Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 06/06/19891364 CITY COUNCIL MEETING Port Angeles, Washington June 6, 1989 I CALL TO ORDER Mayor McPhee called the regular meeting of the Port Angeles City Council to order at 7:04 P.M. II PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Mayor McPhee. III ROLL CALL Members Present: Mayor McPhee, Councilmen Gabriel, Haguewood, Hallett, Hordyk, Lemon, Sargent. Members Absent: None. Staff Present: Manager Flodstrom, Attorney Knutson, Clerk Maike, 0, Miller, M. Cleland, S. Brodhun, L. Glenn, J. Pittis, T. Smith, S. Hardy, G. Kenworthy, B. Coons, K. Ridout. Public Present: P. Feeley, J. Phillips, L. Brouillard, J. VanOss, J. Fairchild, B. Varela, H. Fulkerson, S. Everett, J. Jackson, L. T. Beil, G. Pettit, S. Cram, D. Brewer, J. Glass, Mr. Mrs. Carl Alexander, J. Haguewood, R. Gruver, V. J. Tangedahl, R. Uranga, H. Govedich, J. E. McCarter, R. Terril, B. Hutchison, K. L. Rose, B. Philpott, P. Nikodym, R. Wight, R. Crumb, J. Shefler, D. Vautier, R. Mayville, H. King, R. Phillips, B. McDowell, R. Bogusch, C. Rennie, T. Sinclair, J. Boyd, L. Ross. IV SWEARING IN OF NEW COUNCIL MEMBER, Mayor McPhee officially announced the appointment of Sam Haguewood to the vacancy on the City Council. Clerk Maike administered the oath of office to Samuel Haguewood and thereafter Councilman Haguewood was seated with the Council. Councilman Haguewood will serve until after the 1989 general election results. V APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MAY 16TH SPECIAL MEETING AND REGULAR MEETING AND, SPECIAL MEETING OF MAY 23, 1989 Councilman Hordyk moved to accept and place on file the minutes of the regular and special meetings of May 16th and the special meeting of May 23, 1989.Souncilman Gabriel seconded. Councilman Sargent offered corrections to page 8, item IV, A, final paragraph, to add to the end of the sentence, "such as shopping malls Page 11, item 8, last paragraph, last sentence,' to add, "Fire Marshall Becker responded and explained the manner in which the ordinance could be enforceable." On the May 23rd special meeting, she offered a correction to page 2, item 2, last paragraph, last sentence, to correct the typo in the word "rest changing it to "rent" so that the sentence would read, outlining Councilman Hallett's unsuccessful attempts to find a house to rent within the City limits." Mayor McPhee offered corrections to the May 16th meeting, under Public Hearing item G, page 7, paragraph 6, last sentence, to change the sentence, striking the word "hydrobeam" and replacing it with "hydrant being" so that the sentence would read, "The homes will be sprinklered in lieu of an approved turn around or a hydrant being within 500 feet." Page 11, item 10, to correct the typo in the title, changing the word "file" to "fill" so that the title would read, "Consideration of Senior Citizen Board Recom- mendation to Fill Vacancy on that Board And finally, on item 14, page 14, second paragraph, to strike the words "not illegal" so that the sentence would read, "In rebuttal to the letter, Mayor McPhee stated he found it interesting that the organization should question an issue which is not patently illegal. On the meeting minutes of May 23rd, item 1, VI FINANCE 1365 CITY COUNCIL MEETING June 6, 1989 page 1, 7th paragraph, first and second sentence to change the word "clique" to "claque On call for the question, the motion carried unanimously with Councilman Haguewood abstaining. 1. Consideration of Bids on Three LID Proiects: Alder Street, 6th Street and Regent Street. Councilman Sargent moved to concur with the recommendation of the Public Works Department that the bid from Lakeside Industries of $181,408.69 be accepted and to authorize the Mayor to sign the contract with Lakeside Industries for construction of the Regent, Alder, and 6th Street LID projects. Councilman Hallett seconded the motion. Councilman Gabriel questioned whether the property owners were aware of the 14% increase over the engineer's estimate. City Engineer Kenworthy stated the property owners have been contacted. Following a discussion of the increase and the Department's policy regard- ing informing property owners in the event a bid is over the estimate, Director of Public Works Pittis stated the Department would work on adopting an internal policy to notify owners before the bid has been awarded. On call for the question, the motion carried unanimously. 2. Request for Progress Payment of $29.388.49 to Lakeside Industries for Golf Course Road Proiect Councilman Sargent moved to authorize the progress payment of $29,388.49 to Lakeside Industries for the Golf Course Road project. Councilman Gabriel seconded. On call for the question, the motion carried unanimously. VII CONSENT AGENDA Councilman Hordyk moved to accept the items as listed under the Consent Agenda including: (1) Request permission to call for bids on animal shelter services; (2) Correspondence from the Washington State Liquor Control Board; (3) Vouchers of $264,351.90; and (4) Payroll of 5 -14 -89 of $245,729.57 and 5 -28 -89 of $236,218.13. Councilman Sargent seconded and the motion carried unanimously. VIII ITEMS FROM THE COUNCIL /AUDIENCE TO BE CONSIDERED /PLACED ON THE AGENDA Jane Shefler, 3717 Park Knoll, representing the League of Women Voters, requested that she be allowed to speak on agenda item 5, regarding the verification of relationship between Mayor McPhee and Councilman Lemon. Jerry Cornell, 1019 East Ninth, requested the Council allow him to speak on Legislation Item 18, regarding the selection of a candidate to fill the Planning Commission vacancy. Raul Uranga, 3910 Nygren Place, requested the Council attend a neighborhood meeting regarding the McDougal right -of -way, to be held Saturday, June 10th, at 11:00 A.M. to discuss the unsafe stgkeet conditions with the citizens in the area. Manager Flodstrom stated that staff has been working toward obtaining the right -of -way from property owners in the area; however they have been unsuccessful. He stated the next step is for the City to proceed with condemnation, followed by the appropriate roadway work. Kenneth Rose, 3609 Galaxy Place, asked to speak on Legislation Item 11 regarding the Laurel Street right -of -way north of Ahlvers Road. Penny Brewer, 111 West 13th, presented a house warming gift to Coun- cilman Hallett, congratulating him on his purchase of a house in town. IX LEGISLATION 1. Yard -of- the -Month Awards. June, 1989 Mayor McPhee presented the following people with Yard -of- the -Month awards for June, 1989: Richard Johnson, 1914 Hamilton Way; Judy Brune, 315 West Park; Tom and Sally Munro, 120 East 12th; Rose Crumb, 236 East Ninth; Rex Averill, M.D. and Doreen Gateless, D.O., 1035 Caroline; Jack -2- 1366 CITY COUNCIL MEETING June 6, 1989 and Evelyn McCarter, 1035 Columbia. Neighborhood: Betty and Wilfred Manning, 3726 Hill Circle; Phillip and Wilma Campbell, 3729 Canyon Circle; Arthur and Hazel Meier, 3736 Hill Circle. 2. Public Hearines A. Zoning Code Amendment ZCA Retail Stand Chapter of Zoning Code (continued from 5/16/89) Mayor McPhee opened the public hearing at 7:30 P.M. There being no public comment, he then closed the public hearing. Mayor McPhee read the ordinance by title, entitled ORDINANCE NO. 2536 AN ORDINANCE of the City of Port Angeles amending Section 1, Ordinance No. 2070, pertaining to outside utility hookups for retail stands. Councilman Hordyk moved to adopt the Ordinance as read by title. Councilman Hallett seconded. Councilman Hordyk stated he was satisfied with the clarification of the language regarding hard -wired in reference to electrical hookups. On call for the question, the motion carried unanimously. B. Downtown Sian Code Revision CBD. Central Business District, Councilman Haguewood stated that he was the person who originally circulated the petition opposing the revised sign ordinance; therefore, he excused himself from the Council dias, on the basis of a potential conflict of interest. Attorney Knutson stated that any time the Council is hearing a Zoning Code amendment which applies area -wide, the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine technically does not apply. However, since Councilman Haguewood feels that appearances justify his stepping down from the matter, Attorney Knutson felt that to be appropriate. Mayor McPhee opened the public hearing at 7:42 P.M. Jim Phillips, Sequim, former President, First National Bank, stated in the past he has been very active with the beautification of the Downtown area. He felt the present ordinance was too restrictive compared to other zoning districts. He stated he was in favor of a sign ordinance; however, the proposed one was too restrictive and should be repealed, with the proviso that the City should be able to control any new applications to eliminate unreasonable signs during the period it would take to re -write a proper ordinance. The questionnaire sent around by the Downtown Business Asso- ciation, in his opinion, did not reflect all concerns. He voiced his concern over the percentage of businesses which are closed in the Downtown area, stating that the businesses should not be saddled with restrictions in which they are not as competitive as other areas of the community in attracting new business. Harry Fulkerson, 129 East Park, representing BPOE 353, Elks Club, stated he felt the Elks Building was a cornerstone of Port Angeles and a large contributor to the growth in Port Angeles. The present sign ordinance requires the removal of the reader board; however, he pointed out that the theater is allowed to have their reader board. He was in favor of repealing the ordinance. Richard Terril, 3123 Old Olympic Highway, was concerned with the large back- lit signs. He did not feel that these would bring more business into the Downtown area, stating there is definitely a problem in the business area of Downtown; however, it could not be solved with large signs. He hoped that the Council would give consideration to the sign ordinance with moderate signage. Rick Messinger, representing the Red Lion Inn, questioned the Council as to why the Red Lion was restricted by the sign ordinance. Planner Miller stated that the Red Lion sign is just within the CBD Zone and therefore must comply with the regulations of the sign ordinance. A discussion followed -3- 1367 CITY COUNCIL MEETING June 6, 1989 regarding boundaries of the CBD and the restrictions of the sign ordinance. Mr. Messinger discussed with the Council the merits of the reader board, stating he felt it was a community benefit to have such a promotional reader -board within the CBD. Dan Miller, 1321 East Seventh Street, a member of the ad hoc committee which worked on the new sign ordinance, stated there was ample opportunity given for participation in the drafting of the Downtown sign ordinance. He stated that the sign ordinance was written with the pedestrian- oriented Downtown area in mind. Further, he felt the proposed ordinance sufficiently covered the Downtown area; however, they did incur three problems consistently: Haguewood's sign, the Red Lion sign, and the Elks sign. He suggested the following solutions: since Haguewood's and the Red Lion were more traffic oriented, the boundaries be set at Lincoln Street. In regard to the Elks sign, to consider a variance and to see if the neighboring businesses object. Craig Whalley, 1000 Mt. Pleasant Road, also a member of the ad hoc com- mittee, gave a brief overview of the events which brought the sign ordinance to the committee. He stated the final result was a satisfactory outcome. This did allow Haguewood's to have a bigger sign than most businesses within the Downtown area, but not its present sign. He pointed out that the number of businesses which would not be in compliance with the proposed ordinance was very small and the majority of those would only take a few minor changes in order to bring them into compliance. Of the money spent to bring non complying signs into compliance, 90 -957 of that cost would be incurred by Haguewood's and the Red Lion. He pointed out that dozens of Downtown businesses spent money to comply with the existing sign ordinance over the years since its adoption, stating that during these years neither Haguewood's nor the Red Lion did anything to comply with the law or seek a change in the law, or even to change the zoning to escape the consequences of the law. The document before the Council is a result of a process established by the Port Angeles City Council and carries the support of the Downtown Association and the support of the majority of the Downtown businesses. Further, any effort to substitute a different sign ordinance or to make radical changes in the proposed ordinance would be a rejection of an open and democratic process. Councilman Gabriel commented that in the democratic process, one of the things that the Council must consider is if the Council sees the reader board at the Red Lion as a community service. Mr. Whalley discussed with the Council the origin of the ordinance and the concept of the democratic process. Carl Alexander, 1712 West 5th Street, stated he felt the situation is a matter for the Downtown merchants to carry out themselves. He felt the trouble started when the enforcement of the ordinance took place, not because of the ordinance itself. Furthermore, the enforcement has been inflexible and there has been a lack of common sense with shades of political overtones. In his opinion, the Elks Club, because it is a charitable organization, should be allowed to keep their sign, and he felt that the Haguewood's sign was a landmark. In regard to the Red Lion sign, the business is out of sight; therefore, the sign is needed for their business. With the revisions of the sign code, as made by the Downtown businesses, he felt there was a basis to work with but additional things need to be done by the City Council. He suggested having exemptions or grandfather clauses. The arbitration and complaint processes should be taken away from the Board of Adjustment, as they were too inflexible. He also suggested the Downtown merchants themselves should have some type of board or committee where complaints regarding signs in the Downtown area could be handled, keeping the City out of the process. Jean Fairchild, 952 Mt. Pleasant Road, agreed with the comments made pre- viously by Mr. Whalley. She stated she had worked on both sign ordinances for the Downtown area and since the revision of the Downtown sign ordi- nance, of 168 businesses, only 8 had signs which were not in compliance with the ordinance. When the original sign ordinance was drafted, the Downtown merchants wanted the enforcement clause enforced. In closing, she stated she wished the Council would consider the Downtown's vote, where 57.1% voted yes for the revised ordinance. Jim Byse, 915 Draper Road, stated he felt the Red Lion and Haguewood's signs were somewhat anomalous to what he considered the facets of Downtown Port -4- 1368 CITY COUNCIL MEETING June 6, 1989 Angeles, stating he felt the Downtown businesses were a homogeneous unit and it was his opinion that the two large signs did not fit in with the Down- town. He recommended that Haguewood's sign be lowered and to bring the Red Lion sign down to the level of the marquee. This would allow people coming in to the Downtown area to notice the signs but still not detract from the area. Jim Haguewood, 705 Christman Place, owner of Haguewood's Restaurant, felt this was the end of a long process. He stated he has been involved with the process for the past four years and has still found a number of inequities contained in the proposed ordinance, one being the cloth versus other types of signs in the Downtown area. He did not feel that the calculation of the signage area was fair; the cloth awnings have the ability to block signage of a business next to them. Another inequity is the comparison of the visibility of the Downtown versus the rest of the community. He felt this caused an economic impact on new and existing businesses in the Downtown. This results in a less expensive, less professional signage and is not for the betterment of the Downtown area. Another inequity he cited was the Red Lion /Haguewood situation; that the businesses are outside the zone, however, the signs are within the district. He stated he did not feel the decision made by the Board of Adjustment for the variance of the Haguewood sign was very intelligent. He questioned the Council whether the proposed ordinance was for the betterment of the Downtown area. Bill McDowell, 318 East Front Street, concurred with the comments made by Mr. Whalley and Mrs. Fairchild. He stated that he and his wife are currently suing the City over unequal enforcement of the sign ordinance. He said he felt the Council was getting close to the application of the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine, close to a spot rezone, close to taking certain sections out of a sign code, and he suggested that Mayor McPhee should disqualify himself, as he had stated publicly his feelings about the sign ordinance under oath in a deposition in Mr. McDowell's office; that Councilman Gabriel should disqualify himself, as his company supplies paper products to Haguewood's; that Councilman Hordyk should disqualify himself because he is a good friend of Councilman Haguewood; that Councilman Lemon should be disqualified because of his employment contract with the Mayor and the possibility of his judgment being tainted. Further, unless the Council passed the entire ordinance, his lawsuit would continue and he felt there would be a lot more plaintiffs than himself and his wife. Pearl Nikodym, 118 South Chambers, spoke in opposition to the removal of the Haguewood's, Red Lion, and Elks signs. Jim Phillips stated if the Council wanted to get the complete story they needed to solicit the businesses, business owners, and the property owners. That would then reflect the true desires and the percentage of the majority. Lorraine Ross, 418 East Front Street, voiced her concern that the Council may succumb to the threat of a lawsuit. Dave Brewer, Angeles Music, reminded the Council this is not a new issue; it had been before them for at least 10 years, 4hd there were only three people wanting special exception, pointing out that the Elks had added the marquee after the sign ordinance was passed and the Red Lion wanted an exception because their sign was just a little bit within the CBD. He likened that to being a little bit pregnant. The sign is either inside or outside the CBD. He stated the democratic process is trying to speak again and he was irritated with the process taking place regarding this issue. Jim Cammack, 3752 Hill Circle, requested Mayor McPhee consider consulting the City Attorney about the appearance of fairness and the lawsuit which has been referred to, because he, as a taxpayer, was concerned that he would have to pay for that lawsuit. He stated he himself had seen Mayor McPhee with Councilman Haguewood, and he reminded the Council that they need to listen to the people. Mayor McPhee asked Attorney Knutson if Mr. McDowell was to pursue the suit and the City should win, who pays for the costs incurred? Attorney Knutson replied that the City would pay for its own legal expenses, and the McDowells would pay for their own. -5- CITY COUNCIL MEETING June 6, 1989 1369 Bob Mayville, 102 Grant Road, Sequim, also a business owner within the Downtown area, stated he felt the sign ordinance is a hypocrisy; that it is mainly for pedestrians; however, in viewing traffic coming off the COHO ferry, 90% of that foot traffic goes toward the Haguewood's sign, because of its visibility. He stated something needs to be done to better the businesses and was in support of improving the ordinance. Mayor McPhee then closed the public hearing at 8:58 P.M. Mayor McPhee read the ordinance by title, entitled ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the City of Port Angeles amending Ordinance No. 2152 and 2182, the Downtown Sign Code. Councilman Hallett moved to adopt the ordinance as read by title. Councilman Sargent seconded. Councilman Lemon spoke in opposition to the motion and challenged Mr. McDowell. He stated there were extreme inadequacies within the previous ordinance, and even more so in the revised ordinance. He stated he felt the decision made by the Board of Adjustment was a bad decision. He did not feel there was anything wrong with banners, and that the ordinance is too restrictive. The comments he has heard in the Downtown area are that the government has made this too restrictive. One of the most crucial issues is that the Downtown area is unlighted at night and he felt this to be an economic impact which allows unfair competition between the businesses uptown and Downtown. Councilman Gabriel asked Attorney Knutson to speak on the appearance of fairness issue. Attorney Knutson replied in his opinion, the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine does not apply, citing that the McDowell lawsuit does not raise any appearance of fairness challenges against any Councilmembers, and Mr. McDowell has challenged five Councilmembers, including Councilman Haguewood, which results in less than a quorum. A new State statute specifically says if challenges result in less than a quorum, then the legislative body disregards the challenges. Councilman Gabriel asked whether there was any prohibition of changing the boundaries of the CBD without a rezone. Attorney Knutson replied, no; however, it would require a change in the ordinance. Councilman Gabriel stated he was completely in favor of the sign ordinance, but he did not feel that the boundary east of Lincoln Street had any logical reason to its placement. Councilman Hordyk stated it was incorrect that the original sign ordinance came from the Downtown Association, as he had introduced the idea in the late 70's. He felt the sign ordinance presently was discriminatory among separate businesses; Council should repeal the ordinance on an interim basis and re -write it, including a continuation of the sign ordinance which would cover the entire community to make it fair and equitable to everyone. Councilman Sargent stated she had been seated on-,the Committee and in her opinion, there had been a democratic process in which the Downtown Associa- tion had approved the revised ordinance; the Planning Commission had approved it unanimously; and the Council should approve it also. However, the boundary question needed to be dealt with separately. Councilman Hallett questioned how the boundaries were set forth. Manager Flodstrom stated the boundaries were originally put in place as part of the LID project in the Downtown area. Councilman Hallett stated he really did not care about the sign ordinance one way or the other, but he did care about due process, the majority, people taking the initiative to do things on their own, and respecting the wishes of those who have put forth time and effort. He spoke in support of the ordinance, stating he was disappointed when the original motion was made to revise the sign ordinance instead of enforcing the ordinance as written. He voiced his concern over the Council's direction to change the sign ordinance when 95% of the businesses within the CBD were in compliance; that the Council should respect the wishes of the majority; and also that the issue of the boundary should be dealt with separately. -6- BREAK 1370 CITY COUNCIL MEETING June 6, 1989 The Council discussed the issue of the size of marquees and the area boundaries with Planning Commissioners Jerry Cornell and Dick Wight. Councilman Sargent asked if the ordinance was adopted, how many businesses would be in violation? Planner Miller stated six businesses would be in non compliance. Mayor McPhee stated that clever people with a private agenda can manipulate something very well and for a long time, and they can accomplish with a few well placed people and a few well placed votes something that a true majority of the people is unable to, stating that he was opposed and is opposed to the sequence of steps in place; that the ordinance was sent to a group which was not elected, to try and simplify the ordinance, and yet it had come back longer than it was originally. The Council was told that the sign ordinance was necessary because signs were blocking other signs, but now there are awnings which block signs. He suggested the solution to the problem is simple: the merchants should get a letter from each of their neighboring businesses saying they agree with the sign, and a letter from the Downtown Association, and if they all agree then the business should be able to get a sign permit; and if they do not agree, then an appeal can be made to the City Council. He stated there should be some regulations having to do with size, voicing his concern that people cannot drive in the Downtown area and read the signs. He felt there was no need for a boundary change, but a sign ordinance that makes sense throughout the City, and if Council makes the parameters big enough to not have to worry about the size of the sign, then they can get on with the City business. He stated there is nothing undemocratic about letting the elected representatives make decisions. At this point in the meeting, Mr. Whalley approached the podium in an attempt to speak to the Council, asking for clarification. Mayor McPhee reminded Mr. Whalley that the public hearing was closed. Mr. Richard Wight approached the Council dis, handing Mayor McPhee his letter of resignation from the Planning Commission. Mayor McPhee asked Attorney Knutson if it was inappropriate for the City Council to accept unsolicited comments after a public hearing has been closed. Attorney Knutson responded yes. Following further discussion between the Councilmembers, Councilman Hordyk called for the question. The motion failed with Councilmen Hallett and Sargent voting in favor. Councilman Gabriel stated the Council should have something in the way of a sign ordinance. Mayor McPhee suggested taking the input received and to have the City Attorney draft an ordinance. Councilman Hallett was opposed to the suggestion and requested the item be placed on the next Council agenda and members of the Council with any constructive suggestions submit them for consideration by the Council. Councilman Hallett moved to continue with the agenda. Councilman Sargent seconded and the motion carried. Mayor McPhee recessed the meeting at 9:45 P.M. for a 15- minute break. The meeting reconvened at 10:00 P.M. 3. PlanninE Commission Minutes of May 31. 1989 Councilman Hordyk moved to accept and place on file the Planning Commission minutes of May 31, 1989. Councilman Lemon seconded and the motion carried, with Councilman Hallett voting in opposition. Councilman Sargent pointed out that the Planning Commission had appointed a new Chairman. She wished to thank Richard Wight for serving his term as Chairman on the Commission. On call for the question, the motion carried unanimously. 1371 CITY COUNCIL MEETING June 6, 1989 4. Consideration of Draft Fireworks Ordinance and Public Awareness Information Councilman Sargent moved to hold a public hearing at the June 20, 1989, City Council meeting to consider the proposed fireworks ordinance. Councilman Hallett seconded. Councilman Sargent stated that she hoped the Fire Department would promote public information and proceed with the public service announcements. 5. League of Women Voters Request for Verification of Relationship Between Mayor McPhee and Councilman Lemon Requested by Councilman Sargent Jane Shefler, 3717 Park Knoll, member of the League of Women Voters, stated she would be available for comments if the Council so desired. Councilman Sargent stated the item was brought before the Council because of a request she had received regarding the verification of the relationship between Mayor McPhee and Councilman Lemon and she also wished to protect the City from any possible legal costs. She requested that Attorney Knutson outline the procedure to be followed by Mayor McPhee and Councilman Lemon. Attorney Knutson stated there is a statutory re- enactment of the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine which the legislature passed a few years ago to try to alleviate some of the burden which is judicially placed on local government legislative bodies. One of the provisions in that statute is if the appearance of fairness problem is addressed at the beginning of the proceedings at which the quasi judicial matter is being discussed, then it would be up to anyone present to indicate that they wanted the member with the appearance of fairness problem to step down. However, if they feel that the member could act fairly and they did not want one or more members to step down, then the appearance of fairness problem would dissipate and under the statute it could not be raised thereafter; stating that employer/ employee relationships are not subject to disqualification for cause. Ms. Shefler requested that the clarification of the relationship be disclosed. Mayor McPhee stated it is one of employer /employee. Councilman Hallett requested that Mayor McPhee and Councilman Lemon provide the Council with a written record of their relationship. 6. Consideration of Contract with Clallam County for Port Angeles Senior Center Councilman Hordyk moved to approve the contact and to authorize the Mayor to sign the contract with Clallam County for the Port Angeles Senior Center. Councilman Sargent seconded and the motion carried unanimously. The contract period is January 1, 1989 to December 31, 1989. The funding level is $20,210.00. 7. Consideration of City /County Contract for PavFments to County for Human Services Councilman Hallett moved the authorize the Mayor to sign the contract for Human Services for the year 1989. Councilman Sargent seconded and the motion carried unanimously. The funding level is in the amount of $115,308.00. The contract is in effect from January 1, 1989 through December 31, 1989. 8. Flag Day Proclamation Mayor McPhee proclaimed June 14, 1989, as Flag Day in Port Angeles and urged all citizens to Pause for the Pledge at 4:00 P.M. on that day. 9. Resolution of Sole Source for Corp Yard Metal Building Mayor McPhee read the Resolution by title, entitled 1372 CITY COUNCIL MEETING June 6, 1989 RESOLUTION NO. 13 -89 A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Port Angeles designating Marathon Metallic Building Company as the sole source for metal buildings at the City of Port Angeles Corporation Yard. Councilman Hallett moved to pass the Resolution as read by title. Councilman Sargent seconded and the motion carried unanimously. 10. Consideration of Agreement with Brown Caldwell Councilman Hallett moved to authorize the Mayor to execute the contract with Brown and Caldwell to provide secondary sewage treatment design phase services for the City in the amount of $2,249,195.00. Councilman Hordyk seconded. Following a discussion regarding the secondary sewage treatment design and the proposed boundaries, a short presentation was given by Doug Schneider of Brown and Caldwell. The question was called and the motion carried unanimously. 11. Consideration of Agreement for Laurel Street Right- of -Wav North of Ahlvers Road Kenneth Rose, 3609 Galaxy Place, stated he would like to hold his comments until after the staff has given their presentation. Councilman Lemon stated the Real Estate Committee had met and concurred with the staff recommendation to exchange property with Joseph Hofrichter for the additional right -of -way required for the widening of Laurel Street north of Ahlvers Road. The City would be involved with the trade whereby Mr. Hofrichter would deed to the City a 30 foot by 648 foot area along the frontage of his property adjacent to Laurel Street. The City of Port Angeles would deed to Mr. Hofrichter Lots 19 and 20 of Block 407, TPA. Those lots would be cleared and filled by the City over the period of one year and the City will relocate Mr. Hofrichter's fence to the new right -of- way line. Councilman Sargent stated the Real Estate Committee suggested that there be a clause in which the City be held harmless for any damages in removing of trees and the settling of the ground. Following discussion, Councilman Sargent moved to concur with the recom- mendation of the Public Works Department, that the City Council concur in the property exchange and authorize the Mayor to execute the right -of -way agreement and sign the deed from the City to Mr. Hofrichter after the City has rgceived the deed from Mr. Hofrichter, on condition that a hold harmless clause is included. Councilman Lemon seconded and the motion carried unanimously. 12. Reouest from Adult Literacy for Use of City Space for Reading Program Councilman Hallett moved that the Council direct the City Manager to secure or identify space that would meet the needs and to bring the recommendation back to the Council at the June 20, 1989 meeting for deliberation. Councilman Haguewood seconded. Manager Flodstrom provided information to the Council regarding the issue to date. Councilman Sargent pointed out that the Volunteer Reading Tutors of Clallam County have been in existence since 1968 and the Peninsula Adult Literacy Services broke away from the Volunteer Reading Tutors and operates on grants. However, the Volunteer Reading Tutors found that paid staff did not work out and that grants were not worth the paperwork, and volunteers were subject to tests and screening. They also feel that the Peninsula Adult Literacy Services, using taxpayers' money, are not producing. Councilman Sargent stated she is not in favor of the motion, and since the Volunteer -9-