Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02042002CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF FEBRUARY 4, 2002 The City Council of the City of Port Townsend met in regular session this fourth day of February 2002, at 6:30 p.m. in the Port Townsend Council Chambers of City Hall, Mayor Kees Kolff presiding. ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilmembers present at roll call were Freida Fenn, Joe Finnie, Kees Kolff, Geoff Masci, Catharine Robinson, and Michelle Sandoval. Mr. Youse was excused due to an employment training commitment. Staff members present were City Manager David Timmons, City Attorney John Watts, BCD Director Jeff Randall, Planner John McDonagh, and City Clerk Pam Kolacy. CHANGES TO THE AGENDA Ms. Fenn requested the addition of a discussion item relating to Governor Locke's proposed State Library funding elimination and its impact on the local library, under "New Business." PRESIDING OFFICER'S REPORT Mayor Kolff corrected a statement from a prior meeting concerning the Civil Service Commission. He noted that the committee meets regularly and thanked the citizen members for their service. The Mayor noted that the appointments to the vacancies on the Planning Commission have been moving more slowly than he anticipated and that personal interviews have not as yet been scheduled since applications are still arriving. A recommendation has been made to the staff that a major effort at recruitment for all citizen advisory boards begin in March with the goal of filling all vacancies and expired terms by May 1. He thanked the Council members for their cooperation in accepting appointments to Inter-agency Committees and noted he still had not been able to speak with Mr. Youse about appointments which have tentatively been assigned to him. Mayor Kolff noted that one of the efforts to establish more efficient and effective communications has been to arrange the Council desks in a configuration that is closer to a U-shape so that members are able to speak face to face. He noted that a section of the railing has been removed so that access to the second exit is provided to conform with fire safety requirements. The railing will be stored with other City Hall historic furniture. City Council Regular Business Meeting Page 1 February 4, 2002 The Mayor encouraged the council to follow the Council Rules already established which state that the reason for absence from a meeting should be stated so all can be supportive of the occasional needs to miss meetings. He then referred to the Roberts Rules portions concerning "decorum of debate" and asked that to this end members remember to refrain from attacking a member's motives; that actions may be condemned but motives and personalities should not be questioned. A trip to the AWC legislative action conference in Olympia was reported; Mayor Kolff noted that Port Townsend will lose about $50,000 in backfill money because of budget cuts but that is a smaller percentage of our budget than some cities who lost 50% of their General Fund. He and City Manager Timmons will visit Port Angeles next week to meet the City Manager and Councilors in that city; the Mayor expressed his interest in cooperating with other jurisdictions further in order to promote the well-being of all citizens of the North Olympic Peninsula. Mayor Kolff announced that an executive session will be held this evening which is anticipated to last about 30 minutes. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT Mr. Timmons noted that the request for extended use of the Pope Marine Park building listed under this section of the agenda has been withdrawn. He noted that the final audit report for 2000 has been received and that the final budget numbers for 2001 are available. He recommended that these two items be referred to the Finance Committee. Motion: Mr. Masci: moved that the year end budget report and the 2000 Audit report be referred to the Finance/Budget Committee for review. Ms. Sandoval seconded. The motion carried unanimously, 6-0, by voice vote. Mr. Finnie suggested that each member of the Finance/Budget Committee arrive at the meeting prepared with at least one idea for a subject they would like to address so that these can be dealt with prior to the intense time of the budget cycle. Mr. Timmons presented an update on the volunteer coordinator. Due to some personal issues, she is scheduled to begin working from the city offices in March rather than February. An e-mail and telephone message account will be provided so the public can have direct access to the office. He called attention to the tentative schedule of items to be addressed at future council meetings which will be included in each packet. Mr. Timmons then thanked John and Mary Widener of Carpets Etc. for the generous donation of wall to wall carpet and installation at the PTTV studio. City Council Regular Business Meeting Page 2 February 4, 2002 COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC (Consent and non-agenda) Steve Hamm: representing the Coalition for Instant Runoff Voting. Mr. Hamm explained the concept in which candidates are chosen based on preference, and voters choose candidates in order of choice, assigning a number to each candidate. If no one candidate receives a majority in the first round of vote counting, those with the lowest number of votes are eliminated but the voters second preference then becomes their first and ballots are recounted. He stated that this enhances the process of majority vote and not just plurality; he added that it eliminates the "spoiler" effect. The legislation would be enacted at a state level and the first hearing is in Olympia on Thursday (HB 2698). He invited any interested Councilors to attend and stated he would be happy to answer any questions. In reply to a question by Ms. Sandoval, he said the method is currently used in Australia, London, Ireland and in Oakland and San Leandro, California. He stated that fifteen states are now considering similar legislation; if passed in Washington it would be the first state in the nation to have enacted this voting system. Ken McBride: noted that based on the Growth Management Act, Port Townsend is the only major Urban Growth Area in the County and stated the city should make the appropriate changes to the Comprehensive Plan that allow us to live up to our obligations on this issue. Lack of proper zoning, proposed high impact fees and high cost of property within the city results in an inability to recruit small manufacturers or small businesses which would increase the tax base and create jobs so people can live in so- called affordable housing we don't have. He said as of now the Council is the architect of the future. Mr. McBride requested an opportunity to address an agenda item since he had to leave the meeting for a prior obligation. Mayor Kolff allowed the comments regarding expansion of the Planning Commission. Mr. McBride then stated that at the joint meeting on January 31, the four members of the Planning Commission present who gave testimony said they did not favor expansion and gave good reasons for their recommendation; members of the Council then proceeded to tell them why they should expand. He noted that it seems the Council has already made up their minds and asked why they requested the opinions of the Planning Commission. He added that Mr. Masci did not agree with other Councilors present but did agree with Planning Commission members on the lack of need to increase the size. He also said Councilor Robinson had brought up a very good point in relation to the "three touch" rule that should apply to allow citizen involvement; he stated that the application of that rule to the issue may have occurred technically but doubts that it occurred properly. He asked if the Council will listen to the majority of opinion or vote with their own pre- planned agenda. CONSENT AGENDA City Council Regular Business Meeting Page 3 February 4, 2002 Motion: Ms. Sandoval moved for approval of the following items on the Consent Agenda. Ms. Fenn seconded. The motion carried unanimously, 6-0, by voice vote. Approval of the following Bills, Claims and Warrants: Vouchers 79671 through 79851 in the amount of $348,031.66 Approval of the following Minutes: Workshop Session of January 14, 2002 Business Meeting of January 22, 2002 Workshop Session of January 28, 2002 Approval of the following Resolution: RESOLUTION 02-002 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND, WASHINGTON DECLARING HUGHES SUPPLY, INC. AS THE SOLE SUPPLIER OF HYDRANTS, METERS AND REPLACEMENT PARTS FOR THE CITY WATER SYSTEM Approval of the following actions: Delegation to the General Government Committee the following legislative work plan issues: Port Townsend Paper Company EMS Services contract; Multi-Modal Functional Plan contract; Demand Management Parking Strategy contract; authorization for wastewater capital improvement projects; affirmation of the Wastewater Facilities Plan. Delegation to the Community Development/Land Use Committee the following legislative work plan items: Point Hudson Master Plan; Northwest Maritime Center; Comprehensive Plan Update. UNFINISHED BUSINESS ORDINANCE 2795 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND AMENDING THE PORT TOWNSEND MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 2.32 PLANNING COMMISSION, SECTION 2.32.010, CREATED, AND SECTION 2.32.020 MEMBERSHIP, AND PROVIDING FOR A PLANNING COMMISSION OF UP TO 11 MEMBERS City Attorney John Watts presented the Ordinance. He addressed the history to date of the issue, noting that the direction from the Council at their January 14 meeting was to obtain input from the Planning Commission. The subject was addressed at the joint workshop meeting on January 31. He also pointed out that two versions of the proposed ordinance are marked in the packet as "A" and "B" versions. In the "A" version, the commission is permanently expanded but in the "B" version, certain terms may be City Council Regular Business Meeting Page 4 February 4, 2002 sunsetted if the Council determines a seven member Commission is adequate following completion of the five-year Comprehensive Plan Amendment process in 2002. Mayor Kolffnoted that acting Planning Commission Chair Jerry Spieckerman has spoken in favor of the expansion. Public comment: Nancy Dorgan: stated that the "three touch" rule has historically included presentations such as mentioned in the City Manager's report. She said she has heard Mr. Masci say that expanding the Planning Commission is a form of political manipulation; she stated that Mr. Masci removed Barbara Marseille from the Historic Preservation Committee and herself from the Non-Motorized Transportation Committee without prior notice. She stated that this is not a typical year and all ordinances that regulate development will be examined; staff has also proposed that site specific rezones be accepted. She said these two issues legitimize the proposal to expand the Planning Commission; that it would also be useful to figure out why so little has been done since 1996 to implement the Plan and to figure out how to get on with as much implementation as possible. She stated that the Planning Commission needs to be expanded to handle the work load but whether to expand to 9 or 11 may depend on staff resources. She referred to a council retreat at Fort Worden where Mr. Masci stated that the Planning Commission should do more long term planning and went on to say that if the seven member Commission has been unable to make that progress to this point, it is doubtful that seven members can do it now. Motion: Ms. Fenn moved to adopt version "B" of Ordinance 2795 amended by striking positions JO and l l from the list of members on page 2. Ms. Sandoval seconded. Ms. Fenn noted she favors permanent expansion to nine as the Commission can break up and accomplish more work. Ms. Sandoval stated that state mandated issues must be dealt with and then the actions which will make the plan A reality rather than a theory. She said it seems like a year may not be long enough. She added that she and Mr. Spieckerman are going to meet to talk about the Comprehensive Plan process and it might make sense to wait on the expansion vote until after that meeting. Mayor Kolff noted that passing the ordinance does not mean expansion is mandated, just that it is an option. Mr. Masci spoke against adoption, noting that pending state legislation may make passage of the ordinance premature or moot as staff planners may be allowed to take a longer view without a mandated deadline. He added that three quarters of the existing Planning Commission have objected to the expansion and that the Council should honor the people who are doing the work as they have a good feel for it. He reminded Council of his suggestion that a citizen committee could be appointed to assist the Planning Commission; he supported comments from Bob Sokol and Scott Walker at the workshop meeting who suggested breaking the plan into chapters and assigning a work group City Council Regular Business Meeting Page 5 February 4, 2002 including a City Councilor and Planning Commissioner on each chapter group. He added that Ms. Dorgan incorrectly characterized his comments at the Fort Worden retreat. He stated that he never supported expansion of the number of people on the Planning Commission but rather supported more long term planning in their scope of work. Ms. Fenn opposed waiting 60 days to see what the state legislature will do; she believes the ordinance gives the Council the ability and flexibility to appoint up to eleven Planning Commission members to tackle the work plan handed to them by the Council. She expressed support for division of the Comprehensive Plan into its elements, with a committee assigned to each. Ms. Robinson expressed concern about the 'three touch" rule which is in place to prevent the Council from acting too quickly and also to provide a chance for the public to become aware of the issue and be able to comment and involve themselves in the process. She added that she was not sure she wanted to delay while the state legislature deliberates and that her inclination now is to support expansion to nine members in view of the information received at the joint workshop meeting about the large number or Comp Plan items which have not been addressed for implementation. She added her wish to comply with the law but also to have the community to receive the benefits of the law. She stated again she would rather not vote tonight but would prefer one more "touch". Ms. Sandoval noted that some items have been implemented and requested that staff present a list of the issues that have received implementation. Mr. Timmons noted that staff does have a proposal that will divide the Plan into specific elements running on their own separate track as well as looking at implementation strategies and site specific requirements. He added that he believes the staff has a pretty good handle on keeping the update process a manageable task within the time frame. Mr. Finnie stated there is no staff recommendation on the expansion. He asked Mr. Timmons what the sense of staff was. Mr. Timmons replied that the staff is neutral on the issue and therefore has not made a recommendation. Mr. Finnie stated that scale is not an argument for the work product of a group to be better. He stated that he does not feel a compelling argument has been made for expanding the Planning Commission. Withdraw motion: Ms. Fenn withdrew her original motion, realizing that a suspension of Council Rules would be necessary to vote on an ordinance at this time. Motion: Mr. Masci moved to suspend Council Rules and that the first reading of Ordinance 2795 be considered the second and the third be by title only. Mr. Finnie seconded The motion carried unanimously, 6-0, by voice vote. City Council Regular Business Meeting Page 6 February 4, 2002 Ms. Kolacy read the title of the Ordinance Motion: Ms. Fenn moved to adopt version "B" of Ordinance 2795 with the amendment to strike positions ! 0 and 11 on page 2, but leaving language under 2. 32. 020 allowing up to eleven members. Ms. Sandoval seconded The motion carried 4-2, with Mr. Finnie and Mr. Masci opposed COUNCIL DISCUSSION OF FORMATION OF BOARDS Mr. Timmons presented the issue, stating that if the council voted for their establishment then each new committee could be assigned to a particular council standing committee which would return a recommendation to the council regarding size, scope of work, sunset, etc. The committees proposed are: Impact Fees Community Reinvestment Merchants Advisory Parking There was no public comment Motion: Mr. Masci moved to establish citizen advisory boards as follows: Impact Fees, Community Reinvestment; Merchants Advisory; Parking. Ms. Robinson seconded. The motion carried unanimously, 6-0, by voice vote. Motion: Ms. Fenn moved to assign Impact Fees, Community Reinvestment, and Merchants Advisory boards to the Community Development/Land Use Committee and the Parking advisory board to the General Government Committee. Mr. Masci seconded. Amendment: Mr. Finnie moved assign the Merchants Advisory board to the Finance Committee rather than Community Development. The amendment was accepted by the maker and seconder of the motion. Vote: the amended motion passed unanimously, 6-0, by voice vote. RECESS The Mayor called for a recess at 7:55 p.m. for the purpose of a break. RECONVENE The meeting was reconvened at 8:00 p.m. CHANGE TO AGENDA ORDER Mayor Kolff requested a change in the agenda to bring item 9D (Ordinance 2796) forward because the applicant is in attendance. There were no objections City Council Regular Business Meeting Page 7 February 4, 2002 ORDINANCE 2796 AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF THE 22ND STREET RIGHT-OF- WAY LYING BETWEEN BLOCK 64 OF THE EISENBEIS ADDITION TO THE CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND AND BLOCK 4 OF THE C.H. PINKS ADDITION TO THE CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND; ESTABLISHING CONDITIONS TO THE STREET VACATION; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFICTIVE DATE Ms. Robinson stated she wished to disclose that she is a personal friend of the proponent and asked to be recused from the matter. Mr. Watts noted that since this is a legislative matter there is not legal need to recuse but if she believes voting on this could be perceived as improper because of a personal relationship, it is appropriate for the Council to allow her to be recused. Ms. Robinson confirmed her wish to be recused and left the Chambers. Ms. Sandoval disclosed prior discussions with the proponent in the past in regard to a real estate matter, but stated she has no personal financial stake in the outcome of the present matter. Staff Planner John McDonagh presented the ordinance, noting that the Council adopted Findings of Fact and Conclusions when preliminary approval of the street vacation was adopted. The conditions of approval have been met in a manner satisfactory to the City and staff recommends final approval of the street vacation and accompanying exchange of property. Motion: Mr. Masci moved to waive Council Rules and accept the first reading as the second, with the third by title only. Ms. Sandoval seconded. The motion carried unanimously, 5-0, by voice vote. Ms. Kolacy read the title of the Ordinance. Motion: Mr. Masci moved for adoption of Ordinance 2796. Ms. Fenn seconded. The motion carried unanimously, 5-0, by roll call vote (Ms. Robinson recused). Ms. Robinson returned to the chambers. MAJOR INDUSTRICAL DEVELOMENT (MID) INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH JEFFERSON COUNTY City Attorney Watts introduced the item. He noted that the city's representatives to the Joint Growth Management Steering Committee have held three public meetings and the documents contained in the packet (Draft Interlocal Agreement, Draft Flow Chart, Draft Document entitled City Comments to UDC 1/30/01) are the result of the their discussions City Council Regular Business Meeting Page 8 February 4, 2002 and work with the staff as directed by the City Council. The matter and documents, following any change from City Council action, are scheduled for discussion at the Joint Growth Management Steering Committee meeting on February 6. Mr. Watts added that he has spoken with County Prosecutor David Alvarez to get technical comments and clarifications but added that there were no comments that would result in substantive changes to any of the document. In response to a question by Mr. Finnie, Mr. Watts noted that the Board of County Commissioners had been scheduled to take action on changes to the UDC, but have put the hearing off pending comments from the City. He added that the City's Comprehensive Plan was amended in November, to state that the City would approve MIDs subject to an interlocal agreement, so coming to this agreement will be consistent with the Comp Plan. If we do not come to agreement, then inconsistency between action by the County and the Comp Plan would create a legal issue. Mr. Finnie then noted that page 2 of 14, line 2 should more properly read "a cooperative process concerning the authorization of the siting..." to be consistent with the state RCW. Public Comment Nancy Dorgan: thanked the Council for giving the public an historic opportunity to attend an open public meeting of the Joint Growth Management Steering Committee representatives. She stated that Jefferson County will be the first county to adopt an MID process. She also stated that predictability of zoning will be a thing of the past in Jefferson County. She has listened to delegates work through the draft with an eye on preventing "mini-MIDs" from siting outside the Urban Growth Area. She stated that revenue sharing is crucial as the City must be able to recover costs from the kinds of impact resulting from a Major Industrial Development. She added that the Interlocal Agreement should be included in the text of the Unified Development Code. She also said it is completely wrong to grant the County Hearing Examiner final authority to make the final decision on siting an MID; she believes it should remain a strictly legislative process through a real BOCC political decision and not a rubber stamp of the Hearing Examiner's decision. If a project is totally wrong for whatever reasons, the Hearing Examiner, operating under quasi judicial rules, would not be able to legally say no to an applicant who met the clear legal requirements but not the fuzzy "feel good" elements. Motion: Ms: Sandoval moved to recommend that the Council of the whole authorize the Council delegates to the Joint Growth Management Steering Committee to proceed to the next meeting with the committee's recommendations as contained in the Interlocal Agreement dated 1/31/02; the flow chart dated 1/31/02, and Draft UDC comments dated 1/30/02. Mr. Masci seconded Ms. Sandoval noted that the delegates did not attempt to reinvent the wheel, but tightened up the interlocal and brought other issues for discussion separately. She added she is comfortable with the result. City Council Regular Business Meeting Page 9 February 4, 2002 Mr. Masci commented that the Interlocal Agreement is very wordy for three simple issues. He listed the following issues with which he has concern: 1) cost of land to be deemed substantially higher if costs within the City exceed the estimated costs within the County by 50% (page 7 of 14: lines 4 & 5) He argued that the cost on a large project could be a very substantial sum, that the result will be a ping pong match based on land cost criteria. He stated that land cost should be determined by the project proponent; that this may result in fixing in stone real estate costs and will cast disparity and contribute to rising costs in the county as well as random escalation of real estate prices. 2) 9 of 14: eliminate (d) regarding termination of approval to projects not built according to an approved phasing schedule): noted that this is unrealistic and constraining; if left in, would like language stating the City would prefer an extension process be put in place rather than nullifying the permit completely. He stated that the problem we are dealing with is that this is a major development, a project so huge no one has the appropriate infrastructure, so the project could be stand-along. Such a company may have phasing problems due to cash flow. He stated this is unrealistic and would discourage development. 3) page 10 of 14, lines 18, 19, 24 and 25 regarding the designation of the Western Growth Management Hearings Board as the entity to appoint a mediator. Stated he would prefer the American Arbitration Association be used. 4) page 11 of 14: Regarding a decision by an arbitrator, he suggested language stating that the arbitrator's decision must be consistent with state law, county wide planning policies, the interlocal agreement, County UDC and City code. He stated that if there is an MID application, there will almost certainly be a third party appeal and it may get to the Growth Management Hearings Board soon enough so why would we have them pick a mediator; perhaps Jefferson County Superior Court? Ms. Sandoval replied to the percentage of cost differential, that the item had been brought up by the County Planning Commission although the Board of County Commissioners decided not to put a specific number on it. In regard to phasing: the schedule is developed by the County in the Development Agreement. She stated the City would not be proposing its own time frame, but that the time will be negotiated between the county and the applicant. Regarding mediation, she stated the county has chosen to do the process with the Hearings Examiner, which is out of the city's purview. One of our issues is clarification of the development agreement itself; she added that it seems appropriate that there is mediation and discussion, and that the mediator be taken out of the realm of the political world. City Council Regular Business Meeting Page 10 February 4, 2002 Mr. Masci suggested that the American Arbitration Association rather than the Growth Management Hearings Board for a mediator be appointed by agreement of both parties. Ms. Sandoval stated that the work on the agreement should be concentrated on working with something the City has purview over, not just attempting to direct the County on their own process. Ms. Fenn noted that the 50% differential between city and county property recommendation came from staff and added that the committee did try to address issues that had to do with city/county interaction, not applicant/county issues. She stated that she does not believe cost is a criteria under state law and may actually be giving ground on siting since the state regulations provide that if land is available in the city the development must go there; adding the 50% cost differential actually adds some flexibility for the proponent. She also added in regard to the discussion of whether an interlocal agreement must be in place, that Police 9.3 of the County-Wide Planning Policies states that issues of tax revenues sharing, etc. will be resolved through development of interlocal agreements. She stated that the case for necessity of an interlocal agreement can be based on the Comp Plan and the CWPP. Mayor Kolff suggested adding to the "laundry list" those items which have been identified as not having consensus of the entire Council. It was agreed to include: 4. project phasing 5. mediation 6. differential in costs between county and city (infrastructure and land) Mr. Finnie noted that the MID process has three parties, the City, County and proponent. He agrees with the need to protect the City but the party who will make it all work is the customer and the customer has not been talked about much tonight. He added that the interlocal contains language that can now give absolute guidance to an applicant and that has been sadly lacking. He added that it is not his nor the Council's job to script the County Commissioners on how to deal with the document and for that reason he will not comment further. He added that from his review, he believes the new members of the committee are enthusiastic but he has concerns that their land use vision is such that we have crafted a document that could be rejected by the Commissioners and he doesn't want that to happen because then the only winners are those who use the bureaucratic process to block any kind of development. He suggested that the council accept the document and authorize the three members to represent the City on it. However, he proposed an amendment to the original motion. Amendment: Mr. Finnie proposed the addition of the following text to the original motion: Notwithstanding the text of the proposal, the city representatives understand and agree that they will negotiate in good faith and where necessary seek and agree to compromise in order to reach an agreement with the BOCC on the terms and conditions of the interlocal agreement. The amendment was accepted as a friendly amendment. City Council Regular Business Meeting Page 11 February 4, 2002 Amendment: Mr. Masci proposed to add language under (E)(3)(B) Alternative Dispute Resolution, final sentence to read "The arbitrator's ruling(s) shall be consistent with state laws, this Interlocal Agreement, County-wide Planning Policies, and City code." The amendment was accepted as a friendly amendment. Vote: the main motion as amended carried unanimously, 6-0, by voice vote. STATE LIBRARY FUNDING Ms. Fenn stated that she requested this item be discussed as Governor Locke is proposing to eliminate funding for the Washington State Library which acts as a conduit for funding state and local libraries. She referred to information received from the Port Townsend Library Director and a County Library representative detailing the impacts to the Port Townsend and Jefferson County Libraries. Motion: Mr. Masci moved to authorize the Mayor to write a letter to the Governor, requesting maintenance of library funding. Ms. Fenn seconded The motion carried unanimously, 6-0, by voice vote. EXECUTIVE SESSION At 9:40, Mayor Kolff announced that the Council would go into Executive Session to discuss a real estate transaction. He stated the session would last about 30 minutes and that no action was anticipated when the council reconvenes. RECONVENE The Council reconvened at 10:11 p.m. ADJOURN There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:12 p.m. Attest: Pamela Kolacy, CMC City Clerk City Council Regular Business Meeting Page 12 February 4, 2002