Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/20/89JAN e 1990 TAPE #700 UNAPPROVED DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES DECEMBER 20, 1989 #0035 #0O53 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, December 20, 1989 at 5:30 p.m., with Council President Spencer Horning. Council members present were Lon Overson, Shirley Marty Crutcher, Lynn Horton, Hank Waibel, Morrie Dawkins, C. R. "Tiny" Collins, A1 Colvin and Russ Johnson. Also present were City Attorney Ian Sievers and Deputy City Clerk Gil Johnson. The meeting opened with the Pledge of Allegiance led by Council President Horning and Invocation was given by Councilman A1 Colvin. CONSE~FT AGENDA A. Minutes Of Meeting - December 6, 1989, #AB89-353 Bid Award Recommendation - Asphalt Products And Services, #AB89-354 - Awarded to Ace Paving $218,570, low bidder. Bid Award Recommendation - Chlorine Products, #AB89-355 Awarded to: Jones Chemical. M/S/C/U(Waibel/Crutcher) 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(Colvin/Horton) on December 20, 1989, the Council does approve for payment those vouchers included and further described as follows: 102056 through 102260 in the total amount of $269,358.65 and Regular Payroll in the total amount of $348,988.78. COUNCIL MEMBER REPORTS Mr. Johnson wished everyone a happy holiday season and merry Christmas and a special thanks to Woodlawn Cemetery once again for providing a beautiful Christmas tree display. Mr. Colvin expressed his appreciation to the City staff and Mayor for all their kindness and consideration they have shown through out the year in responding to his requests. He received a call from a gentlemen who felt a 9-member Council was too unwieldy but he, Mr. Colvin, did not share those views and felt the current Council membership allowed individual thinking and decision making. And, he wished everyone a Merry Christmas and happy New Year. Mr. Dawkins wished everyone a happy holiday with their families. Mr. Collins wished good Yule to everyone. Mr. Waibel stated he hoped everyone has a happy holiday season including happy Hanukkah. Mrs. Horton wished everyone a happy holiday and cautioned if you are going to drive please don't drink. Mr. Crutcher wished everyone a happy Christmas and New Years. Next week he hopes to have the opportunity to show housing/business opportunities in the Bremerton area to some people who have recently moved to Washington from California and are looking for a place to settle. He felt Bremerton had much more affordable #0444 TAPE #700 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes December 20, 1989 Page 2 of 17 prices then the Seattle/Tacoma areas. Mr. Hornina expressed a Merry Christmas to everyone from he and his family. PUBLIC RECOGNITION Mayor Gene Lobe announced there is a little Canadian boy, Garrard Booth, who is ten years old and is suffering from a terminal illness. He is trying to make the "Guiness World Book of Records" by receiving the most Christmas Cards. Anyone who would like to send Garrard a Christmas card can do so by mailing it to: Garrard Booth c/o Gulf Island Driftwood Newspaper, Box 250, Ganges, British Columbia Canada V051EO. And, Mayor Lobe made a presentation of "Certificates Of Appreciation" to the following individuals for their volunteering to assist with the 1990 Census: Polly Welch, Margery Bezona, Vivian Armstrong, Nina Hall and Becky Lorber. Gordon Byrd, 402 Chester Apt. 103, reported his fund raising effort to establish a shelter for the homeless has grown to $256.00. He realizes this is an almost impossible task but he is putting in his ultimate effort to achieve this goal. He encouraged anyone who cares about the homeless to contact him at 373-9227 or 479-3333 (Booths Drugs). 6A - EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT - CONNIE DEVANEY, GRANTS PROCUREMENT OFFICER, ~AB89-356 The 1990 Executive Department budget provides for a Grants Procurement Officer at $35,000. The salary represents 106.424 of the mid point of the salary range. Attached for Council consideration and approval is an employment contract. M/S/C/U(Crutcher/Dawkins) to approve the employee contract as presented and authorize the Mayor to execute said agreement, subject to relevant Administrative Policy. 6B - CONTRACT EXTENSION - RYDER MLS, #AB89-357 The contract with Ryder MLS for Fleet Maintenance Management services expires December 31, 1989. The City has received proposals and is proceeding with negotiations. However, there are a number of operations and financial issues yet to be resolved before a contract recommendation can be brought to City Council. Because of contract expiration dates, written notification requirements and negotiation issues, it is requested that the present contract be extended for sixty (60) days. Mr. Johnson stated since this was the first contract for contracting out fleet maintenance, he suggested asking the City Auditor to review both functional and financial aspects within the 60 day extension period, providing an analysis of how well the contract was structured and how well the services were provided. #0525 M/S/C/U(Johnson/Collins) that the contract with Ryder MLS for Fleet Maintenance Management be extended for sixty (60) days and request the City Auditor to do a functional and financial review of that area. 6B - 1990 RATE INCREASE PROPOSALS FOR AMBULANCE COMPANIES, #AB89- 358 The Ambulance Advisory Committee has reviewed the 1990 rate proposals for Olympic and Bremerton Ambulance Companies. Evidence of rising costs and competitive rates to other regional firms was TAPE #700 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes December 20, 1989 Page 3 of 17 reviewed by this Committee. It is the recommendation of the Advisory Committee that the proposed increased rates for 1990 be approved by Council. Paula Johnston, License Inspector, stated the Ambulance Ordinance mandates that all Ambulance Companies submit their rate proposals for the up coming year at the later part of 1989. The City Council must approve what ever rate schedule will be in effect for 1990. She noted the ambulance rate schedules do include some increases, however, not all items were increased. The Advisory Committee for ambulance services did meet with both owners of the existing Ambulance Companies, who brought forth documentation on why they need rate increases for 1990. The Ambulance Committee membership included Acting Fire Chief Meigs, representative from Mayor's office, Police Chief Del McNeal, representation from City Attorneys office and the two owners of the Ambulance Companies. She pointed out a letter was submitted by Acting Chief Meigs which states two rate schedules were submitted and the one which the Committee is recommending includes non-emergency and emergency basic life support rates as equal amounts. Bill Littlejohn, owner of Olympic Ambulance, stated one thing to keep in mind, which is typical in the health care industry, is that for every dollar the rates are raised they will only realize fifty cents return. The reason for this is that many of the patients are paid for by a government program. And, Medicare rates have been frozen for the past five years and implementation of the Gran± Rudman Bill decreased payments by an additional 24. Gravle Johnson, Bremerton Ambulance, stated their rate schedule is the same as presented by Olympic Ambulance and the reasons for the requested increases are based on the same reasons presented by Olympic Ambulance. Mrs. Pat Caldwell, 9722 Spinnacker Blvd., N.W., Silverdale, expressed concern over a charge of $332.00 for ambulance services to transport her husband from Harrison Hospital to a diagnostic center which was approximately 1/4 mile (this involved a two-way trip). She felt this charge was excessive considering no services of a registered nurse or paramedic were required. Mr. Littlejohn explained that the charge was made to Harrison Hospital for their providing ambulance service for a patient of the hospital and it would be difficult for him to comment further until he had an opportunity to review the billing for services received. He offered to look into this matter and meet with Mrs. Caldwell later. Robert Schneidler, President Kitsap Physicians Service, stated KPS has been in business for over 40 years and presently provides health insurance for over 57,000 people. KPS works hard at cost containment, such as during the past five years they have not allowed professional allowances to increase by more than 44 in any one of those past five years. In some cases they do not have the ability to regulate costs for certain types of providers and they look to other regulators to do those things, such as the City and ambulance services provided to the residents of Bremerton. He noted the two ambulance companies in Bremerton do an excellent job providing a high quality service, however, they do have a high cost for providing those services. And, after reviewing ambulance service rate increase proposals over the past five years, he finds that the rate increases range from 9 1/2 4 to 334. He pointed out the current request for a rate increase is from May 1, 1989, an 8 month rate increase and when analyzed the numbers come out 144 up to 504 increases depending on which line item is being considered. The Ambulance Advisory Committee has provided some justification: (1) rising costs ...however there is no documentation which prove what those rising costs are; (2) competitive rates...comparisons #1527 TAPE #700 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes December 20, 1989 Page 4 of 17 were made to Seattle and Tacoma and Mr. Schneidler believes that Bremerton is a lower cost area than both of those cities and therefore should be reflected in the proposed rates. There is a greater portion of residents in Bremerton that are insured which reduces the number of patients who do not have compensated ambulance care. Lastly, the local population seem to be more conscientious about their debts and KPS has found the residents of Bremerton pay their debts much better than those residents in Seattle and Tacoma, therefore, there is not as much "write off of debt" for revenues for services provided in Bremerton as there would be in Seattle/Tacoma. A good example of this is Harrison Hospital whose costs are 254 less than hospitals in Seattle. Mr. Schneidler stated he did not know of anyone who has looked at the financial statements of the ambulance companies and determined whether or not the proposed rates are appropriate. He pointed out that over the last seven years the City Council has approved base rate services averaging 8 3/44 per year. The cost of living increase for the past seven years has been 44. He urged the Council to look at what the real return on investment is and whether there is justification for increased rates. Mr. Johnson questioned if the ambulance service had two ALS patients to transport in the same vehicle at the same time what would it cost in 1990 (1989 was $100.00 per patient)? Mr. Littlejohn stated that was not included in the rate schedule, however, it is rare that situation would happen. And, if Council desires that can be include on the rate schedule at the same cost as 1989. Mr. Littlejohn stated KPS has very narrow vision and they must look out for the rates, however, not everyone in the Bremerton area carries KPS insurance coverage nor do they always pay their debts. He pointed out not all items were increased,in fact there was a period of almost 16 months where there was no rate increase. Mr. Johnson questioned why would it cost $7.00 per mile in 1990 to transport a patient when in 1989 it cost $6.00 per mile? Mr. Littlejohn stated one thing that has to be considered is the total average cost of an ambulance and mileage is generally not very much. Mr. Johnson expressed concern that the rates are being raised, since May of 1989, significantly and would have an impact on senior citizens. Mr. Littlejohn pointed out that their financial records had been audited six years ago. Mr. Colvin questioned if the Ambulance Advisory Committee looked at the financial statements of the two companies? Mr. Little~ohn stated no. M/S/C(Overson/Johnson) to table this issue for one month and provide Mr. Littlejohn time to provide financial statements to the Council for review. Vote: In Favor: Abstain: Collins, Dawkins, Colvin, Johnson, Overson, Horton, Waibel, Horning Crutcher President Hornina stated he personally would like the Ambulance Advisory Committee to take another look at the proposal concerning the information provided during this meeting. Mr. Waibel requested a "typical ambulance use cost" breakdown over the past four years and a comparison made with the same services and annual rate increases during that four year period, for example, taking costs for specific services in 1985 and compare those with rates charged in 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989. Mr. Collins stated he did not feel the Ambulance Committee is the TAPE #700 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes December 20, 1989 Page 5 of 17 appropriate entity to do the financial statement analysis and suggested that the City Auditor do that review and provide a financial statement. President Hornin~ pointed out there is a short time line for a response and he did not know how this would fit into the Auditor's current work schedule and suggested Mr. Collins process his request through the Audit Committee. Mr. Collins questioned if the City Auditor was involved in projects that were more important? Mr. Overson, Audit Committee Chairman, stated yes, the City Auditor has other priorities. President Hornin~ suggested that Ms. Johnston could follow up with additional financial data. 6D - ADMIRAL THEATRE PURCHASE AGREEMENT, #AB89-359 The City of Bremerton has been given an opportunity to purchase the Admiral Theatre from the Bremer Trust for $75,000. The assessed value of the building is $228,000. It is proposed to utilize funds from the Hotel/Motel Tax Fund to purchase the building. This fund is dedicated, by law, to certain capital improvements and activities which promote tourism and cannot be utilized for personnel or other general fund expenditures. The intent is to renovate the facility and utilize it as a Performing Arts Center. A community group has been formed and will accept the responsibility for fund development to finance the necessary renovations of the building and work with the City in developing a management contract for the operation of facility Mike Parker, (Foundation Committee) owner Parker Lumber Company, urged the City Council to accept the Bremers' Trust offer - sale of the Admiral Theatre, and stated he represented a group of individuals who will form a non-profit foundation for renovation and operation of the theatre. The following individuals have signed up to work on this foundation: Chair Ike Parker, Ken Hills of Pacific Electric - one Vice Chairman; Joan Soriano of Soriano Insurance Co. - Co-Vice Chairman; John Mitchell, Attorney - Secretary; Jim Pratt of Puget Sound Bank; Jim Barber, Civilian Executive PSNS; Dr. Boyd, Superintendent of Schools, Bremerton School District; Jane Christianson local artist; Carl Kramer, Farrells' Pharmacy; Bill Harvey, ex-Drama Coach/Olympic College; Spencer Horning, Builder, Horton Lee, builder; Capt. Kevin McCook, Commander Supply Department; Marshall Miller, banker, Don Ricks, PR Specialist, Jim Robinson, Builder, Dr. Les Salmon, retired Medical Doctor; Rob Schneidler, KPS, Kay Schoneman, art patron; Mike Schroeder, insurance; Betti Sheldon, Executive Director Bremerton Area Chamber of Commerce; Ed Sheldon, Banker, Ray Souls, Great Northwest Savings & Loan; Dr. John Stanley, Medical Doctor; Ray White, Executive/Puget Power; Gretchen Woods, Minister. Ken Hills, (Foundation Committee) owner Pacific Electric Co., stated the Admiral Theatre was inspected on Tuesday, December 19, and he noted the following: The building is approximately 120 feet (along Pacific Avenue), 150 feet on 5th Avenue and is constructed of poured concrete having 1,250 seats of which 752 are downstairs. Included in the building are four prospective rental spaces, a small office area, a previously used beauty shop area as well as four office spaces upstairs. Mr. Hills noted that the gas furnace in the basement seems to be in good working condition. He acknowledged there is asbestos in the boiler cover and some piping. The electrical system serving the main theatre, marquee, lobby etc., will need upgrades as it will not meet code in its current condition. The projection room has 800-amp, 480 volt service for production-related uses and is acceptable for use and will meet code. The toilets and sinks on the second floor look good. The blower system, located on the second floor, is in good condition. The 200-amp power panel has been installed within the past 10 years. General building condition: Good - everything is concrete...concrete beans, floors, outside walls. Ceilings are plastered with metal lath, which is good for fire proofing and the TAPE #700 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes December 20, 1989 Page 6 of 17 basement is entirely dry. Heating, wiring and plumbing in the street-level retail spaces are all workable. Jim Robinson , (Foundation Committee) Developer and representing the Bremerton Area Chamber Of Commerce, stated the Chamber of Commerce is on record favoring the City's acquisition of the Admiral Theatre and he personally believes this is an opportunity for a cooperative venture between the City and citizenry that will benefit the community and he urged the Council to approve the proposal as presented. If he were in the Council's position an important aspect of this proposal would be "what is the City's responsibility for maintenance beyond the purchase price"? He cited a standard clause which states: "The Lessor (landlord) shall maintain outside walls, roof and foundation and repair damage arising from fire or other unavoidable casualty". In response to the first part of that statement referencing maintaining outside walls, roof and foundation...that portion of statement had the unanimous support of the Foundation Committee and beyond that it would be the intent of the Committee that maintenance expense would be the subject of negotiations of any definitive lease between the City and the Foundation. Joan Soriano, (Foundation Committee) representing Soriano Insurance, stated her support of the proposal as presented and feels it is the beginning of what could be the future of Bremerton, that it is not the answer but it is a beginning. She pointed out details of the business plan had been included in the Council packet and she would stand by for any questions. In regard to insurance coverage, the Foundation is prepared to provide insurance for the actual cash value of the Admiral Theatre building and to name the City of Bremerton and the Foundation as insured as their interest may appear for both fire and liability coverage. On the General Liability Policy it would name the City of Bremerton as an additional insured with an agreement to hold the City harmless for any and all claims arising out of operations of the Foundation. Ed Sheldon (Foundation Committee) Banker and speaking on behalf of a group of individuals who are interested in the betterment of Bremerton, briefly recounted the recent past successful partnership between the City, free enterprise system and the people of Bremerton in the building of a new YMCA facility. He believes that this is another opportunity to create another successful public/private partnership. What is being proposed, per the Business Plan, includes a time table and working plan between the City and the Foundation, which will go through with formal formation if the Council approves the requested purchase of the Admiral Theatre. What is being proposed is: (1) the City to purchase the Admiral Theatre and work out a formal agreement between the City and the private foundation which will be formed; (2) until that agreement is worked out, the City will accept the responsibility for the building; (3) the Foundation will put on a fund raising drive, similar to that of the YMCA, to cover the cost of rehabilitation - with a goal to raise one million dollars; (4) the owner of the building will acquire the lease hold improvements, therefore, the citizens will be getting a $1,250,000 value for an expenditure of $75,000. The final reason for proposing the public/private partnership is that 503C1 charitable organizations are eligible for all kinds of grants that municipalities and any other governmental forms are not eligible for. By the same count, municipalities/cities are eligible for certain kinds of grants that the charitable corporations are not eligible for and it makes a great deal of sense to become equal partners in a project for the City. Anticipated time frame for implementation of renovation would be approximately 12 months from the date of purchase, with possibly another 6-8 months for actual rehabilitation work to take place. TAPE #700 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes December 20, 1989 Page 7 of 17 TAPE #701 Gil Johnson, Deputy City Clerk, stated a request had been made by Del Knauss to have the proposed purchase agreement read into the record. Ian Sievers, City Attorney, read into the record the proposed purchase agreement between the City of Bremerton and Bremers' Trust. Gordon Byrd, 402 Chester Apt. 103, questioned if the Hotel/Motel Tax funds can be spent to establish a shelter for the homeless? President Horninu explained there are strict regulations as to what the Motel/Hotel Tax funds can be spent on and he was not sure if the project he was referencing would be appropriate for that fund, but he suggested he speak with Mr. Sievers after the meeting. Wayne Estes, 1604 Gregory Way, stated he was not opposed to the purchase of the theatre and he would donate toward the project, however, he had questions that have not been asked, such as: (1) had anyone checked the structural integrity of the roof or the condition of the roof because there is evidence of leakage in the north west corner of the structure; (2) outside of the plumbing is there any other asbestos in the building that is used for insulation, etc.; (3) questionable condition of copper plumbing (normally copper plumbing has a life span of 40 years and the building is 47 years old; (4) insurance - since the building is masonry there should be consideration given for Earthquake coverage. Mr. Hill explained the walls and floors of the building are steel and concrete and it has a concrete roof. The second story where the balcony is located is steel and concrete and he believes all the existing walls, except for the newer remodeled area which divided the area into several screen rooms, are sealed with steel studs and plaster. As far as the copper piping he was not aware that there was a 40 year life span designation. President Hornina questioned if the copper plumbing date back to the origin of the building? Mr. Hill stated it looks like original installation because even the main water line connecting to the City water system is a copper line. President Hornina questioned if this would fall under the responsibility of the Foundation rather than the City? Mr. Hill stated if he were personally buying the building, he would not be concerned with the copper plumbing. And, in regard to asbestos the lower boiler is covered with asbestos and he would assume it would continue to the outer parts of the heating system...the pipes themselves are uncovered and made of copper. Lastly, he did not believe that anyone in this area obtains Earthquake Insurance. President Hornin~ questioned considering the fact that this area has had several earthquakes in past years does there appear to be any structural damage that could be attributed to that cause? Mr. Hill stated he feels the Admiral Theatre building is probably the safest building in Bremerton as far as structural stability/earthquake durability. In reference to the roof, he believes the roof is made of poured concrete (4- inch reinforced concrete steel) and it should be sound. An estimate was given on replacing the roof, if needed, which amounted to approximately $34,000. James E. Skitying, 1555 Marguerite, real estate developer, expressed concern that other cities, Seattle and Tacoma, have undertaken similar projects which have ended up costing them much more than estimated as well as having to be subsidized. He suggested that this item be tabled until after the new Mayor takes office and has the opportunity to investigate to see why other cities' projects such as these have not worked out. Paul Scbanitt, Manette, stated he remembered two conditions that were established, at a previous City Council meeting, which required that a group be established to raise the necessary funds for renovation (which is being carried out) and that the building would be inspected. He felt strongly that the City officials TAPE #701 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes December 20, 1989 Page 8 of 17 should do such an inspection...Chet Meigs/Fire Department, Dick Mumma and Scott Erickson/Building Department. Jeff Smith, member of the Board of the Bremerton Symphony, stated the Bremerton Symphony supports this concept and feels it would definitely be an enhancement to the arts in the City of Bremerton. Jim Arsenault, 924 Shorewood Drive, Artistic Director of Opera Northwest, stated both the 5Th Avenue Theatre and Tacoma Pantages Theatre are architecturally more detailed than the Admiral Theatre. Because it is an art deco design it would not require as extensive refurbishing as the other two theatres mentioned. He encouraged the Council to purchase the theatre and reported the Northwest Opera group is ready to perform there. Louwan Morrison, Peninsula Dance Theatre, urged the Council to purchase the Admiral Theatre as it would fill a great need for dance and other arts programs. About i 1/2 year ago she helped open a theatre in Big Fork, a small town in Montana, and within that period of time the entire cost of that theatre has been met. This shows what a community can do if it is of benefit to the citizens and community. Robert Montgomery, Treasurer Bremerton Community Theatre, stated he had been involved in the design of three theatres and construction of one theatre. He felt any problem the City might have would not be with the structure itself but how it is operated after it is renovated and he supported City action to acquire the building. Mr. Crutcher pointed out the people who would become involved in the Foundation are people who are successful and be believes the Hotel/Motel Tax funds need to be reinvested back into the community. President Horninu stated he had contacted Mr. Sievers to see if there were any reasons why he should not be allowed to serve on the Foundation's board. Mr. Sievers stated there was no reason why Mr. Horning could not serve on the Foundation board since it is a non-salaried position and is not a direct conflict of interest. President Horninu asked the "Appearance Of Fairness/Conflict Of Interest" question relating to his serving on the Foundation board -no response was received from the public. Mr. Johnson read into the record a letter and proposal from the Bremer's Trust to the City of Bremerton for the purchase of the Admiral Theatre. He pointed out that Flagship had provided a lot of research data on what other cities had done in similar instances. Mr. Colvin stated he did have several concerns prior to the presentation, however, many of his questions had been answered. He did object to Bremers' Trust mandating the terms of their proposal. Also, Mr. Colvin previously questioned whether or not the newly elected Mayor, Louis Mentor, had been consulted on this issue due to the fact that he will be responsible for administrating the requirements for this facility and he learned that Mr. Menton had been contacted. Lastly, he also supports having City staff make an inspection of the building and provide a report of findings. Mr. Dawkins stated he was in favor from the very beginning to purchase the theatre. He noted the Council is committed to the downtown and City as a whole and feels this is the right time to use the Hotel/Motel Tax fund. Mr. Collins stated he had several questions which needed answering: (1) is it the intent of the Foundation that all costs for TAPE #701 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes December 20, 1989 Page 9 of 17 refurbishment will be borne by the Foundation or is it going to be borne by the City? Mr. Parker stated the Foundation would be responsible for all refurbishing. Mr. Collins questioned if the City's only obligation would be the actual purchase price and all other expenses would be the responsibility of the Foundation? Mr. Parker stated he did not believe that was the intent of the Foundation's proposal. Mr. Robinson pointed out that the Foundation Committee agreed to - that the City as lessor would be responsible for the exterior walls, roof and foundation and beyond that any maintenance expense would be resolved by negotiation between the City and its tenant. Mr. Collins requested clarification on what was meant by "negotiation" and what is the normal trend in business? Mr. Robinson stated that probably varies with every building and every two parties that come in contact. Sometimes one individual may want to guarantee that insurance coverage is obtained and they would then take that upon themselves to provide it...sometimes everything possible is turned over to the tenant if it is determined they would fulfill that responsibility. Mr. Collins questioned if the Foundation feels the City is in the position to purchase the building with the Foundation taking the responsibility for all other costs? In all of the other examples of cities becoming involved in municipal/private theatre projects, there seems to be a considerable amount of money that is provided from the cities' general fund for the maintenance of those structures. He questioned if it was anticipated that the Foundation would1 be seeking similar funds from the City in the same amounts or percentage wise? Mr. Parker stated one of the things included in the Business Plan that the Foundation would like to share with the City is the Admission Tax, on some kind of basis. Mr. Collins pointed out that included in the Business Plan is "City General Fund Subsidy" and that was the part he was concerned about. Mr. Parker stated the Foundation thinks that is part of the negotiations on a contract under which they would enter into with the City and they hoped the City could consider allowing the Foundation to have all or part of the Admission Tax on the theatre. President Horninu expressed concern and asked for clarification...is it the Foundation's intent to completely rebuild this building, primarily on the inside, to bear all of the costs including the $34,000 cost if the roof needed replacing? Mr. Parker stated that is correct, however, they would like the City to consider helping with costs for a new roof if needed. Mr. Johnson pointed out that responsibility of the retail spaces surrounding the theatre may be desirable for the City to maintain control of. Or, it may be in the best interest of the City to let the Foundation have the responsibility for the retail spaces. Mr. Parker stated he believed the Foundation would guarantee a good faith contract negotiations. He feels some things have not come up at all, such as a sprinkler system, in upgrading the building. Mr. Collins stated he is taking it at face value that the Foundation would accept this building as is and that they will go forward with it. He is concerned about demands on funds which could put the City into a situation where employees providing services to citizens would have to be layed off; and he did not want to be part of having caused such a situation. Mr. Waibel stated he did not have a "good handle" on what the City's financial liabilities are after purchase of the building. The Purchase Agreement does say that the City has 30 days from this date to agree to it and he thinks some of the negotiations just discussed should take place during this time. Mrs. ~,rton stated 1 1/2 year ago this Council met in a Study Session and tried to prioritize some things the Council wished to accomplish in the City of Bremerton. There were five top priorities listed, one of those five was a cultural center. She #1186 TAPE #701 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes December 20, 1989 Page 10 of 17 believes this proposal fits that priority. The City has been saying time and time again that the City needs the community to come into partnership to accomplish some of the goals. This is just such an opportunity. Mr. Crutcher noted that when the Council has an issue before them with which the public disagrees the Council Chamber is usually filled to capacity. In this instance that is not so and he believes the citizens are backing the Council to go ahead and purchase the Admiral Theatre. Mr. Overson stated there definitely are some concerns, however, he believes they are manageable, the opportunity is good and time is right; and the budget process within the City will handle this like any other problems that have come up. Mr. Colvin stated his support that the Foundation take over the whole building which would include management of the retail spaces. Mr. Johnson requested that a member of the Bremerton Cable Access Television group be included in the Foundation/support group to provide some assistance relating to lighting, sound, etc. Mr. Collins questioned if Bremers' Trust agreed to the "30 days from date of signature" because the letter and proposal sent to the City Council stated they were only open to the $75,000 sale proposal until December 30, 19897 Mr. Sievers stated the City has not had a formal response back from the Bremers' Trust, however, Connie Devaney did have contact with representatives of the Trust and they indicated they did not have any problems with the agreement as written. Mr. Collins questioned, for clarification, if it is decided the City wishes to step out of the agreement can they do so within those "30 days"? Mr. Sievers stated yes, that is true - if an agreement has not been signed then there is no purchase agreement and none of the terms go into effect - that does not happen until the City receives the Trust's signed copy back and then the Mayor would have 30 days to sign for the City. However, during the normal course of events those two signatures would probably come very quickly. He did not believe that Council is telling the Mayor to wait a full 30 days and to do something in the interim and if that is the Council's intent then the Mayor should be so advised. If the Council desires to require the Mayor to sign the agreement based on some contingent or fulfilling some condition before signing, then the Resolution should be changed to reflect that position. M/S/C(Overson/Horton) to approve Resolution #2281, regarding the purchase of the Admiral Theatre Building, and authorizing the Mayor to sign the purchase agreement. Vote: In Favor: Abstain: Overson, Crutcher, Horton, Horning, Collins, Dawkins, Colvin, Johnson Waibel Ed Sheldon stated he believes this to be the second step for a public/private partnership that will take care of a lot of the steps necessary to bring the City back to life. 6E - EXTENSION OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH PATMON COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE FOR CONTROLLER TESTING, #AB89-360 The Electronics Department wishes to extend the Professional Services Contract with Dave Patmon (Patmon Communications Service) for the testing of traffic signal controllers for the downtown project. Due to unanticipated work on the Permit Center Project for and 'must' leave, we do not have the staff available to complete this testing on time. Mr. Patmon will be paid $25.00/hour. The contract change will not exceed the additional #2199 #2463 TAPE #701 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes December 20, 1989 Page 11 of 17 $5,000 and shall terminate 1/15/90. the Department budget. There are funds available in Ken Brees, Street Superintendent, briefly outlined the circumstances, as stated above, which brings the need for this request. He noted the Arterial Street Fund is providing funds for the Electronics Department to test the controllers. M/S/C/U(Horton/Crutcher) to approve extension of Professional Services contract with Patmon Communications Service with an expiration date of 1/15/90. 6F - KITSAP COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM REOUESTS CITY OF BREMERTON ENDORSEMENT FOR STATE COMITY DEVELOPMENT GRANT FUNDS, #AB89-362 Kitsap Community Action Program (KCAP) is applying for its base allocation of Community Services Block Grant Funds from their primary source, the State Department Of Community Development (DCD). The funding period is January 1, 1990 through December 31, 1990. This grant is for $175t606 and will provide funds for KCAP's Emergency Shelters, Food and Nutrition Program, Crisis Assistance programs and base operation. The Department of Community Development requires that we obtain endorsement from local governments for these funds. Larry Ever, Executive Director of KCAP, stated 1990 is KCAP's fourth year of a four-year plan and they are essentially proposing to go in the same direction as the past three years. The specific goals and objectives were included in the information submitted for the Council Packet. Emphasis will continue in the areas of providing job training service, which provides training for about 200 low income people in the area. One of the key four-year plan items developed in 1986 was the development of a community health clinic, which serves the uninsured and at this time is up and running and is independent with its own Board giving direction. One of the primary areas they are concerned about and still working on is the issue of homeless in our area - a real and growing problem in Kitsap County. Currently they house over 80 people per night in emergency shelters, two thirds of which are families with children. In the past two years they had add four family units but they are still turning away 50-60 people per month. Another major area that KCAP has been involved with significant changes in the past three years has been in the early childhood area - 3 years ago they had 72 children in the Headstart Program (4 classes in Kitsap County area) now they have been able to attract additional funds and will be serving 333 children in 18 class rooms at nine sites throughout the County and 10 of those classes are located in the City of Bremerton. Another area they are heavily involved in is providing energy assistance to 2,500 households and are expanding another program to assist 1,500 people with the Women/Infant/Children Program. During the course of the next four months KCAP will be completing a quadrennial community needs assessment on poverty issues in the area and that includes surveys that are being done of residents to determine what they see as the greatest poverty needs and a fiscal needs assessment. KCAP will then use this information as basis for the next four year plan. And, he thanked the City for the appointment of Barbara Boyd and Ken Hughes to the KCAP Board of Directors this past year. Mr. Crutcher noted this group is one of the most useful in the community. M/S/C/U(Waibel/Colvin/Dawkins/Crutcher) the City endorse the Kitsap Community Action Program requests for $175,606 from the State Department Of Community Development (DCD). 8A - PUBLIC HEARING - TO ACCEPT COMMENTS PERTAINING TO THE PROPOSED TAPE #701 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes December 20, 1989 Page 12 of 17 RICKEY ROAD ANNEXATION, A 41 ACRE AREA SOUTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF RICKEY ROAD AND PINE ROAD, #AB89-361 Rehearing on a seventy-five percent petition to annex the Rickey Road annexation area and to adopt this annexation by amendment to Ordinance #4243, which has not yet taken effect, due to a court Stay of the favorable Boundary Review Board Decision on the annexation. The primary effect of the amendment is to remove the requirement that existing City indebtedness must be assumed by properties in the annexation area. Staff feels it would be more equitable to remove this condition where petitions are predominantly supported by Outside Utility Agreements. State law allows cities the option of imposing this as a condition of annexation. It is not a significant financial impact, representing approximately $900.00 less total annual revenue for the annexation area now, with this differential diminishing in future years. Ian Sievers, City Attorney, stated this is a rehearing on the petition and a first reading on the ordinance implementing annexation, if Council accepts the annexation once again. Following the City's first acceptance the Boundary Review Board did approve the annexation unanimously. Both their decision and the City's decision were appealed and were in Court under "stays" under both of those actions. One of the issues that was raised was there was some objection that these agreements be used on an annexation where assumption of indebtedness was imposed since there was certainly no way the signers of these agreements several years prior to commencement of annexation could have known the exact figure of the City's indebtedness. State law gives that option to cities to impose it or not impose it. He was not surprised that the City's acceptance of the petition, using those agreements, was challenged in Court. There is one case that favorably supports the City's use of the agreements for signatures out of Spokane in 1988, but there are still some uncertainty in this area of the law in using those petitions. However, it is felt that by dropping the condition of assumption of indebtedness would have a much clearer challenge to the hard issues in using those petitions in the future. And, it is more equitable to the signers of those petition who represent all of the signatures on the petition and many are several years old. Therefore, the Council is being requested to accept the annexation without assumption of City debt as a condition. Two stipulations he desired to place on the record: (1) he has talked to Counsel for the petitioners in our law suit and they are going to stipulate the hearing on this matter will be produced as part of the record which is subject to the writ of review which has been issued by the Superior Court; (2) that any objections and comments that are brought forward in the first hearing on the petition will be considered as part of the Council action on this date, which will prevent waiver if some of those are not presented and he invited any Council members who were not at the first hearing of the petition to review the minutes of that meeting before second reading on the Ordinance if it does receive first approval at this time. Ron Hou~h, Annexation Coordinator, stated there have been at least seven or eight opportunities for public input into this annexation question for the past year and this is one more opportunity. Mary Killjan, Attorney with Hiscock & Barclay, stated as the City is taking this opportunity to attempt to make a better record for the litigation which is now before the Superior Court so will they. Most of the arguments regarding the Outside Utility Agreements were made as part of the record on June 21, 1989, but she wishes to supplement those at this time. Ms. Killian represents Mrs. Mary Wagner, who was accompanied by Mrs. Anderson, Vernon Church and Chris Bower. All of these individuals are opposed to the TAPE #701 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes December 20, 1989 Page 13 of 17 annexation and most of the other people in the annexation area also oppose annexation but did not come to this meeting because they already attended the meeting on June 21. Many decision made by the City Council are made in a representational capacity - they are elected to make decisions for their constituents and citizens. Annexation, however, is not one of those representational decisions. The statutes regarding annexation leaves the choice whether or not to be annexed to the people in the proposed annexation district. Whether they hold an election or submit a 75~ petition - the choice resides in the people who live in the proposed annexation area. The gist of the argument with the current proposed annexation is that the people who live in that area have been stripped of their choice. Virtually no one in that area is in favor of this annexation. There are 43 parcels in the proposed annexation area and approximately 16 of those parcels are affected by Outside utility Agreements, most of which were signed before 1980. Some of those parcels are currently owned by people who actually signed an Outside Utility Agreement. They signed that agreement in order to get sewage utilities. In order to get utilities they had to voluntarily waive their choice under Washington State Law to whether or not 10-15-years hence they wished to be part of the City. When they made that choice the current Council was not in office; when they made that choice the City of Bremerton was different; when they made that choice they did know what conditions would be imposed on them or what the tax structure the City would look like 10 or 15 years ago. At best their choice at that time (10-15 years ago) was uninformed. At worst, it was coerced and an involuntary waiver of their rights under the State law to make a decision as to whether or not they want to be part of the City of Bremerton. But, the basis for this annexation is even worse than uninformed choice. As stated before, 16 of the 43 parcels are affected by Outside utility Agreements and some of the owners of those parcels signed those agreements; but most of the owners of those 16 parcels did not sign those agreements they, therefore, did not have any choice. And, many of those Outside Utility Agreements affecting those parcels were not recorded in the Auditor's Office of Kitsap County. So, many of the persons affected by those 16 parcels are owners of parcels affected by Outside Utility Agreements containing waiver of choices concerning annexation about which they had no knowledge - absolute lack of choice. Once the record is completely certified to the Court they will be able to tell exactly the extent of the persons who had absolutely no choice. However, they do know that Randy Seers, one of those 16 parcels, lives on a piece of property affected by an Outside utility Agreement in the proposed annexation area and the Outside Utility Agreement was not recorded. He had no notice when he bought the property that his predecessor had waived his right. And, on that premise they are taking a stand that the Outside Utility Agreement cannot be used in determining whether or not there is a 75~ petition. Other owners of property who live on property affected by an Outside Utility Agreement, which is unrecorded of those 16 include the Ballisteros, Abarios, Escoritizos, Foxes, Austroms, Robinsons. Therefore, if it is in the Council's range of contemplation, at this time, they requested Council's not approving this ordinance at least until it is determined whether or not they desire to go forward with an annexation where people waived a choice 10-15 years ago, had uninformed choice and where people had no choice. Ms. Killian submitted a petition of property owners (about 30) many of whom are affected by the Outside Utility Agreements who do appose the annexation. Dave Dickson, 325 Schlagel, stated he had been listening to the Council saying they want to do things right for Bremerton and in ?APE #702 TAPE #701 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes December 20, 1989 Page 14 of 17 this instance he does not feel the way the annexation of Rickey Road is being carried is right. He pointed out the agreements which are being used are old and unrecorded. If the City wants to annex that area then a petition should be circulated to the people who live within the proposed annexation area. Mary Waaner, 3125 Rickey Rd., stated from the first she has opposed the annexation because the City combined the assessed valuation with the assessed valuation of a high density area in order to obtain the 754 petition. Mrs. Wagner read a letter into the record which she had sent to The Sun to be published in the Letters To The Editor section stating her position. During previous hearings the residents on the west side of Rickey Road were told that they would not have to have to use the regular size garbage can - they were worried about mandatory garbage collection. Many residents on the west side are single family residents and the City staff had indicated they could have special privileges. Mrs. Wagner noted that would not have set well with the other single family residents in the City. At the March 16 Sheridan Neighborhood meeting a representative from Brem-Air Disposal Inc., informed the residents they would not be allowed any special privileges for garbage collection. Another concern of Mrs. Wagner was the down zoning of the property. This could mean a loss of as much as $20,000 per acre. As a point of clarification Mrs. Wagner wanted everyone to know that she does not own a cow...Mrs. Search owns a cow. Chris Bower, 3209 Rickey Rd., stated the Council should not proceed any further with the proposed annexation until the property owners have a chance to express their desire. She did not understand why the City would not give the property owners the opportunity to vote on this issue. Chris Search, Rickey Rd., stated she really does not want to be annexed into the City. She expressed concern over the higher costs of ambulance service within the City than what they are currently required to fund through their Fire District. Elmay Anderson, Rickey Rd., stated she likes the rural area and hope they can keep it that way. Mary Waaner, 3125 Rickey Rd., read into the record the criteria for annexation (dated 1982). Based on the criteria outlined, she emphasized that included in the criteria is the statement that those who sign an Outside Utility Agreement must also sign the petition to annex in order for their names and valuation to count. John Fox, 328 Pine Road, stated he, as a property owner, and his neighbors do not feel they have been given the right to vote on whether it is mutually beneficial for them to come into the City for the annexation to take place. Mr. Johnson questioned if the City were to waive the indebtedness procedure at what point would those residents assume some indebtedness? Mr. Sievers stated at the point of annexation they would be taxed as other residents based on property tax. They would only be exempt from prior levies or assessments made before the date of annexation. Rich Hanna, City Treasurer, stated the issue is currently outstanding general obligation debts supported by excess property taxes...the City has three such issues: (1)(2) two that support the Fire Station construction; (3) library construction. These property owners, under these set of circumstances, would not pay the excess property tax levies that support those currently outstanding debt issues. Mr. Johnson questioned would they pay the County Fire District until they begin paying the City? Mr. Hanna stated no, they would simply not pay those particular property tax levies which this year amount to approximately $ .15 per $1,0000 of assessment valuation. Mr. TAPE #701 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes December 20, 1989 Page 15 of 17 Johnson noted this does not make sense...either one is in the City or in the County. Mr. Hanna stated the issue is one of the decisions which is within the Council's purview to make. The residents would receive City fire service. Staff is recommending that the City not require those individuals in the annexation area to assume those three outstanding debts. Mr. Johnson pointed out that every other citizens in Bremerton has to pay for those debts. Mr. Sievers explained it is difficult to figure out what the public policy reason is behind not making it a mandatory requirement on an annexation, but cities can opt not to impose that on newly annexed areas. Mr. Overson questioned what tax do the people pay in the County which provides them free ambulance service. Mr. Hanna stated ambulance service in the County is provided by the Fire District and the property owners pay a property tax levy to the Fire District. Mr. Collins questioned what was the property owners level of property tax? Mr. Hanna stated he believed it was $1.50 per $1,000 this year. Mr. Colvin questioned if this matter was still before the Courts or had it been settled? Mr. Sievers stated the Courts had not made a decision - this is at the very preliminary stages and right now the appellants are responsible for producing the record of the proceedings both at all Council meetings and also at the Boundary Review Board hearing. Once that transcript and record is submitted to the Court the Court will then evaluate, based on a standard, whether the decisions were arbitrary or capricious or whether they should be sustained or set aside. When someone appeals a decision of the Boundary Review Board there is an automatic "stay" imposed by statute on the effective date of that decision - so it is as if it had not been filed and won't go into effect until the determination of that legal proceedings is made. Mr. Colvin questioned if there was any restriction in the "stay" that precluded the City Council from taking further action during that period? Mr. Sievers stated no, it simply "stays" the effective date of the annexation. There was a hearing on the "stay" on the separate lawsuit having to do with the City Council's action and the City did appear before the Court on that and explicitly asked the Court to make that "stay" parallel to the statutory "stay", so that some curative actions could take place if the City sees flaws in their procedures and present those with final decision with the earlier hearings. Mr. Collins questioned if 754 of the total valuation of this area had some sometime in the past voted with their hip pocket for an Outside Utility Agreement. Mr. Sievers stated yes, those individuals wanted the benefits of that agreement and they have received those benefits for many years since signing those agreements. He believed it was an informed and voluntary choice, they were not forced to sign those agreements and take the City's utilities. Mr. Collins stressed that those individuals who signed the Outside Utility Agreements did have a free choice - some time in the past - whether or not it is the same people who may currently live on that property and is an incumbrance upon that property. Mr. Sievers stated yes and as to the people who were not signatory to the agreement but people who were in the chain of title bought subsequently from the signers of the agreements there is a dispute with the petitioners in that the City feels all those agreements were recorded and are in the chain of title and therefore gave constructed notice to subsequent purchasers. Mr. Waibel questioned if the City has upheld its half of the agreement by providing the utility services and is the City now asking that the property owners uphold their end of said agreements and not oppose the annexation with the inclusion of their not #0683 #0908 TAPE #702 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes December 20, 1989 Page 16 of 17 having to assume the City's indebtedness? Mr. Sievers stated he is absolutely sure that is the case regarding utility services, and yes, they are being asked to agree to the annexation and the only change is that relating to assuming prior indebtedness. The zoning, which the Council adopted earlier, is not subject to any amendments. M/S/F(Waibel/Collins) to approve the Rickey Road Annexation and approve the Annexation Ordinance, on first reading. Mr. Overson questioned if this motion fails then prior Council action stands whereby the residents in the Rickey Road annexation area would assume the City's indebtedness. Mr. Sievers stated yes. Mr. Crutcher stated he did not support the prior annexation action and he still was very uncomfortable with this proposal and would continue to vote no. Mr. Dawkins questioned if he was correct in that the multi-family residence - The Willows- was in the County at the time that area was rezoned? Mr. Sievers stated yes, the County provided the zoning that allowed that development. Mr. Dawkins asked those in the audience if they attended any meetings on The Willows property when it was rezoned by the County? Note - no response. President Hornina stated if this motion is approved he believed it would set a dangerous precedent. Vote: In Favor: Opposed: Waibel, Collins, Dawkins, Colvin Overson, Crutcher, Horton, Horning, Johnson Motion failed. 7A - ORDINANCE #4256 (SECOND READING) SETTING THE MAYOR'S SALARY, #AB89-349 Public comment invited - none received. Mr. Johnson stated for the record that this is the last time he will vote on an increase for the Mayor's salary for four years. President Hornina commented that a procedure is needed to handle this issue in future years. Mr. Colvin questioned what prompted this item coming before the Council at this time? Rich Hanna, City Treasurer, stated he prepared the Agenda Bill at the request of the Mayor. He noted the funds to implement the ordinance are included in the Mayor's budget and approved by Council. And, Mr. Hanna stated the thinking of the Mayor was an attempt to keep the compensation of the position consistent to compensate for the effects of inflation. Mr. Colvin questioned if it was necessary to do only at this time or could it be done in the coming year? Mr. Hanna stated it is within the authority of Council to change it at any time. Mrs. Horton emphasized the need for a policy and because the position received an increase in mid-1989, she could not support another increase at this time. Mr. Collins noted in comparison to some of the Department Heads' salaries the proposed Mayor's salary is very conservative. M/S/C(Waibel/Colvin) to pass Ordinance #4256, on second reading, setting the Mayor's rate of compensation and repealing Ordinance #4198. Vote: In Favor: Crutcher, Waibel, Collins, Colvin, Dawkins, Johnson TAPE #702 City Council Reg. Mtg. Minutes December 20, 1989 Page 17 of 17 Opposed: Horton, Overson, Horning ~1298 7B - ORDINANCE #4257 (SECOND READING) ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO MANAGERS SALARY AND BENEFIT PLANS, #AB89-352 Ian Sievers, City Attorney, stated a "sunset clause" was added to the ordinance and provided Council members with a draft for their approval. Also, as a part of the original motion, dollar figures were included rather than percentages for the Dental and Medical insurance benefits. Public comment invited - none received. Mr. Dawkins requested that future presentations include both the current salary and proposed increase salary for each nonunion management position. M/S/C(Crutcher/Horton) to pass Ordinance #4257, on second reading, amending the salary and benefit plan for non-union managers, and amending Chapters 2.49 and 2.50 of the Bremerton Municipal Code, including the alternate sunset clause as presented by the City Attorney which stated: Section 4. Sections repealed effective December 31, 1990. Bremerton Municipal Code Chapter 2.49, NONUNION MANAGEMENT PERSONNEL, and 2.50 BENEFIT PLAN FOR NONUNION MANAGEMENT PERSONNEL, as amended by this ordinance, are hereby repealed effective December 31,1990. Vote: In Favor: Abstain: Johnson, Colvin, Dawkins, Collins, Horning, Horton, Crutcher, Overson Waibel ~1340 7C - ORDINANCE #4258 (SECOND READING) MUNICIPAL TREE AND SHRUB, #AB89-352 Public comment invited - none received. M/S/C/U(Horton/Crutcher) to pass Ordinance #4258, on second reading, regulating the planting, removal, maintenance and protection of municipal trees and shrubs, and trees and shrubs directly affecting public access areas in the City of Bremerton, Kitsap County, Washington. With no further business meeting adjourned at 9:17 p.m. KATHLEEN L. MCCLUSKEY, CITY CLERK APPROVED SPENCER HORNING, Council President City of Bremerton KLM/SH/me cc: Normal Distribution File/Vault