Loading...
2006, 12-19 Study Session MinutesMayor Wilhite called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., and welcomed everyone to the meeting. Present: Councilmembers: Staff: Diana Wilhite, Mayor Steve Taylor, Deputy Mayor Mike DeVleming, Councilmember Dick Denenny, Councilmember Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Rich Munson, Councilmember Gary Schimmels, Councilmember MINUTES CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION Tuesday, December 19, 2006 Dave Mercier, City Manager Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Mike Connelly, City Attorney Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Mike Jackson, Parks & Rec Director Scott Kuhta, Senior Planner Greg McCormick, Planning Manager Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Greg Bingaman, IT Specialist Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk 1. Mayoral Appointment: Spokane County Housing and Community Development Advisory Board — Mayor Wilhite Mayor Wilhite explained that these appointments are generally made during regular council meetings; however, this Board's work is accumulating and the vacancy needs to be filled now to give the new appointee ample opportunity to review documents associated with Community Development grants. Mayor Wilhite stated that she intends to appoint Rick Scott to this vacancy, and asked for a motion to confirm that appointment. It was moved by Councilmember Gothmann, seconded, and unanimously agreed to confirm the Mayor's appointment of Rick Scott to the Spokane County Housing and Community Development Advisory Board. Rick Scott was in attendance and thanked Councilmembers for their trust in him in making this appointment. 2. Economic Development Council (EDC) 2006 Third Quarter Report — Jim Huttenmaier Partner Relations Director Jim Huttenmaier thanked Council for the opportunity to present the EDC's 2006 Third Quarter report, and then introduced Pat Smith, Manager of Health Care Resources group, a company the EDC assisted moving into the Pinecroft Business Park; and also introduced Robin Toth, EDC Director of Funding and Community Projects. Ms. Smith then gave a history of her company and how it originated in Sandpoint, Idaho, of their decision to open an office here in the Valley and in several other states, of how it has grown, and of her appreciation of the EDC's assistance. Mr. Huttenmaier then spoke of the Third Quarter 2006 Key results, followed by remarks from Ms. Toth of the work force and integration of the EDC and the Spokane Chamber. Council extended their thanks for the update. 3. Parks 2007 Capital Program — Mike Jackson Parks and Recreation Director Jackson explained that in working within the 2007 Parks Capital Projects Budget, staff developed a list of recommended projects, which projects also follow the general recommendations of the Parks and Recreation MasterPlan adopted last April. Via his PowerPoint presentation, Mr. Jackson explained that staff recommends the top three priorities as upgrading the existing park facilities, making aquatic improvements, and acquiring land. City Manager Mercier added that the governor's budget was released today and in it, the Governor plans $70 million in funding for IAC type projects, which is the entity that funds many of the park and recreation acquisition requests that go before the state; that we filed an application and we were ranked 14 out of 69 projects; and that we anticipate receiving verification of funding by the end of next week. Meeting Minutes: 12 -19 -06 Page 1 of 5 Approved by Council: 01 -09 -07 Mr. Jackson mentioned that some of the project funding would be from REET, and he can provide those figures later to Council. Council /staff discussion included the need for security lights; neighborhood parks and areas that have a school within a half -mail radius; that the Greenacres area is the highest priority in the plans for a neighborhood park; parking in Mirabeau and mention that a property owner in the area is considering building a restaurant in that location which might lead to an opportunity to work with them for parking; that staff plans to apply for grant funds to develop the park in 2008; how these projects fit in with each department's and the City's overall business plan; the public's desire for facility improvements, and that Parks and Rec staff will follow the Parks and Recreation Masterplan as their business plan for park development as they put the projects together. 4. Proposed Urban Growth Area Defined — Scott Kuhta and Greg McCormick Senior Planner Kuhta mentioned that at the last council meeting during council's review of some new information, Council asked that staff provide Council with copies of all citizen letters received by the Planning Commission along with the Planning Commission relevant meeting minutes; and that the minutes were distributed separately tonight; but the letters are contained in tonight's council packet. It was also mentioned that Mr. McCormick attended last week's Planning Directors' Meeting to discuss the process to get the urban growth update finalized and through the County's process, and that another meeting is set for this Thursday to further discuss the process with the hope of finalizing exactly how the UGA upgrades are accomplished. In further regard to process, Mr. Kuhta stated that the development of the capital facilities analysis would be based on the map the Planning Commission recommended, including some of the areas Council asked staff to add, and if additional lands should be considered, staff would need to know that as well; and that this would move forward through the Comprehensive Plan amendment process and then through the County; adding that the County is not pushing an end- of -the- year deadline, and staff is also not now trying to finalize this by the end of this year. Councilmember DeVleming asked staff to indicate which citizen letters were approved or denied with a brief explanation of the reason for such decision; and Deputy Mayor Taylor asked that staff prepare a map showing where we are with our current proposed areas. Further discussion included the Painted Hills Area; the southeast portion of Morningside area; areas on the northeast; how far on the Forker area; and that these items need to be discussed with the rationale and guidance from staff on why or why not to include what areas. Mr. Kuhta mentioned that some of the areas are ones which we think Spokane Valley would grow into and be annexed over the years; but we will need to look at how such annexation would benefit our city, in addition to looking at growth which occurs outside out city but impacts our city; and mentioned that we will look at those parcels and boundaries as we all move deeper into the process next year. Mr. Kuhta added that a plan should be devised within another few months. Mayor Wilhite called for a recess 7:10 p.m., and reconvened the meeting at 7:24 p.m. 5. Street MasterPlan Update — Neil Kersten Public Works Director Kersten explained that Council previously expressed their desire to have a well - defined Street MasterPlan along with funding options, that identifies the current condition of the City streets and also recommends appropriate improvements and maintenance that would preserve the value and structural integrity of the local transportation system; and that J -U -B Engineers was selected as the most qualified consultant for this project. Mr. Kersten then introduced J -U -B representatives David Kliever, Area Manager for the Spokane Office; Chuck Larson, Corporate Transportation Manager; and Spencer Montgomery, Transportation Planner. The gentlemen from J -U -B went through two PowerPoint presentations explaining various aspects of the Pavement Management Program, including its purpose, program benefits, software requirements, pavement management program components, pavement condition (including the Pavement Condition Map of 2006), budget scenarios and results, and the next steps including evaluating different construction techniques, evaluating maintenance /capital improvement costs, drafting an annual maintenance and capital budget, and the draft six -year plan. The second PowerPoint, Phase 2 Transportation Planning, also highlighted the purpose of the planning and the Meeting Minutes: 12 -19 -06 Page 2 of 5 Approved by Council: 01 -09 -07 primary and secondary data needs, followed by a flow -chart showing the entire Transportation Improvement Program Preparation Process. Mr. Mercier stated in reference to the map showing the graphical rendition of the current condition of our pavements, that this map would point out the need to have another map developed which would suggest what the condition statement would be at the end of the sewering program since sewering is not included on the map, and to also look at the chart on the deterioration curve and to give us a post - sewering glimpse that way, as that may not have been one of the variables cross tabulated previously. J -U -B representatives responded that one of the positive attributes of the program is that staff can give them all the "what -ifs" and they will tell us what they will do; and he mentioned that they are on top of the sewering issue and that will be one of the evaluation components on how they move forward with a five -year pavement maintenance plan, showing what roadways will get done as part of that. Councilmember DeVleming added that he would like to have this system include a function that would allow citizens to enter their address on the system and see exactly what their street's condition is and the planned maintenance for the street, or any connecting street. J -U -B representative said this software would be able to include that option; and to be effective, this system would need to be managed annually, and that each year we would re- inventory about one -fifth of the roadways and re -run the five -year plan; so that every five years we will have inventoried and inspected every roadway and kept that data updated. Mr. Mercier asked if any other jurisdiction of significant size in our area has anything equivalent to this program; and the response was no; although there are some on the west side such as in Bellevue, Auburn, Kitsap County; and for a community our size, J -U -B representative said he doesn't know how anyone could effectively manage a roadway system without such a program. J -U -B representative added that currently more than 55% of our roads are in "very good" condition, adding that their schedule for completion of the plan is within the next four to six months. In reference to the Pavement Management Program "Scenario Results" showing the $ 1.5 million budget and the budget baseline of 72.6, Mr. Mercier said a scenario he would like to see would be what is the amount of increased spending or investment required to maintain that current baseline at 72.6; and to therefore have at least one scenario that doesn't show the bar below the baseline. Mr. Kersten stated that these budget figures are very preliminary and the scenarios do not include the sewering projects. Mr. Mercier added that his comment was intended not to focus on the $1.5 but to understand that the trend line would require an increasing amount each year to maintain the same level of condition. Mr. Mercier mentioned that should J -U -B consultants come back and state that the recommended baseline should be 79 or 82, or whatever figure, we would need to have information about the cost of the delta between that and the 72.6 as well as the value ratio; so that if the baseline is stepped up, not only will that increase cost "x" but will likely save cost "y." Mr. Montgomery explained that the Phase 2 program, which has an ultimate goal to help staff prepare the annual Transportation Improvement Program with better tools, and to therefore make better city infrastructure. Mr. Mercier asked that if in Mr. Montgomery's experience for a community of our size with the configuration of our transportation system, do you typically run this analysis solely on intersection level of service or do you perform a corridor analysis as well? Mr. Montgomery responded that typically one would start at the intersection then begin to see corridor projects that can be identified. Mr. Larson added that a lot of the level of service analysis done here was done by our staff with the synro -model in a corridor setting where practical. Mr. Larson added that prior to the open house for the public, likely to be held in March or April, that they will attempt to have the maps placed on our website for public viewing. Meeting Minutes: 12 -19 -06 Page 3 of 5 Approved by Council: 01 -09 -07 6. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor Wilhite Mayor Wilhite asked if there were changes to the Advance Agenda, and mentioned the Tentative 2007 Calendar, adding that this year at a glance will give Councilmembers dates to consider when planning time away from City Hall, and that the 2007 calendar also lists the 2007 AWC and NLC conferences. 7. Information Only: Fiber Internet Service for CenterPlace: Information only, no discussion or report. 8. Council Check -in — Mayor Wilhite Mayor Wilhite mentioned a tentative date of January 18 for a Conversation with the Community, but said she hesitates to firmly schedule such as attendance has been very low in the past; but that last week a constituent approached her about issues of interest in the Ponderosa area. Taking into consideration Deputy Mayor Taylor's Thursday class schedule, she will work with councilmembers for a mutually agreeable date. Councilmembers also mentioned the upcoming legislative conference in Olympia and the desire to coordinate travel arrangements. Mayor Wilhite mentioned the opening on the Cable Advisory Board with a December 29 application deadline, and she stated that any assistance in applicant recommendations would be appreciated. 9. City Manager Comments — Dave Mercier Regarding the vacant City Police Chief position, City Manager Mercier reported and he and Deputy City Manager Regor attended a series of meetings with the Sheriff's Office in an effort to negotiate enhancements in the selection process and clarify understandings of rights, roles and responsibilities; that a series of proposals were made to the Sheriff's Office to alter the recruitment process, including the possibility of broad based advertising so to be appraised of all interested candidates, or to include the position as a City Employee; but that those alternates were not embraced by the Sheriff's Office; and that a letter was received from the Sheriff's Office containing three names for Police Chief consideration, but an initial review suggests there may be a need to have one or two replacement names; as Mr. Mercier mentioned he contacted two of those on the list and one is going to retire at the end of February and is therefore no longer a candidate; and that another candidate apparently did not meet all the academic attributes provided in the draft job description. Mr. Mercier said that the Sheriff is out of the area until after the first of the year, but was informed by the Under Sheriff that the Sheriff's Office will recompose a list of names for Police Chief Consideration. Mr. Mercier further explained that questions have arisen concerning who has authority to remove the chief of police; that the current provisions of the RCWs list the City Manager with appointment and removal authority; so there is a need for our attorneys to meet with the Board of County Commissioner's attorneys to discuss several phrases in the contract and any other contract issues such as one sheriff binding another sheriff to ongoing contracts. Councilmember Munson asked Mr. Mercier if he thought it would be advisable to look into what it would cost us to run our own police force, just in case things don't go as well as we hope. Mr. Mercier responded that he believes if we could satisfy our evolving interest in having suitable autonomy arrangements, that would add cement to the ongoing relationship and enhance its viability over time because as with all relationships, our needs evolve over time and relationships adjust over time so that it can attend to those changing needs, or without those adjustments, there could be added stress to the relationship which sometimes could break a relationship as opposed to further evolving; so the first effort has been to name the enhancements we thought would be appropriate to perpetuate the current arrangement; that there are still some unsettled questions and we hope to get the legal rendition through and discern whether the other options gain some sense of appeal with the Sheriff's Office, although they have not been embraced yet; and at some point it makes sense in our due diligence in this contract as we have done with so many other contracts, to undertake an alternatives analysis; whether this is the moment to move forward is still an open question. Councilmember Munson said he agreed the question will remain open until advised otherwise by Mr. Mercier. Meeting Minutes: 12 -19 -06 Page 4 of 5 Approved by Council: 01 -09 -07 Mr. Mercier said attempts are ongoing to get everyone in a meeting to discuss unresolved issues; and that Mr. Mercier looks to have those issues clarified and to secure a list of names of several interested candidates. Council /staff discussion included autonomy of the City in securing a candidate to fill the position; selection, retention and removal issues; and that contracts are generally entered into when beneficial to all parties. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Lam... . Christine : ainbridbe, tty Clerk 1 n.o-a Wa. ATTEST. Diana Wilhite, Mayor Meeting Minutes: 12 -19 -06 Page 5 of 5 Approved by Council: 01 -09 -07