CITY OF SHORELINE

SHORELINE CITY COUNCIL

SUMMARY MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING

Monday, July 26, 1999

7:30 p.m.

Shoreline Conference Center

Mt. Rainier Room

PRESENT: Mayor Jepsen, Deputy Mayor Montgomery, Councilmembers Hansen, King, Lee and Ransom

ABSENT: Councilmember Gustafson

1. CALL TO ORDER

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

2. FLAG SALUTE/ROLL CALL

Mayor Jepsen led the flag salute. Upon roll by the City Clerk, all Councilmembers were present with the exception of Councilmember Hansen, who arrived shortly thereafter, and Councilmember Gustafson.

Upon motion by Councilmember Lee, seconded by Councilmember Ransom and unanimously carried, Councilmember Gustafson was excused.

3. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER

City Manager Robert Deis noted that the second Clean Sweep event was held on Saturday. Volunteers pulled Scotch broom and installed beach grass at Richmond Beach Saltwater Park. He also reminded Council of the Point Wells public forum to be held tomorrow evening.

Kirk McKinley, Transportation Manager, explained a revised proposal for mitigation on 20^th Avenue NW that was requested by Shoreline for the Woodway Highlands project. The original proposal with traffic-calming devices, such as chokers or islands, cannot be accommodated within the right-of-way with the road in its present location. The new proposal is to have a walkway on the east side of 20^th Avenue NW with bulbouts on three roads at the north end, thus narrowing the throats of these side streets for pedestrian safety and providing some traffic calming .

Councilmember Hansen arrived at 7:44 p.m.

Continuing, Mr. McKinley said staff met with the Richmond Beach Community Council Executive Board, which had questions about the elimination of calming devices on 20^th Avenue NW. He noted that adjacent residents will be contacted by letter about the new proposal. He explained that the traffic-calming devices originally proposed would require moving the entire roadway, which would be beyond the developer’s budget. He said staff will continue to monitor speeds on 20^th Avenue NW and, if necessary, could revisit this issue with a proposal for a capital project.

Responding to Mayor Jepsen, Mr. McKinley said the path is located at the east fogline and in three locations would be open to the road to allow bicycles to pull off.

Responding again to Mayor Jepsen, Mr. McKinley said the final decision on the type of landscaping has not been made. The goal is to install trees and low maintenance ground cover. He said if the developer cannot fund the full landscaping plan, perhaps another funding source, such as a neighborhood grant, could do so.

Mayor Jepsen was concerned about whether this approach is enough to slow down the traffic on 20^th Avenue NW. He suggested plantings of some mass that, at the same time, will not create view blockage problems. He felt staff should "push a little harder" because the proposed solution is not what the community had hoped for.

Responding to Councilmember Ransom, Mr. McKinley said no vote is required on this matter, and staff will proceed under the strategy described tonight, working to get landscaping that will mature quickly and have vertical and horizontal bulk.

4. REPORTS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS: none

5. PUBLIC COMMENT

(a) Donna Hull, 17504 Corliss Avenue N, described her situation regarding digging in the City right-of-way to correct a plumbing problem in her home. She felt a permit cost of $189.50 is too high for what she did and suggested lower fees for homeowners. Mr. Deis responded that right-of-way fees are based on average amounts of time spent. He said the City has a different arrangement with utilities because of the volume of work done. He asked staff to investigate Ms. Hull’s case.

6. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA

Councilmember Hansen moved to approve the agenda. Councilmember King seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.

7. CONSENT CALENDAR

Deputy Mayor Montgomery moved to approve the consent calendar. Councilmem-ber Hansen seconded the motion, which carried 6-0, and the following items were approved:

Approval of expenses and payroll as of July 19, 1999 in the amount of $1,006,646.29

Ordinance No. 203 granting US Crossing Inc. a non-exclusive franchise for ten years, to construct, maintain, operate, replace and repair a multiple conduit fiber optic telecommunications system, in, across, over, along, under, through and below certain designated public rights-of-way in the City of Shoreline, Washington

Motion to authorize expenditure of $5,000 in 1998 mini-grant funds for the Briarcrest Neighborhood Association to purchase materials and construct a neighborhood information kiosk

8. EXECUTIVE SESSION

At 8:05 p.m., Mayor Jepsen announced that Council would recess into Executive Session for 30 minutes to discuss potential litigation. At 8:35 p.m., Mayor Jepsen announced that the Executive Session would continue for another 15 minutes. At 8:50 p.m., the Executive Session concluded, and the regular meeting reconvened.

9. ACTION ITEMS: PUBLIC HEARINGS

(a) Public hearing to consider citizens’ comments regarding proposed Ordinance No. 200, which amends and extends the moratorium on expanding or establishing new establishments conducting social card games, punch boards or pull tabs imposed by Ordinance No. 190 as amended by Ordinance No. 193

Ordinance No. 200, amending Ordinance Nos. 190 and 193 establishing a moratorium on the filing of applications for business licenses and building permits for the expansion of existing or the addition of new food or drink establishments conducting social card games, punch boards, or pull tabs, for the purpose of clarifying land use activities subject to the moratorium, renewing the moratorium, and declaring an emergency

Ian Sievers, City Attorney, explained that the first public hearing tonight is on the six-month renewal of the moratorium on expanding or establishing new gambling businesses in Shoreline. During this time, staff will continue to work on drafting permanent regulations for the gambling industry. He noted that both versions of Ordinance No. 200 do the following: 1) renew the moratorium until January 26, 2000; 2) continue the right to commence or expand gambling establishments based on building permits filed before February 8, 1999; 3) continue the prohibition against new gambling activity or expansion of gambling activity whether or not building permits are required; 4) eliminate the term "intensification" as part of the moratorium restrictive formula because of the difficulty of policing this concept; and 5) contain a definition of expansion in terms of gross square footage of the building as one part of the definition. The two versions of the ordinance differ in the other part of the definition of expansion of activity. The version called Exhibit 1 measures expansion as an increase in the number of tables approved by the Washington State Gambling Commission (WSGC) as of March 22, 1999. The second version measures expansion as an increase in the number of tables applied for as of March 22, 1999. The latter approach follows Washington law in terms of vesting for other types of land use permits. He noted that the WSGC approval format for enhanced gambling requires a substantial commitment of money for the permit and resources for staff training and equipment before approval is achieved. The two versions potentially affect two businesses in Shoreline with a potential increase of 20 tables between them.

Mayor Jepsen opened the public hearing.

(1) David Luft, 1265 NW 202^nd St., supported Option 5 as the only way to allow Shoreline to continue to be a desirable place to live and raise a family. He noted that Option 5 would reduce long-term total costs to the City. He urged Council to plan for a family-centered community.

(2) Kathy Adams, 1114 NE 195^th, wished to see a reduction in the number of gambling establishments in Shoreline, pointing out that gambling can have a negative impact on families. She did not want Shoreline to become dependent on gambling tax revenue.

(3) Larry Bingham, 313 185^th, said families are destroyed by vice industries, which strip people of both their economic capability and self-esteem. He submitted a report by the Washington State Council on Problem Gambling which says that over 240,000 Washington citizens, including 40,000 under the age of 18, are addicted to gambling. He asked Council to establish a policy eliminating all forms of vice in Shoreline, but providing assistance to those gaming businesses willing to redirect their efforts. He asked that the Council create a physical symbol of dedication to freedom from all forms of slavery and have it sewn into the City flag to demonstrate that Shoreline holds inviolate all principles that strengthen and preserve the family.

(4) B.D. Sampson, 18707 Meridian Ave. N., spoke against all forms of gambling because they add nothing to the quality of life. He mentioned the cost of rehabilitating chronic gamblers and said "we are selling our birth right for a bowl of soup."

(5) Vito T. Chiechi, 1501 S. Capital Way, Olympia, spoke representing the Washington Recreational Gaming Association. He mentioned a poll taken by the Elway Research Council of 300 voters in the Shoreline area. It showed that 68 percent of Shoreline voters believe that gambling is a matter of personal freedom and 65 percent felt people should be able to go into cardrooms and spend their money as they wish. He said the survey showed that even numbers of respondents (44 percent--with the remainder undecided) said cardrooms should and should not be allowed in Shoreline.

(6) Bob Tull, representing Goldies, supported the City’s cautious approach and said the recommendation to adopt Ordinance No. 200 is wise policy. In general, he supported Option 3, but since it is very complicated to craft land use regulations, Option 4 is an alternative the City can maintain for some months to come without jeopardizing the legitimate businesses involved or creating a situation that would be disadvantageous to City policy in the future. He said from a practical and legal standpoint, the City Council should choose the second version of Ordinance No. 200 because it is consistent with vesting rules and the fact that businesses have to spend $13,000 up front ($3,000 for an E-5 license and $10,000 for defraying the costs of participating in the enhancement program).

(7) Al Crane, 18551 Meridian Ave. N., pointed out that so far the Council has heard from those who stand to gain from the exploitation of those with gambling disorders. He noted a Congressionally-appointed National Gambling Impact Study Commission which found gambling is "a destroyer that ruins lives and wrecks families." It recommended a moratorium on the expansion of gambling and a ban on neighborhood gambling operations.

(8) Ranee Palacios, 17535 8^th Ave. NE, said she is against encouraging or providing incentives for casinos. She noted that Shoreline is well-known for its support of children and she wanted to maintain a quality community. Noting she believes many Shoreline citizens agree with her, she asked Council to support Option 5.

(9) Carol Henry, 17001 Aurora Ave. N., spoke against raising taxes on gambling establishments. She said Parker’s employs 130 people, many of them single parents. To support these families, Parker’s provides medical and dental benefits. She said if taxes were increased, Parker’s would consider eliminating these benefits.

(10) Amir Zolfaghary, 17001 Aurora Ave. N., spoke as a Shoreline resident and an employee of Parker’s. He said the money spent in Shoreline will be spent elsewhere if gambling is banned. Moving casinos elsewhere will not solve gambling problems and will only remove revenues that could make Shoreline a better place to live.

(11) John Vasko, 529 NW 197^th, said many citizens trust the Council to do what is best for the City of Shoreline. Here, the Council has an opportunity to protect the City. Gambling is not family-friendly and the arguments that gambling establishments provide jobs and tax revenue are not relevant to the decision. He referred to the addictive nature of gambling and asked Council to support Option 5.

(12) Carrie Vasko, 529 NW 197^th, said gambling poses serious societal problems. She reported on a meeting of Gamblers Anonymous in Shoreline which gave her firsthand knowledge of the impacts on families and lives. She said a study has shown that 31 percent of all people in a casino are in trouble over gambling. She also supported Option 5.

(13) Joanne Kriddle, 1806 22^nd St., Anacortes, spoke as a casino employee, noting that if casinos were closed, the lives of many people would be devastated. She felt it is a person’s choice whether to indulge in any vice, including gambling.

(14) Tu Leister, 205 134^th St., Everett, felt people come to gambling for recreation, particularly older people. He said gambling allows shy people to relate to others. Most people gamble intelligently and are simply gambling to have fun.

(15) Rishi Noreiga, 15420 40^th Ave. S., Tukwila, spoke representing Goldie’s casino and recommended Option 4. He felt people become addicted to gambling because they have no discipline. He said closing down casinos would shatter many people’s dreams.

(16) Michael Preston, 317 22^nd E., Seattle, said the gaming industry does not try to trick people or break up families. People have the freedom to choose their activities. The vast majority of people who gamble do so for recreational purposes. He noted that many activities, such as moviegoing, have no redeeming social value. Gambling at least provides the dream of an exciting payoff. He said the yearly costs of dealing with pathological gambling are less than those for drinking or for health problems related to lifestyle choices that cause heart disease. He concluded that the casino industry contributes to research on problem gambling and is one of the only self-policing industries.

(17) Dixie Richards, 407 N 87^th, Seattle, a Goldie’s employee, said it provides opportunities for young people to work, provide for their families, and go to school. She said the employees at Goldie’s are her family.

(18) Christine Haggerty, 8236 Latona Ave. NE, a dealer at Goldie’s, said that this establishment has been improved and the clientele has changed. In the time from March to the present she has seen a reduction in fighting and the improvements will upgrade the surrounding community as well.

Upon motion by Deputy Mayor Montgomery, seconded by Councilmember Hansen and unanimously carried, the public hearing was closed.

Councilmember Hansen moved to approve Ordinance No. 200 (Exhibit A.2 on page 44 and repeated on page 63 of the Council packet). Councilmember Lee seconded the motion. Mayor Jepsen confirmed that this version defines "expand" to mean an increase in the gross square footage of the structure(s) licensed for gambling activities or to increase the number of gaming tables over the number of tables for which application was pending before the Washington State Gambling Commission as of March 22, 1999.

Councilmember King was concerned about Shoreline’s dependence on gambling taxes. She suggested that gambling revenue should go into the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Noting this issue will be discussed at the annual retreat, Mr. Deis said staff is also very concerned about relying on this funding source because of its volatility. Furthermore, the gaming association continues to lobby the legislature to remove municipalities’ ability to control use of the funds.

Councilmember Ransom confirmed that the motion includes the existing gambling establishments and those on the WSGC list that was closed as of September, 1998, of which there are two or three in Shoreline.

Mayor Jepsen summarized that Council has been studying this issue and trying to determine the best option for Shoreline from a social, moral and financial perspective. He referred to all the discussion done in public and said the matter was also discussed in Executive Session.

Councilmember Ransom said that he has not voted on gambling issues in the past because he is on the Board of Cascade Bingo (a charity bingo supporting music programs). However, the State Supreme Court has said that involvement with non-profit associations does not present a conflict of interest. Therefore, he will vote tonight.

A vote was taken on the motion to approve Ordinance No. 200 (Exhibit A.2 on page 44 and repeated on page 63 of the Council packet). It carried 6 - 0 and Ordinance No. 200 renewing the moratorium was adopted.

(b) Public hearing to consider citizens’ comments regarding proposed Resolution No. 155, which directs staff to draft land use regulations prohibiting new social card games, punch boards, or pull tabs as commercial stimulants for food or drink establishments and restricting existing establishments as nonconforming uses, and further directs the development of a gambling tax on existing social card rooms if the number of total gaming tables approved for these establishments increases

Resolution No. 155 initiating land use and tax regulations for the gambling industry

Tim Stewart, Director of Planning and Development Services, described the five options brought before Council, noting they represent the broadest range of policy alternatives. He said Council discussed these options at the June 21^st workshop. Based on that discussion, Resolution No. 155 gives direction to develop policy based on Option 4, which permits legally existing operations to continue but prohibits new establishments. Implementing land use regulations will be drafted and brought to the Planning Commission for public hearing and a recommendation to Council. The resolution also addresses tax rates and suggests a policy that would increase the tax rate if the number of gaming tables in Shoreline were to increase.

Mayor Jepsen opened the public hearing.

(1) Larry Bingham, 313 NE 185^th, asked the Council to identify the principle it uses to tax businesses in the City. Noting his view that gambling establishments not be recognized as legitimate businesses, he questioned the principle upon which the City would extort a higher rate of tax on gambling than for other businesses.

(2) Bob Tull, 709 Dupont, Bellingham, felt there should be further consideration of Option 3, although he could support Option 4 at this time. He felt the process outlined by Mr. Stewart would provide a good opportunity for discussion. He said the gaming industry may change its position in terms of trying to tell cities how to spend tax revenues, as long as the tax rate is not crippling. He supported a strong relationship between the City and the gambling industry.

Upon motion by Deputy Mayor Montgomery, seconded by Councilmember Lee and unanimously carried, the public hearing was closed.

Councilmember King moved adoption of Resolution No. 155. Councilmember Hansen seconded the motion.

Mayor Jepsen said his original preference was to regulate land use. However, at this point he could support allowing grandfathered uses. He asked how grandfathering and the land use approach could be fit together so that a consolidation or a limitation on locations could be achieved. He also asked about taxing based on increases in the number of tables. Stating that his thoughts on taxation have been misunderstood, he pointed out that gambling lobbyists talk in Olympia about the 20 percent tax rate they could be required to pay, yet when the cities want to tax at that rate, the industry says it cannot afford it. He thought the industry would continue to lobby to have the maximum rate lowered at the next session.

MEETING EXTENSION

At 10:00 p.m., Councilmember Hansen moved to extend the meeting to 10:30 p.m. Councilmember King seconded the motion, which carried 4 - 2, with Deputy Mayor Montgomery and Councilmember Lee dissenting.

Mr. Stewart said the principle of nonconformity is well established in land use law. The nonconforming use is allowed to continue but not expand unless certain criteria are met. He referred to page 69 of the staff report, noting it would be possible to establish a conditional-use permit or a special-use permit for the expansion of a nonconforming activity such as a casino. There is a potential to regulate very carefully the nonconforming uses and to prohibit new uses.

In terms of the taxation issue, Mr. Stewart said the industry has testified that an increase on the tax rate would have a chilling effect on business. Resolution No. 155 neither establishes a new tax rate nor a new regulation. It directs staff to further develop these ideas. He clarified that the proposal would increase the tax rate uniformly across the City for an increased number of tables at any casino.

Councilmember Ransom pointed out that an increase of tables at one casino could thereby impact all of them.

Deputy Mayor Montgomery noted that at the public hearing about an equal number of individuals spoke for and against Option 5. However, those favoring the gambling industry are all employees or representatives of the industry. She said gambling is the number one issue people approach her to discuss. She supported pursuit of Option 4 for now, but requested continued consideration of Option 5. She did not think it is extortion to tax a certain industry at higher rates because some businesses incur greater societal costs.

Councilmember King said the resolution discusses both land use and taxation, but she felt taxation should be discussed independently. She moved to amend Resolution No. 155 to eliminate the fourth "whereas," thus eliminating the reference to tax policy for discussion as a separate item. Councilmember Ransom seconded the amendment.

Councilmember Ransom clarified that the 20 percent tax rate applies to gross revenue, rather than net. This is a very heavy tax, and State B&O tax must be paid on top of that, along with federal tax. This makes an enormous impact and is very different from a normal business, which might be taxed at 35 or 40 percent of net. He said many businesses failed in Spokane when the tax rate was raised to 20 percent. Federal Way recently went to 20 percent, and one casino closed within a week, and another is trying to negotiate a compromise to amortize itself out of existence.

Mayor Jepsen clarified that if the motion passes, Section 2 would be removed and the title of the resolution changed. He said Resolution No. 155 does not state that the City will immediately go to a 20 percent rate. It simply gives staff direction to develop a policy. He said he would like to see proof of the impacts on these businesses and staff is being directed to bring back facts upon which to base a policy.

Councilmember Hansen said he originally had concerns about the resolution because he does not generally favor raising taxes; however, he can now support it because it addresses only policy development. Noting no support for Options 1 and 2, he favored removing them from further consideration.

Mayor Jepsen felt that the adoption of tonight’s legislation would make this clear.

A vote was taken on the amendment, which failed by a vote of 2 - 4, with Councilmembers King and Ransom voting in the affirmative.

Councilmember Ransom asked that the Council continue to consider Option 3 because State and federal laws allow gambling. Option 3 sets zoning restrictions, which is clearly within the parameters of a city, and controls location and size of buildings, etc.

Councilmember Lee said that in this case she had to choose between her personal preference (Option 5) and the arguments and facts put before Council. Based on the facts, she supported Option 4. She commented that the City is allowed to tax up to 20 percent and that this rate should be considered.

A vote was taken on the motion, which carried 6 - 0, and Resolution No. 155 was adopted, initiating land use and tax regulations for the gambling industry.

10. ACTION ITEMS: OTHER ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND MOTIONS

(a) Update on additional parking for the Shoreline Pool

Mike Gillespie, City Engineer, reviewed the staff report on parking improvements for the Shoreline Pool. He explained that a master plan will be created to deal with the future of the pool. The current recommendation addresses existing needs for additional parking, enhances the vehicular safety for cars coming to the pool, and eliminates overflow parking in the neighborhood. He explained the process for arriving at the recommendation after evaluating several options. The following criteria was used: 1) pedestrian and vehicular safety, 2) minimizing the impacts to the park, 3) minimizing permitting issues, 4) utilizing existing right-of-way, and 5) cost considerations. The preferred alternative, which creates approximately 40 new stalls, consists of angle parking along the east side of 1^st Avenue to the north and south of the pool and a drop-off area adjacent to the pool.

Mr. Gillespie described the public involvement process, noting the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Advisory Committee voted unanimously in favor of the preferred alternative, although requesting mitigation for the loss of the trees and vegetation in the park. The School District staff also supports the preferred alternative. He said the major concern expressed by the public was impacts to the park area. Staff will propose mitigations to reduce the impacts, including replacing trees and vegetation and enhancing the landscaping in that area. There was also concern about future parking if there is increased use of the facility. Mr. Gillespie said the improvements proposed now will be compatible with any future expansion. Safety and concentrated pedestrian crossing issues will be considered as the plan moves into the design stage. He concluded that the project will go to bid this fall, with completion of construction in the spring.

Mayor Jepsen supported the proposed solution. He asked staff to study the access from 192^nd and 190^th. He also asked whether it is the norm to separate angle parking by 15 feet from the edge of the fogline. He felt this might be overcautious, noting if this distance were reduced, more of the trees could be saved.

Mr. Gillespie said both the intersection analysis and the distance from the fogline will be looked at in the design phase.

MEETING EXTENSION

At 10:30 p.m., Councilmember Hansen moved to extend the meeting until 11:00 p.m. Councilmember Ransom seconded the motion, which carried 6 - 0.

Councilmember King suggested signage limiting use of this parking to pool users. She also commented that the height of the ivy affects visibility. Finally, she opposed elimination of the grassy swale. Mr. Gillespie said other things can be done in lieu of a swale. He noted the difficulty of enforcing signage limitations.

Mayor Jepsen expressed the consensus to move forward with the preferred alternative.

Responding to Councilmember Ransom’s question about petitions circulating at the open house regarding not parking in the north area, Wendy Barry, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Director, said her understanding was that the petitions addressed the expansion of the pool as considered in the master plan alternative.

11. CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENT

(a) John Hull, 19522 Aurora Ave. N., commented on the letter he received from the Shoreline Police Department regarding his two traffic stops. He said he had been stopped a third time in his own parking lot. This time the officer was aggressive and hostile. He described all three incidents, which involved different officers and different sergeants, stating that in his view the Shoreline Police Department is engaging in racial profiling and "pretext" stops. He said a King County Police representative has been quoted as saying King County practices and trains for pretext stops, even though the Washington Supreme Court has found this to be illegal. He felt that the officers stretched their authority and that the police department is "out of hand." Mr. Hull concluded that he is writing to the Washington State Attorney General’s Office, the U.S. Attorney General, his State and federal legislators, and the governor.

Mr. Deis said the police department will respond to these accusations. He assured the Council that the department is not racially profiling or making pretext stops.

(b) Matt Reagan, 11221 Greenwood N., described a situation in which he drove Mr. Hull’s car under similar circumstances and was not stopped.

MEETING EXTENSION

At 10:50 p.m., Councilmember Hansen moved to extend the meeting until 11:20 p.m. Councilmember Ransom seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.

12. EXECUTIVE SESSION

At 10:51 p.m., Mayor Jepsen announced that Council would recess into Executive Session for 20 minutes to consider one item of litigation. At 11:29 p.m., the Executive Session concluded, and the regular meeting reconvened.

13. ADJOURNMENT

At 11:30 p.m., Mayor Jepsen adjourned the meeting.

__________________________
Sharon Mattioli
City Clerk