be made at the Port's regular meeting next week. Patton said another decision on this subject would not be made until October 4th at the second workshop meeting, because the Board had not planned on discussing this subject at the regular meeting. Weber said the topic of advertising the position could be added to the agenda for the regular meeting on September 12th. Weber asked if the position to be advertised was for the Asset Inventory person, and Patton said he was referring to the position of Master Site Plan Coordinator. Baenen and Stansbury agreed that the Coordinator was the position that needed to be advertised and not the Asset Inventory person. Patton said the inventory person or mechanic would prepare the common document that will be used and referred to by each of the committees. That person's job would be over before Christmas.

Role of the MSP Coordinator: Patton said the more sensitive job is that of the Master Site Plan Coordinator or ringmaster, who would be responsible for coordinating the different focus groups (agriculture, recreation, commercial, etc.). The Coordinator would be attending one of those meetings every week for a year. He/she would have to take all that input, integrate the information and provide reports to the Board. Baenen said if they hire the inventory person first and take some time before hiring the Coordinator the Board will not have a double expenditure. He said if they do it differently, they would hire two people now and the Coordinator would not be able to start doing his/her job until the person conducting the inventory was done. The Coordinator would be getting paid but wouldn't have any work to do. Patton said that was one thing he found interesting in Diamanti's proposal. The Coordinator's work prior to the end of this year would be to identify the members of the several focus groups, determine what information they required, and work out a schedule. That would be a lot of work, but it is not as much work as will be required once the committee meetings begin and the Coordinator attends each of those meetings and compiles all the information from all the groups.

Skills of the Coordinator: Stansbury asked what characteristics would be emphasized in the potential candidate: Their administrative ability? Their familiarity with planning? Their familiarity with land use or land development? He asked what the Commissioners think of when considering the individual for this job. Weber said a land use planner. Patton and Bryson said all of the above and Bryson added that the administrative portion is very high on this level because of the development that has to occur, but all of the factors have to come into it. Stansbury asked if, for example, a candidate had limited land use experience but proven administrative ability, would that candidate be more likely to get the job than someone who had a lot of land use experience but didn't have experience in managing people. Stansbury said he is looking at what the relative weights are for the ideal person. Weber said it would depend on all of the qualifications of the individual, and she would have to look at the total package. Bryson said although administrative skill is high on the list because of the coordination required, by no means is it a single, most outstanding quality. Weber said the Board needed the individual to have all of those qualities. Patton said he had observed Laura Blankenship marshal 8 individuals, each with special skills and knowledge, and she was able to extract their views and have the group arrive at a consensus. She was much like the conductor of a band, not playing any instrument herself. Patton said therefore the individual they are looking for will not come in with his/her own agenda and/or conceptions of the focus groups' report results. He said the Coordinator would be expected to create an environment conducive for group members' discussions, schedule the time and location of meetings, etc. Stansbury said Patton had described a facilitator talent and Patton agreed with that term, and said that would be the strongest element in the composition of the individual they are looking for - a demonstrated, proven facilitator.

Selection of members of the focus groups: Patton said the Board will tell the Coordinator what they want to get out of this process, and the Coordinator will help identify those people who could contribute, and then the Board, Patton and the GFMG would use that information to select the focus group members. Baenen said the Board would definitely want the Coordinator on board before the inventory person's job was completed. The Coordinator will have to be involved in the selection process of the focus groups. Baenen asked how the committees would be populated. He wondered if it would be individual appointments or if there is the possibility of a public meeting or two to gather more possibilities. Baenen said if public meetings were held and individuals could volunteer to serve and share their qualifications, the Coordinator could begin by looking at the possible member lists created at the public meetings. Baenen said that nothing precludes a Port Commissioner or a GFMG board member from adding names to the list, but a public hearing would provide a bigger and better pool, providing a better product in the end.

Pace of selection: Baenen urged caution as they proceed and Patton agreed they should be careful to not move too fast. Patton proposed that ideally, from a budget point of view, the work of the focus group would start early in January, 2008. That means the selection of those individuals would occur in the next 3 months. Patton asked if that was in line with Baenen's thinking. Baenen said to suppose the following: The inventory person begins his/her work on October 1st. In mid-November, the Board will have selected the Master Site Plan Coordinator, who would then begin the process of public hearings and selection of the people who will be on the committees and who will begin working in January, 2008. Baenen said he deferred to Stansbury, who would probably defer to Patton as to what the term immediate in the Comprehensive Plan means. Baenen asked if immediate means when the committees have been formed or does it begin immediately when someone is hired to do the inventory. Patton said tonight's meeting is the beginning. Stansbury said there is an 18-monh marker, and asked if the 18 months starts today or does it start after the Board does all the preliminary work and has decided on the process. Patton said there isn't anything sacred about 18 months, but when discussing funding process, he proposes a 12-month effort beginning in January, 2008 and hopefully ending in December. If it turns out that publication, etc. doesn't occur until after that, it would then be in the 2009 budget, but he hopes all the interactive work of the focus groups, transcriptions and integration could be conducted within 12 months. Stansbury agreed with Patton and said if they can get a process and a structure in place, then they should start driving. He thinks a January beginning makes sense.

Budget limits: Baenen agreed with Patton and Stansbury, and pointed out that the Board is working with the tail end of their budget and anybody hired would be in this year's budget. He said it is easier to begin the planning process in a new year. Weber and Bryson agreed, and Weber said their budget prohibited them from starting right away. She said January is when the Board starts a new year for budget allocation, and she doesn't see a whole lot of wiggle room in this year's remaining budget. Patton agreed and said that, because he needed numbers for the 2008 budget as early as September 12th, he would continue scoping the compensation limits for the positions. Weber said Diamanti's proposed compensation was lower than she expected. Baenen agreed it was very low.

Selection process: Stansbury asked what process would the Board use for the selection of the Coordinator. He asked if they would take the list of names and cull it down to a short list or if they would have interviews. Bryson said one of the reasons for tonight's meeting was to discuss what the process should be. Patton said that in the advertisement, the Board can list the criteria for selection. The Board will need to consider when enough is enough in gathering candidates for the position, and a meeting in mid-November to discuss the 4 or 5 candidates would make sense to him. Patton said that meeting would not necessarily be a public meeting. The person selected would then help with the selection of members for the various focus groups.

Selection of focus group members: Weber said that several potential group members had contacted her and she was sure the other Commissioners, Patton, and the GFMG board members have other names as well. Baenen said that collection of names does not preclude going to the public and Weber agreed. Baenen said by having public meetings, the Board would be giving an open promise to the public that they will have their input. Stansbury said it is really important that there is a public perception of a fair chance for people to be considered as members of the focus groups. Bryson agreed and said the public meetings would help avoid a lot of conflict later. Weber also agreed and said they should place an article in the newspaper explaining they were looking for volunteers, as the Island County Board of Commissioners has done previously. Patton said, with the Board's permission, he could telephone Nathan Whalen and Justin Burnett and let them know that the Board, although not making any decisions, had discussed placing the ads, etc. Weber said that the no decisions rule about tonight's meeting was an effort to be totally fair since McDonald was unable to attend. Weber said she didn't think McDonald would have any problem if Patton was interviewed by the local reporters and let the newspapers know the Board was looking for volunteers to serve on the focus groups.

Caution: Baenen said he would like to put in a word of caution based on his involvement with different boards throughout the years. He said the poorest tactic they could use would be to advertise for volunteers without giving specifics, because generally the individuals who respond just want to be a part of a process and do not want to be part of a result. Such individuals frequently just want to be on the committee just so they can put it on their resume or just have it known that they were on the committee. That type of individual may not have any qualifications or special area of interest. Baenen said he liked the idea of a news article that states the Port is looking for Island County citizens that are willing to serve and let them contact the Board. The article could also inform the public of the public forums to be held regarding the procedures, the descriptions of each committees and what kind of expertise is being sought. Baenen said that way, the people coming forward will be ones who have a definite interest and are committed to the project. Weber agreed and said that people that serve on committees and boards aren't there to keep the seat warm, they are there to work.

Public meeting: Stansbury asked if it would be possible to construct a broad public funnel to start the process in terms of finding people and eliciting their comments. He said the Bayview group had an open-ended public meeting that invited people to share their ideas about what their facility should be. He suggests the Port have a similar public meeting that would allow people to express their ideas about the Greenbank Farm and would also be an opportunity to identify people who have the interest, energy and excitement to serve on a focus group. The public meeting would provide a broader public funnel and could produce more names than just those that the GFMG and the Board can come up with. Stansbury cautioned that such a meeting has to be very well planned or they can be chaotic and dysfunctional.

Town Hall Meeting: Patton said he had prepared and presented briefings on the Comprehensive Plan, and he suggested the Port of Coupeville hold a Town Hall Meeting at the Greenbank Progressive Club with a 20-minute briefing on the desired MSP. He said the briefing would include graphics because it is much better to present it visually than to just have people read the Comprehensive Plan. The briefing would explain the context of the Plan and the details of the Port's commitment to completing the objective in the Comprehensive Plan. Patton said the presentation would provide the timeframe for the process as well as the specific details of the composition of each of the focus groups. He said the attendance and the reactions at the previous briefings held at the Greenbank Progressive Club were exceptional and very useful. Patton noted it is especially important to advertise the meeting adequately beforehand. He suggested doing the full court press with radio ads, interviews, bulletin boards, etc. as the Board did for the previous meetings.

Invitations to the meeting: Baenen said that the committee working on Greenbank Farm's 10th Anniversary celebration has researched the history of the Farm and has a list of 100 or more names of individuals with a definite interest in the Greenbank Farm. The committee has contacted those individuals and as many as 30 of them have attended the planning meetings. Baenen offered that list to the Board and suggested that those individuals especially should receive invitations to the public meeting. Weber said what Baenen proposed was actually part of the Comprehensive Plan in paragraph D. on page 50: Invite interested and knowledgeable citizens and/or community organization's representatives to participate in focus groups for individual plan components. This would be representing a mix of District citizens, Greenbank Farm stakeholders including the Greenbank Farm Management Group Board members, staff, volunteers and subtenants and community organizations. Baenen said he was offering to make the list available to the Board and Weber said that was terrific. Stansbury said that part of fleshing out paragraph D. is the question of timing and the question of format. He said that a broad public meeting for all comers that occurs at the front end would be a feeder for the process and would happen before the process became structured and finalized.

Public participation: Stansbury said there is a real advantage to getting personnel and ideas at that stage, but additionally as the process goes on the Board will have the invitation to the public at the front end, which would enhance the Board's credibility and integrity in the process. Even if no one shows up, Stansbury said the fact that the Board had a public meeting would be a real strong public process element. Bryson said that was the whole process of the Port's Comprehensive Plan. He believed they were very diligent to ensure the public had the opportunity to participate, and so that would follow suit with the Master Site Plan. Weber said the public meeting was a really good idea and she also liked the idea of inviting those on the list as Baenen suggested.

Location: Weber suggested that since Barn A had the new heater, perhaps the meeting could be held at Greenbank Farm. Baenen agreed, but said it would be subject to scheduling. Weber said that location would be advantageous. Patton asked if any audio/visual equipment was available at the Farm as it is in the Greenbank Progressive Club (GPC). Baenen said the Farm didn't have the same equipment as the GPC and the GPC had more chairs. Patton noted the acoustics are better at the GPC, and Weber agreed. Stansbury said the GPC is a good meeting venue. Weber said she was just thinking about the advantage of being on site during the presentation, but added it depends upon the scheduling of the Barn. Weber said they needed to come up with a date, presentation, and advertising.

Announcement of the Town Hall Meeting: Baenen said one of the things the GFMG hopes will come from the 10th Anniversary is revitalized interest in the Farm. Patton wondered if they are far enough along in their thinking to make an announcement of the public briefing on the Master Site Plan at the anniversary celebration on September 23rd. Baenen said there was going to be an announcement that the process of putting a Conservation Easement on the Farm has begun. The announcement will explain that the process has many facets and is going to take a lot longer than originally anticipated, and that one of the aspects that has to be completed is a Master Site Plan for the Farm. They plan to explain the process could take up to 18 months and it is an integral part of any Conservation Easement. Weber asked if they could come up with a date even though September 23rd is not too far away. Stansbury said if they can feel comfortable that they can prepare a public meeting and can get a date, and if they can plan to use that meeting effectively it would be a good thing. He said it means they have to really focus on what kind of meeting they want, plan for it, and make sure they have a plan to use it effectively. Baenen said he was sure the GFMG could give some air time to the process at the celebration and the public would be solicited in the form of public meetings, even without naming specific dates for those meetings. Weber said it is important that the announcement regarding the Conservation Easement be extended to include something about the public hearings to be held. She said it would be to the Board's advantage if they had a date set. Stansbury said they could punctuate it with a date, but only if they are really prepared for the meeting. Patton said it didn't take that long to convert the entire Comprehensive Plan into a one-hour briefing, and now they would only be converting 4 pages into a half-hour briefing followed by public reaction. Stansbury said the real purpose isn't to tell the public what the Board and the GFMG thinks should be done, it is actually much the opposite. Weber added the purpose is to generate enthusiasm. Stansbury said advertisement would be good and suggested the GFMG could do some telephoning, etc. to make people aware of the meeting in order to have a deep and broad participation level.

Timing of the Town Hall meeting: Baenen said it is not imperative that a location for the meeting be determined right now, it could just be announced that the meeting will be held in Greenbank. Patton volunteered to check with the Greenbank Farm and the GPC as to their availability for a several hour meeting in mid-to-late October. He said he could absolutely have a briefing prepared by then, as the 2008 Budget work will be completed on October 2nd. Bryson said he didn't know if it mattered, but he would be out of the area during the last two weeks of October. Weber said it did matter because when the Board has a public meeting like that, she thinks it is important that all three commissioners be present. Stansbury said he had a commitment from October 27th to November 3rd. Patton asked if Saturday would be a good day of the week to hold the meeting. Weber said the Board had found that Saturday was a great day to hold meetings in Greenbank. Baenen said it would be hard to have it on a Saturday at the Farm because that is the most scheduled day of the week with weddings, markets, art shows, etc. Patton suggested they consider any Saturday after November 3rd and said he would check the availability of both the Farm and the GPC and report back via email. Weber noted at the previous meeting held at the GPC that many of the attendees visited the Farm after for lunch and shopping. Patton asked if the meeting should be in the morning or the afternoon, and Weber said the morning was really good for the previous meeting. Patton said he would look into 10 a.m. - Noon. Weber said that since Bryson and Stansbury had other commitments, they should look at November 10th or November 17th. Bryson said the 17th might be tough because it's close to Thanksgiving and suggested the 10th instead. Molly MacLeod-Roberts said that would be Veterans' Day weekend. Weber said the Board had previously held a public meeting at the Greenbank Farm on a long weekend over the 4th of July and had standing room only attendance. Stansbury said a lot of the Seattle contingent might be on the Island for the long Veterans' Day weekend.

Presentation of the planning guidelines established by the Comprehensive Plan: (Patton) Weber said she thought they were making good progress here. She apologized to Patton if they had veered from the Agenda and asked if there was anything they hadn't shared that he needed to present of the planning guidelines. Patton said No, that he thought this workshop had gone beautifully. He said with the help of MacLeod-Roberts he would like to turn the evening's discussion into terms of reference that the Board can approve and sign. The terms of reference would capture all that has been discussed so far about selection of personnel, duration, scheduling, and the holding of a Town Hall meeting to kick the whole thing off. Patton pointed out that Baenen had suggested having the Master Site Plan Coordinator on board by mid-November. Patton said it would be great to have the Coordinator present at the public meeting on Nov. 10th or Nov. 17th, so he/she can relate to the public reaction. The Coordinator is essentially the recruiting sergeant for the focus groups and will be at the meeting with sign up sheets for each group. Weber cautioned that they don't want the public to assume that they will absolutely be selected to serve on a committee just because they signed up. Patton said that was a very important point, and they would be sure to tell the public that at the meeting. Bryson suggested asking the public if they would like to sign up for their pool of possible focus group members. Baenen suggested asking if the individuals had the time and talent to lend to the effort and if they have specific interest or experience in one area. Weber said she liked that idea.

Briefing preparation: Patton said that turning the 4 pages from the Comprehensive Plan relating to the Master Site Plan into 20 graphics isn't difficult to do, but the difficulty lies in making certain that what is represented is an accurate representation of the Board's and the GFMG's interpretation of those 4 pages. Patton cautioned they would need to be careful to make sure the audio visual presentation matched the words in the Comprehensive Plan.

Hiring the MSP Coordinator: Weber asked if hiring the Master Site Plan Coordinator in time for that person to attend the public meeting in mid-November was doable. Patton said he thought it was doable if they launch into advertising pretty soon. Then after the budget process is completed early in October and the job has been advertised for nearly a month, the Board can then have another workshop meeting to look at all the applicants and come to some conclusions. The Coordinator could then be introduced at the public meeting on Nov. 10th or Nov. 17th. Patton said they would also be introducing the Asset Inventory person at that time. He said that would be consistent with everything they have said about the timing. Baenen encouraged the Board to recognize that the process needs to be very open and the process does need to give credit to the citizens' elected representatives who serve on the Board of the Port as well as the members of the Board of the Greenbank Farm Management Group. Baenen said it is a cooperative and joint effort from beginning to end, and Weber said, Absolutely. Baenen said when selecting who will fill the position of Coordinator, somebody from the Farm needs to be in on that type of decision. Weber agreed, and Patton added they weren't saying somebody - they were suggesting it was going to be Baenen and Stansbury. Stansbury said everybody benefits if the process and key personnel are jointly endorsed by the Port and the GFMG. Weber agreed, and said, We must be united on this. All present agreed with her statement.

Presentation of issues for Board decisions: Weber said the Board had agreed earlier in tonight's meeting that no decisions would be made this evening because of McDonald's absence.

Suggestions for the planning process: Weber said they have started the first part of the planning process with the scheduling of the Town Hall-style meeting on November 10th or 17th. It has been suggested that the announcement of that public meeting be made at the Farm during the 10th Anniversary celebration on September 23rd. Weber said she liked Baenen's idea of the sign up sheets with the announcement worded as he suggested. People willing to share their time, energy and talent would be invited to sign up and would be asked to note their special area of interest. Weber asked if anyone else had any thoughts or suggestions about the planning process other than what was already considered. Patton suggested that the Board hold off on its decision whether to hold a 2nd Town Hall-style meeting until after the 1st meeting has been held. Weber agreed because they could then evaluate the meeting itself and determine if it was worthwhile. Baenen said they might also get public feedback as whether the day of the week and/or time of day of the meeting worked. Patton said he is certain the Port will also hear from people in Coupeville that the meeting should have been held at the Coupeville Recreation Center. He said that they did hold their last briefing at both locations and Baenen said they may well decide to do that again. Weber said that was a very good point and she thinks we might need to do that.

Fee for the MSP Coordinator: Weber asked if there was anything else. Baenen said that he hoped that dollar per hour would not be the sole driving issue in selection of the Master Site Plan Coordinator. Patton said they would have to make an estimate for the 2008 Budget by next week. Baenen cautioned against underestimating the amount. Stansbury asked if the compensation for the Coordinator would be conceived of as hourly or as total piece work. Weber said that it was not done hourly before; it was a lump sum. Patton agreed but said it doesn't have to be a lump sum this time. He said for the purpose of estimating, it is conceivable he could come up with the number of hours that would be involved over the course of a year. He could then multiply that by some dollar fee and get the gross amount. If no candidate comes forward with a compensation figure close to the amount in the estimated budget, then the Board would have to forego something else in the budget. Baenen said the Board should be able to pin down pretty closely the compensation figure for the Asset Inventory specialist. That figure would fall within this year's budget. Patton said that for example, the Port has never had to turn away anyone at the fuel pier, but it is conceivable they might before the end of the year because they won't have money to pay for the fuel. Weber said they do not have a lot of wiggle room and they need to be frugal.

Environmental Resources Protection Plan: Weber asked if there was anything else. Patton said there was one procedural item. He referred to page 44 of the Comprehensive Plan and the section titled Environmental Resources Protection Plan. He said it is unclear whether the Environmental Resources Protection Plan (ERPP) should run concurrently with the work of the other focus groups, is integrated with those groups or comes afterward. Patton wanted everyone to be aware that just because the ERPP was written first on the site planning, it does not necessarily mean that it must be done first. He said it is very hard to do an ERPP unless you know what the threat to the environment is, and any threats will be determined by the other groups. Patton said he would discuss this procedural issue with the Coordinator, and perhaps the Coordinator will make a recommendation to the Board as to how the ERPP should be handled. Stansbury asked if there were two aspects to the ERPP, with one aspect dealing specifically with the geographic area of the wetlands and the other aspect dealing with how the environmental characteristics are affected by agriculture, commercial development, etc. Patton said it is not clear that it would be bifurcated in any way. He added that the Board could fill pages with anodyne statements about how much the Port loves the environment and wants to protect it, etc. and give those pages to the subgroups and just paralyze them.

Weber said they could do as the Plan says and read aloud from the site planning section: The Environmental Resources Protection Plan shall be developed in association with the Agricultural Plan to ensure a proper balance between environmental protection and agriculture use. The development and implementation of a noxious and invasive plant control plan will receive immediate priority in planning to facilitate rapid implementation of control measures. Weber said the Coordinator should share with each of the other groups the entire ERPP and the Board's concerns regarding it, and not just the agricultural group. Patton suggested one way to address it would be to have one person on each focus group charged with the environment as the environmental watchdog. All present agreed.

Concluding comments: Patton said he had nothing further to add. Bryson said he had nothing further to add, but noted that a lot of territory had been covered in this short while. Baenen said he had had more than his opportunity to speak. Stansbury said his only comment was that this had been a terrific meeting. He said it was styled as a workshop and it turned out to be a really good workshop experience. Stansbury gave his compliments to the Board. Weber thanked everyone for coming, with special thanks to MacLeod-Roberts for coming on short notice.

ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, Weber adjourned the meeting at 6:50 p.m.