Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

We can start.

Well, we can start with the Pledge of Allegiance and stuff.

Yeah. Let's just go until we have one. It ends, right?

We've just seen the whole national anthem.

Yeah, we can do.

Put it back on standby. What's that? Put it back on standby.

Yeah, put it back on standby. Manny, can you hear us?

Yes, I can hear you now.

It's 6.02.

Excuse me. Welcome to the Planning Commission meeting for August 4th, Franklin County Planning Commission. We have a commissioner. You can jump right to this part. We have a commissioner on the phone. Please confirm you have read and reviewed the packet.

I confirm I have read and reviewed the packet.

Okay, thank you, Manny. Well, planning staff, please call roll and announce whether or not we have a quorum.

Rollis? Mike Vincent?

Here.

Tommy DeRue?

Here. Here.

Here.

Okay, I will now lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, Okay, approval of agenda. Item number one has been rescheduled for the September Planning Commission, meeting per applicant's request. We will only have the two items tonight. I'll entertain a motion to approve the agenda for tonight's meeting.

So moved.

Seconded. Okay, moved by Stacey, knifed in and seconded by Joel.

Brantle.

Brantle, thank you. So approval of minutes. I'll entertain a motion to approve the minutes from July 7th, 2026 meeting. Oh, okay. All in favor of the approval of the agenda?

Aye.

All opposed, same sign. Thank you. Okay, I'll approve a motion to approve the minutes from July 7th, 2026 meeting.

So moved.

Okay, moved by Stacy, Commissioner Knifeton, and seconded by? Seconded. By Commissioner Pradle. Roll call. All in favor?

Aye. Aye.

All opposed, same sign. Okay, will staff in attendance please introduce yourselves?

Wes McCart, Director.

Alex Hall, Long Range Planner.

Jen Bellamore, Planner II.

Thank you. Okay, it is now time for the public hearing portion of our meeting. Good evening and welcome. Here are the ground rules for tonight's hearing. In-person public testimony will go first. Each person will be called upon to speak during their allotted in-person public testimony section. Please state your name for the record. To email comments received during the public hearing will be read into the record by staff after the in-person testimony section of the hearing. All comments shall be addressed to the Planning Commission and should be relevant to the application. Each speaker shall have five minutes to provide testimony and shall speak into the microphone. Please avoid repetitive comments. Please be respectful of each speaker. Avoid personal attacks or disruptive behavior. Are there any questions regarding the public hearing ground rules? Seeing none, turning for a moment to our commission members, let's keep in mind that we are prohibited by law from communicating with members of the public on the subject matter of these hearings except in these hearings. We also may not participate in a decision in which there is an appearance of conflict of interest to the average person. So let's take a minute to consider as to the matters which are before us for the hearing today, whether we had any ex parte communications, whether we have any ownership interest in the properties. Whether we have any business dealings with proponents or opponents of the matters, or whether we have business associates or immediate family who may be either benefited or harmed by decision in these matters. Are there any Commission members who have a declaration at this time regarding any of the items on the agenda? Seeing none and hearing none, is there anyone in the audience this evening who would object to any commission member hearing any of the items on the agenda? So no, let the record show there were no objections. The order of the hearing shall be as follows. Planning staff shall provide a staff report What's that? Oh, okay. Planning staff shall provide a staff report. The commission may ask questions of staff. the applicant or applicant's representative presentation, in-person public testimony, email public testimony written to the record by staff, final staff comments, if any, close the public testimony and planning commission discussion deliberation of the proposed action. Are there any procedural questions before we begin the public hearing? OK, moving to item number one. which item one is a public hearing for ZC 2026-05 slash SEPA 2026-10 RKAP LLC rezone. The proposal is to rezone a five acre parcel from RC5 to RC1. This proposed zone change is consistent with the Franklin County comprehensive plan designation as a rural shoreline development. I declare the public hearing for ZC 2026-05 slash SEPA 2026-10 to be open at 6.10 p.m. May we have staff present the staff report, please?

Good evening, commissioners. I will present ZC 2026-05, SEPA 2026-10 for the RKAP LLC rezone. This is located in 240 Larkspur Road, Pasco, Washington with a parcel number of 126190229. It is currently zoned RC5 and the property is approximately five acres. Here is the general location of the proposal. It is a rezone of a five acre parcel from RC5 to RC1. Here is the location of the parcel. The applicant submitted a rezone on behalf of the property owner for one parcel from RC5 to RC1. Parcels north of this area have already been rezoned. I will go through this quick. The two parcels in blue have already gone through a zone change with this commission, and one of them has been approved by the Board of County Commissioners. This is just north of those two areas that we just recently rezoned.

I'll add that the other one is to be in front of the commissioners on the 12th of August.

The comprehensive plan shows areas within the county that have been designated Lammards. This area is in the Columbia River West Lammard, which is the rural shoreline development Lammard. On July 20, 2026, a SEPA DNS was issued. Comments were due until the end of the day today, August 4th, 2026. We received no comments from surrounding property owners and residents within the county. Franklin County Public Works commented that an approach permit is required for access and any utility extension crossings from the county roads will be addressed at the time of application. Here are the recommended findings of fact. The proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan, since this is in the rural shoreline development LAMR type one. The effect of the proposal on the immediate vicinity will not be materially detrimental. Surrounding properties are also in the LAMR, and the surrounding properties have also been rezoned to RC1. There is merit and value to the proposal for the community as a whole. Rezoning the property to RC1 will allow these lots to be subdivided into smaller lots. Conditions will not be required to be imposed in order to mitigate any significant adverse impact for the proposal. Lastly, any concomitant agreement is not being entered into between the county and the petitioner. here is the suggested motion i move to forward zc 2026-05 sepa 2026-10 to the board of county commissioners with a positive recommendation based on the five suggested findings of fact thank you thank you does any commissioner have any questions of staff

Seeing none, hearing none. Does the applicant or applicant's representative wish to speak or give a presentation? Seeing none. In-person public testimony? None. Email public testimony? If any?

None.

None. Does staff have any final comments?

No final comments.

Okay, I will entertain a motion to close the public comment.

I move to close public comment. I second it.

Okay, so it's been moved by Commissioner Knifeton and seconded by Commissioner Pradel. All in favor? Aye. Aye. All opposed, same sign. None. Okay, so the motion has passed. The public testimony portion of public hearing ZC 2026-05 slash SEPA 2026-10 is closed. Is there any discussion from the planning commission members? Seeing none, I would entertain a motion.

Want me to do it? That's okay.

I move to forward ZC202605, SEPA2026-10 to the Board of County Commissioners with the positive recommendation based on the five suggested findings in fact.

Second.

Okay, moved by Commissioner Pradel and seconded by Commissioner Knifton. Is there any discussion? Seeing none, may we have a roll call vote, please?

Mike Vincent?

Yes.

Manny Gutierrez?

Yes.

Stacy Knifton?

Yes.

Joel Prannel?

Yes. The motion has been approved. I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing on item number one.

Move to close the public testimony on item number one.

I second it.

Okay, moved by Commissioner Knifton, seconded by Commissioner Pradle. All in favor? Aye. Aye. All opposed, same sign. Public hearing has carried and is closed. So moving right along, number two. Item number two is a public hearing for CUP 2026-03 slash SEPA 2026-09 Davidson Brothers slash Freeman Dairy Expansion. The request is to increase the maximum allowable milking cow head size from the previously approved 1000 cow head from CUP 2002-10 to 2000. The applicant is currently operating with 1300 cow head and was unaware of their noncompliance. The applicant submitted the CUP to come into compliance with the county's regulations as soon as they became aware of the issue. There are currently no immediate plans for expansion and future growth towards the maximum herd size, which will be incremental. I declare the public hearing for CUP 2026-03 slash SEPA 2026-09 to be open at 6.17 p.m. May we have staff present the staff report please?

Good evening, commissioners. I will present CUP 2026-03, CEPA 2026-09 for the Davidson Brothers Freeman Dairy Expansion. The proposal site is located at 4680 North Willouk Road, Mesa, Washington, with a parcel number of 121080106. It is currently zoned AP 20 with a comprehensive plan designation of agricultural. The property size is approximately 31.36 acres. The request is to increase the maximum allowable milking cow head size to 2,000. They were previously approved for a maximum cow head size of 1,000 and currently operating at 1,300. The CUP is also to come into compliance with county's regulations as soon as they became aware of the issue. Here is the site location. The current site has been previously approved to operate as a dairy under CUP 2002-10. The current dairy is operating with 1,300 milking cow head. There is currently a milking parlor, two manufactured homes, commodity sheds, cow shades, old milking parlor, utility sheds, and scale on site associated with the existing dairy. Approximately 16 individuals currently reside and or work at this dairy. The Franklin County Board of County Commissioners approved the CUP under Resolution 2002-340 on August 26, 2002. Condition number one of the CUP stated that this approval will allow the dairy to expand to a maximum of 1,000 mature dairy cows in the future. Prior to the approval of CUP 2002-10, the dairy was already in operation, consisting of approximately 600 mature dairy cows. The previous CUP was to allow them to expand their operations for up to 1,000 mature cow head. Historical aerial imagery shows the dairy has existed on site since around 1972. Picture on the right shows Google aerial historical aerial imagery dated July 5th, 1996. The current applicant was not aware that they were not in compliance with their existing CUP on the maximum size of their cow head limits. As soon as the applicant became aware of such, they contacted the department to get into compliance. The applicant submitted a new CUP application to come into compliance and requested an increase in their maximum cow head to 2,000 in the future. There are currently no immediate plans for expansion. Future growth towards the maximum herd size will be incremental. Franklin County Code 5.12, the right to farm, is intended to protect lawful agricultural activities on farmland from nuisance lawsuits. Agricultural activities consistent with good agricultural practices are presumed reasonable and are not a nuisance unless they substantially harm public health and safety. Compliant activities also cannot be restricted by hours or days of operation. FCC 5.12040 defines agricultural activity broadly to include noise, odors, dust or fumes, machinery operations, movement of equipment or livestock, and construction or maintenance of farm buildings and roads, including new technology. A dairy expansion to approximately 2,000 cow head would involve these listed activities and therefore falls under the presumption of reasonableness unless a substantial public health or safety impact is shown. Franklin County's odor and fly control guidelines, county resolution 2001-238, applied to this dairy expansion and were used in the application review. The guidelines recognize odor management as important, but also acknowledge that no livestock operation can be completely odor-free. Zoning should be used to minimize conflicts where possible. The focus is on reducing odor impacts where feasible, frequency, duration, and intensity, and addressing neighbor concerns. For larger dairies over 500 head, a conditional use permit is required and expansions should evaluate site conditions and manure handling practices to avoid or reduce potential problems, especially near neighbors and major roads. The applicant has submitted their odor and fly control plan that was required under their previous conditional use permit. Nutrient management plans are required under Washington's Dairy Nutrient Management Act and are approved or enforced by the Washington State Department of Agriculture. NMP objectives focus on protecting water quality, preventing contaminated wastewater discharges to surface waters, preventing contaminant migration to aquifers, and meeting Clean Water Act and other legal requirements. Plan requirements help reduce the risk of nitrate and nutrient buildup in soils through proper nutrient application rates and timing. Ecology has provided a comment to staff for the CUP and SEPA, which stated that an updated dairy nutrient management plan is needed to account for the increase in manure production. The applicant will submit an NMP to the Franklin County Conservation District for review and provide a copy to the Franklin County Planning Department. The Clean Water Act's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System program regulates the point source discharges to waters of the US through permits. Large livestock operations are regulated under the NPDES concentrated animal feeding operation or CAFO permit, which is a no discharge permit that generally prohibits discharges except under limited conditions and requires protective management practices and record keeping. As a CAFO permit condition, the applicant must submit a manure pollution prevention plan to Washington Ecology outlining practices to prevent manure or process wastewater and related pollutants from reaching surface waters. The applicant shall provide the CAFO permit and MPPP to the Franklin County Planning Department. On July 20th, 2026, a SEPA MDMS was issued by the lead agency. Comments were due on August 4th, 2026. It was posted on Ecology's website under SEPA number 202603065. Washington Department of Ecology gave their comments on July 27th, 2026 and August 3rd, 2026. Air quality program says that if there is an anaerobic gesture process at the facility, a notice of construction application may need to be submitted for air polluted emissions. For any questions related to permitting, please contact David Finley. Water Quality Program commented, no construction, excavation, or grading is expected as part of this project. If all construction-related stormwater can be retained on-site during construction and there is no discharge off-site, a construction stormwater general permit may not be required. Water Quality Program also commented back in July 27th stating that Davidson Dairy currently qualifies as a large CAFO. If there is a discharge to surface or groundwater, they need to obtain CAFO permit coverage. An assessment should be done to determine if there is leakage from the manure lagoons or moisture reaching groundwater from under the soil pads and cow pens an updated dairy nutrient management plan to account for the increase in manure production is also needed they may be there may be cumulative long-term impacts to groundwater nitrate levels from the increase in nutrient loading to surrounding area from exported manure to land application fields Prior to any expansion, this dairy operation meets the definition of a large CAFO, and if any pollutants reach surface or groundwater, they must apply for the CAFO permit. Water Resources Program commented, drinking water for stock under RCW 90.44.050 is unlimited. Any subsequent water uses associated with their operation, including wash down water and cooling water that exceed 5,000 gallons per day for industrial under RCW 90.44.050 would require water right authorization. Skibid commented on July 28th stating that there exists multiple buried drains across the site. At this time, the applicant has a permit for the milking parlor encroachment, but none of the other encroachment within those drain easements. The applicant shall do everything in their power to protect the drain system to include the exposed manholes across the site. the site effluent or waste shall not be permitted to enter the buried drain system in the event that future expansion of structures or waste lagoons the applicant shall work with the district to keep those out of the easements the district will not be held liable for any damage caused by the possible failure of the existing buried drains impacted by the dairy operation It appears that multiple manholes from the buried drain system were lowered without permission from the district. The applicant shall contact the district drainage supervisor to discuss these manholes and to submit a permit to maintain these lowered manholes. These include manholes 12, 10, and 9 of the D20-230D system. With the WB5 lateral on the southern edge of the property, every care needs to be taken to limit any release of effluent of solid waste from the dairy operation into the district facilities. Franklin County Public Works Department commented today stating that a headcount increase may cause impacts to the county road system. A traffic impact analysis shall be required to properly identify and mitigate for any potential impacts. this needs to be completed prior to closing the public hearing to allow for proper mitigation proposals to be considered therefore public works is requesting that the open record hearing be continued and a decision be postponed until such time that the tia is completed and the county road impacts mitigation measures and required road upgrades are identified. The TIA shall include county roads impacted by this increase and at a minimum include North Willouk Road adjacent to the site to the state route. They also commented that approach permits are required for all access to Franklin County roads per the county's road approach policy. And any utility extension crossing from Franklin County roads will be addressed at the time of application. The Planning and Building Department received no comments from surrounding property owners and residents within the county. These are the recommended findings of fact. The proposal is in accordance with the goals and policies, objectives, maps, and or narrative text of the comprehensive plan. The comprehensive plan land use designation is agricultural, is currently zoned AP20 pursuant to FCC 17.10.020B5, the approval of a cup is required for large-scale confined animal feeding operations the codes further set out a dairy separation standard stating that no more than two operations that are greater in size than one thousand three hundred milking cow head count shall be located within a two mile buffer. The buffer area shall be two mile radius from each operation center of primary animal confinement as defined by the Franklin Conservation District. The project complies with this standard. A dairy operation greater than 500 head count requires an approval of a conditional use permit. A feedlot operation greater in size than 1,000 requires the approval of a conditional use permit. The comprehensive plan says that the county will encourage agricultural industries in agricultural areas. The current comprehensive plan pages 94 to 98. This proposal will not adversely affect public infrastructure. Access to the proposed site will be from Malook Road. There is already existing and doesn't have immediate plans for expansion towards 2000 cow heads. I do want to reiterate that the public works is requesting for a traffic impact analysis for them to meet this findings. A proposal will be constructed, maintained, and operated to be in harmony with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity. The site location for the animal operation expansion is in an area zoned AP 20. The dairy operation has been in existence since about 1972. The general area consists of farms and animal operation. The animal operation expansion is in harmony with and is compatible with the surrounding lands, including the existing and intended character of the agricultural area. The animal operation is compatible with the use under the county comprehensive plan because it is classified agricultural With an AP 20 zoning district in the surrounding areas The farm site is not located near a rural settlement area or a designated urban growth boundary active farms are located near the proposed dairy expansion site and The location and height of the proposed structure and the site design will not discourage development of permitted uses on the property in the general vicinity or impair the value thereof if mitigated. A dairy site is located in agricultural area, not located near a rural settlement area or a designated UGA. Agricultural industry and animal operations are consistent with the uses allowed in the area and in the AP-20 zone. The height of future proposed structures are in compliance with AP 20 development standards. Mitigation is required in terms of the implementation of a dairy nutrient management plan that will help address the potential for buildup of nitrates and nutrients in the soils. The operation in connection with the proposal will not be more objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, dust, traffic, or flashing lights than would be the operation of any permitted uses within the district if mitigated. The area is zoned AP 20, which allows a wide range of agricultural activities and animal agricultural operations to occur. Their expansion is in harmony with and is compatible with surrounding lands. Mitigation is required to ensure compatibility with surrounding agricultural area to reduce impacts to neighbors Dairy nutrient management plan as enforced by the state of Washington is required a state of Washington CAFO permit is required They must comply with their odor and fly control plan and they must develop a manure pollution prevention plan as well as shielding of all the lights on the property and The proposal will not endanger the public health of safety if located and developed where proposed or in any way will become a nuisance to uses permitted in the district if mitigated. Mitigation is required in terms of requiring of a dairy nutrient management plan. This will have prevent discharge of contaminated waste water to streams, drainage ditches, or other surface waters from facility. An odor and flight control plan was submitted as part of the previous CUP. A manure pollution prevention plan shall be developed for the dairy operation. A chemical hazard communication plan was developed and submitted to Franklin County Planning Department. A CAFO general permit must be submitted to the Washington Department of Ecology. A spill prevention control and countermeasure plan shall be developed for the dairy operations. An inadvertent discovery plan has been prepared and must be implemented for the project through all phases. Franklin County's right to farm ordinance states that an agricultural activity, if consistent with good agricultural practices, is presumed to be reasonable and shall not be found to constitute a nuisance. Here are the recommended conditions from the SEPA MD&S. Best management practices to minimize dust during construction shall be used, such as watering the sites in accordance with the Franklin County's clean air and dust control ordinances. The applicant shall meet and comply with all necessary air and water quality standards required by the Department of Ecology. Compliance with these standards shall occur at all times. Stormwater shall be retained on-site during and after construction. The project shall implement a stormwater pollution prevention plan in accordance with the Washington State Department of Ecology's stormwater management guidelines Toxic or hazardous chemicals shall be managed handled used and stored in accordance with applicable federal and state laws the chemical hazard communication plan shall be followed The applicant shall comply with State of Washington's requirement for dairy operations. A manure pollution prevention plan shall be developed and submitted to the Franklin County Planning Department. A spill prevention control and countermeasure plan shall be developed and submitted to Franklin County Planning Department. The submitted odor and flight control plan shall be followed. The submitted inadvertent discovery plan shall be implemented for the project through all phases. A Franklin County grading permit must be submitted before any grading, filling, or movement of earth greater than 50 cubic yards. A Franklin County building permit must be submitted before any future construction. For the conditional use permit, they are required to comply with the requirements of the Department of Ecology, in which they are required to get a CAFO permit, and they are required to get an updated dairy nutrient management plan to account for the increase in manure production. If there is an anaerobic digester process at the facility, a notice of construction application may need to be submitted for air pollutant emissions. If all construction-related stormwater can be retained on-site during construction and there is no discharge to off-site, a construction stormwater general permit may not be required. And any subsequent uses associated with dairy operations that exceed 5,000 gallons per day would require a water right authorization. They must comply with the requirements of SCBID pertaining to their buried drain lines. that they will not be held liable for any damage caused by possible failure of the existing buried drain lines, that they need to contact the district's drainage supervisor regarding the multiple manholes on site and the WB5 lateral on the southern edge of the property must be taken care of. They must comply with the requirements of Franklin County Public Works regarding the traffic impact analysis and the requirement pertaining to approach permits and any utility extension crossing. They must comply with the requirements of the Franklin County Planning and Economic Development pertaining to outdoor lights that are required to be shielded down prohibit the Franklin County ordinance number 5-2007 as amended prohibits the accumulation of irrigation water on county roads. All structures shall comply with the standards of the currently adopted international building codes. Any deviation from the submitted plans shall be submitted to the Franklin County Planning and Economic Development Department for review. The rest of the conditions are the standard conditions for all our conditional use permits. Here is the recommended motion.

If I can interrupt that, that will not be the motion that they'll want to make based on the comments from Public Works.

That is it for my staff report.

OK, thank you. Does any commissioner have questions of staff?

Well, it looks like since they didn't do the final for the public works for road, that's the reason why we're not going forward with it.

So based on the comment from public works today that we received asking for traffic impact analysis and that has not been done. The fact that they're asking for this to be continued my suggestion is that you take any applicant or public testimony and that you Then make a motion to continue this hearing leaving the public comment period open until your September 1st meeting I

Okay. I just had one question about the manhole adjustments to the drainage system. What's the story on that?

I think that would be a question.

It sounds like they dropped it down, right? Yes. The risers on the manhole.

Yeah, I believe the applicant could answer that one. Okay.

Well, on that same matter, I worked for the district for many years. A lot of farmers will lower manholes without asking the district.

We lowered many of them when they got the notification to ask for it.

Is your mic on? It is. Sorry, I'm not up close enough. But, yeah, a lot of them get lowered, and then we have to go, hey, where'd them go?

So then SCIBID will want to look at that and approve that modification then. But... That's the question for the applicant. No more questions? Commissioners, does the applicant or...

I have a question for the applicant.

Okay, Manny.

With the conditional use submitted application on behalf of the applicant, I'm understanding that they're currently under a noncompliance but the cemento has been made for the 2,000 heads of dairy cows. Is there a specific timeline? I may have missed this. Is there a specific timeline of when that will take place?

Are you referring to getting to the 2,000 cows or increasing the herd?

Correct.

You want to come up and answer that?

So there, there is not a time to give your name. Oh, uh, Jeremy Davidson. Okay. Um, uh, represent the Davidson brothers dairy. Uh, so there is not a timeline associated with reaching the 2000 cows. Uh, and it's taken us 20 years to go up 700 head. Um, uh, I don't know if it's going to take that long again. I don't know if we'll ever even get to 2000 cows. Um, but, but to have the opportunity to grow for our children is mainly the reason.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Mr. Chairman, if I might. Manny, just to address your other concern, though, also in your beginning of your statement, the fact that the dairy is currently over the 1,000 cow limit, as long as folks are working towards compliance, we take note. I'm sorry.

Is this Wes?

Yeah, this is Wes. Um, sorry about that. Uh, but yeah, as long as, as long as folks are working towards compliance, uh, they're good to continue on with their op current operation. So just want to make that for the record.

Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that.

Okay. Does the applicant or applicants representative wish to speak or give a presentation?

Not a presentation. But no, just that mainly it's just to have a little bit of room for our kids to keep expanding. For myself, I guess, too. I'm the second generation. I hope my kids are the third generation to be there and just continue that form and continue living in Franklin County and being an active part of the county and the community there. Um, yeah, no, no, um, set timeline on, on, on, you know, increasing cows, but we've just been doing a small, small amount per year. And, um, uh, as, as we're able to, and as you know, you're able to do it with prices and everything. So, and also just that we're, you know, we're, we're open to doing everything that the county is, uh, the planning department has asked us to do.

Thank you. Any in-person public testimony? Seeing none, is there any email public testimony?

No.

Does staff have any final comments?

No final comments.

OK. I will entertain a motion to close the public comment.

Mr. Chairman, if I might, you're going to have to deviate off the script. Um, it would be my recommendation again, that you make a motion to, um, keep the public comment period open and continue this hearing until the September 1st meeting. Okay. You can do so right now.

I would make a motion to continue the, the, the public testimony portion and continue this, uh, until September of this year.

So moved. Seconded.

Okay, so it's been moved by Commissioner Knifton and seconded by Commissioner Prannel. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed, same sign. Okay, the motion has passed, well, to September.

And for clarification, that will be your September 1st meeting.

Okay. Okay, so that would be the motion then, right?

As of this point, the hearing is continued, and you're done with that piece, and you can move on in the agenda to other business.

Okay, great. So let's move on to the next item, which would be... Just a sec here, let me get squared away. Well, the next item is the last item. The next item is other business. Is other business. Okay. Other business.

So we're going to go ahead and turn this over to Millie Ann. Yeah. To start out with our presentation on the comprehensive plan.

Thank you, Director. Thank you, Commissioners. I'm Millie Ann Van Dievender. work for AHBL, and we're helping the county update your comprehensive plan and development regulations. So tonight we're gonna talk about a few elements of the comprehensive plan, and if you'll remember from last month, or maybe some other time, we call them elements. That's in the GMA vernacular wording. They're chapters. It's a big book, it's a big document. The elements are the chapters. So you may hear me use those two terms interchangeably. So tonight we're going to talk about the capital facilities element or chapter utilities parks and recreation and climate Capital facilities and utilities have always been in or at least in the last two rounds of updates have been in your comprehensive plan Parks and recreation is a new element and I'll go into why in a little bit and climate is a new element And then I'm going to present the first three and then Alex Hall will step in for climate. So just to reiterate some stuff we went over last month, there are general kind of sweeping updates to the comprehensive plan. When we first go in and look at these, we look for low-hanging fruit. We can improve grammar and word use because we don't want this to be some academic white paper that nobody understands. You want it to be readable and approachable, so that's the first step is just to try to make it so or make it better that way. We've also gone in and updated any outdated information. updated links to reference the most recent online resources. Maybe something didn't have a web page last time, now it does. We've added that. Updated maps, provided some more maps and replaced previous maps. And then the big thing that you'll see if you were here the last time, I know at least one of you was here last time, there's a proposed reorganization of the chapters to provide the goals and policies in one volume and the analysis in a second volume. And then there's been a proposed rewrite of all of the goals and policies for many reasons, including these general changes to make them more readable, approachable, more succinct, efficient. So again, just some reminder, background information. The comprehensive plan is required by fully planning counties in the state of Washington. You've had it for many, many years. It's been updated several times. I've personally been involved with two updates now. And the first step in updating your comprehensive plan is to work with the other communities, cities in your county. So the cities and counties sat down and worked on, hammered out the countywide planning policies and the Board of County Commissioners adopted those in 2025, late last year. And then the legal framework for the plan is that it is part of the Growth Management Act. It's required and there's lots of rules that we have to follow for the comprehensive plan. There's lots of information that the state requires every community to provide in their comprehensive plan. They divide it into counties and cities, thankfully, so you're not subject to some of the same rules that PASCO is subject to. And then legally you are obligated to follow those rules and to provide those rules as applicable. And then the plan's purpose is to be a roadmap basically for your future. What does Franklin County want to be over the next 20 years? And then what's that going to look like? What's that going to take to happen? So that's basically the purpose, is to give some thought to how it's going to happen. And then plan implementation strategies. We will be bringing some development codes and different code updates to you. That's how your plan gets implemented. If the comprehensive plan is the roadmap, your development standards and your zoning code, for instance, or your subdivision codes, those are like your GPS and your road signs. That's the boots on the ground. That's where the rules come into place. That's where your goals for your county get implemented and start to happen. Okay, so we'll start with the capital facilities element. So what's required from the Growth Management Act in the RCWs is that you have to have an inventory of your existing capital facilities, you have to identify all public entities that own capital facilities, and then you have to look at a forecast and provide a forecast of the future needs of capital facilities. So if you think about it as any business or perhaps a person starting out, if a person starting out has a goal in 20 years to have a good job and to have a house and maybe some kids, they start first by looking at what they have. Well, you know, I've got this much money. I could start saving for a car. That's one of my goals. Or I'm a business. I want to sell this many widgets in the future. What do I have right now? What's my inventory? And then what do I need? AND THEN WHO ELSE IS PROVIDING STUFF FOR ME? AM I STILL LIVING OFF MY PARENTS? SO BASICALLY THAT'S MY ANALOGY FOR IT. SO THERE'S A WHOLE INVENTORY INCLUDED IN THIS CHAPTER. AND I'LL GET MORE INTO THAT IN A MOMENT. YOU ALSO HAVE TO PROVIDE PROPOSED LOCATIONS AND CAPACITIES OF EXPANDED OR NEW CAPITAL FACILITIES. SO YOU CAN'T JUST SAY WE THINK WE SHOULD HAVE X NUMBER OF NEW CAPITAL FACILITIES THAT WE SHOULD HAVE THIS MANY NEW COUNTY STAFF BUILDINGS. WE SHOULD HAVE 20 OF THEM. YOU HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO PUT THOSE. DO YOU PUT THEM OVER HERE WHERE THERE'S NOT A POPULATION CENTER AND THERE ARE NO PEOPLE OR DO YOU PUT IT CLOSER? YOU HAVE TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS AND THINK ABOUT IT. AND THEN IT ALSO HAS TO INCLUDE A SIX-YEAR PLAN THAT WILL FINANCE THE CAPITAL FACILITY. SO HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PAY FOR IT? AND THAT HAS TO INCLUDE PROJECTED FUNDING CAPACITIES AND CLEARLY IDENTIFIED SOURCES OF PUBLIC MONEY. There's also a requirement to reassess the land use element if probable funding falls short and to assure that the land use capital facilities and financing are coordinated and consistent. So the Growth Management Act is saying it has to be more than just pie in the sky. You've got to root it in something. You've got to anchor it in something and have some SO IT ALL WORKS TOGETHER. SO WHAT'S INCLUDED IN THIS CHAPTER, THERE'S A FORECAST OF FUTURE NEEDS, THERE'S CAPITAL FACILITIES FUNDING, THERE'S A FACILITIES INVENTORY WITH ALL OF THE COUNTY BUILDINGS, AND THEN THERE ARE OTHER PUBLIC ENTITIES INCLUDED AND HIGHLIGHTED THROUGHOUT THE CHAPTER. So this would include information about sheriff department, fire districts, hospital district number one, emergency dispatch center, agencies and community service providers, schools, libraries, essential public facilities, et cetera. It's all mentioned in there. Tried to highlight anything. Of course, if you see something that's missing, please let us know. So county staff circulated draft copies for review by agencies and public entities. And also, Wes and staff circulated a questionnaire to the different departments to ask different departments in the county, what do you need in the future? What do you need to meet your goals in the future? What are your capital facility needs? That information has been included as well. So the elements been reorganized to better correspond to those GMA requirements for the capital facilities element. And then there was the adopted plan right now has parks and recreation information in the capital facilities element. But that's been proposed to be removed out to its own chapter just to keep it clear. And and there's been more information added to that and gone in a little more in depth with that. So we've updated some maps. These are just examples of what you can find in there, fire protection districts, school district boundaries. So proposing to add a section for hospital district number one. WE'VE ADDED A NEW CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, WHICH IS REQUIRED, AND A SECTION ON THE FUTURE NEEDS IDENTIFIED IN THAT PLAN. SO THAT'S THE PART THAT WES ASKED DEPARTMENT HEADS FOR THEIR NEEDS FOR THE FUTURE, AND IT DETAILS THAT OUT. WE'VE INCLUDED IT AS AN APPENDIX. YOU'VE GOT IT IN YOUR PACKET, A NICE CHART THAT SHOWS WHAT EACH DEPARTMENT NEEDS, WHY THEY NEED IT. how far in the future they think they're going to be able to obtain it or attain it, and then how much money it's going to cost. So that's all included in there, and then there's a description of each of those requests. It's just really nice to have that documented. It's really going to help moving forward to reach those goals. And then also proposed to expand the capital facilities funding section. So the Climate Commitment Act and County Distressed Public Facilities Fund are both provided in the chapter. There are three goals proposed. So one is to provide adequate, secure public facilities for governmental services, to ensure that the land use element, capital facilities plan element, and the financing plan within the capital facilities plan element are coordinated and consistent, and plan for potential displacement impacts and consider equity when reviewing infrastructure investments for expanded or new capital facilities. So B and C are required by the RCWs. Probably A, too. There are also 18 proposed policies that go with these goals to help drill down. OK, so we'll move on to the utilities element. So you may be asking yourself, wait, can we just talk about this? We talked about capital facilities. What's the difference? So capital facilities, that chapter's focused on planning and financing. It answers the question, what does the county own, which includes roads, maybe parks. And it ensures that development can be adequately served by public infrastructure. Utilities chapter addresses the general location, provider, and capacity of existing and proposed utilities, including water, sewer, surface water, electricity, natural gas, telecommunications, pipelines, and solid waste surface. So your capital facilities are more like your buildings. Utilities is more the infrastructure, if you want to think about it that way. So I'm not going to repeat that but you get the gist. So sometimes the capital facilities and utilities elements chapters are combined but that's more likely when the jurisdiction provides the utility. So like city of Richland provides some utilities. So there's maybe altogether. It's not that way in Franklin County so it's broken two different chapters. And county staff circulated this chapter draft copies of this for review by agencies and public entities and then we've taken that information and incorporated it in. We also did that with the capital facilities. I just forgot to say that. So there are some proposed additions. We've expanded on alternative energy section to include descriptions for wind, solar, geothermal and BESS or battery energy storage systems. And then expanded the telecommunications section to discuss improvements in the county infrastructure and service. So broadband, BFCOG has a digital equity local action plan and then satellite internet. Again, some updated maps, pipelines, select utility service area. So the proposed goals for the utilities are to maintain and coordinate utility infrastructure to support current and future development and ensure that the proposed utility projects outlined in the county's capital budget align with the goals and policies of the utilities element of the comprehensive plan. To protect and maintain current infrastructure while enhancing and hardening the utility network. support the provision of quality utility services that are reliable, efficient, accessible, and financially and environmentally sustainable, and support emerging utility technologies. And there are 12 proposed policies with this one, and those should be in your packet. Happy to take suggestions on any edits that you'd like to see to any of the goals and policies for any of the elements. Okay, parks and recreation elements. This is new. It includes an inventory of public lands. It includes information about regional parks, fishing and hunting, private parks, trails, projected needs, and funding. So county staff created a new public lands map and inventory acreage. There's an expansion of description of locks and dams in the chapter. There's an expanded section on hunting and fishing spots. It's added a description of Palouse Falls which just by the way the county is considering pursuing funding for improved access and having Having that information in your plan is a really good way to help secure that funding. It shows the potential funders that you're serious about it, that you've contemplated it, that you've put some thought into it. And then the element also establishes a level of service standard for parks. The level of service standard is five acres per 1,000 residents. And staff has mathed to figure out that there's about 361 acres per 1,000 residents. So meeting that LOS, surpassing it. So there's an updated map showing probably some of your favorite spots in green there to show those park lands or open lands. A couple of proposed goals with this one to foster recreational opportunities and open spaces for all Franklin County residents and to foster tourism consistent with the rural and agricultural character of Franklin County. And there are 15 proposed policies to drill down on those goals. And then I'll turn it over to Alex, unless.

Everyone, my name is Alex Hall. I'm the long range planner here at Franklin County. And today we'll be presenting on the, actually, do I have the control over the slides?

I can do it.

Okay.

Unless you want the clicker.

The climate change and resiliency element. And so this is our other new element that we have to do this year. As the state of Washington, our legislature has passed a bill mandating each county and city creates a climate change and resiliency element. And so next slide, please. And so this includes two sub elements. So one that's focused on resilience to natural and climate driven disasters, such as, for instance, we can all appreciate what's happening in Spokane. get to experience a lot of the smoke that's coming down our way. And so, for instance, it's about building resiliency against wildfires, flooding, drought. And I know the political nature of this element is, yeah, it was passed by a partisan vote in the legislature, but we can think of it as a way, as Millian was saying, to help us pursue funding and help our residents and farmers pursue funding the state and federal governments and other private entities make available that we can take advantage of to help meet our targets set forth in this element. The other big sub-element we have is the greenhouse gas emissions reduction sub-element. And you can see the statutory requirements for both of those sub-elements up there. Next slide. And so what is included in this sub-element, or sorry, in the climate change and resiliency element? We convened a climate policy action team which consists of county staff, other agencies such as the Conservation District, Franklin PUD, as well as local volunteer residents to help us ensure that this climate element reflects the needs and values of Franklin County. And it also included a risk and vulnerability assessment where we identified assets such as public health, our agriculture industry, our parks, and so forth, and assessing their risk and vulnerability to climate hazards such as flooding and wildfire. And we went through several discussions and exercises assessing those. And you can find a matrix associated with those exercises in your comp plan draft. WE ALSO DISCUSSED A COUNTY-WIDE GHG OR GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORY. THE BASE NUMBERS WERE PROVIDED TO US BY THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, WHICH considers the entire county, including Pasco and the other incorporated cities. However, since Pasco is required to do their own climate element, we did some calculations and excluded all of their emissions from our inventory. So we consider just the unincorporated areas, as well as the cities of Connell, Colotus, and Mesa. WE ALSO HIGHLIGHT SOME GREENHOUSE GAS AND VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED REDUCTION STRATEGIES. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. I'M GOING TO START OFF WITH SOME DISCUSSION OF CLIMATE HAZARDS. YOU CAN THINK OF THESE AS JUST NATURAL HAZARDS SUCH AS EXTREME HEAT ASSOCIATED WITH WEATHER. THIS OBVIOUSLY HAS A LOT OF PUBLIC HEALTH NEXUS AS WELL AS CAN AFFECT OUR COUNTY'S AGRICULTURAL ECONOMY. WILDFIRE AND SMOKE ESPECIALLY IS PREVALENT IN THE NORTHERN AND EASTERN PARTS OF THE COUNTY. AND WE DISCUSSED THAT IN ELEMENT TEXT AS WELL. AND DROUGHT OF COURSE IN AN AGRICULTURAL BASED COMMUNITY IS A HUGE ISSUE AND ENSURING THAT WE CAN Safeguard against that is important and as well. We have flooding and extreme participation rather And you can you can continue on to the next slide And so Touching on the second greenhouse gas inventory sub element we have AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, WE BASED OUR EMISSIONS INVENTORY OFF OF WHAT THE COMMERCE DEPARTMENT PROVIDED AND THEN DID A LITTLE ADJUSTMENT FOR PASCO. HOWEVER, ONE THING, THERE'S 11 COUNTIES THAT ARE REQUIRED TO DO THIS. WE'RE THE SMALLEST IN POPULATION AND THE ONLY ONE WHERE TRANSPORTATION EMISSIONS AREN'T THE NUMBER ONE SOURCE OF EMISSIONS. WE HAVE AGRICULTURE AS OUR NUMBER ONE SOURCE. HOWEVER, AS I'LL DISCUSS IN GREATER DETAIL LATER, THE STATE DOES ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WE HAVE LESS CONTROL OVER REDUCING THOSE EMISSIONS AND SO WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO STRIVE THROUGH A VOLUNTARY PROCESS SIMILAR TO OUR VOLUNTARY STEWARDSHIP PROGRAM KIND OF ENSURING THAT HELPING LOCAL FARMERS GET FUNDING FOR THINGS SUCH AS METHANE DIGESTERS AND OTHER SORT OF capture carbon capture methane capture technologies and and so again just kind of highlighting that this is a mechanism to help people get funding and not to regulate them even more and you can continue on to the next slide um and another thing i'm a little delayed here on my computer so i have to look up But yeah, so the one thing that the Department of Commerce has sort of overlooked in their calculations is the real carbon sequestration benefits of agriculture. And you can look at this chart here. We got from, I forgot the source, but the US Geological Survey. And it shows that we, carbon sequestration in Agriculture can sequester 7.1 billion metric tons. This is nationwide statistics. And a lot of our crops that we grow out here, corn, alfalfa, are particularly beneficial in carbon sequestration. And so just to highlight, this is one thing that the state has kind of overlooked in their analysis and that we have kind of emphasized that agriculture, when coupled with sustainable practices that the conservation district is highlighting can really help us reach these goals. And so as I mentioned before, there's core emissions and non-core emissions. So this kind of gets into the weeds a little bit. But core emissions are emission sources that the state acknowledges that we have more control over so this can be residential commercial electricity natural gas use as well as on-road vehicle emissions and then and so we've designed policies to specifically reduce the greenhouse gas emissions in those areas. And then we also have non-core emissions, which, as I mentioned before, is agriculture. And we are really hoping to approach that as more of a voluntary stewardship approach. And another major requirement of the The comprehensive plan's climate element is that we have to set carbon reduction targets. Let's see.

I'm seeing a different slide here on my screen.

OK, there we go. And so we have about 71%. So the state in their carbon estimates has projected three scenarios. So one scenario is the business as usual scenario by 2050 if the IF BASICALLY NO REGULATIONS ARE PUT IN PLACE, THEN WE WILL INCREASE BY ROUGHLY 32% BY 2050. AND THEN THERE'S THE STATE AND FEDERAL SCENARIO, WHICH ISN'T AS IMPORTANT. AND THEN WE HAVE THE LOCAL ACTION SCENARIO, WHICH IS JURISDICTIONS, FRANKLIN COUNTY TAKE ACTION IN HELPING REDUCE OUR EMISSIONS. 71% SEEMS HIGH, BUT FOR A LOT OF JURISDICTIONS AROUND THE STATE 95%, AND SO WE JUST USED THE SCENARIO THAT'S BACKED KIND OF BY THEIR CALCULATIONS AND ESTIMATES AND ANALYSIS, AND WE REALLY TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION POTENTIAL SCENARIOS THAT COULD HAPPEN LATER ON IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE AND HOW TO BEST APPROACH THAT. SO NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. Okay, and so we have, as I mentioned, we have our resilience element, which has three goals, and those goals are tied to the three subsections of state law outlining certain requirements. And so I can read those off. Let's see. YOU CAN ALL READ THEM. IF YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO MOVE ON, I CAN MOVE ON. WE CAN READ THEM OVER HERE. GREAT.

I CAN READ THEM FOR YOU. PROTECT NEW AND EXISTING BUILDINGS, INFRASTRUCTURE, NATURAL RESOURCES, CULTURAL RESOURCES AND ECOSYSTEMS FROM THE NEGATIVE EFFECTS OF CLIMATE HAZARDS AND OTHER TYPES OF EXTREME WEATHER. Protect and enhance the resiliency of the local economy, including agricultural activities, to extreme weather and other climate hazards. Protect the health and well-being of all county residents from the impacts of climate hazards. And there are 27 proposed policies that go with that. So that was the resiliency, right? This is the GHG reduction. So three goals with that. Two, equitably reduce emissions and sequester carbon by voluntary measures throughout the county. Support agricultural practices that sequester carbon. And reduce vehicle miles traveled throughout the county. 14 proposed policies that go with that.

AGAIN, THE LIST OF POLICIES IS IN YOUR MEETING PACKET, AND WE'RE HAPPY TO DISCUSS ANY OF THOSE WITH YOU.

SO I'M GOING TO ADD ONE LITTLE THING THERE TO THE POLICIES THAT ARE IN BOTH OF THOSE SECTIONS. SO WE HAVE GONE THROUGH AND DONE THE WORK TO ALSO HAVE POLICIES, IDENTIFY THE POLICIES THAT ARE RELATED TO CLIMATE ELEMENT IN OTHER ELEMENTS. It's a little hard when everything works together to separate it into separate sections. So I think we were using little trees, little green trees or a symbol like that to point out in other sections how those policies were also supporting our climate element. So we're not just relying on this to meet the state mandate where we have policies throughout the entire comp plan that are proposed to do that.

Kind of strange how the state is the one that's implementing it to us fully, even though we've been doing it for years for them, for ourself and to have a plan, but then to have it where they're going in the hole faster than us ever, ever. I mean, they're so much in the negative and we got to make sure that we keep it in the budget. It doesn't make any sense with them doing what they're doing, but they need to learn how to cut back.

And then if you have any questions.

I got a question. What's the concept of sequestered carbon from an agricultural standpoint? What exactly does that mean and how do we get there?

So the state really didn't, Commerce generally didn't talk too much about the ways that agriculture looks at holistically. Some of what I've heard is that ag, you sequester some carbon in, let's say alfalfa, you're growing alfalfa, you're sequestering some carbon, you cut off the crop, you sell the crop to somebody that's feeding it to their animals, gets digested, that carbon's released back into the atmosphere again through different processes. You till the soil, you lose some of that carbon back out through natural processes of tillage. This is where the no-till drills and stuff actually do help sequester more carbon than they actually produce. That's one mechanism. But probably the best example that I've used is thinking of the dairy proposals that we have with the methane digesters. You know, the methane digesters, methane is, I believe, like 20 times more powerful than carbon dioxide, some number like that. So for every bit of, you know... type methane gas that we can sequester, that's just that much more carbon equivalents that we end up getting credit for. So if you put a methane digester in there, you're literally taking that methane and turn it into useful products and sequestering it to where it can be used for different processes.

But by not tilling the soil, you sequester carbon.

Yes. Yes. Okay. So it's – and I think that's why the state considers it a non-core emissions. You know, we mentioned in one of our policies in the comprehensive plan, we actually – encourage the development of the next phase of the Columbia River Basin project. Let's get the dry land irrigated. And when we were on the phone with the gal from Ecology, she mentioned the fact that, well, you'll be increasing your carbon footprint if you do that. And, you know, it's like, so I asked her, well, how, what are you looking at that would do that? And she says, well, you know, if you've got to pump that water up, all the pumps are, you know, using oil for lubrication and, you know, they could be using motors or some kind of an energy to... that produces carbon to pump that water out there. Um, you know, so it's like, well, a lot of the power we're using is, is hydropower. Well, hydropower puts out, you know, the dams put out, they have a carbon footprint too. It's like, well, yeah, but at the end of the day, for those guys that are out there and gals that are out there, you know, dry land, predominantly wheat, um, Now, if I can rotate three crops through in a year, think of how much more carbon I can sequester. So, you know, your input's going to be there. I'm not going to argue that, but your sequestration part of the equation is going to drastically increase over the dry land farming that's out there now. So we actually have a net benefit by getting that project done and getting more irrigation out on the ground.

How does our carbon footprint compare with others of a more industrial type of a situation?

So a lot of the, like Alex mentioned, a lot of the other counties are dealing with vehicle miles traveled is our biggest thing. And in our thought process and trying to come up with policies that fit Franklin County, yes, we concentrated on ag quite a bit in our thinking, but we tried to think as broadly as we can And again, the voluntary approach is what we're trying to take. Well, some of those industries that are producing that carbon output, think of like your Lamb Weston, not to pick on any one particular industry, but they're processing those potatoes and they're doing that work. There are mechanisms that industry can use that would help capture some of that carbon and sequester it to reduce their carbon footprint. And part of what we tried to do in the policies, again, is lay the foundation so that they would be eligible to receive some of the Climate Commitment Act dollars to help implement those practices and or machinery that would help them cut their overall carbon footprint.

So the funding is all about sequestering the carbon?

Sequestering or just flat reducing. I mean, if you think about, so when we thought about vehicle miles traveled, one of the things we thought about is, you know, think about your residents that are up there by Colotus. You want to go to the grocery store, where do you go? You know, your closest place to find any kind of market is Connell, and you're probably going further than that. So, you know, you talk about some of the benefits for equity. Well, what about our food deserts? Well, if we can help put food in different locations for these folks to be able to buy, they're not having to drive across the county to get their food. So we're killing two birds with one stone. We're helping the equity equation, but we're also helping reduce that carbon footprint by them not having to drive to get to the store.

How would you fund that? Make a county grocery store? That's part of your capital budget.

You were talking about that.

Well, we're not talking about putting government stores in. Yeah, we don't want to do that.

No. So I guess to your point, one example could be, so Millian was talking about the comprehensive plan is like a roadmap, and then our development regulations are the individual routes along that map. And so one potential thing we could allow, have more... LENIENT REGULATIONS TO ALLOW MOBILE GROCERY STORES THAT MAYBE GO AROUND RURAL COMMUNITIES. I HAVE HEARD OF THAT AS ONE METHOD.

OR SIMPLY ZONING TO ALLOW FOR COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES THAT ARE YOUR RESTAURANTS, YOUR MARKETS, YOUR THINGS THAT YOU NEED. A lot of times what you find is that in these small communities or around these small communities in the urban growth areas around them, they don't have enough available land for some of those commercial activities. So we've kind of looked at that as we're talking about the zoning and we're talking about the use tables and what can go there to allow for those types of things to go in to help You know because land use is one of those core things that we have control over so I By trying to zone properly and put use tables in the proper mechanism so we can have those things closer to where people really need to be, we actually reduce the vehicle miles traveled.

Yeah, like when you had mentioned earlier about where someone's growing hay and then it goes off to the cattle and then it's producing more. Well, you can't. I mean, you can't piece it all together and say, well, that guy didn't produce any, you know, less carbon. I mean, one guy's doing the less carbon, one guy's doing more. It's all a trade no matter what you do because everything that changes is going to cost no matter where it's at.

Right, right. And, you know, it's... Again, we've tried to think about how can we help support the community as a whole to reduce their carbon footprint and get benefits from the other side of the equation. And some of that zoning, you know, we've tried to simplify some of that so it allows a little more development in certain areas, but also restricts some development in other areas where it would make no sense to, I mean, you wouldn't want to put a Costco in the you know, in Mesa, because then I'd have everybody from Pasco going to Mesa to go shopping, right? It doesn't make sense, but if we were to put one, you know, if we were to allow one to go in the urban growth area, you know, here in Pasco area, you know, you've got your larger population that's not having to drive a long way. Maybe that's a poor example, but it is an example of that.

Well, like doing a less carbon footprint for us would be, well, we just do $100 a year and all our groceries are delivered, but then someone else is doing the carbon then. You did less, but they may be doing it in multiple in the one car, though, too. So it actually could be less.

So one of the things the state did require us in the carbon element to think about is that we can't, In our effort to try and reduce our carbon footprint, we could not just shift it to another county, right? Another area. Some of that's going to happen natural. I mean, you get dairies that move from somewhere else to here. You know, that carbon footprint's coming with them. with those cows being transferred to the methane piece of that equation. But it also balances out in the big picture.

So I just see the only way to reduce the carbon emissions is everybody has to slow down and not do as much and only go once every month or two to certain things. I mean, that's the only way you can really reduction it because everybody needs to work. Everybody needs to go. Everybody needs to farm. I mean, all them things are going to keep moving. You can't stop them or otherwise you have no growth. Because if like you mentioned what the lady spoke to you about, well, they're pumping water from the Grand Coulee and pumping in Banks Lake and doing all that. It's all costing carbon emissions. But if you don't do anything, the whole place would die.

So, again, I think, Commissioner, I think you bring up a good point. When we were developing these policies, and we don't... I mean, you sit in there in a room and we're talking about them and we're trying to come up with, you know, what helps us get these policies put forward. You're really, you're concentrating the different elements that you're doing at the same time, but you are thinking about how does this work as a whole. So, again, the comp plan, even though we have other chapters, You know, the chapters are meant to be a way to help divide things up. It's a little hard to tackle the whole thing at once, but they do all work together. So, you know, when you're doing policies in one section, you need to be thinking that you're not creating a problem in another section of the comp plan. And the utilities element, one of the things we tried to think about and Millian mentioned was the emerging energy. It's a wide open field right now. We've got Battery storage projects, I'd never even heard of a battery storage project. And we've got one coming and another one on the horizon. You know, you hear about the small modular nuclear out of Hanford. Being right here, they're testing it. You hear quite a bit about that. Well, what about the micronuclear? You know, so some of those things, we try to make the policies broad enough to encompass all of that. And then when we get to the actual development regulations where the rubber meets the road, we try and put the appropriate sideboards around it for protecting the environment and people and allowing for that economic opportunities because that's part of the economic element. is to make sure that we have good jobs and growth and things like that. So as you're reading the different pieces, just remember you haven't gotten them all presented to you yet, and we are thinking about all those other sections as we're trying to craft these. And if we've missed the mark, that's your job. Tell us. If there's something we missed, we'd love to hear it.

There'll always be some that are kind of like, oh, why are they thinking this? But that's our state pushing it, though. You've got to realize that if it was just run by, you could say, Republicans or ones that are conservative, you wouldn't have all that shoved down our throat in the state of Washington.

Well, the laws are there. I know. We have to follow them, and we have, in my opinion, done the best we can to make sure that they fit the flavor of Franklin County, and that is... uh our ability under the growth management act to do that so um and so again if you if you read something that you um think needs to be tweaked or something we missed that needs to be added or something that needs to be deleted in the policies um you know by all means you know you you guys are the ones that are going to help guide this process um you know the commissioners will make the ultimate decision but um The public and public testimony and your guidance here in the commission will help make sure that happens.

Well, and I would just add to that. We had a discussion a few months ago and we talked to you about public input and we did a survey and there were questions about, you know, why was the turnout so low? And to that, I would remind you to add on to what Wes just said. You are ambassadors for the county, and this will come to a public hearing. So you'll get it at a public hearing, and then the Board of County Commissioners will also, in order to adopt it. And so it's part of your job to let everybody know, to get it out to the public so that they can come and give input on it.

We'll still obey the law. I mean, we're going to try to meet the law. We just want to make sure that we don't get implemented so many things that it just reduces the residents to where we're burdened by even more county problems. I mean, because that can happen when you add so many different things to the aspect of this.

So please remember that the comp plan is meant to be a goal and policy document that guides the implementation of the development regulations. So it is meant to be a little higher level. So I like to remind people that, you know, and I've used this for years, Think of your comprehensive plan as your, basically it's your county constitution for land use. That's a good way to think about it. You know, how much do you want to put in the constitution? You want enough, but you don't want to overdo it, right? And then when we get to the development regulations, that's actual law that's implementing the intent of the Constitution as it pertains to land use. Mm-hmm.

Hey, I wonder how this, not to change the subject, but as we get into this comp plan update, as far as the future with these data centers coming into town, the county's reaction to that, I've seen Pasco, they put up the roadblock and moratorium there at Richland, can't do that because they've already committed to a fertilizer company. But I'm curious, because that is the future.

So we actually talked about that. I attend on behalf of Commissioner Didier, the Eastern Washington Council of Governments that I've been involved in for well over 20 years, has commissioners from all over Eastern Washington. And one of the pieces of conversation that come up was data centers. And what I'll tell you is there's a lot of misinformation out there about data centers. If you think, and this is not coming from me, this is coming from the discussion that we had. The race for AI is definitely out there. And if you think about it as a space race, we needed to beat the Russians to the moon and get a handle on space. And we were successful in that. And AI with China is somewhat the same. And there's a lot of, through social media, a lot of misinformation. There's been a lot of learning curve. The first data centers that came in, the typical, they came in, they had plenty of water, they used the water for cooling, it kind of went through their system one time and then back out. comes in cool, goes out hot, not necessarily the best thing in the world, right? Most of the day centers now, yes, they'll use that big gulp of water to fill them up, but once they're there, they're a closed-loop system, so they're using very, very little water. I know You know, as part of the electricity, even President Trump had just signed an executive order basically saying any large users of energy in the AI world needed to bring that energy with them so they didn't raise the rate of the electricity local community uh... that's already in there so you know we need start talking about you know this micro nuclear or battery storage these are all technologies that these companies are doing uh... uh... There's a proposal in, I think it's currently in Grant County right now, where they're bringing all their own power and the water consumption that they have is extremely little. I mean, like I said, it's going to take a little bit to get the the system filled but once it's filled being a closed loop system there's very little water that they actually use no more than what you'd say would come from you know kind of an an average office type business well as you so my point is that as you negotiate with these data centers uh you build them into the fabric of the

you know, the infrastructure of the community. You know, as far as the, back in the day, it was the aluminum plants that were, that don't exist now, that were the backbone of the BPA and the hydroelectric power and that kind of thing. So the same thing could be true with this negotiation that you could enter into, you build them into the fabric, they become part of the community, and they support basically the grid.

Well and that's sort of what we're trying to do with our policies and our development regulations is to make it appropriate. Where should they go? Some of it is what should they be bringing with us? I know for Pasco right now, with the way the water is in the city of Pasco, it's limited. A lot of businesses that are locating in Pasco have to bring a water right with them. and they're looking for water rights to transfer into the area to supplement Pasco's water, because they just can't handle that. So the county's perspective, we're trying to set up a mechanism that's similar to that. If we've got the resource and it's available, and folks want to use it, by all means, let's be using it, but if we're short on the resources or need to conserve some of those for the future, then you need to be thinking, how do you bring some of that with you? So that's kind of the airplane we're trying to build as we put this thing together.

Well, I think it could be a positive thing. It's just a matter of how you lay it out.

I think it's just a lot of, being on the Big Ben board, you had a lot of talk about them, but like Quincy is just, the money they have brought to Quincy is just unreal. I'm just talking about the money that the data centers have brought into Quincy is unreal. That high school is state-of-the-art, and it's all data center funded.

Exactly. I mean, you just build it right in New York.

You've got to make sure it's done right and negotiated correctly.

And this is why when we were doing the open houses as... we did in the scoping meeting, somebody asked me the question and the wording I'm using is making sure you put the proper sideboards on it, right? It's not necessarily about regulating it down to the nitty gritty, it's literally putting the appropriate pieces uh in place to be a win-win-win for everybody so even if you did bring them in though you won't meet the state standard because now your emissions are too high now you're going downhill not uphill the more you do the more you are going to be in missions no matter what you do i i would say that um I'm not as concerned about that. I think we've got a good set of balancing policies that will let us have that economic growth and sustain the economic growth we've got and actually build on it while still being able to meet our reduction standards.

Okay.

Well, plus your comment on the nuclear stuff in the future. I mean, what kind of carbon footprint does that have? None. Almost. Well, there's always a carbon footprint. Well, true. Changing of anything is going to cause a footprint. But I think nuclear is the future.

One of the things that, you know, when we were sitting around coming up with some of the policies related to the utilities and energy was literally we're required to think 20 years out. Well, I can tell you in the last... three to five years, technology has massively changed in the energy world. And I don't see it slowing down any. So we tried very hard to craft, and please keep this in mind as you're going through those policies, we tried to craft them in a way that would leave us opportunities for the the different emerging energies that would come in the policies and you know as as we get new energies i mean our current comp plan doesn't really doesn't really address solar we we've got a solar that we made fit uh i think we did a good job of it uh but it doesn't directly and it's like well this has been around for a long time we should we should know kind of what we're doing and borrow from those counties that have that experience to put the proper sideboards in place. But going forward, let those energy opportunities come. But again, make sure we've got those right sideboards in place to protect public safety, open spaces, and benefit our economy. So, any other questions?

Don't know if we lost Manny or not But if there's nothing else mr. Chairman we don't have any administrative items, okay So is there a member of the audience who wants to comment on items not listed on the agenda I Seeing none, the Planning Commission meeting is adjourned at 7.43.