Pre-Incorportion Public Hearing Transcripts BRB 555-01 08/08/2001�^ 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
l
BEFORE THE BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD
August 8, 2001
7:00 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING BRB 555 -01
Being held at 1445 North Argonne
Spokane, Washington
PRESENT:
Robert E. Nebergall, Board chairman
Douglas Beu, Board member
John B. Hagney, Board member
Lawrence B. Stone, Board member
Daniel E. Turbeville, III, Board member
Robert Kaufman, Special Assistant Attorney General
Susan Winchell, Director
Michael Basinger, Planner
Danette Dobbins, Staff Assistant
Peter Fortin, Consultant
1
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
questions for you when you call the office, and
Mr. Robert Kaufman is the Special Attorney General, and
Peter Fortin who has done a very capable job as
consultant on the Spokane Valley proposal.
At this time I would ask if there are any
members of the Board who have received any exparte
communication regarding this matter, and if any members
believe that they cannot hear this matter on the basis
of the appearance of fairness doctrine.
MR. STONE: I just want to let the Boundary
Review know and the public know that I own industrial
property in the Yardley area, and that is one portion
that is covered by the proposed incorporation. I also
own a manufacturing business in the Yardley area. I
also own industrial and residential property in the
City of Spokane and City of Airway Heights.
I did want the public and the Board to be
aware that I have interests, and I also want the public
to know that this will have no,affect on my ability to
render a fair and impartial decision.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. stone
MAN: We would like to know if any of the
Board lives in the Valley. I don't know if that is a
fair question or not.
CHAIRMAN: We'll deal with that at a break
3
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
tonight. At tonights public hearing first the staff
will present an overview of the incorporation process
and the brief overview of the Spokane Valley
incorporation proposal. The proponents will then
present the basis for the proposal. The
representatives of the agencies affected by the
proposal will then be given an opportunity to address
the Board, and then those signing the roster will be
called in the order the signed.
Because of the formal nature of the public
hearing, only Board members can ask questions of the
speakers. If you do have questions, the Boundary
Review Board staff.will be available at the break
which we will take at approximately 8:00, and after the
hearing to assist you. To be most effective in your
testimony, speakers are asked to direct your
comments to the factors and objectives of the
Boundary Review Board is required to consider when
making its decision. A list of these factors and
objectives is available in the brochure on the table.
Because of the timing of the adoption by
Spokane County of its GMA comprehensive plan urban
growth area this public hearing will be continued to
7:00 p.m. Monday August 27th at the same location. The
Board will accept written testimony on this proposal
2
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
until August 27th, and the Boundary Review Board will
not make a decision on the proposal at tonight's
hearing and will make either its decision at the
close of the public hearing on August 27th or set
another date.
The public hearing will now please come to
order. This hearing is called to gather facts and to
hear testimony in the matter of File No. BRB 555 -01
Proposed Incorporation of the City of Spokane Valley.
Will all those who plan on speaking at
tonight's public hearing please rise and raise your
right hand. The planner will now administer the oath.
MS. WINCHELL: Do you swear or affirm the
testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth?
SPEAKERS: Yes.
MS. WINCHELL: So sworn.
CHAIRMAN: The Boundary Review Board
Director will now present the proposal.
MS. WINCHELL: First I'll give you a
background of Boundary Review Boards and go over an
overview of the proposal on the incorporation.
Boundary Review Boards were created in
1967 to provide a method of guiding and controlling
growth in municipalities. Boundary Review Boards are
5
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
a quasi judicial administrative bodies, and the
Boundary Review Boards make decisions on annexations,
new city incorporations and utility extentions.
Boundary Review Boards can approve
proposals, modify proposals or deny proposals. The
Spokane County Boundary Review Board has five members,
they are appointed by the governor, the mayors of the
cities and towns of Spokane County County Commissioners
and the special purpose districts. The Board members
are residents of Spokane County, and one of the
stipulations of the law is they cannot hold local
government elected or appointed positions, contracts or
jobs with local governments.
The Boundary Review Board bases their
decision on several things that are outlined in the
statutes. They have certain factors which I'll go
over, objectives, and their decisions must be
consistent with growth management, the planning goals,
countywide planning policies and urban growth areas as
identified in the Growth Management Act. The factors
that the Board must consider in making a decision are
listed in the brochure that you have, and when you are
presenting your testimony you can address these. One
is population density, land area and uses, adopted
comprehensive plan and zoning, topography and soils,
1
D
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
projected growth rates for the area, community
facilities, the need for municipal services or urban
services of an area, the adequacy of services, existing
services and the cost of proposals, the effect on
adjacent areas, effects on the county and other
governments units, and then a look at alternatives
to the proposals.
The objectives that the Boundary Review
Board shall attempt to meet in each of these decisions
include preservation of the neighborhoods and
communities, use of physical boundaries, provision of
logical service areas, provision of irregular
boundaries, adjust impractical boundaries,
discouragement of small cities for incorporation and
encouragement of cities over 10,000 population,
encourage incorporation and annexation of urban areas
and protection of rural and ag lands as designated in a
adopted county comprehensive plan.
To be consistent with the Growth Management
Act there are a few sections that are specifically
called for, and one is the planning goals of the Growth
Management Act. The Countywide planning policies,
which were adopted a few years ago by Spokane County,
urban growth areas which the Spokane County currently
has adopted the interim urban growth area which is
7
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
something that we talked about and is in the process of
adopting the final growth area, and also development
regulations. Spokane County has interim development
regulations and is in the process of developing final
development regulations.
I just wanted to talk a little bit about
the urban growth area, because the urban growth area
is kind of a key one for this proposal and part of it
is just the timing of how this fits in. The County
Commissioners are expected to adopt the final urban
growth area next Thursday, August 16th, and that's why
the Bounday Review Board is having to continue the
hearing until after the Commissioners adopt that urban
growth area. That is a key one for this decision.
The steps that a city would go through to
incorporate, are the Notice of Intent is filed with the
county, and this was done last August for this
proposal. The Boundary Review Board held a public
meeting in September of 2000. A petition was
circulated and turned in to the auditor declaring
sufficient in March, a Notice of Intention was filed
with the Boundary Review Board May 31, and an
incorporation study was prepared and issued June 10.
Tonight the Boundary Board is holding a public hearing
which will be continued August 27 and then the Board
0
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
will deliberate and make their decision.' If the Board
files their decision by September 6 an election can be
held in November, and if it passes then there will be
election for City Council and an interim period will
exist and then the incorporation will be final. There
are a few steps yet before it can be completed.
Here is the time line as far as the actual
dates for each of these steps. Where we are right now
is August 8th, the Boundary Review Board public hearing
which is right in the middle. August 16th is when the
county is expected to adopt their growth management
plan and their urban growth area, August 27th the
continued Boundary Review Board hearing and they
may deliberate and make their decision that day, or
they may set up a new date. If the resolution and
hearing decision is filed by September 6, the County
Commissioners can set an electon date and hold the
election in November. If if is filed after September 6,
then the election will be in the spring, February,
March, April, depending on when the hearing decision
was filed.
As I mentioned, and many of you have
attended a presentation on the incorporation study,
the Boundary Review Board completed an incorporation
study of the incorporation proposal, it has five parts
L•,
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and we have copies available of the report in the back
and it's also also on CD rom and on our web page.
These are the five parts and what we will concentrate
on tonight is to give you an overview of the proposal
and talk a little bit about revenue expenditures and
the alternatives to incorporation.
Her'js just the basics of the
incorporation. The proposed city name is City of
Spokane Valley and this is something that cannot
change. It is a non - charter code city with a
council /manager form of government, and this is a
little different from other proposals that the Spokane
Valley in that the others were a strong mayor /council
form of government. The council /manager form of
government is similar to all the other new cities that
have been formed in the state of Washington since 1990.
The 2001 population for the Spokane Valley
area is 82,135, 45 square miles, with a population
density of about 18 -- 1800 per square mile the
assessed value is about 4.45 billion. And we have lots
of maps around and maps in your brochure that will
describe the boundaries, but the maps show -- the red
line shows the urban growth area as proposed and
expected to be adopted by the commissioners next week.
The dark green area is.the area proposed for
10
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
incorporation, and anything with an urban growth area
can be included in the incorporation.
At this point the proponents decided to
include only the area within Fire District 1, so there
is an area around Northwood, which is Fire District 9
and that was excluded, an area south of 44th, the
Ponderosa area which was excluded because that is Fire
District 8.
This will give you an idea of the
population growth that has occurred and is expected to
occur in the next ten years. The Spokane County as a
whole had a 13.5 percent change of population from
1990 to the year 2000. This is based on the 2000
census and at that same rate of growth, that is that
population density is expected to reach in 2010.
The unincorporated area of the county had a 6.9 percent
increase, the incorporated area, all the cities and
towns had 10.5. The City of Spokane had a 9.4 percent
increase, and the Spokane Valley incorporation area had
about a 9.7 percent increase. And this is the
population density comparison with other cities in the
state of Washington. Spokane Valley has, by far, the
lowest population density.
The Shoreline is on the left and has the
highest density and Tacoma and Federal.Way, Bellevue,
11
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the City of Spokane, Everett, Vancouver, Lakewood,
Yakima, Kent, Bellingham, and Kennewick. So those are
all the cities in Washington over 50,000, and excluding
the City of Seattle.
Land uses within the Spokane Valley covers
all kinds of urban land uses, and some suburban land
uses. 47.2 percent of the land is single family
residential. About 23 percent is undeveloped and it
could be that it is undeveloped and there might be an
approved plat on it and it is just not developed yet,
it could be that it's undeveloped and it's agriculture
that is lumped all together, and I think you can see
the other percentages.
And another segment of the study is kind of
financials of the new city, and Mr. Fortin is going
to go over and kind of summarize the financial side of
the report.
CHAIRMAN: Do the Board members have any
questions of Ms. Winchell?
(No response).
CHAIRMAN: Mr. Fortin.
MR. FORTIN: Good evening.
This report has been given in a public
presentation here in the Nevell auditorium. It was
given to the Valley Chamber here in the Nevell
12
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Auditorium and was given to the County Commissioners.
It was given to the County Department heads and it was
given to the Regional Chamber of Commerce and SERTI.
And I know there was some people in the room who have
heard this two or three times. So what I would like to
be able to do tonight is to kind of summarize the
financial feasibility portion of the report. And the
first thing I did was to develop budgets for
departments that in my opinion would be best performed
by city employees. And you can see what they are up
there, obviously the mayor, council, city manager, and
city clerk, the things that are of necessity that be
done within the city itself. The total of 52 employees
that I proposed within that.
Then there is another whole group of
departments or functions that because of their
complexity would be very difficult for a new city to
perform themselves, and this budget that I have
developed shows these functions being contracted with
Spokane County to provide those services.
And this budget that I have developed is a
budget that I have developed, it's not a budget that a
new city would adopt, and I want to state that right
up front. I think that when the new city is formed,
the mayor and council are going to set their priorities
13
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and give those priorities to the newly hired city
manager who will then develop a budget in accordance
with their council's desires, not Pete Fortin's.
So what we have here are functions that are
currently being performed by Spokane County within the
corporate boundaries of what would be the City of
Spokane Valley. And these are the estimated costs that
the County has been providing those current services
within this boundary. So you can go through the list,
you've got court, probation, public defender, the
biggest one is the sheriff. You have Geiger
Correction, which is a minimum security prison, then
you have the County jail, animal control, engineering
and administration, which is street design,
right -of -way acquisition, things like this, street
maintenance, and then the big item that I don't think
any other city in the state has had to face, and that
is that the Spokane Valley and virtually all the rest
of Spokane County is in the process of being sewered,
mainly in the Valley, and currently Spokane County
Commissioners have adopted a policy where 1 /8th of the
sales tax they collect goes toward subsidizing hookups
for sewering in the Valley, and the adjacent areas.
So 80 percent of the effort is taking place
in the Valley, and I put in an amount which is
M
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
equivalent to 80 percent of the amount that Spokane
County Commissioners are putting into the sewering, and
that comes out to 2.9 million. So this would continue,
the hookup subsidy that the County is providing, and
it would then be the responsibility of the new city to
provide that amount. And we have buildings and code
enforcement, hearing examiner, park's, and this is for
maintenance of the parks that are inside the corporate
limits of Spokane Valley. GIS is for me the program to
handle this and the planning department in the new
city to maintain their parcel layers. The total for
the county is 29 million, 212 added onto that, we have
Spokane County Air Population Control which is an
assessment based formula that works out to be about
135,000, and then State Department of Transportation
when the city incorporates, the city is then required
to provide the maintenance on state arterials within
the city and then the City of Spokane Valley, will have
a portion of Trent and Pines, and that estimate is
$300,000 a year for that maintenance.
On the.revenue side, I have in the maximum
amount allowable for property taxes for a city which
contracts for fire and library services. My assumption
is that the new city would continue to contract or
annex Fire District 1 and to the Spokane County Library
15
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
District. If you do that, it leaves a $1.60 per
thousand to the City for general purposes. That is
what the 7,120,000 works out to be. The sales tax is
at the same level the County is currently charging,
14.3 million dollars.
Now, when a city assesses sales tax out of
the.one percent, they keep 85 hundredths and 15 one
hundredths goes to the County, so this is the
amount that will go to the City. The 85 hundredths is
14.3 million dollars. If you look at that amount as a
percentage of all the sales tax collected in the
unincorporated area, that amounts to about 70 percent,
so you can see there is an awful lot of sales tax
generated within Spokane Valley.
Criminal justice is a state one tenth of
one percent which can be levied, the County currently
levies it, franchize fees is on cable TV at four
percent and the County currently levies that. Gambling
tax the same way.
I've just carried over what tax the County
currently levies. The only addition I have in there
is a five percent admissions tax, and that would be on
theaters. Building permits is the amount that would be
collected, charging the same building permit level that
Spokane County currently charges, that is the 894,000
16
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and a good portion of that is paid back to the County
Planning Building Department for services. Planning
fees is a guess on my part, but I think it is somewhere
around 100 to $150,000 a year.
The State shared revenues are given to
the City based on a per capita formula, and at 82,000
people that is what it works out to be. Fines and
forfeits is the amount that would come in through
District Court, the estimate is about a million and a
half would be collected due to infractions within the
City, and it would cost about 1.7 million to operate
the court. And interest earning amounts that could be
earned, or cash that comes in today that is not needed
for a day or week or month and through investment, you
could get at least $175,000 a year.
So if you look at the bottom line there, we
have 28.6 million dollars in 2001, and 31 million in
2003, which I would assume would be the first full year
of operation of the new city.
Then we have other revenues. There is
currently a hotel motel tax levied by Spokane County,
my assumption is new city would continue to levy that
tax. It would be only used for promotion or tourism
and convention business or to maintain facilities that
provide those services. On the capital investment
17
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
side, State shared revenue is the arterial gas tax, and
that is based on a per capita formula as to what the
new city could get, and real estate excise taxes
of which there are two, both being one quarter per
cent each. The total amount that I am estimating
available for capital purposes in 2001 is 2.2 million,
jumping up to 2.4 million in 2003.
One of the biggest things that everyone
here is seeing are the capital improvements currently
going on in Spokane Valley, and it is nice to see
Argonne with some asphalt on it. But that is due to a
couple of things. One is the sewering of the Valley,
z
and the County Commissioners decided that when a street
was dug up to be sewered, that rather than just pave
the strip where the pipe is, they would pave curb to
curb. So we've got an awful lot of streets that have
been dug up this summer and an awful lot of money being
spent for these capital projects.
Now, the sewer projects here are only the
sewering portion, they don't even address the addition
of another treatment plant, which is contemplated being
online by 2007, I believe. So that is not even
included there. And these fees are paid by user fees,
they are paid by State grants, and they are paid by the
aquifer protection tax that everybody pays and by the
IM
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
subsidy that the County currently puts in.
Parks is something that is just a general
obligation of the County. And the roads, the County
gets much more money, they certainly get a lot more in
property tax for the maintenance of roads than the
cities do, and a lot of that payment has to do with the
sewering project. But do we have one showing
individual use -- well, you can see here the local cost
for 2002 and 2003 on roads is 7.8 million dollars.
And the total that would be spent would be 28 million.
So there were grants and other things going into that
28 million. But if we look at 7.8 million, you can see
that the city is sitting -- there with somewhere around
2.4 million a year. So the amount that the City, as I
see it, could put into streets isn't as much as the
County could, but the County is going through a big
construction boom right now because of the sewering,
and I think that would drop off. But the City could
stretch out its capital improvement program over a
longer period of time.
When I mentioned engineering administration
of a little over 3 million dollars a year, that money
is mainly spent for street design, acquisition of the
right -of -way, and all things that are road construction
related. So that if the City weren't maintaining that
19
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
almost 4 million dollars a year in street construction,
it could cut the amount it was paying the County on the
engineering administration side because the engineers,
wouldn't be any sense in designing the road if you were
not going to construct it within a year or two, so I
think there is probably at least a million there that
would be a reduced on the general fund side if, in
fact, the new city couldn't maintain the current pace
of street construction.
So as I said, we have a budget developed by
Pete Fortin that will not be a budget that is adopted
by any city or any county, it is just my guesstimate
based on what other cities are doing, as to what the
City of Spokane Valley would do approximately. And we
have somewhere around two and a half million dollars
between what would be generated in revenue and what
is anticipated to be spent.
Now, when I estimated salaries, I estimated
all the salaries at 90 percent of the top level for
cities over 50,000 in Eastern Washington. So those
salaries could be reduced by a council. A council
could go through and change the amount of services they
wish to provide in different functions. They could
add, they could subtract, and the council has the
ability to levy other taxes. At this point, based on
X11]
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
what I've seen, a new city could operate with the same
level or less taxes and provide basically the same
level of service, but it is really up to that newly
elected mayor and council to set the priorities for the
new city based on what they hear from the citizens, and
it is not up to me to say how they would balance.
There are certainly plenty of options available to
a newly elected city mayor and council.
CHAIRMAN: Any questions by the Board
to Pete Fortin? Thank you.
MS. WINCHELL: One of the things that the
Boundary Review Board is required to do is look at
alternatives. In the incorporation study, we just
briefly described some government alternatives for
the Spokane Valley, things that have been proposed in
the past. One was an expanded County Commission with
five commissioners instead of three, and that was
thought to give more representation to the Spokane
Valley. Something else is partial annexation,
annexation of parts of the Valley to the City of
Spokane, consolidation of the government. This is
something that the freeholders had proposed and was
voted on. Functional consolidation of services, this
is something that is under consideration now, the
sheriff and state police share services and there are
21
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
other services that are shared. The waste water
treatment plant, that would be expanded. And another
alternative is to remain unincorporated and for the
Spokane Valley to continue to receive services as
provided by the County and the special purpose
districts.
Another area that the Boundary Review Board
can take action on is modifying the boundary to the
proposal. The Boundary Review Board can modify the
proposal, by modifing the land area by 10 percent, and
there were 11 areas that are in the incorporation study
and these can be looked at in more detail by the Board
or if you want to not consider any more or people
tonight presenting testimony have other areas that
they would like considered, we can put anything
together on these.
Some of these we have letters on file
asking for territory to be added to the new city or
excluded from the new city. First we are going to
try to do closeups of some these areas of the map so
that you can see, and I don't know if those of you can
see the map okay.
The first area is the Yardley area, it is
in the City of Spokane's water and sewer service area,
and in the City of Spokane's adopted urban growth area,
22
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
so this is an area that was requested by the City
of Spokane that the Boundary Review Board consider
excluding from the proposal to let the City of Spokane
to continue to serve. It is approximately 840 acres,
which is about 2.7 percent of the land area of Spokane
Valley. It has a population 220, which is a very minor
percentage of the population. 88 dwelling units,
assesed value is 139 million dollars, which is about
three percent of the assessed value of the entire
proposal. It is mostly an industrial area with only 88
housing units, there are not a lot of residents. And
the Yardley area is the only area that has a
significant -- that generates a significant amount of
sales tax, and I think it is nine and a half percent of
the total Spokane Valley, which I think is about 1.3
million dollars.
The second area that we looked at is the
Alcott area, and I think it is 8th Street on the north
to 16th on the south, and this is another area that is
served by the City of Spokane for water and sewer and
into the City of Spokane's urban growth area. It has a
population of about 350, which is about 4 /10ths of a
percent of the whole area, a very small portion. 120
dwelling units, about 133 acres, which is about a half
percent of the whole incorporation area assessed value
23
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
of 13 million, which is about .8 percent of the entire
proposal, and that is mostly residential. And there is
a lot of undeveloped land which used to be the gravel
area.
And then the third area, and these are all
in the incorporation study, is an area that we just
labeled the Carnahan area, and this is an area, the
area in the pink is in Fire District 8, and that is why
it was excluded from the Valley incorporation proposal,
because they only included Fire District 1. This is an
area where the boundary is irregular, it runs along
parcel lines and in some cases even between homes. And
I think one of the people on our steering committee
said it goes right through the property that he owns.
I don't think it actually bisects any parcels, but it
is kind of hard to tell from the boundaries. This is
the area, the whole pink area is 106 acres. The
population is about 577, there is about 230 dwelling
units, and 33 million dollars in assessed value. It
would be possible to modify the proposal to make it a
more easy to read boundary by not including the whole
area, the red line is the urban growth area, so we took
the largest area to include as a modification, but if
the Board is interested in getting more information, we
can look at different alternative to include different
24
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
parts of it.
The forth area is the Ponderosa area, and
this is one that the Board received a lot of comments
on. And it's an area that 44th street is the division,
right in the middle. The north side is Fire District
1, so it was included in the incorporation proposal,
and the south side is Fire District 8, and that is why
it was left out. A number of letters that the Board
received asked that Ponderosa be kept as one
neighborhood and not be divided, either all of it in
the incorporation proposal or all of it out or the
incorporation proposal. So we kind of looked at both
pieces. The area north of 44th is 423 acres, the
population is 1367, there is 526 dwelling units and 69
million dollars is the assessed value. The area south,
which is in Fire District 8, has 440 acres, 1448
people, 580 dwelling units, and the assessed value of
71 million dollars.
So that is an area that has received a lot
-- I mean people in that area have written letters to
the Board about the exclusion.
The fifth area we just called 40th Avenue
area, it kind of runs down the middle. It is in Fire
District 1, it is inside urban growth area and it is
601 acres, or about two percent of the total acreage.
25
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Population is 259, and there is 104 dwelling units and
assessed value is about 17 million. This is one where
people in the area asked that it be excluded because it
was less developed and more rural. I don't know. I
think it is written down. That is the fifth area.
The sixth area is another area that the
Board received comments on asking that it be excluded.
214 acres, the population is 75, 30 dwelling units,
the assessed value is about 7 million, and this is
one where people said the residential was large lots
and more surburban and it is not in an area to be
sewered in the County sewer plan.
The seventh area is that pink area, and
this is one that was excluded because it is in Fire
District 8, and it is really part of a subdivision on
the Morning Star PUD. Fire District 8 and Fire
District 1, it is nine acres with 13 dwelling units and
an estimated population of 30, and assessed value of
2.3 million. This is one that was to be included
because access is only from the area that would be in a
new city.
And then the eighth and ninth areas --
well, the eighth area is Greenacres, and that was one
that people asked to be excluded. Some people asked
for it because of the large lot residential and more
101
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
suburban nautre of the area. There were some other
requests because it was next to the city of Liberty
Lake and they felt more tied to the City of Liberty
Lake than Spokane Valley. The acreage is 322 acres,
population 348. 140 dwelling units, and 18 million in
assessed value.
Area nine is north of that, and is an area
that was requested to be excluded from Spokane Valley
City, because there is some developments under way,
which include part of Liberty Lake, that area that
is undeveloped or unattached to a city. And then
inside the area number nine, it has 348 acres, the
population is 302, and 121 dwelling units. Assessed
value is 13 million dollars.
The tenth area is the Otis Orchards area,
and this has acreage of 1027, 3.5 percent of the
proposed city. Population is 1150, about 1.4 percent
of the population. 460 dwelling units with assessed
value of 45 million dollars, or 1 percent of the
incorporation area.
The 11th area is Northwood, and this is
Fire District 9, and that is why it was excluded. The
proponents originally had included it, then excluded
it. 582 acres, or two percent of the total area.
Population 1646 and 658 dwelling units. The assessed,
27
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
value is 136 million, or three percent of the total
incorporation area.
Those are the modification areas and these
areas, the Board can chose to get more information for
the next hearing and people tonight might be providing
testimony on.
Do you have any questions about this part
of the presentation?
(No response).
CHAIRMAN: Lots of people cannot hear. I am
having a difficult time as well.
We have proponents of the proposed
incorporation of the city of Spokane Valley, there are
two that would like to speak in reference to that. Dr.
Phil Rudy and Ed Mertens, and we'll call on Dr. Philip
Rudy first, please.
DR. RUDY: Honorable members of the Board,
Boundary Review Board, ladies and gentleman, my name is
Philip L. Rudy. I am the chair of the governance
committee of the Spokane Valley Chanber of Commerce.
It is a honor to speak to you folks this evening.
About four years ago after the
incorporation effort at that time was completed, the
Chamber of Commerce phoned the governance committee to
study the various forms of government available to the
m
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
people of Spokane Valley. After studying the forms
that Susan talked about earlier, the governance
committee came to the conclusion that incorporation
would allow the people of the Spokane Valley to
represent themselves, and to maintain the quality of
life and type of life style that they would like to
have, so the governance committee, along with the
Community Action Committee, which Ed Mertens is the
chairman, and Spokane Valley Business Association, of
which many members are here this evening, formed a
coalition, and the process to begin the incorporation
of Spokane Valley was done by filing an intent to
incorporate.
We were interested in local control and
bringing the elected officials closer to the people
that they represent, 82,150 people within the Spokane
Valley. The initial area chosen for the City of
Spokane Valley was all of that area designated by the
County Commissioners as an interim urban growth area
lying east of the city limits of Spokane and west of
the proposed City of Liberty Lake.
You folks had a hearing out at the fire
training center on Sullivan, and at that meeting the
fire chiefs from District 8 and Fire 9 both requested
that their areas be excluded from the proposed city of
O
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2E
Spokane Valley. Proponents got together, and when the
final drawing was made up, those requests were honored
and Fire District 8 and 9 Fire District 9 were
excluded. The reasons being that we honored the fire
chiefs requests, because those people needed to have
elected representation to negotiate with them if and
when they may be annexed to the new City of Spokane
Valley, and that is the reason why we are proposing the
incorporation of Spokane Valley because we would like
to have representation that is local and local control.
With regards to the areas that are east of
the boundaries of the City of Spokane, we would
strongly recommend that you continue to include the
Yardley area and the Alcott area of which would be
serviced by Fire District No. 1 to continue that within
the proposed City of Spokane Valley. Reasons being for
that is we have many water purveyors in the Spokane
Valley. I didn't have time to count up, but there is
20 plus or minus a few water purveyors, and in the
Spokane Valley, the people like to have local control,
and many of those water boards operate very
effectively, with the water boards that they have
because they are closest to the people.
With regards to the Spokane City providing
water to the Alcott and Yardley areas, they would act
30
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
just as the other water districts to do in the Spokane
Valley providing water for those areas.
With regards to sewer, we presently are
getting all our sewer from the Spokane County, which
when the Spokane Valley becomes a city, it would
probably continue to contract with Spokane County Sewer
District and the areas of Yardley and Alcott could
also continue to contract with the City of Spokane, or
it could be that negotiations could be made that some
of those things could be changed as the proposed water
treatment facility may be near Upriver Dam and some of
the flows and directions may be considered to be more
adequate in different directions.
The job that you have before you is very
large, and we wish you well in making those decisions.
The proponents have tried to work within the guidelines
that are the objectives of the Boundary Review Board,
and we have tried to do the best we can around those
lines.
As
indicated that
I need to also
outside of the
it. My busine
proposed city,
Mr. Stone made some exceptions and
he was impartial in making his decision,
bring to your attention that I live
boundary so I can't vote for or against
ss is within the boundaries of the
and it is my interest to keep my
31
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2C
21
22
2?
29
2`
patients who live within proximity of my business very
healthy so that they can enjoy the quality of life and
services that I provide; in other words, I like to have
the government as efficient as possible for them to
enjoy the services that many of us provide.
My wife is happy that I am outside the
boundary because she tells me that the only things she
will let me run for is the Canadian border. I like it
here in the Spokane Valley. I thank you for the
privilege of speaking.
Do you have any questions?
CHAIRMAN: Questions?
(No response).
CHAIRMEN: Mr. Mertens.
MR. MERTENS: Good evening. I am sure glad
to be here, and I want to thank you gentlemen for
serving on the Boundary Review Board and for the effort
that Susan and Mike and Pete have put out, because my
patience gets worn thin once in awhile.
But I was born and raised in Spokane Valley
and I am 72 years old, so I have a real interest in
wanting to see you gentlemen come up with the right
answer on this proposal to incorporate.
I signed the petition to incorporate. I
went out and got the signatures and we had 6600
32
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
signatures on our petition to send to the County and
they stopped counting at 4400 and so we brought with us
the voice of some people that say as we do, we
certainly feel it is time for us to incorporate this
Valley.
Larry did a very fine job of taking us from
the time of the first meeting to this date, and I want
to reiterate that we definitely feel that we want to
support the efforts of Fire District 8 and 9. As I
understand it is under statute that RCWs that they
would lose their money of that particular area if they
are included, and we made that concession with those
fire chiefs so that they could annex in later and
then that money stays in their fire district. I think
that is a very important fact to consider in those
particular areas.
When you get down to Yardley, in talking to
some of the people that live there and such as that,
the map that Susan and Mike have put together make that
a beautiful city that can really operate in the way we
need to.
Now, we've done our homework since that
first hearing, we have 13 successful cities on the west
side that have proven that people need their right to
their destiny, to give themselves more in life, and
33
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
every
one of them have done that. We have had those experts
here to Spokane and they have had several forums where
they gave a green light to everything we show here to
you tonight.
I hope that everyone here -- and I want to
thank the people that are showing up here too, I think
I have been educated ion what our process is and you
gentlemen are certainly part of it. I didn't really
know what the Boundary Review Board did until I came to
your first meeting. I've heard of it and I do know
that growth management has been around for eight years,
I've been to many of those hearings and I think it will
be finalized on the 16th.
I would like to ask you one sincere thing,
please do everything you can so we can get it on the
ballot in November I think that's key right now. It is
already close to two years that we made the intent to
incorporate and I still have patience. I know that
time will tell, but I want to ask your sincere effort
to do everything you possibly can to approve what we
have shown here tonight.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN: Do Board members have any
questions of Mr. Mertens?
34
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(No response).
CHAIRMAN: We'll adjourn for five minutes,
and at that time we will hear testimony from those who
signed the roster, and so we'll take a five - minute
recess at this time.
(Recess taken.)
CHAIRMAN: We will now hear testimony from
those who have signed the roster.
We would like you to remember to keep your
comments to three minutes each in order to hear from
each person on the list. I would also like to mention
that your comments are to be directed to the Board
because it is the Board who you are addressing, not the
audience. I would also ask that the members of the
audience that we not have any cheering or booing. I'm
sure there might be some here of varying opinions, and
it is your opinion that you are stating to the Board,
and we are the ones who would like to hear that
opinion.
We are going to first hear from
representatives of the affected agencies.
Mr. John Mercer will be the first, and we
would like for you to state your name, your address,
and whom you represent.
MR. MERCER: Good evening Boundary Review
35
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Board members, Mr. Nebergall, Susan, Pete. Thank you
very much for the opportunity to provide testimony.
My name is John Mercer, and I am planning
director for the City of Spokane and I have a letter to
read into the record, and I have provided you with a
copy of the letter. It's from the mayor of the City
of Spokane, dated today, August 8.
"The City of Spokane again requests the
boundaries for proposed City of Spokane Valley be
modified pursuant to RCW 36.93. To exclude the City of
Spokane's Urban Growth Area. Attached is a map that
shows the Yardley and Alcott areas requested for
exclusion. Spokane County Board of County
Commissioner's designated both Yardley and Alcott as
interim Urban Growth Areas associated with the City of
Spokane in February of 1997.
"On September 11, 2000, city manager, Hank
Miggins, sent you a letter requesting the exclusion of
the areas of Yardley and Alcott from the boundaries of
the proposed City of Spokane Valley. At that time, the
City of Spokane was still in the lengthy process of
completing work on its Growth Management Act compliant
Comprehensive Plan. That process which began in 1995,
included assessments of growth capacity, capital
facility and service requirements, urban services
36
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
currently provided by the City, and existing interlocal
agreements. The City of Spokane's Adoption of the new
Comprehensive Plan also confirmed the Yardley and
Alcott areas as part of the City's proposed Final Urban
Growth Area lying adjacent to the City's current
municipal boundaries.
The exclusion of these two areas from the
proposed boundaries of the City of Spokane Valley would
be consistent with the factors to be considered by the
Boundary Review Board pursuant to RCW 36.93.170. These
are both areas recognized through actions of the City
of Spokane and the Spokane County Board of County
Commissioners as Urban Growth Areas associated with the
City of Spokane. The actions of both the City of
Spokane and Spokane County were done pursuant to the
Growth Management Act, RCW 36.70A, and the County -wide
Planning Policies for Spokane County. Both areas are
adjacent to the corporate boundaries of the City of
Spokane and are addressed in the City's Comprehensive
Plan adopted pursuant to the Growth Management Act.
Also, the City of Spokane provides
municipal services to both of these areas in the form
of both water and sewer pursuant to the Spokane County
Coordinated Water System Plan and the Spokane County
Coordinated Wastewater Management Plan.
37
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Additionally, on October 26, 1998, the City
of Spokane and Spokane Valley Fire District 1 entered
into an interlocal agreement pursuant to the provisions
of the Growth Management Act and RCW 39.34. That
agreement contains the procedures for addressing
impacts to Fire District 1 in the event of annexation
by the City of Spokane. That document also contains
agreement for joint planning of location selection,
design and construction of statuion facilities, as well
as operational planning of services to these areas
covering mutual responses, training, and possible joint
station use.
The exclusion of the Yardley and Alcott
areas from the proposed boundaries of the City of
Spokane Valley would also be consistent with the
objectives of the Boundary Review Board found in RCW
36.93.180. In particular, this would achieve the
preservation of logical service areas that are already
in place for water and sewer.
In closing, we ask that you consider all of
our efforts in complying with the Growth Management Act
and the County -Wide Planning Policies, as well as the
substantial investment by the City of Spokane in
infrastructure to serve these areas. Please remove the
Yardley and Alcott areas from the boundaries of the
M
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
proposed City of Spokane Valley.
Respectfully, John T. Powers, Jr., Mayor
of the City of Spokane.
Do you have any questions?
CHAIRMAN: Any questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN: Thank you, very much.
Next speaker will be Mr. Mark Grover,
please.
MR. GROVER: Members of the Board and
ladies and gentlemen, my name is Mark Grover, I am Fire
Chief for Spokane County Fire Department, also known as
Spokane County Fire District 1. I am going to do an
introduction and let Larry Rider take over to complete
our talk.
Our department has been in existence for
nearly 60 years providing fire, emergency medical,
fire prevention, and rescue service for the needs of
our citizens.
CHAIRMAN: Can you get a little closer
to the mike.
MR. GROVER: Our agency is in existence
to provide those services for our citizens. Our
presence here tonight is to convey to the Board our
opposition to any boundary changes that would
39
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
negatively effect our ability to deliver emergency
services to our citizens, and we believe excluding both
areas one and two from the city of Spokane Valley would
negatively effect the services to citizens within those
areas and the remainder of the fire district.
And I would like to applaud the efforts of
the proponents for the incorporation of the city of
Spokane Valley for the hard work that they have shown
in moving this proposal forward. And as a fire
department, we watched with some nervousness other
incorporation attempts that were brought to a vote, and
our concerns were with any changes that would
negatively effect our ability to deliver services
to the citizens.
I would like to thank the proponents for
including the boundaries of Fire District 1 as those
for the city, proposed city, and at this time I would
like to turn the microphone over to Larry Rider to let
him talk about our concerns, particularly dealing with
the Yardley and Alcott areas.
MR. RIDER: Good evening, Board members.
Maybe I can make this mike a little longer. I am a
little taller, how's that for everybody.
Do the Board members have a copy of that
map? They are headed your way. Sorry about the fact
40
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that I can't present this, but this is a map of some of
our station locations, and I am going to talk about the
affects of changing of jurisdictional boundaries within
the incorporation.
I know the Board members have been
inundated with data over the period of time with this,
and I have provided an outline of what I will speak
about for you, and the map to try to talk about
something a little bit different, a different scope.
My purpose here is to convince you to leave Yardley and
as many of the boundaries within Spokane Fire District
1 alone. And I am going to try to explain that to you
in a way that has to do with our service delivery
systems.
we have been in existence since 1942, and
it was nice to hear John talk about the fact that the
city was putting in water and sewer lines in 1997. And
we've been planning for the provision of emergency
services since 1942, so we are way ahead of the city in
the necessary need for long range planning.
And I'm going to try to do that by showing
you on the map where the fire station locations are,
and currently within the red zone there on your map, we
have a fire station number 6 and fire station number 2.
That diamond represents a mile and a half of distance
41
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
from that location. And that is established through
the Washington survey and rating bureau, and has to do
with fire flow requirements to put out fires, and it
also has to do with the fact that a mile and a half
response and is around a three - minute response time if
you are in with some other factors figured in, to get
into life safety of BLS and ALS provision of services
to the citizens.
So the distances from stations and the long
range planning necessary to obtain those locations,
watch the transportation routes to provide those
services is huge. It is what makes the fire service
work.
The problem with taking the Yardley area
out is this for us; if you look at the white line on
the map, that is basically the boundaries of Yardley
area. You are going to put my fire station on the
boundary, I'll be within 100 yards of the City of
Spokane, and yet I will not cross that boundary to
provide services because there is a difference in a
taxing authority and who pays for what.
So the concern of ours is when you look at
the City of Spokane, which is the black diamonds, they
have three stations within those service areas. They
have Station 8 by the community college, Station 7
42
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R..
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
down around Napa, and Station 14, which is up on Thor.
If you look at that and you look at those
diamonds how the red ones cover the Yardley area and
how they intersect with each other, that is 59 years of
planning between the City of Spokane's government and
their fire service people and the citizens of the
Valley and their fire service provider.
With the stroke of a pen you can change 59
years of planning and put my fire Station 6 on the
border and put all of the fire stations for the city of
Spokane out of range to provide services. And I'm not
speaking to water and sewer, I am talking about people.
We had around almost 600 runs in that area
in 2000. So this isn't about sales tax revenue, this
is about the ability of the fire service people and EMS
to provide efficient and effective services.
On page 2 of my information there, I have
tried to map out the distances for you on where those
fire stations are located to certain streets, which
were on current borders and the proposed borders. It
is a little confusing, but on the bottom six lines
there look at my Station 2 on the existing boundary,
is 2 /10ths of a mile closer than the nearest city
station. Predominantly across all of the area you are
talking about, except for one area where the City of
43
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Spokane's station 14, can provide an ALS unit faster,
the Valley fire department is significantly faster.
When you look at my station 6, it was
purchased, built established and put there to provide
services to Yardley. If you take Yardley out of the
incorporation boundaries and the incorporation happens,
it will be annexed eventually to the City of Spokane.
We had this same discussion with the City. Like John
explained in his document to you, and it happened to be
Pete Fortin that I got to give this exact same ,
information to in a dark smoky room, you know how City
government works -- that is a joke -- and I was
basically able to convince him that annexing Yardley by
the City of Spokane was a bad idea.
It isn't bad to collect water and sewer
rates and taxes, it isn't a bad idea for the City of
Spokane to collect sales tax revenue, but it was bad,
and not a logical idea to try to provide emergency
services to the businesses and people that live there.
So I know that I'm speaking to a different
context that is in this area, but the fact of the
matter is that the Boundary Review Board needs to be
very cognizant of the fact that when we rewrite these
boundaries, the fire chiefs and the fire service people
that come before you are speaking about people, we are
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
speaking about long range service planning. It takes
years years to procure property, be on the right
transportation routes, and not overbuild or underbuild,
and appropriate revenue streams to generate those
services.
And if the incorporation happens with this
area out, we will have to respond over a mile right
down the City of Spokane's border to get to a service
area that is outside of the city's area that they want
to annex, to provide services.
And in our discussions with the City at
that time, the answer was to have very long range
planning where we didn't chop up and piecemeal these
types of service areas, and if they wanted Yardley,
they needed to be able to put a station someplace in
there or take ours over to be able to provide the same
services.
What we will have with this proposal if you
take Yardley out, specifically, is that the taxes on
the rest of the Valley citizens would have to go up to
maintain the same level of service because we will not
be able to exclude our station 6 because we still have
to have it there for the citizens that have purchased,
paid for, and supplied the infastructure for almost 60
years to have that station service them.
45
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
So all those people south of Sprague, I
still have to service, and the City of Spokane will
have the 60 years of planning where they do not have a
station in that area, and with their closest station,
station 8, their closest route of travel is down
Havana, which is a private road that goes across six
tracks of the Burlington Northern, and it is closed all
the time.
They have big service delivery problems.
And I can tell you that if they anticipated the Yardley
annexation 59 years ago, they would have a station
someplace in that area able to serve them.
Station 7, if you look at the map of
Spokane, and station 6, both essentially on Sprague
Avenue, were both built in 1941. Forty years ago the
mayor and fire chief of the City of Spokane said build
a station to serve to Havana, and fire chief and the
citizens of the Valley said build a station to serve
the area to Havana. If you change that boundary now,
we are in trouble.
And we may be able to mitigate the
circumstances based on it with the City of Spokane on
joint planning and everything else, but no matter
how you slice it, the service delivery system from
the fire service is in trouble in Yardley for the rest
C�
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
of my district it is now going to be served by station
6 but revenue is not there to support it, and the City
is going to have to increase something in their tax
structure to pay for a station to deliver services.
Not only that, the citizens in the Valley
and the Yardley area have paid for the infastructure
that now exists. If you annex that into the City of
Spokane when you pick these boundaries, those people
are going to pick up the cost of the improving or
sustaining the infastructure of the City of Spokane. T
just passed a 21 million dollar bond issue to fix their
fire department, buy apparatus, facilities and
equipment. They are going to have to pay those taxes
to support an infrastructure where their service level
just went down. Their service will be slower and their
costs will be higher if you take Yardley and put it
into the City of Spokane.
So with all of those facts, it seems
difficult, but if you leave the Yardley area in the
incorporation boundaries and the incorporation is
successful, the fire service delivery system will be
the same one way or the other; whether they annex into
the fire department or if they form their own. If you
leave it out like a plum on a tree hanging there and
the incorporation happens, John Mercer and the fire
47
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
chief of the city and us, we are going to have to do
some real short -term planning that should have been
done over about 60 years.
So with that, I specifically ask you to
leave the Yardley and Alcott areas within my fire
protection district alone. I would also ask if you
take that same logic that exists with this piece of
ground specifically, and apply that logic to all the
other areas that you are looking at that are within the
fire district boundaries and outside in Fire District 8
and 9, many of those same principles apply.
So I have only brought to you tonight
Yardley and specifics, but those principles apply also
between Fire District 8 and myself and Fire District 9
and myself. We understand that all the little areas
that are out of the UGAs are going to have to come out
of this incorporation effort, and we think because of
the way that the new city will have to provide fire
protection, that's just how it is going to have to
work. But when we are dealing with Yardley and Alcott
with the City of Spokane fire service and District 8
and District 9 fire service, we ask you to leave the
boundaries alone because there are long reaching
affects that I don't believe with some of the things
being requested are getting enough consideration.
M
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
When we talk about sewer and water and
waivers, okay, but the next time you are in your car
and you want a fire truck to come to your car wreck or
someone that you know is in trouble, hold your breath
and think about the two more minutes it is going to
take the City of Spokane to get to your location
because you drew a line on the map. That's a fact.
These jurisdictions have problems crossing
borders, there is taxing authorities, please be
careful. We would ask you to leave Yardley in the
incorporation boundaries because of those reasons, and
Alcott, and try as much as you can to maintain the
integrity of the District 1's boundaries.
And that is all I have to say.
MR. STONE: I'm seeing in the middle square
here, fire station number 6 -- am I reading that
correctly?
MR. RIDER:
MR. STONE:
MR. RIDER:
MR. STONE:
updated or is it state
situation is it?
Correct.
When was that built?
1941.
And is it scheduled to be
of the art or what kind of a
MR. RIDER: No, it was built in 1941. If
the only house you lived in that was built in 1941
no
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
would be -- all your facilities are always maintained
in one way or another. We would love to have it
redone, you bet, but the fact is it is very difficult
to move fire stations because the location is why it is
there.
When you talk about real estate, it's
location, location, location. That is the fire
service, they actually have to be in the right
location. The long term planning that happens in
the fire service -- the new couplet, you may have read
about it in the paper, they changed the way traffic
moved, and that affected us to about a minute and a
half in one direction from a station that exists.
Well, when you are talking about million
dollar facilities, we have to make plans, and we are
doing that right now to try to mitigate that affect
when the County changed the road systems. The same is
thing happening at Station 6.
But the biggest problem is we can't move
that station very far to the east because we still have
to go to Havana Road going west. And what happens is
if you take out the tax base, the 139 million dollars
in tax base which generates around $400,000 in revenue,
we have to make that up and yet we can't get rid of the
station. It really disrupts the long -term planning of
50
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the fire service.
MR. STONE: Just to give me a perspective,
how does the age of 6 compare with number 1 and number
2?
MR. RIDER: Our station No. 2 was built in
1960.
MR. STONE: And No. 1.
MR. RIDER: No. 1? Well, from the distance
it is at, that was rebuilt in about 1976. The City
recently located its station 8 and has closed some
stations. I didn't take you guys into the survey and
rating bureau based on the rating systems, and that
also has to do with the mile and a half diamonds.
We are currently a four in the survey and rating which
effects your fire insurance and the City is a three.
But the city also went from a two to three when they
were rerated, and we are hoping to go from a four to a
three.
And that has to do with our long range
planning as well. It has an affect on where we place
stations. They have to be within a mile and a half of
a 2000 GPM fire flow, or more than five buildings five
stories tall, so we have all these lists of things we
try to support. The City will take a hit on Yardley
because they are not close enough. I really believe
51
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
lE
li
lE
1S
2C
21
2,
2;
2e
21
that fire service in the City, if they take Yardley,
will have to mitigate problems they are going to have
with response time and distance and fire flows.
MR. STONE: You mentioned planning and the
city's lack of planning and --
MR. RIDER: I hope I didn't say they had
bad planning.
MR. STONE: I thought you said bad planning
for Yardley, or did I misunderstand you?
MR. RIDER: No. What I am trying to show
with this map
MR. STONE: I understand you to say that
the City of Spokane has not planned well for Yardley
for 59 years, is that a misunderstanding?
MR. RIDER: The perspective the City and
Valley have planned for the boundaries that exist, but
if they really wanted to take Yardley in, we have not
planned for that and neither has the City.
MR. STONE: My question is, where should
the City of Spokane put a station if they had planned
for it?
MR. RIDER: Well, if you look at the
station 14, 7, and 8, the City will have to probably --
well, if I was going to do it with the City of Spokane,
and I would have to do some relocation probably of two
52
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
of those stations, but at a million dollars a pop, that
is a lot of money.
And they have a bigger problem, they have a
finger of land that goes out there in Yardley and they
have very limited access. You can come down Trent to
Fancher, but Havana is usually closed at the BN tracks,
that is a private road so I've been told, and they have
a difficult delivery system.
What the City wants is my fire station 6,
that is where I would put a fire station. See, that is
what I am trying to say is that --
MR. STONE: I simply asked where they
should have put it if they planned it.
Mr. Board Chairman and planner,.I think it
would be important, at least by the time of our next
meeting, our next continuation of the public hearing,
that we have a letter from the City of Spokane, or
testimony from the City of Spokane on the short,
medium, and long -term plans by the City of Spokane
should this not be a part of the City of Spokane Valley
and should it be a part of the City of Spokane, so I
think we need that information.
That is all my questions.
MR. TURBEVILLE: I just have a quick
question about the way the information is presented on
53
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
your map. Is the use of one and a half mile response
area, is the use of diamonds a survey as rating bureau
convention or was that done locally?
THE WITNESS: No, it is done in lieu of a
circle, because what you are really trying to
accomplish is a mile and a half of driving distance.
So when you use a diamond in this way, you can drive a
mile left or right from your location, and it will take
you down north or south a half mile. So predominantly
when you are just trying to project these over maps,
not withstanding significant things like rivers,
railroads and other things, the diamond tends to be
very easy way to project your mile and a half travel
distance.
MR. TURBEVILLE: I just wanted to be sure
that if this map had been designed with the use of the
more conventional circles, you would have come up with
a different map.
MR. RIDER: That is why in the fire service
we use diamonds.
MR. HAGNEY: Are we to understand that
through the interlocal agreement of October 26, 1998,
there is already a process in place by which some of
the issues that you've raised could be negotiated?
MR. RIDER: Yes, the examples.exist. The
54
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
agreement basically states that
two years notice that they want
date we do not have, that we wi
mitigating those factors, those
with in a lot of ways; the city
to provide fire protection from
exist.
when the City gives us
to annex, which to this
11 start negotiations on
factors could be dealt
could contract with us
the location that we
But when you start talking about contracting
out, bargaining, working with unions, you have a lot of
big problems, and we don't have the answers to those
types of questions yet. And for us, it would be just a
lot simpler if Yardley stayed out of the City of
Spokane.
MR. HAGNEY: But by entering into this
agreement, implicit is that these problems could be
negotiated?
MR. RIDER: I would say that entering into
this agreement was a requirement underneath the Growth
Management Act for the City to deal with us, and we did
that as best we could. If we ever get down to the
bargaining table to try to mitigate the consequences of
the City annexing this area, I tell you that what we
will be asking for is not to have any loss of revenue,
and hence disrupting our service ability to the area
south of Sprague that are not going into the city.
55
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
In those discussions we tried to look at
a much more global view of this type of situation, and
the problem was with the City, now with the UGA being
defined and this being part of the City and the City's
plan to grow, that global view becomes much more
difficult.
If the City and Valley were one, we would
maintain station 6 as a City fire station and those
boundaries, nothing would move. But because we can't
do that, we talked a lot about trying to take those
areas -- the other areas, go clear to Park Road but
they are not capable of going there, so we have not
dealt with those kinds of problems.
What happens is we are looking at these
little pieces of it that have these far reaching
affects, and I really don't know where we would be. We
took a very hard stance with Mr. Fortin when we met,
and we are going to fight diligently to protect the
ability to provide services to the citizens of the
Valley.
MR. HAGNEY: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN: You mentioned 600 runs, does
that pertain to the area of Yardley or to that service
area, station 6?
MR. RIDER: Just Yardley.
56
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1 2 2000.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIRMAN: Six hundred runs in the year
MR. RIDER: Just in the area of Yardley. I
didn't even include Alcott. I was just trying to focus
on one thing, and bring principles to the Board to try
to apply to other areas. But in this particular, I
think I wrote it down in here, 518 responses to the
area of Yardley, and that's north of the tracks to the
freeway and west of Elizabeth.
CHAIRMAN: Any other questions?
(No Response).
CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Chief.
This concludes the testimony of the people
testifying for the effective agencies. Now we will be
hearing from you citizens who are going to be voting,
and we asked you when you signed the roster to
designate on the map. Those of you in leaving might
see that the markers back there from where we are
sitting, a fair representation of the area that is
presented by the proponents.
We are asking you, we have some 20 people
that would like to testify, and we would like to get
all that testimony in this evening; it's 8:35 and we
want to move right along, and we are going to give you
a three - minute time.
57
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
But to make a long story short, this new
Valley couplet, and I would imagine people have been
watching this thing, I've gone from University City,
which is the first phase down to Fancher, and there
are 26, and I have pictures of them, 26 vacant
buildings since the new couplet has come about. I have
talked to some of the County Commissioners and asked
the County engineer, I said, Ross, what have you given
any consideration to the economic impact it has caused
on our county, even if the new city comes on board we
W.
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
I am going
to ask Mr. Jack Riley to come
first, and
I would like
standing behind him Mr. Loyd
Peterson so
we can move
right along.
Mr. Riley,
Mr. Peterson.
Mr. Riley.
State where you are from.
MR. RILEY:
My name is Jack Riley, I am
part owner
in the Plantation
Restaurant on Vista and
Sprague. I've
been in
the automobile business in
Spokane for
37 years, and
watched transportation -- I
was born and
raised in
this Valley and have been here
62 years.
I have watched
this Valley grow from apple
trees from
Dishman area
clear out to Greenacres, and
from what I
understand,
our County Commissioners are
now proposing
putting pear
trees in place of apple
trees.
But to make a long story short, this new
Valley couplet, and I would imagine people have been
watching this thing, I've gone from University City,
which is the first phase down to Fancher, and there
are 26, and I have pictures of them, 26 vacant
buildings since the new couplet has come about. I have
talked to some of the County Commissioners and asked
the County engineer, I said, Ross, what have you given
any consideration to the economic impact it has caused
on our county, even if the new city comes on board we
W.
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
are going to have to face this and it is getting worse
every day.
The people, the property owners that own
these properties and the business owners, the renters,
are forced to close their doors, and it affects
everyone from the people that own the businesses right
down to the work force, because if people can't run
their business, the work force suffers right along with
them.
The property owners, if they can't rent
their buildings, and I've asked people about this, I
said what happens if we can't pay our taxes, what
happens if we can't rent our buildings out, the County
will confiscate our buildings, sell them at auction or
we are forced to tear the buildings down. Our
restaurant, I just had a lessee close because they
couldn't handle the construction that is going on right
now, and the one -way.
We have lost 60 percent of our traffic off
of Sprague Avenue. I would like to advise people of
what the economic impact is. If we are forced to tear
our building down, where is the tax base coming from.
Two - thirds of our tax base is on the building and
one -third is on the property.
I would like the people of the new and
59
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
proposed city can hopefully get this turned around.
From what I understand, it is going clear out to
Greenacres, and we are in the first phase of it now.
I respectfully ask your consideration on
what is going to be done.
Thank you, that is all I have to say.
CHAIRMAN: Any questions?
(No response).
CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Riley.
Mr. Peterson, please.
MR. PETERSON: I am Loyd Peterson. I live
in your area 10 out on the eastern boundary of the new
proposed city.
I would ask respectfully that you do not
exclude that area. There are approximately 1000 homes
in that area, and those homes need to be in the new
city. If you go immediately to the east of that area,
you will find that you have a bunch of agricultural
land and quite an area that lays between the homes that
I am talking about and the beginnings of the homes that
are out in the Otis Orchards area.
We are a part of the area to the west, not
a part of the area to the east. Even though our
address is Otis Orchards, we are still closer to
Greenacres and the rest of the city than we are to the
F3
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
actual area of Otis Orchards.
Now, I am a retired real estate appraiser,
I did that for about 40 -some odd years, and I can tell
you that there is a lot of assessed value out there in
those 1000 homes, that it is proposed that they might
exclude. It's a big piece of revenue, tax revenue for
the new city. And we would very much like to be in the
new city. So please do not exclude area 10.
CHAIRMAN: Any questions?
(No response).
CHAIRMAN: Margaret DeCroff Milsap.
We would like you to state your address,
please.
MS. MILSAP: Margaret DeCroff Milsap, 1426
North Bowdish, Opportunity.
I have lived there since 1952, and I have
been working for incorporation before I ever knew what
the word meant, and I would like the Valley
incorporated before I die.
And actually, all my lifetime I've been out
here one way or another. My grandparents lived in the
Valley and I had an aunt and uncle that lived in Mica
Peak. I have bicycled it, walked it, everything else.
I was fortunate enough to be part of the --
first of all Larry was a baby, our neighbor. I have
j"
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
been to Europe, I am a photographer, studying education
and government of 16 countries. I've seen and been
under communism and socialism, and this is the Valley.
I was born in Spokane, I have nothing much to do with
that city is what I am saying. But tax without
representation is tyranny. I want to know where my
money goes. And I am getting awfully tired of hearing
about the potholes of Spokane and I could go on and on
and on, but I love the Valley and I just want to
incorporate, please.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN: Any questions?
(No response).
UNIDENTIFIED MAN: Mr. Chairman, I waive my
spot.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
Mr. Donahue, followed by Tony Lazanis.
MR. DONAHUE: My name is Mike Donahue, and
I live at 18809 E. Fairview Court, Otis Orchards.
And to follow up on what Mike Peterson just
said about leaving that boundary east of Barker Road
where there are so many homes with good valuations and
so forth, please leave that area in the area.
One more thing I would like to say with
regards to the fire district, I'm certain that over the
Z
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
years that the City of Spokane has recovered their cost
of whatever they did, whatever good they did for the
Yardley area. Please leave the Yardley area alone.
CHAIRMAN: Any questions?
(No response).
CHAIRMAN: Mr. Lazanis, is that correct,
sir?
MR. LAZANIS: Yes.
I am Tony Lazanis.
Members of the Boundary Review Board, I am
a Valley resident for many years. I want to say a
couple of words.
I've been involved for a long time in the
community, and I believe that the things that I've been
involved with have always benefited many.
He mentioned the flow control, the City,
Mr. John Mercer mentioned the flow control, and if you
look at flow control, you've got the Sullivan over
there, transfer station under the City's flow control,
Colbert landfill under flow control. The City of
Spokane spends 17 million dollars to sewer the
incinerator, the airport, spent a lot of money under
not a flow control along the way. So if they
going to use that as an excuse for Yardley, I think it
won't hold water. I think they get things like that
63
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
big revenue, but when they cannot allow them to take a
base there, that the Valley station does a wonderful
job in service to Yardley for many years, and I think
we need that area in order to service the Valley, to
I guess that is all I have to say:
CHAIRMAN: Your address?
MR. LAZANIS: 10625 East Trent, Spokane.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN: Any questions.
(No response).
CHAIRMAN: Next we will hear from Harold
Kellams to be followed by Annette Remshard.
MR. KELLAMS: Good evening. My name is
Harold Kellams. I live at South 1424 Eastern, Spokane.
If you look at the map on the southwest
corner there, I live kind of in the little lip on
the bottom, so I haven't really been involved too much
in the incorporation of the Valley. My main, just
intention, has been trying to stop annexation of parts
of the Valley by the City.
I work for the Spokane Valley Fire
Department. I have been there for 23 years. I've
dedicated most of my life to trying to serve the people
that, live in the Valley. I have to, in defense of the
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
people that I work with, we are extremely dedicated to
provide the best service absolutely possible. We are
very dedicated people, and planning is a very big part
of that.
That fire station that you were talking
about, station 6, I drove at that station for 12 years.
It was built in 1941, and it's a great station and
still is. It's not a bad station, it's not a bad
building, it doesn't have to be torn down. It is
serviceable for a long time.
I drove those streets providing fire
service and emergency medical service for 12 years.
Nighttime, daytime, winter time, icy, hot, you name it.
Those boundaries are critical for that area.
Burlington Northern disects Havana at the northern
part, there is a lot of traffic flow patterns that are
laid out ideally for the station locations as to where
they are at. If you start changing that, it really
puts a bind on services that is provided.
I'm not a chief officer, I am not privy to
a lot of information, I am the guy that drives the
truck to get to a need. And I can tell you that the
location of that station works very well for that area.
I've been fighting annexation for a long
I live south of that station, and I've seen a
65
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
lot of different plans that the City wanted to annex.
One of the best ones from their point of view for
taxation revenue, has been a block south of Sprague and
then a block north. It gives them all of the
commercial area, and they really wanted that for a long
time.
The big problem with that, and I've been
handing out flyers for that that I paid for, and I got
a lot of my friends to show up to go to City Council
meetings to try to change their thinking. It would
have made the closest truck that would respond to my
area, Station 1, which is the center station in the
Valley, east of Station 2 and Station 6, which would
have been about a six and a half minute response to my
house.
I have six children that live in the
Valley, and I am very concerned with their safety. All
of the people that are south of that station, if that
would be annexed, could be in jeopardy of much inferior
service.
I would really hope that you would take a
very hard look at the services that are provided, and
people of the Valley, I think really identify quite
often with the Valley Fire Department. It is a very
close community throughout the.whole Valley and I stand
37
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
in support of the idea of a city.
Thank you, very much.
CHAIRMAN: Any questions?
(No response).
CHAIRMAN: The next speaker is Annette
Remshard to be followed by Scott McClay.
MS. REMSHARD: Thank you for the
opportunity to express my view on this important issue.
I have worn many professional hats in my
relatively short life, and one of those hats I was a
critical care nurse. And I also was a disaster
services supervisor for the Red Cross, and I responded
with the firemen.
And there is nothing worse than being
delayed in a response to an emergency. Being the
responder, being the person waiting for help, or being
the person in that hospital receiving the person if
they would have been reached 30 seconds more would have
survived.
Peop
there, well, the
its limits. And
Fire District No
admirable job of
community we are
le think a second here or a second
human body is resilient, but it has
I am asking you to please maintain
1 and its boundaries, they do an
serving us. We couldn't be the
without them.
67
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I live at 1705 N. Macmillan Lane. I live in
the Riverwalk subdivision, Greenacres. We are one of
the areas that you are considering to exclude from the
new city. Well, we identify with Spokane Valley. The
whole area within Fire District No. 1 is a community.
Now, nobody can say that the County has not
provided for this area, because they have. They have
done pretty well as far as the County can go, but a
county has never been intended to take care of city
problems. The people out of 82,135 citizens, I have
every confidence that we will be able to get
responsible people to represent themselves and our
neighbors to the satisfaction of the citizens of this
area.
The fact is that County Commissioners have
to consider people in Mead when they study issues in
the Valley. Now, that is fair for the County, but it's
not fair for the Valley. There is a lot of issues that
would have been decided differently if it would have
been decided by a City Council responsible to their
neighbors.
I thank you for this time, and I ask you to
please consider the testimonies that have been given
here today. Thank you.
M
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIRMAN: Any questions?
(No response).
CHAIRMAN: Scott McClay, followed by Tom
Herman.
MR. McCLAY: I think Danette had me sign
the wrong list and I didn't raise my right hand.
There is three things that are important to
the Valley that make up the integrity of --
CHAIRMAN: Excuse me, you didn't sign the
list?
MR. McCLAY: I did sign the list, I didn't
raise my right hand.
CHAIRMAN: We do need to swear you in,
please.
Mr. McClay having been so sworn did testify
as follows:
MR. McCLAY: There are three things that
really make up the Spokane Valley, one is the Chamber
of Commerce, the other is the Central Valley School
District, and the last is Spokane Valley Fire
Department. These are the three treasures of the
Spokane Valley.
Every leader that has come up and done
anything for the Valley, any opinion that is * for
the Valley, has come through those three entities.
Cam]
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
As a real estate agent in the Spokane
Valley, I think that is one of the biggest benefits
that we have in becoming our own city is the control of
our land use. We have an extremely challenging problem
in Eastern Washington, and one that I don't think we
share solutions that are being offered by the City or
by the County, so all I could add is I think from those
perspectives, that we are deserving of a new city.
CHAIRMAN: May I have your address, please.
MR. McCLAY: I live at 2222 South Collins
Court, Spokane
CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
Tom Herman, followed by Cary Driskell.
MR. HERMAN: Hello, my name is Tom Herman,
and my address is 8703 East Maringo Drive, Spokane.
I'm a resident of the Pasadena Park
community, have been for 41 years. And I am going to
go against the grain a little tonight, but I wanted to
speak about the possibility of you excluding Pasadena
Park from the proposed new city limits, and the
decision criteria that are involved here are according
to the back of this green sheet that I have,
comprehensive plans and zoning, topography, and natural
boundaries, and the preservation of the natural
neighborhoods and communities.
70
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
About ten years ago, the summer of 1991,
many of the citizens of Pasadena Park were involved in
developing neighborhood plans with the help of the
Spokane County Planning Department, and they spent two
and a half years doing this. It was a long and
involved process. And I think by the end of this time
we came up with a pretty good comprehensive plan that a
lot of the citizens of Pasadena Park were happy with.
We are concerned, well, I can't speak for
everybody, there are many of us that are concerned that
rather than gain control of our neighborhood we might
actually lose some control.
The second thing that is on my mind is the
fact that Pasadena Park's geographic location kind
of isolates it from the rest of the proposed city, the
Spokane River and the town of Millwood isolates it from
the south, and Riblet's Hill area isolates it from the
east. In fact, there is only two roads that actually
connect Pasadena Park with the rest of the city, and
one directly, that would be Upriver Drive, and the
other would be Argonne, which has to go through the
town of Millwood.
Speaking for myself, I actually have much
closer, or feel more closely tied to Millwood than I do
for example Opportunity, Veradale, or any of the
71
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
communites that are inside the new proposed city.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN: Any questions?
(No response).
CHAIRMAN: Mr. Driskell.
MR. DRISKELL: My name is Cary Driskell,
this is my daughter Piper has accompanied me.
My business address is 12704 East Nora.
I'm here today on behalf of Bernard Daines. I am a
land use attorney practicing in the Valley.
I wanted to make a couple of generic
statements about the proposed annexation. The Valley
City boundary is by definition under the Growth
Management Act, an urban area. It has been designated
urban by the Board of County Commissioners for Spokane
County. That final urban growth area is undergoing
some minor modifications, and we certainly expect that
to be finished any time now.
The Growth Management Act anticipates urban
areas should be either incorporated or annexed by
existing cities, and that is exactly what we are hoping
will happen here.
I am also involved with the Chamber of
Commerce, the Valley Chamber in pushing this issue. In
terms of feasibility study done by Mr. Fortin, it shows
72
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that the proposed boundaries and revenue generated
within those boundaries and expenses, essentially this
would pencil out, keeping in mind that Mr. Fortin said
the expenses, that the expenses that he estimated were
on the high side and the revenue he estimated was on
the low side, just a nice conservative approach. So
from that aspect, there is no financial reason not to
do this.
There has been a lot of discussion tonight
on some factual reasons why the Yardley and Alcott
areas should not be excluded from the proposed
boundary. I don't know any of the factual issues, but
I am going to present you with some pretty compelling
legal argument that the City of Spokane has no
authority to claim those areas in it urban growth study
area.
The Growth Management Act requires counties
and cities inside of it to plan under the Act, there is
no place in that Act that states that a city has any
authority to plan outside of its corporate boundaries.
What is anticipated by the Act is that
cities will plan within their boundaries, and if there
is additional population allocation that cities cannot
handle, that will be allocated in urban growth area
outside of those corporate boundaries.
73
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
What the City is proposing to do with its
urban growth study area, which by the way has not been
adopted by the Board of County Commissioners, that is
subject to vote, I believe, on the 16th, so that is not
a compelling reason to do that. But what the City
proposal would do would result in the City having
planning authority over those areas that are in the
County and those residents would have no electoral
recourse over the people making the decisions.
I assert very firmly that is an unlawful
delegation of power, and I would feel very strongly
also that there would be a number of people that would
challenge that.
I requested in writing on behalf of
Mr. Daines to include additional property within the
final boundaries, the final urban growth area proposal
goes farther south on Highway 27 than the current city.
Mr. Daines has 80 acres of property beginning of what
would be 42nd Avenue down to about 46th Avenue. This
boundary split his property and he would like to have
either all of his property included or taken down to
the final end of the final urban growth area.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN: Mr. Wayne Frost, followed by
74
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. FROST: Hi, food evening. Wayne Frost,
and I am here representing the Inland Empire Paper
Company.
CHAIRMAN: Your address, please.
MR. FROST: The address of the company is
3324 North Argonne Road.
I am not personally a resident of the
boundaries of the proposed city and as a representative
of the company we have no comment for or against the
proposed incorporation. However, we do have comment
specifically on the eastern boundary of the proposed
city.
Inland Empire Paper Company owns over 1000
acres that lies within the proposed incorporation
limits. The mill itself is in the city of Millwood.
Of that 1000 acres, approximately 250 were
involved in a master planning process of 900 acres that
the company is currently working. To reiterate we own
1000 acres, or a little more than 1000 acres in the
proposed city, 250 of that 1000 acres were part of a
master planning process of a 900 acre block. Those 900
acres, the remainder of that 900 acres either lies
within the City of Liberty Lake or lies between the
boundaries of the proposed city and the proposed City
of Liberty Lake.
75
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
We would like the Boundary Review Board to
look at that eastern boundary as we have done in our
master planning process, and look at the issues with
regard to buffers between the two cities.
It is our feeling that a good portion of
our property should be probably part of the City of
Liberty Lake rather than the City of Spokane Valley.
We came to that conclusion based on a number of
factors, transportation patterns, infrastructure,
population growth, and a sense of community.
I will follow up with a letter and attached
drawing that shows you our ownership and specifically
the areas that I am suggesting that we be excluded
from the proposed city.
That's all I have.
CHAIRMAN: I'm a little confused. You said
there is 900 acres within the proposed area but there is
250 --
MR. FROST: We have 1000 acres within this
proposed city, from Pasadena Park all the way to the
City of Liberty Lake boundary, and actually beyond if
you consider north of the City of Liberty Lake. 250
acres of those 1000 acres were included in the master
planning process of a 900 acre block.
CHAIRMAN: Where does that lie?
76
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. FROST: The 900 acre block lies on the
eastern part of the proposed boundary. A portion of
that 900 acre block is now within the City of Liberty
Lake. So about 250 acres does not lie within the City
of Liberty Lake but lies within the proposed City of
Spokane Valley. What I am suggesting to you is we
would like that 250 acres to be included in the City of
Liberty Lake eventually, rather than be included in the
incorporation of Spokane Valley.
CHAIRMAN: Any questions?
(No response).
CHAIRMAN: Mr. Hansen.
MR. HANSEN: I am R.A. Hansen, and I am
representing Hansen Industries who is the developer of
the Valley Shopping Center and all the ground around
it. I have no interest in the shopping center itself,
that was sold to Price Company in Salt Lake, which is
now called J.B. Realty. However, we developed the area
so they could build the shopping center, and I've been
a strong proponent of the incorporation long before
there was any shopping center there.
I just believe the people have the right to
control their own destiny, government closer to the
people is better government, smaller government is
better government, and I.think they have that right.
77
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
And you hear all the testimony about the
borders, I don't believe there is any changes that
ought to be made. The fire district, we think of the
fire district as somebody that saves property, well,
that is great, but their biggest function is to save
lives, getting people out of the situations or getting
them to the hospital or the EMTS. So when we think
fire department, I think we should say it is a people
department, and I don't think we ought to meddle with
it. I don't think there is anything sufficient reason
that I've heard to change any boundaries, and I
strongly urge you to support the city with the present
boundaries.
Of course the Yardley area is tax rich,
that is why the City wants it -- somebody said to
follow the money. An industrial area, Kaiser or any of
them, our shopping center, we pay a hell of a lot more
taxes and don't require many services, and that is why
the City wants Yardley.
So.let's call a spade a spade. Thank you
very much.
CHAIRMAN: Mr. Richard Behm to be followed
by Pete Higgins, please.
MR. BEHM: My name is Richard Behm, and I
live at 3626 South Ridgeview, Ponderosa.
Wd
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I am a commercial property owner on East
Spraguel and have two businesses on Sprague and Dishman
Road.
First of all, I want to say that Spokane
Valley lost two very wonderful citizens in the last two
days, people who spoke for the Valley, one was Rod
Tedrow, fire chief for Fire District 1 who worked with
us for many years, was active in all civic affairs, the
other one is John Velonoff, owner of the Valley Harald
and Voice of the Valley. And we all wish they were
here participating in this and wish their families
respect and they were both very good friends of mine.
In regard
been said, and I agree
as the fire department
to address later on to
balance sheet, because
part of the revenue.
to Yardley, I think a lot has
with what has been said as far
goes. I would like Mr. Fortin
what that would do to his
he figured Yardley in that as
In the Ponderosa I am within the boundaries
of the new city. I have many friends who live south of
44th, people from church, acquaintances, including my
son. Most of them would like to be in the new city
that I've talked to, and some don't, but most of them
do. However, when I talk to them and explain to them
the reasoning for the boundary of 44th and the problems
79
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
L
3
4
c
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
with the fire district boundaries and Fire District
No. 8 wishing to negotiate with the legal entity like a
new city, they understand why the boundary was put
there, and most of them agree they would annex to the
new city right away as soon as the fire district comes
through.
It is not hard to explain something that as
to the reason why, because that is a reasonable
approach. And I would very much like to be within the
city. I don't think we should worry about the 44th as
a legal boundary for years, Fire District 8 and Fire
District 1 have mutual agreements and we feel very
fortunate.
Where I live, I don't know who would show
up first, Fire District 8 or Fire district 1, but one
of them would be there real quick, and that we know.
And it works out very well. I don't think it is a case
of finding a neighborhood that is not going to affect
the fire district or the Ponderosa school. I am a
member of the -- a board member of the Spokane Valley
Business Association for the last eight years, and also
on Spokane Water Quality Advisory Board, and in that
capacity we have discussed the utilities, sewer, sewer
plan and so forth.
In my personal recollection of those
'-
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
meetings, there wasn't a problem. We figured any
reasonable person would, as soon that the new city
council would sign an interlocatory agreement with
Spokane County Utilities, and at some time working with
the new sewer plan and with the utilities, we would
work it out. So we don't think as far as the Water
Quality Advisory Committee, we don't think there would
be any problem dealing with the new city other than
bookkeeping. We are pretty sure that the new city
council would want to do that, "If it ain't broke,
don't fix it," that type of attitude.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
Mr. Pete Higgins followed by Donna
Blomberg.
MR. HIGGINS: My name is Pete Higgins. I
live at 20221 East 8th, Greenacres. I live on the
exact eastern border of this proposed annexation or
this city.
I want to speak to the opposition. I
moved there 25 years ago and we were part of the
valley, we are in an area that is designated suburban.
One acre or larger. Basically we are satisfied with
what we have. We are somewhat out in the country,
still have some area around us, quite a bit to the east
[L
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
l
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
of us south of Liberty Lake.
It is modification area No. 8, and I have
yet to speak to any neighbor in the neighborhood who is
in agreement with this, and hope to have signatures to
you before your next meeting to designate this.
We keep hearing about the fire station. To
let you know how urban we are, our fire station was
closed and moved approximately two miles to the east.
So everything is negotiable, like I said. We are in
basically an suburban area, not in need of what would
be designated urban services. In fact, urban services
for our area would be a detriment, not a positive.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you, sir.
Donna Blomberg?
MS. BLOMBERG: My name is Donna Blomberg,
and I have lived in Spokane for 51 years. My dad's
home on 8015 Upriver Drive, he's lived there since the
40's, and I got a chance to move back in 1980 and I
lived there until I was 20 and then moved back and I
have lived there for 21 years more in the same
neighborhood, and I would like to see it incorporated
as part of a new city.
I am sick and tired of the City of Spokane
and not being represented in it, and I don't feel we
m
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
have been.
My brother owns Gober's on Trent, that was
my dad's business, and I have land there also. I work
on North 421 Mullan, and I would like to see it all
incorporated, and I just would like to get some more
information on it and see that area. I know Northwood
above me won't be part of the incorporation, but maybe
later.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN: Dennis Scott, followed by Alan
Carlson.
MR. SCOTT: Thank you, members of the
L:.. •
My name is Dennis Scott. My comments are
short. Actually, I wasn't going to say anything at all
until later when I heard the presentation by the
representative of the City related to Yardley. I
certainly appreciated the comments made by Fire
District No. 1 on the safety issue.
But regarding Yardley, Yardley was included
by the City and the County --
Excuse me, my address is 24324 East
Pinehurst Lane, Liberty Lake.
I am part of the Valley Chamber of Commerce
and sat on the Governance committee since it was formed.
MK
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
4
E
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
They did do that planning that was in
conformance with the growth management plan. That
planning was done because the growth management plan
required it to be done. And the issue did not include
what the impact might have been if there were a city
out here because it was not under consideration at that
time, and I believe that if it were, there would have
been other issues laid on the table.
It is a stretch of the imagination for the
City to say that they currently provide city services
when those services consist of water and sewer
service. There is no library, there is no fire
protection, no police protection furnished by the City.
Those are huge issues to be able to say we provide City
services.
The last thing I would like to add is that
although any issue, including the fire district issue,
can be mitigated, the mitigation comes at a cost where
right now there is no cost for mitigation.
CHAIRMAN: Mr. Carlson.
MR. CARLSON: Thank you, I will make it
brief.
Alan Carlson, I live in the north, extreme
northwest area that is designated for the new city's
boundaries. It.is in a subdivision called Pasadena
m
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Park Terrace, and as you can quickly recognize, it is
just to the north of Pasadena Park itself.
I was interested in what the residents that
spoke about Pasadena Park and the activity that we had
with the County for some two and a half years was a
pleasurable and difficult, thoughtful experience that
I too, joined in on, and was very pleased with the
leadership of the County.
You won't be surprised, then, that I, too,
don't need a new city here in the Spokane Valley. And
I have had some experience in my some 40 -odd years
living here, me and my family. I have participated in
the community, past president of the Spokane Valley
Chamber of Commerce, a past member and chairman of the
Spokane County Library system, and not to mention some
of the activities with the school system.
I have one thought, I don't want to pay
higher taxes. And I know that there used to be a law,
I haven't looked it up recently and it may have gotten
changed, but I think this ought to be followed up if it
has not been, investor owned utilities pay a tax to the
county or city -- or generally the city not the county,
the county does not have the right to collect the tax
and the cities do have the right to collect the tax on
electricity, natural gas, I think water if they are
M
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
L
7
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
investor owned, and the amounts can be as high as 6
percent of the bills.
I doubt that much of the public understands
that, but it can amount to a lot of money. With the
rising cost in energy, it can become even higher. So I
hope that you follow up on that and see that that will
be an increase in taxes, too, if the city is approved.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN: Thank you, and I appreciate the
comments of all of you. This concludes all of the
testimony of this evening's hearing.
Do Board members have any review that they
would like to have of any of the staff reports or
notes or anything in regard to the testimony that we
have received this evening?
MR. STONE: I think based on the testimony
that I've heard, I think it would be helpful for the
Board to know -- to get as much information from the
City of Spokane for the Alcott and Yardley areas, not
only with fire protection, but also streets and roads,
police protection, all those normal services that would
be provided if it became part of the City of Spokane.
Also, I think the last speaker,
Mr. Carlson, mentioned utility tax. I think it would
be valuable to get an exhibit on what Eastern
ON
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Washington cities over 50,000, what taxes they have on
utilities, what rates they are, that would be helpful.
That is something that I would like to see on or before
our next hearing.
The other thing I would like to mention,
while we appreciate the exhibits, it is difficult when
we receive exhibits right when we start the meeting is
we want to pay attention to the speakers and that
doesn't permit us to read the exhibits, so I would
encourage any and all entities to get the exhibits to
our Board staff as early as possible. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN: In the matter of Yardley, we
have the assessed value of that area and Alcott. I
believe it would be important for us if that area were
removed, to have the sales tax figure and how that
might play in regard to the overall breakdown of the
economics performance. So if we could have that for
the next meeting also.
Anything else?
MR. HAGNEY: I am assuming we are going to
continue the public hearing on the 27th; is that right?
It would be very helpful to hear from some of the few
residents of Yardley, it would be very helpful to hear
from some of the residents, more of the residents or
some of the residents in the Ponderosa area living
ME
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
7
4
C
E
i
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
north of 44th.
I realize there are very few residents, I
think 88 residents in the Yardley area, but I think it
would be helpful to hear from that perspective', and
especially asking questions about services and delivery
of services, and things like that. And then again,
just to be emphatic here, I definitely would like to
hear from some people living north of 44th and
Ponderosa.
MR. STONE: There is one more speaker that
has come forward that would like to speak.
CHAIRMAN: Brian Sayrs. Did you raise your
hand prior?
MR. SAYRS: Yes, I did, sir.
CHAIRMAN: Please come up.
MR. SAYRS: I apologize for this.
My name is Brian Sayrs. I live at 1011
North Malvern Circle Road, Liberty Lake.
My prepared comment will last four minutes,
but I will spare you and just hand that in.
I am going to be talking about -- I am
going to be expanding on Mr. Frost's comments about
modification No. 8 and 9, and how exclusion of these
areas help the Board pursue three objectives, mainly
the preservation of the natural neighborhood and
M
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
community, the preservation of logical service areas,
and encouragement of the incorporation of cities in
excess of 10,000 in population.
In about 500 hours, the City of Liberty
Lake will officially incorporate, due in no small part
to this Board's careful consideration of the State's
mandated objective. In particular, the City of Liberty
Lake exists today in order to preserve the Liberty
Lake's natural community, and a recognition that any
perceived deficiencies in that category would easily be
corrected once incorporation occurred through the
community's now famous two step process.
The Liberty Lake two -step, as it came to be
known, envisioned a process by which areas within the
Liberty Lake community but outside the original Liberty
Lake incorporation area would be permitted annexation
opportunities once the incorporation process was
complete.
As a member of Liberty Lake 2000, the
Liberty Lake Incorporation Transition Team and the
Liberty Lake City Council, I have been a proponent of
the Liberty Lake two -step since its conception.
The inclusion of areas 8 and 9 in the
proposed city of Spokane Valley would interfere with
the Liberty Lake's two -step process. The Liberty Lake
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Transition Team Growth Management Committee charged
with the task of developing the procedure by which the
two -step plan would be implemented included part of
area 8 and all of area 9 within the city's urban growth
area in the recommended comprehensive plan.
The proposed urban growth boundaries of the
City of Liberty Lake extends one half mile from our
current boundary in order to complete the inclusion of
the property of a local land owner. The Inland paper
company. The land owner is currently facing the
prospect of building a single neighborhood in three
separate jurisdictions, the City of Liberty Lake, the
City of Spokane Valley, and Spokane County, frustrating
the preservation of natural neighborhoods objective.
once built, and with three local
jurisdictions, the citizens of this development will
not know from whom they receive services, reminding us
of the purpose of the logical services area objective.
In conclusion, I do want to mention that it
appears there were some questions on this Board last
year as to whether the City of Liberty Lake should have
been allowed to incorporate because of concerns that
our population was too small, and that integral
portions of our community were not included. Exclusion
of areas 8 and 9 from the current proposal will allow
we
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
us to pursue our two -step process, reintegration of
central areas of our community. And it will insure
that our population will more easily reach the 10,000
population plateau that we promised to you last year.
Thank you for your time and patience and
consideration in excluding modification areas 8 and 9
of the current proposal. Thank you.
Chairman: Any questions?
(No response).
CHAIRMAN: I will now entertain a motion to
continue the public hearing to the date of August 27,
7:00 p.m., Monday, location of the 1445 North Argonne.
MR. BEU: Motion so made.
DR. TURBEVILLE: Seconded.
CHAIRMAN: Motion entertained by Mr. Beu
and seconded by Dr. Turbeville. All those in favor say
aye. Aye carried.
This special meeting is adjourned at 9:30.
Thank you all for your cooperation.
Lail
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) ss: REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
COUNTY OF SPOKANE )
I, BETTY A. SITTER, Certified Shorthand
Reporter and Notary Public in and for the State of
Washington;
DO HEREBY CERTIFY:
That the foregoing is a true and correct
transcription of my shorthand notes as taken upon the
public hearing on the date and at the time and place as
shown on page one hereto;
That the witness was sworn upon his oath to tell
the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and
did thereafter make answers as appear herein;
That I am not related to any of the parties to
this litigation and have no interest in the outcome of
said litigation;
WITNESS my hand and seal this February 14,
2002.
Notary Public in and for the
State of Washington, residing
in Spokane.
05
BETTY SITTER, C.S.R.
Spokane, WA (509)926 -2670