Loading...
02/19/2013 - Work Study - MinutesCity of Port Orchard Council Meeting Minutes Work Study Session of February 19, 2013 7:00p.m. Call to Order Mayor Matthes called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Mayor Pro-Tern Fred Chang and Councilmembers Carolyn Powers, John Clauson, Rob Putaansuu, Cindy Lucarelli, and Jim Colebank were present. Public Works Director Mark Dorsey, Acting Planning Director Tom Bonsell, Associate Planner Jennifer Haro, City Clerk Brandy Rinearson, City Attorney Greg Jacoby and Deputy City Clerk Rhiannon Fernandez were also present. Absent: Councilmember Jerry Childs 1. Discussion: HB 1013 Briahna Taylor, City Lobbyist, gave the history of the House Bill 1013 and what the purpose was. Kitsap County Commissioner Robert Gelder explained the intent of the Bill. He spearheaded this piece of legislation, because it became apparent to him over the past two years that there is a physical divide in time and distance for the public to attend their Council meetings. North Kitsap had great participation in special hearings. The Bill would offer counties the flexibility to hold business meetings in different areas of the County. Representative Schlicher introduced the Senate Companion Bill, which proposes a cap of perhaps a 25 percent of the meetings being held in locations other than the county seat. A newspaper group was worried about receiving adequate public noticing. Kitsap County sets their meeting schedule a year in advance, so all of the meeting locations would be prescheduled. Ms. Taylor said she had spoken with Representative Appleton, the sponsor of the bill, to see if she was open to an amendment to limit the number of meetings, and she was adamantly opposed to it. Commissioner Gelder would like the ability to have 6-8 meetings a year in North Kitsap. They currently have approximately 22 board meetings a year. Logistically it will be difficult to move the meetings, so he doesn't anticipate doing it often. Councilmember Putaansuu likes the idea of encouraging public participation, but doesn't want a loop hole created in the future. Commissioner Gelder feels that the proposed legislation as written does not provide for loop holes. In response to Councilmember Powers, Ms. Taylor said that from the Port Orchard Legislative Delegation Representative Seaquist has signed onto the bill, Representative Angel has not, and Representative Schlicher introduced the Senate Companion Bill. February 19, 2013, Work Study Session Minutes Page 2 of7 In response to Councilmember Powers, Commissioner Gelder said he did not recall any questions from the House Committee regarding frequency. He also has not heard of any other cities having issues with the Bill. Ms. Taylor added that AWC asked other jurisdictions, and no concerns were expressed. Councilmember Colebank said he opposes the word "occasionally" and he is not happy with Representative Appleton not considering an amendment. Councilmember Chang agrees with Councilmember Colebank, but feels the Council is talking about semantics. He feels the word "occasionally" needs to be defined. In response to Councilmember Lucarelli, Commissioner Gelder said the RCW does not allow flexibility to test having meetings in other locations, because any action they take would not be binding. However, they have had special meetings in North Kitsap, for example the Shoreline Master Plan, and the North Kitsap hearings had the highest participation. Councilmember Clauson recalled Kitsap County trying to move the county seat a few years ago. That is why this piece of legislation has left him gun shy. If the Bill defined the word "occasional", then he would support it. Council Direction: The Council opposes the underlying bill, but if there was an amendment that defined the term "occasional," the Council may support the Bill. 2. Discussion: Code City /City Manager Pat Mason, MSRC, gave a presentation which highlighted the following: • Mayor-Council Plan Structure. • Council-Manager Plan Structure. • Mayor-Council with City Administrator Structure (hybrid}. • Council decision to add employee to have professional administration without having to change form of government. • Washington State Statistics: 227 Mayor-Council; 53 Council-Manager; 1 Commission. • Code City goes back to 1970 (optional municipal code, any size city can be a code city). • Trends based on population. • Reviewed cities changing from Mayor-Council to Council-Manager in the past 40 years and cities that have changed from Council-Manager to Mayor-Council. These were voted changes. Some attempts have been rejected by the voters. • Both forms of government work in this state. • Reclassifying to code city does not have to be voted on. • Compared and contrasted the forms of government. February 19, 2013, Work Study Session Minutes Page3of7 • It takes a certain population and revenue for a city to support a City Manager position. City Attorney Jacoby shared the different options a city has to move from mayor-council to council-manager: 1. Second class cities can change to council-manager through a resolution subject to referendum. This can happen without changing to a code city. If it passes, all council members stand for re-election. 2. Change to code city and change council manager in one step. Can be done directly by city council subject to referendum of the people. 3. Present as a ballot measure for the people to vote on both reclassifying the city and changing the form of government. If it passes, all councilmembers stand for _ re-election. 4· First start by changing to a code city by passing a resolution by ballot. If approved, the statute says that the City would have to wait one year, and then could pass a second resolution to reorganize and put it on a ballot measure. If approve, the Mayor becomes a councilmember for the remainder of his term, and no elections are required until the next election cycle. This would minimize the cost of elections. Councilmember Putaansuu shared his conversation with Bainbridge Island Councilmember Anne Blair regarding Bainbridge's experience with the change. The positive was getting professional management. The negative was not having the City Manager who had experience in such a position. The Council still tried to micromanage staff, when they should only be providing policy decisions. Councilmember Putaansuu also talked with Kitsap County Auditor Walt Washington about election costs. He estimated the November election would cost $1,000 to add another measure. For the election of councilmembers, it would cost $15,000 if the election was shared with another measure from another jurisdiction. If it is the only measure on the ballot, it would cost $30,000. Mayor Matthes recalled the previous Work Study where it was stated the City has gotten large enough that it needs a city manager. He shared his research of statistics on MRSC's website, and felt Washington statistics are better than using the National statistics; provided in the Work Study packet. He noted the two largest cities in the State of Washington, Seattle and Spokane, are still mayor-council. He then took the same statistics presented by Mr. Mason, but took the population category from to,ooo- 25,000 and narrowed the ranged to 10,000-15,000, which is more comparable to Port Orchard. Of those similarly-populated Washington cities, twelve were. mayor-council and three were council-manager. Councilmember Lucarelli said the real question is whether or not a city can fund the position of city manager based on their revenues. February 19, 2013, Work Study Session Minutes Page40f7 Mr. Mason also commented that a council member would be appointed as mayor in the council-manager form of government, but they would be more ceremonial. However, they would also have to attend the Board meetings, such as Kitsap Health District, CenCom, Kitsap County Department of Emergency Management, KRCC, KEDA, Housing Kitsap, and Kitsap Transit. Councilmember Putaansuu said the salary of a City Manager ranges from $n8,ooo (Port Townsend) to $150,000 (Bainbridge Island). He estimated the City would have to pay around $120,000 for a City Manager salary. Council Direction: Discuss further at the March Work Study. City Attorney Jacoby will summarize the different . options with timelines and costs associated with ballot measures. City Clerk Rinearson will send Mr. Mason's contact information to the Council. 3· Discussion: Social Media Policy City Clerk Rinearson presented the draft Social Media policy, noting that some departments have expressed an interest in creating a City Facebook or Twitter account to inform the public of City business. It would be in the City's best interest to first adopt a policy defining individual and departmental responsibilities before the use of City Social Media sites. The general concern of the Council was how much added work this would create for staff. They feel staff is already overburdened. Councilmember Powers would like to know the benefit of social media versus the cost to implement it. Councilmember Lucarelli would like staff to get caught up on current work before adding more responsibilities. Mayor Matthes said he understands the benefit of social media and it will give the City another way to communicate with a portion of population that we are not currently reaching. People who are 40-years-old and younger use social media to get their information. He said this was brought forward at this point because the Police Chief started a twitter account to communicate with the public on safety issues, but the Mayor had to ask him to deactivate it because Council wanted a policy in place before social media was used. Using social media would not be forced on departments. There would be one Facebook and one Twitter account, and if there was something they needed to promote, they could access that tool to promote it. Councilmember Lucarelli and Putaansuu were in favor of shelving the policy. Councilmember Colebank was not opposed to creating the policy, so that it is available to those departments who have the time to use it. February 19, 2013, Work Study Session Minutes Page 5 of7 Councilmember Clauson is not opposed to looking at the policy, but is concerned about staff time. Councilmember Chang thinks it is worth working on the policy and would like to revisit it in a couple of months at another work study. He said social media is very useful. Council Direction: Staff will bring this up for further discussion in three months. Councilmembers will bring proposed changes to the policy. Councilmember Chang would like to see examples of other jurisdictions' policies. 4· Update: Master Shoreline Plan Associate Planner Haro updated the Council on the status of the Shoreline Master Plan. Discussion highlights include: • In January, the City received a conditional approval letter from the Director of the Department of Ecology (DOE). • There are 14 required changes that need to be adopted for approval to be finalized by DOE. • The City was given 30 days to respond to the letter and either accepting the . required changes, reject the changes, or propose alternatives. • The City sent a letter on February 1, 2013 requesting more time pending the City Council's action. • Ultimately, if the Department of Ecology does not approve the City's plan, they can write it for us, but they will most likely push it back on the City to complete until it is accepted by them. • The DOE recommendations have been emailed to a citizen interest list of approximately 40 people, some of which are commercial property owners and waterfront homeowners. She received no comments from them on the recommendations. • If an existing property were to tear down, they could rebuild in their existing footprint. Council Direction: Staff will draft an ordinance for Council's consideration at the March Council meeting. Staff will write a letter to DOE to update them on what is being done. 5· Discussion: Westbay Development Agreement City Attorney Jacoby noted on February 26, 2013, Council needs to take action so that Public Works Director Dorsey can move forward with putting a contract together for the Bay Street Pedestrian Pathway Segment s. The proposed agreement is between the City and Bob Hampton, the property owner. The property owner wants to redevelop his property in the future when the economy is better. He is requesting to be vested to February 19, 2013, Work Study Session Minutes Page 6 of7 certain development regulations for twenty years. In return, the City will get two easements: one for the Bay Street Pedestrian Pathway Segment 5 and public access to the pocket beach of the northeast corner of this property. The property owner's original request was for 10 years, but changed it to 20 years due to difficulty faced with redeveloping downtown Port Orchard. He would like additional time so that he has the maximum flexibility. Mr. Hampton will attend next week's meeting and will speak at the Public Hearing. Public Works Director Dorsey said 20 years is not uncommon. Council Direction: The Council was okay with the agreement and directed staff to place it on the February 26, 2013, Council meeting for consideration. 6. Discussion: Belfair Bypass Council Letter of Support Council discussed the request from Ms. Jeanne Cushman to sign a letter of support for the Belfair Bypass Project. After a brief discussion, they did not feel this was the "best" project as indicated in the letter, but were in support of it; and felt it would have some benefits for the City. Council Direction: Staff will let Ms. Cushman know the Council agrees to sign on to the letter of support. Councilmember Clauson recused himself from the foot ferry discussion. 7· Discussion: Sunday/Holiday Foot Ferry Services City Clerk Rinearson asked for guidance from the Council on what kind of contract to negotiate with Kitsap Harbor Tours for Sunday/Holiday-Event foot ferry service during the summer in partnership with the City of Bremerton and the Port of Bremerton. Councilmember Chang proposed extending service Friday and Saturday nights instead of having service on Sundays, due to the low ridership numbers in the past two years. Councilmember Lucarelli reminded the Council that there is no additional money available from Lodging Tax funds, if the ferry runs over the anticipated cost. Public Works Director Dorsey recommended having service to meet the final ferry coming back from Seattle. The Council was in support of City Clerk Rinearson pursuing what it will cost to have Friday and Saturday late night service. February 19, 2013, Work Study Session Minutes Page 7 of7 Jerry Harmon commented that the City has to let the public know that the service is available; otherwise no one will ride it. Don Ryan commented that he has a tentative agreement with the owner of the proposed site of the Port Orchard Market. The owner would like a commitment from the City to bring back the foot ferries before he agrees to the cost of the project. Kathy Michael stated extending the evening hours would be beneficial. Many of her guests would like to take the ferry over and visit Seattle, but are afraid of becoming stranded if they come back too late. City Clerk Rinearson stated, she already has a request into Kitsap Transit for their ridership numbers back when they offered late night evening service. She will forward it to the Council once she gets the requested information. Council Direction: City Clerk Rinearson will contact Kitsap Harbor Tours to see if they could do extended evening service on Fridays and Saturdays, and will then contact the City of Bremerton and the Port of Bremerton regarding the 2013 contract. At 9:41p.m., Mayor Matthes adjourned the meeting. ran y Rinearson, CMC, City Clerk ,L~t?~~ Timothy C. atthes, Mayor