SUMMARY MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING

The purpose of these minutes is to capture a high-level summary of Council’s discussion and action. This is not a verbatim transcript. Meeting video and audio is available on the City’s website.

Monday, April 4, 2022 Held Remotely via Zoom

7:00 p.m.

PRESENT: Mayor Scully, Deputy Mayor Robertson, Councilmembers Mork, Roberts, Pobee, and Ramsdell

ABSENT: Councilmember McConnell

1. CALL TO ORDER

At 7:00 p.m., the meeting was called to order by Mayor Scully who presided.

2. ROLL CALL

Upon roll call by the City Clerk, all Councilmembers were present except for Councilmember McConnell.

Deputy Mayor Robertson moved to excuse Councilmember McConnell for personal reasons. The motion was approved by unanimous consent.

(a) Proclamation of Sexual Assault Awareness Month

Mayor Scully announced the proclamation of Sexual Assault Awareness Month in Shoreline.

3. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

The agenda was approved by unanimous consent.

4. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER

Debbie Tarry, City Manager, reported on various City meetings, projects, and events.

5. COUNCIL REPORTS

Councilmember Pobee reported his attendance at a meeting of the SeaShore Transportation Forum and said their biggest updates were related to Orca cards, project funding, and Highway 99.

6. PUBLIC COMMENT

The Council heard comments from the public from approximately 7:05 p.m. to 7:26 p.m. Written comments were also submitted to Council prior to the meeting and are available on the City’s website.

Melody Fosmore, Shoreline resident and member of the Tree Preservation Code Team (TPCT), stated that she found in the tree removal template in the 2021 Engineering Development Manual that lists recommendations proposed by the TPCT and thanked staff for including the information and she stated support for the 45-day approval for tree removal and noticing methods.

Gayle Janzen, Shoreline resident and member of the TPCT, asked for transparency through the tree code in SMC chapter 12.30 regarding nonhazardous public trees and she listed the recommendations she asked Council to approve.

Nancy Morris, Shoreline resident, asked Council for more transparency in the design stage of development projects with public tree removal before construction begins.

Kathleen Russell, Shoreline resident, stated that the TPCT tracks public tree removal and asked that information on public tree removal be more easily accessible.

Rebecca Jones, Shoreline resident, spoke about the public’s success in saving trees when there is ample time for public comment and asked Council to provide more time for public comment on tree’s proposed for removal.

Jackie Kurle, Shoreline resident, advocated for transparency and an online method for accessing available data regarding the Enhanced Shelter.

Courtney Ewing, Shoreline resident and member of the Richmond Highlands Neighborhood Association and Linden 10, spoke about a 395-unit development replacing the Garden Park Apartments on Linden Avenue that she said will contradict the zoning limit and she expressed concern with garage access and sidewalks.

Derek Blackwell, Shoreline resident, listed several issues with the proposed development on Linden Avenue and offered potential solutions to address them. He also cited the increased traffic congestion on the two-lane road as a major safety issue for residents and emergency service vehicles.

7. CONSENT CALENDAR

Upon motion by Deputy Mayor Robertson and unanimously carried, 6-0, the following Consent Calendar items were approved:

(a) Approval of Special Meeting Minutes of Annual Strategic Planning Workshop of March 4 & 5, 2022

(b) Adoption of Resolution No. 488 - Approving the Relocation Plan and the City Manager Property Acquisition Authority for the State Route 523 (N/NE 145th Street) & I-5 Interchange Project

(c) Adoption of Ordinance No. 957 - Authorizing the Use of Eminent Domain for Acquisition of Certain Real Properties to Construct the State Route 523 (N/NE 145th Street) & I-5 Interchange Project

(d) Approval of Property Tax Exemption Program Contract for the Shoreline Multifamily, LLC Project Located at 18551 Aurora Avenue N

8. STUDY ITEMS

(a) Discussion of Ordinance No. 960 - Amending Shoreline Municipal Code Chapter 12.30 Public Tree Management

Administrative Services Director, Sara Lane, recalled that the Tree Preservation Code Team submitted 13 amendments related to tree retention and preservation. Tonight’s discussion is related to one of their amendments that was reviewed by the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services/Tree Board (PRCS/TB) to set a 90-day notice for removal of all public trees. She noted that PRCS/TB compromised and instead supports codification of a 45-day notice, however, staff does not support either of these amendments given public engagement will not change the outcome of the removal and there would be an increase in development delays and staff resources. Ms. Lane said staff is recommending other changes to SMC 12.30 that would establish the PRCS/TB, correct position titles, and clarify code language along with other housekeeping changes.

Citing a project involving the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT), Council asked for an explanation on why the length of time for public notification of a tree removal would not change the outcome for these trees and City Manager, Debbie Tarry explained that the WSDOT permits had yet to be issued unlike other projects where the decision to remove a tree has already been approved. She explained the challenges with managing the discussion with the applicant and the public through the application process and concluded that the Development Code defines how permits are reviewed and staff must comply with these for consistency.

Regarding the financial impact of the proposed changes, Ms. Lane explained that the 45 days as proposed would not cause a financial impact as work could be reprioritized to accommodate the changes, but anything beyond 45 days would require additional staff time.

Council agreed that 45 days is excessive and would make little impact to the final determination of a permit, and asked staff to elaborate on the opportunities the public has to influence the outcome prior to a permit being issued with the idea of codifying language to clarify the process. Mayor Scully said he believes it would not be challenging to implement a process to notify the public of a potential tree removal before a permit is issued and offered a solution practiced by other cities to notice upon receipt of an application to make it easier for the public to voice their concerns.

(b) Discussion of Ordinance No. 961 Unlimited Tax General Obligation (UTGO) Bond 2022 – Park Improvement and Park Land Acquisition and Ordinance No. 962 Amending Ordinance No. 829 Limited Tax General Obligation Bond Anticipation Notes

Ms. Lane first explained Ordinance No. 961 saying that it would delegate authority to the City Manager to conduct the sale of $38.5 Million in bonds in order to improve 80 parks and acquire and improve park land. She detailed the parameters of the bond and stated that there would be a $125,000 cost to issue the debt, shared the costs for the park projects with the stipulation that they are estimated in “today’s dollars”, and reported that staff is also seeking grant funding to complete the projects but would use general funds if needed. Ms. Lane said that staff announced their request for qualifications and will be using a progressive design build approach to increase efficiency and lower the costs and risks of the projects and she said they will be ready to start permitting in the summer of 2023. After acknowledging the capacity strain in the Planning and Community Development Department, Ms. Lane said their goal is to have final completion by the end of 2024. Ms. Lane then discussed Ordinance No. 962 to amend Ordinance No. 829 to extend the City’s outstanding General Obligation Bond Anticipation Note (BAN) to December 1, 2025, reduce the principal amount to $16.6 million, and lower the interest rate to 2.75% all in support of the purchase of park properties and a potential future pool and community center.

Council asked how the general fund could be used and how staff negotiated a lower interest rate to which Ms. Lane responded that with Council’s direction, general funds can be directed to a multitude of areas as part of a budget deliberation process and explained that the interest rate rose from its initial 1.92% two years ago to 3.25% and the renegotiation reduced that to 2.75%.

Mayor Scully said he is concerned with extending what was supposed to be a short-term bond that is leading the City to hold onto real estate that was purchased to build an aquatics and community center and said he would like to have a policy discussion on what to do with the property. Ms. Lane responded stating that a cross-jurisdictional feasibility study is being conducted for a future community pool and said with the deadline in November, staff felt locking in a lower interest rate now would be preferable to waiting and Ms. Tarry added that exploring options for an aquatic solution would take at least a year but would result in long-term options for Council to consider for the property. Ms. Lane continued explaining that with the extension, the City could prepay for the property giving the City the most flexibility to determine its outcome, otherwise, the City would hold on to the property and pay the interest for the three years.

Councilmember Roberts commented that the property is one that met the City’s size and location criteria and said putting it on the market does not seem to make sense and expressed support for the extension and staff’s judgement on payment terms.

Senior Transportation Planner, Nora Daley-Peng, introduced the presentation as the fifth in a series of presentations on the Transportation Master Plan (TMP) focused on shared use mobility hubs and pedestrians and announced that the project team is preparing to launch Outreach Series 3 in April and developing a draft transportation project list. Ms. Daley-Peng spoke about staff’s work to advocate for additional transit services in Shoreline and stated that their goal is to enhance speed and reliability for community members by working with Sound Transit to identify and plan networks to the Light Rail Station and neighborhood centers in Shoreline. She explained the concept of mobility hubs and discussed the draft for Shoreline’s shared use mobility health plan that was developed by the University of Washington’s Evan School. She then reviewed the project team’s draft pedestrian plan that shows the City's existing and future sidewalks including those part and not part of the Sidewalk Prioritization Plan.

When asked where funding would come from to create the mobility hubs, Ms. Daley-Peng explained that staff must recognize the need and plan locations for the hubs and then would pursue partnerships and grant opportunities, but she said staff wanted to first ask Council to set policy that they are an emerging technology and then move into a feasibility study. Councilmember Roberts suggested that the mobility hubs would be a nice addition to the community but he would not want them to be a priority over more pressing needs and advised that staff should add sidewalks to the draft pedestrian plan.

Elaborating on the Outreach Series, Ms. Daley-Peng said staff is putting together self-guided posters and comment cards and working with venues so the public can encounter the materials as part of their daily life such as in school cafeterias and she said she hopes to have staff hours delegated to having organic conversations with the public along with online surveys, yard signs, and presentations.

(d) Update on the Wastewater Rate Study Project and Policy Discussion

Ms. Lane introduced Gordon Wilson, a Senior Program Manager with FCS GROUP, who she said the City has on retainer to do the wastewater rate study. Mr. Wilson first explained capital funding concepts, discussed narrow-based and broad-based funding sources, compared cash funding to debt financing and stated that the cash versus debt funding decision will affect rates, and showed how key rate components interact to determine the revenue requirement forecast for capital projects. Next, Mr. Wilson spoke about low-income customer assistance programs and described four levels of low-income programs including Shoreline’s current program and he detailed each level’s process, eligibility requirements, and impacts to the City and he offered options and outcomes if the City were to expand the current assistance program to reach more residents in need. Finally, Mr. Wilson spoke about wastewater rate design options and he listed the charges that go into providing the wastewater utility and stated that 90% of the cost goes to King County and some to the City of Edmonds. He said there has been interest in incorporating a volumetric component to the rate and he analyzed several forms of rate design and their impact on the City, pointing out significant administrative needs with implementing volume-based rates.

Ms. Lane presented staff recommendations to ask FCS GROUP to: include a balance of the appropriate funding tools and their rate study; explore low-income assistance levels three and four for potential implementation; and to continue charging a flat rate for single family customers.

Councilmember Roberts and Mork expressed support for the staff recommendations regarding capital funding tools and rate design and Councilmember Roberts advised staff to ensure enough is contributed to maintain the utility system but cautioned against aspects of the low-income assistance program that would make administration too complicated. He highlighted that property owners are ultimately responsible for paying the utility bill and asked staff to find out how many households are paying for the utility directly versus paying as an incorporated cost with rent. Ms. Lane stated that a partnership with Seattle City Light may limit the administrative burden in working to qualify and manage a low-income program, if Council accepted their low-income qualifications.

Council asked about the fiscal impact of expanding the low-income program and Mr. Wilson explained that there is a disparity between residents who need assistance and those receiving assistance and he stated that the variables from discounts on top of increased administration costs need to be balanced to make up the revenue. Ms. Lane expanded on her opposition to level two for the low-income program and reasoned that a full-time employee would be needed to accommodate additional administration demand and she concluded that the level four would be more feasible than level two but would carry more overhead than level three. She offered to bring back models of different options if Council was interested. Councilmember Ramsdell stated support for level three in order to be more inclusive of the low-income population. Council agreed that more information on the fiscal impacts of the program options is needed to make a decision.

Mayor Scully commented that while there is not much Council can do about rental rates, they can make a difference with wastewater rates for those in need and he voiced support for level three and concern with level four. Mr. Wilson added a drawback to level four, the rebate check option, is that it is an annual rebate when usually a more frequent rebate is needed.

9. ADJOURNMENT

At 9:25 p.m., Mayor Scully declared the meeting adjourned.

/s/ Jessica Simulcik Smith, City Clerk