Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/10/93 ) TAPE #1149 UNAPPROVED DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 10, 1993 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, November 10, 1993, at 5:30 P.M., with Council President Eileen Fitz presiding. Council members present were Richard Neville, Lynn Horton, C.R. "Tiny" Collins, Morrie Dawkins, Russ Johnson, Lon Overson, and Al Colvin. Councilman Hank Waibel was absent. Also present were Assistant City Attorney Jim McNamara and Acting City Clerk Rich Hanna. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council President Fitz and Invocation given by Bonnie McCullough of Abundant Life Foursquare Church. CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes of Meeting -- October 20, 1993 #AB93-215 #0041 M/S/C/U(Neville/Horton) to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. CLAIMS/WARRANT 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. #0041 M/S/C/U(Colvin/Dawkins) November 10, 1993, the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: 170675, 170676, 170733, 170739 through 170988 in the amount of $745,953.57. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Mrs. Horton extended a sincere "Get Well" wish to the City's Purchasing Agent Gil Johnson. Mr. Colvin announced Mayor-Elect Lynn Horton and the newly elected Council members have been invited to speak at District # 1's Coalition meeting on January 20. He understands the Mayor-Elect has a challenge for District # 1 and she will share that information at the January 20 meeting. He acknowledged TAPE #1149 UNAPPROVED DRAFT the presence of an individual, known as the "Oprah Winfrey of Kitsap County" in the Council Chambers, and he expected her to speak during Public Recognition time. Mr. Johnson stated he hoped people would take a few minutes on November 11th to remember the veterans and their sacrifices. Mrs. Fitz welcomed her mother, who resides in Albuquerque, New Mexico, to Bremerton and was pleased that we've had sunny weather during her visit. PUBLIC RECOGNITION Mayor Louis Mentor reported on November 5th he attended the dedication of a new commissary at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard. This new facility will be of benefit to the many active and retired military personnel who reside in the Bremerton/Kitsap County area. The Flea Market held on November 6 at the Sheridan Park Recreation Center was well attended. He reminded everyone that Thursday, November ll is a holiday and City offices will not be open for business that day. The ribbon cutting ceremony opening the 4th Street project will be held Tuesday, November 16, 4:00 P.M. Mayor Mentor shared a letter of thanks received from a group from a Village Assembly in Japan, who visited Bremerton approximately two weeks ago. Gordy Byrd, P.O. Box 930, reported as of this date he had collected $14,480.76 for his shelter for the homeless. He urged anyone who has a concern or question to come before the City Council and share that information with the City Council. Karen Williams announced she is a featured guest host on KITZ's Consider What I Say program (Sundays at 5:00 P.M.) for two weeks. This week her guest will be Seattle author, Mr. Lon Elmer, who wrote a book entitled "Why Her, Why Now", which deals with a situation of a man whose wife is dying and how men handle grief. Her guests for the November 21 broadcast will be two people who have experienced near death experiences. She anticipated both shows to prove to be very interesting. Beverly Woods, Executive Director of the Bremerton Area Chamber of Commerce, announced the Chamber will be sponsoring the following workshops in November and December in preparation for the holiday season: November 16, 7:30 AM to 9:00 AM, at the Community Room of Washington Mutual Savings..."Tis The Season For Bad Checks, Shoplifting and Holiday Fraud" (mainly for retail and service businesses). This workshop will be conducted by Police Officer Jon Johnson of the Bremerton Police Department. Cost for this workshop is $5.00 per person. Reservations for the workshop are being taken through the Chamber's office 479-3579. The second workshop they are putting on is something they have wanted to TAPE #1149 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 3 of 26 do for awhile and that is getting ready for the Chamber to kick off a "shop Bremerton" year-long promotion. They want the residents of Bremerton to know that there are lots of places to shop, and things to buy in Bremerton, and that they don't have to go outside of Kitsap County. In order to do that, they must make sure that we have the best customer service oriented sales people in the state. Therefore, the Chamber is sponsoring a workshop for sales people and they are encouraging businesses and their employees to take advantage of this opportunity, especially if they have seasonal workers. The workshop is titled "I'll Never Go Back There Again Or They Have The Best Service In The County" presented by Bill Hope on December 2, 7:00AM- 10:00AM, at the Kitsap Vocational Skill Center multi-purpose room. Reservations for that workshop can be made by calling the Chamber Office. President Fitz stated we too would like everyone to "shop Bremerton". Don Atkinson, Bremerton Main Street Association, announced the upcoming special events during the Christmas season: first ever Christmas market will be held downtown on the weekends leading up to Christmas in the Weir's building on 4th Street. Some vendors will be in under cover in the parking area next to the Weir building. Dates for the Market are December 4, 5, 11, 12, 18, and 19. Another event that will be new this year will be Santa's arrival on a Bremerton fire truck on the evening of December 4 at 5:00 P.M. and lighting of a Christmas tree outside of City Hall. The second annual Hospice tree lighting on the boardwalk will take place on the evening of December 3, at 6:00 P.M., followed by a candlelight procession up to Yesterdays, Today's and Tomorrow's for a social event with the Puget Sounders performing. He noted there is another new attraction around Bremerton and that is an open air horse drawn carriage that will be taking people for rides in the downtown area periodically throughout the holiday season. Earl Smith, Executive Director of the Economic Development Council, reported he brings good news. The EDC received an Office Of Economic Adjustment grant in the amount of $100,000, which was submitted for EDC by Kitsap County. Also, the EDC got the State to put $50,000 into matching funds for diversification for Kitsap County to accompany that grant. What comes with that $100,000 is $50,000 to complete the incubator program, one of which will happen in downtown Bremerton. The other $50,000 will go to the City of Bremerton to hire the Leland Group again for the second phase of their study. He emphasized the "real plus" for having funding for that second phase study was not having to go out to County people and again ask for private donations. The State's matching $50,000 paid for the first half of the incubator TAPE #1149 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 4 of 26 study and it also allowed him to hire a full time person to do diversification in Kitsap County. He referenced the two million dollar grant that will be administered by Employment Security and the fact that the EDC was one of the participants. He raised the question what is EDC getting out of that grant...EDC will receive $215,000 and $25,000 will be used for a full time person to implement the incubator program. He felt one of the best results of those grant funds is getting 10 additional people who are classified as paid volunteers. The definition of a paid volunteer is a person who will work for the EDC for 10 months, who has been laid off by the Department of Defense, the Navy, from a defense contractor, or who just does not have a job. Paid volunteers will receive $620.00 per month and will work for 10 months and at the end of that period they will have gained $2,500 toward some kind of higher education at either Olympic College or vocational training. Of the ten workers, two will work on the Admiral Theater project, at no cost to the project; two will work on the Turner Joy; two will work at Keyport so that Keyport can continue doing the things relating to diversification, dual use, transfer of technology and create some jobs; and six people will. be assigned to oversee thirteen committees that have been created in the EDC, such as finance, land use, etc. These committees will make sure that what was said at the diversification conference can and will happen. He is very happy about what is happening because it will help diversify Kitsap County and revitalize the downtown area. He assured the Council that the Turner Joy is alive and well and yes, there will be some financial concerns surviving the winter months, but they have already figured out how to raise funds to carry them through. Efforts must be put forth to move people inland to the Admiral Theater and other businesses located in the inner-core of the City. Shannon Cook, 256 Burwell Apt. 202, stated the 4th Street project was looking very nice and she was pleased to be living one street over from such a nice area. 6A - INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT DESIGNATING KITSAP TRANSIT AS LEAD AGENCY TO ADMINISTER COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION PLANS AND ORDINANCES, #AB93-216 Kitsap County and all Cities within the County have adopted a common Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) ordinance. The CTR ordinances authorize Kitsap Transit to administer the CTR Plan and Ordinances for each jurisdiction. This Interlocal Agreement reaffirms the ordinances, provides for Kitsap Transit to receive CTR funds, and adopts a statement of work. John Clauson, Service Development Manager for Kitsap Transit, TAPE #1149 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 5 of 26 introduced Bob Ferguson, Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Planner, who provided a brief update on what they have been doing since their last appearance before the Council. Bob Ferguson, TDM Planner for Kitsap Transit, stated this past year Kitsap Transit trained all the Employee Transportation Coordinators for the major employers of the area. Currently, they are in the process of reviewing the major employer's Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) programs. They have already reviewed all of the County's, and so far every program has passed. They have been working on Kitsap Transit's Registered Car Pool/Van Pool Program. The major employers in the County, including PSNS, are picking preferential parking spaces at their work site and posting "car pool only" signs. The employees parking in those spaces register through Kitsap Transit and in return they send the employer the registration information as well as the employee the car pool passes. Presently, they are working with local merchants throughout all of Kitsap County where the merchants will be able to offer discounts to those individuals who are car pooling/van pooling in the County. This program was "kicked off" just two weeks ago, and at Bangor there are already approximately 250 ride share members. The purpose of the Commute Trip Reduction Law is to reduce air pollution and traffic congestion in our communities. Implementation of this program is moving "full speed ahead" with monthly meetings with major employers providing assistance in reducing the number of single occupancy vehicles coming into the City and County. Mr. Dawkins questioned the number of employees and number of major employers in this area? Mr. Ferguson stated there are approximately 33 major employers within the County, representing approximately 20,000 employees. They are hoping, with the involvement of PSNS, to have 5,000 registered car pools/van pools in the County. President Fitz questioned if Kitsap Transit vehicles would be used in this program or are they privately owned vehicles? Mr. Ferguson stated both kinds of vehicles will be used. Most of the registered car pools are private, two-person car pools. However, Kitsap Transit purchased 40 new vans that they are lending out to the public. To qualify for a van there needs to be a driver and six additional members. The new vans are being placed strategically throughout the work sites of the major employers and they are filling those vans rapidly. Mr. Overson pointed out the Statement of Work for the trip reduction program included 23 separate elements and questioned TAPE #1149 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 6 of 26 through what vehicle will he be working to implement the identified elements? Mr. Ferguson explained the cities and counties, except Bainbridge Island, have an Employee Transportation Coordinator that they work with. The City of Bremerton's CTR program is due November 13 and should be implemented in June of 1994. Mr. Overson questioned if the City's program is on track? Mr. Ferguson stated yes, the City is completely on track. Mr. Overson stated the original program started off with some status reports and questioned if the Council would receive further updates? Mr. Ferguson stated yes, everyyear a survey will be conducted to determine where the major employers are as to the single occupant vehicle rate. Mrs. Horton questioned how well the City was doing in complying with required tasks up to this point? Mr. Ferguson explained the process is slow and continuing. The cities and County need to be reviewing their Parking Ordinances and how those ordinances relate to the Commute Trip Reduction law. Through the CTR law, the question needs to be asked: "Do we need this much parking, and in having this much parking do we encourage the use of the single occupant vehicle?" Mr. Clauson stated, as Mr. Ferguson mentioned, that it is a long and tedious process. The review of City ordinances is critical to the long term success of this program and what they are proposing to do is to take the lions share of the funds that are coming available through the State and part of those funds will be used to hire a person who will serve two purposes: (1) to work with the community, cities and the County in the development phase of these large projects that come along, i.e., large apartment complex, short plats, etc. Emphasis will be placed on encouraging some other form of transportation than the single occupant vehicle, be it pedestrian amenities, bicycle paths, etc.; and (2) working with the various jurisdictions to assist in that review process of ordinances, be it the Zoning Ordinance, Parking Ordinance, etc. During that review process, suggestions and recommendations will be made as to how changes could be made to better address the CTR law. There will be time required from City staff to carry out this review process. He explained there is a group called Partners For Smart Commuting that encompasses counties in both Washington and Oregon and collectively through the money they have put together have developed some public service ad campaigns focused on getting people out of their individual vehicles. Some of those ads have been running in the Seattle area and some have been aired on local radio stations. Print media has been provided through local newspapers at no charge. TAPE #1149 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 7 of 26 Mr. Colvin noted at one time perimeter parking was advocated that would include van pooling into the City. He questioned if that was still a viable option? Mr. Clauson stated it was still in their goals and plans, however, it is a long term process to acquire property and develop parking lots. Their first preference is to pick up an individual before they get into their vehicle and that was why they had such an expansive worker/driver program and van pool programs. For those people we can't pick up, then the park-and-ride system strategically laid out throughout the County is the direction they are heading. They have expanded co-op lots where they contracted with churches where they have contributed some to the development in exchange for the use of their lot Monday through Friday during the commute day. This plan has worked out quite well. An example of that program is a church in the South Kitsap area near the Southworth Ferry terminal where they are currently using about 150 spaces in their lot. A piece of property adjacent to the church became available, which Kitsap Transit purchased, with the intent to turn it into a park-and-ride lot contiguous to the church property. Kitsap Transit would use the church parking lot and the newly acquired lot during the weekdays and the church would then use their parking lot and Kitsap Transit's lot during the weekend. Today, Kitsap Transit representatives met with the Suquamish Tribe about taking advantage of their parking available at the Suquamish Bingo Parlor. Gordy Byrd, P.O. Box 930, expressed concern that vehicles were being parked in the bus loading zone in front of Woolworths on Pacific Avenue. He questioned if people parking in the loading zone could be ticketed? President Fitz stated she would contact Parking Supervisor Ms. Goddell and provide him with a response by next week. Mr. Johnson stated he supports the trip reduction program, however, he felt reviewing the Parking Ordinances would be a waste of City staff time on a non-problem. He has never heard that there is excess parking in Bremerton any where, especially since the waterfront was developed. He does not believe the City's parking arrangement encourages going against CTR. What he sees happening if changes were made to the Zoning Ordinance, is multi-family facilities being built that provide inadequate parking, such as some multi-family complexes that exist now in East Bremerton. Until there is a problem where there is so much excess parking that we start encouraging people to use their own vehicle, he felt that would be "kind of crazy". He also believes most people feel there is inadequate parking spaces and in development the last thing Council wants to do is build something with inadequate TAPE #1149 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 8 of 26 parking spaces. Mr. Collins stated he had been working with Kitsap Transit personnel to develop a system whereby commuter parking would be forced out of the neighborhoods, which is what the City wanted to do and in line with the CTR program. Now, they are almost back into the same problem that existed before where people are not participating in the initiated program and vehicles are again being parked all over the hillside in District # 7. Mrs. Horton stated she concurred with Mr. Collins and what this proposal is addressing is commute trip and what Council has heard over and over is that there is a problem with residential parking and with people who want to come to Bremerton to shop. If City policies and ordinances are reviewed in accordance with CTR she believed it promoted both neighborhood parking and commercial parking where it is appropriate. She wholeheartedly concurred in this agreement and felt strongly that the City needed to promote transit pooling, bicycle riding, etc., to get people out of their single occupancy vehicle for commute trips. Mr. Johnson stated he felt the City had already taken those steps through the Residential Parking Zones, increased fines for parking infractions, etc. He emphasized there are some major City projects that need staff time and he would put commute trip parking at the bottom of the priority list. Mr. Dawkins emphasized parking is an on going problem in every City and he felt Bremerton was fortunate having someone handle the coordination of the CTR program. He agreed that implementation of the program will not happen overnight, however, it will work in time. Mr. Overson noted Mr. Johnson had a good point in diminishing returns. He believed there was already a very good rate of eliminating single occupancy vehicles (SOV) and that it would be hard to improve on that rate. #1558 M/S/C/U(Horton/Collins) to approve Interlocal Agreement administering CTR Plans and Ordinances. 6B - 245 4TH STREET BUILDING (PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT #3349) CHANGE ORDER # 1, #AB93-217 In October 1991, the City entered into a contract with Puget Sound Masonry & Restoration, Inc. in the amount of $42,396.00 to clean seal and paint the exterior surfaces of the 245 4th Street Building. Before work started, it was discovered that the existing exterior building coating contained asbestos, and TAPE #1149 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 9 of 26 work was stopped. Recently, the City has pursued removal of the asbestos exterior so the building can be sealed and painted. The attached change order to the contract with Puget Sound Masonry & Restoration, Inc. in the amount of $29,973.00 addresses removal of the loose exterior building coating which contains asbestos. A summary of the project costs including the change order are as follows: Original Contract Amount $42,365.00 Change Order #1 29,973.00 Revised Contract Amount $72,338.00 8.1% WSST 5.859.38 TOTAL COST $78,197.38 Section 2.76.100 of the Bremerton Municipal Code requires that change orders in excess of 20% of the contract price, or $30,000, whichever is less, be approved by the City Council. Up to this limit, the Mayor has the authority to authorize change orders. With approval of the attached change order, the contract will exceed the change order authority of the Mayor and require City Council approval for all future change orders. As the contract work has not yet started, staff requests that the change order authority be given to the Mayor for a revised contract amount of $78,197.38 (the contract plus change order # 1). This will allow timely reaction to any changes which may occur and require quick action by the staff. Randy Witt, City Engineer, explained when he started with the City one of the first things pointed out to him was getting the exterior of the 4th Street Building sealed and taking care of any asbestos. There were three ways of getting the asbestos off contractually and after reviewing all three options it was felt this proposal was the best, which is a change order to the existing contract. The other two options were to have the City contract the asbestos removal itself independent of the existing contract and then have the painting contract come in later. If the City had opted to go in that direction, there was the possibility that paint might peel off and the painting contractor and asbestos contractor could blame each other. By rolling both the asbestos removal and painting into one contract, it puts the responsibility on the contractor to make sure the asbestos removal is satisfactory for painting. Another way the City could have approached this work would have been to reject the contract with the painting contractor and readvertise the proposal. The reason they chose not to do that had to do with the time involved. If the dry weather holds, there is the possibility TAPE #1149 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 10 of 26 of getting the work accomplished this winter, which would allow the building to be sealed for the winter. Water damage that has already occurred to the building is evident and can be observed on the 5th floor. In the schedule of things that need to be done to the building, sealing the exterior of the building is probably one of the highest priorities. Mr. Johnson stated he was concerned with staff's second recommended moton that authorizes the Mayor to approve future change orders. He referenced the fact that change order rules are listed in the Bremerton Municipal Code as a result of an ordinance passed by the City Council. He questioned if there was a provision in that ordinance allowing Council to waive their approving authority? Jim McNamara, Assistant City Attorney, stated he did not believe Council can waive that authority. The language in Section 2.76.100 states that changes must be approved by the City Council. He felt that language was included as protection for the City Council in having oversight for change orders. Mr. Johnson stated something might be considered some day adding a section in the Bremerton Municipal Code that said the provisions of this restriction could be waived by the Council with a super majority vote. Mr. McNamara stated the Code could be amended, however, at this time there is no provision to waive that Council authority. Mr. Dawkins questioned the length of time needed to accomplish this work? Mr. Witt explained given the time of year, the contractor was not given a certain end date, however, the contractor envisions the work to be completed in 4-6 weeks. Mr. Dawkins questioned once the work is completed can the tenants move in? Mr. Witt stated this work is independent of tenants moving in and will benefit the tenants that are already in the building. Mr. Colvin questioned what would happen if the proposed work is not done? Mr. Witt stated if the City does not move forward with the proposed work the building will continue to deteriorate due to water coming through the walls. Mr. Colvin questioned if delaying the repair at this time would cost the City more at a later date? Mr. Witt explained the more damage there is the high cost of repair. Mr. Colvin questioned what was Mr. Witt's recommendation to solve that problem? Mr. Witt stated he is recommending approval of the proposal as presented. Mr. Colvin questioned if such action was legal? Mr. McNamara stated yes, however, his earlier concern had to do with the fact that because of an ordinance, Council cannot waive its authority for approving future change orders. He pointed out this change order is before Council for approval TAPE #1149 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 11 of 26 and there is no legal problem with that action. Mr. Witt noted motion # 2 has been withdrawn. Mr. Neville questioned if Mr. Witt actually had a schedule of maintenance for the 4th Street building and if not, will there be one forthcoming? Mr. Witt stated earlier he used the word schedule, however, a better word would be "shopping list". He was not aware of a specific schedule/shopping list developed for the 4th Street building, however, he did not have all the pieces "in his court". Mr. Meville pointed out there is a certain amount of dollars set aside for this building project, and now the City is going into it for an extra $30,000. He questioned how far will this money go and what will it cover? Mr. Witt stated in response to Mr. Neville's question will the whole amount of money fix everything on the "shopping list", he did not have an answer and was something the Mayor had been deliberating over. He recalled an earlier "shopping list" that included a 6-year renovation at approximately $300,000 and we've come in with something 10% of that figure. As they get into renovating the building, he hoped the trend of reduced costs can be maintained. He offered to take Council's concern back to staff members who are working on the 4th Street building project. Mrs. Horton stated she was concerned that the City entered into this contract without knowing there was asbestos in the paint. She questioned if in the future there was some way to guarantee that things like that will be taken into consideration so that Council will be fully apprised when going into projects such as this? Mr. Witt stated without being there at the time this particular project was initiated, he did not know what the assumptions were. The intent is to always go into a project knowing what the full. costs are, however, he could not guarantee they won't run into surprises. There is an Asbestos Report on the 4th Street building and they are using it. Mrs. Horton stated when the City undertakes future projects, we will be more aware that problems such as this could exist, and she urged that they be analyzed ahead of time. Mr. Witt explained they do learn from mistakes. Mr. Overson noted Councilman Waibel, who is not present at this meeting, has voiced concerns about growth of a contract through these kinds of vehicles. He questioned if he understood correctly that the City would be given a 10-year guarantee on the completed work? Mr. Witt stated that was his understanding. Mr. Overson stated it surprised him that the painting contractor gave an estimate for painting the exterior of the building and did not notice that there was an existing TAPE #1149 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 12 of 26 asbestos problem. Mr. Collins stated it is not all that common to find asbestos in a coating like that found on the 4th Street building. He believes it was an incident where no one was aware of the asbestos problem until the paint scraping started and it become evident that a problem existed. Public comment - none. #2172 M/S/C(Dawkins/Colvin) to authorize and direct the Mayor to execute the attached change order #1 to P.W. Contract #3349 with Puget Sound Masonry & Restoration, Inc. in the amount of $29,973.00 for removal of the loose building coating which contains asbestos on the 245 4th Street Building. The revised contract amount is $72,338.00. Vote on motion: In Favor: Dawkins, Colvin, Johnson, Overson, Fitz, Collins Opposed: Neville, Horton Motion carried. 7A - ORDINANCE NO. 4437 (SECOND READING) FOR THE ANNEXATION OF THE KITSAP/CORBET AREA INTO THE JURISDICTION OF THE CITY OF BREMERTON, #AB93-214 Public comment - none. #2256 M/S/C/U(Johnson/Colvin) to pass Ordinance No. 4437, on second reading annexing approximately 20.18 acres known as the Kitsap Way Annexation Area, located north of Kitsap Way, east of Marine Drive and west of Corbet Drive along Kitsap Way, into the City of Bremerton and fixing the effective date of annexation. 8A - PUBLIC HEARING: WEST KITSAP LAKE ROAD SEWER UTILITY LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (U.L.I.D.), #AB93-218 The City Engineer has received a petition signed by a majority of the property owners within the West Kitsap Lake Road Sewer Utility Local Improvement District (ULID) boundary requesting sewer improvements. Section 35.43,125 RCW requires a public hearing be held on the creation of a proposed ULID that is initiated by petition. The City Council meeting is the public hearing. The total estimated project cost is $625.000. In working with the property owners supporting this project, it was apparent that they understood the City would provide $300,000 toward the project completion. This was evidenced by handouts distributed at public meetings. A search of the record shows no formal City Council authorization to provide the funding. The estimated cost per lot with the City contribution is TAPE #1149 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 13 of 26 $4,200, while the estimated cost per lot without the City contribution is $8,000. Pursuant to the petition, the City Council is requested to take action on initiating the ULID and to provide a City contribution toward the project. The options available to the City Council are: 1. Direct the City Engineer to proceed with formation of the West Kitsap Lake Road Sewer ULID and authorize a City contribution in the amount of $300,000 toward the project. Possible funding sources are the Wastewater Utility Fund and the General Fund. 2. Reject the petitions to proceed with formation of the West Kitsap Lake Sewer ULID because a City contribution of $300,000 is not authorized by Council, yet was assumed by the signing property owners. The petition should be recirculated with the understanding that the City will not contribute $300,000. 3. Proceed with formation of the West Kitsap Lake Road Sewer ULID and not approve the City contribution. However, this is not fair to the property owners who signed the petition assuming the contribution, and should not be considered. The Public Works and Utilities Department staff recommend Option Number 2 above. An impression was made that the City would contribute $300,000 toward the project, yet it was not formally approved by the City Council. With the current City commitment to reducing the combined storm overflows, reducing odors at the Wastewater Treatment Plant, and maintaining and operating the existing system, Wastewater Utility Funds are not available to provide $300,000 to this project. Likewise, the City's General Fund is not able to support a $300,000 City contribution toward the project. Staff supports this project, but cannot support a $300,000 City contribution. Therefore, the petition should be re- circulated reflecting the lack of City contribution. Randv Witt, City Engineer, explained the City received petitions signed by a majority of property owners (61%) in the west Kitsap Lake area to provide sewers in that area. The project involves putting sewers in west Kitsap Lake Road and on Northlake Way within the boundaries of the district. There are two questions before Council at this time: (1) first hearing to accept or reject the petition; and (2) the City's TAPE #1149 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 14 of 26 contribution of $300,000 to the project. During the petition process, people supporting the petition and obtaining signatures at the various meetings were left with the impression that the City would contribute $300,000 to the project. Even he, during his participation at meetings, contributed to that process with impressions he picked up from City administration. However, as the petitions were being processed what they did not find was a Council resolution approving the $300,000 for that project. Therefore, Council must decide: (1) does the City want to make a $300,000 contribution to the project; (2) does the City want to go forward with the project as a ULID? Council can either approve the funding and approve the project or reject the money and not accept the petitions because they were put together with the assumption of the City's contributing $300,000. Another option is to accept the petitions and not approve funding, which he was not recommending. If Council wanted to force forming a ULID, there is another process that could be used. Members of the City Administration have worked quite some time on this project and they cannot, at this time, recommend funding for the project for the following two reasons: (1) with the recent settlement of the lawsuits, consent orders from Department Of Ecology and wastewater projects the City must construct, funding is not available in the Wastewater Utility; and (2) a contribution of $300,000 for this project, which is a $625,000 project, is about a 50% contribution, which could be setting a precedent that the City is willing to do that for all ULID projects. The Administration is aware of others who are interested in forming ULID's to fill in gaps in the system and areas that have not been developed. It is their recommendation that funding not be approved and the petitions be recirculated with the understanding that the funding is not approved. The administration supports the project and it is only the funding that they cannot support. President Fitz asked the "Appearance of Fairness/Conflict Of Interest" question with all Council members present, except Morrie Dawkins, being seated. Jack Lefcoski, Kitsap Lake, stated he was speaking on behalf of 78 parcel owners, who signed the petition and he asked that the Acting Clerk read into the record a letter submitted to the City by the W. Kitsap Lake Sewer Project Committee, dated November 8, 1993: To: Bremerton City Council Members - Homeowners in the W. Kitsap Lake Sewers Improvement area have struggled to improve the City's lake and prevent contamination i TAPE #1149 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page-15 of 26 of the lake. In this process, property owners have suffered setbacks; re-organized to develop more agreeable and affordable results; only to face setbacks again. Property owners in this area have witnessed a rapid growth of users on the lake since its extension includes the park developed by the City. The entire City has only one fresh water lake for its people to enjoy and thereby adding contaminates to the lake. The Ecology Department is currently testing salt water bodies and is projected to start testing on fresh water bodies within ten years. We as concerned property owners must act NOW to preserve the lake, and preserve our City's investments in the addition of the park for all citizens of the City, as well as protecting the wildlife reserve adjoining the City's park. Improvements in this area for sewers would be adding value as well. We currently have at least twelve (12) possible building sites in our seventy-eight (78) lot site area to increase the City's infill. Many are waiting for the sewer improvement in the area before finalizing construction. With the City of Bremerton paying the consulting engineers $60,000 from the 1993 budget for the engineering completed thus far, showing the City's intent to continue the project, we are asking the balance of $240,000 to be included in the 1994 and 1995 budgets and the City Council to proceed with the sale of bonds to finance the ULID. Over 60% of the property owners have requested and are willing to pay their fair share for the project as indicated in the City Engineer's letter dated August 2, 1993. In the past, property owners in the W. Kitsap Lake area, at that time, donated about one mile of good quality, usable water pipe and five fire hydrants to the City to provide the City low-connection costs (due to the existing pipelines) for uncontaminated water to the citizens in the area. The exchange for this donation was annexation to the City of Bremerton. Improvements have helped the City to become more livable. W. Kitsap Lake sewers will make the lake area and the lake more healthy and more desirable for the entire City. Acting NOW will save costs, help with City infill, and preserve the environment for long term enjoyment for the entire City of Bremerton. Property owners may never again be in mutual agreement on this project without acting NOW. Signed: Committee members Judy Butler, Ron and Billie Ralston, Shella Scatena, Hal Reume, Sam Moritz, Jack Lefcoski. Mr. Lefcoski requested Council members to note the highlighted portion of the attachment (page 2) to the letter. He provided the following history of the lake: It is five miles around TAPE #1149 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 16 of 26 and up until about three years ago, it was half City and half County owned. On the City portion, which is the east side, a sewer system was installed approximately 12-15 years ago. That system was obviously installed because the citizens, City, and Utility Department recognized the problem on the lake, and at that time, the City had no authority to work on the west side of the lake. In May of 1983 the City asked Parametrix Inc., the same firmthat designed the new W. Kitsap Lake project, to prepare a study of the west side of lake. He was not sure what that study cost the City, but he was sure it amounted to a significant sum. In that study, the bottom line was that in 1983 the west side of Kitsap Lake should have sewer systems and two or three types were cited along with different cost estimates. He discovered that the City could not find its copy of the 1983 study, so he provided them a copy. In March of 1993, the W. Kitsap Lake property owners asked the Health Department to take water samples. He read into the record four finds made by the Health Department: "Sample results indicates presents of E-coli forms in the water taken from the lake and the inflow of the lake near shorelines west and north. E-coli form analysis is the method .used by the State as an indicator for evaluating a micro biological stability of recreational waters. The presence of E-coli is indicated from human and animal waste". He also wanted Council to be aware that surface drain field run-off into the lake is much more prevalent during and after a week of rain and the testing done by the Health Department was done on a nice, dry day. The 78 property owners like to think Kitsap Lake is not theirs to own, just the property to the meander line. He emphasized'all City residents own the lake. He also views the lake as a City park and evidence of that is the fairly new City park that was built on the southeast corner of the lake. What that new park did to them as residents around the lake, was to quadruple the boat traffic on the lake...increased number of skiers, boats, swimmers, etc. The south end of the lake is totally infested with weeds, which precludes fishing, no jet boating, etc. What is happening is that the boats are going around the lake depositing plant life all over the north end of the lake, which is also becoming infested with plant life. When the W. Kitsap Lake area was annexed approximately three years ago, he was the last deciding vote because he did not want to be annexed. He was very content being in the County, however, there was a problem of getting water and they came to the City of Bremerton and asked if the City could sell them water. The City responded yes, they could provide water but it would have a 50% surcharge cost. The community's response was not positive, so the result of negotiations was for the TAPE #1149 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 17 of 26 area to annex in exchange for City water service. The City was given a mile of 8 inch water line as part of the annexing transaction. When the City took over water service, they immediately installed water meters at each residence. Many of the residents expressed their opinion that if they were "going City" then they would go the whole nine yards...they want sewers. After about a year, Mr. Lefcoski approached Bill Duffy, City Utilities Director, and told him the residents in the W. Kitsap Lake area wanted sewers on the lake. Mr. Duffy's response to him was sure, but it would cost the residents. At that time, Mr. Lefcoski's response was to give us the numbers of what it would cost. Mr. Duffy then told him that he would go talk with the City Council and see what could be done for them. Mr. Lefcoski was not sure how many City Council members remember that meeting with Mr. Duffy, but Mr. Lefcoski was present, as was Mayor Mentor and all nine Council members. At that time, Mr. Duffy made a presentation that Kitsap Lake was the City's only lake, it belonged to the City, it was loosing the fight, the City residents want sewage service and the City is obliged to take care of them. At that time, a Council member asked Mr. Duffy how much money he was looking for? Mr. Duffy's response was $300,000. Mr. Lefcoski noted not a single Council member made one negative comment following that discussion. Following that meeting, he asked Mr. Duffy if "that was it...is it that easy?", and Mr. Duffy's response was "you've got your $300,000, now it is up to you to start the petitioning process". The petitioning process involved petitioning that street about five times using different formulas for assessing. The contract was let out of that $300,000 to show intent of the City, to Parametrix, Inc., in the amount of $60,000 to start the engineering design. Within a month, surveyors were surveying the area and the whole ball was rolling, based on the $300,000 City contribution. With the expenditure of $60,000 for engineering design, the $300,000 figure is reduced to $240,000. Parametrix Inc., recently stated they have only about 40 hours to complete the design drawings. He emphasized the residents walked the street and got the petition signed based on the City's offer of providing $300,000 towards the project. He reflected back that Mr. Neville may be the only Council member that was not present at the Study Session held where this item was presented to Council. The northwest corner of the lake is the primary corner being addressed and is nearly all clay. They have condemned drain fields that have taken two years in court to fix. It can cost $6,500 to put in a new drain field and septic tank. A resident in the subject area has a home for sale for $420,000. At the time he purchased his home, there was an installed TAPE #1149 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 18 of 26 drain field, which failed and allows water flowing over his drive way and into the lake. That individual turned himself into the Health Department based on his wanting to sue the person who sold him the home and wanted evidence that his septic system had failed. The Health Department's response was "he was in bad shape", and they recommended installing a sand filtration system and offered to design it for him, which they did. Now, there is a hole large enough to bury five vehicles, which is filled with sandtrap sand, variable aggregate that does not pack with tile in space. That new system cost the owner $18,000 and a week of rain comes by and it fails. After the new system failed, he went back to the Health District and asked them what does he do now? The Health Department's response was that they did not know what to do, but they agreed to let him use the system as it was until sewer lines are put in and the day it is available-for hookup he would be required to hook up to the sewer collection system. Another landowner in that area was given a Building Permit by the City to build a 2 1/2 car garage with an apartment above it based on the "come" of the sewer line. At this time, the City will not give that individual an Occupancy Permit, so he has about $40,000 into a project that he can't use, except for the garage below. Mr. Lefcoski is a member of a Citizens Action Committee For Growth Management and they are often studying and talking about infill. In their 78 parcels, they found 12 potential infill sites, which could increase the assessed value of the area and bring in some return for the City. He emphatically stressed the City needs the new sewer system. He pointed out if Lions Field experienced an ecological spill the cost of clean up would be born by the City government and City residents. He emphasized Kitsap Lake is not much different...just the fact it is an aqua park that is getting contaminated. It is his feeling that Kitsap Lake is a "lit firecracker" and the wastewater treatment plant is a "bomb", and he sees the firecracker growing into a bomb. In conclusion, there have been news articles about the Department Of Ecology (DOE) being on the cases of Sinclair and Dyes Inlet, Chico, Tracyton, Rocky Point, and Marine Drive for polluting. He expects it will take 10-12 years for DOE to get those areas cleaned up and when they finish with the saltwater clean-up, they will come after the fresh water. He emphasized 10 years from now Kitsap Lake will be much worse than it is today. He is urging the City to "buy in now" when the price is right, and that $240,000 will not break up the City. The proposed ULID, if approved, will personally cost him $16,400 due to his owning a double lot. He noted he has no intention of building on the second lot, but he must pay because it is TAPE #1149 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 19 of 26 a buildable lot. If the City does not contribute $240,000, then the assessments for property owners could climbto $8,000 per lot. He could not jump from a cost of $16,400 to approximately $30,000, nor could he ask his neighbors to pay those costs. Randy Witt was so engrossed in this project that he told Mr. Lefcoski the contract could be let in January/ February with construction started by summer, and have hook up ready by November/December of 1994. He emphasized that work schedule was also given to him by Mr. Duffy when he headed up the Utility Department. Jim Strait, 6530 Harlow Drive, stated this project has been going off and on for so many years, and was looked at during the time sewers were put in on the east side of the lake. He agreed that Kitsap Lake is getting contaminated. He acknowledged the effort put in by Jack Lefcoski in obtaining the necessary signatures on the petition. If funding can be identified, he supports proceeding with the project now because the lake needs to be cleaned up. Hal Reume, 1103 Kitsap Lake Road, questioned why Randy Witt recommended disapproval on this proposal. He referenced Mr. Witt's letter to Mr. Lefcoski, dated August 2, 1993, and quoted the following: "I have recalculated the estimated project costs using only City residents as participants in the district. The revised estimated project cost is $625,000. Reducing this by the $300,000 City contribution and spreading it equally among the 78 City lots, gives an estimated cost per lot of $4,200. Although this cost is higher than the estimates you had earlier, I feel they accurately reflect the maximum cost of the improvements. We will make every effort to find ways to decrease costs as the design proceeds. However, with the City's contribution to the project, this project is a very good value especially with the payback period an LID can offer". TAPE #1150 D. E. Sam Moritz, 1098 Kitsap Lake Road, stated he has lived in that area for 33 years. He was aware of several efforts to get an LID established, one in 1962, another effort in 1968, and then the project formed up when Chuck Hazelwood wanted to put in 40 units at the southeast corner of the lake. Mr. Hazelwood's contribution was to be in order to get his 40 units sewsred he was going to build a connecting line from the southwest corner over to the southeast corner where the City park is located. At that time, the whole concept of installation of a sewer line was to make a complete connection from mid point on Northlake Way connecting to West Kitsap Lake Road, down to the southwest corner, which would also encompass TAPE #1149 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 20 of 26 Camp McKean. He noted the area from Camp McKean south were County residents and due to the ownership of the railroad in that area, an easement was unattainable to service the 40 units and the project was put on an "indefinite" hold. During the annexation process, there was interest to install a water pipe all the way around the lake and at that time they had envisioned installation of a sewer line would complete all aspects necessary for a nice liveable area. However, things fell apart where now all that is being considered is from Camp McKean north to a mid point on Northlake Way, and that contributed to the extra effort that Mr. Lefcoski had to exert as the project became smaller and smaller. He pointed out Parametrix Inc., has virtually completed the design for the sewer project as it exists now, and all that is needed is funding. Mr. Overson noted a copy of the petition was not included in the Agenda Packet and questioned if Mr. Witt had a copy? Mr. Witt stated yes, he did have the petitions in his office. Mr. Overson questioned the wording on the petitions and who originated that language? Mr. Witt stated the petition contained fairly standard language out of the Engineering office. The City provided the petitions to Mr. Lefcoski and they were reviewed by the City Attorney's office prior to distribution. He quoted the following language on petitions: "We the undersigned property owners in Bremerton, Washington, do hereby petition the City Council to proceed with creation of a Local Improvement District for West Kitsap Lake Drive and Northlake Way as shown on the attached map. Said improvements shall be for the construction of a sanitary sewer. The mode of payment will be assessment against the property on a per lot basis. Actual assessments may vary from the assessment estimates so long as they do not exceed the figure equal to the increased and fair value of the improvement to the property. Names of petitioners should be identical form as the same appears of recording the chain of title to the real estate. Both husbands and wives must sign. Wives must sign their given names." Mr. Overson questioned wherein did that petition lead anyone to believe the cost of construction? Mr. Witt explained the petition itself does not discuss actual dollar amounts. The way people were lead into believing what the cost would be were two fold: (1) Jack's synopsis of how the district was put together and he had a clear understanding that the City would provide a contribution; and (2) when Jack worked with residents in the area he indicated that understanding. Mr. Overson noted Mr. Witt's letter is dated August 2, 1993, and questioned the date when the petitions were circulated? Mr. Witt explained the letter was put together to accompany the petition. As previously stated, i TAPE #1150 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 21 of 26 when he started working for the City, he did nothing to discourage that the City would make that contribution. It was very firmly stated to him by Mr. Lefcoski and people within the City, who had been working on the project, that the City would share in the cost. It was not until they got into assessing the petitions that they found this contribution had not been approved by the City Council. Mr. Overson stated in his opinion he believes the City has made a promise and he could hardly believe staff would go back on what was essentially their word. He was surprised that a recommendation would come back that reflected that staff's word was nothing to rely on. He emphasized no city wants to send that kind of signal. He questioned if all 78 property owners would connect? Mr. Witt stated not all of the 78 lot owners would connect nor would they be required to connect. Some of the lots are currently undeveloped, however, everyone would pay as part of the LID. Mr. Overson questioned if the Navy had been given the opportunity to participate in the LID? Mr. Witt stated this proposed project stops at Camp McKean and it was their intention to extend it past Camp McKean, hoping for Navy participation, however, if that is not attainable then it would not be extended past Camp McKean. Mr. Overson stated he thought there was quite a number of people living beyond Camp McKean. Mr. Witt explained there are 36 potential people beyond Camp McKean, who are currently in the County. Those people could be included in the project, and were invited, and effort is still underway to encourage their participation. Mrs. Horton stated she agreed with Mr. Overson that it appears the City did convey the intent to contribute $300,000 toward the project. However, rather than have Council say tonight, when the recommendation by City staff is that there is no funding available, she would like to make a motion to table the issue, specifically bring up the $300,000 share during the 1994 budget discussions for the Utility Department, and then come back and continue the public hearing knowing the source of funding for the City's share of $240,000. Mr. Collins stated he has a great problem with subsidizing the LID and the reason for that being the people on the east side of Bremerton paid the full cost when their sewer improvements were made. He did not feel it was appropriate for people in Manette to pay fora sewer line at Kitsap Lake. That point is the only issue he can speak to at this time. He could not speak to the good that it would do and all of the nice things because that is a totally separate issue. The only thing he could look at now is that sewer line and the LID for that sewer line. Whether there is a lake on the other side of that TAPE #1150 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 22 of 26 are was immaterial to him at this point. We are appropriating money or we are going to come up with money to do this. He wanted to give Mr. Lefcoski some thoughts on why there wasn't anything said in the Study Session. He emphasized the City Council cannot vote in a Study Session for appropriation of money or. approving any action. Normally, issues are brought to the Council during a Study Session where it is discussed and may be followed up with formal Council action during an official City Council meeting. He believes the proposed sewer .project is a tremendous idea. He does remember discussions about bringing this group of people into the City and that there were significant costs in taking over their water system due to the need to provide a "loop" in the system; and the City did accept those costs. He emphasized the only reason the people in the W. Kitsap Road area wanted to be annexed into the City was because their water system was being in essence "shut off" due to not having any filtration for surface water. He is happy to have people from Kitsap Lake as residents, but like any other group of people if they form an LID they need to fund the entire project. Mr. Neville applauded Jack Lefcoski on his efforts for this project and because of a number of questions he would like answered, he supported Mrs. Horton's suggestion to table this hearing to allow for further review. He felt his questions should be directed to Eddy Chu, Public Works Director, rather than the City Engineer. Mr. Witt made the comment he would not place this project high on a priority list...he raised the following questions: (1) where would this project fall on such a priority list? (2) If his project was funded would it place other projects in jeopardy, and what percent of the funding could be afforded? and (3) If 50% funding of the project was too much, how much would he recommend without precedent setting? Mr. Witt stated following discussion on this project with Council committees, he did some research and found that what appeared to be the practice on LID's was the City would pick up the cost of design and construction inspection of a project. In this case, the City has covered the cost of design, which has a final cost of estimate of $60,000. The question may be raised and probably should discussed as to what policy does the City want for contributing to LID's. Is what the City has done in the past a good policy? Where this project fits on the list of projects, he would have to go along with Mrs. Horton comment that could be best determined during the 1994 budget review. Currently, they are working on a lot of projects, the ones soaking up the largest amounts of money are the ones that are mandated, which are also the highest priority projects. There are a lot of operational needs that are high and this system needs a good looking at TAPE #1150 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 23 of 26 and Council will see that in the Public Works Budget. If this project was fit into the budget, it would probably be below those projects that are mandated and the ones below those are all pretty equal as to need. Mr. Colvin stated it appeared to him that the City encouraged the action that led to the petitions. Also, he felt there were extenuating circumstances in that Kitsap Lake belongs to the City, and if it is contaminated, what is the City's liability letting that lake continue to be contaminated? Mr. McNamara stated he had not explored that issue fully and he would imagine if there was a public health hazard the City might have some obligation to take remedial measures. He did not think at this time the City had any liability to place a sewer line in to protect the public health. Mr. Colvin stated the City is aware the lake is currently being contaminated. Mr. Witt stated the Health Department has been unwilling to say that the lake needs immediate sewering even though they have the ability to say "you have to have sewers and have that done". Jack Lefcoski indicated that septic fields have failed in that area and that they are contaminating the lake. Beyond those comments, he has nothing more to add. Mr. Colvin stated if in fact the lake is being contaminated, he could not see how the City could not afford to take some action. Mr. McNamara stated at this point he could not address to what extent the City's liability would be for contamination from septic systems. President Fitz stated, lets suppose for argument sake the City decided to fund the $300,000, which is one-half the cost of the project, and another group in a similar situation, such as Marine Drive, asked for the same thing. Could the City protect itself from a precedent? Mr. McNamara stated he did not think participating in this project would obligate the City in any future projects, to participate to the same degree or to any degree. The City can make a decision on a case-by- case basis to what extent they want to participate on any project. Mr. Overson stated he believed there will be some Health Department input relative to Marine Drive, which could make that project even a higher priority. Following along some of that reasoning, if you follow Mr. Collins' reasoning, then we as the City should not have gotten any support for building the sewer treatment plant because it was not the problem of those people out there who pay taxes. And, by the same token then only the west side of Bremerton should pay for the Warren Avenue and Callow Avenue Basin projects because they don't affect the east side. He did not think that reasoning followed either. TAPE #1150 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 24 of 26 Mr. Johnson questioned the whereabouts of Mr. Chu, the Public Works and Utility Director? Mr. Witt explained Mr. Chu was out-of-town today, and not able to return in time for the City Council meeting. Mr. Johnson questioned if Mr. Chu always went out-of-town on Council meeting nights? Mr. Witt stated he did not know. Mr. Johnson questioned if the project was approved, would it require installing a pump station and will it be sized for 78 lots? Mr. Witt stated yes, a pump station will be required, and it sized to extend out into the County. Mr. Johnson pointed out then the 78 property owners would be paying to extend the sewer service out into the County. Mr. Witt stated he believed when County residents hook up to the sewer system, some of those costs can be recouped. If the City is making a contribution on the order of $300,000, he believes he could argue that the City is paying for that extension. It could be worked either way...if we roll it into if the residents pay the entire ULID, then they should be reimbursed when County residents hook up. Mr. Johnson questioned if the Utility approved the handout that was given to the citizens at public meetings? Mr. Witt explained he could only assume the handouts that were passed out indicating the City's contribution were approved by the Utility Department. Mr. Johnson pointed out the handout did not state that the City's share of the project was dependent upon a grant. Mr. Witt stated that was correct. President Fitz questioned the date of the handout referenced by Mr. Johnson? Mr. Johnson stated it was dated Revised Cost April 29, 1993 and it has a picture drawn on it by the City of Bremerton Municipal Utilities as well as Parametrix Inc., signature. Mr. Johnson questioned how many ULID's for new sewer extensions has the City had over the past ten years? Mr. Witt stated he did not know the answer to that question. Mr. Johnson questioned where did the cost of contribution figure come from? Mr. Witt stated those figures were based on the 4th Street project and Lake Drive project that was completed approximately two years ago. Mr. Johnson noted Lake Drive LID was for paving a street. Mr. Witt stated that was true but it was an LID. Mr. Johnson stated we are talking about the first citizen request for a ULID for sewer extension in the City of Bremerton that he can remember since his coming to Bremerton. President Fitz pointed out there was an ULID for Marine Drive requested in the 1970's, however, the City could not get the bonding capacity to undertake the project at that time and it died. Mr. Johnson stated his point is, why is this ULID being treated different when the other LID's pay all this money .... and his response to that is that there haven't been any. Mr. Witt stated it was his understanding that about 10 years ago the use of LID's were fairly common, probably more for road work. Mr. Johnson stated he disagreed with Mr. TAPE #1150 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 25 of 26 Witt on that point due to the fact that since he has served on the City Council for the past 10 years the use of LID's has been very uncommon. And, if there were any, they came from his district, except the 4th Street project. He noted that when Fiscal and Budget Committee reviewed this item, there was a 2-1 vote to vote down the recommendation of denial to fund the $300,000. He questioned what other grants have been applied for to lower cost since the City lost the grant for the $300,000 to the Seattle folks to build the METRO plant? Mr. Witt stated since he joined the City they have not pursued the Department Of Ecology grant because prior to this involvement, staff had met with DOE and it was made clear that this project would not be eligible for funding. He did apply for a CDBG Block Grant, as the area qualified for that application, but it was also turned down. He has not applied for any others, however, grant applications/notices are received fairly often and they are evaluated against on-going needs and none of those have fit this project. Mr. Johnson acknowledged he represents the people who signed the petition and he resents the way they have been treated through this whole process. More than once they were given one price for the sewer, which they then sought out signatures on petitions, but when they brought them back to the City, they were told a new cost figure had been calculated and must be taken back out to the community for approval. He questioned why does Mr. Witt think Bremerton gets the reputation that they always go back on their word. To him the creditability and integrity issue for the City of Bremerton is probably even more important than the people who signed the petition over the $300,000. When City staff is sent out to speak with residents outside City limits to talk about annexation, they talk about benefits that have not been approved by the City Council, just like in this hearing. The message being sent is "don't believe nothing". He believes a lot of hard work has been expended by the City to be up front and honest with the public. The people on Marine Drive are still complaining over the fact they were promised sewers but still don't have sewers. He noted the W. Kitsap Lake residents were not promised sewers at the time they annexed, but after they came forward with initiating the ULID we did promise them we would contribute $300,000, and now we're being asked to tell those residents "we really didn't mean that". He emphasized the City needs to continue to grow and he feels the City has a large creditability problem with County residents in many pockets around the City. He did not mind the suggestion to table this item for a short time. When other major sewer projects were mentioned earlier as those taking all the available funding, he wanted people to understand the City doesn't have that kind of funding available and would have to #1514 TAPE #1150 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes November 10, 1993 Page 26 of 26 go out to the bond market and borrow tens of millions of dollars to solve some major problems at the sewer treatment plant and distribution points. He truly felt $300,000 was literally a "drop in the bucket" when it is spread over 30 years at a cost of approximately $10,000 per year. In the final analysis, the City Council needs an up-front policy when citizens want to talk about an LID. He believed Mr. Duffy knew the process, however, there was not a City Council policy for him to follow on an action such as this. He offered to assist in writing a policy on LID's that would assist staff when they held annexation meetings. Mrs. Horton stated she believes we have to show good faith and concurred in comments made about the City's creditability. She also happens to think that if we had a fresh water Pacific Alliance in the community, they would come in and the City would be looking down the barrel of another Consent Order and the cost will probably be double or triple the $300,000 contribution. When this issue comes up to a vote, she will support the City contributing $300,000 once the funding source is identified. M/S/C(Horton/Colvin) to table this item until December 8 City Council meeting. Vote on motion: In Favor: Neville, Herton, Fitz, Collins, Dawkins, Colvin, Johnson Opposed: Overson Motion carried. With no further business meeting adjourned at 8:12 P.M. KATHLEEN McCLUSKEY, City Clerk EILEEN FITZ, Council President City of Bremerton KLM/EF/me cc: Normal Distribution File/Vault