Loading...
2005, 01-04 Study Session MinutesAttendance: Councilmembers: Diana Wilhite, Mayor Rich Munson, Deputy Mayor Dick Denenny, Councilmember Mike DeVleming, Councilmember Mike Flanigan, Councilmember Steve Taylor, Councilmember Absent: Gary Schimmels, Councilmember MINUTES CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY STUDY SESSION Tuesday, January 4, 2005, 6:00 p.m. Staff: Dave Mercier, City Manager Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Ken Thompson, Finance Director Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Tom Scholtens, Building Official Mike Jackson, Parks and Recreation Director Marina Sukup, Community Development Director Cal Walker, Police Chief Sue Pearson, Deputy City Clerk Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor Wilhite called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., welcomed all in attendance, reminded everyone that this is a study session and requested that all electronic devices be turned off for the duration of the meeting. It was moved by Councilmember DeVleming, seconded by Councilmember Flanigan, and unanimously agreed upon to excuse Councilmember Schimmels from tonight 's meeting due to a family emergency. 1. Spokane Conservation District Presentation — Rich Baden and Vicki Carter Executive Director Rich Baden and Operations Manager Vicki Carter gave a presentation and background of the Spokane Conservation District and briefly explained their Five -Year Plan. Mr. Baden explained that the Conservation District is a political subdivision of the State government, and is a special purpose district dedicated to providing natural resource information, education, and technical assistance to the citizens of Spokane County; that they are a grassroots organization operating under RCW 89.08; and that they promote the sustainable use of natural resources in the County. He stated that their vision is to protect, serve, and enhance natural resources. Mr. Baden also explained that the District is very diverse and includes farms having between 3,000 and 10,000 acres; and that issues are driven mostly by water quality concerns. Ms. Carter mentioned that their mandate is to present a long -range five -year plan covering the years 2005 -2010; and part of that plan calls for opportunities for residents to provide input and public comment; she stated they are trying to collect comments by January 30 and after that date, they would like to present their final plan to Council, adding that the copy in Council's packet is a draft. She encouraged Council to address members of the District with any issues they feel relevant, and added that they are willing to come back and meet if Councilmembers have questions. She also encouraged Council and others to visit their website. In reference to the Five -Year Plan's "Strategies to Address Trends," Deputy Mayor Munson asked who would be funding that promotion of on -farm production of alternative fuel feedstock. Mr. Baden indicated that they are the facilitators bringing this program together and are working with farm co -ops in putting together a business plan; he stated that they are also working with the EDC on some funding for the project, but that key to this plan is gathering the raw materials; he stated that once the plan is in place, he believes this program will be a huge economic boom to the area and will provide jobs and help re- vitalize the community. In response to Councilmember Denenny's question concerning background of board members, Ms. Carter explained that Board Members include (1) Chair Jerry Scheele, retired farmer from the south part of the Study Session Minutes of 01 -04 -05 Page 1 of 5 Approved by Council: 01 -11 -05 county, who has been a board members for six or seven years; (2) Vice -Chair Randy James, head of the science department at North Central High School, who works in DNA study and has been a board member for six years; (3) Treasurer Chris Mahelona, which is an elected position which also serves as their auditor and has been with the Board for five or six years; (4) Dixie Riddle, appointed member who has also been with the Board for five or six years; and (5) Tom Hargreaves, appointed member who was previously a county commissioner. 2. Spokane County Six -Year Sewer Plan Presentation — Bruce Rawls and Kevin Cooke Bruce Rawls and Kevin Cooke explained the six -year sewer plan, explaining that the discussion topics really cover four areas: (1) mandatory sewer connections, (2) septic tank elimination program schedule (STEP), (3) alternative subsidy method for capital facilities rates (CFR), and (4) recommended rate adjustment. As shown in their PowerPoint presentation, the County code requires connection to sewer within one year after public sewer service is deemed available, but also gives the director the ability to extend that one year period for good cause. Kevin Cooke discussed the STEP schedule and draft six -year CIP and stated that this document is their most recently adopted version and goes from 2004 -2009; and said that they are on schedule. He continued by explaining that the sewer projects for 2005 are underway, and said he would appreciate the City's input on scheduling projects for the 2006 -2010 timeframe; adding that it is sometimes possible to switch one project for another if there are similar number of connections and similar costs; and again that he would appreciate city council and staff input on those matters. Mr. Cooke stated that it is their intention to set a public hearing for February 1 for the Board of County Commissioners to consider their six -year plan. After further explanation of the CFR subsidy, alternative CFR subsidy method, financial considerations and impacts, discussion then ensued regarding the subsidy and affects if it were increased; issues surrounding the wastewater treatment plant, change in the treatment plant monthly charge from $4.00 to $6.68; issues concerning suspending hookups and responses from the Department of Ecology (DOE) (nothing in writing yet), the Health Department (which thought it would be reasonable giving the issues of protecting the river), and that that the DOE cannot stop the County from changing its Code, but they (the DOE) could withdraw their grant if they thought we were in violation of the intent. Mr. Rawls stated that keeping the schedule shows the DOE that the County is not in violation of intent. Mr. Rawls also mentioned that inflation increases the cost of plant construction and changes cash flow in terms of how to use subsidy money, but does not change the end result, and said that the Board of County Commissioners wants to commit to protect the aquifer; he added that it will take five years from start of implementation to running the plant; and if they start construction in 2007 the plant should start in 2012; adding that they have 2005 and 2006 to resolve all issues. He also mentioned there are approximately 15,000 to 20,000 septic tanks remaining. Mr. Mercier asked if the Board of County Commissioners has agreed on a periodic report on capacity consumption, such as a quarterly or semi - annually report. Mr. Rawls responded that no one has asked for such a report but it can be provided; adding that he has not compiled such a report for about the last three or four months. Mr. Mercier added that when such a report is compiled for the County, that we would appreciate sharing that information in order to get a sense of drawdown in those commitments. 3. Accomplishments Report Presentation — Department Directors Deputy City Manager Regor Nina stated that this is an opportunity to recognize all of the 2004 accomplishments, adding that this was the first full year of the City's operation. Through the PowerPoint presentation, Deputy City Manager Regor, followed by each department director, explained their portion of the presentation. As an added note in the financial explanation, City Manager Mercier stated that regarding the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), he is not aware of another newly incorporated community which has put together such a comprehensive document in such a short period of time, in that it usually takes five years or more to complete such a report; and that putting together this document is a remarkable achievement. Study Session Minutes of 01 -04 -05 Page 2 of 5 Approved by Council: 01 -11 -05 Mayor Wilhite called for a recess at 7:40 p.m.; and reconvened the meeting at 7:47 p.m. 4. New Employee Position Description for CenterPlace Coordinator — Nina Regor Deputy City Manager Regor went over the background of this position as per her January 4, 2005 Request for Council Action form. Discussion then ensued regarding the most appropriate salary level for the position, and the salary ranges for position level 15 and 16. It was ultimately Council consensus to change the position to a salary level 15, and to place the resolution on the next Council Consent Agenda. 5. Annual Financial Report - Ken Thompson Finance Director Thompson explained that the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) is for our year ending December 31, 2003, which is technically not a full year; and mentioned the auditor's opinion on page nine, which is as a result of the annual audit required by law. 6. Initiative /Referendum Discussion — Cary Driskell /Josh Leonard City Legal Intern Joshua Leonard explained that Council requested information on the exercise of referendum and initiative powers for City governments. Through use of his PowerPoint presentation, Mr. Leonard defined the terms and explained the difference between the two terms, explained the formal process for each, explained sufficiency of petition, statutory authority, limitations on the use of each, types of ordinances statutorily exempt from the referendum process, limitations on the use of each and arguments in favor and in opposition to the use of each. Councilmember Denenny asked therefore, if the decision rests with Council, and since the City was incorporated without those powers, would any movement to use these have to come from the Council dais. Mr. Leonard stated that was correct; that there is no ability for someone to propose use of initiative /referendum unless the authority is there as in the form of an ordinance. City Manager Mercier mentioned that Council had asked staff to do research on this process in order to consider the information and provide direction at some time in the future. Mayor Wilhite stated that Council will review the material and perhaps have this topic as an additional agenda item to see if this is something Council wishes to provide. Councilmember Taylor added that he feels this topic is not to be taken lightly and that significant community input is needed; that he is not a fan of the initiative process but believes in the power of the vote where leaders are elected to make decisions, and if those decisions are not made correctly, then voters vote the leaders out of office. He added that if there were repeated abuses by city officials, that might warrant a public outcry for the need, but he feels there is no need at this point and wants to see if a true demand for this type of mechanism needs to be put in place. Councilmember Denenny stated that he feels the venue for having this discussion is at a regular city meeting as Council needs input from citizens and by putting it on a future agenda, that process can start. Mayor Wilhite stated that anyone in attendance at a Council meeting always has the opportunity during regular meetings, to comment on items not on the agenda. Councilmember Flanigan stated that he does not approve of the initiative form of government, but feels the topic should be advanced and he has no problem in passing it, and that he would support having it in the hope of never having it be used; adding that he too would like to get public comment. Councilmember DeVleming stated that Exhibit A4 of the Governance Manual shows the initiative process is only for matters in accordance with Washington law, and stated that if that chart does not mesh with the remaining sections of the Governance Manual, perhaps the manual needs to be revised. Deputy Mayor Munson said that he feels the problem is that the best intended efforts tend not to accomplish the education process that is wanted; that the intent of the State Initiative law is to make sure the public is well informed; and that he feels that is not happening at the State or the local level; that he is concerned, but tends to agree this is something to be publicly debated; that he is not sure of what venue to use but realizes the venues are limited and the process is full of land mines; that we have a representative form of government and people can make sure the incumbents change, and that he would like to avoid the process if possible. Councilmember Denenny repeated his desire to see this topic included on the advance agenda. Mayor Wilhite asked if council preferred further discussion, or opting for public Study Session Minutes of 01 -04 -05 Page 3 of 5 Approved by Council: 01 -11 -05 comment first? Deputy Mayor Munson remarked that there are no pending recommendations yet and that there needs to be something to comment about rather than general comments, and he recommended staff draft an ordinance. Mayor Wilhite said it is council consensus (except for Councilmember Taylor's objection) that staff draft an ordinance and place this matter on a future agenda. 7. Infractions for Violation of Parks Rules — Cary Driskell Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained the issue as per his RCA; adding that he discussed this matter with Chief Walker and that he was advised that the more appropriate level of violation would be a class 3 rather than a class 1 violation. After brief discussion, Council concurred that staff should draft an ordinance changing that violation from a class 1 to a Class 3 violation. 8. Centennial Trail Update — Mike Jackson Parks and Recreation Director Jackson explained that there exists an Interagency Cooperative Agreement between Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission, Spokane County and the City of Spokane; that the agreement expires 2032 and Spokane County has indicated that they will no longer be responsible for the costs associated with maintaining the Centennial Trail inside the Spokane Valley City limits; therefore we are being asked if we want to be a formal partner in trail maintenance as per the attached agreement. Director Jackson mentioned we may own one mile of trail in Myrtle Point, that we own the park but are not certain if we own the asphalt. After Director Jackson's PowerPoint presentation, discussion ensued regarding certain maintenance items now being taken care of up to this point; of the possibility of discussing maintenance issues with the other partners, of the need to gather additional information and of the necessity in taking care of the trail now instead of allowing it to deteriorate; funding issues, possible future major capital improvements, ownership questions, infrastructure responsibility, of the desire to further examine the agreement, enforcement of the stipulations in such agreement, and of exploring all possible options and facets of entering into such an agreement. In conclusion, City Manager Mercier said that in the meantime, we hope to continue maintenance until some longer term resolution comes about. It was Council consensus to continue with maintenance of the trail. It was moved by Mayor Wilhite and seconded by Deputy Mayor Munson to extend the meeting for an additional fifteen minutes. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Wilhite, Deputy Mayor Munson, Councilmembers Taylor, Flanigan, and Denenny. Opposed: Councilmember DeVleming. Motion carried. 9. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor Wilhite Mayor Wilhite asked Council to note the February 16 trip to Olympia; and said that Councilmembers might want to coordinate flights or other transportation efforts in order to get the best flight costs; and that the registration form is now on -line. Mayor Wilhite also stated that she wanted to pose an issue for Council discussion, in that there is a piece of artwork which might be available to Council; it is a sculpture which was done for Pacific Gas Transmission, and that they have closed their office and donated this piece of art to the Spokane /Coeur d'Alene Opera Society to be sold to raise funds for their non -profit organization; and it if Council thinks it would be nice to have, that maybe someone would purchase the piece and donate it to the City of Spokane Valley. Councilmember Flanigan said that he feels it is only worth exploring if we can get someone else to pay for it. Mayor Wilhite added that it was suggested that the item could also be plumbed for water and used as a fountain, that it is a large piece and contains over $20,000 worth of steel and sits on a basalt base; might be appropriate to use this at a gateway, or in Mirabeau Meadows or CenterPlace. It was Council consensus to involve the Spokane Valley Arts Council regarding the item. Discussion turned to the status of crime check and it was determined that such discussion will continue after the updated report scheduled for the January 11, 2005 Council meeting. Study Session Minutes of 01 -04 -05 Page 4 of 5 Approved by Council: 01 -11 -05 10. Council Check -in — Dave Mercier City Manager Mercier stated that he had nothing new to introduce. Councilmember DeVleming stated that he wants to make sure all seven Councilmembers are clear on Council directives that comes from the dais; that he thought it was the instruction, that whatever we do make we should make sure the minutes reflect what the corporate decision is on moving forward or not on any given topic, and he suggested tape recording study sessions as Council could take action at any given time during any study session. City Manager Mercier stated that initially, there was discussion on taping study sessions and it was Council preference at that time not to tape study sessions as there was no formal action taken during those meeting, and that those meetings were intended to provide a free flow of information. He mentioned that because some recent past meetings were cancelled, the end result was a few "hybrid" meetings, but that the advance agenda has a clear delineation between workshop /study session items and regular meeting items. Mr. Mercier said of those times when action might be necessary at a study session, the City Clerk is prepared to tape those sections; but that this is a procedural item and can be done according to council preference. After further brief discussion, it was Council consensus is to tape all future study sessions as well as regular and special meetings. 11. City Manager Comments — Dave Mercier City Manager Mercier announced the departure from employment of two employees: Code Enforcement Officer Kelly Sammeli will be returning to Arizona at a supervisory level; and Budget Analyst Courtney Moore will be relocating to his home town of Walla Walla and that his last day with us will be January 21, 2005. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m. A / pristine Bainbridge, City Clerk 5w.dvo& 4i14_ Diana Wilhite, Mayor Study Session Minutes of 01 -04 -05 Page 5 of 5 Approved by Council: 01 -11 -05 2004 Report of Accomplishments Spokane Conservation District Natural Resource Improvements in January — June 2004 — Summary Spokane County Conservation District worked throughout the year with City of Spokane officials and staff to formulate a plan for the City to be annexed into the Conservation District On May 24, 2004. the Spokane City Council voted to request annexation That request was approved at the June 8, 2004 meeting of the Dtstnct Board of Supervisors. Since then, staff has continued working with City employees to produce a plan of operations for District and City projects to be implemented in 2005 This annexation extends the special assessment. adding $360,000 Funds will be used as match for project specific grants, SRF projects. and to implement conservation projects through a seamless delivery system in Spokane County Mission of the Spokane Conservation District • To promote the sustainable use of natural resources in Spokane County. Water Quality Implementation/Watershed Conservation and Habitat Improvement Continuous CRP • 2 continuous CRP projects completed. 18.000 plants were installed on 19,000 feet of streambank • County Buffer Program • 4 projects completed • 2.500 plants were installed on 3.800 feet of streambank • 350 feet of fence was installed to keep livestock out of waterway • 2,700 feet of fence was installed to keep livestock out of four acres of wetland. • 2 irrigation systems, 1.300 feet of irrigation pipe, • 2 off-creek water systems. • 3 maintenance projects completed using 500 plants. • 10 initial site visits completed • 3 committee meetings held • 2 public meetings held • Calculated head loss and estimated flow for off creek water system • Conservation Futures Project • One project completed • 3.900 plants were installed including 400 large stock trees, (1 1/2 -2" diameter) on 6,400 feet of streambank. • Reclaim 50 acres of cultivated land by seeding back to native grasses • Shoreline Inventory and Assessment Project • 1,860,672 linear feet (352.4 total miles) of shorelines inventoried and assessed (PFC methodology) • Developed 3 GIS map layers • 1 draft report • Attended riparian PFC class • Herbarium Project (District) • 124 herbarium species identified to genus and species and mounted (displayed) on herbarium paper with information tag • Hangman (Latah) Creek Watershed Management Plan • 22 Routine planning unit meetings • 3 Instream flow committee meetings ■ 2 Instream flow public meetings • 49 water quality samples and 28 discharge measurements for Hangman Cr TMDL during months of January-July (scheduled) • 2 events (6 samples 8 4 discharge measurements) during months of January and February (unscheduled) • Assisted in Redband Trout Genetic Fisheries Study with WDFW Electro- shocked 6 reaches within Hangman, California, and Rock Creeks. Collected hundreds of fish for measurements • 8 presentations to local town council meetings in the Hangman watershed. • 3 displays at local community day events (Fairfield, Tekoa. and Rockford). • 1 Multipurpose Storage Grant application • i Multipurpose Storage Grant contract • 1 lnstream Flow Report • Conducted a seepage run on Marshall Creek • 44,000 Stream gage height data points collected from five stream discharge stations • Seven Water surface elevation surveys performed • 18,000 Daily stream flows calculated • 10 Water quality samples collected • 22,000 Water temperature data points collected • Little Spokane River Water Quality Management Plan • Facilitated 9 committee meetings • 30 Stream flow measurements performed • 44,000 Stream gage height data points collected from five stream discharge stations. • 18,000 Daily stream flows calculated • One Water surface elevation surveys performed. • 22,000 Water temperature data points collected • Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Program • Developed 25 volunteer notebooks • Conduct 5 volunteer committee meetings. organizing 12 volunteers into sampling groups • 3 volunteer equipment- training workshops were conducted for approximately 22 volunteers • Trained 24 volunteers • 18 samples runs were completed by volunteers (assisted by SCCD staff — field parameters only) • Contact 4 schools about participation in volunteer sampling program • 1 quality assurance project plan • 1 education plan • Hangman Creek Water Quality Clean -Up Plan • Facilitated 5 committee meetings • 2 tours (1 for Ecology and 1 for committee) ■ Collected 162 Hangman Creek TMDL water quality samples for nitrates, nitrites. ammonia. turbidity, temperature, TSS, total phosphors, pH, conductivity, dissolved oxygen and fecal colrform over seven routine monthly samples and two event samples. • Conduct 2 public meetings • 20 fecal coliforrn samples (events) were collected • 165 discharge measurements and 45 indirect measurements of stream flow were collected • 44,000 Stream gage height data points collected from five stream discharge stations • Seven Water surface elevation surveys performed. • 18,000 Daily stream flows calculated • 22,000 Water temperature data points collected. ■ 1 quality assurance project plan. • 1 education plan • Miscellaneous, Meetings, and Activities • 15.000 water quality data points submitted to Ecology's EIM database from SCCD projects • Technical assistance (in the field) to 68 landowners • 20 WRIA 55157 Watershed Planning Meetings • Coordinated and conducted a stream gaging discharge station workshop (2 day — 13 participants) • 3 Intermountain Province Sub -basin meetings • 1 meeting with City of Spokane Valley • Attended 1 TMDL (4 employees) conference in Skamania • 1 tour of the Slavin property project with Ducks Unlimited • 3 Water Resource committee meetings • 4 Water Resource quarterly staff meetings • 1 riparian workshop with West Valley Outdoor Learning Program • Developed 2 grant applications (DOE 319 /CCWF, Terry Husseman Fund) • Set -up display and staffed the Ag show • Conducted two fact - finding tours in the county. one on the Little Spokane River and one on Hangman Creek. • Attended soil mechanics (6 staff) training • Wrote 9 articles for venous newsletters. • Attend 2 UAA meetings for the Spokane River • Attend 2 FERC meetings • 1 Display at the Country Living Show • 1 Presentation at the Country Living Show • Participated in Liberty Lake's Streamside Education Day • 1 presentation at SCCD Annual Meeting • 1 Conservation Commission tour of grant project Soil Survey Update • Mapped 150.000 acres • Map Compilation for 140.000 acres • Digitizing 140,000 acres • On screen digitizing of 100,000 acres • NASIS maintenance Basic Funding • Basic funding is used to supplement our urban forestry and technical assistance /service program • Provided over 65,000 trees and shrubs to 550 landowners for conservation practices. • Technical assistance was provided on 365 acres to 20 NIPF landowners, for insect and disease identification and control, fuel hazard reduction, forest management, improving wildlife habitat and revegetating critical needs areas • Technical assistance was provided in cooperation with Spokane County on 10,400 feet of road right - of-way enhancement and development. • Technical assistance was provided on 2 reforestation projects on 12 acres, planting 2,500 trees • Provided 43 forest information packets to area landowners and assisted 122 walk -in customers • Gave 3 school presentations to 355 students, parents, and faculty Local Funding • Thirty -five percent of our local assessment was used to fund the update of the Spokane County soil survey 150.000 acres were mapped in 2004 732.000 acres have been mapped and digitized since the inception of the project in 1998 • Sixty-five percent of our local assessment was used as leverage for State Revolving Fund loans We currently have over 100 low- interest loan contracts in Spokane County and have S2 million available for loans in Asotin. Adams, Lincoln and Whitman counties • Avista Corporation donates 510.000 annually to be used within the Hangman Creek watershed Legislative Activities • SCCD in cooperation with Puget Sound Clean Cities Coalition wrote and introduced five pieces of legislation during the 2004 legislative session. The bills were all incentive based legislation aimed at providing economic incentives for the production and use of locally grown and produced alternative fuels. One piece of legislation reduced the State motor fuels tax on alternative fuels used in school buses Owing to a short session and continued budgetary problems, none of the bills were brought to the floor vote. There was considerable bi- partisan support for all of the Legislation, but time ran short. Current plans are to run all five pieces again in 2005 plus a couple of additional bills More than 100 meetings were held with legislators, committee and caucus staff. SCCD staff testified at eight public hearing before the 2004 legislature Professional Engineering • Spokane Conservation District is the administenng district for the NE Area engineer Projects in 2004 were pnmanly in Stevens County Dairy • Twelve Dairy Nutrient Management Plans were certified, one is progressing toward certification by December 31. 2004. and the other has a new Nutrient Management Plan that will be implemented In 2005 • SCCD and NRCS, and the WSDA Dairy Inspector are working together to put a fact sheet out for all dairy producers in Spokane County indicating how to use soil test accurately applying waste to tneir fields. • SCCD participated in several on -site visits with NRCS and the Washington State Department of Ag Dairy Inspector_ Small Farm Programs • Status Review preparation through a TSP contract was completed on 9 conservations plans • Field checks on EQIP contracts were finalized on 5 plans • Assistance was provided to 9 landowners on CRP projects, grass seedlings, and reforestation Community Collaboration & Coordination • Participates in the Local Working Group — Chris Mahelona, Chair • Member of three Chamber of Commerce groups. with seats on the Spokane Natural Resources Committee and local government committee. • Review panel for WA state Wetland Rating System for Eastem Washington • Participates in the 2514 process with local communities and governments • Participates in FERC relicensing project for Spokane River • Participates in Spokane River TMDL process • Facilitates the WQ management plan in the Little Spokane River watershed • Participates in the WRIA 55/57 and 34 watershed planning • Facilitates the Hangman Creek Stream Team meetings • Partner in the Clean Cities Coalition Information & Education • Instructed the soils courses at the Inland Empire Natural Resource Youth Camp. a summer camp for high school students, teaching them about natural resources. • Facilitated field exercise for Spokane Community College's Forest Soils course • Participated in the facilitation of a Spokane County Geology Field Trip designed for county planners. • Prepared and judged High School Land Judging Contests. in Stevens and Whitman Counties, this reaches 150 to 300 high school students from Eastem Washington per contest. teaching them about soils 4 • Facilitated the Map & Property Descnptions and the Forest Soils portion of the Forest Stewardship Coached Planning course: a program to assist private forest landowners in writing their management plans Public Outreach • The BioBug was on display more than a dozen times throughout the year and was featured in three television news stones and six publications including newspapers. newsletters, and magazines. • SCCD submitted articles on oilseed crops and biodiesel that were printed in 10 different magazines and newsletters. • Presentations on alternative fuels and crops were made to five civic organizations in Spokane, the Clearwater Environmental Council in Idaho; two colleges; four professional organizations; and three other conservation distncts ■ Presentations were made at the Harvesting Clean Energy Conference in Portland; Northwest Bio Fuels Conference in Seattle; Clean Cities Conference in Seattle; Biodiesel Utilization Conference at Ft Lewis; Renewable Energy Fair in Walla Walla; Regional Biofuels Conference in Sacremento, CA, and a meeting of all Washington State school district fleet managers. ■ SCCD staff participate in the SciTech Science Museum planning for Spokane. • A series of radio ads were ran in January, February and March promoting the streamside buffer program and our annual tree sale Washington Conservation Districts assisting land managers with their conservation choices City or Town Name County Population Date of Incorporation Classification Initiative & Referendum Burien King 31,130 1/28/1993 Code City Yes Edgewood Pierce 9,440 2/28/1996 Code City No Federal Way King 83,590 2/28/1990 Code City Yes Kenmore King 19,170 8/31/1998 Code City No Lakewood Pierce 59,010 2/28/1996 Codc City No Liberty Lake Spokane 4,950 8/31/2001 Code City unable to determine Maple Valley King 16,280 8/31/1997 Code City No Newcastle King 8,375 9/30/1994 Code City No Newport Hills King 9/30/1994 Code City unable to determine Sammamish King 36,560 8/31/1999 Code City No SeaTee King 25,130 2/28/1990 Codc City Yes Shoreline King 52,740 8/31/1999 Code City Yes Spokane Valley Spokane 83,950 3/31 /2003 Code City No University Place Pierce 30,800 8/31/1995 Code City No Newly Incorporated Cities in the State of Washington and the Powers of Initiative and Referendum This chart includes all Washington cities and towns that have incorporated since I/1/1 990. Note: All code cities in Washington are authorized by state statute to include the powers of initiative and referendum in their municipal code. Each cafe city must expressly authorize use of the powers of initiative and referendum in their respective cities in order for the powers to be available for use. The decision whether to authorize use of the powers is made by each municipality. Those recently incorporated cities above with a "Yes" in the 'Initiative & Referendum" column have expressly authorized use of the powers of initiative and referendum in their respective jurisdictions.