Loading...
05/26/1987 City CouncilTHESE MINUTES SUBJECT TO JUNE 2, 1987 APPROVAL EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES MAY 26, 1987 (SPECIAL MEETING) A special meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7 p.m. by Mayor Larry Naught - en in the Plaza Meeting Room of the.Edmonds Library. All present joined in the flag salute. PRESENT STAFF PRESENT Larry Naughten, Mayor Mary Lou Block, Planning Div. Mgr. Jack Wilson, Council Pres. Art Housler, Admin. Svc. Director Steve Dwyer Bobby Mills, Public Wks. Supt. Laura Hall Jim .Barnes, Parks & Rec. Div. Mgr. Jo -Anne Jaech Peter Hahn, Comm. Svc. Director Bill Kasper Bob Alberts, City Engineer John Nordquist Scott Snyder, City Attorney Lloyd Ostrom Jackie Parrett, City Clerk Margaret Richards, Recorder CONSENT AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. Items (8) and (C) were removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILME�BER JAECH WITHDREW THE MO- TION. THE SECONDER AGREED. Item (A), Roll Call, was approved. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 28, 1987 VERBATIM AND MAY 19, 1987 ITEM B ON THE CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Kasper said the April 28 minutes were acceptable as submitted. He made the follow- ing addition to the May 19 minutes: page 10, fifth sentence from the bottom, "I suggested that the $20,000 fire service study be reviewed and analyzed of the Fire Department and the fire de- partments of other cities". COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED. AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS ON 80TH AVE. W. STORM SEWER FROM 194TH PL. S.W. TO 192ND ST. S.W. 75 000 ITEM C ON THE CONSENT AGENDA 80 " ,r�,.•� Councilmember Kasper noted that the City has already made substantial improvements to the sur- rounding area. He inquired why an L.I.Q. has not been considered. City Engineer Bob Alberts said the project has been budgeted for two years and is one of the priorities in the 1987 budg- et. Councilmember Kasper inquired iff there were sufficient funds available to make the improve- ments without assistance of an L.I.D. Councilmember Ostrom noted that the developer of the area did not provide proper drainage, and the residents were unaware of the situation but requested assistance from the City when the problem arose, which led to the improvements that were made. Mr. Alberts said he was unsure why an L.I.D. was not considered. He said the project has been a priority, and no one has questioned the source of funding until the present time. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO APPROVE ITEM (C). MOTION CARRIED. AUDIENCE Mayor Naughten opened the audience portion of the meeting. Frank White, 1545 N.W. 52nd, Seattle, submitted copies of a letter to the City Clerk who dis- tributed them to the Council. Mr. White said he represented Corpus Christi Church in Edmonds. He requested that the City consider holding the Taste of Edmonds event at another location in 1987 because he said the festivities, particularly the music, disrupt their Saturday night mass. u Mayor Naughten inquired about the hours of Saturday night mass. Mr. White replied 6:30 to 8 p.m. Mayor Naughten said Staff will review the letter and speak to the sponsors of the Taste of Edmonds to try to coordinate the music entertainment. Councilmember Ostrom inquired if the rock band was planned again for this year's event. Mayor Naughten said the plan for the entire event will be reviewed next week. Councilmember Dwyer recommended that approval of the contract for the Taste of Edmonds be removed from next week's Consent Agenda and discussed as an agenda item. Councilmember Hall clarified that the Chamber of Commerce, and not the City of Edmonds, was the chair of the Taste of Edmonds. rCharles Rezba, 510 - 12th Ave. N., said he strongly believed that the wastewater treatment plant should be relocated because of the obnoxious odor it emits. He said he was glad that the Union Oil site was being considered as an alternate site. Mr. Rezba noted that certain indus- tries that are not compatible with the environment are not allowed to operate in those areas, and he suggested that the City approach Union Oil with a request to donate their property to the City for the secondary treatment plant and operate their plant jointly with the City as an incentive to continue their operations. Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, said most residents of the City did not know where the present plant is located. He noted that Staff has indicated that the Pine Street site will increase costs absorbed over and above the $39 million by 25% or more. Mr. Hertrich by tax payers that the tax payers should decide where the said because the costs will be treatment plant will be locat- ed. He said if the Council decides to relocate the plant to Pine Street, it should be responsi- ble for finding a method of financing the additional costs without tax payer assistance. Karl Niggol, 809 Walnut St., said upgrading of the treatment plant was necessary because the present plant is antiquated and because of the increase in population. Mr. Niggol suggested that the City inform its citizenry of the entire process involved in constructing a secondary sewer treatment plant as well as the costs involved to relocate the present plant. Annette Jones, 341 Caspers, said she walks past the treatment plant on a daily basis and said the odor it emits is extremely obnoxious. Ms. Jones said a percentage of the tax base of the City is t5�* 7` derived by merchandising the City. She said it will be difficult to merchandise the City if the treatment plant is located in downtown Edmonds. She implored the Council to relocate the plant and to use foresight and not hindsight. Diana Echert, 18223 - 76th Ave. W., expressed concern regarding the post office annex in Perrin- ville because of the adverse impact to the residential community created by additional traffic generated by postal patrons and postal employees. She was also concerned that the City was con- sidering offering the adjacent City -owned property to the post office. She suggested that the City suggest to the post office to build its annex in the retail area of Perrinville rather than the residential area. She noted that elderly people who do not live on a direct bus route will not have transportation to the Perrinville office as it is presently proposed. Barbara Kindness, 212 Skyline Dr., expressed her appreciation to the Council for allowing its citizenry an opportunity to voice its concerns regarding the secondary treatment plant. She said ,,,d ei✓ the citizenry is hoping the Council will use foresight in selecting the site of the plant and review all of the alternate sites. Peter Roberts, 605 - 27th S.W., inquired about the disposition of the equestrian facility in Perrinville. Mayor Naughten said the Council will discuss that issue that evening and make a decision at that time. Kirby White, 639 - 8th Ave. S., said he was happy that the City was considering alternate sites for the secondary treatment plant. He questioned how a 25% increase in costs to relocate the plant was arrived at when the results of the studies were not known yet. o,nry Chris Matt, 9211 - 216th St., encouraged the Council to review alternate sites for the secon- dary treatment plant. He said an important issue to consider with respect to relocation of the plant was the benefit to the City of an improved business district. Carol Thompson, 18209 - 76th Ave. W., expressed concern regarding the post office annex in Perrin- ville because of: 1) increased traffic, 2) safety of the children, 3) increase in noise, 4) b inconvenience to businesses which presently utilize the downtown post office. Mayor Naughten closed the audience portion of the meeting. CONTINUED DISCUSSION REGARDING ALTERNATE SITES FOR SECONDARY SEWER TREATMENT SITE FROM MAY 12 1987 Community Services Director Peter Hahn reported that the Council discussed alternative project sites on May 12, 1987 with particular attention drawn to a site known as Pine Street. He said the Mayor indicated to the Council by memorandum that Staff would conduct a no cost preliminary investigation of the costs and consequences of pursuing that option more fully. That investiga- tion involved immediate telephone and written contact with Union Oil, a site visit, and a compila- tion of reports and documentation. Staff attempted to estimate the incremental costs --both the *See Council Minutes of June 2, 1937 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 2 MAY 26, 1987 total and Edmonds' share --of locating the plant at that site, noting the unknown costs which would have to be developed through further studies. In addition, Staff defined the process of changing. sites, the environmental and permit review and approval procedures, and the consequences of meeting the Department of Ecology (DOE) Compliance Order deadlines, and the impact on both the present design grant and the potential construction grant. Staff also discussed with the partici- pating agencies the impact to the sewer agreement negotiations of moving the site and to the cost allocations. Mr. Hahn said from the commencement of the planning stage, the City has sought alternatives which either eliminate the need for a treatment plant (a full Metro option) or relocate the plant to a less visible and minimal impact site. The original Union Oil site identified in the engineering report was such a site. The Pine Street site, also owned by Union Oil, also presents excellent opportunities for minimizing plant visibility, traffic, and other impacts. The first question raised was whether the same site acquisition, condemnation, potential litigation, and soil contam- ination problems associated with the original Union Oil site would be present, and the answer appears to be negative. The site, however, is much more environmentally sensitive, which creates opportunities as well as costs. The other primary issues which need to be addressed are space and buildability, costs, and schedule impacts. Mr. Hahn said immediately after the Pine Street site was mentioned at the May 12 meeting, Union Oil Company was contacted. They informed the City that the site is available and have made a formal offer. The property has an assessed valuation (AV) of $2.06 per square foot. (If five acres were purchased, the total amount would be $449,000.) The City may want to commission an appraisal to determine actual market value. AV can be a fairly good estimate of appraisal value but is not always accurate. The present treatment plant has no AV, but the land on the north side of Dayton, owned by Alaska Publishing, has an AV of $4.64 per square foot. Several properties only two or three blocks from Dayton and Second have AV's and appraisals in the $14 to $15 per square foot range. Mr. Hahn noted that the location of two streams and a fish hatchery on the site and the proximity of the marsh necessitate the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). In addi- tion, an Army Corps of Engineers (Sec. 404) Permit would be required. An EIS would identify environmental impacts, alternatives, and costs of mitigation. The latter could include possible rerouting of the stream or relocation of the fish hatchery. The most serious consequence of an EIS process .and the permits is the delay of the Compliance Order and the suspension of design grant funding until the environmental assessment is completed. Mr. Hahn said the City's consultant has estimated that a Phase I investigation would take between 8 and 12 weeks at a cost of $32,000. The investigation would provide the Council with more de- tailed information to decide whether or not to relocate the plant and to proceed to prepare an EIS and amend the engineering report. Phase II elements would cost between $35,000 and $70,000, but the time frame cannot be estimated at this time. Mr. Hahn said the site is environmentally sensitive, and the preparation and statutory review of the EIS could be time consuming. DOE has assumed, from their experience, that such a process could take several months. Review of the EIS and amended engineering report by DOE will, in itself, take between 4 to 8 weeks. Mr. Hahn noted that it took DOE 6 to 7 months to review and approve the present engineering report. Mr. Hahn said HDR, Inc., CWC's parent company, was the firm that conducted the EIS and engi- neering work for the Lakota treatment plant in Federal Way, a plant which involved stream relo- cation in an environmentally sensitive area similar to the Pine Street site. He said Staff has been told that one reason that project was able to receive the environmental approvals was due to the expertise of HDR staff. Mr. Hahn said the Pine street side was reviewed in 1979 for a total relocation and costs were identified to be $4 million more. He said the comparisons were not precisely analogous because the 1979 and 1987 projects have several important differences. The Pine Street site would have at least the same $3.663 million additional costs for conveyance, as did the original Union Oil site. However, of the $39.1 million estimate, $5.4 million is for the pump station, which is part of the present and proposed plant facility. To relocate the plant to any location on the Union Oil facility would eliminate the need for the pump station for the participating agencies. It could be argued that the City of Edmonds should be responsible for the entire cost of the pump station in any relocation of the plant, which would change the costs to the Edmonds rate payers. Mr. Hahn referred to a cost comparisons chart for alternative sites, noting that costs to Edmonds would increase from $18.3 million to approximately $22.9 million (approximately 25%), which means an approximate increase of $18 in monthly rates to an already increased amount of $4.50 per month. The increase in costs does not take into account the costs of environmental mitigation, the elimination of some of the mitigation costs at the present site, land value impacts, and the probable ineligibility of incremental alternative site costs for grants. In addition, the costs of the studies discussed would be ineligible for design grants. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3 MAY 26, 1987 1 J Mr. Hahn said the Pine Street site offers opportunities and is superior, in almost every aspect, to the present site. He said the question remains to be costs. Staff and the consultant have always proceeded to identify alternatives and to find the most cost effective solution. The Council has reiterated this by using "bare bones" terminology to reinforce its commitment to keeping costs to a minimum. He said the Pine Street site will cost more, but it will take a considerable sum of money to refine the very preliminary cost estimate of a $4.50 increase in monthly rates. Mr. Hahn identified the locat.ion.of the Pine Street.site on a vicinity map. He then reviewed the criteria utilized in determining the feasibility of alternate sites for the secondary treatment plant. He said the Union Oil and the Pine Street site have advantages for low impact and minimal plant visibility. Mr. Hahn submitted photographs of the Lakota treatment plant and reviewed slides of the photo- graphs on the overhead projector for comparative purposes to the Pine Street site in relation to the environmental sensitivity. Mr. Hahn said it is Staff's recommendation that the Council authorize the Phase I study. Mr. Al- berts noted that the cost proposal did not include surveying and mapping. He said Reid -Middleton estimated the cost of surveying and mapping to be $5,500. Mr. Hahn said an estimated cost for appraisals may be between $5,000 and $7,500. Councilmember Jaech noted that the 25% increase to relocate the plant to Pine Street did not include relocation of the stream and fish hatchery, land acquisition and sales, time period, and possible outfall. Mr. Hahn concurred. He said the Phase I study will identify the route the outfall would take to Puget Sound. Councilmember Jaech inquired what the monthly rate for Edmonds residents would be for secondary treatment, not considering the Pine Street site. Mr. Hahn replied approximately $18 per month based on the $39.1 million. Councilmember Jaech in- quired if the $18 included the present $7. Mr. Hahn replied affirmatively. Councilmember Jaech inquired what an average monthly water and sewer bill is at the present time. Mr. Hahn replied approximately $17.50. Councilmember Jaech she she wanted citizens to be aware that the total cost for water and sewer utilities when the secondary treatment plant is completed will not be $18 per month but approximately $33 per month. * Councilmember Dwyer inquired where the money for the Phase I investigation would emanate from. Mr. Hahn replied Fund 412 (water/sewer). Councilmember Dwyer inquired if those funds were a v project budget figure or an Edmonds budget figure. Mr. Hahn replied a project budget figure. Councilmember Dwyer inquired if the expenditure of $45,000 was necessary to obtain reliable fig- ures. Mr. Hahn replied affirmatively. Councilmember Dwyer inquired if there was any reason to believe that the study would produce a result which would approximate the $18 rate. Mr. Hahn said only if appraisals indicated that the present site is much more valuable than the existing site. Councilmember Kasper inquired if figures were available regarding the economic and social costs of the existing site. Mr. Hahn said that type of analysis would be very difficult to conduct with conclusive results. Councilmember Kasper noted that the present value of the site was not included in the figures to reduce the cost. Mr. Hahn noted that unknown factors were taken into consideration in the cost proposal for purchase and sales figures. * Councilmember Dwyer suggested, if the only means of obtaining comparable costs would be if the value of the present site is substantially more than an alternate site, to obtain those apprais- als first and then make a determination, Mr. Hahn said Staff was making a judgment call which reflects the City's interest in moving the site because there is an overall advantage in moving the plant off of the present site. Councilmember Dwyer inquired if the appraisals would help to further define the cost estimates. Mayor Naughten replied affirmatively. Mr. Hahn said approxi- mately $1 million more would be realized, assuming that the highest resale value was received for the present site and a low acquisition price obtained for the alternate site. Councilmember Dwyer inquired if there was any reason to believe that further refined costs would result in a plant with a comparable cost to the existing site. Gordon Culp said he thought it was unlikely. Councilmember Dwyer inquired what the lowest predictable monthly rate charge would be based on the most favorable results of a study. Mr. Hahn said the incremental costs for Pine Street are at least as reliable as the $39.1 million figure. He said no figure, other than the land costs, could vary enough to approximate the $18. Councilmember Dwyer inquired about the purpose of the study. Mr. Hahn said the following concerns would be addressed: 1) is there sufficient space to build the plant, 2) will soils support the structure, 3) is the soil contaminated, 4) what extent of mitigation must be made with respect to the stream and hatchery. Councilmember Dwyer inquired if the best scenario was an 18% increase over the cost of the present site. Mr. Hahn replied approximately. See Council Minutes of June 2, 1987 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4 MAY 26, 1987 Councilmember Kasper expressed concern that not all of the economic and social factors have been analyzed. Mr. Hahn said the social and economic factors are difficult to identify. Councilmem- ber Jaech said those factors are totally unrelated to the participating agencies, and they should not be expected to share in those costs. She noted that the sales tax generated from the sale of the present site could not be factored into the cost analysis of the alternate site because those funds would be deposited into the General Fund and not the Water/Sewer Fund. Councilmember Nordquist inquired if a particular phase of the study would identify whether or not the alternate site was feasible rather than conducting the entire study to make that determina- tion. Mr. Culp replied affirmatively. Councilmember Kasper inquired if Pine Street was worth further investigation. Mr. Culp said sufficient data was not available at the present time to make that determination. Councilmember Kasper inquired why Pine Street was not considered in the past. Mr. Culp said Pine Street had been committed to other uses at that time. Mr. Hahn added that a 1979 report revealed that acqui- sition costs would be an additional $4 million. Councilmember Nordquist inquired if the Pine Street site may be contaminated. Mr. Culp said the ground west of the triangle (the undisturbed timber) has been disturbed. If construction would include that portion then soils samples would be necessary. Councilmember Nordquist inquired if the study could be accomplished in phases. Mr. Culp replied affirmatively. Mr. Hahn said the study could be accomplished sequentially with each phase specifically approved by the Council. Councilmember Dwyer inquired about the time frame to conduct a study in phases. Mr. Hahn replied 12 to 17 weeks rather than 8 to 12 weeks. Councilmember Wilson said the issue involves more than just comparative costs. He said Edmonds is a unique city and the aesthetic quality must be preserved. He said he believed that few citi- zens would hesitate to relocate the plant only because of an additional $40 to $50 per year. Councilmember Wilson said the Pine Street site will allow the construction of a secondary treat- ment plant with minimal visual impact. He noted that other cost factors favor relocating the plant away from downtown Edmonds. * Councilmember Hall commented, for the public's benefit, that the issue of the secondary treatment plant has been a very long and time-consuming process. She noted that EPA has cautioned cities not to base the total operation on a short-term basis. Councilmember Hall felt that the Pine Street site would be the most favorable site when considering the long-term benefits. She said the Council has in the past and continues its endeavors to save tax payer money on a long- term basis. Councilmember Wilson read a letter into the record from Mr. & Mrs. Harley 0. Bray which urged the Council to relocate the plant away from downtown Edmonds. * Councilmember Dwyer said it has become apparent that there is no single reason to believe that moving the site will result in a scenario more beneficial than an 18% to 25% increase over the already projected increased rate. Secondly, he said there is no reason to believe that the major- ity of rate payers are willing to incur the additional 18% to 25% increase. He noted that Profes- sor Golden of Central Washington University analyzed the City's water/sewer survey, and his analy- sis revealed: 1) Edmonds citizens did not perceive any benefit to themselves of spending addition- al monies to relocate the treatment plant, 2) in calculating the statistical error of the survey, it was determined to be 99% accurate that 83.589% to 88.4111% of the residential community and 77.88% to 86.9% of the business community indicated that they were not in favor of absorbing costs to relocate the plant. Councilmember Wilson said the results of the survey were invalid because the citizens were not informed with all of the facts when they were asked about raising taxes. Councilmember Dwyer said the margin of error would have to be 39% to change the results of the survey. Councilmember Hall said she was opposed to spending $39 million to upgrade the treatment plant at the present site. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO APPROPRIATE $45,000 FROM FUND 412 TO BE EXPENDED SEQUENTIALLY PER CWC PHASE I ACTIVITIES PLAN TO DETERMINE THE FEASIBILITY OF THE PINE STREET SITE FOR THE SECONDARY TREATMENT PLANT, AND AS THE PHASES ARE COMPLETED THEY WILL BE COMPARED TO THE PRESENT SITE. Councilmember Jaech said the costs associated with relocating the plant for aesthetic reasons cannot be passed onto the participating agencies and, therefore, the citizens of Edmonds would have to absorb the additional cost. She said any surplus which may be realized from the sale of the present site and acquisition of an alternate site would be absorbed by the costs related to relocating the stream and fish hatchery. Councilmember Jaech said it was not apparent to her that a study would identify any cost savings and, therefore, was not warranted. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES *See Council Minutes of June 2, 1987 Page 5 MAY 26, 1987 1 Councilmember Hall inquired if the volunteer committee for stream management has been contacted. Mr. Hahn replied negatively. He noted that the scope of the project is unknown at the present time. He said they will be contacted when the feasibility study has progressed. Councilmember Ostrom said the long-term factors must be considered. He noted that a more expen- sive treatment plant will continue to cost more in ensuing years. He said the City must take into consideration the impact of the increase in rates to citizens who are on a fixed or limited income. Councilmember Nordquist expressed concern that results of the study may reveal that the site is unfeasible and at a cost of $45,000. Councilmember Wilson said he intended the motion to in- clude that the survey be conducted in increments and evaluated by each increment. Councilmember Nordquist requested Councilmember Wilson to restate the motion. COUNCILMEMBER HALL WITHDREW THE SECOND TO THE MOTION. THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR, THEREFORE, FAILED. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO APPROPRIATE $45,000 FROM FUND 412 TO BE EXPENDED SEQUENTIALLY AND EVALUATED ITEM BY ITEM BY THE CITY COUNCIL PER THE CWC PHASE I ACTIVITIES PLAN TO DETERMINE THE FEASIBILITY OF THE PINE STREET SITE AS AN ALTERNATE SITE FOR THE SECONDARY WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT, AND AS THE PHASES ARE COMPLETED THAT THEY BE COMPARED WITH THE PRESENT SITE. Councilmember Kasper said the feasibility of the site should first be determined, and then the other studies should be conducted if the site is determined to be feasible. Councilmember Kasper said he believed the cost to relocate the plant to a more appropriate location to preserve the aesthetic quality of the City should be shared by the participating agencies. Mr. Hahn pointed out that the motion should specify an amendment to the existing contract with CWC. Councilmember Jaech noted that the City is bound by contract to provide participating agencies with water/sewer utilities until a specified date in the future. She said those agencies are not bound to share in the additional costs and could refuse to. She pointed out that authorization to proceed with the study is another form of increasing costs to Edmonds citizens because, she said, information received that evening indicated that relocation of the plant would result in higher costs to Edmonds tax payers. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER HALL, COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, COUN- CILMEMBER NORDQUIST, AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, AND COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM OPPOSED. The meeting recessed at 9:10 p.m. and reconvened at 9:18 p.m. DISCUSSION OF AGREEMENTS WITH PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS INVOLVED IN SECONDARY SEWER TREATMENT Mayor Naughten recognized Jeanette Wood, the Mayor of Woodway', and Pat Meeker, Commissioner of Olympic View Water District (OVWD),in the audience. Community Services Director Peter Hahn reported that a preliminary report was made to the Council on May 5. At that time, copies of the formal City position papers and responses from the other cities were provided to the Council. A draft agreement containing the principles was provided to the participating agencies on May 8. Mr. Hahn said staffs are meeting on a regular basis in an effort to clarify any technical points, i.e., a review of the original flow and land use data has resulted in more accurate ultimate flow capacity needs for each agency. Mr. Hahn said the City has received a copy of the written financial advice provided to the agen- cies which seems to support the independent financing alternative. However, Mountlake Terrace insists that Edmonds do the financing. Mr. Hahn said another technical point being discussed is overhead costs. He said Administrative Services Director Art Housler will develop justification for a fair overhead charge methodology. Mr. Hahn said OVWD agrees with the major principles. One exception is the allocation of 0 & M costs. OVWD prefers allocation on basis of annual flows. Staff strongly recommends that modi- fication in the Council's position. OVWD desires alteration of the current annexation clauses which allows Edmonds the option of taking control of the collection systems in OVWD areas which is annexed into Edmonds. Mr. Hahn said Edmonds has virtually never exercised that option because it is impractical. However, Staff recommends that the clause be retained to enable the City to take control of the District when 60% of the area is annexed. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 6 MAY 26, 1987 Mr. Hahn said a major effort should be made to conclude an agreement with OVWD as soon as possi- ble. Staff recommends that the land cost issue be limited to recovering the costs of the expan- sion parcel purchased in 1984; that an oversight committee be formed; and that 0 & M costs are allocated on basis of flow. Mr. Hahn said the re-evaluation of flow figures resulted in decreased present value costs to Mountlake Terrace of approximately $2 million and, yet, no concession was made to agree with the major principles in the Edmonds Council position paper. Mr. Hahn reminded the Council that the City has no obligation to provide treatment services beyond 1999 to Mountlake Terrace. Staff is unaware what treatment service area alternatives Mountlake Terrace officials are considering, but has surmised that the rate consequences to Mountlake Terrace residents will be enormous. Mr. Hahn said Ronald Sewer District appears to agree to many of the key terms and is requesting a separate contract with Edmonds. Mr. Hahn reviewed the status of agreements as follows: EDMONDS POSITION MLT QVWD RSD Capital costs shared Capacity Capacity Capacity on capacity basis Oversight Committee Yes Yes Yes Independent financing Neutral Strong yes Moderate yes Share in land cost No No No Share in mitigation Some Some Some Share moving costs No No No 0 & M costs shared Flow Flow Flow on capacity basis Mr. Hahn said Mountlake Terrace has expressed a desire that Edmonds be in charge of the entire system, including the Lake Ballinger lift station. The participating agencies have indicated a willingness to participate in the cost to upgrade the station to meet City standards. Mr. Hahn said another issue of interest to the participating agencies is the swap issue. He said based on recent progress, the City concurs that the swap appears to be beneficial and is interest- ed in pursuing it subsequent to resolving agreements with the participating agencies and receipt of a statement from DOE rescinding its order to construct a parallel force main from the Ballin- ger lift station to Highway 99. Councilmember Dwyer said it is his impression that QVWD• has negotiated in good faith. He in- quired if the agreement could be consummated with OVWD and that that agreement serve as a model contract for the other agencies. Mr. Hahn said the 0 & M costs would have to be agreed to be shared on the basis of flow. Councilmember Dwyer inquired if the contract could serve as a model if the City acquiesced on that issue. Mr. Hahn replied affirmatively. Councilmember Ostrom inquired what action was sought from the Council. Mr. Hahn replied: 1) a letter of consideration to Metro, 2) the City formally amend its position with respect to 0 & M costs from capacity to flow, and 3) general approval of taking control of the Ballinger lift station. Mr. Hahn said the issue of land costs must be resolved, otherwise signed contracts will not be obtainable. Councilmember Jaech said she would prefer that Metro assume the contract with Mountlake Terrace if the swap is consummated. She concurred with 0 & M costs on a flow basis, as well as not re- quiring the agencies to share in land costs, with the exception of the parcel that was purchased in 1984 for expansion to secondary treatment. Mayor Naughten inquired if Mountlake Terrace rates would increase substantially if Metro took control of their system. Mr. Hahn said the entire Metro swap concept is predicated on a cost neutral swap. COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO ADOPT THE POSITION ON 0 & M COSTS BASED UPON FLOW. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER KASPER OPPOSED. He stated that this is a subsidy. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 7 MAY 26, 1987 COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO SEND A LETTER TO METRO EXPRESSING AN INTEREST WITH RESPECT TO THE LAND SWAP SUBSEQUENT TO FINALIZATION OF THE AGREEMENTS AND IF DOE RESCINDS ITS ORDER TO CONSTRUCT A PARALLEL FORCE MAIN FROM THE BALLINGER LIFE STATION TO HIGHWAY 99. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO INCLUDE THE LAND COSTS FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1) THE CITY HAS BORNE THAT COST FOR 20 YEARS, 2) IF MARKET VALUE RATES ARE NOT CHARGED TO THE PARTICIPATING AGENCIES FOR THEIR PROPORTIONATE SHARE, THE CITY WILL LOSE THAT TAX BASE AND, THUS, SUBSIDIZE THEIR OPERATION. Councilmember Ostrom inquired about the position of the participating agencies regarding the land cost issue. Mr. Hahn said they were not opposed to participating in the cost of the land pur- chased in 1984 for the purpose of expansion to secondary treatment but were opposed to absorbing a percentage of the cost of the present site because it was purchased many years ago. MOTION FAILED WITH COUNCILMEMBER KASPER AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON IN FAVOR; AND COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, COUNCILMEMBER HALL, COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, AND COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM OPPOSED. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM, TO EXPRESS A WILLINGNESS TO ASSUME CONTROL OF THE LAKE BALLINGER LIFT STATION. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER KASPER OPPOSED. Mr. Hahn stated that overhead costs are included in directs costs of 0 & M. He said because that issue is potentially controversial, Mr. Housler will develop a methodology that is fair and justi- fiable. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM, THAT IF THE PLANT REMAINS AT THE PRESENT SITE THAT THE COST OF ONLY THE PARCEL PURCHASED IN 1984 BE ASSESSED TO ALL AGENCY USERS. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, COUNCILMEMBER HALL, COUNCIL - MEMBER NORDQUIST, AND COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER KASPER AND COUNCILMEMBER WIL- SON OPPOSED. Councilmember Kasper said that is another subsidy. Councilmember Jaech said she did not believe it would be practical for Woodway to do their own bonding due to the percentage of utilization that they require. Mr. Hahn said their capacity will increase from 50 connections to 464. He said he has suggested to Woodway that they contact a financial consultant to determine a method of financing. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, THAT ALL PARTICIPATING AGENCIES SHARE IN THE LAND COST ACQUISITION BASED UPON CAPACITY, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF LYNNWOOD AND WOODWAY, WHO WILL HAVE SEPARATE AGREEMENTS. Mayor Naughten adjourned the meeting at 10 p.m. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL - MEMBER KASPER, TO EXTEND THE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR WHEN ADJOURNMENT WAS DECLARED. MOTION FAILED WITH COUNCILMEMBER HALL, COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON IN FAVOR; COUNCIL - MEMBER DWYER, COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, AND COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM OPPOSED. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, THAT IF THE SITE IS MOVED FOR ANY REASON THAT THE NET COST (ACQUISITION MINUS SALES COST) OF ACQUIRING THE SITE BE DISTRIBUTED EQUALLY AMONG THE AGENCIES. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, AND COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM IN FAVOR; COUNCIL - MEMBER HALL, COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON OPPOSED. Councilmember Jaech raised a point of order. She noted that several people were in the audience from the participating agencies who were in attendance to listen to the discussion with respect to the Citizens Advisory Committee (Item #7). She requested that that issue be discussed prior to the Executive Session. DISCUSSION OF FORMATION OF SECONDARY TREATMENT CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE �yGv"`Y A significant part of the wastewater treatment project is a community information program as described in the Engineering Agreement with the City's consultant CWC-HDR, Inc. This program is to include a public information specialist hired by the consultant and a Citizens Advisory Commit- tee to be established by the City. Staff and the consultant would work with the committee and evaluate their input on issues and use the committee as a possible "sounding board". Issues that would be discussed include aesthetics of the treatment plant, construction impacts, and the pub- lic information program itself. The Committee will be only advisory. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 8 MAY 26, 1987 COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM, THAT ONE REPRESENTATIVE FROM EACH PARTICIPATING AGENCY, ONE BUSINESS PERSON FROM EDMONDS, AND THREE EDMONDS CITIZENS SERVE ON THE CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE. Councilmember Hall inquired who the Committee would report to. Mayor Naughten replied the Coun- cil. Councilmember Kasper recommended that the Committee report to the Mayor and then the Mayor report to the Council MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, THAT ALL PARTICIPATING AGENCIES SHARE IN ANY MITIGATION COSTS OR PROBLEMS ON A CAPACITY BASIS. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER KASPER ABSTAINING. The Council recessed to an Executive Session at 10:15 p.m. to discuss a property matter and recon- vened at 10:23 p.m. DISCUSSION ON PERRINVILLE PROPERTY SITE Q �Councilmember Dwyer reported that Congressman Miller and Senator Evans have informed the City !� """that the post office intends to construct a postal annex in Perrinville despite efforts made on their behalf. Councilmember Dwyer said in view of that posture, the City should sell the City -owned lot which abuts the lots the post office intends to purchase. He noted that approxi- mately $250,000 could be realized from that sale of that.property. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM, THAT THE CITY -OWNED LAND BE SURPLUSED AND OFFERED FOR SALE TO THE POST OFFICE WITH AN EYE TOWARDS NOT IMPOSING THE 6% PROP- ERTY TAX INCREASE THIS YEAR BUT, RATHER, UTILIZE THE FUNDS DERIVED FROM THE SALE OF THE PROPERTY TO REPLACE THE PROPERTY TAX INCREASE. Councilmember Wilson said: "I will vote against that issue. Not only.is it bad enough that this project is going forward, which impacts this City, it also impacts that neighborhood and it's ill conceived and it shouldn't happen. However, if that was the only issue, I probably would vote for the motion simply because we have somewhat belatedly done as much as we can to stop the project, and it appears we can't do that and so to'sell the property is, indeed, at this point, in the best interest of the citizens. But to tie the budgetary process into this motion and anticipate our needs later in the year is more than I can handle, and I will vote against it based upon that part of the motion". Councilmember Jaech inquired in what fund the City -owned land was held. Mr. Hahn said he be- lieved approximately 50% was held in the Water/Sewer Fund but was not certain. Councilmember Jaech inquired if 50% of the proceeds must be deposited into that fund, then. City Attorney Scott Snyder said it was his understanding that only the original purchase price must be deposit- ed in that fund. He said he would review.that issue.... Councilmember Ostrom said the motion does not strictly tie the Council to the budgetary process because of the wording, "...an eye towards...". Mr. Snyder pointed out that the Council cannot take binding action in that respect without a public hearing or proper process for setting the budget. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, COUN- CILMEMBER NORDQUIST, AND COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER HALL, COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON OPPOSED. Councilmember Kasper said he was opposed to the motion because of the 6% factor. MAYOR Mayor Naughten said a new representative was needed for the Visitor Information Center. He in- quired if any Councilmember was interested in that position or if the Council preferred that the Mayor appoint someone. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM, THAT MAYOR NAUGHTEN APPOINT A MEMBER OF THE COMMUNITY TO THE VISITOR INFORMATION CENTER. MOTION CAR- RIED. Mayor Naughten said he intended to reappoint Bill Mathias to the Planning Board. He inquired if the Council desired to interview him again. Councilmember Kasper replied affirmatively. Mayor Naughten reminded the Council that the Meadowdale Playfield dedication is scheduled on June 11 at 7 p.m. He requested Council President Jack Wilson to form a challenge team with the City p and the School District against the County. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 9 MAY 26, 1987 1 COUNCIL Council President Wilson noted that the Memorial Day program was very successful and the best one ever. He said it was an honor to represent the City. vt Council President Wilson said a Student Representative has been selected to serve on the Coun- cil. He noted, however, that it was called to the Council's attention that a former motion had been made which dictated that student representatives must reside in the City of Edmonds. He said since.1984, six representatives have resided in the County and only 4 from the City. Coun- cil President Wilson said the representative that was selected was very enthusiastic about serv- ing on the Council but happens to reside in the County. He asked the Council how it wished to proceed. Councilmember Dwyer recommended that the representative that was selected be allowed to �.serve his term and then restrict the representatives to City residents following his term. -`� p lam"^— Councilmember Kasper inquired when Mayor Naughten would discuss the road bond issue. Mayor l� Naughten said he intended to put forth an advisory ballot in November. Councilmember Nordquist inquired about the status of the proceedings regarding the variance to reduce the required number of parking spaces at the Dorchester Condominium. City Attorney Scott Snyder said prosecution commenced following dismissal of the appeal. He said Judge Conroy found them to be guilty and has suspended imposition of sentencing for six months in order to restore property and parking spaces or obtain a variance. Mr. Snyder said his rationale, as he ex- plained, was that he felt that since Mr. Bedal initiated it and those people came in finally at the last hearing that they.ought to be able to present their case. . Councilmember Hall reiterated that the Memorial Day program was impressive. She said the ceme- tery is beautiful. She requested the Council President to write a letter to the Cemetery Board on behalf of the City Council in appreciation of their efforts. She said she understood that the cemetery may become self sustaining due to the sale of lots. The meeting adjourned at 10:37 p.m. J CQUE INE G. PARRETT, City Clerk f LARRY S. NAUGHTEN, Mayor EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 10 MAY 26, 1987