12/05/2000 City Council1
hange to
genda
rove
im
cks
ute
aking
ervices
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES
December 5, 2000
Following a Special Meeting at 6:30 p.m. for an Executive Session regarding a legal matter and an
interview of a candidate for the Architectural Design Board at 6:45 p.m., the Edmonds City Council
meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Haakenson in the Library Plaza Room 650 Main
Street. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Gary Haakenson, Mayor
Thomas A. Miller, Council President
Dave Earling, Councilmember
Michael Plunkett, Councilmember
Jim White, Councilmember
Lora Petso, Councilmember
Dave Orvis, Councilmember
Christopher Davis, Councilmember
ALSO PRESENT
Kim Boese, Student Representative
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
STAFF PRESENT
Al Compaan, Assistant Police Chief
Duane Bowman, Development Serv. Director
Stephen Clifton, Community Services Director
Peggy Hetzler, Administrative Services Director
Noel Miller, Public Works Director
Brent Hunter, Human Resources Director
Rob Chave, Planning Manager
Steve Bullock, Senior Planner
Scott Snyder, City Attorney
Sandy Chase, City Clerk
Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst.
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT,
TO AMEND THE AGENDA BY MOVING ITEM #5 TO ITEM #3A. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DAVIS, FOR
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember Petso requested Items B and G be removed from the consent agenda. Councilmember
Earling requested Item C be removed, and Councilmember Orvis requested Item K be removed.
COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER,
FOR APPROVAL OF THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Items approved are as follows:
(A) ROLL CALL
(D) APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #44904 THROUGH #45086 FOR THE WEEK OF
NOVEMBER 27, 2000, IN THE AMOUNT OF $274,996.93
(E) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH KARIN NOYES FOR MINUTE TAKING SERVICES
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 5, 2000
Page I
inute I
(F)
AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
Taking
WITH JEANNIE DINES FOR MINUTE TAKING SERVICES
Services
ublic
(H)
AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
efender
FOR LEGAL REPRESENTATION OF INDIGENT DEFENDANTS WITH JAMES
FELDMAN
ocating
ublic
(I)
AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH
acilities
SNOHOMISH COUNTY ON LOCATING ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES
[Recycling
(,n
AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN
oordinator
THE CITY OF LYNNWOOD AND CITY OF EDMONDS FOR JOINT FUNDING OF THE
RECYCLING COORDINATOR
Item B• Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of November 21, 2000
Councilmember Petso requested the reference to 2001 in the first paragraph on page 10 be revised to
2000. Councilmember White requested the second sentence in the seventh paragraph on page 13 be
revised to read, "He asked how this seuldke ged is regulate "
COUNCILMEMBER PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, FOR
Approve APPROVAL OF ITEM B. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The item approved is as
11/21/00
Minutes as follows:
Corrected
(B) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 21, 2000
Item C• Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of November 28, 2000
Councilmember Earling requested the first sentence on page 16 be revised as follows: "Councilmember
Earling reported Sound Transit express bus service moved 15,000 passengers a day in the first year."
COUNCILMEMBER EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT,
Approve FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM C. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The item approved is as
11/28/00 follows:
Minutes as
Corrected (C) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 28, 2000
Item G• Authorization for Mayor to Sign Employment Contract with Jana Spellman, Senior Executive
Assistant to the City Council
Councilmember Petso indicated she would vote in opposition to this item as nothing in the packet
materials justified the extraordinary increase of 16 %, which was well in excess of COLA and steps.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WHITE, FOR
�enior APPROVAL OF ITEM G. MOTION CARRIED; THE VOTE WAS 5 -2, COUNCILMEMBERS
xecutive PETSO AND ORVIS OPPOSED. The item approved is as follows:
ssistant
(G) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT WITH JANA
SPELLMAN, SENIOR EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Item K: Proposed Ordinance Reenacting Certain Ordinances Which Would Purportedly be Invalidated b
Initiative 722 by Reenacting Ordinance No. 3280 Establishing a Property Tax Levy, EMS Levy and Levy for
Voted Indebtedness• Ordinance No. 3281 Establishing a Tax on Its Sewer Utility; Ordinance No. 3282
Establishing a Transient (Non- Resident) Business License Fee; and Resolution No. 967 Amending the Fee
Schedule for Planning, Engineering and Other City Fees
Councilmember Orvis advised he would abstain from the vote on this matter as the referenced
ordinances and resolution were enacted prior to his being elected a Councilmember.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 5, 2000
Page 2
COUNCILMEMBER EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DAVIS, FOR
APPROVAL OF ITEM K. MOTION CARRIED; THE VOTE WAS 6 -0 -1, COUNCILMEMBER
ORVIS ABSTAINING. The item approved is as follows:
rd (K) ORDINANCE NO. 3337 REENACTING CERTAIN ORDINANCES WHICH WOULD
Reenacting ctin
Tax Levies PURPORTEDLY BE INVALIDATED BY INITIATIVE 722 BY REENACTING
d Fees ORDINANCE NO. 3280 ESTABLISHING A PROPERTY TAX LEVY, EMS LEVY AND
LEVY FOR VOTED INDEBTEDNESS; ORDINANCE NO. 3281 ESTABLISHING A TAX
ON ITS SEWER UTILITY; ORDINANCE NO. 3282 ESTABLISHING A TRANSIENT
(NON- RESIDENT) BUSINESS LICENSE FEE; AND RESOLUTION NO. 967 AMENDING
THE FEE SCHEDULE FOR PLANNING, ENGINEERING AND OTHER CITY FEES;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL
BECOME EFFECTIVE
3. CONFIRMATION OF APPOINTMENT TO ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD
Council President Miller explained the Council interviewed Derek Gustafson prior to tonight's Council
meeting. Senior Planner Steve Bullock introduced Mr. Gustafson, a landscape architect, and a resident
of Edmonds. Mr. Bullock said the ADB also interviewed Mr. Gustafson and were excited about his
joining the Board. Mr. Gustafson stated he was honored to be selected and appreciated the opportunity
Confirm to serve on the ADB.
Appoint-
ment to
B COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS, TO
CONFIRM THE APPOINTMENT OF DEREK GUSTAFSON TO THE ARCHITECTURAL
DESIGN BOARD. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Baring 3A. ANNUAL REPORT FROM HEARING EXAMINER RON MCCONNELL
xaminer
nnual Mr. McConnell advised he had enjoyed the past year and looked forward to another ear. He reported
eport P Y Y P
1999 had been the busiest year in the past 10 years; 2000 was a more normal pace.
Mayor Haakenson thanked Mr. McConnell for his hard work.
Council President Miller complimented Mr. McConnell on his work. He recognized the fair and
balanced judicial interpretation he provides and expressed his appreciation to Mr. McConnell for taking
the extra step to visit sites to assess the entire picture.
4. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING PROPOSED UTILITY RATE INCREASES
roposed . PROPOSED INCREASE IN WATER AND SANITARY SEWER CHARGES FOR NEW
Utility Rate
ncreases DEVELOPMENT
• PROPOSED GENERAL RATE INCREASE FOR SANITARY SEWER SERVICE FOR ALL
RESIDENTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS
Public Works Director Noel Miller explained the first issue under consideration was whether to establish
new capital charges for new development when connecting to the water and sanitary sewer; the second
issue was whether to increase sanitary sewer rates for all residents. He explained during the past year,
staff proposed raising the sanitary sewer rates to provide funds to repair /replace aging infrastructure and
comply with federal clean water laws. He advised the Council packet contained the minutes for the
March 21, 2000 public hearing which described the need for the rate increase. Following the public
hearing, the Council delayed any action due to requirements of I -695 which required a utility rate
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 5, 2000
Page 3
;.;
increase to be decided by the voters. During the March 2000 public hearing, the Council questioned
whether the rate increase could be reduced by securing Public Works Trust Fund loans from the State of
Washington and /or by imposing a capital connection charge on new development. Therefore, the utility
rate study contract with Financial Consulting Solutions Group (FCSG) was extended to consider the
effects of using Public Works Trust Fund monies and additional revenue generated by a capital
connection charge.
Tracy Dunlap, Senior Project Manager, Financial Consulting Solutions Group, explained although
capital connection charges may also be referred to as system development charges, general facilities
charges, capital facilities fees, etc., it was essentially a one -time, up -front fee collected from new
development or re- development that placed new demands on the utility system. She explained RCW
35.92.025 granted the City the authority to impose connection charges as a condition of utility service.
She said the main purpose of the capital connection charge was to provide an additional funding source
for capital but also addressed the issue of equity. The City currently charges $200 per connection for
water and has no charge for connection to sewer.
Ms. Dunlap reviewed the methodology used to determine the capital connection charge, the buy -in
method. She explained this method was based on investment in the existing utility systems, where a new
customer "buys" a proportionate share of the existing utility built by existing customers. Future planned
capital was included since projects are replacement in nature. She said an interest component was
included to recognize the cost of capital for excess capacity in the system to serve new growth. She
reviewed the steps for calculating a connection charge, 1) calculate the net allocable investment in utility
plant, adjusting for contributed assets (such as state and federal grants provided to construct wastewater
treatment plant), outstanding debt paid by rates, and adding interest, 2) determine customer base over
which the costs should be allocated (meter equivalents for water and ERUs for sewer), and 3) calculate
the proposed charge by dividing the allocable plant by the appropriate customer base. She explained
Step 2 included a proposed change to base the charge on meter equivalents (demand that each meter can
place on the system) rather than $200 per meter. Step 2 also recommended the use of Equivalent
Residential Units (ERUs) for sewer.
Ms. Dunlap displayed the results of the above calculations:
Utility
Current
Proposed
Water
$200 per connection
$ 908 per meter equivalent
Sewer
$0
$ 739 per ERU
TOTAL
$200
$1,647
Ms. Dunlap displayed a connection charge comparison that indicated Edmonds' connection charge
would continue to be one of the lowest. She explained this was due to 1) much of Edmonds' system was
constructed using Local Improvement Districts (LID), 2) the City has a dense, well developed system,
and 3) sewer costs are shared with other agencies. She pointed out cities /water districts that were less
developed extended water service into less developed areas, thus the higher cost. She acknowledged
although Edmonds' connection charge would continue to be one of the lowest, the proposal represented
an increase of over $1,400 for each single family equivalent unit connected to the system.
Ms. Dunlap reviewed the impact the connection charge had on the sewer rates recommendation. She
recalled a recommendation was provided earlier this year that sewer rates increase by 5 -6 %. She
explained the recommended scenario reflected the City's current budget, assumes the $739 per ERU
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 5, 2000
Page 4
would be implemented (which generates additional revenue for capital), and assumes the City would
secure approximately half the funding for capital improvements from the Public Works Trust Fund. She
recommended the Public Works Trust Fund monies be aggressively pursued. Other assumptions include
that the sewer utility will meet debt service- coverage on a stand alone basis beginning in 2001, a growth
rate of about 80 ERUs per year generating annual connection charge revenue of $60,000 per year,
connection charge revenues are available toward debt service coverage, there is an increase in the capital
payments from King County, operating expenses have grown at a slower rate than projected, and half of
one of the CIP projects will be paid by other agencies (reducing the CIP by $325,000).
Ms. Dunlap stated the assumptions in this scenario reduced the increase to approximately 4.2% per year
for four years. She recalled one of the recommendations from the study that resulted in a large rate
increase in 1997 was that the City impose several moderate increases rather than no increases for a
number of years followed by large increases.
Ms. Dunlap explained the impacts of the connection charge on the water utility had not been addressed
because a water utility rate study had not been conducted. Increasing the water charge from $200 to
$908 (assuming approximately 80 ERUs per year) would be $56,000 over what is currently collected.
Mayor Haakenson asked for clarification of why the increase and connection charge was necessary. Mr.
Miller explained the primary reason was to fund capital projects. He recalled at the March 2000 public
hearing, staff presented a Sewer Comprehensive Plan update that identified a number of sewer lift
stations that needed to be replaced /upgraded /rehabilitated and sewer lines that needed to be replaced or
relined due to signs of deterioration. City Attorney Scott Snyder explained most of the expansion in the
City's system had been in annexed areas, funded via LIDS. Since future annexations will be limited,
expansion will occur via infill development. Without a connection charge, new development "gets a free
ride" on the system built by current ratepayers.
Councilmember Orvis requested clarification on applicable interest. Ms. Dunlap answered the statute
allows the City to incorporate an interest component into the cost of the system to recognize either the
City financed the assets incurring a debt service cost or there was a carrying cost for having that capacity
in place. The statute allowed the City to accrue a maximum of 10 years of interest or the age of asset to
recognize there is a proportionate cost for the excess capacity in the system that was funded via the
existing ratepayers. She said in their calculations, 5% per year in simple interest was accrued on the
actual cost of the asset for the number of years the asset had been in service.
Councilmember Orvis asked how the rate of 5% was determined. Ms. Duncan answered the municipal
borrowing rates have been approximately 5 -6% per year and the earning rates have been approximately
4'/2 - 6' /z %. The rate of 5% results from a conservative estimate of the City's interest earnings if the asset
had not been constructed and the funds invested.
Mr. Snyder explained GMA requires the City issue a certificate of sewer and water availability for each
new subdivision. Had excess capacity not been maintained, the City would have been unable to approve
development permits.
Councilmember Orvis clarified the treatment plant was constructed with excess capacity. Mr. Miller
agreed. Councilmember Orvis asked if the excess capacity was used in any way. Mr. Miller answered
some of it was used to accommodate flows from Shoreline and Metro which assists in keeping the city's
rates down. Mr. Snyder said the City reserves the treatment plant's excess capacity for itself, therefore,
as the City grows, flows from other jurisdictions could be reduced. He said although the City received
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 5, 2000
Page 5
revenue for operating costs, the City paid the capital costs for the treatment plant. He clarified the
revenues provided by jurisdictions were operating costs and not original capital costs of construction.
Councilmember Orvis recalled the previous presentation regarding the rate study included revenue and
expenditure detail by year. Ms. Dunlap answered that level of detail was provided at the last public
hearing but was not provided in this update. She said that information could be provided again if
desired.
Councilmefber Orvis observed a 4.2% increase over 4 years represented approximately an 18% increase
in sewer rates. Mr. Miller said the increase would fund the cost of borrowing monies to construct the
proposed capital improvements over the next 5 -6 years. Councilmember Orvis asked if consideration
had been given to delaying some capital projects to reduce the amount of the increase to at or below
inflation. Mr. Miller did not recommend the proposed capital program be delayed due to the need to
replace pump stations and reline sewer lines to avoid overflows.
Councilmember Orvis asked what the impact would be if the sewer rates were increased by the rate of
inflation this year. Ms. Dunlap answered the effect would likely be increases higher than 4.2% in
subsequent years due to the compounding effect of deferring increases. She recalled in 1997 there was a
17% increase due in part to the cumulative effect of several years of no increases. Mr. Miller said if the
sewer rates were not increased enough to fund the proposed capital program, projects would have to be
delayed.
Council President Miller asked if the proposed connection charge was for new construction only. Ms.
Dunlap answered the connection charge would be imposed on new construction or redevelopment that
changed the demand on the utility system. She clarified an existing customer remodeling their home
would not be effected.
Council President Miller referred to the connection charge comparison (page 11) which indicated
Edmonds' combined water /sewer connection charge would be $1,647, the average of cities /districts
surveyed was $3,807, and the highest, Olympic View Water and Sewer District, was $5,039. He
questioned whether the proposed connection charge was adequate. Ms. Dunlap answered there were
differences in how utility districts constructed their system. One of the main differences in Edmonds
was the City used LIDS fairly extensively, requiring each parcel to fund their portion of the extension.
Further, water supply was not a component of the City's capital investment cost because it purchased
water from Alderwood and Seattle. Another factor was the City has very dense development with a lot
of customers connected to a smaller amount of infrastructure as compared to a jurisdictions whose
development is more spread out. Further, because the City's system was fairly old, the original cost of
the infrastructure was quite low. Another reason the City's connection charge may be low was due to
other agencies participating in the funding of the wastewater treatment plant.
Councilmember Plunkett recalled when the original presentation was made, he was concerned about the
rate increase; however, Mr. Miller convinced him of the need to upgrade the system.. 'He asked if the
proposed increase was sufficient -to do the upgrades and maintenance in the future. Mr. Miller referred to
the 1999 Comprehensive Plan Sewer Plan, displaying a map that identified problematic pump stations
and lines. He said once these were replaced /repaired, a significant rate increase would not be necessary
unless other problems were identified.
Councilmember Plunkett asked whether a 4.2% increase for 4 years for a total of 18% would be
sufficient for the future. Ms. Dunlap explained the projections were done one year beyond the four -year
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 5, 2000
Page 6
period with an increase proposed in the fifth year of 3.7 %. Mr. Miller pointed out there were unknowns
such as the amount that will be funded via Public Works Trust Fund loans. Ms. Dunlap said she would
not guarantee there would not be increases in subsequent years; however, they would be more
inflationary in nature. She said the proposed increase was driven primarily by capital needs.
For Councilmember Petso, Ms. Dunlap recommended the connection charge be considered every 2 -3
years or a minimum of every five years to reflect the investment being made in the system.
Councilmember Petso asked whether staff's request was for the Council to approve a four -year rate
increase or just an increase of 4.2% this year. Mr. Miller stated the number of years was up to the
Council. Councilmember Petso said the City may not need a 4.2% increase for four years if King
County flows changed, more residential units were built, the City was successful in obtaining Public
Works Trust Fund monies, etc. Mr. Miller agreed that was a possibility. Councilmember Petso asked if
the utility would survive if the Council approved a 4.2% increase for two years and then considered
another rate increase. Miller answered yes. Ms. Dunlap said that would also address the possibility of
the need for additional rate increases if the City was not successful in obtaining Public Works Trust Fund
monies.
Councilmember Davis asked why the original costs were used. Ms. Dunlap said case law in Washington
did not support a replacement cost approach. She said a Washington State court case found "investment
in utility system" meant original investment. She pointed out the interest component recognized the
increase in the value of the investment over time although that did not equate to replacement cost. She
said there was no way to use true replacement costs without risking a legal challenge.
Councilmember Davis asked if the increased needs in the system were due to the age of the system or to
provide capacity. Mr. Miller answered it was primarily due to the age of the system.
Councilmember Earling recalled at the public hearing in March, staff made a compelling case regarding
the deterioration of the existing system. He stated his preference for staff to recap that information when
the issue was presented for public hearing.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS, TO
EXTEND THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR 30 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing.
Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, did not support an increase in the connection
charge, commenting new development already provided increased revenue. He did not support an
increase in the sewer rates and suggested holding another public hearing to address individual
circumstances. He urged the Council to place the proposed increases on the ballot, referring to the
message sent by the public via I -695 and I -722.
Shirley Gauthier, 23820 84th Avenue W, Edmonds, agreed the proposed increases should be placed on
the ballot. She said her neighborhood voted against annexation for many years but were annexed without
their vote. Since then prices have increased. She objected to increases, stating she and many others
including seniors could not afford to pay the continual increases.
Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, acknowledged there were problems that needed to be
fixed and the City needed the funds to make the repairs. Although he did not object to an increase, he
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 5, 2000
Page 7
did object to a 4.2% increase for four years and recommended the increase be approved for two years and
then recalculated. He supported the proposed connection charge.
Tel Sladum, 21103 78th Avenue W, Edmonds, asked whether each apartment/condominium unit paid
the same sewer rate as single family residential and if not, why?
Juan Campion, 7701 202nd Place SW, Edmonds, did not support paying any further increases. He
described his participation in the construction of the Lynnwood and Edmonds treatment plants, and
offered to assist the City working for minimum wage. He asked where the money was going and why
sewer and water rates were so costly.
Hearing no further comment, Mayor Haakenson closed the public participation portion of the public
hearing.
In response to the question whether apartments paid the same as single family residential, Ms. Dunlap
explained apartments pay slightly less than single family because as a group, they use less sewer services
than single family. The sewer utility rate study indicated the average sewer usage for a single family
resident was 700 cubic feet per month; the average per multifamily unit was 500 cubic feet. Although
individual units may use different amounts, the rate structure was done on a class basis. She said the
usage reflected that the average occupancy of a multifamily unit was lower than the average occupancy
of a single family residence. She said multifamily pays the same rate structure for water but may have a
lower bill because they tend to use less.
In response to the question of where the money goes, why repairs to the system are so costly and why
water costs so much, Mr. Miller advised the monies collected were used for capital projects such as
rebuilding lift stations, force mains, trunk lines and pipelines in the system that are bid on a competitive
basis. Monies are also used for operation and maintenance of the stations to ensure they did not fail and
for maintaining and inspecting the lines. He said other costs included insurance, electricity to operate the
pump stations, etc. Regarding water costs, Edmonds has one of the lower water costs in the Seattle
metropolitan area. The City's water is obtained from the Cascade Mountains via pipelines in Everett
(through the Alderwood Water District). The City also obtained water from the City of Seattle. Water
passes through a meter, the City is charged for the amount of water used and costs passed along with the
City's operational costs to ensure clean, safe water is provided to the City's customers.
Mayor Haakenson asked the average age of the City's sewer lines. Mr. Miller answered most sewer lines
were built in the 1960's; lifetime expectancy if the lines were well maintained was 100 years. Sewer
lines in the downtown area were built in the 1920's. It was anticipated with continued good
maintenance, those lines could be maintained for a number of more decades.
Councilmember Plunkett asked Mr. Miller to describe federal, environmental and ESA regulations that
caused water rates to be so high. Mr. Miller advised there were several unfunded mandates such as the
Clean Water Act that required the City not pollute any bodies of water, keep sewage out of these bodies
of water, keep runoff from roadway and properties clean, and reduce erosion so silt does not wash into
streams. He said even more protection for bodies of water would be required once ESA requirements
were finalized. He summarized there was limited funding available from the federal government to
respond to these mandates.
Councilmember Plunkett asked if the regulations were in place 40 years ago. Mr. Miller answered the
regulations were enacted primarily in the 1970's. Mr. Snyder said the cumulative impact of the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 5, 2000
Page 8
regulations Mr. Miller cited created a situation where the ability to develop new. well sites, and dam and
contain, had virtually been eliminated.'' As a "result, more people seeking limited resources increased the
price of water.
Councilmember Orvis observed the General Fund received revenue from sewer taxes and asked how they
were levied. Mr. Miller answered they were levied at the rate of 6% on the amount of the utility bill.
Mr. Snyder said the 6% was the same rate that was levied on all utilities within the City (cable, water,
electricity, etc.) Councilmember Orvis observed if the sewer rates were increased, the revenue from
sewer taxes would also increase. Mr. Miller agreed there would be a 4.2% increase in the revenue
generated via the sewer utility tax. Councilmember Orvis asked if staff had considered a scenario that
placed the increase generated by the sewer utility tax into Fund 411 or reduced the sewer utility tax rate.
Mr. Miller answered the utility taxes were intended to generate revenue for the General Fund. Mr.
Snyder said the utility taxes were used to fund regulatory measures and the employees who were not
compensated via the utility such as enforcement, sewer infiltration, etc. Councilmember Orvis
questioned whether this required an 18% increase.
Mayor Haakenson remanded the matter to Council for deliberation.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT,
TO EXTEND THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR 10 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
Council President Miller observed tonight's presentation was an abbreviated version of an issue that has
been discussed over the past year. In response to comments by the audience that this matter should go to
a vote of the people, he emphasized the Council was representative government, elected to represent the
people so that numerous elections were not required. He said extraordinary steps had been taken to
gather information including an extensive study conducted by FCSG and subsequent reports regarding
the appropriate adjustment to keep the system operating in the black, provide capital funding for
infrastructure, identify equitable increases, and recognize new construction should pay a connection fee
to pay for the initial cost of the lines. He agreed with Councilmember Petso's suggestion to adopt a
4.2% increase for two years. This would allow the City to reduce the increase in the event additional
funding was obtained via Public Works Trust Funds or increase it if additional funds were necessary due
to unforeseen circumstances.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER EARLING, TO
INCREASE THE SANITARY SEWER RATES FOR THE YEARS 2001 AND 2002 BY AN
ANNUAL RATE OF 4.2% ALONG WITH ADOPTION OF THE CAPITAL CONNECTION
CHARGES OF $908 PER METER EQUIVALENT FOR WATER SERVICE AND $739 PER
EQUIVALENT RESIDENTIAL UNIT FOR SANITARY SEWER SERVICE.
Councilmember Petso pointed out the rate increase was less than previously recommended. When the
Council received the materials in the spring, the recommended increase was 6.8% for the next 4 -5 years.
As a result of staff's work, the increase was reduced to 4.2% which she emphasized was progress. If
additional funding was available via Public Works Trust Funds, the increase could be reevaluated.
Councilmember Orvis indicated he would not support the motion. Although he was glad the Council
was proposing an increase for a two year period versus four years, he preferred only a one -year increase.
He was cautious about multi -year increases and felt it was his duty as a Councilmember to keep a close
watch on increases. He also would not support the motion because he wanted to consider other scenarios
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 5, 2000
Page 9
that could bring the rate down. He recommended there be further study, particularly reducing the utility
tax rate on sewers to lower the rate.
MOTION CARRIED; THE VOTE WAS 5 -2, WITH COUNCILMEMBERS PLUNKETT AND
ORVIS OPPOSED.
rosecutor 6. ANNUAL REPORT FROM PROSECUTOR JEFFREY GOODWIN
nnual
e ort Jeffrey Goodwin, Prosecutor, commented it was an exciting time because the City was looking for a new
judge and the court would be moving into a new building. He indicated the current budget for the
prosecutor was appropriate and he was not seeking an increase. He reported that over the last year, there
has been a decrease in the number of DUI cases, but an increase in trial issues related to domestic
violence cases. He was unsure of the reason for this increase although domestic violence had been a
focus of Washington courts over the past five years and the message was getting out regarding the
seriousness of domestic violence and the need to report it.
Councilmember White recalled the Public Defender reported the City budgeted an additional $15,000 for
his services due to an increase in assigned cases. Councilmember White asked if that increase affected
Mr. Goodwin. Mr. Goodwin said there had not been a substantial increase in his caseload. He said a
portion of the public defender's increase was due to the necessity of his appearing in Lynnwood for In
Custody matters. Mr. Goodwin said he was not appearing at any .additional calendars.
Councilmember White pointed out this would be a transitionary period and schedules may change. He
invited Mr. Goodwin to return to the Council if he, too, experienced an increase in his caseload. He
cautioned Mr. Goodwin against becoming frustrated and discouraged and said the City wanted to
maintain him as the prosecutor. Councilmember White pointed out it was unrealistic not to request an
increase in two years. Mr. Goodwin did not anticipate becoming frustrated or discouraged and said he
was excited about the opportunity to make changes that increased the efficiency of the court and the
public's confidence in the court as the new court facility was opened and a new judge hired..
Mayor Haakenson thanked Mr. Goodwin for the terrific job he did over the past year.
7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Kiwanis Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, reported on the Kiwanis Club's IDD program,
Club Food expressing appreciation to the Gates for their donation to the program. He reported the Kiwanis Club
Drive would be conducting a food drive at Top Foods on December 8, 9, & 10. Mr. Rutledge also suggested
the Council read emails and faxes at the Council meeting and /or allow the public to call during meetings.
ibrary I Richard Marin, 18918 88th Avenue West, Edmonds, suggested the Council consider a different
unding approach to the library funding rather than annexing into Sno Isle Library District. He recalled at a
recent presentation, the Sno Isle Director indicated 8% of the district's revenue came from Edmonds and
9% of the usage came from Edmonds, implying there was a problem with this ratio. Mr. Marin said the
numbers that should be considered were revenue and operating expenses and suspected since the Sno Isle
Director did not mention those numbers, the library was in good shape in that respect. He said the
motivation for annexing to the Sno Isle Library District was to provide a steady source of income to
ensure there was not an interruption or reduction in library service. He was concerned with the potential
risk of an unsuccessful vote to annex to SnoIsle. He said a recent headline in the Enterprise indicated
there would not be a property tax increase and suspected the perception among voters may be the library
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 5, 2000
Page 10
was not a problem, although a campaign must soon be mounted to educate the public to vote on a new
tax to fund the library. He proposed a new tax, outside the General Fund, that represented continuation
of the current funding arrangement.
tility Rates Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, agreed with Councilmember Orvis regarding increasing
utility taxes on sewer rates. He proposed the Council develop a formula that increased the sewer rate but
not the revenue generated by the sewer utility tax. In regard to the upcoming discussion regarding the
[Role of role of the Architectural Design Board (ADB), he recommended the public process at the Planning Board
MB and ADB occur before any changes were made to the role of the ADB.
Pine Street Carol Hahn, 1031 2nd Avenue S, Edmonds, objected to the reference to the Pine Street traffic study as
raffic the Pine Street Closure Study. The issue was not closing Pine Street but how to provide ferry access.
Study She urged the Council to consider the whole issue and not find a way to close Pine Street.
ift Stations Juan Campion, 7701 202nd Place SW, Edmonds, asked whether the lift stations had a secondary
pump. Mayor Haakenson stated he would ask Public Works Director Noel Miller to call him.
tility Rates Peter Beck, 723 Hanna Park Road, Edmonds, commended Councilmembers Plunkett and Orvis for
realizing the sewer rate study was not a very thorough study. He objected to Ms. Dunlap's response to
the question regarding why replacement costs could not be used. He agreed with Mr. Hertrich's
comments regarding the utility tax on sewers. As a member of the ADB for 11 years, he offered to
D13 answer questions when the Council discussed that issue.
Shirley Gauthier, 23820 84th Avenue W, Edmonds, speaking on the behalf of crafters who, although
fters/ they do not make a great deal of money making crafts, would like to be able to put out a sign,
nsmg
uirement
particularly at Christmastime stating they sell a craft without running into problems with the City. ' She
asked the Council to consider making such an amendment to benefit crafters.
tility Rate John Hayward, 1130 4th Avenue S, Edmonds, expressed concern with increased taxes in general and
ncrease said numerous small tax increases equated to a big tax increase. He said the Council was not listening to
voters in elections. He commented the sewer rate study did not consider demographics or the impact the
increase would have on seniors. He said the 4% increase consumed the money he needed to put away for
retirement. He suggested the connection charge for new development be sufficient to pay for repairs.
[AT&T Mr. Hayward questioned how AT &T was able to purchase the cable system from Chambers Cable and
able why subscribers now paid more and did not get the stations they did before. Mayor Haakenson noted
AT &T had been scheduled on the extended agenda for this evening but rescheduled for January as their
representative could not be present tonight. Mayor Haakenson explained there was nothing in the City's
agreement with Chambers Cable that prevented AT &T from purchasing the system, however, AT &T
must live up to the provisions in the franchise agreement. Unfortunately, neither the Council nor the
City had any control over rates, the federal government eliminated that ability.
lectric Mr. Hayward pointed out electricity would soon be deregulated which would result in major increases.
ates The news reported electric rates in this area were $30 /kilowatt hour; rates on the open market were
$1,000 /kilowatt hour. He recommended the City establish a contingency plan for utility rate increases.
City Attorney Scott Snyder pointed out the City has adopted rate reductions for any low income citizens.
He encouraged anyone impacted by the increase who felt they may qualify for the reduction to check
with the Finance Department.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 5, 2000
Page 11
eso #989
MEBT 8. RESOLUTION NO. 989 APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL
Amend- EMPLOYEE BENEFIT TRUST PLAN AUTHORIZING PICK UP CONTRIBUTIONS IN
ents ACCORDANCE WITH IRS CODE SECTION 414(H)(2), AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE
Human Resources Director Brent Hunter explained the Municipal Employee Benefit Trust (MEBT)
program, provided to employees in lieu of Social Security, was created in 1977 and was last updated in
1989. The program was administered via an employee committee with outside contracts for legal
assistance, record keeping, and trust arrangements. The program is funded via employee and employer
contributions in the same amount most people pay into Social Security. Changes to the program were
due to legal requirements, employee recommendations, and practices in other MEBT programs. The
resolution had been reviewed by legal counsel and employees and he recommended approval.
Mr. Hunter highlighted several of the proposed changes to the MEBT program.
1. Tax Deferred Participant Contributions: Proposal to change contributions to the plan, currently
made with post -tax contributions, to a pre -tax basis. Legal counsel advised this change was
possible under current IRS regulations. This change enhances the program without any
additional cost to the City or employees or change in the mandatory nature of the plan.
2. Extra Participant Contribution: Proposal to increase the voluntary contributions an employee
was allowed to make to the plan. This change benefited the employee at no increased cost to the
City.
3. Vesting Schedule: The vesting schedule determines the amount of the employer contribution
credited to the employee account. This is currently on a 10 year schedule, for each year of
service, 10% of the employer contribution is credited to the employee account. The
recommended change was a 7 -year vesting schedule which was comparable to other cities. This
change benefits the employee with no increased cost to the City.
4. Distribution Options: Employees who leave the City prior to retirement must withdraw their
funds from the plan (retirees currently may leave the funds in the plan and withdraw as desired).
The recommendation was to revise the plan so that employees who leave the City with a
minimum of $10,000 in the plan and are fully vested be allowed to leave their funds in the plan
and withdraw as desired. A small fee would be charged to remain in the plan.
5. Rehire Vesting: Change the program so that employees rehired by the City can claim past
vesting benefits. This change was a benefit to the employee with no cost to the City.
Mr. Hunter recommended the proposed changes be effective January 1, 2001. Once the program was
approved by the Council, it would also be filed with the IRS for their approval.
Assistant Police Chief Al Compaan introduced the members of the MEBT Board, Human Resources
Director Brent Hunter, Assistant Administrative Services Director Doug Farmen, Facilities Supervisor
Tom King, Accountant Scott James, Senior Planner Steve Bullock, and Senior Fire Inspector Mike
Smith. He said the Board has considered the changes over the past year and the proposed changes have
the unanimous support of the Board. An employee education program has been conducted by individual
board members including dialogue with work groups, and providing feedback to the Board. Citywide
written communications have been provided to educate employees regarding the changes and four
employee meetings were held to explain the changes. The outcome of the meetings as well as various
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 5, 2000
Page 12
1
communications has been very positive. He noted this was a win -win situation and did not require a
request for funding. MEBT was a program that allowed the City to attract and retain qualified
employees.
Councilmember White asked who manages the fund and what the return has been. Assistant Chief
Compaan answered the fund had been managed for the past two years by Prime Asset Consulting. The
average annual rate of return over the past 10 years has been slightly over 12 %. He explained the fund
was conservatively invested due to the judiciary responsibility to participants. The portfolio is
comprised of approximately 55% stocks and 45% bonds and fixed income investments.
Councilmember White inquired how the City's contribution was determined. Assistant Chief Compaan
answered it was the same 7.65% that was contributed under Social Security as this was a Social Security
replacement plan.
COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, FOR
APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 989. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
ole of 1 9. DISCUSSION OF ROLE OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD REVIEW (PRE- DESIGN OR
DB AFTER DESIGN)
Planning Manager Rob Chave advised this item was primarily for Council discussion and the packet
included information the Council requested at the last meeting. He requested Council provide as much
direction as possible for the Planning Board. The Planning Board would take the proposed Design
Guidelines through the public hearing process and forward a recommendation to the Council. Once that
was completed, they would consider the ADB process and make suggestions regarding their role.
Councilmember Petso observed in reviewing the materials, there appeared to be more than one issue
regarding the ADB such as the timing of the process, how authoritative the process was, and what the
thresholds should be. Mr. Chave said he was most interested in process, whether the Planning Board
should complete the Design Guidelines process before considering the ADB process or do both at the
same time. Further, the Council could provide specific direction regarding the process to narrow the
range of possible solutions the Planning Board may consider.
City Attorney Scott Snyder said strengthening the Design Guidelines was a requirement; this was in
response to the Anderson v. Issaquah case that required cities, if they had design guidelines, to have
specific direction in the design guidelines. Changing the process was an optional decision. He
recommended the City get the design guidelines in place first as the stopgap measure that was in place
was not as specific as the proposed guidelines. Mr. Chave agreed that he did not want the Planning
Board review of the design guidelines slowed by consideration of the process.
Councilmember Plunkett recalled the ADB process has been considered by the Council for the past two
years. The Council had decided to front -end the ADB process when staff suggested developing draft
design guidelines first. He concluded the City needed the knowledge and skills of the ADB at the
beginning of the process so that designers knew what was expected up front rather than waiting until the
end of the process as they do now. He said appeals would still go to the Hearing Examiner and City
Council. He recommended moving the ADB process forward as an advisory group as recommended in
the Cedar River Study.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 5, 2000
Page 13
COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS, THAT
THE DRAFT GUIDELINES BE AMENDED TO REFLECT THAT THE ADB SERVE IN THE
FRONT END OF THE PROCESS AS AN ADVISORY BOARD AND ALL REFERENCES TO THE
ADB IN THE DRAFT GUIDELINES THAT CALL FOR THE ADB TO BE QUASI JUDICIAL BE
STRUCK AND REPLACED BY THE HEARING EXAMINER AND CITY COUNCIL.
Councilmember Petso pointed out the proposed change would complicate the process. She observed the
Planning Board and ADB wanted to complete the design guidelines first and then discuss the ADB
process.
Councilmember White recalled the comments at various meetings regarding the ADB's role were that it
should be moved forward in the process. He was concerned about changing the quasi judicial role of the
ADB, pointing out sufficient consideration had not been given to possible implications of that change
under Regulatory Reform such as the consequences to a subsequent reviewing body.
Councilmember Earling suggested the Planning Board be directed to complete the design guidelines first
with the clear indication that the recommendation submitted by the Planning Board should have ADB
review in the pre- design stage. He said this would free up the Planning Board to look at the design
guidelines more clearly. He was also sensitive to the need to have adequate public input.
Councilmember Davis stated the Cedar River Study concluded the ADB review should be at the front
end of the process. However, he wanted the public process to occur at the Planning Board before making
a decision regarding that issue. He was unsure the public had had sufficient opportunity to provide input.
Councilmember White responded the public had had numerous opportunities to provide input; the public
participated in the Cedar River Study and there were no objections to moving the ADB process to the
pre - planning stage.
Councilmember Davis indicated, as a new Councilmember, he had not seen any public involvement
described in the materials. Further, he has heard from citizens who do not agree with moving the ADB
process to the pre - planning stage.
MOTION FAILED; THE VOTE WAS 2 -5, COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT AND
COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS IN FAVOR, AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER AND
COUNCILMEMBERS EARLING, WHITE, DAVIS, AND PETSO OPPOSED.
Council President Miller offered to draft a letter to the Planning Board describing the issues discussed by
the Council tonight. Councilmember Earling recommended it be made clear that the Council preferred
the ADB's involvement occur at the front end of the process so that design issues could be identified at
the beginning. He commented the complaints regarding the ADB process have been that because the
ADB is brought into the process so late, a great deal of money and time is required to review the project.
This could be avoided by having the ADB process at the beginning.
Councilmember Plunkett recommended the City notify specific organizations of any public hearings
regarding the design guidelines such as the Chamber of Commerce, the staff and director of the Edmonds
Alliance for Economic Development, and all architects in the City. Mr. Chave advised extensive public
involvement was planned at the Planning Board level.
10. MAYOR'S REPORT
mencan
ea cross Mayor Haakenson reported the American Red Cross had their Real Heroes Breakfast today that
cal Heroes Y p Y
celebrateI the real stars in Snohomish County in 2000. He read a nomination for Edmonds Police
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 5, 2000
Page 14
rOfficer Bill Nelson under the category of Police Rescue that described Officer Nelson's involvement in
preventing an imminent suicide when be went'to a residence to serve a court order. Mayor Haakenson
commented that Officer Nelson and other officers placed themselves at great personal risk to bring the
situation to a successful conclusion. Mayor Haakenson said the City was proud of Officer Nelson, a very
kind, gentle officer who was a credit to the Edmonds Police Department.
11. COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmember White advised the train station's annual open house would be Saturday, December 8,
from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
WIMM
NSON, MAYOR
SANDRA S. CHASE, CITY CLERK
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 5, 2000
Page 15
Revised 1211100 —1: 00 p. m.
LL_ AGENDA
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
Plaza Meeting Room - Library Building
650 Main Street
7:00 -10:00 D.m.
DECEMBER 5, 2000
SPECIAL MEETING
6:30 PM. — EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING A LEGAL MATTER
6:45 P.M. — INTERVIEW CANDIDATE FOR THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD
7:00 P.M. — CALL TO ORDER
FLAG SALUTE
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
(A) ROLL CALL
(B) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 21, 2000
(C) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 28, 2000
(D) APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #44904 THROUGH #45086 FOR THE WEEK OF NOVEMBER 27, 2000,
IN THE AMOUNT OF $274,996.93.
(E) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH KARIN
NOYES FOR MINUTE TAKING SERVICES
(F) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH JEANNIE
DINES FOR MINUTE TAKING SERVICES
(G) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT WITH JANA SPELLMAN,
SENIOR EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
(H) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR LEGAL
REPRESENTATION OF INDIGENT DEFENDANTS WITH JAMES FELDMAN
(1) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH SNOHOMISH COUNTY ON
LOCATING ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES
(J) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
LYNNWOOD AND CITY OF EDMONDS FOR JOINT FUNDING OF THE RECYCLING COORDINATOR
(K) PROPOSED ORDINANCE REENACTING CERTAIN ORDINANCES WHICH WOULD PURPORTEDLY BE
INVALIDATED BY INITIATIVE 722 BY REENACTING ORDINANCE NO. 3280 ESTABLISHING A
PROPERTY TAX LEVY, EMS LEVY AND LEVY FOR VOTED INDEBTEDNESS; ORDINANCE NO. 3281
ESTABLISHING A TAX ON ITS SEWER UTILITY; ORDINANCE NO. 3282 ESTABLISHING A
TRANSIENT (NON- RESIDENT) BUSINESS LICENSE FEE; AND RESOLUTION NO. 967 AMENDING
THE FEE SCHEDULE FOR PLANNING, ENGINEERING AND OTHER CITY FEES; PROVIDING FOR
SEVERABILITY AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE
3. ( 5 Min.) CONFIRMATION OF APPOINTMENT TO ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD
4. (45 Min.) PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING PROPOSED UTILITY RATE INCREASES:
• PROPOSED INCREASE IN WATER AND SANITARY SEWER CHARGES FOR NEW
DEVELOPMENT
• PROPOSED GENERAL RATE INCREASE FOR SANITARY SEWER SERVICE FOR ALL
RESIDENTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS
Page 1 of 2
�I
1
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
DECEMBER 5, 2000
Page 2 of 2
5. (15 Min.) ANNUAL REPORT FROM HEARING EXAMINER RON McCONNELL
6. (15 Min.) ANNUAL REPORT FROM PROSECUTOR JEFFREY GOODWIN
7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS (3 Minute Limit Per Person)
8. (10 Min.) PROPOSED RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEE
BENEFIT TRUST PLAN, AUTHORIZING PICK UP CONTRIBUTIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH IRS
CODE SECTION 414(H)(2), AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
9. (20 Min.) DISCUSSION OF ROLE OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD REVIEW (PRE- DESIGN OR AFTER
DESIGN)
10. ( 5 Min.) MAYOR'S REPORT
11. (15 Min.) COUNCIL REPORTS
Parking and meeting rooms are accessible for persons with disabilities. Contact the City Clerk at (425) 771 -0245 with 24 hours advance
xotice for special accommodations. The Council Agenda appears on AT &T Cable, Channel 21. Delayed telecast of this meeting appear:
`he following Wednesday at noon and 7:00 p.m., as well as Friday and Monday at noon on Channel 21.