Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/04/96TAPE #1403 UNAPPROVED DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES COUNCIL APPROVED OCT 2 1996 SEPTEMBER 4, 1996 #0010 #0032 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Bremerton was called to order in the City Council Chambers, 239 4th Street, Bremerton, Washington, Wednesday, September 4, 1996, at 5:30 P.M., with Council President John Law presiding. Council members present were Bob Winters, Carlos Montgomery, Sherril Huff-Menees, David Farr, Richard Neville, Lon Overson, Cecil McConnell, and A1 Colvin. Also present were City Attorney Ian Sievers and City Clerk Kathleen McCluskey. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council President Law and Invocation given by Reverend Cleveland Williams of Ebenezer A.M.E. Church. CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes - August 14, 1996 #AB96-188 B. Minutes - August 21, 1996 #AB96-189 C. Bid Award Recommendation Cardlock Fueling #AB96-190 and Fuels M/S/C/(Neville/Montgomery) to approve Consent Agenda as presented. Vote on motion: Motion carried. In Favor: Abstain: Colvin, McConnell, Law, Overson, Neville, Huff-Menees, Montgomery, Winters Farr CLAIMS/CHECK REGISTERS Vouchers audited and certified by the auditing officer as required by RCW 42.24.080, and those expense reimbursement claims certified as required by RCW 42.24.090, have been recorded on a listing that had been made available to the Council. M/S/C/U(Colvin/Montgomery) on September 4, 1996, the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: 201110 through 2011322 in the amount of $249,308.04. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORT8 Mr. Winters reminded District #9 residents that he will hold a District neighborhood meeting on September 9, 7:00 P.M, where he will give an update on the past year's actions. He thanked Terrie O'Neill, Municipal Services Coordinator, for the Certificate of Appreciation he received for his participation at TAPE #1403 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 2 of 24 Kids Day event on the Boardwalk. Mr. Montgomer]F commented on very successful events... Concerts On The Dock and Blackberry Festival, and the fact none of them were hindered by rainy weather. Mrs. Huff-Menees congratulated Carol Atkinson, Bremerton Main Street Association and all the volunteers, who put together the Blackberry Festival, which was a wonderful event. Mr. Farr stated it was good to be back after spending some time in North Dakota. While there, he was struck by the absence of "eyesore" type residences and after doing some research learned the average income within that community is significantly less than the average income in Bremerton. He drew the conclusion that eyesores and rundown property aren't related to economic conditions of an area. It made him hopeful that if we, as a community, put enough effort into it, perhaps we could get the area around our community cleaned up and have pride in our neighborhoods. Mr. Neville announced a Neighborhood Information Network Meeting encompassing Council Districts #4, #5 and #6 will be held on September 10, 7:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers. The topic of discussion at that meeting will be the Sinclair Landing Project. Also, on September 10, 6:00 - 7:30 P.M., at the Olympic College North Conference Room #140, the Engineering Department will hold a meeting to discuss "removal of parking from planting strips" for residents of the 1100 and 1200 block of McKenzie and the 800 block of 12th Street and the 800 block of 10th Street. Mr. Overson encouraged residents of District #4 to attend the Information Network meeting on September 10. Regretfully, he was unable to attend the Blackberry Festival, but he understood it was a great festival. He extended a special WELCOMEto his mother, who is visiting this area. Mr. McConne11 announced the next District #2 Neighborhood meeting will be held September 10, 6:00 P.M., at Fire Station #3. The topic for that meeting will be the proposed changes to the City Charter. Mr. Colvin reported on August 28th he attended the Tuskegee Airmen's convention in Seattle. He congratulated everyone responsible for the very successful Blackberry Festival. He reminded residents of District #1 that the next Neighborhood meeting will be held September 19, with Mayor Lynn Horton as guest speaker. Mr. Law announced the Manette community will hold a Flea Market, TAPE #1403 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 3 of 24 hosted by the Manette Business District, on September 15. The monthly meeting of District #3 will be held on September 17, 7:00 P.M., at the Senior Center. The guest speaker at that meeting will be Police Chief Paul DuFresne. MAYOR'8 REPORT Mayor Lynn Horton handed out copies the first City of Bremerton Community Newsletter, which will be mailed out in the current Utility billing cycle. She will try to incorporate any suggestions she receives from the citizens regarding the newsletter as space allows. The newsletter will be published every other billing cycle. Today, Mayor Horton attended the regional Board meetings and one of the topics at the Health District segment was a stop smoking campaign involving a group of young people in Kitsap County, who formed an organization...STAND (Stop Tobacco Addition Now DO IT). Members of the group go into stores and try to purchase tobacco products from the sales clerks. When the project was started two years ago, 60% of the Bremerton businesses targeted sold tobacco products to minors. In 1995 that percentage dropped to 17% and so far in 1996 that percentage is 2%. County-wide overall the percentage rate was 8% with North Kitsap having "0%". Mayor Horton announced on September 23rd she and Carol Whitehead, Bremerton School District Superintendent, will initiate the first Community School Forum that will be held in each of the elementary schools within the community. The intent of those meetings will be an opportunity for parents/residents to voice their concerns about school issues or community issues. She will be looking for opportunities for partnership type projects with the School District that can be funded out of Traffic Safety funds. Mayor Horton was pleased to announce the opening of the Olympic Course at Gold Mountain on September 13. She encouraged golfers to take advantage of the opportunity to play a free round of golf on September 13-14-15. And, she was pleased to report young people are frequenting the newly installed Skate Board Park; and she complemented the Parks Department for their effort in developing the park. PUBLIC RECOGNITION Carol Atkinson, Bremerton Main Street Association, thanked the Council for their kind remarks regarding the success of the Blackberry Festival. She acknowledged the sponsors of the festival...Parr Ford, Budweiser, The Sun, Power Aid, United Airlines, McDonalds, Cascade Clear, Crime Stoppers, and she extended a special thanks to the City of Bremerton and Port of Bremerton. She was pleased to announce over 55,000 people attended #0898 TAPE #1403 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 4 of 24 the festival over the two day event. She also acknowledged the many volunteers serving on the Festival Committee. Ed Pietras, President Martin Luther King Scholarship Fund, reminded everyone of the Constitutions Day Luncheon on September 15, 1:30 P.M., at the Bayview Inn. 7A - APPOINTMENT OF DEBRA L. JACKSON TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ADVISORY COMMITTEE, #AB96-191 There are vacancies on the Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee. It is recommended that Debra L. Jackson be appointed to fill one of the vacancies. Mayor Lynn Hotton noted Debra Jackson served a term on Bremerton's Planning Commission and due to personal commitments was not able to consider an additional term on the Commission. However, Debra indicated she would be interested in serving on the Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee since it is a shorter time commitment. Mayor Horton believes Debra will look at the grant applications fairly and try to apply the established policies; and she urged Council to confirm her appointment to the committee. Public comment - none. Mr. Neville stated his support of Debra Jackson based on qualities -she has exhibited... fairness, honesty, good judgement and common sense. M/S/C/U(Huff-Menees/Winters) to confirm the appointment of Debra L. Jackson to the Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee. 7B - APPOINTMENT OF DRAKE EVANS TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ADVISORY COMMITTEE, #AB96-192 There are vacancies on the Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee. It is recommended that Drake Evans be appointed to fill one of the vacancies. Mayor Lynn Horton noted Mr. Evans has been activity within the community and is a retired PSNS employee. He has been active in the Puget Rental Operators Association and as such has had the opportunity to come in contact with people within the community, who are less fortunate, and whose needs are helped through the City's Block Grant program. She urged Council's confirmation of Mr. Drake to the Block Grant Advisory Committee. Public comment - none. #0960 TAPE #1403 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 5 of 24 President Law stated based on his having known Mr. Evans for some time, he lends his support to his appointment to the Block Grant Advisory Committee. Mr. Overson pointed out he also has worked with Mr. Evans through the Naval Reserve, and as a Master Chief Petty Officer Mr. Drake has been involved in some of the higher level boards and committee in the Naval Reserve. Mr. Colvin pointed out Mr. Drake is also a pilot with an instrument rating for Search & Rescue. M/S/C/U(Colvin/McConne11) to confirmthe appointment of Drake Evans to the Community Development Block Grant Advisory Committee 7C - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR SCOTT ALEXANDER, GOLF PROFESSIONAL GOLD MOUNTAIN GOLF COMPLEX, #AB96-193 A provision within the current Professional Services Agreement with Scott Alexander, requires renegotiation of the agreement as a result of the opening of the Olympic course at Gold Mountain. it is the request, therefore, of the Gold Mountain Board of Directors for Council to approve the attached revised agreement. This agreement covers the time period 1997 through 2001 and provides compensation at the rate of 10% of Greens fees revenue net of sales tax. Scott Alexander has been at Gold Mountain for over 10 years and has been one of the key factors in the course's success. Over the last 4 years Gold Mountain has averaged 72,013 players per year. Jim Spencer, Parks and Recreation Director, stated he believed Mr. Alexander's management record at Gold Mountain Golf Course over the past decade speaks for itself. He reviewed the following major changes in the proposed agreement: (1) term of contract will carry Mr. Alexander through the year 2001; (2) additional requirements have been identified regarding PGA support. Mr. Alexander's current contract calls for one PGA assistance, the new requirement is 3. (3) Additional Marshalling. (4) Clarified requirements relative to the City providing covered storage for the motorized golf carts..the City will provide 4,000 sq. ft. of covered storage space. (5) Current contract calls for Mr. Alexander to receive 14% of the net green fee total and the proposed contract reduces that amount to 10%. (6) In the area of percentage paid to the City relative to golf cart rental and driving range fees, the proposed contract will stipulates that the City will receive 6% and 8% respectively for the cart rental and driving range fee. Public comment - none. Mr. Neville stated he has noticed a difference in the Gold Mountain Golf Course since Scott Alexander took over its management. He TAPE #1403 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 6 of 24 emphasized Mr. Alexander is a true professional and has brought the course up to a professional standard that is well recognized throughout this community and the State. He believes the contract is very fair, but more demands have been placed on Mr. Alexander as well. Scott has shown that he is a true friend of the City of Bremerton by accepting the negotiated requirements and the City would be remiss if Council did not approve the contract. Mr. Colvin questioned if an individual can use a privately owned golf cart? Mr. Spencer stated yes; however, they must pay a cart path fee. Mr. Winters asked what percentage of that fee goes to the City? Mr. Spencer stated that was part of the green fee revenue with Mr. Alexander getting 10% of that total. Mr. Winters stated he felt that Mr. Alexander's percentage should be retained at 14% rather than the proposed 10% based on his successful management of the golf course and the benefits derived by the City from that level of quality service. He appreciated the fact that the City would be receiving additional revenue from the golf cart rental and driving range fees. He also acknowledged the significant contribution John Alexander, Scott's brother, made to the golf course as Golf Course Grounds Superintendent. Mr. McConne11 noted Scott Alexander has made the golf course a paying proposition for the City and revenues derived from the course are used to help fund the City's park program. Mr. Farr referenced a newspaper article that identified Scott Alexander as a partner in a proposed new golf course in the County. He asked if that is the case were those considerations were resolved to avoid any potential conflict of interest. Mr. Spencer stated in his mind they have and the contract specifically states Mr. Alexander will be the golf professional on a full time basis and identifies the specific number of hours he is expected to be at the course. Ian Sievers, City Attorney, noted the contract stipulates 1,920 hours, which defines full time hours of service to the course. If there is fault in the way he is performing his duties, the City can terminate the contract, but he is expected to put in full time regardless of any outside activities or interests. #1350 Mrs. Huff-Menees stated she could not imagine the City could be served any better than what has been received from Scott and his staff through his leadership. She doubted there would be any dissention over this contract and fully supports the proposal as presented. M/S/C/U(McConne11/Montgomery) to approve the Professional Services Agreement. TAPE #1403 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 7 of 24 Scott Alexander, Golf Professional, thanked the Council for their support and he looks forward to promoting the spectacular new golf course. Mayor Lynn Hotton stated when she first came into office as Mayor she announced to Parks staff members that she anticipated having a new golf course developed and ready for play starting in 1996. And, because of the hard word and dedication given by those staff members her projection became a reality. Because of Scott's involvement with the designer of the course, she believes it is even better than it would have been. She also acknowledged the professional attention of John Alexander, and the fact that the City will miss having his expertise; however, the Assistant Greens Superintendent is proposed to take his place and will carry on the quality of work set in place by John. 7D - BID AWARDTO ACE PAVING COMPANY FOR 14TH STREET RECONSTRUCTION - PARK AVENUE TO SHELDON BLVD., #AB96-194 Bids were opened for the 14TH Street Relocation Project on August 19, 1996. One bid was received for this project from Ace Paving Company in the amount of $68,043.50. The Engineer's estimate for this project was $68,000. Total project construction cost including construction inspection, surveying, management and contingency is $85,054.38. The action before the City Council is approval of a contract for the construction of the 14TH Street Relocation with Ace Paving Company. Randy Witt, City Engineer, stated 14th Street between Park Avenue and Sheldon Blvd., will be the new entrance into Evergreen Park. The Park Master Plan has been developed to show the street being moved southerly through what use to be the Street Maintenance facility. A traffic calming circle will be made as part of the intersection into the park and a portion of the existing 14th Street will be demolished and included into the landscaping. Public comment - none. Mr. Farr noted in the past there has been some criticism on the variances between the Engineer's estimate and the bid. He asked if there was an explanation for the difference of $43.53 on a $68,000 bid? Mr. Witt stated every once in awhile they do it right. Mr. Neville commented on the improvements being made, especially the demolition of the old quonset hut, and the fact it will become a much more valuable and needed project. Relocation of 14th Street is the beginning of a grand scheme for the expansion of Evergreen Park. Mr. Winters asked if the bid of $68,000 allowed for contingencies? #1700 TAPE #1403 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 8 of 24 Mr. Witt stated the bid contains a small amount of "force account work". The actually contingencies are outside of the amount awarded. The total construction costs are $85,000, which includes a 10% contingency ($6,500), which will be used for change orders. Mr. Overson asked the anticipated date of completion? Mr. Witt stated he recalled the contract stipulates 30 working days and work should begin within a couple of weeks. Mr. Overson emphasized this proposal is just the relocation of 14th Street, not the redevelopment of the area. Mr. Colvin asked if the bid was a firm bid? Mr. Witt stated he did not anticipate any surprises in this type of project. M/S/C/U(Neville/Farr) the City Council approve a contract for $68,043.50 with Ace Paving for construction of the 14TH Street Relocation Project and authorize the Mayor to execute the same. 7E - WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT ODOR CONTROL PROJECT (V42152000) AMENDMENTS NUMBER 8 AND 9 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH R. W. BECK, #AB96-195 The City has negotiated amendments number 8 and 9 to the Professional Services Agreement with R. W. Beck on the Wastewater Treatment Plant Odor Control Project. Amendment #8 is a no cost amendment, which modifies the method of compensation from salary times a multiplier basis to a cost plus fixed fee basis. This change will satisfy the Department of Ecology grant requirements. Amendment #9 provides a budget allowance of $60,000 for additional construction management and start up assistance. This is required because of additional time required by the consultant to monitor the contractor during completion of the project. Staff recommends approval of both amendments. Randy Witt, City Engineer, statedAmendment #8 changes how the City is compensating the consultant engineer, who is handling the contract management on the project. The City negotiated a contract with them at a salary and multiplier basis, which is a typical practice. The City received a grant for the dechlorination system from the Department of Ecology that requires contracts for consultants be on a cost plus fee basis. What that does from the City's perspective is it breaks apart the multiplier to show the overhead and profit separate from a lump sum number. The amendment will not change the cost or scope of work. Amendment No. 9 is the result of extending the contract time on the project. The contractor is completing the project and expects to have their equipment off site within 2-3 weeks, which is significantly later than anticipated when the project was started. Additional funding is required in order to keep the Project #1870 TAPE #1403 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 9 of 24 Management Team in place and working. At this point, it is assumed the contractor will be done by the end of October and it also assumes they will have full time inspections, which is also generous. He is reasonably comfortable that he will not have to come back and ask for additional money and time to compensate the construction management during the project. Additionally, the contractor is in a situation of liquidated damages that will allow partial compensation for his extended time to the construction management. Public comment - none. Mr. Overson asked if he understood correctly that even though we are still wrestling the project, it was within budget. Mr. Witt stated yes. Mr. McConnell asked when Mr. Witt anticipated the project to be completed? Mr. Witt stated he expects the contractor to be off site within 2-3 weeks. M/S/C/U(Montgomery/Winters) that the Mayor is authorized and directed to execute amendments No. 8 and 9 to the Professional Services Agreement with R. W. Beck for engineering services on the Wastewater Treatment Plant Odor Control Project. 8A - ORDINANCE #4566 (SECOND READING) AUTHORIZING THE ISSUE OF $342,421.31 LID BONDS I~TDACCEPTING THE PURCHASE OFFER OF SEAFIRST BANK, #AB96-185 Rich Hanna, City Treasurer, distributed two handouts to the Council, the first being an update of the Bond Ordinance that was discussed at the previous Council meeting...being amended to include the revised sizing of the bond issue. That change was necessitated by a late pre-payment accepted from a property owner. In addition, he provided the scale for the interest rates on the various anticipated maturities of the bonds. It is expected they will be repaid between now and the year 2009 in the amounts indicated in the appropriate section as well as in the Purchase Offer. The second handout is Seafirst*s offer to purchase the bonds, as described at the previous Council meeting. Of most interest to the Council, in both documents, is the schedule of expected maturities and the coupons associated with different maturities of the bonds. He introduced Jane D. Towery, Vice President Municipal Finance, Seafirst Bank. Jane TowerVstated she was pleased to be before Council to present the Purchase Offer to buy the bonds of the City of Bremerton. Today, they concentrated on marketing the bonds locally and will open it up system wise on September 5. They were able to sell approximately 1/2 of the bonds ($150,000) and all but $20,000 of that was to individual investors. The Bond market has been a little volatile lately, but she believes #2125 #2225 #228 TAPE #1403 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 10 of 24 the identified rates are very fair and considered to be low as far as other comparable issues available. The average coupon on the Bonds overall for 13 year issue, potentially out to a 15-year issue, is 5.56% and that is considered to be very fair. Public comment - none. Mr. Colvin asked if there was a minimum amount requirement to purchase the bonds? Ms. Towerr stated there is a $5,000 minimum. M/S/C(Overson/Colvin) that Council pass Ordinance #4556, on second reading. Vote on motion: Motion carried. In Favor: Abstain: Colvin, Winters, Montgomery, Huff- Menees, Neville, Overson, McConnell, Law Farr 8B - ORDINANCE #4567(SECOND READING) TO AMENDTHE "ADMINISTRATION" SECTION OF THE BREMERTON ZONING ORDINANCE, #1%B96-187 Ron Hough, Planning Manager, stated since first reading of the ordinance, staff found one correction. At first reading, Council changed a portion of Type I Decisions giving a local appeal to the Planning Commission and after that they had to go through the document and change everything related to that action. One change was missed, found on page 28, section (f) Decision & Appeal: (3) should read: An administrative decision on a Site Plan be appealed to Planning Commission (the words "Superior Court" were deleted and replaced with "Planning Commission). Public comment - none. M/S/C(Montgomery/Neville) the City Council pass Ordinance #4567, on second reading. M/S/C/F((McConnell/Overson) to amend the motion by removing the ,(s) under Type III Decisions under the column heading of Planning Commission Public Meeting Recommend. Mr. Colvin asked Mr. McConnell to give an explanation of the basis of his motion. Mr. McConne11 stated it would give a false impression to the public attending the "meetings" held by the Planning Commission and a decision would be made by the Commission; and there is a remote possibility that by having it included it could cause an appeal and challenge in as much as the 1724 regulation stipulates one Open Hearing and one Close Hearing. Even though it is not a formal Open Hearing it could be construed by people and possibly by the Court. And in as much as it will only TAPE #1403 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 11 of 24 be a "recommend", the people sitting on the Planning Commission are unpaid volunteers and would be required to sit through a 3-5 hour meetings to make just a consensus recommendation, not the kind of recommendation they had made in the past because that would have the tendency of make it look like a hearing. Mr. Colvin asked Mr. Hough if he had a response to Mr. McConnell's comment? Mr. Hough stated this issue has received a great deal of discussion by the Planning Commission and City Council. He had no problem with the proposal to hold a public meeting that would involve a recommendation to Council. Such a meeting would not have to be widely advertised or inviting lots of people to testify. He felt it was more of a legal issue. Ian Mievers, City Attorney, stated he felt the discussion should focus on whether it is valuable or not to have a hearing at the Planning Commission level. He agreed with Mr. Hough that it can be clearly established that the "public meeting" would not be the Open Record Hearing and is more of an expanded study session with invited public comment. The risk of that in itself being grounds for an appeal is small. The City is trying to follow the legislation as far as definitions being used and also with the expedited land use review process in Superior Court we know quickly, within 30 days, whether it will be appealed to Superior Court. Mr. Overson stated there are various reasons for supporting that and one he supports is that the intent of 1724 is to move along the process smartly and probably the primary for supporting this amendment is that it is highly recommended unanimously by the Planning Commission. Mr. Montgomer7 disagreed with Mr. Overson, he believes the primary objective of 1724 is the permit process, not the approval of the Council. He doubted that anyone will go to court over a recommendation by the Planning Commission, which he feels is a false perception. As discussed last week, he believes the decision to keep the Planning Commission in Type III Decisions is appropriate; therefore, he will not support the amendment. Mr. Farr questioned if the proposal, as published with the Type III Decision recommendations coming from the Planning Commission, gives the applicant an option to skip that process? Mr. Hough stated he believed the applicant would have that right. It is not mandatory to attend the Planning Commission meeting and would be a kind of an extension of the staff recommendation. The type of projects under this designation are subdivisions, PUD's and fairly massive projects that may benefit by further discussion on the design, access, etc. Mr. Parr questioned if the applicant wished to not participate in that "public meeting" based on the fact only a recommendation would come from that kind of activity, could he push TAPE #1403 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 12 of 24 his application directly to the City Council for an Open Hearing? Mr. Hough responded yes. Mr. Neville stated he would not support the amendment to the motion because by not having the Planning Commission hold public meetings and inform people of their rights we're doing an injustice to the citizenry. He has always taken the Planning Commission's recommendations very serious and he looks forward to getting their recommendations even though they would not have the final decision on Type III Decisions. President Law stated he shared Mr. Neville's view until he gave it deeper consideration and his concerns are as follows: (1) the Planning Commission's recommendation was that the Open Hearing be held by the City Council and that they not hold one; (2) he agreed with Mr. Neville that the person naive to the procedures will be fair game because if the individual has knowledgeable counsel they will be able to buy an appeal that could torpedo any action by the Planning Commission that Council thought was not a hearing and then we would in affect be breaking the law. Mr. Colvin raised a questioned whether or not the City would be breaking a law and asked the City Attorney to comment on that point. Mr. Sievers stated he did not believe the Council would be breaking the law. He believes the City is obeying the letter of the law. In deed 1724 was intended to expedite and consolidate and part of that process is to not have multiple recording hearings. The "public meeting" before the Planning Commission would not be an open record pre-decisional meeting, it would be voluntary and would not slow up the process appreciatibly and it is allowed in the statute. He believed a Court would have a difficult time trying to extend the intent of 1724 to say that complying with this kind of hearing as set for in the statute must be against the intent of the statute. There is some risk the Court would second guess the wording in the statute and say the intent was not to have invited public comment twice. Mr. Colvin stated based on that reason he will not support the amendment to the motion. Mayor Hotton stated she had an opportunity to meet with Senator Sheldon and conveyed to her the depth of Council's unhappiness with the Legislature's decision to move forward with this piece of legislation. She also told her about Council's discussion about keeping the Planning Commission in the loop and provide a function as well by holding neighborhood meetings and then make a recommendation to Council. Senator Sheldon's response was that she had talked to one of the makers of the bill and that was the thought they had when developing the bill...that some communities were moving in the same direction to have the Planning Commission hold neighborhood meetings. The City Attorney has indicated such meetings are not illegal and from her perspective having the TAPE #1403 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 13 of 24 Planning Commission hear issues at a neighborhood level informally does a lot to bring both sides together. Having served on the City Council for six years, it is far earlier to make a decision when both parties come together and show their agreement on proposals. She believes the Planning Commission can bring forward that common sense position in an informal, less threatening position than the City Council. If such a process doesn't work, the ordinance can be amended by the City Council. Mr. Montgomery pointed out a case in point is the development of the Harrison District Plan and the community involvement prior to formal adoption by the City Council. Mr. McConne11 asked Larry Stone, Planning Commission member, to state the Planning Commission's position on this issue? Larr7 Stone, Planning Commission member, stated their final motion on this particular issue was unanimous that they hold no hearing and the City Council hold the hearing. That was not in any way an evaluation of what they felt was their relative competence or incompetence, but rather a clarification if it would help Council resolve the ponderous problems of 1724. His concern and he believed the majority of the Planning Commission is not with the concept of meetings, but they are to have some functional value, i.e., a recommendation comes to the City Council. He questioned what form would the recommendations come to the Council...simply letters from seven members of the Commission or by a motion? If it is transmitted by motion, it creates a formal process in an informal situation. He asked how would the Commission become involved in a development issue if someone appealed a land use proposal? He expressed his confusion and pointed out the Commission is the "creature of the Council" and they will do what they are tasked by the City Council, but they do, as a body, have a reticence proceeding with these "meetings". He is confused as to how to proceed. TAPE #1404 Vote on amended motion. Motion failed. In Favor: Opposed: Winters, Overson, McConne11, Law Montgomery, Huff-Menees, Farr, Neville, Colvin Vote on main motion: Motion carried. In Favor: Opposed: Montgomery, Huff-Menees, Farr, Neville,, Colvin Winters, Law, Overson, McConnell 8C - ORDINANCE (FIRST READINO) AMENDINO THE 1996 BUEM3ET (BUDGET #0100 TAPE #1404 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 14 of 24 ADJUSTMENTS #96-13, 96-15 THROUGH 96-26, 4AB96-196 A number of actions have been taken by the City which need to be incorporated into the Budget in order for the document to remain an accurate projection of City financial activity. Rich Hanna, City Treasurer, explained the proposed ordinance will incorporate the approved Budget Adjustments Nos. 13-26, with the single exception of Budget Adjustment No. 22, which has not appeared as a separate item before Council prior to this discussion. That particular Budget Adjustment was at such a low amount it only needed the Mayor's approval. Public comment - none. M/S/C/U(Montgomery/Huff-Menees) to approve ordinance, on first reading, amending the 1996 Budget. 8D - ORDINANCE (FIRST READING) ACKNOWLEDGING A REVISED EMPLOYEE EXPENSES REIMBURSEMENT POLICY, #AB96-197 The current "Employee Expense Reimbursement" policy can only be changed by City Council approval. There is a need to update and revise the policy. Further, by repealing the existing ordinance any future changes can be appropriately done by the Administration. Jim Meith, Human Resources Manager, stated over the past 1/2 years the Human Resource Department has been updating the entire Personnel Policy and in that process discovered that the current Employee Expense Policy had been approved by Ordinance action in 1992. In order to revises the policy, it requires Council action and Council is being asked to repeal the ordinance that originally approved the policy and at second reading of the ordinance to approve a Resolution acknowledging that revision and instructing the Auditor to periodically perform audits of how the policy is being used. The new policy not only meets the format that is being used, but it also address concerns that are not addressed in the old policy, specifically it instructs that the employees for reimbursement will use the most inexpensive way of transportation, for example, if they had a choice between driving some place and taking public transportation and they opted for a more expensive way of travel, the City would only reimburse up to the least expensive way. It also makes it clear on the per diem allowance that receipts aren't needed and per diem will only apply to offset lodging and meal expenses and it sets the per diem allowance and basically talks about the verification and documentation that needs to be completed by the employee in order to receive reimbursement. It also details what is reimbursable for mileage, airline tickets and meals. Public comment - none. #0384 TAPE #1404 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 15 of 24 Mr. Overson questioned the appropriateness of staff setting whatever rates they want for reimbursement? Mr. Meith stated reimbursement rates in the new policy talks about the rates being reasonable and is in account for the area in question. The old policy set rates, but it also stated that reimbursement for meals will not exceed $26.30 per day in total unless the additional expense incurred is deemed necessary, which basically negates the rates. It has been his experience that having actual rates in a policy as to meals and lodging allowances due to the great variation between cities and localities is almost impossible to enforce. He believes it is better to trust management staff and the Mayor to monitor such costs. Mr. Overson stated he was looking for a more artfully written ordinance as opposed to something that basically eliminates Council's involvement in this issue. He sees the Audit function becoming more significant in monitoring the expenditures. Mr. Meith explained Council retains its budgetary authority function. Mr. Colvin asked who would determine what is a "reasonable cost" and the "least expensive way"? Mr. Meith stated the "least expensive way" would be a little easier to determine and used the example of flying to the City of Spokane or driving a personal vehicle. In regard to "reasonable costs" it is not precise and Department Heads and Managers are asked to make good sound decisions based on the facts presented. A reasonable cost for a meal in Bremerton will be quite different than the cost of a meal in downtown Seattle. Mr. McConne11 raised a point regarding future revisions to the policy being provided to the City Council by the Mayor and whether or not that action would be in writing. ME. Meith stated he would assume it would be in written form. M/S/C(Neville/McConnell) to approve ordinance, on first reading, repealing Section 3 of Ordinance #4374. Vote on motion: Motion carried. In Favor: Opposed: Montgomery, Huff-Menees, Farr, Neville, McConnell, Colvin, Law Overson, Winters 9A - RESOLUTION #2557 ACKNOWLEDGING ~ REVISED VEHICLE USE POLICY, #2~96-198 The current "Vehicle Use Policy" can only be changed by City Council approval. There is a need to update and revise the policy. Further, by repealing the existing resolution any future changes can be appropriately done by the Administration. Jim Meith, Human Resources, stated in 1990 a Resolution was passed #0500 TAPE #1404 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 16 of 24 approving the current City Vehicle Use Policy. That policy is in need of being updated and Council is being asked to repeal the currently in force Resolution and establish a new Resolution making sure the intent of the Council for the use of City vehicles be limited exclusively to those instances when it is necessary to conduct City business, and also making sure it is not the intent of the City Council that the use of City vehicles be considered a benefit for an employee. The old policy specifically addressed the classifications that were allowed to take vehicles home. Some of those classifications no longer exist due to the reorganizations that have taken place since 1990. It is also unrealistic to have specific classifications identified because circumstances and classifications change. The proposed policy is written such that the Department Head would have to provide a written recommendation to the Mayor and the proposed policy outlines what that recommendation has to include i.e., the reasons for the request, benefit to the City, cost savings analysis, potential and probable consequences that would result if an employee does not bring a vehicle home and any other pertinent information. It was felt that was a more realistic policy other than to state a specific classification. If the proposed policy is approved, they will then look at Department Heads justifying all use of City vehicles. Public comment - none. Mr. Montgomez7 noted he believes all resolutions and ordinances should have expiration dates because of changes taking place and this issue was a good example of such changes. M/S/C(Montgomery/Colvin) to approve Resolution No. 2557 acknowledging a revised Vehicle Use Policy and repeal Resolution No. 2285, which will include an expiration date. Mr. Overson stated the original resolution was passed as a check and balance system and although the fact that staff did not care to follow it is a different concern. If the proposed resolution is passed, Council will be totally eliminated from the process and suggested taking action to put it under the Auditor's function. His main concern has to do with the elimination of Council approval. Mr. Colvin asked Mr. Meith to explain how Council was being eliminated out of the process under the proposed resolution? Mr. Meith stated it is basically an Administrative Policy and Council's role is more within the budgetary control. Who takes a vehicle home is based on the needs of the City and a management function that is more appropriately at the Administration arm of the City. Of course, if any Council member feels there is an abuse of any policy or use of a City vehicle, it would be appropriate for them TAPE #1404 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 17 of 24 to go to the Mayor and/or Audit Committee and asked that the Auditor look into the potential abuse. ME. Colvin asked how was that different from the current policy? Mr. Melth explained the only difference was the currently policy contained language that any changes to the policy was by Council approval and the proposed resolution gives the Mayor authority to change the policy with notification to the City Council. Vote on motion: In Favor: Neville, Colvin, Montgomery, Huff-Menees, Farr Opposed: Overson, McConnell, Law, Winters Motion carried. 10A - PUBLIC HEARING - REVISIONS TO CITY CHARTER, #AB96-199 The revised Charter removes redundant and inconsistent language, updates the current language to reflect changes in State law, such as the election of the Municipal Court Judge and clarifies a number of ambiguous passages. A second emphasis is to remove the majority of references to administrative organization, including position titles and duties of officers and employees. A summary of substantive changes is attached as a cover sheet to the draft. The first hearing will provide an opportunity for public input and incorporation of changes to the draft. A resolution referring the revised Charter to the November general election will be considered the following week. Kathleen McCluskey, City Clerk, read into the record the Summary Of Charter Revisions: Sec. 3: Definition section added. Sec. 6: Judge is included as an elected official; One year residency requirement added for elected officials. Sec. 7: Sets a deadline for redistricting prior to election; Council members displaced by redistricting are allowed to serve out their terms. Sec. 10: Allows for continuity of city government if several vacancies occur at the same time. Sec. 11: Council President will serve as Mayor Pro Tem to fill an unanticipated need during the Mayor's absence. Sec. 15: Procedures for shortening notice and effective dates on emergency ordinances are clarified using State emergency appropriations as a model. TAPE #1404 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 18 of 24 Sec. 18: Replaces Mayor on the Auditing Committee with an additional citizen member. Sec. 31: Reduces Civil Service Commissioner residency requirement from three years to one year. Removes Police and Fire Chiefs from Civil Service. Sec. 37: Removes restriction on exclusive franchises. restrictions to franchises. Limits term Ian Sievers, City Attorney, stated prior to getting into substantive discussion on additional language or changes, he wanted to point out several minor typographical corrections: page 8 of the proposed Charter subsection (2) third line striking "the Council" to be consistent with the format. Page 14 Sec. 14 first line should read "All meetings of Council and City boards, commissions and committees shall be open to the public except as excluded by 42.30 RCW or this Charter", (striking "and" between boards and commissions). Page 22 - add the word "office" after appointive in the first line; and correct the spelling of Marshal by deleting one "1". And, under Section 21, second sentence shall read: "Council employees who serve at the pleasure of the Council may only be removed by a majority vote of Council sitting as a whole. Section 22 first sentence shall read: "Any officer or employee", before entering upon the performance of his duties, may be ..... ". Secton 24 first sentence insert the word "or" between the words committee and commission and delete the words "or" and "department". Section 29 first line...the "d" in the word "declared" should not be struck out. Page 28 Sec. 29, second sentence add the word "any" before the word "special". And the third sentence of Sec. 29 should show "state Law" stuck out prior to RCW 35.92,070; and the addition of the word "need" prior to the word "only". Council was provided a copy of the proposed Charter without the amendatory format and he used that opportunity for one language change requested by Councilman Overson on keeping an option open to amend Council's salary through Initiative Ordinance, which allow those salaries to be implemented immediately across the board. The proposed change is in Section 8 (1) "The compensation and benefits of the Mayor, Municipal Judge and Council members shall be fixed by ordinance and may be revised from time to time, but any change in Council members compensation shall not be applicable to Council members serving the remainder of unexpired terms unless fixed by ordinance and aDproved bv the voters. He asked for Council's direction if they wished to include the language change he identified. Mr. Montgomery stated he does not believe in fixing something that isn't broken and he believed that items were being left out of the TAPE #1404 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 19 of 24 proposed charter. In reference to Section 8 - Compensation, he firmly believes no elected official should ever get a salary increase unless it is voted on by the citizens. Mr. Colvin stated he does not believe the citizens have had sufficient time study the proposed Charter and wanted to extend them an opportunity to carefully review the document prior to making comment. Mr. Winters stated as Mayor Pro Tem he has had concerns with Section 11 (1), the appointment of the Mayor Pro Tempore. He finds not only do we have a Council President that sometimes is very busy, but we have a Council Vice President and a Mayor Pro Tem, who are elected by the members of the Council, based on who they feel can best handle that position for what it requires. As an example, when he was on vacation the chain of commend went down as far as Councilman McConnell to represent the City; however, he did know that the Mayor appointed him to represent the City as Mayor Pro Tem or Deputy Mayor in a situation. That is why he believes Section 11 where one person takes on the responsiblity of two or three people is not fair. He firmly believes there needs to be a change of officers of the Council, but also each duty experienced by a Council member. He continues to have a problem with this section. Mr. Colvin stated he could appreciate Mr. Winters' concern, but he believes the duties of the position of Mayor Pro Tem should be clearly defined and he did not see that Section 11 gave the Mayor Pro Tem the authority granted to the Mayor. Mr. Winters stated prior to his being sworn in as a City Council member, he asked the City Attorney what his responsibility would be as a new Council member. Mr. Sievers' response was for him to read the City Charter, which he did. He found the definition of Mayor Pro Tem, Council President and Vice President are defined in the current City Charter. The proposed revised charter does not go into the same depth as the current Charter. He asked Mr. Sievers if the duties of the Mayor Pro Tem are as clearly defined in the proposed Section as they are in the current City Charter? Mr. Sievers referenced Section 11(2) and quoted: "The Mayor Pro Tem shall perform all the duties of the Mayor, except he may only remove appointive officers subject to Council confirmation after the Mayor as been absent for thirty consecutive days, at which time the Mayor Pro Tempore may remove such persons subject to any applicable law, rule or regulation relating to Civil Service, with the approval of Council majority plus one." The Department head language in the current Charter was replace with appointive offices because there is no definition for Department Head, but he did not see that as a significant change. He was not aware that the current Charter contained more detail as to the role of the Mayor Pro Tem other than he is the Mayor, under certain circumstances, and would carry TAPE #1404 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 20 of 24 out the duties as Mayor when stepping into that office. Mr. MontaomerV stated the reference to "he" is used throughout the document and to be political correct "he" should be changed to "he/she" or delete the "he". Mr. Neville pointed out that issue was covered under Definitions of Genders, Section 3(1). Mr. Montgomer~ requested the Council be provided a smooth copy of the proposed Charter that would include the recommended changes for the September llth Council Agenda. Mr. Colvin asked when would the public have an opportunity to view a copy of the revised Charter that included all of the recommended changes? Kathleen McCluskey stated as soon as the changes are made, within a day or two, the City will provide copies to the Main Library and the downtown branch of the library. Mr. Colvin questioned how long would the public have to review the revised proposed charter? Ms. McCluskey noted until September llth. Mr. Colvin asked if there was a legal requirement as to when the public should have an opportunity to review a "smooth" copy of the proposed charter? Mr. Sievers stated this process before Council is to give the Council as much input as possible for them to make their recommendation. The citizens will have the opportunity to approve the proposed Charter through the ballot, which must be published four times (weekly) in the mandatory formate, which will show changes from the current Charter. Mr. Montgomery asked if it would be possible to place the proposed revised Charter on the Internet through the Kitsap Regional Library? Ms. MoCluske~ stated yes. Mr. Farr asked the percentage of votes needed to approve the ballot measure? Mr. Sievers stated by simple majority. Mr. Fare asked what would be the affect if the proposed revised Charter was not approved by the voters? Mr. Sievers stated obviously some of the inconsistences brought about through State law changes would take precedent over the City's Charter. Mr. Montgomery pointed out Section 8 was left off the Charter Revision Summary. Mr. Sievers explained the information he provided earlier on Section 8 could be added to the Summary either as a motion at this meeting or at the Council meeting on September 11. President Law stated he had the impression that Council was comfortable with the language in the Section 8 handout. Mr. M~Conne11 and Mr. Montgomery stated they each preferred their own version of Section 8 over Mr. Sievers' version. President Law stated Section 8 will be covered as a voting item after public input has been taken. TAPE #1404 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 21 of'24 Andv Parype, Bremerton resident, referenced Article II Section 5 and recommended changing the title to read:"Officers - Election - and (strike out and) Term of (strike out of) and add the word Oualifications (underlining Oualifications). He explained the reason for underlining the word Qualifications is because it would be a new word to both Charters. Under the same section, he also asked Council to consider adding wording after the word "Washington" (inserted and underlined) "no person shall be eligible for the position of Council member while holding any other public office; or is an employee of the City." The reason for that suggested wording is that Section 12 of the Charter does state the Council has the power to fix the compensation of City officers and employees. If the Council has that authority then he did not feel is was appropriate for an employee to be seated as a City Council member. He also did not feel it was appropriate for the City to do business with an entity where a Bremerton City employee held an elected office. Mr. Parypa recommended that the Fire Chief and Police Chief not be excluded from Civil Service because in his mind there is the possibility as well as past history where the Mayor asked that City/State regulations not be enforced. He viewed such action as detrimental to the City. He recalled a few years ago the City paid dearly to get rid of a Police Chief; however, that was not because of Civil Service. The proposed Charter requires citizenship for elected people. No where in the proposed Charter does it stipulate citizenship other than the Civil Service section. And in no other commission, board or committee did it require that they be citizens. Also, Mr. Parypa recommended the age requirement for boards, committee and commissions should be at least electorate age. He questioned if a minor is serving on a board, committee or commission and there is a tortious claim against the City over something the minor said, what could be the repercussion? Larry Stone, Bremerton resident, stated he was reminded of the fact that the holy Bible has been interpreted over 50 times and the United States Constitution has been amended more than 20 times. He found it gratifying to stand before Council, after 3 1/2 years when the idea of improving the Charter came about. He acknowledged that the proposed revised Charter is not perfect. He and Mr. Parypa discussed thoroughly the issue of keeping the Police and Fire Chiefs under Civil Service; however he was not sure he agreed with Mr. Parypa on that issue based on his experience in other areas. He does believe Mr. Parypa had other valid points that deserve discussion by the City Council. However, he urged Council to give the proposed Charter serious consideration, which he felt was worthy of their consideration. #2984 TAPE #1404 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 22 of 24 President Law expressed special thanks to Mr. Parypa and Mr. Stone for their effort in developing the proposed revised Charter. M/S/C(McConnell/Huff-Menees) to have the proposed revised Charter corrected, per the recommended changes by Mr. Sievers, for presentation to the public at the September llth. Vote on motion: In Favor: Winters, Huff-Menees, Farr, Neville, McConnell, Colvin, Law Motion carried. Opposed: Montgomery Mr. McConne11 recommended the following wording for Section 8 - Compensation - "The compensation and benefits of the Mayor and Municipal Judge shall be fixed by ordinance and may be revised from time to time. Council's salary shall be set by a Commission appointed by the Mayor." He also recommended the following title for a new section "Sale Of Watershed Prohibited - Nothing in this Charter shall be construed to permit the City of Bremerton to sell all or any portion of any of the real property it now owns or may hereafter acquire for water supply purposes. more generally known as watershed, whether or not currently used for water supply purposes unless a question of such proposed sale shall have been first submitted to the qualified electorate of the City at a General or Special Election called for that purpose and consented to by 60% majority vote of said electors." Mr. Neville asked if that recommendation included the timber on of the watershed land? Mr. McConne11 stated no. Mr. McConne11 also recommended the following new section: Disposal of Utility Properties -The City shall not sell. lease or dispose of any Utility system or Darts thereof essential to the continued effective Utility service unless and until such disposal is approved by a majority plus one of the Council." Mr. Farr stated he could support some of the proposed changes, but he could see some possibilities where it will be tough to get to a whole document without submitting some of the proposed changes to the individual proposal being voted on by the Council. President Law stated he is asking that every proposed change identified during this discussion be documented and made part of the Agenda Bill for the September 11 Council Agenda packet. Mr. Farr asked when it comes to individual proposals where they are vastly different will Council get a chance to try to influence which one goes into the proposal that is approved and presented to the voters? President Law stated Council will have to vote on each change. Ms. MCCluskey asked President Law if he wished each proposal to be submitted separately from the body of the document. President Law stated yes. Mr. Montgomery asked that his TAPE #1404 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 23 of 24 recommendation for Section 8 also be included as follows: Compensation for the City Council, Mayor and Municipal Judge will only be approved by the voters" Mr. Farr referenced the recommendations by Mr. Parypa and noted one of the changes involved qualifications to City Council included two distinct criteria, one of which sounded acceptable and one he did not agree with. He asked Mr. Sievers for a legal definition of "public office" in response to Mr. Parypa's recommendation that City Council members could not hold any other public office. Mr. Sievers stated he could distinguish "public office" from employee, but Mr. Parypa is including both. Mr. Farr stated in his particular case the prohibition against the City employee serving on the Council might be reasonable, but by including "public office" it could preclude one from serving on the Kitsap Planning Council or board. Mrs. Huff-Menees asked Mr. Parypa to clarify if he was talking about elected office? She also needed clarification in terms of how that compares to the statute on Election Law, because she is aware that Election statutes do address the ability to hold more than one public office. Mr. Parypa stated when he spoke of "public office" he was speaking about any elected public offices. For example, there was recently a case where a person was holding a public elected office in Bremerton and that same person was running for State Legislature. If that person would have been elected as a State Legislator, that person wanted to hold down both of those jobs at the same time. Mr. Winters referenced the Sinclair Landing Association (SLA) and noted Bremerton's Mayor is elected as is Councilman Huff-Menees, but one of them is elected to the SLA board. Mrs. Huff-Menees pointed out neither of them were elected to the SLA board. Mr. Winters stated he needed to know if that would apply since it was not publicly elected although it could be within its organization? Mr. McConne11 stated it would not be a public officer. Mr. Colvin asked if that means that no Council member, under Mr. Parypa's proposal, could be elected to the School Board? Mr. Sievers stated that was correct. Mr. Colvln asked if currently they could be elected to the School Board? Mr. Sievers stated he did not see it as a conflict. Mr. Colvin asked if was legal to set such a restriction? Mr. Sievers stated he believed Council could set the qualifications in the Charter for running for City Council, and doubted it would run afoul of any fundamental rights for the person running for office, it would be just an established qualification.. There is a common law of conflict of offices and he will check the statutes to see if there is something more specific for elected offices. He noted there is a lot of case law precedent disqualifying various positions in elected offices and holding office and being an employee of the same constituency. Mr. TAPE #1404 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes September 4, 1996 Page 24 of 24 Farr asked that the issue of "employee" and "elected office" be addressed separately. Mr. Winters asked that Section 11 - Mayor Pro Tem, remain the same as the current Charter. President Law reminded Council members and the public that this is the first of two hearings and the public is invited to read the document that will be prepared that will have the proposed document as discussed plus all of the alternatives/recommendations presented to the Council, which will be a separate document following the proposed Charter. President Law thanked the following TV camera crew members: Erin Daniels, Valery Daniels, Stephanie James and Martin Strohs. With no further business meeting adjourned at 10:00 P.M.. ~. LAW, Council City of Bremerton KLM/JL/me cc: KATHLEEN L. McCLUSKEY, City Clerk President Normal Distribution File/Vault