Loading...
2004, 02-10 Regular Meeting MinutesMayor DeVleming called the City of Spokane welcomed everyone to the 36 official meeting. Attendance: Councilmembers: Michael DeVleming, Mayor Diana Wilhite, Deputy Mayor Dick Denenny, Councilmember Mike Flanigan, Councilmember Richard Munson, Councilmember Gary Schimmels, Councilmember Steve Taylor, Councilmember MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meeting Tuesday, February 10, 2004 Valley Regular Meeting PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor DeVleming led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called roll. All councilmembers were present. to order at 6:00 p.m., Staff: Dave Mercier, City Manager Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Stanley Schwartz, City Attorney Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Ken Thompson, Finance Director Marina Sukup, Community Development Director Cal Walker, Police Chief Kevin Snyder, Current Planning Manager John Hohman, Senior Development Engineer Tom Scholtens, Building Official Sue Pearson, Deputy City Clerk Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk INVOCATION: Pastor Darrell Cole of the Spokane Valley Wesleyan Church gave the invocation. and APPROVAL OF AGENDA: City Manager Mercier stated he would like to add two items to the agenda: as item 1la: Weed and Seed Grant Program Presentation by Police Chief Walker; and as item 11b: Clarification of Staff Role at Council /Joint Planning Commission meetings. Mayor DeVleming also announced he would like to move item #11 immediately prior to item #7 as the first Administrative Report. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Wilhite and seconded by Councilmember Denenny to approve the agenda as amended. Roll Call Vote: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS: Councilmember Flanigan reported that he and Mayor DeVleming attended the Commuter Trip Reduction Recognition Awards Luncheon in January; he and most Councilmembers also attended the legislative session in Olympia a few weeks ago; and last week he addressed a student class at Gonzaga Prep concerning what is involved in forming a new city; he and most Councilmembers also attended last night's Pizza with the Mayor at Central Valley High School. Councilmember Munson stated he attended the Association of Washington Cities' Board of Directors meeting at which time an election was held for a number of different positions within the Board; the Board discussed initiative 864 which if passed would reduce income of municipalities by 25% in property taxes alone; and that the Board will oppose the imposition of this initiative. MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor DeVleming reported that the "Conversations with the Community" are being well received, and the next "conversation" will be held April 14 at the Senior Center. Mayor DeVleming also reported that the Pizza with the Mayor is also going well and he expects to formalize a student advisory council in the next few months and to have that council functional by next fall. Additionally, the Spokane County Library District is working on capital facilities planning and Council Council Minutes 02 -10 -04 Page 1 of 6 Date Approved by Council: 02 -24 -04 seeks a representative from the community to be a part of that committee, and that applications will be available at City Hall's reception desk. PUBLIC COMMENT: Doyle Knight, 3750 N. Deer Lake Road: Said he is the Chair for District #4 Washington Tow Truck Association, and suggested having private impound signs in the Spokane Valley City; he stated that those businesses outside the City can come into the Spokane Valley and have their public signs put in without having to have a license or an office within the City of Spokane Valley; that there are businesses already in Spokane and outside the city that have signs in their private parking lots and they would like to have those remain without having to have an impound lot and an office within the City limits of Spokane Valley. 1. CONSENT AGENDA: After City Clerk Bainbridge read the Consent Agenda, it was moved by Councilmember Munson and seconded by Deputy Mayor Wilhite to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. NEW BUSINESS: 2. First Reading Proposed Flood Plain Ordinance 04 -004 After City Clerk Bainbridge read the Ordinance title, it was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Munson to advance Ordinance 04 -004 to a second reading. Community Development Director Sukup gave background on the reasons for this ordinance, highlighted the provisions of the ordinance, and stated that Cities are required to approve an ordinance signifying the City's intent to participate. She also mentioned FEMA suggested two changes: Section 5.06.08.3(2)(ii) to change the word "designed" foundation system to "anchored" foundation system; and to change Section 5.06.10(2) last line from "shall not" be included in the 50 percent, to "may" be included in the 50 percent. Discussion ensued regarding Mr. Dingfield's January 22, 2004 letter and his suggested changes, in particular, changing Section 5.06.11(2) from "flood- proofing certified by a professional civil engineer" to "flood proofing to withstand 100 -year flood flows and velocities, and be prepared [and stamped] by a registered professional engineer." Senior Development Engineer John Hohman said that staff met with Mr. Dingfield and discussed this issue; that staff recommends keeping the word "certify" as it is taken from the Washington Model Ordinance which was drafted by FEMA and the Department of Ecology; additionally, staff will recommend that Mr. Dingfield share his concerns with FEMA and DOE. Mr. Hohman also stated that certification would be in reference to the completed analysis staying within current engineering practice, and not that the structure in question would be free from flooding concerns; he added that other jurisdictions use the certification language. Mayor DeVleming asked if the stated requirements refer to the flood map, and staff assured council staff would clarify that issue. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment. Public Comment: Richard Behm, 3626 S Ridgeview Drive: stated he has worked on various committees dealing with floodplain issues; he filed the citizen's appeal to FEMA on the Chester Creek floodplain which started the revision to the floodplain map; that there were errors in Ms. Sukup's presentation; that the FIRM should have been completed by March of this year and he received word that it will be completed in August; that staff indicated FEMA helped in the draft of the Ordinance but he saw no indication of that; and that language should be included so that future revisions to the FIRM are automatically developed and thereby avoid the need for future ordinance amendments; that staff suggested there are 80 residential and four commercial properties affected; but in the area of Dishman Road between 2 and 9 Avenue, there are 12 commercial properties involved in the floodplain as are the approximate 20 manufactured homes located in Mica Park as well as numerous other areas and residences. Community Development Director Sukup explained that she and staff have discussed and work with members of FEMA and the DOE concerning this ordinance. It was suggested to staff that rather than specify a number of residences and businesses that will be affected, to change the verbiage to state that Council Minutes 02 -10 -04 Page 2 of 6 Date Approved by Council: 02 -24 -04 there will be a number of businesses and residences affected as reflected on the FEMA map. Ms. Sukup said that staff and FEMA realize there are some errors on the map. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 3. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 04 -005 Amending Ordinance 35, Planning Commission After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance by title, it was moved by Councilmember Munson and seconded by Deputy Mayor Wilhite to suspend the rules and approve Ordinance 04 -005. Community Development Director Sukup explained that the Planning Commission reviewed the Rules of Procedures and the provisions of Ordinance 35 and recommend the stated change for annual elections rather than bi- annual elections; and that other changes proposed are housekeeping in nature. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment. Bill Gothmann, 10010 East 48 Planning Commission Chair: stated the reason for this suggested change is that the ordinance and the rules were inconsistent; and that other jurisdictions call for annual elections. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 4. Motion Consideration: Library Services Agreement. It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Munson to approve the Library Services Agreement. Deputy City Manager Regor explained the changes in the document, the total value of base services, and the subsequent steps necessary in regard to this agreement. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment; none was offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. 5. Motion Consideration: Tourism Promotion Area Interlocal Agreement. It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Denenny to approve the Tourism Promotion Area Interlocal Agreement. City Attorney Schwartz explained the contents of the agreement and highlighted the disestablishment and termination provisions. Mayor DeVleming invited public comment. James Sloane, of Paine Hamblen, Attorneys for the Spokane Hotel /Motel Association: stated he supports the agreement, and added that only the hotels that will be subject to this assessment will be able to initiate the process; they have done that and are satisfied the petition is valid, and it will be considered by the Board of County Commissioners. Ron Anderson, President Hotel /Motel Association, 810 N Fairway Court, Liberty Lake: represents all hotels in the County and in the City; that occupancy countywide is down, appreciates the outreach, and appreciates Council's consideration in this matter to assist the industry. Harry Sladich, Sterling Hospitality, 8923 E. Mission: extended thanks for Council's consideration in this matter; noted that the hoteliers have a problem, this is a proposed solution which must be approved by the County Commissioners. Dean Feldmeier, 438 W. 21 ", represents the Doubletree downtown: supports the proposal and urges Council support; feels especially with the sunset clause that the risk would be small and the benefit large. Jim Dean, 8614 N Sally Court: said he was recently elected chair of the Spokane Regional Convention Visitor's Bureau, is a banker and endorses this endeavor. Dan Zimmer, 16609 Fairview Court: said he is excited about this endeavor and looks forward to moving this forward to aid in the marketing of this region. Council Minutes 02 -10 -04 Page 3 of 6 Date Approved by Council: 02 -24 -04 Jeff Fox, General Manager for Mirabeau Park Hotel, 1100 N Sullivan Road: said he is satisfied with the sunset provision, the hotel occupancy countywide is not good and this should help with jobs, tax base, and also help area restaurants and shopping. Tony Lazanis: suggests caution, feels the Valley will get very little benefit from this and the hotels should promote their own properties. Julie Prafkey, represents Spokane Valley Chamber: said the Chamber supports the establishment of the TPA and the Board of Directors approves this endorsement. Liz Beck, Super 8 General Manager: said she has been involved in the TPA from the beginning and supports this change to improve the industry. Council discussion then ensued concerning new taxes, the sunset provision, the support of the agreement, the Board of County Commissioners' oversight of the proposal and budget, and that non - elected individuals should not have authority over this organization. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor DeVleming, Deputy Mayor Wilhite, Councilmembers Schimmels, Taylor, and Denenny. Opposed: Councilmembers Munson and Flanigan. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. Mayor DeVleming called for a short recess at 7:50 p.m.; and reconvened the meeting at 8:05 p.m. 6. Mayor Appointments /Council Confirmation. It was moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Councilmember Munson to accept the following Mayoral committee appointments: Councilmember Schimmels to the SCRAPS (Animal Control) Task Force, Deputy Mayor Wilhite to the Spokane County Library Task Force, and Councilmember Munson to the International Trade Alliance. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENT: Betty Simmons, immediate past president of the Washington Tow Truck Association; said she wanted to speak regarding the towing ordinance and the problems with not being able to tow within the City limits and private property impounds. 11. Proposed Towing Discussion. Deputy City Attorney Driskell said he spoke with a member of the City Police Department, to a member of the Washington State Patrol, and to several tow operators within and without the City, and that one issue remains, i.e., whether the City Council wants to include tow operators doing private impound within the tow ordinance. Attorney Driskell said previous discussion involved public impounds, and in those instances when police would direct that a vehicle be taken, we would not want that vehicle taken to a tow yard outside the City of Spokane Valley. Attorney Driskell said that at the time of that discussion, he had not differentiated between a private and public impound; and after the first reading, he received numerous calls from concerned businesses located outside the City limits stating they felt there would be no reason to require those businesses to have an impound yard within the City of Spokane Valley if they were not doing public impounds; hence, tonight's issue is does the City Council want to include private impounds with the public pounds. Attorney Driskell explained that an example of a private impound is any tower not located within our City, who would contract with a business here, post a sign stating no illegal parking, and that if a vehicle were towed it would be done by a different company. Attorney Driskell said our insurance carrier, WCIA, indicated that we should have one million dollars coverage. Deputy Mayor Wilhite said she believes in free enterprise and has no objection to allowing private enterprise to select whomever they feel would be best to tow illegally parked vehicles from their property. Councilmember Taylor said we need to allow businesses a choice of private sector, and Councilmember Denenny agreed that we should not interfere with private business practices. Discussion continued regarding this issue and Council stated concern with privately impounded vehicles being towed by Council Minutes 02 -10 -04 Page 4 of 6 Date Approved by Council: 02 -24 -04 properly licensed establishments; if private impounds should be addressed in this ordinance; liability issues if we fail to regulate the private impounds; and that this ordinance addresses public towing and council can always change it later to address private towing. It was council consensus that there is no objection for this initial towing ordinance to focus on public towing. Attorney Driskell said he would see if it would be feasible to add a clause concerning anyone doing a tow must meet state licensing requirements. 7. Walgreen's Public Access Easement Discussion. Current Planning Manager Snyder explained the proposal as stated in his February 10, 2004 Request for Council Action. After brief discussion of the proposal, it was Council consensus to place this matter for resolution consideration on the February 17 Agenda. 8. Considerations in Stormwater Regulations. City Attorney Schwartz summarized the contents of a draft Stormwater ordinance and explained that these regulations would be keeping with Section 208 of the Clean Water Act, and that the purpose is to protect property and water resources. Council concurred to bring this matter forward on the 24 Agenda. 9. Sidewalk Responsibility Discussion. After City Attorney Schwartz explained the purpose and issues connected with the proposed sidewalk ordinance, it was Council consensus to bring this matter forward on the 24 Agenda. It was moved, seconded and no objections were noted, to extend the meeting to 9:15 p.m. 10. Proposed Franchise Ordinance for One - EIGHTY Networks Discussion. Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained the difference between the old language and new proposed language in Section 4, #4 and stated that One - EIGHTY representatives have no issue with the change as it is minor. Deputy Driskell added that he will send letters to EMAN and Columbia, but does not anticipate any changes forthcoming in those ordinances and any changes that might be made, could be made through a letter of agreement. It was Council consensus that this item will be moved forward for the February 17 agenda. 11a. Weed and Seed Grant Program. Police Chief Cal Walker explained that there is an opportunity for a Weed and Seed grant, and that these grants are used to "weed" out specific issues and "seed" it with self - sustaining programs with the help of federal funds. Chief Walker said this new project is for the Central Valley Area, that a meeting will be held Friday to identify youth and business and other members of the community who are unemployed or under - employed, and this program will help build or elevate skills to aid in community employment. 11b. Clarification of Staff's Role in Joint Council/Planning Commission Meetings. City Manager Mercier explained that there is a desire for role clarification for staff as it moves forward working with the Council and Planning Commission on issues such as the couplet, and visioning. It was moved, seconded and no objections were noted, to extend the meeting another ten minutes. Mr. Mercier said the issue for consideration is should staff attend those meetings as facilitators or participants, as it was mentioned that staff might make more contributions in a position other than facilitator. Councilmember Munson said perhaps we are not tapping the expertise of staff in having staff facilitate these meetings rather than join in the discussion. Councilmember Schimmels said he feels comfortable with the staff in the advisory position and is happy with the way it has been handled; Mayor DeVleming also indicated his satisfaction with the current format. It was Council consensus to keep staff as facilitator so not to have any unattended affect on the topic. Council Minutes 02 -10 -04 Page 5 of 6 Date Approved by Council: 02 -24 -04 OTHER BUSINESS: Deputy Mayor Wilhite asked to be excused from the March 2 council meeting. It was moved by Councilrnember Taylor, seconded and no objections were noted, to excuse Deputy Mayor Wilhite from the March 2 Council meeting. It was moved, seconded, and unanimously agreed upon to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 9:25 p.m. j. S ,1 Christine Bainbridge, Ci e Clerk ' #,------ Mike DeVleming, Mayor Council Minutes 02 -10 -04 Page 6 of 6 Date Approved by Council: 02 -24 -04 NAME PRESENT /ABSENT COMMENTS Mayor Michael DeVlerning- Position No. 3 Deputy Mayor Diana Wilhite - Position No. 1 Councilmember Dick Dcnenny- Position No. 7 Councilmember Mike Flanigan- Position No. 6 Councilmember Rich Munson - Position No. 5 Councilmember Gary Schimmels- Position No. 4 Councilmember Steve Taylor- Position No. 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY COUNCIL MEETING DATE g-io-d L� COUNCIL ROLL CALL NAME PLEASE PRINT TOPIC OF CONCERN ADDRESS TELEPHONE \P-\ Pr CZ-9. Stc — TPA . S t2S E. v. Lt W- 2 co- (.:.4 13 09413 13 Z ("( n f ttdl <<- Ti- '�I , � er AL A— T&IL/ 1, 531/ CI- L/6 - n Z; AA ."�,✓ / e /q ��‘ -<--- 77 o AL — 1 - PA 7s - c-44 3 Jr Fax TPA //L) N su«,'4, Rd g V -9er-0 '.. kaki. P T . L-z- ii-eei Citizen comments on items included on this agenda (see list below). Please state your name and address for the record. Your time will be limited to THREE MINUTES. 1. First Reading Proposed Flood Plain Ordinance 04-004 2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 04 -005 Amending Ordinance 35, Planning Commission 3. Motion Consideration: Library Services Agreement 4. Motion Consideration: Tourism Promotion Area Interlocal Agreement Forma/Public Cameo sgtu -u, t.cniac as PUBLIC COMMENT SIGN -IN SHEET SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCI ME TING DATE a!/ O D f/e2 NAME PLEASE PRINT TOPIC OF CONCERN ADDRESS TELEPHONE . . J fl M L 5 S LD AiVE 76u219.1 / CO'i o Tiou 14)2 45 5 6'000 t 1 (r --1?"-STS-*f- 4 3.1(.7 -s y ff 12 4A- PUBLIC COMMENT SIGN -IN SHEET SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE 2 1 ID) 0 ( 1- CITIZEN COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT INCLUDED ON THIS AGENDA. Please include your name and address for the record. Your time will be limited to three (3) minutes. I was out Friday PM and Monday, so I just saw this. Please make available to the City Council. --- Forwarded by Stan M Schwartz WKDT on 02'10/2004 08.58 AM - - -- "Emacio, James" <JEmacio(aapolanecounty.org> 02/0612004 03:18 PM Stanley: To 'Stan M Schwartz' <SMSAnotes wkdtlaw com> cc. Subject RE TPA Interlocal Agreement (1) I agree with your interpretation of Section No. 7. However, it is not too clear as to whether or Section "C" applies to both Section "A" and Section "B." I would recommend that we modify Section "C" by addiding the following underlined and bolded language: In the event the resolution under either 7A or 7B proposes..." (2) As I discussed in my earlier e-mail, I legally believe that the Board via Ordinance /Agreement can agree on the circumstances under which they will "disestablish" a TPA. You properly point out that the law leaves the Board with broad discretion as to the circumstances it feels would warrant a disestablishment. Yes, I suppose some court could find that the ordinance and /or agreement wherein the Board agreed upon the circumstances it would disestablish was an unlawful delegation. And, in that unlikely situation, one could argue that the language was simply a statement of the Board's intent. Regards, Jim ----- Original Message---- - From: Stan M Schwartz [mailto:SMS @notes.wkdtlaw.com] Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2004 2:33 PM To: cbainbridge@spokanevalley.org Cc: dmercier@spokanevalley.org; dmassoc; rbeaumier@spokanecity.org; jemacio@spokanecounty.org Subject: TPA Interlocal Agreement -- Chris, please include this in the 2/09/04 City Council Agenda Packet -- At the January 20, 2004 City Council meeting, a couple of questions were asked about the TPA Interlocal Agreement and the related state law. The questions primarily related to disestablishment of the TPA. 1 have presented these questions to the attomeys that have been working on this matter. The following is the legal understanding and intent of the drafters of the Interlocal Agreement. 1. Disestablishment Provision, Section 7 of the Interlocal Agreement. The TPA can be modified or disestablished two ways: (1) the BOCC may modify or disestablish through Board Resolution; or (2) if a petition requesting modification or disestablishment is presented by the lodging operators who pay 40 percent of the assessments, the BOCC must hold a hearing and either (a) keep the TPA in place, (b) modify or (c) disestablish. If the BOCC does not modify or disestablish, the local governments can, upon 90 days notice, withdraw from the TPA. But, if the lodging operators who pay 50 percent of the assessments protest disestablishment, the BOCC may not disestablish. (This 50 percent veto operates under either procedure (1) or (2) above). 2. Termination Provision, Section 8 of the Interlocal Agreement. Without action of any party the TPA will "sunset" on December 31, 2008. The Council discussed whether Section 7 was in conflict with the State law authorizing the disestablishment of TPA's. The attorneys read the statute as giving the BOCC discretion when they consider a disestablishment. With this discretion the County can agree on how this discretion will be exercised. Section 7 attempts to control the exercise of this discretion. From the City's perspective, 1 look at paragraph 7 as a City waiver of the BOCC unilateral discretion to disestablish. if for some reason (and 1 note this matter has not been reviewed by any court) the paragraph is found to violate state law, then the section simply stands as a statement of intent to the BOCC regarding disestablishment. --To the attorney's, if I have misstated or misread )'our email and comments, please let me know.— v SUMMARY OF DRAFT STORMWATER ORDINANCE. I. RECITALS A. Describe duty to control stormwater through "208" swales and other facilities. II. PURPOSE A. Protect property and water resources. III. DEFINITIONS - Best Management Practices. - Site Drainage Plan. - Threshold Requirements. IV. REGULATED ACTIVITES A. Grading in excess of 500 cubic yards. B. Construction/Addition to a building except single family or duplex. C. Create Impervious surface in excess of 5,000 square feet. D. Subdivision, Short Subdivision and BSP. V. STANDARDS A. Director given authority to develop and administer. C:1Documents and Settings\cbainbridge \Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK2E \SUMMARY OF DRAFT STORMWATER ORDINANCE.doc VI. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL A. Based on City Standards, Site Drainage Plan or other relevant data. VII. DESIGN ELEMENTS A. Shall not impact adjoining parcel unless agreed otherwise. B. Sets standards with respect to continuous swales. VIII. DESIGN DEVIATION /APPEAL A. Director may grant design deviation from Stormwater Regulations. B. Right to appeal Director's Decision. IX. STORMWATER DRAINAGE FACILITIES A. CIO upon completion or bond posted. B. Warranty Bond for two years (20 %). X. INSPECTION A. City entry authorized. XI. PROPERTY OWNER RESPONSIBIITIES A. Repair, restore and maintain. XII. PUBLIC DRAINAGE FACILITIES A. Unauthorized discharges. C:\Documents and Settings \cbainbridge\Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files \OLK2E\SUMMARY OF DRAFT STORMWATER ORDINANCE doc XIII. FAILURE TO COMPLY/NUISANCE A. City notice and abatement procedure. C:1Documents and Settings\cbainbridge \Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files \OLK.2E \SUMMARY OF DRAFT STORMWATER ORDINANCE.doc SUMMARY OF PROPOSED SIDEWALK ORDINANCE I. PURPOSE. A. Provide for maintenance, repair and improvement of sidewalks. II. DUTY. A. Abutting Property Owner to maintain, repair and replace sidewalks. (City can assume this responsibility on a case by case basis through Resolution, Ordinance or Contract). 1) Maintain by removing snow, debris and other materials. 2) Repair when broken or damaged. 3) Replace when repair is not feasible. III. STATE LAW. A. Cities may regulate the use of sidewalks, including: Placing duty on abutting owners. Allowing private use. Use of City funds to construct and maintain. B. RCW Chapter 35.68 and 35.69 1) If City establishes a duty upon an adjoining land owner, it must do so by Ordinance. C. \Documents and Settings\cbainbridge \Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files\OLK2E\SUMMARY OF PROPOSED SIDEWALK ORDINANCE.doc 2) Ordinance must provide Notice and Hearing procedure with an opportunity to cure the problem before the City takes action. 3) City Council reserves discretion with respect to the "action". 4) If City constructs, City may charge general fund or levy the adjoining property owner. IV. LIABILITY FOR INJURY. A. City has a duty to exercise ordinary care and keep sidewalks in a safe condition for ordinary travel. B. City liability if City had notice and failed to take corrective action. C. Abutting owner is not responsible for upkeep of public sidewalk unless imposed by Ordinance. D. City Ordinance imposing duty does not create liability for injuries upon abutting property owner. E. Court has stated "the Ordinance is an aid to the City in discharging its duty to the public." C: \Documents and Settings\cbainbridge \Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files \OLK2E \SUMMARY OF PROPOSED SIDEWALK ORDINANCE.doc City Sidewalk Ordinance will: V. CONCLUSION. A. Advise property owners of their duty to maintain an abutting sidewalk. B. Allow the City to use a Notice and Hearing procedure if it elects to require repair or improvement by an abutting property owner. C. Assist the City in discharging the general duty to the public. D. Enhance neighborhood sidewalk use and maintenance. C: \Documents and Settings \cbainbridge\Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files \OLK2E \SUMMARY OF PROPOSED SIDEWALK ORDINANCE.doc • TOURISM PROMOTION AREA I. INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT. • For County -wide TPA, City must consent through agreement. • Certain State law restrictions, otherwise freedom of contract. II. DISESTABLISHMENT. • RCW provides "the legislative authority (BOCC) may disestablish by Ordinance after a hearing." • Section 7 of Agreement provides: (i) BOCC may modify or disestablish through Board Resolution; or (ii) following Disestablishment Petition presented by operators who pay 40% of assessments, BOCC must hold a hearing and (a) maintain TPA (b) modify or (c) disestablish. • If BOCC does not modify or disestablish, the City, upon ninety days notice, may withdraw from TPA. tO • But if operators who pay % of the assessments protest, BOCC may not disestablish. - Veto operates under either (i) or (ii). III. TERMINATION PROVISION. • Sunset on December 31, 2008. C and Settings\cbainbridge \Local Settings\Tcmporary Internet Files \OLK2E \TOURISM PROMOTION AREA overhead.doc