20100419m

CITY OF SHORELINE

SHORELINE CITY COUNCIL
SUMMARY MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING

Monday, April 19, 2010 – 6:30 p.m.

Council Chamber - Shoreline City Hall

17500 Midvale Ave North

PRESENT: Mayor McGlashan, Deputy Mayor Hall, Councilmember Eggen, Councilmember Roberts, and Councilmember Tracey

ABSENT: None

1.	CALL TO ORDER

At 6:30 p.m. the meeting was called to order by Mayor McGlashan, who presided.

2.	FLAG SALUTE/ROLL CALL

Mayor McGlashan led the flag salute. Upon roll call by the City Clerk, all Councilmembers were present with the exception of Councilmembers McConnell and Scott.

Upon motion by Councilmember Tracey, seconded by Councilmember Eggen and carried 5-0, Councilmembers McConnell and Scott were excused.

(a) Proclamation of Earth Day

Mayor McGlashan read the proclamation recognizing April 22, 2010 as "Earth Day" in Shoreline. Brian, Megan, Zeth, and Devon Peterka accepted the proclamation and thanked the City for the recognition.

3.	REPORT OF THE CITY MANAGER

Bob Olander, City Manager, provided reports and updates on various City meetings, projects, and events. Joan Herrick, Web Developer, presented the City’s new eComment software which allows residents to comment on the Council agenda items on the website. Mr. Olander noted that the deadline for eComments should be Friday by 12:00 noon. Mr. Olander displayed the new Shoreline Police video which will be shown on the government access channel and website.

4.	COUNCIL REPORTS

Deputy Mayor Hall thanked the Mayor for his appointment to the Enterprise Seattle Board. He noted that the next meeting of the Board will be in Shoreline.

5.	GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT

a) Laethan Wene, Shoreline, encouraged citizens with disabilities to volunteer with the specialized recreation and drop-in programs.

6.	STUDY ITEMS

(a) Providing for Effective Public Comments at Business Meetings and Study Sessions

Eric Bratton, Management Analyst, provided an overview of the proposal to amend Council Rules of Procedure to balance the Council's commitment to public comment with the need for thoughtful deliberation and decorum during elections. The changes, he noted, propose that no person may use public comment to promote or oppose any candidate for public office, and there will be only public comment on agenda items at study sessions. Furthermore, there would be public comment at the beginning of business meetings. He noted that if passed, these policies would go into effect for a six-month trial period.

Mayor McGlashan called for public comment. There was no one wishing to provide comment on this item.

The Council discussed the merits of the proposal. Councilmember Eggen expressed opposition to Resolution No. 298 because it reduces public comment. He stated that the issue of restricting comment on candidates makes some sense due to negative campaigns, but reducing public comment at Council meetings doesn't solve any problems.

Deputy Mayor Hall spoke in support of the proposal, because it allows people to provide comment when it makes a difference and that the proposal clarifies when the Council is seeking meaningful comment. He noted that study sessions also present opportunities to address items raised by the public on specific agenda items.

Councilmember Roberts inquired what the public comment process would be for those items that the Council waives the second readings on. Mr. Olander noted that in the past the Council has waived its rules if it feels more public comment needs to be taken on any item. It was noted that the presiding officer would have the final judgment on whether a speaker was speaking about a campaign.

Councilmember Tracey stated that there was a lot of discussion about this at the retreat, but she hasn’t heard anything from the public on this item.

Mayor McGlashan commented that this legislation will help target the conversations the Council wants to have with the citizens. However, the campaign item is tricky, but he will support the proposal.

Councilmember Roberts wondered if the Council would support a limitation on campaign speech so that it would only apply six months prior to an election. Councilmember Tracey also stated that a limitation can be tied to when a candidate files with the County.

Deputy Mayor Hall felt this could be voted on next week and the suggestion about defining candidates could be inserted into the measure.

Councilmember Roberts confirmed that the six month trial period isn’t included in the Resolution. Mr. Bratton noted that it was a suggestion from the City staff to institute the legislation for a six month trial period.

(b) Amendments to the King County Planning Policies

Steve Cohn, Senior Planner, briefed the Council on this item. He noted that the driving factor behind the amendment is the County growth targets and this takes the City through 2031. He highlighted that the new targets reflect the economic downturn and are consistent with the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) forecast. The City of Shoreline, he noted, is defined as a large city and the City’s target is at the high end for large cities (5,000 households). He said it is an aggressive target, but it can be achieved without changing the Comprehensive Plan.

Mayor McGlashan called for public comment. There was no one wishing to provide comment on this item.

Deputy Mayor Hall noted that that the Growth Management Act (GMA) requires setting growth targets. Mr. Cohn noted that they used a countywide average for homes, based on the PSRC ratio for assumption of how households are divided up in the future. The City of Seattle has Metro service concerns, he noted. Councilmember Eggen clarified that the south end cities have smaller households and shrinking schools.

Responding to Councilmember Eggen, Mr. Cohn noted that the City of Shoreline has a capacity for jobs, housing, and development. However, there must be some redevelopment at some sites. He warned that this is a 20-year plan and things won't happen overnight. He also commented that the City is slightly ahead of job targets and things like zoning and the location of commercial zones allow for a variety of employment opportunities and various businesses.

Deputy Mayor Hall pointed out that the City’s investment in the Aurora Corridor and the Town Center Subarea Plan are two projects aimed at meeting the jobs and growth targets. Additionally, permit streamlining and code amendments also help.

RECESS

At 7:44 p.m. Mayor McGlashan called for a five minute recess. The Council meeting reconvened at 7:49 p.m.

7.	ACTION ITEM: PUBLIC HEARING

(a) Public hearing to receive citizens’ comments on Ordinance No. 571, adopting a Subarea Plan for Point Wells; and Motion to adopt Ordinance No. 571

Deputy Mayor Hall recused himself from this item and left the Council Chamber.

Mr. Tovar briefed Council on this item and said there was a public hearing on January 25 on the Subarea Plan and pre-annexation zoning. He stated that the transportation information has been generated for this subarea and this is the second of two public hearings. He noted that the only new information included in this item is policies dealing with inter-jurisdictional coordination. Additionally, the City staff recommended a change to Subarea Plan PW-13 and a new policy, PW-14.

Mayor McGlashan opened the public hearing. There was no one wishing to provide comment, so there was Council consensus to close the public hearing. Councilmember Roberts moved to adopt Ordinance No. 571, adopting a Subarea Plan for Point Wells including City staff recommended amendments. Councilmember Eggen seconded the motion.

There was Council discussion about the reason for not moving forward with the zoning. It was noted that the City is not proposing moving forward with zoning at this time because it would be much more detailed than these policies and would further complicate the discussions with the stakeholders. Councilmember Eggen expressed concerns about this item because there isn’t any way to resolve it right now. Mr. Olander commented that the City staff and Planning Commission feel that moving forward with general policies would be most productive and that it is important to continue working on zoning regulations. Mr. Tovar explained that the reason to adopt a subarea plan involves traffic information and sets a threshold for traffic impacts on City roadways and it cannot be used as justification if it's not included in the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Tracey clarified that the subarea plan can be amended by the Council in the future. Mr. Tovar added that the subarea plan is a policy document for a specific area of the city, but not detailed like a zoning proposal. It is simply a statement of the City’s preferences and concerns.

A vote was taken on the motion to adopt Ordinance No. 571 adopting a Subarea Plan for Point Wells, including City staff recommended amendments, which carried 4-0.

8.	ADJOURNMENT

At 9:30 p.m. Mayor McGlashan declared the meeting adjourned.

/S/ Scott Passey, City Clerk