CITY OF SHORELINE

SHORELINE CITY COUNCIL
SUMMARY MINUTES OF STUDY SESSION

Monday, December 1, 2008 - 6:30 p.m.
Shoreline Conference Center
Mt. Rainier Room

PRESENT: Mayor Ryu, Deputy Mayor Scott, Councilmember Eggen, Councilmember Hansen, Councilmember McConnell, Councilmember McGlashan, and Councilmember Way

ABSENT: None

1. CALL TO ORDER

At 6:30 p.m. the meeting was called to order by Mayor Ryu, who presided.

2.	FLAG SALUTE/ROLL CALL

Mayor Ryu led the flag salute. Upon roll call by the City Clerk, all Councilmembers were present.

3.	CITY MANAGER’S REPORT AND FUTURE AGENDAS

Bob Olander, City Manager, provided updates and reports on various City meetings, projects, and events.

4.	COUNCIL REPORTS

5.	GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT

a) Charlotte Haines, Shoreline, invited the community to the 11th Annual North City Tree Lighting Event on Saturday, December 6th.

b) Jim DiPeso, Shoreline, highlighted an article showing the presence of graffiti and litter can induce undesirable behavior.

Councilmember Hansen commented favorably on the City of Shoreline public announcement regarding graffiti removal.

Mr. Olander commented that the City has kicked off an aggressive anti-graffiti program.

6.	STUDY ITEMS

(a) Update of Council Goal No. 8

Julie Underwood, Assistant City Manager, provided an update on the City’s effort to develop the "Healthy City Strategy." She noted that overall the development of the Healthy City Strategy would include: 1) Updating the Human Services Plan by fall 2009; 2) Identifying strategies for achieving desirable changes in the community over the next 10 years, consistent with resources available; 3) Developing a set of indicators to track progress on each outcome; 4) Developing a Youth Master Plan to implement a youth strategy by spring 2010; 5) Continue efforts to support the development of affordable housing; and 6) Leveraging existing events as well as plan events to include an emphasis on celebrating our diversity. She said that the $40,000 budget would be used for consultant services and additional administrative staff assistance. The consultant would assist City staff in interviewing human service providers; oversee the public involvement process which will include focus groups of citizens and at least one facilitated group discussion with human service providers; and prepare a report on the results of the public process and the input from the ad-hoc committee. The City staff, she explained, would be responsible for updating statistical information. Likewise, much of the ongoing support of the citizen committee would be handled using in-house staff. The City staff recommended that the City Council endorse the proposed program to implement Council's Goal No. 8 - Develop a Healthy Community Strategy. She noted that this is a strength-based framework and the City staff recommends forming an ad hoc citizen’s advisory committee to help study this and recommend action. She felt this would lay the foundation for a youth master plan.

Councilmember Hansen stated that the first AWC conference he attended was in 1997 and the Search Institute was the primary speaker and he said this report comes out of that meeting.

Councilmember Way referred to page 51 and inquired if the City has any socio-economic descriptors that explain where the City is on the desired outcomes. Ms. Underwood replied that there isn’t a lot of data and it hasn’t been analyzed.

Mr. Olander added that setting up some statistical monitoring and reporting needs to be done. He said some measures may be approximations. He noted that the City staff and the committee should establish measures to determine the effectiveness of the money the City is spending.Mr. Olander pointed out that page 14 shows what kinds of organizations are involved.

Mayor Ryu questioned if Councilmembers should serve on this committee. Ms. Underwood said originally the City staff didn’t think the Council would want to because of the time commitments. However, she said it may be a good idea to have liaisons.

Councilmember Eggen stated that there is a very active, faith-based organization missing here and Bill Bear is the contact. He noted that in some cases where there are no real outcomes it seems to make more sense to have two-stages of measurement. He said the academic community could identify the actions that result, to help reduce delinquency, violence and crime, and then decide if you're actually measuring something the City can control. Ms. Underwood added that sometimes cause-effect models are not accurate.

Mayor Ryu highlighted that there have been King County budget cuts to human services agencies. Mr. Olander submitted that this report would help the City set priorities, but not get into the actual funding levels. It should be valid for the next 5-10 years. It helps with priorities, goals, and measurements. Ms. Underwood added that the City would have to create the baseline data, then track King County funding. Mr. Olander highlighted that this would involve only those things that can be tracked.

Councilmember Hansen commented that the Rec Center, which was initiated by the City, does address a lot of major problems. He said there are also school programs at Kellogg. He noted that there are 40 assets in the City for teens and the City has done a great job. He noted that the report is amazing and it was written in 1998.

Rob Beem, Community Services Division Director, discussed the update of the youth policy plan, which was adopted in 2000. He said it has a large overlap between the fifteen desired outcomes, since nine of them involve youth issues. He recommended the City address the youth policy plan and affordable housing.

Ms. Underwood addressed the issue of cultural and racial diversity. She stated that the Lake Forest Park has a theme for 2009 called “Weaving a Cultural Tapestry”. She said she would like the City work with Lake Forest Park and hire a local artist to work with them and weave an art piece to be displayed in the new City Hall.

Mayor Ryu stated that the Council and citizens did a great job electing a diverse Council. She asked if the public will be allowed to bring things such as country flags and other materials to the tapestry and to the new City Hall. Ms. Underwood replied that she felt the artist would be open to anything.

Councilmember Way felt this is a good idea, but she wondered how to get more people involved who represent diverse cultures. Mr. Beem said he is proposing to update the Human Services Plan by next year, followed by an update of the Youth Master Plan. He added that the updates would address affordable housing and leveraged events to celebrate diversity.

Councilmember Way discussed additional ideas for the Task Force. She suggested having people from the health clinics, Shoreline Community College (SCC), the Chamber of Commerce, developmentally disabled organizations, the school resource officer (SRO), the Center for Human Services (CHS), and maybe a representative from Ballinger Homes included. Mr. Olander added that people from the district court and juvenile justice system should be included.

Mayor Ryu inquired if people from the Fircrest campus should be added. Mr. Beem replied that it can be looked at and they possibly could be included.

Councilmember McGlashan commented that he would like to direct the City staff to put the group together because the City staff is well-connected to all kinds of organizations. He noted that the 1998 group was done that way. Mr. Olander replied that the City can advertise and solicit volunteers and present the Council with the applications which would lead to Mr. Beem making a City staff recommendation to the Council. Councilmember McGlashan said he wants to avoid politicization of the process by getting the Council out of it.

Mayor Ryu commented that the prior Council had trouble updating the youth plan and staffing and paying for the SRO. She questioned if the schools are able to engage us in a meaningful way because of their budget issues. Mr. Beem said they have an intense focus on “getting in the black” and are able to communicate with the City at this time.

Deputy Mayor Scott asked about the list of people from Shorewood and Shorecrest High Schools. He asked if they were staff or students. Mr. Beem replied that they were school staff.

Deputy Mayor Scott inquired whether there was some thought about having youth members on the human services committee. He noted that within high schools there are several diversity-based groups already. Councilmember Way agreed. She stated that there are lots of students who could make a difference on this committee.

Councilmember McGlashan discussed the Senior Housing Assistance Group (SHAG) housing and asked if anyone knew of any organization to help them come into this. Mr. Beem stated that the City doesn’t get into the detailed site location for developers and has tried to put the word out in the non-profit housing development community, but not actively marketing sites. Mr. Olander commented that there is an economic development side and human services side to this and described both of them.

Councilmember Eggen noted that affordable housing is a good question. He stated that developers want to build in ways that causes problems in neighborhoods and it is best to scatter development throughout the City. He wanted the group to be more proactive in promoting affordable housing.

Councilmember McGlashan noted that when SHAG is looking for a site, they need a certain unit count to keep rents as low as possible to be able to build the building.

Councilmember Hansen discussed the Youth Services Plan and stated that former Councilmember Gustafson advocated it and noted that the school district didn't oppose it, but there was a resource problem with the City. Mr. Beem confirmed that it was a City issue.

Mr. Olander noted that there was discussion about the scope of the plan and it is still something that needs to be addressed. He noted that resources and finances also need to be examined. Mr. Beem commented that he would address the issue with the ad hoc committee.

Councilmember Way questioned the $40,000 budget and asked if anything else would be implemented rather than just the plan. Mr. Beem said this was budgeted to support the development of the plan and it is one-time funding, not for direct service. Councilmember Way encouraged the City to focus on an outcome resulting from the group and stated that there should be various levels of outcomes.

Mayor Ryu called for public comment.

a) Laethan Wene, Shoreline, said he is speaking on behalf of the disabled population. He said there is a specialized program in the City of Shoreline. He said they use the gym in the evenings and there is a drop-in program here in the City.

Mayor Ryu inquired if there was a way to get more funding. Mr. Olander stated that the City staff has enough guidance and can bring back a scope of work, a timeline for the advisory group, and a recommendation. Ms. Underwood stated that one of the key ways the City does outreach is through Currents. She stated that if the Council wants to publicize the need for volunteers in the February edition of Currents it would delay this a bit.

Deputy Mayor Scott stated that citizens get information through Currents. Ms. Underwood added that Currents is effective and recommended it for advertising. Mr. Olander said the City recommends utilizing Currents and mailing it a month later because of the number of readers.

Councilmember Eggen noted that if all of the people accepted the invitation to be on this committee there would be a 50-person committee; he wondered what the composition of such a committee would be.

Deputy Mayor Scott believed in advertising this broadly to have “new faces” on this committee.

Mayor Ryu questioned what the schedule would be if this is announced in February. Mr. Beem commented that it slows down the committee's work and the City staff would have to interview the stakeholders and do some of the up-front work then turn it over to the committee for review.

Councilmember McConnell commented that she reviewed the proposed list of committee members and there are 23 from the last time. She said large committees don't work and the Council should direct the City staff on its size. She added that it may be a good idea to include some at-large stakeholders and to have some organizations represented.

Councilmember Way felt there should be some special outreach to high schools and there should be a summit of students formed as a prelude to this, then they could self-select representatives to the committee.

Councilmember McGlashan stated that kids are still available through the summer except for family vacations. He felt they would read about this in Currents.

(b) Green Streets Demonstration Project

Kirk McKinley, Aurora Corridor and Interurban Trail Project Manager, and Jon Jordan, Public Works, provided an update of the Green Streets Demonstration Project. The update included a recommended street for the demonstration project, a schedule, and a process to complete the first demonstration street. The Green Street Demonstration Project is included in the adopted 2009-2014 Capital Improvement Plan. The CIP includes $200,000 for construction, design and planning in 2009. The toolkit for improvements in the right-of-way includes bioswales/raingardens, walkways, plantings, pervious surfaces, and combined traffic calming with water quality features. There is also the potential to work with neighbors to help them improve private property impacts through reduction of impervious surfaces, collection of rainwater, solid waste and composting techniques. Mr. McKinley outlined the public process and rationale for selecting 17th Avenue NE, between NE 145th and 150th Streets, as the recommended site for this demonstration project.

Councilmember Way asked what issues were brought up by the neighbors. Mr. McKinley replied that one resident had a fear that the right-of-way would impact his fencing. The City responded that they would work with him and rectify his situation if the fencing was impacted. Mr. Olander noted that 17th Avenue NE was chosen because it presents a low failure risk.

Councilmember Way commented that whether this succeeds or not is going to be related to the flexibility and choices that people can make. Mr. McKinley concurred, adding that the intent is to have a heavily involved community. He added that the budget is limited so there will be more items than available resources.

Mayor Ryu commented that 17th Avenue NE doesn't have a surface water drainage system. Mr. Olander replied that water quality will be incorporated in the traffic calming at this site.

Mr. McKinley added that the City staff will look for grant opportunities to supplement the funding. He continued and said that the City met with neighbors and there were 12-13 attendees. He said that four of them were from the Southeast Neighborhood Subarea Planning Advisory Committee. He noted that there are 17 parcels on the street and only half of the people representing them attended the meeting. He added that there was consensus from those in attendance to move forward.

Mayor Ryu called for public comment. There was no one wishing to provide comment on this item.

Councilmember Eggen said he is very supportive of this but he has questions. He stated that the demonstration project indicates that the City wants to do more in the future. He felt that $200,000 per street is fairly expensive. He asked that that certain basic techniques be identified more broadly and for the City staff to determine where street improvements might occur. Mr. McKinley replied that there will be different tools tried out with this demonstration project and the cost of each of them will have some weight on whether it is considered or not.

Councilmember Eggen suggested that a complete report be done with recommendations, benefits, and costs after the project. Mr. Olander agreed that this can't be done for every street in Shoreline and that most streets are already built out. He stated that the City staff will look at runoff sources on a street-by-street basis. He added that the demonstration project will also analyze different plants that help absorb pollutants and water.

Councilmember Way wondered what has been spent in the past on 25th Avenue NE. She highlighted that there have been 4-5 major streets done in Shoreline which represents just a small portion of the City.

Mr. Jordan highlighted that curb and drainage improvements were added at a cost of $200 - $300 dollars per foot. He noted that 17th Avenue NE lends itself to low-cost, effective solutions which can be replicated in the future without spending a lot of money.

Councilmember Way suggested finding ways to add incentives to this in the future.

Councilmember McGlashan supported the item but with some concerns. He noted that SEA streets and swales are a part of a much larger system. He questioned if this is going where the City can derive the most benefit. He noted that there were comments made about cut-through traffic, darkness, and puddles occurring in this area.

Mr. McKinley replied that the City staff looked at streets all over the City and this street doesn’t have any major problems, because problems equal major costs. He noted that the City staff looked at 10 neighborhoods and 30 different sections and took into account flooding and neighborhood traffic action plans.

Mr. Jordan stated that any street the City would incorporate these green street technologies features on reduces flooding downstream and provides proper infiltration. He noted that 17th Avenue NE is ideal because it doesn’t have water running onto it from other streets. He added that 12th Avenue NE was also investigated, but it wasn't suitable because there is a high amount of surface water flows and not enough right-of-way. Mr. Olander highlighted that doing this on 12th Avenue NE would have quickly become a multi-million drainage project.

Councilmember McGlashan commented that the SEA Street project was very narrow and wanted to know if that was the plan for this location. Mr. Jordan replied that he isn’t sure what the plan is yet. Mr. Olander added that there are a lot of creative ways to do bulb-outs and there are several areas for parking.

Councilmember McGlashan noted that the City has always had trouble with the City of Seattle at NE 145th Street and 17th Avenue NE and wondered if Shoreline can partner with them. Mr. McKinley replied that this won't go down into that block and will stop around 146th or 150th because of the limited budget.

Councilmember Way said SEA Streets is a meandering model and it accommodates cars with angled parking. She felt that it is a great package because it combines traffic, neighborhoods, and addresses the surface water issue.

RECESS

At 8:16 p.m., Mayor Ryu called for a five minute break. The Council meeting reconvened at 8:21 p.m.

(c) Proposed Amendments to the Development Code and the Surface Water Management Code

Mark Relph, Public Works Director introduced Jesus Sanchez, Public Works Operations Manager and Jeff Forry, Permit Services Manager and provided the staff report. He noted that every Phase 2 city must adopt a surface water manual and the Puget Sound Partnership (PSP) is influencing this process. He noted that this is an attempt to coordinate the federal requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) surface water program and influence local regulations. He added that low-impact development (LID) will be required in the future, "when feasible." He explained that the City is trying to balance the many PSP, federal, state, and local issues and have outlined the history and background on the surface water management program. Basically, he explained the need to revise Shoreline Municipal Code (SMC) Chapter 13.10 and Title 20, various administrative procedures, and technical manuals in order to consolidate the surface water management program. He said the City has been taking the recommendations of the Department of Ecology (DOE), which recommends requiring LID when feasible. He added that a definition has been created and this manual is appropriate for the City at this time.

Mr. Sanchez explained that the adoption of a surface water design manual is necessary to be in compliance with state equivalency and DOE. He discussed the evolution of the SMC, King County code and amendments, and the King County Surface Water manual that was adopted in 1998. He added that King County has a new, revised 2005 version. However, DOE has deemed the 2005 version inadequate. He discussed the major milestones that have been accomplished.

Mr. Forry reviewed the background and proposed code amendments which need to be compliant with DOE.

Mr. Olander stated that this took years of negotiation and is designed to forested conditions. He said it allows for more infiltration and detention.

Councilmember Eggen asked Mr. Forry to elaborate on "higher level of review." Mr. Forry commented that a certain threshold of impervious surface triggers review and under the new standards the criteria is 2000 square feet of existing, added, or redeveloped impervious surface. That is the trigger on the DOE manual that the City will use to look at more projects and their impacts. Right now, any project that adds less than 1,500 square feet of new impervious surface isn’t evaluated under the King County manual. He noted that there will be more review by the City which will affect a change in the environment.

Councilmember Eggen read the Planning Commission (PC) minutes and said 1,500 versus 2,000 square feet was an issue with them and highlighted that on page 97, exhibit 1, it still says 1,500 square feet. He noted that it is specified in the DOE manual and it may be confusing for developers to look at the different documents. Mr. Forry replied that typically developers will read the whole chapter as it relates to their project.

Mr. Tovar pointed out that the City staff raised the same question, but the PC recommended 1,500 square feet as it pertains to thresholds for clearing and grading.

Mr. Forry continued his presentation and discussed the DOE manual. He noted that good basin planning leads to good enhancements to the manual.

Mr. Sanchez commented that basin planning provides a different baseline and the DOE manual is used as a fundamental platform, but within the basin more watershed planning is based on hydrologic function. He added that in 2006 the City staff did an interdepartmental work group to look at codes and design standards to ensure the codes work and are compliant.

Councilmember Way said she sees the value of a statewide standard, but there have to be differences between the basins and watersheds. She felt there should be some customization. Mr. Forry replied that the customization is done through basin planning.

Mayor Ryu clarified that all of the amendments are new language.

Mr. Forry outlined the code amendments and defined hardscape surfaces such as gravel, asphalt, driveways, and sidewalks.

Councilmember Way inquired about lawns being considered impervious. Mr. Sanchez replied that lawns are considered softscape. Mr. Olander noted that lawns would still have to meet the forested standard.

Councilmember Hansen commented that people use gravel in raingardens and commented that that type of gravel isn’t included in the definition. Mr. Forry commented that gravel is used for walking surfaces, walking areas, and driveways, etc.

Councilmember Hansen said he has put a pervious fiber bed down on his property and has covered with red crushed lava and presumed that it is going to absorb all the water. Mr. Forry replied that it depends on soil conditions underneath and what else there is on site. He said it is a holistic approach. Councilmember Hansen said he wanted it like that because the area is sloped. He continued and discussed sloped areas in general.

Councilmember Eggen said there are different types of gravel and round gravel is considered pervious while crushed gravel is considered impervious. Mr. Forry stated that this provides a reasonable approach; if it is used as a walking or parking surface it would be evaluated differently.

Mr. Forry continued with his presentation and stated that most of the changes are in the Adequacy of Public Facilities, Chapter 20.60 and Engineering Standards, Chapter 20.70.

Councilmember Way questioned how compliance is enforced as noted on page 113. Mr. Forry replied that the facilities have an extensive plan review and the City staff inspects it and the property owners are required to maintain it and the information is provided to Public Works.

Mr. Sanchez noted that under NPDES we are required to enforce it. He noted that the development code sections that are being removed are not needed and anything necessary has been consolidated into 13.10. He stated that the City needs to transition into the new requirements and develop administrative guidelines; implementation is set for March 31, 2009.

Mayor Ryu called for public comment.

a) Mary Weaver, Shoreline, said she would be arrested if she replaced her front walkway with pea gravel. She stated that things don't follow the “green” philosophy here in Shoreline. She discussed some of the items in the proposed legislation. She said yard waste and compost piles are good, but steam cleaning and pressure washing aren’t. She said cleaning brushes and hot water on weeds isn’t allowed. She also expressed concern that people will still be washing vehicles and boats and leaving animal waste in yards. She stated that the City has wrecked the ecology at Twin Ponds. She asked if the City was going to redo the drainage area there.

Mr. Forry clarified the requirements based on page 124 and stated that the discharge is prohibited and some of the applications of these of chemicals, materials, or waste is not prohibited. However, it is based on the level of concentration. Tree removal is existing criteria, he stated.

b) Boni Biery, Shoreline, wanted language added to page 87 which states the removal of significant trees as detrimental. She felt that the removal of six trees as noted on page 97 is too many on any lot. She also stated that only tree preservation legislation is under clearing and grading. She felt the City needs to draft a tree preservation code, not as a secondary thought to clearing and grading.

Mr. Tovar stated that the question of significant trees is a long-range task. He said the City staff has some thoughts, but this isn’t the tool to go about that. Mr. Olander said this issue has a long history and it will be brought back as a separate issue next year.

Councilmember Way asked how this is balanced with tree removal. Mr. Olander replied that the state manual says LID will be implemented where feasible. Mr. Forry added that the premise is that the City will use LID techniques first before other solutions are used. Mr. Relph also said that eventually DOE will define feasible.

Councilmember Eggen inquired what the definition was. Mr. Forry added clarification under minimum requirements page 122.

Mayor Ryu said she felt comfortable with 1,500 square feet as the threshold for new impervious surface. Mr. Forry said 1,500 square feet provides more than an adequate level of review and consistency.

Councilmember Eggen referred to the public comments. He stated that it seems the goal is to mimic the runoff behavior of a natural forest and the trees are an integral part of that forest. Therefore, he felt trees need to be addressed at some point and disputes that they aren’t a part of the solution for the surface water management plan. Mr. Forry concurred that trees are a part of the surface water management plan and some of the prime criteria is using natural vegetation and trees. He added that developers get large credits for retaining natural features and when they are removed the design criteria goes "through the roof." He added that developers are penalized for tree or natural vegetation removal and the surface water manual does a good job analyzing this as it pertains to surface water goals.

Mr. Olander stated that the City has a long range goal of increasing the tree canopy and it will require much more community input.

Mr. Tovar highlighted that the regulations weren’t discussed in the PC record. He added that the City staff will be working on them, but when the public comes to talk after the hearing is closed, they are not in play.

Councilmember Way inquired about public notice on the SEPA process. Mr. Tovar replied that this is a legislative action and that there is an e-mail list. He added that it is not uncommon for people not to show at the PC hearings and it is frustrating that people come to the Council meeting and bypass the Commission.

Mayor Ryu asked if there was a way to have this as an item at the January 12 business meeting and open it up as a hearing. Mr. Sievers replied that this is a matter of adhering to the City’s local ordinance as it relates to the role of the Commission. He said the Commission submits their recommendation to the Council, but a hearing process at the Council level circumvents the Commission public process.

Councilmember McGlashan left the meeting at 9:00 p.m.

Mayor Ryu inquired if there is a way for the Council to identify topics of concern such as trees. Mr. Olander said the briefing pointed out a number of things and suggested the Council relieve this topic but ask questions or give comments so the City staff can research and get back to them. He added that the tree issue is very important and it raises a lot of concerns for the Innis Arden group. A lot of these technical details have been adopted by the state, he explained, but there are some policy implications for Shoreline.

Mayor Ryu pointed out that if more than a few Councilmembers have issues it may be time to form a committee and discuss this. Councilmember Way said she has many different issues to talk about and felt it would be worthwhile to have a subcommittee.

Mr. Olander highlighted that this doesn’t have to be adopted in January and felt it would be appropriate to have another full study session discussing it. He said policy issues need to be addressed by all the Councilmembers and it is not advisable to form a subcommittee for technical aspects of the surface water manual. He suggested not to schedule adoption on January 12, rather to convert that meeting to a study session and do research.

Mr. Tovar concurred, however, he said identifying questions is good for the process. Mr. Relph agreed and said the City is short on resources and staff. However, he said it would be useful for the Public Works staff to hear the comments.

Mr. Sanchez stated that August 2009 is the deadline and that the current amendments and the DOE manual is basically the City’s starting platform and it doesn’t detract from current codes with respect to trees. He noted that the City does want to establish the requirements that gets the City into compliance with the state and helps the development community understand the codes and DOE guidelines.

MEETING EXTENSION

At 10:00 p.m. Councilmember Eggen moved to extend the meeting ten minutes. Councilmember Way seconded the motion, which carried 3-2, with Councilmember Hansen and Councilmember McConnell dissenting and Deputy Mayor Scott abstaining.

Councilmember Eggen stated that Ms. Weaver brought up the point that the code is not user-friendly and not easy to follow. Mr. Forry agreed that none of these codes are easy to follow and the City staff’s task is to interpret them through public education and outreach. He said the City staff works hard to educate the public. The codes are typically taken and rewritten into layman’s terms. Mr. Olander added that a frequently asked questions brochure can be developed.

Councilmember Way said there are five major components of the process and she would like to see the first and second ones repeated. Mr. Sanchez replied that this is a part of the NPDES permit requirements; public involvement and participation, public outreach and education, detection and elimination, pollution prevention, and control runoff. Mr. Olander summarized that it may be a good idea to have two to three more study sessions.

Mr. Forry said the surface water master plan requires the City to include an education program.

Mr. Olander added that the education program is also a federal requirement.

Councilmember Way said the alternatives noted that the Council could have minor amendments or remand it back to the Commission.

7.	ADJOURNMENT

At 10:05 p.m. Mayor Ryu declared the meeting adjourned.

/S/ Scott Passey, City Clerk