CITY OF SHORELINE
 
SHORELINE CITY COUNCIL
SUMMARY MINUTES OF BUSINESS MEETING

 

Monday, December 11, 2006                                                   Shoreline Conference Center
7:30 p.m.                                                                                                   Mt. Rainier Room
 

 

PRESENT:       Mayor Ransom, Deputy Mayor Fimia, Councilmember Gustafson,                                            Councilmember Hansen, Councilmember McGlashan, Councilmember                          Ryu, and Councilmember Way.

 

ABSENT:        None 

 

1.

CALL TO ORDER

 

The meeting was called to order at 7:32 p.m. by Mayor Ransom, who presided.

 

2.

FLAG SALUTE/ROLL CALL

 

Upon roll call by the City Clerk, all Councilmembers were present.

 

 

(a) Proclamation honoring Ros Bird’s Retirement from the Shoreline-Lake Forest Park Arts Council



Mayor Ransom read a proclamation honoring Ros Bird for her contributions to the Shoreline community as the executive director of the Shoreline-Lake Forest Park Arts Council.  He also presented her with a plaque to commemorate her service.

 

Ms. Bird accepted the proclamation and the plaque, noting that it has been an honor and a privilege to serve.  She said she looks forward to seeing collaborative projects in the future. 

 

3.

CITY MANAGER’S REPORT AND FUTURE AGENDAS


Bob Olander, City Manager, reported on past and future activities in the City.  He commented on the success of the Christmas ship event at Richmond Beach.  He reported that the trees in Ronald Bog Park show evidence of beaver activity.   He briefly reported on the monthly maintenance to soccer fields A & B, and the metal framework installed on the Aurora Avenue bridge.  He announced that the next meeting of Comprehensive Housing Strategy Citizen Advisory Committee would be held on December 12, and the next Planning Commission meeting will be held December 14; the next Council meeting will be held January 8, 2007.

 

Councilmember Way reported that a store clerk was shot and killed at a convenience store on 5th Avenue NE in the Ridgecrest neighborhood.  She urged people to donate to the memorial fund that has been set up for the victim’s family. 

 

Councilmember Ryu noted that any information people might have about this crime would be helpful.  It was noted that citizens can provide reports to the police tip-line at 546-7861.   

 

Deputy Mayor Fimia commended Mr. Rob Beem and Mr. Steve Cohn for their work with the Comprehensive Housing Strategy Citizen Advisory Committee.  She said she is impressed with the tone and coordination of the group, adding that the meetings are open to the public.

 

4.

REPORTS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS

 

5.

GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT  

 

            (a)        Teresa Lee, Shoreline, announced that her Shorecrest High School senior project is a charity banquet on January 5, 2007 at the Shoreline Conference Center.  The banquet proceeds will benefit underprivileged students in Peru.   She provided her contact information to those interested in purchasing tickets. 

 

            (b)        Charlotte Haines, Shoreline, urged the Council to approve the budget as presented by the City Manager and staff.  She said the proposed amendments may have merit, but we can't afford the risk of taking money out of reserves.  She stressed a focus on economic development rather than raising taxes on homeowners.  She urged the Council to take the advice of its excellent and knowledgeable staff.

 

            (c)        LaNita Wacker, Shoreline, thanked the Shoreline School Board, Shoreline Water District Commissioners, and the City Council for making the purchase of the Southwoods a reality.  She recognized the efforts of Bob Olander, Stu Turner, Sue Walker, Bill Clements, Shari Winstead-Tracy, Dick Deal, Julie Modrzejewski, Bernard Seeger, Audrey Jacobsen, Miriam Sleeper, Shari Marlin, Vicki Westberg, and the Southwoods Preservation Group.    She also thanked the students of the SAFE club at Shorecrest High School as well as the thousands of people who voted for the parks bond. 

 

            (d)        George Mauer, Shoreline, commented on the scoping phase of the Aurora Corridor Phase II project.  He said the Council and City Manager should address three outcomes early in the process: 1) transportation system; 2) economic development; and 3) impact on the physical environment. He elaborated on each of these outcomes, emphasizing safety, level of service (LOS), impact on adjacent neighborhoods, competitive rate of return on taxpayers investment, jobs, business preservation, and a net improvement in environment's current status.  He concluded that if the City addresses these components, there will be no surprises to the citizens.

 

            (e)        Wendy DiPeso, Shoreline, speaking on behalf of Sustainable Shoreline, urged the Council to extend the public comment period for the Aurora Corridor scoping phase by three weeks to give people more time to gather information and talk to people in neighboring communities.

 

            (f)         Joe Ripley, Shoreline, commented that there was a lot of talk but very few facts at the scoping meeting for the Aurora Corridor Phase II project.  He said people will have many more detailed questions, but they don’t know where to get more information about the project.  He said additional time is absolutely vital because citizens cannot offer meaningful comments and questions without meaningful information.  He commented that u-turns are unsafe and keeping traffic moving should be a higher priority. 

 

            (g)        Bill Bear, Shoreline, concurred with previous speakers in urging the Council to extend the public input period by three weeks.  He said the information is very complex and there are many factors involved.  He noted that citizen input is the key, pointing out that the primary beneficiaries of the Aurora Corridor Project are not the people in Shoreline, but the drivers.

 

            (h)        Gretchen Atkinson, Shoreline, urged the Council to pass the budget as proposed in its original form, noting that the amendments would draw down the City’s savings program.  She noted that the Council already reduced revenues by reducing the gambling tax rate.  She encouraged the Council to maintain the number of Currents newsletters for 2007 because the citizen survey shows this is where people obtain City information.  She also supported ongoing funding for Economic Development because it has already worked well in North City.

 

Mr. Olander clarified that the intent of the scoping meeting is not to provide answers but to ensure that the City is asking all the right questions.   He urged citizens to submit their comments and questions, noting that Mr. Ripley’s questions are exactly the kind of comments that are needed.   He said the City will check the federal regulations with regard to possibly extending the public comment period.

 

Deputy Mayor Fimia expressed support for extending it as long as it doesn't delay the completion date.  She suggested that the City should mail comment cards to Aurora Avenue businesses because it is a very busy time for merchants.

 

Mayor Ransom supported an extension because of the busy holiday season.

 

Councilmember Ryu said she would appreciate a two week extension at the very least, noting that merchants are busy and don’t have time to consider the issues.  She urged the City to get the input of the merchants who have “lived through” the Aurora Corridor Phase 1 project.

 

Councilmember Way concurred with the extension, noting that most people are still not aware of the scoping process.

 

Councilmember Gustafson agreed but reminded Council that the cost of time is money.  He felt the City should get additional comments but also apply the lessons from Aurora Corridor Phase 1. 

 

Kirk McKinley, Aurora Corridor and Interurban Trail Bridges Project Manager, responded to Councilmember McGlashan that about 3,000 comment cards were mailed to Aurora Avenue business and property owners based on prior mailing lists.

  

6.

APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA


Councilmember Way requested that items 7(e) and 7(f) be pulled from the Consent Calendar and made Action items 8(c) and 8(d).  Councilmember Ryu requested that items 7(c) and 7(d) be pulled from Consent and made Action items 8(a) and 8(b).  Upon motion by Councilmember Gustafson, seconded by Councilmember Hansen and unanimously carried, the agenda was approved as amended.

 

7.

CONSENT CALENDAR

 

Deputy Mayor Fimia moved approval of the Consent Calendar.  Councilmember Hansen seconded the motion, which carried 7-0, and the following items were approved:

          (a)          Minutes of October 9, 2006

 

          (b)          Approval of expenses and payroll as of November 30, 2006 in the                                              amount of  $2,692,477.60

 

          (g)          Ordinance No. 455 extending the Shoreline Water District Franchise



 

(c) North Central Section - Interurban Trail Construction Contract Award Recommendation



Councilmember Ryu moved to award a construction contract with Road Construction Northwest, Inc. in the amount of $1,551,962.70 for construction of the North Central segment of the Interurban Trail for Base Bid plus Additive Alternate #1; and authorize the City Manager or designee to approve change orders of up to 10% of the contract amount for project contingencies. Councilmember Gustafson seconded the motion. 

 

Councilmember Ryu asked about the design of Alternative 1, the proposed sidewalk at N 185th Street and Midvale Avenue N.

 

Dave Buchan, Capital Projects Manager, described the proposed curb, gutter, and sidewalk improvements at the NE corner of this intersection, noting that the sidewalk extends approximately 180 feet back to the complex on the east side.

 

Councilmember Ryu pointed out that one contractor was the lowest bid for Alternative 1, but they were the fourth highest on the base bid.  She asked if it is possible to use the lowest bidders for the base bid and for Alternative 1.

 

Mr. Buchan said it is not possible because the sequence of the additives must be maintained for fair bidding purposes.

 

Councilmember Ryu noted that the project budget totals $2.167 million, but this contract is only for $1.55 million.  

 

Mr. Buchan explained that the project includes contingencies for construction management and staff time, which adds up to the total project amount.

 

Councilmember McGlashan pointed out that the northwest corner of the intersection also needs improvement.  He inquired if the Interurban Trail crossing at this intersection posed any problems.

 

Mr. Buchan said the contractor is required to coordinate with the property owner on the sequencing of the work; eventually it will become a signalized intersection.  The City has negotiated a right-of-way pass-through for the Interurban Trail.   

 

Mayor Ransom asked staff to address the issue of electrical infrastructure and lighting on the trail.

 

Mr. Buchan explained that the lowest bid was higher than the City’s estimate, which doesn’t allow the City to include the lighting infrastructure for this project.  However, the project will include installation of underground conduit, which will accommodate the installation of lighting fixtures in the future. 

 

A vote was taken on the motion, which carried 7-0.

 

 

(d) Approval of Echo Lake Neighborhood Association Mini-Grant in the amount of  $5,000



Councilmember Ryu moved to approve $5,000 in 2006 Mini-Grant funds for the Neighborhood Association to be combined with $3,400 carried over from the 2001 Mini-Grant, for a total of $8,400 in Mini-Grant funds.  Councilmember Hansen seconded the motion.

 

Councilmember Ryu asked about the total amount awarded to-date in the 2006 Mini-Grant fund.

 

Joyce Nichols, Communications and Intergovernmental Relations Director, responded that the total amount awarded to-date in 2006 is $16,500; the Council has approved $30,000 in Mini-Grant funds for 2006.

 

A vote was taken on the motion, which carried 7-0.

 

 

(e) Ratification of Southwoods Purchase Agreement between the  City of Shoreline and the Shoreline School District

 

 

(f) Ratification of Southwoods Purchase Agreement between the  City of Shoreline and the Shoreline Water District

 

Councilmember Way moved to ratify the agreement authorizing the purchase of the Southwoods Lot 2 from the Shoreline School District and the agreement authorizing the purchase of the Southwoods Lots 3 and 4 from the Shoreline Water District.  Councilmember Ryu seconded the motion.

 

Councilmember Way noted that these properties have enormous meaning to people.  She asked staff to briefly describe the properties and the process. 

 

Mr. Olander described the properties and the process that has culminated in the proposed purchase agreements.  He thanked the Shoreline School District and Shoreline Water District for their partnership and cooperation in making this purchase a reality.  He said although the parties must still approve the sale, the City can proceed with ratifying the purchase agreements.  He urged the Council to ratify the agreements. 

 

Councilmember Way thanked the members of the Parks Bond campaign committee for their efforts in this regard.

 

Mr. Olander thanked the residents of Shoreline for being willing to tax themselves vis-à-vis the parks bond to acquire these properties. 

  

A vote was taken on the motion, which carried 7-0.

  

8.  (a) 2007 Budget Adoption

 

 

(a.2)  Ordinance No. 451, increasing City fees for inflation, revising fees for Planning and Development Services, reorganizing  Hearing Examiner and Business License Fees, and amending  Chapters 3.01, 5.07, 5.10, and 5.15 of the Municipal Code

 

Deputy Mayor Fimia moved to approve Ordinance No. 451, increasing City fees for inflation, revising fees for Planning and Development Services, reorganizing Hearing Examiner and Business License Fees, and amending Chapters 3.01, 5.07, 5.10, and 5.15 of the Municipal Code.  Councilmember Hansen seconded the motion.

  

There was no one wishing to provide public comment on this item.

 

A vote was taken on the motion, which carried 7-0.

 

 

(a.3) Ordinance No. 449 adopting the annual budget of the City of  Shoreline for the year 2007

 

Councilmember Hansen moved to approve Ordinance No. 449 adopting the annual budget of the City of Shoreline for the year 2007. Councilmember Gustafson seconded the motion.

  

Responding to Deputy Mayor Fimia, Debbie Tarry, Finance Director, explained the proposed amendments.   Deputy Mayor Fimia noted that the amendments do not propose the use of $1.4 million in reserves, as some have stated.

 

Responding to Councilmember Ryu, Ms. Tarry noted that while the amendments use some City resources, the overall budget would be balanced with the adoption of the amendments.

 

Mayor Ransom noted that his absences at prior meetings have prevented him from expressing an opinion on the budget amendments, so he wanted to express his views now.  He said he expressed opposition to using reserve funds to the Council by voice mail.  He stated he did not want to use reserve funds until the actual costs for the City Hall project are known.  He noted that the City’s bond rating is based on the City’s financial condition.  He opposed other amendments that propose reducing funding for travel and training.  He felt the City Council and staff use this money very effectively to bring in millions of dollars for the City.  He said the Council used its funds effectively for retreats and lobbying for additional resources.  Regarding police services, he felt the amendment relating to an additional street crimes officer was not needed because the police chief could reassign an existing officer to street crimes.  He noted that previously, the City fully funded four street crimes officers; two were reassigned after they closed 225 drug houses and the workload dropped.  He felt adding another officer for an ongoing position would cut deeply into one-time reserve funds.  Regarding a Fircrest planning process, he noted that it largely depends on the actions of the governor and state legislature.  He said DSHS and the Developmentally Disabled Division were showing very limited interest in a master plan by restricting discussions to only a few buildings they are interested in renting.  He agreed with amendments relating to environmental mini-grants and surface water fees. He said he has mixed feelings about the different programs within the Economic Development Program.

 

Councilmember Ryu asked Mayor Ransom to clarify his position regarding her proposal to use reserve funds for a traffic light at NE 170th Street and 15th Avenue NE.  

 

Mayor Ransom said he supports a pedestrian-activated traffic light at the intersection because it is not likely that the intersection will qualify for warrants or state/federal money for a full traffic signal. 

 

Councilmember Ryu asked for the Mayor’s position on her proposal to remove local improvement district (LID) funds from the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP).  She noted that the citizen survey indicated that pedestrian sidewalks in neighborhoods is a high priority, but funding them using City funds and LIDs are “double taxing” our residents.

 

Mayor Ransom said at some point the City has to rely on LIDs because it cannot afford to build sidewalks throughout the City.  He said the plan is to build sidewalks in targeted locations, such as within 1,000 feet of schools.

 

Mr. Olander felt there was Council consensus to separate the capital budget items from the operating budget; the operating budget is the focus of tonight’s action. 

 

Mayor Ransom called for public comment.

 

            (a)        Bill Bear, Shoreline, expressed support for the amendments, noting that the underlying factor is the value of human life.  He said everything that happens to people on the lower end of the economic scale impacts us.  He said if people don’t get the counseling they need, the City will end up spending more to deal with the adverse impacts resulting from a lack of mental health services.  He favored a Youth and Low Income Needs Assessment as well as making Economic Development funding more contingent on results.

 

            (b)        Wendy DiPeso, Shoreline, addressed the Council Goals and noted that safety is the key point for Goal #7.  She said the public will stay in their cars if they don't feel safe as pedestrians.  She said Shoreline spends less than comparable cities on law enforcement, and the assaults, murder, and vandalism suggest we have a problem.  She expressed support for the amendments proposed by Deputy Mayor Fimia and Councilmember Way. 

 

            (c)        Lanita Wacker, Shoreline, urged the Council to support the budget as presented by staff.  She disagreed with Amendment #1 because the police chief should be allowed to make assignments and not be “micromanaged.”   She said Economic Development should continue to be funded if we want more revenues coming into the City.  She opposed reducing travel budgets because they can be used to get more ideas from other cities and more revenues for Shoreline.  She said she supports additional funding for mental health counseling but not at the expense of travel, dues, and memberships.  She opposed the use of reserves for a youth/low income needs assessment because the Human Services Manager has assessments available. 

 

            (d)        Maria Walsh, Mountlake Terrace, noted that she has a son living at Fircrest Rehabilitation Facility.  She said she would like to collaborate with the City regarding Firecrest issues, and while she doesn’t like borrowing from savings, a preliminiary process on Fircrest would be useful.  She expressed hope that the Comprehensive Housing Strategy CAC will address Fircrest issues, adding that Fircrest can be compatible with low-income and senior housing developments.

 

Mr. Olander suggested that the Council refer to the budget amendment sheet that was distributed earlier.

 

Deputy Mayor Fimia moved to amend the budget by increasing the Police Department budget by $137,000 in order to add one officer to the Street Crimes Unit, and to decrease the proposed budget by $137,000 in the following areas: a) $109,000 in Economic Development contracts; b) $4,000 in City Council retreat funds; c) $10,000 in professional services in the City Attorney budget; d) $14,000 in general Travel, Dues and Memberships.  Councilmember Ryu seconded the motion.

 

Deputy Mayor Fimia noted that the Council has an obligation to examine the budget and see if there is a way to improve it.  She said following an analysis of public safety, the issue of street crimes rose to the top of her priority list.  She said the street crimes unit investigates everything from narcotics to vice, auto theft, burglary, and so on.  The benefits of adding one detective is significant because the department is small to begin with.  She said the City is already seeing the effect of traffic officers and patrolling, so it doesn't make sense to reassign existing officers. 

 

Councilmember Ryu supported the motion, noting that while citizens consider Shoreline a livable City, it is not really supplying enough staff.  She said having two plainclothes officers increases the City’s ability to achieve its safety goals.  She said if criminals know that Shoreline is a tough place to do business, they will learn not to commit crime here.  She said crime statistics will improve just like traffic enforcement improved with additional staff.

 

Councilmember Way expressed support for the amendment, noting that the City would benefit from an additional street crimes officer in terms of crime prevention.  She speculated about whether the recent homicide in North City could have been prevented with an additional officer.  She felt police work would only be enhanced with another officer available to investigate these crimes, but without the funding they won’t have the capacity. The citizen survey results say that quality of police service received lot of emphasis, and there is lots of input stressing the need for crime prevention. The police say they would consider an additional officer valuable and useful, and the public clearly wants us to provide this service. 

 

Councilmember Gustafson opposed the amendment because this item should be considered within the overall analysis of the City’s long-term financial strategy.   He said the staff worked hard to maintain a positive budget, and he agrees with staff’s recommendation to consider a financial strategy.  He noted that crime has gone down over past year, and safety reports have gone up in every category.  He said people feel safer in 2006 because the overall feeling of safety in the City has increased from 79 percent to 82 percent.  He said it is not Council’s job to micromanage the City Manager or the sheriff.

 

Councilmember Hansen opposed the amendment because the police did not ask for an additional officer.  He said the police chief, under the direction of the City Manager, can reassign personnel, and it is not the Council’s position to micromanage.  He said although the amendments are revenue-neutral for 2006, the proposals have a long-term impact, as budget deficits will increase over time.  He said rather than spending less on retreats, perhaps more time and money should be spent on retreats and negotiation.  He said he likes the $32,000 increase for human services, but not at expense of dues, travel, and memberships.

 

Councilmember McGlashan opposed the amendment.  He said money should not be taken from reserves because the City might have to depend on them later.  He also did not want to risk the City’s bond rating by using reserve funds.  He said this Council made bad mistakes at the beginning of the year which could have funded these proposed items.  He commented specifically on the resignation of Steve Burkett, lawsuits, and gambling tax reductions.  He calculated that all these items amount to over $450,000, which could have been used to fund three additional police officers.

 

Mayor Ransom noted that the Council budgeted that position in the street crimes unit but it was transferred out to traffic; the officer could be transferred back to street crimes.  He noted that the $450,000 figure for travel/membership/dues is somewhat misleading because certain elements of that line item cannot be reduced. 

 

Deputy Mayor Fimia asked the Police Chief and the City Manager to respond to the proposal. 

 

Tony Burtt, Police Chief, characterized the shift of one officer from traffic patrol to street crimes as “robbing Peter to pay Paul.”  He explained that the police operate on minimum staffing levels already, so it would be very imprudent to move staff into street crimes.  He commented that he wouldn’t pull another officer out of traffic enforcement either.

 

Mr. Olander said an additional officer is at the top of his priority list, along with human services, safety, and sidewalks.  However, given the $400,000 budget deficit projected in 2008, it would be advisable to consider the entire range of needs. 

 

Deputy Mayor Fimia noted that the City has accumulated reserves totaling $9.1 million, or 33 percent of the operating budget, which far exceeds the 10 percent requirement.  She pointed out that the staff-proposed budget includes using $100,000 from reserves for a Natural Resource Management Strategy, so there is some precedence to the use of reserves.  Regarding police services, she said the City needs another officer tomorrow, not in one to two years.  She said this is not micromanaging but setting priorities. 

 

Ms. Tarry explained the staff recommendation regarding reserve fund spending.

 

Councilmember McGlashan agreed that the City needs to come up with more money because of a need for more services, but it must be done strategically.

 

Councilmember Hansen noted that Federal Way is increasing its police force by 18 officers because they passed a levy to support the additional staff.  He said perhaps the City of Shoreline should consider a similar budget amendment in 2007.

 

A vote was taken on the amendment, which failed 3-4, with Deputy Mayor Fimia and Councilmembers Ryu and Way voting in the affirmative.

 

Deputy Mayor Fimia moved to increase the Human Services budget by $32,000 for the Center for Human Services mental health counseling services, and to decrease general Travel, Dues and Memberships by $32,000.

 

Deputy Mayor Fimia noted that human services are a basic City responsibility.  She said the Center for Human Services (CHS) uses a sliding scale to provide counseling services for the working poor; they need an additional $32,000 to cover services for the whole year.  This is a great investment that brings back an enormous return, since King County continues to cut people off of county services.  She said this amendment would reduce the travel/dues/memberships budget by less than 10 percent.

 

Councilmember Ryu supported the amendment, noting that the City is only spending about $5 per person per year on human services, which is not adequate.  She felt we should be spending more for a city that prides itself on a great school system, livability, and safety.  She said this amendment will make mental health counseling services available all year, which will help prevent other problems.  She urged the Council to support the motion, pointing out that there are other competing needs and priorities and county funding is disappearing. 

 

MEETING EXTENSION

 

At 9:30 p.m., Councilmember McGlashan moved to extend the meeting until midnight. Councilmember Hansen seconded the motion, which carried 4-3, with Deputy Mayor Fimia and Councilmembers Ryu and Way dissenting.

 

Councilmember Gustafson said he is going to follow the City Manager and staff recommendation regarding the budget.   He said he has some amendments too, but they should be part of a long-term financial strategy.

 

Councilmember Hansen said he has the most sympathy for this particular amendment but cautioned the Council against assuming services without getting the revenue sources to support them.  He disagreed that human services are a basic City responsibility.  He did not agree with the proposed reductions for funding the additional services.

 

Councilmember Way noted that Councilmembers have taken several worthwhile trips this year, but sacrificing a small portion of funding is a worthy price to help CHS.  She said $32,000 is pretty reasonable for a program that could prevent crime, suicide, homelessnesss, and other social problems. She said it seems to be a minor expense that will garner large benefits.  She said she is proud to vote for this amendment and urged the Council’s support. 

 

Mayor Ransom stated that mental health services are largely a state and county function, and whenever the City increases funding, the others cut back.  He recommended asking the King County Council and State Legislature for adequate funding for this program.  He pointed out that the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program provides funding for human services, and as the CDBG funds are cut back, we seem to supplement it.  He noted that we’ve already increased the budget 20-30% to make up for past cuts by the state and county.  He opposed the amendment because he felt the City should not absorb the role of the county, which comes as a mandate from the state.

 

Deputy Mayor Fimia said that each jurisdiction passes blame on each other every year, during which time the public is not served.  She urged the Council to pass this amendment.

 

Councilmember Way pledged not to participate in any more Council-funded trips or dinners if this amendment fails.

 

A vote was taken on the motion, which failed 3-4, with Deputy Mayor Fimia and Councilmembers Ryu and Way voting in the affirmative.

 

Deputy Mayor Fimia moved to increase Human Services funding by $20,000 for a “Needs and Asset Assessment of Youth and Low Income” to be funded by a one time reduction of $20,000 in General Fund Reserves.  Councilmember Ryu seconded the motion.

 

Deputy Mayor Fimia emphasized the importance of understanding the long-term financial needs of youth and low income residents, many of whom are not represented in surveys and focus groups.  The intent is that this would be a process with significant stakeholder involvement.

 

Councilmember Gustafson agreed that a needs/asset assessment is needed, but it should be part of an overall master plan.  He suggested that the Council consider it at a future retreat, so he opposed the amendment at this time.  

 

Councilmember Hansen reported on the large number of youth delegates who attended the National League of Cities Conference this month.  He said he agreed with the needs of youth, and because it’s a small amount of money from reserves, he could support it.  However, he said although he wouldn’t oppose the amendment, it’s probably best to carry it forward to discussions next year.

  

Mayor Ransom had mixed feelings about the proposal, noting there are many parks and recreation programs that the City already provides for at-risk youth.   He was inclined to address this proposal at a future Council retreat.

 

Councilmember McGlashan reminded the Council that the youth master plan did not make the goal list at the last Council retreat.  He said this should be looked at strategically, and $20,000 probably won’t be adequate.

 

RECESS

 

At 10:15 p.m., Mayor Ransom called for a 10 minute recess.  At 10:27 p.m. the Council meeting reconvened.

  

A vote was taken on the motion, which failed 3-3, with Deputy Mayor Fimia and Councilmembers Ryu and Way voting in the affirmative and Councilmember Hansen abstaining.

 

Councilmember Way moved to create an Environmental Education Grant program of $30,000 to be funded by $20,000 from the Surface Water Utility Fund and $10,000 by General Fund monies from the transfer of $10,000 from the Neighborhood Mini-Grant account.  Councilmember Ryu seconded the motion.

 

Councilmember Way noted that the neighborhoods are not availing themselves of all the funds in the Mini-Grant account.  She suggested that this program be available as an option for neighborhoods that want to do environmental projects.  She felt it could potentially be used as a matching fund account for other grant sources.

  

Deputy Mayor Fimia characterized this amendment as a targeting of mini-grant funds for environmental purposes.  She said while the money remains in the neighborhood fund, it is designated for environmental projects.  The remaining $20,000 will be available for other organizations wishing to undertake environmental projects.

 

Responding to Council questions, Ms. Tarry clarified that the amendment proposes a total of $30,000 in the account; $10,000 would be existing neighborhood Mini-Grant funds designated for environmental projects, and $20,000 would come from the Surface Water Utility Fund. 

   

Councilmember Gustafson said it sounds like a good idea, but it should be placed in the same category as the other proposals; within the context of a Council retreat.  He said he would probably vote for it at that time, but he would like to know more about the criteria for environmental projects. 

 

Councilmember Way stated that the criteria could be developed as organizations submit their proposals.  She said there is support from the community for this type of program as evidenced by the support for the parks bond. 

 

Councilmember Ryu pointed out that the Council ratified the Southwoods purchase agreement earlier tonight, and the previous Council ratified purchase agreements with the school district.   She said one purpose of purchasing Southwoods was to preserve it for environmental education.  She stated that the City has spent millions of dollars purchasing land for environmental education, but now there’s no money to help the school district.  She supported the amendment because this is a small but effective way to fund the long-term goal of environmental education.

 

Councilmember Hansen pointed out that National League of Cities (NLC) sponsored workshops on Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) and green building practices.  He wondered if he would be eligible to apply for this grant to install solar panels, or if the proposal would remove impediments to green building practices.

 

Mayor Ransom assumed that this would be a mini-grant program for organizations, not individuals.  Councilmember Way affirmed that that is the intent of the amendment.

 

Mr. Olander clarified that such programs would have to have established criteria, so grants would not be provided on a case-by-case basis.

 

A vote was taken on the motion, which carried 4-3, with Councilmembers Gustafson, Hansen, and McGlashan dissenting.

 

Councilmember Way moved to increase the Planning and Development Services budget by $20,000 for a Fircrest Planning Process and to decrease General Fund Reserves one time by $20,000.  Deputy Mayor Fimia seconded the motion.

 

Councilmember Way explained that Fircrest is a residential rehabilitation facility and a historic Shoreline asset.  She said the intent of this amendment is to conduct an assessment to “jump start” a proposal that would eventually lead to a Fircrest master plan.  She said this amendment will demonstrate to the state and other stakeholders that we are serious about planning for the future of the Fircrest campus. She urged the Council’s support. 

 

Mayor Ransom asked how the money would be spent, noting that there are already staff assigned to work on Fircrest issues.

 

Councilmember Way said she anticipates that it would be spent on gathering information, although she doesn’t have all the details.

 

Deputy Mayor Fimia suggested that it would be a process to bring people together to develop a professional set of materials and strategic plan to present to the state.   She said unless the City finds common ground and identifies what can be done, the stalemate with the state will continue.  She added that the community would like to be involved in this process.

 

Mr. Olander noted that there is an incredible opportunity at Fircrest in terms of community assets and economic development, but they haven't found a willingness on the part of the state.  There could be advantages of having documents/plans to present, but it is not the factual information that is lacking, but a lack of political will on the part of the state.  He said he remains skeptical whether this will provide an impetus.

 

Councilmember Hansen felt the City should allow the state to initiate discussions on Fircrest.  He felt it would be counterproductive for the City to produce its own document because it would significantly increase our chances of being rejected.

 

Councilmember Ryu disagreed, noting it will require consultants and lobbying, regardless of which approach the City takes.  She supported the amendment because Fircrest is one of the Council’s goals, and $20,000 is not much to initiate a Fircrest master plan.  

 

Deputy Mayor Fimia pointed out that political will has to be generated and the governor needs to hear from the stakeholders in order to get the process moving.   She said when the elected officials see there is common ground, they will be more apt to move forward.

 

Councilmember Hansen said he could not support this amendment without knowing how the money would be spent.

 

Councilmember Way emphasized the need to nurture the political will, adding that there is support for Fircrest by our local representatives in Olympia.  She noted that dealing with DSHS is a formidable task, and sometimes asking once or twice is not enough.  She said we must ask in several different ways and reach out to the right elements.  She said all the right ingredients are there; its’ just a matter of rearranging them.   

 

Councilmember Ryu stated that there are over 600 beds provided by adult family homes in the City of Shoreline.  She pointed out that if these were all located in one place, it would be equivalent to a large hospital.  She used this example to illustrate that this is all the more reason to support Fircrest. 

 

Mayor Ransom asked if the funding would be spent at the discretion of the City Manager and Planning and Development Services Director.  Mr. Olander and Planning & Development Services Director Joe Tovar responded affirmatively.  

 

There was discussion about the effect of inserting the phrase “up to” before “$20,000” in the amendment.  Mr. Olander clarified that if the amendment passes, the budgeted amount will be $20,000, but the City doesn’t have to spend it all.  The phrase was accepted as a friendly amendment.

 

A vote was taken on the motion, which carried 4-3, with Councilmembers Gustafson, Hansen, and McGlashan dissenting.

 

Councilmember Ryu moved to remove $50,000 in the Community Capital Development (CCD) contract of the Economic Development Program and allocate the funding as follows: 1) Mental health counseling ($30K); and 2) Needs and Asset Assessment of Youth and Low Income ($20K).  Councilmember Way seconded the motion.

 

Mr. Olander commented that small business retention is a Council goal, so this funding will be needed regardless of who provides the service.

 

Councilmember Ryu commented that she has been very patient with the CCD contract in terms of effectiveness and deliverables, but they spent $2,000/month for 8 months with little to show for their efforts.  She urged the Council to consider this proposal. 

 

Mayor Ransom said he is not predisposed to CCD, but the Council has already voted on those two issues.  He felt he could not support it if it is tied to mental health and youth issues.   

 

After further Council discussion, a vote was taken on the motion, which failed 3-4, with Deputy Mayor Fimia and Councilmembers Ryu and Way voting in the affirmative.

 

Councilmember Way moved to amend the budget to reduce the CCD contract by $50,000 and to transfer funding to create a Renewable Energy Program in conjunction with Shoreline Community College.  Councilmember Ryu seconded the motion.

 

Councilmember Gustafson opposed the motion and emphasized the need for a strategic planning session.

 

Mayor Ransom noted his earlier commitment to the president of Shoreline Community College with regard to solar energy.  He said the college is interested in developing a program where they can train people in alternative energy and there was to be some support from the City for the “solar house.”

 

Councilmember Gustafson said there will be opportunities to discuss this at a planning session with feedback from the community.  He said such a program can be created at a later time in an organized and thoughtful manner with adequate public involvement.  He said there is value in partnering with the college, but this is not the appropriate time for this kind of proposal.

 

Mr. Olander expressed concern that there haven’t been any discussions with the college; nor is this something that staff has explored.  In addition, the Council needs to establish its priorities for additional service levels.  He said that he doesn’t know enough about the proposal to make any firm conclusions. 

 

Councilmember Way noted that the college is developing an outstanding renewable energy program, and while the CCD had some potential, they haven’t produced the desired results.  She felt a partnership with the college on renewable energy and sustainability would be a “win-win” situation.

 

Deputy Mayor Fimia agreed that such a program has lots of potential, but the need for Economic Development funds may still be there.  She felt the Council has given enough feedback to the City Manager to reexamine the investments in Economic Development.  She suggested an expedited schedule for addressing the City’s long-term needs and capital projects, and asked Councilmember Way to consider temporarily withdrawing her motion.

 

Mayor Ransom stated that City staff are feeling “blindsided” by the proposal and are raising concerns.  As a result, he felt it should be moved to a retreat discussion in January.  He asked staff to meet with Shoreline Community College in the meantime to get answers to the City’s questions and concerns.

 

After brief discussion, Councilmember Way withdrew the motion.

 

Deputy Mayor Fimia commented that due to her concerns about police services as well as Economic Development, she cannot support the proposed budget. 

 

Councilmember Way thanked the staff for their work on the budget.  She said while she appreciates support for her two amendments, she hopes that in the future more funding can be found for public safety.

 

Councilmember Ryu noted that she agreed with 98 percent of the budget, but she still has reservation about public safety and funding for human services.  She said she appreciates the environmental education program and Fircrest planning process, but the Council’s job is not to “rubber stamp” everything staff does.  She concluded that she appreciates the process in concept.

 

A vote was taken on the motion to approve Ordinance No. 449 adopting the budget for the City of Shoreline for the year 2007 as amended, which carried 5-2, with Deputy Mayor Fimia and Councilmember Ryu dissenting.

 

9.         ADJOURNMENT

 

At 11:45 p.m. Mayor Ransom declared the meeting adjourned.

 

/S/ Scott Passey, City Clerk