Loading...
19830329 City Council Minutes126 March 22, 1983 - continued • Department's secretarial position. Regarding the nonrepresented wage and salary program, COUNCIL - MEMBER NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNC.ILMEMBER HALL, TO APPROVE THE PRESENTATION FROM THE MAYOR AND STAFF, WHICH INCLUDED THE FOLLOWING ELEMENTS: (1) AN ACROSS-THE-BOARD SALARY INCREASE AT 4.E5%, EFFECTIVE APRIL 1, 1983. (2) ALIGNMENT INTO PROGRESSION PAY PLAN ON EVALUATION DATE. (3).MERIT ADJUSTMENT ON EVALUATION DATE. (THE PROGRAM WILL REQUIRE FUNDING OF $53,287 OR 6.4%, AND THIS REPRESENTS AN INCREASE OF,$12,287 AND 1.4% OVER WHAT WAS BUDGETED FOR 1983.) Councilmember Kasper said he would vote against.the motion for the reasons he had stated in the Personnel Committee meeting, the across-the-board increase and the comparable cities aspect. THE MOTION CARRIED, WITH COUNCILMEMBER KASPER VOTING NO. The camp time ordinance will be reviewed. Action on the request to fund the Personnel secretary position will be delayed until May when there will be a presentation from the Personnel Director regarding reclassifications. Mayor Harrison announced at this time that the Staff will be having a management breakfast at 8:00 a.m., the following morning, at Glendenning's. Councilmember'Gould advised that. Ken McCauley had contacted him.regarding a traffic problem in his area (83rd and 203rd). He is gathering some neighborhood signatures and will bring a petition to the Council. Councilmember Naughten reported that the SNOCOM and SNOPAC boards had met this morning regarding the possibility of a joint location and the 9.11 levy. It was decided they cannot co -locate but they will pursue means of communication between the two agencies. SNOPAC has looked at five sites and has decided to go in with the Mountlake Terrace/Lynnwood new public works building on 212th. Councilmember Naughten advised that.the Rescue Boat Safety Committee will be giving, presentations to the Port and to Rotary, and letters are being sent to Union Oil and the railroad soliciting money. Councilmember Kasper noted that in the ADB minutes they were talking about putting pine trees all over the City, and he said that should be pursued. There was.no further business to come before the Council, and the meeting adjourned at 11:00 p.m. IRENE VARNEY MORAN, City erk HARVE H. HARRISON, Mayor March 29, 1983 The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:40 p.m., following a dinner meeting, by Mayor Harve Harrison in the Plaza Meeting Room of the Edmonds Library. All present joined in the flag salute. PRESENT ABSENT STAFF PRESENT Harve Harrison, Mayor John Nordquist Jim Adams, City Engineer Jo -Anne Jaech Irene Varney Moran, City Clerk Bill Kasper Art Housler, Finance Director Laura Hall Jeff Ristau, Accounting Supervisor • Ray Gould Marlo Foster, Police Chief Larry Naughten Ron Schirman, Asst. Fire Chief Katherine Allen Mary Lou Block, Planning Director Teresa Jolly, Student Rep. Pat LeMay, Personnel Director Steve Simpson, Parks & Recreation Dir. Jim Jessel, Property Manager Bobby Mills, Acting Public Works Supt. Wayne'Tanaka, City Attorney Mark Eames, City Attorney Jackie Parrett, Deputy City Clerk Councilmember Kasper announced that Councilmember Nordquist would be late; however, he did not arrive. AUDIENCE Karen Mueller, 20206 83rd Ave. W., and Ken McCauley, 20223 83rd Ave. W., presented a petition requesting a traffic safety feasibility study of 83rd Ave. W. between 200th St. S.W. and 204th St. S.W. They had talked with people in the Engineering Department and also with two Councilmembers about the traffic problems in this area. Councilmember Gould had been out to the area at the request of Mr. McCauley, and he agreed that there is a real traffic problem in that neighborhood. Therefore, COUNCILMEMBER GOULD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALLEN, TO ACCEPT THE PETITION AND FORWARD IT TO THE STAFF FOR A FEASIBILITY STUDY, WITH A REPORT BACK TO THE COUNCIL ON MAY 3, 1983. MOTION CARRIED. MAYOR Mayor Harrison read aloud a proposed resolution, commending Teresa Jolly for her service to the City Council as a Student Representative. COUNCILMEMBER NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, • 127 • March 29, 1983 - continued TO PASS RESOLUTION 550, COMMENDING TERESA JOLLY. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Harrison presented the framed resolution to Fis. Jolly. Mayor Harrison reported that the water color painting purchased at last year's Edmonds Arts Festival had been located in the office of the library, and he asked where the Council wished to have it hung. After some discussion, it was agreed that it t•.as originally purchased to Lie hung somewhere in the new library building, and it was decided to ask Arts Coordinator Linda McCrystal for a recommenda- tion as to where -to hang it. CONSENT AGENDA Items (B), (F)., (K), and (.0) were removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALLEN, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The approved Items on the Consent Agenda included the following: (A) Roll call. (C) Acknowledgment of receipt of Claims for Damages from "Tor Storkersen 'in the amount of $240 and from Glenn D. Barton,.Jr., in the amount of $350.75. (D) Approval of final plat of Maple Creek, 10 lots at 21127 Shell Valley Rd. (P-3-82). (E) Set date of April 5, 1983 for hearing on appeal from ADB approval or freestanding sign at 22828 100th Ave. W. (Appellant--Shippen). (G) Adoption of Hearing Examiner recommendation to remove proposed street in vicinity of 78th Ave. W. and 2:34th St. S.W., and add a proposed cul-de-sac off 231st St. S.W. (G & M • Investments/ST-7-82) (H) Adont Planning Board recommendation on helicopter and hot air balloon landings. (I) Approval of County -wide Mutual Aid Agreement. (J) Passage of Resolution 551 designating April as Planning Month. (L) Passage''of Resolution 552, transferring $12,287 from Council Contingency Fund to General Fund for the purpose of funding salary increases for exempt and non - represented nonexempt employees. (M) Adoption of Ordinance 2359 to reduce right-of-way of Sea Vista P'I. from 50' to 30'. (N) Adoption of Ordinance 2360 regarding deadline extensions for PRDs. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MARCH 22, 1983 [Item (B) on Consent Agendal Mayor Harrison made reference to the second paragraph on page 5 (regarding the Water/ Sewer rate structure), the motion stating the phase -in rates, and said they would have to be modified somewhat to give an equal spread, and that mould be discussed later this evening during the hearing on that item. Also, it had been brought to the Clerk's attention that in the fifth paragraph on page 7 (under "COLINCTL"), the sentence on the thirteenth line should read: "The come time ordinance was reviewed." The minutes state "!rill be" and the Personnel Committee minutes confirm that it was reviewed and that further action is not anticipated. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER"NALIGHTEN, TO APPROVE ITEM (B) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH THAT AMENDMENT. MOTION CARRIED. is SET GATE FOR HEARING ON APPEAL. FROM ADB APPROVAL OF DIRECTORY SIGN AT 22828 100TH AVE. W. (APPELLANT--DREWNIANY) (SUGGESTED'DATE: APRIL 5, 1983) !_Item (F) on Consent Agendal This item was discussed later in the agenda relative to a. similar appeal by the same appellant which was scheduled for this evening's agenda. The conclusion was that both appeals were considered to be withdrawn, so this item was not approved. PROPOSED ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING.NONREPRESENTED EMPLOYEES' WAGE AND SALARY PROGRAM Item (K) on Consent Agenda] Councilmember Naughten stated that: in the first paragraph of the ordinance he !,could like inserted after the word "determined," the -phrase "upon the recommendation of the Mayor and the Staff" so the sentence reads: "WHEREAS, after review and discussion the City Council has determined, upon the recommendation of the Mayor and the Staff, to adjust the salary ranges for exempt personnel and for the nonrepresented, nonexempt personnel. . ." COUNCILMEMBER NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED FOR DISCUSSION BY COUNCILMEMBER. JAECH, TO.MAKE THAT CHANGE. Councilmember Jaech asked if was agreed by all that they were changing the salary ranges, or did they think the; were only giving all nonrepresented employees a 4.85% increase. She did not think they had changed the salary ranges. Personnel Director Pat LeMay stated that the ingredients .of the program definitely did entail an adjustment to the grids --that was the second ingredient in the program. Councilmember Gould said it shifted the ,arid upwards and set the salaries, and he would anticipate that to be something that happens annually. THE MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMEMBER NAUGHTEN THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER.HALL, TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 2358 AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED, WITH COUNCILMEMBER KASPER VOTING NO FOR THE SAME REASONS AS HE HAD STATED WHEN PnEVIOLISLY VOTING. APPROVAL TO LEASE FOUR 1983 C„EVROLET MALIBU POLICE VE!'I(., [Item (0) on Consent Agenda] Councilmember Kasper said he would like to refer this item to the Finance Committee meeting of • April 5, 1983. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER THEREFORE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO REMOVE 128 March 29,.1983 - continued ITEM (0) FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA.AND TO PLACE IT ON THE APRIL 5, 1983 FINANCE COMMITTEE AGENDA. ;LOTION CARRIED. HEARING ON APPEAL FROM HEARING EXAMINER DECISION TO DENY VARIANCE FOR OVERHEAD WIRING AT SUNSET AND MAIN (SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUD/V-17-82) This variance request had been heard on January 20, 1983 by the Hearing Examiner, and on February 17, 1983 he issued his decision, denying the requested variance. The appeal was received on March 4, 1983. Planning Director Mary Lou Block stated that the specific variance requested was to allow an additional 328' of -new overhead wires at the intersection of Sunset Ave. and Main St., and to install a 60' pole at the same interesection. Section 18.05.000 of the Edmonds Community Develop- ment Code requires that all new or*extended utilities within the City of Edmonds are to be placed underground except where exempted by law, and the proposal of the.applicant does not fall under the exemption. Ms. Block reviewed all of the findingsof the Hearing Examiner, and his conclusions which were based on those findings. His decision was that the variance was denied because the additional 328' of new overhead wiring and the installation of a 60' pole at the intersection of Main St. and Sunset do not meet the criteria as listed in Section 20.85.010 of the Community Development Code. The reasons for the failure to meet these criteria were set forth in the conclusions of the Hearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiner further.stated that the applicant is faced with a difficult problem as the criteria set forth in Section 20.85.010 are strict. He stated that it appears to be the intent of the City'of Edmonds to be restrictive as to the placement of overhead wires in the vicinity, and the City, through its Community Development Code, has established a policy of jealously protecting the aesthetics and views, and part of this protection has been the implementation of a policy requiring underground wiring. He strongly suggested that the applicant contact the various customers involved with the service in that area and suggested the formation of LIDS for the purpose of providing underground service. Ms. Block added that the applicant is the PUD, a public entity looking to the public good, and this request was not to the public's benefit. A drawing was shown to illustrate • where the new overhead wires were proposed to be located, and then the hearing was opened. Gene Bastys, representing Snohomish County PUD, said the entire Edmonds waterfront area receives electrical service off a single line on Dayton St. at the present time. He showed the location of the existing lines on a drawing and said if for any reason there is an outage the entire waterfront is without electrical service until the power can be restored. There are planned and unplanned outages. He described the various uses of power on the waterfront which are interrupted. Their proposal was to intall a tie -line between the two existing lines on Main St. which would then give a second feed of power to the waterfront and thereby shorten the period of any outage. He said the existing pole is 40' high and the new pole would be 52' (12' higher), and the reason they have to go to a taller pole is because of the street light in order to meet the electrical code distance between the street light and the line. He said the cost to do this overhead will be $5,500, whereas to underground it is estimated that the cost will be $45,909 (the previous estimate was $50,000). He added that undergrounding is not the answer to eliminating outages as there is a drainage problem there and the switch cabinets already have had to be raised in order to try to alleviate the problem. Also, he said if the wires are underground you have to search for an outage, whereas if they are above it can be seen. He said undergrounding would be disruptive to the ferry traffic also. He said they appreciate the City's aesthetic concerns but they must be realistic in their approach to the problem, and this tie -line is the most cost effective way to do it. He said PUD does have the power to LID, but normally LIDs are initiated by the cities. He concluded that they cannot justify paying $45,000 for something that can be done for $5,500, and there is not that much additional line to be added. A suggestion was made that they go down Bell St. to underground and along Sunset where there would not be so much restorative work as they could go into the unpaved area. Bill Neubauer, an engineer with PUD said that route follows the railroad right-of-way and the park is there, and they would have to apply for a permit from the railroad and he thought it very unlikely that they would give permission to put an.underground line there. Also, he noted that there is a cliff next to Sunset and they would have to bore under the railroad tracks, and it probably would end up costing more to do that. He said they -had looked at every possible route and the one proposed is • the least expensive with the least problems. Councilmember Gould asked about the actual history of outages --how many would not occur if there was a loop system. Mr. Bastys said they are not going to eliminate outages, only the length of time of the outages. They are trying to eliminate the long- term outages. Mr. Neubauer said at the beginning of construction on Harbor Square a cap was damaged and there was about a four-hour outage, rather than 15-20 minutes. He noted that there will continue to be outages on the waterfront as Harbor Square continues to develop to completion. He said, in answer to a question, that the poles which are there now will not be changed except for one which will be somewhat higher.. Glen Mixdorf, on the PUD legal staff, said it is a matter of 200' of additional wire and the poles are already in place with one being increased in height and the difference in what would be seen would not be that great, and it would not be justifiable for the district to create an.LID for the difference in costs. He said they believe a special circumstance for a variance applies very clearly and that the loop may be economically unfeasible if it has to be underground. He added that this is not a new or extended utility, it is only an addition or alteration to the common utility. He read from the code that businesses can add to or repair their business up to 50% and said they are asking to be treated like everybody else. He felt what they intended was not contrary to the Comprehensive Plan but said it is not economically feasible to do it underground. He addressed the rezone criteria from their standpoint, saying the addition would increase the reliability and result in less down time and reduce or eliminate the need for planned outages, resulting in improved services, so it would improve the public health, safety, and welfare. He said they felt this was the minimum change necessary to allow this benefit to take place and they believed they did not even need a variance because they were connecting to existing poles. He read from a section of the code that said only that which exceeds 50% must be undergrounded. He thought the Council should find that it would be economically wasteful to require this and said the Hearing Examiner seemed to have determined that $50,000 was not unreasonable to pay not to have that section there, and he submitted that it is too,much and there already is a great deal of wire there. He added that a line had been put there temporarily for about two months and there were no repercussions to his knowledge. 12 9'. • March 29, 1983 - continued Natalie Shippen, 10,92 Euclid, spoke in support of undergroundir.;. She noted that �vith undergrounding for beautification you paya lot to see nothing. She thought each opportunity to underground should be, taken as it arises, and she noted: that the oast is always an issue and that it wi11 always he more eXpensive than overhead wiring, but she said Edmorids has alr_ady invested a lot in the under- Srcunding prograroi so there should be no retreat at this point. Steve Dwyer, 8820 Main St., appeared on behalf of his family, his father having spoken at the Hearing Examiner hearing. He said the decision was made long ago that the scenic views are wanted for the City, and that decision was included in the code aut PUL wants an exception to that. He said thera was one reason for this hearing, to determine if the gearing Examiner was wrong when he decided that PUD was not entitled to the .variance, and the: "earing Examminer had 25 findings -of fact on which he based his conclusions. He said they have been striving for years.to have orderly procedures, and this was a prime example where the system set up -has worked, and there have been reasonable applicants with reasonable requests, but this.request is not provided for in the code. He said the code has been applied by the hearing Examiner as passed by the Couricil and Pie came up with the decision that these applicants have riot met the requirements for a variance, and the Hearing Examiner was not wrong when he rendered his decision, and the Council should uphold it. Lloyd Ostrom, representing the Edmonds Council of Concerned Citizens, said the ECCC had reviewed this matter and they feel the Hearing Examiner came up with the proper decision. he added that Ms. Block had done an exceiient job of stating the facts. No one else wished to speak, and the hearing was closed. Councilmember jaech said she had heard the PUD representatives say they are requesting 200' rather than the 328' previously stated, _but to her the amount of footage is inmiaterial and even 10' would be too much. She believed the citizens of this town feel very strongly about view enhancement and they have worked hard to develop the cede the City has. She thought wires to be one of .the best • examples of visual pollution, and she said visual pollution affects the health and welfare of the people. THEREFORE, COUNCILVEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALLEN, TO UPHOLD THE DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER, DENYING THE APPEAL V-17-82. Councilmember Hall said they have to make a start somewhere, and this is a start. She was a firm believer in upholding the code at this time, and she sucgEsted the appellants get creative and trY to accomplish their proposal with -the other entities in that area. Councilmember Kasper asked why this transaction was going to the Hearing Examiner whey; ti;ere are other new lights being built within the City that do not c,c to the Hearing Examiner. He stated that there are completely new power poles being put up arid that he is familiar with lines having been put up within the last four years. Ms. Block responded that any new lines should be underr;rour:d. Councilmember Gould saw that a loop system would be desirable, that aesthetic impacts are important to the citizens of Edmonds, that ar, LID is possible, and that he believed the residents to be willing 1.0 Vay t[]e'costs of maintaining their Community Development Code and the appearance of their City. He agreed that it was proper to uphold the: decision of the Hearing Examiner. THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Kasper noted that there is $12,000 in the underground fund and that the: port is affected by this and should get involved. He thought the whole thing should be locked at, and he noted that an LID would take in the City as well as the Port. He thought the undergrounding should be explored as a joint effort.. COUr.CILMEMPER KF,SPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ALLEN, TO LOOK AT IT FROM THAT STANDPOINT IN THE COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE AFTER HEARING FROM THE PUD. MOTION CARRIED. HEARING ON APPEAL FROM ADB DECiSICP, REGARDING DIRECTORY SIGN AT 2282F TOOTH AVE. l!. (GLSON'S/ADB-5-83) (APPELLANT--DP,EVit;IANY) Planning Director Vary Lou Block e;cplained that thehearing date which had been on the Consent Agenda was a different appeal as the appellant- had appealed two decisions, but he now had agreed to continue the whole thing. In the rneantime, she had received a letter from Pave Kehle, the architect for Clson's, requesting; that the directory sign be withdrawn from the approval. Therefore, with the sign withdrawn, both appE:als would be for something no longer existing, so both appeals were con- sidered v; i thdrawn. Pls. Block noted that, basically, the problem had been between the two parties, rather than with the Cite. At this time, Council President Jaech noted that Item 8 on the a.c;enda, "Lease of Public Works Building to the Elm Club," had been placed on the agenda after the agenda was closed and they would not be able to got to it this evening. However, she had discussed it: with the City Attorney and deterr, i ned that this raas an ad'mi ni strati ve ma titer, rather thar; a Council matter, so Council action was­not�needed.. THEREFORE,.COUNCIL PRESIDENT JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COL'NCILVEMBER ALLEN, TO REMOVE THAT ITEM" FROMTHE AGENDA. Mayor Harrison asked for, clarification, and City Attorney Mayne Tanaka stated that the extension of a lease could be approved administratively (the requE:st was for a four-n;onth extension of the lease on the: Elm Club's present quarters in the Anderson Center i• lhi le they look for other quarl.. MOTION CARRIED. HEAP.IPiG ON. FIRST READING. OF PROPOSED ORDiNANCE TO IMPLEMENT NIATER/SEWER RATE STRUCTURE Accounting; Supervisor JE;ff P,istau passed out water/sexier rate structure information sheets such as had been provided to the audience. He said it was his interpretation that the intent of the motion made last week was that the phase --in would be done in Equal Increr,ents, and when the previous presenta- tion was made there was a flour --step phase, -in. lie was proposing this evening that the intent of the motion be amended so the April i, 1983 water rare for, multiple dwellings be changed from y6.68 to $7.68. There was no change from,, the existing structure for "other" customers. On the sewer side, the domestic: rate of $14.91 would rerr:ain the same through the three phase -in periods. The rate charged to multiple dwellings would be adjusted to a flat rate basis of $11.84, $13.37, and $114.91 per unit. The motion had indicated no change as far as the variable rate charge to all customers, but the presentation had included a change in the variablE rat: fror�i 82�- to 92(r, and since the minutes did not reflect that change he asked for an action to.clarify this issue to indicate whether the Council wanted to retain the current 82t per 100 cu. ft. or increase to 92� so all "other" customers would carry their share of the debt service. He said it was the intent of the presentation last week that this additional revenue would be generated. He said the unconnected customers rate D March 29, 1983 - continued • would remain unchanged. Councilmember Gould said he thought they wanted the "other" customers to have an equitable sewer bill along with the multiple family and single.family. He thought the reserve was larger than it had to.be and that they should deal with that factor. Councilmember Kasper, however, said the City's bond rating is currently B-aa and to reduce the debt ratio at this time would prevent it from going to A. He felt that overall the City has a tremendous load and will just have to'come back and hit the.people harder. He said a long-term solution is needed and this is the best way to do it. The hearing was opened. Lloyd Ostrom, representing the Edmonds Council of Concerned Citizens, expressed appreciation for the information sheet provided the audience this evening, saying it was a good aid to following the Council deliberations. He said his group had been involved in this issue for several months and until last week he was encouraged that a well organized and well conceived approach had been ac- complished, but last week shot the whole thing down. He said a whole lot of points that were . brought out seemed to be lost in the shuffle. His group's view was that the single-family users have been overcharged for their water and sewer for the last two years, and their point was not simply that they.wanted equity but.they wanted a reduction in the rates for the single-family users as recompense for the fact that they have been paying more.than their share fora long time. He said a great deal of the discussion has focused on the bond rating, and he understood that any of those approaches discussed would bring in the same amount of revenue to the utility and the orderly increasing flow of revenue is the prime consideration in determining a bond rating. He said the Council had gone from order into chaos last week, after the principles had been put forward, dis- cussed, and agreed upon in a well ordered approach. He asked them to look at those principles again and adhere to them, and then he thought they would probably come up with a good solution. He asked them to stop introducing irrelevant subjects, and he said the proposal was easy for him to under- stand until all the irrelevant things were brought up last week. Dorothy Williamson, 703 Main St., said she gets the feeling that all of a sudden this is a great way to make money. She said they started with making things equal and.now the Council was talking about • making money, and they do not now know exactly where they will spend all this money. She thought perhaps they were going to make too much money, and she said the single-family people were not gaining anything. Bill Crow said he thought the structure was accomplishing what they wanted to do, and if the City can hold the rates the same for the single-family users and raise the rates for the multiple -family users the City will gain a lot of money. He had told people if their rates (single-family) do not go up they have accomplished something because everything else is going up. Finis Tupper, 711 Daley, said he did not necessarily agree with all of the principles but he thought that was a great way to start. He agreed with Mr. Ostrom regarding last week's meeting and he wondered if the phase -in was really equity, and he thought it totally unfair not to give some benefit to the single-family residents just to build cash reserves. The hearing was closed. Councilmember Gould thought the whole point was that single-family rates were too high and multiple - family rates too low, and he said they have a chance to lower the single-family rates at least to the end of 1984 while. raising the multiple -family rates. He asked what governmental body can say it has lowered anybody's rates, and said they have the chance to do it and he thought they should. He said they could finance the 1983-1984 utility projects while lowering the single-family rates, and it appeared that they were trying not to let the public know they could lower them. He felt they needed to lower them and raise the multiple -family rates on a phase -in, and then review annually. He thought the Staff plan of March 16 should be adopted. Councilmember Kasper responded that he did not think the March 16 plan was the Staff plan but Councilmember Gould's plan --he did not think they had a Staff plan. He said the 6% reduction is highly questionable in his mind although he cannot prove his figures and cannot say if the rates will go up or down. But he said to be decreasing their income when they should probably be increasing it and should be staying somewhere in the debt coverage area where they are now --which is fairly high --to pull it down when they are going in the bond market --does not make good sense. Councilmember Gould countered that the rates given to them. by the Staff were not his rates, that he had guided the set of principles through the Council and • the Council adopted them, and the Staff came up with the rates based on those. And Councilmember Kasper said the plan they were acting on then was not his plan but an alternate of the Staff's plan --his plan would be entirely different. Councilmember Naughten said that he had voted against the plan last -week as he felt they previously were after equity in the rate structure, but it was always his belief that the single-family users were paying too much and that they could be given a 6% discount and keep the integrity of the water/sewer fund. He thought all people in the system should pay and that the rate should go from 82Q to 92t for all the users. He did not think there was a need for extra money, based on the future needs, and he thought they should keep the cost as low as possible and provide equity and give the single-family users at least a 6% discount. He favored last week's Staff plan and he did not mind shortening up the phase -in period. Councilmember Hall wondered what would be generated in revenues if they held the present rates and built up the multiple -family rates at one time. Finance Director Art Housler said, regarding the concern of the extra cash on --hand and how that was proposed to be used, that the Council had anticipated keeping the money to assure no rate increases until 1985, and there was a debt service coverage of 2.3 which would be 1.3 by January 1985. He said this money was going to go for financing the operations. He said last week incorporated a 6% decrease to single-family and a proportionate increase in the multiple -family rates for water, and there was no additional revenue increase. On the sewer side there was an additional revenue.requirement of $117,000 for the debt service on the bond issue, and that resulted in an increase in both the multiple and the single. COUNCILMEMBER NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER GOULD, TO REJECT THE CURRENT PROPOSAL OF MARCH 29, 1983 BECAUSE IT DOES NOT INCORPORATE HIS GOAL WHICH THEY WERE SEEKING IN THE WATER/SEWER STRUCTURE. He said it does not allow a 6% discount to single-family users which was his goal. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION, WITH COUNCILMEMBERS NAUGHTEN, GOULD, AND JAECH VOTING YES, AND WITH.COUNCILMEMBERS KASPER, HALL, AND ALLEN VQTING NO, RESULTI"1G.I-N A TIE VOTE. Mr. Tanaka.advised that the Mayor could not vote on ordinances. THE MOTION FAILED. Mayor Harrison observed that all of the proposals were very close and that he would accept any of them. Councilmember Allen suggested that the Staff be asked for a recommendation within the ranges presented in the last two or three meetings. QUARTERLY REPORT FROM POLICE CHIEF REGARDING PAROLE OFFICE ON 212TH 0 1,3 4_ March 29,.1983 - continued Police Chief Marlo Foster reported that he had received no information, positive or negative, during the first quarter. Councilmember Fall said she did not feel the City had a handle on any reporting, negatively or positively, and she did not think his people were involved in the.process. She asked the Mayor to see if the police can coordinate some effort on this as she felt there were violations thatwere not being recorded, and she wanted a reporting system. Chief Foster said his people work with the parole office and on a friendly basis, and he did not see that he has the ability to monitor that place to come up with information. Councilmember Nall said she wanted him to meet with them, and he agreed that he should do that to establish a dialog and mend some fences. Councilmember Jaech said these parolees are being concentrated near a school and a family area and that concerned her. She referred to a newspaper article about Michael Hightower and read his record, noting that after many repeated incidents he finally killed a woman. COUNCIL Councilmember Naughten read a. report from Jim morrow, Chairman of the Chamber of Commerce Downtown Parking Committee, which indicated the all -day parking area is being used and is found beneficial. They felt the 3-hour parking zones require more enforcement, and they indicated they had not received reports on the In -Lieu Parking Fund which they were to receive every six months. COUNCILMEMBER NAUGHTEN MOVED., SECO-NDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BALL, TO RESCHEDULE THE APRIL 12 WATER CONSERVATION PRESENTATION BY SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT TO APRIL 26, AS THE REPRESENTATIVE IS UNABLE TO ATTEND ON APRIL 6. MOTION CARRIED. Student Representative Teresa Jolly said she would like to get some Campfire Girls to work at the cemetery during the last week in April. This request was well received, and Acting Public Works Superintendent Bobby i^ills will coordinate it with her. • Council President Jaech had -talked with the Paris and Recreation Director regar ding the minutes of the Arts Commission and also to Jerry Ward, the Chairman of that group, and reported that as Mayor Harrison had suggested, the minutes were misleading. She said the problem is not between the Council and the Commission, but rather is within the Commission as to the members coming to an agreement as to what they want. Council President Jaech announced that the new Student Representative will be Tony Foss from Meadow - dale High School and will serve from April through June.. Councilmember Naughten suggested that the outgoing Student Representative telephone the incoming one to brief him on the position, and Teresa Jolly agreed that this would be a good idea. Council President Jaech passed out a list of committee assignments and said she had a letter from the Health District saying Councilmember Allen had resigned so a replacement may be needed. Council - member Nordquist also serves on the Health District. Council President Jaech said that at- the dinner meeting this evening she had presented input from the various department heads and comments from the Councilmembers to reorganize the committee system and the general consensus appeared to be to have the various meetings. For the Staff/Council meetings there will be four committees: The Finance Committee will consist of the full Council and the Finance Director, with the Council President as Chairman, and will meet on the first Tuesday of each month. The Personnel Committee also will consist of the full Council and the Personnel Director, with the the Council President as Chairman, and will meet on the third Tuesday of each month. The Community Services Committee will meet on the second Tuesday of each month and will.consist of -the Public Works Supertendent, the City Engineer, the -Planning Director, and the Parks and Recreation Director, as well as Councilmembers Gould (the Chairman), KCasper, and Allen. The Public Safety Committee will meet on the fourth Tuesday and will consist of the Police and Fire Chiefs and Council - members Nordquist (the Chairman), Hall, and Naughten. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY • COUNCILMEMBER NAUGHTEN, TO ADOPT THE COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS AND THE PROCEDURES SUGGESTED BY THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT REGARDING COMMITTEE MEETINGS, COUNCIL WORK MEETINGS, COUNCIL REGULAR MEETINGS, AND THE CONSENT AGENDA (THESE WERE PRESENTED AT THE DINNER MEETING). MOTIm CARRIED. Councilmember Kasper commented on the PSCOG, saying the emergency jobs bill is coming up and he has a letter regarding implementation. There was no further business to come before the Council, and the meeting adjourned at 11:05 p.m. IRENE VARNEY MORAN, Civ Clerk HARVE H.:HARRISON, Mayor 1 is