Harrington holds public hearings, budget discussion

HARRINGTON – The City Council met via Zoom for a special meeting and two public hearings. Those attending were councilmen Peter Davenport, David Buddrius, Stephen Hardy, Levi Schenk and Justin Slack; Clerk Janice Cepeda; Mayor Nathan Luck and identified visitors Jamie Henneman (Davenport Times), Marge Womach and Cherie MacClellan and others unidentified. The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA/DNS) Determination of Non-Significance was the first of two public hearings to be opened. MacClellan asked which project this was in reference to and the council responded that it was for the wastewater treatment plant project. With no questions or concerns from the public, the council closed this public hearing and opened the Tax Levy Public Hearing. Statistics from the Lincoln County Assessor’s Office that a 1% tax levy increase would reap $584 in anticipated revenue for the city of Harrington. Questions were addressed regarding the effect on taxpayers of having their taxes increased. The council voted a 4-1-0 to make the 1% increase that is allowed, with the dissenting vote recorded by Buddrius.

A long discussion ensued regarding the Community Development Block Grant program requirement that the city pass what seemed at face value a mere formality to have a resolution in place forbidding the use of excessive force by law enforcement if Harrington is to be eligible to accept federal grants. Clerk Cepeda had spent considerable time working with the sheriff’s office to ensure that the council and the sheriff’s office were in agreement with the policy. The CDBG program is authorized under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, and the policy is geared toward the protection of civil rights, particularly in entitlements regarding housing and community facilities. Several on the council wanted a clear-cut definition of “excessive force” before they would be willing to vote on the topic. Questions were asked regarding other towns in the county that utilize the Lincoln County Sheriff’s Office for their protection and whether anyone knew what the other town councils had decided. During the discussion Slack contacted Steve Marsh who stated that our contract with the Lincoln County Sheriff’s Office would make it sound policy to pass the resolution prohibiting excessive force with the understanding that if the Sheriff’s Office violated the Federal policy, Harrington has the option to terminate its contract with the sheriff. The motion to accept the terminology forbidding the use of excessive force passed with a 4-0-1 vote, Hardy abstaining.

Hardy shared more research he had done regarding the City of Harrington hosting its own website and email which he stressed would not be in competition with other web sites containing city information. He noted that if the council voted to take this route, the website would be strictly for city hall business. Regarding the expense, he said that there is a $60/year package, plus tax, plus a $20 domain-name fee, which would allow unlimited data and email accounts. Luck spoke favorably about the opportunity. Davenport questioned the specifics of what would be hosted. Hardy said that minutes, files and records which the public normally would be provided on request at city hall could be posted and available without making requests, with the goal of moving most of our records on line. No action was taken.

More than an hour was spent discussing the preliminary budget for 2021 including the nature of garbage rates, tipping fees, weighing in at the transfer station and changes due to the city switching garbage collectors due to the apple maggot quarantine. One aspect of the payment for water bills is that the citizens are paying more for the privilege to have water available than for the amount that a household is using. Slack noted that he was aware of 15 inactive accounts in the city and that the city had raised the water-sewer-garbage rates for the past two years after several years of the rates remaining the same. Others questioned whether the city wanted to do away with granting discounts for non-use or if it was reasonable to grant a minimum connectivity rate. Many other items on the budget were scrutinized in like manner.