CITY OF SHORELINE
SHORELINE CITY COUNCIL
Monday, April 17, 2006 Shoreline Conference Center
PRESENT: Mayor Ransom, Deputy Mayor Fimia, and Councilmembers Hansen, McGlashan, Ryu, and Way
ABSENT: Councilmember Gustafson
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Mayor Ransom, who presided.
2. FLAG SALUTE/ROLL CALL
Mayor Ransom led the flag salute. Upon roll call by the City Clerk, all Councilmembers were present, with the exception of Councilmember Gustafson.
(a) Proclamation of “Earth Day”
Mayor Ransom proclaimed April 22, 2006 as “Earth Day” in Shoreline and called upon residents to protect, preserve, and enjoy the natural environment and to commit to accomplishing positive change in this regard.
Larry Owens, representing the Shoreline Solar Project, accepted the proclamation, noting that everyday should be considered “Earth Day.” He commented on the growth of the Shoreline Solar Project and the threat of global warming. He urged the Council to support the Kyoto Protocols, the Parks bond, and to take measures to make Shoreline a more livable community.
Upon motion by Councilmember McGlashan, seconded by Councilmember Hansen and carried 6-0, Councilmember Gustafson was excused.
3. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
§Bob Olander, City Manager, provided the following
announcements and updates:
Paul Haines, Public Works Director, provided a demonstration of porous pavement to illustrate the types of materials that are available to create durable, yet pervious surfaces. He explained the advantages and disadvantages of the product and concluded that although it does have limitations, it could be beneficial in certain applications. He further explained that pervious surfaces ultimately help the environment by reducing channelization and erosion.
Mr. Olander concurred that porous pavement does have limited uses and is “one tool in the tool kit.”
Mr. Haines responded to Councilmember questions relating to durability and appearance of the product. He explained that porous pavement would last for decades under light traffic use, but it would not be suitable for high traffic areas such as Aurora Avenue. He noted that porous pavement is a high friction surface that will spall over time and is relatively resistant to vandalism.
Councilmember Way suggested that porous pavement and other related products might necessitate a review of the City’s Development Code to see how they fit into the City’s ground surface classifications.
4. COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmember Hansen reported on the upcoming Suburban Cities Association meeting, which will feature King County Executive Ron Sims and Senator Patty Murray.
Deputy Mayor Fimia asked Councilmember Hansen to follow up with the Shoreline Water District regarding their insurance concern so that the scheduled Earth Day events can still be accomplished.
Mr. Olander said he would also research the City’s insurance coverage.
Councilmember Ryu reported on the training session she attended on effective City Council Meetings, provided by the Association of Washington Cities. She noted the Unite for Parks Rally would be held on Saturday, April 22.
Councilmember Way urged everyone to vote for the Parks bond on May 16. She provided information of various Earth Day events and encouraged people to familiarize themselves with the native flora and fauna.
Councilmember McGlashan noted his attendance at the AWC training and commended staff for always providing meeting materials a week in advance. He noted that many cities only provide their Councilmembers with materials a few days ahead of time. He also plans on attending the Judge Ronald Annual Luncheon on Saturday, April 22.
Deputy Mayor Fimia reported on the walkabouts she participated in with the City Manager along Aurora Avenue. She said they visited with several businesses in the vicinity of NE 150th Street. She urged residents to patronize Aurora Corridor businesses because they report losses of 20-70% due to the Aurora Corridor Project.
Mayor Ransom said he will also attend the Judge Ronald luncheon, as well as a SeaShore Transportation Forum meeting next week where the topics will include membership and bid funding. He provided information about “All Cities Credit Union” and noted that since Shoreline doesn’t have a credit union for employees, it could possibly participate and provide this service. He concluded his remarks by encouraging all the Councilmembers to attend the SCA meeting with Executive Sims and Senator Murray.
5. PUBLIC COMMENT
(a) Michael Clark, Shoreline, explained that his doctor prescribed a walker for him but the type he needs is not fully covered under Medicare. He asserted that businesses should be penalized for false advertising if they claim they accept Medicare when products they carry are not fully covered.
(b) Chris Page, Seattle, representing the Homewaters Project, explained the mission of his organization, which is to use environmental education, science, and community programs to explore and preserve nature. He commented on the organization’s intention to work with schools. He urged the City to participate as a partner in its many community-based programs and said Homewaters would like to develop programs focusing on Thornton Creek, Twin Ponds, and Ronald Bog. He provided literature on the Homewaters Project as well as the Thornton Creek Watershed.
Councilmember Way wished to know what type of “off-the-shelf” programs the Homewaters Project provides.
Mr. Page responded that Homewaters provides natural history tours and other resources, but they really try to tailor the programs to fit individual cities.
Councilmember Ryu pointed out that many parents are looking for such programs for their children. She wondered if parents could get involved through the schools.
Mr. Page answered affirmatively and said there are many opportunities to be innovative and creative.
Deputy Mayor Fimia spoke in support of the Homewaters Project, noting that it is one of the best organizations for applied learning. She said they work with schools and businesses to map, measure, and preserve the natural environment.
(c) Charles Brown, Shoreline, said there are three reasons for people in his age group (70+ years) to support the parks bond: 1) there are levy exemptions for people with less than $35,000 annual income; 2) parks offer opportunities for low-cost exercise; and 3) the bond is a great way to leave a legacy to future generations. He said he is privileged to be part of the group to vote on acquiring more park property, and he is grateful to those who preserved Hamlin Park for us. He recommended that everyone read Arthur Kruckeberg’s “The Natural History of Puget Sound Country.”
Mr. Olander said staff will follow up on Mr. Clarks’ concern and he thanked Mr. Page and Mr. Brown for their comments.
Councilmember Hansen concurred with Mr. Brown’s comments but wished to ensure that accurate information is provided regarding levy tax exemptions.
Mr. Olander said more detailed information regarding the levy is posted on the City Website and linked to the King County Assessor’s Office.
6. WORKSHOP ITEMS
(a) Parks Maintenance Program
Dick Deal, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services (PRCS) Director, introduced Kirk Peterson, Parks Maintenance Supervisor, who provided a PowerPoint presentation outlining the key efforts and programs of the Parks Maintenance Crew. The five full-time employees, volunteers, and seasonal staff are charged with a variety of responsibilities, including parks upgrades, equipment installation, litter control, tree repair, athletic field preparation, and setting up and cleaning up after the many activities and events sponsored by the PRCS Department. There is approximately 356 acres of City-owned park property in Shoreline, and over 337,000 people participated in PRCS-sponsored events last year. He then outlined the parks maintenance budget, explaining that it comprises 34 percent of the total parks budget. The department contracts a large part of its services, including landscaping, electrical, and janitorial. The Parks Repair/Replacement Fund, which the Council approved several years ago, provides the resources to upgrade outdated facilities, such as playground equipment.
Mr. Deal concluded the presentation by summarizing the many citizen-driven programs, projects, and activities that define Shoreline’s commitment to both recreation and environmental stewardship. These include Ivy OUT, the application of environmentally-friendly herbicides and pesticides, Eagle Scout projects, and special events, such as the Christmas Ship and Showmobile concerts. He said the 2005 citizen survey showed that 40 percent of respondents used City parks 20 or more times per year.
Mayor Ransom called for public comment.
(a) Barbara Lacy, Shoreline, emphasized the need for more frequent park maintenance and police surveillance at night at Echo Lake Park. She commented on the unsightly graffiti and litter, pointing out that it only takes a few such incidents to being to degrade such an area. She said while the neighborhood appreciates the funded lake water quality tests by the City and the stocking of trout by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, residents need consistent help to keep the park attractive, sanitary, and safe. This is particularly true of a park that is located on a small lake, along a public trail and across from a major transit center.
Mr. Deal affirmed that some of the problems at Echo Lake Park can be attributed to the close proximity of the transit center. He said Echo Lake Park probably has the most after-hours activity of any park in Shoreline.
Councilmember Hansen concurred. He suggested that more monitoring by the police might help solve the problems. Regarding the parks budget, he noted that the presentation included 2005 budget figures and he wondered if these were actual figures.
Mr. Deal responded that although they are not the actual figures, they are reasonably accurate, perhaps with the exception of revenue figures.
Councilmember Ryu emphasized the role that volunteers can play in maintaining City parks. She also expressed support for efforts to educate people on the prevention of graffiti and litter control.
Mr. Peterson said the City sill be hiring seasonal staff soon and will look into the resources that might be available at the high schools.
Mr. Olander affirmed the greater need for part-time help and volunteers in the spring and fall seasons.
Councilmember Way expressed appreciation for the parks maintenance crew, noting their help and expertise have been invaluable to her neighborhood. She said the City can connect with the public through effective park maintenance. She encouraged everyone to get out and enjoy the wildlife and vegetation that can be found in City parks. Finally, she asked if there was a plan for vegetation management in the parks system.
Mr. Deal replied that $50,000 was reserved in the 2006 budget for an urban forest plan, although it’s mostly an inventory of trees. He reiterated the ongoing effort by residents to remove invasive plants in City parks, noting that public participation has been strong in the area.
Councilmember Way wondered if members of the public could take it upon themselves to help maintain parks in their neighborhoods.
Mr. Deal said the City welcomes anyone who would like to help maintain the parks, but staff would like to train them first and track their time.
The Council and staff then discussed the need for increased maintenance and clean-up of major events. Staff clarified for Councilmember Way that utilities are now accounted for in the park budget, which explains the difference in efficiency measures from 2004 to 2005. Also, the shutting-down of Fields A and B for renovation will create a revenue loss. Mr. Deal clarified that the measurements for field rentals has been revised and updated, so the 2005 budget figures might be misleading. He confirmed for Mayor Ransom that the revenue difference was in the passive park areas, such as shelters.
Councilmember Way encouraged the City to plant more trees, noting that there is always something more we can do. Mr. Deal said that goal can be incorporated into the Urban Forestry Management Plan.
Councilmember McGlashan wondered if passage of the bond, which would add 25 more acres to the City’s park inventory, would necessitate an additional member on staff. Mr. Peterson was confident that the City’s needs would be covered with the addition of the new Parks Maintenance II position.
Deputy Mayor Fimia noted that with the passage of amendments to the Critical Areas Ordinance, pesticides and herbicides are not used on City-owned right-of-way. She pointed out the existence of vendors which provide aerial photography services as a means to inventory trees. This information can be used to estimate surface water costs and make other financial projections.
Mr. Deal affirmed that this is exactly the type of work the staff will be pursuing in the Urban Forestry Plan. He commented that the City has an excellent GIS mapping system.
Deputy Mayor Fimia commented that environmental attractions, such as landmark trees, can be a great for tourism. She outlined her idea for a “passport” volunteer program, which would mutually benefit the volunteer and the City. Mr. Deal said the City will continue to work on ideas to expand its base of volunteers.
Responding to Councilmember McGlashan, Mr. Deal said the City has been researching Adopt-A-Park programs in other cities, and the Parks Board is currently considering a draft plan.
Mayor Ransom wished to view the parks maintenance budget in terms of active fields versus passive fields. He speculated that of the 353 total acres in the park system, there might be between 50 to 70 acres of active fields (soccer/baseball fields). He wondered about the difference in the cost of maintaining both types. He felt it should be possible to estimate the cost of active field maintenance.
Mr. Deal commented that no “sharp line” has been established between active parks and passive parks; those figures would require some calculation.
After further discussion, Mayor Ransom commented that prior to City incorporation, King County only spent about $250 per acre for Shoreline passive parks and $7,000 per acre for active ball fields. He said although the City of Shoreline spends much more than that, it is spending it more efficiently, and park usage has increased by four times
Mr. Olander commented on the parks workload figures, noting that baseball/soccer fields were prepared for nearly 1,300 games. He complimented the efforts of the maintenance crew, noting they are the dedicated, “behind the scenes” workers that do an incredible job.
Councilmember Way requested that the outdoor light at Paramount Park be shut off during the stargazing events.
(b) U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement
Mr. Olander noted that this item was brought forth by the Council and staff is seeking direction on whether it should be proposed for adoption.
Mayor Ransom read a portion of the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement (USMCPA), which urges federal and state governments to enact policies and programs to meet or exceed the target of reducing global warming pollution levels to 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012. It also urges the U.S. Congress to pass bipartisan greenhouse gas reduction legislation that includes clear timetables and emission limits. The agreement also strives to meet or exceed Kyoto Protocol targets for reducing global warming pollution through a number of actions that can be taken in our own communities.
Responding to Councilmember Way, Mayor Ransom said the inspiration for endorsing this agreement came when former Vice President Al Gore visited Seattle and gave a presentation on the threat of global warming. He reported on ice levels and carbon dioxide levels in Greenland and Iceland, explaining that science has shown that carbon dioxide levels are currently at the highest point in 600,000 years. Carbon dioxide levels have historically ranged from 50 parts per million (ppm) to 300 ppm, but the present carbon dioxide level is 360 ppm. He said estimates show that levels may reach 600 ppm in another 45 years. He speculated that unless something is done, carbon dioxide levels may be unstoppable.
Councilmember Way said the evidence of global warming is overwhelming and citizens have a strong desire to stop this trend. She said the City can make a strong statement and commitment by signing on to the agreement with the other 224 cities. She pointed out that the nation took action on endangered species when it recognized a threat, and the City should do the same in this case. She added that this is not a “feel good” measure but a serious and real concern, so she urged the Council to support it.
Councilmember Hansen commented that Shoreline cannot change the global climate, and the issue of global warming has not been decided by the scientific community. He said there have been warming and cooling cycles throughout history, noting that grain was being cultivated in Greenland in 1000 A.D. He said although there are good reasons to have clean water, parks, and a healthy natural environment, global warming is beyond our ability to control. He said signing on to the agreement is only a symbolic gesture that accomplishes no practical benefit. He said the index that tracks the world’s warmth peaked in 1998. He said current climatology is only focused on carbon dioxide, but the most significant greenhouse gas is water vapor. He contended that ocean currents, sun spots, and volcanic action have more effect on the global climate than greenhouse gases. He noted that the March 27 minutes indicate that global warming would be discussed at the Council retreat, so he did not support giving direction to staff at this time.
Councilmember Ryu felt that the City could make incremental steps, noting that “the little things can add up.” She pointed out that Shoreline is already implementing many of the recommendations in the Agreement, such as incentives for energy conservation. She felt that most items were revenue-neutral, but she requested staff input regarding the budget implications of measuring emission levels. She expressed support for endorsing the Agreement since Shoreline is already setting up guidelines for its own behavior.
Referring to page 28 of the Council packet, Councilmember McGlashan read the statistical requirements relating to greenhouse gas emissions. He was not entirely comfortable with the stated mandatory emission targets and timetables because it is difficult to accurately measuring greenhouse gas levels. He felt the issues should be discussed in more detail at the Council Retreat before giving staff direction.
Deputy Mayor Fimia said she is ready to give staff direction tonight. She pointed out that much of the conventional wisdom of the past has been found to be in error today. She said although other factors besides greenhouse gases cause global warming, the City can make incremental changes for the better. She suggested that the Council discuss specific projects at the Retreat to which emission standards could be applied. She encouraged infrastructure improvements that reduce the number of trips and investments that encourage people to “get out of their cars.” She noted that Councilmembers could carpool to meetings and set goals for ourselves and staff.
Mayor Ransom said while the consensus in the scientific community is not unanimous, the prevailing opinion is that greenhouse gases have a significant affect on global warming. He said even if endorsing the Agreement is only a symbolic gesture, it might influence actions on the national level. He noted that the United States has less than five percent of the world’s population, but it is responsible for 25 percent of the world’s global warming pollutants. He said it would be good to curtail that and he urged the Council to endorse the Agreement.
Councilmember Way concurred, stating that even the smallest, incremental action can make a difference, and Shoreline citizens want to make a difference. She said she cares about the planet and about her City, street, and family. The Council can discuss this more at the Retreat, but staff should be given direction to pursue this because it is a “win-win” situation. She emphasized that there is no disadvantage to endorsing the Agreement.
Councilmember Hansen pointed
out that the United States has not even signed on to the Kyoto Protocols, and
some have estimated the costs of doing so in the trillions of dollars. He
said several of the protocols are very good but they have nothing to do with
global warming. He said he could identify several professors from
reputable universities who oppose the Kyoto Protocols. He concluded that
it is Council’s job to improve parks, roads, and other things that make
the lives of Shoreline citizens better, but this does nothing for them.
Mayor Ransom indicated there was Council consensus to direct staff to return with a resolution to endorse the Agreement.
Mr. Olander noted that from a practical standpoint, the City is already implementing many of the recommendations, although measuring emission levels may prove challenging. He said staff would bring a resolution back for Council action.
Councilmember McGlashan requested that some of the statistical figures be refined. Staff noted that more refined figures could be obtained from the City of Seattle.
(c) Amendments to Council Rules of Procedure
Mr. Olander introduced this item, explaining that the Council requested a review and revising of its Rules of Procedure in order to balance the need for public input with the Council’s need to efficiently conduct City business. He briefly outlined the proposed changes, which include renaming the Council’s various meetings, providing three readings for any proposed action, consolidating opportunities for public comment, reformatting meetings and clarifying rules relating to Workshop Dinner Meetings.
Mayor Ransom called for public comment.
(a) Richard Johnsen, Shoreline, opposed the proposed removal of public comment from study sessions. He felt this would unfairly deprive citizens of bringing pertinent information to the Council’s attention. He also spoke in favor of retaining public comment periods following each agenda item, because it allows the public to respond to the staff presentations. He also opposed the proposal to limit speakers to two minutes if more than ten people are signed up to speak.
Mr. Olander concurred with Mr. Johnsen but clarified that there are many ways to communicate with the City Council, including public comment at meetings, e-mail, telephone, and voicemail. He said the Council wants as much public input as possible but would prefer it at the beginning of deliberations rather than at the end.
Councilmember Ryu expressed general support for the proposed amendments, noting that having three readings for proposed actions is an improvement over past practice. She recommended that the public comment period be retained for Study Sessions. She thanked staff for capturing the Council’s direction in the document.
Councilmember Way said she has always appreciated the opportunity to address the specifics on individual agenda items. She felt that eliminating the public’s opportunity to address agenda items at Business Meetings would deny the Council a valuable tool.
MEETING EXTENSION
At 10:02 p.m., Councilmember Ryu moved to extend the meeting until 10:15 p.m. Deputy Mayor Fimia seconded the motion, which carried 4-2, with Councilmembers Hansen and McGlashan dissenting.
Mr. Olander pointed out that Shoreline has provided more public comment opportunities than most cities, adding that Shoreline is the only city he has worked in that people can comment after each agenda item. He noted that Council packets are provided a week in advance, and people can also comment at Business Meetings before action is taken.
Responding to Councilmember Ryu, Mr. Olander confirmed that the Council is not precluded from holding more than one Study Session on a particular agenda item.
Deputy Mayor Fimia said the proposed changes are a good synopsis of what the Council decided at its Retreat. She requested that staff incorporate a new rule which would allow for 30-minute presentations from selected community groups.
Mayor Ransom said it is important and significant to allow public comment on Action Items at Business Meetings. He said there were problems in the past because the public was not allowed to comment on Action Items.
Councilmember Way felt the rules should allow some flexibility. She also commented on the large number of Action Items and the fact that public comment on each item can be cumbersome. She wondered if Council committees or other opportunities for Council deliberation might improve the process.
Mr. Olander pointed out that the Council can always move to suspend its rules if it feels more input is needed. He explained that the reason to have public comment on each agenda item in the past was to open up more avenues, but the proposed rules provide for more opportunities.
Councilmember Ryu concurred, noting that three readings for action items will ensure that the Council receives meaningful input in advance as well as reduce the need for item-by-item comments. She felt the Council could still approve more public comment opportunities as needed.
MEETING EXTENSION
At 10:15 p.m., Councilmember Ryu moved to extend the meeting until 10:30 p.m. Councilmember Way seconded the motion, which carried 4-1, with Councilmember McGlashan dissenting (Councilmember Hansen momentarily stepped away from the Council table).
Councilmember McGlashan concurred that providing three readings is a great improvement. He pointed out that the idea of 30-minute presentations by community groups was not considered at the Council Retreat. He asked staff to clarify the reason for removing Section 4.4.
Mr. Olander explained that Section 4.4 will not be necessary if the proposed changes are adopted.
Councilmember McGlashan agreed that there are many opportunities for public comment. He emphasized the need for members of the public to address the Council rather than addressing the TV. He suggested that perhaps public comment should not be televised if speakers do not follow the guidelines. He suggested that the last sentence of Section 6.7A be revised or eliminated, because the Council does not enforce rules governing speakers who purport to speak for recognized organizations.
Deputy Mayor Fimia concurred, noting that the City should allow organizations to police themselves.
Councilmember McGlashan opposed the new section proposed under Section 6.2, which allows the Mayor to direct a limited number of speakers to cover the views of their supporters, when there are large numbers of people signed up to speak. He felt this could potentially cause confusion or confrontations.
Deputy Mayor Fimia said it is not difficult to implement because people network and they can decide ahead of time who will represent their group.
MEETING EXTENSION
At 10:30 p.m., Councilmember Ryu extended the meeting until 10:40 p.m. Deputy Mayor Fimia seconded the motion, which carried 4-2, with Councilmembers Hansen and McGlashan dissenting.
Mr. Olander noted that substituting the word “request” for “direct” would allow for more flexibility in this situation.
Mayor Ransom suggested that the titles “Honorable” and Your Honor” not be stricken from Section 5.15, noting these are commonly used titles that are consistent with other cities’ practices. He also suggested adding the following: “At the Council meeting, for consistency, the Mayor and City Councilmembers shall be addressed as Mayor (surname) and Councilmember (surname).” It was noted that Section 5 is written in the context of Council meetings, so adding this would not be necessary.
Mayor Ransom also brought up the issue that there are times when a Councilmember needs or desires to recuse themselves from voting. He gave examples of this. He pointed out that the current rules do not provide for this or how it would be recorded, for example, when somebody is absent.
There was Council consensus to accept the changes in Section 5.15 as proposed by staff. The Council provided additional direction to Mr. Olander on what the final proposal should look like.
7. ADJOURNMENT
At 10:39 p.m., Mayor Ransom declared the meeting adjourned.
_________________________
Scott Passey, City Clerk