Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/02/90TAPE #746 U.APPROVED DRAFT JUt, 1 090 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES #0052 #oaBe JULY 2, 1990 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 July 2, 1990 at 5:30 p.m., with Council President Lynn Horton presiding. Council members present were: Lon Overson, Wayne Estes, Spencer Horning, Hank Waibel, A1 Colvin. Councilmen Morrie Dawkins, Russ Johnson and C. R. "Tiny" Collins were absent. Also present were City Attorney Kelley Ian Sievers and Deputy City Clerk Gil Johnson The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council President Horton Invocation was given by Councilman A1 Colvin. President Horton announced that the Heeter Rezone Public Hearing that was scheduled for this meeting has been moved to August 22, 1990. CONSENT_ AGENDA A. Minutes Of Meeting - June 13, 1990, #AB90-165 B. Bid Award Recommendation - Three Dump Truck Chassis Awarded to Pacific Coast Truck Center In The Amount Of $137,949.50, #AB90-166 Bid Award Recommendation - Twin Lakes Production Well, Awarded to Charon Drilling In The Amount Of $49,561.05 #AB90-167 D. Bid Award Recommendation - Werner Road Transmission Main Project - Awarded to RT&T Construction In The Amount Of $368,331.04, #AB90-168 M/S/C/U(Waibel/Dawkins) to approve Consent Agenda as presented. ~LA~S~W_A~,~__AN~_REGI ST~RS 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 which has been made available to the council. M/S/C/U(Colvin/Overson) on July 2, 1990 the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: 112249, 112250, 112251, 112252, 112256 through 112436 in the total amount of $198,013.27. TAPE #746 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 2, 1990 Page 2 of 13 COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Mr. Johnson cautioned everyone to please be careful over the 4th of July and those who have pets to please take care of them during this noise time. Last week Council had a Study Session following the Council meeting, which ran rather late, and he apologized to the Mayor for his being a little grouchy due to the late hour. He hoped the public was not surprised when the Council, Mayor or staff had some disagreements during discussion of items - Study Sessions are times for discussing and sorting out issues openly and he would prefer having occasionally having a tiff in public than to do everything non-public. In recognition of recycling efforts, Mr. Johnson recognized employees at KCAP for their getting involved in a agency-wide recycling effort - HATS OFF TO KCAP! Mr. Colvi~ stated he had a talk with one of the City's attorney on "lobbying a Council member" and he announced he had been lobbied and will declare that contact during the discussion on that item. M[- .o~_.e~9~ stated he rode the Port Orchard ferry this weekend and enjoyed Fathoms 'O' Fun activities. He noted he is looking forward to the time when Bremerton can have its event of that caliber. M~..~ reported there should be air conditioning within two weeks in the Council Chambers and Council office area. And, he noted that there is always news about businesses that move out of town or shuts down and he wanted the community to hear about an expanding business in Bremerton; and he introduced Joe Stark. Joe Star~, president of St. Vincent DePaul, gave a brief description of the growth of this organization over the past few years. Currently they have 37 paid employees and many volunteers, who serve over 20,000 clients in the areas of clothing, food, utilities, medical needs and shelter at a cost of over $265,000. Their clients consist of the elderly, limited income, young and limited people on low income. He emphasized no one is turned away from St. Vincent DePaul - they help everyone. Besides their store, they own two private homes designated as transitional homes and they also have a single men's quarters, which is normally full. While people utilize these buildings they are feed and clothed as well. Recently the organization purchased the old Johnson Lumber Company because they needed a larger space and more parking spaces. They intend to modernize the building to meet the City's codes but there are certain things that are more difficult in old buildings and hoped the City would be somewhat flexible for the time being. He noted the Building Inspector had been coming down rather severe, however, they TAPE #746 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 2, 1990 Page 3 of 17 have had excellent working relations with the Fire Chief. During the many years Johnson's operated a lumber company on this site they did not have any problems, however, since they have taken possession of the site they have had nothing but problems with the building people and since they moved in they have received several complaints against them. Lastly, he emphasized the fact they feed and cloth people every day of every year, not just during Thanksgiving and Christmas. They are an organization that is out to help the community and request the City's cooperation to the fullest. Ken Smoot, Store Manager, stated a lot is done for people in the community through this organization and looked to helping even more in the future. Mr. Estes also extended his apology to Mayor Mentor for the treatment he received last week during the Council Study Session and in the event there are differences of opinion he hoped to find a better way of handling them. Mr. Waibel pointed out that the City of Bremerton does have a noteworthy festival - an Armed Forces Pageant and Armed Forces Parade were held in May and far out did Fathom's 'O' Fun. Having artended all the Armed Forces events, he was very impressed with those activities. Mrs. Horton reported she received a call from a staff person from the City of Everett, who expressed concern over the new make up of the new Puget Sound Council Of Governments (PSCOG). She received another call from him today after he had attended a meeting where they handed out a new tentative make up of the new PSCOG. The make up is proposed as follows: King County (15) Representatives (5-Seattle, 5-King, 5-other cities in the County); Pierce County -5 (2-County, 2-other cities in County, 1-Tacoma); Snohomish County -4 (2-County, 2 - other cities in County); Kitsap County - 2 (1-County, 1-other cities in County). The City of Everett is going to try and get added as the largest city in Snohomish County and suggested that Bremerton try to do the same...making Snohomish County up to 5 and it would bring Kitsap County's total up to 3. If all the other Counties join forces, Kitsap County would still be out voted. She emphasized the need to do something to make sure Bremerton is not lost in this shuffle. Right now the City of Bellevue is talking about withdrawing from PSCOG and the City of Everett is also thinking along those lines. She did not want to see King County running the whole Puget Sound area. ~yor Lgu!s. Men~o~ reported he artended the fund raising event for the "Bird's Nest" on June 30, which was well artended and TAPE #746 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 2, 1990 Page 4 of 9 brought together lots of people form different areas, included Kitsap County elected officials. He did not know what funds were raised but he anticipated it would be several thousand dollars, giving a real boost for the home for the homeless. _.A~.._~y~_~, 1122 Hayward, expressed concern over recent Council actions toward Mayor Mentor during a Council Study Session. He cited several instances where Council members publicly pledged their cooperation to Mayor Mentor and from recent past actions did just the opposite. He noted the Mayor is not beyond making mistakes and he did not believe Council must always agree with the Mayor nor will the Mayor always agree with the Council, but common decency dictates that each should be allowed to present their thoughts in a civilized manner. DeN __.Kn~, 139 Olympic Avenue, expressed concern over President Horton, Councilmen Lon Overson, Spencer Horning and Russ Johnson actions toward Mayor Mentor during a recent Council Study Session. He felt it was unethical for a Council member to lobby a private citizen about something that was not public yet. Also, he noted President Horton contradicted herself when she stated the Mayor was not following the design concept approved by the Council in March. At the March meeting President Horton asked the Mayor to direct Portico Group to offer the council several options, not just one plan. He demanded President Horton apologize to Mayor Mentor and fellow Council members and the public for actions taken during that Study Session. Robert Schneidler, Kiwanis Club Of Bremerton, announced the Kiwanis Club's 14th Annual Air Show will take place on Sunday, July 8. ~a__m_...~.,. writer for the Whitman & Dancers, announced the Whitman Dancers will be putting on a production on July 27, 28 and 29 in the purple space on 4th Street. She invited everyone to join them for a multi-media event, Tickets $12.00 general admission, $8.00 for students/senior citizens. She noted their performers are mostly from the Kitsap County Area; and their group also will be involved in bringing a Soviet performance troop to Kitsap County. M[- ~s__t.e~ requested a description of the seating arrangement for the performance. M__s.._~n~ explained it will be set up as a "theater in the round" and will bring the performers near to the audience. ~_T___ADMI__I~_~__TH~T~R CONTRACT, #AB90~_~ On June 27, 1990, the Admiral Theater Foundation met with the TAPE #746 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 2, 1990 Page 5 of 1A City Council at a Study Session to discuss the Theater contract. This Agenda Item reflects the changes discussed at that meeting. Those changes are as follows: - Major maintenance clause removed. - City staff support for fund raising removed. - Length of contract changed as discussed. Mr. Horning stated on materials handed out on this item he had been listed as a supporter of the Admiral Theater and he did not see how this represents a conflict of interest but he asked the City Attorney to give an opinion on this issue. Ian Sievers, City Attorney, stated that would not be a conflict of interest. ~O~.ISchneidler stated he is President of KPS, a member of the Executive Committee of the Admiral Theater Foundation, and was appointed Chairman of an ad hoc committee to negotiate some specifications for an operating agreement between the Admiral Theater Foundation and the City of Bremerton. Their objective is to have Bremerton's Admiral Theater, a community owned non-profit center for the performing and cinema arts, created and their participation in that process. Their goal is to provide the citizens of Bremerton with a great variety of cultural activities and to enhance the education, information and cultural advancement of the community. To that end, they presented to City Council proposed specifications for an operating agreement, one that would last for a term of 10 years, with the Foundation going to the community to obtain donated funds to renovate the facility, make it operational and operate the facility for the purpose of cinema and performing arts during that 10-year period. Public input requested - none received. M~.JOhn~on questioned several items: (1) under Renovations about Council's pre-approving structural renovations - he requested clarification; (2) during discussions of the 5-year period deadline for completion of building renovation and operational - he felt there was not much in the scope that tells him what is to be renovated and operational and he felt something measurable needed to be added. M~. ~hne~d~.e~ stated there were two requests made by the City in previous discussions, one of them having to do with the definition of "operational", the other being renovations to exceed at least 3/4 million dollars. The Foundation had a problem with the 3/4 million dollars renovation issue because it may be TAPE #746 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 2, 1990 Page 6 of 15 possible to renovate the entire facility to the specifications and expectations of the entire community for less than million dollars. As far as "operational" date, five years seems to have been attached to the process because of some wording in the trust arrangement of delivering the facility to the City. If the City wants to put a time limit on "operational", they would be willing to define "operational" as available for use or available for contracted use by any performing entity. ~,~,~9,hn~n stated he would like to have something more measurable stated in the scope. ~.s__c_~n~[ stated when talking about something measurable there are a lot of extenuating circumstances that could impact that whole process, such as something happening to prevent them from even entering the facility for a couple years or an act of God - that could set everyone back. Their expectation, given everything else being equal, they will have the theater renovated in five years and it will be available for contracted use. Ian Sievers, City Attorney, stated both of the original terms were to quantify or make definite the considerations the City would be getting back, either in terms of real improvements to the building that the City would get at the end of the term of the lease, similar to the Bremerton Community Theater where a piece of raw land was leased and the building was provided through grant funding; or a certain level of operation, which they are performing to this standard of putting on events. Mr. Schneidler's position seemed to be that it would be difficult to know if their efforts would pay off once the building is ready. The level of improvements to the building was also dropped as somewhat indefinite, but maybe what the City really intends is that at the end of five years they have an operational building - meaning there would be something available for immediate bookings by visual or performing arts events. ~E..~Ohn~On stated his position was that he wanted to prevent a problem later on. An other concern with the scope was that the City is saying the Foundation cannot do any subletting and it is his understanding that the City does desire that the Foundation rent out the retail spaces around the Admiral Theater. He did not support allowing the Foundation to sublet theater operations. He also had a thought about adding sales tax on the things they would pay. Also, under reviewing changes to this agreement by mutual consent, he believed those should come back to City Council. Finally, to determine the contract - Mr. Johnson stated he would feel very uncomfortable going beyond 10 years. He did want to give strong support to the Foundation for long term support from the City. He passed out to Council members a drafted Resolution which does that and hoped to bring it before Council for a formal vote at a later time. TAPE #746 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 2, 1990 Page 7 of Mr. Estes stated he has supported this proposal from the beginning, but he also wants to look out for the public's interest. He noted he believed there were a lot of hidden costs buried in the building and before proceeding he suggested getting some of the City's engineers and local builders to make a review and come up with a cost estimate. This review would provide a report on what damage exists and what needs to be done to repair it immediately. If this is done, he will get behind this proposal and support it all the way. He volunteered to go in and clean up one of the retail spaces fronting Pacific Avenue. Mr. Overso~ questioned doesn't the City own the building and isn't it in the best interest of the public to maintain the building in good condition - the better condition it is in the more value it is to the public. Mr. Sievers stated yes. Mr. Overson noted one thing that was discussed previously was identifying who would be responsible for the marque and he questioned if something had been included addressing this item? ~~_e._~e~ stated the marque is one of the major maintenance items, as he understood it, was to be the responsibility of the City for maintenance. ~..~ Overs~n stated the wording "the City shall be responsible for structural integrity of the building and for the marque" need to be in the agreement because the City is the owner of the building. Mr. wa~Ibe~ did not recall the discussion as outlined by Mr. Overson. He stated Mr. Overson's comments on the face value appear accurate, however there is nothing to say the City can't delegate that responsibility by contract. And, if in fact that responsibility is not upheld, it would be in violation of the contract and the City would be still maintaining their responsibility toward the building. It was agreed last week that the City would not take on major maintenance and renovation and in fact agreed to eliminate that particular paragraph from the specifications. And, Mr. Waibel emphasized that a facility study of the condition of the building should have been done prior to its ever being purchased by the City. The things that are being done now should have been done during the 30-day period before the City signed the purchase agreement. Previously, the City was told if they purchased the building the Foundation would take it from there. There were questions raised during the early discussions with the Foundation. And, he knows for a fact that the building did not have heating during the last performances of the theater, because the entire boiler system could not be operated. He questioned Ms. Peggy Lessor, City Risk Manager, if that is still the case and where the City is TAPE #746 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 2, 1990 Page 8 of ~ in terms of turning this over to the Foundation with that particular problem? ~egg~ Lessor, Risk Manager, stated there is a problem with the boiler. Several months ago in an effort to place coverage on the facility the City's boiler and machinery insurer sent a loss control representative through it and the Certificate Of Operation had been suspended. Extensive repairs need to be made, which have not been done. The Foundation has asked to be allowed to operate the boiler, however, she declined to provide that authorization due to the liability it places on the City in the event something going wrong. At this point, the hold up is how will the repairs that need to be made be funded. Mr. Waibel emphasized the items listed on the cover sheet of the Agenda Bill were to be removed from any agreement and he urged Council to keep them out...the City does not need to get into maintaining by putting on a new roof, putting in a boiler and air conditioning when the City was assured, when they bought the building, they would not have to do this. M~_.~v~rs stated he did not see how the City could enter into a contract with an operator expecting them to fulfill certain obligations and having this thing up and operable if the City knows these major things need to be done before the Foundation could fill their obligation; and that they needed to be addressed in the contract some how. ._Mr..~.W~b~. stated they need to be done within five years before it is operational. stated then there should be an out allowed the other party if these are not accomplished. M[t__~e! stated if they were not, then they would be in violation of the contract if the City requires them to take on that responsibility. _l!r_~_QFerSg~ questioned why hadn't the Mayor proceeded in getting a review of the building condition so decisions could be made in an intelligent manner? ~___wajb~ stated normally one finds out about these types of things before a building is purchased. ~!_~. C__~o~y~ stated one of his concerns was over the statement the Foundation could not sublet the theater and questioned what does it really mean? M~. s ie~e~S. stated since this isn't a lease to sublet, it is the wrong term and it would probably be an assignment of agreement for operation, i.e., city leases would be negotiated and arranged and signed off by the City at least on the commercial apron spaces. P~eS!dent Hor~on stated it related more to the operation rather than subleasing of those spaces. M._r.. ~hnei__d~[ stated the specifications presented to the City Council at the Study Session and as had been modified and placed in the Agenda Packet do not include the terms of subletting. The Foundation never anticipated that they would not be allowed to sublet commercial space. TAPE #746 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 2, 1990 Page 9 of ~ There is language included which prevents the foundation from being able to assign their operating agreement to another entity and they think that is very appropriate. With regard to cost analysis, perhaps a discussion about costs may have been more appropriate to the purchase of the building, however, it is owned by the City and in normal lessee/lessor agreement it states who will be responsible for what. He believed it was their position that it was not appropriate at this time to take into consideration what the potential expenses may be for a roof...what is being talked about is who is responsible for each one of those items. And, he continued to believe that in a normal lessee/lessor relationship responsibilities for major maintenance items of a building should remain with the owner of the building. Their interest, of course, is that if the Foundation goes out and generates one million dollars for renovations of that building, they want to make sure that the roof doesn't leak all over and destroy those renovations. Once a million dollars is put into the building and it is worth i 1/4-1/2 million that it stays being worth that amount. As far as operating the gas boiler, he pointed out what they asked for was the opportunity to encapsulate the small amount of asbestos that was in there and rebrick the interior, getting it operating so that heat could be generated for the building, instead of using the heat pumps. And, they did that all on a voluntary basis. Mr. ESter requested Council President to request the Mayor to get the engineers to conduct a survey of the building, establishing the condition; and he agreed with Mr. Schneidler that five years from now if something is wrong the City takes care of it, but initially he would like to know what the City is getting into. He personally saw a leak in the northwest corner of the building and is concerned as to what it will cost to bring in up to a usable condition. Mr. O~erSon stated Council needs to recognize the Foundation ~ the only organization in the City trying to obtain use of this building and he hoped they would be treated kindly in coming together over this agreement. He felt it was one of the best programs he has seen put together for the future of the City. He agreed there are risks and a long term venture, and he is not proposing the City say they will rebuild the room, boiler, etc., but that the City will be responsible in the manner they will work with the Foundation to try and support the development of the Foundations interest along with their use of this structure. He urged his fellow Council members to be proactive on this issue. questioned if he was not correct in understanding TAPE #746 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 2, 1990 Page 10 of 17 that the Foundation had someone look at the building and assessed the major components? Mr. Schneidler stated it was not a professional survey that he referred to and his comments relating to the rebricking of the boiler came from discussions with the insurance people who made the inspection. They have also inspected the roof, inspected some of the sources of the primary leaks, which had to do with the heat pump system going through the roof and they did some voluntary work to close off those leaks to prevent continued moisturization of the facility. M_r_~ Horning questioned if the Foundation would be willing to make some calls to local people who might have expertise in boiler works, roofing, etc.. and he requested Council President contact Mayor Mentor requesting an inspection by City Engineer, Building Official and Foundation representatives to make a joint walk through and give the Council some sort of presentation of what they find? ~ghne~.~e~ stated this could be done and they are prepared to do it. He noted they pleaded to get into the building to close off the leaks and to do whatever needed to get some heat in the building. The City has owned the building for six months and none of this has been done - they think this is unfortunate. They do not want another six months go by in the process of trying to decide when something will be spent on what critical area. They want to gear up and go to the community with a fund raising drive and say that the Foundation has a firm agreement with the City to allow them to do something in a partnership relationship. And, they will work out the timing of necessities having to do with the maintenance of the facility as those things take place. He feels they are mutually exclusive items and whether there is an operating agreement or not certainly the City should know how much it will cost to put on a new roof and when it will have to be put on. M~._~..._.~O~rn~ng urged President Morton to have the Mayor get together with Mr. Schneidler and Mr. Parker to set up this inspection. He realizes that not everything can be identified outright and felt there would be much benefit to the City from having activities taking place at the theater. Mr. Collins stated he had a great deal of difficulty with the specifications - it is not a contract. On the matter of the roof repair and boiler repair, he felt the City Attorney had the appropriate words to allow the City to do what is known to be needed and wanted a contract drafted. And, he suggested maybe enacting the proposed Resolution Mr. Johnson had provided to the Council members for their review in which it lends long term support to the Admiral Theater Foundation. Mr. Schnei~r pointed out the title on the proposal they submitted is Operation Agreement Specifications and they did TAPE #746 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 2, 1990 Page 11 of lg not propose it to be an actual contract. What they were trying to do was to identify the specifications to allow the City Attorney to write it up in contract language. President_~or_t~n made a statement of clarification on what direction Council had taken during the Study Session on this issue: under major maintenance issue they had talked about an Admissions Tax fund set up and administered through the City for those type of things that come up. The question came up what if we need those repairs ahead of time? Two options were discussed: (1) implement an inner-City loan to pay for those items; or (2) take out a loan against the building; and under both of those scenarios the City would be paid back once the Foundation has the theater up and running and reimbursement made out of the admission tax. Some how discussion has gotten away from that point. She hoped that progress could be made in getting a contract agreement. #2509 M/S/C/U(Overson/Dawkins) that the City Council approve the Specifications For Contract Agreement between the City of Bremerton and Admiral Theater Foundations, those specifications contained in the Agenda Bill, with follow on that the City Attorney interpret Council comments based on this discussion and bring back to Council in two weeks (July 18). M_r_r~...~ghn~on stated there were a lot of things brought up during this discussion that were not included in the written specification, such as the definition of operational subcontracting issue; and questioned if it was the intent to have the City Attorney write up the contract based on specifications and comments made by Council members? M~.- overson stated that was the intent of his motion. M~.aohnSon reqUeSted the following comments be put on record: (1) when Council talked about the City being responsible to take care of these things that does not mean "immediately responsible" - we would do it as fast as we can and as fast as capable. Assuming the roof is leading and the City is short on funding that temporary measures would be taken to handle the problem; (2) if there is some type of major disaster, such as the building burns down, etc., at that point the City may not be committed to the Admiral Theater but would be committed to the Admiral Theater Foundation at that point in time setting down and discussing with them rebuild - remove, etc. Mr. Waibel stated for clarification the motion was for the Ci~'y'Xtt~ey to interpret some of their comments and he offer to help in that interpretation. What he remembers from logic if in fact Council agreed last week that they would attempt to TAPE #746 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 2, 1990 Page 12 of 17 provide a loan to an agency, which was actually responsible for the maintenance itself and renovations themselves, that seems to mean that the City is intending for the Foundation to be responsible for these things. And, the City will do what they can within their fiscal responsibility to loan or create an Admission Tax Fund. He emphasized that from those discussions it is clear that the intent was not to take on any responsibility for that particular shell then agreed to in December 1989. Mr. Sievers questioned at what point would the City take out municipal finances? President Horton stated she was not sure the City may not want to do that - it is in the purview of the City and there may be some agency the City has a contact with which could be piggy- backed to provide for those repairs. She did not want to preclude the City from doing that portion if in the long run it is a financial benefit to the City and the Foundation. M_r_._~._Waibel stated if the City did undertake such activity, there would be very strict accounting for the labor costs incurred by the City and they would be reimbursed by the Foundation. M~.,..Sievers stated in order for the Foundation to get moving they will need a commitment from the City. If the City told the Foundation to start operating this facility next month and knew the City was responsible for doing these items but had not plan to get them done before operation start date, then it would be an illusionary contract - how would the City expect the Foundation to perform; and although the five years sounds like a long time the principles are the same. Someone needs to account for a process and mechanism for getting the major items done that both the City and Foundation are aware of and he questioned what he should do to put that in the contract? ~[.~.....~_Ohn~on stated he thought that was what the fund raising effort was all about - raising funds for renovation of the building. M~.. Wa_i_~e~ stated the Foundation is responsible for them, according to the agreement made during previous discussions and as Mr. Johnson pointed out the Foundation did agree to a fund raiser of one million dollars and hopefully within that five year period it should cover the costs for items being discussed. M__r~ ._.S~hn~d~_r restated the Foundations's position that they believe it is the responsibility of the City to maintain the major maintenance items of the facility. The Foundation will take on a fund raising effort of one million dollars (or $650,000) or whatever is necessary to renovate the facility. But, they emphasized that the owner of the facility, the City of Bremerton, should maintain the roof, preventing the roof from leaking and how that is funded, possibly from Admission Tax, which is a use tax on the people who use the facility, must be determined and they are certainly willing to support that activity. TAPE #746 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 2, 1990 Page 13 of 17 Mr. Johnson stressed that the City has only talked about the utilization of Admission Tax funds, not any other funds. M~ Schneidler stated under the Revenue Section of the proposal it states Admission and other related taxes - those taxes relating to the operation of the theater, not commercial space, not utility taxes, not sales taxes...just taxes that the City may or may not collect relative to direct operation of the facilities. ~e~id~n~ Mo__r_tg~ stated for clarification her understanding the City's position is that the City will charge Admission Tax to go into a fund to pay for those major maintenance items. If there are no funds, then the City can take out a loan either through the City or against the building. Now, there is nothing to say the City can not get an assessment of those needs for a 5-10-15 year period, figuring out how many dollars will be needed, how many people will be coming through the doors at a given period of time and then divide that number into the number of dollars that are available and then add on Admission Tax; and explain the reason for this is that there are major maintenance to take care of and the users will pay for that major maintenance. M__r._.ao~,n~gn stated if this is the position the City is taking then it should be stated Admission Tax and User Fee. During first discussion on the theater the City was asked to spend $75,000 and in small print noted that the issue of major maintenance items will be discussed later. The other agreements from other cities for similar type operations do not give the foundations as much as the City is offering this Foundation. Mr. Schneidler stated he believes it takes different forms - looking at what other cities do in some instances they provide operating funds in the S100,000/per year category. What is being requested is a mutual agreement where the City owns the building and maintains it, the Foundation will renovate it and operate it and hopefully the revenues that are realized from the commercial spaces will allow them to operate the theater in an at least break even method. ~[.~__.JOhnSon pointed out if the Foundation finds it needs some assistance they can come to the City during the budget process and request assistance. p~esi~ .... Ho__r~_O~ questioned if progress could be made in developing an agreement by clearly stating in the contract the major maintenance costs will be born by Admission Taxes and User Fees against the building and an assessment of those costs are and charge appropriately. M~.~_ev~rs that is true, except the first dollars generated from these fees will not be forthcoming until these major items are accomplished. TAPE #747 ~[~.~,.HO_r_~n questioned if the City's intent is clearly covered using the that verbiage. M[? ~i_e~e~ stated he was still a little uncertain as to timing of the City's commitment to getting the work done. Is it left to the City's budget TAPE #747 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes] July 2, 1990 Page 14 of 15 process - the City will do those things as required and as funding is appropriated by City Council - he felt this left the Foundation in a somewhat uncertain position. Horton stated if the City states they will take on that responsibility but someone has to do the initial ball rolling, then if the City makes sure by doing that, the City will be paid back through those funds when they are up and running. Mr. Waibel stated in defense of the Foundation, he pointed out that by including the wording "User Fee" the City is in fact setting the Foundation's budget. The City is forcing them to set aside some of their income for that purpose. He did not feel the Foundation would like having that restriction placed on them. M~_ghn~.~e~ stated they are certainly not excited about the whole process. They believe this is a viable solution to the problem as users use the facility they will contribute toward that use and part of that use they will be contributing to is the overhead of maintaining the facility in an occupiable condition. ~___~.~aW~n~ cautioned Council that if this debated much longer the Foundation may not want to move ahead on this project. He emphasized that the Foundation is made up of one of them respected group of people the City of Bremerton will ever get together on this and he urged Council to move forward on this proposal. Mr._ H~n~ng stated he believes Mr. Schneidler and the Foundation Negotiating team has said the same thing as his fellow Council members have said - that the City may be technically responsible for these major maintenance items but they are going to pay for them and the method of payment will be through a User Tax or Admissions Tax. Mr. Estes stressed doing this right - to get an assessment of the building and within the next two weeks he hoped to see a written assessment on what needs to be done to the building. Motion passed unanimously. 7_A_Tg~D__I~N_AI~_~.~[~RS~T~R.~.INg.)__~AD,.OPTING _M/~ATORy~...UTOMO~.ILE INSURANCE,~ ~B90i~ The State Legislature has enacted RCW 46.30 requiring those who operate a motor vehicle to maintain liability insurance. This civil infraction should be added to the Municipal Code to allow local prosecution. Public comment invited - none received. TAPE #747 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes] July 2, 1990 Page 15 of 17 Mr. Morning questioned when this is adopted will the City receive a fraction of the penalties paid? ~_~!~r__s, City Attorney, stated the City would get their percentage if they prosecute. Right now they are writing this offense under State Law with prosecution through District Court. Mr, Hornin~ questioned what impact this would have on the Municipal Court budget? M~.~.~e~e[~ stated there would be no impact as far as expenditures but there would be a revenue income affect. Mr. Collins stated it was his understanding that if the Legislature passed this particular act they did not include it in the Model Traffic Code, therefore, it was not included in the City's Traffic Code because it was not part of the State code, which the City adopted. M~ _s_!~.~ stated that explanation was correct. Mr. Colvin questioned what impact this would have on the current Court workload? Mr. Sievers stated a survey would have to be taken of the number of citations processed through District Court to come up with a figure. ~ Waibel stated hopefully the impact on workload would be offset by revenues. #0751 M/S/C/U(Johnson/Colvin) to approve Ordinance, on first reading, amending Title 10 of the City of Bremerton Municipal Code, to provide for mandatory automobile insurance. 7B - ORDINANCE (FIRST READING) AMENDING PENALTIES FOR MARIJUANAPOSSESSION, #AB90-170 The State Legislature has preempted the field of drug enforcement. State pre-emption voids any other law on the same subject which conflicts or is inconsistent with State Law. The current ordinance cannot be cited. Ian Sieve~S., City Attorney, requested this item be continued one week for further review and possible re-write. Mr. Johnson pointed out that the public should have the opportunity to speak on this item when it comes before Council on July 11. #0927 M/S/C/U(Waibel/Colvin) to continue this item for one week. 7C_-_R__E_~Q~_UTION #2303x ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GRANTAPPL~TION,. #AB90-172 The City of Bremerton has been invited by the Economic Development Administration to apply for $892,883 to construct the downtown waterfront project as previously approved from First Street out to the USS Turner Joy, a gift shop, and TAPE #747 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes] July 2, 1990 Page 16 of parking accommodations. For completion, the grant application requires passage of this Resolution. Connie Devaney, Grants Procurement Officer, stated as she understands this the process should be the last application needed to be submitted. It will go to Regional for a period of about three months and will then be passed on to Washington D.C., for final decision on funding, which can take a minimum of three months or possibly longer. She pointed out this proposal shows an increase from what was initially requested, which reflects a couple of issues: (1) budget estimates have gotten better further along in the process; (2) desire on her part to leverage the maximum amount of dollars possible from the Federal Government. Public Comment invited - none received. Mr. Johnson stated he had a minor problem with paragraph 4 because he was not sure of what the scope of work really is; and there is a statement that Council approved the site plan prior to construction - somewhere the Council needs to be in that process earlier in development of the site plan as well as construction drawings. M[~ _Mo~q~ng questioned why the word "boardwalk" had been changed to "project"? Mrs. Devane~ stated because Council felt the word boardwalk left out the inner harbor park and the Second Street park and wanted to expand the project to include both those sites. So, now it reads waterfront development project rather than just boardwalk. ~ Mg_r.~ng pointed out under paragraph 3, C. and E. funding amounts combined are significantly more than originally discussed and he felt it further shows the City's continued support for this project as a whole. M~r~_~.,a3~n~on stated he believed Council could work with the Mayor on development of the scope of work, site plan and drawing development separate from the documents which talks about what to do to get grant funds. He suggested changing paragraph 4 to read that the 99~tract with the Economic Development Administration if the President Morton stated since this proposal is a drastic increase to the project and a first class project could be constructed with less money, she hoped the City would do just that and not put in pure "cadillac" amenities when it does not suit a particular plan but simply to be expending grant dollars. She believed the City needed to be a frugal with #1012 #1289 TAPE #747 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes] July 2, 1990 Page 17 of ~ Federal dollars as the City is with municipal dollars. And, she hoped if a first class project is built with lesser money then remaining funds could go back to someone else's project. Mrs. Devane~ stated for every Federal dollar spent the City has to spend a City dollar. M/S/C/U(Waibel/Colvin) to approve Resolution #2303, authorizing application to, cash match, designation for, and Mayoral signature of the Economic Development Administration Grant with the following amendments, including the change to Paragraph 4, which would read: "The Mayor be authorized to sign the contract with the Economic Development Administration if grant funds are awarded. M/S/C/U(Johnson/Colvin) that the City Council work with the Mayor to develop a method for periodic meetings to discuss refinement and scope of work and development of site plans for the expanded project. With no further business meeting adjourned at 8:47 p.m. CLERK APPROVED KATHLEEN L. MCCLUSKEY, CITY L~NNHOR~ON, Council City of Bremerton President KLM/LH/me cc: Normal Distribution File/Vault