Loading...
2014, 11-04 Study Session MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING STUDY SESSION FORMAT Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley,Washington November 4,2014 6:00 p.m. Attendance: Councilmembers Staff Dean Grafos,Mayor Mike Jackson, City Manager Arne Woodard,Deputy Mayor Mark Calhoun, Deputy City Manager Bill Bates,Councilmember Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Chuck Hafner, Councilmember John Hohman,Community Development Dir. Rod Higgins, Councilmember Mike Stone, Parks& Recreation Director Ed Pace, Councilmember Eric Guth, Public Works Director Ben Wick, Councilmember Morgan Koudelka, Sr. Administrative Analyst Rick VanLeuven, Police Chief Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor Grafos called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. ACTION ITEMS: 1. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 14-012 Terminating Sunshine Disposal Franchise—Erik Lamb After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve Ordinance No. 14-012 terminating the City's solid waste collection franchise with Sunshine Disposal, Inc. Deputy City Attorney Lamb explained that this will terminate the existing franchise for collection services; he said the termination is appropriate as the City has negotiated a contract with Sunshine to replace the franchise, and that this ordinance will be effective November 17 to coincide with the effective date of the contract once approved. Mayor Grafos invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation:In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 14-013 Terminating Waste Management Franchise—Erik Lamb After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve Ordinance No. 14-013 terminating the City's solid waste collection franchise with Waste Management of Washington, Inc. Deputy City Attorney Lamb explained that this will terminate the existing franchise for collection services; he said the termination is appropriate as the City has negotiated a contract with Sunshine to replace the franchise, and that this ordinance will be effective November 17 to coincide with the effective date of the contract once approved. Mayor Grafos invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 3. Proposed Resolution 14-011 Adopting Solid Waste Management Plan—Eric Guth It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve Resolution 14-011 adopting the Solid Waste Management Plan. Public Works Director Guth said that this is part of our contracting for solid waste services, that this is a twenty-year Plan to guide our system of collection, disposal, recycling, and other aspects of solid waste;that the Plan can be reviewed every five years; as part of the public process, the Plan is on our website,we held a public open house for public review, and copies of the Plan are here at City Hall and at the Library; he said the SEPA environmental review has been completed and there were no significant issues; and that the Department of Ecology (DOE) has ultimate approval authority. Mr. Guth said we previously sent DOE copies of the Plan, they sent us comments, and we have responded; now the final step is Council approval, after which we will submit it to DOE. Mayor Grafos Council Study Session 11-04-2014 Page 1 of 5 Approved by Council: 11-17-2014 invited public comments; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 4. Proposed Resolution 14-012 Adopting Moderate Risk Waste Plan—Eric Guth It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve Resolution 14-012 adopting the Moderate Risk Waste Management Plan. Mr. Guth explained that this is similar to the resolution just adopted, but this addresses the household hazardous waste as it relates to homes and small business generators; and that this is also administered and enforced by DOE. Mayor Grafos invited public comments; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 5. Solid Waste Collection Services Contract With Waste Management—Erik Lamb It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the contract for solid waste collection services with Waste Management of Washington, Inc. Deputy City Attorney Lamb explained that this is the second part in conjunction with the just approved terminated franchises; that this is the contract for solid waste collection services pursuant to a statutorily defined process to compensate the company for us cancelling that franchise; that this is a "status quo" contract and will maintain the same level of service citizens see now, with a term that runs through March 2018;that this directs the company to haul to the Sunshine Transfer Station. Mr. Lamb added that there is no mandatory collection and that collection pickup remains optional. Mr. Lamb noted that this too will have an effective date of November 17. Mayor Grafos invited public comment. Ms. Tami Yeager of Waste Management, speaking on behalf of the eighty employees who work for Waste Management in Spokane Valley,thanked Council and staff for this opportunity; said many drivers have been on the same routes for ten to fifteen years, and that they enjoy living and working here; and she said they look forward to serving the residents. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 6. Solid Waste Collection Services Contract with Sunshine Disposal—Erik Lamb It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the contract for solid waste collection services with Sunshine Disposal, Inc. Mr. Lamb explained that as with the previous motion, this mirrors that contract; he said that the rates will remain the same as they have been until the contract expires in 2018; and that this too will have an effective date of November 17. Mayor Grafos invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 7. Comprehensive Plan Docket—Sohn Hohman It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve the 2015 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket. Community Development Director Hohman said that two applications are included in the amendment process moving forward; that the first is on Mission at the corner of Flora and Indiana, and the second is on Nora between Pines and Evergreen; and he noted that the first amendment is actually a request to change from Low Density Residential and not High Density Residential as noted in the packet materials. Mayor Grafos invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation:In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 8. City Hall Lease Amendment—Mark Calhoun It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve the lease amendment with Northwest Christian Schools that releases the City's obligation on Suite B-3 and adds to the agreement the lease of Suite 102. Mr. Calhoun gave some background on the purpose of the amendment, which releases the City's obligation on Suite B-3, and adds the lease of Suite 102; and said that this assumes a December 1 occupancy date. Mayor Grafos invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. Council Study Session 11-04-2014 Page 2 of 5 Approved by Council: 11-17-2014 9. Legislative Agenda—Mike Jackson It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to adopt the revised 2015-2017 Legislative Agenda. City Manager Jackson explained the proposed changes to the medical and recreational marijuana legislative item as noted on the red-line version; he said he discussed the issue of the Public Facilities District Board makeup with lobbyist Briahna Taylor, who suggested we pursue an appointee when an opening occurs; and said he feels future conversations will be held on this topic as currently there is no statute addressing any city representation except the largest city; said he kept the agenda generic regarding the recouping of code enforcement costs and that future discussions can be held on this as well, adding that Ms. Taylor indicated it would be difficult to get passed. Concerning the marijuana issue, Mr. Jackson said that Mr. Lamb has been the lead on this and we feel the need to start formulating language for discussion purposes. Mayor Grafos invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation:In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. NON-ACTION ITEMS 10. Shoreline Master Plan Review of Findings—Lori Barlow Via her PowerPoint presentation, Ms. Barlow explained that the purpose of tonight's item is to introduce the Planning Commission's recommended draft Shoreline Master Plan; she said this has been to Council numerous times and tonight will be an overview; she said she will focus on the process, where we are now and the next steps, and the main parts of the Plan, and will end the discussion with what we believe may be our last issue for submittal to the Department of Ecology (DOE). Ms. Barlow said that tonight beings the formal and final review; that a public hearing along with a first reading of an ordinance to adopt will be on the November 17, 2014 special meeting agenda; and if all goes as planned, said she anticipates final action at the December 9 meeting; after which the document will be submitted to the DOE for review. Ms. Barlow referenced the separate green binder containing the Plan, and said that the most important parts are Chapters two through four,which is her focus tonight as well, and those chapters address goals and policies,environmental design, and regulations. Planner Barlow said they could still have some discussions with the DOE as the process continues; she noted some added language concerning piers and docks, including joint use of those piers and docks. Ms. Barlow explained that an issue that came up during the Planning Commission process was whether to allow docks in the Coyote Rocks area, which is an undeveloped area; and some discussion of what would happen if we were to allow docks on all properties;that they wanted to preserve the opportunity for those property owners to have a dock if they wanted, but to make sure the ecological areas were protected; she said this adds an extra requirement for reporting docks for those property owners in that area for them to show how they wilI protect and mitigate the impact of having a dock. Concerning the joint use of docks, Ms. Barlow said the SMA(Shoreline Management Act) requires joint use to be addressed and encouraged when there are more than four residential lots; she said the Planning Commission was very concerned with encumbering property owners with this and didn't want to force them to have a dock with their neighbor, so by encouraging joint use it requires them to make contact and show evidence of that contact with neighborhood properties. She said the Planning Commission feels they have made reasonable efforts to comply with the SMA; she added that we have not heard from the main developer in the area and have not had request for docks in the area of Coyote Rock since two docks were issued a few years ago, and said those docks were not secured well enough to withstand the flow. Ms. Barlow said the plan is to move forward and see what the DOE says about these efforts to meet the intent to see if we have adequately protected the functions along the shoreline. Concerning SD-2 Inventory chapter in the green binder, Councilmember Pace noted on page 75 that a word appears to be missing: last paragraph, fifth line: "Major issues the cost associated with City, a state agency, or to a third party conservation group." And suggested perhaps the word "are" should be inserted after the word "issues." Councilmember Pace also asked about 6.4.2 Shelley Lake, middle paragraph about the recommended open space, and asked if that is private property. Ms. Barlow explained that it is private property, but that this chapter deals with the inventory and characterization report, which was developed in 2010 based on the conditions in place at the time. Director Hohman added that this Council Study Session 11-04-2014 Page 3 of 5 Approved by Council: 11-17-2014 particular parcel is also in the flood plain so there are other physical issues that need to be addressed; but that this can't be developed anyway. 11. Governance Manual Review—Chris Bainbridge City Clerk Bainbridge explained that tonight's review is a result from several comments from Councilmembers concerning policies, in particular concerning a process for tax changes and for supermajority votes. As noted in the Request for Council Action, Ms. Bainbridge explained the several draft changes, most of which are minor, but some are new sections such as the tax rate changes, and placing items on an agenda. Councilmembers concurred with changes on page 1, 2 and 3, although the sections about forms of address in a formal versus a study session format brought about some discussion. Councilmember Bates suggested Council follow the procedures which leads to a more relaxed atmosphere and more free-flowing discussion when it comes to study session items, versus the more formal meetings, all of which helps the public realize there is a difference between the two formats; and as well to address each other as "Councilmember Hafner" etc., much the same as other municipalities do during formal meetings. Councilmember Pace said that also not having to be recognized by the Mayor each time a Councilmember wants to speak during a study session, further adds to the smooth and continuous flow of discussion. Mayor Grafos said that Councilmembers needs to keep in mind that this is just a guideline, and it is the Chair who sets the rules. After briefly touching on the various minor edits, Councilmembers turned their focus to page 9 and the tax rate changes. Mayor Grafos said he feels these extra steps are not necessary and burden the process with notification, since staff goes through a notification process currently when it comes to such things as public hearings. Deputy Mayor Woodard said he agrees this would be in keeping with the desire to be transparent, but he is not sure Councilmembers or staff needs to be told to do these things since they are already doing so. Concerning the new section on Placing Items on an Agenda, Mr. Jackson said this spells out the process, that if a Councilmember wanted to add something to an agenda, other members of Council could ask for some background about the issue and what prompted the topic without degrading the topic or the Councilmember's suggestion; following that,the item would be considered at the next Agenda committee meeting and if the Committee desired, would place the item on a future agenda or as a pending item, or if the Committee decided not to include the item on a future agenda, then the proposing Councilmember would be notified and he could then bring up the issue again during the advance agenda discussion, and with a consensus of three or more Councilmembers, the item would be placed on a future agenda. For those who might not know, Mayor Grafos said the Agenda Committee includes the Mayor, Deputy Mayor, City Manager,and City Clerk. Concerning the new item for a tax rate change, Mr. Jackson said it was this issue that prompted the review of the Governance Manual. Councilmember Pace said this originally started to force Council to be intention when it came to changing taxes; that a thought was Council should require a super majority in order to raise taxes, but said they were advised by the City Attorney and City Manager that Council could not do that; but Councilmember Pace said Council can still be intentional by giving the advance notice as stated in the text. Concerning the super majority, Mr. Jackson said that was staffs interpretation of the law, so the committee focused on the process. Deputy City Attorney Lamb explained that as a Code city, we are regulated by state laws, and there are very specific state statutes for Code cities on certain actions that require a majority, and those that require a super majority; and the Legislature is presumed to know what they are talking about when they made that distinction; a super majority vote is for budget amendments and emergency actions, and everything else is done by a majority vote, and as a City we cannot contradict or be in conflict with state law. Mr. Lamb said staff also sought the opinion of MRSC (Municipal Research Service Center) and that cities with a Charter might be able to do certain things by super majority according to their own Charter, but as a Code city, we must not be in conflict with state statutes; he said he was informed by MRSC who has been asked this question in the past, that their answer has been consistently uniform that this is not something that a Code city could change. Council Study Session 11-04-2014 Page 4 of 5 Approved by Council: 11-17-2014 Councilmember Bates said he feels the proposed change in process is important in order to make people more aware of such impending change. Deputy Mayor Woodard said he supports the process but doesn't agree that the law under a Code city doesn't allow us to have a super majority because it is already stated in the Governance Manual for emergencies; but at least this is a good start; he said the question would be is it defensible if you do a super majority, and in this case, it is not an ordinance but just an agreement that Council would be held to a super majority vote for a tax change;the next Council could do whatever they want; and said he disagrees and feels Council has the authority to do a super majority because it is purely a ground rule for Council and becomes a last resort to a tax increase. Councilmember Hafner said if legal counsel said we cannot do a super majority for tax changes, that he doesn't know why Council would not go along with that legal opinion; and that Council has to follow the law and the legal opinions; and he agreed with the proposed changes for the tax rate section. Mayor Grafos said he does not agree with changing the governance manual for tax rate changes;that this is a procedural guide for conducting meetings and following state statutes; he said if this change were to be adopted, it would require multiple filings in the newspaper, and at least one public hearing before any action could be taken by Council; he said he feels this change would disrupt the orderly and transparent budget process; that staff and Council already demonstrated the ability to operate with fiscal restraint, unburdened by excess political pressures. Councilmember Bates said he feels this doesn't attack the fiscal responsibility of this or any Council; that this came about due to Councilmember's Pace's suggestion to discuss the procedure for tax changes, specifically for a tax decrease. Councilmember Pace said the thought was just to be more intentional. After further brief discussion, and noting this was just the first discussion on these changes, it was determined to bring this draft, red-line manual back for an additional administrative report, preferably after the first of the year. 12. Advance Agenda—Mayor Grafos There were no further suggestions for the Advance Agenda. 13. Information Items of the Public Safety Corporation Final Contract Option Year; and Parks and Recreation Quarterly Report were for information only and were not reported or discussed. 14. Council Comments—Mayor Grafos There were no additional Council comments. 15. City Manager Comments—Mike Jackson Mr. Jackson said that in past discussions with the County Weed Control Board, we learned that Spokane Valley residents were charged a $3.00 per year assessment while most other cities' residents did not pay that same assessment; he said that Liberty Lake was also assessed; said this entire issue goes back to the years of incorporation; he said the current proposal is a level assessment of$2.00 per parcel throughout the County,which reduces our residents' assessment from $3.00 to $2.00; said he anticipates more debate from the City of Spokane; and that further discussions will be forthcoming and a hearing is set for November 12 with the Board of County Commissioners, and Mr. Lamb will attend. Mr. Jackson said we want our position to be clear at that hearing; and he said that if we support the $2.00 that adds about 16% to the budget of the Weed Control Board; he said the County has the authority to do as they choose; or do we recommend setting the assessment to keep the County's budget the same, and said the difference of $1.70 will bring them to their current level of operation;that$2.00 would allow them to hire an additional employee or two and buy software; and ended by stating that he wanted to re-affirm Council's position for the $2.00. There were no objections. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m. j6)-1:1 • Dean Grafos, Mayor ristine Bainbridge, City Cler.l Council Study Session 11-04-2014 Page 5 of 5 Approved by Council: 11-17-2014