Council Minutes for May 18, 2009 City of Bellingham, WA

RECORD OF PROCEEDING OF CITY COUNCIL

CITY OF BELLINGHAM, WASHINGTON

COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL
Monday, May 18, 2009, 07:00 PM
Book: 63, Page: 1

REGULAR MEETING

Called To Order The meeting was called to order by Council President Barry Buchanan who led the Pledge of Allegiance.

Roll Call
Present:

Jack Weiss, Council Member, First Ward
Barry Buchanan, Council Member, Third Ward
Gene Knutson, Council Member, Second Ward
Stan Snapp, Council Member, Fourth Ward
Terry Bornemann, Council Member, Fifth Ward
Louise Bjornson, Council Member, At Large
Barbara Ryan, Council Member, Sixth Ward

Excused:

ANNOUNCEMENT(S)

ˇ On June 1st @ 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, there will be a Public Hearing regarding the 2010-2015 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).

ˇ On June 3rd @ 6:30 p.m., Council's Lake Whatcom Reservoir Committee will host a Fishbowl Dialog in the Fireplace Room, 625 Halleck Street, to discuss the effects of the Lake Whatcom phosphorus reduction programs on the residents of the Silver Beach Neighborhood.

ˇ On June 15th @ 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, there will be a Public Hearing regarding an Appeal to Council of a Public Works Director decision denying extension of contract water services to the Governor's Point Development Company.

ˇ On June 15th @ 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, there will be a Public Hearing regarding amendments to the Guide Meridian/Cordata, King Mountain, Meridian and Mt. Baker neighborhood zoning tables to establish a provision allowing payment of fees in lieu of acquiring transfer of development rights from the Lake Whatcom Watershed.

Bellingham City Council meets all requirements of the State of Washington Open Meetings Act.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

BARBARA RYAN / KNUTSON moved approval of the April 27, 2009 and May 4, 2009 minutes of the regular Council Meetings as submitted. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.

15 - MINUTE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD

PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD

The following citizens spoke during public comment in support of asking the city to sponsor a forum on Bellingham becoming a sanctuary city:

Nicholas Spring
Andrew Davis
Marie Marchand
Lisa Marcus
Ian M. A. Grant
Yoshe Revelle
Gene Marx
Larry Hildes
Elizabeth Hayes
Matteo Tamburini
Drew Wollenhouse

Bob Burr, 1130 40th Street spoke in opposition to a 500' buffer zone where stores sell firearms [AB 18405] and spoke in support of Bellingham becoming a sanctuary city.

Stephen Mason, Jr. spoke in opposition to 500' buffer zone where stores sell firearms [AB 18405].

Bruce Deile spoke in support of the 500' buffer zone where stores sell firearms [AB 18405].

Eric Hirst, 1932 Rhododendron Way urged Council to increase the Park Impact Fee from 35% to at least 43%.

Kym Welch (Manager, Yeager's Sporting Goods) spoke in opposition to 500' buffer zone where stores sell firearms [AB 18405].

Dave Pros, 1466 Roy Road said that, according to growth management experts, the county performing a 22 year population projection before a census is done is inappropriate.

Erin, a member of the Bellingham Swim Team, thanked the council for all the pool time the team gets at the Arne Hannah Aquatic Center.

PRESENTATION(S)

AB18433 1. NORTH SOUND BAYKEEPER REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY STORMWATER REGULATION AND PHASE 2 MUNICIPAL PERMIT

Wendy Steffensen of North Sound Baykeeper presented a PowerPoint entitled “Stormwater in the North Sound and Straits: Assessing the Impacts and Taking Action.”

Ms. Steffensen discussed the types of storm water, its' pollution, best management practices and the role of the North Sound Baykeeper Stormwater Program. There are three main types of stormwater: Construction, Industrial and Municipal.

ˇ Construction stormwater – Baykeeper is working to train citizens and contractors on how to assess sites and report sites with potential to pollute.
ˇ Industrial Stormwater – Baykeeper is working to inspect industries and ensure they have permits; assist industries to get into permit compliance via industry sector and one-on-one education and how to report and track permit compliance.
ˇ Municipal stormwater – Baykeeper is assisting with educating citizens, businesses and staff; referring construction stormwater complaints and tracking industrial facilities that may be the source of illicit discharges.

The Baykeeper team recommends that the city:

ˇ Increase staff and inspectors to address Department of Ecology Phase II requirements.
ˇ Work with other Phase II municipalities and the Baykeeper to educate residents and industry about stormwater issues and requirements.
ˇ Ensure that construction sites and industrial facilities, that need Ecology permits, have them.
ˇ Educate and then enforce polluters who disobey the law.

Information only.

PUBLIC HEARING(S)

AB18434 Resolution #2009-14
1. A RESOLUTION FOR RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING POTENTIAL CHANGES TO BELLINGHAM'S URBAN GROWTH AREA BOUNDARY

Greg Aucutt, Senior Planner explained that, at the request of Whatcom County, cities have been
asked to provide recommendations regarding potential changes to Urban Growth Area (UGA) boundaries by June 1, 2009. Staff recommends that the city retain the current UGA boundaries and adopt the proposed resolution.

The Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 5, 2009 and agreed that no changes to the UGA boundaries are needed or should be made at this time.

Council Member Weiss asked about the process and methodology used for the Land Capacity Analysis (LCA).

Mr. Aucutt replied that the Technical Advisory Group (TAG), which includes staff from all of the cities in Whatcom County, worked together to develop the methodology that was initially recommended to the city by a consultant hired by the county. It is a work in progress and the issues that were raised in the staff report are being addressed by the county. The County is doing a next generation LCA and he expects it very soon.

Council Member Weiss asked if any changes are anticipated with the new version of the LCA.

Mr. Aucutt said he hasn't seen the results yet but believes that with the recommendations that the city has made the actual capacity that's projected for the city and UGA will be slightly less than it is now.

Council President Buchanan opened the public hearing.

Bill Bliss, 1834 North Shore Drive reviewed process to date with regard to his property and its' relationship to the King Mountain Urban Growth Area. He has submitted a detailed letter to council [agenda packet, pps. 51-54]. In February 2008, the county council removed his land from the city's recommended UGA. Because of the need for a new north-south connector and access to the King Mountain area he asked that the city re-evaluate his property and reconsider adding it to the UGA.

Simi Jain, Attorney, ZenderThurston representing Robert Matichuk said that the county made a mistake when it downzoned the Matichuk property from UR-3 to R5. [Letter and exhibits, agenda packet, pps. 101-115]. The county said that the property was underutilized and undeveloped. Ms. Jain said that there are services there and almost every parcel in the block is developed. The county said that they weren't prepared to review their decision until hearing the city's recommendation and they will also be studying that area as part of their Environmental Impact Study (EIS) process. Mr. Matichuk hopes to get the city's agreement that a mistake was made and that the county should fix this mistake in December when it makes changes to the UGA. The overall net difference of this change would be one more residence in that area and would provide a great benefit to Mr. Matichuk. Additionally, it would straighten out an irregular boundary in the Geneva area. City staff and the Planning Commission have recommended that the council request that the county review the Matichuk property in the Geneva UGA to determine if the property was mistakenly removed. In response to inquiries by the council, Ms. Jain clarified that each lot is less than ž acre and there is development on all lots except for two. Because of the zoning change and the downzone, those two lots are vacant. If the county were to change the zoning back to UR3, then there would be two lots available, however, their client only anticipates building one house.

Dave Pros, 1466 Roy Road noted that the County's Comprehensive Plan Visioning Process said that people throughout Whatcom County wanted their cities to grow up and not out. Since Bellingham does not have a height restriction, no one can really say that there's not enough room for more people in Bellingham or that Bellingham must continue to sprawl. The argument of needing more land available so that people do not have to move to the rural areas brings attention to the real problem - a willingness of the Whatcom County government to subsidize growth in rural areas. If the county changed from having taxpayers pay for growth to the city's process of growth paying its fair share, the playing field would be more level. People could choose to live where the services are and not move to the rural area just because, on the surface, rural living looks less expensive. He believes it does not matter how much land is available inside Bellingham until the county stops directing taxpayer money to encourage growth in the rural areas. Hopefully, he said, the city can inspire the county to follow its' lead of finding out what people want and be willing to lead in achieving those goals.

Carl Weimer, 1055 West Laurel Road, a member of the Whatcom County Council emphasized that he was speaking on his own behalf and not representing the County Council. He has a concern about the population numbers and the UGA's sizing. The city administrations' policy decision wants to leave all the UGA's the way they are right now. But recently the city chose a small population projection number of 113,050. He feels there is a conflict between the low population number and the new policy. At some point in the near future, the county is going to have to start making decisions about the size of the UGA's and those population numbers. He asked for clarity from the city - do you want the low population number; or do you want UGA's?

Mary Dickinson, Governmental Affairs Director, Building Industry Association of Whatcom County (BIA), 1650 Baker Creek Place. Ms. Dickinson thanked Greg Aucutt for his comprehensive summary of the entire process and said that the BIA agrees that any further changes of the UGA should be postponed until 2011. At the same time, the BIA recognizes that the city is under immense pressure from the county to comply with the county's deadline. The BIA offers the following suggestions/ideas:

ˇ The city is being asked to make decisions regarding the UGA without the appropriate information; i.e., the county's draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has just been released. The final Whatcom County EIS will not be released until at least September, 2009. It would be practically impossible and possibly, legally indefensible, for the city to make changes before this EIS review process is complete.
ˇ Mr. Aucutt pointed out in his staff report that Growth Management Act (GMA) planning must be realistic. At this time considering density in the Waterfront and Edgemoor areas is unrealistic.
ˇ The GMA requires that there be land supply to accommodate future population projections under RCW 36.70A.115 - jurisdictions must accommodate their allocated housing and employment growth as adopted in the 20 year population forecast from the Office of Financial Management. The Governor signed into law Substitute House Bill 1825 adding a new section, in addition to the allocated housing and employment growth, “as part of this planning process, each city within the county must include areas sufficient to accommodate the broad range of needs and uses that will accompany the projected urban growth including, as appropriate, medical, governmental, institutional, commercial, service, retail and other non-residential uses.”
ˇ Transfer of Development Rights (TDR's) are not a reliable measure of future density. The TDR bank has proven to be a dismal failure; valuation will always be a problem with TDR's as the people sending the TDR's think they're valued far more than the people receiving them; the supply of TDR's will never by steady. The BIA agrees with Mr. Aucutt's report that TDR's, at this time, are not a reliable tool to facilitate density projections. It can be a tool but it should not be one to make a decision for land supply.
ˇ GMA requires communities to encourage the availability of affordable housing; promote a variety of residential densities and housing types and encourage preservation of existing housing stocks. The GMA has an element that ensures the vitality and character of established residential neighborhoods with planning for single family residences.
ˇ The BIA agrees with Mr. Aucutt's assessment that these issues and others warrant more review than can occur before the deadline.
ˇ The city would benefit from an independent analysis, which would assist the city in not being out of compliance with its already adopted Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, the city would have to do an analysis of how the county's requested increased density would impact existing neighborhood character such as in Edgemoor and Birchwood. There is not time, under the deadline, to comprehensively conduct these studies.
ˇ Ms. Dickinson concurred that there is no “bright line” rule in state law that defines urban density as, at least four dwelling units per acre. The burden of proving otherwise rests with the county.

Clayton Petree, 1132 Birch Street reviewed the rural sprawl and it's affect on Whatcom County since 1990. Between 1990 and 1995, before the Growth Management Act (GMA) was implemented, Bellingham, Ferndale and Lynden attracted under 38% of the population growth in Whatcom County. When the interim urban growth areas were designated in 1994, they began to affect growth patterns. It is not an accident that once GMA was implemented, growth was directed into urban areas and rural sprawl was reduced. Between 2002 and 2008, many unincorporated UGA's were cut off from development, housing choice was severely restricted in Bellingham, land supply was consumed and not adequately replaced, the amount of growth that the major urban areas attracted again dropped to much lower levels and rural sprawl increased. The inescapable conclusion is that restriction of housing choice forces families and other to live outside of Bellingham. It's not what the county does, he said, it's what the cities do.

John Lesow, Point Roberts, member of the Whatcom County Planning Commission, noted that he was not speaking as a representative of the Planning Commission. He believes that the County Planning Commission members are in line with the conclusions of David Stalheim, Whatcom County Planning Director. He noted that most of the members that studied this issue in 2004-2006 are still on the County Planning Commission. He started in 2004 but it didn't take long to realize that under the previous city Planning Director, the system was expanding into about 5,000 acres of greenfields. He said, if you take the safety factor of 25%, the market supply factor of 15%, put minimum zoning on the lots within the Bellingham UGA analysis and Land Capacity Analysis and then work with suspect numbers, you're going to come to the conclusion that we do need to expand into the Greenfield. It is his understanding from what was in the paper today, that it has been concluded the city can in fact, increase its density and accommodate its' population without moving into these urban growth areas. This whole system could be re-examined and we could come up with different results.

He feels it is a red herring, articulated by the city's Planning Director that the biggest problem with sprawl are the 18,000 vested short plats out in county. What are we going to do with them? Mr. Lesow said, maybe we should appreciate that those were mistakes and should not be propagated again by allowing densities that are beyond the care and capacity of this county.

Dan McShane, 1451 Grant Street responded to the four 'now therefore' paragraphs in the proposed resolution.

1. With regard to the Land Capacity Analysis - it is hard to predict the future. The city is agreeing to monitor the development, which is critical.
2. He also interprets the Hearings Board decision that there is no “bright line”.
3. He asked the city to give some rationale for a lower density; and asked the council to put a statement in the resolution that the city supports not allowing any more urban lots to be created within the Lake Whatcom watershed.
4. Suggested taking the Lake Padden watershed out of the UGA.

He said he hopes the community now understands the cost of urbanizing lakes and watershed and that he knows the city is struggling with an incredibly difficult restoration effort. I know city staff is recommending not making a change but having once been in a similar position, he said, the city has an opportunity to do a good thing and that is to fix an error before it gets too big.

Bob Tull, Attorney referenced his letter in the agenda packet [Pps. 116-120 on behalf of Caitac USA, Corporation] and feels this has gotten so complicated because of blending the work and process of the Comprehensive Plan review and revision of the ten year review of Urban Growth Areas . The ten-year review is a look back: are the Urban Growth Areas adequately sized and what do we need to do to make them work? The Comprehensive Plan revision process is, by its very nature, a look forward resulting in a much slower process in starting the impact statement process. These evaluations should not be done until the LCA is done and the impact statement process is far enough along for the public to react to it. At that time council would receive a different staff report as this one is premature. When the city has a full review of the Comprehensive Plan it will be reminded that what is happening today, in terms of discussion of urban growth boundaries and population growth forecast, are not consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. This intersection of the different processes is causing confusion.

When it's time to look at housing balance, commuting and dispersion, and what can be done with respect to making sure that Bellingham captures an appropriate share the city will want to balance that with the theory of trying to make the cities grow up instead of out and what that means to existing neighborhoods. As you put pressure on existing single family residential housing stock you'll be putting pressure on the smallest and most affordable houses and the market and people who are usually possessed of fewer choices than those at the upper end of the market.

Mr. Tull's client, Caitac, is eagerly awaiting the opportunity to begin their planning process - one that actually addresses a new neighborhood that is concentrating on balancing housing types, reducing reliance on automobiles and all of the other goals associated with smart growth. Clayton's [Petree] report shows that during the time when we had explicit compliance, despite the background of all those thousands of rural opportunities, people were choosing to build single family residences and other homes in Bellingham. During the time land supply was absolutely constricted there was a dispersion of people to small towns, Tonight's action is not in the right sequence; you need to have the LCA completed, public scrutiny; conclusions need to be debated and then implementation studied from an environmental standpoint. Some of this will have to go through the Comprehensive Plan process in a year or two but right now we should focus and continue to review what has been working; what we have to do. The notion that we start with the assumption that an incomplete Land Capacity Analysis yields the conclusions that you have to reduce your UGA's is very problematic. It will be challenging to remove someone from the UGA after fifteen-plus years. Mr. Tull looks forward to working with the council to make it possible for this city to capture the share of population that is best for the entire community. That's how we'll protect rural lands; reduce commute trip miles and have the economic vitality we need to keep this community really healthy.

David Stalheim, Whatcom County Planning & Development Services Director feels that Whatcom County and the City of Bellingham have shared goals of commitment to infill as well as coordination and cooperation on these issues. That's why it is confusing to us [the County] when we start making some of these regional land use decisions, that we don't seem to be able to fulfill some of those commitments to those shared goals. In June, 2008 Whatcom County Executive Pete Kremen formed the Growth Management Coordinating Council (GMCC) for the specific purpose of coordinating the cities and the county on growth management purposes. The elected officials on the GMCC have come up with two main recommendations: 1) an overall county growth forecast for both population and employment and, 2) the Land Capacity Analysis methodology that is now under debate.

Both of these recommendations from the GMCC are not being followed by the City of Bellingham at this time. The choice of the City of Bellingham to choose 234,000 people as its future growth forecast is in contradiction to the GMCC recommendation of 251,000. The GMCC has now adjusted that number slightly upward, based on the allocation requests from all of the cities, to about 252,000 people. If the City of Bellingham goes higher than 113,000, he asked: are you expecting the county forecast to change? And if you are expecting it to change, which city am I supposed to go ask to reduce their numbers? The GMCC approved the LCA in December and review and adjustments were made after the public process and review. The data was sent to each of the cities for review and correction. The results were published in January followed by further review and comment. Staff has continued to make adjustments to the methodology based on public input. Some of those adjustments are the issues of re-division of land or large lots that are underutilized in residential areas; underutilized commercial areas and floodplain areas. In the latest version we have taken out all floodplain areas from any kind of capacity for development within the urban growth areas. The City of Bellingham is actually achieving higher densities than the city's plan says. If we plug in achieved densities the land capacity goes to the exact opposite and we show that the city needs even less Urban Growth Area. However, this is not true in every one of the city's zones and that's the kind of a specific feedback that we're hoping to receive.

With respect to the “bright line”, Whatcom County is specifically allowed to have less than four units per acre but only in environmentally sensitive areas. The County rezoned all the areas in our jurisdiction to at least four units per acre that were not in sensitive watersheds. The county is not asking, at this moment, for the city to rezone those areas because of the large public process but we are saying when we look at the LCA that the data shows that the city actually is achieving greater than four units per acre in some zones and we should be planning for those on the net acres that are left in those areas.

Mr. Stahlheim explained the inventory process as starting with inventory of all the acres available and then removing all critical areas (wetlands, geologic hazard areas, floodplains, parks, public uses and planned areas); minus 23% for infrastructure; a market factor for vacant land and a market factor for underutilized land. Using assumed densities this process shows that the city is able to accommodate about 20,000 within its' existing city limits. The next version of the LCA will show some changes as some of the densities used for a midpoint were based on density bonuses that may not be achieved. He noted that they have not calculated any of the capacity for downtown housing, accessory dwelling units or Fairhaven Development. He assured the council that the technical details would be worked through and agreement reached by the cities and the county but does not expect a wholesale change to the land capacity methodology.

Bob Weisen, expressed concern on the following issues:

ˇ those with a selfish attitude about not wanting Wal Mart and certain types of neighborhoods;
ˇ his daughter and her family living in New York state because of the lack of economic opportunities here;
ˇ infill projects that will not be achieved;
ˇ not enough land supply for affordable single family homes causing pressure on the rural lands;
ˇ theory and reality that don't seem to match; and
ˇ few, if any, of the developments achieving zone density now.

At some point, he said, the population numbers will have to adjust to reality. The GMA requires picking a population number most likely to happen, which past history has indicated is the middle population number.

There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.

Greg Aucutt, Senior Planner expressed concern that the city is being asked to make this decision in a very short time frame. There are a lot of areas where staff is in agreement with the county on this process and feels that lengthy discussions need to occur about whether or not to take out portions of the UGA in the Lake Whatcom watershed and the Lake Padden watershed. However, there is not time to do that. The city and the county continue to work together on the Land Capacity Analysis with the shared goal of making the LCA as realistic and accurate as possible. We think we can get there, he said, but we don't think we're there yet. And we [the city staff] do not agree that making decisions about our UGA in this short timeline based solely on the LCA is a good idea.

Cities were told that they would have the opportunity to make recommendations to the LCA based on unique circumstances in the city. Monitoring the land supply and consideration of areas that would either qualify for removal or addition to the UGA are possibilities but we have not had time to review those areas nor make recommendations to council. The county's draft EIS has just been released and contains valuable information that the city would like to use in making recommendations to this process. Again, there has not been time to do that. Staff recommends that no changes be made to the UGA based on the information available at this time. Staff would like to take the next two years while updating the city's Comprehensive Plan to do this work well.

Council Member Weiss said he had a number of questions associated with the cost of service study that was presented to council. He said this entire process has a lot to do with his personal feelings about how the UGA boundaries might be adjusted and the cost of service.

Mr. Aucutt agreed and said that staff would be providing answers to those questions. He said the analysis looked at the UGA as a whole and staff has not had the opportunity to analyze, for example, the cost to serve certain areas on their own.

Council Member Bornemann said the city went through countless hours putting together its' Comprehensive Plan. It is in compliance and was in on time and the methodology has been upheld. The city supported the county in their need for an extension but suddenly the work and methodology that the city has done is out of kilter with what the county had previously agreed with. The city's 'at least' 113,000 population number provided motivation for the county to be able to put in place methodology that would tighten up expansion in rural areas. The city said, 'at least' and with it, the acknowledgement that the city is willing to take more and is willing to work with the county and to look at these areas. But he does not want to be rushed into a decision and will support the recommendation by staff.

KNUTSON / BJORNSON moved final approval of Resolution #2009-14.

Discussion continued between council and staff to clarify opinions and options. It was concluded that both the county council and city council want to preserve land and increase density. Everyone is working hard to do that but neighborhoods must be involved and more time is needed to have conversations and coordination with the other cities and the county. A decision cannot be unilaterally made at this time.

WEISS requested a friendly amendment to remove the second sentence from item 3: “However, the County should review the “Matichuk” property in the Geneva UGA to determine if this property was mistakenly removed from Bellingham's UGA in 2008.”; add a new Item 4 “The city council requests of the county that no additional UGA lots are created in the Lake Whatcom Watershed; and change the current Item 4 to Item 5.

KNUTSON / BJORNSON accepted the friendly amendment.

MOTION CARRIED AS AMENDED 7-0.

BREAK
Council President Buchanan called the meeting back to order at 10:18 p.m.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

COUNCIL STANDING COMMITTEE MEETINGS:

TRANSPORTATION
MEMBERS: JACK WEISS, CHAIR; BARBARA RYAN; STAN SNAPP

AB18374 1. RESUBMITTAL OF ORDINANCE MAKING MINOR TEXT AND MAP AMENDMENTS TO BMC 13.70 MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY FOR THIRD AND FINAL READING

Information only. See action under Financial Consideration of Ordinances.

FINANCE & PERSONNEL
MEMBERS: GENE KNUTSON, CHAIR; LOUISE BJORNSON; STAN SNAPP

AB18435 1. SURPLUS DECLARATIONS FOR FIRE APPARATUS

KNUTSON / BARBARA RYAN moved to approve the surplus sale of the Fire Department's 2002 Darley Spartan Pumper and 2004 American LaFrance Eagle Pumper. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.

PUBLIC WORKS / PUBLIC SAFETY
MEMBERS: LOUISE BJORNSON, CHAIR; GENE KNUTSON; STAN SNAPP

AB18436 2. REVIEW OF CHANGES TO DRAFT SEWER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

Information only.

LAKE WHATCOM RESERVOIR COMMITTEE
MEMBERS: STAN SNAPP, CHAIR; BARBARA RYAN; GENE KNUTSON

AB18437 1. WORK SESSION ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE LAKE WHATCOM RESERVOIR REGULATORY CHAPTER (BMC 16.80)

SNAPP / KNUTSON moved to direct staff to research options for a phase out of animal husbandry uses in the Lake Whatcom Reservoir Watershed and to report back to council. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.

SNAPP KNUTSON moved to direct staff to research options for ground cover for garden plots in the late fall and winter months in the Lake Whatcom Reservoir Watershed and report back to council. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.

AB18438 2. WORKSESSION ON STORMWATER CODE AMENDMENT TO 15.42 ASSOCIATED WITH NPDES AND SILVER BEACH CODE

Information only.

PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
MEMBERS: TERRY BORNEMANN, CHAIR; BARBARA RYAN; JACK WEISS; LOUISE BJORNSON

AB18405 1. CONSIDERATION OF A PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO CREATE A 500 FOOT ZONE AROUND SCHOOLS WHERE STORES SELLING FIREARMS WOULD BE PROHIBITED

BORNEMANN / BARBARA RYAN moved to postpone to June 1, 2009. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.

BARBARA RYAN / WEISS moved to ask Mayor Pike to work with Mayor Nickels of Seattle and other mayors of cities in Washington to influence legislation in Olympia that would give cities more ability to regulate sale and use of firearms in their cities. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
MEMBERS: BARRY BUCHANAN, CHAIR

AB18439 1. CITY OF BELLINGHAM PERFORMANCE MEASURES

Council President Buchanan reported that next steps would include: posting a draft on the Web Site; tracking feedback; council would host public hearings during regular council meetings and send the draft Legacies to the Mayor's Neighborhood Advisory Council for distribution to the neighborhoods. Feedback from the citizens would then be used to inform the final council action.

BARBARA RYAN / SNAPP moved to direct staff to bring this item back to council in June, 2009. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.

2. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE AND/OR SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES

None submitted at evening meeting.

3. OLD/NEW BUSINESS

BORNEMANN / BARBARA RYAN moved to sponsor a public meeting to discuss elements of the sanctuary movement. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.

EXECUTIVE SESSION – Report only.

1. LITIGATION: Hofstetter v. City of Bellingham: Staff provided an update to Council. No action taken.

2. POTENTIAL PROPERTY ACQUISITION: Staff provided information on a potential property acquisition. City council provided direction. No action was taken.

3. POTENTIAL PROPERTY ACQUISITION: Staff provided information on a potential property acquisition. City council provided direction. No action was taken.

4. POTENTIAL PROPERTY ACQUISITION: Staff provided information on a potential property acquisition. City council provided direction. No action was taken.

CONSENT AGENDA

AB18440 CB 13525
1. ORDINANCE FOR WHAT-COMM 911 BUDGET AMENDMENT TO TRANSFER $10,355 FROM ESTIMATED UNDESIGNATED RESERVES TO A COMMUNICATIONS LINE

AB18441 2. BID AWARD FOR THE ART OF STORM WATER MODULAR GREEN ROOF SYSTEM, BID #40B-2009

AB18442 CB 13526
3. ORDINANCE FOR BUDGET AMENDMENT TO ALLOW FOR RECEIPT AND EXPENDITURE OF $39,043.23 FROM A HOMELAND SECURITY SUBGRANT RECEIVED BY WHATCOM COUNTY FOR PURCHASE OF MOBILE COMPUTERS

AB18443 4. AUTHORIZATION OF CHECK ISSUE FOR ACCOUNTS PAYABLE FROM APRIL 17, 2009 TO APRIL 24, 2009.

AB18444 5. AUTHORIZATION OF CHECK ISSUE FOR ACCOUNTS PAYABLE FROM APRIL 24, 2009 TO MAY 1, 2009.

AB18445 6. AUTHORIZATION OF CHECK ISSUE FOR PAYROLL FROM APRIL 1, 2009 TO APRIL 15, 2009.

AB18446 7. AUTHORIZATION OF CHECK ISSUE FOR PAYROLL FROM APRIL 16, 2009 TO APRIL 30, 2009.

BARBARA RYAN / BJORNSON moved approval of the Consent Agenda in its entirety. MOTION CARRIED 7-0.

FINAL CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES

AB18374 1. CB 13509
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BELLINGHAM AMENDING BMC 13.70.010 MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY AUTHORITY AND PURPOSE AND THE CONCURRENCY SERVICE AREA MAP DUE TO THE ANNEXATION OF 652-ACRES OF THE BELLINGHAM URBAN GROWTH AREA

BARBARA RYAN / KNUTSON moved approval for third and final reading as amended after final consideration on April 27, 2009. Upon motion, said bill was placed on final passage and approved by the following roll call vote:

AYES: BJORNSON, BORNEMANN, BUCHANAN, KNUTSON, BARBARA RYAN, SNAPP, WEISS
NAYS:
ABSTENTIONS:

MOTION CARRIED 7-0 and was thereafter named Ordinance #2009-05-028. (This ordinance replaces Ordinance #2009-04-016, which is void.)

AB18406 2. CB 13523
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BELLINGHAM, WASHINGTON AMENDING SECTIONS OF THE BELLINGHAM MUNICIPAL CODE 2.90 WATERSHED ADVISORY BOARD TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF MEMBERS AND REVISE THE AUTHORITIES AND DUTIES OF THE WATERSHED ADVISORY BOARD.

BARBARA RYAN / BORNEMANN moved approval for third and final reading. Upon motion, said bill was placed on final passage and approved by the following roll call vote:

AYES: BJORNSON, BORNEMANN, BUCHANAN, KNUTSON, BARBARA RYAN, SNAPP, WEISS
NAYS:
ABSTENTIONS:

MOTION CARRIED 7-0 and was thereafter named Ordinance #2009-05-029

AB18424 3. CB 13521
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BELLINGHAM AMENDING BELLINGHAM MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 3.16, CIVIL SERVICE, TO ADD A NEW SECTION 3.16.060 EXPANDING RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS FOR MEMBERSHIP ON THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

BJORNSON / SNAPP moved approval for third and final reading. Upon motion, said bill was placed on final passage and approved by the following roll call vote:

AYES: BJORNSON, BORNEMANN, BUCHANAN, KNUTSON, BARBARA RYAN, SNAPP, WEISS
NAYS:
ABSTENTIONS:

MOTION CARRIED 7-0 and was thereafter named Ordinance #2009-05-030

AB18426 4. CB 13522
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE 2009 BUDGET TO ACCOUNT FOR THE RECEIPT OF GIFT AND GRANT MONEY FOR THE WHATCOM ART AND CHILDREN'S MUSEUM AND MOUNT BAKER THEATRE CAPITAL EXPENSES AND APPROPRIATING AN ADDITIONAL $45,875 OF EXPENDITURES IN THE BELLINGHAM WHATCOM PUBLIC FACILITIES FUND

BARBARA RYAN / BORNEMANN moved approval for third and final reading. Upon motion, said bill was placed on final passage and approved by the following roll call vote:

AYES: BJORNSON, BORNEMANN, BUCHANAN, KNUTSON, BARBARA RYAN, SNAPP, WEISS
NAYS:
ABSTENTIONS:

MOTION CARRIED 7-0 and was thereafter named Ordinance #2009-05-031

AB18432 5. CB 13524
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE 2009 BUDGET RECOGNIZING RECEIPT OF A $50,000.00 PUGET SOUND PARTNERSHIP STATE OF WASHINGTON GRANT IN THE STREET FUND TO SUPPORT THE SILVER BEACH CREEK PHOSPHORUS REDUCTION PILOT PROGRAM, APPROPRIATING ADDITIONAL GRANT EXPENDITURES OF $38,206.00 AND PLACING $11,794.00 IN ESTIMATING ENDING UNDESIGNATED RESERVE

BJORNSON / BORNEMANN moved approval for third and final reading. Upon motion, said bill was placed on final passage and approved by the following roll call vote:

AYES: BJORNSON, BORNEMANN, BUCHANAN, KNUTSON, BARBARA RYAN, SNAPP, WEISS
NAYS:
ABSTENTIONS:

MOTION CARRIED 7-0 and was thereafter named Ordinance #2009-05-032

ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 10:49 p.m.
Barry Buchanan, Council President

ATTEST: Linda D. Anderson City Clerk Representative
APPROVED: 06/15/2009

This is a digital copy of an original document located at Bellingham's City Hall. The City of Bellingham specifically disclaims any responsibility or liability for the contents of this document. The City of Bellingham does not verify the correctness, accuracy, or validity of the information appearing in this document.