2018, 01-16 Study Session MINUTES
SPOKANE VALLEY COUNCIL MEETING
STUDY SESSION
Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers
Spokane Valley, Washington
January 16, 2018
Attendance:
cuuncilrnembers Staff
Rod Higgins,Mayor Mark Calhoun City Manager
Pam Maley, Deputy Mayor John I Iolman, Deputy City Manager
Brandi Peetz, Councilmember Cary Driskell, City Attorney
Linda Thompson,Councilmember Prik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney
Ben Wick,Councilmember Chelsie'l'aylor, Finance Director
Sam Wood, Councilmember Mike Stone, Parks &Rec Director
Arne Woodard, Councilmember Gloria Mantz, Engineering Manager
Bill Mel big, City Engineer
Mark Werner, Police Chief
Chaz Bates, Economic Development Specialist
Mike Basinger,Economic Dcv. Manager
Carolheile Branch, Public Information Officer
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Mayor I Liggins cal[ed the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
ROTI. CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll, all Councilmemhers were present.
Proclamation; Honoring Hearing Examiner
Mayor I Iiggins said the reading of the Proclamation will be moved to be part of agenda item #5.
ACTION ITEMS:
1. Second Reading Ordinance 133-001,Nuisances• Caiy Driskell, Erik Lamb
Aller City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Maley and seconded
to approve Ordinance No. 18-001, amending the Spokane Valley Municipal Code related to chronic
nuisances and otter nuisances as written except for.Section 11r 112 r c ircr ing to number of yard sofas', to be
limited to three ,separate yard sale events in one calendar year- City Attorney Driskell introduced newly
hired, part-time attorney Rachelle McFetridge, who he said will be working mostly on code compliance
items, Mr. Driskell then briefly explained the components of the ordinance, after which Mayor I liggins
invited public comment. No comments were offered,although City Clerk Bainbridge noted receipt of an e-
mail from Teri Eveland, secretary on the Board of Directors of Central.Park Condominiums, indicating that
Board's agreement and support of these ordinances. Vote by acclamation. In favor: unanimous- Opposed:
none. Mo tion carried.
2, Second Reading Ordinance 131-002 Unfit Dwelling. —Cai Driskell Erik Lamb
Ater City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley and seconded
to approve Ordinance No. 18-00.2 adopting chapter 17,105 SC for unfit dwelling, building, and
structure regulations. Deputy City Alton-icy Lamb stated Lha( this will be another tool to use to light
• unwanted public nuisances; and that Ms- Mcretridge will be assisting the City on these issues as wel[, he
mentioned the first priority lien, which is allowed under state law which gives us authorization to assess
these costs against the property as a priority lien that is of equal rank with all state and local taxes. Mayor
Council Study Sc ion; O1-16-2018 Page 1 07
Approved by Council: 01-30-2018
Higgins invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation: fn favor: u�rcarrirrrnus.
Opposed. none. Mattern carried
3, Motion Consideration: Bid Award Appleway Trail Project, Sullivan to Cortin — Robert Lochmilleer,
Gloria Mantz, Chelsie Taylor
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley and seconded to award the Appleway Trail-Sullivan to Corbin
Project 40237 to William Winkler Company in the amount o $l,972,69U.00 plus applicable sales tax which
includes the base bid and alternate B7, and authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the.
construction contract. Ms. Mantz gave an explanation of the background of this project as well as the bid
history, as noted in her January 16, 2018 Request for Council Action form, after which Finance Director
Taylor went through some of the financial aspects for funding this project, which include grant funds as
well as City matching funds, and the establishment of a contingency. Mr. Calhoun added that if Council
awards [his bid with the base bid and Alternate Bl,that this project was not contemplated so is not included
in the 2018 budget, and would therefore require a budget amendment later in the spring. Ms. Mantz
explained that if we have remaining funds, we could purchase some of the amenities, and Mr, Calhoun
added that if we end up spending all the contingency,we can't proceed with this$1,3 mill ion project without
benches or garbage receptacles, so we would come up with the funds to make that happen. Mayor Higgins
invited public comment.
Ms. Nina Fluegal, Spokane Valley: she stated that it is difficult for the public to use this trail in the winter
as it is not clear of snow; she also expressed concern that the enure stretch is unsupervised and there are
people sleeping on the benches, and are needles and ra7orblades under the benches; she asked who is
supposed to clear that path in the winter so people can walk on it as it should be available all the time,and
she suggested including that in the budget. Mr. David Jackson, Spokane Valley: said we could probably
save $1 million if we left it in its natural state and used solar for lighting,and let the birds live there instead
of having landscaping; said it will end up like across the street; he said we don't need a lot of stuff, and
don't need a bathroom as people are only about two blocks to the road where businesses are that have
bathrooms; and said bathrooms are a waste of money. There were no further public corn mcnt&
Council discussed tlhe issue of whether there should be restrooms, including safety concerns; and also
discussed plowing or shoveling the snow off the trail. It was moved by Councilmember Thompson and
seconded by Councilmember Woodto amend ihe motion to remove the restroom, schedule Ta'1',from the
bid. Parks and Recreation Director Stone said during all the public meetings, the public's number one
priority was to have a restroom; he said this would not be the only one as there will be another on the far
east side; said we already have plans to have the restroom on University; he mentioned that maintenance
staff go along the trail every day, and SCOPE monitors the trial as well, Mr. Stone said he doesn't see any
difference with having a restroom here from having a restroom in a nark, and he urged Council to
reconsider; he said il'you remove this restroom, it is gone. Mr. Calhoun added that the state capital budget
included$5410,000 for amenities on this trail from University to Pines,and that includes the restroom. Mr.
Stone stressed [haat the public's first priority was a restroom, and they specifi;caIly did not want port-a-
po[lies; he said it was felt that the bare minimum would be two sided unisex restrooms, that it would be
well-lit and we will also have the ability to lock it at a certain time; he said the Police Department is doing
bike patrols,and he thinks we have a good handle on this and [hat the trail is a safe and positive experience
for trail users- Councilmember Woodard reminded everyone that this is a lineal park with a trail, and that
businesses will complain if people walk to the businesses to use their restrooms. Mayor Higgins invited
comments on the motion to amend. Mr. Bill Ootiunann, Spokane Valley: said he is an ardent bike rider
and a trail is not much good without a restroom, Mr- John 1 larding, Spokane Valley: suggested we check
with a couple security offices in the area, and depending on the size, we could have remote 24/7 security
for about $50.00 a month, not including equipment; or have posts with a button; and said there are many
ways to have protection inexpensively. There were no further public comments. Vole by Acclamation to
amend the motion_In Favor. C'ouncihnember Thompson; Opposed: Mayor Higgins, Deputy Mayor Haley,
Council Study Session,O1-16-2018 Page 2 0E7
Approved by Council:01-30-2018
and Councilmembers Peetz, Wick, Door., and Woodard The motion to amend tailed. Vote by Acclamation
on the original motion: In Fervor: Unanimous. Opposed:none. Motion carried.
NON-ACTION ITEMS:
4. Water Banking Henry Allen; and Spokane County Water Re ounces Manager Mike Hertnanson
Engineer Allen introduced Mr- Mike ilcrrnanson, who is the Water Resources Manager within the
Environmental Services Department at Spokane County; said Mr. Hennanson has been in his field over
Iwent),years and worked with the County over ten years,and that tonight he will discuss water banking and
the Hirst decision. Mr. I lermanson explained some of the key holdings with the Hirst decision, as well as
the response from Spokane County; he went over interim ordinance provisions which focused on Iwo
categories of existing water users: senior adjacent groundwater users, and instream flow regulations; he
mentioned instream flow impairment considerations associated with WR.JA 55 (water resource inventory
area),and went over sonic of the options to address no new water use.Mr,Hcrmanson also explained water
banking and how it works, in that when water use is stopped,the groundwater levels go up and streamflow
increases; he said that Spokane County created a new water bunk fund and loaned $1,000,000 from the
general fund to acquire rights and operate the hank;they had completed a purchase and sale agreement for
two rights, with two others pending, and they are working on the development of a water bank ordinance
to implement the bank which will regulate purchase eligibility,quantity of water, and price, and said it was
anticipated the County would sell mitigation certificates in late December,which is likely now late January.
Councilmember wood asked if all this banking impacts the water purveyors in the Valley and Mr.
Hcnnanson said those rights have already been established; but there is some potential interplay discussion
of municipal water rights to hydrate these water banks, and there is also one case where the industrial Park
tried to sell their rights and move them to Chelan County;the said there is a lot of municipal water on paper,
that the transfer application was approved by the Conservancy Board bort denied by Department of Ecology;
he mentioned that Vera needs water rights so there is a disproportionate distribution of water rights, and
how to move that water around is a separate issue and something the legislature could tackle- Council
thanked Mr. 1-Iermanson for his presentation.
5- nearing Examiner Annual Report - Cary Driskelh and Mike Dempsey
City Attorney Driskell introduced Mr. Mike Dempsey, now officially the former Hearing. Examiner;
mentioned his wife Nancy is also here tonight and many of us know her as she attended many of the
hearings; said that Mr. Dempsey just retired from Spokane County, and via contract, he was our Hearing
Examiner,and the only one vrrc have ever had and that atter Mr, Dempsey gives us his report, Mayor Higgins
will provide a proclamation. Mr. Dempsey extended his thanks for the opportunity to serve as the City's
Hearing Examiner; he briefly talked about the hearing examiner process, the number of nralters heard in
2017; that he is required to complete fifteen hours of continuing legal education every year and that the
I tearing Examiner is a longstanding member of the Washington State Hearing Examiners Association. Mr.
Dempsey noted that he retired from his position as Spokane County Hearing Examiner effective January 1,
20]8, and that Spokane County is working on filling the position. Mayor Higgins then read the
Proclamation Honoring Mr. Dempsey, after which Council, stair, and members of the audience thanked
Mr- Dempsey for his service.
6. Intelligent Transportation System In till, Phase One l'rqiect Update—Gloria Mantz, frill ilellaig
City Engineer I lelhig explained the need and benefit of this project, and the project location and scope;
after which Ms.Martz explained the history of the project, including the estimated costs from 2013,grants
awarded and City required match,the 2013 engineering assumption,conduit assumption, and right-of-way
assumption; she then went over the fall 2016 bid results which resulted in all bids being rejected. Ms,
Mantz,explained the project cost and funding with the project estimated costs, current estimated cost, and
difference, which resulted in $149,443 additional funding needed. Mr. Helbig explained that the project
construction must be completed by December of 2018; that the City has been reimbursed so far, about
$50,000 from the CMAQ funds. Mr. 1lelbig explained that some of our options are, the City could spend
Council Shady Session:01-16-2018 Page 3 01-7
Approved by Council:01-30-2018
the extra $1e19,000 and fund that gap; or we could seek additional grants funds; or because of the grant
requirements,it-it is not constructed by the end of this year, we would have to reimburse that$50,000 from
CMAQ, Ms.Mantz said that it'the City determined to construct the project,we would have to move quickly
because our agreement with WSDLYI'expires at the end of the year, so if we haven't billed for some of the
construction motley, we could not get paid back; said if we want to pursue construction we have to bill
SRTC by December 2018- Mr- I[elbig said it is staff's recommendation to fund the current project
requirement, request the $99,000 additional grant funds from SRTC, and [hat we use the $50,000 we are
obligated to repay if we don't complete the project and bill by the end of the year, to use that as a match for
new grants, which is about a 33% grant match of that second grant; which is generally looked at favorably
by SRTC and other grant programs; so if we were awarded the additional ,rant by the SRTC Board, we
would move forward and construct the project this year; however; he reminded everyone there are no
guarantees about getting the additional grant funds. Realizing that lime is of the essence, Mr. Helbig said
staff can work with the SRTC board and get before them at their next board.meeting in early February, to
proceed with this path, that at that time they would make a decision to fund us or not possibly with some
of the funds they have in reserve; and said he is sure Councilmember Wick as part of that Board, would be
able to spearhead that effort- Mr- l Ielbig also went over the next steps shown on slide 11, showing the
funding breakdown, and total project funds proposed of$499,845.
Ms. Mantz agreed that time is of the essence, that in addition to going before the SRTC Board in February,
because we would be increasing the project by more than 30%, and if the Board approved the budget, it
would require an STIP amendment so it would have to go to the state and we would need that approval
before we could obligate the construction funds, which is about a two-month tune period. Councilmember
Woodard asked if we could cut back on what.will get intilled or does the grant stipulate the connections,
and Mr. Helbig confirmed the grant does stipulate the connections.
City Manager Calhoun said assuming Council approves this, we would approach SRTC seeking about
$100,000 additional funds; and if that is rejected, then he said he also assumes we would come before
Council for a decision to come up With the entire $[49,000, or give the $50,000 hack- Ms, Mantz said if
Council concurs that stafmove forward, we should know something as soon as next week whether we can
get on that Board's agenda. Mr, Helbig said staff is looking for council consensus to move forward with
the staff recommendation; noting if SR`I'C denies the grant, we would come hack to Council for a
determination to either fund the entire$149,000 gap, or to return the $50,000 grant funds already received
Brom the CMAQ Program, Mayor I liggi ns said another option is also to return the$50,000 and do nothing,
and Ms. Mantz agreed, noting we have already invested money into the project. Councilm.ember Wick
asked if we wanted to pursue a scope change, is that also just a SRTC Board approval; he said that one of
the most expensive pieces is the redundant loop, that it doesn't add any new connections, it-just provides
the loop and the network down Fancher; he said if we have to go to the SRTC Board for more money or an
allocation change, Is that hoard able to make a scope change? Ms. Mantz said she believes a scope change
would go through the'FTC (Transportation Technical Committee) and then to the board. Councilmember
Wick said so if this would be the same process,is there a way we could suggesl to them that we='d like them
to go with option A, but if they decline A,to allow us to do a scope change, or that we would like to keep
this within the budget and allow us to do a scope change and if no[, then we'd like to come up with another
$50,010 to get another $99,000 from SRTC- Mr- Helbig said staff consulted with SRTC and WS[)OT on
this funding gap, and SRTC,'recommends we take this approach.
Deputy City Manager l-Hohman said as we progress with the consolidation of the two departments, we have
found there are several projects that have been.in the works for a while, and this is one of[hose; and staff
has considered for a long time what to do with this particular project; it has a long history and started a long
time ago, and there have been a lot of mistaken assumptions; he said staff has spoken with many of the
regional partners like DOT, and individuals at the SRTCM; and regarding Councilmember Wick's
suggestion about a scope change, in all discussions and based on all the input gathered,the most important
Council Study Sessicar 01-16-2018 Page 4 of 7
Approved by Council:01-30-2018
part of this project is the Faincher/Broadway piece; he said he previously asked about eliminating the
university piece because that is an outside piece that could perhaps be done on a different date,but all roads
led back to the fact that the fiber optics backbone is along the freeway,and there has been an incident where
that was cut and all communications along that corridor went dark; so this would allow a redundancy in the
system that would allow things to stay up in times of trouble along the system, so if there was a
meomtncnded change, perhaps staff could look at and discuss the Universi[y piece. Mr. Hohman said staff
spent a lot of effoit researching this to figure out how to fund this and whether we should recommend giving
the money back; [hat staff spoke with the Executive Director of Slut'[ Ms. Sabrina MMinshall, and this is
her recorrunended approach to move forward,
Councilrnembcr Woodard said he is prepared to move forward and ask for the $99,000; but that he also
wants a more concerted discussion in the future, on where we are going with ITS in Spokane Valley. Mr.
Hohman said Councilmernber Woodard's suggestions are well noted, that staff has been looking into the
"final game plan"for iTS; and during past conversations with staff, he noticed that there wasn't an overall
map of the system, including different components, and said he will schedule that future discussion;
including the projected projec[s in the pipeline; and where this community wants [0 go with [heir ITS; he
said some past thoughts were to connect every signal,but as he and his staff looked into fiat,them probably
isn't any value to do that; for example, when you get out to 32"`l and other similar areas, there is a lot of
distance between those signals so the opportunities fir coordinating their timing becomes more difficult
due to that distance; and that usually you would want a coordination plan on something that is a little closer
together like a Pines or Argonne corridor, where they are more dependent on each other to move traffic.
There was Council consensus that staff for the $99,000,
Mayor Higgins called for a recess at 7:47 p.m,, and he reconvened the meeting at 8:00 p.m.
7.Aivornic Road Preservation Project. .Gloria Marin.,Bill Helbig
City Engineer I felbig gave the background of this particular project as noted in his RCA and accompanying
PowerPoint, after which he asked for and received Council consensus that staff move forward and amend
the STIP (State Transportation lrraprovcincnt Program)to revise the project limits,
8.Annexation—Erik Lamb, Mike Basinger, Chaz Bates
Deputy City Attorney Lamb explained that council had requested information concerning the annexation
process; he went over the authority for annexation as stated in the state statues, annexation within a IJGA
(urban growth area),several annexation methods hut in particular the three most c.orr mon, i.e.voter initiated
election, Council initiated election, and direct petition; he mentioned since Spokane County disbanded its
boundary review board,the City would not presumably have annexations reviewed by any board.Mr.Lamb
also discussed assumption of indebtedness and applicable zoning, [teonom is Development Specialist Rates
then discussed annexation considerations, including arguments for and against, specific criteria for
annexation zoning, financial impacts to the city, and costs of not annexing. Deputy City Attorney Lamb
mentioned that we have not conducted an annexation other than when we incorporated. CCouncilniemher
Wood asked if he knows of a group that wants to be annexed, would it be appropriate to help [.hem, for
example, Aspen Creek, which is a new development just above the Ponderosa; said a lot of people arc
interested in that area being annexed; and he asked what would be our stance on approaching these, and
would it to be our benefit,
Mr, Lamb said he would suggest directing any inquiries to Mr, Bates,Mr. Basinger,or to himself as any of
those would be happy to talk about the process; he said if they present a petition with the 1 0%,then Council
would have to consider that;he added [hat he would no[say there is no eos[ais we have police,snow plowing
and other services we provide, but such costs would not be the same extent of review compared to others
with a full service city. Councilmember'l'hompson.asked about school districts and whether we would take
Gnunuil study Scaci:on:01-16-2018 I'agc 5 of 7
Approved by Council:01-30-20113
that into consideration_ Mr, l,aatth' said we have not gone to a school district, but we would want to get that
input so Council could have all the information for any such consideration.
9, Advance Agenda— Mayor Higgins
Councilmember Peetz saki there are a lot of positive things going on and in the past, Council had handed
out keys to the City, and she thinks that is a great idea; maybe not monthly but maybe quarterly and perhaps
Council could look at something like that.Councilmember Wisk said that had been the Mayor's prerogative
in the past; and Councilmember Thompson said she likes the idea. Mr. Calhoun said we had a program
during our City's 1 0-year celebration,where we had a monthly award and ceremonial keys; and if Council
wishes,we could do an admin report and explain how that worked and Council could decide how to proceed_
Mayor Higgins said he would 1 ike to recognize people who have done things, not necessarily monthly, but
more dealing with extraordinary things. Mr. Driskell said if Council wants to identify the parameters of
such a program, they could, and it would make sense that one person would identify who that person is, or
take input from others. Mayor Higgins said he likened it to an appointment, with a nomination with approval
of Council. 'There was consensus to put this on the advance agenda.
1[},_Council Check-in=Mayor I liggins
Councilmember Thompson expressed her appreciation of the respect shown with Council and staff; said
she attended the Martin Luther K iing,Jr. celebration on Monday and was disappointed to see what the media
covered and the shouting down of the congressional representative.
Councilmember Wick said he thought more about the solid waste collection fee, and he would like to try
to get more citizen involvement and input, and suggested maybe to do that by use of a survey monkey.
Councilmember Woodard said the problem with any kind of a survey is this is a contract modification and
not dependent upon the public,said he feels it wouldn't give enough information and therefore said it would
feel negative; said we told the public what we are doing and they have seen our contracts with opportunity
for comments, and that he doesn't see the benefit of a survey monkey. Mayor Higgins added that this is a
complicated issue and to try 10 reduce it.ho a questionnaire would he a disservice and not give an informed
decision_ Councilmember Peetz agreed many people are confused and she would like to get more
information to help those concerned, but is not sure how she feels about a survey, Mr. Calhoun asked if
there was a consensus from Council to move in that direction, and if Council doesn't want to go in that
direction, the plan is to bring the contract amendment to the January 30 meeting, and in that report that
accompanies the motion, we will do our best to he very clear what we are doing, adding that there will also
be opportunity for public comment. Councilmember Wick asked about holding a hearing and he asked
about the publication difference between public comment and holding a public hearing_ Mr_ Driskell said
there is not any functional difference; said we advertise the agenda and the action items so there is
notification; that the purpose of a public hearing, the requirement is to ensure that when there is a certain
type of topic; that the public gets an opportunity to comment; he said not every jurisdiction provides for
citizen comment on action items as our Council does;and the public will have the opportunity for comment
at the time Council will be considering this motion. Mr. Calhoun said because of the timing,this would not
be an advance agenda topic; hut staff can set up a link on our website for the survey monkey,and of course
we would have to have an explanation; as ideally, it would be set up for those completing the survey, they
would have to read everything beforehand in order to understand what they would be answering; lie said
we could set this up, taut he is still looking for Council consensus if that is the direction desired. There was
no consensus from at least four Councilmernbers and Councilmember Wick said that already sounds like
more than what he was hoping for,but added that Council is willing to hear from anyone in providing input,
and that this is set for January 30. Mr. Calhoun said at a minimum, we could add to the agenda, the adm in
report on this topic.; and said that he will talk with Mr_ Whitehead about adding to one of the buttons on the
website, so people could click on it and look at that admin report.. Council agreed.
Council Study Session:01-16-2013 Page 6 of 7
Approved by[ unci t_:01-30-2018
1 I. Ci Manager Comments—Mark Calhoun
City Manager Calhoun mentioned that Mr, Dempsey had mentioned in his report tonight, about our state-
of-the-art audio/visual system in our Council Chambers, and that he (Mx. Calhoun) noticed that our IT
Specialist Mr. Binman was pretty active tonight working through some of the technical problems we
were experiencing with the sound_ Mr. Calhoun also noted that there is no meeting next.Tuesday as five
Councilmembers travel to Olympia for the Legislative Action Days; he noted our meetings will continue
as usual with the January 30 meeting; and that the Council's winter workshop will be held February 13
beginning at 8:30 a.m. and continuing until early afternoon, and that there will be no February 13 evening
meeting..
12_ Executive Session: [1(CW 42.30.110(1)(b)and (i): Potential Land Acquisition; Potential Litigation]
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley. seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn into executive session
fbr approximately sixt}+ minutes to discuss potential land acquisition and potential litigation, and that no
action will be taken upon return to open session. Council adjourned into executive session at 8:50 p.m. At
approximately 9:50 p,m., Mayor I liggins declared Council out of executive session, at which time it was
moved by Deputy Mayor Haley, seconded and amanirously agreed, to adjourn_
1
-4
'_ - ,
C --- '(./::
TL.R. Hi ..'•. a l
4.0
. ristine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Council Study Session:01-16-2018 Page 7 of 7
Approved by Council:01-10-2018
Chris Bainbridge
From: Erik Lamb
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 8:23 AM
To: Chris Bainbridge
Cc: Cary Driskell; Mark Calhoun
Subject: FW: Nuisance Homes Ordinances
Chris,
FYI—more comments for the nuisance item tonight.
Erik
Erik Lamb I Deputy City Attorney
10210 E.Sprague Avenue I Spokane Valley,WA 99206
{509)720-5030 I elarnbOspokanevallev.org
Sifokane
.0,0*Nozalley.
This email and any attachments may be subject to disclosure pursuant to Washington State's Public Record Act,chapter 42.56 RCW,
Confidentiality Notice: The Information contained in this email and any accompanying attach ment(s)is intended only for the use of the
intended recipient and may be confidential and/or privileged, If any reader of this communication is not the intended recipient,unauthorized
use,disclosure or copying is strictly prohibited,and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately
notify the sender by return email,and delete the original message and all copios from your system. Thank you.
From: mayor/councilmembers
Sent:Tuesday,January 16, 2018 7:15 AM
To: City Council <CityCouncil@spokanevalley.org>; Erik Lamb <elamh Ospokanevalley,org>; Cary Driskell
<CDriskeII spakanevaIIey.org>
Subject: FW: Nuisance Homes Ordinances
From:TERI EVELAND Owner [rr ailto:ahma2015 centurylink.net]
Sent:Thursday,January 11, 2018 2:52 PM
To: mayor!councilmembers<mayor councilmemberst spokanevalley.org>
Subject: Nuisance Harries Ordinances
Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
I am the secretary on the Board of Directors of Central Park Condominiums. We have a couple of
units (homes) where there is constant illegal activity and disturbances creating many complaints from
homeowners who have to deal with this situation, especially since we live together in such close
proximity. As a Board, these homeowners expect us to "fix" this situation and as you know that is
easier said than done, in a legal mariner.
t
/
We are so happy that you are considering Nuisance Home ordinances that can back us up legally to
do something about this) On behalf of the Board (blind copied here as I didn't ask if I could share
their email addresses), we are entirely in agreement and support your actions on these ordinances
100%!Pi
Thank you,
Teri Eveland
6207 E 6th Ave. C3
Spokane Valley, WA 99212
2