Notes from Shoreline City Council meeting April 22, 2019

Shoreline City Hall
Photo by Steven H. Robinson

City Council 4/22/2019 Meeting 

Notes by Pam Cross

The meeting was called to order by Mayor Hall at 7:00pm

• All Councilmembers were present.
• Mayor Hall Proclaimed April 22, 2019 as Earth Day in Shoreline. 
• The first Earth Day was celebrated on April 22, 1970 with the message that the success of future generations depends on how we act today to protect our environment.
• Bettelinn Brown, a long-time community volunteer working in Southwoods Park since 2005, accepted the Earth Day Proclamation 

Report of the City Manager, Debbie Tarry

• Congratulation to Miranda Redinger, Senior Planner, who is a recipient of a Green Globe Award by King County for being a leader in green building and the regulations the Council has adopted. The Green Globe Awards are the County’s highest honor for local environmental efforts.
• Tuesday 5/28 is the final Home Improvement Workshop 6:00 to 8:00pm at City Hall. Reserve an appointment to discuss your project at shoreline.gov/homeimprovement. There is also a vendor fair that does not require an appointment.
• Saturday 4/27 you can celebrate Shoreline’s annual Earth Day Every Day. This event will be held at Central Market from 9:00am to 2:00pm. There are free samples and giveaways. You can register for giveaways to skip the line at www.shorelinewa.gov/calendar 
• Public Reminders
• Wednesday 4/24 at 6:00pm in Council Chamber there is a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner regarding the Special Use Permit for the Lynnwood Link Extension Light Rail Transit Project
• Thursday 4/25 the PRCS/Tree Board will meet at 7:00pm in room 303. 

Council Reports

• Mayor Hall commented that more environmentally friendly buildings are being built in Shoreline than anywhere else. We had 216 in the last 18 months. He thanked Miranda for her key part in making this happen.
• Councilmember McGlashan attended the Sound Transit System Expansion Committee meeting and spoke on behalf of the 5 City Coalition on 522/523 Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project to thank Sound Transit and staff for trying to get everybody everything they want which is nearly impossible. Also to remind them that two interchanges still need work: 145th and 5th NE as well as Lake City Way and 145th. 
• Councilmember Chang attended the Regional Transit Committee (RTC) meeting. Two topics were discussed. A consultant spoke on income inequality and described how Metro can be better prepared to serve low income people. Metro is already providing several of the services. The other topic was electrification of the bus fleet including articulated buses. Electrical articulated are supposed to work well in the snow.
• Councilmember Roberts attended the Sound Cities Association Public Issues Committee meeting. The King County Conservation District is seeking to raise rates. Many concerns were expressed. The Committee adopted a proposal that is similar to a letter signed by several mayors in King County asking cities to review their policies on affordable housing. 

Public Comment 

• Rev. Kelly Dahlman-Oeth, Pastor of Ronald Methodist Church, spoke in support of having a Shoreline Community Court (Study Item 9a) and offered to invest his time in it.
• Alan Charnley thanked the Council for supporting bike lanes. He also hopes Council adopts Action Item 8a Authorizing Salmon Safe. 
• George Mauer spoke about changes to Richmond Beach Road in spite of widespread opposition as fraud/deception.
• Janet Way, Shoreline Preservation Society, spoke against the destruction of more trees in Hamlin Park. Study Item 9b Maintenance Facility Analysis.
• Laethan Wene invited everyone to attend the Special Olympics on May 5th at Shoreline Stadium. He will be among the competitors. Please come out and cheer us on. 

The agenda and the consent calendar were approved unanimously.

Action Item 8a Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Salmon-Safe Certification Pre-Condition Agreement
Staff Report by Miranda Redinger, Senior Planner

It was a very brief summary since this was broadly discussed at the April 8th Council meeting.

Discussion

The primary concern at this point is future costs. There is no extra money to be spent on consultants. $80k to do the assessment is all that was allocated.

The City would not be required to commit to anything. This is an opportunity providing advice and feedback as well as marketing, all as part of the $80k. We need to balance all the varied environmental needs of a city. We thought we were further along until we saw the list of suggested improvements. The assessment has turned to be more informative that we thought. It provides ways we can improve and we can select the most appropriate. It provides a framework. Any potential additional expenses will come before Council as part of the capital project. We are considered a leader in protecting the environmental. We spent the money, let’s do it.

The motion passed unanimously.

Study Items 9a Discussing Shoreline Community Court
Staff report by Christina Arcidy, Management Analyst
Judge Donna Tucker, King County District Court

Community Court (CommCourt) provides an alternative problem solving method for repeat low-level offenders. There are several throughout the country in slightly different forms. King County District Court (KCDC) partners with one in Redmond and another in Burien. They would like Shoreline to be the third.

What does it do?

It provides an alternative to jail for repeat cycle offenders who may suffer from any one, or combination of, homelessness, poverty, substance disorders, or mental health issues.

This is a voluntary program that tries to break the cycle - or stop it at the first offense. In Redmond, CommCourt participants need to report to court every week. CommCourt offers resources and assistance by being co-located with community resource centers that are open at the same time as the court. 15 different resources are in Redmond. That way you can access multiple resources at one location. If one person is unable to assist you, they direct you to another table whose representative can provide what you need. It is also open to the public, and public participation is greater than the number of offenders in Redmond.

Redmond has limited the type of misdemeanors and does not allow felons, driving offenses, or those with a sex offender history. It is suggested to keep the list of misdemeanors as broad as safely can be done.

What kind of results are we seeing?

KCDC doesn’t know the impact on crime yet because it’s too new. Another year or two is needed. Red Hook in Brooklyn showed results of lower recidivism and lower costs. Burien’s has been in operation 8 weeks so their numbers are estimates. Will have better numbers within the next 6 months. If we get an idea of the number of jail days that are reduced, we can calculate the savings since we know the cost per day that we spend jailing.

Collaboration that is needed:

• The city has to provide space and security. KCDC has money to study results but not implement the system.
• Several cities want a CommCourt, but KCDC is prepared to ask for Shoreline next because the City has shown interest and the Judges support it. 

Shoreline’s next steps

• Form a steering committee of community stakeholders and create workgroups to plan the court logistics, eligibility criteria/case processing, resource center, etc

Discussion

Who determines what the treatment program is? If the individual wants to volunteer, CommCourt does the assessment, the prosecutor and defense attorney reach an agreement on terms and conditions, then this is discussed with the individual and they are told what is expected of them (community service, weekly appearances at court, for example). A contract is signed. If they fail, they go back to regular court and do some jail time or pay some fines.

The saving in court costs and jail costs offset some of the expense of the building and security, as well as the $140/year cost to Shoreline for the Court itself. The resource providers get their money elsewhere.

What kind of facility is needed space wise? Our courthouse is full. What about the third courtroom? It’s too small for resources and they prefer to keep it away from the courthouse in a less formal atmosphere. They need a room large enough to conduct court, and a second room for 20 different agencies and their tables. Space for evaluator. A private room for attorneys to meet with clients and with each other. It’s best if it’s all at one location so people just have to walk down the hall. Shoreline will have to find the space. Security is required by state law (to wand). But this location is needed for only three hours, one day per week. Burien uses their community center and there was no blowback even though it caters to seniors and children. Redmond uses its library and it hasn’t been a problem. Shoreline CC has expressed an interest. It’s not centrally located but is accessible by Metro. 

How are jurisdictional issues addressed since offenders cross jurisdictions. Anyone who lives in Shoreline would be ok. Adjacent jurisdictions sometimes give the person a break when they learn they are an agreement with a CommCourt. Kenmore is not interested so they probably wouldn’t refer many to Shoreline. LFP court could refer to Shoreline CommCourt. Since it’s optional, does it take repeated invitations? No, their public defender/attorney usually encourages participation. Once they’ve had an assessment and been told what is required of them, they know whether or not it’s something they’re interested in. Does it save money? Probably. Does it help the community? Definitely.

This is good for our community. But we have a much smaller revenue stream. Do voters want to spend more still? That would be tough. But we shouldn’t focus solely on the cost.

Think of this as encouraging compassionate accountability. Managing the system without help is formidable. This relies on strong volunteer support to help get people through the door, and encourage them to work with the resource center. Just be there. And police are an important part because these are people they see on the streets. Success, and we want them to succeed, will mean fewer problems in the future for the police.

Study Item 9b Update Discussion of the City Maintenance Facility Analysis
Staff report by Randy Witt, Public Works Director and
John Featherstone, one of Shoreline’s Capital Project Managers

A single Maintenance Facility is not doable and we’re looking at our existing city owned properties. Parks is included in this conversation.

The sites considered for this analysis include:
• Hamlin Yard Maintenance Facility (16006 15th Avenue NE),
• North Maintenance Facility (NMF) (19547 25th Avenue NE),
• Brightwater Portal (Brightwater) (20031 Ballinger Way NE)
• Ronald Wastewater District Property (17505 Linden Avenue N) – property to be transferred to the City following Assumption.

• Highland Plaza (1306 N 175th Street) - Turned out to be too small.
• North City Water District Site - Turned out to be too small, and the timeline didn’t work

Staff recommendation

Scenario A – Hamlin Yard Maximum Capacity

This alternative maximizes the future maintenance facility capacity at Hamlin Yard by proposing a 4,400 square foot (0.1 acre) yard expansion to the north into Hamlin Park. Most of this expansion area would be for the new two-story building footprint, located on the north side of the yard. Scenario A provides the best site configuration for Hamlin Yard, allowing the most space for traffic circulation flow, storage and other operational uses. Scenario A impacts fewer trees and fewer large trees compared to Scenario D by minimizing impacts to a stand of mature trees along the south side of Hamlin Yard. The higher amount of Hamlin Yard canopy covered parking available under Scenario A allows for a smaller maintenance site footprint at the NMF site, and a greater area of that site to be converted to park expansion, compared to Scenario D.

Hamlin Park is an 80 acre park and the existing Maintenance Facility there is about 1.5 acres. This option includes only 0.1 acre additional.

Full details available in the Staff Report available online.

Discussion

This is a 50 year plan. We just need to get it started. Removing the fewest number of trees is appreciated. It is obvious we need multiple sites. Hamlin Park needs some help with undercover could help offset tree loss. We need protection for the new equipment we are investing in. Will it be possible to put in electric for future use of electric equipment.Should be able to at a later date. Sidewalks need to be put in as part of the changes. They will address that in the design phase. Is it possible to put some of the staff parking someplace other than Hamlin Park? 30 vehicle spots is a lot. We are asking business to provide less parking. Why not use the some of the existing parking at the park? Use street parking. Re-shape parking to work around existing trees? We have 23 FT staff, 10 seasonal, and space for a couple visitors so we are already past the 30. More staff will be hired. We realize we need to have people drive less. 2025 is the final discussion. Let’s put this on the back burner for now.

We all agree this scenario preserves the most trees. If we can save even more, no matter where they are, should we? Council needs to weigh the balance between saving every single tree and a providing services we need to support our growing population. We do that by putting growth where it belongs and providing services to support that growth. Many people want things to stay the same. When we plant trees, as we did along Aurora, no one complained about not preserving the status quo. There are no complaints when we buy new parkland. That is changing the status quo. The status quo is killing our salmon and destroying our environment. We have an opportunity for 5 new acres from the Fircrest property. Here we are talking about 1/10th of one acre. It is Council’s responsibility to see to the needs of the entire community. If we can remove a few trees and still show net environmental benefits, we need to do that. And since this scenario includes multiple locations, we are making improvements in different parts of the City.

We’ve been talking about this for 5 years. We cannot afford to continue to delay. Construction costs continue to rise. This is scheduled for the June 3, 2019 meeting, continued as a discussion item, and will include impact on CIP.

Council agreed to additional outreach to make sure the citizens are aware of the plans and the alternatives we have considered. Let’s get the word out there so people don’t think the City didn’t do enough public engagement.

Meeting adjourned at 9:52pm

The April 29, 2019 Council Meeting has been cancelled.