Loading...
2007, 02-27 Regular Meeting MinutesMayor Wilhite called the meeting to order Attendance: Diana Wilhite, Mayor Steve Taylor, Deputy Mayor Dick Denenny, Councilmember Mike DeVleming, Councilmember Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Rich Munson, Councilmember Gary Schimmels, Councilmember MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meeting Tuesday, February 27, 2007 at 6:00 p.m., and welcomed everyone to the 110 meeting. City Staff: Dave Mercier, City Manager Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Mike Connelly, City Attorney Marina Sukup, Community Development Dir. Ken Thompson, Finance Director Steve Worley, Senior Engineer Morgan Koudelka, Administrative Analyst Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Greg Bingaman, IT Specialist Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk INVOCATION: Pastor Marcia Taylor, of East Valley Presbyterian Church gave the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Wilhite led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called roll; all Councilmembers were present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the amended agenda. INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: None. COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS: Councilmember Schimmels: reported that he attended a few functions and visits with the Legislators in Olympia; that he also stopped at the office of the King Co Sheriff and the Pierce County Sheriff, where he met with a technical group which conducts their contracts and liaison information with the Sheriff's Office; and that representatives from those offices are willing to come over for a study session. Councilmember Denenny: said that he met with the Health Board. Deputy Mayor Taylor: explained he attended his first meeting as a member of the Solid Waste Advisory Committee, where they discussed the Plan Council was briefed on previously. Councilmember Gothmann: said he was appointed to the Area Aging and Long Term Care Board of Eastern Washington, and that he and Ian Robertson gave a presentation on what is being done for seniors in our area. Councilmember Munson: reported that while in Olympia representing the City of Spokane Valley, he was also representing the Association of Washington Cities; and that he also attended a GMA Steering Committee of Elected Officials, and that there is still no conclusion on how to fix the County Wide Planning Policies. Councilmember DeVleming: no report. MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor Wilhite reported that she also traveled to Olympia to meet with the Legislators; and attended the GMA meeting; that she participated in the town meeting at CenterPlace with Congresswoman McMorris, and attended a WSU Advisory Board meeting. Council Meeting: 02 -27 -07 Page 1 of 9 Approved by Council: 03 -27 -07 VOUCHER LIST DATE VOUCHER #s TOTAL VOUCHER AMOUNT 01 -26 -2007 10957 -10997 $48,019.45 02 -02 -2007 11007 -11042 $47,319.42 02 -08 -2007 11043 -11076 $498,693.09 GRAND TOTAL $594,031.96 PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Wilhite invited general public comments. Patrick Martin, E 6606 7` Avenue: spoke concerning the Edgeclift Community, and School District #81 closing Pratt Elementary School; said that the children will now have to be bussed; that Pratt Elementary School building will be changed to an administrative building with parking areas for one hundred additional vehicles; that the area is especially dangerous for the kids, and he asks Council to contact the School District and tell them of these concerns, adding that there will be a public meeting tomorrow night at Roosevelt Elementary at 7:00 p.m. Mike Flanigan, 1712 S McCabe: concerning CenterPlace, he explained that citizens' primary concern is to have effective law enforcement and training of officers, and that falls within the purview of that building; that CenterPlace is a facility for the betterment of our community, and he feels training of police officers from the region meets that criteria; that officer training programs help bring up the 20% needed for regional activities, and he urged Council to work with staff to get this ironed out and continue having the training programs. Gail Stiltner, 10119 E 44th Avenue: concerning CenterPlace, she said she wanted to remind council that many people feel this was a decision not in keeping with the community spirit; and that she finds the dispute difficult to understand or to explain to others; and doesn't understand why high level training is permitted but not in- service; that she feels this is a matter of narrow definitions or semantics; and she asked Council to re- examine this issue as she feels the Sheriff's Office should have access to the center. Sandra Lampe- Martin: E 6606 7 Avenue: concerning Pratt Elementary; she said she has solicited the assistance of neighboring businesses for their support to help over -throw the School Board's decision, and the businesses told her it was a political decision; she asked Council for help as she said they don't want to lose the school, which would also mean no funding for Weed and Seed; that the children will be bused to another school, and she feels the crime that has been eradicated will return. Mayor Wilhite explained that this is a matter for the School Board, and that while she understands the importance of the school, and that Councilmembers can weigh -in on the issue; they have no control over the School Board. 1. CONSENT AGENDA: Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. A Councilmember may remove an item from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. a. Following Claim Vouchers: b. Payroll for Period Ending February 15, 2007: $172,666.08 c. Minutes of January 30, 2007 Council Study Session Meeting d. Minutes of February 6, 2007 Council Special Meeting e. Minutes of February 20, 2007 Council Study Session Meeting It was moved by Councilmember Munson, seconded, and unanimously agreed to approve the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Munson asked about the possibility of passing a resolution addressing the Pratt Elementary School issue, and City Attorney Connelly said he is not aware of any prohibition, but that the matter should probably be noticed prior to taking that action. Council Meeting: 02 -27 -07 Approved by Council: 03 -27 -07 Page 2 of 9 NEW BUSINESS 2. Proposed Resolution 07 -001 Extending Cable Franchise — Morgan Koudelka Administrative Analyst Koudelka explained the background on this resolution, which would extend the City's current franchise agreement with Comcast for an additional three months, thereby giving further review time. It was moved by Councilmember Gothmann and seconded to approve Resolution 07 -001 implementing a continuation period for the cable television franchise with Comcast through June 5, 2007. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment. Tony Lazanis, 1626 E Empire, said that he would like Council to ask more questions so we know what we're negotiating and asking so the public knows what kind of contract we are looking at, and that he hopes things are happening for the benefit of the public. Mayor Wilhite invited further comments; no further comments were offered. Deputy Mayor Taylor explained that this action extends the current franchise agreement, which gives Comcast and the City more time for negotiations and discussion. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions. None. Motion carried. 3. Motion Consideration: SRTC Approval of Project Applications — Steve Worley It was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor and seconded to approve the list of project applications and authorize the Mayor to sign each application as required by SRTC. Engineer Worley explained that applications are due the end of this week, and he submitted a revised list of proposed project applications. Mr. Worley said that the figures are estimates, but he believes any changes after this point would be minor; and that staff continues to gather information regarding the eligibility of the projects with the SRTC criteria. Mr. Worley also mentioned that project #6 on the list deals with bus lanes only, and if that project is successful, they will try to secure additional funds for the remainder of Sprague. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment. Tony Lazanis, 1626 E Empire, asked about the particulars of the projects, and Mr. Mercier handed Mr. Lazanis a copy of the list of proposed project applications. Mr. Worley concluded by stating that the projects are not listed in any particular order or priority. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 4. Motion Consideration: Approval of Memorandum of Understanding Sewer Paveback- Steve Worley It was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor and seconded to approve the Memorandum of Understanding with Spokane County for the 2007 Sewer Program and authorize the City Manager or designee to sign the document. Engineer Worley explained that as reviewed last week, this is for our participation in the Septic Tank Elimination Program (STEP) and is an agreement to pay for the full -width paving scheduled for this year; that the agreement is the same as last year but with different dollar amounts. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment; no comments were offered. Deputy Mayor Taylor added that Council had discussions in the past regarding full -width paving; and that the issue of funding has not been totally resolved for this project; but council decided to go ahead and fund full -width paving until the City's Street Masterplan is adopted; adding that ultimately we will need additional dedicated funding for this service of full width paving, as we are depleting our road fund dollars by doing this. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 5. Mayoral Appointments: Lodging Tax Advisory Committee — Mayor Wilhite Mayor Wilhite explained that there are two openings on this committee, along with an opening for a member of Council to be represented; that one position is for a member representing businesses required to collect the tax, and the other vacancy is to represent an organization authorized to be funded by the tax. Mayor Wilhite said that the position was posted on the City's webpage, in the newspaper, and was mailed out to numerous entities; and that three applications were received within the deadline. Mayor Wilhite announced her desired appointment of Eldonna Shaw of the Greater Spokane Valley Chamber of Commerce for one year; Lee Cameron of Mirabeau Park Hotel for two years, and Deputy Mayor Steve Taylor for one year. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment: Mike Flanigan, 1712 S McCabe: extended his "kudos" to Council for Deputy Mayor Taylor's and the Committee's work. Mayor Wilhite invited further public comment; no further comments were offered. It was moved by Councilmember Munson Council Meeting: 02 -27 -07 Page 3 of 9 Approved by Council: 03 -27 -07 and seconded to confirm the Mayor's appointment of Deputy Mayor Taylor for one year, Eldonna Shaw for one year, and Lee Cameron for two years. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENTS .Mayor Wilhite invited general public comments; no comments were offered. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 6. Uniform Development Code Titles 17, 19, 22 and 24 — Marina Sukup Community Development Director Sukup said that this is a brief report to inform Council of some minor changes. She explained the following changes: Title 17 would change the chart designating the types of permits and put shoreline permits as Type II, which are subject to administrative approvals. The conditioned and variance permits would be issued by the department, they are subject to a joint review application, and this would remove the requirement that everything go to a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner. She said the appeals from the denial of a shoreline would go to the Shorelines Hearing Board; and appeals of an administrative decision would go to the Hearing Examiner if that was the method the applicant chose to pursue. Title 19, and 24: the Planning Commission received numerous public comments, with the general compliant of lack of review time; and the Planning Commission continued the public hearings on Title 24 and 19 to March 8, with the proviso that the airport hazard overlay zone be immediately forwarded to the Council. Title 22: design and development standards, the Planning Commission continued that public hearing to March 22. Ms. Sukup further stated that she is meeting with the Home Builders Association here tomorrow at 7:00 a.m., and every Friday from 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. through the end of March., she will meet with various neighborhoods groups to hear concerns and answer questions. Councilmember DeVleming asked if when Council sees these titles again, if there is a way to make sure Councilmembers can differentiate the new changes from what Council has already considered. Ms. Sukup said there are some areas which will be difficult to identify, as staff found some minor changes, along with members of the public recommending changes to the use charts; and that Council will again receive the next drafts in track - change format. Councilmember Munson asked about which title contained the orientation of homes on lots that Council previously discussed; and Ms. Sukup answered that was Title 20, Subdivisions, and that Council has completed its review of that title. Mayor Wilhite called for a recess at 6:55 p.m., and reconvened the meeting at 7:05 p.m. 6a. CenterPlace Use Policy Discussion Conversation began with Councilmember Gothmann stating that he feels we are not serving our customer, the Community Colleges, as well as we could, and that it appears we are trying to micro - manage what they do; and that it also appears the College is trying to rent out only approximately 5% of their total capacity, with the 5% based on assumed use of eight hours a day, five days a week. Mayor Wilhite remarked that there are legal requirements to be met as noticed in the Certificate of City, but in reading the RCW's, there appears to be nothing that covers education; that the Community Colleges are struggling to hold classes; that it was determined we need to use 20% of the space we lease them for regional events, and perhaps a solution to consider is to take that 20% back under the City's purview and control, and leave the Colleges with the rest of the classrooms they have; which would mean that 20% must still be used for regional events, and in discussing this with bond counsel Mike Ormsby, things that are special events include community events, sporting events, theatrical events, trade shows, and Council Meeting: 02 -27 -07 Page 4 of 9 Approved by Council: 03 -27 -07 musicals; and that doesn't mean those things must have 20% attendance from people outside the area; therefore, she explained that perhaps we need to define what types of activities would be permitted. Deputy Mayor Taylor agreed that removing the 20% gets the confusing regional definition out of the way; and Councilmember Munson added that would mean we could re- negotiate the contract with the Colleges and reduce their "footprint" by 20 %. Mayor Wilhite said the College's letter indicated that might be a possibility to explore. Attorney Connelly said the 20% regional use is confusing; that the lease and the Certificate of City were written based on the assumption that a Community College curriculum would have artistic, musical, theatrical exhibits, etc, and it was assumed that would be about 20% of the use; when there are other uses outside the Community College's actual use, that assumption may no longer be valid, and if it reaches a point where it is not valid, the revenue stream could be affected. Attorney Connelly said that problem would be solved if we simply "carved out" 20% of the space and made it a part of the regional facility, which is the bulk of the use for the Center, thereby leaving the remaining 80% of the space with the restriction that use would have to be for a legitimate public purpose to a public entity, i.e., a governmental public entity to use that space, thereby preserving our tax- exempt status of the bonds which were used to build the facility; and at that point it becomes a policy issue. Mr. Connelly said the policy issue is what types of uses does Council want to allow in that remaining space. City Manager Mercier said that in discussions with personnel from the Colleges, they welcome the opportunity to know they could re -size their presence in the building given that enrollments have been less than expected, but that we are still at the conceptual stage of the conversation with Council and staff has not been authorized to re- negotiate a lease, and staff would require such authorization before proceeding as any revised lease must be approved by Council. Mr. Mercier said there are several decisions: (1) whether there is a consensus of Council that staff should re- negotiate a lease with the Community College authorities concerning the amount of space allocated to them in order for the City to capture 20% of that space to satisfy the bond and regional requirement element; and if Council is so inclined and negotiations are successful leading to that conclusion, the next decisions would be (2) enumeration of what precisely Council wants to achieve with that space in the building, (80% of the education wing and not the entire building) and (3) what would be the list of authorized uses. Mayor Wilhite expressed her desire to broaden the definition of what is allowable in that space to consider within certain parameters, work force type of training; and that she understands the need to have the space available to many entities and therefore, we would not book to companies on an on -going basis. Attorney Connelly added that if the use is a convention, conference or special event type use, it would fall under the regional definition; but that any contract or agreement must be carefully scrutinized with any private entity for extended use of the facility as that could jeopardize the tax exempt status; and once Council determines what kind of uses it wants to allow, a lease could be written to preclude these kinds of problems from recurring, and one way to do that would be not to sub -lease at all, or have very restrictive sub - leasing. Councilmember Munson said that as Council develops any policy about usage, to include the Community Colleges and our staff in that conversation to determine what their goals are in using that space for academic purposes and whether that would fit with what we are trying to accomplish. According to excerpts from a letter from the Colleges, Councilmember Gothmann said the Colleges are open to re- examination of the amount of leased space they have in the facility. In response to questions about renting the facility for events, Attorney Connelly said we can rent space to anyone for regional uses such as conventions and conferences and special events; that the City is the public entity which can rent the uses as defined by statute; but we cannot turn it over by way of lease or contract to a private entity for their use by way of a long -term lease; and that statute very specifically defines "regional use" as convention, conference or special event center, with special event center defined as one used for "community events, sporting events, trade shows and artistic, musical, theatrical or Council Meeting: 02 -27 -07 Page 5 of 9 Approved by Council: 03 -27 -07 exhibitions, presentations or performances;" and it would likely be permissible to have the space rented out for a single event, but not to lease space for a specified time period; and it was mentioned that the Convention Center downtown does not lease their space out to any person or entity. To further clarify, Mr. Connelly said if we used 100% Facility District funds to build this building, the Community College would not have been able to lease that space, as they are not a regional use; and the issue is, what does Council want to use those eight classrooms for, and the only restriction is it must be used by a public entity; and if the Colleges want to lease out those eight classrooms, the lease should be written so Council knows exactly what will happen there and will not be faced with an unanticipated user. Mr. Mercier further explained that if Council wants to define that sub - leasing to public entities is acceptable, it is important not to be arbitrary and capricious; and as Council defines a policy of that nature, it is important to conceive of the range of public entities which might want to use that space and for what purposes, whether office, programming, some combination or other, and to determine if that use is the intended use and purpose of the building; and in the absence of a marketing plan, we do not know the continued use expectations of the College. Mr. Mercier said staff made an offer to Chancellor Livingston last week about discussing re- sizing the space; and while the College's demand is building, if their program people would work with ours to identify what is available when, we would be happy to add that to our marketing plan so they could be used as break -out rooms for example, for an incoming conference to help generate some income for the college. Mr. Mercier said other items for Council to consider are (1) whether Council wants to allow sub - leasing and if so, for what type of use (office, weapons training, or something else); (2) to consider specific definitions so as not to have any confusion and everyone will know exactly what "work force" and "in- service training" and other terms mean; that it is not merely semantics, but everyone must have the same definition of the terms. As an example, Mr. Mercier said work force training could mean training for a new technology, or to re -train the entire workforce because the current type of work is no longer available or viable; or could mean something to do with anyone unemployed needing work force training; hence the importance of well - defined terminology. Council discussion turned to negotiation versus setting policy; whether the building manager could handle the general uses; looking at the broad and /or the more narrow issue of use; councilmembers' visions for classroom use; whether the facility should be used as a deputy training center; the need for a marketing business plan; that work force training has always been a part of the building's planned use; whether we are going to further the eviction process of the Sheriff's Office; whether to include the Colleges in the discussion of policy use; if the Sheriff's Office (or any renter) should have office space; whether sub- leasing should be allowed at all; the goal to promote education in the community; and that this is strictly a policy which should be defined by Council. By special request of Councilmember Schimmels, these are his verbatim comments: "I believe that we have an immediate problem over there that we haven't addressed, and I think a good share of that should be addressed tonight; are we going to further the eviction notice or not. I think that we have to ask the question about broadening the scope of just the understanding of what we have on the lease, what we have over there. I for one do not believe that we would have to re- negotiate that lease at this point and time if we had more conversation about what's happening over there. And then looking down the road, but, going to a broader, longer term, not a quick study as far as what we want to do with that building down the road. Because there's been comments made that the people that are the players today may not be there tomorrow. I would certainly not want to limit that, that we would force them out for that reasoning; or for any reasoning in that light. But I think that we have to address what we have over there today and put it to rest one way or the other. I mean, it's, to me it's not good business on anyone's part to stalemate this any further." Council Meeting: 02 -27 -07 Page 6 of 9 Approved by Council: 03 -27 -07 "I'd like to just to say a couple things. Mr. Munson mentioned the office use, and this is part of this problem with this agreement and the Certificate or anything, interpretation. I look in that agreement and I see the word "office" allowed; but that's a bold statement, so I don't know how you differentiate between our office as the City's office there, the College's office, and nor the Sheriff or whomever. It's not an office complex per se, but it's part of the function of just there being there. But I'd like to say one more thing, that in talking with the technical service people in King County in the Sheriff's Department, we are the bold envy in the State of Washington as far as training in Spokane County, and I think we should think about that." "I feel that's part of the process (in response to Deputy Mayor Taylor's remarks about any public entity's use of the building or whether the building should be used for education). The administration over there can only carry so many briefcases to and from, I mean you have to have somewhere to hang their hat. I, to me that defies common sense really. It has to be part in conjunction with that is happening over there." There was Council consensus that Mr. Mercier talk with Mr. Livingston to re- negotiate the lease (the College's footprint) and that the City will retrieve the 20% as discussed. Mayor Wilhite added that the remaining issue is to craft a policy on usage of that particular space that may or may not be leased out to another government agency as to types of uses; and that she agrees in the need to include work force training; but she would prefer to craft the policy for other business community members' use on a case by case basis so as not to tie up the facility for long term usage. Mr. Mercier concurred that the Community Colleges want to know what Council has in mind for the building. Deputy Mayor Taylor said he believes those subletting the space should have a desk and an Internet port provided by the Community Colleges to administer the training that is going on in the facility; but not to have full - time office space; and Councilmember Gothmann agreed that any office space must be instructionally related. Deputy Mayor Taylor added that the primary focus for the classrooms is for an educational institution to use the classrooms to promote education in the community; and if they (the Community College) are having problems filling up the classrooms during this building phase of their lease term which they have (until 2010), he wants to give them the flexibility to sub - lease, with prior Council approval, that the sub -lease has to be approved annually by the City, but to make sure that when they sub- lease, they are not crowding out their own efforts to fill it with the appropriate use that we want it to; and so attaching some kind of percentage, perhaps 20 or 30% as a maximum amount that the sub - lessee's space should occupy, but he added that he does not want to get into those specifics, but more of a general concept; that Council further define workforce training to include some in- service training for that sub- lease; and suggest that Council place the same type of restrictions on office space for the sub - lessee as for the Community Colleges. Mayor Wilhite clarified that the lessor and any sub -lease must be a governmental agency, and that she likes the idea of a percentage; which gives limited space for the sub- letting. There was Council consensus on the use of percentages, limited term of a sub - lease; that some sub - letting is allowable but must be to a public entity; the work force training and in- service training would be allowed as newly defined; that office use would be defined as the intent for the current use of the Community Colleges, i.e., office use is there for the operation of what is occurring at the Center; that we recognize the Community Colleges has office space they use for their programming, and that the City has office space they are using to operate the facility; and if a sub -lease is used, the Colleges could make an administrative space for their sub - lessee to have a desk and a computer port to deal with administration of that training being provided in that facility only; which is not a sub -lease for office space, but is a recognition that the Community College's Administrative area can allow that desk service for an individual to do their program. There was also consensus with Mayor Wilhite's suggestion that as office space, both the Community Colleges and any lessee use no more than one room total; and that in Mr. Mercier's conversations with the Community Colleges, that we will indicate to them that a minority of the Council Meeting: 02 -27 -07 Page 7 of 9 Approved by Council: 03 -27 -07 space that they have leased by us be eligible for sub - lease, and we will try to quantify that more directly in the conversations. To recap: Staff suggested: Council action or consideration needed: • determine policy for use types permitted • determine if staff should re- negotiate lease • determine if City should take back the 20% space • determine the precise use of those eight classrooms • determine if sub - leasing will be permitted and if so, for what (office, weapons training, etc.) • define terms such as "work force" and "in- service training" Council cautions to consider: • Scrutinize any contract with private entity carefully so we don't jeopardize tax exempt status • Cannot lease space for long -term use to private entity • The Community College use is not a Regional use • If sub - leasing, must not be arbitrary and capricious; must define policy Council consensus: • Mr. Mercier will talk with Mr. Livingston to re- negotiate the lease • The City will retrieve the 20% as discussed • Use a percentage (perhaps 20 or 30 %) as a maximum amount a sub - lessee's space could occupy • Have limited term of a sub -lease • Sub -lease must only be with a public entity • Work force training and in- service training would be allowed as newly defined • Office space use only for current use of Community Colleges • Is appropriate for a sub - lessee to have a desk and Internet port for training in the facility only • That the afore - mentioned office space, both the Community Colleges and any lessee have no more than one room total • We will indicate to the Colleges that a minority of the space they have leased by us be eligible for sub - lease, and we will try to quantify that more directly Mr. Mercier mentioned that after Council has had a chance to review these meeting minutes to ensure we have captured all elements, we will schedule an approach to the Community Colleges to discuss re- negotiation of the lease. Council concurred. In summary, Mr. Mercier said that a notice has been submitted to the Sheriff's Office for them to relocate their office operation and in- service training to another facility; that they are eligible to continue as any other entity would be eligible, for their regional seminars; and we know that they have advertised certain programming through September, and we have told them to proceed to fill their advertised obligations through September. INFORMATION ONLY: These topics were not discussed and were included in the Council's packet as informational items only: (7) sidewalk ordinance; (8) proposed amended 2007 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), and (9) Permit Center Update. In other business, Mayor Wilhite mentioned the upcoming June 12 AWC conference in Tacoma; and Deputy Mayor Taylor mentioned that the NLC, EENR (Energy, Environment, and Natural Resources) Steering Committee will hold its September 27 through 29 meeting at CenterPlace. Council Meeting: 02 -27 -07 Page 8 of 9 Approved by Council: 03 -27 -07 There being no further business, it was moved, seconded, and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. ATTEST: 4 Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk N UJLLk Diana Wilhite, Mayor Council Meeting: 02 -27 -07 Page 9 of 9 Approved by Council: 03 -27 -07 NAME PLEASE PRINT TOPIC OF CONCERN YOU ADDRESS TELEPHONE WILL SPEAK ABOUT 1, Ue FJt r i., c&I ,A,2 ?1GL Lam S L i4c1i dig 0o33 G' 0, < \ s-k-; t 4,,.... p I o S . \/ . 5 a—s — L D.4. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT SIGN -IN SHEET SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: February 27, 2007 CITIZEN COMMENTS YOUR SPEAKING TIME WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES Sign in if you wish to make p ublic comments. 2007 SRTC CaII for Projects FTA Section 5307 Funds Proposed Project Applications Project Descriptions Total Est. Project Cost FTA Share Local Share 1 Evergreen Road - 16th to 32nd 32nd, Evergreen to SR -27 $ 4,392,078 79.5% $ 3,491,702 $ 900,376 2 University Road Inlay Project #1 - 15th Ave. to 32nd Ave. $ 735,470 79.5% $ 584,699 $ 150,771 3 8th Phase 1 - Park Rd. to Dickey Rd $ 2,896,230 79.5% $ 2,302,503 $ 593,727 4 8th Phase 2 - Dickey Rd to Carnahan Rd $ 3,356,774 79.5% $ 2,668,635 $ 688,139 5 8th Phase 3 - Carnahan Rd to Havana Rd $ 2,456,726 79.5% $ 1,953,097 $ 503,629 $ 8,709,729 $ 6,924,235 $ 1,785,494 6 Sprague Ave Grind & Overlay $ 2,122,776 79.5% $ 1,687,607 $ 435,169 7 BowdishlSprague PCC Intersection $ 799,734 79.5% $ 635,789 $ 163,945 8 Pines/Sprague PCC Intersection $ 628,014 79.5% $ 499,271 $ 128,743 9 Indiana /Sullivan PCC Intersection $ 1,087,238 79.5% $ 864,354 $ 222,884 10 Broadway /Sullivan PCC Intersection $ 1,009,547 79.5% $ 802,589 $ 206,957 11 Evergreen /Sprague PCC Intersection $ 945,954 79.5% $ 752,033 $ 193,921 12 University/Sprague PCC Intersection $ 836,111 79.5% $ 664,708 $ 171,403 13 McDonald /Sprague PCC Intersection $ 894,365 79.5% $ 711,020 $ 183,345 Sub -Total $ 22,161,015 $ 17,618,007 $ 4,543,008 2007 SRTC CaII for Projects FTA Section 5307 Funds Proposed Project Applications