Last Town Council Meeting of 2002

by Dixie A. Walter
December 28, 2002    

    During a council meeting which lasted approximately 35 minutes, the final budget ordinance was approved unanimously as were two other ordinances and one resolution. A lawsuit brought by local residents Pat and Edwinna Van Eaton was almost discussed, 300,000 gallons of missing water was declared not missing at all, the Community Center, long a financial concern, is "holding its own," pet and business license rates were raised and the beginning of a master plan for the Alder St. Park was also under consideration. 
     The council proved they can take care of  business in a short period of time and still have a conversation about whether the sewer project "kicks to the west" or "kicks to the east" of Larson St.  
    Following  is a verbatim transcription of the December 23, 2002 meeting of Eatonville's town leaders.

Police Report

   *Eatonville Police Chief Jim Lewis presented copies of "Confusions 6 - A comprehensive guide to crime and drugs" to the council. The magazine is published by the National Child Safety Council and covers such diverse subjects as illicit drugs, gateway drugs, families, violence, gangs and suicides.  

   Lewis: I’m terribly impressed with the citizens that actually participated in this program. The high school got cases after cases of this type of material for the kids in school. So I think this is really going to help us the rest of this year and next year. Whenever we need more all we have to do is notify them and they’ll send us additional copies of whatever. So please read these. I’ll tell you, you will be impressed with them.

    Mayor Harold Parnell:  Really impressive. I didn’t know something like this was going on, to tell you the truth. 

 Water Lost and Found?  

   Public Works Director Jamieson Van Eaton: I didn’t prepare a report this month. It’s been a busy couple of weeks for me. But I’d just like to comment verbally that we did have a pre-construction meeting for the sewer project, which should begin the first week in January. We didn’t finish the job by December 31, but it wasn’t our fault that we didn’t, and the grant folks know that. So they’re satisfied to allow the project to proceed and it should be completed by the end of January.
    I wanted to note that you know that we had Rainier Group in our right of way. And I approached them referencing the franchise we have with them, and they were very responsible. They moved their utilities to make way for our project and they did it ahead of time. So I can’t speak hihly enough of how very well Rainier Group did in working with us on this project.
    The town had a situation, not this week, but last week, where we discovered one morning that we had lost most of the water in one of our reservoirs. And the question was, How did it happen? Was it vandalism? Was it an inside job? How could we lose almost 300,000 gallons of water? I didn’t want to raise any alarm until I had some further answers. 
     And I spent a day thinking about it, trying to get all the clues and then another day in recreating what happened. And as it turns out we didn’t lose any water. It wasn’t vandalism. It wasn’t an inside job. What is was, was the water went down below thirty-three percent, and it probably went down to ten percent. And when we started filling the water back we didn’t see that rise until it got back over thirty-three percent, because at thirty-three percent is where our control would stop reading accurately. And, so at any rate, it was simply a result of our pump not operating for about eighteen hours.
     And the control failed to notify us that the pump wasn’t working. And we’ve since ordered the new control device and the backup device. And so the good news was we didn’t lose any water, and it wasn’t vandalism or anything else. Just a pump that wasn’t working like it should have.
     I’ve been attending weekly meetings over in Yelm sponsored by the Nisqually Watershed Planning Unit, of which I’m a member. The town’s a member. So I’ll have a comprehensive report on that. But basically we’re meeting on what criteria in the future - say, for example, the town of Eatonville - what procedures we will be required to follow to get additional water rights. And Eatonville, of all the municipalities and entities, are on the leading edge of being involved in salmon restoration versus water for the public. And it’s a complicated issue. It’s ongoing. I’m representing the town and it’s evolving and I think we’re well represented in the situation that we’re in. And I will have a comprehensive report for you on that.
   
We have a water report that the council members have received. I’ve read it three or four times, and I’d like to have a study session before we have that. I need to have a meeting with the Department of Health, and a meeting with the Department of Ecology, to kind of put some perspective into this report. And when I have that I’ll feel that I will have the info we need to answer just about any questions the council members or the town may have regarding our next step towards our new source of water. So I encourage everybody to read this report. It’s a very defining report. It identifies to us where we don’t want to go in spending our money. And if we do go there we’re taking a risk. And so it’s pretty apparent, probably, what course of action we should take, but it’s not conclusive until I find out what kind of flexibilities we have with the Department of Health to do certain things.
    It’s a new report, just came out. It’s a report based upon what has taken place up until the drilling of our resource recovery well. And it goes all the way back to Ohop Valley, etc.
    Also, the planning commission met last week. And most notable at that meeting was the discussion of comprehensive boundary changes and how really involved the community needs to become in allowing for this change to occur. It’s something the planning commission will deliberate on through the process of public hearing. It will come to the town council. But basically what we have is, we have folks out to the west, the Triangle area, who apparently no longer want to be in our growth management area. So that being the case, there’s probably somebody that does want to be in it. I don’t know, and it’s something that will make good public discussion over a year or so.
   The park committee met last week as well. Mart Kask was stuck in traffic so he couldn’t represent options of the master plan. Mart didn’t represent that to the committee; he was late in traffic. But he did represent it to the planning commission. We would have preferred first that he represent it to the committee, and he’ll do that in January. Then probably come back to the planning commission and then a public hearing and then to the town council.

What About the Van Eaton Lawsuit?

   Council member Mike Gallagher: A public lawsuit has been filed. Do you have any more information on this?

   Van Eaton: Well, that’s something I don’t feel that it’s appropriate…  

   Gallagher: I know our attorney’s not here.  

   Van Eaton:  Well, I can probably comment to the extent where it’s under review. You know, there’s a number of options at this point in time. And one of those options …well, I just as soon the attorney would weigh in. And certainly one of the things that the town will want to consider is… a couple of things. If we feel that we have every reason to represent the town in court, we’ll want to do that. We’ll also want to have some idea about what the expenses to the town might be. And so, my personal belief is that…well, I’d just as soon not comment.

   Gallagher: Is the meeting in February a hearing to show cause?  

   Van Eaton: I believe so.

   Gallagher:  Is that the seventeenth?

   Van Eaton:  The fourteenth.

   Mayor:  The fourteenth.

   Van Eaton: The fourteenth of February.

   Gallagher:  Maybe our attorney could speak a little bit longer on it at the next meeting.

   Mayor:  I imagine he will.  

   Town Clerk Carrielynn Loffelmacher:  He’s been given all the lawsuit information.

   Mayor: We’re not trying to hide anything. It’s just with lawsuits sometimes you can talk too doggone much.

   Gallagher:  Absolutely.

Does the Sewer Project Kick to the West or East?

   Council member Pat Hamilton:  Jamieson, does the sewer project go all through the whole alley?  Or does it curve and come on to Washington? I thought it curved and came on to South Washington. Does it go all the way through the alley?

   Van Eaton:  It goes through the alley from Center Street near the…across to the north of Napa is where it starts. So it crosses Center, goes down the alley to Larson and then kicks to the west…

   Hamilton:  To the west? It must kick to the east and go to Washington doesn’t it?  

   Van Eaton: I think it kicks to the west. 

   Mayor:  It goes down Washington and kicks to the west.  

   Hamilton: But the way he’s talking it goes down the alley between Mashell and Washington.  

   Van Eaton:  And, and…

   Hamilton: …then to Larson…  

   Van Eaton: Yes  

   Hamilton: and then to…

   Mayor: Yes, it has to go to Larson

   Hamilton: And then it crosses Larson? Or are you thinking it goes to Mashell then? To the west to Mashell?

   Van Eaton: Pat, if I had my construction plans I’d glance at it and…

   Hamilton: The reason I’m asking is because in the alley, after you get to Larson, and continue on the alley through the middle of that trailer park, that’s where they were digging to beat heck in there. The telephone company was digging to beat heck in there and changing things around back in that alley and I thought that’s "not involved with the sewer." But I didn’t know.

   Gallagher: Yeah, doesn’t the sewer run along Washington? The west side of Washington Avenue?

   Van Eaton: Mike, I’d have to get my plans to reference that…  

   Mayor:  East. The sewer runs on east side of Washington by Plaza Market. I helped…

     Several voices at once, garbled.

   Gallagher: It ran right down beside my dad’s property down to Oak Street.

   Van Eaton: I know it’s the direct line to the sewage facility. It could be that the AT&T folks were down in the trailer park because they had some other facilities…

   Hamilton: It must be some other work there because they were working to beat heck there for a couple days.

   Van Eaton: Well, you know, I know they’ve got some plans for new headquarters eventually that’s going sort of across from the movie theater. They’re getting their infrastructure ready for that move eventually.

   Hamilton: The new structure, I thought, was at the end of Larson. Cross Mashell, go right up behind that house across from Larson there. That’s a long ways from the movie theater.  

   Van Eaton: It’s kind of kitty-corner.

   Hamilton: It’s a ways. There’s about three houses on the south side of the movie theater before you get to Larson.

   Van Eaton: Well, somehow they’re getting there.

    Chuckles all around.

   Council Member Ray Harper: As pertains to AT&T, what’s the plan? I noticed along their line about every quarter mile you can see conduit. It comes up out of their trench. How are they going to connect that? Or, do you know what the plan is for that?

Puzzled discussion. No real answer

   Town Treasurer Melode Akervick:  I apologize for not getting the report to you earlier. My father had a stroke two weeks ago. And I didn’t really get back to it until the end of this last week. Then we had a few corrections to make but …The Community Center seems to be holding its own for once. And I was very pleased to see that.  And that’s all I really have.

Town Budget Approved

   Mayor:  New Business. Ordinances. Adopting the Budget…  

   Council Member Bob Schaub: A couple of questions. I’d like to know, I’ve gone through this budget and I, just for my own reference, how much of our budget was taken from the reserve fund, to balance the budget? In reference to our taxes and all the other income, what additional amount of money was added to this budget to balance it? From the reserve account?

   Loffelmacher: It’s an investments account that we have, and it’s money that we have been putting in there. We started out with $190,000 last year. It’s up to $300,000. And all of that investment money was put into the budget to balance it. It’s all in there.

   Schaub: And it left how much then in our reserve account?

   Loffelmacher: It stays in here. It stays in the budget every year. Last year we had $190,000 in there in investments, and it rolls over every year. Do we expect to use all of it, no. Could we use all of it, yes. If we had an emergency or something else to happen we could use all of it…all of it is in there in order to balance…

   Schaub: Ok, I’m going to ask my question one more time. How much of our reserve account was used to balance this year’s budget?

   Loffelmacher: $300,000 of the investment account was used.

   Schaub: That’s above and beyond our normal intake, is that true?

   Loffelmacher: Yes..

   Harper: But aren’t we expecting that to be left over…? 

   Loffelmacher: Yes..

   Schaub: In the last two years it looks like that we have, our wages and salaries and benefits have increased to forty percent.

   Mayor: No!

   Loffelmacher: The wages have not increased. The wages only increased last year, it was three-point-five percent of the COLA (Cost of Living Adjustment), is what we got last year. This year, per union contract, the town employees get one-point-five percent. So the wages have not increased forty percent as the newspaper [Dispatch] compared it to. As far as benefits, medical has gone up an incredible amount. Medical goes up every year.

   Schaub: Well, let’s see. Maybe I need to reword that. Instead of increasing it three-point-five and one-point-five, our budget, in the last two years, has reached the point that it is forty percent of our budget?

   Loffelmacher: Wages and salaries, yes. In most municipalities, forty percent of any budget is wages and salaries and benefits. Benefits are very expensive.

   Schaub: I’m just trying to gather enough information for my own benefit, in that I have this feeling of the months coming up, just as I’ve had a feeling in the last six months, and have asked that we monitor our budget process. In that I think we’re going to be in a bit of a bind here in the near future. But I have no further questions.

    Ordinance 2002-04 "Adopting the budget for the Town of Eatonville, Washington for the calendar year 2003" passed unanimously.

Business License Fees Raised 

     Next on the table was Ordinance 2002-07 "amending ordinance 91-21, relating to business license fees."  

   Hamilton: What had this been changed from? What was it before?

   Loffelmacher:  Twenty-five dollars ’91, and it hasn’t gone up since then.

   Harper: Did we ever come to a conclusion with the art festival?

    Loffelmacher: I talked to Bob Mack. He said that the people at the arts festival would not have to pay for a business license. But peddlers in town would.

    Harper: Like the guy who is going door-to-door right now trying to sell…

    Mayor:  Nobody called. [For a license.]

     Harper: He was so nervous he couldn’t even talk. (Chuckles)

     Ordinance 2002-04 passed unanimously. License fees will now cost $50.

Budget Amendment

    Council member Chelan Jarrett: Did we get a report that we knew these people were going to be way over budget?

   Loffelmacher: The last report that I put in your boxes. It showed that they were in the negative, except for the airport. Fire and EMS were negative. The airport was not. I just got another bill from the airport for the end of the year insurance, which was not accounted for last year. And the reason why Fire and EMS are in the negative is because they had to buy this year’s standard operating procedures. And this was the cost of them. They could be in a lot of trouble with L&I if they were operating a fire department without standard operating procedures. So they purchased them this year.

   Gallagher: You’re saying then that they had somebody write the standard operating procedures?

   Loffelmacher: Yes.

   Gallagher: It cost $11,000 to have somebody write out…

   Loffelmacher: I can get you the correct amount…they were over in a couple of departments, it wasn’t just that department only.

   An unidentified councill member asked, “Is this a state requirement?

   Loffelmacher: For standard operating procedures? Yes. I think the police department has one.

   Chief Lewis: We do them ourselves. It’s cheaper.

   Gallagher: Is this an ongoing expense? Is there going to be yearly updates, do you know?

    Lewis: It’s mandatory you do it yearly…you have to update them every year with new laws and stuff. We just did ours for 2003…Ours will be coming to ya’all for review shortly…

    Loffelmacher: The fire department will also bring them before you. But when AWC (Washington Association of Cities) came out here to evaluate our system, that was part of the problem, was that they didn’t have an operating procedure.

   Schaub: For several years past they haven’t had nothing?

   Loffelmacher: They never, ever, had anything.

   Jarrett: They never had any.

    Schaub: Geez.

   Loffelmacher: So that’s why we are over budget in those three departments. But this was the only budget amendment made this year, were these three departments.

   Schaub: There’s not a line item in the fire department budget for blazers or pullovers for next year is there?

   Loffelmacher: They do have equipment.

    Jarrett: We took out the sweatshirt money.

    Schaub: I know they’re not going to fight fire with a sweatshirt or a blazer. I can understand fire equipment but not the other stuff.

    Mayor:  All those in favor of Ordinance 2002-06…

    Hamilton: On the second reading...

    Mayor:  …on the second reading…all those in favor of Ordinance 2002-06, say aye. Passed unanimously. The motion is carried.

   Gallagher: This might be after the fact but I don’t remember this two weeks ago.

    Jarrett: Yes, I think this is the first reading.

    Schaub: This is the first reading.

    Loffelmacher: Actually, on a budget amendment you only have to have one reading. And you can approve it.

    Discussion about the passed motion.

    Mayor:  Yeah, I’ll have to back up a little.

    Jarrett: Pat’s going to have to remake the motion.

    Hamilton: I’ll have to change the motion, and I’m just wondering if needs to be an ordinance as opposed to a resolution. I think it’s been a resolution in the past.

    Loffelmacher: It’s been ordinances. They’re non-codified ordinances.

    Hamilton: Mr. Mayor I’ll restate the motion. I move we adopt Ordinance Number 2002-06 on its first reading.

    Mayor:  Forget about the old motion, we’ll go with the new one, right? Carried.

  Pet License Fees Go Up

     Resolution 2002-II "setting the rates for dog and cat licenses and repealing Resolution 91-L" passed unamimously with no discussion. To license a surgically altered pet now costs $25 each. Non-altered pets are now $50. For senior citizens over the age of 60 the fee is $10 for each altered pet and $15 for non-altered animals. 

 Council Comments

   Harper: In the future when we do a budget amendment could we have a little breakdown of costs?

    Loffelmacher: Do you want it line item by line item?

     Harper: If it’s a big item.

     Gallagher: It’s in the budget that way. I think Ray is right. Any amendments should be presented to us the same way the budget is.

     Harper: The department heads aren’t here so we can scowl at them. (laughter)

    Loffelmacher: I scowled a lot when I saw it happen. A lot. Loffelmacher agreed to present  future amendments the same way as the budget.

     Hamilton: I would like to day it’s been an interesting year and I appreciate the efforts of all the council people and CarrieLynn and Jamieson and Happy New and Merry Christmas to everybody.

     Mayor:  All I have to say to you all is Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, and hope the New Year is really a happy one.

     So ends the last town council meeting of the year 2002.

    *For Eatonville Police Report Please See  Law Enforcement

                                                                                                                              Back to Top

                                                                                                                                                                        Back to Front Page

 

 

"Democracy is when you are not closed for being open."

~Vlada Bulatovitch

 

 

 

"Vote for the man who promises least; he’ll be the least disappointing."

 
-~Bernard Baruch

 

 

 

 

 

"Politicians can’t give us anything without depriving us of something else.  Government is not a god.  Every dime they spend must first be taken from someone else."

~Gary Asmus