Loading...
09/03/1985 City CouncilTHESE MINUTES SUBJECT TO SEPTEMBER 10 APPROVAL EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES September 3, 1985 The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m, by Mayor Larry Naughten in the Plaza Meeting Room of the Edmonds Library. All present joined in the flag sa- lute. .. PRESENT Larry Naughten, Mayor John Nordquist Steve Dwyer Laura Hall Jo -Anne Jaech Bill Kasper Lloyd Ostrom Jack Wilson Tom Cole, Student Rep. STAFF PRESENT Art Housler, Administrative Services Director Dan Prinz, Police Chief Jack Weinz, Fire Chief Peter Hahn, Community Services Director Bobby Mills, Actg. Public Works Superintendent Jim Adams, City Engineer Pat LeMay, Personnel Manager Jerry Hauth, Hydraulics Engineer Jackie Parrett, City Clerk Scott Snyder, City Attorney Shirlie Witzel, Recorder Councilmember 6sper arrived at 7:45 p.m., during discussion of the Employee Assistance Program. CONSENT AGENDA Items (B), (D), and (G) were removed from the Consent Agenda for further discussion. COUNCILMEM- BER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The approved items on the Consent Agenda included the following: (A) Roll call. (C) Adoption of Ordinance 2518 establishing no parking on Ocean Ave. (E) Award Contract to For -Land, Inc., for drainage restoration in Meadowdale area ($1,480). (F) Set date of September 17, 1985 on appeal of Hearing Examiner's Decision regarding home occupation permit (Pomeroy/CU-9-85). (H) Acknowledgment of receipt of Claims for Damages from Michael Arthur Klima ($1,076.25) and J. C. Francis ($432). (I) Authorization for Mayor to sign 1986-1988 Firefighter Labor Agreement. (J) Report!on bids and award of contract for Union Oil Waterloop construction project to Utelcon, Inc. ($79,297.68). APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF AUGUST 20, 1985 Councilmember Dwyer indicated that he had voted yes on the motion to extend the meeting of August 20 in the last paragraph on page 8 of the minutes. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL - MEMBER JAECH, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS CORRECTED. MOTION CARRIED. PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2519 DELETING APPENDIX TO UILD Councilmember Dwyer complimented the staff for catching the implications of this code and recom- mending the deletion of the appendix. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 2519. MOTION CARRIED. i SET DATE FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ORDINANCE REGULATING SATELLITE DISH ANTENNAS, AND EXTEND THE MORATORIUM ON CONSTRUCTION OF SATELLITE DISH ANTENNAS TO SEPTEMBER 24, 1985 (SUGGESTED HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 17., 1985) Since there is another hearing scheduled for September 17 that may involve a great amount of time, Councilmember Dwyer suggested that the hearing for this subject be rescheduled for October 1, 1985, and extending the moratorium to a date consistent with that hearing date. He indicated that there could be lengthy discussion on both the Highway 99 issue and the hearing on Secondary Sewage Treatment Facilities as well. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO SCHEDULE THE HEARING ON REGULATING SATELLITE DISH ANTENNAS TO OCTOBER 1, 1985, AND TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE THE APPROPRIATE ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION TO EXTEND THE MORATORIUM FOR THE NECESSARY LENGTH OF TIME TO ACCOMMODATE THE OCTOBER 1, 1985, HEARING DATE. MOTION CARRIED. AUDIENCE Jim Morrow, 19243 94th Ave. W., Chairperson of the Main Street Committee, was present to answer any questions the Council might have on the report just submitted. Ae reported that several local banks have made a low interest loan pool, totaling $148,000, available for design renova- tion of buildings in the downtown area with loans up to $15,000. He said the design must be. approved by the Main Street Committee Design Board and the loan application must also go through the regular loan approval process. A design expert from the Oregon Main Street Program will meet with property owners who wish to renovate the facades of their buildings. Asked by Councilmember Dwyer how Edmonds' program progress compared with that of the five cities selected for the Main Street Program, Mr. Morrow indicated that Edmonds is even with or ahead of those cities, citing the various difficulties the others have faced because of program changes at the State level. He. said the program suffered a serious loss in the area of communication when the Edmonds View stopped publication and they are still working on ways to improve communication. Councilmember Jaech mentioned a building on Main Street east of the Rainier Bank that has would be a good candi- date for renovation. Mr. Morrow agreed and said there have been other changes since the renova- tion of the Leyda building and he expects a snowball effect to take place, such as the facade renovation and expansion at Quintana Roo and the painting of the building across the street from the Leyda building. DISCUSSION OF EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM Personnel Manager Pat LeMay reviewed the information that had been provided to the Council for their consideration of this program and then introduced Bill Dethlefs of General Telephone, North- west. Mr. Dethlefs described his experience with the Employee Assistance Program during the past few years in establishing the program in various major firms. He said the concept originated follow- ing World War II when a number of veterans, returning to the work force, were found to be alcohol dependent. In 1970, he said, the House enacted legislation that was passed by Congress and feder- al funds were made available for use as seed money in developing the program. Other employee problems were addressed during the '70s, he said, that were affecting the ability of employees to do their jobs. In Washington State, he noted that the public sector seems to be taking the lead in implementing the Employee Assistance Program. Mr. Dethlefs listed several benefits that are derived from the program by the employer, the employee and the community. In response to ques- tions from the Council and the Mayor, Mr. Dethlefs said General Telephone Northwest has had the program for the past nine years, having been the first GTE company to implement this program. He noted that there has only been one staff person coordinating or directing the program. In refer- ence to the cost of treatment to the employee, Mr. Dethlefs said the program is more effective if the employee has sole responsibility for payment. He said this is primarily because they do not want anyone else to know about the problem. He indicated that there are means that are used to determine the cost savings to the employer from the program. He said training of supervisors would be the responsibility of the program, either by the contractor or the person designated within house. Responding to further questions, Mr. Dethlefs said the person with alcohol dependency has only a 30% chance of success when going through a program on their own, whereas there is a 60-70% suc- cess rate for employees that seek help through the employee assistance program. City Attorney Scott Snyder noted that he has worked with alcohol and drug programs and has recom- mended that in addition to adopting strong rules dealing with dependent employees there is provi- sion for a program that encourages employee disclosure and assistance. Councilmember Hall saw a strong tie to unionism and questioned whether the location of the pro- gram within the organizational structure might have an effect upon the use of the program by employees. Mr. Dethlefs explained that there seems to be a greater difference felt in the use of an internal program as compared to an external program. He said this is a management tool and he has found it more effective when it is not included in negotiations with the Union. Councilmember Dwyer asked if the Mayor recommended the program and approved of the funding source. Mayor Naughten replied affirmatively. Councilmember Jaech said the Administrative Servic- es Committee had considered the program and had asked for further information and an opportunity to hear from an expert in the field. She said the Committee felt there was value in offering such a program. Councilmember Ostrom asked where the figures were obtained that appear in the cost savings summary. Mr. Dethlefs replied that these were figures from the GTE program. In response to a question from Councilmember Ostrom concerning the anticipated cost of the program, Mr. LeMay said he had contacted Mavis McDowell of the Eastside Mental Health clinic and she had EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 2 September 3, 1985 advised that $3,000 would cover costs annually; this was based on costs experienced by Everett and Redmond. Mr. LeMay said this cost is for an external provider. Councilmember Ostrom observed that the cost savings are real, but the program would be valuable even if there were no cost savings involved. He said there would be many benefits and believes the City should enact the program. COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, TO APPROPRIATE $1,000 FOR THE REMAINDER OF 1985 FROM THE EMPLOYEE ACQUISITION FUND TO FUND AN EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAM. Councilmember Kasper indicated that he would vote against the motion because this is an item that should be brought into labor negotiations. Although the Employee Assistance Program appears to be a good idea and costs are not a factor, he believes it should be reserved for use as a trade- off or bargaining item. Councilmember Hall asked if he would consent to trying the program for a short period of one to three years. Councilmember Kasper replied that the City never has any- thing with which to negotiate and cited the recent firefighters' contract,which went from a 4.1% * salary increase to a 5.6% increase. Councilmember Ostrom said that was why he had asked earlier how the program fit into union negotia- tions; the benefit is to the. employer and would not be a very practical negotiating point. He said it is good, once in a while, to provide something to the employees for which have not had to fight. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER KASPER VOTING NO FOR THE REASONS STATED. Mr. LeMay thanked the Council for their decision and asked if they would authorize a less in- volved process of consultant selection since this is for less than $5,000. Mayor Naughten direct- ed him to proceed. PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2520 ADOPTING FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL, LID 210-NORTH MEADOWDALE SEWERS PROJECT City Attorney Scott Snyder said the recommendations of the Hearing Examiner, resulting from the hearing on LID 210 held April 25, 1985, are reflected in the final assessment roll now before the Council. He advised that there are two issues before the Council this evening, an appeal filed by Mr. and Mrs. Luefkens and consideration of the final assessment roll. If the Council wishes to amend the assessment roll downward, they should do so by motion. If an amendment up- ward were decided upon, he said a new hearing would have to be held. Asked if the hearing this evening were a de novo hearing, he said the hearing would be based upon the findings, conclusions and recommendations of the Hearing Examiner and any information presented by the Luefkens this eve- ning. He noted that the appeal from the Luefkens was the only one filed in a timely manner. Mayor Naughten invited the Luefkens to present their testimony. Bud Luefkens, 16320 76th Ave. W., described the location of their property, Lots 5, 6, 7, and 8 in Block 6, Assessment numbers 63 and 64. He described the work done by Tri-State on their proper- ty and the poor condition of his driveway after they had finished. He said he would not sign a release and Tri-State did patch the driveway but it was still not a good job. In the end, he said he had to hire a contractor to pour a concrete driveway at a cost of $14,000. Although he is not asking for anything for this, he had wanted to describe the problem because he felt the Company was not responsive in dealing with them. Mr. Luefkens then described the acquisition of the four lots, their size and the location of his house on one lot and a portion of another. He said he was left with only one sewer stub; someone had decided these lots were joined because they were in one ownership. He said they are in his name but are owned by the family. Mr. Luefkens said he pays $100 a week in taxes on the property and the lots are valued at $70,000 each. He said he has no problem in paying the assessment but would like to be billed separately for the assessment on each lot. He said he has asked for confirmation of the existence of the two separate lots at each opportunity afforded for protest and has never had a reply. He said a survey was completed and he has a court ordered property line. Councilmember Ostrom asked if Assessment No. 64 was one parcel and Assessment No. 63 is the one which is being referred to as two lots. Mr. Luefkens replied affirmatively. Asked if the lots were acquired in separate actions, Mr. Luefkens said he bought the lots in 1963 as separate lots from one owner. Councilmember Kasper asked if they were segregated. Mr. Luefkens said they were listed as separate lots and have been carried as separate tax lots by the County. He said the Court had recognized these as separate lots. In response, City Engineer Jim Adams said the first protest letter was heard by the Hearing Examin- er and the second is before the Council this evening, both appropriate times for response. He referred to a letter contained in the Council packet this evening, written by Planning Manager Mary Lou Block to Jerry Hauth in which the Planning Department maintains that this is one piece of property as defined by the Community Development Code, since it has never been legally segregat- ed. He said segregating the assessment would give some credence to the argument that Mr. Luefkens does have a segregated lot; however, the Planning Department contends that would be an illegal subdivision. Councilmember Ostrom asked if they were not separate lots, since they were EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES *See .September 10, 1985 Minutes. Page 3 September 3, 1985 recorded as two lots when purchased and are carried by the County as two lots, receiving separate tax statements. Mr. Adams quoted from chapter 21.55 of the Community Development Code and said these lots have never been legally segregated. Mr. Snyder explained that segregation of property refers to how many tax units are contained in a parcel. Councilmember Kasper asked if the property had ever been in separate ownership and what the zon- ing was when the area was annexed to the City. He suggested there might have been more lots under a previous zoning. Councilmember Wilson observed that purchase of Assessment No. 64 by Mr. Luefkens 20 years ago and purchase at a later date of Assessment No. 63 in the form of two sepa- rate lots would make them separate now. Mr. Adams observed that the Community Development Code does not agree with that interpretation. Councilmember Dwyer asked if any assessments would be increased if the City recognized the two lots as requested by Mr. Luefkens. Mr. Snyder replied in the negative. Councilmember Dwyer then asked whether estoppel applied against the LID if the City were to grant this request. Mr. Sny- der said the Council may segregate property at any time in the assessment.roll, now or later. The only limitation placed by statute is that nothing maybe done to impair the security of the assessment. Councilmember Dwyer asked if recognition of the property as two lots would prevent the City from requiring a subdivision process. Mr. Snyder said the Planning Department believes there has been a merger of the property and would not issue building permits without a subdivi- sion of the property. He said this does not tie the Council's hands on this decision. Councilmember Kasper suggested the roll be approved and this issue be considered at another time. Councilmember Ostrom asked if a decision by the Council to recognize separate lots would imply approval of a subdivision. Mr. Snyder replied sale of a lot without proper subdivision is a crime by state law and local regulations. If a building lot were sold in the future, the City would discover that when there was application for a building permit. He said several assumptions were being made without supporting facts. Mayor Naughten invited Mr. Luefkens to answer questions regarding acquisition of the property and from whom they were purchased, if the lots were held in common ownership, and if they were considered substandard and were merged into one lot. Mr. Luefkens said the lots were bought at one time from one owner. He said there was a change in zoning to 20,000 square ft. because the land would not perk. He said the lots were purchased 16 years ago and the house was purchased 20 years ago. The lots were purchased from one person, but he had developed them with underground power as separate lots and they were proper lots at one time. He contended that a value of $70,000 per lot would produce a value of $140,000 for the one large lot; the lot is 140' by over 200'. He said each lot should bear the cost of the sewer assessment if it were sold. Councilmember Hall expressed concern that there may be other property owners in the same position as the Luefkens. Mr. Snyder said the time for appeals has passed and other property owners have lost that opportunity. He noted that the methodology used to determine the assessment has been uniformly applied throughout. He said granting the segregation would not increase or decrease any other assessment. Councilmember Dwyer said this was not the proper time for a resolution of the number of lots involved, but the City could give Mr. Luefkens the relief he is asking in allowing him to have three segregations of LID assessment. He said any action taken by the Coun- cil should not be construed to be a resolution of that question, a question that is to be re- solved in the future. Hydraulics Engineer Jerry Hauth said Mr. MaCauley of MaCaulay & Associates, was approached about breaking this into three parcels but was unable to do so based on the highest and best use of the land. He said illegal lots do not realize a benefit from the sewer project and would have no assessment. Councilmember Dwyer observed that the Council is not considering a resolution of whether there are or are not illegal lots contained in this parcel. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM, TO: (A) ADOPT THE ORDINANCE CONFIRMING THE FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR LID 210 WITH THE SOLE REVISION THAT THE LUEFKENS ASSESSMENT BE IN THREE PARTS AS REQUEST- ED IN THE APPEAL; (B) THE COUNCIL, BY ADOPTING THE MOTION, IS MAKING NO DETERMINATION OF WHETHER THERE IS AN ILLEGAL LOT OR IF THE PROPERTY WOULD NEED TO BE SUBDIVIDED IN THE FUTURE. Councilmember Jaech said she would have to vote against the motion because there is no need to break Assessment NO. 63 into two separate bills. She said the Council does not know if these are legal lots. She said this procedure was not followed with other properties and, even if there were no appeals from others, the same procedure should be followed for them if granted for Mr. * Luefkens. She added that this is not a subdivided property and should not be billed separately. Councilmember Hall also indicated that she would vote against the motion since there is no need to separate the billing. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN, WITH COUNCILMEMBERS DWYER, KASPER AND OS- TROM VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS NORDQUIST, HALL, JAECH AND WILSON VOTING NO. MOTION FAILED. COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO ADOPT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE CONFIRM- ING THE FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR LID 210 AS REVISED ON AUGUST 27, 1985, AS IT STANDS. *See September 10, 1985 Minutes. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4 . September 3, 1985 Councilmember Kasper will vote against the motion because the effect of the assessment merges the property without the consent of the owner. COUNCILMEMBER JAECH AMENDED THE MOTION, AGREEABLE TO SECOND, TO INDICATE THAT THE MOTION DOES NOT INTEND TO MERGE ANY NEIGHBORING LOTS OR INDICATE ANY SUBDIVISION. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER DWYER VOTING NO. AUTHORIZATION TO REPLACE MAINTENANCE AND EQUIPMENT BUILDING AT FIRE STATION 2' Fire Chief Jack Weinz explained that he believes the replacement of the maintenance and equipment building at Fire Station 2 should be delayed and included in the 1986 budget. He said he has realized that more study must go into the project and asked to be first on the budget hearings. DISCUSSION OF MAYOR'S 1985 SALARY ADJUSTMENT Council President Nordquist said the requested information on the salary survey and comparisons of salaries in surrounding municipalities is before the Council. He recommended that the Mayor's salary be increased by 4% retroactive to September 1 and that future adjustments be consid- ered at the time exempt personnel are considered. Councilmember Wilson agreed something should be done and expressed appreciation that this was not tied to other factors. Councilmember Kasper did not see justification for increasing the salary. COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO INCREASE THE MAYOR'S SALARY BY 4% RETROACTIVE TO SEPTEMBER 1, 1985. Councilmember Hall indicated agreement, noting that she had spearheaded the move to set the salary at $40,000 in 1982. In order to make this an attractive full time position, she maintains that an adequate salary is needed and this is a reasonable salary. Councilmember Kasper indicated that this must be considered each time and not become an automatic increase; he will vote against the motion because there is no justification. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER KASPER VOTING NO. Councilmember Ostrom noted that he intended to have the City Attorney prepare the necessary salary ordinance. Council President Nordquist recommended establishing a time of review for the Mayor's salary at the same time exempt employees are considered. COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEM- BER DWYER, TO RESOLVE THAT ALL FUTURE ADJUSTMENTS BE DISCUSSED AT THE SAME TIME OF DISCUSSION OF ALL EXEMPT EMPLOYEES IN JANUARY OF EACH YEAR. Councilmember Jaech said the Council has indicated the need to discuss these salary adjustments earlier in the budget cycle in order to include any increases in the budget rather than have them enacted retroactively. COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM WITH- DREW HIS MOTION, ACCEPTABLE TO THE SECOND. COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO CONSIDER ALL FUTURE SALARY ADJUST- MENTS FOR THE MAYOR AT THE SAME TIME AS SALARY ADJUSTMENTS FOR EXEMPT EMPLOYEES ARE CONSIDERED. MOTION CARRIED. DISCUSSION (PRE -BUDGET) RE ADDITION OF POLICE OFFICER POSITION Police Chief Dan Prinz explained that, in April, he had requested that the probation/warrant officer position be replaced with a police officer position and he had been directed to wait until the 1986 budget year projections were available.. He noted that the transfer of duties from the probation/warrant officer to the staff employees had gone smoothly. The Department workload continues to increase, he said, making it difficult to allow officers to go on vacation. In addition, over 90% of the overtime budget has been spent and 78% of the reserve officer budget has also been used. Councilmember Kasper said this should not be considered prior to other budget items. He is not against hiring a man but believes this is not the appropriate time to consider it. He said $7,500 was authorized for additional overtime on Sunset Ave. Chief Prinz replied that he expects to return most of that money. He added that the recent Garcia decision eliminates the use of comp time for overtime worked so these hours must be paid. Councilmember Kasper asked why the police officers are working at the ferry if they are getting stressed out from all the overtime. Chief Prinz replied that stress in one job is not necessarily found in a different job. Council - member Kasper expressed interest in the correlation between safety and working at other jobs. Chief Prinz explained that there must.be an eight hour break between any other job and a police officer's shift at the City. Councilmember Hall asked why officers are not wearing full uniform when directing traffic. Chief Prinz explained that there are many different situations in which officers find themselves and their uniforms correspond to those situations. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO°AUTHORIZE HIRING -OF POLICE OFFI- CER REQUESTED BY CHIEF PRINZ TO BE FUNDED OUT OF BUDGETED REVENUE. He noted that there is only one city that spends less than Edmonds for their police department, adding that it is apparent the police department is not squandering its money. Councilmember Kasper said he would vote for the motion on the basis that the answer to his questions will be furnished. MOTION CARRIED. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5 September 3, 1985 COUNCIL/STAFF 1986 PRE -BUDGET DISCUSSION Council President Nordquist asked if there were any objections to the scheduled presented. Ques- tioned about the notation for Council and Staff budget hearings, Council President Nordquist said intent at the retreat was to involve the committees at the staff level, after which the vari- ous budgets would come to the Council for presentation by the Committee Chair or Department Head. Councilmember Ostrom remarked that the Council had intended to establish over all goals for the budget and get away from the line by line itemized review done last year. He said discussion of the big picture, based on revenues and goals such as $100,000 for a maintenance fund, etc., is needed rather than each department saying what they want. Councilmember Wilson said discussion in committee on the 24th and 29th does not allow input from all members into all areas; he agreed that they should set the large overview. Councilmember Kasper agreed that the budget should come from the top down. Councilmember Hall suggested the Council meet as a group and act as liaison to the departments. She would like to see the staff present the budget to the Council on Novem- ber 12th and 26th. Councilmember Wilson said he received the most benefit from the Saturday meeting held during the budget process last year. Councilmember Ostrom reiterated that the Council should be setting the goals for the next budget year, determining certain projects and allocating revenues to those projects, leaving the staff to allocate the remainder of the budget. Councilmember Jaech agreed that a Saturday meeting would be beneficial. Councilmember Ostrom suggested September 21. Coun- cilmember Hall wondered if those campaigning for office would have time on Saturdays. COUNCILMEM- BER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO MEET ON SEPTEMBER 14 TO ESTABLISH BUDGET PARAMETERS FOR PRESENTATION AT THE SEPTEMBER 24 COMMITTEE MEETINGS, MEETING TO BE HELD IN THE COMMUNITY SERVICES CONFERENCE ROOM. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Kasper asked Administrative Services Director Art Housler to be present. MAYOR Mayor Naughten announced that Ms. Witzel has resigned as minutetaker for the Council meetings. The Mayor announced that Edmonds firefighters had received the Snohomish County Firefighters Recycler of the Year Award and he displayed the plaque they received. The money realized, $6,332, was used in the community. Mayor Naughten said letters have been received praising the flowers in the City. The Mayor said the PUD is being asked for cost figures for undergrounding utility wires in the various locations recently indicated by Natalie Shippen. Upon receipt of the information, he said, it would be up to the Council to decide what, if anything, they wish to put in the budget for 1986. COUNCIL Student Representative Tom Cole said he had noticed that the signs on Olympic View Ave. have been removed and the area looks much better. Council President Nordquist said the Council Assistant position has been advertised and applica- tions should be in by September 13. There may be need for a special meeting to review the applica- tions, he said. Councilmember Hall mentioned that Treatment Plant Supervisor George Kopan retired last week after 26 years and a party was held for him. Councilmember Dwyer said there was a good article in the League of Cities Newsletter regarding the difficulty cities are experiencing in obtaining insurance. He said there was one town in which everyone resigned. Councilmember Ostrom said the meeting two weeks ago was adjourned at 10:00 p.m. the evening the initiative and referendum ordinance was adopted and he had wished to make some comments about it. He thanked everyone for their vote on that motion. He believes this is one of the most significant achievements of his career as a Council Member. Councilmember Kasper complimented the Mayor and staff on their handling of the waterloop situa- tion and its resolution. Since there was no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 9:25 P.M. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES LAR S. NA GHTEN, Mayor Page 6 September 3, 1985 AC , ELINE G. P RRETT, City Clerk