The URL can be used to link to this page

2016, 01-12 Regular Meeting AGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING FORMAL FORMAT MEETING Tuesday,January 12,2016 6:00 p.m. Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers 11707 E Sprague Avenue Council Requests Please Silence Your Cell Phones During Council Meeting CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION: Pastor Brad Bruszer, Genesis Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF AGENDA INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: n/a COMMITTEE,BOARD,LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS MAYOR'S REPORT PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is an opportunity for the public to speak on any subject except those on this agenda as action items. (Action items include public hearings, and those items under NEW BUSINESS. Public Comments will be taken on those items at the time those items are discussed.) When you come to the podium,please state your name and city residence for the record and limit remarks to three minutes. 1.PUBLIC HEARING: Tesoro Savage Vancouver Energy Distribution Terminal Facility,Draft Environ- mental Impact Statement (re Application to construct and operate a new crude oil terminal) — Mike Jackson 2. CONSENT AGENDA: Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. Proposed Motion:I move to approve the Consent Agenda. a. Approval of vouchers on Jan. 12,2016 Request for Council Action Form Totaling $2,975,371.58 b. Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending December 31,2015: $494,242.89 c. Approval of December 15,2015 Special Council Meeting Minutes d. Approval of December 15,2015 Study Session Council Meeting Minutes e. Approval of December 18,2015 Special Council Meeting Minutes f. Approval of December 29,2015 Study Session Council Meeting Minutes NEW BUSINESS 3. Proposed Resolution No. 16-002 Declaring Banking Authority—Mark Calhoun [public comment] 4.Mayoral Appointments: Planning Commissioners—Mayor Higgins [public comment] 5.Mayoral Appointments: Councilmembers to Committees/Boards—Mayor Higgins [public comment] ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS 6. Street Vacation, 3rd Avenue —Karen Kendall 7. Advance Agenda—Mayor Higgins CITY MANAGER COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT Council Agenda 01-12-2016 Formal Format Meeting Page 1 of 1 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 12, 2016 Department Director Approval: ❑ Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ® public hearing ❑ information [' admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING: Tesoro Crude Oil Terminal Draft Environmental Impact Statement GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: BACKGROUND: Tesoro Savage Petroleum Terminal, also known as Vancouver Energy, has applied for a Site Certification Agreement to construct and operate a new crude oil terminal capable of receiving an average of 360,000 barrels of crude oil per day. At the proposed Facility, the crude oil would be unloaded from trains, stored on-site, and loaded onto marine vessels at a marine terminal located at the Port of Vancouver in Clark County, Washington. Marine vessels would then deliver the crude oil to refineries primarily located on the US West Coast. According to the Draft Environmental Impact statement (DEIS), an average of four unit trains would arrive and depart for the proposed Facility each day for a total of 2,290 one way train trips per year by unit trains comprised of 120 crude oil tank cars. Occasionally a fifth train may arrive within a 24 hour period. The Washington Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) makes the assumption that the Bakken would be the likely source of oil and that BNSF would be the carrier. The trains would pass through Spokane Valley. The Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council is conducting its review process for the proposed Facility. The public comment period begins when the DEIS (draft environmental impact statement) is issued. A minimum thirty-day comment period is required by SEPA (State Environmental Policy Act). The comment period began November 24, 2015, was originally scheduled to end January 8, 2016, but the applicant agreed to extend the comment period to end January 22, 2016. A public meeting had been originally scheduled for January 7, 2016, at CenterPlace Regional Event Center, but is now set for January 14, 2016. In order to give our citizens an opportunity for comment, we have scheduled tonight's public hearing. OPTIONS: Conduct Public Hearing RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Conduct Public Hearing BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: City Manager Mike Jackson ATTACHMENTS: Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council Executive Summary Siokane Draft Environmental Impact Statement Vancouver Energy Distribution Terminal Facility at the Port of Vancouver, WA *Wane Overview: .valley Tesoro Savage Petroleum Terminal has applied for a Site Certification Agreement to construct and operate a new crude oil terminal capable of receiving an average of 360,000 barrels of crude oil per day. This will increase the amount of crude oil transported through Spokane Valley. Average of 4-5 unit trains/day westbound loaded/eastbound empty totaling 8 — 10 trips per day through Spokane Valley Total of 2,920+ one -way train trips per year passing through Spokane Valley 120 sole purpose crude oil tank cars/train, 7,800 feet long Study assumes Bakken Crude transported via Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (1 K. OjiUna Zft .i i \ l `J' P4 , E Environmental Resources/ j Issues Analyzed in Draft EIS : Earth Resources Historic and Cultural Resources Air Quality Transportation Water Resources Public Services and Utilities Terrestrial Vegetation Noise Terrestrial Wildlife Land and Shoreline Use Aquatic Species Visual Resources Energy and Natural Resources Recreation Environmental Health 3 Spokane Existing #valley BNSF Train Traffic ` r_ rt 0 0 Currently, up to 56 trains per day (392 per # r� -'_ s� week) cross the Barker Road/ SR290 ;` E intersection. 4 \' I ' 19 trains per week are unit oil trains {i h � '� - If all potential crude-by-rail facilities are built g ¢ out, oil train numbers are estimated to exceed: 57 weekly loaded CBR unit trains by 2020 113 weekly loaded CBR unit trains by 2035 Estimates predicted to be "much higher" with crude export. `�� ' J° There are multiple potential projects in V` 4 . 1 ,Il 111 ;1,1-- There addition to Vancouver Oil Terminal that would ,r. add additional train traffic to Spokane Valley. \-.. Spokane Existing (cont.): ___jValley BNSF Crossings in City of Spokane Valley Park Road Crossing — At Grade Vista Crossing — At Grade Argonne/Trent - Underpass 9j�9 `�A90 0 University Crossing — At Grade, TRACKS Existing Quiet Zone - ,, • Pines Road — At Grade 4,4 Evergreen — At Grade _P- Sullivan/Trent - Overpass 1 Flora Road — At Grade . r) [ s Barker Road — At Grade ..."....... Primary RR Grade CrossingsSlikane 4,•• Valley . . _ _ • IV „7- _ iii--- .,.. C Mriltr aM ;NW 11 11.1 - t ff" ,i _ :-• -mi.eilE1 sp._•.17.1.,wpm? •.in a It 2!,._7.=Ep #liim ... Pzity of : u. .ilititill4 AIM._ Allii ipokane , _LI - .,,...4;e401.- .6.41wThatilA np. .-.... *Ay ',0..,Nts7artik-ia ...... ....a ,‘,.. .....,-- 5-- --wok, -.. 1.,i,-;..em Spokane kw, Milli.- -NEIL* i"------mian _ = latikiiispr --\\;11-7 -==/.1 f IlligNiMiEZMIL:=ILSP P. - Mair 4 t:11111 ,........ '. mmimisamilii;wp-,..-- di t. i! _ ih._ *NM....,.., , & IINITIL•0, =4,...11111_111111111k;i -4 bow .----- Ariogisizazi....,..1 - •4-.,:t4..*:?--Fl= ....---. inig .„1 . ..,,. -- - ,elpirminia.- -- 116-,, IMISIUMM=11:4111=a ma AN" 1 'Prg 11111:Pralriii moir•-•ii:ormm . .1 lei . vio,ilm,-,m • StitidElargilliileRigii ..-----eqattiltiTIOSC1 milli II • w'••• iliallogaritiF liair!!nal 41 iiiigilliniiiiiili anFINFIIIMI '"'"'"all =1:111y.IIIIIIIIrai-giik, ." ' 1E-41v--4-.! El-4,011111111•1111 Trpolltirom SPII rr;zglil AM ----..,..4.-- ,, ... -.., ........... *Tar -- miramirmirmIiirrwlzim-rm°111E-9-11Effm1,111 E.,,..., _ ern." gem" t. allitmeniallkAMM! ---'- III"+=. piariIIMILIMInINESIM' 1111111101111101E"-% Gilm i GC ' - lialiniW -E20110i,e• tr.„,,F. NE.= ..-- .,,,.......m....m,,. woomm...1111.&Mr — Mill ' a , . 1 nonir,,,,r041. 4,10114.....ras.:2,ris_u_ 11.1irsimmimii. l", , 411'....... srl....ii up TilillrinninWrmn.m..m -imourvi. ismuurminpu-,.-r-gamwmmez .1;,--a.,- ..."mirt-riimirarall gra;mh..da..,.. a:Tx--.22 11=m21.5,11=11aM•MIN1Er'-.7-•NEM-m=611E .'.0, .,-. INIniliniSi 4 imErier .,1 .. __,,,,, -11"11F.1?-1=111311101=-11111111116. . -ck. ' - - - - r.6_,J ' 4 4,1.6„IF NT 14igo-orig I 1 min . .-k----ar. ,. -,- ipa t A '4,111:la°Mall t .1111116". i Mli0“" miliali_Lirsit: au - watemsinglomptimpimemPrlir, -if _ '..6-- Aim -rirg-1-,„ii.<1.4itiewi=dr,40 11.1.111mIle ilibe L mi , , 4 . •21-tzdv.ii— 4.-Nkii-maia.1.:. liangrariP \Aix. 4,'''. , B NS F Li ne 1-1:11-H istraImari_n_iit ,M=filtrir it , -:,.,„.„ = lwir ImimialVIIIiille.akV=Inti • Ls.'467per,, ..,...L.. _lirj.__ .. . APPENTImil mpg-- 1 ...,fic lellananii..11.111w I .I. daheaul ,_ T . .. [ 6 ) UP Line ( II •tirriiiiwir Jo i,-,.. 't . OPAIIES,,_44in Se. 1 Mit >Valley Impacts : it ua i Vehicle idling while delayed at at-grade crossings could increase emissions to a level that would represent an additional impact to local air quality *Congestion from this project alone would create the following estimated emissions output at the 7 at grade crossings. 78.54 metric tons of nitrogen oxide (Nox) _1 2.94 metric tons of volatile organic compound (VOC) / 2.24 metric tons of particular matter (PM) 9,377.20 metric tons of carbon dioxide CO2) A 41. * Estimate based on 2015 Tiger Grant for Barker Overpass. Spokane Impact: Transportation At Grade Daily Train Traffic Increase: 7 at Grade Crossings X 8 trains daily = 56 unit train crossings daily Annual Train Traffic Increase: 56 unit train crossings/day x 365 = 20,440 unit train at grade crossings annually *Grade Separated Daily Train Traffic Increase: 2 Grade Separated Crossings X 8 trains daily = 16 unit train crossings daily Annual Train Traffic Increase: 16 unit train crossings/day x 365 = 5,840 unit train =,.aa grade separated crossings annually Total Train Traffic Increase = 26,280 crossings annually ' £ *DEIS describes heightened risk for elevated train crossings Spokane Impact : Transportationvalley Rail Transportation (3.14.3.2; pg. 3.14-26) Figure 3.14-7 shows locations of at grade crossings having Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT)* of 2,500 or more 4I :4 wrr. y Barker — 5,100 vehicles • _ ,_ �- .... Pines - 16,000 vehicles (DEIS says 11,000) . 1�' �-� University - 2,662 17 --- 'A _ _ � a , -- Park Road — 6,682 At Grade Crossing Delays (pg. 3.14-24) Train 7,800' long @20 MPH = 5 minutes/train X 8 trains = 41 minutes/day 41 minutes/day/crossing X 7 at grade crossings = 287 minutes/day 287 minutes/day X 365 days/year = 1,746 hours of gate down time/year DEIS identifies moderate to major impacts to motorists from delays. *Barker Rd. is included here but for some reason was omitted from Figure [ 9 3.14-7 of the EDIS. Cumulative S"okane Valley Rail O rtati O n2 -9(executive summary 6.2. ES / ) The total number of trains that would be added to the system if all the identified existing and future projects were permitted and operated is 155 unit trains or 310 round trips/week Unknown if these would all come through Spokane Valley The additional rail traffic ... "could increase the rate of accidents and fatalities to pedestrian trespass or motorists at at-grade crossings [ 10 ] Spokane Cost for Grade Separations : h1ey allilBarker Rd. Pines Rd. Park Rd. Sullivan Rd. To - • Overpass Underpass Overpass Improvements Bond Issue $29,784,000 $17,527,752 $19,372,778 $16,473,451 $83,157,981 Amt. Annual Bond $1,828,486 $1,076,056 $1,189,325 $1,011,331 $5,105,198 Pmt. Amt.* *Estimated interest rate of 4.5% Bond issue costs of 2.0% Bond repayment of 30 years [ 11 ) Spokane .0•0Valley 10 Impact: Noise Subtracting 1 existing quiet zone = Additional 17,520 train horns/year Two Long — One Short — One Long — Repeated as necessary until locomotive clears the crossing. (17,520 X 4 = 70,080) Locomotive Horns must be sounded 15-20 seconds before entering all public grade crossings, but not more than 1/4 mile in advance Engineer may do more based upon their judgment Train horns must be between 96-110 Decibels Spokane Impact: Safety ,#Valley Potential for increased risk for oil train fire/ explosion Reduction of emergency access to residents & businesses with amount of train traffic at crossings City in Quebec was low population density yet suffered the highest number of deaths resulting from an oil train fire. Potential fires are devastating no matter where they occur. It is a false premise to categorize by population density. The volatility of Bakken Crude is similar to diesel or gasoline. "It has been described as looking like" "two-stroke oil mixed with gasoline." (pg. 407, Washington Marine and Rail Oil Transportation Study) S>Va11ey ne Emergency Greater Spokane Emergency Management Local planning efforts , Fayette County,West Virginia Alert and Warning ,„ 1-0 Evacuations L Sheltering of victims '* . Mass Care .- - IN BREAKING NEWS 4. Police EXPLOSION & OIL SPILL AFTER TRAIN DERAILS : GI • ! 3:37 PM PT Fire r BOSTON,MA CURRENTAIRPOIIT RELAYS ,G.ROuND pELAYS s Lo+an Ground[?slays '.tea-;' 1 Fire Department/Medical Facility Response Preparedness (4.6.4.3) June 2014 survey by Washington State Military Department "even the most metropolitan, best-equipped departments consider themselves ill prepared to respond to a crude-by-rail (incident) with related explosion and/or fire incident." Public Works [ 14 Impact: Economic Deve1opment— Potential negative impact to development of vacant parcels due to increased proposed train traffic. Property values could be impacted near train crossings. Increased wait for commerce traffic at crossings. Oil train demand may impact transport of other goods that have direct economic impact on COSV. ....BNSF mainline capacity and operating protocols are continually being challenged." (Pg. 175 Washington Marine and Rail Oil Transportation Study. Lower quality of life resulting from noise and potential safety concerns. Spokane Spokane Valley Pvalley Grade Separations: Council Adopted Goals: Continue to work with state and federal legislators for possible financial assistance for the Barker Road Bridge Grade Separation. Develop a strategic plan for funding and completion of all grade separation projects COSV State & Federal Legislative Agenda: Transportation Funding Request — Bridging the Valley & Barker Road/ BNSF Grade Separation (overpass/ underpass). Pines Underpass Barker Grade Separation was part of our last 2 Tiger Grant Applications. NLC Federal Legislative Agenda: Invest in Local Transportation Priorities AWC State Legislative Agenda: Transportation: Adopt a multi-modal transportation package that addresses [ 16 city needs Spokane o m m e n ts : #valley Draft EIS Statement presents issues and problems without tangible solutions Governor's report doesn't list Spokane Valley as a priority. What confidence does the COSV have to see enhancements? COSV has been unsuccessful at funding requests from the state and federal government. No known direct benefits to City of Spokane Valley if this project is approved Scope of DEIS is overly broad i.e. from Washington/ Idaho border to Vancouver, WA, down the Columbia River and along the Pacific Coast Some elements do not seem to be adequately addressed i.e. very limited discussion on alternatives. Barely addresses shipping by truck. Spokane Comments Cont. . valley DEIS leaves out Spokane Valley in list of "Municipalities" DEIS references and relies on Washington State 2014 Marine and Rail Oil Transportation Study. COSV had numerous comments on the State study The State study prioritized by population and the City of Spokane Valley was not listed as a priority or even "potentially at risk" 18 Spokane Comments Cont • valley Excerpt from Washington State Marine and Rail Oil Transportation Study (pg. 341-343) "Because there is no mandate for railroads to develop comprehensive plans or ensure the availability of necessary response resources, carriers have effectively placed the burden of remediating environmental consequences of an accident of local communities along their routes. This is particularly true when a tank railcar incident occurs with a subsequent fire/explosion event coupled with potential evacuation due to the danger that may be present from fire and toxic fume emissions." "Bakken crude is highly flammable and easily ignited at normal temperatures by heat, static discharges, sparks or flames." [ 19 1 Spokane Public u t• ,#Valley City of Spokane Valley Public Hearing Tuesday, January 12, 2016 Public Comments at CenterPlace Thursday, January 14, 2016 Written Comments due Friday, January 22, 2016 Summary: Tesoro Savage DEIS j Increase of 4-5 unit trains/day westbound loaded/eastbound empty totaling 8 — 10 trips per day through Spokane Valley Total increase of 2,920+ one -way train trips per year passing through Spokane Valley Total Train Traffic Increase = 26,280 crossings annually 1,746 hours of gate down time/year 17,520 train horns/year. Two Long — One Short — One Long — Repeated as necessary until locomotive clears the crossing. (17,520 X 4 = 70,080) Train horns must be between 96-110 Decibels If all potential crude-by-rail facilities are built out, oil train numbers are estimated to exceed: 57 weekly loaded CBR unit trains by 2020 113 weekly loaded CBR unit trains by 2035 Estimates predicted to be "much higher" with crude export. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 12, 2016 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Approval of the Following Vouchers: VOUCHER LIST VOUCHER NUMBERS TOTAL AMOUNT 12/23/2015 5350, 5358, 5359, 5361, 5362 $73,686.92 12/24/2015 37262-37299; 1222150116 $159,463.44 12/31/2015 37300-37312; 1230150043 $2,624,546.06 12/31/2015 37313-37316 $2,850.28 01/05/2016 37317-37334 $114,824.88 GRAND TOTAL: $2,975,371.58 Explanation of Fund Numbers found on Voucher Lists #001 - General Fund Other Funds 001.011.000.511. City Council 101 —Street Fund 001.013.000.513. City Manager 103 —Paths &Trails 001.013.015.515. Legal 105 —Hotel/Motel Tax 001.016.000. Public Safety 106—Solid Waste 001.018.013.513. Deputy City Manager 120 -CenterPlace Operating Reserve 001.018.014.514. Finance 121—Service Level Stabilization Reserve 001.018.016.518. Human Resources 122—Winter Weather Reserve 001.032.000. Public Works 123 —Civil Facilities Replacement 001.058.050.558. CED -Administration 204—Debt Service 001.058.051.558. CED—Economic Development 301 —REET 1 Capital Projects 001.058.055.558. CED—Development Services-Engineering 302 - REET 2 Capital Projects 001.058.056.558. CED—Development Services-Planning 303 —Street Capital Projects 001.058.057.558 CED—Building 309—Parks Capital Grants 001.076.000.576. Parks & Rec—Administration 310—Civic Bldg Capital Projects 001.076.300.576. Parks & Rec-Maintenance 311 —Pavement Preservation 001.076.301.571. Parks & Rec-Recreation 312—Capital Reserve 001.076.302.576. Parks & Rec-Aquatics 402—Stormwater Management 001.076.304.575. Parks &Rec- Senior Center 403 —Aquifer Protection Area 001.076.305.571. Parks &Rec-CenterPlace 501 —Equipment Rental &Replacement 001.090.000.511. General Gov't-Council related 502—Risk Management 001.090.000.514. General Gov't-Finance related 001.090.000.517. General Gov't-Employee supply 001.090.000.518. General Gov't-Centralized Services 001.090.000.519. General Gov't-Other Services 001.090.000.540. General Gov't-Transportation 001.090.000.550. General Gov't-Natural & Economic 001.090.000.560. General Gov't-Social Services 001.090.000.594. General Gov't-Capital Outlay 001.090.000.595. General Gov't-Pavement Preservation RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve attached list of claim vouchers. [Approved as part of the Consent Agenda, or may be removed and discussed separately.] STAFF CONTACT: Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director ATTACHMENTS: Voucher Lists vchlist Voucher List Page: 1 12/23/2015 11:00:25AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 5350 12/18/2015 002227 IDAHO TAX COMMISSION Ben64805 309.231.50.03 IDAHO STATE TAX BASE: PAYMENT 1,013.99 Total : 1,013.99 5358 12/18/2015 000048 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS, 401A PLS Ben64807 001.231.14.00 401A: PAYMENT 29,489.16 Total : 29,489.16 5359 12/18/2015 000682 EFTPS Ben64809 001.231.11.00 FEDERAL TAXES: PAYMENT 36,313.52 Total : 36,313.52 5361 12/18/2015 000145 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS, 4E Ben64811 001.231.18.00 457 DEFERRED COMPENSATION: I 5,697.90 Total : 5,697.90 5362 12/18/2015 000162 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS,401A EX Ben64813 001.231.14.00 401 EXEC PLAN: PAYMENT 1,172.35 Total : 1,172.35 5 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 73,686.92 5 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 73,686.92 Page: 1 )---„......1-'" vchlist Voucher List Page: , 12/24/2015 9:55:11AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 37262 12/24/2015 003076 AMSDEN, ERICA EXPENSES 001.032.000.543 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 13.82 Total : 13.82 37263 12/24/2015 000506 ASCE 1043198929 001.143.70.00 AMERICAN SOC CIVIL ENGINEERS 250.00 Total : 250.00 37264 12/24/2015 002603 B&H PHOTO VIDEO 104800481 107.000.000.594 MACBOOK PRO FOR TV STUDIO 2,199.00 Total : 2,199.00 37265 12/24/2015 002993 BROADWAY SPLICING SUPPLY 413242 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 48.92 Total : 48.92 37266 12/24/2015 000796 BUDINGER&ASSOCIATES INC L15339-1 101.043.000.542 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES 120.00 Total : 120.00 37267 12/24/2015 002562 CD'A METALS 987124 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES FOR MAINT SHOP 392.02 987638 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES FOR MAINT SHOP 90.76 • Total : 482.78 37268 12/24/2015 000101 CDW-G BGS2899 001.090.000.518 IT SUPPLIES -184.62 BKZ1972 101.000.228.594 IT SUPPLIES 366.19 Total : 181.57 37269 12/24/2015 000322 CENTURYLINK DECEMBER 2015 001.076.000.576 2015 PHONE SVCS:ACCT 509 Z14- 498.75 Total : 498.75 37270 12/24/2015 003348 DATA PRO SOLUTIONS INC 17574 001.090.000.518 KASPERSKY SELECT TO ADVANCE 4,983.90 Total : 4,983.90 37271 12/24/2015 002604 DELL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC 78272770 001.143.70.00 COMPUTER LEASE 001-8922117-0( 1,049.27 Total : 1,049.27 37272 12/24/2015 001194 DEPT OF ECOLOGY 7222 402.143.70.00 2016 WASTEWATER OPERATOR CI 30.00 Total : 30.00 37273 12/24/2015 000795 EARTHWORKS RECYCLING INC. 36443 001.076.305.575 RECYCLING COLLECTION: CP 20.00 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page: 5 -7- 12/24/2015 9:55:11AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 37273 12/24/2015 000795 000795 EARTHWORKS RECYCLING INC. (Continued) Total : 20.00 37274 12/24/2015 002507 FASTENERS INC 54358367.001 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 22.32 Total : 22.32 37275 12/24/2015 000106 FEDEX 5-244-62054 101.000.000.542 FEX EX 11-12-15 22.77 Total : 22.77 37276 12/24/2015 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 44782 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 275.20 44786 001.013.000.513 LEGAL PUBLICATION 25.00 Total : 300.20 37277 12/24/2015 001003 GEOENGINEERS INC 0138060 311.000.000.544 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 16,024.31 Total : 16,024.31 37278 12/24/2015 001944 LANCER LTD 0456697 001.032.000.543 BUSINESS CARDS 95.10 Total : 95.10 37279 12/24/2015 004632 LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS 08828383 001.076.305.575 TELECOM SERVICES 1,153.45 09073012 001.076.305.575 TELECOM SERVICES 1,010.26 Total : 2,163.71 37280 12/24/2015 001640 MAINTENANCE SOLUTIONS INC 121719102 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 487.35 Total : 487.35 37281 12/24/2015 000662 NAT'L BARRICADE&SIGN CO 89533 402.402.000.531 SUPPLIES: PW 47.28 89963 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 997.32 90006 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 32.28 FC1431 402.402.000.531 SUPPLIES: PW-FINANCE CHARGI 0.50 Total : 1,077.38 37282 12/24/2015 000193 NORTHWEST CHRISTIAN SCHOOL INC 3RD QTR 2015 CAM 001.090.000.518 3RD QTR 2015 CAM CHARGES FO} 1,261.82 Total : 1,261.82 37283 12/24/2015 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 810963083001 001.090.000.519 OFFICE SUPPLIES: IT 19.76 811974618001 001.032.000.543 OFFICE SUPPLIES: PW -19.12 811984798001 001.032.000.543 OFFICE SUPPLIES: PW 110.37 Page: "2 vchlist Voucher List Page: L/ ---"S- 12/24/2015 9:55:11AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 37283 12/24/2015 000652 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. (Continued) Total : 111.01 37284 12/24/2015 000307 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER NOVEMBER 2015 001.016.000.586 STATE REMITTANCE 37,296.17 Total : 37,296.17 37285 12/24/2015 002424 PITNEY BOWES GLOBAL 2969758-DC15 001.090.000.518 LEASE SCHEDULE#001 1,065.14 Total : 1,065.14 37286 12/24/2015 002578 REBUILDING& HARDFACING INC 56597 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 5,770.88 Total : 5,770.88 37287 12/24/2015 003208 RODDA PAINT CO. 9446384 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 259.23 Total : 259.23 37288 12/24/2015 002520 RWC GROUP 18410N 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 1,584.55 20234N 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 220.33 20327N 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 630.11 20422N 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 193.45 CM18183N 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW -99.07 CM18410N 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW -1,362.67 Total : 1,166.70 37289 12/24/2015 004844 SOLARWINDS INC. IN252934 001.090.000.594 NETWORK PERFORMANCE MONIT 7,086.15 Total : 7,086.15 37290 12/24/2015 000090 SPOKANE CO INFO SYSTEMS 50313717 001.013.015.515 COUNTY IT SUPPORT JANUARY 2C 10,763.07 Total : 10,763.07 37291 12/24/2015 000308 SPOKANE CO PROSECUTING ATTY NOVEMBER 2015 001.016.000.586 CRIME VICTIMS COMPENSATION F 522.44 Total : 522.44 37292 12/24/2015 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 42000215 001.143.70.00 ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES JAN 20,435.67 Total : 20,435.67 37293 12/24/2015 002540 SPOKANE HOUSE OF HOSE INC. 493675 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 150.62 Total : 150.62 37294 12/24/2015 000273 SRTC TS-1929 101.143.70.00 2016 MEMBERSHIP DUES- 18,668.00 Page: vchlist Voucher List Page:—"5- ---- 12/24/2015 9:55:11AM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 37294 12/24/2015 000273 000273 SRTC (Continued) Total : 18,668.00 37295 12/24/2015 000335 TIRE-RAMA 8040060317 101.042.000.542 SERVICE 47362D 128.81 8080040300 101.042.000.542 SERVICE 40209D 65.22 Total : 194.03 37296 12/24/2015 004849 US POSTMASTER POSTAGE 001.018.013.513 HOT TOPICS POSTAGE 8,018.56 Total : 8,018.56 37297 12/24/2015 002500 WASPC INV026825 001.016.000.521 WASPC ACCREDITATION PROGRA 1,334.20 Total : 1,334.20 37298 12/24/2015 000980 WESTERN SYSTEMS INC 0000028876 101.000.228.594 0228-EQUIPMENT/SWITCHES 9,682.18 Total : 9,682.18 37299 12/24/2015 001885 ZAYO GROUP LLC DECEMBER 2015 001.090.000.518 DARK FIBER LEASE 253.01 DECEMBER 2015 001.090.000.518 INTERNET SERVICE 569.27 Total : 822.28 1222150116 12/23/2015 002244 AOT PUBLIC SAFETY CORPORATION SPKVLY-72 001.016.000.521 NOVEMBER 2015 REVENUE SPLIT 4,784.14 Total : 4,784.14 39 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 159,463.44 39 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 159,463.44 Page: -4 vchlist Voucher List Page: `t' 12/31/2015 12:52:05PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 37300 12/31/2015 002615 BULLOCK, SUSAN EXPENSES 001.013.015.515 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 47.00 Total : 47.00 37301 12/31/2015 000044 DELL MARKETING LP XJW1M44F4 001.090.000.518 SERVER FOR SV DC1 REPLACEME 2,657.15 Total : 2,657.15 37302 12/31/2015 003177 GUTH, ERIC EXPENSES 001.032.000.543 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 44.85 Total : 44.85 37303 12/31/2015 004853 HALVERSON NORTHWEST LAW GROUP 182938 001.013.015.515 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 150.00 Total : 150.00 37304 12/31/2015 000313 INLAND ASPHALT COMPANY INC. PAY APP 4 303.303.156.595 0156-MANSFIELD AVE CONNECTIC 12.53 Total : 12.53 37305 12/31/2015 003185 LAMB, ERIK EXPENSES 001.013.015.515 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 12.25 Total : 12.25 37306 12/31/2015 003959 MAX J KUNEY CO PAY APP 15 303.303.155.595 0155-SULLIVAN RD WEST BRIDGE 901,139.36 Total : 901,139.36 37307 12/31/2015 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 812719968001 001.018.016.518 OFFICE SUPPLIES: HR 27.66 813076148001 001.018.014.514 OFFICE SUPPLIES: FINANCE 44.89 Total : 72.55 37308 12/31/2015 001604 PACIFIC NW PAPER 166467 001.090.000.519 PAPER FOR GENERAL USE 1,459.84 Total : 1,459.84 37309 12/31/2015 001089 POE ASPHALT PAVING INC. 44810 101.042.000.542 2015 STREET AND STORMWATER 14,649.14 44811 101.042.000.542 2015 STREET AND STORMWATER 9,772.34 44812 101.042.000.542 2015 STREET AND STORMWATER 13,625.94 44813 402.402.000.531 2015 STREET AND STORMWATER 2,472.39 44814 101.042.000.542 2015 STREET AND STORMWATER 75,954.37 44815 101.042.000.542 2015 STREET AND STORMWATER 3,187.54 44816 101.000.000.542 95225-WINTER RESPONSE 2015 3,141.46 Total : 122,803.18 Page: .-'I 1 vchlist Voucher List Page: c2 12/31/2015 12:52:05PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 37310 12/31/2015 003407 RIGHT! SYSTEMS INC 139447 001.090.000.594 SPARE SWITCHES FOR CENTERPI 8,343.16 139454 107.000.000.594 JUNIPER SWITCH FOR COUNCIL C 1,622.71 Total : 9,965.87 37311 12/31/2015 000419 SUMMIT LAW GROUP 77115 001.018.016.518 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 47.00 Total : 47.00 37312 12/31/2015 002651 WOODARD,ARNE EXPENSES 12-2015 001.011.000.511 EXPENSES 53.48 Total : 53.48 1230150043 12/31/2015 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 9290200850 001.016.000.521 LE CONTRACT BILLING DECEMBEI 1,586,081.00 Total : 1,586,081.00 14 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 2,624,546.06 14 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 2,624,546.06 I,the undersigned,do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished,the services rendered,or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just,due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley,and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Page: �L vchlist Voucher List Page: U 12/31/2015 2:10:27PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 37313 12/31/2015 001606 BANNER BANK 8565 Dec 2015 001.032.000.543 OFFICE DEPOT 21.72 8565 Dec 2015 001.032.000.543 HOBBY LOBBY 9.77 8565 Dec 2015 001.090.000.518 DROPBOX INC 244.58 8565 Dec 2015 001.090.000.518 AIRTAME 299.00 8565 Dec 2015 001.090.000.518 BANNER BANK 2.69 8565 Dec 2015 001.090.000.518 RISE VISION 472.85 8565 Dec 2015 001.090.000.518 BANNER BANK 4.26 8565 Dec 2015 001.090.000.518 RISE VISION 472.85 8565 Dec 2015 001.090.000.518 BANNER BANK 4.26 Total : 1,531.98 37314 12/31/2015 001606 BANNER BANK 8557 Dec 2015 001.011.000.511 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY CHAP 105.00 8557 Dec 2015 001.011.000.511 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY CHAP 35.00 8557 Dec 2015 001.011.000.511 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY CHAP 35.00 8557 Dec 2015 001.143.70.00 ASSOCIATION OF WA CITIES 300.00 8557 Dec 2015 001.011.000.511 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY CHAP 40.00 Total : 515.00 37315 12/31/2015 001606 BANNER BANK 8581 Dec 2015 001.058.056.558 SPOKANE REGIONAL HEALTH DIS" 40.00 8581 Dec 2015 001.058.050.558 ASFPM 140.00 8581 Dec 2015 001.058.056.558 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOC 175.00 8581 Dec 2015 001.058.057.558 IDABO 165.00 8581 Dec 2015 001.143.70.00 WABO 20.00 8581 Dec 2015 001.058.055.558 MRSC 35.00 8581 Dec 2015 001.143.70.00 WABO 185.00 8581 Dec 2015 001.058.057.558 SHOPLET CREDIT FOR RETURN -76.70 Total : 683.30 37316 12/31/2015 001606 BANNER BANK 8573 Dec 2015 402.402.000.531 WSU URBAN IPM&PESTICIDE 120.00 Total : 120.00 4 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 2,850.28 4 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 2,850.28 Page: ,-� q vchlist Voucher List Page: -.- 01/05/2016 1:33:32PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 37317 1/5/2016 000030 AVISTA Dec 2015 101.042.000.542 UTILITIES: PW MASTER AVISTA 27,478.91 Nov 2015 001.076.300.576 UTILITIES: PARKS MASTER AVISTA 7,123.24 Total : 34,602.15 37318 1/5/2016 001545 BERNARDO WILLS ARCHITECTS PC 2015-1380 309.000.225.594 0225-VM DOG PARKARCHITECHTI 897.50 Total : 897.50 37319 1/5/2016 000918 BLUE RIBBON LINEN SUPPLY INC 9706086 001.076.305.575 LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C 309.15 9708185 001.076.305.575 LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C 45.97 S0125272 001.076.305.575 LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY ATC 37.10 S0125300 001.076.305.575 LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C 129.29 S0125319 001.076.305.575 LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C 87.32 S0126214 001.076.305.575 LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY ATC 51.13 Total : 659.96 37320 1/5/2016 004854 CAMTEK INC 34697 001.016.000.521 GATE INSTALLATION AT PRECINCT 3,047.50 Total : 3,047.50 37321 1/5/2016 003300 CAPITAL ONE COMMERCIAL Dec 2015 001.090.000.518 LARGE DISPLAYS FOR CONFEREN 1,291.35 DEC 2015 001.090.000.518 LARGE DISPLAY FOR CONFERENC 2,030.50 Total : 3,321.85 37322 1/5/2016 003760 CHILDRENS HOME SOCIETY OF WA Dec 2015 001.090.000.560 2015 SOC SER GRANT REIMBURSI 2,982.00 Total : 2,982.00 37323 1/5/2016 003795 CLEARWATER SUMMIT GROUP 15-029 309.223.40.00 RETAINAGE RELEASE 4,650.58 Total : 4,650.58 37324 1/5/2016 001635 ISS FACILITY EVENT SERVICES 975393 001.076.305.575 MONTHLY CLEANING AT CENTERP 7,136.00 976066 001.076.305.575 EVENT SERVICES AT CENTERPLAC 21.07 Total : 7,157.07 37325 1/5/2016 000252 LOWE'S BUSINESS ACCOUNT November 2015 001.076.305.575 OPERATING SUPPLIES: CENTERPI 56.62 Total : 56.62 37326 1/5/2016 000193 NORTHWEST CHRISTIAN SCHOOL INC Jan 2016 001.143.70.00 CITY HALL RENT:JAN 2016 35,511.52 Page: -�1" iD vchlist Voucher List Page: —2- 01/05/2016 1:33:32PM Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 37326 1/5/2016 000193 000193 NORTHWEST CHRISTIAN SCHOOL I (Continued) Total : 35,511.52 37327 1/5/2016 000469 NORTHWEST PLAYGROUND EQUIP INC 39034 309.000.232.594 SHADE SYSTEM FOR DISCOVERY 18,405.38 Total : 18,405.38 37328 1/5/2016 000324 SPOKANE CO WATER DIST#3 Dec 2015 001.076.300.576 WATER CHARGES: PARKS 39.36 Total : 39.36 37329 1/5/2016 000854 SPVV LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 1510.08 309.000.231.594 OLD MISSION TRAILHEAD 1,000.00 Total : 1,000.00 37330 1/5/2016 003532 STERICYCLE COMMUNICATION SOLUT 8010212361 001.076.305.575 ANSWERING SVC CP 39.44 Total : 39.44 37331 1/5/2016 001832 SWISHER 1084265 001.076.305.575 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES: CP 553.28 Total : 553.28 37332 1/5/2016 001472 TESTAMERICA LABORATORIES 59102263 001.076.300.576 J2534-1 MONTHLY DRINKING WATE 28.50 Total : 28.50 37333 1/5/2016 000038 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF SPOKANE 0237343-2681-4 001.076.305.575 WASTE MGMT: CENTERPLACE 739.95 0237344-2681-2 001.016.000.521 WASTE MGMT: PRECINCT 283.09 Total : 1,023.04 37334 1/5/2016 000066 WCP SOLUTIONS 9366424 001.016.000.521 SUPPLIES FOR PRECINCT 756.10 9366425 001.016.000.521 SUPPLIES FOR PRECINCT 93.03 Total : 849.13 18 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 114,824.88 18 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 114,824.88 Page: ‘-2— CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 12, 2016 Department Director Approval : Item: Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business [' new business [' public hearing [' information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Payroll for Pay Period Ending December 31, 2015 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN; BACKGROUND: Budget/Financial impacts: Employees Council Total Gross: $ 308,733.83 $ 6,225.00 $ 314,958.83 Benefits: $ 167,882.29 $ 11,401.77 $ 179,284.06 Total payroll $ 476,616.12 $ 17,626.77 $ 494,242.89 RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to Approve above payroll. [Approved as part of the Consent Agenda, or may be removed and discussed separately.] STAFF CONTACT: Raba Nimri DRAFT MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Special Meeting Tuesday,December 15,2015 Attendance: Councilmembers: Staff: Dean Grafos, Mayor Mike Jackson, City Manager Arne Woodard,Deputy Mayor Chuck Hafner, Councilmember Rod Higgins, Councilmember Ed Pace, Councilmember Ben Wick, Councilmember Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Pro Tem Mayor Grafos called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. EXECUTIVE SESSION: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn into executive session for approximately fifty minutes to review the performance of a public employee, and that no action would be taken upon return to open session. Council adjourned into executive session at 5:03 p.m. At approximately 5:58 p.m., Mayor Grafos declared council out of executive session after which it was immediately moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. L.R. Higgins,Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Special Council Minutes: 12-15-2015 Page 1 of 1 Approved by Council: DRAFT MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING STUDY SESSION FORMAT Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley,Washington December 15,2015 6:00 p.m. Attendance: Councilmembers Staff Dean Grafos,Mayor Mike Jackson, City Manager Arne Woodard,Deputy Mayor Mark Calhoun,Deputy City Manager Chuck Hafner, Councilmember Cary Driskell, City Attorney Rod Higgins, Councilmember Erik Lamb,Deputy City Attorney Ed Pace, Councilmember Chelsie Taylor,Finance Director Ben Wick, Councilmember John Hohman, Community Development Dir. Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Pro Tem Mike Stone,Parks&Recreation Director Eric Guth,Public Works Director Morgan Koudelka, Sr. Administrative Analyst Karen Kendall,Planner Gloria Mantz,Development Engineer Luis Garcia,Development Services Coordinator Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor Grafos called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. ACTION ITEMS: 1. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 15-024 Adopting Shoreline Master Program—Lori Barlow After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve Ordinance No. 15-024 adopting the Shoreline Master Program. Standing in for Ms. Barlow, Community and Economic Development Director Hohman explained that this ordinance repeals the Shoreline Master Program and Development Regulations in Chapter 21.50 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code, as well as Appendix 21-H, and adopts new Spokane Valley Municipal Code chapter 21.50. Mayor Grafos invited public comments. No comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 15-025 Amending Spokane Valley Municipal Code Title 17 — Marty Palaniuk After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve Ordinance No. 15-025. Standing in for Planner Palaniuk, Community and Economic Development Director Hohman explained that this ordinance corrects certain inconsistencies within the Spokane Valley Municipal Code in title 17 relative to the newly adopted Shoreline Master Program. Mayor Grafos invited public comments. No comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 3. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 15-026 Amending Spokane Valley Municipal Code Title 18 — Marty Palaniuk After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve Ordinance No. 15-026. Standing in for Planner Palaniuk, Community and Economic Development Director Hohman explained that this ordinance corrects certain inconsistencies within the Council Study Session: 12-15-2015 Page 1 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT Spokane Valley Municipal Code in title 18 relative to the newly adopted Shoreline Master Program. Mayor Grafos invited public comments. No comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 4. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 15-027 Amending Spokane Valley Municipal Code Appendix A —Marty Palaniuk After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve Ordinance No. 15-027. Standing in for Planner Palaniuk, Community and Economic Development Director Hohman explained that this ordinance corrects certain inconsistencies within the Spokane Valley Municipal Code in Appendix A relative to the newly adopted Shoreline Master Program. Mayor Grafos invited public comments. No comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 5. Proposed Resolution 15-011 Repealing Previous Shoreline Master Program Resolutions—Lori Barlow It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve Resolution No. 15-011 repealing Resolution numbers 10-014, 12-004, 12-007, 12-012, 13-001, and 14-009, which accepted individual components of the Draft Shoreline Master Program. Standing in for Ms. Barlow, Community and Economic Development Director Hohman explained that this resolution will repeal the prior resolutions that accepted drafts of the various parts of the 2015 Shoreline Master Program. Mayor Grafos invited public comments. No comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 6. Consulting Services Agreement—Mark Calhoun It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the Consulting Services Interlocal Agreement Regarding potential development of Plante's Ferry Sports Stadium and Liberty Lake Regional Sports Complex. Deputy City Manager Calhoun explained that this stems from the City's continued focus on economic development activities; he explained about the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee's recommendation for levying an additional 1.3% lodging tax, along with the Council's approval of Resolution 15-008 levying that tax; and of the City entering into a contract with a consultant to perform a study to examine how tourism and hospitality benefit local economic development efforts, and which study also investigated additional strategies for leveraging tax dollars to benefit the City's tourism economy. Mr. Calhoun noted that this past summer the Chamber of Commerce held a meeting on this subject where the group expressed a desire to invest in an economic impact study of two potential park projects currently under consideration by Spokane County; i.e. a sports complex at Liberty Lake, and a variety of improvements at Plante's Ferry. Mr. Calhoun said that the cost of the study will be determined through the Request for Proposal process and will be shared among the four participating entities at a rate of 25% each. Mayor Grafos invited public comments. No comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation:In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. NON-ACTION ITEMS: 7. Historic Preservation—Karen Kendall, Gloria Mantz Director Hohman explained that when this subject was before Council September 15, Council reviewed some draft ordinances, but it appeared there was some confusion as to the process to move this forward and have a historic preservation plan adopted; he said staff worked on an implementation plan and that is what will be discussed tonight; adding that if eventually adopted, this will be an entirely new program. Via the PowerPoint presentation, Ms. Kendall explained what would be needed to implement the program, including staff training, adoption of an historic preservation program ordinance as well as an historic preservation commission ordinance, implementation of rules and procedures for the commission, amending the fee schedule, development of documents, appointment of commission members, applying to become a Certified Local Government, commission training, and setting of commission meetings. Councilmember Gothmann asked about staff involvement and if more staff would be needed, and Council Study Session: 12-15-2015 Page 2 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT Director Hohman explained that we will try to take this on with existing staff although we had talked about hiring an outside consultant if the workload become too heavy, but the workload at this point is unknown as we don't know how many structures will be considered. In response to a question about cost, Ms. Mantz said it would cost approximately $10,000 to implement, and $17,000 to $20,000 to run the program, assuming we do this in-house and there are no consultant fees. Discussion ensued with Councilmember Hafner mentioning that participation would be strictly volunteer, and that we want to make sure there is a process if people decide they no longer want to participate. Councilmember Hafner and Mayor Grafos both indicated they would like to move forward with Mayor Grafos adding that having and preserving the history of our city is worth the cost. Deputy Mayor Woodard indicated he wasn't ready to give his vote of consensus yet as he would like a list of properties and structures that would qualify as well as an idea of the valuation of those properties; said he doesn't want this to be at a cost to the citizen and said he is not convinced this won't become a dictatorial program; said Council doesn't have control over the commission and he is not convinced Council could keep control. Councilmember Hafner disagreed and said he felt Council would have that control. Councilmember Pace mentioned the only advantage to the owners would be the ten-year tax incentive but Ms. Mantz clarified that the tax incentive is not automatic as the owner would have to spend at least 25% of the value of the structure to get that incentive. Councilmember Pace said he would be more inclined to do this if we could do it on our own and not have the state and National Park Service involved; said he was thinking that we could roll back the building codes for those old buildings, but since that is not the case,he said he couldn't support this. Councilmember Gothmann noted this as an opportunity for economic development; said the model ordinance indicated the property owners have a choice and participation is voluntary; said he would rather turn this incentive to the property owners instead of Council; said if property owners don't apply, then we haven't lost anything. Councilmember Pace countered we have lost staff time and taxpayer dollars,while Councilmember Gothmann said we are all part of the society and thinks it is a good opportunity for property owners to make improvements and use this incentive if they choose. Mayor Grafos added that if the property is improved, it also increases the tax, and would create jobs to perform the improvements, and the value of those properties would be higher. Ms. Mantz stated that studies she read have indicated that when a program is in place, it does help the local economy, people would hire local workers and those houses that are preserved tend to appreciate better than a house that is not, and the property tends to maintain its value. Councilmember Pace said the property can realize that benefit without the program. Deputy Mayor Woodard asked if people are inquiring about the requirements, and Mr. Hohman responded that perhaps a handful have over the last few months, but we are not doing any outreach or publicizing the program;, so we don't know how many might be interested. Council concurred for staff to bring back the requested information. 8. Code Enforcement Update—Luis Garcia Development Services Coordinator Garcia gave a brief report on the City's code enforcement efforts; said the purpose of the code enforcement regulations contained in the City's Municipal Code are to "create and maintain a safe and healthy environment for the citizens by identifying and reducing the conditions that contribute to injury, illness,devaluation of property, and the incidence of crime through the existence of nuisance conditions on public and private property." Mr. Garcia explained the organizational structure, noted we previously had two code enforcement officers, and now we have one with support from existing staff. Said the process includes information coming into the office assistant who creates a case, and moves the case to the building inspection for investigation, who then based on the outcome of the investigation, involves the code enforcement officer. Mr. Garcia explained that staff works with a proactive approach as when building inspectors observe Code Enforcement issues as they travel, they make contact with the property owner as a means of seeking voluntary compliance. Mr. Garcia also noted the process improvements include staff's ability to work electronically, as iPads are issued for all inspectors with the Council Study Session: 12-15-2015 Page 3 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT ability of directly uploading photos,thus eliminating the need for physical files when possible.Mr. Garcia mentioned staff works directly with the Spokane Valley Fire Marshall and other prevention staff, and Councilmember Gothmann encouraged staff to also meet with representatives from Fire District 8. In closing,Mr. Garcia said the future of code enforcement includes more public education to highlight topics that concern property maintenance, continuing education for staff as part of the continuing relationship with the Washington Association of Code Enforcement, and of possibly working with a vacant property registry. 9. Spokane County Information Systems Department Interlocal—Morgan Koudelka Senior Administrative Analyst Koudelka explained that the attached agreement replacing a previous agreement that includes existing services for Geographic Information System, Webpadal (a license granting access to the County's databases), and Stormbill, which is a stormwater database used to access and bill stormwater fees. Mr. Koudelka said that we have been paying for GIS and Webpadal services but have not been charged for Stormbill, which is approximately $1,200 per year. Mr. Koudelka said the Stormbill database is used to generate approximately $1.9 million in stormwater fees. There was Council consensus to move this forward at next week's meeting. At 7:02 p.m. Mayor Grafos called for a recess; the meeting was reconvened at 7:13 p.m. 10. Commute Trip Reduction Interlocal—Morgan Koudelka Senior Administrative Analyst gave a history on the Commute Trip Reduction (CTR)plan and interlocal; said the previous interlocal was good for two years and expired the end of June; said we are required to oversee all the affected employers who are required to have a CTR program; said the state provides funds to provide that service, and since our incorporation we have signed an agreement with the County for them to provide that service; and they provide that service to other cities as well. Mr. Koudelka said that program runs on the state budget cycle and it usually takes time after the budget cycle to determine what funds are afforded each jurisdiction, after which the County draws up the agreements and sends them to the jurisdictions; he said it is typical that we get them this time of year, adding that the County never stops providing the service. Mr. Koudelka said he seeks consensus to move this forward for a motion consideration next week. After brief discussion about running the program, Council agreed for staff to bring this forward for a motion consideration next week. 11. False Alarm Agreement Extension—Morgan Koudelka Mr. Koudelka explained the intricacies of the program and of the contract, adding that this contract expires the end of this year, and the modification to the contract would be that Public Safety Corporation/CryWolf(PSC) proposes to be compensated for its services by 30.5% as compared with the previous 25%. Discussion included comment about keeping the system or other options that would not involve our police; renewal rates, false alarm fees, and that one of the most important aspects of this program is that the Police has contact information, where it was severely lacking beforehand. There was also some discussion about staff issuing a Request for Proposal in the future, and that this amendment would be just for one additional year. It was ultimately decided to go with the additional year, and to keep the initial alarm system registration fee, but to change the annual renewal residential fee to $15.00, and the annual renewal commercial fee to $25.00, to eliminate the appeal fee, eliminate the statement about if there are no false alarms the registration would be reduced, and to change the service fees for response to a false alarm to $75.00 per residential incident, and$125.00 per commercial incident. Council agreed that this item be brought back at the December 29 meeting for a motion consideration. Mr. Tony Lazanis came up to the podium to speak and Mayor Grafos explained to him that there was no comment tonight since it is a study session. Mr. Lazanis said he knows there isn't any public comment but he continued speaking regardless, and told Council when his alarm goes off it is very loud so it Council Study Session: 12-15-2015 Page 4 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT prevents crime; said there shouldn't be any fees as he pays his taxes and the police department works for him; said the system is broken and not fair. 12. City Hall Update—John Hohman Mr. Jess Stauffenberg and Mr. Chris Holliday,representatives from MSI Engineers gave an overview of a proposed general heating and cooling system, VRF (variable refrigerant flow) System for the new city hall. They gave a life cycle cost analysis, explained the benefits as compared with other systems, mentioned some of the relevant projects that use the system, and showed the zone diagrams for each floor of the new city hall. There was some discussion about the placement of the units, how they work, cost, and the extremes of our weather, and Mr. Stauffenberg stated that with this system, we won't need any supplemental heating. 13. Advance Agenda—Mayor Grafos Mayor Grafos reminded everyone that there would be no meeting December 22, and that the January 5, 2016 meeting would be a formal format, with the newly elected Councilmembers receiving the oath of office prior to that meeting. 15. City Manager Comments—Mike Jackson [note: Council Comments and City Manager Comments were taken in reverse order.] Mr. Jackson said that Council had previously approved some additional funding to assist some of the service agencies as a result of the past windstorm; said he made contact with a few of the agencies and had them complete a short easy application; and said we hope to finalize this by the end of the year. Mr. Jackson noted that the all-day workshop has been scheduled for March 15 and that he is working on agenda items, and asked Council to let him know if they have items they would like on that agenda. Mr. Jackson also noted that Council approved closing City Hall at noon next Thursday and said the employees are very appreciative. 14. Council Comments—Mayor Grafos Councilmember Hafner mentioned that the Health District would be working on a resolution about vaping, which they hope will go into effect in March that states that wherever there is no smoking allowed,there would also be no vaping allowed. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:53 p.m. ATTEST: L.R. Higgins,Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Council Study Session: 12-15-2015 Page 5 of 5 Approved by Council: DRAFT MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Special Meeting Friday,December 18,2015 Attendance: Councilmembers: Staff: Dean Grafos, Mayor Mike Jackson, City Manager Arne Woodard,Deputy Mayor Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk Chuck Hafner, Councilmember Ed Pace, Councilmember Ben Wick, Councilmember Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Pro Tem (arrived 2:15 p.m.) ABSENT: Rod Higgins, Councilmember Mayor Grafos called the meeting to order at 2:13 p.m. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present except Councilmember Higgins and Councilmember Gothmann. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to excuse Councilmember Higgins who is out of the country, and Councilmember Gothmann(who actually arrived a few minutes later). EXECUTIVE SESSION: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn into executive session for approximately fifty minutes to review the performance of a public employee, and that no action would be taken upon return to open session. Council adjourned into executive session at 2:13 p.m. At approximately 2:56 p.m., Mayor Grafos declared council out of executive session after which it was immediately moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. L.R. Higgins,Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Special Council Minutes: 12-18-2015 Page 1 of 1 Approved by Council: DRAFT MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING STUDY SESSION FORMAT Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley,Washington December 29,2015 6:00 p.m. Attendance: Councilmembers Staff Dean Grafos,Mayor Mike Jackson, City Manager Arne Woodard,Deputy Mayor Mark Calhoun,Deputy City Manager Chuck Hafner, Councilmember Cary Driskell, City Attorney Rod Higgins, Councilmember Erik Lamb,Deputy City Attorney Ed Pace, Councilmember Chelsie Taylor,Finance Director Ben Wick, Councilmember John Hohman, Community Development Dir. Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Pro Tem Mike Stone,Parks&Recreation Director Eric Guth,Public Works Director Morgan Koudelka, Sr.Administrative Analyst Gloria Mantz,Development Engineer Chris Bainbridge,City Clerk Mayor Grafos called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present. Mayor Grafos stated that there would be an executive session at the end of this meeting. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the amended agenda. ACTION ITEMS: 1.Motion Consideration: False Alarm Agreement Extension—Morgan Koudelka It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the Contract Amendment to the Agreement Between the City of Spokane Valley and Public Safety Corporation/Crywolf. After Senior Administrative Analyst Koudelka explained the changes as noted in the agreement as well as the proposed fee changes,Mayor Grafos invited public comment. Tony Lazanis: said council is elected by the people and council needs to make the decisions and not let staff make those decisions; said he made a mistake one time and they tried to stick him and that shouldn't be allowed; said coming to false alarms is part of the police department's jobs; and if they don't have enough people maybe they should get more. There were no further public comments. Councilmember Hafner asked about the impact of the $35,000 loss in revenues as a result of lowering fees, and Mr. Jackson said while it does reflect a reduction in revenues,we can balance the budget without it. Deputy Mayor Woodard and Councilmember Pace agreed the one-year agreement would enable time for further study of this program. Vote by Acclamation:In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:None. Motion carried. 2. Motion Consideration: Spokane County Information Systems Department Interlocal Agreement — Morgan Koudelka It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the Interlocal Agreement between Spokane County and the City of Spokane Valley regarding data processing applications and services. After Senior Administrative Analyst Koudelka explained the purpose of the agreement, Mayor Grafos invited public comment. No comments were offered. Councilmember Hafner asked about street names going into a GIS (geographic information system) Council Study Session: 12-29-2015 Page 1 of 4 Approved by Council: DRAFT system and of the need for accuracy so first responders can know where to go, and Mr. Koudelka explained that this issue does not address that. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 3.Motion Consideration: Commute Trip Reduction(CTR)Interlocal Agreement—Morgan Koudelka It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the Interlocal Agreement between Spokane County and the City of Spokane Valley regarding Commute Trip Reduction implementation. After Senior Administrative Analyst Koudelka explained the purpose of the agreement, Mayor Grafos invited public comment. No comments were offered. Councilmember Pace said he is opposed to this and that sometimes if the law doesn't fit,you have to push back; said the CTR is somebody else's agenda and doesn't think that is this City's agenda; said perhaps we should push back and say no or have our own program and use that $65,000 for grants for employers to distribute bus passes. Mr. Koudelka explained that the funds are strictly for the purpose of administering the CTR program of all employers in our jurisdiction, and we would have to provide those services whether or not we take the grant. Councilmember Wick also explained that the CTR program is one of the big issues SRTC (Spokane Regional Transportation Council) talks about, that you have to show you have done at least some cost modeling and one of the items they ask for is how do you reduce traffic and/or encourage carpools; he said the grant money is just a fraction of the cost of what the county does for that program, and without this program, it would hurt our ability to obtain grants for road projects, and would hurt well beyond the $65,000 grant if we did not participate. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Grafos, Deputy Mayor Woodard, and Councilmembers Hafner, Higgins, Wick and Gothmann. Opposed: Councilmember Pace. Motion carried. 4. Proposed Resolution 15-012—Fee Resolution—Chelsie Taylor It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve Resolution #15-012 amending the Master Fee Schedule for 2016. After Finance Director Taylor went over the proposed changes to the Fee Schedule, Mayor Grafos invited public comment. No comments were offered. Concerning the proposed fee increase for shelter rental, Councilmember Pace asked why we don't lower the fees so they all match the lower rate rather than raise the fees, and suggested all $84 rentals should become $50.00. Councilmember Pace moved to amend the motion to lower from $84 to $50, the shelter fees for Greenacres, Mirabeau, Terrace View, and Valley Mission. There was no second and the motion did not proceed. Vote by Acclamation on the original vote: In Favor: Mayor Grafos, Deputy Mayor Woodard, and Councilmembers Hafner, Higgins, Wick and Gothmann. Opposed: Councilmember Pace. Motion carried. 6.Historic Preservation Program—John Hohman, Gloria Mantz (As noted on the amended agenda,this item was moved from an administrative report to a motion.) It was moved by Councilmember Hafner and seconded to forward this item to the Planning Commission for further consideration. Director Hohman explained that when this issue was last discussed at a Council meeting, Council had requested staff bring a list of properties and their assessed value. Mr. Hohman stated that this list represents a reduced number from the original number supplied by Heritage Museum Director Jayne Singletone, and all total represent approximately $29 million in valuation. Mayor Grafos invited public comment. Ms. Jayne Singleton: said the museum has acted in the capacity of historic preservation, including the review of some citizens' attempt to put their property on the national historic register; said this will add to the vision of this community as it enables us to further share our history, and she would like to see this move forward. Another individual also spoke concerning historic preservation. Councilmember Hafner stated that he examined some studies from the Internet regarding preservation, what it is and reasons to engage in historic preservation, among which include providing an identity for our city, a source of pride, stabilizes aging neighborhoods, and increases property value. Councilmember Wick added that it also provides an opportunity to help property owners make a decision about Council Study Session: 12-29-2015 Page 2 of 4 Approved by Council: DRAFT rehabilitating or demolishing a building, and he sees this as a tool to help lower those rehabilitation costs. Mayor Grafos said he also supports historic preservation as a means to preserve our history and our heritage, that citizen participation would be voluntary, and that he cares about our valley heritage and history. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor Grafos and Councilmembers Hafner, Gothmann, and Wick. Opposed:Deputy Mayor Woodard and Councilmembers Pace and Higgins. Motion carried. NON-ACTION ITEMS: 5. Library District Update—Nancy Ledeboer and Library Board Member Tim Hattenburg Ms. Ledeboer explained that because of two failed ballot measures,the Library District is now asking the City to consider amending the interlocal agreement it has with the City to change the date for re- acquisition by the City, moving it up from October 23, 2017 to any time after January 1, 2106. Ms. Ledeboer noted that Mr. Tim Hattenburg has served ten years as a trustee of the library board and tonight is his last official duty. They discussed the 2012 agreement concerning moving forward to purchase the land with the idea of having a park and a library, and Ms. Ledeboer explained that everything was contingent upon obtaining funds through a bond election, with the idea of breaking ground 2017; and if the bond election was not passed,the City would purchase the land back from the Library. She explained that the first ballot also included voter approval of a library district, and she said that might have been confusing to voters and said they did not reach the needed 60% super majority.With the second ballot try, the library plan was downsized and the voter outcome was close with 57.7% but it still wasn't enough to fund a bond issue; she said the trustees have re-evaluated the situation and said they feel the voters have said no twice so therefore,the Library is letting the City know the 2017 deadline to break ground will not be met and the Library is requesting the City purchase back that parcel, as the Library has no hope of having the funding to build a new library on that property. Deputy Mayor Woodard said he would have preferred the library had asked for an extension; said he is sorry the bond issue didn't pass, and hopes this is not being short-sighted on the Board's position to ask for the money back before asking for an extension; said if the Library wants the money back he would honor that request, but he asked the Library to reconsider; said the City is not ready to develop that park yet. Mr. Hattenburg said the Valley Library is crowded, there is little parking, and there are also some structural issues and the income from the return of the property could help them fmd an architect to assist with the building issues.Mayor Grafos also acknowledged that the first vote was confusing,but said he is disappointed the Library District didn't go for a third try, or ask for an extension; said with 57.7% in favor, there will be a lot of people disappointed the library is not moving forward. Councilmember Gothmann also expressed disappointment with not going out for another vote; and he suggested concentrating on just the main library; and said a main library in conjunction with a park and a city hall would make a tremendous city center. Ms. Ledeboer said she will take all these comments back to the Board; said if they did go for a third vote, it would also include another vote to create a district. She said they examined some of the last ballot outcomes, and the valley voters seem consistent. Councilmember Wick said he is not ready to give up on it and is still hopeful that persistence will pay off in the end. Mayor Grafos said the City is not in a hurry to move on the parkland, and he appreciates the Board considering these things. 7. City Hall Update—John Hohman Concerning the interior design of the new City Hall, Director Hohman showed some photos and drawings, including a few options for set-up in the Council Chambers and mentioned there are still some details they have to work through; mentioned the study session table in the center, and the moveable podium; said the original staircase design with open risers doesn't meet building code so that will be changed; and he showed the idea of river rock between the columns in front of council chambers. Mr. Hohman also mentioned the lobby floor and of the use of carpet to keep noise to a minimum. Council appeared to like what they saw. Council Study Session: 12-29-2015 Page 3 of 4 Approved by Council: DRAFT 8.Advance Agenda—Mayor Grafos Councilmember Pace mentioned the "information only" police report included in tonight's meeting packet, and said he would like to request that item be placed on an agenda in the near future so that the Chief would give an oral report. There were no objections. 9. Department Monthly Reports These were for information only and were not discussed or reported. 10. Council Comments—Mayor Grafos Mayor Grafos said that tonight is his last meeting as Mayor, and he extended thanks to Council; said being selected as Mayor requires a steep learning curve and an effective working relationship with staff; he extended his thanks to staff, Mr. Jackson, Mr. Calhoun, and the department directors, and thanked his wife. 11. City Manager Comments—Mike Jackson City Manager Jackson stated that he has been watching the progress of the proposed oil terminal for Vancouver, Washington, and the draft Environmental Impact Statement has now been released for that first project; said a public meeting is scheduled for January 14 at CenterPlace,the final date for comment is January 22, and he wanted to make sure Council has the opportunity to provide testimony on the 14th, and/or written testimony by the 22nd; also mentioned the idea of Council holding a public hearing to hear what citizens might say about the proposed terminal; said this project, if approved, would place an additional eight to ten oil trains daily through our city; he mentioned we already have substantial train traffic, and that this is just one of the major projects planned on the BNSF (Burlington Northern Santa Fe) Railroad lines; he said we could see more if this is approved; said the project will terminate in Vancouver then the oil would be placed on barges to the open ocean to refineries. Mr. Jackson suggested bringing this item to Council January 5 for an administrative report, and then if Council desires, to have a public hearing. Mr. Jackson said he anticipates up to one hundred trains ten years from now,which would have a significant impact; said we'd like to get our grade separation projects completed; adding that the City of Vancouver is opposing the terminal. There was Council concurrence for an administrative report January 5, and a public hearing later. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn into Executive Session for approximately thirty minutes to discuss pending litigation, and that no action would be taken upon return to open session. Council adjourned into executive session at 7:31 p.m. Mayor Grafos declared Council out of executive session at 7:50 p.m., and immediately thereafter, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. ATTEST: L.R.Higgins,Mayor Christine Bainbridge,City Clerk Council Study Session: 12-29-2015 Page 4 of 4 Approved by Council: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 12, 2016 Department Director Approval: X Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Proposed Resolution #16-002: Authorization of qualified public depositories the City may conduct financial transactions with, and Councilmembers and City officers with signing authority. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 3.55.010. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: No action has been taken. BACKGROUND: SVMC 3.55.010 requires that the City Council authorize by resolution which qualified financial depositories (banks) the City may use to make payments on claims or obligations, and who has authority to sign checks for the City. OPTIONS: Adopt Resolution #16-002 by motion; request additional information. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move to approve Resolution #16-002 declaring which qualified public depositories the City is authorized to conduct financial transactions with, and declaring which Councilmembers and City officers have signing authority on behalf of the City. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: This action will result in no additional out-of-pocket costs to the City. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Calhoun, Deputy City Manager ATTACHMENTS: Resolution #16-002. P:IClerklAgendaPackets for Web120161agendapacket 2016, 01-1211tem 3 RCA Banking Signatures.docx DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 16-002 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DECLARING WHICH QUALIFIED PUBLIC DEPOSITORIES THE CITY IS AUTHORIZED TO CONDUCT FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS WITH, DECLARING WHICH COUNCIL MEMBERS AND CITY OFFICERS HAVE SIGNING AUTHORITY PURSUANT TO SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE 3.55.010; REPEALING RESOLUTION 09-006 AND 14-001, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, the City Council has authority, pursuant to Spokane Valley Municipal Code 3.55.010 to declare by resolution which qualified public depositories the City may use to pay its claims or obligations, and to declare three Councilmembers and those City officers who are authorized to make payments on claims or obligations of the City; and WHEREAS, it is necessary from time-to-time to update which qualified financial depositories the City does its banking with, as well as to update those Councilmembers and City officers who are authorized to sign checks on behalf of the City at those depositories or otherwise conduct the financial affairs of the City. NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Spokane County, Washington, as follows: Section 1. Authorized Qualified Public Depositories for Making Payments on Claims or Obligations of the City. The City of Spokane Valley is authorized to use Banner Bank, Mountain West Bank, Umpqua Bank and other public depositories as listed on the Washington Public Deposit Protection Commission listing of approved banks, for public deposits, checks, and making fund transfers to and from accounts. Section 2. Councilmembers Designated to Have Signature Authority at Qualified Financial Depositories for Making Payments on Claims or Obligations of the City. Pursuant to SVMC 3.55.010, the following Councilmembers are given signing authority on behalf of the City to make payments on claims or obligations of the City: L.R. Higgins Arne Woodard Dean Grafos Section 3. City Officers Designated to Have Signature Authority at Qualified Financial Depositories for Making Payments on Claims or Obligations of the City and Investing Public Monies. Pursuant to SVMC 3.55.010, the following City Officers are given signing authority on behalf of the City to make payments on claims or obligations of the City, to invest its public monies with the Local Government Investment Pool, and make all appropriate transfers related thereto: Mike Jackson, City Manager Chelsie Taylor, Finance Director Dan Duffey, Accounting Manager Resolution 16-002 Declaring Banking Authority Page 1 of 2 DRAFT Section 4. Repeal. Resolutions 09-006 and 14-001 are hereby repealed in their entirety. Section 5. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be effective upon adoption. PASSED by the City Council of Spokane Valley, Washington this 12th day of January, 2016. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY L.R. Higgins,Mayor ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Approved as to Form: Office of the City Attorney Resolution 16-002 Declaring Banking Authority Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 12,2016 Department Director Approval: n Check all that apply: nconsent n old business ® new business n public hearing n information n admin. report n pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Planning Commission Mayoral Appointments GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Spokane Valley Municipal Code 18.10. BACKGROUND: Three Planning Commissioner terms expired December 31, 2015: Kevin Anderson, Tim Kelly, and Susan Scott. Planning Commissioner Sam Wood terminated his Planning Commission as he was elected to City Council for his Council term beginning January 1, 2106. His departure from the Planning Commission leaves a one-year vacancy as his term was set to end December 31,2016. According to SVMC 18.10, members of the Planning Commission shall be nominated by the Mayor and confirmed by a majority vote of at least four members of the City Council. Planning Commissioners shall be selected without respect to political affiliations, and shall serve without compensation. A vacancy announcement was posted on the City's webpage, and was published in the Spokesman Review and in the Valley News Herald. The deadline to submit an application was 4:00 p.m. Friday, December 18, 2015; and once the deadline passed,copies of the applications were distributed to each Councilmember. Mayor Higgins will announce his nominations for these appointments at tonight's meeting. OPTIONS: Confirm or not confirm, the Mayor's recommendations for appointment to the Planning Commission. If the Mayor's recommendations are not confirmed by Council; Mayor Higgins may either make other recommendation(s),or the matter can be postponed. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: "I move to confirm the Mayor's nominations for appointment of , , and each for a three-year term ending December 31,2018; and to complete the unexpired term of former Commissioner Sam Wood,with a term ending December 31,2016. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: n/a STAFF/COUNCIL CONTACT: Mayor Higgins ATTACHMENTS: Copies of applications were previously sent to Councilmembers December 18,2015 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 12, 2016 Department Director Approval: ❑ Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ® new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Confirmation of Mayoral Appointments: Council- members to Boards and Committees GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Various ordinances, resolutions, and state statutes. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Annually, the Mayor makes appointment recommendations to place councilmembers on various regional board and committees The following are the Mayor's recommendations for each Councilmember's committee assignments: Mayor Higgins: GSI (Greater Spokane, Inc.) Mayor's Association of NE Washington Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency Spokane Valley Finance Committee Deputy Mayor Woodard: Chamber of Commerce Board Spokane Valley Finance Committee Governance Committee Councilmember Grafos: Growth Management Steering Committee of Elected Officials Wastewater Policy Advisory Board Health District Board Councilmember Hafner: Visit Spokane Spokane Transit Authority(STA) Emergency 9-1-1 Board Spokane Housing &Community Development (HCDAC) Councilmember Pace: Governance Committee Spokane Transit Authority(STA) Wastewater Policy Advisory Board Spokane Valley Finance Committee Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) Councilmember Wood: Emergency 9-1-1 Board Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) Tourism Promotion Area (TPA) Growth Management Steering Committee of Elected Officials Councilmember Gothmann (and Councilmember Bates upon his return): Health District Board Solid Waste Advisory Committee (SWAC) OPTIONS: Move to confirm the Mayoral appointments of Councilmembers to the committees and boards as modified or listed above. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: I move to confirm the Mayoral appointments of Councilmembers to the committees and boards as listed above. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: COUNCIL CONTACT: Mayor Higgins ATTACHMENTS: n/a CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: January 12,2016 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: n consent n old business n new business n public hearing n information ® admin. report n pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Administrative Report—street vacation of a portion of 3rd Avenue DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Dan Hultquist has requested the vacation of 340 feet of an unimproved section of 3rd Avenue. The portion of right-of-way proposed to be vacated is located between Appleway Trail and 4th Avenue,just west of Skipworth Road, and adjacent to six parcels (45212.0703, 45212.0719,45212.0720,45212.0721,45212.0722 and 45212.0723). GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) 22.140; RCW 35A.47.020 and RCW 35.79 PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN: At the November 10, 2015 City Council meeting, a public hearing date was set for the Planning Commission for December 10,2015. BACKGROUND: The City received an application from Dan Hultquist on October 21, 2015, requesting a street vacation of approximately 14,400 square feet of 3rd Avenue. The property owner is making a request for the following reasons: 1. The area proposed to be vacated is unimproved and not maintained; 2. The location of the road limits the maximum use of abutting properties; 3. All six parcels abutting 3rd Avenue (north/south) are owned by the same property owner; 4. The structures along the east and west property line hinder future right-of-way connection; and 5. No parcels use 3rd Avenue for access. The Planning Commission conducted a study session on November 12, 2015 and a public hearing on December 10,2015. Following public testimony and deliberations,the Planning Commission voted six to zero to recommend approval of the proposed street vacation. The findings and recommendations were approved by the Planning Commission on December 10,2015. SVMC Section 22.140.040 directs City Council to consider the Planning Commission's findings, conditions and/or limitations appropriate to preserve the public use or benefit, the division of the vacated right-of-way among abutting property owners, and lastly whether to require compensation for the right- of-way and when it is to be paid. Council established Resolution 07-009 to provide parameters on requiring compensation. Within the Resolution, Section 1(Policy); states "The cost for property received as a result of a vacation initiated by an adjacent property owner shall equal 50% of the appraised value of the vacated property received" Section 1.1.a allows the property values to be averaged, if value of adjacent properties differs. Based on the average assessed land value of the adjacent properties, $11,732.85 is 50% of the assessed value. The calculation of assessed value for the vacated street is detailed below. Page 1 of 2 Parcel Number Appraised Market Value Lot Size in Square Appraised Value per Feet(ft2) Square Foot(ft2) 45212.0720 $24,000.00 12,600 $1.90 45212.0721 $30,000.00 11,865 $2.53 45212.0703 $54,000.00 34,050 $1.59 45121.0723 $54,000.00 33,301 $1.62 45212.0722 $30,000.00 15,855 $0.53 45212.0719 $24,000.00 15,265.5 $1.57 1. Average appraised value per ft2 $9.74/6= $1.62 2. Square footage of vacation 14,485 ft2 3. Appraised value for the area of street vacation. 14,485 ft2 x$1.62= $23,465.70 4. 50%of appraised value $23,465.70 x 50% = $11,732.85 5. Subtracting amount paid for application processing $11,732.85 - $ 1,365.00=$10,367.85 Estimated value of vacated 3rd Avenue =$10,367.85 Section 1.4 of Resolution 07-009 allows City Council to take an alternative approach, if it is determined the public interest is better served. In addition to the standard street vacation conditions, the Planning Commission recommended the property owner provide a 15 foot easement or dedicate public right-of- way for a 10 foot paved non-motorized pathway that will extend from the north end of Skipworth Road to Appleway Trail. At the time of development the property owner will be required to dedicate and construct a public street cul-de-sac at the north end of Skipworth Road. Options for Council consensus will be presented at the first ordinance reading to be held on January 26,2016. OPTIONS: Consensus to proceed with first ordinance reading as proposed; or take other action deemed appropriate. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Consensus to proceed with a first ordinance reading at the January 26, 2016 Council meeting. STAFF CONTACT: Karen Kendall,Planner ATTACHMENTS: 1. Signed Planning Commission Findings and Recommendation 2. Staff Report and Recommendation to the Planning Commission 3. Approved Planning Commission Meeting Minutes November 12,2015 4. Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes December 10,2015 5. Resolution 07-009 6. Administrative Report Presentation Page 2 of 2 *ali COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT .-� P�INSN NNS STV- 2015 - 0001 3rd Avenue Street Vacation City Council Administrative Report January 12, 2016 lirir4"-' . >Walley COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT x 1 L : . c. Study Sesson = cis = z c 11-12-15tg a) cu Pas Public Hearing Administrative Ec. cis Viz, U 12-10-I5 ^' Report .� o LIEJ wo ° p o cu • ° Ordinance 1Stzs Pas c. cis A Findings of Fact U E '4U 12-10-15 Reading c c <C 0 Wu Ce U Ordinance 2nd M Reading Ms 1 iVr IVr , , , , , , Today 2 SPoka ....*Valley COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT -4.11!"..._ pukNNING -DIVISION , 1 ' _, , ,i _ D '.. -I I 1 rl 1 1 cL I ' if i' l i I 41 'LI 1 H i 1--; I i I 1 '1--i-_[,----- . - - - , . [0,..., TH_ I 1._!:11— ji_i_ c . il _ 117-11- IL "I• -:1•6x n AvIr. - 7, • - 6' ILI 1 9 "" --- L --ir ...,.., .. .-,,,..Di -.--... -4,,_ 1 j _i i 1 , 1_, Fi OM 1_11 ,_ 0•_roVirr PIN ?,: ' - ,D c_ , 1 -1-- LT 1 ITU Li lil __': :--: -----.; ) I L 1--: or], r?, ,,c, < _- Ca 7.„-- i 1 : 1 'Z' 1 7"!-3,11 _ ,z __,,,Th:li2 ' ' Fi; [ 1 I I Rier 5.de A=T , ="n- ! 74 '3_, 2.'0 ,-I--:-. -- ,,,----'41,_i____ ,..L i 1---, A, 1 m 1:' 1 1 1 i c0 1 , • gn g ..p , , , --11------ 2.. ' --.'-- . 1' ----___,„_,,-- - - - ' - i RgLIE 2 —1,11 ,,..J.,-. ..__________._, ci_-_,___:-TT—1-i (----1 1 1 v „._ __F, ,,,,, , , --- 1.----iT-4. ..„, 0122 12 21 b _I—n L 1 I L--.L10--' 1 I-1-1. :;' • E'!11 ..= 11 1 '2 ''i 1 ri . .: . __ __ ,,, ,, , , ,_ ,i ----17-- ' 4ve ---Ti LEI 77 -7,7-r--- -: ill ,00-1_1111___] ---y 1, —I 171;i-1 5t'AIV° i.1.-- . 1 ''''.-- r•-oe''' ,,,....0.,_,H- _;',___-,---L , ° 1H A57:0- An5211.0710 45211-12607gL,701._ 11 -. • ,r, 1 ,,,i "c5- - t .3 11 : ,___. 1 - =• -. ---.__,., :,__ . '1-------i=ji I ,-'-' --'- — )11"11 _ __ “71-17-7,1----- ' .7-. ----i --- .-,-!-,-- ----'-- _- ---L I-11T 11 17-r- ' ' iii:- ---_- _-,._...,_ 1 ' I I ' b ----,1p)51-1--d---- .--- L . ---1___ ._ - - I -- 'id A•.'e27-- I 11 _ -, ' ' - - Fi( [ °-' III , eway13 v --_,._ -- , __ . .--,..___,11r_d,R75 pz.: ILI[ R F,_ II, ile3 .,„ , L ii„,yK A. N E ALLEY i,-1-711 il I,—au _, [ 1 1 , -1. ----,,, , I ., . ._ r---7---- '1 [ 1__-_-,,ii,__Li ____ __ ,_ 1 1 rp.._: _! , L. 1 .01, , .., - - . - L1_ - t-,L- T __1 =mop .11 .-. 11-1--[-E--- i__L.4_i_,_. - ----. "---1-- = 1 . H.....,,i 1-1'---11hh-IL Z -1. , , , LI ri:,_ .,:) , , ,,:.5.„.,,,,,•,,,_ ,.., ,...., ,___,_ • f 5 4 hi= I F L,'-'I —1---- " 1 1 f 1 ,.__ :Hrrrntrt, i l- IA_I I ' '' '1'''.'-..''''''-th Av.en ,..„ , I 1 '' 2-I' L 4 ir,5th'&11?-2'41 —I' - ./- L-1 - - ' ll (7,, P r.tv_o, -01 j, 17 i 1 I-Ii 4-rlipj_024, . -:g7tii- AArea of proposed jLE,1:7-1 ,L. I .,., Li_ 4521123111,1 . ft----2!----C: ' - 1 FiT:74-1 7 1 . t- • 11 ;i7-11-1421 ‘-`4L'ill II ' --4-1 1 1__ i I 1 --• I-- street vacation — ,1 -- -- = ZLiiiill Li II., ,--=_ -. > iLIIIII ---., --r-i. 1,;TRfi-J1T-TT Fr I 11 1 ---1 ITT '1.7_0•I -' Prir' t. ":` :-LI ic.1-- • ..--i-T 119i 1 1 1 1 1 t 'l ,,,,,,...v -G-'Pr-91'1 Aiv1--1391g4-'411 I-LE- 1 L. ._,.... DI_-.1%...,.__._ __--1- eo,e ._7 IT' -gris--------- i Tritrl.k-ra-11 . iou-rAvro-, ---h-r-c , j'.':- , - --)--H-0 ' : . 1 , (-0.e 1 ith A°,e „.1-,,•;'''') °--;',.:H-"--_,---4--H__1.-:- i_cii7:1_1_1 1 111127 3 - - COMMUNITY DEVELOPM Siiiikane M ,..7. PLA-•-•DINVISNIOINN - G ......0Valley - --Y.,- • . . • - - .. V -.. • -• - . -•'-• i • . ---- --., .. -. - . . ,.. wiii- • `"' it-All 1 - -• '- - '-'-' -%-1,,,:•:04,'-- -----' - h REQUEST: • _.. . . .., ... , ___. .., .. .,.,.:„...-.,_ • .... .. -. -.:._...:. ._. .-_, „_•.-_-...,:_,.:-.. ..- '- -,..7-:-....,:--:-.:-.,A, Vacation area _ :,,,„.,.._ 1 Area un unimproved and if:6 __ . . . . . . . ,.. . . •„. _ ...., . ... ,. . _..... _„._ • ..,....„,„..•.•,:_-„,.....„.....„.._..„.„.;. e ,. , .. - . • • - . - not maintained;. ittr '._. . . ‘ /- \'-‘ , . ._. &.. •.._. tt:_... ,F,•..- _ _.,5-...._ ..4... __.. i.:7 2. 6 parcels abutting . street have same owner, • ., AA' iiiit• , ,: . .;,-- '". _F I, , . ,• 5-.! "MM .' ' , :-N ., . mu_ , ,- . .. 1 i::.--.7.o".: 3. Structures on east and •_ ,_._-..41 .-‘ .ee ___ _ ,.,, .. _ ... . - - L1.1 • -_,... ,•:. ••,• ... ,i,,......•V'.. - My ' < , 4-. .. ,.. ,,,i, - west hinder future 4Lirtit_4 iirmika.4-?„--...,.:::_.:„ .,- •-?-,-- --., ...;.. --- ......,.. , .._. -- - ---,. . - - _,. 4 cNoonnection; and parcels use 3rd _ ._=::„...4., ....._. •....; 4 . ':?.:4;---.'••...4.,... - • - ' ,-- - ' ':'-.- . '. -: ''' -' f!:-- ----4.--. :- - -- :`.....:.'•it-'7. ''':...]7.1j'''.::;1 :',--r-'-' t_. "'"— t° ‘-':. , ..,...,1 ._i Avenue for access. _. _,.. ...,....: t.. -. , . .. i'--, 111 Pr Soo -— COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT E PIA'. ,Ualley ,®IV1sION /1. till w -� I ti.„7 a ,�,.. _,... f,, a p , , , Sp° - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT E 1 I I r 11 IPF• ' -!"47744. PL-ANNI •N j �Ualley - -DIVISION 11 . -tin __ < s4 1 ,_ t '` _ �� • =� taDi; 2 1 "p$ _ !�+ •43 'ter. .g _ A co a -4 . - �An(f m r I •0 0 • , - 111111111111111111111111111111111111 . • _... f ' - fl•y • • _ ,• , s ism r.: ...i. 3 - f $ �� . . ... 0 . . ...� 4• • .....v ......, Sp° COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT E -. _... �Ualley 'DIVISION 4.8.4 - - 382.78' • 1 219-70' I FUTURE 15 0 RAN FOR BIKE o I_ o I PCL#45212.0703 (TRAIL ACCESS. Location and i5 �o len h lo he determined Trail connection Parcel 1 77-23 o' 7, : .91" 219.70 / tin 1 11 /%'� ` Cul-de-sac to be provided Parcel 2 at time of development mowN t �" PCL#45212.0723 a < '' 'rt-cv u7 `g `_ W L'i r T a -I " r Parcel 3 _ 94.76 'o3 ;� x.93' �,� C - , .-_ .s { l' "24' i 97 4 94 75 5 29,97 2474 70 — FUTURE PARCEL CONFIGURATION La .02" L3 12 FT EASEMENT TO AACCCESS PROPERTY LINES PARCEL#45212.0722 vs or 1, • ..- "- I- • 0 —- PROPERTY LINE CONSOLIDATION ' . � 3RD AVE PORTION TO BE VACATED '2 11 �:: 14_ 62.•'... . . . . _, _ - FUTURE DEDICATION OF CITY RW s 4th Ave - EXISTING FT EASEMENT ?.i 1- -J'_.. *ali COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT P�INSN NNS 0 PLANNING COMMISSION voted 6-0 on December 10, 2015 .401 APPROVAL with conditions ur SVMC Title 22 . 140.030.A (findings) 0t ru 8 Sp°kI-a COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT E PLANNING' -.'"--. ' .....0Ualley ®IvISION Conditions recommended by Commission : > Prepare record of survey > Designated with adjacent zoning can > Complete boundary line > Applicant shall pay all costs incurred Z adjustment (BLA) > Locate monuments on centerline of 0 > Transfer property to abutting vacated ROW l'i property owners > Record ordinance, BLA and survey CI > Coordinate with Avista , Modern > Begin conditions in 90 days from Electric Water Co. and Spokane ordinance becoming effective 0 County Division of Utilities for > All conditions met before transferring title t tt e > Provide 15 foot easement or dedication for non-motorized path to Appleway Trail 9 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT � 15DIVISIONN'T ! � SVMC 22. 140.040 City Council Decision • Determination considers Planning Commission Liu findings; CI • Decision may have conditions and/or limitations deemed appropriate to preserve public use or benefit; t3 • Specifies which portion of vacation goes to abutting property owners; and • Reserves right to require compensation based upon � Resolution 07-009. �o *aliCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT E PNey 'DIVISION Parcel Number Appraised Market Value Lot Size in Square Feet(ft2) Appraised Value per Square Foot (ft2) immir 45212.0720 $24,000.00 12,600 $1.90 45212.0721 $30,000.00 11,865 $2.53 CC 45212.0703 $54,000.00 34,050 $1.59 kaa 45121.0723 $54,000.00 33,301 $1.62 CI 45212.0722 $30,000.00 15,855 $0.53 fini 45212.0719 $24,000.00 15,265.5 $1.57 z 0 Average appraised value per ft2 $9.74/. UP Square footage of vacation 14,485 ft2 ii Appraised value for the area of street vacation. 14,485 ft2 x $1.62 = $23,465.70 z 50% of appraised value $23,465.70 x 50% = $11,732.85 M Subtracting amount paid for application processing $11,732.85 - $ 1,365.00 = $10 367.85 Estimated value of vacated 3rd Avenue $10,367.85 11 Spok--e � PL-ANNIN � iiey COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT , ,DIVISION - . . � � f Vacation area s—• •k :.,'1,,::.-,i.:•.-;.:1- " 1 a _ _ • :0 .. `.-- ,tea. .._vo.- 4� _,..—=,_i. i. "C- P _ Y CR -�,� .11 t i = .../',,, r a • i'C�'. t V F�' flit Cr . �' 3 � i *V L 1 .C.� - b`�'. de`l -4,,,,,,;-=_,..‘;,6. ='fit !S` , � 7,- - i 12 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SPOKANE VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION December 10,2015 The following findings are consistent with the Planning Commission's decision to recommend approval of File No. STV-2015-0001,vacating 3rd Avenue. A. Background: 1. Chapter 22.140 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC), governing street vacations, was adopted in September 2007 and became effective on October 28, 2007. 2. The privately-initiated street vacation, STV-2015-0001, proposes to vacate an unimproved section 340 feet in length ranging from 40 to 50 feet in width. 3. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 10, 2015 and to recommend a conditional approval of the street vacation (STV-2014-0001) to City Council. B. Planning Commission Findings: Compliance with SVMC 22.140.030 Planning Commission review and recommendation Finding(s): 1. Whether a change of use or vacation of the street or alley will better serve the public? The area proposed to be vacated is unimproved without pavement, curb or gutter. Existing utilities such as electric, gas, sewer and water are located within current right of way and/or at either end. The utility purveyors have requested easements to preserve existing infrastructure and future connections. The vacation is expected to have no impact on the general public as surrounding parcels currently do not use proposed vacated area for access. The public will be served by a cul-de-sac at the end of Skipworth Road providing a benefit to the surrounding parcels for turnaround capabilities which presently do not exist. 2. Whether the street or alley is no longer required for public use or public access? The right-of-way being vacated is currently vacant land not being utilized for public use or access and is not required for current or future public use or access. The City's Arterial Street Plan provides no indication of 3rd Avenue nor proposes a need for future street extension. 3. Whether the substitution of a new and different public way would be more useful to the public? The proposal includes right-of-way for a future cul-de-sac, to be designed per City of Spokane Valley Street Standards, which will allow access and turnaround capabilities for existing residents. The proposal also includes a dedicated 15-foot right-of-way strip (or easement) for a future multiuse/bicycle trail connection to the Appleway Trail. An existing 12-foot access easement currently exists to Parcel 45212.0722 and is proposed to remain. Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission Page 1 of 3 4. Whether conditions may so change in the future as to provide a greater use or need than presently exists? No changes are anticipated that provide a greater use or need from current conditions. The City's Arterial Street Plan does not designate 3rd Avenue extending beyond the current established right-of-way. 5. Whether objections to the proposed vacation are made by owners of private property (exclusive of petitioners) abutting the street or alley or other governmental agencies or members of the general public? No objections or public comment has been received. C. Conclusions: The findings confirm criteria set forth in SVMC 22.140.030 have been met. D. Recommendation: Planning Commission recommends City Council approve the vacation of an unimproved section 340 feet in length ranging from 40 to 50 feet in width subject to the following: 1. Initial work to satisfy conditions of the street vacation(File No. STV-2015-0001) below shall be submitted to the City for review within ninety(90)days following the effective date of approval by the City Council. 2. The vacated property shall be transferred into the abutting parcels (45212.0703, 45212.0719, 45212.0720,45212.0721,45212.0722 and 45212.0723). 3. All existing lots shall have access to a public street or existing driveway easement prior to finalization. Submit a boundary line adjustment application with proposed lot configuration combined with record of survey vacating 3rd Avenue. 4. A 15-foot easement or right-of-way dedication with a 10-foot paved non-motorized pathway shall be provided from the north end of Skipworth to the Appleway Trail as per SVSS 7.5.11. 5. The ordinance shall reserve and retain a 10 foot easement for the entire length of vacated right- of-way adjacent to sewer easement to serve electric and natural gas utilities. 6. Coordinate with Modern Electric Water Company to establish an easement located along the west side of the 15 foot future non-motorized pathway from the north end of Skipworth Road to Appleway Trail. 7. Coordinate with Modern Electric Water Company the location and width of easement to preserve existing water line in the easterly quarter of the vacated right-of-way. Easement shall be recorded and reference provided on record of survey. 8. Coordinate directly with Spokane County Division of Utilities the location and required language for a public sanitary sewer easement. Easement shall be recorded and reference provided on record of survey. Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission Page 2 of 3 9. Following the City Council's passage of the ordinance approving the street vacation, a record of survey of the area to be vacated,prepared by a registered surveyor in the State of Washington including an exact metes and bounds legal description, and specifying any and all applicable easements for construction,repair and maintenance of existing and future utilities and services, shall be submitted by the proponent to the Director of Community and Economic Development, or designee for review. 10. The surveyor shall locate at a monument on the centerline of the vacated right-of-way with one located at the intersection of the centerline of the vacated right-of-way with each street or right- of-way in accordance with the standards established by the City of Spokane Valley Street Standards. 11. All direct and indirect costs of title transfer of the vacated street from public to private ownership including but not limited to title company charges, copying fees, and recording fees are to be borne by the proponent. The City will not assume any financial responsibility for any direct or indirect costs for the transfer of title. 12. The zoning district designation of the properties adjoining the street to be vacated shall be automatically extended to the center of such vacation, and all area included in the vacation shall then and henceforth be subject to all regulations of the districts. The adopting ordinance shall specify this zoning district extension inclusive of the applicable zoning district designations. 13. The record of survey and certified copy of the ordinance shall be recorded by the City Clerk in the office of the Spokane County Auditor. 14. All conditions of City Council authorization shall be fully satisfied prior to any transfer of title by the City. Approved this 10th day of December,2015 2)2'-i'f„ t).77‘4Z-41-2,-- ?-,--' cjZ--(-- ( ///w Je �Chna// A BEST 62,A,t,cy,6.4-,,,,), Dean a Horton,Administrative Assistant Findings and Recommendations of the Spokane Valley Planning Commission Page 3 of 3 COMMUNITY&ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION "'p(mon _"`�� STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 40000Valley FILE No: STV-2015-0001 STAFF REPORT DATE: December 3, 2015 FILE NO: STV-2015-0001 PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION: Request to vacate 3rd Avenue, an unimproved section 340 feet in length ranging from 40 to 50 feet in width. STAFF PLANNER: Karen Kendall, Planner, Community Development Department PROPOSAL LOCATION: The portion of right-of-way proposed to be vacated is located between Appleway Trail and 4th Avenue,just west of Skipworth Road and adjacent to six parcels (45212.0703, 45212.0719, 45212.0720, 45212.0721, 45212.0722 and 45212.0723), further located in the NW quarter of Section 21, Township 25 North, Range 44 East, Willamette Meridian, Spokane Valley, Washington BACKGROUND: The City received an application from Dan Hultquist on October 21, 2015 requesting a street vacation of approximately 13,600 square feet of 3rd Avenue. The property owner is making a request for the following reasons: 1. The area proposed to be vacated is unimproved and not maintained; 2. Location of road limits maximum use of abutting properties; 3. All six parcels abutting 3rd Avenue (north/south) are owned by the same property owner; 4. The structures along the east and west property line hinder future right of way connection; and 5. No parcels use 3rd Avenue for access. PROPERTY OWNER:Dan Hultquist; 14502 North Freya Road; Spokane, WA 99021 APPROVAL CRITERIA: 1. SVMC-Title 22 (Street Vacations) 2. SVMC - Title 21 (Environmental Controls) 3. City of Spokane Valley Street Standards ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit 1: Vicinity Map Exhibit 2: Aerial Map Exhibit 3: Application Material Exhibit 4: Notice of Public Hearing Exhibit 5: Agency Comments Staff Report and Recommendation STV-2015-0001 Page 1 of 5 December 3,2015 I. PROPERTY INFORMATION Size and The area is approximately 16,000 square feet of an Characteristics: unimproved section of 3rd Avenue that is 340 feet in length and ranges from 40 to 50 feet in width. Comprehensive Plan High Density Multifamily Residential District(MF-2) Designation: Zoning of Property: High Density Multifamily Residential District(MF-2) Existing and Vacant. Multifamily development located west, and single Surrounding Land family residential to the south and east and Appleway Trail to Use: the north. II. STAFF ANALYSIS OF STREET VACATION PROPOSAL A. COMPLIANCE WITH SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE(SVMC)TITLE 22.140.030— Findings: 1. Whether a change of use or vacation of the street or alley will better serve the public? The area proposed to be vacated is unimproved without pavement, curb or gutter. Existing utilities such as electric, gas, sewer and water are located within current right of way and/or at either end. The utility purveyors have requested easements to preserve existing infrastructure and future connections. The vacation is expected to have no impact on the general public as surrounding parcels currently do not use proposed vacated area for access. The public will be served by a cul-de-sac at the end of Skipworth Road providing a benefit to the surrounding parcels for turnaround capabilities which presently do not exist. 2. Whether the street or alley is no longer required for public use or public access? The right-of-way being vacated is currently vacant land not being utilized for public use or access and is not required for current or future public use or access. The City's Arterial Street Plan provides no indication of 3rd Avenue nor proposes a need for future street extension. 3. Whether the substitution of a new and different public way would be more useful to the public? The proposal includes right-of-way for a future cul-de-sac, to be designed per City of Spokane Valley Street Standards, which will allow access and turnaround capabilities for existing residents. The proposal also includes a dedicated 15-foot right-of-way strip (or easement) for a future multiuse/bicycle trail connection to the Appleway Trail. An existing 12-foot access easement currently exists to Parcel 45212.0722 and is proposed to remain. 4. Whether conditions may so change in the future as to provide a greater use or need than presently exists? No changes are anticipated that provide a greater use or need from current conditions. The City's Arterial Street Plan does not designate 3rd Avenue extending beyond the current established right-of-way. Staff Report and Recommendation STV-2015-0001 Page 2 of 5 December 3,2015 5. Whether objections to the proposed vacation are made by owners of private property (exclusive of petitioners) abutting the street or alley or other governmental agencies or members of the general public? No objections or public comment has been received. Conclusions: The findings confirm criteria set forth in SVMC 22.140.030 have been met. B. COMPLIANCE WITH SVMC TITLE 21—ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROLS The Planning Division has reviewed the proposed project and has determined that the project is categorically exempt pursuant to WAC 197-11-800 and SVMC 21.20.040 from environmental review under the provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). III. PUBLIC COMMENTS Findings: No public comments have been received following the notice of public hearing mailing on November 20, 2015. Conclusion(s): A Notice of Public Hearing sign was posted on the property November 20, 2015 and notices were posted in the Spokane Valley Public Library, City of Spokane Valley Permit Center and main reception area the same day. Public hearing notices were mailed to all petitioners of the Vacation and those abutting 3rd Avenue for a total of eight properties on November 20, 2015. Lastly, the notice was published in the Spokane Valley Herald on November 27, 2015 and December 5, 2015. Staff concludes that adequate public noticing was conducted for STV-2015-0001 in accordance with adopted public noticing procedures. IV. AGENCY COMMENTS Notice was provided to agencies and service providers. Comments were received from the following agencies and are attached as exhibits to this staff report: Agency Received Comments Dated Comments City of Spokane Valley Public Works Yes 12-2-15 Spokane Valley Fire District No.1 Yes 11-19-15 Spokane County Division of Utilities Yes 12-3-15 Spokane Regional Health District Yes 11-30-15 Avista Utilities Yes 11-20-15 Spokane Transit Authority No City of Spokane Valley Police Department No Century Link No Comcast Yes 11-19-15 Modern Electric Water Company Yes 12-2-15 WA Archaeology and Historic Preservation Yes 11-30-15 V. OVERALL CONCLUSIONS AND FINDINGS Staff Report and Recommendation STV-2015-0001 Page 3 of 5 December 3,2015 Staff concludes that STV-2015-0001 as proposed is generally consistent, or will be made consistent, through the recommended conditions of approval based on the approval criteria stated herein. RECOMMENDATION: Approve the request to vacate a 340 foot long segment of 3rd Avenue, subject to the following: 1. Initial work to satisfy conditions of the street vacation (File No. STV-2015-0001)below shall be submitted to the City for review within ninety (90) days following the effective date of approval by the City Council. 2. The vacated property shall be transferred into the abutting parcels (45212.0703, 45212.0719, 45212.0720, 45212.0721, 45212.0722 and 45212.0723). 3. All existing lots shall have access to a public street or existing driveway easement prior to finalization. Submit a boundary line adjustment application with proposed lot configuration combined with record of survey vacating 3rd Avenue. 4. A 15-foot easement or right-of-way dedication with a 10-foot paved non-motorized pathway shall be provided from the north end of Skipworth to the Appleway Trail as per SVSS 7.5.11. 5. The ordinance shall reserve and retain a 10 foot easement for the entire length of vacated right- of-way adjacent to sewer easement to serve electric and natural gas utilities. 6. Coordinate with Modern Electric Water Company to establish an easement located along the west side of the 15 foot future non-motorized pathway from the north end of Skipworth Road to Appleway Trail. 7. Coordinate with Modern Electric Water Company the location and width of easement to preserve existing water line in the easterly quarter of the vacated right-of-way. Easement shall be recorded and reference provided on record of survey. 8. Coordinate directly with Spokane County Division of Utilities the location and required language for a public sanitary sewer easement. Easement shall be recorded and reference provided on record of survey. 9. Following the City Council's passage of the ordinance approving the street vacation, a record of survey of the area to be vacated, prepared by a registered surveyor in the State of Washington including an exact metes and bounds legal description, and specifying any and all applicable easements for construction, repair and maintenance of existing and future utilities and services, shall be submitted by the proponent to the Director of Community and Economic Development, or designee for review. 10. The surveyor shall locate at a monument on the centerline of the vacated right-of-way with one located at the intersection of the centerline of the vacated right-of-way with each street or right- of-way in accordance with the standards established by the City of Spokane Valley Street Standards. Staff Report and Recommendation STV-2015-0001 Page 4 of 5 December 3,2015 11. All direct and indirect costs of title transfer of the vacated street from public to private ownership including but not limited to title company charges, copying fees, and recording fees are to be borne by the proponent. The City will not assume any financial responsibility for any direct or indirect costs for the transfer of title. 12. The zoning district designation of the properties adjoining the street to be vacated shall be automatically extended to the center of such vacation, and all area included in the vacation shall then and henceforth be subject to all regulations of the districts. The adopting ordinance shall specify this zoning district extension inclusive of the applicable zoning district designations. 13. The record of survey and certified copy of the ordinance shall be recorded by the City Clerk in the office of the Spokane County Auditor. 14. All conditions of City Council authorization shall be fully satisfied prior to any transfer of title by the City. Staff Report and Recommendation STV-2015-0001 Page 5 of 5 December 3,2015 APPROVED Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers—City Hall, November 12,2015 Chairman Anderson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance. Ms. Heath took roll and the following members and staff were present: Kevin Anderson Erik Lamb,Deputy City Attorney Heather Graham Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Tim Kelley Jenny Nickerson, Sr. Plans Examiner Mike Phillips Christina Janssen,Planner Susan Scott Karen Kendall,Planner Joe Stoy, absent- excused Sam Wood Elisha Heath, Secretary of the Commission Hearing no objections, Commissioner Stoy was excused from the November 12, 2015 meeting. Commissioner Graham moved to approve the amended November 12, 2015 agenda as presented. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero against, the motion passes. Commissioner Wood moved to accept the October 22, 2015 minutes as presented. Commissioner Scott corrected the minutes on page five, line three to add the words and "school districts". Commissioner Graham moved to accept the corrected minutes from October 22, 2015. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero against, motion passes. COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioners had nothing to report. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Senior Planner Lori Barlow reported that the City Council determined that they would be appointing the new Planning Commissioners at the first regular City Council meeting in January rather than the December meeting. As a result there will not be a Planning Commission meeting January 14, 2016, and the January 28, 2016 meeting will be a training meeting in order to bring the new Planning Commission members up to speed. Ms. Barlow stated that the annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment Cycle was opened and one amendment request was received. The Docket has been presented to the City Council for approval.The Planning Commission will likely begin its review cycle in February. She also gave an update on the population allocation PTAC process for the Comprehensive Plan Update. The Steering Committee of Elected Officials met on November 4th and forwarded the Spokane County Planning Technical Advisory Committee's recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. The recommendation was to use Office of Financial Management's medium range population forecast for the 20-year planning period. PUBLIC COMMENT: No public comments. COMMISSION BUSINESS: Study Session: STV-2015-0001, street vacation of 3rd Avenue Planner Karen Kendall presented the street vacation request of 3rd Avenue located between Appleway Trail and 4th Avenue just west of Skipworth Road adjacent to six parcels. The request is for an area approximately 340 feet in length and ranging in width from 40 to 50 feet. The northerly three parcels are proposed to be consolidated into one. South of 3rd Avenue the two westerly parcels will be consolidated into one and access will be by an existing easement from 4th Avenue. The final remaining parcel will be unchanged.Ms. Kendall presented five reasons identified by the applicant for the request: 1. The area proposed to be vacated is unimproved and not maintained 2. Location of road limits maximum use of abutting properties 3. All six parcels abutting 3rd Avenue (north/south)are owned by the same property owner 4. The structures along the west property line hinder future right of way connection 5. No parcels use 3rd Avenue for access. 11-12-15 Planning Commission Minutes Page 1 of 9 The Public Hearing date is set for December 10,2015. Commissioner Anderson asked if the process for changing the lot lines was already underway, and if they were not then, why the two processes, changing the lot lines and the street vacation, were not conducted simultaneously. Ms.Kendall explained that not knowing how the parcels are going to end up and that this application has six parcels,there is potential for a parcel to become land locked and we do not want that to happen. The property owner has presented how he would orient the parcels so that all of them would have direct access to a public street. Currently, the parcels are not proposed to be consolidated or adjusted. That will be proposed going forward at the time of the street vacation is being finalized. Typically,the lot line adjustment is handled by the record of survey that finalizes the street vacation. Commissioner Anderson asked if the City can produce a viable road on a 12 foot easement. Ms. Kendall replied that it is an existing easement that does provide legal access to an existing home. That easement will not change. Commissioner Phillips stated that it did not make sense to get rid of a street and have one parcel be limited to a 12 foot easement. He asked what the property owner proposed to do with the property. Ms. Kendall stated that the property owner has not disclosed through the application the intended use of the property. In addition she clarified that the easement was established in the past and currently serves as access for a residence. The two parcels will be combined creating a larger parcel still utilizing the 12 foot easement for access. Commissioner Scott asked if the City charges when it vacates right of way. Ms. Kendall stated that the City Council would determine what they would like to do for compensation of the vacation of the street. Commissioner Anderson asked if ROW is not used by the City if it reverts back to the property owner. Mr. Lamb stated,there is a provision for plats,platted before 1905 if the right-of-way did not open then it does revert back to the owner. For all other rights—of-way, the right-of-way remains with the City regardless if it is open or not. Commissioner Graham asked about the access for the three parcels to the north. Ms. Kendall stated that the property owner has spoken with the Development Engineering, and the turnaround would need to be provided for vehicles traveling down Skipworth Road. It is a proposed cul-de-sac with right-of-way dedication for vehicles to turn around,and it would be public. Commissioner Graham asked how emergency vehicles would access the northern parcels if something was developed toward the back half. Ms. Kendall stated that the fire department does weigh in on the process through comment. Commissioner Graham asked for clarification on the letter received from the fire department stating some sort of land action is required to maintain access for emergency response. Ms. Kendall clarified the fire department was concerned about creating land locked parcels without access for emergency vehicles. The comment letters fulfill a requirement for application and they will be asked for comments as the process continues. CTA-2015-0006 Marijuana Regulations Deputy City Attorney Erik Lamb began the evening explaining to the Commissioners the current status of marijuana in the City and the state changes in the law. • A moratorium on medical marijuana uses (unlicensed marijuana uses) was established by the City Council on Dec. 9,2014. • A moratorium on new marijuana uses licensed by the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board(WSLCB)was established by the City Council on Oct. 6,2015. • Both moratoriums require the City to develop appropriate local regulations giving effect to the 2015 State Legislative amendments. Commissioner Graham asked a clarifying question on the moratorium on new marijuana uses licenses that is to put a hold on those currently licenses recreational marijuana shops and currently licensed medical marijuana shops from applying for a medical marijuana endorsement. Mr. Lamb stated the 11-12-15 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 9 moratorium will prohibit any new licenses from someone who currently does not have a license. For the current three retail stores, the moratorium will not affect their seeking a medical marijuana endorsement. The WSLCB will not be issuing those endorsements until July of 2016. Mr. Lamb presented the questions posed at the October 22,2015 meeting: Could we require individual qualified patients to license or register with the City?The full legal review has not been completed, however there appears there are several problems presented with this: HIPPA requirements, which requires the City to keep that information confidential and private which goes against our mandate, under the public records act, to be a transparent government. Secondly, there could be some preemption issues given how the state has set out the law for patients to be qualified patients and receive their authorizations. Finally, there are concerns from a Fifth Amendment standpoint,in terms of requiring a patient to register for what is still illegal under federal law. Requiring patients to notify landlords. Again it raises similar issues with the Fifth Amendment. It also would be difficult from an enforcement standpoint. It really is a private issue and the landlord would be able to pursue that though their contract with the tenant. Commissioner Graham asked for clarification on if a cooperative had to have a signed declaration from the landlord. Mr. Lamb clarified that when using the term patients he is referring to individuals. Commissioner Anderson asked if there was an issue with landlords putting stipulations within their contracts to be notified if a tenant will be growing or modifying the residence for growing. Mr. Lamb stated that he is not aware of any,but the landlords are not his clients and he is not able to give them legal advice. Clarification regarding terms used for medical marijuana. Medical collective, medical dispensary, and medical shop all refer to an unlicensed medical facility,under prior RCW 69.51A. A dispensary was originally slated to be a legal use back in 2011, however the state through the Governor's veto eliminated the "dispensary." Medical collectives, are a group of 10 patients coming together and growing the marijuana amongst those 10 patients for the same 10 patients. From a practical standpoint, since there is no enforcement of those collectives, many shops may operate as de facto dispensaries. The City has not regulated them or looked at them and treats them as collectives. Those are the unlicensed medical shops that we had register prior to our moratorium, we do not know how many are in operation now, those are the ones who will be seeking the license from WSLCB to become a retail shop. A cooperative is a group of people taking the place of the collective. They are required to be in a domicile. A cooperative is up to four qualified patients coming together to grow marijuana themselves. Cooperatives are required to be registered with the WSLCB but they do not obtain a license and they are not a retail shop. Only allow medical marijuana? Preemption will prevent the City from breaking this up into medical and retail. The license that is obtained is a retail license, it is solely up to the owner if they wish to seek the medical endorsement. The question was raised can the City require a location only sell recreational or medical marijuana. Mr. Lamb stated that the challenge would be there is no requirement at the state level that a shop be just a medical shop or just a recreational shop. Commissioner Scott asked if the City can be stricter than the State. Mr. Lamb stated that the City can enact laws that are not in conflict with the state laws. From a land use standpoint the City can determine where land uses are appropriate, zoning and buffering requirements for marijuana. From a licensing standpoint and the products a shop is selling is a highly regulated State activity. Mr. Lamb presented that there are other types of uses that the City might want to regulate for example a marijuana club. Currently, there is one considered a 420 friendly lounge where you are able to consume marijuana but not purchase marijuana. Discussion returned to the collective and medial dispensary. Mr. Lamb explained that some operate under the definition of collective since they are taking a donation from a member. Others have expanded and operate as a business. Between 2013 and 2014 fifteen business licenses had listed services for medical marijuana. However, that does not include those who applied under alternative medicine. If they do not get their license by July 2016 it does become an illegal activity. WSLCB 11-12-15 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 9 stated in a webinar that they will not be in the enforcement business against those unlicensed collectives or dispensaries.It will be up to the local level for notification or policing. Commissioner Graham asked about the consultant required by the WSLCB to be present in a medical endorsed retail shops, that the regulations for them would not be available till July 1, 2016. Mr. Lamb stated that he would have to research that further and that the State is working with the Department of Health on those regulations. Commissioner Anderson asked if the City had banned recreational marijuana where would we be today on the subject of medical marijuana? Mr. Lamb stated that we would be in a similar place in terms of defining terminology,no one would be able to obtain a marijuana license, so there would be no marijuana. Discussion from the Commission turned to the City choosing to move ahead with issuing no new licensing, what issues the City would face with medical marijuana. The existing stores would be the only entities that would be able to apply for the medical endorsement. Under this option medical dispensaries would not be able to obtain a license within the City and would have to relocate to another city or county. Commissioner Graham clarified that the cooperatives would not have to leave, since they are for private patients in a domicile. Mr. Lamb stated that is a distinction that could be made, the cooperatives are called out in the State law in terms of a city zoning and up to prohibiting. Mr. Lamb presented information from the WSLCB on the process they are undertaking to determine the number of retail locations. One of the primary things the WSLCB indicated is they are working with a consultant to determine the appropriate number of retail stores. They felt it was important to get the licensing process going, which is why they opened up the October 12, 2015 deadline. However, similar to how they did before using population numbers they will come up with a hard number for retail stores for the statewide broken down by county and city in the final rules. Hopefully will be determined by December. Based on that number, we've had 19 new applications submitted,however,whatever number the WSLCB set that is the number they will license. Mr. Lamb continued with the presentation on the background on City regulations: • City zoning and buffer restrictions on recreational marijuana o Adopted in July 2014 o Applied to licensed retailers,producers, and processors o Have used for siting of 19 producers,21 processors, and 3 retailers o Note that previously State limited City to 3 retailers—now unknown number of retailers • Marijuana Production: Permitted in heavy and light industrial zones outright (indoor and outdoor);permitted in limited manner(indoor growing only)in RC and C zones. • Marijuana Processing: Permitted in heavy and light industrial zones outright (packaging and extraction); permitted in limited manner (packaging and labeling of useable marijuana only) in RC and C zones. • Local buffers for both marijuana production and processing: cannot be located within 1,000 feet of City Hall, CenterPlace,vacant City property(other than stormwater and public rights-of-way), vacant library property, and vacant school property. • Retail sales: permitted in the Mixed Use Center, Corridor Mixed Use,Regional Commercial, and Community Commercial zones. • Local buffers for retail sales: cannot be located within 1,000 feet of City Hall, CenterPlace, vacant City property (other than stormwater and public rights-of-way), vacant library property, vacant school property,the Appleway Trail,and the Centennial Trail. Christina Janssen,Planner presented the options for moving forward with the regulations Option 1)Maintain existing regulations • Add definitions regarding retail stores with medical endorsement 11-12-15 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 9 • Allow cooperatives • Clarify permitting requirements for any modifications for home grows • Would allow 727 parcels for retail, though not all available due to market and existing other commercial uses Option 2)Additional regulations • Additional buffer, the possibilities could be 1,000 feet from retail store to any other licensed use,this results in 61 allowable parcels • Additional buffer could be 1,000 feet from a residential zone • Limit allowable zones • Overlay,limit areas where allowed,e.g.just along west Sprague area • Limit or prohibit cooperatives • Clarify permitting requirements for any modifications for home grows Option 3)Prohibition • All license types or just particular ones e.g.ban retail but allow production or processing • Cooperatives • Clarify permitting requirements for any modifications for home grows • Potential issues with challenges, ongoing appellate cases, with no decisions yet, so result is uncertain Option 4)Provided at the October 22,2015 meeting. • Allow minimum number required by law. • Medical sold at retail outlets—existing stores obtain medical endorsement • Maintain current buffers,possibly restrict under age • Allow cooperatives but only in same zones as producers • Allow qualified patients to home grow, assuming approval from the property owner if a rented or leased property • No solvent extraction within any residence/domicile • Require all infused product or concentrate to be purchased from a retail store Discussion on the tax benefits of having a retail store, processing facility and production facility in the City. Mr. Lamb stated that the City does not see much in tax revenue from the processing or production facilities since they are wholesale. The retail store the City receive the standard sales tax, the additional benefit is a portion of the thirty-seven percent tax imposed by the State. Public Comment: Marilyn Miller,2124 S.Harold Road: Ms.Miller stated she was new to Planning Commission meetings, and unless you want to work on this till the end of your lives which you would if you adopt option 1,2,or 3. I think prohibition is the best way to go. I do not believe you are going to be denying any patients the right or ability to get their medical marijuana. There is access in very close localities. I don't think Spokane Valley needs to indulge in this. Tara Harrison, 513 N.Locust Road: Ms. Harrison stated that she is the interim admin for the Collation for Cannabis Standards and Ethics (CCSE). Her involvement with the CCSE began last year when she was working for an unregulated medical marijuana dispensary. She realized there was a lack of communication on this side of the State. Many business owners were unaware of the legislation that was going on. In efforts to close the communication and information gap she sought out the CCSE. One project that they are working on is the Washington Cannabis Commission through the Department of Agriculture.Ms. Harrison stated that while prohibition may sound great,but no amount of prohibition is going to keep drugs out of school. Ms. Harrison stated that she is a mother of a child in a Valley School District. Her child does witness drugs dealing at school each day.The programs that are being utilized in school are ineffective. She has taken the time as a parent to educate her child as to what is medicine and what is not and why.Her child is not interested in partaking, she sees it as a medicine.That is a parent's 11-12-15 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 9 responsibility and no one else's. Ms. Harrison stated you have to teach your children.When it comes to something like this,the reason Ms. Harrison is involved and why it is so important is the patients. The patients that she has meet in the last two years have touched her life in a way she could never have imagined. She stated that she did not seek out this career. If her father could have had this option she may not have lost him at nine.Tons of her family have died from cancer, she has witnessed people with that, their cancer is gone. There are medical studies that prove this,we know there is a very valid opportunity here. In order to best take care of public health,what is important to the City and how you want to reflect. You want to embrace the health of people.Not everyone has access to transportation,public transit is what they rely on. So having an option for medical here in the Valley is very important. That may be their only option. Luckily with the way legislation happens people do have options. They can choose not to register at all and pay extra taxes,they have the ability to get the products that the Department of Health will not be overlooking.Ms. Harrison stated that you can have a producer that grows medical and recreational in the future,the grower can state that he is only growing one strain,ones deemed medical and ones deemed recreational.The one that is deemed medical under goes more testing and regulations. Being able to have that is very,very important. People are seeking this out in droves,the people that come to us as patients eighty percent are fifty-five plus. That means a lot,this is growing. We need to embrace the fact that this is happening,this is a movement. In my opinion it will be rescheduled in ten years. If we don't look at what's happening in the future and where this is going we are going to be left with moratoriums trying to scramble to put in regulations to keep the dangers away. That's all we want to keep the dangers at bay.It's something that is new and fresh and people are scared. There is also very beautiful things being born out of this and to turn a blind eye on it that you don't want to have anything to do with it is really foolish. We need to take care of our city and our health and our wellbeing. We make guidelines,make sure that everything is pesticide tested. Did you know that right now our laws do not require medicine on the recreational shelves to be tested for pesticides?That is appalling to me. As a City you may be able to require that everything on the shelves within City limits is required to have those kinds of tests. Then you can boast about how healthy and viable your city is because you are taking care of and making sure that your City and the people are getting those medicines,and that it is guaranteed to be healthy medicine. The tax benefits,public education,only three schools,I believe,in Spokane County are receiving any kind of benefits for drug education and prevention.Three in the whole county-that's horrible. One of the tax benefits is to be able to give education and prevention to our youth. It is very important that we do that. On the moratorium, I understand why because of the unregulated businesses, there are a few businesses that have given the Valley a black eye.Ms. Harrison stated that she understood why the moratorium exists.It is important that everyone followed the rules and goes by the book. When an eighty year old woman walks in to get her medicine, she does not walk into something that she may get shot over. She doesn't need to walk in,not for her meds, she does not need to see someone hitting a bong or trimming their product on the table in front of everyone in the lobby. Certain things like that,I would never want my mother in a place like that.We need to have standards.You have recreational stores in the Valley that already have their medical endorsement. So in July they can open their doors and be ready. So we do have options for medical here in the Valley. She stated that having more producers and processors is not going to hurt anything. People work behind the scenes,they bring in income and spending money within the Valley.They are buying their products here they have employees here paying taxes all of that is very viable for our City and our economy. There is a medical research license, allow someone to grow specifically for research purposes,All of their product goes through the same traceability system but its turned over to a school or university that is going to do specific medical tests. We should allow that.It does not hurt anyone or anything. This isn't something that interacts with the public what-so-ever. Blake Alverts, 1801 S. St.Charles: Mr. Alverts stated his problem is the amount of medical shops popping up. We seem to have more of those than we have espresso stands. He state that he did not believe they contribute to the taxes that we collect in Valley,the revenue that could come in. He was embarrassed when he read in the Spokesman Review that Millwood is measuring their revenue from recreational marijuana in the hundreds of thousands,where we are at tens of thousands.With our proximity to Idaho and Liberty Lake,we should be kicking Millwood's butt. Bring in much more revenue than this.Mr. Alvert suggested that decrease the number of purely medical,they should all be retail combined. He asked for a reasonable number of recreational shops,that three is not enough. 11-12-15 Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 9 John Miller,2124 S.Herald: Mr.Miller stated that he is a child of the sixties,he grew up and went to school at Berkley. He knows a little bit about marijuana,not because he uses it but because he's seen it abused. The question came up about the amount of money that is coming into the City of Spokane Valley over and above the sales tax,he believed he read it was above $18,000 and he also read that,that money is used to enforce the laws concerning marijuana. So if we are bringing in money just to enforce the laws, not sure if that is a win-win for anyone. He stated that he did not vote for marijuana in this state, and feels it is a mistake. He asked that the Commission consider Option 3, adopt a policy of prohibition.Medical marijuana is a little different,he asked why if medical marijuana is considered to be a medicine why isn't a prescription written by a doctor,perhaps it is. But why is that prescription not taken to an established drug store?The marijuana delivered to those folks could be tested,certified,safe for the intended use and that would take care of that problem. He stated that recreational marijuana makes no sense to him what so ever. He would like the Commission to consider Option 3 at the least,maintain the moratorium and make it permanent. Commissioner Anderson asked the audience if anyone ran a medical marijuana dispensary. One member of the audience used to work at one. Another audience member stated that they run a recreational shop and would be available to answer any questions. Commissioner Kelley asked if the retail owner saw challenges taking the medical endorsement and separating the recreational marijuana that is taxed from the medical marijuana which is untaxed. Doug Peterson, 16404 E.Rocky Top Lane:Mr. Peterson stated that he did not see a problem separating the taxed from the untaxed.He has met with the Department of Health which will be bringing on systems in the spring which his business will help beta test. His business is embracing it. One survey asked if the business would train its people in more of a consulting role for the medical,if they would pay for it. He would like everyone in his store to be trained medically through the state. Revenue questions,he stated that his business has only been open for three months,it's not going to show like some of the bigger stores open on Trent in Millwood. Part of the challenge is that the Valley has a tougher zoning laws. He worked with the City and with Christina Janssen. Originally there were three licenses for the Valley. The Appleway Trail and other trails made it tough to find a location. When the State revamped with 5052,it is challenging as a business owner who just opened, since he just got opened under the old laws. Mr. Peterson stated one of his concerns as a business owner,the restrictions were difficult and the new licenses may have less restrictions. He's heard that the zones are going to drop down to 500 feet from 1000 and that the licenses are not zone specific. You have "x" amount of licenses for the Valley but they can be from anywhere. The original licensing process was you were licensed in the Valley if you had a valid location. As a business owner he embraced the changes and will continue to meet the standards of the state. He invited the Commission to visit his shop,it is professional environment they take very seriously. It is a nice place,he stated that it is not like what you might think it is like. Mr. Peterson stated that he does not go to the medical shops,he understands that the regulation process need to take place. He addressed the earlier comment on pesticides,growers have a state issued list of pesticides that are approved; the marijuana that is going through recreational stores is tested pretty extensively just not specifically pesticide tested. There are labs that will test it. He is in talks with labs to pay growers more if their products that have been tested more. Commissioner Kelley compared business who sell to customers as well as whole sale, nontaxed as a comparison to medical marijuana and retail marijuana will there be any problems? Mr. Peterson stated that it's about building the process in the store and making it logistically make sense. Need to be very clear with patients and regular recreational uses.There would need to be logistics in place,he will work with the WSLCB to see what kind of process would need to be in place.Mr. Peterson stated as a store owner that process is important,the experience of the customer is important,regulation is important. As you know retail marijuana is one of the most regulated processes in the world. There is so much that a store has to do to be open,we gladly accept that challenge. Commissioner Graham asked for clarification on the consultant part required by the medical endorsement. The reference to patients would imply that they are seeking out medical marijuana as a medication, the pharmacy is typically where you think of for where a medication is obtained. What rules, 11-12-15 Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 of 9 if you know is the Department of Health looking at that would limit the person acting as a consultant from offering medical advice? Mr. Peterson stated it is going to be very strict. He was in a meeting last week that was defining what a consultant means. A person is not going to be able to take a two week course on marijuana medical and become a physician. He believes there will be training on how and what you can tell a patient. It will not be a position of giving medical advice rather explaining the product and what potential the effects are of the product. Commissioners had questions about the concentration levels of medical verses recreation marijuana. Mr. Peterson confirmed that there is not a difference in concentration levels. Discussion continued on packaging and labeling differences for medical and recreation marijuana. It is the same product but regulated and taxed differently. Commissioner Anderson declared a 10 minute break. Commissioners continued with discussion. Commissioner Anderson suggested narrowing down the discussion to four subjects: who should get a retail license with a medical endorsement; should we make regulations beyond the state in regards to home grow; extraction and where it should be allowed; finally should we allow co-ops. Concerns about commercial rentals renting to marijuana retail affecting the surrounding businesses. Mr. Peterson addressed that it is very difficult to find a location as well as higher rates are being charge for this type of business. Additionally marijuana businesses are having issues with banks being willing to accept funds. Mr. Peterson also brought up the fact that since it is federally illegal that the businesses are not allowed to take any tax write-offs for operating their business. Discussion moved to the Options 2 of increasing buffers and the locations of co-ops. Interested in the 1000 foot buffer between stores and the residential zones and to look at how to allow cooperatives. Commissioners asked what happens to a business that becomes legal,nonconforming.Mr. Lamb stated that if a legal,nonconforming use abandons their use for a year they are done. If there is damage up to eighty percent they can continue that use. Ms.Janssen stated that the legal,nonconforming had to resume operations within twelve months.The question was raised as to whether a business may move locations and still be maintain that legal,nonconforming status.Mr. Lamb stated that the nonconforming use allows them to continue operating in that location with that use. If they moved they would be subject to the new rules. Commissioners asked about maintaining the status quo of current retail,producer, and processor would that be considered prohibition. Further they asked if it would be possible to allow the current retail shops the option of moving locations and maintaining license. Mr. Lamb stated he would need to think about this further.The issue was raised that maintaining the three retail locations and that only one of these shops is located on a bus line. This may cause transportation and accessibility for medical marijuana patients. The issue of capacity was raised.Mr. Lamb explained that there will be a three tier structure related to square footage and this will remain the same size,but allow more stores,he will confirm. Discussion turned to the possibility of regulating the concentration of marijuana as well as the packaging. Ms. Harrison returned to further discuss the different compounds within marijuana. Commissioners asked about controlling signage and promotion of the marijuana.Mr. Lamb stated that the State regulates the signage as it relates to the location. The City does not allow off site signage. Jenny Nickerson, Sr. Plans Examiner,presented an update on a proposal before the State Building Code Council to limit the number of plants to 15 in a buildings other than a Moderate Hazard Industrial Occupancy building. If any entity wanted to grow more than 15 plants it would have to be in a Moderate Hazard Industrial Occupancy building, a residential use would typically not be allowed in this zone without a fire sprinkler system. For the most part a large number of our existing buildings that house residential uses would not be appropriate for the growth of any more than 15 plants.The Commission asked why growing marijuana plants is considered to be a fire hazard. Ms.Nickerson stated that it is not necessarily a fire hazard. However a limitation needed to be set to determine if it would be a factory occupancy or a standard garden. A co-op which is able to grow up to 60 plants would need to be an Fl occupancy. She further explained that the types of operation in a building and size of the building would determine when fire sprinkler systems would be required. If an extraction system is in place that include chemicals they can trigger a fire sprinkler system requirement at a much lower threshold. Mr. Lamb 11-12-15 Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 of 9 followed up with clarification that a co-op would be limited to 15 plants if located in a domicile, unless they were located in an industrial zone. Ms. Barlow reminded the commission that at the next meeting they will be hearing from the police and fire department. Commissioner Anderson asked what a marijuana specialty clinic is.Ms. Harrison explained that a specialty clinic is a rotating clinic that have doctors who do authorizations for medical marijuana. Physicians are allowed to write thirty authorizations a month after that they have to report the number to the State. ADJOURNMENT: There being no other business the meeting was adjourned at 8:39 p.m. Kevin And son,V. e Chairperson Date signed (Wi',' Elisha Heath, Secretary 11-12-15 Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 of 9 Minutes Spokane Valley Planning Commission Council Chambers—City Hall, December 10,2015 Chairman Anderson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Commissioners, staff and audience stood for the pledge of allegiance. Ms. Horton took roll and the following members and staff were present: Kevin Anderson John Hohman, Community Development Director Heather Graham Erik Lamb,Deputy City Attorney Tim Kelley Lori Barlow, Senior Planner Mike Phillips Jenny Nickerson, Sr. Plans Examiner Susan Scott Christina Janssen,Planner Joe Stoy, absent- excused Karen Kendall, Planner Sam Wood Deanna Horton, Secretary of the Commission Commissioner Wood moved to excuse Joe Stoy from the meeting. The vote on this motion was six in favor, zero against and the motion passed. Commissioner Graham moved to accept the December 10, 2015 agenda as presented. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero against and the motion passed. Commissioner Scott asked for clarification regarding a sentence in the November 12, 2015 minutes. She said on Page 3, second to last paragraph, the sentence reads "Mr. Lamb presented that there are other types of uses that the City might want to regulate for example a marijuana club. Currently there is one considered, at 420 friendly lounge where you are able to consume marijuana but not purchase marijuana." It was determined the 'at' in front of'420' should be replaced with an 'a.' There were no other corrections to the minutes. Commissioner Wood moved to approve the November 12, 2015 minutes as amended. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero against and the motion passed. COMMISSION REPORTS: Commissioner Kelly reported he attended a meeting at CenterPlace regarding marijuana usage. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT: Community Development Director John Hohman reported the deadline for Planning Commission openings is December 18, 2015. Mr. Hohman thanked the Planning Commissioners who would be leaving at the end of this year, Commissioners Anderson, Scott and Wood. Mr. Hohman also reported the first meeting of the Planning Commission in 2016 would be January 28, 2016. This will allow for the delayed process of choosing the next Planning Commissioners. The January 28 meeting will be training which is required each year for the Commissioners. PUBLIC COMMENT: No public comments. COMMISSION BUSINESS: Public Hearing: STV-2015-0001, Street Vacation of portion of 3rd Avenue Karen Kendall presented the street vacation request of 3rd Avenue located between Appleway Trail and 4th Avenue just west of Skipworth Road adjacent to six parcels. The request is for an area approximately 340 feet in length and ranging in width from 40 to 50 feet. The northerly three parcels are proposed to be consolidated into one. South of 3rd Avenue the two westerly parcels will be consolidated into one and access will be by an existing easement from 4th Avenue. The final remaining parcel will be unchanged. Ms.Kendall presented five reasons identified by the applicant for the request: 1. The area proposed to be vacated is unimproved and not maintained 2. Location of road limits maximum use of abutting properties 3. All six parcels abutting 3rd Avenue (north/south)are owned by the same property owner 4. The structures along the west property line hinder future right-of-way connection,and 5. No parcels use 3rd Avenue for access. Commissioner Scott said the staff report mentioned the abutting property owners along 3rd were notified but was anyone on 4th Avenue notified. Ms. Kendall responded based on the City's noticing 12-10-15 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 9 requirements, only the property owners who were abutting 3rd Avenue were notified. Commissioner Scott mentioned the person with the easement was not notified. Commissioner Wood asked about the noticing on the property and Ms. Kendall explained the posting requirements for a street vacation and the location of the signs which had been posted on the property. Mr.Wood mentioned the sign hanging on the fence was difficult to see. Commissioner Anderson asked why the southern lots were not combined into one parcel. Ms. Kendall asked for clarification. Mr. Anderson said the northern parcels were proposed to be combined into one parcel. The southern three parcels are being proposed as two parcels instead of one as is being done on the north side of the right-of-way (ROW). Mr. Anderson wanted a reason why the parcels were being configured as proposed. Ms. Kendall stated there are two single family residences on the land and in order for each residence to have its own parcel this is how the configuration was proposed. Mr. Anderson said he thought the goal was to develop the property into multifamily development. Ms. Kendall stated staff was not aware of any future development plans for the property. If in the future,the parcel configuration did not work for the property owner, then steps could be taken at the time of development to realign them. Commissioner Scott stated she was concerned about the size of the easements. One of them is a 12-foot driveway easement which was granted in 2002 to serve as a driveway for one of the homes on the applicant's property and an easement which will be granted to the City for a path to the Appleway Trail which is shown to be 15-feet wide. Ms. Kendall stated as part of the proposal, adjacent parcels with access are not looked at. Ms. Kendall said only during future development would access to the parcels need to be addressed. Ms. Scott was concerned the parcel to the west, with the driveway easement was not notified of the street vacation. Senior Planner Lori Barlow explained the noticing practices to the Commissioners. The noticing requirements for a proposed street vacation are in place to allow people who use the street to comment. Ms. Barlow said the property to which Ms. Scott is referring is not affected by the vacation of the street. Ms. Barlow said the noticing requirements have been met. Any discussion of the need for more access would be taken up if further development was proposed. Commissioner Anderson opened the public hearing at 6:30 p.m. Commissioner Anderson asked the applicant if he would like to speak, the applicant stated from the audience he did not really have anything to say. Commissioner Anderson asked him to step up to the podium to speak because he wanted to question him. Dan Hultquist, 14502 N. Freya: Mr. Hultquist stated he had no comment. Commissioner Anderson asked to clarify whether the driveway easement, which serves one of the houses on Mr. Hultquist's property, would be an easement as it is. Mr. Hultquist said it was just a driveway to the house on his property. Commissioner Anderson asked if he had to leave it as an easement. Mr.Hultquist stated he did not understand the question. Commissioner Anderson asked if he developed the property in the future, if the easement would change. Mr. Hultquist stated it would be hard to say, he didn't know what else it would be. He had been planning on developing the property for 20+ years now and it still looks the same. He said he could, not at this time, anticipate what would happen to the property. He would not want to give up the easement since it serves his rental property. Commissioner Anderson asked Mr. Hultquist if the easement was as it is, where it is and would not change. Mr. Hultquist again stated he was not sure what Mr. Anderson was asking, but it was an easement to the rental property. Ms. Barlow clarified that in this process the easement will remain as it is. Mr. Anderson stated he was trying to look out for the property owners not involved in this process. Having no one else who wanted to testify, Commissioner Anderson closed the public hearing at 6:33 p.m. Commissioner Wood stated he had no issues with this proposal. Commissioner Kelly said he did not have a problem with it either. Commissioner Phillips was only concerned there would not be a landlocked parcel. Commissioner Anderson said he had no problem with the street vacation, but he was fixated on the easements. He was concerned the easements for the property would not be sufficient for future development. Commissioner Scott asked if the property had been investigated to be one which the ROW would go back to the property owner. Deputy City Attorney Erik Lamb stated, although he did not look up to see if this plat was dated previously to 1904, if it had been then the land would have reverted 12-10-15 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 9 back to the property owner. Ms. Scott wondered if the City would have to buy back the ROW if there was future development. Ms. Barlow stated if there was future development, the ROW would be dedicated to the City. Ms. Scott was concerned the increase in the amount of square footage of the properties would increase the density allowed in the area,if the property was developed. Commissioner Graham moved to approve STV-2015-0001. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero against and the motion passed. Planning Commission Findings: STV-2015-0001, Street Vacation of portion of 3rd Avenue Ms.Kendall stated the City preferred process is to bring the findings back at later meeting after the public hearing. However because of the holidays and the Planning Commission's next available meeting for business would not be until February, staff is bringing the findings forward now. Ms. Barlow stated the proposed findings reflect the decision made at the public hearing. Commissioner Graham moved to approve the Planning Commission findings for STV-2015-0001. The vote on the motion was six in favor, zero against and the motion passed. CTA-2015-0006 Marijuana Regulations Commissioner Anderson asked the Commissioners if they wanted to proceed with the study session or to defer the discussion until new Commissioners are appointed in the New Year. Deputy City Attorney Lamb said this would be up to the Commissioners, but there were people in attendance who came to speak to the subject and there would be a written record of previous actions for the new members to review. There was consensus to continue with the study session and listen to the people who came to share information regarding marijuana in the City and related fire codes. Lt. Khris Thompson, Spokane Valley Police Department(SVPD): Lt. Thompson stated it had been a long process in changing the regulations regarding the legislation of marijuana. Senate Bill 5052 brings together how medical or compliant marijuana will be handled. The City's numbers since the passing of I-502,which is when the police department started tracking marijuana related driving under the influence (DUI). In the first period after the law was enacted the police made 18 arrests, four of which were minors. In 2013, there were 43 arrests with 20 being minors. Lt. Thompson clarified the law reads a `minor' would be anyone 21 years of age or younger. Commissioner Kelley asked if these were just marijuana arrests, or all DUI arrests. Lt. Thompson stated these were all intoxicants, including alcohol, marijuana and other intoxicants. He continued in 2014 there were 62 total incidents, with 22 of them being under age. So far this year there have been 50 DUI arrests with 15 of them being under age. These were DUI, by drug, specifically marijuana. Commissioner Wood asked if there was a blood test associated with the DUI arrests. Lt. Thompson said there are many methods used to confirm the use of drugs. He said there are people trained specifically to determine if someone is using drugs at the time they are pulled over. In 2013/14, when the SVPD started tracking marijuana related calls there were 55 calls related to marijuana. These could be burglary, theft, property crimes and so on. In 2015 there had been 95 incidents so far. He stated about half of the arrests were minors and there was a trend of youth becoming involved in these crimes. Commissioner Graham asked if Lt. Thompson was aware of any increase in funding to support the police departments. Lt. Thompson said he was not aware, but this would be a question for administrative staff. Commissioner Kelley asked how the police department handles cases where plants were involved if the person owning the plants stated they were for medical use. Lt. Thompson stated there were different levels of enforcement between the different police departments and the Washington state Liquor and Cannabis Board (WSLCB). A medical patient is required to keep paperwork on site to show if there is ever an issue with plants being grown in a home. Lt. Thompson stated patients who wished to grow their own, would need to be licensed in order to avoid potential prosecution. Commissioners had questions regarding a cooperative grow. Lt. Thompson stated the rules for a cooperative grow have changed, from allowing 10 people to participate to four, it also reduced the number of plants which will be allowed. Registration would assist officers in knowing where authorized growing would happen, but it is voluntary for individuals. However the medical card received from the doctor would state how many plants the patient needs. Commissioner Kelley asked if the increase in crimes could be pin-pointed to occurring around schools, siting the Commission has been tasked to consider new regulations including new possible buffers around certain facilities. Lt. Thompson stated he did not have that detail of information with him, but it might be possible to find the 12-10-15 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 9 information at a later time. Commissioner Scott asked about enforcement from the WSLCB. Lt. Thompson stated there are different levels of enforcement and the WSLCB enforces the licensing, the police enforce the criminal violations. She also asked if the information regarding an in-home grow was supposed to be posted on the door of the room containing the plants. Lt. Thompson stated the patient is required to have the information readily available, it should be posted but this is not always the case. Commissioner Wood asked if there was a portion of the City getting more criminal incidences than another. Lt. Thompson stated it was all over the City, not in any one place. Commissioner Scott also asked if, in his personal opinion,the officer could see the trend continuing. Lt. Thompson said he could see the trend continuing with the availability of the product. Greg Rogers, Spokane Valley Fire Dept. Fire Marshall: Mr. Rogers stated he did not have the numbers, like the police department does because they do not associate these things with their response with the chemical components which are used. They have seen an increase in call volume, mainly from older adults who are experimenting, based on people thinking they are having symptoms of larger issues such as a possible heart attack. Said he has seen the call volume increase in the last month, of unauthorized burn of harvested plants and feels this is in part due to fewer extraction processors in the county. In these incidents, the fire department is required to turn these incidents over to the Clean Air Agency, and they are responsible for the enforcement. Tracy Harvey, Spokane Valley Fire Dept. Fire Protection Engineer: Ms. Harvey stated she has become involved in the marijuana regulations through the building permit process. She has noted a need for regulations to make sure the growing and processing of the marijuana are done safely. She has been involved with the International Fire Code 2015 amendments. She stated there have been some emergency amendments to address some of the extraction processes. She said she would be participating in a Cannabis Technical Advisory Group for the State Building Code Council next year. She said the fire department is learning from the growers and processers how things work and how to regulate these businesses. Commissioner Graham asked about the extraction processes and the medical facilities which are licensed to do business,but are not licensed to operate as a medical business. Ms. Harvey explained as the new rules take effect and `medical' marijuana gets rolled into the recreational stores the requirements for the recreational will apply. A new permit, which has been adopted by the Fire Code, states any new extraction processes must be reviewed by the local fire department. There will be inspections of the processes, facilities and an annual review will be required. Commissioner Graham asked if the fire department had responded to any calls at one of the City's processor or producers. Mr. Rogers stated they had not. He said the processors and growers have invited the fire department to look at what they are doing so they are more aware of what is going on at the property in case of the need for response. Mr. Rogers said he was glad the medical would have to follow the same regulations as recreational, which means they will not be able to open business unless they have been through the fire department permitting process. Ms. Harvey explained currently there is not a processor in the City which is using a chemical extraction process. Some are using a CO2 system, but not a chemical extraction. Commissioner Anderson asked if harvested plants can be taken to the "clean green" process at the transfer station. Ms. Harvey stated there is a process where the plants must be taken to the Waste-to- Energy Plant for destruction. Mr. Lamb offered there are also state regulations which require the addition of non-edible materials in with the plants so there is no useable material. Commissioner Wood asked if you have a cooperative grow of two to four people, and they can grow up to 60 plants, aren't they using halogen lights to grow the plants, which could be a fire hazard. Ms. Harvey stated many are using LED lights now. Commissioner Wood said he felt this type of operation could cause trouble for the fire department. Ms. Harvey stated a couple of years ago, there was a fire in a garage, which had a grow operation in it. The two minors running the operation had medical cards. But this was seldom. Commissioner Wood asked if using so much energy, changes to amperage systems, those kinds of things, wouldn't this be a concern to the fire department? Ms. Harvey stated a permit would be needed to make any changes to the home. Changes to the electrical systems are governed by Labor and Industries, which the City does not have a hand in. Commissioner Kelley asked if there was not a way to make suggestions requiring these types of changes and these types of growing operations have to meet a certain standard to be safe. Ms. Harvey stated the regulations already require a change of occupancy to an F-1 occupancy, which would require a permit and City review. An F-1 occupancy is a factory/industrial moderate-hazard occupancy. In an F-1 occupancy there is a 12,000 square foot 12-10-15 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 9 minimum at which the building is required to have sprinklers. Most cooperative grows would not trigger this requirement. Sprinklers are based on the size and square footage of a building, not on how many plants might be growing in a home. Jenny Nickerson, Senior Plans Examiner: Ms. Nickerson responded to a question from Commissioners regarding the ability to require sprinklers in a cooperative. Ms. Nickerson pointed out some of the rules being discussed are proposed, and have not been adopted by the State Building Code Council, and are not currently requirements. She said in theory if an in-home grow had 17 plants, was classified as F-1 occupancy, there would be minimum life safety requirements in place. Sprinkler thresholds are generally at 12,000 square feet for an F-1 occupancy. However an F-1 occupancy of any size is going to be subject to certain fire sensitivity, egress in an emergency situation, including address and posting measures which would allow the fire department to respond adequately in an emergency. Commissioner Kelley asked if a daycare with 7,000 square feet would not require a sprinkler system. Ms. Nickerson stated a daycare is a different occupancy and the requirement would be based on the age of the children, number of exits, and the number of children which would be accommodated in that building. Ms. Nickerson felt a 7,000 square foot daycare would probably be a sprinkled building. Commissioner Kelley asked if the Commission could suggest lowering the limits for a home grow operation. Ms.Nickerson said canopy space could be something which could be considered. She said it could be considered, tighter sprinkler thresholds for those types of uses. Commissioner Graham asked if a co-op has 17 plants, have registered with the state as a co-op, do they need to apply for a change of occupancy. Ms.Nickerson said, assuming the proposed regulations are adopted,which would trigger the F-1 occupancy requirement, a single family dwelling would not be considered an F-1 occupancy classification. She said what had been discussed at the previous meeting was if a grow was housed in a building which has an F-1 occupancy and a person decided to live in the building, that would trigger the fire sprinkler requirement, no matter what the square footage was. Sprinklers are only going to be required if a person is living in the same building. A detached garage would need to maintain at least 20 feet of separation. Then came a question regarding a domicile, which is in the state code as a requirement for a co-op,but Mr. Lamb stated it would not fit the City's regulations for residential zoning. Commissioner Wood stated he did not understand a cooperative very well. He offered a likely suggestion of a person with a medical card for marijuana. That person wanted to grow 15 marijuana plants in their home, a person could do that. Mr. Lamb stated unless that person wanted to modify their home in a way which would trigger a standard building permit, there would be no way anyone would know about the plants. Commissioner Wood confirmed no one in the City would know about the growing plants,if a patient decided to do so. A cooperative is up to four individuals who decide to grow plants together. Mr. Lamb said this would be legal under current local zoning codes. However,there are proposed changes to the building code, where once a person is growing over 15 plants there would be a requirement for a change in occupancy. Currently zoning does not allow for an `industrial' building in a residential zone. A co-op has to register with the state,however there is no mechanism which shares that information with the jurisdiction. Mr. Rogers stated once a permit is applied for a change of occupancy and is approved, then it would trigger annual inspections from the fire department. It would be considered part of a home business and allow for the inspections. Commissioner Kelley asked if the City had the power to require anyone who applies for a medical marijuana card to register with the City. Mr. Lamb stated he did not feel this would be possible based on the need to protect an individual's medical records according to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), and it could be a possible violation of an individual's rights. Commissioner Wood asked if the suggestion of not allowing cooperatives in the City would be a problem. Mr. Lamb stated it was in the new state law to allow the prohibition of cooperatives if a jurisdiction chose. Mr. Lamb stated the cooperative was allowed for more rural areas, where some patients might not be able to get to a store to purchase what they need. Mr. Lamb said he felt the City could site other stores in the areas in the county as well as a person could grow for themselves. Lt. Thompson added regarding medical authorization charges, patients do not need to enter into a registration, they can purchase marijuana at retail amounts, and pay the extra tax. If a patient does voluntarily register, then they are able to purchase a higher quantity than a regular retail customer and they will not have to pay the taxes. Lt. Thompson said he would try and get more information for the Commissioners regarding property crimes around within a quarter mile around a retail store. 12-10-15 Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 9 Commissioner Graham asked if there were regulations in place where if a person went into a retail location and they appeared to be `intoxicated' does the retail store have the right to refuse service to them, and Lt. Thompson said he did not know. Mr. Lamb then stated he would like to address some of the questions which were raised at the last meeting. • Question: How much money in taxes is the City getting from marijuana? The taxes being received are a 37% excise tax, but also general sales taxes. Producers and processors are considered wholesale and so they generate no taxes. Said we do see secondary benefits of employees who work for these operators who would live or shop in the City. Mr. Lamb said at least one producer/processor employees 108 people. The City's distribution in 2016 of the excise tax is $75,000, based on the 37% tax collected at the point of sale. The retail operations are generating a fairly good business and the sales tax for this year should be in the area of$58,000. The state must use a portion of the revenue generated for education and enforcement. The distribution to the City has not been tied to this. WSLCB reported for their fiscal year ending June 30, 2015 in all of Spokane County, who were allowed 18 retail shops total, from producers was $816,000, $14,000,000 from processors and$37,000,000 in sales from retailers. • Question: Can the City restrict retail outlets to be medical only? Mr. Lamb said after looking at case law there could be significant legal questions from a preemption stand point, primarily based on the way the state has set the licensing of the retail stores. The City would not be looking at it from a land use basis,but how they do their business and that is governed by the licensing scheme. Based on this the City would be trying to step into the state's role. There were questions regarding the Health Department. The Health Department has acknowledged there could be some beneficial properties in marijuana. They can't make it a prescribed medicine so what people are commonly referring to as medical marijuana is not being recognized by the Department of Health as "medical" marijuana. The term used is "compliant" marijuana. There will be three different types of compliant marijuana. There will be "general compliant" marijuana which is safe handling and limits use of pesticides and contains less than 10 milligrams of THC, this will lead to patients having a cleaner product. The next is "high THC compliant" this cannot be in bud form, it must be in capsules or patches. The high THC compliant has a higher THC than is allowed for recreational,the THC will be between 10 and 50 milligrams per serving and is only available to qualified patients. The third type is "high CBD compliant" which is similar to the high THC but the ratio of the CBDs is higher than the THC. This marijuana has more pain relieving affects,but is allowed for purchase by any buyer. Only the high THC compliant will require a medical card for purchase. The Health Department will not be regulating the marijuana more than this at this time. This would be why it would be difficult for the City to separate the two types of stores. Commissioner Wood asked if the City could regulate growing in homes. Mr. Lamb said it would have to come from a health/safety standpoint which would require talking about any gardener and what they want to grow. Commissioner Kelley asked if the City had the right to make a prohibition on medical marijuana home grows. Mr. Lamb corrected saying the City could limit the cooperatives,but the individual patient who wants to grow up to 15 plants, there would be a very difficult time in prohibiting them. If it was done there was a health/safety standpoint which would apply to all plants being grown. Commissioner Anderson said he felt the Health Department supported his theory of it being a public health/safety issue for having segregated facilities. Mr. Lamb said the Department of Health has made different classifications for compliant marijuana. Commissioner Anderson said the only thing common about the two types of stores is the word marijuana. He feels there would be different inventories, there should be a separate wall between the two facilities in order to keep the public safe from the sales of the wrong product to the wrong person. He offered that he would be willing to take the chance in a court room on his idea. Mr. Lamb said he did not know from an enforcement standpoint,how this could be done. Compliant marijuana can be sold to anyone. The only time a sale would need to have a check for a medical card would be if a person wanted to: 1) buy in higher than recreational amounts, 2) buy the high THC compliant marijuana or 3) didn't want to pay the sales tax. Mr. Anderson continued he still felt that medical and recreational should not be in the same building, then there could be more medical shops and we could get away from allowing more recreational shops. Mr. Lamb said the 12-10-15 Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 of 9 challenge for the City would be trying to enforce the fact that a retail store would not be selling to recreational users as well as a medical store. Commissioner Graham asked Mr. Lamb to explain this. At a retail marijuana store any person can go in and buy any kind of marijuana they would like, EXCEPT for high THC compliant marijuana. Mr. Lamb said if the City were to only allow more medical marijuana stores, anyone over the age of 21 would be able to go in and buy any of the products, except the high THC compliant marijuana. Commissioner Graham asked what would be the problem with this proposal. Mr. Lamb asked what the goal would be in trying to do this. Mr. Anderson asked if medical marijuana wouldn't be more expensive, have to have training, a consultant is required, tighter product regulations, tighter packaging regulations, in general a recreational user would want to go somewhere else and buy their product. Commissioner Kelley said many businesses sell retail/wholesale in the same place. Ms. Janssen asked the Commissioners to clarify why they would want to separate the two businesses. Commissioner Anderson said to keep the number of major retail stores from growing and medical has a legitimate point, and the state is saying we have to have more outlets. The Commissioners said they are frustrated the rules keep changing while we are trying to make the rules. Commissioner Graham said as of July 2016 all of the unlicensed dispensaries will have to be out of business or moved to a retail store. She asked if it was fair to these business owners. She asked if the City adopted something like Commissioner Anderson was proposing, couldn't those businesses apply to be one of those places. It would protect their business,they are used to providing medical marijuana. Mr. Lamb said they could and it would be up to the Commission, but before moving forward he would like to highlight, first although they are going to say they are going to be medical stores, they could sell to anyone who comes in at this time. Second he wanted the Commissioners to know this decision would be subject to a legal challenge. If someone wanted to sell recreationally and did not want to sell medical, it could be subject to challenge. There was a discussion about the current medical dispensaries and wanting to allow them an avenue to continue their business without allowing any more recreational shops in the City. Mr. Lamb stated the state is going to allocate to the City more retail stores based on the need of the community. He said there is no requirement for those to get a medical endorsement. The state created a retail system in which patients can get a tax break. The City is not mandated to have the allowed number of stores. Stores who sell compliant marijuana will need to be able to prove to the state they have the appropriate documentation in order to not be collecting the taxes owed. Commissioner Scott asked if there was a way to prohibit any more new stores in the City until 'the dust settles' and we have better defined rules regarding the selling of marijuana. Mr. Lamb said this would be one option. • If the City prohibited any more new stores could existing stores be termed legal nonconforming uses and be allowed to move around the City. There is a rule for that for billboards. There is no statutory rule which would prohibit it. Mr. Lamb cautioned there is no other business in the City which would be allowed to do that under our non-conforming use provisions. Commissioner Scott wondered if this would not be a problem because we do not allow other businesses to do this. She said these businesses have already said they know this is a high risk business and she did not feel obligated to allow special accommodations. Mr. Lamb said the City's current nonconforming regulations would take care of these concerns. • Signage restrictions: Mr. Lamb said he has concerns about the First Amendment and trying to regulate the content of signs. He said there was a question about comparing it to cigarette advertising. He said this law was written with extensive studies on how long a minor sees that advertisement can directly affect their likelihood of using that product. There was a strong factual basis for those laws. If the City were to develop a factual record, we might be able to develop a regulation along those lines. There was a recent court case (Reed vs. the Town of Gilbert) which has strengthened First Amendment protections and further restricted cities' authority for their sign codes. The state has significant restrictions on signs. The state does not allow more than two signs on site, and signs are limited to 1,600 square inches. The City sign code does not allow any off-site signage. The WSLCB also does not allow the signs to be appealing to children. They have stated, but it is not in the rules, they will not allow signs with cannabis leaves in them. 12-10-15 Planning Commission Minutes Page 8 of 9 Commissioner Wood said his opinion moving forward would be to allow the three existing retail stores to become licensed medical marijuana stores. He said he felt the three retail outlets were enough, the number of processors and producers was sufficient. He said we should allow a private individual patient the right to grow up to 15 plants, but not to allow cooperatives in the City. The City should maintain all of the current buffers around schools, parks and city land. Commissioner Scott said she agreed with Commissioner Wood and would make the three existing stores a legal nonconforming use. Commissioner Phillips said he agreed with Commissioner Wood, he would like to reduce the ones we already have but did not feel that was possible. Commissioner Anderson said he did not see any reason why the City would change or expand its processing and producing regulations. He is in favor of eliminating cooperatives. He would like to require the home owner be aware when someone is growing plants on their property for medicinal purposes. He feels all the boundaries should remain the same. He did not feel the City should be allowing home extraction. He would allow more stores if they could be medical only, even though he feels it would work, but if not then he would not allow any more stores in the City. Commissioner Kelley said he agrees with the all the guidelines proposed,but he would increase the buffers. Commissioner Wood said some of the retail stores came in and said their landlords were not going to allow them to continue their leases, which would be no fault of their own, and he wanted to allow the nonconforming laws to move with the stores to allow them to continue on if they were a business in good standing. Then there was discussion regarding legal nonconforming uses and of the ultimate goal of the Commissioners. Do you have to make the three retail shops nonconforming? Commissioner Anderson said no more than the three outlets without making them legal nonconforming uses,which would prohibit any more marijuana uses. Because of the state licensing system, there isn't a way to just restrict three to our City, so we have to prohibit and use the nonconforming regulations. Mr. Lamb summarized the Commission's desired direction for the regulations to be drafted: • No more marijuana retailers,producers or processors • No clubs • No cooperatives • Allow home grows,but look at the possibility of requiring the grower be the home owner • No home extraction Commissioner Scott asked if it was possible to restrict chemical extraction in the City. Mr. Lamb said he would allow the fire department to speak to the subject, but to keep in mind there are other processes which uses chemicals which are not related to marijuana. Ms. Harvey said the permit has a reasonable amount allowable which would allow the process in most any room in order to keep control of the chemicals to avoid problems. Chemical extractions require many systems to monitor. Extractions at home are using rubbing alcohol which is not likely to be a problem,but there could be a problem with the propane or butane. Most are using a CO2 process. She said it was highly unlikely to see one of these systems in a home because they are expensive systems. Commissioner Graham said she would like to see home grow be in an enclosure and that they can't be seen from a neighbor's yard. How could enforcement of this happen,only after they were reported? At this point it was agreed staff will begin to draft regulations based on the Commissioners agreeing this was the direction they wanted the regulations to move. Commissioner Graham asked about accommodating the current business owners through zoning, and Mr. Lamb stated an overlay could be created but that spot zoning would not be allowed. Commissioner Wood asked about renters who had permission to grow, and it was clarified this would be allowed. There was consensus not to come back with a zoning alternative to be able to allow the existing medical stores (dispensaries) in a zoning overlay. Commissioner Graham asked if a marijuana grow, or a federally illegal activity, was something which would have to be disclosed when selling a building. Commissioner Wood said he would say no, but he felt they were damp and would generate black mold which would be required to be disclosed. Commissioner Kelley wanted to know if the City could make it a requirement to inform of a home grow. Mr. Lamb said it would require some investigation. 12-10-15 Planning Commission Minutes Page 9 of 9 GOOD OF THE ORDER: There was a discussion regarding Planning Commissioners notes. Do they to be turned in to staff at the end of the year. These were their own notes,but Commissioners need to be aware they were subject to a public records requests. They should probably be destroyed at the end of each subject. ADJOURNMENT: There being no other business the meeting was adjourned at 8:53 p.m. Kevin Anderson,Vice-Chairperson Date signed Deanna Horton, Secretary CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY,WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO.07-009 RESOLUTION ADOPTING POLICIES FOR IMPOSING VACATION CHARGES PURSUANT TO RCW 36.79.030 WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley has the authority to vacate roadways and right of ways pursuant to RCW 36.79.030; and WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley has the authority to charge for said vacations in an amount that does not exceed 50% of the full appraised value or for the full appraised value of the area vacated where the street or alley had been part of a dedicated right of way for over twenty five years or if the property was acquired at public expense; and WHEREAS, the City of Spokane Valley wishes to establish a policy by which they determine the amount to be charged the benefited property owners of any such vacation. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY ADOPTS THE FOLLOWING POLICY: SECTION 1. Policy. I. The cost for property received as a result of a vacation initiated by an adjacent property owner shall equal fifty per cent (50%) of the appraised value of the vacated property received. a. The appraised value shall be the same as the value of an equivalent portion of property adjacent to the proposed vacation as established by the Spokane County Assessor at the time the matter is considered by the City Council. b. If the value of adjacent properties differs, then the average of the adjacent property values per square foot will be used. 2. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (1), the applicant shall pay the above- described fee only to the extent that it exceeds the cost charged by the City of Spokane Valley to initiate the vacation process, exclusive of any surveying or engineering costs that may be incurred by the applicant. 3. This charge shall be paid subsequent to council action and prior to recording the vacation with the Spokane County Auditor. 4. The City Council shall reserve the right to deviate from this policy upon the adoption of written findings of fact that demonstrate that the public interest shall be best served by an alternate approach. SECTION 2. This Resolution shall be in full force and effective immediately upon adoption. Resolution 07-009 Street Vacation Charges Page 1 of 2 Adopted this 10th day of July, 2007. i w islasz Diana Wilhite, Mayor ATTEST% hristine Bainbridge, Ci Clerk Approved a�.to Form: 1 Office the City ttorney Resolution 07-009 Street Vacation Charges Page 2 of 2 DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA as of January 7,2016; 1:00 p.m. Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative To: Council& Staff From: City Clerk,by direction of City Manager Re: Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings January 19,2016, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Jan 11] 1. Pavement Preservation Plan Update—Eric Guth (20 minutes) 2. City Hall Update—John Hohman (15 minutes) 3. Police Re-accreditation Report—Chief VanLeuven (10 minutes) 4. Council Training: Open Public Meeting Act,Public Record Act—Cary Driskell, Erik Lamb (25 minutes) 5. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 75 minutes] January 26,2016,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Jan 18] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. First Reading Ordinance 16-001 Vacating 3rd Avenue—Karen Kendall (10 minutes) 3. First Reading Ordinance 16-002 Extending Mining Moratorium—Erik Lamb (15 minutes) 4. First Reading Ordinance 16-003 Mining Moratorium Findings of Fact—Erik Lamb (10 minutes) 5. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 6. Info Only: (a) Dept. Reports; (b)Amended 2016 TIP [*estimated meeting: 45 minutes] (AWC City Action Days, Olympia, Wa. -Jan 27-28) February 2,2016,Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Jan 25] 1. Amended 2016 TIP—Steve Worley (10 minutes) 2. Sidewalks and Development—John Hohman (25 minutes) 3. City Hall Update—John Hohman (15 minutes) 4. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 55 minutes] February 9,2016,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Feb 1] 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Amended 2016 TIP—Steve Worley (10 minutes) 2. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 3. Second Reading Ordinance 16-001 Vacating 3rd Avenue—Karen Kendall (10 minutes) 4. Second Reading Ordinance 16-002 Extending Mining Moratorium—Erik Lamb (10 minutes) 5. Second Reading Ordinance 16-003 Mining Moratorium Findings of Fact—Erik Lamb (10 minutes) 6. Proposed Resolution Amending 2016 TIP—Steve Worley (5 minutes) 7. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: 55 minutes] February 16,2016, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Feb 8] 1. City Hall Update—John Hohman (15 minutes) 2. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] February 23,2016,Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Feb 15] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Mayoral Appointments: Lodging Tax Advisory Committee —Mayor Higgins (10 minutes) 3. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 4. Info Only: Department Reports [*estimated meeting: minutes] Draft Advance Agenda 1/7/2016 11:36:21 AM Page 1 of 2 March 1,2016, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Feb 22] 1. Accomplishments Report—Mike Jackson (45 minutes) 2. City Hall Update—John Hohman (15 minutes) 3. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) March 8, 2016,Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Feb 29] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) March 15,2016,Workshop, 8:30 a.m. -3:30 p.m. (no evening meeting) [due Mon,Mar 7] City Hall Council Chambers. Tentative agenda items include: March 22,2016,Formal Meeting Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Mar 14] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 3. Info Only: Department Reports March 29,2015, Study Session Format,6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Mar 21] 1. City Hall Update—John Hohman (15 minutes) 2. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) April 5,2016, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Mar 28] 1. City Hall Update—John Hohman (15 minutes) 2. Advance Agenda (5 minutes) April 12,2016,Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Apr 4] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) April 19,2016,Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Apr 11] 1. City Hall Council Chambers 2. Advance Agenda April 26,2016,Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon,Apr 18] 1. Consent Agenda(claims,payroll,minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 3. Info Only: Department Reports *time for public or Council comments not included OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS: Avista Electrical Franchise AWC Conference (June 21-24) Blake Street Sidewalk Ordinance 15-023 (expires June 9,2016) SRTMC Agreement(June/July 2016) TIP 2017-2022 (May/June) Uncovered/unsecured loads Draft Advance Agenda 1/7/2016 11:36:21 AM Page 2 of 2