Loading...
11/22/1994 City CouncilApproved City Council Minutes Approved 1216194 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES November 22,1994 The meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Laura Hall in the Library Plaza Room, 650 Main Street. The meeting was preceded by the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Laura Hall, Mayor John Nordquist, Council President Steve Dwyer, Councilmember Dave Earling, Councilmember Barbara Fahey, Councilmember Michael Hall, Councilmember William J. Kasper, Councilmember Tom Petruzzi, Councilmember EllenAnn Chiddix, Student Representative 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA STAFF PRESENT Tom Miller, Police Chief Art Housler, Administrative Services Director Paul Mar, Community Services Director Brent Hunter, Personnel Manager Chuck Day, Accounting Manager Noel Miller, Supt. of Public Works Jeff Wilson, Current Planning Supervisor Rob Chave, Planning Manager Minh Truong, Accountant Doug Farmen, Accountant Bill Stroud, Street Supervisor Ron Holland, Water/Sewer Supervisor Tom King, Facilities Supervisor Arvilla Ohlde, Parks and Recreation Manager Joel Miller, Park Maintenance Supervisor Brian McIntosh, Recreation Coordinator Steve Fisher, Recycling Coordinator Rhonda March, City Clerk Councilmember Petruzzi stated he would like to add an item to the agenda. He requested placing the item as agenda item 3A and it would be a discussion on Edmonds City Code 2.05, City Attorney, and the accompanying Ordinance No. 926. Mayor Hall suggested placing this discussion after the Community Services budget discussion because they were postponed from the last meeting. Councilmember Petruzzi stated he would prefer dealing with this matter before getting into the budget discussion. COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO ADD ITEM 3A TO THE AGENDA, A DISCUSSION ON EDMONDS CITY CODE 2.05, CITY ATTORNEY, AND THE ACCOMPANYING ORDINANCE NO. 926. MOTION CARRIED. Approved City Council Minutes November 22, 1994 Page 1 Council President Nordquist requested adding an item to the agenda as 5A. He has had a request from the Planning Department regarding the scheduling of hearings for the Comprehensive Plan. Council President Nordquist provided a copy of the schedule to the Mayor and Councilmembers with an overlay of the extended agenda. COUNCIL PRESIDENT NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI, THAT ITEM 5A BE PLACED ON THE AGENDA AS A DISCUSSION OF THE REVIEW OF THE SCHEDULING OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER EARLING, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS MODIFIED. MOTION CARRIED. 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Council President Nordquist stated he would like to discuss item C. Councilmember Fahey noted there was a memo in the packet indicating the minutes of November 15, 1994, were not included. City Clerk Rhonda March stated these minutes will need to be deferred to the meeting of December 6 for approval. The reason for the delay is due to computer problems. COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FAHEY, TO CORRECT ITEM B TO STATE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 7, 1994. MOTION CARRIED. Regarding item C, Council President Nordquist stated that as Council President he reviews the warrants. He wanted to mention that he has reviewed them for this particular period of time and noted there were some questions in particular with regard to cellular phone charges. He will be receiving responses from the Finance Department to these questions. With that in mind, he would recommend the passage of item C. COUNCIL PRESIDENT NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI, TO APPROVE ITEM C ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. Item C reads as follows: Approval of Claims Warrants #945843 thru #945946 for Week of November 14, 1994, and Payroll Warrants #945897 thru #946210 for the Period of November 1 thru November 15, 1994 Mayor Hall noted that County Councilman John Garner was present in the audience, and she welcomed him to the meeting. 3. PRESENTATION BY REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY REPRESENTATIVES R. Councilmember Earling introduced John Dewhurst of the Snohomish County Planning /}+A 1 Department, and Barbara Stenson who is in charge of communications in Snohomish County for the Regional Transit Authority (RTA). Approved City Council Minutes November 22, 1994 Page 2 Councilmember Earling addressed the Mayor and Council and presented the final plan that the RTA has assembled for all the Councils' deliberation in the three county area, and hopefully, will eventually be put before the voters. The plan as it has been finalized has changed dramatically from the plan that was presented 14 months ago by the Joint Regional Policy Committee (JRPC). That committee had put together a plan that would have cost in the vicinity of $15 Billion (1995 dollars). The plan before the Council tonight would cost about $6.7 Billion (1995 dollars). It is a plan that incorporates a variety of modes of transportation from light rail, to commuter rail, to bus service, and would attempt to integrate all of those services along with ferries. Councilmember Earling referred to a handout provided to the Mayor and Council in their packets. The handout was titled "Choices" and included a map. The first page of the handout indicates what the plan includes. It includes commuter rail that would use preexisting tracks and run from the City of Everett to Seattle, Tacoma and Lakewood. There is approximately 86 miles of commuter rail that would be part of the first phase. In addition, the new technology to be added is the light rail. It is planned that the light rail would start in Seattle going north to Lynnwood, from Seattle to Tacoma, from Seattle to Bellevue and up to Overlake. Seventy-three miles of light rail is proposed. Eight regional bus lines would be established as express bus service in and out of Seattle attaching with local bus feeder services. Further, it is proposed to set aside funds in the transit development fund for such uses as bus enrichment, and for cities to compete for multimodal funds. Councilmember Earling stated the key to making the transportation plan work is the integration of all three of the modes of transportation that have been discussed. Fundamental to that is the interconnection system that needs to work efficiently. It is proposed that the system would be constructed over a 16 year period. Commuter rail could be up and running in 3 years from south King County to Pierce County, and up and running from Seattle north to Everett. The bus service would be up and running in 3 years with priority service to be given to Snohomish County and to east King County. In the financing plan, it is presumed that some funds will be available at the federal and state levels to help with funding. The plan is intended to be conservative so there are not cost overruns. Mr. Earling distributed a copy of a memorandum from Sid Morrison, Secretary of Transportation. The memorandum indicated Mr. Morrison's intent to go to the Legislature this year and to attempt to cooperate with the RTA by reducing the build -out of the high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes from 20 years to 10 years in the 3-county area if those 3 counties are participants in the RTA. This would mean that within 3 years the HOV lanes would be built out to Everett. Mr. Earling explained that on November 7 the plan was transmitted to all 3 counties. This started a 45 day time period in which each of the three counties has an opportunity to review the plan and then to make a decision on whether or not their county would remain in the RTA. Assuming a successful vote is received from all 3 counties, the plan would go to ballot on March 14, 1995. The intent at this time is to have an all -mail ballot. Councilmember Dwyer inquired about Everett's concern about the fight rail not going as far north as Everett. Councilmember Earling responded that while Everett is not in Phase One for light rail, Approved City Council Minutes November 22, 1994 Page 3 it is still integrated into the system with bus and commuter rail. There is a priority in the master plan that indicates to Mr. Earling that Everett would be a top priority in Phase Two to receive the light rail. He noted that negotiations were difficult in determining what was best for Snohomish County. Councilmember Kasper stated he read that the projections on commuter rail would not require speed increases. He asked if this is correct. Councilmember Earling responded he asked that all the ridership numbers be modeled without speed increases in Edmonds and Mukilteo. The ridership numbers and the speeds are all related to no speed increases in Edmonds. Any time commuter rail discussions come up during Board meetings, Mr. Earling always raises the safety and speed issues that are of concern to Mukilteo and Edmonds. Barbara Stenson reported that on December 6, 1994, there will be an opportunity to view a modern commuter rail car. A modern car will be in Edmonds and on display open to the public. On January 28, 1995, the commuter rail demonstration project will begin and it will be possible to ride to Tacoma for a sporting event. During the first two weeks of February, there will be commuter service to try out from Everett to Seattle and back. Councilmember Petruzzi thanked Councilmember Earling and the rest of the RTA members for an outstanding professional job. Further, Mr. Petruzzi addressed the County Councilman that was present and stated he feels it is very important that Snohomish County get on board with regard to this project. Councilmember Dwyer commented that Edmonds was one of the cities who recommended that the County opt out of the JRPC Plan because of the tremendous costs. The current proposed $6.7 Billion plan that accomplishes this much is more than anyone expected in comparison to the JRPC Plan that did not accomplish a whole lot more. Mr. Dwyer stated he hopes that the notion of regionalism which prevailed in the appointments of the representatives to this organization is heeded by the County Council when they make their decisions. Mr. Dwyer stated he believes it is time that the City Council recommend that our County government be a part of this plan. COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, TO HAVE THE CITY ATTORNEY DRAFT A RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR THE RTA PHASE ONE PLAN. THAT RESOLUTION SHOULD BE ADDRESSED ` R,.f n ,,. TO THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY COUNCIL AND ASK THAT SNOHOMISH COUNTY REMAIN IN THE RTA AND FURTHER REQUEST THAT THE CITIZENS OF P' ( SNOHOMISH COUNTY IN THE RTA BE ALLOWED TO VOTE ON THE RTA PLAN. P THE RESOLUTION SHOULD CALL OUT OUR CONTINUING CONCERN THAT RAIL SPEEDS IN EDMONDS BE MAINTAINED AND SAFETY ISSUES BE ADDRESSED BY THE RTA, BURLINGTON NORTHERN, AMTRAK AND WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3A. DISCUSSION ON EDMONDS CITY CODE 2.05, CITY ATTORNEY, AND THE r ACCOMPANYING ORDINANCE NO.926 Councilmember Petruzzi stated the City has requested Request for Proposals (RFPs) to see who the City would like to hire for City Attorney. This discussion started back a couple of years ago. Former Approved City Council Minutes November 22, 1994 Page 4 Councilmember Palmer had asked for these RFPs. Mayor Hall has asked on several occasions and so have several other Councilmembers. Mr. Petruzzi assumed that this would go forward without too much discussion and felt that it would be basically somewhat routine. He has been very concerned, however, over the last week over discussions that have been going on vis-A-vis the Mayor and City Attorney, and some of the results of those discussions. Mayor Hall questioned what discussions Mr. Petruzzi was referring to as she had not had any discussions with the City Attorney per se. Mr. Petruzzi stated he would be addressing a letter received from the City Attorney dated November 21, 1994. Councilmember Petruzzi commented that during the past three years there has been some conflict between the administration and Council. Mayor Hall commented that this is healthy. Mr. Petruzzi agreed that this is healthy because if everyone thought the same way there would only be one person needed. The issue of concern that he has is best represented in part of this particular letter that came from the City Attorney dated November 21. He read a couple of paragraphs so the people present would get an understanding of what he is talking about. One of the paragraphs says that current City Ordinance provision ECC Section 2.05.010 provides that the City Attorney is appointed by the Mayor with the consent of the City Council. In a town only the Mayor may hire the attorney, in a Constitutional Code City the City Council determines whether the City Attorney is to be an employee or a contractor. In other words, the decision as to whether the attorney will be a City employee or a contractor is clearly that of the City Council. To summarize, the City Ordinance provides for an appointment process and the City Council should defer to the Mayor's process for selection or appointment. If, on the other hand, the City Council wishes to have legal services provided by contract, the City Council has the ability to change the ordinance and determine the interviewing process. Councilmember Petruzzi continued reading the letter and stated that in the following paragraph you will be able to see what the crux of the problem is. "This conflict in interviewing processes also points out a significant difference in philosophy between the way the Mayor and the City Council appear to wish legal services provided. I have had a number of conversations with the Mayor concerning her need for "support" from the City Attorney. As both Mayor and City Council are aware, there has been a significant conflict regarding the policy roles of the Mayor and City Council during the past three years. It is my belief that the Mayor feels that she has not received the support to which she believes she is entitled from me as City Attorney. You will note [and I want you all to listen to this part very closely] that question number two on the Request for Proposals packet for the City Attorney's position asks for the candidates to describe their philosophy regarding the provision of legal service in the event of a conflict between the administrative and legislative branches. My philosophy and that of my firm is to provide legal advice to the City of Edmonds in its corporate capacity rather than provide legal advice and services to the Mayor or to the City Council. We strive to provide even-handed accurate legal advice without favoritism to either body and allow policy disputes to be resolved in the appropriate legislative ordinance form. We provide service to the City of Edmonds directly through the Mayor in support of administrative functions and to the City Council and the Mayor regarding legislative matters. This issue also affects the criteria under which you are to select the City Attorney. If it is the policy decision of the City Council and the Mayor that the City Attorney position as a contracted entity is to provide a professional third party role we are happy to be candidates. If it is the City's ultimate determination that the City Attorney is to fulfill a different role, I suggest the decision be Approved City Council Minutes November 22, 1994 Page 5 made now so that the candidates for the City Attorney as well as those involved in the selection process know which philosophy controls the selection process. I am not seeking to become involved in the process, only to have this issue resolved at the earliest possible opportunity." Councilmember Petruzzi stated the concern that he has now is that under the existing policy a seemingly important criteria in hiring a firm is to determine whether or not this firm would support the Mayor in disputes with the Council. He finds that in direct conflict of what we should be providing for the citizens of Edmonds. In his opinion, the City Attorney should supply legal advice to the corporate entity, being the City, and to the Mayor and to the Council. He does not believe that a City Attorney should support either the Mayor or the Council in disputes that come between the two parties; between the administration section and the legislative section. Mr. Petruzzi further stated that it goes beyond the pail to ask a philosophy of a firm of "will you support me in actions, in disputes, with the Council." He would not do that from the City Council standpoint. He wanted to make it very clear why this is up for discussion and stated his belief that a law firm, i.e., a City Attorney, should represent the best interest of the community; that is paramount. How that falls into place with the City Council and the Mayor becomes secondary. There may be a dispute that we have with the Mayor that the City Attorney may have to look us in the eye, and say you're wrong. The Mayor is correct in this. The City Attorney has done that and we have yielded. And Mr. Petruzzi believes the same has been the reverse with the Mayor, and he will let the Mayor speak for herself on this issue. He expressed his concern about going forward with the process as it is set out now. He noted his intent to hear out the other City Councilmembers and at the end of the discussion he intends to make a motion that will provide some changes in how we would go about this. Mayor Hall stated the ordinance that is in place states the Mayor shall appoint subject to Council confirmation the positions of City Attorney, Judge, Hearing Examiner, Police Chief Fire Chief Community Services Director, and Administrative Services Director. The City Council will interview the top three candidates for each position prior to the Mayor's final selection. Mayor Hall stated this is how the process has been handled in hiring some of the other positions, noting the Council has been involved. With that ordinance backing, Mayor Hall tried to open the process further. She noted that the Council requested that the Selection Committee be in place. Step two of the interview process for selecting a City Attorney includes a list of those who will participate in the selection: the Selection Committee, another Councilmember, former City Councilmember Ray Gould, former Mayor Merle Hrdlicka, the Mayor and Brent Hunter. This has been set up in order to open the process and to provide a balance. The top three candidates are to be sent to the Council as a whole for consideration. Mayor Hall commented she has tried to take the best of all worlds, open up the process and get community involvement. She stated the process is what she is dealing with; all the applicants have been given that information and they know the ordinance as it stands. Councilmember Petruzzi stated he does not have a problem conceptually with the process. The problem that he has is that in his hands he holds a letter from the firm that has served the City for approximately 33 years, and the letter states that the Mayor has continually felt that she does not receive the "support" in arguments that go back and forth between the Council and the Mayor. Mr. Petruzzi feels that arguments are good for discussion. However, where the situation fails in his opinion is that it all boils down to the appointment by the Mayor, noting the Council can say yes or no. Mr. Petruzzi does not feel comfortable in that, and he does not feel comfortable because of the fact the Mayor has set a standard in reference to the letter from the City Attorney. Approved City Council Minutes November 22, 1994 Page 6 Mayor Hall stated that she and the City Attorney had a talk regarding that letter. Councilmember Petruzzi stated the fact remains that this is a very courageous letter. For the City Attorney to come out and lay down in black and white a factual account of the pressure that he has been feeling with the Mayor's Office, this. is Mr. Petruzzi's concern. A blue ribbon committee could come in to interview people, and the Mayor can still appoint the one that will give the Mayor "support" other than what the Council is looking for. Mr. Petruzzi does not feel comfortable with that. Mayor Hall described the situation as similar to the Council appointing Councilmember Dwyer's replacement. She may not be comfortable with the selection either. Her point is that she went a step further and wanted the Council to have a comfort level and a participatory effort. Regarding the firm that is now in place, in recently going before the Boundary Review Board, the City of Edmonds did not have a City Attorney because they are also representing the other entity. This is one issue that needs to be considered. Councilmember Hall stated he understands that Councilmember Petruzzi intends to make a. motion to change the process that the City has undertaken for the last 3 appointments, Police Chief; Fire Chief and Community Services Director. Councilmember Petruzzi stated he is only talking about the City Attorney position. Mayor Hall cautioned Councilmember Petruzzi that the Request for Proposals (RFPs) have gone out. Councilmember Petruzzi stated he does understand that. Regarding the issue of conflict of interest of the present firm before the Boundary Review Board, Mr. Petruzzi stated this is not germane to this discussion. The reason it is not is that he is not either speaking for or against the current City Attorney. That is not the point of discussion. The point of discussion is the selection process and the fact that he has lost confidence in the selection process as it is now, based on the factual information as given to the Council by the City Attorney. Mayor Hall stated Councilmember Petruzzi is not stating this correctly, because he has not had an opportunity to fully digest the process as she just handed to the Council a copy of what was finalized on this date. Councilmember Petruzzi stated he has been thinking about this issue and working on it over the weekend. He would like to make a motion at this time. Mayor Hall pointed out there are other cities who have handled the selection process in this manner. She would like to defer briefly to the Personnel Manager Brent Hunter regarding the other municipalities and how they are dealing with legislative and administrative issues, the City Attorney, and how these issues are not unique to the City of Edmonds. Personnel Manager Brent Hunter stated he is the individual who crafted the questions in the RFP. The reason the particular question referenced by Councilmember Petruzzi was put in the RFP is that in the public sector we are unique with our legal advice going between the administrative and legislative Approved City Council Minutes November 22, 1994 Page 7 branches. And the second purpose of the particular question was that there is a fairly recent court ruling out in this particular area, and the whole purpose of these questions is to try and find out philosophically where these firms are going to come from. In the process that the Mayor laid out, we were trying to make sure that both the Council and the Mayor had all of these questions in advance at the time they were doing the selection. Councilmember Petruzzi asked what is the best answer to that question? Mr. Hunter stated he cannot give that answer. Councilmember Hall stated he thinks this is going a little bit too far. This exact question has been asked of Police Chief candidates and the Fire Chief candidate. The point is all the Council asked that same question to those candidates to get their philosophical response. Councilmember Dwyer pointed out what is different is that it is clear that the other candidates clearly work for the Mayor and are employees of the City. The City Attorney is not an employee of the City. Mayor Hall stated the City Attorney has told her that he classifies himself as a City employee. Councilmember Dwyer pointed out he is not. There is a concern that the corporate body of the municipality which is the seven Councilmembers are getting shouldered aside, and that the City Attorney is being made to function as an employee. Councilmember Kasper referred to the Council agenda of October 11, 1994, item number 6, where it was discussed that following the advertising and return of the proposals, the Council Consultant Selection Committee will review the proposals. The top three finalists will go before the Mayor and City Council. Following the Council interview, the Mayor shall appoint an individual. He pointed out it did not say anything about outside consultants coming in. It states the "Consultant Selection Committee." Mr. Kasper stated the RFP is for a contract, not a City employee. Councilmember Petruzzi stated he would like to read from Ordinance No. 926 which is an ordinance creating the office of City Attorney. This ordinance was created in 1962. He read the section that relates to duties to show that this person is not an employee of the Council or of the Mayor. "The City Attorney shall advise the City authorities and officers on all legal matters pertaining to the business of the City and shall approve all ordinances as to form. He shall represent the City in all actions brought by or against the City or against any City officials in their official capacity. He shall perform such other duties as the City Council by ordinance may direct. In addition to the duties prescribed by the laws of the State of Washington as hereinabove set forth the City Attorney shall (1) attend all regular and special Council meetings, (2) draft all ordinances, leases and conveyances, and such other instruments as may be required by the business of the City when requested to do so by the City Council or the Mayor, (3) attend all regular and work meetings of the Board of Adjustments and Planning Commission of the City of Edmonds, and (4) attend all sessions of the Edmonds Police Court." Councilmember Petruzzi stated he would like to make a motion at this time. Mayor Hall stated that ordinance points out that the Mayor shall appoint the City Attorney subject to Council confirmation. She stated we are talking about the process. Approved City Council Minutes November 22, 1994 Page 8 COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, TO INSTRUCT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE TO 90;4 REMOVE THE CITY ATTORNEY POSITION AS AN APPOINTED OFFICE AND TO A ESTABLISH FOR LEGAL SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY CONTRACT. SUCH �J�,4_0 CONTRACT SHALL BE APPROVED BY A MAJORITY VOTE OF THE CITY COUNCIL. THERE SHALL BE A REQUIREMENT THAT THE PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANT SELECTION COMMITTEE AS APPOINTED BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE CITY COUNCIL SHALL CHOOSE TOGETHER WITH THE MAYOR UP TO THREE CANDIDATES FOR THE CONTRACT TO PRESENT TO THE COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL. FINAL APPROVAL OF SUCH CONTRACT WOULD REQUIRE A MAJORITY VOTE OF THE COUNCIL. Councilmember Petruzzi stated he has no objection to a process that has an ad hoc advisory committee of citizens to be involved whatsoever. Mayor Hall informed Councilmember Petruzzi that exactly what he is asking for is in place. She believes this is an over reaction. She stated she can abide with the finality of it all, because we are all going to the same end which is to get the best possible attorney firm to represent us. Councilmember Petruzzi stated he is looking specifically to what is correct for the City as a whole. Whoever is finally selected may not be his choice, but at least he will know that it will be someone who represents the City. Mayor Hail described for the public the process she has in place. Step one is the screening process which is by the Selection Committee of Council President John Nordquist and Councilmember Bill Kasper. Personnel Manager Brent Hunter will also participate. This is to screen all the applications that have come in. Step two is the interview process including Council President John Nordquist, Councilmember Bill Kasper, Councilmember Barbara Fahey, former City Councilmember Ray Gould, former Mayor Merle Hrdlicka, Mayor Hall, and Personnel Manager Brent Hunter. Step three is that three candidates will be referred to the City Council for Council perusal and recommendation and then the Mayor can select from the top three or from the recommendations. Mayor Hall stated the same type of steps has been in place for the selection of the Prosecuting Attorney, for the Public Defender, and for the Hearing Examiner interviews. Mayor Hall stated she offers this to the public pointing out all the positions take into consideration the Council Selection Committee, taking into consideration the community, and the experts in the field. Council President Nordquist inquired with regard to the motion, what would the duration of the contract be? Is it based on performance? Councilmember Petruzzi responded affirmatively. Mr. Nordquist asked if the performance would be determined only by the Council or if the Mayor is unhappy does she approach the Council? Mr. Petruzzi responded that if the Mayor is unhappy with what the Attorney is doing, the Council would definitely want to hear about it. Mr. Nordquist asked if it would be an open-end contract? Mr. Petruzzi responded affirmatively, the contract would be negotiated. Mr. Nordquist commented that in essence this has been in place for years. When the Attorney brings his budget to the Council in December, it is determined at that time whether or not the contract will be funded. The only issue is the term of the contract. Approved City Council Minutes November 22, 1994 Page 9 Mayor Hall noted that was the complaint that a couple of the Councilmembers voiced to her at various times that the City Attorney had been in place for 33 years without a contract. Councilmember Petruzzi stated the length of the contract does not have to be tied with this. Mayor Hall noted there is not a City Attorney present for ordinance passage. Councilmember Petruzzi suggested passing this motion and instruct the City Clerk to talk with the City Attorney tomorrow. Councilmember Hall stated this motion would change the ordinance to be instead of the Council approving what the Mayor has appointed, the Council will now approve the contract. In reading the City Attorney's letter, he pointed out it also reads as follows: "On the other hand if the City Council wishes to have legal services provided by contract, the City Council has the ability to change the ordinance and determine the interviewing process." Councilmember Hall questioned if the Council has the ability to actually change the way the person is chosen or does the Council have the ability to change the interviewing process by cutting out some of the other people that the Mayor wants involved in the selection process. In reality, this is a big philosophical difference. Mayor Hall stated that the City Attorney informed her that he did not realize that a Councilmember would be a part of the selection process before he had written this letter. Councilmember Dwyer stated his impression of the portion of the memorandum that was referenced that dealt with "town" was that when a municipal corporation is the size of a town qualifying as a "town," the legislative authority does not have the ability to contract for legal work. However, when the municipal corporation is the size of Edmonds it qualifies as a municipal code city and obtaining legal services can be done by either of two ways. The City Council starts with the ability to contract for the service and it can either exercise that authority or it can divest that authority and let that authority fall upon the Mayor. Apparently 33 years ago, the Council chose the latter and Councilmember Petruzzi's motion would return the City to the former. Mr. Dwyer stated the difference is between a choice and a veto. When the Council's role is to confirm an appointment, the role of the Council at that point is to confirm the appointment unless the person lacks the qualities or qualifications for the job. The decision was made previously by the Council that the appointee did not have to be foremost the "best choice" for the office, but simply had to have the qualifications and be compatible with the appointing authority. If those qualifications were met then the City should confirm the appointment because the decision was made that what the Council was doing was giving up a lot of the qualitative judgments in favor of the appointing authority. Mr. Dwyer explained that Mr. Petruzzi is proposing the Council make the decision rather than just simply make a decision to confirm or reject. Councilmember Hall clarified that is the basic philosophy difference. The City Council is going to choose the City Attorney, or the Mayor is going to choose the City Attorney. He questioned if the Council has the ability to choose the City Attorney as a Council, or does the Council only have the ability to choose the process. Approved City Council Minutes November 22, 1994 Page 10 Mayor Hall responded that she believes it is the process because at any point the Council can hire its own legal counsel. Councilmember Petruzzi stated that he disagrees. He believes that the counsel can hire its own legal counsel and it can also choose the City Attorney. He knows it has been done in another City. He believes it is either Port Orchard or Gig Harbor, pointing out it is in the letter from the City Attorney referenced earlier. Councilmember Fahey stated she agrees that in the final analysis once the Mayor has made the selection from the three top candidates, it amounts to the Council being put into the position of a veto which she would not always be comfortable with. She thinks it puts the Council in a compromising situation. She would like to think there would be a way to come to a meeting of the minds before an appointment was decided and they were never put into that negative role. Having recently participated in the very comprehensive Selection Committee process, and also participating in the role of the consultant selection where there were only three people present and it required doing quite a bit of homework, she believes the community would be better served with a more comprehensive selection committee than the two Councilmembers and the Mayor. That is the only process that would be taking place. At some point in time, she believes the selection process should be more open. She cannot support the amendment for that reason. Councilmember Petruzzi stated he does not object to an ad hoc citizen committee as an advisory for it. Mr. Petruzzi asked if Councilmember Fahey objects to the selection process as proposed by the Mayor? Ms. Fahey responded negatively. Mr. Petruzzi stated the motion sets out who is the selection committee; it does not say that the selection committee cannot have an advisory committee. It is possible to go through a process that is laid out as the Mayor has stated up to a point, and that point is that the selection committee is the one that brings the three candidates to the Council. The Council then makes a decision as to who they will give the contract to. The Advisory Selection Committee would provide input to the Consultant Selection Committee. He has no problem with that. He called for the question. MOTION CARRIED. ROLL CALL VOTE: COUNCILMEMBER DWYER—YES, COUNCILMEMBER EARLING--YES; COUNCILMEMBER FAHEY--YES; COUNCILMEMBER HALL --NO; COUNCILMEMBER KASPER--YES; COUNCIL PRESIDENT NORDQUIST--YES; COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI--YES. Mayor Hall stated Council will need to provide quick direction. She asked to go on record saying that we are at the same juncture we would have been, and the public will be well served. Councilmember Petruzzi stated the public will be well served. He assumes that the Professional Consultant Selection Committee of John Nordquist and Bill Kasper will get together with the Mayor to decide what the process will be. Councilmember Kasper stated a meeting is set for November 28. Approved City Council Minutes November 22, 1994 Page 11 Council President Nordquist asked the Mayor if she would be out of town through Monday, November 28. Mayor Hall responded affirmatively. She stated the Selection Committee along with Brent Hunter would go through the proposals. 4. BUDGET WORK SESSION - REVIEW OF COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT A. COMMUNITY SERVICES ADMINISTRATION Community Services Director Paul Mar introduced members of his staff who were present: Acting City Engineer Jim Walker, Planning Manager Rob Chave, and Parks and Recreation Manager Arvilla Ohlde. Using the overhead projector, Mr. Mar gave an overview of the Community Services Administration budget. He pointed out that about one-half of the full-time equivalent (FTE) employees of the City work for Community Services. In terms of revenues generated, Community Services generates about 8% of the General Fund, and it generates about 95% of all other funds. From the expenditure side, Community Services spends about 27% of the General Fund and about 97% of all other funds. In looking at the 1995 budget, a 7.4% increase is proposed. About half of the changes are in salary and benefits. A Building Official will be employed for a full year in 1995, whereas the Building Official was only employed for about one -quarter of a year in 1994. In addition, program staff in Parks and Recreation have been added. A custodian has also been added. In the 1995 expenditures of other funds, half the changes are in the supplies and equipment category. The Recycling Coordinator dollars have been removed as well as a decrease in the street construction labor in-house staff is proposed. Mr. Mar next discussed the Capital Improvement Programs. He presented a 3-year profile of the combined utility projects, the transportation related projects, and park capital projects. The bottom line is that $4.6 Million is budgeted for 1995. Councilmember Petruzzi asked if there will be a special session to discuss capital improvements. Mr. Mar responded it is his understanding that this may be discussed under item number 5 on tonight's agenda. In terms of the work program for 1995 for Community Services Administration, Mr. Mar stated they will continue to work on: the planning on the multimodal transportation center; the cable television franchise review process; the records management set-up; the space planning for the new City Hall complex; and one of the major functions of Administration is to support all the other divisions in terms of their work programs. Mr. Mar stated in looking at the cable television franchise renewal, they believe the total need is between $25,000 and $50,000 inclusive of the legal consulting aspects for the negotiations. Historically the legal fees for the negotiations have not been part of the Community Services budget. He is asking the question of where those fees should appropriately be put. From his budget, there will be a $12,000 carryover, and Council has $5,000 budgeted for cable franchise negotiations. He believes that up to $33,000 needs to be added at this point. Approved City Council Minutes November 22, 1994 Page 12 Based on the recent work session held by the Council with regard to space needs, Mr. Mar eestimated that about $25,000 to $50,000 would be needed for professional service fees. Currently w $10,000 is budgeted; an additional $30,000 to $35,000 is needed. Responding to Councilmember ��'" Kasper's question, Mr. Mar stated that when the budget was put together, they made an assumption that they would want to go out next year in terms of a bond issue. At the work session, it was discussed carrying it on for another year. Mr. Mar believes this would be a realistic number in terms of the level of effort that would be needed. Councilmember Petruzzi commented he does not believe the Council would want to go out for another study regarding space needs. Mr. Mar stated the costs would basically be pre -engineering costs. There are also the costs for placing that issue on the ballot. Responding to Councilmember Dwyer's question concerning the cable television franchise, Mr. Mar stated Chambers has a franchise with Edmonds; they have an active franchise in Northern King County that has about the same number of subscribers of the City of Edmonds; they have an inactive franchise in the Town of Woodway; and there are some unincorporated parts of Snohomish County that they also have a franchise in. Mr. Mar stated he tries to work cooperatively with King County to make sure that if they were to renegotiate the franchise with Chambers that it is consistent with the City of Edmonds franchise except for the unique needs that the City might have. Mr. Mar has had discussions with the Town of Woodway, King County, and Vision Shoreline with regard to the cable franchise. He has not spoken with Snohomish County at this point. Mr. Mar further reported in terms of workload for 1995, the impacts of annexation to Community Services Administration will be minimal. Councilmember Fahey asked about the cost of election processes for the annexations. Mr. Mar stated it is not budgeted at this point. It would be budgeted in either the Planning Division or City Clerk's Division. B. PLANNING DIVISION Planning Manager Rob Chave stated the work program in Planning and Building is still focusing Pon the Growth Management Act (GMA). It is hoped to have the Comprehensive Plan (Comp , Plan) completed the first of the month. They have also been coming up with proposed revisions 0� to the Code to implement the Comprehensive Plan. These revisions have been developed by the Oversight Committee. Phase Two of the Code amendment process will be much more detailed and will be a major restructuring and will take the balance of 1995. While doing the restructuring, one of the major intents is to stream line and improve the accessibility of the Code, noting it is extremely difficult for someone new to the City to try and figure out the permitting processes. This will be one of the major pieces of work for 1995 - to try and focus on making this a more user-friendly development regulatory environment. From a budget standpoint, Mr. Chave highlighted the changes. A slight decline is anticipated for the 1995 budget of 1%. This is largely a function of some of the professional services work. The major project included in the professional services is a housing study. With the GMA and new Approved City Council Minutes November 22, 1994 Page 13 Comp Plan they are looking at a housing policy for the City. Regarding the funds for placing the annexation issues on the ballot, it is not currently in the budget; it is an unanticipated item. As soon as the costs are nailed down, it is an open question as to whether or not this belongs in this budget or the Clerk's budget. A Councilmember Petruzzi asked if there was an estimate as to the cost involved. City Clerk Rhonda March stated she has an estimate of $3,000 to $5,000. However, there may be some savings if it is possible to combine the two annexation issues. Councilmember Fahey stated it may be necessary to plan for the annexation of the Perrinville area and possibly other areas that may come forward. Mr. Chave suggested a safe figure to plan on may be $10,000. In terms of the Building budget, Mr. Chave stated the big change is they will be at a full staffing P�JP� level for the first time in two years. Under small equipment, Mr. Chave noted an increase of q $4,000. This funding is intended to put some emergency kits together (hard helmets, flashlights, 0' etc.) in the event of an emergency such as an earthquake. Councilmember Fahey asked about the funds budgeted for computer upgrades. Mr. Chave stated they are trying to be in a program of a regular cycle of upgrading selected equipment so that they are not in a situation of having to replace everything. Councilmember Kasper inquired about the $12,000 under Planning salary. Mr. Chave stated the $12,000 is a Coastal Zone Management Grant that was received a few months ago; a portion of that will be expended in 1994 but the balance will be in 1995. Councilmember Fahey asked about Team Building and Communications under the Office Support budget. Mr. Chave stated they have some on -call consultants in the event there is a situation of employee conflicts in order to mediate and solve problems. C. ENGINEERING DIVISION Acting City Engineer Jim Walker reported for the most part their budget is unchanged from 1994. He did note there is an increase in overtime. This is anticipated due to a couple of projects at the ly,N Treatment Plant. Another thing that could have an affect on their budget is the potential annexation of Perrinville, by both an analysis of the proposal and in the event an LID comes into N play. The scope of the project is big enough that they may need to have a consultant design the project. Mr. Walker further reported they have added a few items of equipment, mostly minor items. Responding to questions of Councilmember Earling, Mr. Walker stated the costs involved with the proposed Perrinville annexation are difficult to pin down, as it depends greatly on what kind of questions the residents want answered. It is quite a bit of work to do the design of sewers for that area. Council President Nordquist asked about the involvement of Engineering with regard to the renovation work at the ferry dock. Mr. Walker stated there is almost no involvement by his department. They have had some preliminary meetings with the State. They have not requested Approved City Council Minutes November 22, 1994 Page 14 any use of City property on this project. Mr. Nordquist asked if Engineering has been involved with the traffic patterns to the new loading site at the marina. Mr. Walker responded that consultants are doing that work. *, D. PARKS AND RECREATION tD Parks and Recreation Manager Arvilla Ohlde introduced Joel Miller, the new Grounds Supervisor, 4 and Brian McIntosh, Recreation Coordinator. Ms. Ohlde reported the budget reflects an 11.2% increase. Of that increase, above the 4%, is for the fee -reimbursement programs in the Recreation Division. In the Park Maintenance Division there is a 4% increase over 1994. She pointed out there is a 2.3% increase for the grounds maintenance at the Public Works facility. Ms. Ohlde noted a procedural process of the utility, which is a rate payer, paying into the General Fund, and those funds being expended as grounds maintenance. She noted they have been working with Finance because there was a printing error in the 1994 Budget Book, where it should have reflected the Treatment Plant having done this same thing for the last three years. A correction of $11,000 will be shown. Additionally, Ms. Ohlde reported an issue that is not in the budget is the Youth Fitness Center. Responding to questions of Councilmember Petruzzi concerning a location for a youth fitness -fit' program, Ms. Ohlde stated they have been scoping out a number of places. Mr. Mar stated one site that is being considered is the old Public Works building. It is estimated a one time cost of $19,000 would be needed for cleaning and painting the facility. Further, a net operating deficit for the first year of about $19,700 would be anticipated. No funds are budgeted at this time. Councilmember Fahey inquired about small equipment that is budgeted, and asked how often this type of equipment needs to be replaced. Ms. Ohlde stated this equipment is needed to support the existing program. They have been trying to replace one or two pieces of equipment each year. The longevity on the equipment of benches is about seven years, and mats have a useful life of about five years. Responding to questions of Councilmember Earling, Ms. Ohlde stated there are requests from the public to fund a cultural arts position. In looking at a full time employee, it would be a value of about $45,000. Councilmember Earling stated there is a current staff member who is assigned half time to the Arts Commission and asked if this could somehow be incorporated. Ms. Ohlde P stated this may be an opportunity for the Council to look at a reorganization of this area. Mr. Earling requested, with the Mayor's permission, that he meet with Ms. Ohlde on this issue. Ms. Ohlde also reminded the Council that the Sister City Commission has requested $2,000 under community requests. Mayor Hall asked if it was the consensus of the Council to receive further information regarding the cultural arts position. Mr. Mar stated they will try to provide a report on this at the December 6 Council meeting. Mr. Mar stated that he understood the community request to be a dedicated FTE for the cultural arts plan and all the activities related to that specific endeavor for 1995. He stated they have not taken that request and tried to include it with what is existing today. If that is the request of Council, they will try to put something together. Approved City Council Minutes November 22, 1994 Page 15 E. WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT �/ i Mr. Mar reported that a change is being proposed on the organization chart. The Wastewater Treatment Plant will become a division, and the manager of the Treatment Plant will report directly to Mr. Mar. The operating budget is $1.8 Million with approximately $650,000 for labor. A priority for 1995 is to stabilize division staffing. In terms of activities for 1995, one is to monitor the incinerator exhaust emissions; the chlorinator will be worked on; the outfall line will be replaced and upgraded; and to maintain the operational integrity of the plant. With regard to the incinerator, Councilmember Petruzzi asked about the funding. Mr. Walker responded that $200,000 is budgeted for the repairs. Mr. Petruzzi commented that from the information the Council has received previously this amount does not seem to be enough. He suggested the amount should be $250,000. Mr. Mar stated they will come back to the Council with a funding source for it, and any adjustments that have to be made to other projects will be brought back. Mr. Mar stated there may be additional overtime needed for emergencies. In terms of annexation impacts, this is a regional treatment plant so any additional people into the City limits does not affect their budget. �p F. PUBLIC WORKS Mr. Mar introduced Tom King, Facilities Maintenance Supervisor, Ron Holland, Water/Sewer Supervisor, Bill Stroud, Street Supervisor, and Noel Miller, Public Works Superintendent. Mr. Miller summarized the programs for 1995. He reported everyone is affected by the new Operations and Maintenance Center. They are in the process of moving in and noted there is a lot of setting up to do. With the remaining money from the project, two additional projects will be contracted out. These two projects are erecting the covered storage building, and building a new dewatering station for the storm drainage and sewer wastes. It also ties in with the environmental compliance. Mr. Miller stated they are continuing to update and computerize the maintenance programs which is reflected in the type of equipment they are buying. With regard to the safety program, the compliance space regulation that is going into manholes, pipes, etc. requires more attention and more equipment. They are striving to take customer calls and be as speedy as possible in maintaining the City's infrastructure. (1) PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION Mr. Miller stated they do not have a need to increase their expenditures. (2) FACILITIES MAINTENANCE Mr. Miller stated the budget in this area reflects an additional custodian. Cost of electricity, natural gas and other utilities have some increase. Outside contract maintenance has also increased. It is planned to use staff to replace locks in the Public Safety Building and the Approved City Council Minutes November 22, 1994 Page 16 Anderson Center. In addition, a number of projects are planned that can be done with in-house labor as opposed to contracting those projects out. Councilmember Kasper asked about funds to maintain the old Public Works building while it is empty. Mr. Miller stated that building is on stand-by; there will be nominal costs. Councilmember Fahey asked about the drop in the budget for salary. Mr. Miller stated the Support Clerk left in August and a new person was hired who is at a lower salary level. Mayor Hall noted the time is 10:00 p.m. and requested a motion be made to extend the meeting COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FAHEY, TO EXTEND THE MEETING. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Kasper left the meeting at this time. (3) STREET SECTION Mr. Miller stated this coming year basic maintenance is being emphasized. He indicated that an increase is not being seen in revenue, so therefore they are holding the line with regard to expenditures. dv Regarding recycling, Councilmember Petruzzi pointed out that it is completely out of the budget WyW . for 1995. He noted that this item will be revisited later in the meeting. If it is something that was 11`` desired to be in the budget, why isn't it? Mr. Miller stated it is his understanding that the funding is under the second 3% increase in property taxes. Mr. Mar stated the recycling position was brought before the Council on a committee meeting night in September. The feedback they received was to have it addressed by the Mayor in her budget. Mr. Miller responded to questions and stated the State Department of Health and Department of Ecology have very tight requirements for proper disposal of street sweepings and catch basin wastes. The City's concern is that of going past the threshold for organic hydrocarbons. When 200 yards of street sweepings are accumulated, a hauler takes the sweepings to a site in Seattle where it is shipped to Eastern Washington. Mr. Miller stated he feels the amount requested in the budget for this purpose is sufficient. (4) WATER AND SEWER SECTION Councilmember Petruzzi commented that the beginning cash balance is slim in comparison to what it was before, noting a reduction of $885,950. Mr. Miller stated something will need to be done with that this coming year. He stated reasons for the cash balance decrease include lower water usage with less overall water revenue coming into the City because of conservation and the draught in 1992; higher costs for Metro; the way the administrative overhead is calculated has gone up; removal of the existing fuel tanks at 200 Dayton Street; and equipment purchases. Councilmember Petruzzi commented the City will be faced with serious problems at the beginning of 1996. Administrative Services Director Art Housler disagreed and stated funds owed to Approved City Council Minutes November 22, 1994 Page 17 Edmonds by Mountlake Terrace and Shoreline will bring the cash balance to where it originally was. Council President Nordquist inquired as to where the I.O.U.. from Mountlake Terrace is being reflected in the budget. Administrative Services Director Art Housler stated it is not in the budget; it is in the general ledgers as accounts receivable. Councilmember Dwyer asked if the new city in Shoreline will run its own water and sewer. Mr. Housler responded it is his understanding that they will maintain the districts they currently have. Councilmember Petruzzi asked if it would be possible to put a footnote in the budget to reflect the funds that are outstanding from Mountlake Terrace and Shoreline. Mr. Housler responded affirmatively. Mr. Miller reported the increase of expenditure of equipment is due to trying to stay within the confine space entry requirements and also computer enhancements to bring the computer maintenance management up to speed. Additional money ($25,000) is requested for a new back hoe to allow for excavating deeper trenches, and also with trenching and shoring excavation laws, a trenching box is required. Mr. Miller stated the existing back hoe will be purchased by the Cemetery Board. Mr. Miller further reported that no man power increases are proposed for water or sewer. Public utility services have gone up partly due to Metro and Lynnwood. The increase in intergovernmental services is partly due to increases for storm drainage. The major item under Equipment 64 is the purchase of a new jet/vactor truck. Presently there is only one vactor truck that is available for both street and water/sewer maintenance and two trucks are needed in order to keep the maintenance program going and meet the higher compliance requirements for storm drainage. 5. EQUIPMENT RENTAL Mr. Miller reported a new full time employee for fire vehicle maintenance is proposed. Councilmember Petruzzi inquired about the grader for $63,000. Mr. Miller stated the grader would be used for street work; there is enough funds under equipment rental to purchase a new grader without any additional supplemental money from the I I I budget. This is the amount of reserve that has been established. Councilmember Petruzzi requested a list of all of the vehicles such as automobiles, station wagons and pick-up trucks, that the City has excluding fire and police. He would like this provided at the next Council meeting. Also, he would like to know the department the vehicles are assigned to and who uses them. Councilmember Petruzzi stated that since Councilmember Kasper has left the meeting, he would like to request that the Executive Session on real estate be canceled and carried over to next ,fil week. ' po/ Approved City Council Minutes November 22, 1994 Page 18 G. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED FUNDING OPTIONS FOR RECYCLING COORDINATOR POSITION Mr. Mar provided a synopsis .of the recycling program. The City began a recycling program in August 1990. The County/City participation began in August 1992 (Cycle 1). The program was funded 75% by the County and 25% by the City. The cost to the City for Cycle 1 was $40,000. Cycle 2 was funded 50% by County and 50% by the City with the cost to the City of $47,000. This cycle ends December 1994. Accomplishments of the recycling program include: heightened public awareness of recycle benefits; promoted single family residence recycling; enhanced hauler/customer relationship; promoted south county jurisdictional coordination. Using the overhead projector, Mr. Mar provided graphs reflecting the increase in single family solid waste customers as well as an increase in the percentage of single family recycling. The Cycle 3+ program for 1995-1996 would have an estimated annual cost of $47,000 to $60,000. It is proposed to continue to respond to single family inquiries, to continue the public education process, to increase commercial/multifamily recycling, and to increase the percentage of tonnage that is recycled. Council President Nordquist mentioned an editorial in the Seattle Times this summer that related that the public is educated on recycling and it is time to move ahead. He asked that if the City funds this position, would the position be readvertised and would it then become a new position with the City rather than a granted position. Personnel Manager Brent Hunter stated the Recycling Coordinator is a City employee at this time; the funding source would change but the status would remain the same. Mr. Nordquist inquired if the salary that is applicable to this position is included in the $47,000 to $60,000 estimated annual cost. Mr. Mar responded affirmatively. They are proposing the salary plus benefits to be about $35,000. The remainder would be the expenses to be incurred on the program. Mr. Mar indicated that in talking with the current Recycling Coordinator they could work with a $47,000 budget. Councilmember Dwyer inquired as to what funds the City paid for this position in 1994. Mr. Mar stated approximately $23,500. Mr. Dwyer further inquired what the discussion was that led to the removal of the $23,500 from the Mayor's budget? Mr. Mar stated it was in terms of looking at the priority of other positions and other costs. It was his understanding from the direction of the Council was to address this in the Mayor's budget. Mr. Dwyer stated the discussion was to put this position in competition with all other requests when the management team went through the process of negotiating the budget with one another. Mr. Mar stated that if the City decides to continue with the recycling program and to go into Cycle 3, the County would fund 25% of the cost. There are discussions at the County at this time as to what will happen after 1995. It is being discussed that perhaps they will fund 40% of the costs at that time. Approved City Council Minutes November 22, 1994 Page 19 Mr. Mar presented 4 additional options for funding the program: (1) to have the two haulers in the City pay for the program (Mr. Mar indicated the reception for this idea was not positive so this would likely not work for 1995); (2) to have direct pay by customers via a solid waste utility tax; (3) to work on interlocal joint funding such as working with the school district; and (4) the City to fund the program out of the General Fund. Mr. Mar stated this would be his last choice. Mr. Mar reported that 26 out of 31 cities surveyed have a solid waste utility tax. The average tax rate is 9.4%. Everyone of the cities surveyed have a recycle position in their city government. Responding to questions, Mr. Mar stated they have spoken to Lynnwood regarding the possibility of a joint venture. Only preliminary discussions have taken place to date. He believes that it may be possible to do a joint venture with the City of Lynnwood and the school district in terms of helping to fund the program in the future. Mr. Mar stated staffs recommendation is to either fund the program with the solid waste utility tax, or to continue with the County's grant program for Cycle 3 and pursue vigorously the other funding options. The exposure for 1995 on a budgetary basis would be $36,000 out of the General Fund. Recycling Coordinator Steve Fisher commented he believes there is a need for ongoing education of recycling and waste reduction issues. It is basically an economic situation where the public is being asked to separate materials along with the creation of markets so these materials can be utilized and find their way back into the marketplace. H. REVIEW OTHER FUNDS Councilmember Petruzzi stated he is aware that Councilmember Kasper is very interested in the capital improvements section. A meeting will be held next week on the budget as well and he asked if this section could be discussed at next week's meeting so that Mr. Kasper could be present? Mayor Hall clarified if he would also like to continue Item No. 5 on the agenda, Continued Budget Work Session. Mr. Petruzzi responded yes. 5. CONTINUED BUDGET WORK SESSION Carry Over of Any Items from Previous Budget Work Sessions C � This item is continued to the meeting of November 29, 1994. a 5A. DISCUSSION OF THE REVIEW OF THE SCHEDULING OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN p Planning Manager Chave stated that he is trying to target January as Comprehensive Plan month. vp,I�,n� Recognizing the budget schedule, he is trying to schedule some time on December 13 and 20 to ��" begin discussing some of the Comprehensive Plan issues. Approved City Council Minutes November 22, 1994 Page 20 Council President Nordquist asked the Council if they would like to follow the schedule proposed by Mr. Chave. Responding to questions, Mr. Chave stated that January 1 is the deadline for the completion of the Comprehensive Plan. However, he recognizes the budget work that needs to take place in December. Once the budget is approved he feels that this should be the number one priority for the Council. Council President Nordquist suggested beginning with January 3. All Councilmembers agreed. Councilmember Fahey brought to the Council's attention that the minutes from the meeting held on November 5 were not added to the agenda for approval. City Clerk Rhonda March stated she had included a memo in the packet asking the Council to add the minutes to the agenda. She suggested placing these minutes for approval on the consent agenda of November 29. 6. EXECUTIVE SESSION ON PERSONNEL NEGOTIATIONS The Council went into Executive Session on personnel negotiations at 11:00 p.m. and adjourned from there. THE ORIGINAL SIGNED COPY OF THESE MINUTES, AS WELL AS A TAPED RECORDING OF ALL COUNCIL MEETINGS, CAN BE LOCATED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. �RND�A3. �MAR�,CIT�YCLE�RK� Approved City Council Minutes November 22, 1994 Page 21 >s<> AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL PLAZA MEETING ROOM - LIBRARY BUILDING 7:00-10.00pm NOVEMBER 22, 1994 WORK MEETING - NO AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 P.M. FLAG SALUTE 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS (A) ROLL CALL (B) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 7 AND NOVEMBER 15, 1994 (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIMS WARRANTS #945843 THRU #945946 FOR WEEK OF NOVEMBER 14, 1994, AND PAYROLL WARRANTS #945897 THRU #946210 FOR THE PERIOD OF NOVEMBER 1 THRU NOVEMBER 15, 1994 3. (30 Min.) PRESENTATION BY REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY REPRESENTATIVES 4. BUDGET WORK SESSION - REVIEW OF COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT: A. COMMUNITY SERVICES ADMINISTRATION .B. PLANNING DIVISION C. ENGINEERING DIVISION D. WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT E. PARKS & RECREATION DIVISION F. PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION (1) PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION (2) FACILITIES MAINTENANCE SECTION (3) STREET SECTION (4) WATER AND SEWER SECTION (5) EQUIPMENT RENTAL SECTION G. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED FUNDING OPTIONS FOR RECYCLING COORDINATOR POSITION H. REVIEW OTHER FUNDS 5. CONTINUED BUDGET WORK SESSION: CARRY OVER OF ANY ITEMS FROM PREVIOUS BUDGET WORK SESSIONS 6. EXECUTIVE SESSION ON A REAL ESTATE MATTER Parking and meeting rooms are accessible for persons with disabilities. Contact the City Clerk at 771-0245 with 24 hours advance notice for special accommodations. **** The Council Agenda appears on Chambers Cable, Channel 32. Delayed telecast of this Meeting appears the following Wednesday evening at 7.00 p.m. on Channel 36, and the following Friday and Monday at noon on Channel 32.