19841204 City Council Minutes3 6.
December 4, 1984
U
The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Mayor Larry
Naughten in the Plaza Meeting Room of the Edmonds Library. All present joined in the flag salute.
PRESENT
Larry Naughten, Mayor
Jo -Anne Jaech
Steve Dwyer
Laura Hall
Bill Kasper
John Nordquist
Lloyd Ostrom
Jack Wilson
Suzanne Adams, Student Rep.
STAFF PRESENT
Jim Adams, City Engineer
Art Housler, Administrative Services Director
Duane Bowman, Assistant City Planner
Jack Weinz, Fire Chief
Steve Simpson, Parks & Recreation Director
Dan Prinz, Police Chief
Peter Hahn, Community Services Director
Mary Lou Block, Planning Director
Ron Schirman, Assistant Fire Chief
Bobby Mills, Acting Public Works Superintendent
Jackie Parrett, City Clerk
Scott Snyder, City Attorney
Shirlie Witzel, Recorder
Councilmember Kasper arrived during the Audience portion of the meeting.
CONSENT AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY-COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION
CARRIED. The approved items on the Consent Agenda included the following:
(A) Roll call.
(B) Approval of minutes of November 27, 1984.
(C) Acknowledgment of receipt of claims for damages from Jerry and Debbie Dramer ($103.00),
Charlene Zimmer ($64..04), and Kathleen L. Summerlin ($33,772.93).
(D) Authorization to proceed with sale of vehicles and used equipment.
(E) Adoption of Ordinance 2469 amending section 8.64.080 of Edmonds City Code to allow buses
on weight restricted streets.
(F) Adoption of Ordinance 2470 amending Ordinance 2468 relating to draining of swimming pools.
(G) Authorization for Mayor to execute interlocal.agreement for South Snohomish County
Emergency Services Coordination Agency, and approval of 1985 funding ($5,173).
(H) Adoption of Ordinance 2471 amending 18.95.010(A) of Community Development Code relating to
applications for parking lot construction.
AUDIENCE
Ed Bahr, 23004 75th Ave. W., spoke regarding the planned traffic island at the intersection of 75th
Ave. W. and 230th St. S.W. Since the temporary island arrangement now in place does not reduce the
speed of traffic at that intersection, he said his neighbors.and he would prefer the island not be
installed and alternative solutions be found. He suggested that a stop sign and white striping
would be just as effective and safer.. Mr. Bahr noted there have not been any accidents at that
intersection during the 28 years he has lived there; however, during the past two weeks while he has
been monitoring the traffic, there have been four near -accidents. He asked City Engineer Jim Adams
if the island was a good idea. Mr. Adams replied that this is the first intersection of this type
with which he has worked and it needs improvement before it will operate properly. He'noted this is
a difficult intersection. Mr. Bahr said this was not a four-way intersection, there is not adequate
room for the island nor is the island accomplishing the intended purpose of slowing traffic. He was
asked if he had contacted the Mayor or the staff about these problems and he replied that tonight
was the first mention he had made. Mayor Naughten explained that the City is aware of the problems
and City staff have been present at the intersection to study it. When the design is completed for
the permanent island, he said, that design will have to be approved by the fire and safety units
before installation begins. He noted there have been phone calls to the City in support of the
island as it exists in its temporary form.
Councilmember Hall agreed that there are problems and questioned whether this intersection is a
proper location.for a traffic island. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON,
TO PLACE THE TRAFFIC ISLAND QUESTION ON THE JANUARY 15, 1985 AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION. MOTION CARRIED.
Ron Dudeck, 1237 7th Ave. S., asked the Council to widen 7th Ave. S. directly adjacent to the new
construction there, since this street is used as a shortcut between Edmonds Way and Elm St. He said
the street is 22' wide and is too narrow for cars to pass if there are parked cars on both sides of
the street. Mr. Adams said the City requires a 22' right-of-way for any street on which there are
more than ten homes, this includes two standard travel lanes and no parking allowance. Planning
Director Mary Lou Block indicated that the street is being developed according to the approved plans
for the project. Mr. Dudeck said if no parking is allowed, signs to that effect should be erected
and this seemed silly in a residential area. Councilmember Jaech asked Mr. Adams if the City does
not allow parking in residential areas. Mr. Admas replied that the Code, as set by the City Council,
requires only a 22' width with no allowance for parking; most streets in the City are less than 22'
which is in accord with the intention.that residential streets remain narrow. Councilmember Jaech
asked the Staff to look at the problem, to discuss it with the neighbors to determine what could be
done and bring their findings to the Council on the December 18 agenda. (Councilmember Kasper
1
1
11
E
I
1
XT
• December 4, 1984 - continued
arrived at this point and took his place at the dais.) City Attorney Scott Snyder cautioned that
the preliminary plat for the project in question had.been approved and the builder has the right to
construct the street in.accord with that plat; the Council may not take actionat this point to
require the builder to construct anything other than a 22' right-of-way. The Council may, he said,
look at long range planning if they wish. Councilmember Dwyer questioned the intent for bringing
such information before the Council, since the Council may not compel any changes and he would not
want to raise the neighbors' hopes. In examining the area and considering.what Mr. Snyder had said,
Community Services.Director.Peter Hahn said parking can be provided for approximately five vehicles
at an. additional cost of $2,000 to $3,500. He said the builder is willing to make the change but it
would be at the City's cost. The parking would.be realized by eliminating the sidewalk and making a
10' curb cut for appoximately 120'. Councilmember Kasper said negotiation of a trade-off could be
left to the Staff; he felt elimination of the sidewalk would equal the cost of the curb cut. Ms.
Block explained that the curb and sidewalk are ready for pouring and any change would necessitate
removal of the sidewalk preparation.and bringing in extra fill, which the builder estimates will
cost between $2000-3500. COUNCILMEMB.ER KASPER MOVED, -SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO AUTHORIZE
THE STAFF TO NEGOTIATE FOR PARKING ON AN EVEN TRADE OFF BASIS. Councilmember Hall noted that those
people who were present during the public hearing held on the project are not present this evening
and have no voice in any changes that are being made: She asked who would be polling the neigh-
borhood to assure that everyone is agreeable. Mayor Naughten said the builder.had contacted him
regarding the problem; the bu.ilder wishes to be a.good neighbor but.at this late date there would be
a definite impact if this were opened for review. He noted that the Council has heard only one side
of the question. Mr. Snyder explained that this action.would.be a staff amendment to the plat for
minor deviations., which could be appealed by any citizen. An appeal would bring it back to the
Council, at which point the builder could proceed as he was authorized, rather than wait for any
delays. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER HALL VOTING NO AND COUNCILMEMBER DWYER ABSTAINING BECAUSE
HE HAD NOT BEEN ABLE TO ASK ALL OF THE QUESTIONS HE WISHED IN ORDER TO MAKE A PROPER DECISION.
PRESENTATION OF.COMMUNITY SERVICE AWARD TO MCDONALD'S
Mayor Naughten explained that Community Service Awards are presented to individuals or organizations
who, by thier efforts, improve the quality of life of the community. The Staff and Council chose
McDonald's Corporation for their landscaping, design.and good neighbor policy. The award was pre-
sented -to a representative of the McDonald's Corporation. Councilmember Jaech said McDonald's was
an excellent addition to the City. She noted the idea for the award had originated with Mr..and
Mrs. Lorraine and they had also recommended McDonald's 'as a recipient.
HEARING.ON PLANNING BOARD.RECOMMENDATION ON AMENDMENTS TO SIGN. CODE REGARDING SIGNS FOR CONDITIONAL
USES IN RS/R11 ZONES AND TEMPORARY SIGN REGULATIONS (CDC-10-84)
Planning Director Mary Lou Block reviewed the proposed changes recommended by the Planning Board for
amendments to the sign code: 1. Change in sign area provisions for conditional.uses in RS and RM
zones, 2. Amendment to incidental sign definition, 3 Modification to the temporary sign regula-
tions, and 4. Provision to allow confiscation of.prohibited signs in the public right-of-way. Ms.
Block suggested, in regard to incidental sign standards, provision for review by the Community
Services Director to insure consistency with City standards. In regard to portable readerboard
signs, Ms. Block said they are allowed for 7 consecutive -days in any 30 day period but must not have
blinking lights. Mayor'Naughten opened the public hearing.
Mel Ste.inke, 200 Beach P1, #403, spoke for Olympic Properties and the real estate industry in
general. He said they wished to cooperate in working with the changes to the code. They appreciate
the attempt being made.to deal with signs in the right-of-way, since there is a problem in the real
estate business with policing this situation.
Natalie Shippen, 1022 Euclid,.expressed reservations regarding several portions of the proposed
amendments: 1. Allowing.business size signs.in a residential area appears contradictory to the
•
current practice of carefully reviewing conditional uses in residential areas. This could result in
large signs being installed in.residential areas near Seaview, Olympic View Westgate
and elementary
schools or at church buildings. She suggested the variance process be used rather than a sweeping
amendment.such as this. 2. Regarding temporary signs, item (F), she suggested keeping six square
feet as the maximum area for residential zones and allowing ten square feet in multiple and business
zones, which would be in keeping with the idea that the City is more restrictive in residential
zones than in multiple family and business zones. 3. She asked if the number of off -site signs
would be limited on the section dealing with incidental signs. She agreed that a review by the
Community Services Director would be a good provision. 4. The problem with confiscation of signs
originally was the Staff's dilemma in handling nonpermanent and nonhazardous signs. The proposed
amendment deals with confiscation of permanent and hazardous signs, she said, which the City already
has the authority to confiscate, but does not deal with the problem that was troubling the Staff.
Mr..Snyder said the signs being addressed are public nuisances, things the City has the right to
abate; for the City to confiscate and destroy public property, there must be something more than a
mere violation of the law, there must be a hazard involved. He said the City may seize signs that
are in the public right-of-way, but they must be held as evidence if they are not presenting a
public hazard or are not permanently affixed. Any sign permanently affixed in the right-of-way
would be a traffic hazard and may be abated as a public nuisance, as may a sign that would be a
hazard to a pedestrian. With signs that are merely in -the public right-of-way, there is a depri-
vation of property without due process of law problem, if the City starts taking the signs and
destroying them. He said there i.s a remedy at law since people can be cited for the signs and a
fine levied. He added that the proposed amendment addresses.those cases in which the sign may be
summarily seized and destroyed after 10 days. Ms. Shippen said the City has the authority now to
deal with the.affixed or hazardous.signs and sees a need for dealing with the non -permanent and non-
hazardous signs which create the clutter and are a nuisance.
Since the time allotted for this subject was nearly gone, Mayor Naughten asked the remaining
speakers to limit their comments to five minutes each.
0
December 4, 1984 - continued .
John Sposato, 22300 100th Ave. W., student body president at Woodway High School, explained that the.
school would like to install a readerboard sign similar to those at Edmonds and Meadowdale High
Schools. They had been told.the sign was too large and cannot be illuminated and asked what the
school can do at this point. They believe the school needs the visibil,ity provided by such a sign
since the school sits above the street and is not visible. He said the sign would be used for
community purposes such as advertising Council meetings. Mr. Sposato said the sign would not be a
problem and suggested that a sensor could be used to turn off the illumination of the sign at
specific times. Mayor Naughten noted that the proposed amendments would not allow the size and
illumination described and suggested the school apply for a variance for the sign. Councilmember
Dwyer asked. Ms. Block what the zone was.for Edmonds and Woodway High Schools. She replied that
Edmonds High School has no underlying zoning; Woodway has zoning of open space and single family
residential since it was recently annexed. The area surrounding Edmonds High is multiple family and
BN across the street; the sign they now have,would not be allowed under the current code.
Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Dr., told Mr. Sposato that he would support a variance request for the
high school because he believes the high schools should all be equal; however, changing the whole
code for one sign is not necessary. Mr. Hertrich measured the height and width of the room to
provide referents for the Council in considering the proposed Code amendments. He said a 12' sign
height is excessive and he believes real estate signs should be limited to 6 square feet. He said
signs are meant to identify a business, not attract customers and believes a small, well designed
sign is sufficient for identification. He suggested that the RS and RM areas be separated when
considering signage to preserve the residential zone and keep things smaller. He asked the Council
not to adopt the proposed amendments.
Since there was no one else wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing.
Councilmember Wilson indicated agreement with Mr. Hertrich's statements regarding a 12' height. In •
regard to freestanding signs, he would like to see consideration given for monument signs. He said
the 32 square foot size would be acceptable if the lower height were used. He would also like to
see a limit placed on the number of incidental signs. Councilmember Jaech agreed that a 12' height
is not appropriate for a residential area. She would also delete the 32 square foot size, intending
that the variance process be utilized in situations that would warrant a larger sign. Councilmember
Ostrom also agreed that the proposed changes are radical in regard to the proposed sizes. He said
the height of the sign is probably the most important aspect, since a larger sign that is lower in
height is less objectionable visually. He questioned the reasoning that would allow a readerboard
sign, since,he feels this is -one of the ugliest signs in use and is opposed to their use. In
regard to the readerboards, Ms. Block agreed and said they are working to remove them from the
Commerical areas. However, at the high schools they are used to advertise community events and are
felt to be of community value. She said the ADB must approve the appearance and design of these
signs. In regard to the incidental signs, Councilmember Ostrom feels there are not enough in
Edmonds and saw no problem with these proposals. He indicated that the provisions for confiscation
of signs does not,address the problem of non -permanent signs and, if the code already contains
provision for permanent and hazardous signs, there would be.no need to have any further changes.
Councilmember Hall indicated that the wording in 20.60.040A should be "Free standing signs are
discouraged." She said Woodway High School needs a readerboard sign as a part of their school
spirit and identity; however, use of the variance process would allow necessary signs without allow-
ing them as a general rule in the RS/RM zones. Ms. Block suggested that monument signs could be
encouraged rather than freestanding pole signs in these zones. She did not know whether other
cities limit the size of wall graphics. She said most codes do not address wall graphics in any
way.
COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO INSTRUCT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE
AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING THE CHANGES TO THE SIGN CODE REGARDING SIGNS FOR CONDITIONAL USES IN RS/RM
ZONES. SECTION 20.60.040 PARAGRAPH A, THAT A PERIOD BE PLACED AFTER THE WORD DISCOURAGED IN THE .
FIRST SENTENCE, ELIMINATING THE WORDS "IN THE BC, BN, AND CW ZONES."; DELETE THE 32 SQUARE FOOT
PROPOSED ADDITION IN PARAGRAPH B, AND UNDER ITEM C THE 12 FOOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT BE DELETED. Mr.
Snyder asked if the motion intends to retain the current standards of the code except for paragraph
A; Ms. Jaech indicated that was.correct. Councilmember Ostrom indicated it would be simpler to
state what changes are being,made rather than what is not wanted in the proposed changes. A ROLL
CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN WITH COUNCILMEMBERS JAECH, HALL, NORDQUIST, OSTROM, AND WILSON VOTING YES;
COUNCILMEMBERS DWYER AND KASPER VOTING NO. MOTION CARRIED.
COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, THAT THE RECOMMENDED CHANGE TO
20.60.060A "OFF -SITE DIRECTIONALSIGNS FOR SCHOOLS, CHURCHES, INSTITUTIONAL USES, AND PARK
FACILITIES ARE CONSIDERED AS INCIDENTAL SIGNS." BE ADOPTED. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER
KASPER VOTING NO.
COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, NOT TO ADOPT THE PROPOSED CHANGES
TO 20.60.070.PARAGRAPH C. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER KASPER VOTING NO.
COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED CHANGE TO
20.60.080B "UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED BELOW, NO TEMPORARY SIGN SHALL EXCEED 10 SQUARE FEET." MOTION
CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER KASPER VOTING NO.
COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED CHANGE TO
20.60.080C "MAXIMUM AREA, PER SITE, SHALL BE ONE SQUARE FOOT OF SIGN AREA PER ONE LINEAL FOOT OF
WALL CONTAINING THE PUBLIC ENTRANCE INTO THE BUILDING." MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER KASPER
VOTING NO.
COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED CHANGE TO
20.60.08OF "LEASE SIGNS MAY REMAIN AS LONG AS SPACE IS AVAILABLE IN THE BUILDING." Councilmember
•
• December 4, 1984 - continued
Ostrom questioned whether the date of sale should be changed to the date of closing, since that
could be a much longer time. Councilmember Dwyer noted that there is not necessarily a sale until
the date of closing. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER KASPER VOTING NO.
COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO ADOPT THE PROPOSED CHANGE TO
20.60.080I "THERE SHALL BE NO SPECIFIC SIZE LIMITATION FOR THESE SIGNS." MOTION CARRIED WITH
COUNCILMEMBER KASPER VOTING NO.
In regard to the proposed amendments for confiscation of prohibited signs in public rights -of -way,
Councilmember Dwyer noted that the newest proposal before the Council gives the City the power to
destroy the signs; the old staff proposal presented problems in confiscating and destroying signs.
Mr. Snyder said under the old provision, the City would have the authority to seize and destroy all
signs in the public right-of-way; under the new proposal the City could only seize and destroy those
signs that are permanently affixed or hazardous. Ms. Block said the proposed change would enable.
the City to pick up those signs on the sidewalk that are hazards to the pedestrian. She said those
signs on private property would not be affected by this proposal., COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED,
SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM, TO ADOPT THE PREVIOUS STAFF PROPOSAL ON CONFISCATION OF SIGNS. A
ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN .WITH COUNCILMEMBERS NORDQUIST AND OSTROM VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS DWYER,
KASPER AND WILSON VOTING NO; COUNCILMEMBERS JAECH AND HALL ABSTAINING SINCE THEY DID NOT HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO ASK QUESTIONS BEFORE THE VOTE. MOTION FAILED.
Councilmember Jaech asked if a directional sign for real estate would become an immediate public
nuisance and could be confiscated under Councilmember Nordquist's motion. Mr. Snyder said that was
true,.everything in the right-of-way is illegal and the proposed amendments are not addressing the
.illegality but whether the City cites someone and goes to the municipal court or seizes and destroys
the sign. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO ADOPT THE PLANNING BOARD
RECOMMENDATION FOR 20.60.100E AS PRESENTED. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN WITH COUNCILMEMBERS JAECH,
• DWYER,.HALL, NORDQUIST AND WILSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM VOTING NO; COUNCILMEMBER KASPER
ABSTAINING SINCE THE MOTION WAS NOT CLEAR TO HIM. MOTION CARRIED.
In reviewing the actions taken, Councilmember Ostrom noted that one change had been missed.
COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, THAT THE SIZE OF REAL ESTATE SIGNS AS
DESCRIBED IN 20.60.080 PARAGRAPH F REMAIN AT SIX SQUARE FEET. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER
KASPER VOTING NO. Councilmember Kasper noted that he had voted no since he was opposed to any more
regulation of signs.
REPORT ON OUIET TITLE OF MUNICIPAL CEMETERY
COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED., SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY ATTORNEY TO
INSTITUTE QUIET TITLE ACTION IN SNOHOMISH COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT TO DETERMINE OWNERSHIP OF LOTS
WITHIN THE ED14ONDS CEMETERY. Councilmember Jaech questioned what newspapers and publications will
be used for advertising this action. Mr. Snyder said the purpose of the quiet title action is to
notify all owners of lots. He added that there isa requirement for publication in the legal
notices section of the newspaper in the County in which the property is located for a specified time
period. He said the major portion of the costs will be for notification. Councilmember Jaech asked
that the notices also be placed in the Seattle Times to insure notification to residents of King
County. Mr. Snyder said that would necessitate an additional expenditure of $400-500. MOTION
CARRIED.
COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO INSTRUCT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PLACE
THE LEGAL NOTICES IN THE SEATTLE TIMES ALSO. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER DWYER VOTING NO.
DISCUSSION OF PUBLIC SAFETY BUDGETS (POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS
Several Council Members left the room, resulting in a lack of a quorum, and the meeting was recessed
• for approximately 20 minutes.
Fire Chief Jack Weinz explained that the larger amounts for salaries, wages and personal benefits in
the 1985 budget are the result of three factors: 1. an additional person being added, which was
not reflected in the 1984 budget; 2. a two year contract, which included step increases and grade
alignments that were not reflected'in the 1984 budget, and 3. the settlement regarding buy back of
holidays. He answered several questions from the Council regarding the Snohomish County -Medical
Program, the division of his salary between fire suppression and emergengy aid, .and reserves for
purchase of vehicles.
Police Chief Dan Prinz reviewed his budget, answering questions on specific line items regarding
overtime, increases in employee.benefits, traffic enforcement and the crime prevention program. The
Chief noted that the amount budgeted for communications on page 45 should be cut $2500. He also
explained his rationale for an additional clerk. Councilmember Kasper noted during the discussion
of the budget that the increases in the Police Department and throughout the City for salaries and
benefits will have to be examined closely because cuts will have to be made in personnel if the
trend continues.
MAYOR
Mayor Naughten reported the tree -lighting ceremony on November 29 was very nice with 500 people in
attendance and the weather cooperating.
The Mayor announced that the Police Officers' Association had hosted 21 senior citizens at the
annual turkey dinner at Arnie's Restaurant. He commended them for their actions.
Mayor Naughten asked that Doug Herman be reappointed to the Architectural Design Board since his
term has expired. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, THAT DOUG HERMAN BE
L�
M
December 4, 1984 - continued •
REAPPOINTED TO POSITION 2 ON THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD, TERM.TO EXPIRE NOVEMBER 5, 1988.
MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Naughten said the Youth Board is planning a dance for Junior High students on December 14.
The Board is requesting a loan of $230.00 as a guarantee for a disc jockey and $84.00 for two
uniformed officers to be present during the dance, for a total of $31.4.00 to be repaid from the
proceeds of the dance. COUNCILMEMBER.OSTROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO ADVANCE
THE AMOUNT OF $314.00 TO THE YOUTH BOARD. Councilmember Jaech asked the City Attorney how this
should..be handled.. Mr. Snyder suggested a contract be prepared. Councilmember Kasper questioned
the payment for police officers when the City might just..assign two officers. Chief Prinz said past
policy has been for officers present for high school dances to be employed as independent con-
tractors and -have been paid by the school groups. He said he was hesitant to use overtime for
assigning these officers. Following discussion of the means to fund this.advance, COUNCILMEMBER
OSTROM ADDED THAT THE ADVANCE BE TAKEN FROM THE GENERAL FUND OPERATING CASH, AGREEABLE TO SECOND.
MOTION CARRIED.
Since it was 10:06 p.m, COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO CONTINUE THE
MEETING THROUGH THE BALANCE OF THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED.
The Mayor noted that he had sent letters of congratulation.to Roger Wittman, Mike Dubendorf, Tim
Ger.spacher, and Steve Gerspacher upon achieving the rank of Eagle Scout in Troop 325.
COUNCIL
Councilmember Ostrom said Senate Bill 4872, which was brought to the Council's attention last week,
represents an issue that is pertinent to the community i-n a way that.other issues that have come
before the Council have not been. Therefore, he believes it is consistent with City policy to take
a stance on this issue. He would like.to see a resolution passed in support of the bill. In .
response to a request, Mr. Snyder, explained that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down an
existing State Statute because of the inclusion of the word "lust." He said this is an attempt to
enact the same provision with other language that, it is hoped, will cure the defect. He said most
violations would be charged under the State law, if this is passed, because of the fiscal impact.
Councilmember Dwyer asked if it would then be best for the City to repeal its ordinance in this
area. Mr. Snyder said there is a.gray area between pornographic.and erotic matters and so the
zoning statute would be needed to regulate location of lawful but not pornographic businesses.
Councilmember Dwyer noted that the proposed Senate Bill does not substitute for the City ordinance
and would not remove the expense.of enforcing the ordinance and there does not seem to be a City
interest. Councilmember Hall expressed concern about what items may be appended to the bill on its
way through the legislature. Councilmember Dwyer said he would vote against a motion to support the
bill since he sees no distinction between this issue and others that have been before the Council.
COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO INSTRUCT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT
A RESOLUTION BASED ON THE EXAMPLE. PRESENTED FROM THE CITY OF EVERETT, TO SUPPORT SENATE BILL 4872.
A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN WITH COUNCILMEMBERS JAECH, HALL, KASPER, NORDQUIST, AND OSTROM VOTING
YES; COUNCILMEMBERS DWYER AND WILSON VOTING NO. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Hall asked that the
bill be brought back before the Council after passage in the Legislature.
Councilmember Ostrom summarized a letter from Don Schroeder regarding recycling stations in the
City. He asked that the staff investigate these stations. Ms. Block replied that Mr. Schroeder's
letter had been received in her department and would be pursued. She suggested this would be an
appropriate topic for the Planning'Board. Councilmember Ostrom indicated that he would like to have
the Planning Board consider this. .
Councilmember Ostrom referred to a newspaper he has received from the Washington Centennial Assoc.
and asked if any organization in Edmonds is involved in planning for the Centennial. Mayor Naughten
knew of none. Ms. Block said they would appreciate receiving. the paper from the State Centennial
Association.
Councilmember Jaech reminded Mr. Hahn that a report on the sewers and treatment plant capacity for
Highway 99 had been requested. Mr. Hahn said the report was not ready and he could not give them a
specific date; although the report is his top priority and would be supplied to the Council at the
soonest possible date. Councilmember Jaech noted the information is needed before she.can give
adequate answers to some of the questions she is being asked by citizens. Her concern is that
residents of the City be treated fairly in the matter of new construction in that area.
Councilmember Kasper asked that the subject.of the Yost pool cover be scheduled on the,agenda�.
COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED.BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO HEAR RECONSIDERATION OF COVERING ■
YOST POOL ON THE JANUARY 15, 1985 AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Kasper said he had noticed nothing on the Extended Agenda pertaining to the sale of "e
City property. A motion had been passed to hold a hearing on the sale of 3 or 4 lots and that it is
not on the agenda. He suggested the Staff check on this.
Since.there was no further business to come before the Council, the meeting adjourned.at 10:30 p.m.
CQU INE G. PARR TT, City Clerk LARRY S. NA GHTEN, Mayo
n
LJ