CITY
OF
SHORELINE
CITY COUNCIL
Mt. Rainier Room
PRESENT: Mayor Ransom, Deputy Mayor Fimia, and Councilmembers
Gustafson, Hansen, McGlashan, Ryu, and Way
ABSENT: none
1.
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to
order at
2. FLAG SALUTE/ROLL CALL
Mayor Ransom led the flag
salute. Upon roll call by the City
Clerk, all Councilmembers were present.
3. CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
Bob Olander, Interim City Manager, reported on the
following items:
4. COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmember
Ryu noted that she, Mayor Ransom, and
Mayor
Ransom noted his attendance at the Regional Transportation Committee meeting
and reported that bus fare rates and bus shelters were topics of discussion.
Councilmember
Way requested Council consensus for her to speak on behalf of the City Council
in favor of Substitute House Bill 2799, relating to tax exemptions for solar
hot water systems and on the legislative priorities to the state legislature.
Councilmember
Gustafson said it looked like a positive thing but he hasn’t looked at the pros
and cons of the legislation. He was reluctant
but asked for time to review it and preferred she represented herself as an
individual.
Mr.
Olander said this was consistent with City policy and there is not much
financial impact in
Councilmember
Hansen objected to
Councilmember
Ryu appreciated incentives for energy conservation and supported
Deputy
Mayor Fimia said the legislation is consistent with what the Council has
approved and not contrary with existing policies. The Comprehensive Plan, she stated, has passed
the House of Representatives by a vote of 95-1.
She added that the Council could vote on this at the end of the meeting.
Mr.
Olander pointed out that things happen quickly in legislature and that
legislative priorities give blanket authorization for councilmembers and staff
permission to lobby for timely bills.
Mayor
Ransom agreed with Mr. Olander and stated the Council has to move quickly and consistently
with goals. However, he was willing to
wait until the end of the meeting for the vote.
Councilmember
Gustafson reiterated that he was reluctant to vote when he has not had the
chance to read and review the information, however, he said if staff is
comfortable with going forward with it then he would support it.
There was Council consensus,
with Councilmember Hansen dissenting, to allow
Mayor
Ransom announced that the Council needed to form committees to screen
applicants for the Planning Commission and Library Board. He appointed himself and Councilmembers
Gustafson and Way to a subcommittee to review Planning Commission applications
and Deputy Mayor Fimia, and Councilmembers McGlashan and Ryu to a subcommittee
to review applications for Library Board.
Deputy
Mayor Fimia announced that the City would hold a grant-writing workshop for
non-profit organizations and based on the effectiveness of this workshop the
City can hold more workshops in the future.
Mayor
Ransom opened the meeting to public comment.
5. PUBLIC COMMENT
(a) Rick
Stephens, Shoreline, on behalf of the Shoreline Chamber of Commerce said the
Chamber voted to support the business license as long as the cost of the fee
doesn’t exceed $50.00. He felt it would
be useful to know who the business neighbors and partners are in
Shoreline. However, the Chamber doesn’t support
a revenue-generating system. He said the
registration process tends to scare people and there are a lot of good home
businesses that the City should know about.
(b) Larry
Wheaton, Shoreline, agreed with the previous speaker concerning business
licenses. He said last year Goldie’s
paid $700,000 to Shoreline in taxes and showed no profit. He thanked the City for lowering taxes but
business is off 30% due to
(c) Larry
Owens, Shoreline, on behalf of the Shoreline Solar Project and Solar Washington
said the State of
(d) Henk
Kunnen, Shoreline, said drivers speed in front of his business on
(e) Dan Mann,
Shoreline, urged that the business licensing proceeds go to the Economic
Development Program to allow merchants input on legislation. The first mile of
(f) Bronston
Kenney, Shoreline, thanked the Council for rejecting cottage housing.
Mr. Olander responded that he
would get it to the Council and also look at the gambling tax issue, the flashing
signal in
Councilmember Gustafson would
like more information on solar heating system costs.
Mr. Owens stated that the
fiscal note statewide was $7,000 per year per home. He added that the cost depends on the size of
the home, but in general for a household of four it costs $3,000-$5,000 depending
on the architecture and roofing.
Residential customers receive a 30% federal tax credit on their purchase
and business owner receive a fabulous deal for converting their businesses.
Deputy Mayor Fimia thanked Mr.
Olander and the City staff doing a great job and being responsive to the
residents.
6. ACTION ITEM
(a) Ordinance
No. 409, submitting to the qualified electors
of the City of
16, 2006 a proposition authorizing the City
to issue its
general obligation bonds in the principal
amount of
$18,795,000 for the purchase and improvement
of parks
and open space facilities
Mr. Olander stated this item was brought back per Council
direction.
Councilmember Gustafson moved to adopt Ordinance No.
409, submitting to the qualified electors of the City of Shoreline at an
election to be held on May 16, 2006 a proposition authorizing the City to issue
its general obligation bonds in the principal amount of $18,795,000 for the
purchase and improvement of parks and open space facilities. Councilmember Hansen seconded the motion.
Councilmember McGlashan
inquired if the amount of this bond is “out of the realm for passage” by the
voters. He inquired why the Bond
Advisory Committee (BAC) wanted to avoid raising the bond package to $19
million.
Mr. Olander replied that City
staff and the BAC concurs with the amount and feels comfortable submitting it
to the voters as-is.
Mayor Ransom enthusiastically
supported the bond. He said it is the first
real major addition of parks and open space since incorporation and absorbing the
Councilmember Gustafson agreed
with the Mayor and said the bond gives voters a chance to vote on a
project. Many people have spent lots of
time on this and it is good package that represents the entire City. He said he is excited to see it move forward.
A vote was taken on the motion to adopt Ordinance No.
409, which passed 7-0.
7. WORKSHOP
ITEMS
(a) Business License/Registration Program
Mayor Ransom called for public comment.
1) LaNita Wacker, Shoreline, noted the
Council should consider independent contractors to establish and run the
business licensing program instead of City employees. Furthermore, she inquired how
2)
Dan Mann, Shoreline, said he is the former president of the
Shoreline Chamber of Commerce and was involved in the Economic Development
Program process. He felt if the business
license program is presented to the business owners as a tax it would not
work. The program, he outlined, needs to
have long-term benefits and can be a good tool if done in a correct, fair, and
reasonable way. He added that all
proceeds from the business licensing program should be reinvested in the
Economic Development Program to have a compounding effect on Shoreline
economics and to give local businesses meaningful input into proposed
legislation or policies.
Tom Boydell, Economic Development Program Coordinator, said
that it would provide an “extended outreach” for businesses that want to
partner and respond to legislation that impacts them. There has been a process created which asks
business to prioritize their ideas and put up some funds. Items that have resulted from this process
have been the “business access” signage, the business directory, ads, and small
business assistance programs. He pointed
out that this was the pilot only, so more comprehensive programs would be
forthcoming with a more stable commitment to the budget.
Mr. Boydell noted that another program that the businesses
have been asking for is a marketing and promotion effort. One appropriate use of funds derived from the
business licensing program would be to implement such a program.
Mr. Olander reminded the Council that the fee structure
they approve for the business licensing program will dictate the level of
benefit that can be provided to businesses.
The higher the business licensing fee, the more benefit the local
businesses with derive.
Councilmember Ryu felt Shoreline should be a “business-friendly”
City. She said existing businesses in
Shoreline are already paying their fair share of taxes. She felt that having a master list of
businesses is beneficial, specifically having a regulatory business license. However, having a revenue-generating business
license is unnecessary, she said. She
urged the Council to be cognizant of small businesses and their expenses.
Mr. Boydell announced that there is an end-of-pilot report
being generated for the Council. The
report will note what will be created under a larger program. For example, he noted there have been
thousands of dollars saved in energy costs at a number of businesses. Additionally, there has been the creation of
a $500,000 loan fund. The pilot efforts
have also allowed them to respond to businesses wanting to relocate to
Shoreline.
Mr. Boydell responded to Councilmember Ryu and stated that
the pilot program does not duplicate the
Councilmember Gustafson favored the regulatory program and
partnering with the Washington State Master Licensing Services (MLS) program
and would like to verify the $30,000 cost for partnering with them.
Ms. Tarry responded that that cost is an estimate based on
other cities that have utilized MLS, including some technology costs.
Councilmember Gustafson felt the City should be considerate
to local businesses, but a master list is important to the City. He felt a rate of $50 to $60 for commercial
businesses and a rate of $25 to $30 for home businesses would be appropriate.
Councilmember McGlashan supported a business license program
but felt it should be a revenue-generating license. He felt if the program wasn’t
revenue-generating the City would not get a complete master list. He said it needs to be revenue-generating in
order to get the most out of the program and for it to be effective.
Deputy Mayor Fimia felt the program should start out being
a regulatory program with the main goal to get an inventory of the businesses
in the City. She felt then the City
could develop a revenue-generating program based on net income rather than
location.
Mayor Ransom said he has supported a Shoreline business
licensing program for 10 years. He
reported there being 300 businesses on the Aurora Corridor, and another 300
businesses in the Chamber of Commerce.
He said there have been studies that say there are anywhere from 1,200
to 1,500 businesses in Shoreline, with an additional 1,200 to 1,500 home-based
businesses in the City. He noted that the
Chamber recommended a $50 license fee for businesses with an exemption for
those businesses that net less than $12,000 per year as the MLS does.
Ms. Tarry stated that the MLS licensing would require all Shoreline
businesses with State licenses to have Shoreline business licenses. The State does some of the enforcement but
that would need to be coordinated with the City’s Planning & Development
Services Department. Additionally, sales
tax records provide some cross checks to include word-of-mouth reporting from
residents.
Mr. Boydell stated the enforcement could be used as a way
to help businesses understand the benefits and programs that would be available
to them if they were licensed.
Councilmember Hansen stated he is opposed to a City business
licensing program. He felt that honest
businesses would register, but those that were struggling or were dishonest
would not.
Councilmember McGlashan said there should be a fair, tiered
business licensing system established based on the gross sales of each
business.
Mayor Ransom said there appears to be Council consensus in
support of a regulatory business license and no apparent objection to the MLS
system.
Ms. Tarry said the tiered system offers flexibility and
there is no real threshold with the State.
Mr. Olander noted that home occupations are impacting
neighborhoods and suggested that the system not have too many tiers.
Deputy Mayor Fimia said the City would need to advertise
whether or not the system would be a State MLS system or one developed by the
City. She felt the threshold needed to
be lower in order to make sure every business signs up, maybe even without a
fee for entities with gross revenue of less than $6,000. She said that at a later date the City should
consider a revenue-generating business license once the City can demonstrate
the benefits to the licensed businesses.
Access to information on other businesses and sending out surveys to
City businesses would make the program more comprehensive. She supported having an exemption of $6,000
per year in gross receipts for businesses who apply for a City business
license.
Councilmember McGlashan felt that rather than having
exemptions, the City should set one rate for regular businesses and one for
non-profit organizations.
Mayor Ransom felt strongly that a $12,000 exemption is reasonable. He pointed out that some non-profits are
doing $6 million in sales per year and should be included but they would be
exempt if they are doing less than $12,000 per year. He also felt there should be a category for
government and educational institutions.
Ms. Tarry said she has enough information from the Council
to draft an ordinance and said it could be brought back in late March, but no
later than early April. She felt it is
imperative to work with the Chamber of Commerce. She commented that MLS said that the easier
the City makes the program, the easier it would be to implement it.
Mayor Ransom noted that there was Council consensus for an
annual renewal business license process.
Deputy Mayor Fimia summarized that the threshold level and
the pros and cons of exemptions were items for staff to bring back to the
Council for discussion.
Ms. Tarry stated that a threshold level based on net income
can be complicated because all of them utilize gross income for
comparisons. There are different taxes
placed on different types of businesses, so utilizing net income for
comparisons would not be feasible, she said.
She added that there will be discussion with the City Attorney on the
legal aspects and MLS before bringing the item back to the Council.
Mr. Olander commented there is a strong advantage to having
an up-to-date system with an inventory of businesses, especially for emergency
response reasons.
Councilmember Gustafson thanked the Economic Development
Task Force and the Chamber of Commerce for their comments and input on this
item.
RECESS
At
(b) Performance Management Program
Ms. Tarry stated there is
some connection because Initiative 900 has nine requirements of performance
audits. The City and the Association of
Washington Cities (AWC) has encouraged the State to utilize some of the models
that have been established by the International City/County Management
Association (ICMA). She felt the Council
can access what the State is going to propose by looking at the City’s current
performance measures.
Mr. Olander said the
performance measures are also used to analyze deficiencies at a departmental level
and to make decisions. The staff is
constantly reevaluating the most cost effective means of providing services
which are management decisions that may not be seen at the Council level.
Mr. Olander stated that this
is a “bottom-up” briefing and the Council, as the policy makers, must set and
revisit the goals, vision, and critical success factors. He felt this would be a very important task
that the Council will address at the April retreat. When the Council returns from the retreat
with changes or modifications, then, he said, the staff can revisit the
performance measures based on the Council input.
Mayor Ransom outlined that
there was mid-year 2005 data that the Council received from the Police
Department that should be included in the performance measures.
Ms. Tarry responded that they
were formulated from surveys and documentation received from residents.
Mr. Olander said the City staff
creates scientifically valid surveys that result in viable data that is applied
to the performance management program.
Ms. Modrzejewski responded to
Mayor Ransom’s inquiry and explained that the Customer Response Team (CRT) increase
of efficiency is based on CRT adding the abandon vehicle enforcement program to
their duties. This addition, without
adding more personnel to the department, increased their efficiency rating, she
explained.
Mr. Olander explained that
this change freed up more officer time in the traffic enforcement division. He said some of the data will naturally evoke
the type of questions that Mayor Ransom asked.
Mayor Ransom questioned if
the City’s data is comparable to that of other cities.
Ms. Tarry responded that in
some cases the data is comparable, but that is based on whether or not the same
survey questions are utilized.
Mr. Olander stated that it is
important to determine what should be measured in a performance management program;
otherwise, an organization can spend lots of staff resources trying to measure
everything.
Responding to Mayor Ransom, Ms.
Modrzejewski noted that the ICMA has not developed performance management
templates for planning and development services because it is very difficult to
apply measures for all planning departments across the nation. However, this is another section the
Ms. Tarry added that the City
has developed measures that are meaningful to Shoreline residents.
Deputy Mayor Fimia expressed
concern about the validity of the statistics, since there are not many cities
participating in the ICMA program.
Mr. Olander reported that the
data that the City has been receiving is the best there is nationally. However, he stated, as the program grows, so
will the amount of data that gets reported in
Mayor Ransom responded to
Mr. Olander described the
performance measurement program as an important way to work with citizens and
let them know if the City is meeting their expectations.
MEETING EXTENSION
Councilmember Ryu moved to
extend the meeting until
Mr.
Olander summarized that it is important for the Council to deliberate and
decide at their April retreat what the Council vision, mission, and goals are. After the retreat, the staff can work with
the residents, the citizen groups, and the Council to develop measures that
accurately measure the City’s performance.
Responding
to Councilmember McGlashan, Ms. Tarry stated that the City is more interested
in looking at the data it receives first rather than the averages at this time.
Mayor
Ransom called attention to the fact that the AWC conducts workshops on
performance management.
Mr.
Olander added that the City has a depth of expertise on performance management
in Ms. Tarry and Ms. Modrzejewski, who both have attended several ICMA training
sessions on the topic.
Mayor
Ransom said he analyzed the program from his educational psychology and statistical/cost
accounting background, and although these aspects usually involve a higher
level of detail, he didn’t see any analysis done to determine how the numbers
have changed over the past years.
Ms.
Tarry noted that some of that data can be viewed in the pavement surfacing
program. Costs have gone down in terms
of cost per mile due to cost efficiencies identified by public works staff. Based on their analysis, they determined they
could use slurry seal with the overlay to make the project more cost effective. She added that departments are doing that
work in the background and the Council may not see the analysis, only the
results through the performance measures and the recommendations from the
department.
Mr.
Olander noted that the City did this for the City’s street sweeping program as
well. The cost benefit analysis was not
revealed to the Council, only the “before and after” numbers, he said.
Councilmember
Gustafson thanked the staff for the answers to the questions he submitted. He noted that the key piece is the goal-setting
that will occur during the April retreat.
He agreed that a lot more data is needed to move forward.
Councilmember
Ryu wondered whether Washington Cities Insurance Authority is able to provide
data on risk management.
Deputy
Mayor Fimia appreciated all the work and effort that has been put into the
program. She said this is a tremendous
job and the City must build on what has been done thus far. She advocated taking this information to the
public since the performance measures should be derived from public input. City staff and the Council should know what
the residents want, what they value, and what their goals are. Most citizens, she said, want to know what
the general performance measures are and how those goals tie into the budget. She added that she would like “customers”
referred to as “constituents,” as they also have responsibility in reducing the
need to provide City services, such as cleaning the area in front of their own
homes. She concluded that citizen
involvement needs to be the first step in getting the performance management
program going in Shoreline.
8. ADJOURNMENT
At
/S/ Scott
Passey, City Clerk, CMC