CITY OF SHORELINE
SHORELINE CITY COUNCIL
Monday, November 16, 2015 Conference Room 303 - Shoreline City Hall
5:45 p.m. 17500 Midvale Avenue North
PRESENT:
Mayor Winstead, Deputy Mayor Eggen, Councilmembers
McGlashan, Hall, McConnell, Salomon, and Roberts
ABSENT: None
STAFF: Debbie Tarry, City Manager; John Norris, Assistant City Manager; Rachael Markle, Planning & Community Development Director; Paul Cohen, Planning Manager; Steve Szafran, Senior Planner; and Bonita Roznos, Deputy City Clerk
GUESTS: Planning Commission: Chair Keith Scully, Vice-Chair Easton Craft, Commissioners David Maul, William Montero, Donna Moss Thomas, Laura Mork, and Jack Malek (Arrived at 6:01 p.m.)
At 5:50 p.m., the meeting was called to order by Mayor Winstead.
Mayor Winstead welcomed members of the Planning Commission and thanked them for their attendance at the meeting.
Rachael Markle, Planning & Community Development Director, explained that the meeting agenda was developed based on Council Goals, the 2016 City Workplan, and emerging issues.
145th Subarea Plan and Code Implementations
Ms. Markle said that the Planning Department is gearing up to resume planning for the 145th Street Station Subarea. She reviewed the process to date, and the timeline for a recommendation of a preferred alternative to study for the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). She asked for Council’s directions on the next steps.
A discussion ensued on how the 145th Street Corridor Study would impact the FEIS. Commissioners questioned if further review by the Planning Commission is necessary and commented on the importance of public input. Ms. Tarry explained that population growth assumptions and increased traffic volume were included in the Draft EIS. She shared that the 145th Corridor Study will assist in determining levels of service standards and mitigations. Ms. Markle added that the result of the Study will also be provided to the consultant that performed the traffic analysis for the EIS to evaluate.
There was a consensus to continue with the current timeline to provide predictability to residents and to prepare for the construction of the Stations beginning in two years. Ms. Markle suggested having a review meeting of the process and the work that has been completed to date prior to scheduling items for action.
Enhance Permit Process
Ms. Markle shared that the Development Code Amendments include improvements in the permitting process and that a permit software system has been requested in the 2016 Proposed Budget. She commented on the online-permit feature and said it will save time and create predictability. She asked for feedback on improving the permit process.
Commissioner Malek commented that builders communicated to him that the Express Permit Process takes too long. Commissioner Craft commented on the need to have more predictability in the process. Paul Cohen, Planning Manager, commented that builders make assumptions regarding the time it takes to process a permit, and explained that staff works to provide realistic timelines.
Deputy Mayor Eggen shared that a Permit Technician positon and a permit software system have been proposed in the 2016 Budget and will help improve the process.
Commissioner Malek commented that a pre-application on-line system is a great service to offer the public and said he would like to see it sooner rather than later.
Public Participation Plan
A discussion ensued about the merits of having a 30 day waiting period before adopting an ordinance that has been substantively changed by the Council after a Planning Commission recommendation.
Commissioners commented that a 30 day waiting period will provide additional public input after substantive changes are made by the Council. There was consensus among Councilmembers that they have already received public input and the input is considered in the deliberative process. Commissioners and Councilmembers agreed that codifying a process to address substantive changes will only serve to slow down and hinder the process.
Ms. Markle suggested that staff be responsible for alerting the Planning Commissioners to substantive changes. John Norris, Assistant City Manager, added that the City Attorney’s Office will also provide clarification of substantive changes.
Areas of Interest to the Planning Commission
Miss Tarry provided a synopsis of how items are identified as Council Goals and Priorities and then placed on the City’s Workplan as action steps.
Commissioner Montero said he would like to have discussions regarding micro housing and Commissioner Malek said he would like to revisit Cottage housing. Councilmember Salomon commented that Cottage Housing could be positive for Shoreline.
Councilmembers Roberts stated that he would like parking for home-based business addressed. Councilmember Hall added that a broader view of parking should be looked at in preparation for the Light Rail Stations. Commissioner Moss stated that she would also like to discuss multi-family dwelling parking allocations.
Councilmember Salomon commented on the importance on moving forward with Parks and Park Impact Fees. Commissioner Moss asked that the Planning Commission’s role be identified in the process for open space planning. Mayor Winstead suggested that the Parks Board and the Planning Commission work together on this effort, and Councilmember Roberts suggested that they have a joint meeting. Ms. Tarry commented that the Parks and Open Space Master Plan is on the 2016 Workplan. Councilmember Hall pointed out that there is strong language in the 185th Street Station Subarea Plan for no net loss in parks; but rather an increase in the number of parks. Councilmember McConnell added that with an increase in density that the Plan should include an increase in parks, and shared that the Park Plan must be implemented.
Commissioner Malek commented that Point Wells should remain on the Agenda as an item of interest. Mayor Winstead responded that Point Wells will continue to be a top priority for the City.
Commissioner Mork stated she would like to move forward with continuing to improve communications.
Upcoming Expiration of Commission Terms
Mayor Winstead congratulated Commissioner Scully on being elected to the City Council.
A discussion ensued regarding Commissioner’ terms that are set to expire March 2016 and the impact it will have on the 2016 Planning Commission Workplan. It was agreed that recruiting for the positons should begin earlier. It was recommended that successful candidates be notified about the possibility of assuming the position earlier to fill the position being vacated by Commissioner Scully. Commissioner Moss recommended having a discussion regarding the merits of having an alternate Commissioner that can attend meetings, and in the case of a vacancy, assume the position.
Steve Szafran, Senior Planner, shared that the Planning Commission recruitment announcement will be posted in December, and said he has already received two applications.
At 6:53 p.m. the meeting was adjourned.
/S/ Bonita Roznos, Deputy City Clerk
CITY OF SHORELINE
SHORELINE CITY COUNCIL
SUMMARY MINUTES OF BUSINESS MEETING
Monday, November 16, 2015 Council Chambers - Shoreline City Hall
7:00 p.m. 17500 Midvale Avenue North
PRESENT: Mayor Winstead, Deputy Mayor Eggen,
Councilmembers McGlashan, Hall, McConnell, Salomon, and Roberts
ABSENT: None
1. CALL TO ORDER
At 7:00 p.m., the meeting was called to order by Mayor Winstead, who presided.
2. FLAG SALUTE/ROLL CALL
Mayor Winstead led the flag salute.
Mayor Winstead called for a moment of silence to acknowledge les habitants de la France that lost their life in the brutal terrorist attacks, and to honor people around the world that have been victims of terrorist attacks.
Upon roll call by the City Clerk, all Councilmembers were present.
3. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER
Debbie Tarry, City Manager, provided reports and updates on various City meetings, projects and events.
4. COUNCIL REPORTS
There were no Council Reports.
5. PUBLIC COMMENT
Ginny Scantlebury, Shoreline resident, commented on an article in the Currents Newsletter that recognized the City of Shoreline for receiving awards for their efforts in the 185th Street Station Subarea Planning. She read an excerpt from the article. She commented that a majority of Councilmembers adopted the Plan despite objections from the Community and the lack of capital facilities planning in the Environmental Impact Statement. She commented that the King County Growth Management Hearing Board is currently reviewing a lawsuit to see if the City has adequate funding to support the Plan.
Phyllis Johnson, Ronald United Methodist Church Building Chair, spoke in favor of the Fee Waiver for Affordable Housing and the Transportation Impact Fee Waiver Program for Human Services Agencies. She shared that every dollar that is saved by these Agencies will go into saving lives and doing good for homeless students and neighbors in need.
Janet Way, Shoreline Preservation Society, commented on the Shoreline City Council Special Joint Meeting with the Planning Commission. She expressed concern with the wording on the Agenda and pointed out that it should have conveyed that the 145th Subarea Plan and Code Implementation was a discussion about the process and not about implementation since a plan has not been approved. She requested that City Council and Planning Commission Joint Meetings be held in the Council Chambers and televised so the public can watch. She commented on attending a neighborhood meeting regarding public safety at Lower Paramount Park. She shared that a Shoreline Police Officer and Eric Friedli, Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Services Director were in attendance and that they offered their assistance to address safety issues, which she appreciates.
6. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
The agenda was approved by unanimous consent.
7. CONSENT CALENDAR
Upon motion by Deputy Mayor Eggen, seconded by Councilmember McConnell and unanimously carried, 7-0, the following Consent Calendar items were approved:
(a) Minutes of Special Meeting of October 26, 2015 and Minutes of Business
Meeting of October 19, 2015
(b) Approval of Contracts for Property Tax Exemptions (PTE)
8. STUDY ITEMS
(a) Final Discussion of the Proposed 2016 Budget and 2016-2021 CIP
Sara Lane, Administrative Services Director, joined by Rick Kirkwood, Senior Budget Analyst, presented the report. Ms. Lane presented the 2016 Fund Summary and said that the Budget is scheduled for adoption on November 23, 2015. She pointed out that there is a $1.5 million increase in the Budget from what was originally presented to Council. She explained that the increase includes the Transportation Benefit District Assumption, Class and Compensation adjustments, and funding for two grants. She shared that the Fund Summary does not include any of the proposed amendments.
Ms. Lane presented the following Budget Amendment Proposals:
Mayor Winstead inquired if there is a statutory requirement for microfilming payroll records, and asked about best practices. Councilmember McGlashan asked what the cost would be if microfilming was postponed for another year. Councilmember Salomon asked if microfilming is mandated by State law. Ms. Lane explained that microfilming was not completed last year and shared that the City would be at risk if the original documents were destroyed. She said microfilming is mandated by State law, and the best practice would be to complete it as soon as possible but it could be completed next year. She shared that ongoing funds were set aside for microfilming in 2016.
Deputy Mayor Eggen commented on the need for the City to help the Human Services Community because they are experiencing multiple funding reductions. He shared why he believes the City should provide additional funding for identified Hopelink programs, replace the Senior Center’s grant, and cover the Center’s catering revenue gap. He commented that he supports Option 2, and said he does not support cutting funds for the Promotion of Shoreline. He encouraged Council to take a good look at Human Services funding in the coming year.
Councilmember McConnell urged Council to support one of the options to provide additional funding to the Human Services Agencies for 2016. She stated that there are a lot of seniors that need more assistance, and encouraged Council to have a more robust discussion regarding Human Services.
Councilmember Salomon stated that he supports Option 1. He spoke about the importance of providing additional funding for Human Services, and shared a story about receiving a letter from a parent residing in the Ballinger Apartments explaining how Center for Human Services funding helps to pay for computers that are helping her children to succeed in school. He commented that this type of funding assistance takes priority over microfilming payroll records and a Public Works Consultant Contract.
Councilmember Roberts commented on having a larger discussion about Human Services. He asked if the Human Services Study adopted by Council in 2010 will be updated in 2019. He acknowledged the concerns of fulfilling one-time funding requests. He said the Budget should be reviewed holistically and not piece by piece, and that ultimately there needs to be a balanced budget. Ms. Tarry responded that there is not a mandate to update the Human Services Study but she recognizes the importance of identifying Human Services priorities. She advised that a Council discussion on Human Services funding is scheduled to take place in March/April 2016.
Mayor Winstead said that agencies will continue to request funding from the City to fill their budget gaps and that decisions will need to be made by the Council. She said she supports funding the Center for Human Services Chrome Books, the Hopelink programs, and the Senior Center’s grant fund replacement. She shared that she supports eliminating microfilming this year but said she is not in favor of getting rid of the allocation for the Promotion of Shoreline. She also supports having a larger discussion on Human Services funding and reiterated the need for a balanced budget.
Councilmember McGlashan expressed concern about providing Human Services agencies one-time funding. He asked about the budget allocation for the Public Works Consultant. He pointed out that the Human Services Task Force goes through a process to determine the organizations that the City will fund and the amounts. He pointed out the City only heard from four organizations, and asked if it is fair to those organizations that have not approached Council about additional funding. He said he supports having a larger discussion on Human Services funding. Ms. Lane responded that the scope of work for the Public Works Consultant has not been designated, but could include the 145th Street Corridor Study, Point Wells, and other issues that arise requiring a specific expertise. Ms. Tarry shared that the Human Services Task Force recommends a two year funding allocation which is then adopted by the City Council. She said the second year of that funding will end in 2016.
Mayor Winstead asked clarifying questions about the Property Tax Equalization (PTE)
Fund. Ms. Lane explained that the PTE has no funding requirements and said
funds were programmed to be fully expended by this year. She stated it is
currently scheduled to be used in 2018 and that it can also fund the Human
Services proposals.
Councilmember Salomon commented on the Promotion of Shoreline project and asked if funding is reduced, would it prevent the City from implementing the strategies. He asked if there are carryover funds from the $200,000 allocated in 2015. Ms. Tarry responded that there are carryover funds, and she said that reducing the allocation by $11,850 will allow the City to proceed with plans for the Promotion of Shoreline.
Councilmember McConnell commented that she supports the additional funding requests for the four Human Services agencies represented, and relayed that Rob Beem, Community Services Manager, has been in contact with the other agencies.
Ms. Tarry said that staff will provide all five budget amendments related to Human Services for Council’s consideration.
Ms. Lane continued presenting the 2016 Proposed Budget Amendments.
o Amendment 6: Add $30,000 for a Tolling Study focused on Richmond Beach Road proposed by Councilmember Roberts.
Councilmember Roberts recalled that Council has been considering tolling for a while. He suggested that tolling is the next step to explore options for infrastructure funding and commented that the Tolling Study would study high level issues. He said it is important to understand tolling authority, and that it would provide information on whether the Study should be focused on one corridor or on a larger scope.
Deputy Mayor Eggen concurred with Councilmember Roberts and said the Study will provide an opportunity to better understand revenue options to deal with costs associated with Point Wells. He commented that tolling will provide revenue to fix roads damaged by people from the Point Wells Development and people driving from outside of Shoreline. He recommended that the Study focus on Richmond Beach Road.
Councilmember Salomon said the City should move forward with the Tolling Study to help understand additional revenue options. He shared that the Study could potentially pay for itself. He asked if the Study could be completed by City staff, and how staff estimated it would cost $30,000. Ms. Lane replied that completing the study in-house impacts the Department’s Work Plan and that outside expertise is needed. Ms. Tarry commented that staff provided Council with high level research on tolling back in February and now outside expertise is needed to proceed further.
Mayor Winstead expressed concern that a revenue source has not been identified to support the $30,000 expenditure.
Councilmember McGlashan asked if the Study will be specific to Richmond Beach Road or include the entire City. He said he does not know if he can support expending that amount of money to conduct a study on one road.
Randy Witt, Public Works Director, commented that $30,000 is what staff will use to conduct the Study and that the work will include what can be supported by that amount. Ms. Tarry added that State law has provided the authority for the implementation of tolling and explained that additional questions need to be answered such as how to set toll rates, and identifying the nexus between the tolling collected and what the funds can be used for.
Councilmember Salomon stated that he is first interested in studying tolling on Richmond Beach Road moving into Snohomish County, and if funds allow, opening it up to other parts of the City.
Councilmember McConnell agreed with Councilmember Salomon in focusing the Study on tolling the Richmond Beach Road point of entry into Shoreline to help fund roads impacted by the Point Wells Development, and then learning what other roads are eligible for tolling.
o Amendment 7: Amend the City of Shoreline Fee Schedule 3.01.200(B) Regulatory License Fee to include a fee for cannabis retail facilities for $647.25 per year plus additional $12.50 fee for background checks for each operator proposed by Councilmember Roberts
Councilmember Roberts said this amendment will create equity between the Collective Gardens and Retail Stores. Ms. Lane commented that additional discussion is needed to justify implementing additional fees and shared that Retail Stores will be regulated by the Liquor and Cannabis Board.
o Amendment 8: Increase the Curb Ramp, Gutter and Sidewalk Maintenance Program by $195,00 funded from additional $5 Transportation Benefit District Fee by Councilmember Roberts
Councilmember Roberts commented that this amendment will allow the City to repair sidewalks and provide funding for pedestrian infrastructure.
Deputy Mayor Eggen commented that an Ordinance and public participation is required to increase fees. He asked if the Budget can still be adopted pending these actions. He talked about the need to improve handicap mobility, but said he is not sure he can support the amendment without input from the public. Ms. Lane stated that this amendment does not have to be adopted in the Proposed Budget and explained that it can come back for Council’s consideration as a 2016 Budget Amendment.
Councilmember Hall shared that he appreciates this idea for funding sidewalks but stated that a determination needs to be made on how much funds are needed. He suggested having a larger discussion on what to do to improve City sidewalks, how to fund them, and on how to engage the Community in the discussion. He asked if sidewalk funding can be done through debt services.
Councilmember Salomon concurred, and Councilmember McConnell said she would also like to have public input before increasing vehicle license fees by $5.
Mayor Winstead said she would like to take a more comprehensive approach to funding sidewalks, have input from public, and determine how much money is needed.
Councilmember Roberts urged Council not to delay the maintenance of sidewalk in need of repair. He said $5 is a small amount to invest in the Community to improve sidewalks.
Councilmember McGlashan commented that the majority of the streets in Shoreline do not have sidewalks. He asked if the vehicle license fee were to increase by $20 could all the funds be used to pay for sidewalks. He said he would like to find out from the Community if they want to provide this level of support for sidewalks.
o Amendment 9: Eliminate the Business and Occupation Tax Evaluation and reduce the proposed professional services budget in the Administrative Services Department by $20,000 proposed by Councilmember Roberts
Councilmember Roberts expressed concern about imposing an additional tax on sole proprietors and business owners. He said the City should engage the business community regarding the topic. He added that he does not see the need to expend $20,000 to pay for a consultant.
Councilmember Hall asked what $20,000 would pay for. Ms. Lane responded that the funds are for a consultant to engage the business owners. Councilmember Hall said he believes we should move forward and engage the business Community. Councilmember McConnell concurred and said she does not want to delay this for another year.
Councilmember Salomon said he supports the Amendment and that the Financial Sustainability Study has this listed as a revenue option to implement after other strategies have been used. He said he wants to look into cutting costs and other ways to increase revenue, like economic development and transportation impact fees.
Deputy Mayor Eggen commented that he expected the Study to provide an understanding of the impact the tax will have on businesses, rather than on how to implement a Business & Occupation Tax.
Mayor Winstead stated that she supports moving forward with the Study, and said just because it is studied that it does not mean it will be implemented, but rather it will provide information on how to proceed.
o Amendment 10: Reduce the proposed professional services budget for on-call Consultant Services in the Public Works Department by $20,000 (50K to 30K) proposed by Councilmember Roberts
Councilmember Roberts commented that this amendment was to assist in providing offsetting reductions to support additional funding for Human Services.
o Amendment 11: Limit the term of the new 1.0 FTE Technical Assistant in Planning & Community Development to two years proposed by Councilmember Roberts
Councilmember Roberts commented that he does not necessarily support this amendment and asked about the Department adding staff and not seeing improved efficiencies in permit turnaround times. He asked if improved efficiencies will be achieved in 2017. Ms. Lane commented on the positions’ long learning curve, reassignment of duties, and getting a staff member prepared for the position. She said she anticipates improved efficiencies in 2017. Ms. Tarry commented on the increase in high level permit activity and said staff is identifying opportunities to improve turnaround time. She said the City is also acquiring a permit software system that will provide better tracking of information.
Councilmember Hall said he hopes to see efficiency data presented to Council on a more regular basis.
Deputy Mayor Eggen said it is troubling when you hire someone new and performance measures get worse, and urged Council to track this closely.
Mayor Winstead commented that she is unsure how you attract a good candidate for a limited job term and said she will not be supporting this amendment.
o Eliminate the drafting of a vegetation management plan regulations and reducing the proposed professional services budget in the Planning & Community Development budget by $48,327 proposed by Councilmember Roberts
Councilmember Roberts explained the driving force for this amendment is to reduce expenditures but also it is unclear whether there would still be a need for a Vegetation Management Plan if Council were to adopt Planning Commission’s recommendation (in the Critical Area Ordinance) to allow development/alteration in steep slope areas.
Councilmember Hall recalled that this issue has been around for over a decade. He said there are large tracks of land in Shoreline where the current regulations do not work well. While it is more logical and reasonable to take a comprehensive look at how to manage these tracks, when he looks at the Planning & Community Development Department’s overall Work Plan, he does not see this as a priority item to get done in 2016. He recommended further discussion on Vegetation Management after the Critical Area Ordinance discussions are complete and the Department’s Work Plan has been revisited.
Councilmember Salomon asked what the goals of a Vegetation Management Plan are. Margaret King, City Attorney, explained the Plan will provide standards and guidelines for a person to do a vegetation management plan that adheres to the Shoreline Municipal Code. She said it would allow for a holistic approach on how to manage a large area instead of applying for permits on a case by case basis.
Councilmember McConnell commented on why she will not be supporting this amendment. She said that it has been on the Work Plan and she believes that staff wants to move forward with it. Councilmember McGlashan asked if the Vegetation Management Plan will set up regulations for specific communities. Ms. King responded in the affirmative.
Ms. Lane presented the following Other Proposed Amendments:
o Amend fee schedule moving "Aquatics and general recreation program fees are based upon market rate" to a proper section in the fee schedule. (Possibly adding a [3] "Program Fees")
o Recommendation to reduce Aurora Banners to $29,808
Ms. Lane said the first Amendment is an administrative change that will be included in the 2016 Fee Schedule. She said the second Amendment has already been included in the Proposed Budget and therefore an amendment is not required.
Mayor Winstead advised Councilmembers to provide additional amendments or questions to staff, and said the 2016 Proposed Budget and 2016-2021 CIP is scheduled to be adopted on November 23, 2015.
(b) Discussion of Ord. No. 731 - Development Code Amendments
Steve Szafran, Senior
Planner, explained that the purpose of tonight’s meeting is to introduce the
2015 Development Code Amendments, discuss and answer Council’s questions, hear
public testimony, and develop a list of Amendments to be adopted on December 7,
2015. He shared that there are 34 City staff general Proposed Amendments and
one privately-initiated Amendment. He presented the following Substantive Amendments
and provided descriptions of each:
o 20.20.034 – New definition for multi-modal access improvements
o SMC 20.30.100 – Allows the Director to waive permit fees for affordable housing
o SMC 20.40.230 – Allows a permit fee waiver for affordable housing
o SMC 20.40.235 – Allows a permit fee waiver for affordable housing in the MUR zones
o SMC 20.30.340 – Establishes clear requirements for processing Comprehensive Plan Amendments
o SMC 20.30.355 – Adds additional decision criteria for Development Agreements
o SMC 20.30.380 – Raises the number of lots in a short plat from four to nine
o SMC 20.50.020 – Allow Lots under the minimum size for the zone
o SMC 20.50.020(C) – Adds a warning to potential developers that dedications may result in less density/building area
o SMC 20.50.400 – Revises criteria for a reduction to minimum parking standards
o SMC 20.60.140 (3) – Adds a level-of-service standard for pedestrians and bicycles
o SMC 20.100.020 – Adds new section for all Community Renewal Area related development standards and establishes transition area requirements for structures in the CRA
Mr. Szafran shared the public comments received on the proposals and reviewed the next steps in the process. He said Council Adoption for Development Code Amendments is scheduled for December 7, 2015.
Councilmember Hall asked staff to provide an update on their conversations with Sound Transit related to access improvements to light rail stations. Rachael Markle, Planning & Community Development Director commented that the City is currently working with Sound Transit and has presented proposed amendments to them that have already gone through the Planning Commission process. She shared that Sound Transit has requested addition time to address multimodal access and parking management regulations.
Councilmember Hall said he would like to hold off on adopting a definition for “Multimodal Facility” until Council sees a package of regulations that go along with it. He requested an update on how staff is proceeding with Sound Transit on the Term Sheet and getting them to provide improvements wanted by the Community. He shared that he prefers to get results for access improvements from Sound Transit through collaboration but supports the regulations being in place. Ms. Markle commented that Sound Transit also requested that the City delay adoption of SMC 20.50.240 that addresses supplying utility to High Capacity Centers and Stations.
Deputy Mayor Eggen asked for clarification on who is eligible for the affordable housing fee waiver. He said he supports waiving fees for very low income housing but not for the 70% and 80% income level. He asked who ultimately pays the fee and shared that the costs should not be shifted to Shoreline residents. Mr. Szafran responded that the fee waiver applies to those not exceeding 60% of King County median income.
Councilmember Roberts commented on the affordable housing fee waiver and expressed concern about developers’ reneging on their obligation to provide affordable housing. He asked what the City’s recourse would be in this situation. Ms. Markle explained that the affordability housing waiver requires a developer to enter into a contractual agreement and said if the developer does not provide the specified amount of affordable housing that it would be a breach of contract that is recorded on the title deed.
Councilmember Roberts discussed identification requirements for Tent City residents, questioned the meaning of “valid identification”, and asked how strongly the Sheriff’s Office wants a valid identification.
Councilmember Salomon stated he supports the Amendment to have identification to exclude sex offenders and people with warrants and to assist in the protection of children in the encampments. He commented that the number one concern is to protect the Community. He pointed out that the current language will exclude some people who do not have identification.
Mayor Winstead asked if the
word “valid” is required by law. She shared that she does not want to exclude
those that need to be in the encampments because they do not have a valid
identification, and shared that the number one priority is to protect the
Community. Ms. Tarry responded that the requirement calls for government issued
identification, and said staff can research to see if there is alternative
language that can be used. She also advised that the Host of Tent City agreed
to this type of language, and explained that identification assists the Host
when background checks have to be performed.
Deputy Mayor Eggen asked if the process can be expedited for someone who has previously lived in a homeless encampment. Mayor Winstead asked if a background check is done each time a person moves to a new encampment. Ms. King shared that a Host applicant must provide the City a list of camp residents, and explained that it is acceptable for them to provide the required information from a previous application. Ms. Tarry explained that the process supports the ability to perform a background check each time a person enters a new encampment.
Ms. Tarry confirmed that there is consensus among Councilmembers to move forward with all the Proposed Amendments with the exception of the Sound Transit Amendments identified in tonight’s discussion and the Transitional Encampment Amendment.
Councilmember Salomon commented about having questions regarding the change to home-based businesses, specifically, the last sentence of the clause, and asked that an economic perspective be provided.
10. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Personnel RCW 42.30.110(1)(g)
At 9:25 p.m. Mayor Winstead announced a seven minute recess and said that the Council Meeting will reconvene at 9:32 p.m. into an Executive Session for a period of 30 minutes as authorized by RCW 42.30.110(1)(g) to review the performance of a public employee. At 10:02 p.m. , Mayor Winstead emerged from the conference room and announced a 30 minute extension to the Executive Session. At 10:33 p.m. the Executive Session concluded.
At 10:33 p.m., Mayor Winstead declared the meeting adjourned.
/S/ Jessica Simulcik Smith, City Clerk