2006, 05-09 Regular Meeting MinutesAttendance:
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 May 9, 2006
Mayor Wilhite called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., and welcomed everyone to the 91s meeting.
City Staff:
Dave Mercier, City Manager
Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager
Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney
Marina Sukup, Community Development Director
Ken Thompson, Finance Director
Neil Kersten, Public Works Director
Mike Jackson, Parks & Rec Director
Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner
Cal Walker, Police Chief
Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer
Tom Scholtens, Building Official
Morgan Koudelka, Administrative Analyst
Greg "Bing" Bingaman, IT Specialist
Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk
INVOCATION: Pastor Manuel Denning of Fountain Ministries 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: Councilmember Munson stated he would like to add an agenda item #8a
concerning a proposed Cable Franchise Bill. It was then moved by Councilmember Munson, seconded
and unanimously agreed to approve the agenda as amended.
INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: None.
COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS:
Councilmember Schimmels: reported that he attended a Weed and Seed meeting last week, which was
well represented by the Sheriff's Office and police officials; but poorly attended by the public.
Councilmember Gothmann: explained that he attended several meetings, including a Chamber of
Commerce business meeting where they discussed planning for new facilities; a SNAP meeting; and a
Special Regional Health District Awards ceremony; and that he attended a law enforcement memorial
ceremony at the courthouse.
Councilmember Munson: stated that he attended a risk seminar by the Association of Washington Cities
on how best to put together an insurance pool; that today he attended a Board Of County Commissioners
meeting where population allocation numbers were discussed, and that he testified on behalf of the
Steering Committee of elected officials, and that Greg McCormick spoke for the City; that they
recommended a medium number as opposed to a large number and of the eight people speaking, no one
supported a large allocation number; and that the Board Of County Commissioners postponed their
decision until they have a chance to further reflect on the subject, and that it is possible a decision will be
made at the May 23 meeting.
MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor Wilhite reported that she attended the Association of Washington Cities
Nominating Committee for officers for the state association; and that she attended today's reception for
Council Meeting: 05 -09 -06 Page 1 of 7
Approved by Council: 05 -23 -06
VOUCHER LIST DATE
VOUCHER #s
TOTAL VOUCHER AMOUNT
04 -24 -2006
8985 -9037
$88,483.33
04 -28 -2006
9038
$6,527.19
04 -28 -2006
9039 -9071
$1,733,285.95
GRAND TOTAL
$1,828,296.47
city staff and Planning Commission in celebration of the completion of the Comprehensive plan. Mayor
Wilhite then read three proclamations, with each proclamation followed by comments from the associated
agency: (1) "Older Americans Month" with comments by Diane Smith, member of the Aging and Long
Term Care of Eastern Washington Planning and Management Council; (2) "National Safe Boating Week"
with comments from Jim Kelley of the Coast Guard Auxiliary; and (3) "Tourism Week" with comments
from Harry Sladich, Spokane Regional Convention Visitor's Bureau President and CEO.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Rob Nordhagen, 6708 E Appleway: commented on the signage issue; said he does not understand why
flags and pennants are signs, and that the sign ordinance is confusing; he said the definition of a sign does
not include streamers, nor does the definition of streamers include signs; he stressed concern having to
secure permits for the streamers, putting them up and taking them down, at $50.00 for every quarter; that
it appears to him that something got written wrong as there is nothing addressed in the ordinance about
streamers, which is his main concern. Mayor Wilhite said that a member of staff will back to him on this
issue.
Richard Schatzka, 19108 E 2 — he encouraged council to pass the ORV ordnance and said that he is still
being plagued by those folks; and he thanked Mr. Driskell and Mr. Connelly for their support; adding he
is anxious to get this issue behind him.
Donald E. Hess, owner Town & Country Auto at the corner of Pines & Broadway: voiced his concern
about the proposal of changing Broadway; said he has had his business there for 16 years, has seen very
few bikes; that he left about 5:20 tonight to get here and he sat though two red lights trying to get out of
the lot onto Broadway so he could turn on Pines. He said that if we did a neighborhood survey he thinks
we would discover that people would not be happy if they knew how long it would take to back out of
their driveway; and also that it would contribute to property depreciation; he said Council could better and
spend money on something more profitable then a gimmick to try to give people a ride on a bike.
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 Pay Period Ending April 30, 2006: $200,784.91
c. Resolution 06 -011 Setting Planning Commission Public Hearing for Street Vacation
Request STV -02 -06
d. Minutes of April 18, 2006 Special Council Meeting
e. Minutes of April 25, 2006, Regular Council Meeting
f. Minutes of May 2, 2006 Council Study Session Meeting
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor, seconded, and unanimously passed to approve the Consent
Agenda.
NEW BUSINESS
2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 06 -012 Amending Regulations for Off -road Vehicles — Mike
Connelly /Cary Driskell
After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor and seconded,
to approve Ordinance 06 -012. Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained that there have been no changes
to this ordinance since the first reading; and briefly explained the background of the ordinance. It was
Council Meeting: 05 -09 -06 Page 2 of 7
Approved by Council: 05 -23 -06
moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor and seconded by Councilmember DeVleming, to amend the motion to
preclude UR -1 zones from this particular prohibition and allow the use of ORV's in UR -1 designated
zones. Deputy Mayor Taylor explained that there are some areas in the City more rural in character, that
are or will be zoned UR -1; that some areas include several acre parcels where it would not be a nuisance
to have an ORV used on those properties; and he stated his opposition to the ordinance as written as
possibly being too broad. Council discussion continued concerning size of parcels, small parcels
surrounded by higher densities; regulating the peace and quite of parcels bordering the one -acre lots; and
whether this should apply to UR -1 areas in Ponderosa and /or Rotchford. Vote by Acclamation to amend
the agenda: In Favor: Deputy Mayor Taylor; Opposed: Mayor Wilhite, Councilmembers Schimmels,
Denenny, Gothmann, DeVleming, and Munson. Abstentions: None. Motion failed. City Manager
Mercier mentioned that we have a complaint - driven enforcement program. Mayor Wilhite invited public
comment.
Gail Stiltner 10119 E 44th Avenue: said she feels it will take the wisdom of Solomon to make this right;
that she knows people in the Ponderosa area are very interested in this issue; she realizes you can't
legislate respect for people yet there must be some way to solve this, and she stated that perhaps this
ordinance is not the right way to go; that someone using an ORV on their own property that creates a
noise or nuisance problem to a neighbor, should be treated as any other nuisance problem like barking
dogs, or hot - rodding at midnight; that she would like to see those areas strengthened rather than a
prohibition on off -road vehicles in places with acreages; she mentioned she spoke to some of the kids
who ride the ORVs, and they stated they have no place to go; she suggested we need to give them a
reasonably safe place that won't harm the land or infringe on other's rights.
Richard Schatzka, 19108 E 2 ° — : said he is in support of the ordinance and is surprised at the "last hour"
discussion; that he hopes not to reverse course and wants to put this behind him; that the people using the
track are now urinating in public; that this activity seems to happen every weekend; and the people have
no regard or respect for their neighbors; that it often happens at 10:00 p.m. and that it has to stop.
Claire Penel 19109 E 4th: said that he lives next door to the race unit; that he formerly owned the property;
that the current owners run as many as five ORVs at once; that the track is too small and five are too
many; and they can't sit outside because of this problem; and he asked when the six months would start.
Mike Edwards, 19205 E 4 explained that he lives next to Claire; that he encourages passage of this
ordinance; and as a neighbor east to the problem, he still hears the problem; that it is a constant problem;
and it does prevent neighbors from having peace and quite.
Mayor Wilhite invited further public comments. As none were offered, City Clerk Bainbridge read the
May 9, 2006 e -mail from the Halversons, adding their encouragement to Council to pass the ordinance.
Council discussion included comments of trying to help the majority of the people in the community; the
efforts of the legal staff in drafting a reasonable ordinance to address the issue; that this issue is not
merely confined to one section of the City; that Council tries to balance the right to use property and the
right to peace and quite in the neighborhood; and that the real issue is neighbors being unkind or
unfriendly to other neighbors. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Wilhite, and Councilmembers
Schimmels, Denenny, Gothmann, DeVleming, and Munson. Opposed: Deputy Mayor Taylor.
Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
In response to Council question to clarify when the six months begins, Attorney Driskell said the six
months begins after the effective date of the ordinance, which is five days after publication; but that the
provisions prohibiting new or expanded off -road vehicle use will be effective on the effective date of the
ordinance; adding that he will continue to monitor the situation and if complaints are issued, staff will
check for violations.
Council Meeting: 05 -09 -06 Page 3 of 7
Approved by Council: 05 -23 -06
After brief Council discussion concerning the need for the six month period, Mayor Wilhite stated that
Council can discuss the ramifications of the six months with the City Attorney later.
3. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 06 -013 Regulating Logo Use — Cary Driskell
After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor and seconded,
to suspend the rules and pass ordinance 06 -013. Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained that changes
were incorporated in the ordinance per Council's discussion last week; and if Council approves this
ordinance, staff will prepare a resolution setting a style and standards guide for the logo. Mayor Wilhite
invited public comment; no comments were offered. It was moved by Councilmember DeVleming and
seconded to change the word `plaques" with "items of recognition." Vote to amend the motion: In
Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. The amended motion was then
voted upon: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried to suspend the
rules and pass ordinance 06 -013 with the change in section 3 as noted above.
4. Motion Consideration: Contract Award for Sprague /Appleway Subarea Plan — Marina Sukup /Scott
Kuhta
Senior Planner Kuhta explained that Council previously received an update on contract negotiations for
the Sprague /Appleway Corridor Subarea Plan; that staff has further examined the proposed Scope of
Service and the budget proposals of the consultants; and that staff is pleased to bring forth a final contract
proposal and detailed scope of service. Mr. Kuhta also briefed Council on the proposed timeline as
shown in the materials accompanying his presentation, including the phasing of the project. He further
explained that stakeholder and community workshops are very important in this process and those will be
scheduled; and that once Council chooses the final alternative, phase three will begin which is
implementing community intent; which is where the final subarea plan is developed, which includes a full
coding, regulatory framework for the entire corridor and includes the City center and all associated
segments. Mr. Kuhta explained that the first two phases should be completed by the end of this year, with
the regulatory part completed early spring next year. Mr. Kuhta also mentioned that the entire project
amount is slightly over $400,000; that staff made sure there were no duplications of services among the
consultants, and that staff worked hard to get this project cost down to this amount, and reminded Council
that the entire project can be split between two fiscal budget years.
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor and seconded by Councilmember Denenny, to authorize the City
Manager to execute a contract with ECO Northwest, Freedman, Tung & Bottomley, Glatting Jackson,
and Studio Cascade in the amount of $428,972 for the development of the Sprague /Appleway Corridor
Subarea Plan. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment; no comments were offered. Council discussion
included positive comments concerning budgeting this project over two budget years; having this study
done first does not preclude the incremental implementation of the plan (e.g. starting at Auto Row and
moving down the street) should Council decide upon that approach; and positive comments concerning
the consultants. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None.
Motion carried.
5. Motion Consideration: Consultant Services Agreement for the Street Master Plan — Neil Kersten
Public Works Director Kersten gave the background of the street masterplan as noted in his May 9, 2006
Request for Council Action; that two responses were received with staff recommending JUB Engineering.
Mr. Kersten brought Council attention to the accompanying detailed scope of work and the phases and
costs of the project, adding that the contract would be funded from the Street Fund. It was moved by
Councilmember Gothmann and seconded by Councilmember DeVleming, to approve the contract with
JUB Engineers for the Street MasterPlan Project in the amount of $435,470.00. After brief positive
council comments, Mayor Wilhite invited public comment.
Mary Pollard, 17216 E. Baldwin: asked if this is going to help define concurrency of the streets and to
make sure we have community concurrency in the neighborhoods. Mayor Wilhite indicated staff will
respond later, to Ms. Pollard's question.
Council Meeting: 05 -09 -06 Page 4 of 7
Approved by Council: 05 -23 -06
6. Motion Consideration: Hearing Examiner Agreement — Morgan Koudelka
It was moved by Councilmember DeVleming and seconded, to authorize the City Manager to amend the
Hearing Examiner Agreement CO6 -14. Administrative Analyst Koudelka explained that the County
adjusted the hearing examiner rate to include non - productive hours, such as vacation, sick leave, breaks,
training, and other non - billable time so that we will pay for a share of all hearing examiner costs; and that
this is similar to settle and adjust agreements in which our usage rate is applied to all costs of service. Mr.
Koudelka stated that the estimated cost for 2006 Hearing Examiner services will increase from $43,352 to
$55,307; and that the addendum to the agreement (including a new Exhibit 2), was included in the council
packet; and that staff recommends approval. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment.
Chuck Hafner, 4710 S Woodruff: said there are many developments beginning to happen in his
(Ponderosa) community which puts a time concern relative to the Hearing Examiner; that there have been
times already where they are looking at retired judges that might assist; or at the City of Spokane's
Hearing Officer to give some assistance; and that his concern is by limiting the number of hours, it will
also limit the time the Hearing Examiner will be able to do his work; and if there are too many
developments and too many hearings, Mr. Hafner doubts that the examiner will be able to accurately do
the job he was hired to do.
Mr. Koudelka further explained that the number of hours the hearing examiner works on cases will not be
reduced; that this simply factors in time that the hearing examiner spends on other matters which are not
billable to clients, such as training, vacation, breaks, etc.; which are classified as non - productive times.
Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
7. Motion Consideration: Acquisition of State Park Lands — Mike Jackson
Parks and Recreation Director Jackson explained that April 28, 2006, the City became aware of the
proposed auction sale of several parcels of Washington State Park property which lie within the City of
Spokane Valley; that the Washington Parks and Recreation Commission scheduled a public meeting
concerning the potential auction of these parcels, for May 11, 2006 with some determination of the land
set for June 22 when the commission votes; and that he feels open space is critical to recreation activities.
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor and seconded to direct the City Manager or his designee to submit
formal notification to the Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission expressing the City's
desire to acquire and manage the surplus State lands located on the north side of the Spokane River and
lying within the City's boundaries. Director Jackson further stated that the primary goals are to hold onto
property; but actively evaluate all properties against criteria and added that the County is looking at this
from the same aspect as we are, which is to have the property transferred. Mayor Wilhite invited public
comment.
Dick Behm, 3626 S Ridgeview Drive: said he was on the original board that built the Western Dance
Hall; that the property was originally part of the state and was surplused; that the Department of
Transportation turned the property over to the County under the condition it be used for recreation
purposes, with the Western Dance Association holding a 25 -year lease; that the County agreed to put in a
well and the Western Dance Association agreed to furnish restrooms; that the border doesn't seem correct
as the County would not have put a well into a state park property; and that he encourages our pursuit to
keep that property in public ownership.
Mary Pollard, 17216 E. Baldwin: said she worked hard as a neighborhood to bring this issue to the City's
attention; that she urges Council to pursue the land; that they have 64 signatures if support is needed; and
that she would appreciate council taking action on this item; and she handed the City Clerk her May 9
letter voicing support for the property acquisition.
Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
Council Meeting: 05 -09 -06 Page 5 of 7
Approved by Council: 05 -23 -06
8. Motion Consideration: School Zone Flashing Light Project Grant — Neil Kersten
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Taylor and seconded, to accept the Washington Traffic Safety
Commission Grant for School Zone Flashing /Radar Boards in the amount of $35,600. Public Works
Director Kersten explained that public works submitted a grant request to the Washington Traffic Safety
Commission to purchase and install four flashing yellow lighting /radar board systems for the vicinity of
Progress Elementary and University Elementary. Director Kersten explained that the equipment needs to
be purchased on or before June 30, 2006, with installation to be completed by September 1, 2006; that we
purchase the items and bill the Washington Traffic Safety Commission for reimbursement no later than
sixty days from the date of the approval letter, or from April 6, 2006. Mr. Kersten added that they are
submitting funding requests for four more grants for lights only (no radar), adding that all the elementary
schools are located on arterials. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote
by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
8a. Franchise Bill and Congresswoman McMorris (added agenda item)
Councilmember Munson explained that consensus is needed to move forward with this item; that
Congress is considering a bill entitled the "Communications, Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement
(COPE) Act;" which is a telecommunications bill that passed the House Energy and Commerce
Committee on April 26, with action by the full House expected this month; that the National League of
Cities has issued a call to action for all local officials to contact their representatives in Congress and tell
them to vote no on COPE. Councilmember Munson explained that this bill would strip meaningful
authority away from cities; would eliminate local franchising of video /cable service, would preempt local
oversight of the rights -of -way and provide insufficient enforcement and audit authority, and would
undermine local governments financially by limiting revenues, and it would oppose "build -out"
obligations on the presumption that market competition will bring high -speed service to all consumers.
He further explained that this bill would strip local governments of their authority to franchise the use of
the rights -of -way; and that consumers would have to contact the federal government with concerns about
their television or advanced internet services; and finally that the measure would allow service providers
to pick and choose which neighborhoods get premium services and which get no service at all.
Councilmember Munson proposed we follow the lead of the City of Spokane and Comcast and send (via
e -mail) a letter to Congresswoman McMorris asking her to oppose the bill; and to allow Mr. Mercier to
draft the letter in order to transmit the letter as soon as possible. Although Deputy Mayor Taylor
indicated he would like more information before sending the letter, Councilmember Munson replied that
time is of the essence. It was moved by Councilmember DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember
Munson, to send the letter. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by
Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Wilhite, and Councilmembers Munson, DeVleming, and Gothmann.
Opposed: Deputy Mayor Taylor and Councilmembers Schimmels and Denenny. Abstentions: None.
Motion carried.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Mary Pollard, 17216 E. Baldwin: stated she feels this is a good time to bring up the need for a Parks
Board for the City; that such board could reach across and help build the community; and also that during
their neighborhood meeting they expressed a desire for Mission Avenue to have a lower speed limit; that
she realizes the only ones who can lower a speed limit is Council, and she asks for a motion to do that.
Mayor Wilhite called for a recess at 8:10 p.m.; and reconvened the meeting at 8:20 p.m.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS:
9. Hazard Inventory Analysis Report — Tom Scholtens
Building Official Scholtens explained that staff learned October 2004 that a Hazard Inventory and
Vulnerability Analysis was required to be developed and approved prior to any federal disaster mitigation
funding granted to the City; and the Community Development Department began working with the Fire
and Police Chiefs to develop that plan, which they later learned would actually be a Spokane County-
wide analysis. Mr. Scholtens further explained that staff became involved with the Spokane County
Council Meeting: 05 -09 -06 Page 6 of 7
Approved by Council: 05 -23 -06
Hazard Mitigation Committe in September 2005, which was formed at the request of Spokane
City /County Emergency Management Department; and all involved worked to develop a Draft Mitigation
and Objectives Plan. Via his PowerPoint presentation, Mr. Scholtens gave an update of the project,
including the goals and objectives, and stated that the next steps after the Plan is approved at the State
level, is to return to the local jurisdictions for that approval. Council/staff discussion included that drills
are not planned; getting the utilities involved on the committee (Chuck Hafner reported that no one from
the Water Department is involved at this point); the main objective of the committee was to develop the
overall plan which enables jurisdictions to apply for FEMA funds; and that disaster recovery is a function
of the Department of Emergency Management.
10. Draft Customer Service Definition — Nina Regor
Deputy City Manager Regor explained that one of Council's last year's goal was to have an official
customer service program; and that the first step of such a program is to define what customer service
means; that the interdepartmental task force drafted that definition as explained in her PowerPoint
presentation. Council thanked Ms Regor for the presentation; and Ms. Regor mentioned that the plan will
be finalized and eventually included as part of the City's webpage.
11 CenterPlace Technology — Mike Jackson
Parks and Recreation Director Jackson explained that staff previously presented various options to
Council concerning installation of fiber -optic cable at CenterPlace; and part of that discussion included
the possibility of T1 lines rather than fiber option. Mr. Jackson explained that they are revising that again
and now have three Ti lines; but that overall it was determined that the best alternate is the use of fiber to
connect City Hall to CenterPlace; adding that IT Specialist Bing is working on the details with Columbia
Fiber. Director Jackson also mentioned that the recurring monthly fees (with the fiber use) would be
approximately $1300.00, compared with the current monthly cost of $435, plus the build cost estimated at
$23,000. In response to council question, Mr. Jackson indicated further study would be needed
concerning video - conferencing transmitting, and if that were pursued, it would be more of a viewing site
rather than a transmitting site. Director Jackson concluded that he is open to guidance at this point, that
they are serving the current needs, but will likely need fiber in the future. After Council /staff discussion
on the topic, including what Comcast does or does not currently provide, it was concluded that Mr.
Jackson will find out what service is needed or what would be optional to provide, and then determine
what type of technology will be needed to accomplish that goal.
It was moved by Councilmember DeVleming, seconded, and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The
meeting adjourned at 8:52 p. m.
ATTEST Diana Wilhite, Mayor
iristine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Council Meeting: 05 -09 -06
Approved by Council: 05 - 23 - 06
Page 7 of 7
E !Ilil Ibld
NAME
PLEASE PRINT
mime, vita I I 141 QQM .
TOPIC OF CONCERN YOU
WILL '11 U,('. 41ERE jB'
WI MINOI II O I ll' .
ADDRESS
TELEPHONE
11
?, 01-0.e 4 Sena_1' —
0 e. V '0€i ) I ^'A P. Z
1' ( Z,_
��." ("zi d
ff' D0/0a -`R/
/�/'S'
#70 G - //ei1c
9 S5'^ 1700
i�
10 3
1 I CI ' ViatlY t 1t ii
SIGN -IN SHEET
SI'OKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DATE: May 9, 2006
CITIZEN COMMENTS
YOUR SPEAKING TIME WILL BE LIMITED TO TIIREF MINUTES
May 9. 2006
Mary Pollard. Chairwoman
North Greenacres Neighborhood
17216 E. Baldwin Ave.
Greenacres, WA 99016
Honorable Mayor Wilhite and Council Members,
We strongly urge that City of Spokane Valley to make a resolution to
have Washington State parks and Recreation Commission transfer the
properties that are under consideration of disposal. to our jurisdiction.
This would preserve these river properties as a legacy for the future
recreation use, passive enjoyment. and habitat of wildlife along the river.
We ask that the City please send someone to the hearing, this
Thursday to emphasize the importance we place on preserving this
land, a natural resource of irreplaceable worth.
North Greenacres Neighborhood brought this up at our neighborhood
meeting last Wednesday and has 62 signatures in support of this being
transferred to the city.
We have worked very hard since we discovered the public notice to alert
the entire community. since the Centennial Trail is enjoyed by all
jurisdictions. This is a joint effort that we can join hands in protecting.
The fact this almost escaped notice, and could have been lost
heightens the need for action. Retention of solely the 200 ft. of
shoreline is not stewardship. We are deeply concerned.
Mike Jackson has worked very hard and we would also like to thank
Mike Bassinger for the excellent map he provided to help relay
information to the public and all concerned.
Please ensure the retention of the public ownership of all parts of these
parcels.
Sincerely,
Mary Pollard
Chris Bainbridge
From: Annette Halverson [halverson97 @hotmail.com)
Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 10:15 AM
To: Chris Bainbridge
Subject: our public comment for tonight
From: Kevin and Annette Halverson 19124 E. 2nd Ave. Spokane Valley, WA 99016
509 - 027 -5947
Dear Councilmember:
We will not be able to attend tonight's meeting regarding the use of off -road vehicals in
residential areas tonight due to a prior family comittment. We do not want this to appear
as if we are not strongly interested in having this measure be passed by your council
since we have spent the last 2 years, along with our neighbors, trying to make this
happen. We missed the last hearing as Mike Connelly knows, because we were not notified
that the issue would be on the agenda at the meeting. We have always been notified in the
past, as we were this time, but unfortunately did not know until it was too late.
This is what we would Like to say about the issue because we will not be there tonight to
speak during public comment.
For the past 2 years our neighbors at 19025 E. 4th have been riding motorcycles for hours
on end on a regular basis in their back yard. Almost always they have friends come with
motorcycles in trucks and 4- wheelers and ride for hours on end. This is especially the
case on the weekends. This has been a horrible noise and dust nuisance for us and our
neighbors and has prevented us from enjoying the outdoor use of our own property. The
noise is irritating and unreasonably loud, and the clouds of dust from the constant riding
of often 3 -5 big motorcycles has been unbearable and has coated our house, play equipment
and shop. All of us neighbors tried to work with the home owner, but many of us have been
met with very disrespectful and aggressive behavior from the homeowner at 19025 and can
only turn to the city of Spokane Valley for a lawful solution to this problem.
We have been passed from Crimecheck to code enforcement, to the council, the city
attorney, to the planning commission and now back to you.
Please pass this ordinance so we and our neighbors and the other citizens of Spokane
Valley who live in close proximity to one another can enjoy our properties, family
barbecues and peace and quiet. As the city develops more and more residential housing this
problem will arise more frequently and this is now the opportunity to take care of it
while it's in your hands instead of going through this process again. Please let our hard
work and your hard work pay off and pass this law.
Thank you so much, feel free to call us if you have any more questions.
Thank you and good luck,
Sincerely,
Kevin and Annette Halverson
19124 E. 2nd Ave, Spokane Valley 99016, 509 - 927 -5947
FREE pop -up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar — get it now!
http: / /toolbar.msn. click- url.com /go /onm00200415ave /direct /01/
1
Chris Bainbridge
From: Richard Munson
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 8:06 PM
To: Bill Gothmann; Branch, Carabelle; Cary Driskell; Chris Bainbridge; Dave Mercier; Diana
Wilhite; Dick Denenny; Gary Schimmels; Mike Connelly; Mike Devleming; Nina Regor;
Richard Munson; Steve Taylor; Sue Golman
Subject: Franchise Authority
Importance: High
Attachments: Franchise authority.doc
wrrtir
Franchise
uthority.doc (40 KB.
Best Regards,
Rich
I know all of you have seen the letter the City of Spokane and Comcast sent to
Congresswoman McMorris. Attached is an article from NLC explaining in more detail what
this bill will do to Cities. I will ask the council to authorize our Mayor to send
Congresswoman McMorris an email that will agree with Spokane City's position which is to
oppose the bill.
I apologize for dropping this on you at the last minute, but since the vote is this week,
we have little time to consider our action. As you saw in my email to Jim Haggerton, I
have posed some questions about mitigating measures that may help us. Jim is the AWC
representative on the NLC Telecommunications Committee. I figure either Cathy or NLC will
know how to accomplish this or if we have chance to mitigate.
Richard M. Munson
Council Member
Spokane Valley
1
NLC Stands Ready To Defeat Latest Assault On Local
Franchise Authority
by Alexander Ponder and Jimmy Gomez
In the face of recent legislative developments, cities must
stand together to defeat the Communications, Opportunity,
Promotion and Enhancement (COPE) Act
telecommunications bill that passed the House Energy and
Commerce Committee on April 26.With action by the full
House expected this month, NLC has issued a call to action
for all local officials to contact their representatives in
Congress and tell them to vote no on COPE.
The bill represents the latest attempt of the federal
government to strip meaningful authority away from cities.
COPE would eliminate local franchising of video /cable
service, preempt local oversight of the rights -of -way, provide
insufficient enforcement and audit authority, undermine
local governments financially by limiting revenues and
oppose "build -out" obligations on the presumption that
market competition will bring high -speed service to all
consumers.
The negative impact of these changes would reverberate in
the pocketbook of every city — big and small — throughout
the country. NLC, as well as a coalition of national groups
that represent local interests on telecommunications
legislation, opposes the COPE bill.
Local elected leaders welcome new video competitors into
the marketplace to drive down prices and increase service
quality. Current efforts of reform, however, will significantly
undermine cities' ability to perform their core functions.
Franchising is an essential local tool municipalities use to
manage public roads and to protect public safety when they
grant private companies access to local streets and
sidewalks. Franchising also ensures public compensation
when a private company uses public land to sell services to
their customers.
The bill strips local governments of their authority to
franchise the use of public rights of -way for video /cable
services and gives that authority to the federal government.
The Federal Communications Commission has never had
the authority to regulate local public rights of way and has
no expertise concerning local streets, sidewalks, public
safety or traffic patterns.
COPE gives the federal government the authority to oversee
all local rights of way management practices and all
customer service issues. In addition, the legislation allows
broadband /video service providers to pick and choose which
neighborhoods they want to serve while bypassing all others
completely.
The bill would also allow broadband /video providers to
avoid maintaining or upgrading facilities in poorer
neighborhoods while affluent neighborhoods receive cutting -
edge services and lower prices.
The telecommunications reform bill, as it now stands, will,
in effect, muzzle the voices of consumers and local
governments. If enacted, consumers will be at the mercy of
telecommunication giants and the federal government when
faced with concerns about their television and advanced
Internet services.
This measure leaves the door wide open for service providers
to pick and choose which neighborhoods get premium
services and which get no service at all.
The legislative battle occurring in Congress to determine
who benefits from telecommunications reform will have
long- lasting consequences for consumers and local
governments. Local officials must go on the offensive and
send a powerful message to members of Congress to respect
the authority of cities in telecommunications and when it
comes to matters that are inherently local.
Local officials can make their voices heard on this important
issue through various means, including calling, writing or
meeting with their members of Congress. NLC's staff is
available to assist in efforts to defeat the current telecom
bill.
By visiting NLC's Grassroots Action Center at www.nlc.org,
members can find: legislative updates; localize and
personalize templates; and talking points on the impact of
telecommunications reform on cities.
Furthermore, local elected officials are encouraged to write
op -eds to highlight the benefits of city authority over
telecommunications matters. Every phone call, letter,
meeting and op -ed will make the difference in this struggle
to protect the interests of cities and consumers.
Local Government Champions on Telecommunications
When the House Energy and Commerce Committee voted on
April 26, 42 to 12 to support the Communications,
Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement Act (COPE),
without approving any of the amendments to protect local
government interests, there were members of the committee
who voted in support of a substantial number (or all) of the
amendments supported by NLC and voted against the final
committee legislation.
As local governments move to mobilize opposition to COPE
when it is considered by the full House of Representatives, if
you are a local government official in any of these districts,
please take a moment to thank these members of Congress
for their support of your community: Reps. John Dingell
(Mich.); Henry Waxman (Calif.); Edward J. Markey (Mass.);
Anna. Eshoo (Calif.); Diana L. DeGette (Colo.); Lois Capps
(Calif.); Mike Doyle (Pa.); Thomas H. Allen (Maine); Janice D.
Schakowsky (111.); Hilda L. Solis (Calif.) and Ta.mmy Baldwin
(Wisc.).