Tie goes to the mayor, as the $20.6 million downtown reconstruction plan moves forward.

To one observer, Winslow Way has become a “monster” that will be neither cheap, nor easy to tame.

Many at Wednesday’s City Council meeting agreed with that assessment; fewer could agree on the right plan, or when to crack the whip.

“Residents have waited over 10 years to get this project off the ground,” said Winslow Way Streetscape Manager Chris Wierzbicki. “The street is suffering today because of that delay.”

It took a lengthy debate, but with one monster-sized decision, councilors and the mayor on Wednesday narrowly approved the financing plan for the $20.6 million streetscape.

“This is probably one of the most important votes we’ve taken during my term on the council,” said Nezam Tooloee, who voted against the plan, along with Debbie Vancil and Bill Knobloch.

Mayor Darlene Kordonowy agreed with Tooloee about the importance of the vote, but disagreed with his position, casting the deciding tally in favor of the plan to break a 3-3 split among the council. Councilman Bob Scales was absent from the meeting.

“My hope, my dream, my perfect outcome for this would have been for a unanimous decision of council,” Kordonowy said. “But I believe this work must go forward.”

The mayor’s words set off applause in the council chambers, and relief among planners, who with the decision can proceed with final design and keep the project on schedule for groundbreaking in spring 2009.

The project will replace utilities beneath Winslow Way, while widening sidewalks, narrowing vehicle lanes and adding street trees and public art.

It is the first and – according to planners – most important component of the Winslow Tomorrow long-range planning effort.

Along with the financing plan, councilors on Wednesday approved the design framework for four areas of the project – vegetation, sustainability, storm drainage and parking and delivery.

But the focus was on financing, particularly the allocation of costs to islanders. The approved plan shifted $400,000 that would have come from utility user fees into the general fund.

Still, the division in funding sources remains roughly the same, with about half coming from utility users – downtown customers in general would pay more than those in outlying areas – and half coming from the general fund, in the form of bonds.

Tooloee supports the project, but said that wasn’t the key to his decision on Wednesday. The key, he said, was figuring out a fair way to pay for it.

He wondered why planners brought forward essentially the same package that councilors were wary of the last time they reviewed it, earlier this month.

“I don’t think this funding proposal is ready for the prime time,” he said before the vote. “Not at all.”

More detailed cost allocations will come next year, following a utility rate study that will more clearly define each specific customer’s use of the system.

That’s a complicated undertaking, Wierzbicki said, but in general, the greatest share of the burden falls to downtown commercial users, who pay more than residential customers.

The city also is counting on additional revenue from new connections to the system, which would come via growth. Each new hookup – about 75 are expected per year – costs $3,500 on average, Wierzbicki said.

Others said that no matter how you divide the financing, the money is coming out of taxpayer pockets.

Questions were raised about whether a Local Improvement District could be created to ensure that each user’s portion of the cost would be commensurate with their level of use.

Wierzbicki said LIDs aren’t typically used by cities to fund the replacement of existing elements.

Councilor Debbie Vancil worried about the timing of the proposal.

She said it doesn’t make sense to commit so much money to a project prior to the unveiling of the mayor’s budget, which will happen on Monday.

She also would have welcomed some alternatives.

“This is by no means the only legal way to arrange payment,” she said.

Bells, whistles

Despite assurances from planners, Councilman Bill Knobloch was uncertain about the legality of the plan.

He feared it could open the city up to lawsuits, alluding to cases elsewhere in which cities were sued by utility users.

“This is going to be heavily audited by the public,” he said. “I’m just not ready to vote for it.”

Knobloch also opposed the elements of the project that go beyond the basic functionality of the street.

He said that any “bells and whistles” should require public support before being included in the plan.

Council Chair Chris Snow said he thought the project as presented was better than any stripped down alternative.

Basic curbs and sidewalks, he said, likely wouldn’t retain the character of the street.

“Winslow Way may be quaint and funky,” he said. “But that’s too quaint and funky to my way of thinking.”

Wierzbicki said that the essential components of the utility repairs and replacement of the street would cost about $18 million, with the remaining $2.6 million going toward various surface improvements.

Many community members spoke on both sides of the issue.

Several stressed the importance of maintaining the project’s schedule to avoid being stung by rapidly increasing construction costs.

Planners have estimated the project’s price would increase by as much as $3 million for every year of delay.

Among the streetscape supporters were School Board President Bruce Weiland, who has worked on several major capital projects with the school district. He lauded the quality of work done by the city’s design team.

“Don’t fall into the trap that you’re not getting good advice,” he said, before calling the project a “monster” that has grown more troublesome over time.

Others, like Blakely Court resident Kirsten Hytopoulos, worried about the urgency of some to charge ahead, and the reasons being used to justify the project.

“I’m tired of fear tactics,” she said, adding that downtown landowners and developers would see a greater benefit from the work than the community at large.

Snow disagreed, saying his support wasn’t driven by fear as much as community need and a “desire to see council actually make a decision.”

“It’s not going to get cheaper,” he said.

Following the vote, Tooloee voiced his displeasure, saying it “wasn’t as good” as a 4-3 council decision because the mayor broke the tie.

He questioned whether she had the legal authority to do so because the vote was “tantamount to a budget decision.”

By law, the mayor can only break a tie among councilors on certain types of decisions. City Attorney Paul McMurray affirmed the legality of the move before the mayor cast her vote.

Councilman Jim Llewellyn compared efforts to advance the project to driving a car with its parking brake halfway on.

“It’s time to pull the parking brake off and move forward with the resources we already have,” he said.

Councilman Kjell Stoknes concurred.

“If we do nothing else, this is probably the one thing we should do,” he said. “I think we need to go for it right now.”

***************************************************************************************

What it means

City Councilors on Wednesday approved the financing plan for the $20.6 million Winslow Way Streetscape project.

The vote allows planners to begin final design of the project using the current budget. A more refined financing plan will come next year after the city finishes a utility rate study. Under the current structure, the project cost is divided roughly in half between utility rate users and the city’s general fund.

Also approved Wednesday were the frameworks for four components of the project: vegetation, sustainability, storm drainage and parking and delivery.