Loading...
2017, 02-07 Study Session MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY COUNCIL MEETING STUDY SESSION Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley, Washington February 7, 2017 Attendance: Councilmembers Staff Rod Higgins, Mayor Mark Calhoun, City Manager Arne Woodard, Deputy Mayor John Holtman,Deputy City Manager Caleb Collier, Councilmember Cary Driskell, City Attorney Pain Haley, Councilmember Erik Lamb,Deputy City Attorney Mike Munch, Councilmember Chelsie Taylor,Finance Director Ed Pace, Councilniember Mark Werner, Police Chief Sam Wood, Councilmember Mike Stone,Parks &Recreation Director Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Karen Kendall, Planner Mike Basinger, Senior Planner Ray Wright, Planning/Grants Engineer Doug Powell,Building Official Jenny Nickerson, Senior Plans Examiner Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor Higgins called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: City CIerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. ACTION ITEMS: 1. CONSENT AGENDA: consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. Proposed Motion:I move to approve the Consent ARearda. a. Approval of claim vouchers on Feb 7,2017 Request for Council Action Form Total: $761,207.63 b. Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending January 31, 2017: $434,677.13 c. Approval of January 17, 2017 Council Meeting Minutes, Study Session d. Approval of January 24, 2017 Council Meeting Minutes,Formal Meeting Format It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the Consent Agenda. • 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 17-002 Amending SVMC 2.15.050—Caty Driskell After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve Ordinance 17-002 amending SVMC 2.15.050 relating to t1w City Manager.As mentioned during the ordinance's first reading, Mr. Driskell explained that this is mostly a housekeeping item done in order to avoid confusion as to whether the Code dictates the exclusive means for removing a city manager. Mayor Higgins invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation: In favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 3. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 17-003 Amending SVMC 2.40.010—Cary Driskell After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title,it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve Ordinance 17-003 amending SVMC 2.40.010 and removing the words "pursuant to"and replacing therm with "and that I will support and defend." Mr. Driskell explained that during the ordinance first reading, there was discussion about other optional language, such as the words support and defend, and that he said at that time,that he would do some additional research. Mr. Driskell Council Study Session:02-07--2017 Page 1 of 3 Approved by Council:02-28-2017 said that his research revealed that any of the three options are legal, and the ultimate decision is up to Council, and noted once approved and codified, this would be the oath of office used for incoming councilmembers as well as for the four staff members specified in the document. Councilmember Haley said she would vote against this change as she is uncomfortable with the wording. Mayor Higgins invited public comment;no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation:In favor:Mayor Higgins,Deputy Mayor Woodard, and Councilmembers Munch, Pace, Collier and Wood Opposed:Councihnember Haley. Motion carried. 4.Resolution 17-003 Selling Street Vacation Public Hearing Before Planning Commission—Karen Kendall It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve Resolution 17-003 setting March 9, 2017 as the date for a public hearing before the Planning Commission on street vacation application RV- 2017-0001. After Ms. Kendall explained the process and showed the area in question on the map, Mayor Higgins invited public comment. No comments were offered. Vote by acclamation:In favor: Unanimous. Opposed' None. Motion carried. 5. Motion Consideration: Council Expense Reimbursement Policy—Cary Driskell_ It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve the City Council Expense Reimbursement Policy. City Attorney Driskell explained that there is no formalized adopted policy for travel reimbursement for Council; that staff has had a policy in place for a long time, and that we are approaching a time when councilmembers will be travelling,so this would be helpful;and if passed tonight, it will be incorporated into the Governance Manual for the next time that comes to Council for approval or adoption of a revised Manual.Mr.Driskell noted that the City's Code has some language about the finance committee being responsible for the adoption of a procedure, and said that in about three or four weeks he will bring Council a draft ordinance suggesting changing that as well. Mayor Higgins invited public comment;no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation:In favor: Unanimous, Opposed:None. Motion carried 6. Motion Consideration: Mayoral Appointment to Governance Manual Committee —Mayor Higgins It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to confirm the Mayoral appointment of Councihnember Sam Wood to the Governance Manual Committee. Mayor Higgins said that in the past, there were as many as three on this committee, that it is currently functioning well with two, but Councilmember Wood requested to be appointed to this committee. Councilmember Pace noted that he is on the committee now,along with Deputy Mayor Woodard,City Manager Calhoun,City Attorney Driskell, and City Clerk Bainbridge. Mayor Higgins invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation:In favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried NON-ACTION ITEMS: 7. CenterPlace Food Event: Crave! NW -Mike Basinger Mr. Basinger gave some background information on the idea of the City sponsoring a potential 2017 food event associated with Crave! NW, as noted on his Request for Council Action form. There were some discussion about costs and Mr. Calhoun stated that we won't know the exact costs until we know what portions of CenterPIace they will actually use; and in response to Councilmember Munch's question about a City in-kind donation, Mr. Calhoun said that that it is a cleaner audit trail if we follow our own fee resolution for a pre-determined price.Mr. Basinger confirmed that these funds have already been approved for us from the Economic Development marketing funds. Mr. Calhoun also explained that SVMC 3.35 grants the City Manager the authority to enter into contracts up to$200,000,so while this would fall within that authority, said this is an unusual request and he wanted to give Council opportunity for input. Mr. Basinger noted we would not be locked in for five years;that we hope this will be a successful event, but if not,we are not obligated for the additional years;and that the intent is if this is a successful endeavor that will bring in hotel stays,the contractor would submit an application in the future for Lodging Tax Advisory funds. There was no objection from Council in moving this forward. Council Study Session:02-07--2017 Page 2 of 3 Approved by Council:02-28-2017 8. 2017 Amended Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)—John Hohman,Ray Wright Mr. Hohman explained that this proposal is to amend only the 2017 TIP in order to include some projects for which we have received grant funds,and to make sure the program is updated so we can start working on those projects; he said this is separate from the development of the six-year plan which will come later this year. After Mr. Wright went over the proposed amended 2017 TIP, Mr. Hohman said that staff will follow up in the near future with specific discussion on projects such as Pines/Trent,and Trent and Barker; and that this particular item is scheduled for Februaty 28 for a public hearing, followed by a resolution to accept the amended TIP, and that the next TIP will come to Council in approximately May. 9. City Hall Update—Doug Powell,Jenny Nickerson Building Official Powell went through the PowerPoint showing the various sections of the city hall building, and noting we are still on schedule. 10. Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins Councilmember Pace said he would like a future administrative report on what other jurisdictions do about allowing or not allowing people to have shipping containers in residential areas, as we currently do not allow them; said this interest stems from a meeting he attended along with Deputy Mayor Woodard, and several staff members, and that he received an e-mail from a citizen who wanted such a shipping container so he could convert half of it into a storage shed,and the other half into a shop.There was Council consensus to add that topic to the pending list on the Advance Agenda. 11. Parks &Recreation Quarterly Report This item was for information only and was not reported or discussed. 12. Council Check in--Mayor Higgins Councilmember Wood said he attended a Health Board meeting; and that lie appreciates being on this committee and feels it will be an interesting committee. 13. City Manager Comments—Mark Calhoun City Manager Calhoun mentioned that Council has two draft letters before them, concerning two House bills we feel would be detrimental to the City;said that City Attorney Driskell drafted one letter,and Deputy City Attorney Lamb drafted the other; and that we are seeking Council consensus to allow the Mayor to sign the letters to send to our lobbyist and other appropriate agencies. Concerning the letters relative to House Bill 1022, Mr. Driskell explained that the intent is to take away the ability of local jurisdictions to control the number of marijuana retailers; said the Council previously restricted us to three and we are allocated three; but if passed, this measure would mean we'd have to allow more, or lose 70% of the liquor revenues, which would be about$617,000. Concerning House Bill 1574, Mr. DriskelI said this addresses cities' authority to negotiate certain contract terms with contracts for public works projects; said the proposed bill would do away with having to make a claim within ten days;he said we negotiate our contract to protect the public dollar,and need certain negotiating rights;said we'd rather have the flexibility we have now as we have the option of waiting, and said we would like to continue to have that option where appropriate and fair; and said we have a strong desire to maintain strong, good working relationships with our contractors, and feels this would interfere with that as well as interfere with our ability to timely close a contract. There was Council consensus to have the Mayor sign and send both letters. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded id unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 6:53 p.m. A L.R. Higgins, a��� / r iristine Baitibri.ge,City Clerk Council Study Session:02-07--2017 Page 3 of 3 Approved by Council:02-28-2017 February 7,2017 XXXXX The City of Spokane Valley opposes House Bill 1574. This Bill would improperly interfere with the contractual relationship the City has with the contractors the City does business with. We strive to manage our contracts to ensure they meet the needs of the City while complying with legal requirements. One of the assertions from the construction industry in advocating for HB 1574 is that enforcement of strict contractual claim notice requirements increases costs to both contractors and public entities. While we agree that there is potential for increased costs associated with utilizing mandatory notice and claim provisions, this is not the case is Spokane Valley and we are not aware of this happening elsewhere. Spokane Valley greatly values the relationship it has with the contractors it does business with. Pursuant to that, the City exercises its discretion when considering whether to require strict compliance with claim notice requirements. The City has occasionally chosen to waive its right to require strict compliance with contractual notice provisions, even if they are not timely. We have done so in the past where appropriate. As you know, the relationship between jurisdictions and the contractors with whom they do business is critical. We don't want to get into a situation where a contractor believes that we treated them unfairly by enforcing strict notice and claim procedures where a more reasoned approach was more appropriate, and then have to wonder the next time we use them whether they are inappropriately trying to make up "lost" money. Currently, cities have the ability to negotiate contract terms with private contractors in a way that protects public funds, including a requirement that claims must be filed by a certain date. Other examples include minimum insurance requirements and strong indemnity provisions. HB 1574 would disrupt that dynamic by allowing claims to be made long after when the contract was completed or terminated. We have a significant interest in having such issues resolved in a shorter timeframe so we can have finality in closing out projects, and closing out the financial books from year-to-year. Again, the City of Spokane Valley opposes House Bill 1574, and urge you to vote against it. Thank you for your consideration. C:1 Userslcbainbridge 4AppData4Local Lificrosofl4Windovs4Temporai y Internet Filesl Content.Outl ook4LACZ1 HVP4drnfl letter opposing IIB 1574 by Cary Driskell.docx 1444444441 January 31, 2017 XXXXX The City of Spokane Valley opposes House Bill 1099. This Bill would effectively prohibit the City from exercising its local legislative authority to manage the siting of marijuana uses as it sees fit within its boundaries. We strive to respond to our community's desires for the types of land uses allowed within the City and the manner in which they are allowed. The City is cognizant that Initiative 502 was passed statewide, and that marijuana production, processing, and retail sales are legal under state law. However, the impacts of marijuana primarily occur at the local level. Impacts from marijuana-related crime, local youth marijuana use and prevention, and noise, smell, and traffic impacts from marijuana businesses are all immediately felt within the City, and not at the state level. Accordingly, it is important for the City to maintain its local control over the siting of marijuana businesses. The City understands that some jurisdictions have responded by shying away from the important discussions about marijuana businesses, thus leaving some businesses in limbo. However, the vast majority of local jurisdictions have had the discussions and continue to have ongoing discussions about the appropriateness of marijuana businesses within their cities. The City of Spokane Valley is one of those jurisdictions. We have had extensive Planning Commission and City Council review and discussion over how to best allow marijuana uses within the City. These have included visiting both a marijuana production business and a marijuana retail Iocation. It was only after extensive review and deliberation over the last two years that the City developed its final rules. It would be unfair to penalize the City and take away our local control after we have spent so much time developing rules appropriate for our local circumstances. This holds true for all of the other jurisdictions that have taken the long deliberate path that the City has taken to establish local rules. House Bill 1099 is also problematic because it relies upon a retail store allocation set by the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board, an appointed State agency, as a basis for taking away the City's funding. Indeed, the City has already experienced firsthand how often the WSLCB changes its rules, including instances where it passed emergency rules with no advance notice. The large number of changes and the immediate nature of emergency rules has forced the City into the unfortunate position of having to conduct our own emergency rulemaking in order to respond. We cannot have such a large portion of our liquor revenues, which are a critical component of the City's finances, subject to the whims of an agency with such a proclivity for emergency rulemaking. Again, the City of Spokane Valley opposes House Bill 1099, and we urge you to vote against it. Thank you for your consideration. C:\UserslcbainbridgeWppDatatiLocallA1icrosoftliVindowsl'1'emporary Internet Files\Content.Ontlookk AC71III'Pldraft letter opposing NB 1099 by Erik Lamb.docx