City of Burien
BURIEN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
June 11, 2002
6:30 to 9:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers
MINUTES
Planning Commission Members Present: Robert Pierce, chair; Gerald Robison; Len Boscarine; Mickey Conlin; Jon Newton; Douglas Rahn; Robert Simpson-Clark; Bruce White
Absent: Kirsti Weaver
Others Present: David Johanson, senior planner; Beverly Wilson, DSHS; Linda Gorton, Finance and Administrative Services Director; Gerry Lindsay, recording secretary
Chairperson Pierce called the meeting to order at 6:43 p.m. Upon the call of the roll, all commissioners were present with the exception of Commissioner Weaver.
Agenda Confirmation
Motion to reverse the order of agenda item V.A and V.B was made by Commissioner Simpson-Clark. Second was by Commissioner Boscarine and the motion carried unanimously.
Motion to add to the agenda a discussion of the sign code recommendation made by the Planning Commission to the City Council was made by Commissioner Conlin. Second was by Commissioner Boscarine and the motion carried unanimously.
Motion to add to the agenda a discussion of the commission’s calendar of upcoming meetings was made by Commissioner Boscarine. Second was by Commissioner Simpson-Clark and the motion carried unanimously.
Motion to approve the agenda as revised was made by Commissioner Simpson-Clark. Second was by Commissioner Boscarine and the motion carried unanimously.
Approval of Minutes
A. May 28, 2002
Motion to approve the minutes as submitted was made by Commissioner Simpson-Clark. Second was by Commissioner Boscarine and the motion carried unanimously.
Public Comment - None
B. Discussion of Secure Community Transition Facilities
David Johanson, senior planner, introduced Beverly Wilson, associate superintendent for community programs with the Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS). Ms. Wilson said her department has been tasked with the responsibility of siting facilities in the communities for people who are conditionally released by the court.
By way of background, Ms. Wilson noted that in the late 1980s there were a number of serious sexual crimes committed by offenders who had been to prison, served their time and could not be held any longer. The state Legislature in response drafted and passed the 1990 Community Protection Act, landmark legislation that has since been followed by a number of states across the nation. The act provides for public notification of sex offenders as they are released. The act also provides for civil commitment of sex offenders. Essentially a mental health treatment program, civil commitment is separate from the criminal justice system and is for sex offenders who have served their time in prison but are still considered by the court to be in need of additional treatment before being allowed freely back into society. The Superior courts act as the courts of commitment.
Continuing, Ms. Wilson said the Special Commitment Center (SCC) is a total confinement facility within the secure perimeter of the McNeil Island Correctional Facility operated by DSHS as a mental health treatment program. Under the law, residents have a right to an annual review by the court to determine if they have made progress in their treatment. If so determined by the court, residents can be conditionally released to a less restrictive alternative (LRA). Before that can happen, the court must first determine if there is a treatment provider available and willing to work with the resident. The provider must prepare treatment plans and make regular reports to the court. The court determines whether or not an LRA is available that will adequately protect the community. The resident must also be willing to meet the conditions of the court, the treatment providers, and the community corrections officer (CCO).
As the result of a federal court case, the state must site and operate secure community transition facilities (SCTF) in order to provide constitutionally adequate mental health treatment. Because the state was found to not be providing constitutionally adequate treatment, the state has been found in contempt. The fines from that ruling stand at $4 million and are continuing to grow. What remains to be dealt with is the provision of housing in the community that meets the LRA standards. Options must be provided for civilly committed residents; they cannot simply be locked up. Significant progress must be made by the state before the next hearing on October 7, 2002. If the requirements are not met by that time, the court could order the state to pay the contempt fines in full and order the release of residents.
The court recognizes that the state has taken steps to improve treatment and meet the standards. However, there still are not LRA options in the community, therefore the entire program remains unconstitutional. A SCTF was established in 2001 on McNeil Island, but the court has said other facilities on the mainland also must be established.
Ms. Wilson said the structured community transition program is highly intensive and supervised treatment program. It is not just a halfway house where the residents are free to come and go as they please. There is a very high staffing ratio required and one-to-one escorts. All staff and escorts must receive training. The law requires any facility with six or fewer residents to have a one-to-one staffing ratio for 16 hours a day and a two-to-one staffing ratio during the night. Anytime a resident leaves the facility for any purpose, the trip must be planned and pre-approved by the treatment provider and the CCO. The staff works closely with local law enforcement to keep them aware of all trip plans and other security issues.
Commissioner Newton asked if the treatment providers must live on the premises. Ms. Wilson explained that they do not but must be within a reasonable commute of the SCTF. The location of resident treatment providers has some determining effect on where the residents are housed.
Ms. Wilson said SCTFs are not prisons but they do have a great deal of security in the form of electronic monitoring, microwave detection devices and video cameras.
Commissioner Robison asked if an SCTF could be co-located with another facility, such as a jail, in the same building. Ms. Wilson said DSHS must be careful not to co-mingle the residents with inmates. A facility could be located in the same building as a jail facility, provided there was a clear separation between the two.
From the audience, Deputy Mayor Rose Clark asked if the proposal of King County to eliminate all probation officers would have any effect on SCTF residents. Ms. Wilson said the Department of Corrections appoints the CCOs. SCTF staff members are residential rehab counselors and not employed by any county.
Continuing with her presentation, Ms. Wilson said in 2001 the Legislature passed the bill authorizing the establishment of a SCTF on McNeil Island. The bill also directed DSHS to project how many additional facilities would be needed statewide over the next several years. The determination was made that in King County there would be need to site a maximum of 15 residents.
Commissioner Newton asked if the civilly committed residents are always released back to the county they came from. Ms. Wilson said the Legislature directs each county to take their fair share of residents being released. The court ultimately decides where residents must go, and it bases that decision on several factors.
Chairperson Pierce suggested that a facility housing five residents and employing some 15 staff should be welcomed in some counties in Eastern Washington as a benefit to the local economy. Ms. Wilson said the criteria for transitioning residents back into the community includes opportunities for education and the like that perhaps would not be met in some of the more rural counties.
Commissioner Boscarine asked how many SCTFs will be sited in Bellevue, Mercer Island and Medina. Ms. Wilson said DSHS is looking to site only one facility in all of King County. All local jurisdictions are on equal footing under the state law. Certainly, property values will play a role, but all communities have the same obligations to plan for the siting of SCTFs.
Answering a question asked by Commissioner Boscarine, Ms. Wilson said if steps are not taken to bring the program in line with the Constitution and the court findings, the entire program will fail. The result of that would be the release of civilly committed residents into the community without the benefit of treatment.
Chairperson Pierce said he did not care. He said many in the community have over the years taken steps to improve Burien. Unfortunately, DSHS and other state and county organizations have consistently and in a very vile way denuded the community of its pride. Burien has been dumped on repeatedly with similar facilities and directives. The law threatens Burien in that it will allow all local zoning laws to be pre-empted if the City does nothing to comply with the law; there is nothing in that approach that calls for working together for a positive outcome. The history of the state working with Burien is not good; the airport is a prime example of that.
Ms. Wilson stressed that no decisions have been made about where to site facilities. No facilities are needed in every single jurisdiction; only one is needed in the entire county, and where that will be will be based on set criteria.
Ms. Wilson said the Legislature in March 2002 acted to revise the 2001 law. The revisions deleted the requirement to site SCTFs where there is an average five-minute response time by law enforcement. The new law granted local governments and law enforcement officers immunity from being sued for damages, and authorized DSHS to enter into contracts with local jurisdictions with regard to operating procedures and public safety mitigation. All cities and counties must complete their planning for the siting of SCTFs by September 1, 2002. Failure to meet the planning requirements will, after October 1, 2002, subject jurisdictions to pre-emption of local laws.
Ms. Wilson explained that should DSHS attempt to site a SCTF in a community that has adequately completed its planning, the local codes and process will be followed. If the community has not conformed with the law, the state will have the right to pre-empt all local regulations in order to site the SCTF. There still would be consulting between the state and the local jurisdiction. The facility would have to be sited in accord with all of the criteria set forth in the statute.
Chair Pierce asked if Burien could elect to allow SCTFs to be located in only one zone in one corner of the city in the same way adult entertainment uses are regulated. Ms. Wilson said local jurisdictions can decide what zones the facilities will be allowed to locate in provided all is within the framework of state law.
Commissioner Conlin noted that there are currently 33 registered Level 2 and Level 3 sex offenders living in the Burien community. He added that very few places, if any, in Burien would actually be able to meet the state criteria. Ms. Wilson said the law, as put together, is not easy to implement by either local jurisdictions or DSHS. However, all jurisdictions have the equal responsibility to plan for the siting of SCTFs.
Commissioner Newton said the City should go through the process of determining exactly where a facility could be sited given the limitations set forth in the state law. He agreed that there may be very few if any locations in Burien. The proper planning will need to be done, however, in order to determine that.
Answering a question asked from the audience, Ms. Wilson said DSHS has developed a geographic information system that plots out the location of all risk potential locations such as schools, daycare centers and the like. That information has been provided to Burien staff. That tool will be very useful for all parties in determining where SCTFs can be sited. The law makes it clear that in siting SCTFs preference must be given to locations that are furthest away from risk potential locations.
Local jurisdictions in doing their planning must develop regulations that comply with the state requirements. Local criteria must be consistent with and not more restrictive than those imposed by the state law. Local jurisdictions also must provide for the timely siting of SCTFs and cannot preclude them. Local jurisdictions are permitted the ability to identify the zones, areas or specific sites on which SCTFs can be located. They also are allowed to develop the process for siting the facilities.
Commissioner Newton said the planning effort for Burien will need to include an understanding of appropriate sites in adjacent jurisdictions to avoid recommending a location that would in fact be in conflict with a risk potential location in a neighboring jurisdiction. Ms. Wilson allowed that the bigger picture is something DSHS must consider in siting the facilities. She stressed that the intent is to site no more than 12 beds in all of King County, preferably in a single facility. The minimum number of beds in any one facility will be three. A local jurisdiction could include in its ordinance that no SCTF with more than three beds will be permitted.
Commissioner Simpson-Clark asked if the jurisdictions that complete their planning requirements in accord with the law and the established timelines will be looked at preferentially for siting SCTFs. Ms. Wilson said siting decisions will be made irrespective of whether or not local jurisdictions have met the requirements of the law. She added that a 12-bed facility could require as much as five acres of land; proportionately smaller sites would be needed for facilities with fewer beds.
Ms. Wilson said local plans should include a discussion of equitable distribution as provided for by state law. The number of registered sex offenders living within a community, the number of Department of Corrections correctional facilities and DSHS mental health hospital beds should be noted, along with work release facilities and the like. State law anticipates that local jurisdictions will work together to develop equitable distribution policies, but the reality is that the planning must be done by each individual jurisdiction.
Once potential sites are selected by the state, the law requires that public hearings be held. The public hearings can be held in tandem with the local jurisdictions in which the potential sites are located in order not to duplicate process. Major public notification is required. At the public hearing, the state will be required to set forth its rationale as to why the site is appropriate for a SCTF.
Answering a question asked by Commissioner Newton, Ms. Wilson said graduates from the SCTF programs are registered as Level 3 sex offenders.
Commissioner Conlin asked if DSHS would be looking for urban or suburban settings. Ms. Wilson said that densely populated urban settings generally offer fewer possibilities given the siting criteria. Locations that are too far out into the woods are generally not within a reasonable commute for the treatment providers.
Deputy Mayor Clark asked if mitigation measures could include funding to add police officers. Ms. Wilson said the law sets forth specific mitigation measures. It is a possibility that additional police officers could be provided.
Commissioner Simpson-Clark asked if the state has any authority to monitor and control residents who graduate from SCTF programs. Ms. Wilson said residents assigned to the programs are on conditional release by the court. Each case is reviewed annually, and the court could at some future time order the state to provide even less restrictive alternatives. Ultimately the court has the authority to unconditionally release residents. Graduates are all required to register as sex offenders.
The Commission thanked Ms. Wilson for her information.
**BREAK**
A. Discussion of 2003-2008 Financial Plan and Capital Improvement Program
Finance and Administrative Services Director Linda Gorton explained that the first step in setting the City’s annual budget is the adoption by the City Council of the financial policies that guide the budget process. Among other things, the policies direct how much money should be held aside in savings and how much money each fund should carry to cover emergencies. Once those policies are adopted, an economic forecast is developed focused on both anticipated revenues and expenditures. The CIP is drafted based on both of those documents.
The Council already has adopted the financial policies. The financial forecast and CIP were presented to the Council the first meeting in June and could be adopted as early as July. The CIP remains largely unchanged from the current one.
Ms. Gorton said the forecast shows sales taxes remaining flat for 2003, which compares to as much as a 10 to 15 percent drop in sales taxes in other jurisdictions. I-747, the property tax initiative passed by the voters in 2001, limits growth in property taxes on an annual basis, though Burien has some banked capacity.
There are still some unknowns in the budget, such as the provision of court services. The City is working with Yakima County on housing inmates there in order to save some money. The city of SeaTac intends to pull its King County contracted officers out of Burien and assign them to SeaTac only, and that will shift some administrative costs.
Ms. Gorton said it is city policy that revenues must exceed expenditures every year. Over the past few years, however, the gap between the two has been narrowing. The forecast shows that the difference will remain positive in 2002 and 2003. By Council policy, the revenues that exceed the expenditures are used to fund the CIP. In general, the financial forecast for Burien has improved.
Answering a question asked by Commissioner Boscarine, Ms. Gorton said about one-third of the city’s total sales tax revenue comes from car dealerships. Furthermore, sales tax revenues represent about one-third of the city’s total revenue stream. The single largest taxpayer in the city is the casino; that may change once the sales tax on utilities is imposed.
Ms. Gorton said the 2002-2008 CIP totals $38.2 million. Of that, only 20 percent will come from local money. Some 41 percent will come from a bond issue needed to build a new senior center and community center. The transportation CIP totals $33.9 million, of which only 27 percent is from local money. Within the CIP, there are both funded and unfunded projects, the latter of which totals $40 million. Twenty percent of the projects on the funded list are not fully funded.
Chair Pierce said he has heard from several in Burien who feel they are carrying the brunt of the tax increases approved by the Council. What if three large car dealers could move their establishments just three miles to the north and gain a much better return on their investments? Chair Pierce asked if any consideration has been given to finding additional sources of revenues that will not place an even greater burden on local businesses. Ms. Gorton said all local jurisdictions have bills that must be paid and programs residents want, but are finding it more difficult to keep up given passage of I-474 and other such initiatives. When funds from one revenue source are diminished the burden shifts to another source. A state income tax would be one approach to get the burden off of businesses. Allowing property taxes to increase at more than one percent per year would be another method.
Chair Pierce said he envisioned taking advantage of all opportunities to increase revenues. One idea would be for the City to lease out the north end of Seahurst Park for a large luxury hotel. The city could generate a great deal of revenue from the lease, perhaps an amount sufficient to fund the entire parks CIP annually.
Chair Pierce asked if the city has the ability to effect a property swap with the school district or gain a long-term lease for the property on which the senior center is located. Chair Pierce said if the City owned the property, it could construct an eight-story building on the site, the bottom two floors for the senior center and a community center, and the top floors having residential units bringing additional revenues into the City’s coffers. Ms. Gorton said the City would like to gain control of that property and there have been discussions with the school district. She said she would pass along the suggestion to the City Manager.
Mr. Johanson said the downtown Phase II master planning process may uncover additional opportunities for partnerships that would be beneficial to the City in any number of ways. Commissioner Robison is one of the members of the steering committee. One community forum has already been held to draw input from the community at large. A second community forum will be held on July 1.
C. Discussion of Sign Code Recommendation
Commissioner Conlin noted that the Commission worked diligently on the sign code issue for several months. The recommendation that went forward to the Council represented a fair compromise that all could endorse. Now that the matter is before the Council for review, all that is on the table for consideration is the recommendation of the subcommittee and the staff. The subcommittee was guided in large part by the staff. The City Council should make its decision based on the recommendation of the Business and Economic Development Partnership and the Planning Commission. He proposed that the commission pass a resolution and forward it to the council indicating that the commission stands behind its original recommendation.
Chair Pierce said the cornerstone of the recommendation formulated by the commission was that it offered everyone choices with regard to signs. The issues were all given adequate review and the recommendation was solid.
Deputy Mayor Clark said the intent of the City Council is to look at all of the recommendations that have come forth: the Planning Commission, the Business and Economic Development Partnership and the joint committee recommendations. Everything was allowed to sit on the shelf for a full year, which did not make some councilmembers happy. When the issue was again brought to the table, some business people who had not previously been involved suddenly stepped up; they are working on formulating a recommendation that will suit them. What the council has in front if it is a matrix outlining the recommendation of each individual group relative to each issue. The staff has done an excellent job of not weeding out any group and bringing to the council a full array of options to consider. She added that there is agreement among all of the different bodies on fully 80 percent of the issues.
Commissioner Conlin reiterated his concern that the recommendations of the joint committee might as well have been written by the staff. Staff has had too much control over what is happening with the sign ordinance. The problem with that is that the staff do not run businesses and have no idea of what signs draw customers and what signs will be useless. The recommendations of people who run businesses should be given some extra weight. As it is, the sign ordinance in the end will wind up hurting the City.
Deputy Mayor Clark urged the commissioners to drive around the city for the specific purpose of looking at what signs are in place and draw some conclusions from that exercise.
Commissioner Simpson-Clark commented that if the commission and the council only had to consider the non-business portion of the Burien community, the sign code would be a simple matter to decide. The fact is the needs of the business community must be weighed heavily. Deputy Mayor Clark concurred, saying the council needs to have people come and speak rationally why one part of the code or another will not work, and which parts of the code will work just fine.
Commissioner Conlin said he wanted the commission to forward to the council a resolution asking that only the recommendations of the Planning Commission and the Business and Economic Development Partnership be used in formulating the sign code.
Motion to forward to the City Council a statement indicating that the Planning Commission stands by the recommendation forwarded to the council and that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council give that recommendation its highest consideration in formulating the sign code ordinance was made by Commissioner Conlin. Second was by Commissioner Simpson-Clark and the motion carried 7-1 with Commissioner Boscarine voting no.
D. Discussion of Planning Commission Schedule
Mr. Johanson said he would work with Planning Director Scott Greenberg toward providing at the next commission meeting a best-guess schedule of meetings for the next few months.
Commissioner Boscarine said he would prefer to see the commission not meet during July. Commissioner Robison concurred, but Chair Pierce said his preference would be not to meet in August.
It was agreed that the commission should continue meeting during the summer months even if there are some commissioners not able to attend every meeting.
Returning to the issue of siting SCTFs, Commissioner Boscarine expressed an interest in holding an off-the-record meeting with the City Council to gain its direction on how to proceed relative to the issue. Chair Pierce noted that anytime a quorum of councilmembers or commissioners meets the meeting must be noticed and open to the public. Mr. Johanson said the commission is free to hold study sessions to discuss the matter fully but must strive to remain within the state-mandated timelines.
Commissioner Conlin complained that the timeline would have been no problem to meet had the staff scheduled Commission meetings during the three months when no meetings at all were held. Mr. Johanson pointed out that flux in the department caused the three-month delay. Chair Pierce agreed with Commissioner Conlin, suggesting that the commission is fully capable of conducting meetings without having staff present. He said the presentation from Ms. Wilson from DSHS could have been made months earlier even if staff had not been in the room.
Commissioner Robison pointed out that the SCTF issue will not take long to decide. The City’s hands are tied in that it cannot create regulations more restrictive than those imposed by the state, and it is highly unlikely the City would choose to develop less restrictive regulations. Even if the deadline is not met, the worst that can happen would be for the state to step in and use its processes instead of the City’s.
Commissioner Rahn disagreed. He said the City has the opportunity both to determine the process and identify specific sites for SCTFs. He said he would rather take the lead than be told what to do.
Commissioner Simpson-Clark suggested that when the state regulations are overlayed on a map of the city it will be seen that there will be a very limited range of choices for siting SCTFs in Burien.
Mr. Johanson said the planning process will give the City more control and more say over how and where SCTFs are sited in Burien. Local requirements cannot be more restrictive than the state requirements. Burien code already includes recommendations for community residential facilities and essential public facilities. The problem is that the criteria for both of those categories are too restrictive to be applied to SCTFs. The parallel goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan also are too restrictive. The City is left with the option of developing a new use and a new definition, along with criteria, or modifying the existing uses and the Comprehensive Plan policies to accommodate the state criteria for SCTFs. He allowed that staff is leaning toward the first option but has made not firm recommendation yet.
Commissioner Robison offered his support for the first option. He said it is both simpler for staff and does not require a rewrite of the code with respect to other types of facilities, which could have unwanted effects. Commissioners Rahn, Simpson-Clark, Newton, Conlin and Chairperson Pierce concurred, while Commissioners Boscarine and White preferred not acting at all.
Deputy Mayor Clark thanked the commission for taking a position with regard to SCTFs. She said the City Council believes the community would be better served if the issues are tackled head on and proper planning is done to avoid having the state preempt all local regulations.
Commissioner Robison said he would like staff to find out what the actual impacts have been on area jurisdictions currently housing regional justice centers and prisons.
Commissioner Simpson-Clark proposed that in describing the SCTF use the description should be kept sufficiently broad to pre-empt being selected for other, similar, facilities in the future. Commissioner Robison concurred, suggesting the definition should cover other types of civil commitment facilities and even penal facilities.
Commissioner Conlin apologized to staff for not bringing the SCTF issue to the Commission sooner.
Adjournment
Motion to adjourn was made by Commissioner Robison and was seconded by Commissioner Rahn. Chairperson Pierce adjourned the meeting at 9:26 p.m.
Approved:
/s/ Robert Pierce, chair
Planning Commission
/s/ Scott Greenberg, director
Community Development Department