Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 01/02/1991 1776 CITY COUNCIL MEETING Port Angeles, Washington January 2, 1991 I CALL TO ORDER - SPECIAL MEETING Mayor Sargent called the special meeting of the Port Angeles City Council to order at 6:05 P.M. II ROLL CALL Members Present: Mayor Sargent, Councilmen Cornell, Hallett, Nicholson, - Ostrowski, Wight. Members Absent: Councilman Lemon. Staff Present: Manager Pomeranz, Clerk Upton, S. Brodhun, M. Cleland, B. Collins, L. Glenn, K. Godbey, J. Pittis, B. Coons, S. Hursh, K. Ridout, S. Roberds. Public Present: L. Beil, J. Bondy, D. Withers, R. Wilhelm, S. Burkhardt, M. Sturgeon. III ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Sargent adjourned the meeting to executive session at approximately 6:06 P.M. to discuss labor negotiations and personnel matters for approximately one hour. IV RETURN TO OPEN SESSION The Council returned to open session at approximately 6:59 P.M. V CALL TO ORDER - REGULAR MEETING The regular meeting was called to order by Mayor Sargent at 7:00 P.M. VI PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Mayor Sargent. VII APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF DECEMBER 18, 1990, REGULAR MEETING Councilman Hallett moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of December 18, 1990. The motion was seconded by Councilman Cornell. A vote was taken on the motion, which carried unanimously, approving the minutes as presented. VIII FINANCE 1. Consideration of bids for 2nd and Cherry guardrail Bids for the replacement of the guardrail at Second and Cherry Streets were opened on December 18, 1990, at 2:30 P.M. Two bids were received and it is the recommendation of the Public Works Department that Peterson Bros., Inc., be -- awarded the contract, as their bid was under the engineer's estimate by 29%. Councilman Ostrowski moved to accept the bid from Peterson Bros., Inc., for $9,990 and authorize the Mayor to sign the contract with Peterson Bros. for the Second and 6"nerry Streets guardrail project, No. 89-13. The motion was seconded by Councilman Wight. After limited discussion, a vote was taken on the motion, which carried unanimously. 2. Consideration of bids for 5th and Peabody signal Bids for the Fifth and Peabody signal installation were opened on December 18, 1990, at 2:30 P.M. Three bids were received, all of which exceeded the engineer's estimate of $110,104.75, by 52% to 61.9%. This particular project is to receive 90% funding from the Federal Hazard Elimination Safety Program, with 10% matching funds from the City of Port Angeles. The major item of -1- 1777 CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 2, 1991 increase is the signal system itself, which reflects an increase in excess of 75%. The Public Works Department has addressed these excessive bids with the Washington State Department of Transportation, which indicated bids on such contacts have been fluctuating a great deal. It is recommended that the bids be rejected at this time and rebid with the project rescoped and rebid in the spring of 1991. Lengthy discussion followed, with Councilmembers inquiring as to the reason for such a discrepancy between the engineerfs estimate and the actual bids received. Public Works Director Pittis responded that many of the contractors have been extremely busy and are not in need of such contracts at this time, resulting in higher bids. Perhaps the bid documents can be restructured and bid again in the spring in order to realize better bid prices. Mayor Sargent inquired as to the length of time the 90% funding would be available from the Hazard Elimination Safety Program, to which Director Pittis responded two years. Discussion followed, with Councilman Hallett moving to reject the bids for the Fifth and Peabody signal project, No. 89-12, and to direct the Public Works Department to rescope the project for bidding in the spring of 1991. The motion was seconded by Councilman Ostrowski. After further discussion, a vote was taken on the motion, which carried unanimously. 3. Request progress payment to DelHur for Landfill construction of $54,418.21, with retainage of $2~646.81 to escrow Councilman Nicholson moved to authorize the progress payment to DelHur Industries for Landfill construction in the amount of $54,418.21, with retainage to escrow of $2,646.81. The motion was seconded by Councilman Cornell. In response to an inquiry from Councilman Wight, Public Works Director Pittis reported the project is at approximately 81% completion of payments to the contractor, with the original amount of $3.7 million. Change orders thus far have totalled approximately $137,000, or 3.7%. A vote was taken on the motion, which carried unanimously. IX CONSENT AGENDA Councilman Hallett moved to accept the items as presented on the Consent Agenda, including: (1) Request to call for bids for legal publications for 1991; (2) Request for payment to Riddell, Williams of $1,580.35 for legal representation of W-PPSS issues; (3) Correspondence from Washington State Liquor Control Board; (4) Vouchers of $1,750,300.12; and (5) Payroll of 12-14-90 of $291,962.48 and payroll of 12-23-90 of $270,448.94. The motion was seconded by Councilman Cornell. Following discussion of some of the items as presented, the motion was voted on and carried unanimously. X ITEMS FROM THE COUNCIL/AUDIENCE TO BE CONSIDERED/PLACED ON THE AGENDA Mayor Sargent added as Item No. 7 the matter of a storm damage report. The Mayor noted that a letter of recognition will be signed by all Councilmembers and sent to City employees who have been so responsive during recent storms. XI LEGISLATION 1. Presentation/Status Report on cable television by 3H Cable Communication Consultants (rescheduled from December 18th) Present on behalf of 3H Cable Communications were Messrs. Miles Overholt and Lon Hurd. Mr. Overholt referenced the current franchise agreement with Northland Cable and indicated 3H Cable Communications, on behalf of the City of Port Angeles, has been addressing such matters as how the City can actively maintain reasonable rates. Additionally, 3H has been attending to issues pertinent to extra outlet charges and tenuous relationships between the cable operator and citizens. 3H has met with representatives of Northland in Seattle and has been able to accomplish certain goals in terms of efforts toward improved relationships, better reporting mechanisms and the bike. -2- 1778 CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 2, 1991 The major issue, however, remains to be rate regulation. Mr. Overholt indicated this is a national issue due to Federal legislation of 1984 which pulled local government out of the business of rate regulation. Since that time, tremendous rate increases have been realized throughout the country. This past year, Congress considered the enactment of legislation which would return to the cities some vestige of rate control. The proposed legislation did not pass for a variety of reasons. Subsequently, the FCC came forward with proposed regulations for effective competition which would be applicable only to basic cable service. Mr. Overholt referenced the rate structure in Port Angeles, which indicates Port Angeles is in a reasonable position in comparison to other communities in terms of the basic rates. There was, however, a 33% increase in Port Angeles in 1989, subsequent to the entry of Northland Cable in the cable television market in Port Angeles. Much of this increase, according to Mr. Overholt, was due to Northland's acquisition of Port Angeles Telecable. This was also subsequent to the 1987 implementation of the legislated deregulation. Mr. Overholt reviewed information on overheads showing Port Angeles' rates compared to other Washington cities over the past five years. Based on the FCC's narrow definition of effective competition, Mr. Overholt indicated it is difficult for cities to qualify under the effective competition criteria. Present criteria involves three Grade B contour signals received over 100% of the city; technically viewable broadcast signals demonstrated with engineering studies; and "significantly watched". Thus far, two cities in the nation have qualified under effective competition. Under the FCC proposed criteria, a city must receive fewer than six broadcast signals, have greater than 50% penetration, comprise less than 50% of the community served by MDS (Microwave Distribution System) or DBS (Direct Broadcast Signals), and comprise less than 10% of subscribers to other services. Further, the cable operator would be allowed to raise rates up to 5% per year without the approval of the franchising authority. Mr. Overholt noted the FCC would have the prerogative of determining if effective competition exists even if all criteria are met, but the agency determines whether rates and services are satisfied upon appeal by the cable operator. If the FCC proposal is approved, it would be implemented in April or May, 1991. Mr. Overholt expects to receive more information on the proposal in the very near future. Mr. Overholt indicated this is a time to wait and see and to evaluate the prime distinction of how many channels the City does or does not effectively receive. In response to an inquiry from Councilman Hallett, Mr. Overholt indicated they are trying to get Northland to drop the charge for a second cable outlet installation, as other companies do not charge for such an installation. Additionally, in terms of channel capacity, Northland is within the guidelines and will be up to 41 channels by August. In terms of public access, everything is being done as required; a local news channel will be added. Councilman Hallett referenced the recent request via petition submitted for a religious channel and Mr. Overholt indicated the City can submit only generalized requests for programming. In response to Council's inquiry as to what the City can do at this time, Mr. Overholt noted short-term, there is very little that can be done. However, it is appropriate to contact Senators and Representatives in order to make the Council's feelings known. If the FCC regulations don't work, Mr. Overholt indicated the matter would again be placed before Congress for consideration. 2 Public Hearings: Planning A. STREET VACATION REQUEST - STV-90(07)03 - PRIEST, ET AL. Portion of East First Street: Request for vacation of City right-of-way east of Alder Street (Hearing continued from December 18th) Mayor Sargent referenced the public hearing held on this matter at the December 18, 1990, meeting of the City Council, at which time it was determined appropriate to continue the hearing to this meeting. Planning Director Collins reported that since the last meeting, staff reviewed the situation and determined there are still two issues needing to be addressed: the correction of the legal notice, and obtaining information from WSDOT on the property appraisal. Latest information from WSDOT indicates the information is not likely to be available by February 5th, which is the proposed date for -3- 1779 CITY COUNCIL MEETING 3anuary 2, 1991 another hearing on the street vacation. The earliest date indicated for the availability of the information is in the spring. In addition, staff met with the applicant and the applicant's representative in order to advise them of the situation. In the ensuing discussion, Oouncilmembers were in agreement consideration could be given to approve the vacation at the February 5th meeting, subject to the inclusion of the appraised value at a later date. Director Collins noted, however, this matter needs to be addressed by the City Attorney, as he is unaware of the latest events. Mayor Sargent declared the continuation of the public hearing at this time. Julie Bondy, Planning Director of NTI Clark Associates, 717 South Peabody Street, spoke as the representative of the proponents, Priest, et al. Ms. Bondy indicated the meeting with staff resulted in working out some of the details concerning the street vacation. Ms. Bondy acknowledged it is necessary to again post public notice on the street vacation hearing due to the error which occurred previously in this regard. On behalf of the proponents, Ms. Bondy asked Council consideration of passing a resolution at this time with the intent of supporting the street vacation in principle, particularly in view of the fact the State has indicated its support of the vacation. This would satisfy the proponents and would enable them to proceed with their business without being further impeded. Based on information received, Ms. Bondy felt the earliest the State could provide the remainder of the needed information is ninety days. Councilman Cornell, in the absence of the City Attorney, expressed concern about Council stating a preference as to what action would be taken following the February 5th public hearing. Councilman Hallett addressed the matter of the flawed posting and the fact that the public appears to be well aware of the intent and has, therefore, not spoken in opposition to the vacation. He felt the error had no mitigating significance on the process and could be set aside, with Council focusing its attention on what can now be accomplished on the request. In that respect, Councilman Hallett felt it would be appropriate for Council to indicate there is no stated opposition to this vacation request, even though the formal process must be adhered to throughout. Ms. Bondy alluded to the fact this matter has been difficult for a certain individual attempting to acquire the property, in view of the governmental process involved; any statement of a positive nature would be extremely helpful to accomplish a closing. Councilman Cornell inquired as to the closing referenced by Ms. Bondy and why the sale of the property might be contingent on an approval of the street vacation when other adjoining properties had been developed without the right-of-way in question. Ms. Bondy responded many projects are subject to minimum requirements of square footage in order to be allowed. The square footage in this particular street vacation could be particularly important to the proposed project of the buyer. In addition, more amenities might be made a part of a project with more square footage available. Mayor Sargent closed the public hearing at 8:28 P.M. Mayor Sargent indicated it would appear the City Council is not opposed to the approval of the street vacation request. Councilman Wight stated a public record has been established inclusive of a staff report, a Planning Commission report, dialogue with the Attorney, dialogue with the applicant's representative, and written feedback from the State, all of which indicate the request would be approved if it weren't for the legal posting error and the lack of an appraisal. Councilman Nicholson added two public hearings have been conducted with no spoken opposition coming forth. Formal Council action is delayed only by the necessity of meeting the requirements of the law and to obtain data on the appraisal amount. The City Clerk offered to provide an excerpt of these minutes to Ms. Bondy and the proponent in order to satisfy the proponent's need to know Council's position on this matter at this time. Accordingly, Councilman Wight moved to dismiss the application without prejudice due to the problem areas addressed in terms of legalities, and to note, based on public testimony and information to be provided by the City Clerk that there is no reason to believe that a reapplication would not be favorably processed by the City Council. The motion was seconded by Councilman Hallett, a vote was taken, and the motion carried unanimously. '4- 1780 CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 2, 1991 Mayor Sargent then read the Resolution by title, entitled RESOLUTION NO. 1-91 A RESOLUTION of the City of Port Angeles setting a hearing date for a petition to vacate that portion of the East First Street right-of-way in Lots 10-15, Block 133, Thomas W. Carter's Subdivision of the Townsite of Port Angeles, together with that portion of the East First Street right-of-way in the West Half of vacated Virginia Park and Terrace Subdivision, TPA. Councilman Ostrowski moved to pass the Resolution as read by title. The motion was seconded by Councilman Hallett and carried unanimously. B. REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION - ANX-90(IO)i - FREEMAN, South Albert: Request for annexation of approximately 6.9 acres Mayor Sargent opened the public hearing at 8:32 P.M. Julie Bondy, Planning Director, NTI Clark Associates, 717 South Peabody Street, was present as the representative of the proponent, Joseph Freeman. A meeting was held this past week with the City Attorney and others to review the annexation agreement as drafted and the enabling ordinance. The agreement is, to her knowledge, acceptable to her client. A copy of the agreement has been FAXed to Mr. Freeman and, as yet, he has been unable to respond. Ms. Bondy requested this matter be tabled until the next meeting in order to have a signed agreement on hand. Another option suggested by Ms. Bondy was to have Council adopt the ordinance, pending a signed agreement. The annexation agreement requires replatting of the subject property to current City standards. Based on an inquiry from Councilman Cornell, a very lengthy discussion ensued concerning the right-of-way on the southern portion of the subject property and whether or not the right-of-way should be established at a minimum of sixty feet for access. Further, based on clarification offered by Larry Leonard, Planning Commission Chairman, the recommendation of the Planning Commission was based on the presumption the 60-foot right-of-way would not be needed until the time of replat. It had been staff's recommendation to require the 60-foot right- of-way to the National Park property line, particularly due to the recognized possibility that Scribner Road might well serve as a future alternative access route to S.R. 101. Planning Director Collins offered clarification of the situation by showing overhead transparencies of maps of the area. Additional discussion involved the question as to whether the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan would be met by not requiring provision of the 60-foot right-of-way at this time. It was Councilman Hallett's position that, in fact, the Comprehensive Plan would not be adhered to in this regard and, for the sake of long-term planning, the necessary rights-of-way and easements must be a part of the annexation at this time. Further, if the adjacent property owner was willing to allow certain property to be dedicated to the easements and rights-of-way, Councilman Cornell felt a written document would be in order so stating these intentions. After further lengthy discussion, Mayor Sargent closed the public hearing at 9:09 P.M. In considering the options available to Council at this time, it was determined appropriate to reopen the hearing in order to continue the hearing to the next meeting of the City Council, to be held on January 15, 1991. Mayor Sargent, therefore, re-opened the public hearing at 9:13 P.M. Councilman Nicholson moved to continue the public hearing to January 15, 1991. The motion was seconded by Councilman Cornell and carried unanimously. BREAK Mayor Sargent recessed the Council meeting for a break at 9:14 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 9:30 P.M. -5- 1781 CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 2, 1991 3. Consideration of amendment to Health Services Contract between the City and Clallam County 1991 funding Councilman Hallett moved to authorize the Mayor to sign the amendment to the Health Services Agreement with Clallam County. The motion was seconded by Councilman Nicholson and carried unanimously. 4. Information regarding proposed changes in the Cityts policies and procedures for Purchasing and Purchase Orders Director of Administrative Services Godbey presented information pertinent to the proposed purchase order system, which would eliminate delinquent payment of liabilities, incorrect coding of vouchers, lags in financial reporting, and increased costs in the procurement of products and services. Director Godbey indicated the proposed system would essentially reverse the current process and payments would be made to vendors on a weekly basis. The basic differences in the purchase order system are controlling purchases through pre-authorization and payment of liabilities before Council approval. However, internal controls would assure necessary approval prior to purchase and the budget would be adhered to in terms of projected expenses. In response to an inquiry from Councilman Ostrowski, Director Godbey indicated emergency situations would be exempt from this procedure. By consensus, Councilmembers agreed that such a procedure falls under the purview of the City Manager to implement, and Administrative Services should proceed with the proposed changes as presented. Council approval would not be necessary. Director Godbey indicated some ordinances will need to be changed in conjunction with this purchase order system and will be forthcoming. 5. Confirmation of date and time for joint City Council/County Commissioners meeting - January 10, 1991 City Manager Pomeranz indicated it would be appropriate for the City Council and the County Commissioners to meet in joint session to discuss matters of common interest for the coming year, such as Solid Waste Utility and Growth Management issues. After discussion, Council directed Manager Pomeranz to communicate with the County Commissioners to determine if January 22 or 29 would be workable for a meeting. Additionally, Manager Pomeranz is to prepare a draft agenda for this meeting. 6. Consideration of Council Committee assignments Mayor Sargent introduced for consideration the re-establishment of committee assignments for Councilmembers for the year 1991. Various changes were made to the committee assignments. The City Manager was asked to make the appropriate contacts to determine if City Council participation is required in the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Agency, as well as the Developmental Disabilities Board. Further, the City Clerk was asked to assure that Councilmembers are given accurate information as to the meeting times, dates, and places on all assignments. 7. Storm Damage Report City Manager Pomeranz reviewed for Council a report of damage sustained by City property during recent storms and estimated repair costs, as follows: $10,000 for City Light's damage repairs; approximately $42,897 for City Pier repair estimates, to include fire suppression system repair/replacement, pier decking/ stringer replacement, concrete for retaining wall and riprap, pumper truck for concrete, miscellaneous items, pier piling and braces, as well as Downtown banner replacement and Parks Department employee labor. Further, approximately $121,000 is required for repairs to the Railroad Avenue shoreline, Second Street Bridge, the parking lot by the Harbortowne Mall, Ediz Hook by the Coast Guard Base, the Waterfront Trail, and Public Works employee labor. The total damage incurred is approximately $170,000. Manager Pomeranz indicated the City has applied for disaster funds through FEMA in order to obtain reimbursement through the Federal Government. Repairs to -6- 1782 CITY COUNCIL MEETING January 2, 1991 the Second Street Bridge appear to qualify for FEMA funding, according to preliminary indications from a recent inspection by FEMA. Public Works Director Pittis reviewed specific areas of damage and indicated FEMA may use the date of December 20th as a cut-off on disaster funds. However, as Director Pittis pointed out, it has been difficult for City crews to ascertain the actual date of damage, as it was difficult and dangerous to inspect some of the areas on an immediate basis. Ail damage and repair costs will be totally documented and submitted to FEMA for review. Those costs not reimbursed by FEMA will be subject to payment by the Self-Insurance Fund. XII CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS/LATE ITEMS - Councilman Cornell introduced the subject of the parking issue in the Downtown area as previously considered by the City Council. This matter is being addressed by the Planning Commission and Councilman Cornell expressed his interest in participating in the discussions at the Planning Commission level, rather than the City Council level. After due consideration, it was the consensus of the City Council members to allow Councilman Cornell to participate in these discussions with the Planning Commission, noting Councilman Cornell's abstention from Council discussions will be appropriate. XIII RECONVENE EXECUTIVE SESSION It was not necessary to reconvene the executive session. XIV ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at approximately 10:25 P.M. CC.197 -7-