MINUTES OF THE LACEY CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION THURSDAY, MARCH 16, :00 P.M. COUNCIL PRESENT:

Transcription

1 MINUTES OF THE LACEY CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION THURSDAY, MARCH 16, :00 P.M. COUNCIL PRESENT: A. RYDER, C. PRATT, V. CLARKSON, J. HEARN, L. GREENSTEIN M. STEADMAN STAFF PRESENT: S. SPENCE, S. EGGER, T. WOO, L. GOTELLI, D. PIERPOINT, J. BURBIDGE, R. WALK, C. LITTEN, S. KIRKMAN, P. BROOKS, T. PALMATEER MOTION: MOTION TO APPROVE AGENDA. MADE, SECONDED, AND CARRIED BY COUNCILMEMBERS GREENSTEIN AND CLARKSON. COUNCIL CHAMBERS VIDEO SYSTEM UPGRADE BRIEFING STAFF: STEVE KIRKMAN, PA PUBLIC AFFAIRS MANAGER INFORMATION ONLY Staff is in the process of accepting bids for a contract that will provide for furnishing and connecting new television broadcast equipment to improve or replace some of the components of the city s existing broadcast system. New equipment in the City Council Chambers will include 4 high-definition cameras and 3 program monitors on the city staff table. New equipment in the Control Room will include digital video recorder, 46 program monitor, video production switcher, signal encoders and distribution amplifiers. Editor s Note: The bid process closed at 3 p.m.on March 17, Key Code Media, Inc. of Mountlake Terrace has been accepted as the low bidder for the job at a bid of $67, POLICY CONSIDERATIONS FOR SEPTIC TO SEWER CONVERSIONS STAFF: PETER BROOKS, WATER RESOURCES MANAGER INFORMATION ONLY Presently, there are 17,000 septic systems in Thurston County. Of that number, 10,000 are located in the City of Lacey and its urban growth area. Council will meet with the County Commissioners in April to discuss the development of regulations to enforce septic to sewer conversion. Prior to this meeting, Council has the opportunity to review several policy model options for sewer line extension. Why does it matter? Page 1

2 Safety of our Current Water Supply About 2 million gallons of septic effluent soaks into the ground in the Lacey service area each day. This poses a risk to our water supply. Nitrogen concentrations have already increased in some of Lacey s water supply wells. Provision for Future Water Supply getting water has an advantage It is unlikely that Lacey will be granted additional water rights. The city has 30 years of water rights, but cannot receive anymore, due to a state Supreme Court ruling that water rights are temporary, not permanent. If the 2 million gallons of septic effluent was collected, treated, and stored in the ground, it would provide for 8,400 additional homes. Or, an extension of 15 to 20 years on Lacey s water rights capacity. Protect our Surface Waters Lacey residents enjoy recreating on our lakes and Puget Sound. Excessive amounts of nitrogen from septic systems contribute to rapid growth of water weeds and algae blooms. Established policy principles Prevent new development from utilizing septic systems. (i.e. no new short plats or subdivisions on septic systems.) Contain the price for septic conversions. Cities use a pragmatic approach to extend sewer employing these principles; Inside city limits first Avoid leap frogging Highest risk before lower risk A reasonable time-frame is 45 to 75 years to convert all parcels with septic systems within the city and UGA. Conversion programs in each city are independent but as consistent as practicable. Policy Models for Sewer Line Extension Policy Scenarios 1. Status Quo - The City of Lacey does not undertake a multiyear program to extend sewer into neighborhoods served by septic systems. 2. Extend sewer lines into neighborhoods presently served by septic systems over a 60 to 70-year period with no requirement to connect until septic system failure. 3. Extend sewer lines into neighborhoods presently served by septic systems over a 60 to 70-year period with a minimum time period to connect. Page 2

3 4. Extend sewer lines into neighborhoods presently served by septic systems over a 60 to 70-year period with a minimum time period to connect and an incentive to connect sooner. Status Quo - The City of Lacey does not undertake a multiyear program to extend sewer into neighborhoods served by septic systems. Pro No additional fee on utility bill for an extension program. Con As septic systems age and fail, property owners will have to replace them with expensive advanced treatment onsite systems, if that is even possible. Groundwater, from which the City of Lacey draws its water supply, continues to be unprotected from septic effluent placing the city s water supply at risk. Septic systems situated over soils which drain too well and provide little treatment will likely never fail hydraulically. When the septic tank fails, the owner will replace the tank and continue to use the septic system perpetuating the release of pollutants. The water quality of Puget Sound and its tributary streams is allowed to be degraded by septic effluent. If the septic system conversion issue is resolved at all it, will be in a chaotic, expensive, emergency manner when citizens complain about the cost of installing advanced treatment onsite systems and demand sewer be extended to them. In short, the status quo is not proactive. Septic effluent is not collected, treated, and used to extend Lacey s finite water supply. Extend sewer lines into neighborhoods presently served by septic systems with no requirement to connect until septic system failure. Definition of Option No cost to property owners in newly served neighborhoods for the sewer line extension. Extensions are payed for by a rate increase or monthly fixed charge for sewer and/or water. No minimum connection time No availability fee Property owner pays sewer connection fees at the time of actual connection to include; Lacey Sewer GFC LOTT CDC Cost of physical connection to the sewer lateral for their property Cost to decommission the septic system on their property (currently estimated at $12,000 to $15,000) Pro Sewer lines will have adequate flow sooner thus minimizing additional O&M costs. Page 3

4 Con Same as with prior option plus; Some property owners on septic will oppose the minimum connection time. Extend sewer lines into neighborhoods presently served by septic systems with minimum time to connect and incentive to connect. Definition of Option Same definition as previous option plus, there will be incentives for early connection. One option could be a discount on connection fees if connection occurs within a limited time from when sewer is made available. Another option could be the imposition of an availability fee that is no longer charged once a property is connected to sewer. A third option could be suggesting to neighborhoods about to receive sewer lines that they consider forming a ULID. Pro Sewer lines will have adequate flow even sooner thus further minimizing O&M costs. Con Same as with prior option plus; Council discussed all options for the extension of sewer lines, and agreed that doing nothing (status quo) is not an option. Staff will provide additional information on cost estimates and distribution of payment for sewer line extensions CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN STAFF: STATUS: TOM PALMATEER, PW MANAGEMENT ANALYST REVIEW THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN AND MOVE FORWARD FOR COUNCIL ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE. SCHEDULED FOR MARCH 23, 2017, COUNCIL AGENDA. Capital Facilities Plans are considered a mandatory element of the city s overall Comprehensive Plan by the Growth Management Act as set forth in RCW 36.70A. A Capital Facility Plan element must show an inventory of existing capital facilities, their locations, and a forecast of the future needs to include locations and capacities. It must show a least a six-year plan that details how the city intends to finance the cost of the facilities consistent with the city s revenue forecast. This new annual update, the Capital Facilities Plan, includes an Executive Summary, an Introduction, and sections for General Government, Parks, Transportation, Wastewater, Stormwater, Water and applicable Appendices. It updates all capital projects planned in the current 6-year window of 2017 to 2022 and future years to The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the draft CFP on February 21, Notice of the hearing was sent to public agencies, interested parties, and published in the Olympian. No written comments were received and no members of the public attended the Page 4

5 hearing. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend the draft update of the CFP to the City Council for adoption. COUNCIL VACANCY PROCESS PRESENTER: SCOTT SPENCE, CITY MANAGER INFORMATION ONLY. NEED TIMELINE DECIDED. State law requires that the City Council make an appointment to fill this vacancy within 90 days of the resignation date, effective March 9, The successful applicant appointed to fill the vacancy will serve until a qualified person is elected at the next regular election for municipal officers (November 2017). As outlined in the Council Policies-Procedures Manual, the following procedures for filling a vacancy will be used during this process. Recruitment Process The recruitment process will be coordinated through the City Manager s office. After Notice of Resignation is filed with the City Council, the City prepares an announcement and application form to be advertised in the local paper, City website, and social media. Note: per policy 2-3 week s advertisement. Per Council Policies-Procedures Manual, the Mayor will accept suggested interview questions from each Councilmember. Interview process City Council conducts interviews in an open public meeting. The decision as to which applicants to interview will be determined by the City Council based on information contained in the application form. The applicants order of appearance will be determined by the date and time when the application was received. The Council shall ask the pre-determined set of questions, which must be responded to by the applicant. Each applicant will be asked and answer the same set of questions. Followup questions, based upon responses, are permitted. Upon approval of Council, an informal question and answer period in which Councilmembers ask and receive answers to miscellaneous questions may be set aside for 10 minutes. Voting Process Upon completion of interviews, Council may convene into executive session to discuss qualifications of applicants. However, all interviews, deliberations, nominations, and votes taken by Council must be in open public session. The Council may not determine who to select, or reach a consensus on a preferred candidate, in executive session. The Mayor shall ask for nominations from Councilmembers for the purpose of creating a group of candidates to be considered. No second needed. Page 5

6 Nominations are closed by a motion, second, and majority vote of Council. Council may deliberate on such matters, as criteria for selection, and the nominated group of candidates. Mayor polls the Councilmembers to ascertain if they are prepared to vote. Voting needs to take place in a manner in which the public is notified as to the vote of each existing Councilmember for which candidate. If there is more than one candidate, a vote must be taken for each candidate to record each Councilmember s vote. The selection of a candidate to fill the vacancy is made by a majority vote of the remaining six members of the City Council. Council may postpone elections until another date, if a majority vote is not received. The Mayor shall declare the nominee receiving the majority vote as the new Councilmember to be sworn in immediately after the effective date of the resignation. If Council does not appoint a qualified person to fill the vacancy within 90 days of occurrence of the vacancy, the County Commissioners will appoint a person to fill the vacancy. Applicants must be a resident of the City of Lacey for a period of at least one year prior to his/her appointment. Applicants must be a registered voter of the city at the time of filing his/her declaration of candidacy. Pursuant to RCW 29A , the candidate appointed to fill the vacancy will serve until a qualified person is elected at the next regular election for municipal officers ( ). The candidate elected at the 2017 general election will serve the remainder of Councilmember Gadman s term ( ). Council discussion Timeline for filling vacancy: Date range for applications? March 20 April 7, 2017 Date to approve list of candidates? All applicants will be interviewed. Date for interviews and/or for final appointment? Interviews scheduled for April 17; need more discussion on when to appoint immediately following interviews or future Council meeting? April 13 meet prior to Council session from 5:30 6:30 with light dinner to finalize interview details. Per last vacancy process, does Council want to limit interview questions to one Councilmember each? Yes. Interview questions should be sent to Mayor and/or City Manager by April 7. Per last vacancy process, does Council want to limit interview questions to 15 minutes? Still open for discussion may depend on number of applicants 15 minutes each would be 3 hours); a second interview meeting may be needed if applicants exceed 12. Discussion still open on whether to distribute questions to applicants prior to interviews. The meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m. Page 6