Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/07/91TAPE #943 UNAPPROVED DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES AUG :e 8 #0029 #0036 AUGUST 7, 1991 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, August 7, 1991, at 5:30 p.m., with Council President Lynn Horton presiding. Council members present: Lon Overson, Wayne Estes, Spencer Horning, Hank Waibel, C. R. "Tiny"Collins, Morrie Dawkins and A1 Colvin. Councilman Russ Johnson was absent. Also present were City Attorney Ian Sievers and City Clerk Kathleen McCluskey. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council President Horton and Invocation given by Frank Washburn of Kingswest School. Councilman Waibel was not present at start of meeting. CONSENT AGENDA A. Minutes Of Meeting - July 17, 1991, #AB91-199 B. Minutes Of Meeting - July 24, 1991, #AB91-200 M/S/C/U(Dawkins/Colvin) presented. to approve Consent Agenda as 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. M/S/C/U(Colvin/Overson) on August 7, 1991, the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: 133774 through 133780 in the total amount of $29,220.53 and Regular Payroll for the period ending July 31, 1991, in the total amount of $467,350.03. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Mr. Overson attended the Concert On The Dock last Thursday and reminded everyone of the next concert featuring "Who's Driving", with Earle Smith of the EDC as Master Of Ceremonies. Mr. Estes reported on the Saratoga Memorial Ceremony, held on August 2. He noted this event was very well attend and it is now receiving national recognition through the Saratoga TAPE #943 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 2 of 28 Organization. He commended Bremerton Progress for their wonderful article on the ceremony. Mr. Horninq reported he attended the Concert On The Dock last Thursday. He agreed with Mr. Estes that the Saratoga Memorial Service was wonderful. He complimented everyone who organized the event on a "job well done". Today he attended a special Transit meeting where they discussed the special needs community and Paratransit Services. Their response to those discussions resulted in reinstatement of services that were changed earlier this month due to financial constraints. Transit, in his estimation, is doing an excellent job throughout the County and Paratransit's portion of the Transit system is probably doing a superb job, but it is not enough. Unfortunately, it is an economic issue as well as a people issue and very difficult to balance. Mr. Colvin thanked President Horton for reading his letter to Council at the Study Session, August 5, concerning Mayor Mentor's poll. He agreed and applauded Mayor Mentor's motive to establish greater communication between the citizens and city government. However, he disagreed with the wording of the questions sent out on the poll. He felt Council should take advantage of the opportunity and develop their own questionnaire and word the questions as they see fit. In his opinion, the Mayor and City Council could benefit by this project. In regard to some citizen's concerns that Council is infringing on administrative responsibilities, he believed if the Mayor felt that was so, then he should complain to the Council. He also attended the Saratoga Memorial Ceremony and thanked Mr. Estes and all others who worked hard organizing this event. At the ceremony, Mr. Colvin met a man who had been a prisoner of war for four years. This man related a racial incident that took place in Texas many years ago. Mr. Colvin stated he believed that kind of action would not be allowed in Texas today. Mr. Dawkins thanked Mr. Estes and all the others who coordinated the Saratoga Memorial Service. He noted that the Roxie Theater in downtown had been purchased and he looked forward to its being developed into a viable business once again. Mr. Estes stated all the credit for planning and coordinating the Saratoga Memorial service goes to Sgt. Majors (Retired) Bob Sauter and Richard Chrisinger and several other hard working individuals. Next they will be planning a special service for December 7, Pearl Harbor Day. TAPE #943 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 3 of 28 Mrs. Morton stated after Transit's public hearing today, they had the opportunity to tour Transit's new facility, which is marvelous. It is a welcome expansion and utilization of space available was very efficient. On the issue of Paratransit, it is one area they are trying to deal with in regard to the elderly and handicapped population. On August 17 Kitsap Transit will hold a Study Session with various agencies to discuss special needs. Mrs. Horton encouraged anyone in the community who had someone in their family with special needs or knows of someone, to attend that meeting. For specific information she suggested they contact the Kitsap Transit Office. All input will help formulate the policy for Paratransit use. PUBLIC RECOGNITION Mayor Louis Mentor introduced Meg Coyle, who was 1989 Miss Bremerton/Miss Armed Forces Day and who was selected as a 1991 Seafair Princess. Ms. Coyle was the third runner up to Miss Seafair. Meq CoVle stated she is a Junior at the University Of Washington and was sponsored by the University District as their Seafair Princess. She had a wonderful time participating in the many Seafair activities. She credits her ability to go on to other pageants as a direct result of her having been chosen Miss Bremerton. Mayor Mentor introduced the following exchange students from Kure, Japan and their host families: Terukazu Doi - Jack and Pat Stodden; Eijiro Shidara - Melvin and Kimmi Hamm; Junko Funamoto - Hank and Marylyn Waibel; Tomomi Hirahara - Mike and Kim Hoyt. Terukazu Doi gave a welcome speech which outlined their activities experienced in their first week in America and how much they were enjoying their stay here so far. Mayor Mentor thanked Reverend John Eichmann of the Bremerton Servicemen's Center and Vicki Vanneman, Director Of the Parks and Recreation Department, and all others who were responsible for the Saratoga Memorial service. This past weekend the USS Shobrick Reunion Group held a wreath laying memorial service at the waterfront viewing tower. In regard to his survey, he has received over 600 responses and found that people do appreciate the opportunity to voice their opinion on a variety of subjects. He hoped the controversy on this program was over as he believed the opportunity for citizens to respond would be of benefit for the City. Lena Swanson 2123 Snyder Avenue spoke on the following issues: (1) Saratoga Memorial Services and how it was a very moving event; (2) reduction of services by Paratransit for elderly and disabled individuals and her desire that Paratransit is TAPE #943 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 4 of 28 "left alone"; (3) City's current payroll and the fact it was too high;(4) needed sewer upgrade in Park Avenue/Evergreen Park area - she reminded everyone that many years ago absentee landowners and slum landlords chose not to submit a L.I.D. to make the noted improvements that were needed at that time, and she did not want the City as a whole taxed to provided such an upgrade. S. M. Christianson, 419 Plum Street, spoke on the issue of the proposed change in City Government and did not support taking the power away from the mayor and giving it to a City Manager. He also did not support giving the City Council the power that would come with a Manger/Council form of government. He commended Mayor Mentor for his decision to ask citizens for their opinions on issues using the water billing system. Cecil McConnell, 3245 Almira Drive, stated he did not support the Mayor sending out questionnaires to County residents through the Utility Department and the public should be informed as to the cost of this project. Andy Parypa, 1122 Hayward Avenue, stated in reference to the Mayor's poll, he did not think it was appropriate that the City tell outside areas how to run their area nor did he believe it was appropriate for outside areas telling Bremerton how it should run its business. He questioned if the questionnaire was being used for political gain or was it being used for information? He used Roosevelt Field as an example and questioned why would the Mayor pose a question on what to do about selling or trading Roosevelt field when the College had already started condemnation proceedings. He predicted that a "cut deal" was made even before that trial is started. Del Knauss, Olympic Avenue, raised nine questions relating to Roosevelt Field that touched on: City consider using Attorney Guy Beckett as co-Council on the condemnation process; possible court settlement by trading Roosevelt Field; proper defense by City in the condemnation process; need for ordering a new appraisal of Roosevelt Field; force Olympic College to prove they have no other solution to solve their space needs and have a higher priority for the need of Roosevelt Field; and was the City Council and Mayor going to ignore a 76% majority vote by Bremerton residents to save parks and open space. Lena Swanson, Snyder Street, questioned if public input would be taken on Item 7C? President Morton stated public input would be allowed, however, the City Attorney advised Council TAPE #943 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 5 of 28 to just pass it on and she preferred no debate on its merit be held during this Agenda item. Discussion will be accepted on the issue of "passing it on" to the County. Mrs. Swanson stated she understood the explanation given by President Horton, however, she disagreed with that decision. She recommended if Council voted yes on this item that they do so under protest. Gordy Byrd, 402 Chester Apt. #3, informed Council that he had collected $11,600.00 for a shelter for the homeless. He extended a special thank you to his niece and nephew for their assistance, this date, in soliciting funds for his project. He thought it was wonderful that young people would give up part of their "free" time to help him in his project. Councilman Hank Waibel joined the Council meeting at 6:30 P.M. Wade Lieseke, 426 Bremerton Blvd., stated he supported retaining Roosevelt Field as a park. He did not support the way the Utility Department calculated sewer charges and felt a flat fee would be more appropriate and fair to the residents. It was his belief that people have moved out of Bremerton because of the high sewer/water costs. He questioned why couldn't the Sewer Treatment Plant be paid off so the sewer/water costs could be reduced? He also questioned the accuracy of sewer/water billings and cited two separate billings that showed different sewer charges when the water usage was the same. 6A - OUARTER PROGRAM REPORT FROM KITSAP ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL OF KITSAP COUNTY, #AB91-201 Council has requested that representatives from these groups present oral reports on a quarterly basis. Representatives are here to present second quarter reports and to answer any questions that Council may have. Earl Smith, Executive Director of the Economic Development Council, gave a briefing on the following issues: Turner Joy - they were on track in getting the ship ready at the time the boardwalk is ready. They were pacing their progress on purpose in order to afford paying for security until the boardwalk was ready. The Navy has been asked if tourist will be allowed back on board the USS Missouri after it is decommissioned? This question troubled him over the idea of being in competition with another popular ship as the Missouri. The Navy responded that they would not be in competition with the Turner Joy and their current plans were to not allow tourist on board the Missouri. However, if it came to pass that they did, they would let the Turner Joy TAPE #943 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 6 of 28 group run the tours for the Missouri. Red- lininq by banks in KitsaD County - he noted the perception of such action was real whether or not it was a reality. He referenced a letter from Congressman Norm Dicks to Fanny Mae saying please help us.stop this perception. Secondly, in reference to housing prices the average housing price in west Bremerton in 1990 was $57,000 and the average price in 1991 was $80,00; and in east Bremerton the average price in 1990 was $67,000 and in 1991 $80,000. What this information shows is that property values in Bremerton are increasing. Congressman Norm Dicks has extended an invitation to Council members to attend a Housing Conference on August 15, at the Bayview Inn. Community Reinvestment Act - He attended a conference, along with Don Pratt, regarding this issue and learned $80 million dollars had been set aside for housing. The question is can we get some of those funds in Kitsap County? They have put in bids for such funds and Great Northwest Savings and Loan and Seafirst Bank are players in this program. The banks understand that they need to participate from a Community Reinvestment Act point of view. The Federal Reserve announced they would publish community reinvestment standings for all banks. He learned that through the Spokane Business Development Association organization, 10 banks and the Small Business Association put together $3.6 million for reinvestment locally. He now has five banks in Kitsap County that are willing to participate and they anticipate being able to come up with an organization that will make some of the investments that are needed in the area of housing. Education - he serves on a board of business people who want to figure out how they can help invest in the education of the State of Washington. This board is comprised of Senior Vice Presidents of Boeing, U.S. West, Battell, Merrill Lynch. This group developed four things which they believe they can do: (1) help counsel businesses to figure out sources of training for their employees; (2) to research businesses and find out what businesses need education services; (3) develop a program to undertake training; (4) creating a mechanism where businesses have input into education as to what kind of student and what type of training a person has when they come out of the education system enabling them to become a businessman. Procurement Program - this has not been as successful as desired, however,'in the last six months they had obtained funds in the City of Bremerton for small businesses in the TAPE #943 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 7 of 28 amount of $1,034,000 and created nine jobs. Last year was a much more successful year for this program. Mr. Smith posed the question "do they think they have complete funding for 19927" - the answer was yes. 8A - SITE PLAN REVIEW - TO ACCEPT PUBLIC COMMENTS AND CONDUCT A SITE PLAN REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED RIDDELL ROAD APARTMENTS AT RIDDELL AND ALMIRA DR., #AB91-206 In March 1991, the City Council approved a rezone of a 20-acre parcel southwest of the intersection of Riddell Road and Almira Drive from "SF-3" to "MF". The Council conditioned the Rezone to require a public hearing and Council approval of a future Site Plan for the site. The developer has been working to prepare the Site Plan and has met with neighborhood residents and City staff to ensure that all concerns have been addressed in the design. The Site Plan for Riddell Road Apartments is now returning to the City Council for the public hearing. The normal notification area has been expanded to include about 165 households and the hearing notice was posted in four places around the site. The Staff Report describes the proposal and the seven specific factors the Council asked to be addressed in the design. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Preliminary Site Plan, finds it to meet the minimum requirements of the City's Zoning Ordinance, and recommends APPROVAL. President Morton asked the "Appearance Of Fairness/Conflict Of Interest" question with all Council members being seated. Ron Hough, Planning Manager, stated the site plan was to specifically address the following issues: 1. Transit access and turnouts 2. Access onto neighborhood streets 3. Streets and sidewalks 4. Open space 5. Setbacks and types of vegetation within them 6. Basic lighting 7. Concern for trash facilities. The conclusions of Staff's review was that this proposal was: (1) clearly within the City's "MF" zone development limitations for density, and exceeds the requirements for off- street parking, landscaping, building setbacks, open space and all other requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. (2) The developer had met several times with neighborhood residents and City Planning and Engineering staff during the design phase. Many of the concerns and new ideas expressed TAPE #943 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 8 of 28 during those meetings were incorporated into the site plan, including an access easement to the back yards of Hollis Street properties, preservation of a "fossil rock", pedestrian access to the shopping center through the site, and others. (3) If reviewed administratively, this Preliminary Site Plan would be found to be in compliance with all applicable City development standards and would be approved as presented. This is only a Preliminary Site Plan and if approved it would come back for Administrative final approval. It will also be drawn in more detail, which would include specific measurements of parking lots and driveway details, lighting details, water/sewer/drainage facilities/ plant materials list, open space calculations, street improvement plans and necessary detail work for Building Permits. Mr. Hough assumed those details would be done administratively, if Council approved the Preliminary Site Plan. If Council desired to approve the final details, that could be arranged. Mr. Hough stated as a result of the neighborhood's request, the notification list was expanded out to 600-800 feet away from the property to come up with a list of 165 people, approximately twice as many as were notified for the rezone hearing. Mike Hancock, representing the applicant, noted there was a fair amount of neighborhood opposition to this project and he specifically took actions to work with the neighborhood to mitigate their concerns. Several meetings were held involving the neighborhood and the following individuals worked closely with Mr. Hancock as an Advisory Group: John Canady - Petersville area; Tom Bueller - View Court; A1 Mercer - Hollis Street; Del Knauss - Neighborhood Associations. These representatives were somewhat self-appointed, however, they did discuss issues with the neighborhood at large. At the first meeting with the Advisory Group, he used the site plan, which was used as a conceptual idea during the hearing processes, and requested their input both pro and con. From that review, they came up with a long "laundry" list and gave further study as to how those issues could be addressed. One of the issues discussed was a "used" access that was unrecorded along the south side of the subject property. Residents along Hollis had been using that area to gain access to their back yards. Those issues were discussed and a solution developed so that access could be maintained and their right to use it would be built into the project. A surprising issue that came up was the "fossil rock" located TAPE #943 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 9 of 28 on the project site. The fact that the rock was located at that specific spot was widely known and because of its significance as a "fossil" resource, they decided to leave it alone and to include it in the open space. Even though they had worked diligently with the neighborhoods, there were still some negative comments, however, it was not possible to please everyone. He personally felt they had done a good job in the review process. Patrick MoBride, Project Architect, gave a brief history of his background in designing multi-family projects. He explained this project would be developed at about 17 units per acre, which was relatively low density compared to other types of multi-family developments. In response to the seven areas of concern Mr. McBride made the following commen~s: Transit Access And Turnout - they are willing to provide this service area, however, at this time they had not had direct dialogue with Transit, but do feel they have the space along Almira to accommodate such a proposal. Access Onto Neighborhood Streets And Streets and Sidewalks- four vehicular access points have been identified, which drops the amount of impact of traffic on any particular street. The major access point is from Riddell even though they know there are problems along that area. They initiated a full Traffic Study to identify what type of impacts they may create from their development and how it would dovetail with existing conditions. He noted Riddell Road was important to them because it was the most commercial street of the three the project would access on. It really becomes their "commercial window" and was the reason why they placed the Rec/building- clubhouse and management suites at that location. The southern access from Maple off Hollis is one single family lot removed from Hollis and did not make a good window because the recreation building would be hidden behind residential lots. They did look at two access points along Almira Drive and the purposes for that was phasing as well as easy access in and out of the site for emergency vehicles. They aligned those access points on View Court and Clemens so that they ended up with a four-way access point. They are intending to do full street improvements along Riddell and intend, at this point, to put the sidewalk along the east side of Almira due to the elevation change from the curb along the west side of Almira and the element of safety for pedestrians walking along this area. TAPE #943 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 10 of 28 In regard to the question about internal pedestrian circulation, they are suggesting development of 4 ft. sidewalks throughout their property extending from View Court through the property as well as from Clemens through the property and running along the face of the parking area and running into the shopping to the west. There will also be a north/south access in addition as well as a nature trail that runs through the naturally preserved open space in between the buildings. The purpose of that natural open space is to allow the buildings to situate parallel to grade as the site basically plateaus down the hillside and leaving a natural area and to allow grade elevation changes in the natural area. TAPE #944 Open Space - City requirements for open space is a minimum of fifteen percent of the total site. This project is estimated to have 50 percent of the site as open space. The site has about 50 feet of elevation from east to west - that requires buildings basically be oriented on a north/south axis so that they plateau as they step down the hill side. The other element they used to integrate, not just the buildings and plateauing, was a building design that is a 2-3 split...two stories on the uphill side. This allows the buildings to make the elevation change from 10-12 feet. Setbacks'And TVDes Of Vegetation Within Them - the setbacks along Almira Drive, along with Riddell and the rear lots adjacent to Hollis properties average between 30-70 feet, with a 38 ft. average. By using buildings that work with the contours and by keeping them in clusters of 2-3 stories and units of 8 - 24 units per building, they are able to leave as much open space and provide necessary setbacks. He noted this was one of their strong goals to accomplish and was accomplished by creating buildings that were consistent with the character of the neighborhood in two story structures. There are some three story elements on the site but they are generally located on the interior or located in the center of a building with the ends being two stories. Basic Liqhtinq - they will use state-of-the-art light fixtures in the street that are non-glare both on and off site. These typically are 12 ft. high wood type street lighting that was characteristic to the architecture they are proposing. Concern For Trash Facilities: there will be between 14-16 6- yard dumpsters located throughout the site. Those dumpsters will be located in wood-fenced 6 ft. high enclosures with gates. TAPE #943 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 11 of 28 CarolVn Mercer, 1308 Hollis Street, questioned if the preliminary design would be the actual plan or would it be changed prior to final approval? Patrick McBride explained this plan was the best utilization of the subject property considering the types of building mix and site elevations. Ms. Mercer questioned what assurance do they have that this plan will be the actual one built? Don Shomberg, 1950 N.E. Riddell Rd., manger of the Mini- Storage located on Riddell, expressed concern over the widened street in front of the project site and how it would relate to the entrance into the Mini-Storage. During severe winter weather conditions there are problems with ice forming and not melting for several weeks. Other than the concern over the road conditions during winter months, he felt the project was very well done. Del Knauss, Olympic Avenue, reviewed the process whereby the developer met with the neighborhoods and through that process the proposed plan was the best the residents could come up with. He noted no one wants increased density, but it happens. He encouraged Council to leave the plan as it is because it was what the people want. He had two final questions for the developer: (1) who would be responsible for maintenance and upkeep of the sidewalk along Almira Drive in future years; (2) what impacts will this project have on parks and schools? Cecil McConne11, Almira Drive, commended the developer for the way he worked with the neighborhoods in that area. In reference to the location of the sidewalk on the east side of Almira, it was his opinion that there was not enough room on the west side unless a lot of fill dirt was brought in. He believed the developer should at least share the responsibility for maintenance of the sidewalks in future years. Eleanor Berksma, 1328 Bradley, questioned if the developer would be paying the impact fees, as previously identified as $215,0007 Don Pratt, Director Of Community Development, stated the State has given the City the authority to collect impact fees for Building Permits, however, the City has not adopted that process at this time. It is an involved process and needs to be negotiated and an established menu put in place before the City can collect such fees. It is possible that the City could go through that process before this developer submits his Building Permit application. The Growth Management Impact TAPE #944 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 12 of 28 Fee should not be confused with something the County is doing right now and which the City has the authority to do - that is to collect impact fees when property is subdivided. This is an entirely different process when building lots are created and impact fees can be collected. The subject project is not proposed to be subdivided and the City does not have legal authority to demand such fees. Patrick McBride explained the problem of placing sidewalks along the west side of Almira due to the change in elevation. They offered the local residents to choose where they wanted the sidewalks and because they wanted to retain existing vegetation and buffer, they chose the east side of the street. Had they desired to have it placed on the west side, it would have meant taking out the natural vegetation, bringing in fill, building some type of retaining structure and installing a durable guardrail along the length of the sidewalk. This type of sidewalk development would have cost the developer approximately $300-400,000 and would impact their building affordable housing. The area on the east side of Almira was of a grade that would not be difficult to construct more reasonably priced sidewalks. President Morton noted there was a concern regarding access on to Riddell from the site. Mr. McBride stated the intent of placing their access on Riddell and widening Riddell because of the issues that are not substantiated in the Traffic Report, they are suggesting widening Riddell across the frontage of the project in order to provide an acceleration lane up the hill and a de-acceleration lane to the entrance of the project on Riddell. That would also allow, if approved, a left turn lane to be extended past their property entrance on Riddell to allow safe left turns movements in and out of the site. Mike Mancock stated the issue of impact fees was discussed on occasion at the neighborhood meetings and they stand behind their statement that they would pay whatever impact fee schedules were in place at the time the project was developed. They did not go over and above that to negotiate a gratis payment at this time. Ron Mough responded to the question about the site plan and if there would be changes between now and the final site plan approval. He explained from the conceptual design stage this proposal will go back and be redrawn in greater detail and brought back for Administrative approval. That approval will be granted on the basis of the conceptual drawing. If there are radical changes to the plan, the proposal would have to TAPE #944 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 13 of 28 come back to Council for approval. It is their intent to treat the conceptual drawing as a binding site plan and once it is approved by Council it will be recorded. They do expect to allow certain types of changes as outlined in the P.U.D.Section of the Zoning Ordinance. Even if the property were sold to someone else before the project was built, that new owner would have to come back to the City to request approval to build something other than this proposed site plan. Mr. Dawkins stated he received a call from a Mrs. Benton, who questioned about a bus turnout on Almira. Mr. McBride stated the final location of the bus turnout has not been settled, however, they are looking into making it workable for the residents. Mr. Estes questioned what would the approximate setbacks be behind Hollis Street and the subject site? Mr. McBride stated the average setback was between 40-70 ft., and there would be a 30 ft. easement between the Hollis properties and the south end of their site. Mr. Estes questioned if the people who live on Hollis felt this was acceptable? A1 Mercer, Hollis Street, stated they had discussed this issue several times during meetings with the developer and what it boiled down to was "this is the best we're going to get" The developer did work with the residents, did listen to their concerns/suggestions and tried to incorporate them when possible. Mr. Waibel stated Bremerton is going to have to increase its density and this particular site plan was a result of a model procedure for increasing that density. He hoped the rest of the developers will recognize this procedure and follow it as well. Mr. Collins stated he requested Planning staff to provide him a copy of the criteria for approval of a rezone. He reviewed that criteria and could not answer, in the affirmative, all six of the specific statements. Therefore, he will not support this proposal as presented.. Mr. Overson stated he hoped there was a vehicle to insure future maintenance and repair of the sidewalk along the east side of Almira. Ian Sievers, City Attorney, stated neither side of Almira would have right-of-way dedicated to theCity, thereby making it the City's sidewalk. The City would welcome L.I.D.s if it were dilapidated. Mr. Colvin noted he had previously voted against the rezone, #1025 #1151 TAPE #944 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 14 of 28 but because the developer had mitigated the concerns of the neighbors he would support this proposal. Mr. Hornin~ thanked the neighbors for understanding the scope of the project and working with the developer. He felt this was more significant potentially than putting in 380 housing units for people who otherwise would not be housed in Bremerton. He believed cities were meant to house people and provide service delivery. By doing this project we are, in a very real sense, saving a lot of the character of Kitsap County that we all love and truly cherish. Sometimes it is painful, but it is a price we are paying. M/S/C(Waibel/Colvin) to approve the preliminary site plan. Vote: In Favor: Opposed: Overson, Estes, Horning, Waibel, Horton, Dawkins, Colvin Collins 8B - LAKEHURST DRIVE L.I.D., ORDINANCE (FIRST READING), #AB91- 207 On April 10, 1991 a petition was accepted by the Council to proceed with a L.I.D. on Lakehurst Drive from Cedarwood Drive south to the plat of Dockside. Resolution No. 2353 was passed by Council on April 10, 1991 setting the date of Hearing for August 7, 1991. If the aggregate L.I.D. cost total of owners protesting the L.I.D. is less than 60% of the total cost of the L.I.D. then pass Ordinance establishing the Local Improvement District for construction of Lakehurst Drive from Cedarwood to the plat of Dockside. Public comment - none. M/S/C/U(Waibel/Horning) to approve Ordinance, on first reading, ordering the improvement of Lakehurst Drive from Cedarwood Drive south to the Plat Of Dockside all in accordance with Resolution No. 2353 of the City Council; establishing Local Improvement District No. 325; ordering the carrying out of the proposed improvement; and providing that payment for the improvement be made by special assessments upon the property in the District. 6B - CONTRACT TO RE-ROOF PARKS & RECREATION BUILDING 680 LEBO BLVD., #AB91-202 The 680 Lebo Blvd. building needs re-roofing. Request for proposals was advertised and 3 were received. The proposal from Fields Roofing Service, Inc. in the amount #1409 TAPE #944 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 15 of 28 of $60,875. was selected as the least costly and most appropriate for this building. Public comment - none. Mr. Morning questioned if Fields Roofing Service, Inc., was the only responding bidder? Mr. Baker, City Engineer, stated no, three responses were received: Bremerton Roofing in the amount of $75,000 plus tax; Washington Ventures in the amount of $67,300 plus tax; and Fields Roofing Service. Mr. Waibel questioned for clarification the "note" indicated on the Roofing Sales Agreement? Mr. Baker stated the roof wood replacement would be $2.00 per square ft., in case there was rot. Mr. Waibel questioned if that was included in the $60,875 bid? Mr. Baker stated it could be an addition. Mr. Waibel questioned if that was the reason why the information about current state of the structure was not filled out as completely as it could be? Mr. Baker stated they did not know for sure what was under the roof. Mr. Waibel questioned if they expected that there could be $10,000 worth of linear footage increase in this project? Mr. Baker stated no - they don't expect any but may be looking at less than 100. President Morton questioned what was provided under the "3- year guarantee"? Mr. Baker stated the guarantee itself was for the workmanship. The life of the roof is expected to be 15 years. Mr. Colvin questioned the track record of the low bidding company? Mr. Baker stated they have a very good track record. Mr. Colvin questioned how long had the present roof been in place? Mr. Baker stated parts of the present roof have been on at lease 15-20 years. Mr. Overson questioned whether or not Mr. Baker felt it would be required to come back to Council for an addendum to the contract if there was significant wood replacement? Mr. Baker stated no. M/S/C/U(Waibel/Dawkins) Council authorizes the Mayor to execute the contract. 6C - INTER-LOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF BREMERTON AND KITSAP COUNTY FOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNING, #AB91-208 In August of 1990 the City verbally agreed to participate in a joint City/County Transportation Planning effort which also includes Kitsap Transit and the cities of Port Orchard, Poulsbo and Winslow. This is a $170,000 effort of which the TAPE #944 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 16 of 28 City's share is $8,000. The County- wide nature of this study gives Bremerton the opportunity to obtain valuable data for its own transportation plan at a fraction of the cost of a consultant to the City alone. Public comment - none. Mr. Waibel questioned what was going on considering there is a Regional Transportation Organization (RTPO), in fact the City joined two RTPOs. This agreement and the scope of work was exactly what that organization was supposed to be doing. For some reason another organization is being created through this agreement. The State and Federal Government had already recognized two other agencies as being responsible for this. He questioned why was this not being done at the Puget Sound Council Of Government? Mr. Baker stated this was started considerably before the Peninsula Puget Sound Council Of Government and he did not know why it was not being done under the other PSCOG organization. The City is a part of this planning effort, which was started by the County and a cooperative agreement with cities in Kitsap County. Mr. Waibel stated the regional organization had been recognized by the State and Federal Government for at least eight years. This work is under that scope and there are rules set up for how such things are approved and how contributions are established under that organization and its replacement organization. Mr. Baker stated he could not answer Mr. Waibel's question specifically, except that this study is virtually done. Don Pratt Director of Community Development, stated Mr. Waibel's point was well made. This particular plan is for a County-wide Transportation Plan and the two Regional Planning organizations the City belongs to plans improvement that are of a regional nature or multi-county nature. Mr. Waibel emphasized this group was not recognized by the State or Federal Government and he felt the issue should go back and worked through the regional organization. Mr. Colvin questioned if the documents were correct in that the City verbally agreed to participate and does that mean there is no documentation? Mr. Baker explained the request was made by the County through himself to the Mayor and it was agreed at that time to join in with the effort for this Transportation Plan. Mr. Colvin questioned if Council was notified at that time? Mr. Baker stated no. President Morton noted generally things of this nature that are in the form of an Interlocal Agreement are handled through the Subregional Council, and from that point are taken back to the respective Councils for further action. This process is #1790 TAPE #944 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 17 of 28 outlined in the By-laws of that organization. Mr. Morning stated he supported Mr. Waibel's position on this issue and questioned how far along was the study? Mr. Baker stated he had a copy of the final draft. Mr. Morning stated the study was needed and it would cost the City whether it was developed through the County or through PSCOG. However, the point should be made that it should not have been done with a "handshake" and an information item after the fact. He wasn't sure what else to do but to support this knowing that it should have been done differently. President Morton stated she preferred that the Mayor refer it to the September Agenda of the PSCOG meeting. Mr. Oversonquestioned which departmental budget reflected the cost of this study? Mr. Baker stated he believed funding was partially in the Planning budget and other funds identified by the City Treasurer. Mr. Overson questioned if it was part of the 1991 budget? Mr. Baker stated no. Mr. Homing stated he had no knowledge of this item even being discussed during the 1991 budget process. Mr. Colvin questioned what the impact would be if it were deferred to a later time? Mr. Baker stated he guessed the amount of $8,000 would be paid at a later time. Mr. Overson questioned if the study contained any information relating to the Gorst-to-Bremerton-Ferry Terminal connection? Mr. Baker stated yes, there is some very specific information on that issue. M/S/C(Dawkins/Colvin) to approve payment of $8,000, the City's portion of the $170,000 cost for the City/County Transportation Study. Vote: In Favor: Overson, Estes, Collins, Dawkins, Colvin, Opposed: Horning, Waibel, Horton Motion carried. 7A - ORDINANCE (FIRST READING) AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF $730,000 GENERAL OBLIGATIONS BONDS, #AB91-203 By previous action, Council has authorized the purchase and renovation of the Fourth Street Building and amended the City's budget accordingly. This ordinance authorizes the sale of General Obligation bonds as was described in the Financial Plan and budget adjustment request No. 91-10. Public comment - none. #1915 TAPE #944 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 18 of 28 M/S/C(Collins/Colvin) to approve Ordinance on first reading. Vote: In Favor: Opposed: Motion carried. Estes, Waibel, Collins, Dawkins, Colvin Overson, Horning, Horton 7B - ORDINANCE (FIRST READING) REZONE FROM NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS TO GENERAL BUSINESS WITH CONCOMITANT REZONE AGREEMENT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6525 KITSAP WAY - HEETER REZONE, #AB91-148 Following the public hearing on the Heeter Rezone on August 23, 1990 the City Council agreed to restore the land uses that were previously allowed under the B-2 zone of the City's former Zoning Ordinance for the Heeter property only. The proposed ordinance changes the zoning for the property at 6525 Kitsap Way from Neighborhood Business to General Business and, by means of a Concomitant rezone agreement, restricts the use of the property to certain specified uses. Approval of proposed rezone ordinance and concomitant rezone agreement. Councilman Morrie Dawkins stepped down on this issue due to his not participating in previous hearings nor viewing tapes of those hearings. Jim McNamara, Assistant City Attorney, stated there were changes made from the prior version of the agreement based upon Council input. It was decided in that the original motion, by Mr. Horning, was not for a rezone to General Business but rather to allow the B-2 uses under the banner of Neighborhood Business, the ordinance was changed to state that the property located at 6525 Kitsap Way would retain its zoning designation as Neighborhood Business, however, future uses as allowed in the B-2 zone would be allowed subject to provisions of the attached Concomitant Agreement. This item had been before Council several times and was tabled due to the lack of signature on the agreement by Mr. Heeter. Therefore, Council requested that they take action on the agreement and submit it to Mr. Heeter for signature. The agreement states that if it is not signed within 9 days after approval, it would go back to the Neighborhood Business zoning, excluding any B-2 uses. Changes were made in the Concomitant and Rezone agreement to reflect those changes. Council had a concern that several uses allowed'in B-2 might be objectionable based upon traffic, or whatever, such as taverns, dance halls, machine shops. Mr. McNamara recommended a change to Section 1, Item "D" of the Concomitant Zoning Agreement as follows: "D. Uses established, processes and TAPE #944 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 19 of 28 equipment .... ". Even if dance hall was one of those uses in the B-2 zone, the Concomitant Rezone Agreement would limit that use because of the noise or other ill affects it might have. Mr. McNamara pointed out language in Section 1, Item "P" made it clearer that zoning in effect at the time of any future development or permanent application applied. This would save the Planning Commission and City Council from having to analyze the permanent application under the old development standards. Language under Section 5 - Construction Of The Agreement - again addresses rezoning the property to return all uses under the B2 zoning designation. He requested a correction to a typographical error in Section 2 of the Ordinance as follows: "This ordinance shall become effective ten (10) days from passage, and publication; Provided, however, that David Heeter, the property owner, fails to sign the attached Concomitant Rezone Agreement within nine (9) days of passage .... ". President Morton stated one of the issues brought up at prior meetings was the legality of using the Neighborhood Business zoning but then applying higher uses to that Neighborhood Business zoning. Mr. McMamara stated he believed the ordinance, as written, would be a legal action on behalf of the City Council. A B-2 zone was approved in 1979 and now the City no longer has B-2 uses. At that time, it was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the owner of the property developed the property consistent with B-2 zoning, therefore, the adoption of the ordinance would be an attempt by Council to allow the uses consistent with prior zoning and mediate the hardship. Bill Amo, Lakehurst Drive, pleaded with Council to not move forward and approve the Ordinance and Concomitant Zoning Agreement. He did not want Council to be compromised and urged them to revisit the rezoning action to correct the mistake they were making. He was of the opinion 'that the applicant's request did not meet the criteria for rezone, specifically the condition that the immediate vicinity of the subject property had markedly changed in the recent past. He urged Council to "do what is right". Lastly, he questioned if Council planned to go back and revisit all properties that were down zoned at the time the new Zoning Ordinance was adopted? He felt everyone should be following the same rules. Jim Strait, 6530 Harlow Drive, President of the Kitsap Lake Neighborhood Association, stated the Neighborhood Association thinks this property should remain Neighborhood Business. He questioned if it is a crime to down zone slightly when no thought was given to down zoning residential property. TAPE #944 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 20 of 28 Roy McInnis, 2711 Maple Street, stated he hearings on this issue for at least two years. what was the problem in moving forward on action. had attended He questioned prior Council Kathleen McOluskey, City Clerk, noted a letter had been received from William Seidel, 6504 Lake Drive, urging Council to not approve the Ordinance. Mr. Estes questioned would this be setting a precedent and have an affect on all other zoning actions? Don Pratt, Director of Community Development, stated what was being proposed was substantially outside of the zoning pattern that they usually work with. They do understand why it is being proposed and they have worked with the Attorney and believe have a workable system through a Contract Rezone to accomplish it. It is not from a purely technical standpoint the desired outcome, but the City Council is here to help round off the rough edges in purely technical decisions. In that case, we think it is appropriate and acceptable within their operation. Mr. Estes cautioned in future cases if the City had to go to Court on this action, he questioned Mr. Pratt's thought as to how a Judge might rule? Mr. Pratt stated he was advised by the City Attorney that in such a case the Judge would find in behalf of the City, and he accepted that. Ian Sievers, City Attorney, stated he had reviewed the conclusions that Council had to find and he believed they supported the rezone action. Contract Rezones are not illegal and had been used by this Council in the past. Now that the 1988 Zoning Ordinance is in effect, use of such contracts should be less frequent. They are difficult to enforce~and keep track of and cause confusion when rezoning or doing Comprehensive Plan changes. However, he did not find anything illegal with the action being proposed. Mr. Overson pointed out the property owner was not happy with the result of the new Zoning Ordinance, he applied for a rezone that was denied and continued pursuing ways to provide for his intent. He did not believe Council's action would be legal because a zone cannot be given the rights of a high zone without a rezone. Mr. Sievers stated he did not find that statement written any where in the statute or case law saying this is illegal because it was doing something that was not a rezone. He felt that was taking the term "rezone" too literally by saying the label looks the same so it is not a rezone. This is a rezone and does change the uses and conditions of use of this property...that is what a rezone is despite what the Zoning Map says. It does need to be to be supported by legal criteria and he believed it was. TAPE #945 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 21 of 28 Mr. Collins stated back in 1989 this Council said they did not want a spot zone at the subject site, nor did they want to increase the uses or grant it higher zoning. Now, two years later Council was back doing the same thing only it had a different facade. He questioned the burden of proof that the applicant met the criteria for a rezone and he could not answer all of them in the affirmative. Therefore, he could not agree to a rezone. Mr. Colvin expressed concern over several issues raised by Mr. Amo that were of a legal nature and he requested the City Attorney to answer those questions prior to a vote being taken. Mr. Waibel called for a point of order that this was not a hearing on a rezone and a hearing on such a rezone could not be held at this time, the parties were not all present and it was not properly announced. All that was to be decided at this time was whether a motion passed by this Council previously, as a result of a hearing, is being implemented by an ordinance. He questioned if the ordinance reflected an action already taken by Council? If Council desires to reconsider a previous decision, then Council must go through some processes; and, he did not want to discuss it because it would be illegal to do that. Mr. Colvin stated he deferred all legal questions to the City Attorney and he requested a response to this statement. Mr. Sievers stated Mr. Waibel was correct in his point of order discussion, and Council could not revert the prior decision of the Council at this time without due process notice to the applicant and affected parties. However, if the Council does not wish to execute the ordinance and desires to revisit or reconsider their action, then the hearing would need to be reset and appropriate notices sent out. Mr. Colvin questioned if the City Attorney was saying Council should proceed even though a mistake may have been made? Mr. Sievers stated if Council is concerned with the decision, then they must go backwards. He believed Council did have the opportunity to rehear the issue and go back through the public hearing process. That hearing is not happening at this time, so no final conclusions can be made unless the conclusion can be made that this ordinance, by majority vote, does cement the other decision and you wish to go forward and implement that former decision with the ordinance. Mr. Colvin stated if Council did something wrong he did not want to compound it by proceeding. Mr. Sievers statedhe did not think any thing was done illegal. The ordinance and findings that are being adopted in support of the ordinance are supportable. TAPE #945 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 22 of 28 #0184 #0234 M/S/F(Horning/Waibel) to approve Ordinance and Concomitant Rezone Agreement, on first reading, including the wording requiring Mr. Heeter approving the agreement within nine (9) days after passage. Vote: In Favor: Opposed: Motion failed. Horning, Waibel, Horton Overson, Estes, Collins, Colvin President Hotton stated further direction needs to take place - a rezone had been approved and action needed to be taken to implement thatrezone or go back and readdress the issue. M/S/C(Collins/Overson) moved to have a rezone hearing all over again. Vote: In Favor: Opposed: Motion carried. Estes, Colvin, Collins, Overson Horton, Horning, Waibel Mr. Dawkins returned to the meeting. 7C - RESOLUTION #2359, PLACING A PROPOSITION ON THE 11/5/91 BALLOTAMENDING THE CITY CHARTER PROVISIONS REGARDING THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT, #AB91-204 Resolution No. 2359 authorizes and sets forth language for placing a proposition on the ballot for the November 5, 1991 General Election, to amend the City Charter provisions regarding the form of government. Jim Adrian, 621 Washington Avenue, requested the City Clerk to read the Resolution for the benefit of the Council and viewing public. Kathleen McCluskey, City Clerk, read the resolution into the record. Mr. Adrian stated pursuant to Council Presidents direction at the Pre-Council study session, he would not get into the advantages or disadvantages of this proposal and would only present the facts. This issue was not a new issue, it was addressed in 1984 by the City Council. Documentation of that action was included in the Agenda Packet. This issue again came up in 1985 in the Mayoral election. In 1988 a group of citizens (15-18) met to discuss the issue and the issue was not brought to the table because there was a Mayoral election coming up in 1989, and they felt it would be inappropriate to bring this up at that time and have a Mayor and five Council members running not TAPE #945 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 23 of 28 knowing what positions they would be running for. In January, 1991, this committee reconstituted itself, comprised of some of the same people who served on this committee previously, including himself. Approximately 20 people remained on this committee and were part of preparing this proposal. Proposition I - will reduce the Council size from nine to six members, will have a Mayor elected at large, retain six Council Districts and the Mayor would become part of the City Council. If approved, this would be implemented fully in January 1994. This was specifically designed for a two year implementation date for the following reasons: (1) to have current Mayor and Council and City staff have good transition period in order to make the change; (2) did not want to jeopardize anyone's term of office. There will be two elections prior to 1994, and if anyone does not want to participate in the new form of government, they could simple decline from running for office again. During the preparation of this proposal, they were in contact for over a year with the International City Managers' Association, the National Civic League, Municipal Research And Services Center of Washington. They have had two meetings with the President of the Washington state Managers' Association, consulted on several occasions with the City Attorney, County Auditor and County Prosecutor on technical issues as they relate to the election. This proposal is not new or novel, many cities in the United States have this form of government. This proposal is modeled after the City of Tacoma. They requested documentation from the National Civil League, an organization established in 1898, and who are a kind of advocacy group for municipal governments facilitating citizen participation in making changes in government. They are also similar to Municipal Research and he would encourage the City to join them because of their extensive resources. That organization developed a model City Charter in 1915, which underwent seven revision and is today recognized as the model City Charter for the United States Council/Manager form of government. Chapter 35 of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) requires that they obtain 15% of the signatures of registered voters who voted in the November 1991 election (7,031 voters in that election). A certified letter from the County Auditor stating that they had provided the necessary signatures and a copy provided to the Director of Administrative Services. They compiled 1,481 signatures, which were turned in to the Auditor and have surpassed that number by approximately 400. TAPE #945 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 24 of 28 Some of the technical issues that came up are as follows: (1) will this cost the City any more money? Mr. Adrian stated no. Three Council positions would be eliminated, saving about $19,000, and the Mayor's position would be relegated to a part-time position with a cost savings of about $41,000. The ICMAand Washington State Managers' Association have indicated that a first class Manager could be hired at a salary of $55- 70,000. There are also other opportunities for savings through sharing the same staff for Council members and the Mayor. In response to a question "how long do Managers change positions" - the ICMA indicated nation-wide the average stay of a Manager is 4 1/2 years. Statistics relating to the average stay of a City Manager in the State of Washington was about 8 1/2 years. (2) At Will Employee - the City Manger, by the Charter proposal, would be an at will employee of the City Council and totally exempt from Civil Service. (3) Mandatory Residency - Manager must live in the City of Bremerton. State law, as well as case law supports this requirement. (4) Requirement Super Majority To Terminate Manager (5- votes). (5) Why wasn't consideration given to At-Large Elections - this was not an issue their Committee looked at. This would have been a second type of an issue and would have required either a separate petition or additional signatures. (6) Mayor being presiding officer of the Council - it was felt that latitude should be provided to the City Council to choose their own presiding officer, therefore, they did not make that a mandatory condition. There is a provision in the Charter that a Manager would be hired in 1993 by the City Council seated at that time. In conclusion, the object is simple...what is the best system of local government to deliver efficient, cost effective professional services to the citizens of Bremerton. Fifty eight percent (58%) of the citizens in the United States have come to the conclusion that Council/Manager plan is the best. Every year over 100 cities change to Council/Manger plan. Well over 100,000,000 citizens in the United States live under this form of government. Every new city incorporated or proposed to be incorporated in Washington State for the last 20 years had proposed they incorporate under the TAPE #945 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 25 of 28 Council/Manager plan. This is becoming such a popular model that 92 Counties in the United States selected this model and the ICMA, during their next annual meeting, will change the name of their organization to International City/County Managers' Association. Lena Swanson, 2123 Snyder Avenue, noted that Mr. Adrian did not cite source of statistical information and she put little value in the ICMA. She also has an initiative addressing a change in government and has a vested interest in the process being considered. She firmly believes one citizen can have an affect on local government by using the Initiative process. She believed a City Manager/Council form of government removes the power from the local citizens and places too much power in the City Council. She believed Council did have to act on the Resolution, however, she did not believe they had to vote "yes" on it. She related previous action by the former Commissioner form of government when they were presented with a similar situation. Lastly, she felt Council should voice their protest if they are required to pass through this issue. Ms. McCluskey stated County requirements were different today then they were when the former Commissioner form of government was in office. Marold Pickard, 2307 8th Street, questioned the statutory requirement when a petition of this nature comes before Council? Ian Sievers, City Attorney, stated his opinion was different than his recommendation on this issue. A number of questions were referred to the County Auditor and the Prosecuting Attorney's office referred the procedure~ back to the City in an opinion letter. They referred to a particular State law section which stated the proposition had to be filed 45 days prior to the election, but interestingly that same statute stated it also had to be submitted by Resolution. To quote that section: "The County Auditor, as ex-officio supervisor of elections, upon request in the form of a Resolution of the governing body of the City presented to him/her at least 45 days prior to the election will submit a proposition on the ballot". The pivotal point in their opinion was that a Charter Amendment Proposition requires or is a special election; and this section covers special elections. He then referred that County's opinion to Municipal Research and they disagreed with the conclusion and felt there were a number of State statutes that were irreconcilably in conflict and they used a statutory construction technique of picking the last one that was passed, which happened to be the one the County Auditor referred to. Mr. Sievers was of the opinion that both of these attorney groups did not address another State statute, TAPE #945 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 26 of 28 which seems to state directly that a Proposition to be submitted to the electorate for approval or disapproval takes place at a General City Election. To be pragmatic in his recommendation to Council, the County is saying what they require before placing an item on the ballot. And, they are stating the City Council does not have to take a position for or against the proposed amendment, it must simply comply with the section by submitting a Resolution. Their position is that the Resolution process is a ministerial action of the Council (ministerial means that there is no discretion involved, not a legislative act which is a weighing of policy considerations, but something that must be done if a petition was submitted.) He suggests, given the time lines and to avoid any litigation, Council take the approach of passing the Resolution and submit it to ballot. If it was resolved in Court, there is nothing to be won as it would still be placed on the ballot. Andy Parypa, 1122 Hayward, stated he did not believe there was a need to change the form of government. If the public was not happy with their elected representatives they could vote them out of office. He felt City Council members were doing more work and should be compensated more accordingly. It is not the job of a Council to run the City, but rather to be legislators and legislate. He questioned the meaning of: "Manager shall have the power to appoint all officers and employees of the City under his jurisdiction or may at his discretion recommend to Department Heads to appoint and remove subordinates in such department or office"; and questioned what happened to the Civil Service Commission? He did not like this type of proposal because he did not feel it was fair to the employees. He did not support giving the power to the City Council to also act as the Administrator and ultimately Manager of the City. Lena Swanson stated the United States Supreme Court has a ruling that you cannot require a City employee to live inside the City of Bremerton. President Morton questioned assuming Mrs. Swanson gets her measure on the ballot and one would need a 50% majority to pass what if both initiatives received a 50% majority to pass? Mr. Sievers stated if the two propositions were conflicting, there is a ballot title procedure in RCW 29.79,320, which sets up two questions asking "should either of the two propositions be approved?" A no vote would mean no change in the present form of government. If that question was answered in the affirmative, a second question would request the voter to vote for one of the two propositions. TAPE #945 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 27 of 28 Mr. Oolvin questionedif there would be a proposition on the ballot to vote to retain the present form of government? Mr. Sievers stated a "no" vote against the change should be clear that there would be no change in the current form of government. Mr. Colvin questioned if it would be possible to place a proposition on the ballot to continue the present form of government? Mr. Sievers stated no - you could not do that because if they voted on the question "should we continue the present form of government" and if everyone said no, then what would you have. President Morton explained if the title ballot was in the affirmative then one of the two propositions will automatically win...which ever one gets the majority. Mr. Collins stated he did not believe the City was in a special condition to warrant a Special Election. If this Resolution is passed and the initiative placed on the ballot, then Council is subverting the whole philosophy of proposition by the electorate. He questioned if this would mean Mrs. McCluskey would berequired to then insure all the signatures on the initiative are appropriate or is it the Auditor's responsibility? It was his opinion that Council could place an initiative on the ballot without obtaining any signatures except their own. Mr. Sievers stated he did not think it was a Special Election. However, he felt it was better to spend legal resources on something that would accomplish something to benefit the City. President Morton stated because the County Auditor stated the Initiative(s) would not be accepted without the Resolution, she urged Council to pass it on as a bookkeeping measure. Mr. Waibel stated the Resolution, as written, needed to be corrected as follows: (1) Item #5 needs to be changed to insert the word "on" after the word "position". And, the following two paragraphs should be reversed because one cannot talk about "further resolving" before something is "initially resolved". In terms of process he quoted from the opinion letter from Municipal Research: "This does not mean, however, that the Council has any discretion to reject a proper and valid petition". In the United States, no one tells him how he has to vote. If it is a vote, he will vote as he chooses, but if it is required as an administrative step to "pass it along", he could understand that requirement. Mr. Morning stated he accepts this Resolution as an administrative matter and he supported Mr. Waibel's request for the changes as stated above. Mr. Overson pointed out a correction to Item #5, which should read "Item #4. #1652 TAPE #945 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes August 7, 1991 Page 28 of 28 Mr. Colvin questioned if Council was required to vote in the affirmative on this issue? Mr. Sievers stated the State statute section says that it has to be referred by a Resolution. A Resolution that passes by a majority will give the direction to the County Auditor and will place it one the ballot. A unanimous vote is not necessary. M/S/C(Horning/Estes) to approve passage of Resolution #2359, authorizing and setting forth language for placing a proposition on the ballot for the November 5, 1991, General Election, to amend the City Charter Provisions regarding the form of government, as amended by Mr. Waibel. Vote: In Favor: Opposed: Abstain: Motion carried. Homing, Overson, Estes, Horton Waibel, Collins, Colvin Dawkins President Hotton announced Item 7D would be held over for the August 14 City Council meeting. With no further business meeting adjourned at 9:55 p.m. KATHLEEN L. McCLUSKEY, City Clerk LYNN HORTON, Council President City of Bremerton KLM/LH/me cc: Normal Distribution File/Vault