Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout011413 CITY OF PORT TOWNSEND MINUTES OF THE WORKSHOP MEETING OF JANUARY 14, 2013 CALL TO ORDER The Port Townsend City Council met in workshop session the fourteenth day of January 2013, in the Council Chambers at 540 Water Street. Mayor David King called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Councilmembers present at roll call were Kris Nelson, Michelle Sandoval, David King, Catharine Robinson, Robert Gray, Mark Welch, and Deborah Stinson. Staff members present were City Manager David Timmons, Public Services Director Rick Sepler, City Attorney John Watts, Public Works Director Ken Clow, Library Director Theresa Percy, and City Clerk Pam Kolacy. REVIEW OF CITY PARKS FOR POSSIBLE INCLUSION IN A METROPOLITAN PARKS DISTRICT Mr. Timmons stated that the City and County are having ongoing discussions about formation of a metropolitan park district and the implementation of a district contains many challenging aspects. For example, there is a question of how far the City or County can go to bind a future legislative body to our intent? In addition, some discussions must take place regarding the current asset inventory of the City. Inclusion of assets can take many forms such as fee simple ownership, transfer of assets, deeds, funding agreements or interlocal agreements for services. We have asked the City and County parks advisory boards to weigh in on potential inclusion of assets and the City Parks, Recreation and Tree Advisory Board has had an initial meeting to discuss this. Mr. Sepler noted this will be a long and intensive process with many opportunities for discussion, and much public process. He reviewed the process which the Parks, Recreation and Tree Committee went through at their recent meeting and noted that the degree of detail and analysis that will be done in the next few months will be much greater. Mr. Timmons noted that forming an MPD creates a separate legal entity but the legislative body can take varying forms. The option which seems to be preferred is a separate elected board. There are many pros and cons to each of these options and those will need to be examined carefully. Mr. Sepler discussed the process and timelines and provided two documents (Draft MPD Process Map and Schedule and Draft "Framing Policy Initiatives"). He reviewed the draft schedule which includes a joint meeting of the City Council and Board of County Commissioners. City Council Workshop Meeting January 14, 2013 Page 1 of 3 He noted that this draft process map includes participation by a task force and a steering committee. The schedule is predicated on August adoption of a resolution for an item to be included on the November ballot. Council discussion ensued. Regarding staffing, it was noted that County staff will take minutes and keep records for the task force and steering committee. A paid consultant will provide facilitation with the expense covered by Proposition 1 funds. Further explanation was given about the difference between the steering committee and the task force. Mr. Sepler covered a number of entities which will be invited to participate. Concerns were expressed about a quick schedule with no public outreach since last summer and about bringing an outside consultant up to speed in a short time. There was further discussion about whether the MPD would provide funding for capital repairs, such as the pool. The funding from an MPD would be intended to supplant Proposition 1 funds which could then be reallocated for capital projects. Mr. Timmons noted that the money raised if the boundaries were just within the City would be about 1.1 million dollars. The County's intent is to add all of their parks to the district but the City may reserve certain parks. This could create an imbalance or inequity. The benefit to each entity (City and County) must be assessed. By August, it must be pretty clear as to the form the ballot issue will take. The importance of public outreach was discussed further. Philip Morley, County Administrator, noted that geographic limits are a foundation question. At the staff level, bookends have been created and now the citizens need to look at alternatives. The broader extent of the district is East Jefferson County excluding the Coyle Peninsula and Brinnon; the smaller district follows the lines of Fire District 1. He stated the County would like to look at signing over the broadest range of properties and recreation programs. The County's inclination is to give over ownership to the MPD but will go through properties, as the City has, on a property by property basis. Again there are many forms the MPD could take from taking over the properties to raising funds to fund City and County programs. It was noted again that excluding properties would result in the government entity continuing to find a funding source for that property. More discussion followed about legislative intent and how far that can be spelled out on the ballot. The question about whether ownership of the property by the MPD is necessary to receive grants was also posed. Economies of scale were discussed. It was pointed out that if some parks were excluded from the MPD, the entity responsible for the parks would need to own equipment and employ staff to maintain those parks while the same would be true for the MPD with the parks they would control. Multiple entities having responsibility for maintaining parks would override the efficiencies that might be gained by creating the City Council Workshop Meeting January 14, 2013 Page 2 of 3 MPD. Transferring properties with federal or state ties must be looked at carefully. The next step is for staff to return with proposed directions to provide to the steering committee and task force as well as suggestions for membership in these entities. This will occur at a joint meeting in early February. It was agreed that the broader issues that have been raised should be dealt with before considering individual properties. CONTINUATION OF BALLOT OPTION DISCUSSION Mr. Timmons noted that as we move forward on this variety of initiatives, a broad policy framework needs to be established. There should be a consensus about which issues should be addressed and what the timeframe should be prior to getting into details. Council must agree on priority objectives. Mr. Timmons reviewed recent discussions with the School District regarding potential adaptive re-use of the Lincoln Building and how that might be combined in a broader community initiative which would include Mountain View. A joint steering committee of the Council and School Board has been proposed but it must be done in a timely manner. The possibility of putting Mountain View in a form of"community trust" was discussed so that the school district could retain ownership but the City would manage the facility. Cooperation among entities is an exciting notion. It was agreed there are many pressing issues, and Mr. Sepler noted that the meeting on the 28th will examine many of these and their relationships. Other entities were discussed as potential partners including the hospital, YMCA and Maritime Center. Mr. Timmons noted there may be a preview of the utility rate increase by the 28th. ADJOURN There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m. Attest: Pamela Kolacy, MMC City Clerk City Council Workshop Meeting January 14, 2013 Page 3 of 3