Loading...
2005, 04-12 Regular Meeting MinutesAttendance: Diana Wilhite, Mayor Rich Munson, Deputy Mayor Dick Denenny, Councilmember (arrived late) Mike DeVleming, Councilmember Mike Flanigan, Councilmember Gary Schimmels, Councilmember Steve Taylor, Councilmember MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meeting Tuesday, April 12, 2005 Mayor Wilhite called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., and welcomed everyone to the 64th meeting Dave Mercier, City Manager Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Ken Thompson, Finance Director Cal Walker, Police Chief Marina Sukup, Community Development Director Mike Jackson, Parks and Recreation Director Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Steve Worley, Senior Engineer Greg "Bing" Bingaman, IT Specialist Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk INVOCATION Pastor Manuel Denning, 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 except Councilmember Denenny. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Munson, seconded by Councilmember Flanigan, and unanimously approved to excuse Councilmember Denenny until he arrives. APPROVAL OF AMENDED AGENDA It was moved by Councilmember DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Flanigan to approve the amended agenda as presented. City Manager Mercier explained that the two items which were independent action items setting public hearing dates, are now under the Consent Agenda; as a result of receipt of an appeal to a hearing examiner decision, item 8a has been added for Council consideration; and lastly, an Executive Session has been added to discuss labor negotiations. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS Mayor Wilhite acknowledged and welcomed the Latter Day Saints Youth Group attending tonight's meeting as part of their citizenship requirements. COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS Councilmember Schimmels: reported that he attended the Solid Waste Liaison Board meeting a few weeks ago where they continue to work on routine business, and that they have issued a Request for Proposals for a contractor and hope to have a report in about a month on that issue. Deputy Mayor Munson: stated that he attended Spokane Transit Association Light Rail Steering Committee meeting last week and they are moving forward with their community outreach, and plan to place kiosks in both malls with information and questions for the public on questions concerning how much the public may be willing to pay for light rail; that he also attended the Mayor's Ball Saturday night and expressed appreciation to the Valley Chamber of Commerce for sponsoring the event. Councilmember Flanigan: announced that he also attended the Mayor's Ball and thanked Rick Wilhite for all his work. Council Meeting: 04 -12 -05 Page 1 of 9 Approved by Council: 04 -26 -05 VOUCHER LIST DATE VOUCHER Number(s) TOTAL VOUCHER AMOUNT 03 -18 -05 6488 -6514 85,265.33 03 -28 -05 6515 -6528 12,932.10 04 -04 -05 6542 -6591 (less 6569) 97,130.16 04 -04 -05 6592 -6593 210.00 GRAND TOTAL 195,537.59 Councilmember DeVleming: mentioned he also attended and had a good time at the Mayor's Ball. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Wilhite reported that she attended a change of command for the Naval Reserve; and she also thanked Mr. Wilhite for his assistance with the Mayor's Ball. PUBLIC COMMENTS: No comments were offered. 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. (Note: Council may entertain a motion to waive reading and approve Consent Agenda.) a. Approval of Regular Council Meeting Minutes of March 22, 2005 b. Approval of Study Session Meeting Minutes of April 5, 2005 c. Approval of Payroll of March 30, 2005 of $153,169.82 d. Approval of the Following Vouchers: e. 4- Proposed Resolution 05 -003 Setting Public Hearing for Street Vacation STV 01 -05 f. - Proposed Resolution 05 -004 Setting Public Hearing for Street Vacation STV 02 -05 It was moved by Councilmember DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Flanigan to waive the reading and approve the Consent Agenda. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. NEW BUSINESS 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 05 -014, Nuisance Code Amendment – Cary Driskell After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Councilmember Flanigan and seconded by Councilmember DeVleming to adopt ordinance 05 -014. Deputy City Attorney Driskell briefly explained the background of this proposed ordinance amendment, mentioned that a violation could result in a $250 fine as a non - criminal violation, and that there have been no changes to the proposed ordinance since the first reading. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment; no comments were offered. Council discussion then ensued regarding the code enforcement status of the property which prompted this action, possible similar situations on 8 Avenue and Dearborn concerning the storage of personal belongings in residential yards, and if there are other current ordinances which could be used to address this issue. Attorney Driskell explained that there are times code enforcement receives complaints about what appears to be garbage or junk in someone's yard, but when approached, the resident asserts they are having or preparing for a yard sale; and that it is his belief this ordinance will address that type of argument. Councilmember Taylor stated he feels the ordinance is over - regulating and will not support the change. Further discussion included how to enforce the "no more than three times in a calendar year" requirement and if that would be promoting neighborhood discord; and that perhaps that clause should be stricken from the ordinance. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Munson and seconded by Councilmember Flanigan to amend the pending motion to strike that section in 3R which states "or more than three times in one calendar year." Vote by Acclamation to amend the motion: In Favor: Mayor Wilhite, Deputy Council Meeting: 04 -12 -05 Page 2 of 9 Approved by Council: 04 -26 -05 Mayor Munson, Councilmembers Schimmels, Taylor, and Flanigan. Opposed: Councilmember DeVleming; Abstentions: None. Motion approved to amend the motion. Vote by Acclamation on the amended motion to approve the ordinance striking the words "or more than three times in one calendar year :: " In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Councilmember Denenny arrived at the meeting. 3. Second Reading Proposed Pawn Broker Ordinance 05 -017 — Cal Walker /Cary Driskell After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Munson and seconded by Councilmember Flanigan to approve Ordinance 05 -017 regarding pawnbroker regulations. Police Chief Walker gave a brief background of the ordinance, and proceeded to explain the changes in the ordinance since the first reading: removed the requirement of obtaining a photocopy of a person's driver's license at time of transaction; and added a requirement that a digital photo be taken of the person seeking to pawn the merchandise, which photo would then be transmitted to the Police by the following day with the other required information; that all records required be transmitted in computer format so the police can quickly do computer cross - reference checks to determine if items were reported stolen; the requirement that business keep their own records on computer for a least three years was removed, and added that records may be maintained in paper form; staff recommends removing the yearly fee as there does not appear to be a reason to charge such fee and by not doing so, it would help offset the cost to a business of taking digital photos. Chief Walker added that the police department will provide the necessary computer training, and that there will be a grace period of three months during which time no punitive action will be taken against the pawnbroker for violations, but that the Police Department may require and enforce the penalty section for failing to provide the records of transactions. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment. Bob Blum, 12722 East 15 expressed satisfaction in taking out the requirement of acquiring a photocopy of the person's identification document. Council and staff discussed transmitting the digital photo if the owner did not own a computer; and Chief Walker explained that some programs are necessary and some people will have to purchase some type of Photoshop; but that the cost of doing so is small compared to the potential in losses. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 6. Proposed Resolution 05 -005 Creating the Public Information Officer Position — Nina Regor Deputy City Manager Regor explained the background leading to the creation of the position; the position description and proposed job classification; the benefits of hiring the Public Information Officer (PIO); and that there have been no changes to the resolution since last reviewed. It was moved by Councilmember DeVleming and seconded by Deputy Mayor Munson to approve resolution 05 -005 creating the Public Information Officer. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment. Bill Gothmann, 10017 East 48 stated that he wants to make sure that paths of communication remain open to find out what the facts are; that he wants a PIO to be an enabler to that process and not a roadblocker; and that he feels hiring a PIO is bad public relations as it suggests there is something to hide although he knows that is not the intent. Tony Lazanis: stated that he thought all citizens need is truth and full disclosure from council and management and he feels that is a pretty high priced position; said he doesn't believe we should hire public relations people or lobbyists to tell people the truth. Bob Blum, 12722 East 15 said that he wonders after reading the duties of the position, that if the almost 50 employees and council can't handle these duties how one person could be expected to do so; that if money is available to hire, he'd feel better hiring a human resource analyst, code enforcement officer, or Council Meeting: 04 -12 -05 Page 3 of 9 Approved by Council: 04 -26 -05 traffic project manager as those positions benefit the community; and that a PIO is more of a benefit to council; that he feels Councilmembers are already the PIOs, and asks that the position not be approved because in so approving, we would be diminishing the accomplishments by admitting we need spin control. Mayor Wilhite invited further public comment; no further comments were offered. Councilmember DeVleming stated that this position is not a public relations officer but is a public information officer; that Councilmembers are carrying a full load with other full -time employment, and attending board meetings and committee meetings, and that he feels we need help in getting correct information disseminated to the public. Councilmember Taylor agreed and added that a message from one councilmember is limited and fragmentary as there are seven members of the council; that this is not about politics, but is about ensuring we have a consistent accurate flow of information coming from the city to be heard by all; that this PIO will not be a lobbyist, but will help deliver information to other elected officials at the State and County level. Deputy Mayor Munson said that no Councilmember or staff intends to be less readily available to the community; and that council and the City Manager would never allow a PIO to spin anything; adding that we pledge to provide the population with accurate information and we need a coordinator to help get the job done. Councilmember Flanigan stated his opposition to the position; and stated that there have been several instances where if there had been initial reactions to specific issues like a tax issue, such would have been detrimental if we had had a PIO at that time; that he feels there is a need for dialogue amongst council; that he is concerned at what point a PIO starts issuing statements of the City's position; and that he would rather use the funds elsewhere. Councilmember Taylor said that a PIO does not issue positions or advocacy statements, but once Council's advocacy is turned into policy, that is when it would become public information. Councilmember Denenny agreed and stated that part -time Councilmembers simply cannot get out as much as they would like; and that proper and effective communication requires a professional. Mayor Wilhite also added that this position will serve as a benefit to the community as facts are disseminated. Councilmember Schimmels said he would support the position but would prefer the position be contracted out and if that does not work well, the process could always be refined later. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Wilhite, Deputy Mayor Munson, Councilmembers Schimmels, Taylor, DeVleming, and Denenny. Opposed: Councilmember Flanigan. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Mayor Wilhite called for a short recess at 7:10 p.m.; and reconvened the meeting at 7:20 p.m. 7. Motion Consideration: Contract Approval, Pool Operation — Mike Jackson Parks and Recreation Director Jackson explained that the YMCA was the only respondent to this Request for Proposals; he stated that he toured their facilities and they looked at ours; that the funds are available in the 2005 budget; and that the Y would like to keep our copying costs separate (at a rate of about 3¢ a copy). It was moved by Councilmember Flanigan and seconded to authorize the City Manager or designee to negotiate and execute a pool operation and maintenance contract with the YMCA. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 8. Motion Consideration: Contract Approval, Furnishings for CenterPlace — Steve Worley Engineer Worley reported that this issue is for approval consideration of a contract to provide furniture and furnishings for the CenterPlace facility, and that he would like to address two recommended actions: one to authorize the City Manager to award and sign the contract, and the other to grant the City Manager an additional $50,000 in change order authority. Mr. Worley distributed copies and explained the bid tabulations and process; he also stated that not all bidders provided a price for every pricing group; that the bid was set up so bidders did not have to bid each group but if they did they had to bid every piece of equipment in that group. Mr. Worley mentioned that some bids were not considered responsive as they did not meet the specification requirements. In addition, Mr. Worley stated that when the bids were received, the price exceed the original anticipated budgeted amount; that staff reviewed the items which Council Meeting: 04 -12 -05 Page 4 of 9 Approved by Council: 04 -26 -05 were bid and decided to try to get the price closer to the original $300,000 estimated budget, and in doing so staff recommended reducing the number of chairs by 100 and the number of classroom tables by about 35; which brought the total recommended approval amount down to $339,572; through the process of developing the equipment and furnishings for the facility, it was decided to make the dining room chairs in the great room and the classroom chairs the same to make it easy to transfer chairs from one room to another based on the situation and need. Mr. Worley also mentioned that it was stated in the bid package that staff reserves the right to adjust the quantity of each of the items based on the City's budget; so bidders were submitting bids based on stated quantities with the knowledge that staff has the ability to reduce it if the bids came in above budget. Mr. Worley mentioned that all of the classrooms will be completed in keeping with the previously council- approved change order to finish the second floor classrooms; and that some of those classrooms will be leased to Spokane Community College and they will provide their own classroom furnishings. In regard to the reduced number of tables and chairs, Mr. Worley stated that if there are funds in the budget once the project is complete, and it appears additional tables and chairs are needed, there would be an opportunity to purchase those items at a later date. It was moved by Mayor Wilhite and seconded by Councilmember Flanigan to award and authorize the manager to sign the contracts in the amount of $339,572.65 for the furnishing and furniture for the CenterPlace Project as outlined in the attached Final Bid Recommendation. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment; no comments were offered. Councilmember DeVleming requested that Council receive more information at a later date to show the entire budget for this project, including any other projections of future needs. Parks and Recreation Director Jackson indicated he would gather that data. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. City Manager Mercier said that for the second part of this issue, that the change order authority recommendation is $50,000 and not the stated $100,000; and as that gets drawn down, staff will seek Council approval to replenish that amount. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Munson and seconded by Councilmember Flanigan, to grant the City Manager an additional $50,000 in change order authorization. Mayor Wilhite invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 8a. Motion Consideration:Setting Closed Record Hearing on Appeal Numbers APP 01 -05 and 02 -05 Deputy City Attorney Driskell recommended two separate motions, although one hearing could be held to consolidate the issues as both relate to the same land use decision, and will be the same record to be considered by Council. He further explained that this issue is as a result of a decision made by the Hearing Examiner and of subsequent receipt of application by a landowner to appeal that decision; that some neighbors in addition to the property owner were elected to appeal that decision; that the next step in the process is to set a date to hold a closed record public hearing to be held before Council; that it would be a closed record as the record has already been established before the Hearing Examiner. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Munson and seconded by Councilmember Flanigan to grant a closed record hearing to be heard no later than June 14, 2005 in reference to appeal number APP 01 -05. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. It was then moved by Deputy Mayor Munson and seconded by Councilmember Flanigan to grant a closed record hearing to take place no later than June 14, 2005 on appeal number APP 02 -05. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Councilmember Denenny asked when Council would receive information on this in order to prevent unknowingly receiving communication or contact with those involved. Attorney Driskell indicated he will advise Council tomorrow on who the parties are so Council would not unwittingly partake in any ex -parte communication, since this matter is a quasi-judicial matter. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments offered. Council Meeting: 04 -12 -05 Page 5 of 9 Approved by Council: 04 -26 -05 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: [no public comment] 9. Watershed Management Plan Presentation — Scott Kuhta /Rob Lindsay Long Range Planner Kuhta explained that tonight's presentation deals with an ongoing watershed planning process for the Little Spokane River and the Middle Spokane River, also known as WRIA 55 and 57 respectively. Mr. Kuhta introduced Rob Lindsay, Spokane County Water Resources Manager, and Reanette Boese, Spokane County Groundwater Program Coordinator, to assist in the presentation; adding that Spokane County is the lead agency for this planning process. Mr. Kuhta gave some background information on the issue as noted on his April 12, 2005 Request for Council Action form. Mr. Kuhta then gave his PowerPoint presentation, and mentioned that these projects are connected because there is a connection or exchange of water in the aquifers. Mr. Kuhta stated that this is a voluntary participation process; that this process has been ongoing, and that the steps are (1) organization of the planning unit; (2) collecting data and assessment; (3) planned development and approval stage [the current stage]; and (4) plan implementation. He stated that the planning unit must approve the Plan and we can choose to be a part of that planning unit and have a representative participate and vote on behalf of the City; that there must be consensus of all members of the Planning Unit or a consensus of the government members plus a majority vote of the non - government members to approve the Plan. Once approved, the Plan goes to the County Legislative authorities (Spokane County, Pend Oreille County, and Stevens County) for approval from each authority. If the Plan is not approved, it may be sent back once to the Planning Unit for revisions and then resubmitted to the Legislative Authority. Afterwards, if the County Legislative authority does not grant approval, the project ends. Mr. Kuhta explained that there are two elements of the Plan: water quantity and how it is used now and plans for future use. Mr. Kuhta stated that there is a recommended instream flow of a certain minimum amount of water in the streams in order to sustain fish; that the Plan is proposing an instream flow recommendation of 500 cubic feet per second in the Barker Road area, which has been determined to be the minimum amount that can sustain rainbow trout. Mr. Kuhta explained that further study is recommended further downstream in the river, and then explained the recommended actions; and said if we obligate ourselves through this Plan, we must follow through with that commitment. Mr. Kuhta stated that at this point, we have not committed to any part of this Plan through funds or staff resources, or otherwise, except the possibility of future participation on committees. If adopted, Spokane County will be obligated, he explained to implement this Plan. Deputy Mayor Munson asked that in 2003, the federal government commissioned a study to define the aquifer; and as the aquifer is a major part of the watershed plan, how can such a plan be devised if the definition of the aquifer has not yet been determined? Mr. Lindsay stated that that question is part of a larger question: that there are many facets to this in addition to the interstate aquifer study, which is only now just underway; that this Plan began years prior to that study along with other entities doing their own study, such as Avista, and the Washington Department Of Ecology's (DOE) Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) study; he said that this Plan is just the first step in identifying where the water is available and where it will be needed in the future, and to plan for those needs. This Plan, he explained, also addresses water conservation, and said it will incorporate adaptive management, and that the entire process is intended to build on itself and as additional information comes to light, the Plan will be modified to incorporate such additional information. Mr. Lindsay stated that the Interstate Aquifer Study just completed their first round of data collection last summer; and that information is only now being analyzed as a part of the Plan. Mr. Lindsay explained that while the County is the lead agency, it does not have any more influence over this Plan than any other participating entity; and once this Plan is adopted by the Counties, the clock starts and there will then be an additional year of focused implementation planning to actually prioritize the recommendations listed and identify what will be done. The intent of the Plan at this point, he continued, is to provide the initial thinking on the "who" and the "when" and not necessarily the "how," which will be addressed in the year following plan adoption. Mr. Lindsay stated that there is ample flexibility in the Plan to start implementing some measures which would not require additional costs and which can be handled with available staff; and while moving forward with those Council Meeting: 04 -12 -05 Page 6 of 9 Approved by Council: 04 -26 -05 aspects, the planning unit can develop a more focused and strategic approach to other measures such as water conservation. Mr. Lindsay added that Spokane County staff would be happy to come to a study session or other council format to have further exchange on this issue, and reminded Council that participation in this plan is voluntary. Deputy Mayor Munson stated his preference to follow up with Spokane Valley City staff; and that of his concern about timing issues and resources that this Plan is asking to provide. Councilmember DeVleming, speaking from his Vera Water and Power experience, stated that this Plan has been well thought out with tremendous contribution, and he is comfortable with the participation and suggests Council comply with the Plan, recognizing that approval of the Plan tonight is not the intent. Mayor Wilhite mentioned the "three touch rule" and that this Plan contains extensive information to digest in one session; she stated she feels Councilmembers will have additional questions, and appreciates Mr. Lindsay's willingness to have further exchange on this topic. City Manager Mercier inquired if it might be beneficial to check with the participating political jurisdictions to determine whether they feel it is prudent to pursue this Plan in parallel with the work being done with the TMDL, or if it is a sequential arrangement which should be considered; that in listening to comments from jurisdictions affected by the Department of Ecology's TMDL study, that suggests to Mr. Mercier that the outcome will have the most cost consequences to each of those jurisdictions; and in coming to a determination of what might be allowable uses of that waterway, is a consideration of flow rates and other elements in this Plan; and that he would be hesitant to have any plan going on now to come to conclusion in advance of the more monumental judgment on the TMDL; and asked when was the last visit with each of the elected representatives of the political jurisdictions participating, and he further asked what might be the appropriate approach, whether time - phased, or sequential or otherwise, of this effect compared to that work in analyzing capacities for the Spokane River. Councilmember Denenny added that all the major components of these studies will impact the major decision on how to address wastewater treatment in this community; and if such issue is not resolved, other consequences might follow, keeping in mind that water flow will have a substantial impact on this issue. Councilmember Flanigan, in looking at the question of whether to participate in this Plan, stated he sees no alternative except to participate, because lack of participation could have future mandates for our steps without us having any voice in those decisions. Further discussion continued on timelines, necessary decisions, chronology of steps, the critical importance of having these exchanges with affected entities, TMDL issues, quantity and quality, and instream recommendations based on the needs of fish in the Barker Road area. Mr. Lindsay stated that as more information is collected in the downstream section of the lower Spokane River (particularly from Latah Creek through Lake Spokane), and following the development of the TMDL, the Planning Unit would then come up with a recommendation for flow, making such recommendation from input from all entities involved. He stated that different timelines are falling into place at different rates; that this Plan has its own timeline which must be met regarding this process; and that when funds were accepted in 1998, that set the timeline in process; and at this point, we have exceeded the timeline of when this should have been moved forward for adoption, as have most all other WIRAs within the State; that they are cognizant of the involving issues and stressed that this Plan deals with quantity issues with conservation being a top priority achieved through education. Mr. Lindsay explained that they have a meeting scheduled for early May to incorporate comments received from the involved entities, and ideally they would like to vote for approval of the Plan, by the Planning Unit, in mid to late May; and if approved, will proceed to the counties for approval consideration. Mayor Wilhite stated her desire for more time to further digest the Plan. Councilmember Flanigan said he feels if we agree to participate, that will enable Council further time to study the Plan. Mr. Mercier said that if the timeframe is mid to late May, keeping in mind the Council's three -touch rule, that would put the issue again on Council's agenda about five days before a vote on accepting the entire Plan. Mayor Wilhite stated that after Council has had more time to further read the Plan, this issue can be placed on an Council Meeting: 04 -12 -05 Page 7 of 9 Approved by Council: 04 -26 -05 upcoming agenda. Councilmember Denenny added his concern that keeping in mind all those entities involved with wastewater treatment, that he feels such a vote cannot be taken for Plan approval because of all the pending wastewater issues. Council determined this issue will be brought back on an upcoming agenda for further discussion. 10. Commercial Development Permit Process Flowchart — Nina Regor Deputy City Manager Regor explained that the purpose of this issue is to summarize the activities and draft recommendations in the commercial development permit process, and to make recommendations and suggestions for improvement and the next steps in the process; keeping in mind that the permit process is a work in progress. Ms. Regor also acknowledged the involvement of numerous staff in this process, of the recommendation to hire one additional permit specialist, and once that person has been hired, to designate one of the permit specialists as a lead permit specialist/project coordinator for the commercial development applications. She mentioned that the existing fees received are more than budgeted and would cover the cost of a new position, although staff has not completed a full cost recovery analysis. After Deputy City Manager Regor's PowerPoint presentation, discussion issues included customer service in general and specifically how an additional position will aid in a smoother process; of the apparent construction boom; the current pace and trend of development activity; and the current staff process. Council determined that staff should move forward to bring this issue back for motion consideration to authorize the position, in that a coordinator position is important to further refine our customer service process. 11. Proposed Budget amendment Discussion — Ken Thompson Finance Director Thompson discussed some of the proposed amendments to the 2005 budget as shown on the accompanying exhibit A, adding that this is a summary of the individual items proposed. Mr. Thompson also mentioned that the "preservation project" item under Street Capital Projects has been deleted and is not necessary. Mr. Thompson stated that if Council is satisfied with the list, staff can return to council with a prepared amendment to the 2005 budget and asks Council to schedule a public hearing for April 26, 2005. Mr. Mercier added that staff is attempting to schedule a Finance Committee meeting prior to the public hearing, and at that Finance Committee meeting, he will also discuss the idea of creating a civic building fund as an investment in a City Hall or Police Department or other needed building. It was moved by Councilmember DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Denenny to have staff prepare the amended budget ordinance and schedule a public hearing. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 12. Storage Tank Provisions — Tom Scholtens Building Official Scholtens explained that Spokane Valley is located over a sole- source aquifer which requires protection from potential contamination; that a potentially serious threat of contamination is posed by the use, handling and storage of critical materials, and without provisions for spill containment, both above ground and underground tanks containing critical materials present a potentially serious threat to the aquifer. He further explained that Spokane County adopted standards for storage of critical materials, and while we adopted many provisions of the Spokane County Code, these were not among those adopted. Mr. Scholtens stated that a public hearing for this issue is scheduled for the Spokane Valley Planning Commission for April 28, 2005. After brief discussion, it was Council consensus that Mr. Scholtens move forward as expeditiously as possibly. EXECUTIVE SESSION It was moved by Deputy Mayor Munson and seconded by Mayor Wilhite, to extend the meeting to approximately 9:30 p.m. to accommodate an executive session, and to enter into executive session to discuss labor negotiations. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Mayor Wilhite explained that the executive session should last approximately 30 minutes; that if it takes longer they will come back and make an announcement; and regardless if it takes more or less time, they will adjourn without any further business. Council Meeting: 04 -12 -05 Page 8 of 9 Approved by Council: 04 -26 -05 Council adjourned into executive session at 8:58 p.m., and ended executive session at 9:33 p.m. It was moved by Councilmember Flanigan, seconded by Deputy Mayor Munson, and unanimously agreed upon to adjourn. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:34 p.m. ATTEST Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk )-t,G.m." \)j t4 ik)±Q Diana Wilhite, Mayor Council Meeting: 04 -12 -05 Page 9 of 9 Approved by Council: 04 -26 -05 Bidder's Name: l Group #1 Misc. Seating Glop #2 Dining Room Tables & Dining /Class room Chairs Group #3 Exterior Furniture Group #4 Misc. Tables Group t#5 Classroom Tables Group #6 Desk Units/ Wall Media Boards/ Lectern Group #7 Files & Bookshelves *�* Group #8 Metal Shelving Units Group #9 Mobile Art Display '"„`* Group #10 Appliances Group #11 Moving Existing Furniture Group #12 Possible Discount for Single Vendor 1 Bank 3 ice interiors $98,900.4 - $12.232.81 $44,145.38 $60,86407 $11.850.36 $11,968.58 - _ - 2. f ce L +epot $90 - - - - $4,515.26 - - 3. Office Depot - $ 73,099.48 - _ - - - _ - - _ - 4. COA • . $79,008.76 t. $90.251.04 $13,682.02 f $39,839.54 $66104.57 $16,377.81 $15,681.57 - - - - ($5.000) 5. CDA - - - - - - a - 6. CRG i $80084.71 - $ 12,483.58 $40,833.41 - $12,802.28 $11,875.33 - - - .. 7. Interior Development - $125,069.014 $13,202.28 - $48,805.47 - - - - - _ - L University Appliance - - - - - - - - - $989.52 - - 9. Fred's Appliance - - - - - - - - $1,057.87 - - 10. Dupree Building Specialities - - - - - - $4,300.00 - - - - Madsen Mitchell E venson &tonrad NOTE: Each Group Is a Lump sum Total Including Tax " Bid Instructions not followed - only bid one item in price group /non-approved item included in laid "' Preliminarily approved items not accepted *"• Lowest Responsive Bidder '*" Quotes for Groups 8 & 10 were received after the March 16th bid date since rip bids were received CenterPlace Furn ishings BID OPENING 216 N. Ftoward, Skywalk, Level • Spokane, WA 99201 • P: (509) 624 -6800 • F: (509) 624 -6262 49332 Sobek Rd. East, PG Box 182 • Edwall, WA 99008 • P. (5O9) 236 -2311 Bid Tabulation: Furnishings Package for CenterPlace at Mirabeau Point Park Project Number: 05 -001 • F: (509) 236 -2451 DatefFirrte: March 16, 2005 at 3 :00 PM Page 1 April 8, 2005 Mayor and City Council Members City of Spokane Valley 11707 E. Sprague Ave. City of Spokane Valley, WA 99206 INVOICE: $25.000 for Project Access - Prescription Drug Dear Mayor & City Council Members: On behalf of the Spokane County Medical Society Foundation, we would like to thank you for your leadership and strong support of Project Access. Your 2005 commitment of S25.000 toward the cost of prescription drugs for low income uninsured residents is deeply appreciated and reflect the strong community support we've been able to attract as we proceed with this project in Spokane County. I am attaching a list of our 2004 Accomplishments and our 2005 Goals. As you can see. those goals are aggressive, but we feel that we cam accomplish them and move the program to the next level. We will issue progress reports on a regular basis and have, of course. included you on our mailing list. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call us at 325 -5010. And thanks again for both the donation and your strong support and endorsement. Sincerely. Orange Flag Building, 104 S Freya. Suite 114 • (509) 532 -8877 • Fax (509) 325-5409 Director. Project Access cc: Karen Hagensen Director File PROJECT ACCESS ,J , 3 ' ;I 4/4..e 76 G ..144-e « a4 /fn, RECEIV APR 1 2 2 CITY OF SPOKANE vALLEY CRY CLERK • 2 n,q Accomplishments and 200J coals 2004 Significant Accomplishments ✓ Provider Network of over 640 health care providers in Spokane County ✓ Over 1,000 Spokane County low income residents have received medical services ✓ $3.1 million in free charity care given by providers to Spokane County residents (10 /03 — 10/04) • Dedicated Project Access Staff have processed over 1,300 applications • Almost 2500 visits to providers (313 hospitals, 2177 physicians) ✓ Secured pharmaceutical funding from all small cities and the City of Spokane for 2005 ✓ Robert Wood Johnson Site Visit successfully completed with no findings or suggestions ✓ All appropriate grant audits successfully completed with no findings ✓ Celebration Ad published in the Spokesman Review I2/5/04 2005 Goals A. Provider Network Maintenance and Recruitment 1. Increase current network by 10% 2. Transition all current contract holders to Evergreen contracts 3. Create a Network Relation Program B. Data Management 1. Create a data Warehouse that would blend existing data sources 2. Develop and publish an annual report 3. Develop and manage a Project Access Data Information sheet for us in grants and funding opportunities 4. Contract with a Educational Institution to develop a Project Access Community Health Report C. Program Sustainability 1. Establish Goals for Committee Activity ✓ Sustainability Committee ✓ Project Access Partners Committee _'. Congressional Grant Activities ✓ Pilot Project for Kathy McMorris Office to push • Development of a Congressional Strategy ✓ Research of Federal Funding Opportunities D. (;rant and Development Activity 1 Short Term Grants '. Special Program Grants F. Pharmaceutical Program I Pursue Statewide PhannaceuticalfDME Program 2. Cities and Counties Individual legislative Educational Sessions Develop a Communities Relationship Program 3. Develop and Implement Mental Health Drug Program F. Public Relations/Marketing Program 1. Develop and Implement Marketing Plan G. Administration 1. Development of Administrative Handbook 2. Development and Implementation of a Staff Relations Program 3. Development and Implementation of a Volunteer Program 4. Development of Staff Evaluation Criteria