Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/28/2003 Adjourned Meeting / Study Session 274 CITY OF YAKIMA, WASHINGTON ADJOURNED MEETING /STUDY SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 28, 2003 - 7 :30 A.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS - CITY HALL ROLL CALL Present: Council: Mayor Mary Place, presiding, Council Members Clarence Barnett, Lynn Buchanan, Paul George, Larry Mattson, and John Puccinelli Staff: City Manager Zais, City Attorney Paolella and City Clerk Roberts Absent (excused): Council Member Bernard Sims 2. PRESENTATION OF UPDATED FUNDING OPTIONS FOR THE IRRIGATION CAPITAL PROGRAM (CONTINUED FROM 1/21/03) Council Member Barnett suggested that there be a refined fact sheet for the public hearing. Council Member George suggested there also be a description of the workings of a new water plant with the membrane filtration and the expandability of that plant with its long -term effects on the City. Dave Brown, Water /Irrigation Engineer, reviewed Alternative 2, to convert the 308 - system to a drinking water system and rebuild all the other systems. He said that this would be financed on the 15 -year pay -as- you -go plan for the non -308 system. They anticipate this would be funded through Public Works Trust Fund loans and projections use a conservative 1%,interest figure. Council Member Puccinelli asked if there would be opportunities for grant money for Alternative #2. City Manager Zais advised that block grant money is eligible for both Alternative #1 and #2 but Alternative #2 is eligible for other grants as well that #1 is not. Discussion continued on the rate structure and how there is some opportunity to bring the cost down to 'h% interest. There is risk as there would be competition with other city divisions for this money. The detailed information on the fact sheet for the alternatives was reviewed. Council Member Buchanan expressed his opinion on the issue with regard to money that has already been collected toward rebuilding the 308 system. Suggestions were made as to what information needed to be brought to the public hearing on irrigation. It was suggested that information show the average -lot owner what could happen to their costs if we convert and where the connections are located. There was conversation regarding making sure the lots are restored to their current condition. Mr. Brown suggested they could take a video prior to work being started and again after the work is completed to ensure the property is properly restored. Details on slip lining versus pipe bursting were discussed. 275 • ADJOURNED MEETING — JANUARY 28, 2003 Council Member Buchanan asked what will be done with the additional coverage amount that is collected from the property owners. Tim Jensen, Treasury Services Officer, explained that, typically, coverage is an annual calculation and once you are done with the calculation for that year you move into the next year. Your rate structure must allow for the remaining debt coverage to be in the bottom line at the end of the year. Council Member Buchanan asked what would be done with the extra money when the bonds are done, would it go back to the people? City Manager Zais said the money would either be used to retire debt service early or for additional capital improvements related to what the project requires in the future. Further discussion covered the potential of using block grant funds to help lower income groups with their irrigation bills, the need to translate the material for the public hearing, and other information that could be provided to assist with understanding the issue. Council Member Mattson emphasized the importance of pointing out that Alternative #2 is about $128 more a year versus Alternative #1 at $393 a year, about a 307% difference. It was stated that arrangements have been made for a second public hearing on February 1 8 th at the Yakima Valley Museum at 6:30 p.m. Availability of translated information and public notification was discussed. Council Member George reiterated from the last meeting, that there would be an open house at 5:30 p.m. and staff and materials will be available for review and questions. Council took a brief break at 9:00 a.m. 9:00 A.M. - PUBLIC MEETING The meeting reconvened at 9:10 a.m.; roll call was taken and all Council members were present with the exception of Bernie Sims who was absent and excused. 3. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF ROYAL YAKIMA DEVELOPMENT, LLC. VS. CITY OF YAKIMA AND LYNN RAYMOND (SEE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT) Ken Harper, legal counsel for the City, advised that there is a proposed settlement agreement between the City and Royal Yakima Development. Lynn Raymond, a party to the proposed litigation also has been apprised of the agreement. He said that, in its simplest form, the agreement is intended to provide for settlement of the pending Superior Court litigation in which the City's decision to reverse the Hearing Examiner's decision is being challenged. By settling that lawsuit, the terms of the agreement would allow the casino to be built in accordance with the Hearing Examiner's decision together with additional conditions. The other part of the equation, in terms of what the settlement agreement does, calls for Royal Yakima, by dismissing the lawsuit, to also drop any damage claims that it might otherwise seek against the City for items such as potential lost profits, cost of delay, potential construction delays, etc. In summary, they get the casino with the additional conditions and the City gets the lawsuit against them dismissed. 2 276 ADJOURNED MEETING — JANUARY 28, 2003 He referenced Exhibit A (page 8 of the agreement) listing the five specific additional conditions. Initially, these conditions were not required by the Hearing Examiner nor the City. Royal Yakima has indicated that these additional conditions would be acceptable. The five conditions are: 1. Proposal to erect a six -foot view - obscuring fence along certain property lines of the proposed parcel. 2. Signage limitation - the goal is to maintain reasonable standards for the casino and prevent them from being a magnet for users . of the park. 3. Allows for the physical structure of the casino, as submitted to the City and the Hearing Examiner, to be built. However, it puts a lid on any further expansion without a public hearing. 4. Age restrictions — the City's legislative authority has clear limitations placed on it by state law. This condition is not Council acting to legislate 21 -year old restrictions, this is a matter of the settlement agreement between parties to contractually agree to these terms. The concept behind this paragraph is simply to segregate the gambling part of the casino from the liquor serving part. Liquor Control regulations have a number of provisions on how that type of segregation is to be enforced and the idea, as applied to the settlement agreement, is for a physical segregation of the liquor service area from the casino area. If that is there, 18 -20 year olds will be allowed in the gambling portion. If the segregation is not there, then anyone under 21 years old will not be allowed in the gambling area. There is also an obligation on Royal Yakima's part to post signs in the facility that are intended to apprise patrons of that restriction so it is easier to enforce. 5. No person under the age of 18 shall be allowed to enter or remain on the premises after the hour of 9:00 p.m. Mayor Place asked if Royal Yakima Development had accepted this agreement. Mr. Harper advised that, at this point, he has received a statement of interest. Council Member Mattson went on record saying that opening up settlement agreements to public input is not typical but that Council has agreed to do this as part of an effort to increase public involvement. He said there are those on the Council and in the community, who would like to settle this and those who want to continue to litigate and it's important that we disclose the consequences of either of those choices. Sandra Swanson, 6 South 6th Street, spoke about the importance of separating the gambling from the dining area. The question of whether minors under 18 should be allowed into the gambling facility was discussed with Mrs. Swanson stating she didn't think they should be allowed in. Lynn Raymond, 2302 -A West Viola, wanted to point out that the original draft of this agreement limiting the casino to the existing site has been changed. They are going to be allowed to add an addition that is over 3,000 square feet. She thinks the City is capitulating to everything that Royal Yakima Development wanted. She wanted to go on record for the Citizens for a Friendly Yakima that they want this to go to court. She 3 277 ADJOURNED MEETING — JANUARY 28, 2003 thinks if a judge saw where this started and how hard they have tried to prove that it is incompatible, they would have a case. She's pleased with the moratorium and that casino applicants have to go through a Class 3 review which, in essence, means they have to prove compatibility. She stated disappointment that we are going to end up with a casino across from Chesterley Park. Tom Ellwood, owner of Oil Can Henry's at 3805 River Road, said his initial response is he spent $30,000 to improve his building and to make it so the sign can be'seen from 40 avenue. A six -foot high fence will block that view. He understands the reason why the fence is there, and is torn over that. • Council Member Puccinelli suggested that the City look at the gambling /food separation issue in ordinances while we still can before other new casinos are built. He's not convinced that the state addresses this well. James Carmody, counsel for Royal Yakima Development, said this process is awkward and he had wanted, to avoid the public process to negotiate the settlement. . He said there are two points of ambiguity that they have asked for clarification on; the first one had to do with the 6' high fence. He questioned whether that fence could be combined with a burm. The 6' view obscuring capacity would be there but done in an aesthetically different way. The second question had to do with the signage and he said that Mr. Harper had answered that the signage on River Road would be essentially what has been historically there. He said with those clarifications, they are prepared to settle the case. The burm /fence combination idea was discussed and it appears it is workable under Standard C of sight screening. GEORGE MOVED AND MATTSON SECONDED TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. Council Member Puccinelli commented again that he thinks we need to go back and address restaurants in casinos in our ordinances in order to prepare for the next one. Council Member George explained that it was the issue of compatibility that caused them to reverse the Hearing Examiner's recommendation. Council Member Mattson said he's upset about this use at this location too yet at the same time felt that if compatibility was our only defense the chances in court are less than 50/50 and we don't want to spend a lot of additional City money in court. The question was called for a vote on the motion. The motion passed by 4 -2 roll call vote; George and Place voting nay; Sims absent. RESOLUTION NO. 2003 -12 authorizing and directing the City Manager to execute a settlement agreement between Royal Yakima Development, L.L.C., a Washington limited liability company, and George Cameron and Janin Cameron, husband and wife (collectively referred to hereinafter as "Royal Yakima "), and the City of Yakima, Washington, a Washington municipal corporation. Council Member Buchanan mentioned that he noticed more money was going to be spent on a security camera at the Transit Center and said he would like to see what kind of images we get from that camera before we spend the money. Council Member George advised there is a Transit meeting on Thursday and that issue will be discussed. 4 278 ADJOURNED MEETING - JANUARY 28, 2003 4. ADJOURNMENT MATTSON MOVED AND BUCHANAN SECONDED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. The motion carried by unanimous voice vote; Sims absent. The meeting adjourned at 10:00 a.m. r READ AND CERTIFIED ACCURATE BY: r — _ UNC / MBER D E AUNCIL MEMBER DAT ATTEST: 4- CITY CLERK MARY PLACE, MAYOR Minutes prepared by Linda Watkins. An audio and video ta • e of this meeting are available in the City Clerk's Office 1 5