Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/19/89TAPE #564 UNAPPROVED DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES JULY 19, 1989 #0022 #0032 The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Bremerton was called to order in the City Council Chambers, 239 4TH Street, Bremerton, Washington, Wednesday, July 19, 1989 at 5:30 p.m., with Council President Spencer Horning presiding. Council members present were Lon Overson, Shirley Marty Crutcher, Lynn Horton, Morrie Dawkins, C. R. "Tiny" Collins, A1 Colvin and Russ Johnson. Councilmen Hank Waibel absent. Also present were City Attorney ian Sievers and City Clerk Kathieen McCluskey. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council President Horning and Invocation was given by Reverend Calvin Fann of Emmanuel Apostolic Church. CONSENT AGENDA - A. Minutes Of Meeting - July 5, 1989, #AB89-196 M/S/C/U(Johnson/Horton) to approve Consent Agenda as presented. CLAIMS/WARRANT REGISTERS Vouchers audited and certified by the auditing officer as required by RCW 42.24.080, and those expense reimbursement claims certified as required by RCW 42.24.090, have been recorded on a listing which has been made available to the council. M/S/C/U(Coivin/Dawkins) on July 19, 1989, the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: 44389, 44390, 44391, 44393, 44394, 44395, 44396, 44402 through 44617 in the total amount of $520,215.13. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Mr. Overson announced for those who are following solid waste activities and concerns with recycling next Tuesday, July 25, 9:00 PM, on Channel 9 - Program Title "Inside", there will be discussion of solid plastics and the problems them are causing in solid waste disposal areas. Mr. Johnson reported he received a letter from the American Insurance Association regarding Municipal Bond financing, which also supports the position taken by Association OF Washington Cities, addressing a bill (H.R. 1761 - House Ways and Means Budget: Reconciliation Bill) being considered this week by the Congress of House Of Representatives. The proposed Bill would retroactively eliminate the tax exemption on municipal bond income for those corporations that pay the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), it would also throw the bond market into crisis - substantially undermining the attractiveness of municipal bonds to institutional investors. Municipalities are being requested to contact Representative Chandler (202) 225-7761, who sits on 'this committee, to vote no on this initiative as it will have a tremendous financial affect on cities such as the City of Bremerton. Mr. Dawkins reported the City is still needing two host families for the Japanese students arriving from Kure, Japan, on July 28. Anyone interested please contact the Mayor's Office...478-5266. Mr. Johnson introduced Kathy Collins from the Association Of Washington Citiesr who was very instrumental in assisting the cities in lobbying the State to produce the best possible solid waste bill for the State of Washington. She is one of the more expert people in the State to interpret the 75-page bill and answer the detailed questions that exist. Kathy was invited to speak to the City Council, giving an over view of the bill but mainly from the prospective of cities considering the mandates and costs involved. TAPE #564 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 19, 1989 Page 2 of 18 Kathy Collins stated it is very unusual that in one session the Legislature would consider, compile and solve all the differences and task such a comprehensive piece of legislation. This piece of legislation signals the first step' in a new direction that solid waste disposal is taking. Previously, they didn't think too much was being placed in the waste stream, now due to limited availability of disposal sites and problems incurred both citizens, elected officials, and private businesses begin to do something proactive. This bill does two important things: (1) it lays out the goals for the State of Washington of having 50~ of solid waste, i.e., garbage, recycled by 1995; (a) sets some new priorities in place. The new priorities are similar to the old ones but they give an emphasis and preference to separating out that which might be recycled and reused from that which cannot be recycled and reused. (2) Requires urban areas of the cities to put in place residential collection programs for recyclable solid waste. It also puts in place requirement for rural areas. Cities, such as Bremerton, will be required to put in place a program to collect recyclable materials from each residence. There will be the requirement to have a program to monitor collection of source separated waste from businesses, there is not a requirement in the law, but it does say that activity must be monitored. If there is an adequate market and the County assumes there will be a requirement to collect yard waste hopefully they will be able to fill that void very quickly as that is one of the easiest challenges. All of the above needs to be put in place for Kitsap County and the cities within the first phase. Kitsap County is among the first phase and by July 1, 1991 they must have a plan on how to accomplish this, which will be described as a Solid Waste Management Plan. Some counties are developing their plans now and intend to meet the intent of the law this year when they submit their plans. Some of the other features of the law a compromise was made in trade for a study in packaging -there was a preemption of local government authority on to ban certain kinds of packaging within their governmental boundaries. There are two cities, Port Townsend and Winslow, who have banned styrofoam packaging. The preemption also prohibits governmental entities from imposing a bottle deposit or specific tax on products. Another provision of the law which retail establishments wanted was preventing cities and counties to require businesses have drop boxes for certain types of products if they carried those products~ i.e. pop in aluminum cans. If the City were contemplating an incineration program there is a provision that states an Environmental Impact Statement is required. People who work at landfills, incineration plants, etc., must be certified and licensed. That process will be instituted within two years. Cities and counties in this State are given the option for preferential purchase to products that are recyclable. This will be a real advantage for cities to help stimulate the markets and making sure the people producing the products have an outlet. The last major thing this Bill does is does impose a tax. A new I~ charge on collection service will be used to pay for the kinds of grants local governments receive to implement solid waste programs. It will so fund several positions within the Department Of Ecology to provide assistance to local governments and businesses to get programs underway. This tax should raise about 6 million dollars over a two year period. The other major tax and #0846 #0889 TAPE #564 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 19, 1989 Page 3 of 1'8 program that is address in the Bill is the tax on tires. This state has a tremendous problem with disposal of tires and there will be a $t.00 per tire tax to help find solutions for disposal and reuse of tires. Ms. Collins emphasized the fact that not all of the costs of the programs will be funded by grant monies...the City should expect some increase in the basic garbage rate. PUBLIC RECOGNITION - None 6C - INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH BREMERTON HOUSING AUTHORITY, #AB89- 199 The City has been working with the Bremerton Housing Authority Director and staff to establish an interlocal Agreement for the purpose of increasing the drug and patrolling activities in the Westpark area. This proposal is at no cost to the City of Bremerton but rather a potential income of approximately $68,000 per quarter (3-month period). Contract is for the period of July to September with potential of future renewal. Ian Sievers, City Attorney, stated the Housing Authority did request some minor changes to the draft contract provided to Council. Requested changes include: (I) under "3. Compensation" section - setting a cap or total amount that could be expended under cost plus basis and also designated number of hours they expected the Patrol Officers to work on the property; (2) setting up joint administration as required by the State Interlocal Agreement Act between the Housing Authority and the Police Chief under "Section 4" of the agreement. Don Mansford, President of Westpark Resident Council, stated the Resident Council endorse this proposal. Mr. Johnson questioned if the City would experience any shortage of patrol services by the Police Department if this is approved? Police Chief Del McNeal stated the patrol will be filled mostly on an overtime basis which the City is being reimbursed for use of City vehicles and staff. And, if the City feels it is having too great an impact on regular service provided to the City the Police Department would pull back from the added patrolling. M/S/C/U(Crutcher/Dawkins) to approve a Interlocal Agreement between the City of Bremerton and Bremerton Housing Authority for the purpose of enhanced Patrol and drug enforcement. 7A - ORDINANCE #4218 (SECOND READING) RELATING TO THE PARK AND RECREATION FACILITY DEVELOPMENT FUND, #AB89-190 M/S/C/U(Colvin/Collins) to pass Ordinance #4218, on second reading, amending Ordinance #3623 relating to the Park and Recreation Facility Development Fund. 7B - ORDINANCE #4219 (SECOND READING) ESTABLISHING SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PLANNING AND POLICY, #AB89-191 Jeff West, Supervisor of Recycling Operations for Brem-Air Disposal inc., complimented the City Council for their work in this area, particularly Councilman Johnson who has worked very diligently and cooperativeiy with those in the private sector. It is realized many tough decisions must be made in the area of recycling and they are ready' to move forward but at the same time want to use extreme caution. One of the things needing to be addressed shortly after the adoption of the Ordinance is the question of funding. The reason being recently two recycling firms have gone out of business in the north part of the County. #0976 #1042 TAPE #564 City Council Reg. Mtgo Minutes July 19, 1989 Page 4 of 18 Mr. Johnson proposed a minor change to the proposed ordinance...in Paragraph B, second page, delete the word "Further," so as to not confuse the meaning of the text. M/S/C/U(Johnson/Coivin) to pass Ordinance #4219, on second reading, establishing solid waste management policy for the City of Bremerton and affirming the City's power to establish levels and types of solid waste services within the corporate limits of the City of Bremerton with the amendment to Paragraph B - deleting "Further," 7C - RESOLUTION #2260, COUNTY-WIDE VOTERS PA/4PHLET, #AB89-151 M/S/C/U(Horton/Colvin) to pass Resolution #2260, agreeing to participate in a County-Wide Voters Pamphlet 8A - PUBLIC HEARING - MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION TO SELL ROOSEVELT FIELD, #AB89-201 Public Hearing on Mayor's proposed recommendation to sell Roosevelt Field to Olympic College and Sons of Norway and use the proceeds to develop an athletic complex. On June 27, 1989, the Parks and Recreation Board voted to recommend to the Mayor that the Council hold public hearings on the sale of Roosevelt Field. Mayor Gene Lobe stated he realized this issue will bring out many emotions and he hoped that the issue can be address through facts. He noted there are two issue to be address: (1) possible sale of Roosevelt Field; and (2) a sports complex located off Werner Road. He provided an architectural concept of the proposed sports complex. His association with Roosevelt Field spanned many years and acknowledged its important role to the community. Every year there is a demand for increased use of sports fields not only in the City but throughout Kitsap County and the State. A number of years ago he stated he would not entertain just the sale of Roosevelt Field and he still means that today. A lot of new issues have come up, not the least of which are Olympic College needs. Olympic College is an important part of the community and the City has a tremendous responsibility to that college. The City has the opportunity to sell Roosevelt Field and he would highly recommend that those funds be used for one purpose only and that is to start the beginning of a sports complex. in response to comments made that he was "trying to hide some issue before it coming to the public"°.. Mayor Lobe briefly outlined the difference between the current form of government and how it was in the past...identifying the responsibilities given to the Administrative side of City government. And, it was his responsibility to put together a package proposal and present it to the City Council for their decision. He stressed the importance of the City Councii's responsibility to hold Public Hearings on issues -not his. The Parks Department has been discussing and reviewing the idea of a sports complex for at least six months. Early in the discussion of the sports complex, the Parks Department asked for the Mayor's assistance in determining how to fund a 3 million dollar project. Funding options that have been discussed include Councilmanic Bonds (which can be approved by Council without the vote of the people), however there is a limit to amount of funds available through this method and there has to be a pay back source. The City could go to the vote of the people and request they tax themselves, however, this method has not been very successful in the past. Considering the potential success of options discussed Mayor Lobe believes that the proposal being presented is the best opportunity for the City of Bremerton. He emphatically stated the City needs to start expanding and doing things to make this City a viable city. Not too often has there TAPE #564 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 19, 1989 Page 5 of 1B been an opportunity to undertake something to change Bremerton for the better. This proposal is that opportunity - Olympic College, with his support, did go to the Legislature and requested $465,000 to purchase property to be used for parking. Mayor Lobe noted there is not a strong opposition in the community against a sports complex. People are saying they want to keep Roosevelt Field as an open space/green space, and necessity to keep in its present form forever. But, what does this really mean? The College is proposing to keep one ball park and about 250-350 additional parking stalls and in addition they have agreed that while the City is in the process of constructing of a new complex both fields would be kept as they are and usable. Nothing would be lost until the City had a new field to use. And, he estimated that time frame to be sometime near the end of 1990 or spring of 1991. When the sports complex is completed there would be five fields available and what the City could be loosing is only one ball field. Mayor Lobe emphasized Olympic College is "our" college to support and to keep. Arvilla Ohlde, Director Of Parks and Recreation, gave a brief historical rundown of discussion and preliminary planning for a sports complex, which began about i 1/2 years ago. These discussions were initiated by a citizens committee - Andy Pendergast Committee. Their goal was to see if there could be a athletic complex built in the City of Bremerton. Staff worked with the committee to look into the idea of a sports complex. As work began they looked at what was needed more than just ball fields. They looked at what other amenities would make a master plan and compliment the community. Due to the projected cost of the master plan, the committee looked at development on a stage-by-stage basis. The first stages are termed "five field complex" and two practice fields with nominal parking and beautification. The intent of that designation is that the ball fields are the most essential component and need to be prepared and fine turned developed right of way. Along with field development other amenities were proposed that would compliment the fields. The final stages would be where the Soccer Associations would be brought in to participate in the development of fields through donations or in kind services, RV type facilities could be developed as well as a outdoor swimming pool. In looking at operations and maintenance, she developed a budget that would be enterprising within itself. There had been a new fund created for "athletic" last year so it is a separate entity from the General Fund. With that fund the dedicated dollars can continue on similar to the system that has been used for the Golf Course which generates its own revenue and pays its own operating and maintenance and continuation. The same system has been set up for the sports complex - the dollars would go right back into the project and there wouldn't need to be concern over budget cuts and deficits in the General Fund that would impact the maintenance and operations for such a facility, Also, the players fee that was implemented this year ($15.00 per player) has been dedicated dollars which have been identified as a line item - $30,000 dedicated for capital expenditure. That money is directed to the complex and if the proposal does not come to fruition the funds will revert back to the current ball fields for upgrading. Benefits derived from a plan such as the proposed sports complex not only benefits the ball players but has a significant economic value to the business community. The Visitors and Convention Bureau undertook researching how other communities in Washington had been impacted economically upon the development of a sports type complex and they were informed that cities, such as Yakima, bring in 1.8 million dollars worth of business that comes to their City during the summer tournament season. TAPE #564 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 19, 1989 Page 6 of The City Council will be provided the option of developing an athletic complex - the question will be posed "what happens next" and from that Ms. Ohide will wait for Council's direction to see how to proceed and what method will be used to develop the project. Mayor Lobe stated if it is believed that the Community College needs to be expanded then the College will be in need of much more properties than just Roosevelt Field. He urged the City Council to take advantage of the opportunity being presented to not only help the College but also the City. Dr. Wally Simpson, President Of Olympic College, stated this issue can be viewed as a decision to do something positive. When he first came to the college he was told of the "many plans" for the City and so far they are still in the "plan stage" With the Mayor's proposal there is a plan that can succeed and finally develop into an action. The growth in Kitsap County is continuing on a rapid basis and the College needs to address the impact that growth will have on the facilities and programs at Olympic College. Olympic College has a population base in Kitsap and Mason Counties - drawing approximately 7,000 students. It is entirely possible in 6-7 years they may be serving 10,000 students. Parking persists as the single largest problem facing students at Olympic College, it is a commuter college. The only way people can attend is by vehicle. The college is intended to serve Kitsap and Mason Counties with its main base in Bremerton and it will always remain in Bremerton. Its Library, food service, labs, occupational shops, administration, duplicating services, maintenance, motor pool are all located at the college site. The majority of the students come on to the main campus for most or part of their college education. Olympic College is presently working out an arrangement to invite a University to come in and offer the final two years of education called Two-Plus-Two. They have reason to believe some time next year that University will have an agreement with Olympic College. with 7,000 students on 21.5 acres. The advantages of a community college to this particular community - they are a clean industry, in economic terms their payroll is spent in and around Bremerton, the economic and social advantages are that young people who are 17 years old and older can be attracted and retained in this community thereby preventing a drain of young talent as experienced by other communities elsewhere. If the Two-Plus-Two program is available it will provided even a greater advantage for the community. There is a social and economic impact by the residents who can continue to reside and upgrade their skills in the same location. The question for the Council and community is "can the community of Bremerton support a community college of 7,000 students"..."wili it support a community college of 10,000 students"..."will it support a presence of a University"? Can Bremerton support, in addition to the college, a first class hospital, airport that may become a satellite of SeaTac or are these changes to much for the City. Is changed desired, do they want vitality but find it very difficult to give something up in order to achieve it? The vision for change cannot be accomplished, or serve this number of students until they have some where to go and the Mayor's proposal is one that he urges support for because it allows for that vision, taking something from the drawing boards for the first time in a long time and putting into action. Dr. Michael Connolly, Olympic College, stated about four years ago the college had a number of properties around the college appraised by the State and the price came to about 2 1/2 million dollars. TAPE #565 TAPE #564 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 19, 1989 Page 7 of 18 They requested the State College Board to appropriate funding to purchase those properties - they turned the request down. They were advised to request smaller pieces, which they did - asking for $500,000 and this time around they were allotted $465,000. At the time of the request for the $500,000 they also needed to commit $250,000 local funds for development. The State may purchase property, however, it will not develop parking for the college. Last October the board considered three options: (1) to acquire properties between Broadway and Warren, 16th to 15th -which would provide 116 parking stall at a cost of $450,000 acquisition costs and $250,000 development costs - an average of $6,000 per parking slot; (2) building a 400 car parking garage at a cost of $4,500,000 on land currently owned by the college. Net gain would be 320 slots at average cost of $14,000 per slot if one field is kept intact; (3) to acquire Roosevelt Field at cost of $450r000. Cost to develop 250 added parking slots of $150,000 for a net cost of $2,400 per slot if one field is kept intact. Mr. Connolly provided a conceptual design showing "Option #3" and explained utilization of that land. Actually there is a need for 500 added parking stalls but by acquiring Roosevelt Field it will provide enough parking to get the largest part of the problem behind them and to work gradually on the rest of the parking problem. John E. Winesdorfor~ President of Olympic College Faculty Association, spoke in favor of the proposal noting that Olympic College is not the traditional institution - it is a people's college. The student body is composed of the young, middle aged and elderly. The school offers broadly composed studies in areas both academic and vocational. Some students are parents, some from traditional families but increasingly they are the mainstay of single parent families. They are usually or always commuters. It is the responsibility of Olympic College to provide parking needs for students - they are the life blood of the college. Having viewed the plans for the sports complex and the proposal to use Roosevelt field for college needs, the Olympic College facility at last can say there is relief for their parking problems. It will help them answer the education needs of the citizens and at the same time provide significant recreational and economic benefits to the people of Bremerton. Therefore, the facility of Olympic College urges the City Council to accept the proposed sale of Roosevelt Field. Barbara Day Miller, Program Director for Agape Unlimited, stated she and her husband, who is recently deceased, had sponsored many teams over the years who played on Roosevelt Field so she has many happy memories of activities on this field. However, she strongly supports the proposed development of a sports complex as well as the sale of Roosevelt Field to the college for their parking needs. She personally experienced earning her higher education through Olympic College, first getting her GED at the time she was a single parent of six children and then going on with her Social Studies program. If the growth of the college is stunted it will stunt the growth of the city. Progress cannot happen without change. Ann Dyer, 3540 Shadow Glen, Silverdale, stated she is an Olympic College Nursing student, a single parent and a widow of 18 months. She briefly described the difficulty getting to class due to inadequate parking. With the responsibility of two small children she is unable to take the extra time in coming to school 2-3 hours early just to get a parking space. She and fellow students so carpool when possible. She strongly urged the City council to consider the proposal for the sale of Roosevelt Field which would greatly benefit the students at Olympic College. Marie Picklet District/Beifair, Superintendent of North Mason School stated her support of the proposed sale of TAPE #565 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 19, 1989 Page 8 of 18 Roosevelt Field to Olympic College. She spoke on behalf of the past, present and future students from the North Mason area who are and will take advantage of higher education at Olympic College. She stressed the importance of those students who economically could not attend college if their only choice was a 4-year State University or private University. She pointed out there are two real issues, one being education and the other being growth. From the growth in the areas surrounding Olympic College she predicts that growth will follow through to the college. When the Two-Plus- Two program becomes a part of Olympic College it will bring about a definite increase as students will not have to leave the area, those settled and employed here will not have to leave the area to further their education to obtain a 4-year Degree. For the residents/students in the North Mason area public transportation to Olympic College is not an option - there is none, car pooling is not viable due to class schedules, work and family commitments. The Shelton satellite is 23 miles from Belfair and is not a viable option. Belfair is 18 miles from Olympic College. The Belfair population is orientated toward Bremerton and most of North Mason School District parents work in the Bremerton area. In fact, the most recent Federally Employed People Census identified 60 percent of the parents in North Mason School District are employed by the Federal government. Reverend Larry Robertson, Pastor of Emmanuel Apostolic Church, spoke in favor of the proposed sale of Roosevelt Field to Olympic College. He noted his concern for the progress of Bremerton as well as the importance of Olympic Collage in the educating of our community. He has the opportunity to work with the under privileged and poor constituency in the City and when these young people come to him wanting to know how can they elude poverty and all of the ramifications involved with that he has had the opportunity to point them to the educational facilities at Olympic College. He is very encouraged with what Dr. Simpson is doing at the College and he hoped the Council would grant the sale so progress can move on in the various programs. Carl "Dusty" Rhodes, 2513 Reid Avenue, President of Sheridan Neighborhood Association, stated those citizens who attend monthly meetings of the Sheridan Neighborhood Association desire the City to keep Roosevelt Field. This does not mean they are against the college or a sports complex. It means they believe there are viable alternatives to financing a sports complex as well as Olympic College parking needs and expansion. When contacted, Representative Zellinky and Senator Craswell viewed Roosevelt...it has to go... field is out moded, dangerous and poorly lighted. Considering the number of people having used the field this past year Representative Zellinky and Senator Craswett's comments seem to be rather ill informed statement. In response to actions taken by the legislature in appropriating $465,000 for acquisition of Roosevelt Field by the college, Mr. Rhodes provided Council members with background information, news articles, letters, minutes of Park Board, etc., and was dismayed that Mayor Lobe had not informed the Council of the details early on but waited until about one week ago, He hoped the Council's wisdom and judgement will be a help in guiding the defeat of this proposal to sell Roosevelt Field. Mr. Rhodes, as Acting President of BACON, referenced a letter BACON received from Mr. Fed Kahn, who is an active Commercial Appraiser. Mr. Kahn cites his background in the Bremerton community and his professional qualifications as an appraiser. As an appraiser it is his opinion that the 7 1/2 acres involved are worth in excess of $3.00 per sq. ft., at a selling price of $1,000,000 on today's market and not the proposed $1.50 per sq. ft., selling price. Also, Mr. Rhodes submitted a petition signed by 125 local residents, 25 residents from Port Orchard and Tracyton Beach, who all support the City keeping Roosevelt Field. TAPE #565 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 19, 1989 Page 9 of 1B Margaret Carey, Secretary of Sheridan Neighborhood Association, read into the record a Resolution adopted on July 17, 1989, by the Bremerton Area Council Of Neighborhoods (BACON) to the Bremerton City Council concerning Roosevelt Field. The Resolution urges the City Council to separate the issue of Roosevelt Field from the sports complex issue and allow the citizens of Bremerton to vote on whether they wish to sell Roosevelt Field. Also, Mrs. Carey expressed her concern over the way the City is being asked to "move ahead...times have changed" and to "help Olympic College grow"...she feels it would be worsening the environment in the interest of big bucks for those who expect to profit from the new complex to be built. Roosevelt Field caters to a different segment of the population and the industry-oriented sports complex would not fill their needs. People don't realize how much Roosevelt field is viewed as open space and as an accessible playing field for families, little kids and local teams. She urged the City Council to let the voters decide the fate of Roosevelt Field. Jim Adrian, 621 Washington Avenue, views the proposal as three separate issues - parking needs for Olympic College, development of a sports complex and City's policy for preservation of open space/Roosevelt Field. He expressed concern that the Council was not following policy and procedures which they had adopted (identified under Administrative Policies and Procedures adopted by the City Council on June 29, 1989, Real Property Surplus And Disposal), specifically numbers 4, 5, 6, 7 and 11. In Item number 4 it specifically calls for a public hearing before the Planning Commission to consider the disposal of any real property of the City. Under Item 5 he noted there is no provision that allow the City to negotiate a sales price at the appraised value. If the objective is to sell Roosevelt Field to generate funds for the sports complex, then it would seem prudent that the Council would go for the highest bid and place it out for bid after a minimum appraised price had been established. Item 6 requires that the properties be advertised in the newspapers for sale, be posted and all property owners within 250 feet be notified by letter - this was not done. Item 11 does provide the Council and out..."on a case basis the Council may waive any provision of this procedure when an urgent compelling need is demonstrated." Council has engaged in a hearing and yet have not demonstrated a compelling need. If the Council decides to waive the provisions then that should be done in the public and identify the urgent and compelling need for the waiver. Resolution #1131, passed on May 3, 1961, states the Parks Commission's philosophy on how to handle open space and recreational property..."Areas designated for park or recreational purposes should be held inviolate against diversion to non- recreational purposes, and they should not be considered as reserves of open space to be drawn upon for public uses. Whenever an over-riding public purpose requires the use of park land, compensation should be made for the area taken from park use by the provision of an equal or better area nearby°.." Resolution #2178, passed on August 19, 1987, requires in part the Parks and Recreation Board and their role..."The Board shall adopt bylaws subject to the approval of the Mayor and the City council and shall thereafter advise and make recommendations to the council and City officials and provide assistance with respect to all projects relating to park and recreation development in the City of Bremerton...". In his opinion, he does not think having a one page letter from the Parks Board suggesting a public hearing meets Ehat requirement. Also, after discussions with Park Board members it is his understanding that they never had the opportunity or TAPE #565 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 19, 1989 Page 10 of 1B staff report on this proposal. The Parks Board did pass a Resolution in 1985, expressing the need to preserve Roosevelt Field as park land unless if disposed of the City received compensation equal to and property located in area near by. In 1987 and 1988 the City council, in their Statements Of Legislative Intent, requested staff to evaluate the sports complex and how it could be developed. Never did Council address linking the sale of Roosevelt field to the sports complex. In conclusion, Mr. Adrian believes the City Council is ignoring their own policies and procedures which will: (i) undermine their own policies; (2) undermine both the Parks and Planning Commissions and the volunteers who work on these boards; (3) set a terrible precedent for the public and City staff, that you subscribe to a double standard when it is convenient; (4) deprived the City of valuable input from these Boards and bodies; (5) invited the intervention of the courts to provide for a reading lesson; (6) if Council continues to proceed with this after it has been called to their attention, probably violated their oath of office. As a recommendation, Mr. Adrian suggests referring this issue back to the Parks and Planning Commissions; obtain a legal opinion on issues he raised during the above discussion; put the issue to the vote of the people; pursue legal questions raised and do nothing until after the next election. Andrew Parvpa, 1122 Hayward Avenue, stated he was not in favor of giving Roosevelt Field away. He looked into the issue of replacement costs (identifying the assets already in place at Roosevelt Field) and came up with a low end estimated cost of amenities as $321,588 which would allow approximately $150,000 net for the cost of the land. Also, Mr. Parypa personally inventoried current parking spaces available for Olympic College and came up with the figure of 824 which is much higher than what the college staff is projecting. If Roosevelt Field is ever sold, it should be sold at a price at lease that of adjacent land. And, he strongly believes there are alternative methods to solve any parking problems encountered by Olympic College as well as a funding source for development of a sports complex. Paul Schmitt, Manette, stated he had been asked by the members of BACON Committee to address the appraisal of Roosevelt Field and related land issues. He noted he has been a Real Estate Broker for 15 years and works on a daily basis with most of these issues. He pointed out there are four important issues to discuss: (I) the appraisal itself~ (2) surplus of Roosevelt Field~ (3) Olympic College's parking problem; (4) new sports complex. He voiced his concern that a decision on disposition of Roosevelt Field is being rushed into two weeks when the owners of downtown waterfront property were given two years to make those kinds of decisions. The appraisal of Roosevelt Field, which the City paid $3,000, is accurate on the basis that appraisal was made. The assumption was made that one acre in one corner would be commercial and the balance would be zoned Central/Business/Residential. The density for a CBR zone is 15 units per acre. In the appraisal the appraiser states it might be zoned Multi-family with a density of 22 units per acre, which would be a 504 increase in the value of TAPE #565 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 19, 1989 Page 11 of 18 the property by increasing the density. A good argument might be made to make it a MX Zone which would allow 44 units per acre. An MX Zone is similar to Highland and property on the east side of the Manette Bridge. At 44 units per acre for that property it would mean well over one million dollars. The assumptions in the appraisal are not correct. The property is currently zoned Parks and Schools and the appraiser made a statement that is the only use allowed there. In the Parks and School Zone the following are allowed: buses, transfer station, warehouses and repair sheds for those buses. Kitsap Transit just got through paying approximately $8.00 per sq. ft., on south Callow for similar land. Also, administrative offices could be put on this property. The ultimate determination of the value of this property is determined by the seller themselves. The City may determine, within reasonable limits what that property could be used for. What is being proposed is to down zone it to the least likely use - instead of addressing the best possible use. Fair market value is the probable selling price in a competitive market when neither the buyer nor the seller is acting under haste or undue influence. The buyer (Olympic College) has stated they have emergency parking needs, that they would have to pay $7 to $10 per sq. ft., for adjacent properties, that sometime this year they will sell 9-10 million dollars worth of property and know that they would be financially able to pay more if they have to. The City currently charges $3,000 per year for use of the parking lot. Twenty five cents for two hours parking is not an unreasonable amount. The University of Washington has $1.00 per hour for parking. Even at the lesser amount the income would come in around $75,000 per year. Therefore, the parking lot by itself is worth $400,000. The Bremerton Comprehensive Plan especially addresses need for close in neighborhood parks. Every document the citizens of Bremerton have paid for from the Comprehensive Plan to the market research and new Zoning Ordinance stress the importance of open space. In Fiagship's report to the City, there are nine references to the importance of urban close in parks and their value to the City. The City is only revitalized when people move in - in order to attract young families the City needs open space and parks. The Comprehensive Plan specifically states that when open space is converted, sold and diverted to some other use it has to be replaced with like kind. There are recent court cases in Seattle involving 1-90, I-5, the Seattle Center and Burke-Gilman Trail confronting this aspect. Natural resources and park lands have a value that only can be recaptured by replacement cost not by the market system. Recently there was an inquiry to the Planning Department as to whether or not an Environmental Check List was required. Don Pratt, Director of Community Development, responded in a letter which stated: "the sale or purchase of Roosevelt Field is probably not exempt from the State Environmental Policy Act because it appears to be subject to the authorized public use. Therefore, a SEPA Check List will be prepared". It is an administrative decision whether or not a SEPA Check List is needed. Anyone can appeal that decision whether or not a SEPA Check List needs to be completed, it will go to the Planning Commission for review. It can also be appealed to the City Council for review. If this avenue is taken it will give some time to discuss it in a fair way - not under a lot of pressure. The property being considered for the sports complex is not currently zoned for that use, it is zoned Forestry. Therefore, the City will have to convert that Forestry Zone to one that allows a sports complex. A sports complex is not allowed in any zone without a Special use Permit. All surrounding property owners and TAPE #565 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 19, 1989 Page 12 of 19 residents that will need to be notified for rezone purposes are County residences. More research is needed to determine the reception of the County and surrounding neighbors to the idea of the City developing a sports complex in that area. Mr. Schmitt urged the City Council to not sell Roosevelt Field. Glenn Jarstad, 2823 Hefner, Past Mayor of the City of Bremerton, stated he was representing the Councils of Neighborhoods position that the issues of selling Roosevelt Field and development of a sports complex be handled as separate issues and that one project does not necessarily rely on the other to be successful. Mr. Jarstad gave a background overview of emphasis placed on parks and open space during his tenure as Mayor - that priority was always given to looking and planning for the future generation and what Bremerton's assets could mean to them. During those years the City actively sought out and purchased properties, developed parks/play fields/swimming pool, etc. If the City Council now wishes to develop a sports complex, they have the legal right to issue General Obligation bonds to under take such a project. And~ he supports moving ahead on such a project, based on its own merits. The City of Bremerton has always been the biggest promoter of Olympic College and he hoped the college will start a positive program of buying and continue to buy in the years ahead all the older homes existing east of the High School along 13th down to Warren Avenue and over to Roosevelt field. By developing more open land for college parking and beautification of the college campus, it will present a positive image that we care about education, beautification, open space, adequate parking, enhancement of adjacent neighborhoods and other environmental concerns. The State can and should lead the way. Sometimes it is necessary for local communities to play "hardball" with other governmental agencies to protect and expand what they think is right for their citizens. This one decision you, the City Council, will be making is a major historic decision affecting the City forever. Please decide wisely. Claud Jones, 1253 Fox Run, Olympic College student, spoke in support of the proposal citing investment in the properties that are at stake is an investment that would enhance the City of Bremerton, the community and the students attending Olympic College. As a value the property is so much greater in education opposed to recreation. Louis Mentor, 2669 Marine drive, stated the City has been very good neighbors to Olympic College over the years. As they expanded streets were vacated and buildings were allowed to be built without their providing adequate parking because the City was a good neighbor. The City should not be look upon as a bad neighbor now because they might not want to sell Roosevelt field. If 250 parking spaces are needed, there is a simple solution...there is available property across Warren Avenue, the old Engineering Department building. As a result of an engineering review of this property it will hold 165 vehicles which is within one block of Roosevelt Field° There are other properties which belong to the city...over 250 parking spaces and another 200 near by. These properties may not be the ideal situation but sometimes the easiest and most ideal situation is not always the best situation. The assessed value of the Engineering Department building on Warren Avenue of 1.16 acres is $403,000 land only. TAPE #565 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 19, 1989 Page 13 of 18 If it is desired to do something besides parking, he felt it would be wonderful if the college expanded and took in the whole area but it should be left up to the citizens of Bremerton as to whether or not they want to get rid of Roosevelt Field. Bill A/no, 6524 Lake Drive, stated the issues are not new issues to the City Council. The college came to the City council about four years ago desiring to purchase Roosevelt Field. At that time they could pay approximately $500,000 without going to the Legislature, public hearings were held, staff recommended that the City not sell that as a minimum have an equal trade of land. The measure for the sports complex has been before the votes and they rejected it. When the college speaks it is for the college, a regional, commuter college, but they are asking Bremerton to give up something they value. If the college were to be providing a break in costs for residents of the City of Bremerton attending the college then it would make a little bit of sense. He believes people attending Olympic College should fund it, the City should be a good neighbor and help the college when they can but do not give away the City's recreation area. Ray Alread, 3413 Harbel Drive~ stated parks and play fields should be available in the neighborhoods. He recommended building a mini- dome on Roosevelt Field area. This could be used year around and could be located near the downtown area. Other cities through out the nation have athletic activities centered in the downtown areas and they have proven to be very successful. Vern Binz, 251 Sugar Pine, stated his opposition to the sale of Roosevelt field in order to provide a base fund for a sports complex. Voters have already turned down the idea of a sports complex. Once park lands are lost in the inner city they can never be recovered. Carl Cramer, President Bremerton Area Chamber Of Commerce, stated approximately 3-4 years ago he was before the Council and looking at building a new YMCA - it too was an emotional issue. Today the new YMCA is complete and serves 25'-35,000 people per year. The reason the Chamber is involved in the discussion of Roosevelt Field is many faceted: (1) it will improve the quality of life in Bremerton to go ahead with the sale of the field and build a sports complex; (2) it will improve Olympic College, one of the largest employers in Bremerton; (3) encourage further education by our own people and with the addition of the Two-Plus-Two program more people from other areas will be drawn to this community; (4) provide quality facilities our City can be proud of like the YMCA and new High school; (5) encourage out-of-town athletes to participate, play and pay tourist dollars this area needs to become viable; (6) continue with the modernization of the City in making it a more livable City for everyone. There, the Chamber Board Of Directors of the Bremerton Area Chamber Of Commerce support the sale of Roosevelt Field to Olympic College and the development of a sports complex. Art Anderson, 1721 Ohio, stated his neighborhood is the most impacted neighborhood of the college area and the neighborhood has always backed Olympic College, regardless of the impact. He was personal involved as a Planning Commission member in past decisions bringing about improvements to the college. He also believes acquiring of Roosevelt Field by Olympic College is important to the growth of the college, however, he is concerned that the Council is violating their own rules and regulations and procedure to this point. He strongly suggested Council should go back, mend their fences and procedures and then come out with a solid yes vote to sell Roosevelt Field to the college at the proper TAPE #566 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes july 19, 1989 Page 14 of 18 price. Council should not rush into a decision on an issue as important as this proposal. TAPE #566 Terry Eades, 112 NE Tracy Ave., Assistant Superintendent South Kitsap School District, spoke representing the South Kitsap School District and urged the Council to approve the sale of Roosevelt Field to Olympic College. Their interest is on behalf of their students and consider Olympic College to be a very important asset to the area and to the students. For the past several years about 204 of their graduates have gone to Olympic College for one or two years, about 110 new OC students per year. Virtually all of those students will be commuting via vehicle. When students arrive at the college they learn that there is about one sparking stall per 8 students and this is a problem that will increase as growth continues for both the college and the school districts. He noted the inequity of state requirements that new elementary school of 600 students must be located on 11 acres as a minimum and over 100 parking spaces are required and none of the students drive. Any thing that creates jobs and economic activity in the local area is to the benefit of the City and the entire area. He also agreed this is an education issue, not just a parking issue and as part of the educational community they wished to endorse the proposal as presented. Tiny HenburG, 1526 High Avenue, stated as a life time resident she supported the proposal as presented, noted small children do not use Roosevelt Field and she agrees Olympic College has a parking problem and needs the ability to grow as its needs growth. James HenburG, 1526 High Avenue, spoke in favor of the proposal due to increased parking needs and to undertake action which will stimulate the economic growth of Bremerton. Del Knauss, 139 Olympic Avenue, stated his opposition to the proposal and stated it should be up to the vote of the people to decide whether or not Roosevelt Field should be sold. He urged the Council to vote no on this proposal and not be influenced by the Mayor or college. He cautioned about believing the college and their efforts for beautification...look at the land OC owns on the downtown waterfront now and the lack of any beautification effort. He believes the Mayor desires to get the sports complex started and then to go to the people with a bond issue for completion of that complex. He questioned...doesn't OC want Roosevelt Field so they can expand their buildings? Steven Schultz, 1804 Chester Avenue, stated he had experienced a great impact on his residence/family due to Olympic College students and their parking needs. He has repeatedly gone to the college board to ask for some relief from the impact on his home. He cautioned the Council to not let Olympic College take the cheap way out and urged the City to retain Roosevelt Field for the citizens. Mel Wortman, 121 Lilac lane, stated his support of the proposal as presented. He urged the Council to take on the responsibility of making the decision for the City of Bremerton on this issue. He considers Olympic College a part of Bremerton and he believes the City and the College should join together on this proposal which will benefit both the City and the college. Randy Brezler, 13035 Ash Avenue NW, Poulsbo, WA, OC student and a leader of other Olympic College students, supported the proposal which will help ease parking needs at college and allow the City's progression developing a new park recreation area which will provide increased tourist dollars which will help the Bremerton TAPE #566 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 19, 1989 Page 15 of 18 economy. In response to comments made that there is no urgency to the proposal, he has personally experienced the frustration of many students who are attending OC but struggling with the ability to find available parking. He pointed out that most previous speaker have supported the proposal and would sell Roosevelt Field "for the right price". Earle Smith, President of the Economic Development Council, stated he was speaking for Ray White, President of the EDC. He noted 17 members of the EDC Board are Bremerton residents and the Board has written a letter to the Mayor in support of the proposal strictly from an economic view. He pointed out Bremerton needs to be a people place - Olympic College is the best way and recreation is the other best way. Who is the future of the community...young people. Bremerton cannot afford another non-decision. Randy Spitzer, 3805 Beach Drive E., Port Orchard, Chairman of the Education Committee of the Bremerton Area Chamber Of Commerce, favored the proposal because the college is a key issue in future economic growth and the community cannot afford to take any positions to stand in the way of allowing the college to develop. The college is an "open access school" and what is difficult right now is that some students are being denied access to the school due the lack of adequate parking. Henry Bell, Dean Of Instruction Olympic College, supported the proposal noting the significant quality of the school, both programs and administration and what it contributes to those living in Kitsap County. OC has a parking problem which is compounded by limited resources to solve that problem. Those most impacted are those who can not financially go beyond Bremertono He urged Council to stand up and make a hard decision and to consider what the community needs long range and made a decision based on leadership and not emotion or political expedience. Kathy Chelini, 1783 NW Russell St., Poulsbo, Nursing student, supported the proposal, that the sale is absolutely necessary and the sports complex would be more than what is anticipated in benefits to the City. A change in attitude is necessary to foster good will toward the people in the community and she urged the Council not to turn it over to the voters. Rick Smith, 131 E. 31st, stated his opposition to selling Roosevelt Field due to the need for open space and the availability of recreational fields for young people in the community. There is a shortage of fields throughout the County already. All of the athletic needs within the City need to be considered. Mr. Smith does favor development of a sports complex and noted he worked on every park bond issue before the voters in the past 15 years. He believes the sports complex can be built without tying it to selling Roosevelt Field by funding sources that are readily available today. Also, he believes there will have to be joint participation by the users of fields in development and maintenance costs similar to how the YMCA was built. He urged the Council to not sell all of Roosevelt Field to the college but only 1/2 because that is all they are willing to pay for. Laurie McLau~hlin, 307 Bertha Ave., OC student, complimented the Parks Department for the programs available and that the City has a greater vision to look forward to with a sports complex and allowing growth to happen at Olympic College. Barbara St. John, 110 Northwest Doncee Drive, speaking as ASA Jr. Olympic Commissioner representing the youth of this area, stated they are in favor of the sports complex but not necessarily at the cost of loosing Roosevelt Field. They would like to see improvements made at Roosevelt Field for continued youth TAPE #566 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July !9~ 1989 Page 16 of 18 activities. Rob Fantana, 219 Apple Street, stated he supports the proposal and believes both the City and college will come out winners. Mary Lou LonG, 2433 E. Phinney Bay, stated there are other options other than selling the field to alleviate parking. There is the option of leasing whereby the City would remain in control over that particular area. Since the City has had a long standing dream of a downtown waterfront park she suggested the college and City work out some sort of lease/exchange thereby saving a lot of hardship within the community over loss open space, loosing field utilization, etc., and or possibility of a multi-level parking facility. When the sports complex issue was defeated by the voters it was a non-specific plan for a sports complex and now it may have developed into a more defined plan, however~ she did not believe the general public realizes the cost/developing/maintaining of such a complex and remains a cloudy' issue. The proposed location for the complex is not inside the City limits, a small parcel that was left out of the over all annexation of watershed and utility lands when it was annexed. Ball fields and parks that are located a distance away from the populous are a hinderance to using them. If the City wishes to sell Roosevelt Field she believes it should be up to the vote of the citizens of Bremerton. Tom Creary, 1775 Sun Fjord Lane, stated after experiencing 10 years of parking problems during his studies there he believes the parking needs are an educational issue. However, he supports maintaining the one ball field to support fast pitch baseball for the High School and the college. But, today he was speaking as the 1ST Vice President of Kitsap County Pee Wee Association and expressed concern that currently the youth in Bremerton are not being served (ages 7 - 13) and are having to play on inadequate fields. He hoped that at least one field is reserved strictly to serve youth in baseball if the sports complex is developed. Bob Steer, 1336 Nipsic Avenue, stated his opposition to the proposal. He voiced his concern that Olympic College could financially expand and/or relocate if they so desire and not at the expense of loosing Roosevelt Field. Marty Lewis, Co-owner of Lewis Chapel, stated she is of the opinion that the Council do indeed represent the people and there is no need to put this issue before the people for a vote. She did support the sale of Roosevelt Field to enhance educational opportunities at Olympic College and the development of a sports complex. Wayne Estes, Bremerton resident, suggested that this issue be tabled for 30-40 days, have the City Attorney research all the procedures and legal issues raised and do it right if it is to be done. He also suggested buying up properties between Park from 7Th to llTh and locating the sports complex nearer the downtown area which would enhance the redevelopment of the downtown business area. Mr. Estes questioned how many Council positions that are up for election are being challenged? Don Atkinson, Bremerton businessman, stated some technical questions regarding the sale of Roosevelt Field and development of the sports complex have been posed and need to be researched. He feels the college is good, clean industry and good business for the City of Bremerton which is good for citizens of Bremerton. The most positive thing addressed during this discussion is the light that has focused on the college, the college needs to be encouraged to expand and obtaining the Two-Plus-Two Program is important. He believes the sports complex would have tremendous potential for the community. He hoped all of the legal questions and challenges can TAPE #567 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 19, 1989 Page 17 of 18 TAPE #567 #0315 be answered and the needs of the college can be addressed in a systematic way because they are good neighbors. Ed Sheldon, 721 Woods Place NE, stated he was speaking on behalf of Flagship City. Flagship has taken a strong positive position and recommendation on the issue as presented. Most of the speakers who preceded him this evening indicated they appreciate Olympic College as one of the City's major assets. People in the City are the number one resource and the college and what it does in terms of human values for our people, must be very close to the top. He has had a number of opportunities to work with the leadership of the college over the last three years and he has without exception found them to be sensitive to Bremerton's needs. They are sensitive in more than just this one issue - as you know we share a lot of common concerns with the college and have a great deal of common interest with the college and the Bremer Trust. It is recognized that Bremertonians have developed a strong sense of skepticism. When the YMCA project was being proposed he received many comments that it would not be possible to do a project such as that in Bremerton. Other than one large grant received from the YMCA Of America, 90~ of the dollars raised (over $1,300,000) came from individuals who lived in Bremerton or businesses functioning in Bremerton. When Flagship started he was told and still told this, you really don't think you can do it? Obviously he would not have accepted the responsibility if he had not believed that it could be done. He had been reinforced by his YMCA experience and the experience of the School District being able to raise 16 million dollar levy and bond issue. The skepticism that people have evolves around history of offering many plans from many sources on what was going to be done to make Bremerton a better place than it had been. Many plans were good plans, however, those plans have not become reality. Many people no longer believe the City can be saved. He believes very strongly the people need to see something happening and when they do they will start to believe. Flagship believes that the plan as presented is the greater of the choices. The City can choose to do nothing, can choose to vacillate or the alternatives can be chosen which offer the people and the City a chance to believe. Don Mansford, 128 Russell Rd., questioned what about the kids who use Roosevelt Field and what will they do when it is no longer available? Arvy Mantilla, 3237 Solie Ave., stated he had worked with young people many years and felt a dollar amount cannot be put on Roosevelt Field - it can never be replaced. He suggested that the City remain ownership of Roosevelt Field until they research and find out all the facts and then make a decision on this issue. He questioned why has Olympic College not taken some action before now - their parking problems has been a on going concern. Kathleen McCluskey, City Clerk, noted letters in support of the proposal were received from Kay Charleston and Louise Douglas. M/S/F(Johnson/Colvin) to adjourn the meeting. Vote: In Favor: Opposed: Motion Failed Crutcher, Collins, Johnson, Colvin Overson, Horton, Dawkins, Horning Ian Sievers, City Attorney, stated the Council and Mayor have identified a lot of legal issues, which are under review, and he believes he can have responses to those issues by the August 9 TAPE #567 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes July 19, 1989 Page 18 of 18 date. Mr. Collins questioned how much will it cost the City for the land being proposed for the sports complex. Ms. Ohlde stated a lease has been drafted but not presented at about $700 per month rent, $8,400 per year for land lease. #0382 M/S/C(Horton/Dawkins) to set August 9 as the next public hearing date for this issue to be heard by the City Council. Vote: In Favor: Crutcher, Horton, Waibel, Horning, Collins, Dawkins, Coivin, Abstained: Overson, Johnson With no further business meeting adjourned at 10.25 p.m. KATHLEEN L. MCCLUSKEY, CITY CLERK APPR D NCER H nc ty of B co: ii President Normal Distribution File/Vault