Loading...
02/08/2005 City CouncilFebruary 8, 2005 Following City Council Committee meetings at 6:00 p.m., the Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Haakenson in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Gary Haakenson, Mayor Richard Marin, Council President Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Jeff Wilson, Councilmember Mauri Moore, Councilmember Peggy Pritchard Olson, Councilmember Dave Orvis, Councilmember Deanna Dawson, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Bryan Huntzberger, Student Representative 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA STAFF PRESENT Tom Tomberg, Fire Chief David Stern, Chief of Police Duane Bowman, Development Services Director Dan Clements, Administrative Services Director Brian McIntosh, Parks & Recreation Director Jennifer Gerend, Economic Development Dir. Noel Miller, Public Works Director Kathleen Junglov, Asst. Admin. Services Dir. Dave Gebert, City Engineer Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Meghan Cruz, Video Recorder Jeannie Dines, Recorder COUNCIL PRESIDENT MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS, FOR APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCIL PRESIDENT MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: Approve (A) ROLL CALL Minutes es (B) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 1, 2005. Mi Approve I (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #77000 THROUGH #77215 FOR THE WEEK OF Claim Checks JANUARY 31, 2005, IN THE AMOUNT OF $292,681.18. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSITS AND CHECKS #40135 THROUGH #40210 FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 16 THROUGH JANUARY 31, 2005, IN THE AMOUNT OF $824,533.15. 96` Ave. W Pedestrian (D) REPORT ON BIDS OPENED JANUARY 25, 2005, FOR THE 96TH AVENUE WEST Improvements PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO R &J LANDSCAPE AND CONSTRUCTION ($490,387.25) Esperance 3. WORK SESSION ON ESPERANCE ISLAND ANNEXATION Island Annexation Administrative Services Director Dan Clements explained the intent of tonight's presentation was to review the tools available to City residents and residents of the Esperance area with regard to the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 8, 2005 Page 1 Esperance annexation and to seek guidance from the Council regarding a financial policy for the revenues associated with the annexation. Mr. Clements explained Esperance is the one remaining island of unincorporated Snohomish County totally surrounded by the City of Edmonds. The area encompasses approximately 450 acres, and has 9.34 miles of county- maintained roads, an estimated population of 3,500 and an estimated 12 non -home occupation businesses employing 112 individuals. Mr. Clements described how to obtain information via the City's website (www.ci.edmonds.wa.us) by clicking on Business, Residents, or News /Events /Calendars and then Esperance Annexation. He also offered his telephone number 425 -771 -0239 for anyone to call seeking information. He reviewed the Esperance Annexation introductory page, explaining Council policy adopted at last year's retreat was to pursue annexations that provided a benefit to residents and businesses of the annexation area and current City residents and businesses. The City and Snohomish County believe this annexation meets those objectives. Mr. Clements reviewed the five main areas of information available via the City's website, 1) an annexation fact sheet that provides an overview and impacts for the City, residents, businesses and the County, 2) an Annexation Pro Forma that describes revenues and costs associated with annexation, 3) maps of the annexation area and existing County and proposed City zoning, 4) frequently asked questions and 5) an annexation impact calculator which allowed property owners to input their assessed value, utility bills, etc. to determine whether it would be more or less expensive if they were annexed. Mr. Clements reviewed the fact sheet which contains an overview, changes for residents, businesses, the City and the County and contact information. He reviewed the annexation impact calculator, a tool to assist property owners in determining whether it would be more or less expensive if they were annexed into the City. He concluded for most people, annexing to the City would be slightly less expensive because the Fire District 1 property tax and the County road property tax would be eliminated upon annexation. Since Esperance was in Olympic View Water and Sewer District, there was no utility tax on sewer and water. He noted cable costs in the City may be slightly higher. Mr. Clements reviewed the Annexation Pro Forma that calculated the financial implications of the Esperance Annexation for all revenues and expenditures. He noted in order to estimate first year 2005 impacts, it was assumed that the annexation would be in effect at the conclusion of the first quarter 2005 and the new revenue and expenditure flow would commence July 1, 2005. He briefly reviewed revenues and expenditures as a result of annexation, pointing out the City already provides fire service to the area so there would be no change in that service. The Pro Forma also showed no increase in police costs. He referred to a letter to the Council from the Police Guild regarding police impacts that Police Chief Stern could address. Parks staff estimated expenditure for Chase Lake and Esperance Parks at approximately $60,000 per year. Mr. Clements estimated the net surplus for the City would be approximately $653,000 if a full 2005 fiscal year were realized and approximately $880,000 for a full year 2006. Mr. Clements stated the Pro Forma addressed only operating costs and did not include any capital costs. Public Works staff has visited the area and found a number of capital improvements were needed in the area. Once service levels are established, staff recommends 50% of the surplus be used for capital projects in that area for the next five years such as upgrades to streets, parks and other fixed assets. He anticipated using 50% of the surplus for capital improvements in that area would be a much higher level of service than was currently being provided by Snohomish County. Mr. Clements requested Council direction regarding the use of 50% of the surplus to fund capital projects in the Esperance area for a specified period of time. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 8, 2005 Page 2 Development Services Director Duane Bowman provided his email address, bowman d)ci.ed onds.wa.us. Mr. Bowman explained in the 2004 State legislative session a law was passed to establish a process whereby cities and counties could do an annexation via an Interlocal Agreement process. Staff is currently working on an Interlocal Agreement with Snohomish County that will be brought to the City Council at a later date for passage of an ordinance annexing the area. During the 45 days following adoption of the ordinance, 15% of the people who voted in the last general election could file a petition with the City to force an election on annexation. Mr. Bowman displayed the existing Snohomish County Zoning Map and the proposed City zoning map explaining the City's intent was to zone the annexation area similar to the current zoning. He explained the Snohomish County Comprehensive Plan designates the area as Urban 6 -10 with the exception of the small commercial areas. He identified the proposed City zoning that would match the Snohomish County zoning, explaining the Urban 6 -10 designation that allows rezones to LDMR (low density multiple residential) would be incorporated into the City's RS -8 zoning. Mr. Bowman advised a community meeting /open house is tentatively scheduled for March 3 in a meeting room in the Esperance annexation area. This would be an opportunity for residents to ask questions of staff, elected officials, and Snohomish County representatives. Notification would be provided to residents in the Esperance annexation area and notice would be posted on the City's website. He reiterated Mr. Clements' requests for Council direction regarding the use of 50% of the surplus for capital improvements in the annexation area, noting that information would be important to share at the community meeting. Councilmember Wilson asked whether a list of potential capital projects had been developed. Mr. Bowman responded a list of specific capital improvements had not been developed. Staff was aware that the roads need a significant amount of work so a large portion of the surplus would be used for road improvements. He noted there were also some opportunities for park enhancements. Council President Marin expressed interest in pursuing annexation and requested Mr. Clements draft a resolution for the next meeting's Consent Agenda that addressed using 50% of the surplus for capital projects in the annexation area. He pointed out the importance of making the residents of that area feel . they would benefit from annexing to the City as well as making them feel welcome. Councilmember Orvis inquired about initiating the annexation via an election versus a resolution. Mr. Bowman explained the process staff was pursuing was in accordance with island annexation under State Law. He acknowledged the election method was an option. Councilmember Moore asked how residents and/or the City could be assured of the amount that would be expended on capital improvements if the Council indicated they wanted to use 50% of the surplus for capital projects in that area. Mr. Clements explained staff would track that information via a quarterly financial report and report the surplus to the Council and residents of the area. Councilmember Moore asked whether an assessment had been done of sidewalks, park improvements, etc. that were needed. Mr. Bowman answered staff had not done that assessment yet. Public Works conducted an initial analysis of the streets to determine the needs in the area. He pointed out staff would need to develop projects and amend the CIP. Councilmember Moore observed although capital improvements were important to residents of the Esperance annexation area, improvements to police and fire protection would also be important. Fire Chief Tom Tomberg stated the Fire Department has been providing fire and emergency medical service to Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 8, 2005 Page 3 the Esperance area since January 1, 1996 and that would continue without any change. He acknowledged there would be some changes in revenue. Police Chief David Stern answered historically the Edmonds Police Department has offered a higher level of service than Snohomish County due to geographic difficulties. For example, Edmonds may take crime reports in person whereas Snohomish County may have them mailed. He concluded Edmonds would provide a higher level of service although there were staffing levels that would need to be addressed in the future. He pointed out the crime situation and the necessary level of service in the Esperance area was currently unknown and would need to be assessed. Councilmember Moore inquired whether the Snohomish County Sheriff's Department had any crime information available. Chief Stern answered Snohomish County did not necessarily maintain the information in the same format as Edmonds, requiring evaluation of the records to interpret the information. Councilmember Wilson asked where the officers serving the area were based and what staffing ratios were maintained. Chief Stern answered the officers would come from the South Precinct located in Mill Creek. He was uncertain what their staffing ratios were, noting specific staffing ratios may not be established for that small of an area as ratios are usually calculated on officers per thousand population on a countywide basis. Councilmember Wilson asked whether officers typically patrolled that area or only responded to incidents. Chief Stern was not certain but assumed patrols were likely not at the same level as in Edmonds as it was unlikely officers were assigned to that geographic area. Councilmember Wilson asked what other unincorporated areas were covered by the South Precinct. Chief Stern was uncertain of all the areas covered by the South Precinct other than portions near Brier and Mill Creek. For Councilmember Wilson, Chief Stern advised Edmonds Police already provided some police service via mutual aid agreements due to the difficulty for Snohomish County officers to reach the area. He noted during emergency situations, Edmonds has helped as first responders. Councilmember Dawson questioned why there was not any increase in the cost to provide police service to the area. She was adamant that current City residents not experience a reduced level of police service if the annexation occurred and anticipated substantial additional police staff would be required. Chief Stern acknowledged staffing levels would need to be seriously considered. The City traditionally had lean staffing levels and that would not change with annexation of this area. Councilmember Dawson noted annexation would add a substantial number of people and asked whether Chief Stern was comfortable with the Pro Forma that stated there would be no additional cost for police as projected in 2005 and 2006. Chief Stern explained the 2005 information was developed in a budget scenario in which the policy was no additional staffing. He acknowledged service levels would need to be reconsidered in 2006. Councilmember Dawson inquired about the possibility of four patrol areas versus three and additional staff to provide those service levels. Chief Stern acknowledged that could be a possibility. Councilmember Dawson pointed out the potential for informing residents of the Esperance annexation area that 50% of the surplus would be used for capital improvements and the surplus actually being 1/4 of the amount projected depending on additional police staff. She was not certain the Council was prepared to pass a resolution on the Consent Agenda next week with regard to that policy due to uncertainty regarding expenditures. Councilmember Olson inquired about the parks in the Esperance annexation area. Parks & Recreation Director Brian McIntosh advised there were two parks in the annexation area that would be turned over to the City upon annexation, Chase Lake, 3.3 acres of trails and natural area and the old Esperance School Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 8, 2005 Page 4 site which comprises 7 acres. Councilmember Olson inquired about the condition of the parks to which Mr. McIntosh replied they could be better maintained. Councilmember Moore inquired how surplus income was calculated. Mr. Clements referred to the Pro Forma that identified revenues, explaining departments were asked to estimate costs associated with annexation. He noted when further information regarding police costs was available, those costs would be included in the Pro Forma. Councilmember Moore asked whether the expenditure associated with parks was for increased maintenance. Mr. Clements answered yes, the Parks & Recreation staff identified the amount that would be needed to provide adequate maintenance. With regard to an earlier question about a list of capital improvements that were needed in the area, Mr. Clements pointed out the importance of listening to residents at community meetings to determine improvements they wanted to have made. With regard to making residents of the annexation area feel welcome, he commented the best ones to do that were current residents who were annexed in the past. Councilmember Plunkett commented he was unable to provide direction regarding appropriating half of the surplus toward capital projects, noting he had not even determined whether he favored the Esperance annexation due to other issues facing the City. He recalled plans to discuss long term stable funding for public safety at the Council retreat which could result in establishing standards and needs in the Comprehensive Plan. He concluded that once long term, stable funding for public safety was established, possibly that information could be applied to an annexation area. Councilmember Wilson reminded the Council that annexation of Esperance was discussed at the last Council retreat. He pointed out studying annexation did not necessarily mean the City would proceed or that residents would accept annexation if it were to occur. He felt it appropriate at the same time staff was discussing annexation with residents to gather information regarding revenue, expenditures, level of service, etc. He emphasized the importance of conducting due diligence which included holding meetings with residents in the Esperance annexation area. He expressed surprise at Councilmembers' hesitancy in view of Council discussions at previous retreats. Mayor Haakenson advised staff was only pursuing annexation based on direction the Council provided at last year's retreat. Unless the Council advised otherwise, staff would proceed with holding neighborhood meetings. Staff was seeking Council direction regarding whether the Council was interested in pursuing returning some of the surplus into the annexation area. He noted the exact amount did not need to be determined tonight, however, staff would like to know whether that was the Council's intent so that could be shared at the community meetings as a benefit of annexation. Council President Marin stated the City was only exploring annexation; if annexation was determined to be beneficial to existing City residents and residents of the annexation area, then annexation should proceed. He reiterated staff's request for direction that if the annexation was determined to be beneficial, whether the Council was interested in returning 50% of the surplus to the area. Councilmember Dawson commented she had no issue with exploring the possibility of annexation, both with residents of the annexation area as well as existing City residents; however, she was concerned with the idea of scheduling adoption of a resolution within a week stating the Council supported returning half the surplus for improvements in the annexation area. When the cost of providing police service to the annexation area and maintaining existing levels of police service in the City was determined, there likely would not be any surplus with annexation. Councilmember Dawson pointed out the need to investigate how returning 50% of the surplus would impact services throughout the City, particularly when departments were already stretched very thin. She Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 8, 2005 Page 5 concluded the projection in the Pro Forma that the cost of police services would not increase in 2005 or 2006 was disingenuous because it was impossible to serve that many more people and that large an area with the existing police force while continuing to provide the same level of service to City residents. She agreed it was appropriate to use some of the surplus for improvements in the annexation area but not to the detriment of existing residents. She was hesitant to consider a resolution regarding using 50% of the surplus for improvements in the annexation area when the City had no idea regarding the amount of the surplus. Mayor Haakenson referred to the recommended action from staff in the agenda memo which was policy direction on expenditure of revenues generated by the annexation. Staff was asking how the revenue would be expended. He acknowledged Councilmember Dawson appeared to want revenues spent on the Police Department. Councilmember Dawson emphasized the need to maintain the existing level of service in all areas but particularly public safety and ensure existing residents would not be harmed by annexation of the Esperance area. As long as those issues were addressed, she did not object to using some of the surplus to fund improvements in the annexation area. Councilmember Plunkett agreed with conducting due diligence and having staff meet with residents, pointing out that was a long way from a resolution regarding designating an amount or percentage to be designated for improvements. Councilmember Wilson emphasized the need with any annexation to maintain existing public safety levels of service to existing residents as well as ensure any area that the City annexed was provided equal or better levels of service. He noted it appeared there was consensus by the Council that if there were surplus funds after all expenditures were considered, it would be appropriate to use some of the surplus for improvements in the annexation area. Council President Marin commented he would be open to a statement other than 50 %. He noted if he lived in the Esperance area, one of his concerns would be whether funds generated in that area would be used in other areas of the City. Residents in Esperance wanted to feel the City would treat them fairly. Mr. Clements explained staff was pursuing Council policy that the annexation needed to be beneficial to existing City residents as well as residents of the annexation area; it was not appropriate to reduce levels of service for existing residents or provide lower levels of service to annexed residents. He acknowledged the unknown was the impact annexation would have on police. He pointed out the difficulty was this area was an island and it was difficult to quantify the existing police presence. Councilmember Moore asked whether the intent was to use 50% of the surplus on improvements in the annexation area indefinitely. Mr. Clements answered staff was suggesting the first five years. He noted there were a number of ways to finance capital improvements. Councilmember Moore pointed out other areas of the City did not have their taxes directed toward improvements in their neighborhood. She was troubled by isolating this island and returning a portion of their revenue to them. Mr. Clements explained the intent was to bring the area up to City standards as generally the infrastructure in unincorporated areas has not been maintained to the same level as incorporated areas. Councilmember Plunkett pointed out the Fire Department did not have an Assistant Chief at the present time. He pointed out Esperance was 450 acres, 9.4 miles of roadway and 3,500 more people and 12 businesses with 112 employees and asked whether that many more people would impact the administration of the Fire Department. Chief Tomberg answered from an operational standpoint (firefighters in the fire stations), the Department was in good shape. The impact has been on the 8 -5 staff. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 8, 2005 Page 6 He recalled a study commissioned in 1997 that recommended 7.5 administrative staff, however the Department has only 5. Councilmember Plunkett asked whether annexation would put an appreciable additional burden on the five 8 -5 staff. Chief Tomberg answered even without annexation, the Fire Department has been struggling for the past several years. Councilmember Plunkett concluded from an administrative point of view, annexation could have an impact on the Fire Department. Chief Tomberg acknowledged it was an opportunity to address staffing via additional EMS property taxes that would be collected. Councilmember Wilson asked whether the Fire Department already served the Esperance area. Chief Tomberg answered yes, the Fire Department responded to 224 calls in this area in 2003. Councilmember Wilson pointed out annexation did not change the level of service from an operational standpoint, however, the additional revenue provided an opportunity to address 8 -5 staffing levels. He concluded even without annexation, the Fire Department provided fire suppression and administrative services to the Esperance area. Chief Tomberg clarified he was not asking for 7.5 staff, only some help. He noted his intent was to ask for some help in the next budget whether or not the annexation proceeds. Councilmember Wilson found it appropriate for staff to meet with residents of the area and address their questions and concerns as well as indicate that some of the surplus would be used for capital improvements in the annexation area if a surplus existed after expenditures to maintain the existing levels of service to the City and the annexation area. Council President Marin commented Esperance residents would be satisfied with what Councilmember Wilson suggested if there were not a surplus, knowing the funds generated by their area would be used in an appropriate manner. He suggested the Council adopt a statement such as if it proves to be a good fit, the City and majority of residents of the Esperance area and City Council would welcome annexation of this area and would strive to serve the area in an equitable manner. Mayor Haakenson stated staff did not need a resolution, all they needed was to know if the Council was interested in using some of any surplus on capital improvements in the annexation area, which most Councilmembers appeared to support. He advised staff would proceed with community meetings and report to the Council at which time the Council could then consider a resolution if it chose. Council President Marin expressed interest in including a statement from the Council on the website. Councilmember Dawson commented the information on the website was an adequate statement and it was not necessary to develop a statement for the website. She referred to Chief Tomberg's indication that the additional revenue from EMS property taxes should not be considered in determining the surplus for capital improvements. Councilmember Moore requested staff inform the Council regarding the time and location of community meetings. Councilmember Orvis pointed out if annexation proceeded and residents were not satisfied, they could vote Councilmembers out of office. 4. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Haakenson announced the Washington State Department of Transportation purchased the Unocal ws�oT site which would allow the Edmonds Crossing project to proceed. He thanked Community Services Purchase of g p � p y Unocal site Director Stephen Clifton for his perseverance, noting this would not have occurred without Mr. Clifton's efforts. He commented this was one more step toward building a new multimodal terminal in Edmonds. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 8, 2005 Page 7 5. COUNCIL COMMENTS Health Council President Marin reported there was a plentiful supply of flu vaccine available at the Health District District. He announced a Food Service Award was awarded to the Sons of Norway. He described how so many facilities do an excellent job to prevent food-borne illnesses. He expressed his pleasure that the Sons of Norway received this award for their high quality. Councilmember Plunkett suggested the Council consider not scheduling meetings on Council Committee Meeting nights unless it was an emergency. Councilmember Orvis suggested the Council consider initiating the annexation via an election rather than the petition process. Councilmember Wilson announced he would be out of town on business next Tuesday when the Council considered the remaining Comprehensive Plan amendments. He planned to watch or listen to the tape of the meeting and participate in Council deliberations scheduled for the following meeting. Mayor Haakenson encouraged residents to contact staff with any questions/concerns prior to the March 3 Esperance annexation meeting. 6. EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING LABOR NEGOTIATIONS Executive Session At 8:10 p.m., Mayor Haakenson recessed the Council to a 30 minute Executive Session regarding labor negotiations. The meeting was adjourned at the conclusion of the Executive Session. G•V Y •/• E SON,MAYO' S' A S. CHASE, CITY CLERK Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 8,2005 Page 8 Revised 2/4/05 at 11:30 a.m. illa AGENDA II �,. _—, EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds February 8, 2005 6:30 p.m. - City Council Committee Meetings The City Council Committee meetings are work sessions for the City Council and staff only. The meetings are open to the public but are not public hearings. The City Council will meet separately as committees in different meeting rooms as indicated below. 1. Finance Committee (Meeting Location: Jury Meeting Room) (A) Telephone System Financing Ordinance (5 Min.) (B) Treatment Plant Interim Financing Ordinance (5 Min.) (C) Fourth Quarter Budget Report (10 Min.) (D) Reclassification of Office Assistant Position in the City Clerk's Office (5 Min.) 2. Public Safety Committee (Meeting Location: Police Training Room) (A) National Incident Management System (NIMS) (15 Min.) 3. Community Services/Development Services Committee The Community Services/Development Services Committee will not meet this evening. 7:00 p.m. - City Council Meeting Call to Order/Flag Salute 1. Approval of Agenda 2. Consent Agenda Items (A) Roll Call (B) Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of February 1, 2005. (C) Approval of claim checks #77000 through #77215 for the week of January 31, 2005, in the amount of $292,681.18. Approval of payroll direct deposits and checks #40135 through #40210 for the period January 16 through January 31, 2005, in the amount of$824,533.15.* *Note: Information regarding claim checks maybe viewed electronically at www.ci.edmonds.wa.us. Page 1 of 2 CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA FEBRUARY 8, 2005 (D) Report on bids opened January 25, 2005, for the 96"' Avenue West Pedestrian Improvements Project and award of contract to R&J Landscape and Construction ($490,387.25). 3. (60 min.) Work Session on Esperance Island Annexation 4. ( 5 Min.) Mayor's Comments 5. (15 Min.) Council Comments 6. (30 Min.) Executive Session Regarding Labor Negotiations ADJOURN Parking and meeting rooms are accessible for persons with disabilities. Please contact the City Clerk at(425) 771-0245 with 24 hours advance notice for special accommodations. Page 2 of 2