Loading...
2018, 07-03 Study Session MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY COUNCIL MEETING STUDY SESSION Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley, Washington July 3,2018 Attendance: Councilmembers Staff Rod Higgins, Mayor John Hohman, Deputy City Manager Pam Haley, Deputy Mayor Cary Driskell, City Attorney Brandi Peetz, Councilmember Bill HeIbig, City Engineer Linda Thompson, Councihnember Mike Stone,Parks &Rec Director Ben Wick, Councilmember Doug Powell,Building Official Sam Wood, Councilmember Gloria Mantz, Engineering Manager Arne Woodard, Councilmember John Whitehead, Human Resources Manager Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor Higgins called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. PROCLAMATION: Parks &Recreation Month After Mayor Higgins read the proclamation, it was accepted with thanks from Parks &Recreation Director Mike Stone. 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 Agenda. a. Approval of claim vouchers on July 3, 2018 Request for Council Action Form Total: $2,030,375.27 b. Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending June 15,2018: $338,880.71 c.Approval of June 19,2018 Council Meeting Minutes, Study Session Format It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the Consent Agenda. 2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 18-013 Repealing SVMC 2.45—Cary Driskell After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley and seconded to suspend the rules and adopt Ordinance 18-013 repealing chapter 2.45 relating to creation of the Department of Public Safety, on first reading. City Attorney Driskell again explained that the reasons for the ordinance to repeal SVMC 2.45, is that those public safety services are separate municipal entities with their own elected or appointed leadership,and there is no need for a"Department of Public Safety"as noted in the code, because the City has no legal control over those entities. Mayor Higgins invited public comment;no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation:In favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 3. Motion Consideration: Preferred Alternative, Sullivan&Wellesley Intersection—Erica Amsden, Gloria Mantz It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley and seconded to authorize staff to move forward with the design of a traffic signal for the Sullivan/Wellesley Intersection Improvement Project. Via her PowerPoint, Ms. Amsden explained that the purpose of this agenda item is for Council to make a selection for the control of the intersection,either a roundabout or traffic signal;she mentioned the existing level of service is at failure Council Study Session:07-03-2018 Page I a9 Approved by Council:07-24-2018 level, and there have been 17 accidents in eight years; that with the County's Bigelow project, traffic at Sullivan and Wellesley grows significantly; she went over the project background budget, mentioned the County contributed almost $100,000, that we are coordinating with the County to match schedules, and there is the potential for the County to become the lead agency and construct the intersection improvements. Ms. Amsden explained the pros and cons of the two options of either a traffic signal or a roundabout, and based on staff's evaluation,the conclusion was that the signal would have lower right-of-way impacts and therefore lower project costs, a higher public acceptance since this is near the schools,a signal would have less public impact during construction, and therefore staff recommends the intersection be improved with a traffic signal. Councilmember Peetz stated that she attended a roundabout symposium where she heard a lot of public comment; that many there were concerned about roundabouts next to a school, but the speakers showed examples of why a roundabout might be a good thing; and she asked for confirmation that it is better to have a signal from a congestion standpoint. Ms. Amsden explained that the performance of this issue was also shown during the June 5th Council meeting; and that during that meeting staff showed models of how this would function with a roundabout, with the full connection and estimated 2040 traffic volume, that there is a B level of service for both options, with the roundabout operating slightly higher within the B; but they are both close to the same level. Councilmember Wick said that at the last conversation, staff showed the Sullivan Corridor Study,where this intersection was reviewed as well as the intersection where Sullivan has the ramps down to Trent; and he asked if we use a signal here,that does mean we should also use a signal for that area as well. Ms. Amsden explained that is what the Corridor study suggested, but it doesn't mean we can't engineer a different solution. Councilmember Wick mentioned that he was looking at the amount of asphalt needed for expanding that width of the bridge, and that it appears to be significantly larger if there was a signalized intersection on those two intersections. Ms.Amsden confirmed it was a larger expansion and is a possibility for expanding any of the overpasses, but we are not sure that those roundabouts were accurately designed; she said it is about a 5%schematic and she isn't sure if they have taken into account all the truck traffic;that those could get a lot bigger and the expansion and the overpasses also could get a lot bigger; she said we don't have enough information to put costs behind the project at this time; and there is a lot of expansion with either option. Councilmember Wick said he is sure we didn't take into account too much the cost difference on that project, so if we were to go for a signal here that forces a signal there, then that would be more of an expense there, and said it might be a tradeoff. Again, Ms. Amsden said it could be, but it was just too preliminary to put together costs until this is fully designed; and for roundabouts especially with the right kind of modeling, and looking at auto turns, she said that isn't something we have budgeted for currently; concerning the widening of Sullivan between Trent and Wellesley,that was needed for a signal but not the roundabout, but the roundabout also included banning all left turns on that stretch,which is something we might or might not want to do, and she again stressed that until this is designed and staff goes through all process and talks to the residents to determine what is appropriate for them, that we can't just take what was in the corridor study and run with that. Councilmember Wick said he just didn't want this decision to impair any future decision for the other area. Councilmember Wick asked how much of a percentage of the design is on the one showing today. Ms. Amsden said that the geometry is fairly locked down and staff feels pretty confident in estimates at this time, and there is a contingency; she said they are about 35-40% but staff has not done the full horizontal, but is confident on the geometry and the footprint. In response to a question from Councilmember Thompson about how the design and the project would be affected if the County takes the lead on this project, Ms. Amsden said we would need discussions for the County to take the lead on this which would probably not happen during the design stage;that we'd turn to them for construction, and if they are willing to take on that responsibility, we would transfer the grant to them, and they would then put our plans into their grant packet. Deputy City Manager Hohman stated that we have had several coordination meetings with the County and their recommendation is for a traffic signal Council Study Session:07-03-2018 Page 2 of 9 Approved by Council:07-24-2018 as well. Councilmember Wick expressed his surprise that the County endorsed their preference for a traffic signal, and Mr. Hohman said that the County Engineer in several meetings has said that's his preferred option.Mayor Higgins invited public comments; no comments were offered. Councilmember Woodard said he too went to the symposium on the roundabouts, and there was a lot of consternation about the roundabouts; said his greatest concern and that was shared with the parents and schools, and public is in this case;that he has seen roundabouts next to schools but they weren't coming in with 6400 vehicles or trucks; said this creates a unique problem because of the entrances and exits of the high school's parking lot; said he assumes there will have to be an island so the kids can't come out of the main parking lot and cross traffic lanes going north and then try to get onto the southbound lane; he said the pedestrian part is of great concern as many pedestrians will try to walk the quickest path to get to their destination; said this will be splitting a campus and therefore the signal here is a good solution while the public is getting more used to roundabouts. Deputy Mayor Haley said she agrees with the signal, and that the County even recognizes that while a signal and a roundabout both perform close to the same level,this is a much less expensive concept. Councilmember Wick said he also attended the symposium and one of the presenters, Rachel Price from Roundabotix,used a school model where they were splitting the campus with a highway, which he said is very similar to this and said he brought this project to her attention, and said that she found that roundabouts are easier for students because they are just fresh out of driver's education; and that they have a newer way of doing smaller rights-of-way as one approaches the roundabout; he said a lot of the cost between the roundabout and the signal is because the additional right- of-way coming up to it; in looking at those green shaded areas and all the extra land that has to go with that, that is a good portion of the extra cost. Ms. Amsden said that is not due to the approach lanes; that the reason we are shifting the roundabout north is so we won't have to purchase the properties on the south; that it would actually take out those structures for us to place it right in the middle of the intersection; so it's not the speed and the approach lanes that you see on some highways that is causing this, it is actually just a less expensive use of right-of-way so we don't have to do relocations. Councilmember Wick said he would like to have someone like Rachel Price look at this and come back with another view on this;he said there is a bigger piece on this in how the County will connect Bigelow Gulch into this; he said this discussion has been going on for a long time and there was some discussion about going over or under the Bigelow Gulch Road to provide access to the school across to their campus; said he doesn't know where that idea might be now but the last he heard, there was an for a HAWK signal; he said if you do a HAWK signal it would make sense to move toward a traffic signal as the intersection signal and HAWK signal work together in their timing,which you can't do with a roundabout; said he thinks there are other options; that he is leaning more toward the roundabout; that as we discuss place making and identity,there are some roundabouts with art in the center, and he said he feels this would be a good opportunity to help identify that community area; so there are lots of possibilities with the roundabout option; and said he was hoping we could engage someone else who has done these around the country. Councilmember Wood asked if we are anticipating a lot of truck traffic off of Bigelow Gulch; and Ms. Amsden replied we are. Councilmember Wood said having a centerpiece in the middle of a roundabout could create problems with truckers, and said he favors the signal. Mayor Higgins asked Council if they were ready for the question; then asked for those in favor to say "aye." It was unclear who voted aye. Councilmernber Peetz said that Councilmember Wick had mentioned there are many pieces to this project, and if we decided this option tonight, is this something that can be changed later if something more comes up,or is this permanent.Deputy City Manager Hohman said he wants to assure Council that staff has looked at this in a lot of different ways, this has been coordinated with many different people including our contracted consultant Welch Comer who did the evaluation; said they have had discussions with the County and they see this as a continuation of Bigelow Gulch and they are looking at crossings for students as it does split the campus; said part of our recommendation is we are not so concerned with students driving through as students trying to walk across the street; he said roundabouts have split two schools, but there are no examples of this in this region; that perhaps it is a bit early to introduce the pedestrian crossing at Council Study Session:07-03-2018 Page 3 of 9 Approved by Council:07-24-2018 this location, which is one of the reasons staff recommended going a different direction; said he feels costs and right-of-way issues are secondary issues,but we want to look at safety; said we know that the operations of a roundabout from a traffic standpoint is safer than a signal, but as you do the entire analysis and we use our engineering judgment to provide Council a recommendation, that pedestrian crossing doesn't feel like we are at the right time or the right place for that with the right acceptance from the community and the students; said it is up to Council if Council wants to study this more, or continue with the design selection. Mr. Hohman also mentioned staff had talked about keeping in the design phase and moving this forward. Ms. Amsden said the original schedule was to construct this in 2019 although we are most likely looking at 2020 now, and we have to get right-of-way from several properties, which takes time; that it would probably be the most advantageous to make a decision tonight if possible,in order for us to meet our funding obligation deadlines and to move forward with the project in a timely manner to coordinate with the County. Mr.Hohman noted that this has been coordinated with the County,and as Councilmember Wick mentioned, the County is anticipating putting in a HAWK signal at this location,which could then be easily coordinated with the signal at Wellesley, and that is the direction the County would like to head. Councilmember Wick asked if we have had a public meeting with the students at East Valley. Ms.Amsden said we held a public meeting at East Valley High School, and parents and students,and people from the neighborhood attended; she said they also had several meetings with the trucking industry representatives, and had separate meetings with the School District. Councilmember Wick asked if they were leaning more toward the signal rather than the roundabout, and Ms. Amsden said there were mixed reactions; that initially East Valley School District said they wanted a signal; said they attended the public meeting, and that she placed two calls to Superintendent Mr. Kelly Shea to try to get a consensus from him on his current views, but has not received a return call; and said she does not know if he has a strong opinion one way or the other; she said that the trucking industry indicated both options would work well for them; and that it was the parents and students of East Valley High School who expressed the most concerns, especially of pedestrians not using the crosswalks appropriately, or drivers trying to take the roundabout too fast. Going back to the motion to authorize staff to move forward with the design of a traffic signal for the Sullivan/Wellesley Intersection Improvement Project: Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Higgins, Deputy Mayor Haley, and Council members Woodard, Thompson, Peetz, and Wood. Opposed: Councilmember Wick. Motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENTS: After Mayor Higgins explained the process,he invited public comments. Mr. Lynn Plaggemeier, Spokane Valley: said he has been travelling around and saw many nice looking well-managed cities; said it is important that Council adopt a program to get young people into city government; to train them to know what city government is. There were no other public comments. NON-ACTION ITEMS: 4. Mission Avenue Street Preservation Project, McDonald to Evergreen—Gloria Mantz,Erica Amsden Ms. Amsden explained that the Mission Avenue Preservation Project,McDonald to Evergreen is a priority project as the road segment shows numerous areas of pavement stress such as cracking,as well as potholes. She said the project is part of the 2018 Street Preservation Projects and is funded by City Fund 311; she explained the project design of the grind and inlay drive lanes, replacing failing drywells and providing sediment control,and that the McDonald intersection also requires signal modifications. Ms.Amsden went over the temporary traffic control plan and said that bus stops will be temporarily relocated; she noted that the bid has been advertised with a scheduled bid opening of July 13, after which this will come to Council July 24 for a bid award. In response to a question from Councilmember Thompson,Ms. Amsden said any buses will be treated as "through traffic." 5. Street Addressing Standard--Doug Powell Building Official Powell explained that since our City's incorporation, the protocol of assigning street addresses for parcels and buildings has been consistent with that historically applied in Spokane County, Council Study Session:07-03-2018 Page 4 of 9 Approved by Council:07-24-2018 where street numbers begin at the intersection of Division Street and Sprague Avenue in Spokane. Mr. Powell went through his PowerPoint explaining what initiated the need for a regional system, that our current policy generally mirrors the adopted regional standard, and he went over the basics of our current policy. Mr. Powell noted that the Standard has been adopted by the cities of Spokane, Liberty Lake, Deer Park,and by Spokane county,and for regional consistency,that staff recommends the drafting and adoption of an ordinance consistent with the City of Spokane Valley Street Standards; and said staff seeks Council consensus to move forward with the adoption process. Ensuing discussion included comment from Councilmember Woodard that if we change things, Google maps and other maps would have to be changed;said he doesn't want an ordinance that decrees things must be reassigned, adding that we have an easy layout. Councilmember Peetz mentioned that the Police and Fire Chiefs have asked us to participate; and that it makes sense to be a part of this. Deputy City Manager Hohman said that we had a coordination meeting with Police and Fire and discussed the topic and agreed there are no known problems; said the Fire Marshall suggested we move forward with adoption of the policy and that forms the basis of our recommendation, and said we are looking for Council consensus to move forward with it, or to let staff know not to move forward. In response to Councilmember Wick's question about whether we already have approved standards, Mr. Hohman said we have some items included in our street standards that loosely describe addressing; that we have followed the County's process with little or no conflicts or changes; said with a regional group there might be minor changes in each jurisdiction's process, such as the County allows four or more parcels because their definition of a driveway is different from ours; he said we'd work on a policy and a framework that would fit our circumstances and it would be a new code section.Mayor Higgins asked Council for their preference, and at least four Councilmembers nodded their agreement to have staff bring in an ordinance to outline the formal process. 6. Association of Washington Cities Benefits Trust Sponsorship for Spokane Regional Transportation Council—John Whitehead Human Resources Manager Whitehead explained the purpose of this resolution,as noted in his July 3,2018 Request for Council Action form; and in response to Councilmember Thompson's inquiry,said we did this once previously where we sponsored the County Library District. There was Council consensus to place this on next week's Consent Agenda. 7. Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins Councilmember Wick mentioned that last week's AWC Conference and of the many workshops many of the Councilmembers attended; and he asked about having a special meeting where Council could share and discuss those topics. Three Councilmembers were not opposed to having a special meeting, and City Clerk Bainbridge mentioned as per the Governance Manual, Councilmembers can add these types of issues as a report on an upcoming agenda item. Councilmember Woodard said he will be gone July 24th, but he likes the idea of having this as an agenda topic, or a memorandum or information to share with the public. Councilmember Thompson said she was thinking more along the lines of an action item, making some planning ideas for events; said she would love to see a programming workshop,or a type of vision meeting, and said she is amiable to other suggestions as well. 8. Department Monthly Reports These reports were for information only and were not reported or discussed. 9. Council Check-in--Mayor Higgins Councilmember Thompson mentioned again that as a first time attendee, she was very impressed with the AWC conference and the opportunities to be involved with that organization, and that it was a great conference and she appreciated the opportunity to attend. Council Study Session:07-03-2018 Page 5 of 9 Approved by Council:07-24-2018 Mayor Higgins said that in the beginning when we made committee assignments, he was attempting to set up a system whereby we would work more smoothly and it would be more cooperative,but said that hasn't worked out that way;said he is now proposing to make some amendments to those committee assignments: to have Mr. Woodard move from the Health Board and on to SRTC; for Mr. Wood to move to the Finance Committee,for Mr. Wick to move from SRTC and the Finance to Visit Spokane and the Health Board,and Ms. Haley to move from Visit Spokane. It was then moved by Councilmember Woodard to approve that; and in addressing the City Clerk said he suspects you are going to want exact motion language. City Clerk Bainbridge replied that she would like to defer this to Mr. Hohman and Mr. Driskell, because usually Council doesn't make a motion unless it's been on the agenda so people know what's coming up; she said we can certainly add it to the agenda that is coming out the day after tomorrow if you'd like. Mayor Higgins said we have in the past made motions from the floor, and City Clerk Bainbridge said they have, and they can, but usually you don't, and she asked Mr. Driskell or Hohman for their input. In response to Mayor Higgin's question if they are the parliamentarian, City Clerk Bainbridge said they are not, and said it is.up to you, Mayor Higgins, but reiterated that usually you don't. Mayor Higgins said that he believes what is being proposed is permitted, and City Clerk Bainbridge said absolutely he can; she said she is a little conflicted on this as there isn't a motion on tonight's agenda,that she is struggling with this and asked for assistance from City Attorney Driskell. City Attorney Driskell said he thinks there are two questions: one relates to parliamentarian issues and that he isn't sure there is an issue there;typically we do give advance notice of this for anyone who would care to comment; the second issue is the Governance Manual, and said he isn't able to immediately remember on committee assignments,whether there is any particular protocol that Council has adopted pursuant to that resolution. City Clerk Bainbridge said she doesn't remember anything that sets out the protocol, except that it is usually done once a year, but that doesn't mean it can't happen otherwise, because it does happen otherwise because things come up. Mr. Driskell said this is something that the Mayor makes a motion or proposes, and it is confirmed or not by a majority of the Council. Councilmember Wick asked if there is a more restrictive requirement for committee removal.City Clerk Bainbridge said the Governance Manual Committee is working on that, but there is nothing in that manual that addresses removal from a committee, although the committee is working on some suggested verbiage for the next rendition of that manual. Councilmember Wick said if there is nothing in the Governance Manual,then isn't there a reference in the end that said that in the absence of something in the Governance Manual, that Roberts Rules presides; and said he is pretty sure you have to have a super majority vote for removal from an appointment. City Clerk Bainbridge said she would have to look that up about committees. Mayor Higgins said he believes the super majority for removal is for something other than an appointed office, and City Clerk Bainbridge agreed. Councilmember Peetz asked if she could make a motion to table this until the next meeting. City Clerk Bainbridge said tabling something is different because you can't discuss it until the next meeting and before discussion, would have to make a motion to take it off the table. City Clerk Bainbridge asked for confirmation if Mr. Woodard had made a motion, and he replied he was about to but was interrupted. City Clerk Bainbridge explained that Ms. Peetz could either ask or make a motion that this be postponed to a specific time; she explained that you usually don't table something that's not already on the agenda.It was then moved by Councilmember Peetz and seconded by Councilmember Thompson to put this on the agenda so we can have public comment. Deputy Mayor Haley, speaking to City Clerk Bainbridge, said we have never had public comment on a committee appointment before, but Ms. Bainbridge said she believes we have, although she isn't sure anyone ever commented on an appointment before; and Mayor Higgins said he would surmise since it would have been on an agenda as an action item,there probably would have been opportunity for public comment. Councilmember Wick said he was hoping for some discussion since this is new to him, and as the one being removed from the two committees, that he wished he had more understanding of what was happening to cause for his removal from the committees he sits on. Council Study Session:07-03-2018 Page 6 of 9 Approved by Council:07-24-2018 Mayor Higgins invited public comment. Mr. Bob West, Spokane Valley: said he generally looks at the agenda which drives his coming to the meeting; that this is a spur of the moment thing, and said it is his understanding that there was a lot of thought put into those committee assignments, and it would be interesting to know the reasons why; said he feels those people on those committees now are doing an admirable job and the City is moving forward on those, and if someone is being removed for just cause, that would be information that he believes the public would like to know, and the reasoning behind it; said he doesn't want to call it"blindsiding" but it would be interesting; this is part of the transparency that we have been talking about and said this doesn't feel transparent to him.There were no other public comments. Councilmember Peetz said she would also like to know some of the reasons behind why Mayor Higgins would want to switch things around;that Mr. Woodard and Mrs. Haley already have quite a few things on their plate; and that Mr. Wick has the most experience with SRTC,has great relationships with SRTC, and has actually moved a lot of our projects forward and works well with our staff; and said she doesn't understand why the removal.Councilmember Woodard said the Governance Manual makes it clear that the committee appointments are at the discretion of the Mayor so he really doesn't have to give reasons and it doesn't really matter what the reasons are; if he feels that the shuffling of the current Council is such that maybe something different or more can be accomplished then he has the right to do that; and Council gets to affirm or not affirm, and not the appointment part of it.Mayor Higgins reminded everyone that the issue is not putting this on the agenda and not the actual movement as there isn't a motion for that change right now. Deputy Mayor Haley clarified that Councilmember Peetz talked about Ms. Haley having a lot on her plate, but this would be a removal from a committee and not being put on another committee. Mayor Higgins asked if Council is ready for the question of postponing this and putting it on the agenda. Vote by Acclamation land later confirmed by a show of hands opposed to putting this on the agenda]: In Favor: Councilmembers Thompson, Wick and Peetz. Opposed: Mayor Higgins, Deputy Mayor Haley, and Councilmembers Wood and Woodard. The motion failed. It was then moved by Councilmember Woodard and seconded by Deputy Mayor Haley to make the proposed committee changes: Mr. Woodard movedfrom Health Board to the SRTC, Mr. Wood moved to the finance committee, Mr. Wick moved from SRTC and finance committee to Visit Spokane and the Health Board, and Ms. Haley moved to Visit Spokane. Mayor Higgins invited public comment;no comments were offered. Council discussion ensued with Councilmember Wick stating that he feels he has served well on the SRTC Board, said he was elected vice chair and chair-elect for next year to represent the community;said that this month and in less than a week the committee will be taking action on a multi-year allocation of funds for the next five years for all the major roadway projects, for which, he said he is slated to lead the discussion of a whole new process of how they will be doing that and better align our projects as a region; said he thinks we will get stalled out a lot on this if a change is made at this last second; he said the SRTC Chair will not be there next week for that meeting,and we will miss out on a whole rotation;thinking of this from a City perspective and not trying to be personal, said he's also up and was nominated for the Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board and was selected from the entire cities across the State of Washington to represent all cities on freight and transportation mobility and pending the Governor's Office, which he said he was just in communication with and expects an appointment within the next week to that board as well,so not only representing our community and our region but also all the cities across the state; and said he did get a nomination and full support from the Association of Washington Cities Board as well for that appointment. Councilmember Wick said he has a lot of background and passion for transportation and experience that he feels would benefit and help our City from him being on that committee position, and that he is sorry if he did something that made it seem he was not a team player; said he feels that we have been trying to get together; that all six Councilmembers were at the AWC Conference,we saw each other and tried to dialogue as much as possible; and said he is not sure where he isn't being a team player. Concerning the Finance Committee,Mr. Wick said he'll give that up as he doesn't see that as a huge risk Council Study Session:07-03-2018 Page 7 of 9 Approved by Council:07-24-2018 to our City, but the Regional Transportation Board, there are so many large decisions coming up in such a short time, and our position there would be greatly lost if we make a change at this short notice. Councilmember Thompson said she is very taken aback by this happening; that she thought Council was trying to move forward and make sure Council is focused on Spokane Valley being successful in our region and having the right people in the right place; said she definitely having Councilmember Woodard on the Board of Health was bringing a City perspective, with him having been here a long time on our Council; and that we have talked about Visit Spokane and she realizes that Deputy Mayor Haley knows a lot of people; and as a new Councilmember, said she has been trying to work on the Board of Health and be part of the what's happening in the community; said she would like to see Council be more communicative and more open about plans rather than being surprised on the dais of something that is totally unexpected; said she saw how respected our City Councilmembers were, even the new ones, that many people wanted to engage with Councilmembers; she said this is embarrassing for leaders on our Council to be taken out of a committee publicly like this with no conversation; said she understands that the Mayor has that the ability to appoint someone;said she is thinking that there should be something egregious that has happened, or not participating in the committee or not showing up or just not doing something, and said that doesn't appear to be happening with the committee assignments we have; she said she thinks everyone is trying hard to represent us well, so she is disappointed in this move. City Attorney Driskell asked for a point of clarification, in that the City has one seat on Visit Spokane, but that the way he thought he heard Mr. Woodard's motion, was that Mr. Wick would be on Visit Spokane, but thought he heard one other person as well. Mayor Higgins clarified that we are removing Ms. Haley. Councilmember Woodard apologized if he read that wrong. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Higgins, Deputy Mayor Haley, and Councilmembers Wood and Woodard. Opposed: Councilmembers Wick, Thompson and Peetz. Motion carried 10. Deputy City Manager Comments—John Hohman Deputy City Manager Hohman, said in Mr. Calhoun's absence, that Mr. Calhoun requested that Mr. Hohman address an e-mail that Mr. Calhoun sent to Council last Sunday evening regarding the Mullan Monument, and to give background and provide some clarification. Mr. Hohman explained that the monument designates the location of the John Mullan Trail throughout the region; the monument in question is located at the intersection of Sprague and Vista on the southwest corner; it was constructed in 1922 and has been there ever since, so it is coming up on its 100-year anniversary. Mr.Hohman explained that the monument has been in different stages of repair or disrepair throughout the 100 years, and it has seen some changes in different land uses associated with that area. He said that one of the concerns several years ago when the Plantation Building was razed was what would happen to the monument, is this a secure location, and what will future development do with the community icon; during that time we were also planning on this City Hall building and the site and through that process,the idea came up to have a number of different sculptures here;we went through a planning process,and as part of that process there was public discussion on moving the Mullan Monument to the City Hall site; predominately it would be an amenity here but it would also be for protection from unknown effects of future development in its current location. Mr. Hohman said that was discussed with Council input on the site plan; there were several iterations of that site plan that showed the monument being part of this site plan,to be located just outside the corner of the Council Chambers. Mr. Hohman said that as staff was working toward this, we found that one of the difficult things is no one has ever moved a monument of that nature before;we researched several options, and did some testing with drilling to see if we could discern what it was made of; and said that we did attempt to move the monument, and that as he has been publicly saying for a long time,the monument did not want to be moved. Mr. Hohman explained that through the process staff worked with Jayne Singleton of the Museum prior to the move,and had consulted with her on the site plan generation itself; and said that she understood the concerns and she wasn't in full support of the idea to move it, but she understood the wisdom of that at the time; and once the move was abandoned staff consulted again with Ms. Singleton, who he said has been a great partner with us, as noticed by the historical photos throughout City Hall; and Council Study Session:07-03-2018 Page 8 of 4 Approved by Council:07-24-2018 we put a plan together to remediate the issue out there. Further, Mr. Hohman stated,the one thing that City administration is feeling, is the inaccuracy of the text box on page 19 of the July issue of the Current,where it states that the City's official position is that vandalism caused the issues out there on the monument. Mr. Hohman said that statement is not true. He said that over the years there have been rocks that have come loose due to weathering and vandalism. Mr. Hohman said that at no point in his recollection of the development of the article, did the paper ask if the monument had been moved, and it was several months ago when the article was being put together, and all along we had the approach that we were going to fix the damage we did there; and said we had been working through that; he said it is not easy to find some company with skills to fix that 100-year old structure; and it took some time for us to locate a company that had the particular skills to fix that and again coordinated that with Ms. Singleton to make sure she was comfortable with the plan for repairs. Mr.Hohman said that repair occurred a couple of weeks ago and the monument is now restored and has a protective collar around it;that it is a little different than it was before but it wasn't stable before so that repair had to be done as well. Mr. Hohman added that Ms. Singleton is working on an interpretative sign for the area, and we will also look for other amenities such as bollards,or chains or something to not only designate this, but protect it. Mr. Hohman said we would like to have that public discussion,and clarify that the City's official position was never that vandalism caused this;this was something that we did cause as part of our efforts to look at the site plan, and said we have done the appropriate work to remediate the damage, and the work was done in an appropriate fashion. Councilmember Woodard asked if that is on private land or public right-of-way, and Mr. Hohman replied that it is right on the edge of right-of-way for Sprague, but also right up against private property. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Haley, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 7:36 p.m. C4: isiarril ATT L.R. yor I :4,44,14 Kristine Bainbridg , City Clerk Council Study Session:07-03-2018 Page 9 of 9 Approved by Council:07-24-2018 SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, July 3, 2018 6:00 p.m. Study Session (Hybrid) Meeting GENERAL CITIZEN COMMENTS SIGN-IN SHEET YOUR SPEAKING TIME WILL GENERALLY BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES This sign-in sheet is for making comments not associated with an action item on tonight's agenda. If you wish to comment about an individual action item on tonight's agenda (such a a otion to approve an ordinance, resolution, or contract) the Mayor will ask for comme s on ose items once that item is reached on the agenda. Please sign in if you wish to make public comments. NAME TOPIC OF CONCERN YOU YOUR CITY OF ' IDENCE PLEASE PRINT WILL SPEAK ABOUT jr .,7 /%a/7'� �'� -v C/7/7 a tf7.4% //' 'rte Please note that once information is uttered on this form, it becomes a public record subject to public disclosure.