Ads on: Special HTML
Council votes to close doors of Carol Edwards Center PDF Print E-mail
Written by Don Mann   
Monday, 19 July 2010 09:16
Based upon the published agenda, Tuesday’s Woodinville City Council meeting appeared vanilla: three seemingly benign "study sessions" regarding a review of the city’s 6-year financial planning model, a review of Parks and Recreation cost-recovery recommendations and a sneak peek at the future capital improvement plan (CIP) — with the ongoing, burgeoning issue of Ordinance No. 489 (the downtown plan) to be addressed in finality the following week.

Nary a "business item" was advertised. On paper, it looked like a quickie with no frills.

Yet, five hours and 26 minutes later, after enough numbers to choke a horse were bandied back and forth and a multitude of amendments to a multitude of motions were passed and failed, the Carol Edwards Center would be looking at being "mothballed," if not extinction.

Go figure.

When it got to study session No. 2, City Manager Richard Leahy, on task and data driven, began the proceedings with an overview: The city’s parks and recreation program generates approximately $343,000 in revenue versus $1.6 million in costs, operating at an approximate $1.25 million annual deficit.

Parks and Recreation spokesmen Paul Cowles and Greg Fazzio, after careful study, they said, recommended recreation programs and community center rentals be eliminated to meet council’s budget objectives.

Cowles, defending the recommendation, cited two concerns: that city recreation services were provided to 70 percent of people residing outside city limits and that "70 to 80 percent" of services were in direct competition to existing businesses within the city.

Under the recommendation, among the line items suggested to be scrapped would be Woodinville’s city pre-school program.

"Where is it in our mission statement that we are to babysit?" Cowles asked the council.

In short order, Councilmember Bernie Talmas made a quick three-pronged motion to (1) close the Carol Edward Center "effective September 30, 2010"; (2) direct the city manager to find alternative locations for city-run programs and (3) direct the city manager to assist operators of non-city run programs to find alternative locations within the city.

Councilmember Paulette Bauman seconded the motion, citing the CEC as an "under-utilized facility" and her concern of the city’s operating expenses versus a consistent revenue stream.

The motion died on the vine, however, as Councilmember Jeff Glickman spoke against it for a variety of reasons, and the rookie council members — once again — deferred to the computer scientist.

About an hour later, after the council excused themselves from their self-imposed rules of only speaking twice for 10 minutes total, Glickman took the floor again.

He spoke of the city’s looming $540,000 budget deficit next year — and projected $1.1 million in 2012, and mentioned the "large number" of the city’s accumulating liabilities.

"This will hit every aspect of the city’s operations and parks is just a small part of it," he said. And then Glickman made a motion to raise the field rental rates by a factor of 3.48 to break even (meaning a $20 rental fee will soon be approximately $70), terminate the recreation programs and community center rentals and put the Carol Edwards Center into a "mothball" condition, where it would be locked down but could possibly be restarted in better economic times, he said.

Talmas was quick to second the motion and then it went to a vote, which passed 4-3.

Voting "yes" were Glickman, Talmas, Mayor Chuck Price and Susan Boundy-Sanders.

Voting "no" were Paulette Bauman, Scott Hageman and Liz Aspen.

"Going into the meeting, I had no idea this thing would come to a vote," Aspen said. "It was a shocker and I’m still trying to figure it out," she said."My biggest frustration is those on council did not take the time to work with staff to have a clear dialogue about any other cost-saving measures or ways to increase revenue," she said.

Moments after the vote to eliminate the CEC, the council retreated into an executive session to consider some of its "accumulating liabilities," which included potential litigation with Bargmann Construction (general contractor for Woodinville Fields), current litigation with the roundabout project involving DTTS Enterprises, current litigation involving Phoenix Development and potential litigation with Northwest Parks Foundation.

The next day, some Woodinville citizens expressed concern that the council had violated the public disclosure process.

Woodinville City Attorney Greg Rubstello was asked about the legality of the vote on the CEC, given it was billed as a "study session" and not a "business item." Said the lawyer: "Since the meeting was a regularly scheduled and not a special meeting, the Open Public Meetings Act allows council to take final action on items not on the posted agenda." 

Comments (6)Add Comment
468
Litigation or recreation?
written by Dennis Lone, July 20, 2010
Among the litigation costs mentioned in the article, there was no mention of the quarter-million dollars in legal fees that the city must pay to the defendants' lawyers for their foolish, vindictive, losing suit against Tent City. But suing is more fun--right, Chuck?
467
It's a matter of public trust
written by Ann Rupley, July 20, 2010
I hope there is a large turnout at the City Council meeting tonight, July 20th at 7 pm, to share with the Council the concerns and thoughts of their constituents on this subject.

I don't think there would be such uproar if the Council had not already, several times since the last election, made choices that indicate their disregard for their constituents. Among other things, while operating within the letter of the law, they have called short notice meetings during the holiday season on hot topics. They have drastically limited the opportunities for verbal and written public input at City Council meetings.

In purporting to represent all of us within the city, as they had sworn to do, it is important that they not rely only on the letter of the law, but the intent and the heart behind it. If I had not witnessed firsthand so much of the grandstanding and maneuvering by the majority of these sitting council members in the past, I wouldn't be so suspicious of the decisions they make.

I cannot imagine not opening up this decision for public input prior to voting on a course of action. Belt Tightening is Tough Business, as Mike says in his comment here. However, the Council wasn't brave in my opinion. They were cowardly in not opening allowing the public to have a say in such a major decision. If they were brave, they would have approached the issue with an open mind and open attitude.

The citizens should have the opportunity to give input on where the belt must be tightened and also allowed to suggest alternatives, both in funding sources and in creative resolution to the budget problems. I'd think the City Council would welcome that kind of input.

If the Council would show they could be trusted, instead of continuing to behave in the sly way they have in the past, Woodinville would be in a much better place.
466
...
written by S, July 20, 2010
I think the point the reporter is trying to make is that it seems as though the Council voted to close the center and fields, and thus, all the recreation programs, without the participation of the community residents. If there was a townhall meeting, letter, newspaper announcement, etc that allowed the public to offer suggestions and or advanced notice that closure was possible, then I don't think there would have been such an uproar. We elect the Council on our behalf and I think we are seeing that the Council is acting without the true intent of its constituents who would like community recreation opportunities. Perhaps the City has not done its due diligence to market the center and provide a better and alternative revenue stream to offset the monies brought in through existing taxes. Act not like a parks * rec dept but like any other private rec facility that cannot rely on taxpayer money.
462
Belt Tightening is tough business
written by Mike, July 19, 2010
The selective coverage by this reporter merely adds fuel to the fire for the work that this brave council has subscribed. An objective piece would detail the current budget crisis and shortfall facing the city's operating budget as presented by Mr. Katica. It would emphasize the city staff's request for policy directions given a $1,000,000 mismatch of expenses outstripping revenues throughout the city. It would discuss the possible strategies including raising property taxes, implementing business fees, or cutting costs. It would cover the excellent work by the staff in cutting staffing costs since 2009 and presentation of material to cut more costs. An objective story would emphasize the desire of most council members to avoid raising taxes or fees in this current economic climate. Then and only then could a logical person understand the situation described in the meeting where commissioners present a poor economic performer--the CEC--that costs over 10 times more than it generates. In business this type of operation would be called "low hanging fruit" that is further mitigated by a bleak business plan for growth (ie. no parking and pricing fixed by local competition).

That is however not the story that Mr. Mann writes. He takes swipes at the council in guarded statements about an individual's profession or a group's tenure on the council. He takes liberties to quote one council member he interviewed after the vote, but not another from the prevailing position.

If I hadn't watched the entire meeting on Woodinville TV before reading this story, I too would be very agitated at the council for taking liberties with this material--but I did my own investigation and learned the facts. There are two sides to every story and I get the feeling that Woodinville Weekly presents its OpEd on its first page as do the grocery store scandal sheets disguised as professional journalism. We see more journalistic objectivity in the police blotter!

To those who are reading this story, please take the time to do your homework by watching the July 13 meeting on the Woodinville City Council Website.
461
Community Meeting @ City Hall
written by Marisa, July 19, 2010
This article fails to mention that there is a meeting Tuesday night (7-20) at City Hall at 7pm where residents can show up to show their support for the Woodinville Parks & Rec. program. The parks program is one of the things that makes Woodinville a great place to live.

BTW, it may be true that many residents outside of Woodinville enjoy our programs here, but 2/3 of the parks' budget comes from sales taxes. Many neighboring residents shop here in Woodinville and therefore pay sales tax here.

Final point--very sad when so much money is being wasted in litigation (addressed in the article) that our parks' program suffers for it!
460
...
written by Kat Stremlau, July 19, 2010
Colwes...your remark that the preschool program is akin to "babysitting" is highly insulting to both the staff of the preschool and the parents who enroll their children in the program.

Shame on you. The council is not a place for insults or cute little statements to try to bolster your position.

Kat Stremlau
Mom to Nate (student to Miss Helen and Miss Paula)

Write comment
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy