Shoreline City Council Meeting May 14, 2012
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Shoreline City Council Meeting May 14, 2012
By Devon Vose Rickabaugh
City manager Julie Underwood said Shoreline joined Woodway and Save Richmond Beach in denying a request from Snohomish County to extend their growth management compliance deadline for the Point Wells Development. She said they had plenty of time to comply with the deadline to help solve the problems of traffic and density with their project. She said “A quick fix will not solve the problem. They need to start working with Shoreline.”
Manager Underwood said Ronald Wastewater District had expanded their board members from three to five commissioners which they are able to do without an election if is determined to be in the best interest of the district. Underwood said it is unclear to city staff why the district increased their numbers. The city is concerned since commissioners make $22,000 per year in compensation and benefits which the city pays for. The city has requested information about the change, but has received nothing yet from the wastewater district.
Audience members said they were concerned about home displacement and traffic when the light rail station is built on 145th. Councilmember Hall said since it is a multibillion dollar project there will be big changes. He encouraged the community to be informed and engaged with suggestions about what kind of development they would like around the stations. The light rail will follow I-5 with stations on the East side of the freeway. Actual building will not start until 2023, said Rachael Markle, Director of Planning and Community Development. Mayor McGlashan said he hopes citizens are excited about the benefits of light rail coming to Shoreline and “We want to hear from you.”
Posts
9 comments:
The City is concerned about $44,000 extra that Ronald Wastewater is spending? That is a drop in the bucket compared to the money that the City spends. Would that $44,000 cover the travel expenses of the Shoreline City Council to National League of City meetings and other meetings they attend, not to mention the city staff travel?
It's not necessarily the money, but what about process? Why is this information coming from the city and not the district? There isn't even anything about it on their website. Why didn't citizens have say in this? Do they need 5? Don't most other special districts do just fine with 3? Why is this so secretive?
What is going on here with the district?
The expansion of commissioners has not been approved yet. In my opinion, five commissioners would result in greater accountability - the city council has seven members. As for secretiveness, why did we just now find out about the 2012 legislative priorities for the city council AFTER the legislature is done? In 2011 the city council discussed and adopted the legislative priorities at a dinner meeting when it was not even on the agenda, this year they discussed and adopted the legislative priorites at a dinner meeting. In years past the legislative priorites were discussed at full council meetings - study and business meetings, tens of thousands of dollars are spent by the city each and every year at the legislature, why be so secret?
And for your information, in 2011 the city tried get a bill passed that would have done away with our right to vote on the SPU acquistion - that is completely anti-democratic, talk about a citizens say. Washington State Law requires a citizens vote in the acquistion of a water or wastewater district, but the city staff and city council thinks so little of citizens that they tried in secret to get of our right to vote in 2011, thank State Senator Maralyn Chase for a stop to their madness.
Well, that's not very secret to have it a dinner meeting since they are open to the public and the agenda is posted on the website. Ronald already decided this, there was NO public process. Did you know? I didn't.
I'm talking about the district here, not the city. Why are THEY so secretive?
Oh, by the way, for your information it looks like the city is discussion legislative priorities at the regular council meeting this coming Monday. During open session. On camera. Seems pretty open to me.
Let's see, the 2011 Legislative Agenda was discussed at one of the November 2010 dinner meetings - is it on the agendas or the minutes? No!
As for the 2012 Legislative Agenda - the legislature is DONE! And we are not just done hearing about it, what is so open about that? The minutes for the dinner meeting should have reported what the legislative agenda was.
Why does the city council not do this business in full council session as the used to prior to 2011? The city spends $40 grand a year on a lobbyist in Olympia and Julie Underwood is whining, yes whining about the opportunity for ratepayers getting to elect more commissioners to oversee how Ronald Wastewater is run, what a hypocrite. Better yet, that lobbying contract was approved as a no bid contract in violation of its own city policies. What does Julie & the city have to hide? Oh, stuff like trying to get rid of our right to vote on a purchase of a utlity that will be around $45 million, and she is whining about more accountability in another agency.
As for legislative priorities, the city as usualy is a day late and many dollars short.
I don't care if you are talking about the district, it is the city miscontruing the facts, so the city is fair game.
Whatever. Sounds like you have a thing for the city and stuff that happened a couple of years ago. That's fine - it's your issue.
You want to banter about the district and what is going on right now, I'm happy to oblige.
A couple of years ago? The bill to try to take away the vote on SPU was last year, you don't keep up very well, do you?
It's hard to discuss anything with someone who is ill-informed and just talking out of their hat or keep dates straight - this is 2012 and last year was 2011, I'll make it easier for you, HB 1407 to amend the state law was in the Washington State 2011 Legislature and requested by the City of Shoreline & Marysville.
Lynnwood Link light rail construction begins early 2018 to mid 2023, according to their website (http://projects.soundtransit.org/Projects-Home/Lynnwood-Link-Extension.xml).
The station locations that are presently being looked at are 145th, 155th, and 185th, all on the east side of I-5, but it's remotely possible that some other location might be chosen. While the city is putting for a full-court press for a station at 145th, it's not certain that one will be built there, for there are hurdles of heavy traffic (over 30,000 average daily from 5th NE-15th NE), environmental reasons (proximity to Thornton Creek), Shoreline not owning NE 145th St. (so cannot do any street improvements until they do), and the city limits only covering north of that street, which is where any transit-oriented development would be. At N# 185th, the school district hasn't agreed to sell their property, no developer has bought it, nor has anyone proposed transit-oriented development. One look no further than the SW corner of 196th & SR99 in Lynnwood, where despite Lynnwood's best attempts zoning-wise, they're getting small stores and restaurants, a fitness center, and one other larger store, not TOD next to a Swift BRT station.
Meanwhile, in Shoreline, the developments seem to be geared towards the N. 155th corridor, which presently enjoys east/west Metro #330 service from Lake City to Shoreline CC and the #242, 347, and 373 north/south. SCC is proposing on-campus living in their master plan, while the city of Shoreline's Six-Year Economic Development Strategic Plan calls for “reinventing Aurora Square (155th & Aurora/99) to help catalyze a master-planned, sustainable lifestyle destination” and “unlocking the Fircrest surplus property to establish a new campus for hundreds of family-wage jobs.”
Post a Comment