CITY OF SHORELINE

SHORELINE CITY COUNCIL

SUMMARY MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING

Monday, September 18, 2000

6:30 p.m.

Shoreline Conference Center

Mt. Rainier Room

PRESENT: Deputy Mayor Hansen, Councilmembers Grossman, Gustafson, Lee, Montgomery and Ransom

ABSENT: Mayor Jepsen

1. CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order at 6:35 p.m. by Deputy Mayor Hansen, who presided.

2. FLAG SALUTE/ROLL CALL

Deputy Mayor Hansen led the flag salute. Upon roll call by the Deputy City Clerk, all Councilmembers were present with the exceptions of Councilmembers Lee and Ransom, who arrived later in the meeting, and Mayor Jepsen.

Councilmember Gustafson moved to excuse Mayor Jepsen. Councilmember Grossman seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.

3. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT AND FUTURE AGENDAS

Public Works Director Bill Conner responded to questions raised about the Aurora Corridor Project at the Council meeting September 11. He distributed copies of the 32 points discussed as part of the Aurora Corridor Pre-Design Study. He also provided a list of frequently asked questions with responses.

Mr. Conner explained that a median of 16 feet in width is necessary to accommodate a four-foot pedestrian refuge and 12-foot left-turn lanes at intersections. He noted that the median can be narrower between intersections.

Continuing, Mr. Conner discussed the potential impact of the Aurora Corridor Project on buildings, parcels and parking spaces along Aurora Avenue. He counted 190 buildings on properties adjacent to the Aurora Corridor Project between 145^th and 205^th Streets, 48 of which are between 145^th and 165^th Streets. He estimated that the project will affect 21 of the properties along Aurora Avenue in Shoreline (three of those between 145^th and 165^th Streets). He mentioned possible adjustments to the project (e.g., to the width of sidewalks and medians) to reduce the impact.

Mr. Conner said the 190 buildings adjacent to the project occupy 183 parcels of land. He explained that the project will affect the parking on 141 parcels (23 between 145^th and 165^th Streets). More specifically, staff estimates that the project will affect 550 of the 6600 parking spaces adjacent to Aurora Avenue (81 of the 1138 between 145^th and 165^th Streets).

Mr. Conner cautioned that staff has not yet surveyed or designed any particular street or business. He said the City will address each on a case-by-case basis as it proceeds.

Councilmember Ransom arrived at 6:38 p.m.

Assistant City Manager Larry Bauman said 976 households participated in Super Clean Sweep Day 2000 on September 16. He mentioned that the City collected 146 tons of material for disposal and recycling.

4. COUNCIL REPORTS

Councilmember Grossman suggested that staff invite King County Councilmember Maggi Fimia to attend the upcoming meeting at which Council will consider the County transit tax-option plan.

Councilmember Montgomery said two of the transportation committees on which she serves, the Seashore Transportation Forum and the Regional Transit Committee, meet this week.

Councilmember Gustafson said he will attend the September 19^th meeting of the Human Services Roundtable. He mentioned a proposal to disband and reorganize the organization.

Councilmember Ransom expressed concern at the potential loss of the Human Services Roundtable. He asserted the need for a forum in which human service providers can communicate and cooperate.

Deputy Mayor Hansen noted that the City hosted the September 13^th meeting of the Suburban Cities Association (SCA). He mentioned his participation at the Super Clean Sweep 2000 Day.

Councilmember Lee arrived at 6:55 p.m.

Councilmember Lee said she attended the September 14 meeting of the Regional Water Quality Committee. She mentioned that the committee will have the opportunity to review the siting criteria for the North Treatment Facilities.

5. PUBLIC COMMENT

(a) Richard Johnsen, 16730 Meridian Avenue N, said QFC plans to remove the mail center from its store at 185^th Street and Midvale Avenue N. He requested City advocacy for US Mail services to replace those being lost.

(b) Daniel Mann spoke as the owner of a business at 19926 Aurora Avenue N. He asked Council to reassess the 12-foot width for sidewalks in the Aurora Corridor Project. He said the recommendations from the planning process which Council subsequently endorsed did not indicate the amount of disruption that 12-foot-wide sidewalks would cause.

(c) Jerilee Noffsinger spoke as the owner of CarePlus, 14731 Aurora Avenue N. She said she and the owners of other businesses along Aurora Avenue question whether the City will actually consider reducing the width of sidewalks and vehicle lanes or shifting the roadway to save existing businesses.

(d) Wally Crow, 19025 9^th Place NW, expressed concern about the long-term costs to maintain the median and sidewalk landscaping proposed as part of the Aurora Corridor Project. He asserted the significant impact on small businesses along Aurora Avenue of the loss of parking that will result from the 12-foot-wide sidewalks.

(e) Brian McCullough, 633 NW 180^th Street, said the scope and cost of the Aurora Corridor Project is too large. He expressed concern that Shoreline taxpayers will be responsible for cost overruns. He advocated a demonstration project to show residents and businesses the effects of the proposed medians.

Mr. Bauman said staff will contact the owner of the property of the QFC at 185^th Street and Midvale Avenue N about plans to remove postal services there.

Councilmember Ransom reported that the QFC store manager issued notice that the post office boxes at the store will be removed as of October 1.

Deputy Mayor Hansen advocated that Shoreline obtain its own Post Office and zip codes.

In response to Deputy Mayor Hansen, Mr. Bauman noted that staff will compile and present the public input from the September 14th Aurora Corridor Project open house for Council review and discussion. He explained that the City has not begun the design stage of the project. He stressed that Council will have final approval of any design.

Deputy Mayor Hansen noted that the Aurora Corridor Pre-Design Study included considerable public process. He asserted his willingness to change a position, given sufficient evidence of the need for such a change.

Councilmember Lee disputed the contention that Council is overlooking the concerns of existing businesses in favor of proceeding with the Aurora Corridor Project. She asserted Council attention to "the best interests" of residents, citizens, land owners and businesses.

6. ACTION ITEM

(a) Ordinance No. 247 amending the Development Code for the purposes of further defining and clarifying gambling uses

Senior Planner Rachael Markle reviewed the staff report.

Deputy Mayor Hansen invited public comment.

(1) John Prewitt spoke as the Casino Manager at Parker's, 17001 Aurora Avenue N. He commented that dining, gaming and pari-mutuel betting operate at different hours at Parker's. He asserted that the 200-car parking lot at the business is more than sufficient. He mentioned that Parker's and other mini-casinos in Shoreline contribute gambling tax revenue to the City. He asserted a lack of crime at Parker's. He noted the large new sign at Debby's Drift On Inn.

(2) David Osgood, 1411 4^th Street, Suite 1424, Seattle, spoke as the attorney for Parker’s. He noted that Section 1 of Ordinance No. 247 references RCW 9.46. He said horse racing is exempt from the definition of gambling under RCW 9.46. He characterized the parking requirements of the proposed ordinance as "an ingenuous way to drive casinos out of Shoreline."

(3) Richard Johnsen, 16730 Meridian Avenue N, said he sees casinos in Shoreline as a form of tourism and as means to attract other tourist-oriented businesses. He suggested that the City structure its ordinances to preserve tourism in Shoreline and the tax revenues the City receives from gambling establishments.

Councilmember Montgomery moved adoption of Ordinance No. 247. Councilmember Lee seconded the motion.

Councilmember Ransom said the proposed ordinance expands on the moratorium that Council adopted to allow time to study the impact of pari-mutuel betting. He noted the concern raised previously about parking. He said the daytime pari-mutuel betting operation at Parker's does not compete with the nightclub for use of the 200 parking spaces at the facility. He said Parker's has not filled its parking lot, except on the day of the Kentucky Derby. He noted that ten State studies found no effects on crime from card rooms and mini-casinos, and he mentioned similar studies on horse racing. He commented that pari-mutuel betting has no real effect on the Shoreline community. He said Shoreline is the only jurisdiction in all of the counties where pari-mutuel betting is available to raise an issue about it.

Councilmember Ransom asserted that the requirement of "one parking space per every three seats," in addition to "1 parking space per 75 square feet in dining or lounge areas," is excessive. He said Parker's will need to add 25 more parking spaces to those already not in use.

Councilmember Ransom said the public is not opposed to gambling. He mentioned the results of a survey at a neighborhood forum. He asserted that the State Gambling Commission tightly monitors gambling establishments. He mentioned the Washington Horse Racing Commission.

Councilmember Ransom said pari-mutuel betting creates jobs in Shoreline. He mentioned that the City's former Economic Development Coordinator identified proximity to water and casinos as criteria for attracting a convention hotel. He commented that gambling addiction is not a physical condition and that it is rare, in comparison to physical addictions. He noted that casinos contribute to a fund which pays for mental health counseling for people with gambling problems.

Councilmember Ransom recommended that Council vote against Ordinance No. 247.

Councilmember Grossman said the proposal of Ordinance No. 247 implies that the City has answers to the questions that existed when Council adopted the moratorium on pari-mutuel wagering.

In response to Councilmember Grossman, Ms. Markle said she is not aware of parking problems at Parker's. She noted that Parker's has not made improvements to facilitate pari-mutuel wagering. She said such improvements may attract a number of customers comparable to that the off-track pari-mutuel betting site in Everett, Washington attracts. She said that site has had to rent parking spaces from other businesses to accommodate customers.

Tim Stewart, Director, Planning and Development Services, asserted the intent of Ordinance No. 247 to implement the policy directive that Council adopted in July 1999. The directive prohibited new gaming establishments while permitting existing gaming establishments to continue operations as non-conforming uses. Mr. Stewart said the non-conforming status was meant to prevent intensified or expanded operations.

In response to Deputy Mayor Hansen, Mr. Stewart said Ordinance No. 247 clarifies the intent of the existing City ordinance on gambling and minimizes the potential for argument of ambiguities in the ordinance. He stressed that the parking requirements of Ordinance No. 247 would not apply to legally-existing non-conforming uses. He noted that gambling establishments that propose to expand would have to apply for a special use permit and meet the parking standards.

Councilmember Grossman said he is uncomfortable with the proposed ordinance. He noted that Parker's is an existing gaming establishment, permitted under the existing ordinance. He said the City perceived Parker's to be taking advantage of a loophole in the existing ordinance by offering pari-mutuel wagering, which the ordinance does not address. He stated that the moratorium was meant to provide time to study the impacts of pari-mutuel wagering. He asked what the City has learned from its study. He commented that the impacts seem negligible.

In response to Councilmember Grossman, City Attorney Ian Sievers said the permanent regulation (i.e., Ordinance No. 247) has little to do with the specifics of the litigation by Parker's against the City. He explained that Parker's convinced the judge on preliminary ruling that it had made some application before the moratorium took effect, giving it vested rights. He said Ordinance No. 247 is important to enable the City to regulate Parker's as a non-conforming use. He asserted the ambiguity of failing to regulate off-track betting with other forms of serious gambling. He said off-track betting could then be considered a permitted use, capable of expanding freely (e.g., without the restrictions of a special use permit). In addition, he said the proposed ordinance represents a comprehensive approach to gambling and anticipates other forms of gambling the City may address in the future.

In response to Councilmember Montgomery, Mr. Stewart said the new sign at Debby's Drift On Inn is in compliance with the new Development Code.

In response to Councilmember Lee, Mr. Sievers said Ordinance No. 247 refers to RCW 9.46 to include the definitions in that chapter of the different forms of gambling. He explained that horse racing is exempt from that chapter. He said it has its own chapter.

Councilmember Gustafson explained that he supported the moratorium to prevent the expansion of gambling in Shoreline. He asked how the proposed ordinance will affect pari-mutuel betting. Setting aside the case of Parker's, Mr. Stewart said the ordinance would prohibit pari-mutuel betting in the City of Shoreline. Mr. Sievers mentioned an October 2001 date for the court case concerning Parker's. He noted that Ordinance No. 247 would prohibit pari-mutuel betting at Parker's if the business abandoned or lost its franchise with Emerald Downs for a year.

Councilmember Gustafson questioned the need for the proposed ordinance. He said he is not comfortable with the parking requirements. He explained that his concerns about Parker's regarded the parking and the nearby school. He said he has not seen negative impacts. He expressed his willingness to reject the proposed ordinance based on his belief that existing City ordinances prevent the expansion of gambling in Shoreline.

Councilmember Lee asserted that Council had intended to maintain gambling in Shoreline at the amount that already existed. She said pari-mutuel betting represented an expansion. She commented that passage of Ordinance No. 247 will prevent further expansion (e.g., another establishment obtaining the pari-mutuel wagering franchise in the future).

In response to Councilmember Gustafson, Mr. Stewart said if Council does not adopt Ordinance No. 247 and does not extend the moratorium (which lapses on September 27) there would be a question as to whether pari-mutuel betting is permitted in Shoreline. He advised that Council could exempt pari-mutuel betting from the regulations the City has imposed on mini-casinos and other forms of gambling by including it as a new bullet in the list of exceptions in Section 1 of the proposed ordinance.

Councilmember Montgomery asserted that Ordinance No. 247 affirms and implements the policy directive that Council chose in July 1999 (i.e., Option 4), which prohibited new gaming establishments and expansion of gambling. Mr. Stewart agreed and added that Ordinance No. 247 accomplishes this within the framework established in the new Development Code. Councilmember Montgomery urged Councilmember Gustafson to vote to adopt Ordinance No. 247.

Deputy Mayor Hansen urged Council to adopt Ordinance No. 247. He commented that he considered Option 4 a compromise. He expressed support for measures limiting the expansion of gambling.

Councilmember Ransom moved to amend the motion to revise a portion of Section 3 of Ordinance No. 247 to read as follows: "3. Minimum off street parking for Gambling establishments shall be at a minimum 1 parking space per 75 square feet in dining or lounge areas, plus five parking spaces per card table, plus one parking space per every three seats (not associated with a gaming/card table) available for gambling or viewing gambling activities." Councilmember Gustafson seconded the motion.

In response to Councilmember Lee, Ms. Markle explained that she drafted Section 3 by beginning with the parking requirements that Council adopted for card rooms (i.e., "1 parking space per 75 square feet in dining or lounge areas, plus five parking spaces per card table"). She said she considered pari-mutuel wagering an additional use that would presumably attract more patrons. She therefore added the parking standard used for other types of spectator activity (e.g., theater, sporting events): one space per every three seats. She asserted her understanding that the hours of pari-mutuel wagering at Parker's overlap those of the other activity at Parker's.

In response to Councilmember Lee, Ms. Markle explained that the pari-mutuel wagering site in Everett, Washington rents extra parking to accommodate pari-mutuel wagering patrons.

In response to Deputy Mayor Hansen, Mr. Stewart said Ordinance No. 247 will not apply to Parker's unless it proposes an expansion. He stated that any legally-existing non-conforming use would be allowed to continue, even if it does not meet the standards. Based on these comments, Deputy Mayor Hansen said he does not object to the language that Councilmember Ransom has proposed to delete.

Councilmember Grossman asked if the seats for which the City proposes to require parking spaces are located in the dining or lounge areas for which the City already requires parking spaces. Ms. Markle conceded that the seats could be located in the dining or lounge areas.

A vote was taken on the motion to amend Section 3 of Ordinance No. 247 to read as follows: "3. Minimum off street parking for Gambling establishments shall be at a minimum 1 parking space per 75 square feet in dining or lounge areas, plus five parking spaces per card table, plus one parking space per every three seats (not associated with a gaming/card table) available for gambling or viewing gambling activities." The motion failed 3-3, with Deputy Mayor Hansen and Councilmembers Lee and Montgomery dissenting.

Councilmember Ransom recommended that Council vote against Ordinance No. 247. He suggested that staff could present an amendment to the gambling ordinance that Council adopted previously if further clarification is necessary.

A vote was taken on the motion to adopt Ordinance No. 247. The motion failed 3-3, with Councilmembers Grossman, Gustafson and Ransom dissenting.

Councilmember Gustafson suggested reconsideration of Ordinance No. 247 during a meeting at which the entire Council is present.

In response to Deputy Mayor Hansen, Councilmember Grossman pointed out that Ordinance No. 233, which created the moratorium, will expire September 27.

Staff indicated that Mayor Jepsen will not be in attendance at the Council meeting on September 25.

In response to Deputy Mayor Hansen, Assistant City Manager Larry Bauman agreed that staff will prepare a moratorium extension for Council consideration September 25.

7. WORKSHOP ITEMS

(a) Shoreline Transfer Station Master Planning Effort Briefing

Planner Jeffrey Thomas introduced Kevin Kiernan, Engineering Services Manager, King County Solid Waste Division and Diane Yates, also of King County. He went on to review the staff report.

Mr. Kiernan discussed the Shoreline Transfer Station and the master planning process for the site. He mentioned the revision of the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan currently underway—the County is accepting public comment on the plan and the associated environmental impact statement through September 29. He listed proposed changes to the Shoreline Transfer Station: a new transfer building, further away from the north property line; expansion of recyclable material collection on site; more on-site roadways (to prevent lines of vehicles off site); connecting into the north operating base Interstate access ramps; installation of compactors; management of self-haul traffic; noise containment; dust suppression; and aesthetic improvements. He noted the portion of Thornton Creek on the site, and he acknowledged the impact of the listing of Puget Sound salmon under the Endangered Species Act.

Continuing, Mr. Kiernan reviewed the schedule related to the Shoreline Transfer Station. He said the master plan process and the environmental review will continue through 2001. The County will begin a five-quarter-long design process in 2002, followed by construction, in phases, over 18 months. Mr. Kiernan said a County staff proposal to accelerate the Interstate access ramp project is under review by the County Executive. He explained that accelerated development would require County Council action.

Finally, Mr. Kiernan stressed that the master plan process and the environmental review will include significant public participation.

Councilmember Lee questioned the definition of neighborhood regarding public notice and involvement in the Shoreline Transfer Station planning process. Mr. Thomas explained the notification requirements in the new Development Code. Mr. Kiernan said the County typically exceeds minimum notification requirements to advertise as broadly as possible. He described the citizen advisory committees that the County typically convenes.

In response to Councilmember Lee, Mr. Kiernan said the County Executive's Office will transmit the proposal to accelerate the Interstate access ramp project, together with the rest of the budget, to the County Council in mid-October. He advised that the County Council typically votes on the budget the Monday before Thanksgiving.

In response to Councilmember Lee, Mr. Kiernan said the approved budget for improvements to the transfer station includes funding for the Interstate access ramps. He explained that the County Council included a proviso in the budget under which staff must evaluate the possibility of having some or all of the traffic generated by the new transfer station use the existing restricted freeway ramps. He commented that the rest of the project will proceed after the County Council has reviewed and approved the development alternative for the Interstate access ramps.

Councilmember Gustafson advocated accelerated development of the Interstate access ramps.

In response to Deputy Mayor Hansen, Mr. Kiernan said County staff has considered the time savings of Interstate access ramps to drivers of County hauling trucks.

Councilmembers Montgomery, Ransom and Grossman stressed that the Interstate access ramps are critical to the City.

(b) Metropolitan Area Transportation Plan Briefing

Planning Manager Kirk McKinley introduced Rocky Piro, Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) Growth Strategies Manager.

Mr. Piro provided an overview of PSRC. He went on to discuss the Metropolitan Area Transportation Plan (MTP), which PSRC first developed in 1995. He explained that PSRC began work a year ago to update the MTP. He reviewed the recently-released "Executive Summary: 2001 Metropolitan Transportation Plan Alternatives, Analysis and Draft Environmental Impact Statement." In particular, he described the three MTP alternatives: 1) Updated 1995 Metropolitan Transportation Plan; 2) Current Law Revenue; and 3) Metropolitan Transportation Plan "Plus." He indicated that the alternatives provide a framework for the public discussion process from which PSRC will develop the next MTP.

Mr. McKinley noted that comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) are due October 16. He said staff will prepare a draft letter concerning the DEIS for Council to review in early October. He discussed the issues that staff outlined on pages 54 and 55 of the Council packet. He also mentioned the following issues:

• Urban centers, suburban clusters and other areas in the region may be identified in the MTP as areas for increased housing, employment and transit. The City may want to identify such areas in Shoreline, based on the Comprehensive Plan (e.g., North City, Richmond Beach in the vicinity of NW 8^th Street), to improve City competitiveness for future funding.
• PSRC intends to prepare a list of transportation projects for attention over a six- to ten-year period. Projects on the list will be more competitive for future funding. The City may want to nominate projects for inclusion on the list.
• The City needs to prepare a transit plan to give staff and Council guidance for participating in Sound Transit Phase 2 planning.

Deputy Mayor Hansen invited public comment.

(1) Richard Johnsen, 16730 Meridian Avenue N, questioned the statement on page 54 of the Council packet that "Shoreline is not an 'urban center.'" He also questioned how densely populated Shoreline will become.

Mr. McKinley said Vision 2020 designates 21 urban centers in the four-county region. Mr. Piro explained that each county designated urban centers based on its own criteria and that PSRC accepted the county designations. He noted that several cities wish to revisit the issue of what qualifies as an urban center. He indicated the willingness of PSRC to support such efforts.

On the question of population density, Mr. Piro projected an additional 1.5 million people in the region between now and 2030.

Councilmember Montgomery said she has learned the magnitude of transportation problems in the region from serving on the PSRC Transportation Policy Board. She noted that the region is expected to have two to three times as many people over age 65 by 2030. She asserted the value of transit access ramps on I-5 to improve access to the bus transportation that older people, especially, will need. She commented that there are too many vehicles in the region for the existing roads but not enough people for mass transit. She noted the need to identify a funding method for needed transportation improvements.

Councilmember Ransom mentioned Initiative 745. He said many people think road construction in the region is insufficient. He asserted that these people are unwilling to ride rail or systems not tightly connected to their destinations. He expressed concern that the proposed light-rail system appears disproportionately expensive, considering the number of potential riders. He suggested more highways or additional lanes on highways as part of the funding.

Councilmember Ransom said Shoreline, with a population of 53,000, has a density of approximately 4,000 per square mile, similar to that of Seattle. He asserted that Shoreline should receive higher priority for transportation improvements to encourage local job development. Mr. Piro said PSRC is willing to work with the City to consider an urban center designation for Shoreline.

Councilmember Grossman asserted the need to integrate land-use planning and transport-ation planning and the need to shift from a perspective of building more roads to a perspective of greater housing density with convenient, local services. He disagreed that Shoreline is as densely populated as Seattle. He commented that Seattle includes a more extensive industrial base and that few, if any, people reside in industrial areas.

Councilmember Montgomery noted widespread opposition to greater population density.

Mr. Piro said communities like Shoreline have the population density to support transit. However, he commented that common housing arrangements (e.g., sprawling apartment complexes) encourage driving over walking.

Councilmember Lee mentioned a listing of current transportation initiatives distributed at the September 13 SCA meeting. She suggested that efficiencies could result from greater communication and coordination among jurisdictions. Mr. Piro discussed the PSRC short-term action strategy to invite local jurisdictions, transit agencies and the State to identify their transportation projects. PSRC will create a composite picture and will organize and prioritize the projects in an effort to improve mobility and accessibility. Councilmember Lee advocated PSRC leadership on such initiatives.

8. EXECUTIVE SESSION

At 9:20 p.m., Deputy Mayor Hansen announced that Council would recess into executive session for 20 minutes to discuss one issue of potential litigation.

At 9:45 p.m., Deputy Mayor Hansen extended the executive session another ten minutes.

At 10:00 p.m., the executive session concluded, and the special meeting reconvened.

MEETING EXTENSION

At 10:00 p.m., Councilmember Montgomery moved to extend the meeting until 10:30 p.m. Councilmember Ransom seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.

7. WORKSHOP (continued)

(c) An ordinance granting Metromedia Fiber Network Services, Inc. a franchise to operate an underground fiber optic telecommunications system

Kristoff Bauer, Assistant to the City Manager, reviewed the staff report.

Deputy Mayor Hansen invited public comment.

(1) Jim Greenfield, an attorney from Davis Wright Tremaine, represented Metromedia Fiber Network Services, Inc. He noted a disagreement between Metromedia and the City on interpretation of the right-of-way ordinance that Council recently adopted. He said the parties are working together to develop a creative solution with which to resolve the disagreement.

Deputy Mayor Hansen confirmed Council consensus in support of the staff recommendation to bring the proposed ordinance back to Council for approval on October 16.

Councilmember Gustafson moved to reconsider the motion to adopt Ordinance No. 247. Councilmember Montgomery seconded the motion

Councilmember Ransom noted that many people attended earlier in the meeting to be present for Council consideration of Ordinance No. 247, which was a scheduled agenda item. He expressed concern that Council is reconsidering the ordinance after its earlier discussion and vote and after those present earlier left in the assumption that Council had finished its consideration of the ordinance. He asserted that reconsideration without public notice is unfair to the public process. He said Council should include further consideration of the ordinance on the agenda of another meeting.

In response to Councilmember Lee, Councilmember Montgomery explained that Council directed staff to prepare a moratorium extension for Council consideration September 25. Councilmember Montgomery said Council cannot do this. She asserted that the public is aware that Council had not settled the issue and that Council wanted to take another vote on it.

Deputy Mayor Hansen asserted "an inherent right via parliamentary procedure to reconsider a motion" within the same meeting.

A vote was taken on the motion to reconsider the motion to adopt Ordinance No. 247. The motion carried 5-1, with Councilmember Ransom dissenting.

Councilmember Gustafson moved to amend Ordinance No. 247 with a new Section 10 to read "This ordinance shall be repealed and amendments of no force or effect if it is not readopted or amended within three months." Councilmember Montgomery seconded the motion.

In response to Councilmember Gustafson, Mr. Sievers said the proposed amendment is typically referred to as a "sunset clause." He explained that the amended ordinance will take effect in five days, assuming Council adopts it, but that it will automatically expire after three months if Council does not readopt or amend it before that time.

Councilmembers Gustafson and Grossman asserted the importance of the issues addressed by Ordinance No. 247 and advocated that Council extend its consideration of the ordinance, as proposed, in order to be able to include Mayor Jepsen in the deliberations.

A vote was taken on the motion to amend Ordinance No. 247 with a new Section 10 to read "This ordinance shall be repealed and amendments of no force or effect if it is not readopted or amended within three months." The motion carried 6-0.

A vote was taken on the motion to adopt Ordinance No. 247, as amended, which carried 6-0.

9. CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENT

(a) Richard Johnsen, 16730 Meridian Avenue N, asserted the value of the mail services at the Gateway QFC, considering the locations of the two nearest post offices. He advocated the establishment of mail services at another location in the same area if Gateway QFC stops providing services. He reiterated his earlier comments about the value of gambling as a form of tourism and as means to attract other tourist-oriented businesses to Shoreline. Finally, he disputed Deputy Mayor Hansen's decision not to allow public comment after the staff report on agenda item 7(a).

10. ADJOURNMENT

At 10:14 p.m., Deputy Mayor Hansen declared the meeting adjourned.

__________________________
Ruth Ann Rose, CMC
Deputy City Clerk