Loading...
12/06/1994 City CouncilApproved City Coundl Muudes Approved 12113194 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES DECEMBER 6, 1994 The Edmonds City Council meeting 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 Barbara Fahey, Councilmember Steve Dwyer, Councilmember Michael Hall, Councilmember Dave Earling, Councilmember Tom Petruzzi, Councilmember William J. Kasper, Councilmember Ellenann Chiddex, Student Representative STAFF PRESENT Tom Miller, Police Chief Mike Springer, Fire Chief Art Housler, Administrative Services Director Don Fiene, Hydraulics Engineer Tim Walker, Acting City Engineer Noel Miller, Superintendent of Public Works Jeff Wilson, Current Planning Supervisor Tom King, Facilities Maintenance Supervisor Scott Snyder, City Attorney Rhonda March, City Clerk Christine Laws, Recorder Mayor Laura Hall announced that the new sound system had been installed and was being utilized by the Council for the first time. She also announced that Senator Slade Gorton had been hospitalized with a heart attack, had angioplasty procedure performed, and would be away from work for about eight weeks. The Council has sent its condolences to him. Mayor Hall called an executive session.for 20-25 minutes for two matters of negotiation. Item 12 on the agenda was continued to December 13 because of the inclement weather. That item is: AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO PERFORM FEASIBILITY STUDY LOCATING AN AQUATIC/RECREATION COMPLEX AT THE NEW EDMONDS/WOODWAY HIGH SCHOOL Councilmember Dave Earling requested a ten minute executive session on a real estate matter to be held concurrently with the other issues. The Council adjourned at 7:15 for a 30 minute executive session and reconvened at 7:45. Approved City Council Minutes December 6, 1994 Page 1 APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER TOM PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MICHAEL HALL, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED. CONSENT AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER TOM PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MICHAEL HALL, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The agenda items passed are as follows: (A) ROLL CALL 0-2 (C) Ci DD (D) '0 0 (E) (G) V AUDIENCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 22, 1994 APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 29, 1994 APPROVAL OF CLAIMS WARRANTS #944482 THRU #945948 FOR WEEK OF NOVEMBER 28, 1994, AND PAYROLL WARRANTS #946211 THRU #946505 FOR THE PERIOD OF NOVEMBER 16 THRU 30, 1994 ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM ERIC MEISLAHN ($520) AND JUDY COLLINS ($6,500.00 est.) APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FROM HEARING ON APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUED FOR A STREET MAP AMENDMENT AND VARIANCE FOR THE PROPOSED 12-UNIT MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT AT 8104 242ND ST. S.W. (APPLICANT: ROBERT KOO -- FILE NOS. V-94-117 AND ST-94-118 / APPELLANT: NANCY VLCEK - FILE NO. AP-94-161) [from Hearing on November 15, 1994] AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH OLYMPIC RESOURCES FOR EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM REPORT ON BIDS OPENED NOVEMBER 23, 1994 FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT UNIFORM CLEANING AND AWARD CONTRACT TO EDMONDS DRY CLEANERS ($6,408.00) Peter Hart, 10415 - 228th Street S.W., informed the Council of the current cellular telephone communication tower at Cottage Industry that's developing in South Edmonds. City Attorney Scott Snyder called, as a point of order, attention to the fact that tonight a hearing is scheduled to be set for a cellular tower. His concern was that under the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine, anything Council hears it can't consider and will have to reveal at a later date. He suggested that perhaps Mr. Hart's comments should be deferred until the hearing date. Mr. Hart indicated he did not desire to address that subject, but the general subject of towers. He stated that currently the City does not have a policy on the subject. He has done quite a bit of research on the subject and found a number of cities that do have policies on the siting of telecommunications facilities in their communities. He has a copy of the policy as it pertains to Austin, Texas. Approved City Council Minutes December 6, 1994 Page 2 Councilmember Michael Hall indicated he would not like to have the information come to them at this point and not be able to use it when the hearing is held. He explained his understanding of City Attorney Snyder's remarks. If the Council gets e:� parte information from someone on a subject they are going to be the trier -of -fact for, they might have to disqualify themselves from ruling on it and/or take the material out of their purview. He asked Mr. Hart if he would be willing to come back on the hearing date and provide Council with the materials ahead of time through the City Clerk's office or at that point give a concise statement so that it could be used at that time. Mr. Hart indicated he would. Mayor Hall asked Mr. Hart for clarification as to whether the material needed to be requested. Mr. Hart indicated he had a copy with him. City Attorney Scott Snyder indicated another option would be for the Council to refer this matter to the Planning Board. The Council is currently reviewing the Comprehensive Plan and will follow that shortly with a review of the developmental regulations. He suggested the material Mr. Hart offered might be valuable to be considered by the Board and come back to the Council as part of those recommendations. Mayor Hall advised Mr. Hart he could do it that way or he could give the material to the City Clerk for later distribution. Mr. Hart stated he liked the suggestion of going before the Planning Board. Mayor Hall suggested Mr. Hart contact the City Clerk for the exact dates. Mr. Hart stated that the reason he was bringing it to Council's attention was that the 96th Street tower that was to be in the county, the County has disapproved. The neighborhood. is concerned they will be subjected to yet another tower. They feel there is some urgency to address the subject of a policy as soon as possible. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF APPEALS OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION REGARDING 140' CELLULAR TOWER VICINITY OF 650 EDMONDS WAY AND SET HEARING DATE Jeff Wilson, Planning Supervisor, stated that this item is an appeal that the Council has received regarding the decision of the Hearing Examiner related to a conditional use permit and variance granted for a cellular tower. Because of the heavy agenda of the Council at this time of year in trying to resolve budget issues and other items which must be completed by the end of the year, he asked Council to acknowledge that they have received this appeal and set a future hearing date for the Council to hold the public hearing on the appeal. His recommendation was to set a hearing date for January 17, 1995. COUNCILMEM 3ER STEVE DWYER MOVED, AND THE MOTION WAS DULY SECONDED, TO ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF THE APPEAL AND SET A HEARING FOR JANUARY 17,1995. MOTION CARRIED. AHEARING ON ANNEXATION OF AURORA MARKETPLACE NEIGHBORHOOD AREA AND ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE (FH E AX-4-91) VXJeff Wilson again addressed the Council. This item is the conclusion of a very long process regarding the annexation process for the Aurora Marketplace neighborhood. He summarized the history. The final approval from the Boundary Review Board of Snohomish County issued on November 15 has been received. The last action which must formally be taken is for the City to adopt an ordinance to fully accept the annexation and set an effective date. The recommended ordinance is included in Approved City Council Minutes December 6, 1994 Page 3 Council's agenda packet. The decision of the Boundary Review Board is now subject to a 30-day appeal period to the Superior Court for Snohomish County which will expire on December 15. This action by the Council will be pending whatever final decision is reached in case there is an appeal filed. Councilmember Steve Dwyer asked about the recommended effective date. City Attorney Snyder advised that there was a standard five-day effective clause putting the burden on the appellants if they wish to stay the action. His thought is that it would be important for the Council to take its action to convey to Snohomish County for real estate tax purposes and be on record there. The annexation approved by the Boundary Review Board is the full boundaries that were requested which included the small addition. It is from SR 104 over to Highway 99; 240th Street on the south, west of 84th up to 233rd; on the east side of 84th, it is up to 234th; it goes as far west as 88th drops down to 236th. It does include the rights -of -way adjacent to the boundaries of the annexation, and that was agreed upon in an interlocal agreement between the City and Snohomish County which has been recorded. Councilmember Dwyer asked if the Olympic View headquarters was included. Mr. Wilson indicated it was. Mayor Hall opened the public portion of the hearing. Lois Hopkins, 8600 Madrona Lane, Edmonds, thanked the members of the Council for continuing to work with the issue and the people of her neighborhood who would like to be annexed to the City of Edmonds. They feel that this is the best way to get the services they need and hope the annexation will be successful. Bruce Whittenberg, 8725 Madrona Lane, Edmonds, has been actively seeking annexation for his neighborhood to Edmonds for more than five years. The experience this time has been extremely positive and has demonstrated to him that the Edmonds City government is far more accessible to him and his neighbors than is the County government. He has had positive experiences and access to members of the Council, Mayor Hall, the Police Chief the Fire Chief the Planning Department, and Community Services Director. He and his neighbors support civil activities in Edmonds -- they shop and recreate. He says the only thing they can't do now is formally have a say in the future of their community. He urged the Council to adopt the resolution. In the event the Fire District decides to appeal the Boundary Review Board decision, they would urge Council to vigorously defend that appeal on their behalf. The public portion of the hearing was closed, and the matter was remanded to Council. COUNCILMEMBER STEVE DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MICHAEL HALL, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 2997, ACCEPTING THE FORMAL Q ANNEXATION OF THE AREA COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS THE "AURORA MARKETPLACE NEIGHBORHOOD". MOTION CARRIED. Approved City Council Minutes December 6, 1994 Page 4 HEARING ON PROPOSED STORMWATER ORDINANCE Jim Walker, Acting City Engineer, stated that the ordinance before Council is essentially an all new stormwater ordinance, not really based on the City's existing ordinance but based on the Department of Ecology -recommended ordinance. A separate issue related to this is the effect this ordinance will have on Public Works. This hearing was not intended for that purpose, but at some future time he would like to discuss with the Community Services Committee about how that's effecting the City's operation and what those costs may be. As they get into it, they will have a better feel for how that is effecting the City itself. He received a letter from one of the consulting firms who wanted to have an opportunity to either present written material or have another hearing on this matter. There is an Ecology deadline of January 31 by which time they wish cities to have ordinances that comply with their guidelines. Mayor Hall confirmed with Mr. Walker that he was referring to the letter from Lovell- Sauerland & Associates which Council was presented tonight. Councilmember Bill Kasper asked Mr. Walker if he had had a meeting with the builders. Mr. Walker stated there had been no meeting, but that notification had gone out to them. It was Councilmember Kasper's belief Council had asked that an explanatory meeting be held so that they could respond prior to a last hearing. Councilmember Kasper stated further that it has been customary to go through this. Mr. Walker responded that they were contacted and advised there was an ordinance coming out and that there was a change, and they have talked to some individuals who were interested in discussing the matter further. Mr. Kasper believes it will slow the process down if these discussions were not held. Mr. Walker went through some of the changes through the use of the overhead display of Exhibit 2 to the agenda memo in Council's packet. There are a number of requirements, the first being basin planning and implementation. That will have little effect on the City of Edmonds because it already has basin plans. There are education plans required. The City is presently doing some of that. The biggest impact will be in erosion and sedimentation control. There will be more plans required and more inspection time. There will also be increased stormwater retention required, as well as increased storage. Treatment is another major area of concern. There will be more defined requirements which will effect maintenance and management of stormwater systems. Right now the City has the authority to inspect the system and require maintenance. Under the new ordinance, there will be a required inspection and maintenance schedule. Councilmember Kasper asked if the City had been doing these inspections even though they weren't required. Mr. Walker indicated it was as if there was a suspicion of a problem. Councilmember Kasper questioned Mr. Walker concerning the average cost per single-family lot for the installation. Mr. Walker stated he did not know. Councilmember Kasper asked if he could obtain one, and Mr. Walker said he probably could. He further asserted it was basically unchanged if you are looking at a currently developed lot that is less than 5,000 feet of approved sewer. The higher impact will be on a short plat or the big lots and developments. The larger the project, the larger the cost. In response to Councilmember Kasper's earlier question, Mayor Hall interjected that City Clerk Rhonda March had given her a list of those notified. Councilmember Kasper stated his belief it was going to take several hearings if it is going to be done that way. First they have to hear it and then they Approved City Council Minutes December 6, 1994 Page 5 have to come back and respond. Mayor Hall agreed with what Councilmember Kasper was saying and reiterated that they had been notified. Councilmember Kasper clarified that he was not asking whether they had been notified, but whether there had been any meetings. He further stated his belief that it has been customary in the committee system for them to be brought in and have the situation explained to them, giving them an opportunity to raise questions so someone could come back with answers. He doesn't see where that has happened. Mayor Hall asked if he might want to have a roundtable discussion set up with the Community Services Committee. He believes it is necessary. Councilmember Kasper further alleged that there are only approximately 1,500 more lots available in the City for single-family and recognized that commercial properties were under much heavier control. He suggested we're really talking about a very low percentage to be impacted. He asked what was to be gained by it. Councilmember Dave Earling indicated he continues to have concern over this issue. When this was brought up last, he specifically addressed his concerns regarding developers and builders and the kinds of substantial increases that this would have on the businesses. He stated that sending a letter was fine, but the one response they had from Lovell-Sauerland indicated that, from their perception, they were having a hard time getting the communication and trying to have enough time to be able to respond to tonight's meeting. He hopes that if the Community Services Committee has to have a meeting it is fine, but he feels that the City should have some sort of outreach to the builders and developers. He believes it would be more beneficial to the City to have that kind of meeting to avoid the many trips they will bring across the counter when they find out what the impacts of the proposed changes are. He said we are talking huge costs and believes that is reflected in the letter from Lovell-Sauerland. When he raised the issue last time, it was that specific concern that the City not get itself sideways. He recognized that those in Engineering have to deal with some of the local long-time builders anyway. Something like this will not really sink in until they get the first bill or until they understand what the obligations are to enhance the system. He thinks it will save time pressing for a meeting where the entire concept would be laid out, discussed with them, and if there is that benchmark for a meeting and their name is on the list and they chose not to come, then it would be better. Councilmember Earling thinks it a golden opportunity for Staff to do some good. Mr. Walker responded that there are no Community Services meetings until January. He further indicated they could try to arrange to have such a meeting with the development community. Mr. Walker also said that they have not been given a lot of flexible guidelines from Ecology. Councilmember Earling stated he hopes that before this comes back to the Council it has more definitive information. Councilmember Kasper asked what cities have adopted this to this point. Mr. Walker felt most of the cities in the area were at the same point as Edmonds -- that there had been discussion. Snohomish County went through a long discussion about six to eight months ago and are back again at this same point. His understanding is that Lynnwood is at the same point as Edmonds. He indicated Bellevue and King County have had tighter ordinances for several years, so they are not in the same situation. Councilmember Kasper feels that because our impact is so minimal, there is no justification of leading the way. Mr. Walker stated that we were not leading the way, only meeting the deadline. Councilmember Tom Petruzzi asked for clarification of the deadline and what happens if it is not met. Mr. Walker doesn't know if there would be any immediate action by Ecology. The concern by some of Approved City Council Minutes December 6, 1994 Page 6 the other committees is that if they don't comply, there may be some risk of third -party lawsuits in some situations. Councilmember Petruzzi echoed what the previous Councilmembers said with regard to meetings with the developers. One of the things the Lovell-Sauerland letter addressed directly was the due process. The letter indicates when they got the material. He tends to side for them. He thinks a meeting would be good not only for builders and developers but all the other engineers, architects and others who work with them so they have a general idea what is going on. Councilmember Petruzzi reminisced about Bob Albert's previous comment given as a warning that this would be pretty expensive as we went through the study. He asked how this would impact the City itself on what it would have to do in terms of manpower, requirements the City has for taking care of public rights -of - way, etc. Mr. Walker answered that Public Works is asking for an additional vactor truck which is an expensive item. He thinks eventually there will be two employees in Public Works committed full time to vactoring out waste from catch basins. Not only is there that time, but also the expense of dealing with those wastes which is becoming more of a problem depending upon the nature of the waste. There may be special landfill requirements. Public Works is already set up to deal with the vactor waste according to current rules, but those riles have been changing. That part is kind of an unknown as to how much that will ultimately cost. There is likely to be more labor involved on the Public Works staff for cleaning of the storm drains. Councilmember Kasper said it seemed to him that back when we first got into this that we had reached the conclusion that it was probably cheaper to consolidate rather than to have it on every site everywhere so that there would be less maintenance from the City's standpoint in trying to get on site all over and to bring it into a central locale. He cited the fact that at Shell Creek a bypass was built which is empty most of the time. He recognized the ability to also utilize the creek bed so it could be balanced. He thinks everybody wants to get back to the absolute sewers which is a very expensive process compared to the other process. Mr. Walker remarked that some of the problem is that things are so far developed out. If speaking of a new area, a regional detention facility could be built on undeveloped land which would be a good solution. Every time a basin study has been done, that has been considered. There are only a couple of locations that have been identified as possible spots, one being the post office, and at some points in time they looked at Shell Creek. The nature of the city is that the sites that are left undeveloped are so scattered that it is hard to build a regional site. He recognized that a regional site would be a better way because there would be fewer facilities to maintain, they are easier to maintain and clean, and it would be less costly for everyone. He feels it unfortunate for Edmonds that things are developed as they are. Sites, if you can find one, are very expensive. Councilmember Kasper mentioned that there are now wetlands which did not exist previously. Mr. Walker agreed, stating that we are limited in doing things within creeks and wetlands which in the past could have been done. City Attorney Snyder described a silver lining in this particular rain cloud. In addition to the city being built out, there also are a number of storm waterways (Shell Creek and others that run through the City) and you are downhill near the Sound. Many of the flooding problems and claims that the City receives on an annual basis on Olympic and Talbot Road where there has been historic flooding, are the result of upstream development. Jurisdictions are liable for that flooding, and overall the City will Approved City Council Minutes December 6, 1994 Page 7 benefit from a multi jurisdictional approach that Ecology is putting forward. It will have some burdens on the City, but his guess is that over the years as these standards are developed, particularly in Peninville and the northern part of the city, the City will see more positive benefits because it is responsible with the upstream communities for flooding that occurs. Mayor Hall opened the public portion of the hearing. Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, stated that Edmonds seems to have been the leader with its basin studies, the bypass of some creeks, and has made a very far reaching effort to control water runoff. He thinks that being a leader, more time should be spent to look at all the negatives and positives on this and decide whether or not we want to take this as a forced issue and take everything offered, or whether we want to sort through it and devise our own plan that fits the city better and possibly cheaper. Recently, in Lake Stevens where his son lives, 20th Street was improved. When the paving, widening and new water line were completed, they excavated a huge pit and brought in a prefabricated cement tank to protect Lake Stevens from the stormwater runoff on that street. Mr. Hertrich wondered whether or not when they improve 9th Avenue again or Main Street or whatever, will Edmonds be required to dig a number of these pits to take care of city streets. He believes it will be an issue in widening Highway 99 and other highway projects. He further questioned what the cost might be to the City of Edmonds and whether or not it might be desirable to carve this ordinance down to take a positive, but sensible and reasonable and financially practical, approach. The public portion of the hearing was closed. Councilmember Petruzzi spoke to Mr. Hertrich's suggestion to modify the ordinance. He asked if Ecology was requiring the City to take the ordinance carte blanche. Mr. Walker understands it is as far as the major elements of the plan. Councilmember Petruzzi asked if there had been discussions with Ecology as to possibly reconfiguring the ordinance. Mr. Walker replied that the ordinance submitted has been somewhat pared down from what Ecology had. What was thought not to be to the heart of the issue or essential were eliminated. The main elements meet requirements that Ecology has set forward. Councilmember Petruzzi submitted there may be some items in the ordinance that may be considered overkill. He thinks the overkill could catch up with us as Mr. Hertrich discussed. He suggested that a meeting be held with Ecology to look at the issues that will impact us the most, and see if there is a way to mitigate their request as opposed to circumventing what they are trying to accomplish. Mr. Walker said that could be done. There is an APWA Stormwater Managers meeting group that meets and has discussions with Ecology on the ordinance, and there has been some contact there. He did not know if there had been any contact with them regarding some of the issues. Mr. Walker stated that in some areas we will gain less benefit in the new development community because stormwater is already there. He advised that in some systems it will not make much difference. He also mentioned that Edmonds already does detention with its own public projects and cited examples of 72nd when it was extended for Public Works and the L.I.D. street, as well as others utilizing the same requirements we require of developers as to detaining water. Mayor Hall reported the City has a good relationship with the Department of Ecology and cited examples of the fish hatchery and some of the issues in the Shell Valley drainage basin. She indicated it Approved City Council Minutes December 6, 1994 Page 8 was sometimes best not to ask too many questions but yet follow all the rules, but suggested it doesn't mean we can't revisit some of it. She asked Hydraulics Engineer Don Fiene if he had anything to add. Mr. Fiene stated that with regard to the Ecology concerns, we have to meet certain requirements as far as control of storms and how they compute it. He indicated we do have flexibility on some other issues. Mr. Fiene reported that a copy of the pared down version had been sent to Ecology and was in the process of being reviewed. He advised Council that one of the things that may happen if the City does not go through with the ordinance and with their requirements is that the grants received in the past may not be received. He reported that in the last couple of years the City had received approximately $500,000 in grants. One question that may be on the application is whether or not the City is following the guidelines set out in the ordinance. Projects like the Talbot Road diversion project where flooding is being alleviated and the sewer outfall line (a sewer project) are being funded by a sizable grant because they are under the Centennial Clean Water Grant Program. If we are not adhering to the requirements, there may be a problem. Councilmember Kasper asked Mr. Fiene if he thinks this would have a lot of effect on infiltration in the sewer system and if it would be of any value. Mr. Fiene did not think so. He reported having done a study on the problem and had a test area where they put in sewer lids that take into account the problem of the infiltration into the sewer lids themselves. It looked like the impact was about a 15% reduction, so it did do something. However, it wasn't enough to justify the cost of the lids and the maintenance on them. If it is getting in through infiltration, it could be the possibility we might pick up more rain water by having more detention, but he does not believe it that significant. Mayor Hall asked Noel Miller, Superintendent of Public Works, for his input. Mr. Miller acknowledged the need, under the new ordinance, for more maintenance on the public drainage system. Mr. Miller also mentioned that the new ordinance would require private system maintenance as well. He does not see individuals going out of their way to do anything on their own property. COUNCILMEMBER EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, Jr THAT STAFF MEET WITH THE BUILDING COMMUNITY AND THAT, PURSUANT TO +� COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI'S REQUEST, A COUPLE OF OTHER MEETINGS MIGHT BE IN ORDER, WITH ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULED AS SOON AS IS REASONABLE IN JANUARY. COUNCILMEMBER EARLING REQUESTED A REPORT BACK TO COUNCIL ON THE OUTCOME OF THOSE MEETINGS. SECOND AGREED. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Petruzzi confessed that if the time frame goes beyond February 1, he would rather beg forgiveness than not have proper discussion with the community. [Councilmember Petruzzi left the room.] Approved City Council Minutes December 6, 1994 Page 9 ANNUAL REPORT FROM MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE STEPHEN CONROY Judge Steve Conroy reported on the operations of the Edmonds Municipal Court. He provided to the Council a report which recounted the statistics involving revenues and filings broken down from the court's 1986 inception. The breakdowns are by month, year and type of cases. Judge Conroy called 1 \)Uouncit attention to the first page after the graph where he tried to figure patterns with regard to case �1 filings and the relationship to revenues. For example, 1989 was one of the lowest years in filings, yet the revenues for 1990 were the highest ever. He said it looked like filings will be lower this year, but revenues have held. He can't make projections for 1995. Judge Conroy reported that court is still held all day Monday -- arraignments at 8:30 a.m., pretrials, sentencings and review hearings at about 10:30, and bench trials at 1:30. On alternate Friday mornings the contested infraction calendar is heard at 9:30 and 10:30. These take up the entire morning. Night courts are held two Wednesday evenings per month from. approximately 6:00 p.m. to completion which is generally around 9:00 p.m. Every morning there are bail hearings. Weekend court hearings are still held, and that type of hearing has "grown a life of its own". Originally, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that people in custody had to have a review of the probable cause for their arrest and detention within 48 hours of their arrest. Weekends were not included in that computation. [Councilmember Petruzzi returned.] Consequently, instead of merely reviewing paperwork, hearings are held. A lot of cases are resolved at that hearing. It is an efficient way of handling these. In a budgetary context, Judge Conroy expressed pride in the court's ability to operate responsibility. They are able to operate within budget quite well and service the community and volume of cases with the existing staff and resources. Though the court is not designed for revenue purposes, Judge Conroy feels the court has a responsibility to the citizens to run in an efficient way. Mayor Hall apprised Judge Conroy that she appreciated their once -a -month review meetings. Judge Conroy advised that the Office of the Administrator of the Courts requires a report turned in monthly in which revenue is broken down as to what goes to the City and State, as well as case filings broken down into categories. That document and those figures are what is reviewed with Mayor Hall. Councilmember Kasper asked for clarification of the case filing breakdown. Judge Conroy reminded Council that "IT" represents infractions (which carry a fine rather thanjail time, i.e., speeding, failing to stop at stop signs, driving with no insurance); "IN", non -traffic infractions (i.e., jaywalking); "PP", parking; "DWI", driving under the influence; "CT", criminal traffic (violations for which jail time may be received, i.e., reckless driving, driving while license suspended or with no valid license); TN", criminal non -traffic (i.e., assault, shoplifting, disorderly conducts, criminal domestic violence); "DV", civil domestic violence restraining orders. Judge Conroy advised the court is still operating with four clerks and a court administrator. The court's new clerk has been with the court for about three months and is enthusiastic and working out well. He stated further that not much changes. They see the same types of people, the same people, and the same problems. Approved City Council Minutes December 6, 1994 Page 10 Mayor Hall commented that the court is still operating without a bailiff. Judge Conroy reiterated the court was operating without a bailif, without a law library and without a courtroom. Mayor Hall commended Judge Conroy on the good comments on his procedure and court demeanor and the fact that he reflects the standards of the City of Edmonds. Judge Conroy advised that the court staff enjoys working there and further advised Councilmember Dwyer it is still the best job in town. ANNUAL REPORT FROM PUBLIC DEFENDER JAMES FELDMAN James Feldman indicated he had just completed his seventh year. His ledger review indicated he had had 175 cases for the first 11 months. Those were individuals who were charged with offenses that carried a threat of jail. This averages out to 16 cases per month. This number fluctuates high in the spring and lower in the winter. From his standpoint, the system works well. Mr. Feldman is present most of the day on Monday; he has nothing to do with Judge Conroy's Friday court which deals with the traffic infractions. He deals with in -custody people. His job is primarily to defend these people in the best way possible. The secondary duty is in terms of administrative justice -- to make sure that whatever he does is not solely to defeat the ends of justice or the mechanisms of orderly court. He does not believe they have ever had an appeal from this court. Councilmember Petruzzi asked how many of the 175 cases a year are plea bargained. Mr. Feldman doesn't think they have had a jury trial on a public defender case year. They average about two to three bench trials a month. The remainder are plea bargained. He reminded Council that for the most part these are not violent crimes. He also advised there is a system of government and police department in Edmonds that basically arrests people who have committed crimes. Most of the people are somewhat involved, and it is not cost-effective for them to go to trial it in fact, the end result is they will be found guilty. It is also not cost-effective for the City to spend a lot of time and effort on someone who is not going to be a threat to society again in the future. A lot of times you are dealing with first offenders. Councilmember Hall pointed out that he has seen Mr. Feldman in action on a few occasions and is amazed that someone can have a rapport with a person like this who is in a high stress relationship at the time. There is nobody else in the chamber at that point who is in charge of the defendants other than Mr. Feldman. It is nice to have someone there to marshall these people and organize things. Mr. Feldman does a very good job. Mayor Hall expressed her appreciation for his record of no appeals. ANNUAL REPORT FROM PROSECUTOR DAVID STEINER , David Steiner followed up on the question of plea bargains. He thinks the court runs very smoothly. He has had the opportunity to experience other courts by pro-teming, most recently at Northeast District Court and Kent Municipal Court. He has seen how other courts run, and thinks Edmonds Municipal Court runs very efficiently through the judge, the prosecution and the defense. He expressed his opinion that Mr. Feldman does a very good job and that they work well together and have a good system working. Mr. Steiner agrees with Judge Conroy that nothing much changes which Approved City Council Minutes December 6, 1994 Page 11 he feels is good for the court. Things have run smoothly for the four years he has been there. He provided a handout from the City of Lynnwood that shows the relative costs of prosecution services. The handout shows the City of Edmonds second from the bottom in terms of actual cost. He believes Edmonds has a good conviction ratio for the crimes that are charged. He has not been able to do a study showing what other cities do as it is a rather extensive process. Also, such studies are subject to criticism because of the fact that cases that you decide not to file have an effect on the conviction ratio in the end. Most of our cases continue to be resolved at the lower level in the arraignment process. Because of that we are able to keep costs down and court days down. He has seen other courts wherein the majority of people plead not guilty, with the case going on to pretrial, etc. In Edmonds, if a study were done, you would find most people plead guilty. He believes that is because he and the public defender are there for the arraignments. Persons coming in have an opportunity to speak with both. Mr. Steiner tells them what he is going to recommend; Mr. Feldman is able to tell them the consequences and other options. Because of that people do go through with a better understanding of the system and what they are up against. Mayor Hall thanked Mr. Steiner because of the glowing compliments received from the police, attorneys and others alike. ANNUAL REPORT FROM HEARING EXAMINER JAMES DRISCOLL i James Driscoll reported he had been Hearing Examiner for 10 years. He indicated he liked giving reports in December because he has a fairly good idea of what has been done. He is presently in the process of developing a complete summary of all cases heard. The summary will be finished after the December 17 hearing and will provide Council with copies. Over the course of the year there were 54 separate hearings held. This is an increase of 13 hearings over last year. The yearly average for the past five to six years has been 51 cases. In reviewing the statistics, it is reflected that this is a city where in -growth has occurred. He commented on the belief stated earlier in the meeting about the 1,500 still available to be developed. He thinks that shows in the activity before him. During the past year PRDs and plats accounted for only 3 of the 54 hearings while appeals amounted to 8 hearings. There were 14 conditional use permit hearings, 18 variances, 2 street map amendments, and 3 shoreline permit requests. There were still 6 hearings that he needs to hold. One is another street map amendment and a preliminary plat coming up Thursday, and the rest are conditional use permits and variances. At least 50% or more of the activity in the city is conditional use permits or variances. This means dealing with a parcel of land that is already developed. Very few plats have come up since 1985. He thinks it will be interesting to see what the impact will be on plat development when the Growth Management Act starts being implemented and enforced and the different density requirements of the Act are enforced. Also, issues such as the stormwater drainage ordinance presently before the Council and things of that nature will have a real impact on plat development. In reviewing the cases, some are time consuming and some very simple. Some he thinks could be done administratively although as the process is set up and the ordinances are set up, it has to go through a regular hearing process. Others can be very complex; a small variance can end up a very complex and time consuming issue. He does not think in the past year he has heard anything he has not heard Approved City Council Minutes December 6, 1994 Page 12 before. There are some evolving issues of which he feels the City should be aware. He has prepared a Est of four: 1. Temporary Parking Lots. These have become a difficult issue to resolve. The issues are: What is temporary? Who is to enforce the temporary nature of the parking lot? What do you do if the parking lot has been temporary since 1987 and has just been brought up in 1994? Have they had an opportunity to make it a permanent lot? Another issue that should be reviewed is what standard should be imposed for temporary parking lots. What standards should be imposed on temporary parking lots? Usually these are vacant investment properties. Many times the owner is not ready to invest at that particular time, wants to get some return on the property, wants to convert it to a temporary parking lot for an adjoining business of some sort. The issue becomes that if he/she is only going to use that for two years, should he have to put an impervious surface on the site, should there have to be landscaping, should there have to be all kinds of improvements made? There are pros and cons to that issue. The pros are that while it is being used for the community, the same standards should apply. The argument against that type of requirement would be that to require that amount of investment detracts from the potential for developing the land. These are policy issues that will eventually have to be addressed by the Council if the city continues to have temporary parking lots. 2. Cellular Phone Monopoles. Mr. Driscoll acknowledged the need for sensitivity on this issue because of the upcoming hearing. This matter has come before him on numerous occasions. Currently, monopoles are allowed in neighborhood business, require a conditional use permit, and always require a variance because they are going to exceed the 25' height limit. He feels Mr. Hart earlier made some valid points. We have a technology that did not exist when the zoning code was adopted. At the time the zoning code was adopted all you would have would be ham operators or possibly radio or TV people. During the last three months he has had three different companies before him asking for the same conditional use permit and variance. Mr. Driscoll thinks it would behoove the City to send this issue to the Planning Board for review, set up some specific standards as to where the monopoles would be allowed, and get representatives from the cellular industry to come in and talk about the technology to see if there is a possibility of clustering them in a certain part of town. You are also getting into the area of First Amendment issues. You can't regulate the First Amendment or the rights under that. You can regulate the zoning. He thinks that issue needs to be considered. 3. Recreational Facilities in Single-family Houses. Mr. Driscoll lists this as another issue which has come up during the past year. He has held two hearings on the establishment of sports facilities in the backyard. These include tennis courts, swimming pools and things of that nature. The applicant's say that the City's regulation is too strict and ask why they should not be able to use these facilities in the back yard the same as anyone else uses their back yard. The argument, of course, is that if you have a basketball court, people are going to be playing at all hours of the night and could impact the rest of the neighborhood. This is a rather new issue in the past five or six years. Mr. Driscoll thinks the issue will eventually have to be addressed by the Council as to what standards are to be required for the development of a back yard through those types of recreational purposes. Approved City Council Minutes December 6, 1994 Page 13 4. One other issue that has come up is procedural, that is how often a continuance can be granted by the Hearing Examiner before a request is denied. Mr. Driscoll has no answer. Repeated continuances have the potential of being an abuse of process just waiting to wear down the opposition or the neighborhood so that they won't come back to the third hearing if it's continued. He will attempt to develop something and present it to Council for a change in the procedure so this issue is addressed. Mr. Driscoll suggested that after the second continuance there would have to be a re -application. There is a lot of time put in by all concerned. There should be some type of equitable solution where there will be some type of consequence suffered by such an applicant. Regarding the future of the Hearing Examiner position, the appellate courts of the state continue to adhere to very strict standards in the process that is used in land use hearings. Last year the Supreme Court adopted the Lutheran Day Care v. Snohomish County where they said property rights were civil rights that are protected by the Constitution, and any violation of those civil rights opens liability to the City. During the past year the courts have looked at two more cases and have affirmed that position. As a result, the City of Lynnwood and the City of Seattle were hit with a civil rights suit as a result of the land use process. Both paid substantial sums of money to the property owner. It is believed the courts will continue to impose this strict standard. Mr. Driscoll thinks it important to stay on top of the process to make sure there is due process. The courts are also going to start applying the Dolan v. Ci , y of Tigard Supreme Court case out of Oregon. Therein, a woman had a hardware store, and the City was trying to put in a bike trail. The court said the conditions have to relate to the impacts. That has been pretty much the law in the state of Washington, but the courts will be looking more closely at the case when interpreting any land use review. There will also be the further implementation of the GMA. Mr. Driscoll feels it will be interesting to see how the density issues will be dealt with. In the upcoming legislative session there is a move to regulate reform of the procedures of land use hearings. The Governor's regulatory commission tried to get legislation through last year and did not succeed. However, the individuals who are on that commission will be making a full faith effort to do it again this year. Some of the issues would be different methods of appeal and give the city options as to how appeals of Hearing Examiner decisions will be handled. Another issue will be the consolidation of SEPA appeals with the underlying permit that is being requested. That's all a process to expedite the system so that administrative review can be done at one particular time and they have an idea of how long it will take. He will keep the Council apprised of new developments. Mayor Hall said that when the Hearing Examiner position was established as opposed to the Board of Adjustment, there was doubt. She complimented Mr. Driscoll on the favorable comments received regarding his work as Hearing Examiner and his ability to deal with the people involved. ANNUAL REPORT FROM CITY ATTORNEY SCOTT SNYDER colt Snyder stated this had been an unusual year that has seen him represent Edmonds from the U. S. Supreme Court to South District Court on a recent towing matter. In that range of actions one thing stands out is the difficulty the Council has in budgeting for legal services. The budget is basically a contingency. The Mayor and staff have been very successful in the last few years in reducing the legal costs. Four or five years ago the legal expenditures ran in the mid-$300,000 and has now been reduced Approved City Council Minutes December 6, 1994 Page 14 to $225-250,000. Through September of this year his firm had not used Edmonds' retainer, and there was a credit built up of approximately 100 hours. This last two months has seen a rash of suits, mostly in Superior Court, of three writ actions, the Postman case, and the Burrell action. A lot of these are very unusual cases which have come up and been resolved. Mr. Snyder brought November's bill so it would be available next week when Council met with candidates. It can be used to emphasize the swings the budget goes through each year. From a risk management point of view, Mr. Snyder raised three issues. In a recent decision of the Court of Appeals in the case of City of Tacoma. v. Rivett, stood for the proposition that a city may no longer require abutting property owners to maintain sidewalks. That has the effect of preventing the city from passing the liability for maintenance back to the sidewalk owners, and we have already brought forward an amendment which Council enacted to change the City Code. In terms of administration of your sidewalk program, it puts immense emphasis on the need for the City to proactively inspect and repair sidewalks. He believes Staff will find over the next year that some of the capital improvement priorities will change, particularly in the seven-year tiff. You can still require people to clear snow and ice off their sidewalks, but those buckles and heaves are back on the City. Mr. Snyder further stated that they have provided legal services on request. He suggests next year's city attorney review and update the business license revocation procedures. They are '30s vintage and are difficult to administer. More tools and an orderly process are needed. He reminded the Council that the City's biggest outstanding liability is its adult entertainment ordinance. Going into an election year with five Councilmembers seeking election, it will not likely be addressed. One reason he is emphasizing it is with Snohomish County enacting a moratorium on its property and with the neighbors having changed and tightened requirements, it makes the city a potentially more attractive target, not necessarily to locate here, but to come in here and, whether through damages or court action or requiring the City to purchase that site, to get some money out of it. Mr. Snyder advised that his firm would be sending around a questionnaire regarding services they provide regularly for other clients of which the City has not taken advantage -- E-mail direct document forwarding. They have a variety of software packages and will be sending around a questionnaire to see if that flow of information back and forth can be better coordinated with the City. This is Mr. Snyder's 1 Ith year as City Attorney. BUDGET WORK SESSION — CONTINUED DISCUSSION Councilmember Petruzzi reported that over the weekend he, Councilmember Earling and Councilmember Fahey met to discuss the budget. They came up with some recommendations to the At ' rest of the Council which he passed out. One of the key elements in their recommendations is that outside the 103% that the Mayor has proposed, they felt since this budget has been reported extensively to the community as a balanced Approved City Council Minutes December 6, 1994 Page 15 budget it would be excessive for the Council to turn around and say that we do have to take the other 3% or even that we want to take one of the 3% that we left on the table last year. Since it has been represented as balanced, and since there have been many other requests since the budget was proposed, including an additional $34,500, that the necessary budget cuts be made in order to really balance the budget. There are certain items they wish to add. They have been broken down into categories as put together in a memorandum sent to Council from the Mayor's office. Councilmember Petruzzi called Council's attention to the fact they included an additional $50,000 reserve for the fire truck. By 1999 we need $1 million, with hardly anything set aside. There is another $50,000 that was already budgeted, but he feels there is a need for another $50,000 in order to get this reserve off the ground. He does not want to be in Edmonds, Councilmember or not, and acknowledge he was on the Council that allowed us to know that we needed $1 million five years hence and did nothing to resolve it. Council President John Nordquist commented to Councilmember Petruzzi that this was on the agenda last week and was withdrawn. He was asked by the administration when it was replaced if it would become a full-blown hearing, and Council President Nordquist indicated it was for informational purposes only to be discussed on Thursday. He requested, and received, confirmation from Councilmember Petruzzi. Mr. Petruzzi indicated tonight's discussion was to provide the reasoning behind the conclusions reached. [Mayor Hall left the room.] Councilmember Petruzzi noticed in the December 6 memorandum from the Mayor, she talked about her priorities on a street overlay. It was his feeling that the failed levy that the public has come forward to state that they want the basic infrastructure taken care of, but won't give more money to do so, feeling the City should use the money it has now in a better fashion. [Mayor Hall returned.] Councilmember Earling indicated there were three issues he wished to highlight, one of which was raised at the last meeting. That issue was his concern over the Highway 99 project. With the amount of money not yet set aside for the project, it looks like the problem is something in the range of $200- 300,000 short for when we need to expend money in 1996. He indicated his knowledge of the $400,000 set aside for that in the budget. Budget items they are addressing this evening makes an attempt to recoup some of that with the $100,000. Councilmember Earling urged favorable consideration by the Council. His second concern is the Boys' and Girls' Club. The City of Edmonds has a reputation of having the good fortune of being a relatively affluent community. However, he thinks there are situations where many of the city's younger people need a place to be while their parents are working. Over the years the Council has taken the position to keep this building in as good repair as possible. The Alderwood Rotary Club has presented a challenge (the Edmonds Rotary Club is trying to participate in this project) to match their effort of $28,000. The Mayor's budget has a little over $17,000 set aside. He would like to see the City Council step up and meet the challenge for the $28,000. Councilmember Earling further highlighted a work -in -progress. The Council has been putting together a Community Cultural Plan. Several of the Council members are involved in various committees in V4�1 Approved City Council Minutes December 6, 1994 Page 16 that effort. He stated his belief that Edmonds is a natural artist community, particularly in recent years with the Edmonds Arts Commission and the high profile, quality work they have done, as well as long- standing groups such as the Edmonds Arts Festival which has helped with the study that is under way, along with the Cascade Symphony, the Driftwood Players, and the Olympic Ballet. Councilmember Earling believes that with the arts assessment we've been going through, that now is the unique opportunity for Council to grasp the potential the community has as an arts community. In looking at the plan, some fairly specific items can be considered and pulled together in a job description that would benefit not only the cultural lives of Edmonds and South Snohomish County, but also will do a great deal to enhance the economic well-being of the community. He requested the opportunity to speak on this again Thursday and asked the Council to give this high priority this next year. Mayor Hall advised Councilmember Earling that approximately five letters in support of that arrived this afternoon. A file has been started. Councilmember Fahey reiterated what Councilmember Earling stated in terms of some priorities. She would like us, from the Council's side, to be able to do a matching fund situation for the Boys' and Girls' Club. She feels it an important asset to the community, and that a really good facility is needed where young people can spend time. It is becoming more and more necessary with the latchkey programs going on. Councilmember Fahey indicated they were unified in their desire to add the $11,000 under the Council budget to the $17,500 in the budget. Councilmember Fahey also supports the position for the arts coordinator, but they are hoping to rework the numbers and look at what the current job entails. They are looking at a part time position to carry on the other items done by the coordinator so there isn't quite the expense. She acknowledged the desire to do a lot of catch-up, but she personally feels that saying this was a balanced budget was not accurate because there were several items known in advance to need inclusion and weren't. It was known a consultant would have to be hired for the franchise, and that wasn't included. Now, money for it must be found. She feels these monies were not included in the budget in the hope that the Council would agree to another 3% raise. From her discussions with Edmonds citizens, they don't want to see higher taxes. We must be able to position ourselves in the near future to go to them and ask for a bond issue to pay for our space needs. She stated we can't do things now to establish a mindset that all we do is ask for more money. She thinks the message was clear when they wouldn't vote for additional monies for street improvements. The Council is expected to provide those things out of the monies generated from the City in a reasonable way. In looking at what is contained in the budget, in addition to knowing some things had to be added, there are areas they feel can't be considered this year. First of all, she believes, the Council will have to eliminate the newsletter next year, even though it is a valuable tool and communication is important. By doing video taping, it is felt the Council is trying to make an effort to reach the citizens. Perhaps, other ways of reaching the citizens to provide information about city happenings can be found. The two papers also do a good job. This is something they acknowledge needs to be cut. They can understand the request and possible need for a vehicle for the Mayor, and that area of service, but right now there is doubt as to how it can be afforded. As we go into the next cycle of replacing some of our vehicles or if we have leased vehicles that are turned back, at that point a year from now we can think about retaining one of Approved City Council Minutes December 6, 1994 Page 17 those and putting into the service of the City, but for right now it seems more practical to expend the actual cost of using private vehicles. That item is recommended to be removed from the budget. There are a lot of good requests in the budget, but some requests are excessive. Even though the percentage increases don't appear to be terribly high, the dollar amounts are. Councilmember Fahey cited major consulting fee requests previously not included in the budget. The costs for seminars and training are important, but affordability must be considered. There are numerous requests for software and equipment updates, including $17,000 for software maintenance and an increase of $6,500 for software updates. Councilmember Fahey believes that even in a catch-up mode, these items cannot be afforded all at once. The presenting Council members do not wish to entertain a 3% additional tax to cover these items. They are asking Staff to go back and re-evaluate their budgets. By cutting 1% from each of the budgets and finding just a few things to be deferred to next year, we can come up with the shortfall there from the items that were added to the budget out of necessity. It is believed this can be a successful situation. / Councilmember Petruzzi pointed out that they showed cuts needed of $130,500, but that was before a request for another $34,500 in the salary pool. Now we are up to $175,000 that needs to be cut from the budget in order for it to be truly balanced. Also in the Mayor's memo, their plan proposed to raise money for $165,700 from Fund 325 to be put into the 99 Project and street overlay. The Mayor's memo states she doesn't believe we can use this bond money to do that. In two meetings Council was urged to take money from other areas because there were insufficient funds in the 325 Fund to do what was supposed to be done in the Public Works facility. Some of the money used was interest, but a lot went to other projects. If we can't take it directly, maybe we can take it indirectly by paying those other funds back and then taking the money from those funds to transfer to the street overlay. Councilmember Petruzzi knows numerous people in the community whose streets haven't been touched in 20 years. He believes the people want the streets done, but they don't want to be taxed for it. He further pointed out that 22 of the last 26 bond issues have failed. We should get the message from that. Councilmember Petruzzi would like to know Thursday night if $165,000 from the 325 Fund can be transferred back into the funds pirated in order to do work that was attributable to the Public Works Department and they transferred from those funds to the 112 Fund so the $65,000 can be provided for street overlay and $100,000 for Highway 99. Mayor Hall advised Councilmember Petruzzi that they got a reading from Lee Vorhees regarding those monies and the capitalization. Mr. Petruzzi acknowledged that but asked if we can take it from there and put it in here. He feels it needs to go back to the fund from which it came originally. He believes $150-160,000 was taken when the decision was made on how to complete the lighting system as there was insufficient money in the 325 Fund to complete the project. If the money came from those other funds, it should go back, and then it can be transferred to whatever fund is desired. Councilmember Dwyer spoke to three issues. He continues in his belief that a mistake was made last year in not taking 6%, and he believes we must do so this year. Councilmember Dwyer stated further he does not believe it is Staffs responsibility to cut their budgets. If it is desired to limit the revenue to that 3% level again, it is Council's responsibility to come up with the $165,000. He feels it clear the amount of money at that level, especially after four or five years of tight budgets, is going to require Approved City Council Minutes December 6, 1994 Page 18 decisions that reflect policy orientation. The easiest way to close the gaps is with people. There is nothing that costs more money or saves more money like people. He thinks it is wishful to think that we can do a 1.3%.across-the-board cut after having budgets of the type that have been had for the past few years. If the City is going to come up with $165,000 there is going to have to be qualitative decisions made as to what services we won't provide, and those decisions should be made by Council. With regard to the cultural arts coordinator, Councilmember Dwyer cannot envision supporting adding an employee in a situation where we are $165,000 out of balance. He also cannot envision supporting this employee until working out a restructuring or reorganization of that level of this department. He doesn't believe there is 2,000 hours of work at that level in this department. He feels during the ' summer it is a full time job, but not during December and January. We have both an athletics U'p coordinator and a recreation coordinator. He believes Mr. McIntosh does wonderful work, but doesn't A believe he has 2,000 hours of work to do in a year. The other spot at that level is the arts coordinator with one-third being transformed to two-thirds added. What we are going to have is four spots at that level that are not full time. We have an idea of what is to happen with an arts coordinator, but there is no plan. Councilmember Dwyer is not yet sold that this is the way to go. t� Councilmember Kasper feels somewhat along the lines of Councilmember Dwyer. He thinks too much money is being spent. He thinks the public desires are being built, but Council's job is first public services. The Boys' Club is an 1890 building and before he is willing to spend any money on it, he j' wants an outside building inspection of the structure. If money is to be spent, the structural work must be done first or find another site. The problem with another site is that it must be near a playfield. The other area on which he is adamant is that there was $239,000 in the Highway 99 project last budget, and it is gone. Now, they are talking about adding $100,000 back, but that is still $130,000 short of where we were a year ago. There is an obligation coming at Council which he has discussed with the �h Lynnwood people, and they as well as our departing Engineer stated (and he also showed methods of how it could be worked out) the Council has to have itself in the $600,000 bracket by next year. The fire engine is important. The City bought the last fire engine when it was given an additional 1% sales tax. Councilmember Kasper would rather build up a reserve of not -spent money if minds can't be made up about what to do with it, but he is not willing to go out and ask for taxes just to turn around and ask for a bond issue. He thinks the budget needs to be pared down some more. He agrees with Councilmember Dwyer relative to parks and recreation. A lot of money is being spent in the 125 Fund. He can't see where the money has gone. He feels the matching grants are to the City's detriment in some instances. Councilmember Kasper is not willing to support what he sees coming at Council. He feels progress has been made tonight, but more cuts are needed. Mayor Hall expressed appreciation to the three Council members and the checks and balances on the Council. The Council can take the proposition under advisement and go from there. She agrees with Councilmember Dwyer that she did present the preliminary budget. She is willing to listen and accept modifications in hopes of coming to a meeting of the minds. Art Housler, Administrative Services Director, clarified Councilmember Kasper's statement stating that the $220,000 was carried over. This was gone over at last week's meeting. It shows on page 130 that the beginning cash for 1995 was $235,000 under the street fund, and the ending balance for 1995 is $270,000, so it clearly shows that the $220,000 was carried over. Councilmember Kasper protested Approved City Council Minutes December 6, 1994 Page 19 that it was not in there as a 99 reserve. Mr. Housler called attention to Priority 13 which is the 1995 budget discussion items from four community services. The SR 99 project prepared by Mr. Mar is at the third page from the back. He suggested Council read this, particularly the second paragraph from the bottom. Mr. Mar met with Bob Dixon, Lynnwood City Engineer, on November 30, and this paragraph lays out what money is needed for this project. It shows $100,000 is needed in 1996; $200,000 in 1997, $200,000 in 1998, and $100,000 in 1999. So, $1,000,000 is not needed for 1995. He again encouraged Council to re -read that portion. Councilmember Kasper stated he would bring information from the City of Lynnwood as well. His information came from the Public Works Director. Councilmember Petruzzi asked if he could get a consensus of the Council that their presented document would be the starting point on Thursday night. Final decisions need to be made. He would also like Council consensus as to which way to handle the cuts. He noted that Councilmember Dwyer made some very compelling points about Council making the cuts, but he doesn't necessarily think they must be employees. He expressed concern that, in making cut decisions, Council may take out something that may injure Staff. He requested other ideas. Council President Nordquist responded by saying that it had been decided that each one of the Councilmembers would be presenting a wish list or some of the things they would like to eliminate. There are four more individuals who would like to give their input on Thursday before really getting into this proposition. Councilmember Petruzzi suggested this could be a starting document to which items could be added or subtracted. ' Councilmember.Petruzzi asked Mr. Housler to check to see how much money was transferred into the 325 Fund or whatever fund was utilized to complete the projects dealing with street lights. He would like Council to look at transferring that money out and transferring back to cover the items that were to be covered by the 325 Fund. MAYOR HALL Mayor Hall announced that the train and train car came through on a four minute stop. She had occasion to speak briefly with D. I Mitchell. They are still considering opening Stampede Pass so that 60 trains a day did not traverse Edmonds' landscape. It is thought talks will be soon. Mayor Hall clarified with Mr. Wilson the cutoff for the appeal by Fire District No. 1 to the Boundary Review Board decision. This matter has generated a lot of interest. COUNCIL Council President Nordquist reminded Council of Thursday's 5:30 p.m. meeting and asked for the structure desired for the meeting. He will be providing box lunches. He further reminded Council of City Attorney interviews on Monday at 6:00 p.m. He also handed out information on the four 4 candidates. Approved City Council Minutes December 6, 1994 Page 20 Mayor Hall said she'd had interviews on the positions of Public Defender, Hearing Examiner and Prosecutor. Council President Nordquist indicated there is a need to set dates for Council interviewing for Hearing Examiner. He suggested either Thursday or Monday that could be discussed. COUNCILMEMBER STEVE DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DAVE EARLING, TO EXTEND THE MEETING BY FIVE MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Barb Fahey reported she received information on a telecommunications conference being sponsored by the Puget Sound Regional Council on January 6 in Seattle. She indicated it appeared there was a lot of valuable information to be discussed regarding cable installation issues and the new issues relating to the towers which she would like to attend. The cost is $50. COUNCILMEMBER MICHAEL HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHN NORDQUIST, TO SEND COUNCILMEMBER BARBARA FAHEY TO THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS CONFERENCE IN SEATTLE ON JANUARY 6. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Petruzzi again asked if the Council wanted Staff to propose cuts to the budget. Councilmember Dwyer thought no; Councilmember Hall suggested it be discussed Thursday. Councilmember Earling thanked the Mayor for greeting the commuter rail car in town last Friday and thanked Councilmember Fahey for going along for part of the ride. He also mentioned the rail car was in town today, and at 1:30-1:45 there had already been 200-250 through it. He felt the publicity Council got out was well received. Councilmember Hall said he thought the new sound system worked well and expressed his pleasure. He noted it has an automatic gauge that adjusts for increased volumes. He further stated that next P meeting Council would be able to tell how well it interfaced with the college in their taping of the meeting. He also called Council's attention to the fact that Police Officer Linda Binkley had been commended for her professionalism by the victim of an auto accident. At 10:05 p.m. the Council adjourned. 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. �\�RON�Ma. �MAR /_'_�-,r_ � ��H, CITY CLERK Approved City Council Minutes December 6, 1994 Page 21 DECEMBER 6, 1994 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 22, 1994 (C) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 29, 1994 (D) APPROVAL OF CLAIMS WARRANTS #944482 THRU #945948 FOR WEEK OF NOVEMBER 28, 1994; AND AND PAYROLL WARRANTS #946211 THRU #946505 FOR THE PERIOD OF NOVEMBER 16 THRU 30, 1994 (E) ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM ERIC MEISLAHN ($520) AND JUDY COLLINS ($6,500.00 est.) (F) APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FROM HEARING ON APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUED FOR A STREET MAP AMENDMENT AND VARIANCE FOR THE PROPOSED 12-UNIT MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT AT 8104 242ND ST. S.W. (APPLICANT: ROBERT KOO - FILE NOS. V-94-117 AND ST-94-118 / APPELLANT: NANCY VLCEK - FILE NO. AP-94- 161) [from Hearing of November 15, 1994] (G) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH OLYMPIC RESOURCES FOR EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM (H) REPORT ON BIDS OPENED NOVEMBER 23, 1994 FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT UNIFORM CLEANING AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO EDMONDS DRY CLEANERS ($6,408.00) 3. AUDIENCE 4. (5 Min.) ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF APPEALS OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION REGARDING 140' CELLULAR TOWER, VICINITY OF 650 EDMONDS WAY AND SET HEARING DATE 5. (15 Min.) HEARING ON ANNEXATION OF AURORA MARKETPLACE NEIGHBORHOOD AREA AND ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE 6. (20 Min.) HEARING ON PROPOSED STORMWATER ORDINANCE 7. (20 Min.) ANNUAL REPORT FROM MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE STEPHEN CONROY 8. (10 Min.) ANNUAL REPORT FROM PUBLIC DEFENDER JAMES FELDMAN 9. (10 Min.) ANNUAL REPORT FROM PROSECUTOR DAVID STEINER 10. (20 Min.) ANNUAL REPORT FROM HEARING EXAMINER JAMES DRISCOLL 11. (10 Min.) ANNUAL REPORT FROM CITY ATTORNEY SCOTT SNYDER - continued - EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DECEMBER 6, 1994 PAGE 2 12. (20 Min.) AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO PERFORM FEASIBILITY STUDY LOCATING AN AQUATIC/RECREATION COMPLEX AT THE NEW EDMONDS/WOODWAY HIGH SCHOOL 13. (20 Min.) BUDGET WORK SESSION - CONTINUED DISCUSSION 14. (5 Min.) MAYOR 15. (15 Min.) COUNCIL 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.