Loading...
2008, 06-14 Special Retreat Meeting MinutesAttendance: Councilmembers Rich Munson, Mayor Dick Denenny, Deputy Mayor Rose Dempsey, Councilmember Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Steve Taylor, Councilmember Gary Schimmels, Councilmember Diana Wilhite, Councilmember MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING /RETREAT SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL June 14, 2008 9:00 a.m. — 3:00 p.m. Staff Mayor Munson convened the meeting at approximately 9:10 a.m. Dave Mercier, City Manager Mike Jackson Deputy City Mgr Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Ken Thompson, Finance Director Mike Connelly, City Attorney Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Kathy McClung, Community Development Dir, Mary Kate Martin, Building Official Rick VanLeuven, Police Chief Carolbelle Branch, Public Information Officer Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk 1. Updated Financial Forecast — Ken Thompson Mr. Thompson explained the "Multiyear Financial Plan- General Fund - Problem Statement #1" dated June 1, 2008, and said that there have been some significant changes since this document was last issued; that the projected sales tax had been increased after January to 2 %, but that we are trying to get a more realistic picture and this figure represents about 1.6% less than the prior year. Mr. Thompson also stated that the gambling tax is significantly lower with one casino making weekly payments, one casino in bankruptcy, and one which has not yet paid. In response to a question about options to collect the tax, Deputy City Attorney Driskell said it might be possible to require the landlord who rents the operation to pay the taxes. Mr. Thompson further explained that the carryover from the prior year is up substantially compared to prior years, and that we attempt to account for an annual 8% increase overall in expenditures. Mr. Mercier added that with the wage settlement with Sheriff Deputies over the next three years, we could experience higher expenditures there as well; and that the bottom line figure in 2013 and 2014 show some serious challenges. It was noted that although the sales tax increase figures (Spokane Transit and Crime Check) are unknown at this point, they could have an affect on our figures; and Mr. Mercier mentioned that with the passage of those ballot issues (interoperability) we won't have to rely on a series of federal grants which relieves the problem of coming up with matching funds; and added that the added funds from the ballot issue will not likely be used to upgrade the mobile data in cars, but would more likely be used for the new handheld radios. Mr. Thompson continued with the explanation of "Street Fund - Problem Statement #2" dated June 1, 2008, and said that this shows our most serious challenge; that another transfer will occur in 2009 to help balance that budget, and said that he has asked Public Works to hold the expenditures at $4.2 million, which will be difficult to do, especially if we experience another rough winter. In response to comment about the motor fuel tax, Mr. Thompson said that amount is fixed, and people are driving less now due to the high cost of fuel; and that we need another $2.5 million annually in the street fund. Mr. Thompson noted that it is interesting that entities on the west side of the state use a B &O tax, while entities on the east side tend to use the utility tax. Mr. Thompson said that the good news is that the "City of Spokane Valley - Capital Improvement Program Funding Problem Statement #3 ", dated June 6, 2008, shows the capital side of finances in pretty good shape; and that although real estate sales were going strong, that has slowed down now as well; that we Retreat Minutes 6 -14 -08 Page 1 of 10 Approved by Council: 07 -08 -08 are beginning to draw down the street capital projects now that we have staff to do the projects, and mentioned that the bids are coming in higher than anticipated. Mr. Thompson said it is difficult to put together the data as the street fund jumps around depending on whether the Sate is willing to help fund any projects, and that those projects are constantly changing. Mr. Thompson also pointed out the Storm Water Drainage jump from $300,000 in 2011, to $500,000 in 2012, 13 and 14. Public Works Director Kersten stated that in 2012, the Aquifer Protection Area fees that are being appropriated now to the STEP, which amount to about $400,000, will be focused on stormwater projects. Concerning capital projects, Mr. Thompson continued by explaining that we might have to eventually prioritize those projects as he envisions not being able to afford everything; and added that we will receive about $300,000 annually from the block grants. Mr. Mercier explained that we have just entered into a three -year agreement with the County whereby we will receive entitlement dollars from the HUD, and after that time period, we will make a determination whether to go on our own. Mayor Munson asked what happens to the funds once the project is complete, and Councilmember Gothmann said the grants would continue out a few years and then the funds would be rolled back into the coffers for distribution; and added that perhaps we would look at future negotiations for a set -aside amount for our City. Mayor Munson mentioned he received an e -mail from Greater Spokane, Inc about participating in future planning for economic development, and asked Council for a consensus to have representation on that planning group. Deputy Mayor Denenny stated his preference to get further information and more definitions in order to determine who might want to participate. Mayor Munson said the first meeting is Monday and he asked for a placeholder in the group; and that he will send an e -mail today about the meeting. Councilmember Wilhite said that she could attend the 2:00 p.m. meeting. Mayor Munson said he also received a request for support of federal low income loans for federal housing, and that a draft letter will be inserted as an informational item in the next council packet expressing support of such loans, and if there are questions, he asked Council to bring them up at the next meeting. 2. Review 2008 Council Goals — Dave Mercier In review of the 2008 goals, City Manager Mercier reminded everyone that goal 7 (Develop a Shoreline Master Program) was deleted as a function of last January's retreat, and stated that goal #6: "Perform an analysis of land owner initiated requests for annexation" is a problem as no one can petition for annexation until after the County resolves the Urban Growth Area Assignment, which appears won't occur until the end of the year, if then. City Attorney Connelly commented that once the County adopts the existing UGAs as our future annexation areas, we could attempt to process a petition for annexation, but that the County might want to challenge such as they haven't assigned those gray areas as the City of Spokane Valley's. Discussion ensued regarding the overall process, the area Liberty Lake annexed and that it never came before the GMA Steering Committee, and that based on available information, perhaps we should amend this goal to state that "by the end of this year to have our future annexation areas identified and move forward" and that such goal would be better placed as a 2009 goal. This led to further discussion about the City having identified future annexation areas by the end of this year; that although no one has stepped forward, there would likely be landowners who would indicate they want to annex into our community as some residents such as those on Park Road have expressed interest. Councilmember Taylor suggested having the annexation procedures taken care of through the comp plan by the end of this year, then start to inform the public of the steps needed to request annexation, and that they would be able to do so in 2009, then perform an analysis of the areas in consideration. Further discussion included the suggestion by Attorney Connelly to hire someone to perform such an analysis to see if annexation would be a positive or negative step and to budget for such analysis. It was determined to drop the old 2008 #6 goal (perform an analysis), and add a new #6 goal to address completing the UGA adopting language to identify future annexation. Mr. Mercier added that we have a transportation funding presentation set for the July 1 council meeting, and that staff will come back with more information on revenue sources within the next month to posture council so Council can make decisions which could flow into the structure of the strategic plan. Retreat Minutes 6 -14 -08 Page 2 of 10 Approved by Council: 07 -08 -08 3. Proposed 2009 Council Goals — Dave Mercier City Manager Mercier explained that the first six draft 2009 goals come about as a result of the January 2008 retreat, but that there was confusion over the item regarding continue using private sector for winter maintenance, so he changed the language for #6 to "evaluate" the availability, costs and effects of private sector vendors performing winter road maintenance for the City, and added #7, to "Phase in a document imaging system with the goal of achieving city -wide implementation in 2010," as the continuation of the records management work will entail selecting a software system, then initiating the scanning process which will likely take 18 to 24 months for temporary employees to scan the documents into the system; adding indexing was also mentioned. Mr. Mercier continued by stating that since he was not in attendance at the January 2008 retreat, he was not sure of the intent of goal #2 to "continue monitoring the Police Department" and that after the discussion later today concerning the enforcement assessment, Council may want to re -visit a goal related to the police department. Mr. Mercier reminded everyone that today's desired outcome is not to have final wording of these goals, but to consider these and that the topic of 2009 goals will be placed on the advance agenda for further consideration; and that Council can pass over #2 now, revisit it at the end of today, or discuss it at the July 1 meeting. Mayor Munson said the idea was to look at what we are doing now, to establish those policies that council would be responsible for in monitoring the police department crime levels, and number of personnel, and the idea was to keep this in front of Council to get reports and assess the performance of the police force. Mr. Mercier said one of the deliberations for this assessment is the reasonable performance levels for the police department, and that we might work on language focused on monitoring performance levels of the police department. Deputy Mayor Denenny said part of that is he wants to see what policy decisions could affect the actions of the police department, and to determine where we want the levels and what areas to emphasize. Mr. Mercier stated that Rick VanLeuven is working on a presentation for Council within the next month, and that staff is searching for the appropriate performance measures which will lead to better define the policy goals. In further discussion, Councilmember Taylor said that he would like answers to the question of what goals are they operating under now, what are they trying to achieve now, does that need to be amended, and what is needed to determine where the needs in the community are; and added that he looks forward to the Chief's presentation in July. Mr. Mercier also mentioned that to get where we want to be, it will be helpful to have this assessment product, and the idea is to state the standards of community policy and determine how we are doing, are we doing the right thing; so we want to have the assessment, look at performance, judge policing policies, and determine if we are gaining the desired effect. In considering other goals, Attorney Connelly said staff recognizes the need for ongoing revisions of the Development Code in a number of areas, of the need to make it more streamlined, identify specific road projects, reserve acquisition areas, and that this will be an ongoing change. Mr. Mercier suggested for a 2008 goal to refine the UDC, and for 2009, have the goal of the continued refinement of the UDC. This discussion will be continued at the July 1 Council study session. 4. Public Information Program — Mike Jackson Deputy City Manager Jackson explained that although we have an ongoing communication program, staff is working toward furthering that "Public Information Program" and he went over the listed options for information sharing. Mr. Jackson further explained that Public Information Officer Carolbelle Branch is conducting research, and that he and Ms. Branch and Mr. Mercier went through the matrix to develop all potential options; that the idea is not to necessarily use all the options at once, but rather five or six for any given issue; and he then briefly went over some of the benefits and disadvantages of each as listed on the matrix. Regarding the street fund, Mr. Jackson stated that there are a number of articles on the web, and we are trying to get the word out on this issue and others; and that we can try to do everything in- house or contract out some of it; and he likened this plan to that used to market CenterPlace; that a Fact Sheet can be distributed, put on the website, and even included as a newspaper insert. Mr. Jackson said Retreat Minutes 6 -14 -08 Page 3 of 10 Approved by Council: 07 -08 -08 that Ms. Branch contacted people at Eastern Washington University to ask about what multiple plans work well together so as not to duplicate or overlap. Councilmember Gothmann said that there might already exist some formal studies or research on how citizens best get information about communities, and that EWU might provide a window to that kind of research, and he added that the National Association of Newspapers have conducted research on the effectiveness of various things. The discussion continued with comment on whether to have this in -house or by contract or by some combination; do we have the time and manpower to get this done; mention by Ms. Branch that this project is more than a one - person job and is just one aspect of the Public Information officer's duties; and said having another person in house at least full time would be beneficial; and that this project assumes heavy involvement by Councilmembers to schedule for different events and provide handouts. Mr. Jackson said the actual implementation will require outside sourcing also for developing and printing a flyer or mailer; and said that a communication plan implies two -way communication; that other cites have established such plans, which are not typically just for a specific project, and we need to be careful on how to approach a specific issue. Councilmember Gothmann suggested having a range of issues such as the City Center, taxes, street problem, revitalization, and how we would approach those in the future. Both Ms. Branch and Mr. Jackson said that the cost range is large depending on the scope of work; that we could do the groundwork, but would likely need assistance on the outside research, but that it is too early to state precise costs as they have not examined all the individual costs. The discussion focused on the pros and cons of having in -house versus a contractor, all of which depends on the priority for the communications; with mention that since hiring Ms. Branch, there has been a large increase in the number of media inquiries; and that we have numerous contacts from the Journal of Business on permitting information; there are employee newsletters, media releases on storm events, all of which are challenging for a one - person operation, even with a good intern to assist. Further suggestions included comment that a lot can be generated by hiring the right person; not putting the burden on a consultant for work that should be done in- house; that staff provide the work plan and hire a consultant to carry out the plan; hiring someone for just a few years, perhaps someone just coming out of college with a marketing degree; question on the urgency of this program; speculation on having such program in place now versus later; and mention that this discussion will be replayed in a public form after having more time to gather cost estimates; and that July 1 would make a good first touch, after which a motion could be placed on a later agenda, possibly by mid August. Ms. Branch said that she will work with the proposed standardized plan from the menus as to all elements and bring back cost for each; to which Mr. Mercier added that we will also gather estimated cost for hiring consultant expertise to refine and supervisor the plan and its implementation over the next two years. Councilmember Taylor voiced his opinion that he would be leery about expanding the communications staff permanently over a longer term; to which Deputy Mayor Denenny agreed that we should look for a full time person for immediate needs. Mr. Mercier said he will consider the options for making such a proposal. Mayor Munson called for a short break at 10:30 a.m. and the group reconvened at 10:50 a.m. 5. Transportation Funding — Ken Thompson Finance Director Thompson explained that the street fund is our major financial problem, that it pays for maintenance and operations for streets; that staff identified several potential funding sources including mention that a "Street Utility" tax is not in place yet so that is not feasible at this time; but that a Transportation Benefit District (TBD) with $20.00 vehicle tab fees could generate about $1.3 million; that a solid waste street wear agreement with a 3% tax could generate an approximately $390,000; that we cannot use Real Estate Excise Tax Reallocations (REET) funds for street maintenance as REET funds can only be used for capital projects; that the two options of property tax as shown on his handout could generate $660,000, or a levy, which has the stipulation that 60% of the voters must approve with 40% turnout of the last general election, which could generate $1,980,000; that a gas tax is not possible unless Retreat Minutes 6 -14 -08 Page 4 of 10 Approved by Council: 07 -08 -08 we are a border community, that a storm water tax of 3% could generate $49,500; and that a 3% telephone tax could actually generate $1.5 million rather than his previous estimate of $90,000. Deputy City Attorney Driskell added that regarding the TBD, he spoke with our bond counsel, and with representatives from AWC and the Association of Washington Counties, to see if they felt they could put into place the appropriate language to allow cities to do street maintenance under the license fee; that bond counsel was not comfortable with that and they are working to issue an opinion on that option; and that AWC and the Association of Washington Counties along with Glenn Miles of SRTC are working to put refining language into the Metropolitan Transportation Plan, which will be updated this September; that Mr. Miles recommends the added language, and they feel this is the cure, and if we want to implement the Metropolitan Transportation Plan we could use a TBD for maintenance. Further discussion included mention of the use of councilmanic bonds, general obligations bonds, increasing the solid waste fee by $1.00 or by a percentage to account for inflation; that various phone companies likely do not know which customers are within our city limits and which are not; that some cities have a 6% telephone tax; that Council has authority to set a utility tax up to 6 %; that we need a solution that will last more than a year or two; using the 3% just for street maintenance then increase to 4, 5 or 6% later; mention of the vehicle tab fee which could generate $1.3 million for every $20 dollar fee; that there are exceptions to the tax fee such as government vehicles, private school vehicles, commercial trailers, and others; whether to require mandatory solid waste pickup and /or a reduction in the cost; that Solid Waste has reported they collect from approximately 73% of the population; that any tax could be enacted by specifying the dedicated purpose; and that we cannot impose the tax without the cooperation of Solid Waste until the time period (seven years) ends. There was Council consensus to move toward the mandatory collection of solid waste, with both purveyors: Waste Management and Sunshine; followed by speculation on whether businesses already have mandatory pickup. Mr. Mercier said that while it appears solid waste is the agreeable course to try to develop some funds to support street maintenance, and asked what about a phone tax in 2008? After brief discussion, Mr. Mercier said he will get the rates other cities are charging, and asked if council wants to try to satisfy the entire shortfall problem in street maintenance with these two options of solid waste and phone tax, which could be about a 5% tax increase as opposed to 3 %. Deputy Mayor Denenny said he did not want to use both, as he wants some connection between the road maintenance and the road use. Mr. Mercier asked Councilmembers to consider a tab fee for 2009 to deal with street preservation. Deputy Mayor Denenny said he feels this issue needs further public discussion. Councilmember Taylor said he would like to see the breakdown of numbers from solid waste with and without mandatory pickup; and with an added 3, 4, 5, and 6% increase, and the same analysis with the phone tax. Councilmember Gothmann said that citizens like to see how much it will cost them individually; for example, a 3% phone tax would result in "x" amount of increase in the phone bill. Regarding solid waste, it was mentioned that there are several pickup options and the current rate structure now appears very complex. Mayor Munson said he would like to get this done by the end of the year, and have a motion on this issue within the next there months. Mr. Mercier said he plans to present his preliminary budget to council at the August 12 meeting, and could get this fundamental material prior to that, thereby providing ample opportunity to continue this discussion for the benefit of the community. Attorney Connelly said that although Council concurred to pursue the mandatory pickup, he reminded everyone that nothing can start officially in that regard as that has to be negotiated with the collectors. 6. Shoreline Master Program — Kathy McClung Community Development Director McClung explained that we are not required to update our program until 2013; that the one we have now is very outdated, but we are waiting to see what the City of Spokane and Spokane County's regulations will be as she hopes to piggyback on what they have done, and once they get through the Department of Ecology's (DOE) review, it will make it easier for us to incorporate that; and that both entities plan to have their shoreline master plan done by the first half of next year. Retreat Minutes 6 -14 -08 Page 5 of 10 Approved by Council: 07 -08 -08 Director McClung said that there are two components to this program: a shorelines inventory and the draft text; that our city applied to the Washington State Department of Ecology in 2006 for a grant of over $135,00 but the grant was not funded; and staff will be on the lookout for grants as they become available. Discussion ensued regarding the process and DOE requirements; the idea to pursue this later since we have until 2013; mention that regulations can change but will likely not get less stringent over time; that perhaps we could perform the inventory while the other entities are finalizing their Programs; funding needs for performing an inventory; contracting out the inventory work; setbacks; critical areas; and how we compare with other similar communities. Mr. Mercier said that perhaps we should concentrate more on inventory as opposed to implementation; that we would like to account for some preferences in the preliminary budget and can talk later about outside assistance as opposed to the inventory portion, but that he does not anticipate a budget demand of $150,000 such as that of Federal Way. Mayor Munson mentioned that he received an e -mail from Rob Gragg of Crown West, concerning his dissatisfaction with members of our planning department, and mention of his efforts concerning disincorporation of our City. Mayor Munson said he spoke with Mr. Gragg, who also spoke with Kathy McClung, and since the conversation between Gragg and Kathy, Mr. Gragg was very complimentary and satisfied that the City was not singling him out and that he and our staff can work together; and that in the meantime, John Craig from the Spokesman Review heard rumors that Cal Walker was behind the disincorporation move; but that Mr. Munson called Cal who said that was not the case. Mayor Munson said when he talked to John Craig, Mr. Craig said that Crown Realty was inciting disincorporation efforts; and since then John Craig met with Crown Realty concerning this topic; that John Craig will be writing an article on this issue; and that Crown Realty also told Mr. Craig that Crown Realty was pleased with our staff's contact. Mr. Mercier said he spoke with Chris Berg and Fire Marshall Kevin Miller concerning this topic. Mayor Munson said he will ask Crown Realty to send another e -mail out about the latest response. 7. On -line Permitting — Mary Kate Martin Building Officer Martin explained that since the last developer's forum, there have been many positive results, and compliments to staff several times a month; but to use on -line permitting further study needs to be conducted in terms of continuation of customer service enhancement; that on -line permitting has become the standard with many developers who expect to have this; that the reality of on -line permitting is that it is a challenge in that the database still resides at the County, and we need a database administrator; that staff is examining the potential of having a position 100% to bring the database here and get set up with interface and necessary software; that a server would be needed, including the hardware to put it on; and she added at her last employment, this process took two years to accomplish with full time help to set up and make the database work, including training of staff; but once the system is in place, it takes about one - quarter to half of the database administrator's time to keep the system updated. Ms. Martin said that there are different styles and staff needs to see how each would best interface, that if we want to go with this process, we would need to resolve those issues, and then it would take another few years to have the system up and running. Councilmember Taylor mentioned that the City of Spokane is still working with to get their system up and running after one and a half years; and even now they can only do so for certain minor permits. Ms. Martin responded that staff has to input the data so developers can find where their project is in the system, and she added that the PLUS system is not set up for this, which means we would need another layer to do this, plus the training component. Ms. Martin concurred that most systems she is familiar with only work with simple permits. After brief discussion on utility districts, Mr. Mercier asked and Council concurred, that the goal would not be to affect but to track the status, and refocus on the minimum amount of interface to require viewing only and then have staff come back and report those findings. Retreat Minutes 6 -14 -08 Page 6 of 10 Approved by Council: 07 -08 -08 8. City Center Initiative — Ken Thompson Finance Director Thompson explained that the added series of documents are good for future reading; and some of the funding sources mentioned in the handout, such as sales tax, won't be very significant for a city center. Attorney Connelly added that there are several separate incremental financial methods, such as a tax increment financing area (TIF) using regular property taxes generated by private new development, use of sales tax, or going through other legislative procedures such as Transportation Benefit District (TBD), or Local improvement District (LID). Mr. Thompson further explained that we would likely place this issue before the citizens to ask for some kind of funding; that the cost of a City Center including going back to two -way on Sprague /Appleway, would be approximately $30 million; a parking structure is estimated at $10 million; that we are looking for some portion that would attract a developer and make people want to come to town; that $13 million would be in internal streets such as landscaping and open space such as a plaza. If such proposal would be placed on the ballot, Mr. Thompson explained, we could be asking for about 20¢ per $1,000 assessed value to handle the debt services, which would amount to an annual average increase of $40.00 per homeowner. Mr. Thompson reminded everyone that there are other city needs competing for that same property tax dollar, such as street maintenance, capital projects, parks projects, and a City Hall; and added that the County needs approximately seven to eleven week's notice to place an issue on a ballot. Discussion included the idea of waiting another year; concentrating on what funding we need for City Hall, which Mr. Kersten estimated to be $18 million; attracting a developer to develop the City Center; and having something in place prior to attracting a developer. Council concurred with Deputy Mayor Denenny's suggestion of concentrating on city hall, then go to the voters. Attorney Connelly added that negotiations are on -going for the purchase and sale, and he encouraged Council to look at all financing options, and mentioned that there might be some federal tax credits available which could be used to allure developers; but that most tax increment financing takes money from the city general funds from other years. The idea of grants was mentioned, and Mr. Mercier said our lobbyist did a five -year review of capital budget allocations made and only one city hall project received funding; adding that we are also examining the idea of leasing to own. Concerning a timeline, Mr. Mercier said the plan is to acquire the site and pay for it this year, and continue with city hall planning, then license staff to pursue a call for interest to firms willing to consider a construct lease -to -own proposition. The group stopped for lunch at 12:25 p.m., and the meeting reconvened at 1:15 p.m. 9. Law Enforcement Services — Dave Mercier City Manager Mercier brought attention to the supplemental materials in the packet, and distributed a new sheet entitled: "Law Enforcement" Assessment of Issues and Items of Interest May 19, 2008." Mr. Mercier explained that as we do for all the County services we contract for, we asked for alternative analysis; and said that there was a wide range of conversation at the last January retreat concerning a performance analysis; and to examine options and look at data on how to approach that, we rely on the services of an external agent, and added that everything we've done with law since the beginning, has had political undertones; and that he would like to de- politify this issue; that ICMA (International City /County Management Association) has a consulting group which specializes in this particular type of review, which they have conducted with other cities; that the ICMA Public Safety Services team is led by Leonard Matarese, Director of Public Safety Services, ICMA Consulting Services, who visited us last April and met with the Sheriff's Office, our police Chief Rick VanLeuven, dispatch, and Mr. Mercier to assess what information is available. Mr. Mercier said that he composed a list of issues on the handout, and asked that team to include the scope of services with these critical indicators; that this list was shared with Chief VanLeuven to make sure the most critical indicates were included in the study. Mr. Mercier further explained that they composed a team of highly credentialed individuals to look at our situation; that the price tag for their participation is $110,000 for their basic consultant services, plus about $16,000 for non- overhead expenses, which is primarily travel; and he further explained that this group tried to set the ceiling of cost to equate to the cost of having one police officer on force for one year. The Scope of Retreat Minutes 6 -14 -08 Page 7 of 10 Approved by Council: 07 -08 -08 Services, Mr. Mercier stated, speaks to issues raised; that Mr. Mercier is introducing this document today and looks to move forward in the near future to present this formally for council consideration at a council meeting; that this cost is within the city manager purchasing authority, but this is a very significant issue, and it is staff's policy to bring those issues to council in a public setting. City Manager Mercier said the basic operational plan is to try to assemble the information we have intimate knowledge about, and relay it to council for council commentary, so when Council is ready to review this, it will be mature enough to warrant further consideration and incorporate anything else in the study if needed; that the plan is to have a ninety -day review period, with a final report by November 1 after a preliminary report in October. Mr. Mercier also mentioned that this assessment is not necessarily concurrent with the Sheriff Office contract re- negotiation; and that we have asked them to look at that contract and see what things should be modernized or corrected; that he (Mr. Mercier) and Sheriff Knezovich met and he invited the Sheriff to start to identify factors that need to be negotiated or to get clarification of what aspects need to be negotiated. Councilmember Taylor mentioned he recalled some other review that was recently conducted, and Chief VanLeuven mentioned that they hired Consultant David Bennett regarding the jail; and said that will be an ongoing process as it involves law enforcement, the courts, and the corrections operations; and they want to examine alternatives to jailing people; and Chief VanLeuven mentioned that they are aware they arrest some people numerous times before they actually see their day in court on the first charge, and that they want to streamline that process. City Manager Mercier mentioned he had a conversation with Sheriff Knezovich about a month after we paid off the debt on the precinct building, and the Sheriff suggested rather than have them responsible for 44 %, it should be 14% of the building, justifying that by explaining that the holding /lock up facility, which is a major portion of their occupations, was not being used. Mr. Mercier said he and the Sheriff talked last week; that the Sheriff would be going back to the County administration regarding the risk of them maintaining that space and to reconsider whether to continue that occupancy. Mr. Mercier said he purposely wants this all done openly, that this is not a fault - finding expedition but an opportunity to look at current daily performance, such as what is their current deployment policy; using the people in the best manner, the right number of people; that we are not driving the outcome but are trying to get a thorough examination done by people who do this as a matter of course; and that we want them to look at economies of scale; that they are well versed about that and he talked to Sheriff Knezovich about that as well. Mr. Mercier said the Sheriff's Office will be an active participant in this report and it requires the full cooperation from all concerned in order to understand the reasons why they are doing what they are doing; that he will share the preliminary report as well as everything else about the study. Chief VanLeuven added that in his meeting with Mr. Matarese, they discussed some particular things to examine and to have his people explore data from various people, and that Mr. Matarese was pleased the Police Department collects the type of data he's looking for; and Chief VanLeuven mentioned that the police department keeps an enormous amount of data which is available upon review; and that they look forward to this evaluation as they feel it will be beneficial, and perhaps will discover better or best practices to use; that once the report is reviewed by Council, if Council has recommended policy changes or deployment in certain areas, such as school resource officers, traffic or other, they will be receptive to listen to those to meet those customer needs and develop positive customer service; adding that he agrees the contract they are working off now needs to be updated; and he feels the Sheriff's Office is looking forward to reviewing this report. Mr. Mercier also stated when Leonard Matarese met with Sheriff Knezovich, at the end of the hour, the Sheriff asked Leonard if they'd do an additional report for Spokane County; so Mr. Mercier said he feels there is positive cooperation. As an aside, Mr. Mercier said the number of officers per 1,000 population is not used very much anymore, but that in today's policing environment, they need to determine the nature of crime in the community along with other factors to determine the proper staffing levels. Mayor Munson said that he had heard the Sheriff's Office was not behind the work we are doing, but viewed this as us eventually having our own department; and that it is Retreat Minutes 6 -14 -08 Page 8 of 10 Approved by Council: 07 -08 -08 encouraging to hear that the Sheriff's Office is working with us on this. Mr. Mercier said that the Sheriff's Office does register concern that if the report says it is financially more attractive to have our own department, that they dread that outcome; but that he would not go out in the community making sounds about the citizens being unsafe unless we have a certain amount of officers. Councilmember Taylor mentioned that we are not going to this process with a previously defined outcome; that no decision is being made now, but we are merely doing a much needed review of our police services and are grateful to have the county involved; and prior to receiving this final report, he would like to have a study session item of discussing the police force to go over what they do, the various components in order to get a feel of what is involved; that Council has discussed what is involved in the processes of other city departments but not from the policing side. Mr. Mercier concurred and said staff would be happy to come back with organizational charts to show the functions within the police department; to which Mr. Taylor added that he wants a complete overview, to include how many officers are signed on, and how each component is resourced; what does "patrol" mean, how they interact with SWAT or others. Councilmember Gothmann stated that on April 30, 2007, he reported to Council after visiting with Doug Silver, who gave him a report on the statistics; and Councilmember Gothmann distributed copies of possible police services goals he drafted which included proposed methods and cost for each; and stated his objection to having an independent performance assessment done, said that the Sheriff's Office should conduct their own, and as one of his suggested goals, we should increase our level of partnership with the Sheriff's Office. Other Councilmembers disagreed and explained that if we pay for a service, especially one that cost $14 million annually, we have an obligation to make sure we are getting what it is we contracted for, at the service level expected, and the best way to do such would be through an independent assessment. Mr. Gothmann added that his stated goals would be goals from a citizen's point of view; that he doesn't care about the internal, but does care if they are solving the crimes for our residents; that the report being proposed is a report for a contractor, and Councilmember Gothmann stated he feels we should not be in the business of analyzing efficiencies and internal operations of one of our contractors. Deputy Mayor Denenny said the premise of Mr. Gothmann's statement sets him aback; as we don't treat our police as a department yet it is; that because we are contracting with the Sheriff's Office we have allowed ourselves to step back and say we're not concerned with efficiency; that this is 50% of our budget and a major component of the city, and as such we are obligated to look at every piece and treat this as if it was completely ours. Councilmember Gothmann replied that he feels it is not a good use of our public's money to pay another $130,000 for what amounts to an efficiency study. Council concurred to put this item on the July 1s council study session agenda, for an eventual motion to consider authorizing the ICMA study. 10. Information Only: Work Program The annual workplan for 2008 was inserted in the packet as an information only item, and was not discussed. The group took a short break at 2:19 p.m. and reconvened approximately five minutes later. 12. Public policy Mayor Munson asked to have this item prior to the Braining storming item. City Attorney Connelly said he was asked to give some legal definitions of public policy as defining what council can do versus what administration can do; and he briefly reviewed the materials from MRSC (Municipal Research and Services Center of Washington), concerning "Roles and Responsibilities" and further MRSC materials detailing "Policy Versus Administration," followed by briefly reviewing RCW 35A.13.230, power of council; 35A.11.020 Powers vested in legislative bodies of noncharter and charter code cities; RCW 35A.13.080 City Manager Powers and Duties; and RCW 35A.13.120 City manager interference by Councilmembers; which means that Council can only tell staff what to do by telling the City Manager Retreat Minutes 6 -14 -08 Page 9 of 10 Approved by Council: 07 -08 -08 what they want done; and Councilmember Taylor added that such Council direction should come in the form of discussions at public meetings, to which Mr. Connelly agreed stating hat they can only direct the City Manager and cannot act unless such action is taken at a public meeting; that anything outside a meeting is more of a communication; and that an informal poll or telling the City Manager that he or she speaks on behalf of the Council is meaningless, and said that there have been lawsuits in other jurisdictions resulting from such "straw poll" tactics. Mayor Munson asked Councilmembers to let him, Deputy Mayor Denenny, or Mr. Mercier know if Council would like this discussed further at a study session. 11. Brainstorming Issues and ideas discussed included problems associated with the wastewater treatment plant, including how to approach the monthly sewer costs and how that will affect residents; running out of capacity during the time it takes to get the permit; if the issue goes to court it could get tied up for ten years; that the standards we are to meet are unattainable; drawbacks in not using the City of Spokane's system; Playfair being put up for sale; and the County likely proceeding with the design build option and authorizing construction of the plant. Impact fees and what they can be used for were also discussed; the problem of no baseline study; these issues and the City of Spokane; concurrency; whether to consider impact fees for transportation, schools, and parks, just transportation, or some other option; and getting the impact fee study completed. It was also mentioned that Clark County or Vancouver's process might be one to research. Mayor Munson said that he met with Julie Wilkerson who brought up the idea of having neighborhood counsels and she wanted to know our position; that Mayor Munson said at this point he feels those counsels being sponsored by the City would be counterproductive to making this a whole city; but that neighborhoods could organize without staff support, as having staff support is not mandatory. Councilmember Gothmann agreed, and Councilmember Taylor said that the City of Spokane has had some planning paralyzed because of infighting in neighborhood counsels. Mr. Mercier said it is good to realize that in the election cycle, there is always the prospect that four seats can change after December of next year, and if this group thinks there is unfinished business to attend to, to identify such issue so that it can be scheduled for action prior to December of next year. Council's suggestions included road issues, City Hall, and the Sprague /Appleway Revitalization Program. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at approxim. - 02 p.m. :- s l ATTEST: „ ` ichard -Mu son< Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Retreat Minutes 6 -14 -08 Approved by Council: 07 -08 -08 Page 10 of 10