HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/06/2001 Adjourned Meeting / Study Session 100
CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON
ADJOURNED MEETING — STUDY SESSION
OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FEBRUARY 6, 2001 — 7:30 A.M.
POLICE STATION /LEGAL CENTER — 200 SOUTH 3 STREET
1. ROLL CALL
Present:
Council: Mayor Mary Place, presiding, Council Members Clarence Barnett,
Henry Beauchamp, Lynn Buchanan, Larry Mattson, John Puccinelli,
and Bernard Sims
Staff: Dick Zais, City Manager; Ray Paolella, City Attorney; Larry
Peterson, Assistant City Attorney; Bill Cook, Director of Community
and Economic Development; Bruce Benson, Associate Planner; and
City Clerk Roberts
2. ANNEXATION REPORT
® City Manager Zais gives introduction
City Manager Zais commented that the annexation of the 72 Avenue area has
been in development for nearly one year. He gave some salient points regarding
this annexation:
- This annexation is to unify and help Yakima's future economy
- This annexation follows the Growth Management Act mandates
- This annexation is within the Urban Area Growth Boundary
- The money obtained from the annexed area will not become the reserves for
the City since that money will be needed to provide services within that area
- The City is utilizing Outside Utility Agreements with other petitions to initiate
the annexation process.
O Bill Cook and Bruce Benson give overview of the annexation
Bill Cook explained why it is important for the City to continue its annexation
policy:
- State Growth Management Act says it is the right thing to do; the City and
County agreed this area would be annexed
- The City has a right to annex as a.result of joint contracts
- It is equitable; the cost of urban services should not be financed solely by city
residents, but should be shared by everyone
- Primary argument for annexation for this region is "there is strength in
numbers"
- Yakima is the urban center for this region's economy; it is critical that the
Yakima area be unified to grow and develop its economy.
- Size of a city is related to political clout in the state; the city benefits in the per
capita state and federal funding requests; the block grant entitlement would
also increase.
l ot
FEBRUARY 6, 2001 — .ADJOURNED MEETING
- The'City has taken a leadership role in the ongoing fight for reasonable state
and federal regulations. We must commit to a policy of urban investment and
grow.
He stated that the questions for Council today are: Is it time the City proceeds
with the historic policy for growth? Is it time for the City to increase its population
base to attract its share of regional and world market? Is it time to increase our
infrastructure?
Bruce Benson gave a brief overview of the statistical facts of the annexation:
- A map of the proposed annexation area is under Exhibit B in the Annexation
Report
- The annexation encompasses an area of 1.54 square miles
- The assessed valuation of the area is $237,438,340.
- The population for this area is estimated at 5,075
Mr. Cook interjected that a letter was distributed to Council today that indicates
Congdon Orchards desires to annex into the city.
• Larry Peterson discusses legal issues
Assistant City Attorney Peterson stated that state law is clear that property
owners have the right to seek annexation without an election. When the City's
Outside Utility Agreement (OUA) policy was tested by the West Valley Fire
Department in 1993, the state declared the City's OUAs were valid contracts.
The City has the right to go forward with annexation on the basis of signed
OUAs. It is important to note that the City's policy of extending outside utility
services to unincorporated areas gives the property a chance to be served and
increases its value Now the Fire District is reluctant to let go of what, in essence,
the city made possible. He stated that combined with the OUAs, over 75% of the
assessed property valuation have committed their property to annex. Council
Member Mattson said that if the original property owner signed an OUA and sells
their home, that information should be disclosed to the new owner. Mr. Peterson
concurred, stating it should be disclosed in the title report. The OUA is recorded
with the County Auditor and is a public record for that property. Council Member
Puccinelli pointed out that it may also be a question on the seller's disclosure
form.
• Staff reviews Annexation Report
City Manager Zais reviewed Exhibit H from the Report. Exhibit H compares the
City and County property taxes, sales taxes and utility rates.
City County
Property tax per $1,000 assessed Value $ 13.78 $ 13.83
Sales Tax 7.9% 7.6%
Utility Rates $221.08 $224.62
Mr. Zais further explained that all cities that have a sales tax contribute .15% of
1% sales tax to the County. Commenting on the utility costs, he stated the
biggest difference is due to utilities extended by the City into the urban area.
That cost is reduced upon annexation into the City. County residents would retain
the same refuse provider for seven years and would also remain in the same
2
102
FEBRUARY 6, 2001 — ADJOURNED MEETING
school district. County residents would not be required to connect to municipal
utilities just because they are annexed into Yakima.
City Manager Zais referred Council to Exhibit D in the report. Exhibit D provides
information on the proposed South 72 " Avenue Annexation revenue and
expenditure analysis for the next three years. There is not much of a margin
between the cash revenues vs. expenditures to extend municipal services to this
area. There is an 18 -month lag time before the City begins to receive property
tax revenue from this area. This area needs full -time protection for fire and
police. City Manager Zais pointed out that the County does have a dedicated
funding source for road maintenance. We would endeavor to keep the same
street maintenance schedule that area is receiving from the County.
Assistant City Attorney Peterson commented that State law makes it clear that
the City should take responsibility for urbanized area.
• Shirley Doty asks questions
Shirley Doty asked several questions: (1) What is the status of the meetings with
the West Valley Fire District officials? (2) Would a vote to incorporate into a new
city negate the legality of the signed OUAs? (3) Did the City take into account
that some of the land in this area is under the "open space" tax situation, and
therefore, would result in less revenue? In response, staff explained how the
discussions with the West Valley Fire District disintegrated, explained that staff
doesn't have an answer yet for her second question; and explained that they
used only existing developments to determine revenue. Jamie Carmondy,
attorney representing Apple Tree, assured Council that Apple Tree is committed
to extend the sewer line to their property and are prepared to sign an OUA.
• Dick Zais outlines the next steps to initiate annexation
City Manager Zais outlined the next steps to take from here:
- Give staff direction on the initiation of the annexation as proposed.
- Give staff direction for the other steps recommended in the report under the
Implementation Strategy, including communication with the neighborhood
groups to obtain an understanding about the details of this proposal and the
basic services.
- Another step would involve transmittal of the Annexation Report to the
Boundary Review Board when the annexation is initiated.
• Council discusses the proposed West Valley Fire District Station
Council Member Barnett asked staff to comment on the proposed West Valley.
Fire Station on Zier Road. Mr. Cook commented that staff addressed the
financing of the station in the report. A decision has not been made on whether
or not that new station would be financed through a bond. Mr. Peterson stated
that the bonded debt would remain with the property. The Fire District could also
use councilmatic type bonds that would not bond the property. We would also, at
some time, do an analysis of the investments in the Fire District by those
properties being annexed so those assets could be transferred to the City and
retain their investment in fire protection.
3
FEBRUARY 6, 2001 - ADJOURNED MEETING o
Shirley Doty 'suggested Council hold a lot of neighborhood meetings; in each
church, school, grange or other meeting place; some during the daytime and
some in the evening. She suggested Council publicize the list on TV, radio and
newsprint so people can make plans to attend. She also suggested Council form
a committee, consisting of two council members, Yakima County people
(possibly Commissioner Gamache) and West Valley citizens as well as others
who might be interested in this, to attend those meetings. The City may want to
consider sending a letter to the individual homeowners notifying them if an OUA
is in effect for their property. After the neighborhood meetings, Council might
want to take a courtesy vote.
• Council comments
Council Member Mattson commented that the West Valley incorporation effort is
driven by the Fire District. These fire districts were established to provide fire
protection to rural areas. This area is clearly urban. Volunteer fire fighters are
valuable in rural areas, but in this annexation area there is a need for
professional fire fighters. He spoke out in favor of directing staff to prepare the
legislation to initiate the 72 Avenue annexation at today's Council meeting.
Council Member Sims agreed. Council Member Puccinelli pointed out another
benefit of annexation is the police protection the City would provide. The'
Sheriff's Department is cutting back. Chief Blesio stated that it would involve six
additional officers to provide 24 -hour service to that area, and that area would
also have the support of the 8 -15 officers on duty throughout the City.
It was the general consensus of the Council to support this concept and ask staff
to prepare the appropriate legislation for this afternoon's Council meeting.
3. ADJOURNMENT
SIMS MOVED AND BARNETT SECONDED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT
8:50 A.M. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote.
READ AND CERTIFIED ACCURATE BY: /, 1 , OJ
•UNCIL MBER ' DATE
'4 ill I I
OUN• M MBER DATE
ATTEST:
Kam � /f:‘
CITY CLERK MARY PLACE, MAYOR
An audio tape of this meeting is available in the City Clerk's Office
4