2003, 08-05 Study SessionTuesday, August 5,2003
SUBJECT
Administration
1. Community
Development
2. legal
4. Finance
5. Finance
3. Legal
6. Legislative
7. Adrninisttation
8. Administration
Council Requests Please Turn Off All Electronic Devices During Council Meeting
DISCUSSION LEADER
David Mercier (10 minutes)
Marina Sukup (20 minutes)
Car Dfisiteli 5- minute)
ken Thompson (60 minutes)
Ken Thompson (10 minutes)
Cary Driskell (25 minutes,
Mayor DeVlcming (5 minutes)
David Mercier (10 minutes)
David Mcricr (10 minutes)
Note: At Council Study Sessions, there will be no public comments, except Council reserves the right to request
information from the public and staff as appropriate.
Amended Study Session Agrnda, August S. 2003
AMENDED
AGENDA
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHEET
STUDY SESSION
CITY HALL AT REDWOOD PLAZA
11707 East Sprague Avenue, First Floor
ACTIVITY
Employee Introductions
Comprehensive Plan
Land Use Element
Ifep ed- Zontng£ de
complianee-OKtirkanee
Budget Process Presentation
Proposed Budget Amendment
Advance Agenda Additions
Council Check -in
City Manager Comments
6:00 P.M.
GOAL
Discussion/
Information
Disco
Iti fat+
Discussion!
Information
Discussion/ Set Public
tl�•arinR for Pn pQ 4
Budget Amendment
for Aug 26.2003
Franchise Ordinance Discussion/
Update JnfarmatiQn
Discussion
Discussion
Discussion/
Information
Pnge 1 of 1
Tuesday, August 5, 2003
Council Requests Pease Turn Off All Electronic Devices During Council Meeting
SUBJECT
DISCUSSION LEADER
Administration David Mercier (10 minutes)
I. Community
Development
2. Legal
3. Legal
4. Finance
5 Finance
6 Legislative
Study Session Agenda, August S, 2003
AGENDA
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHEET
STUDY SESSION
CITY HALL AT REDWOOD PLAZA
11707 East Sprague Avenue, FIrst Floor
Marina Sukup (20 minutes)
Cart/ Driskell (15 minutes)
Cary Dhiskcll (25 minutes)
Ken Thompson (60 minutes)
Ken Thompson (10 minutes)
Mayor DeVleming (5 minutes)
7. Administration David Mercier (10 minutes)
8. Administration David Merrier (10 minutes)
ACTIVITY
Employee Introductions
Comprehensive Plan
Land Use Elanent
Proposed Zoning Codc
Compliance Ordinance
Franchise Ordinance
Update
Budget Process Presentation
Pmposcd Budget Amendment
Advance Agenda Additions
Council Check -in
City Manager Comments
X/-f 6p
Page 1 of 1
6:00 P.M.
GOAL
Discussion)
Information
Discussion/
Information
Discussion/
Information
Discussion/
Information
Discussions
Information
Discussion
Discussion
Discussion/
Information
Nat At Council Study Sessions, there will be no public comments, except Council reserves the right to
request information from the public and staff as appropriate.
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: August 5, 2003 City Manager Sign -off:
Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent 0 old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
X information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Interim Comprehensive Plan /Land Use Presentation
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 36.70A - Growth Management Act
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: N/A
BACKGROUND: The City Council adopted the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan as
the City's Interim Comprehensive Plan prior to incorporation. The City will be developing
a new Plan consistent with the guiding provisions of the Growth Management Act and
the Countywide Planning Policies.
The Community Development Department will present a review of individual elements of
the Comprehensive Plan over the next several meetings to familiarize the Council with
both the Comprehensive Plan and the development process. This presentation covers
the Land Use element and includes the requirements of the Growth Management Act, the
adopted Countywide Planning Policies, an overview of relevant elements of the Interim
Plan, requirements for inter jurisdictional coordination, and a brief overview of the
process for developing land use regulations.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: N/A
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A .
STAFF CONTACT: Marina Sukup, Community Development Director
Spol�ane
�Ualley
Background:
Department of Community Development
LONG RANGE PLANNING DIVISION
Staff Report
Subject Zoning Code Enforcement Code Revision
Hearing Date: June 25, 2003
Staff: Greg McCormick, AICP — Long Range Planning Manager
Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney
The City of Spokane Valley adopted several interim regulations necessary for
incorporation of the city on March 31, 2003. One of the main pieces of regulatory
legislation adopted by the city was the zoning code. The zoning code establishes the
zoning districts throughout the city along with allowed uses, development standards, sign
regulations and others. Enforcement of the zoning code is also addressed in the code
under Chapter 14.406 Enforcement. The code enforcement chapter specifies the authority
and the process by which code violations are processed. This chapter also contains
sections on identifying penalties for non compliance, appeals and judicial authority.
At the time of incorporation the city inherited some 273 open code enforcement cases from
Spokane County. In addition the county opened over 400 sign code violation files for
illegal signs within the City of Spokane Valley. After reviewing the county's enforcement
provisions contained in the zoning code it was determined that a major revision was
needed in order to provide the city's code enforcement officer with the tools necessary to
more efficiently deal with code enforcement issues.
The following is a flow chart of the existing code enforcement process describing what
happens to a complaint once received by the city.
1
Written Complaint Received
Valid?
Notice of Violation Issued:
1. Level I fines
2. Level II fines
Yes
Notice of Inspection Issued
—_ Compliance?
Voluntary Compliance Agreement
�j Yes / \ Yes
Agreement Reached? � Vdork Completed?
No
Compliance`
O
Forward to Proseduting
Attnomey Office
4
Yes
No
2
No
Yes
Existing Zoning Code
Compliance Process
CASE CLOSED -
COMPLAINTANT
NOTIFIED
A
Issue Area
Existing Code
Proposed Code I
Receipt of complaints
Written only
Written or telephone
Inspection
Yes — only after written
complaint received
Yes — after written or telephone
complaint received
Notice to violator
Notice of Inspection
Violator contacted either in
person or via written notice
Citation authority
Level 1 & II citations
Notice & order or stop work
order issued
Monetary penalties
Level I - $75 to $250
Level II - $500
Up to $1,000 & 90 days
incarceration
Voluntary Compliance
Agreement
Yes
Yes
Judicial Enforcement
Yes — county prosecutor
Yes — city attorney
Appeals
Yes — hearing examiner
Yes — hearing examiner
Cost recovery
No
Yes
Discussion:
As can be seen from the flow chart above, the existing code lacks some of the tools
necessary to deal efficiently with code violation issues. The primary tools are the notice
and order and the stop work order. These two tools provide the city with a much more
effective and efficient approach to code enforcement. An observation of the existing
process has been that the current code does not focus or emphasize actual abatement of
the code violation. The process tends to be more circular with a series of citations and
fines rather than addressing the violation that is occurring.
The proposed code is characterized by a more results or abatement oriented tone. The
monetary penalties included in the proposed code are more severe, again to promote or
encourage abatement of code violations. The table below compares the existing and
proposed codes:
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the planning commission revise the code enforcement provisions of
the zoning code based on the information provided herein and attached to this staff report.
Attachments:
Attachment 1 — Existing "Enforcement" Chapter Flow Chart
3
Attachment 1
Proposed "Enforcement" Chapter
Flow Chart
Valid?
Complaint Received
Yes
Issue Warning
(Written - within 5 days)
Compliance?
No
Voluntary Compliance Agreement
f
Agreement Reached?
g �
No
r
Issue:
1. Citation
2. Notice & Order
3. Stop Work Order
Compliance?
Yes
Yes
No
Civil Penalty
City Abatement
Cost Recovery
No
p Work Completed?
Yes
Forward to City Attorney for
Prosecution
•
Proposed Zoning Code
C omp l iance P rocess
r
CASE CLOSED -
COMPLAINTANT
NOTIFIED
Yes
Memo
To: Mayor DeVleming & City Council
From: William Gothmann, Planning Commission Chair
Date: July 15, 2003
Re: Recommendation — Zoning Code Compliance Code Revision
Background:
The Planning Commission reviewed proposed changes to Chapter 14.406,
Zoning Code Compliance of the city's interim zoning code during a study
session on June 11, 2003. The Commission then held a public hearing on the
proposed code revision on June 23, 2003. No public testimony was provided at
the hearing. The Commission began deliberations on the proposed code
revision at the conclusion of the hearing on June 23 The deliberations were
continued to the evening of July 9, 2003 at which time the Commission voted
unanimously to forward this recommendation to the City Council.
As the Council is aware, at the time of incorporation the city inherited some 273
open code enforcement cases from Spokane County. In addition the county
opened over 400 sign code violation files for illegal signs within the City of
Spokane Valley. After reviewing the county's enforcement provisions contained
in the zoning code staff determined that a major revision was needed in order to
provide the city's code enforcement officer with the tools necessary to more
efficiently deal with present and future code enforcement issues.
Issues:
The Commission discussed several issues related to this code revision with city
staff during the staff presentation of the code revision and during the
deliberations by the Commission. Those issues are summarized in the
following table:
1
Spokane
jUalley
I Issue Area
Existing Code
Proposed Code
Receipt of complaints
Written only
Written or telephone
Inspection
Yes — only after written
complaint received
Yes — after written or telephone
complaint received
Notice to violator
Notice of Inspection
Violator contacted either in
person or via written notice
Citation authority
Level I & II citations
Notice & order or stop work
order issued
Monetary penalties
Level I - $75 to $250
Level II - $500
Up to $5,000 & up to 90 days
incarceration
Voluntary Compliance
Agreement
Yes
Yes
Judicial Enforcement
Yes — county prosecutor
Yes — city attorney
Appeals
Yes — hearing examiner
Yes — hearing examiner
Cost recovery
No
Yes
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission recommends that the attached Chapter 14.406,
Zoning Code Compliance be adopted by City Council in order to facilitate the
enforcement of existing zoning and development regulations.
William Gothmann, Chair
Spokane Valley Planning Commission
• Page 2
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY,
WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, WASHINGTON,
REPEALING CHAPTER 14.406 OF THE CITY OF
SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE AND
ESTABLISHING ZONING CODE COMPLIANCE 14.406.
WHEREAS, The City of Spokane Valley, Washington adopted a Zoning Code to
regulate the orderly development of the City of Spokane Valley; and
WHEREAS, the existing code compliance provisions, Section 14.406, does not
adequately provide the necessary processes to ensure abatement of identified code
violations;
WHEREAS, violations of the City of Spokane Valley Zoning Code pose a threat
to the health, welfare and safety of the citizens of the City of Spokane Valley, and the
City of Spokane Valley desires to address this problem; and
WHEREAS, enforcement of the City of Spokane Valley Zoning Code is within
the police powers of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE
VALLEY, WASHINGTON ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Repeal. Section_ 14.406 of the City of Spokane Valley Zoning
Code relating to Zoning Code compliance is repealed in its entirety.
Section 2. New Zoning Code Compliance Section. The new Zoning Code
Compliance Section 14.406, as set forth in Attachment "A" to this Ordinance, is adopted.
Section 3. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent
jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or
constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance
Section 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect
five days after publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof occurs in the official
newspaper of the City as provided by law.
ATTEST:
Passed on this day of August, 2003.
City Clerk, Chris Bainbridge
Approved As To Form:
Interim City Attorney, Stanley M. Schwartz
Date of Publication:
Effective Date:
Mayor, Michael DeVleming
Planning Commission Recommendation
7 -9 -03
Chapter 14.406
Zoning Code Compliance
14.406.005 — Name and intent.
14.406.010 — Statement of policy.
14.406.015 — Definitions.
14.406.020 — Relationship to Growth Management Plan.
14.406.025 — Declaration of public nuisance — misdemeanor.
14.406.030 — Enforcement, authority and administration.
14.406.035 — Guidelines for departmental responses to complaints.
14.406.050 — Initial investigation.
14.406.060 — Procedures when probable violation is identified.
14.406.070 — Service — citation, notice and order, and stop work order.
14.406.080 — Training and rulemaking.
14.406.090 — Obligations of persons responsible for code violation.
14.406.095 — Determination of compliance.
14.406.100 — Voluntary compliance agreement — authority.
14.406.110 — Voluntary compliance agreement — contents.
14.406.120 — Failure to meet terms of voluntary compliance agreement.
14.406.200 — Citations — authority.
14.406.210 — Citations— effect.
14.406.220 — Citation— contents.
14.406.230 — Citation — modification or revocation.
14.406.240 — Citation — remedy — civil penalties.
14.406.300 — Notice and order — authority.
14.406.305 — Notice and order — effect.
14.406.310 — Notice and order — contents.
14.406.320 — Notice and order — recording.
14.406.330 — Notice and order — supplementation, revocation, modification.
14.406.335 — Notice and order - administrative conference.
14.406.340 — Notice and order — remedies — suspension, revocation or limitation of
permit.
14.406.350 — Notice and order — remedies — denial of permit.
14.406.360 — Notice and order — remedies — abatement.
14.406.400 — Stop work order — authorized.
14.406.410 — Stop work order — effect.
14.406.420 — Stop work order — remedy — civil penalties.
14.406.430 — Stop work order — remedy — criminal penalties.
14.406.500 — Civil penalties— assessment schedule.
14.406.520 - Civil penalties — duty to comply.
14.406.530 - Civil penalties — community service.
14.406.540 - Civil penalties — waivers.
14.406.550 - Civil penalties — critical areas.
14.406.560 - Cost recovery.
14.406.570 — Collection of civil penalties, fees and costs.
14.406.580 - Code compliance abatement fund — authorized.
14.406.600 = Administrative appeals — standing - filing requirements.
Planning Commission Recommendation
7 -9 -03 •
14.406.610
14.406.620 -
14.406.630
14.406.640 -
14.406.650 -
14.406.660
— Administrative appeal — not?cc of hearing.
Administrative appeal — procedures.
— Administrative appeal — final order.
Judicial enforcement — petition for enforcement.
S everability.
— Effective date.
14.406.005 — Name and intent. This chapter shall be known as "Zoning Code Compliance ".
The purpose of this chapter is to identify processes and methods to encourage compliance with
development ordinances and regulations adopted by the City of Spokane Valley to promote and
protect the general public health safety and welfare of City residents. This chapter declares
certain acts to be civil violations and establishes non -penal enforcement procedures and civil
penalties. This chapter also declares certain acts to be misdemeanors subject to prosecution by
the City.
It is the intention of the City to pursue code compliance actively and vigorously in order to
protect the health, safety and welfare of the general public. This intent is to be pursued in a way
that is consistent with adherence to, and respectful of, fundamental federal and state
constitutional principles.
While this chapter does authorize the City of Spokane Valley to take action to enforce the City
ordinances and regulations, it shall not be construed as placing responsibility for code
compliance or enforcement upon the City in any particular case, or as creating any duty on the
part of the City to any particular person or class of persons.
14.406.010 — Statement of policy. It is the policy of the City of Spokane Valley to emphasize
code compliance by education and prevention as a first step. This policy is designed to ensure
code compliance and timely action that is available to all persons and uniform in its
implementation. While warnings and voluntary compliance are desirable as a first step,
enforcement and civil penalties should be used for remedial purposes as needed to assure and
effect code compliance. Abatement or remediation should be pursued when appropriate and
feasible. Uniform and efficient procedures, with consistent application governed by regulation
should be used to accomplish this policy.
14.406.015 — Definitions.
A. "abate" means to take whatever steps are deemed necessary by the Director to assure that
the property complies with applicable code requirements. Abatement may include, but is not
limited to, rehabilitation, demolition, removal, replacement or repair.
B. "civil code violation" means and includes an act or omission contrary to:
1. Any ordinance, resolution, regulation or public rule of the City that regulates or
protects the use and development of land or water; and/or
2. The conditions of any permit, notice and order or stop work order issued pursuant
to any such ordinance, resolution, regulation or public rule.
2
Planning Commission Recommendation
7 -9 -03
C. "The City" means the City of Spokane Valley, Washington.
D. "days" will be counted as business days when five or less days are allowed to do an act
required by this Ordinance. "days" will be considered calendar days when more than five days
are allowed to do an act required by this Ordinance.
E. "determination of compliance" means a written statement from the Director or designee
that the Director has reviewed evidence to determine that the violation(s) has been sufficiently
abated as to the violation(s) stated in the voluntary compliance agreement, citation, notice and
order or stop work order.
F. "Director" means the Director of the Department of Community Development, or his or
her designee(s) authorized in writing.
G. "found in violation" means"
1. That a citation, notice and order or stop work order has been issued and not timely
appealed; or
2. That a voluntary compliance agreement has been entered into; or
3. That the Hearing Examiner has determined that the violation has occurred and
such determination has not been stayed or reversed on appeal.
H. "Hearing Examiner" means the City of Spokane Valley Hearing Examiner, as provided
by City of Spokane Valley Ordinance number 57.
I. "mitigate" means to take measures, subject to City approval, to minimize the harmful
effects of the violation where remediation is either impossible or unreasonably burdensome.
J. "permit" means any form of certificate, approval, registration, license or any other
written permission issued by the City. All conditions of approval, and all easements and use
limitations shown on the face of an approved final plat map which are intended to serve or
protect the general public are deemed conditions applicable to all subsequent plat property
owners, owner's tenants, and owner's agents as permit requirements enforceable under this
chapter.
K. "person" means any individual, association, partnership, corporation or legal entity,
public or private, and the agents and assigns of such individual, association, partnership,
corporation or legal entity.
L. "person responsible for a code violation" means the person who caused the violation, if
that can be determined, and /or the owner, lessor, tenant or other person entitled to control, use
and/or occupancy of the property where the civil code violation occurs.
M. "public rule" means any rule properly promulgated to implement City civil code
provisions. •
Planning Commission Recommendation
7 -9 -03
N. "remediate" means to restore a site to a condition that complies with sensitive area or
other regulatory requirements as they existed before the violation occurred; or, for sites that have
been degraded under prior ownerships, restore to a condition which does not pose a probable
threat to the environment or to the general public health, safety or welfare.
O. "resolution" for purposes of this chapter means any resolution adopted by the City of
Spokane Valley City Council.
14.406.020 — Relationship to Growth Management Plan. This chapter is adopted as
development regulations pursuant to RCW 36.70A (Growth Management Act).
14.406.025 — Declaration of public nuisance— misdemeanor.
A. All civil code violations are hereby determined to be detrimental to the general public
health, safety and welfare and are hereby declared public nuisances. All conditions determined
to be civil code violations shall be subject to and enforced pursuant to the provisions of this
chapter except where specifically excluded by law or regulation.
B. Any person who willfully or knowingly causes, aids or abets a civil code violation
pursuant to this chapter by any act of commission or omission is guilty of a misdemeanor. Upon
conviction, the person shall be punished by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars and/or
incarceration for a term not to exceed ninety days. Each week (seven consecutive days) such
violation continues shall be considered a separate misdemeanor offense. As an alternative, or in
addition to any other judicial or administrative remedy provided in this chapter or by law or other
regulation, the Director may recommend that the Office of the City Attorney file a misdemeanor
complaint against the person responsible for code violation when the Director has documentation
or other evidence that the violation was willful and knowing.
14.406.030 — Enforcement, authority and administration.
A. In order to discourage public nuisances and otherwise promote compliance with
applicable code provisions, the Director may, in response to field observations or reliable
complaints, determine that civil code violations have occurred or are occurring, and may:
1. Enter into voluntary compliance agreements with persons responsible for code
violations;
2. Issue citations and assess civil penalties as authorized by this chapter;
3. Issue notice and orders,. assess civil penalties and recover costs as authorized by
this chapter;
4. Order abatement by means of a notice and order, and if such abatement is not
timely completed by the person or persons responsible for a code violation, undertake the
abatement and charge the reasonable costs of such work as authorized by this chapter;
5. Allow a person responsible for the code violation to perform community service
in lieu of paying civil penalties as authorized by SVZC 14.406.530;
4
Planning Commission Recommendation
7 -9 -03
6. Order work stopped at a site by means of a stop work order, and if such order is
not complied with, assess civil penalties as authorized by this chapter;
7. Suspend, revoke or modify any permit previously issued by the Director or deny a
permit application as authorized by this chapter when other efforts to achieve compliance
have failed; and
8. Forward a written statement providing all relevant information relating to the
violation to the Office of City Attorney with a recommendation to prosecute willful and
knowing violations as a misdemeanor offense.
13. The procedures set forth in this title are not exclusive. These procedures shall not in any
manner limit or restrict the City from remedying civil code violations or abating civil code
violations in any other manner authorized by law.
C. In addition, or as an alternative, to utilizing the procedures set forth in this chapter, the
Director may seek legal or equitable relief to abate any conditions or enjoin any acts or practices
which constitute a civil code violation.
D. In addition, or as an alternative, to utilizing the procedures set forth in this chapter, the
Director may assess or recover civil penalties accruing under this chapter by legal action filed in
Spokane County District Court by the Office of the City Attorney.
F. The provisions of this chapter shall in no way adversely affect the rights of the owner,
lessee or occupant of any property to recover all costs and expenses incurred and required by this
chapter from any person causing such violation.
F. In administering the provisions for code enforcement, the Director shall have the
authority to waive any one or more such provisions so as to avoid substantial injustice by
application thereof to the acts or omissions of a public or private entity or individual, or acts or
omissions on public or private property including, for example, property belonging to public or
private utilities, where no apparent benefit has accrued to such entity or individual from a code
violation. Any determination of substantial injustice shall be made in writing supported by
appropriate facts. For purposes of this clause, substantial injustice cannot be based exclusively
on financial hardship. •
G. The provisions of this chapter detailing the administration of code compliance procedures
are intended only for the purpose of providing guidance to City employees and are not to be
construed as creating a basis for appeal or a defense of any kind to an alleged code violation.
H. The Director may, upon presentation of proper credentials, with the consent of the owner
or occupier of a building or premises, or pursuant to a lawfully issued inspection warrant, enter at
reasonable times any building or premises subject to the consent or warrant to perform the duties
imposed by this chapter. It is the intent of the City Council that any entry made to private
property for the purpose of inspection for code violations be accomplished in strict conformity
with constitutional and statutory constraints on entry, and the holdings of the relevant court cases
5
Planning Commission Recommendation
7 -9 -03
regarding entry. The right -of -entry authorized by this chapter shall not supersede those legal
constraints.
1. The Director or his or her representative may request that the police, appropriate fire
district, Spokane Regional Health District or other appropriate City department or other non -city
agency assist in enforcement.
14.406.035 — Guidelines for departmental responses to complaints.
A. The following guidelines should be applied by the Director, subject to resource
limitations, when responding to code compliance complaints. The timelines identified bebw
may be modified by Department rule, subject to council review and approval.
1. High risk investigations needing an urgent response (within 24 hours) include any
cases in which there is an imminent likelihood of or actual bodily harm, damage to public
resources or facilities, damage to real or personal property, public health exposure or
environmental damage or contamination.
2. Moderate risk investigations needing a prompt response (within 72 hours) include
cases in which there is risk of bodily harm, damage to public resources and/or facilities,
damage to real or personal property, or environmental damage or contamination.
3. Low risk investigations needing response as time permits (within 14 days of
violation being identified by code compliance staff) including cases where the violation is
non- emergent, does not fit within the high risk or moderate risk categories and has only
minor public impacts.
B. The response times set out in this chapter are not jurisdictional, and failure to meet them
in any particular case shall not affect the City's authority to enforce City code provisions with
regard to that case.
14406.050 — Initial investigation. This chapter sets forth guidelines for more specific
procedures to be used by the Director in implementing this chapter. The guidelines set forth in
this chapter are not jurisdictional, and failure to meet them in any particular case shall not affect
the City's authority to enforce City code provisions with regard to that case.
A. Field verification. Except in emergencies and for low risk case complaints, field
verification should be made if possible prior to, concurrent with, or shortly after notifying the
person responsible for the code violation or alleged code violation. Low risk case complaints
should be acknowledged by sending a letter to the person(s) responsible for the code violation.
The letter should state that a violation may have occurred, but has not been verified, and should
ask the recipient to contact the person issuing the letter.
B. Advising interested parties of receipt of complaint and/or field investigation.
1. The person responsible for the code violation should be advised of any complaint
by personal contact; phone; posting and mail (return receipt requested).
6
Planning Commission Recommendation
7 -9 -03
2. The complainant should be contacted by phone, and if possible, in person during
the field visit.
C. The Director will record all violations in a database system, including a list of all actions
taken on the complaint.
D. To the extent possible, the Department shall check its own records and the records of
other agencies for previous violations on the site of the alleged violation or by the owner or
occupant of the site or such other person as may be responsible for the code violation.
E. Staff undertaking field investigations shall comply with the provisions of this chapter
regarding right of entry.
14.406.060— Procedures when probable violation is identified
A. The Director shall determine, based upon information derived from sources such as field
observations, the statements of witnesses, relevant documents and data systems for tracking
violations and applicable City codes, whether or not a violation has occurred. As soon as the
Director has reasonable cause to determine that a violation has occurred, he or she shall
document the violation and promptly notify the person(s) responsible for the code violation.
B. Except as provided in subsection D, a warning shall be issued verbally or in writing
promptly when a field inspection reveals a violation, or as soon as the Director otherwise
determines a violation has occurred. The warning shall inform the person determined to be
responsible for a code violation of the violation and allow the person an opportunity to correct it
or enter into a voluntary compliance agreement as provided for by this chapter. Verbal warnings
shall be logged and followed up with a written warning within five (5) days, and the site shall be
re- inspected within fourteen (14) days.
C. The guidelines set forth for warnings, notifications and re- inspections are not
jurisdictional, and failure to meet them in any particular case shall not affect the City's authority
to enforce City code provisions with regard to that case.
D. No warning need be issued in high risk cases, emergencies, repeat violation cases, cases
that are already subject to a voluntary compliance agreement, cases where the violation creates
or has created a situation or condition that is not likely to be corrected within seventy -two (72)
hours, cases where a stop work order is necessary, or when the person responsible for the code
violation knows, or reasonably should have known that the action was civil code violation.
E. Citations may be issued in moderate and low risk cas, provided that the Director
determines it is probable that the violation can likely be fully corrected in a short period of time.
F. Notice and orders should be issued in all high risk cases in which a voluntary compliance
agreement has not been entered into within two (2) days of notification by the Director. Notice
and orders may be issued in moderate and low risk cases where the Director determines that the
violation is unlikely to be fully corrected in a short period of time.
7
Planning Commission Recommendation
7 -9 -03
G. The Director shall use all reasonable means to determine and cite the person actually
responsible for the code violation occurring when the property owner has not directly or
indirectly caused the violation.
H. If the violation is not corrected, or a voluntary compliance agreement is not achieved
within fifteen (15) days of notification by the Director, a notice and order or stop work order
should be issued. Citations should be issued within fifteen (15) days from receipt of a complaint.
Notice and orders should be issued within twenty (20) days from receipt of a complaint. Stop
work orders should be issued promptly upon discovery of a violation in progress.
I. All complainants will be asked by star at the time the complaint is filed whether they
wish to be kept advised of enforcement efforts. Any complainant who provides a mailing
address and requests to be kept advised of enforcement efforts should be mailed a copy of all
written warnings, voluntary compliance agreements, citations, notice and orders, stop work
orders and notices of settlement conferences issued by the Director with regard to the alleged
violation. Any complainant may appeal a determination of code compliance issued by the
Director pursuant to SVZC 14.406.095.
14.406.070 — Service — citation, notice and order, and stop work order.
A. Service of a citation or notice and order shall be made on a person responsible for code
violation by one or more of the following methods:
1. Personal service of a citation or notice and order may be made on the person
identified by the Department as being responsible for the code violation, or by leaving a
copy of the citation or notice and order at the person's house of usual abode with a person
of suitable age and discretion who resides there;
2. Service directed to the landowner and/or occupant of the property may be made
by posting the citation or notice and order in a conspicuous place on the property where
the violation occurred and concurrently mailing notice as provided for below, if a mailing
address is available;
3. Service by mail may be made for a citation or a notice and order by mailing two
copies, postage prepaid, one by ordinary first class mail and the other by certified mail, to
the person responsible for the code violation at his or her last known address, at the
address of the violation, or at the address of the place of business of the person
responsible for the code violation. The taxpayer's address as shown on the tax records of
Spokane County shall be deemed to be the proper address for the purpose of mailing such
notice to the landowner of the property where the violation occurred. Service by mail
shall be presumed effective upon the third business day following the clay upon which the
citation or notice and order was placed in the mail.
B. For notice and orders only, when the address of the person responsible for the code
violation cannot be reasonably determined, service may be made by publication once in the
City's newspaper of record. Service by publication shall conform to the requirements of Civil
Rule 4 of the Rules for Superior Court.
8
Planing Commission Recommendation
7 -9 -03 -
C. Service of a stop work order on a person responsible for a code violation may be made by
posting the stop work order in a conspicuous place on the property where the violation occurred
or by serving the stop work order in any other manner permitted by this chapter.
D. The failure of the Director to make or attempt service on any person named in the
citation, notice and order or stop work order shall not invalidate any proceedings as to any other
person duly served.
14.406.080 — Training and rulernaking.
A. In order to ensure strict conformity with the constraints on entry imposed by state and
federal law, and to ensure that City employees deal with the public in a manner which respects
the rights of private property owners, the Director shall develop and adopt internal procedures,
protocols and training programs governing the conduct of searches by compliance officers.
B. The Director shall adopt procedures to implement the provisions of this chapter, and
specifically the guidelines set out in this chapter describing reasonable and appropriate protocols
for investigating code violations.
14.406.090 — Obligations of persons responsible for code violation.
A. It shall be the responsibility of any person identified as responsible for code a violation to
bring the property into a safe and reasonable condition to achieve code compliance. Payment of
civil penalties, applications for permits, acknowledgement of stop work orders and compliance
with other remedies does not substitute for performing the corrective work required and having
the property brought into compliance to the extent reasonably possible under the circumstances.
B. Persons determined to be responsible for a code violation pursuant to a citation or notice
and order shall be liable for the payment of any civil penalties and abatement costs, provided
however, that if a property owner affirmatively demonstrates that the action which resulted in the
violation was taken without the owner's knowledge or consent by someone other than the owner
or someone acting on the owner's behalf, that owner shall be responsible only for bringing the
property into compliance to the extent reasonably feasible under the circumstances. Should the
owner not correct the violation, only those abatement costs necessary to bring the property into a
safe and reasonable condition, as determined by the Director, shall be assessed by the City. No
civil penalties shall be assessed against such an owner or his or her proper ty interest.
14.406.095 — Determination of compliance. After issuance of a warning, citation, voluntary
compliance agreement, citation, notice and order, or stop work order, and after the person(s)
responsible for a code violation have come into zoning code compliance to the satisfaction of the
Director, the Director shall issue a written determination of compliance. The Director shall mail
copies of the determination of compliance to each person originally named in the warning,
voluntary compliance agreement, citation, notice and order, or stop work order, as well as the
complainant, by certified mail, five -day return receipt requested.
14.406.100 — Voluntary compliance agreement — authority.
9
Planning Commission Recommendation
7-9-03
A. Whenever the Director detenmines that a code violation has occurred or is occurring, the
Director shall make reasonable efforts .to secure voluntary compliance from the person
responsible for the code violation. Upon contacting the person responsible for the code
violation, the Director may enter into a voluntary compliance agreement as provided for in this
chapter.
B. A voluntary compliance agreement may be entered into at any time after issuance of a
verbal or written warning, a citation, notice and order or a stop work order and before an appeal
is decided pursuant to SVZC 14.406.630.
C. Upon entering into a voluntary compliance agreement, a person responsible for a code
violation waives the right to administratively appeal, and thereby admits that the conditions
described in the voluntary compliance agreement existed and constituted a civil code violation;
and
D. The voluntary compliance agreement shall incorporate the shortest reasonable time
period for compliance, as determined by the Director. An extension of the time limit for
compliance, or a modification of the required corrective action may be granted by the Director if
the person responsible for the code violation has shown due diligence or substantial progress in
correcting the violation, but circumstances render full and timely compliance under the original
conditions unattainable. Any such extension or modification must be in writing and signed by
the Director and person(s) who signed the original voluntary compliance agreement.
E. The voluntary compliance agreement is not a settlement agreement.
14.406.110 — Voluntary compliance agreement— contents.
A. The voluntary compliance agreement is a written, signed commitment by the person(s)
responsible for a code violation in which such person(s) agrees to abate the violation, remediate
the site, and/or mitigate the impacts of the violation. The voluntary compliance agreement shall
include the following:
1. The name and address of the person responsible for the code violation;
2. The address or other identification of the location of the violation;
3. A description of the violation and a reference to the provision(s) of the ordinance,
resolution or regulation which has been violated;
4. A description of the necessary corrective action to be taken and identification of
the date or time by which compliance must be completed;
5. The amount of the civil penalty that will be imposed pursuant to SVZC
14.406.500 if the voluntary compliance agreement is not satisfied;
6. An acknowledgement that if the Director determines that the terms of the
voluntary compliance agreement are not met, the City may, without issuing a citation,
notice and order or stop work order, impose any remedy authorized by this chapter,
- 10 -
Planning Commission Recommendation
7 -9 -03
perform abatement of the violation by the City, assess the costs incurred by the City to
pursue code compliance and to abate the violation, including reasonable legal fees and
costs, and the suspension, revocation or limitation of a development pen obtained or to
be sought by the person responsible for the code violation;
7. An acknowledgement that if a penalty is assessed, and if any assessed penalty, fee
or cost is not paid, the Director may charge the unpaid amount as a lien against the
property where the civil code violation occurred if owned by the person responsible for
the code violation, and that the unpaid amount may be a joint and several personal
obligation of all persons responsible for the code violation;
8. An acknowledgement that by entering into the voluntary compliance agreement,
the person responsible for the code violation thereby admits that the conditions described
in the voluntary compliance agreement existed and constituted a civil code violation and
9. An acknowledgement that the person responsible for the code violation
understands that he or she has the right to be served with a citation, notice and order, or
stop work order for any violation identified in the voluntary compliance agreement, has
the right to administratively appeal any such citation, notice and order, or stop work
order, and that he or she is knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waiving those rights.
14.406.120 — Failure to meet terms of voluntary compliance agreement.
A. If the terms of the voluntary compliance agreement are not completely met, and an
extension of time has not been granted, the Director may abate the violation in accordance with
the provisions of this chapter. The person responsible for code compliance may, without being
issued a citation, notice and order, or stop work order, be assessed a civil penalty as set forth by
this chapter, plus all costs incurred by the City to pursue code compliance and to abate the
violation, and may be subject to other remedies authorized by this chapter. Penalties imposed
when a voluntary compliance agreement is not met accrue from the date that an appeal of any
preceding citation, notice and order, or stop work order was to have been filed or from the date
the voluntary compliance agreement was entered into if there was not preceding citation, notice
and order, or stop work order.
B. The Director may issue a citation, notice and order, or stop work order for failure to meet
the terms of a voluntary compliance agreement.
14.406.200 — Citations — authority. Whenever the Director has determined, based upon
investigation of documents and /or physical evidence, that a civil code violation has occurred, the
Director may issue a citation to any person responsible for code violation. The Director shall
make a determination whether or not to issue a citation within fifteen (15) days of receiving a
complaint alleging a violation or otherwise discovering that a violation may potentially exist.
Subsequent complaints shall be treated as new complaints for purposes of this chapter.
However, such subsequent complaints shall not constitute a separate violation to which the
penalties of this chapter apply.
14.406.210 — Citations — effect.
Planning Commission Recommendation
7 -9 -03
A. A citation represents a determination that a civil code violation has occurred and that the
cited party is a person responsible for a code violation.
B. A citation subjects the person responsible for a code violation to the civil penalties
prescribed by SVZC 14.406.500.
C. The person responsible for a code violation shall either pay the civil penalties assessed
within twenty (20) days of the date of issuance of the citation, or appeal the citation according to
the procedures described in SVZC 14.406.600 -630.
D. • Failure to appeal the citation within twenty (20) days shall render the citation a final
determination that the conditions described in the citation existed and constituted a civil code
violation, and that the cited party is liable as a person responsible for a code violation.
E. Imposition of a civil penalty creates a joint and several personal obligation in all persons
responsible for a code violation who are served with notice of the violation. The Office of the
City Attomey, on behalf of the City of Spokane Valley, may collect the civil penalties assessed
by any appropriate legal means.
F. Issuance of a citation in no way limits the Director's authority to issue a notice and order
or stop work order to any person responsible for a code violation pursuant to this chapter.
14.406.220 — Citation — contents. The citation shall include all of the following information:
A. The address, when available, or location of the civil code violation;
13. A legal description of the real property or the Spokane County tax parcel number where
the violation occurred or is located, or a description identifying the property by commonly used
locators;
C. A statement that the Director has found the named person(s) to have committed a civil
code violation and a brief description of the violation(s) found;
D. A statement of the specific ordinance, resolution, regulation, public rule, permit
condition, notice and order provision or stop work order provision that was or is being violated;
E. A statement that the citation represents a determination that a civil code violation has
occurred and that the cited party is subject to a civil penalty;
F. A statement of the amount of the civil penalty assessed, that payment of the civil
penalties assessed under this chapter does not relieve a person found to -be responsible for a code
violation of his or her duty to correct the violation and /or to pay any and all civil penalties or
other cost assessments issued pursuant to this chapter, and that the penalty must be paid within
twenty (20) days, if not appealed pursuant to SVZC 14.406.600 -630;
F. A statement of the corrective or abatement action required to be taken and that all
required permits to perform the corrective action must be obtained from the proper issuing
agency;
- 12 -
Planning Commission Recommendation
7 -9 -03
G. A statement advising that any person named in the citation, or having any record or
equitable title in the property against which the citation is issued may appeal from the citation to
the Hearing Examiner within twenty (20) days of the date of service of the citation;
H. A statement advising that a failure to appeal the citation within twenty (20) days renders
the citation a final determination that the conditions described in the citation existed and
constituted a civil code violation, and that the named party is liable as a person responsible for a
code violation; and
I. A statement advising that a willful and knowing violation may be referred to the Office
of the City Attorney for prosecution pursuant to SVZC 14.406.025.
14.406.230 — Citation — modification or revocation.
A. The Director may add to, revoke in whole or in part, or otherwise modify a citation by
issuing a written supplemental citation. The supplemental citation shall be governed by the same
procedures and time limits applicable to all citations contained in this chapter.
B. The Director may issue a supplemental citation, or revoke a citation issued under this
chapter:
1. if the original citation was issued in error;
2. whenever there is new information or change of circumstances; or
3. if a party to a citation was incorrectly named.
C. Such revocation or modification shall identify the reasons and underlying facts for
modification or revocation, and shall be served on the person responsible for a code violation in
conformity with this chapter.
14.406.240 — Citation — remedy — civil penalties. A citation shall carry a civil penalty to be
determined with reference to the schedule contained in SVZC 14.406.500.
14.406.300 — Notice and order — authority. When the Director has reason to believe, based on
investigation of documents and/or physical evidence, that a code violation exists or has occurred,
or that the civil code violations cited in a citation have not been corrected, or that the terms of a
voluntary compliance agreement have not been met, the Director is authorized to issue a notice
and order to any person responsible for a code violation. The Director shall make a
determination whether or not to issue a notice and order within twenty (20) days of receiving a
complaint alleging a violation or otherwise discovering that a violation may potentially exist, cr
within ten (10) days of the end of a voluntary compliance agreement time period which has not
been met. Subsequent complaints shall be treated as new complaints for the purposes of this
chapter. Issuance of a citation is not a condition precedent to the issuance of a notice and order.
14..406.305 — Notice and order — effect.
Planning Commission Reconunendation
7 -9-03
A. A notice and order represents a determination that a civil code violation has occurred,
that the cited party is a person responsible for a code violation, and that the violations set out in
the notice and order require the assessment of penalties and other remedies that may be specified
in the notice and order.
B. Upon a determination by the Director that a civil code violation has occurred pursuant to
a notice and order, the Director is authorized to impose appropriate civil penalties pursuant to
SVZC 14.406.500-580.
C. Any person identified in the notice and order as responsible for a code violation may
appeal the notice and order within twenty (20) days according to the procedures described in
SVZC 14.406.600 -630.
D. Failure to appeal the notice and order within the applicable time limits shall render the
notice and order a final determination that the conditions described in the notice and order
existed and constituted a civil code violation, and that the named party is liable as a person
responsible for a code violation.
E. Issuance of a notice and order in no way limits a Director's authority to issue a citation or
stop work order to a person previously cited through the notice and order process pursuant to this
chapter.
14.406.310 — Notice and order — contents. The notice and order shall contain the following
information:
A. The address, when available, or location of the civil code violation;
B. A legal description of the real property or the Spokane County tax parcel number where
the violation occurred or is located, or a description identifying the property by commonly used
locators;
C. A statement that the Director has found the named person(s) to have committed a civil
code violation and a brief description of the violation(s) found;
D. A statement of the specific provisions of the ordinance, resolution, regulation, public rule,
permit condition, notice and order provision or stop work order that was or is being violated;
E. A statement that a civil penalty is being assessed, including the dollar amount of the civil
penalties per separate violation, and that any assessed penalties must be paid within twenty (20)
days of service of the notice and order;
F. A statement advising that any costs of enforcement incurred by the City shall also be
- assessed against the person to whom the notice and order is directed;
G. A statement that payment of the civil penalties assessed under this chapter does not
relieve a person found to be responsible for a code violation of his or her duty to correct the
violation and /or to pay any and all civil penalties or other cost assessments issued pursuant to
this chapter;
- 14 -
r 1 H. A statement advising that the notice and order will be recorded against the property in the
Spokane County Auditor's Office subsequent to service;
Planning Comrn.ission Recommendation
7 -9 -03
I. A statement of the corrective or abatement action required to be taken and that all
required permits to perform the corrective action must be obtained from the proper issuing
agency;
J. A statement advising that, if any required work is not commenced or completed within
the time specified by the notice and order, the Director may proceed to abate the violation and
cause the work to be done and charge the costs thereof as a lien against the property and as a
joint and several personal obligation of any persons responsible for a code violation;
K. A statement advising that, if any assessed penalty, fee or cost is not paid on or before the
due date, the Director may charge the unpaid amount as a lien against the property where the
civil code violation occurred if owned by a person responsible for a code violation, and as a joint
and several personal obligation of all persons responsible for a code violation;
L. A statement advising that any person named in the notice and order, or having any record
or equitable title in the property against which the notice and order is recorded may appeal from
the notice and order to the Hearing Examiner within twenty (20) days of the date of service of
the notice and order;
M. A statement advising that a failure to correct the violations cited in the notice and order
could lead to the denial of subsequent Spokane Valley permit applications on the subject
property;
N. A statement advising that a failure to appeal the notice and order within the applicable
time limits renders the notice and order a final detenn.ination that the conditions described in the
notice and order existed and constituted a civil code violation, and that the named party is liable
as a person responsible for a code violation; and
O. A statement advising the person responsible for a code violation of his/her duty to notify
the Director of any actions taken to achieve compliance with the notice and order.
P. A statement advising that a willful and knowing violation may be referred to the Office
of the City Attorney for prosecution pursuant to SVZC 14.406.025.
14.406.320 — Notice and order — recording.
A. When a notice and order is served on a person responsible for a code violation, the
Director shall file a copy of the same with the Spokane County Auditor's Office.
B. When all violations specified in the notice and order have been corrected or abated to the
satisfaction of the Director, the Director shall file a certificate of compliance with the Spokane
County Auditor's Office within five days of receiving evidence of abatement. The certificate
shall include a legal description of the property where the violation occurred and shall state
Planning Conirnision Recommendation
7 -9 -03 . -
whether any unpaid civil penalties for which liens have been fled are still outstanding and, if so,
shall continue as liens on the property.
C. After all liens have been satisfied, the Director shall file a notice of satisfaction of lien
with the Spokane County Auditor's Office within five days offinal payment to City.
14.406.330 — Notice and order — supplementation, revocation, modification.
A. Tile Director may add to revoke in whole or in part, or otherwise modify a notice and
order by issuing a written supplemental notice and order, The supplemental notice and order
shall be governed by the same procedures and time limits applicable to all notice and orders
contained in this chapter.
B_ The Director may issue a supplemental notice and order, or revoke a notice and order
issued ender this chapter:
1. lithe original notice and order was issued in error;
2. Whenever there is new information or change cif circumstances; or
3. If a party to an order was incorrectly named.
C. Such revocation or modification shall identify the reasons and underlying facts for
rnodif cation or revocation, and shall be filed with the Spokane County Auditor's Office.
14.40 .335 — Notice and order - administrative conference. An informal administrative
conference may be conducted by the Director at any time for the purpose of facilitating
communication among concerned persons and providing a forum for efficient resolution of any
violation. Interested parties shall not unreasonably be excluded from such conferences.
14.406.340 —Notice and order remedies — suspension, revocation or limitation of permit.
A. The Director may suspend, revoke or modify any permit issued by such Director
whenever:
1. The permit holder has committed a code violation in the course of performing
activities subject to that permit;
The permit holder has interfered with the Director in the performance of his or her
duties related to that permit; •
3. The permit was issued in error or on the basis of materially incorrect information
supplied to the City;
4 - Permit fees or costs were paid to the City by check and returned from a financial
institution marked non - sufficient funds (NSF) or canceled; or
Planning Commission Recommendation
7 -9 -03
5. For a permit or approval that is subject to sensitive area review, the applicant has
failed to disclose a change of circumstances on the development proposal site which
materially affects an applicant's ability to meet the permit or approval conditions, or
which makes inaccurate the sensitive area study that was the basis for establishing permit
or approval conditions.
B. Such suspension, revocation, or modification shall be carried out through the notice and
order provisions of this chapter and shall be effective upon the compliance date established by
the notice and order. Such suspension, revocation or modification may be appealed to the
Hearing Examiner using the appeal provisions of this chapter.
C. Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Director may immediately
suspend operations under any permit by issuing a stop work order pursuant to SVZC 14.406.400-
430.
14.406.350 — Notice and order — remedies — denial of permit.
A. The City may deny a development proposal permit when, with regard to the site or
project for which the permit is submitted:
1. Any person owning the property or submitting the development proposal has been
found in violation of any ordinance, resolution, regulation or public rule of the City that
regulates or protects the public health, safety and welfare, or the use and development of
land and water; and/or
2. Any person owning the property or submitting the development proposal has been
found in violation and remains in violation of the conditions of any permit, notice and
order or stop work order issued pursuant to any such ordinance, resolution, regulation or
public rule; and/or
B. In order to further the remedial purposes of this chapter, such denial may continue until
the violation is cured by restoration accepted as complete by the City and by payment of any
civil penalty imposed for the violation, except that permits or approvals shall be granted to the
extent necessary to accomplish any required restoration or cure.
14.406.360 — Notice and order — remedies — abatement. In addition, or as an alternative, to
any other judicial or administrative remedy, the Director may use the notice and order provisions
of this chapter to order any person responsible for a code violation to abate the violation and to
complete the work at such time and under such conditions as the Director determines reasonable
under the circumstances. If the required corrective work is not commenced or completed within
the time specified, the Director may proceed to abate the violation.
14.406.400 — Stop work order — authorized. The Director is authorized to issue a stop work
order to a person responsible for a code violation. Issuance of a citation or notice and order is
not a condition precedent to the issuance of the stop work order.
14.406.410 — Stop work order — effect.
1. Citations
$250
2. Notice and orders and stop work orders
a- basic initial penalty
$500
_
b, additional initial penalties may be added where there is:
1. public health risk - amount depends on severity
0 -2,500
2. environmental damage - arnount depends on seventy
0 -2,500
3. damage to repent - .amount depends on severity - -
0 -2,500
Planning Coromision Roo endation
- 7 -9 -03
A. A stop work order represents a determination that a civil code violation has occurred or is
occurring, and that any work or activity that caused, is causing or contributing to the violation on
the property where the violation has occurred, or is occurring, must cease.
B. A stop work order requires the immediate cessation of the specified work or activity on
the named property. Work activity may not resume unless specifically authorized in writing by
the Director.
C. A stop work order may be appealed according to the procedures prescribed by SC
14.406.600 -630,
D. Failure to appeal the stop work order within twenty (20) days renders the stop work order
a final determination that the civil code violation occurred and that work was properly ordered to
cease.
E. A stop work order may be enforced by the City Police-
14.406.420 - Stop work order - remedy - civil penalties.
A. In addition to any other judicial or administrative remedy, the Director may assess civil
penalties for the violation of any stop work order according to the civil penalty schedule
established in •SVG 14.406 -500.
B, Civil penalties for the violation of any stop work order shall begin to accrue on the first
day the stop work order is violated, and shall cease accruing on the day the work is actually
stopped.
C. Violation of a stop work order shall. be a separate violation from any other civil code
violation.
14.406.430 -- Stop wvnrk order - remedy - criminal penalties. In addition to any other judicial
or administrative remedy, the Director may forward to the Office of City Attorney a detailed
factual background of the alleged violation with a recommendation that a misdemeanor charge
be filed against the persons) responsible for any willful violation of a stop work order-
14.4t1 .500 - CiVil penalties - assessment schedule.
A. Civil penalties for civil code violations shall be imposed for remedial purposes and shall
be assessed for each violation identified in a citation, notice and order or stop work order,
pursuant to the following schedule:
- 18 -
4. history of similar violations (less than three)
$0 -1,000
5. history of similar violations (three or more)
$0 -5,000
$0 -5,000
6. economic benefit to person responsible for violation
c. the above penalties may be offset by the following compliance
1. full compliance with a voluntary compliance agreement
with prior history of 0 -1 similar violations
$0 -1,500
2. full compliance with a voluntary com pliance agreement
and a history of two or more prior similar violations
$0 -250
Planning Commission Reconunendation
B. The total initial penalties assessed for notice and orders and stop work orders pursuant to
this chapter shall apply for the first thirty day period following issuance of the order, unless
another time period is specified in a voluntary compliance agreement. If a voluntary compliance
agreement is not entered into within that time period, and no appeal is filed, the penalties for the
next fifteen day period shall be one hundred fifty percent (150 %) of the initial penalties, and the
penalties for the next fifteen day period shall be two hundred percent (200 %) the amount of the
initial penalties. The intent of this subsection is to increase penalties beyond the maximum
penalties stated in SVZC 14.406.500(A) as an additional means to achieve timely compliance.
C. Citations shall be subject to a one-time penalty per violation. The Director retains
authority to issue a subsequent notice and order or stop work order for continued non-
compliance. In that event, additional penalties shall be imposed.
D. Civil penalties shall be paid within twenty (20) days of service of the citation, notice and
order or stop work order if not appealed. Payment of the civil penalties assessed under this
chapter does not relieve a person found to be responsible for a code violation of his or her duty to
correct the violation and/or to pay any and all civil penalties or other cost assessments issued
pursuant to this chapter.
E. The Director may suspend civil penalties pursuant to SVZC 14.406.500(A)(c) if the
person responsible for a code violation has entered into a voluntary compliance agreement.
Penalties shall begin to accrue again pursuant to the terms of the voluntary compliance
agreement if any necessary permits applied for are denied, canceled or not pursued, or if
corrective action identified in the voluntary compliance agreement is not completed as specified.
F. Civil penalties assessed create a joint and several personal obligation in all persons
responsible for a code violation.
G. In addition to, or in lieu of any other state or local provision for the recovery of civil
penalties, the City may file for record with the Spokane County Auditor to claim a lien against
the real property for the civil penalties assessed under this chapter if the violation was reasonably
related to the real property. Any such lien can be filed under this chapter if, after the expiration
of thirty (30) days from when a person responsible for a code violation receives the citation,
notice and order or stop work order (excluding any appeal) any civil penalties remain unpaid in
whole or in part.
14.406.520 - Civil penalties — duty to comply. Persons responsible for a code violation have a
duty to notify the Director in writing of any actions taken to achieve compliance with the notice
- 19 -
Planning Commission Recommendation
7 -9 -03
and order. For purposes of assessing civil penalties, a violation shall be considered ongoing until
the person responsible for a code violation has come into compliance with the notice and order,
voluntary compliance agreement, or stop work order, and has provided sufficient evidence of
such compliance.
14.406.530 - Civil penalties — community service. The Director is authorized to allow a person
responsible for a code violation who accumulates civil penalties as a result of a citation, notice
and order, or for failure to comply with the terms of a voluntary compliance agreement, to
voluntarily participate in community service projects in lieu of paying all or a portion of the
assessed civil penalties. Community service may include, but is not limited to, abatement,
restoration or education programs designed to clean up the City. The amount of community
service will reasonably relate to the comparable value of penalties assessed against the violator.
The rate at which civil penalties are worked off under this subsection is $10.00 per hour. The
Director shall take into consideration the severity of the violation, any history of previous
violations and practical and legal impediments in considering whether to allow community
service in lieu of paying penalties.
14.406.540 - Civil penalties — waivers.
A. Civil penalties may be waived or reimbursed to the payor by the Director under the
following circumstances:
1. The citation, notice and order or stop work order was issued in error; or
2. The civil penalties were assessed in error; or
3. Notice failed to reach the property owner due to unusual circumstances; or
4. New, material information warranting waiver has been presented to the Director
since the citation, notice and order or stop work order was issued.
13. The Director shall state in writing the basis for a decision to waive penalties, and such
statement shall become part of the public record unless privileged.
14.406.550 - Civil penalties — critical areas.
A. The code compliance provisions for critical areas are intended to protect critical areas and
the general public from harm, to meet the requirements of RCW 36.70A (the Growth
Management Act), and to further the remedial purposes of this chapter. To achieve this, persons
responsible for a code violation will not only be required to restore damaged critical areas,
insofar as that is possible and beneficial, but will also be required to pay a civil penalty for the
redress of ecological, recreation, and economic values lost or damaged due to their unlawful
action.
B. The provisions of SVZC 14.406.550 are in addition to, and not in lieu of, any other
penalty, sanction or right of action provided by law for other related violations.
Planning Commission Recommendation
7 -9 -03
C. Where feasible, the owner of the land on which the violation occurred shall be named as
a party to the notice and order. In addition to any other persons who may be liable for a
violation, and subject to the exceptions provided in SVZC 1.4.406.090, the owner shall be jointly
and severally liable for the restoration of a site and payment of any civil penalties imposed.
D. For the purposes of SVZC 14.406.550, violation of the critical area ordinance means:
1. The violation of any provision of City Ordinance number 49 (Interim Critical
Areas Ordinance), or of the administrative rules promulgated thereunder. Ordinance
number 49 adopted Spokane County Code, chapter 11.20, as its interim critical areas
regulations;
9.
The failure to obtain a permit required for work in a critical area or
3. The failure to comply with the conditions of any permit, approval, terms and
conditions of any sensitive area tract or setback area, easement, covenant, plat restriction
or binding assurance, or any notice and order, stop work order, mitigation plan, contract
or agreement issued or concluded pursuant to the above - mentioned provisions.
F. Any person in violation of the critical areas ordinance may be subject to civil penalties,
costs and fees as follows:
1. According to the civil penalty schedule under SVZC 14.406.500, provided that
the exact amount of the penalty per violation shall be determined by the Director based
on the physical extent and severity of the violation; or
2. The greater of:
14.406.560 - Cost recovery.
a. an amount determined to be equivalent to the economic benefit that
the person responsible for a code violation derives from the
violation, measured as the total of:
1) the resulting increase in market value of the property;
2) the value received by the person responsible for a code violation;
3) the savings of construction costs realized by the person responsible
for a code violation as a result of perfonning any act in violation of
the critical area ordinance; or
b. code compliance costs (such amount not to exceed $25,000) incurred by
the city to enforce City Ordinance number 49 (Interim Critical Areas
Ordinance) against the person responsible for a code violation.
A. In addition to the other remedies available under this chapter, upon issuance of a notice
and order or stop work order the Director shall charge the costs of pursuing code compliance and
abatement incurred to correct a code violation to the person responsible for a code violation.
These charges include:
- 21 -
Planning Commission Recommendation
7 -9 -03
1. Reasonable legal lees and costs. For purposes of SVZC 14.406, "reasonable legal
fees and costs" shall include, but is not limited to legal personnel costs, both direct and indirect,
incurred to enforce the provisions of this chapter; and
2. Administrative personnel costs. For purposes of SVZC 14.406, administrative
personnel costs shall include, but are not limited to administrative employee costs, both direct
and indirect, incurred to enforce the provisions of this chapter; and
3. Abatement costs. The Director shall keep an itemized account of costs incurred
by the City in the abatement of a notice and order or stop work order under this chapter. Upon
completion of any abatement work, the Director shall prepare a report specifying a legal
description of the real property where the abatement work occurred, work done for each
property, the itemized costs of the work, and interest accrued; and
4. Actual expenses and costs of the City in preparing notices, specifications and
contracts; in accomplishing or contracting and inspecting the work; and the costs of any required
printing, mailing or court filing fees.
B. Such costs are due and payable thirty (30) days from mailing of the invoice.
C. All costs assessed by the City in pursuing code compliance and/or abatement create a
joint and several personal obligation in all persons responsible for a code violation. The Office
of the City Attorney, on behalf of the City, may collect the costs of code compliance efforts by
any appropriate legal means.
D. The City may take a lien for the value of the costs of pursuing code compliance against
the real property of the person responsible for a code violation.
E. In addition to, or in lieu of any other state or local provision for the recovery of costs, the
City may, after abating a code violation pursuant to this chapter, file for record with the Spokane
County Auditor to claim a lien against the real property for the assessed costs identified in this
chapter if the violation was reasonably related to the real property. Such a lien shall be
substantially in accordance with the provision regarding mechanic's liens in RCW 60.04, and
said lien shall be foreclosed in the same manner as such liens. Any such lien can be filed under
this chapter if, after the expiration of thirty (30) days from when a person responsible for a code
violation receives the citation, notice and order or stop work order (excluding any appeal), any
assessed costs remain unpaid in whole or in part.
14.406.570 — Collection of civil penalties, fees and costs. The Director may use the services of
a collection agency in order to collect any civil penalties, fees, costs and /or interest owing under
this chapter.
14.406.580 - Code compliance abatement fund — authorized.
A. All monies collected from the assessment of civil penalties and for abatement costs and
work shall be allocated to support expenditures for abatement, and shall be accounted for
Planning Commission Recommendation
7 -9 -03
through either creation of an account in the fund for such abatement costs, or other appropriate
accounting mechanism.
B. Funds needed to abate a violation by the City shall be obtained from the abatement fund.
14.406.600 - Administrative appeals — standing - fi requirements.
A. Any person issued a citation or named in a notice and order or stop work order, and any
owner of the land where the violation for which a citation, notice and order or stop work order is
issued occurred, may file a notice of appeal of the following:
1. citation;
2. notice and order;
3. stop work order;
B. A complainant who requests to be kept advised pursuant to SVZC 14.406.060(1) may
appeal a determination of compliance by the Director.
C. A person that does not meet the requirements of SVZC 14.406.600(A) or (B) does not
have standing to appeal under this chapter.
D. Any person filing an appeal under this chapter who was issued a citation or order, or is
the owner of the land where the violation occurred, shall do so by obtaining the appeal form from
the Director and filing the completed appeal form with the Director within twenty (20) days of
service of the citation, notice and order or stop work order. A complainant who appeals the
determination of compliance by the Director must file any such appeal within twenty (20) days
of service of the determination of compliance.
E. Any administrative appeal considered under this chapter will be determined by the
Hearings Examiner pursuant to Spokane Valley Ordinance 57, unless in conflict with specific
provisions of this chapter, in which case the specific provisions of this chapter shall control.
14.406.610 — Administrative appeal — notice of hearing. Upon receipt of a notice of appeal,
the City shall provide a hearing notice stating the time, location and date of the hearing on the
issues identified on the violation, notice and order or stop work order. The City shall mail this
notice by certified mail, five -day return receipt requested, to the person(s) responsible for a
violation.
14.406.620 - Administrative appeal— procedures.
A. The appeal hearing shall be conducted as provided for in Spokane Valley Ordinance 57
as adopted or hereafter amended.
13. Enforcement of any notice and order of the Director issued pursuant to this chapter shall
be stayed as to the appealing party during the pendency of any administrative appeal under this
chapter, except when the Director determines that the violation poses a significant threat of
immediate and/or irreparable hann and so states in any notice and order issued.
Planning Commission Recommendation
7 -9 -03 -
C. Enforcement of any stop work order issued pursuant to this chapter shall not be stayed
during the pendency of any administrative appeal under this title.
D. When multiple citations, notices and order or stop work orders have been issued
simultaneously for any set of facts constituting a violation, only one appeal of all the
enforcement actions shall be allowed.
14.406.630 — Administrative appeal— final order.
A. Following review of the evidence submitted, the Hearing Examiner shall issue a written
order containing findings and conclusions, and shall affirm or modify the citation, notice and
order or stop work order previously issued if the Hearing Examiner finds that a violation has
occurred. The Hearing Examiner shall uphold the appeal and reverse the citation or order if the
examiner finds that no violation occurred.
B. If an owner of property where the violation has occurred has affirmatively demonstrated
that the violation was caused by another person or entity not the agent of the property owner and
without the owner's knowledge or consent, such property owner shall be responsible only for
abatement of the violation. Strict compliance with permit requirements may be waived regarding
the performance of such abatement in order to avoid doing substantial injustice to a non - culpable
property owner.
C. The Hearing Examiner's final order shall be final and conclusive unless proceedings for
review of the decision are properly commenced in Spokane County Superior Court within the
time period specified by applicable state law.
D. A final order by the Hearing Examiner affirming, revoking or modifying a citation, notice
and order or stop work order is a final decision.
14.406.640 - Judicial enforcement— petition for enforcement.
A. In addition to any other judicial or administrative remedy, the Office of the City
Attorney, on behalf of the City, may seek enforcement of the Director's order by filing a petition
for enforcement in Spokane County Superior Court.
B. The petition must name as respondent each person against whom the Director seeks to
obtain civil enforcement.
C. A petition for civil enforcement may request monetary relief, declaratory relief,
temporary or permanent injunctive relief, and any other civil remedy provided by law, or any
combination of the foregoing.
14.406.650 - Severabi.l If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance, or any
regulation, rule or order adopted pursuant to the authority thereof be determined invalid or
unconstitutional, it shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence,
clause or phrase of this ordinance.
Planning Commission Recommendation
7 -9 -03
14.406.660 — Effective date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after
publication of this ordinance or a summary thereof in the official newspaper of the City as
�_ Ji provided by law.
STAFF MEMO RE: DISCUSSION POINTS FOR FRANCHISE BOILERPLATE
LANGUAGE
July 9, 2003
GOAL: Identify issues that will be common to all franchise agreements; discuss
and come. to agreement on the language to be used in all such franchises.
(Note: each franchise may have particular issues unique to that franchise. As such, terns
may vary to some extent from "model" language that is developed by the Council and
staff. Additionally, there are two basic types of franchisees, long -term franchisees and
others. Examples of long -term franchisees are water purveyors and power suppliers.)
The Council may want to consider passing a franchise ordinance that sets this boilerplate
language, which would be applicable to all franchises. Doing so could cut down on the
amount of work done on individual franchises.
The Council will identify other issues to address. Please provide any such requests to me
at your earliest opportunity so they can be addressed in a timely fashion.
1. Length of franchise — A franchisee may request a specific length based upon
technical issues, such as fiber. For the most part, long -term franchisees will. seek as long
a. franchise as possible. An issue to keep in ),rind in granting long -term franchises is
whether there are going to be technical considerations that may point to doing a shorter
franchise. For example, are there anticipated changes to the franchisees facilities that we
may want to access for City benefit? Secondarily, as discussed in more detail below, the
Council may elect to impose franchise fees. Granting long -term franchises will preclude
imposing any such fee for many years.
2. Franchise fees — There are two issues. First, does the Council want to impose
franchise fees? Various jurisdictions impose such fees, almost exclusively on the West
side of the state. If the answer to the first question is "yes ", then an amount must be
determined. In researching this, corn.m mities such as Kirkland and Bainbridge island
have established franchise ordinances that state a franchise fee will be imposed in an
amount that will cover all costs of franchise administration. Seattle recently agreed to an
electrical franchise with SeaTac whereby Seattle would install and operate an electrical
system in SeaTac. In doing so, Seattle agreed to pay SeaTac 6% of the power portion of
the electric service in SeaTac, and up to an additional 6% of the distribution portion of
the electrical service. As such, SeaTac imposed a % -based franchise fee.
Franchise fees can either be a one time event, or a yearly event, and both approaches are
used in Washington.
3. Response to emergency — The issue is whether we charge the grantee if we have
to respond to something gone afoul with grantee's facilities during an emergency. The
current language is that grantee shall pay in the event of this happening. You may want
to consider only charging grantee if grantee is notified of the emergency, and fails to
respond. On the other hand, it is a privilege to use the right-of-way. If the City is forced
to respond without having reasonable time to notify grantee, the City eats the cost of
fixing the problem. That may be viewed as a cost of doing business in the right -of -way
for grantees. In any event, this situation should not arise very often. Obviously, it is in
the grantee's best interest to repair its facilities as soon as possible to reduce interruption
of service to its customers.
4. Prior rights issue — Some franchisees were operating prior to Spokane County
(or the State of Washington for that matter) came into existence to provide regulatory
guidelines. As such, they have "prior rights" that impact what Spokane Valley can
regulate at this time. This issue has to be research in some depth, so it will have to be
addressed at a later time.
5. .point use of excavation — This issue involves whether we include a requirement
that when a grantee is going to snake a street cut, the grantee must advise other
franchisees that have facilities in the same trench. This is a comrnon requirement to
avoid multiple cuts being made in the road. Grantees may object to this requirement on
the basis that allowing other grantees to work in the trench may create delay or increase
costs. The current draft model language states that joint use is required, so long as it does
not unreasonably delay the grantee. Further, joint users can be required to share in the
cost of the cut and fill. The provision, as written, should take care of the issue.
STOPPED DISCUSSION ON JULY 15, 2003
August 5, 2003
6. Road repair after cut made — The current language states that grantee shall
"restore the surface of the right -of -way or public property to at least that standard
established by the City Engineer or set by the conditions of any City- issued right -of -way
permit." All of the existing franchises inherited from Spokane County require that the
grantee restore the road to the condition it was in prior to the cut. After consultation with
Dave and others, the following language is recommended: the grantee shall "restore the
surface of the right -of -way or public property to at least the currently adopted City
standards or as required by the City Engineer through a right -of -way permit, depending
upon special circumstances."
7. Do we need to require as -built plans? — The current language requires grantees
to provide as -built plans on facilities within the right-of-way within six months of
execution of the franchise. A question came up �n this. Would we use the as- builts, or
would we be requiring work from the grantees that would just sit around for no purpose.
Part of the original discussion was that we would incorporate the as- builts into a GIS
layer for future planning purposes. The problem with that is we would have to hire
several people to sit and draft on GIS all day. Staff understands that is not a direction the
Council wishes to go at this time.
Even if the City were to collect hard copies of the as- builts, it would quickly become
unmanageable f:roni a storage standpoint.
Staff has continued to discuss this issue and would suggest the following language:
"Franchisee is required to maintain as- built plans in a manner that can be provided to the
City within several days upon request."
8. Compliance with local emergency management plan — The current language
requires the grantee to "adhere to the Emergency Management Plan (the "Plan ") for
responding to any spill, break, or other emergency condition." A question has arisen
whether this means existing Federal emergency plans, or a local plan that will be
developed. Many franchisees already have to have provisions to adhere to a Federal plan.
A local plan would be more tailored to local conditions, and may or may not be more
stringent than the Federal requirements.
9. Notice to grantee to move (temporarily or permanently) its facilities — This
issue would include the need to move wires in the event a house is being moved down the
right -of -way, or if the road is being widened or moved, permanently moving whatever
facilities would be affected. The current language requires 14 days notice to the
franchisee. This may or may not be enough advance notice to some franchisees, such as
power providers, who may not be able. to get the necessary equipment or replacement
parts in that short of time. There are two options: extend the time and/or allow for an
extension on good cause shown by the franchisee. Other jurisdictions on the West side
use 30 days. Another option is to use 60 days notice, with the ability extend on good
cause shown. This time frame should not be an issue for permanent relocations, due to
the normal lead time on such projects. for temporary moves, it will inconvenience
people (rare though it may be) who want to move a house.
10. Abandonment of facilities — This issue relates to those times when a franchisee
wants to abandon all or a part of its facilities, such as changing the route of pipes or
wires. The City should know when facilities are abandoned to know which facilities are
active. There are two easy options: require permission to abandon, or require a map of
the abandoned facilities within a specified amount of time after abandonment.
l..l.. Records — If a third party requests copies of records identifying where specific
facilities are located from the franchisee, should the requesting party have to pay for
them? This may be taken care of if we require as- builts from all franchisees. Then, such
requests could simply come to the City for that information. We may elect to charge for
administrative time to provide copies of that.
if we do not require as- builts, then there should be a mechanism where a requesting third
party can obtain them from the franchisee under the same conditions (and charge ?) as if
they were sought from the City.
12. Indemnification — Should the indemnification clause be mutual? It is currently
written so franchisee would indemnify the City for acts that grantee is liable for. This
clause protects the City from being the deep pocket in allowing franchisees to use the
right -of -way. The City should be avoid exposing itself to potential liability by making
this a mutual clause. From a practical standpoint, the City would not be doing anything
by entering into the franchise that would expose it to liability, so there really is not a need
to have this mutual.
13. Cost of publication — As currently written, the grantee bears the cost of
publication, which runs about $150 -200 for a two -page summary. The question is
whether the City wants to bear this cost for all franchises. The Council may want to
consider whether the City is gaining any tangible benefit from a particular franchise, such
as use of facilities, in determining whether to bear this cost, or pass it on in the franchise.
if not, the Council has already indicated the City should bear the cost of publication.
14. Copies of franchise provided to City — Do we need to require that two copies be
sent, one to the Clerk and one to our Public Works Department? Should the City take the
responsibility of making a copy for the other department?
Cary P. Driskell
Deputy City Attorney
DATE. ACTION IS
REQUESTED: Discussion
TITLE: 2004 Budget Process TYPE OF ACTION:
APPROVED FOR ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance
COUNCIL PACKET:
Outline of Proposed Resolution
City Manager Process
Motion
Dept. Head
Agreement
Attorney Approve
As To Form
J SUBMITTED BY: Ken Thompson, Finance & Admin. Services Director
RECOMMENDED ACTION: A discussion of the proposed components /process for the 2004 Budget is
recommended. Staff would like to test our thoughts on this process prior to preparation of the budget.
ALTERNATIVES:
FISCAL IMPACT: S
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
AMOUNT BUDGETED:
AMOUNT NEEDED FOR PROJECT:
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
I. Calendar
1I. The Usual Financial Charts, Graphs and Schedules
III. Budget Message
A. Highlights
B. Accomplishments
C. Goals
D. Major Budget Issues
1. Sales Tax
2. Mirabeau Point
TV. Community Profile
A. History of Area
B. Population
C. Leading Industries, Employers
V. Map with Spokane Valley Reference
VI. Organization Chart
VII. About the Budget
A. Explanation
B. Background
C. Procedures
D. Process
X. Capital Improvement Plan
XII. Ordinances
A. Adopting Budget
B. Levy Property Taxes
. City of Spokane Valley
2004 Budget Process Discussion
August 5, 2003
VIII. Fund Structure/FIow Budget Organized
1X. Budget
A. Significant Revenues Explanation
B. Program or Activity Format
C. Contingency
D. Service Level Stabilization Fund
XI. Most Significant Budget Policies
XIII. Schedule of Number of Employees and Salary Range
City of Spokane Valley
2003 Budget Amendments
August 5, 2003
Fund Purpose Amount Funding Source
Start -up costs:
General Microilex — Sales Tax $28,000 Loan proceeds
General Emergency Management Services $36,000 Loan proceeds
General Lease/Improvements $70,000 Loan proceeds
General Web Site $20,000 Loan proceeds
General Prothman Costs $26,000 Loan proceeds
General Start -up Supplies $7,000 Loan proceeds
General Road Obstruction Program $70,000 Loan proceeds &
Program income
General Special Attorney $40,000 Loan proceeds
General Public Safety Vehicle $28,000 Loan proceeds
General Interim Positions (3) $40,500 Loan proceeds
General Traffic Engineering —
Manuals/Handbooks $1,500 Loan proceeds
Software — Synchro $3,000 Loan proceeds
General Technology — Computers,
Network & Consulting $194,000 Loan proceeds
General Inspector Manuals &
Certification $10,000 Loan proceeds
General Consultants — Personnel Policies $20,000 Loan proceeds
General Council Memberships, Registrations,
& Travel $12,500 Loan proceeds
Other:
Hotel/Motel Tourism Promotion $190,000 Room tax
Capital Project Mirabeau — CenterPlace $300,000 Bond proceeds
To: Council & Staff
From: City Manager
Re: Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings
DRAFT
ADVANCE AGENDA
For Planning Discussion Purposes Only
as of August 1, 2003 11:30 a.ni.
Please note this is a work in progress; itcms are tentative
August 12 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. [due date Aug 1]
CONSENT:
REGULAR:
1. Proposed Water Safety Regulation Ordinance - First Reading
2. Mirabeau Point Project — Nina Regor /Mike Jackson/Ken Thompson
3. Proposed Ordinance Authorizing Interlocal Agreement re Regional Project - First Reading Mike Ormsby
4. Resolution Designating City Clerk to Receive Claims — Chris Bainbridge/Cary Driskell
5. Resolution Accepting Conveyance of Park Properties — Mike Jackson
6. Interlocal Agreement re Ownership, Operations & Maintenance of Parks — Mike Jackson
7. Motion to approve Lease Agreement with Lamar Outdoor of Spokane — Stanley Schwartz
8. Hotel /Lodging REP Discussion /Outcome — Mike Flanigan
9. Motion: to confirm Mayor Appointment of Councilman Dick Denenny to Spokane Transit Authority
10. Motion: to confirm Mayor Appointments to Health District
11. Administrative Reports: Traffic Issues (1) Stiles, (2) Britton, (3) Noise Levels
August 13, 2 — 4 p.m. — Meeting with Department of Ecology
4601 N Monroe (Department of Ecology Headquarters)
August 19 Study Session 6:00 p.m. [due date Aug R]
1. N.W. Christian School introduction/presentation — Dave Mercier (10 minutes)
2. DARE Program Review — Cal Walker (20 minutes)
3. Proposed Emergency Management Services Interlocal Agreement - Nina Regor (15 minutes)
4. Franchise ordinance update — Cary Driskell (15 minutes)
5. Probation Services Discussion — Cary Driskell (20 minutes)
6. Street Lighting Policy — Cal Walker/Neil Kersten (15 minutes)
7. Wastewater Issues Discussion —Neil Kersten ( 20 minutes)
8. Hearings Examiner Update /Discussion — Dave Mercier (15 minutes)
9. Comprehensive Plan Element Discussion — Marina Sukup (20 minutes)
10. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor DeVleming (5 minutes)
11. City Manager Comments — Dave Mercier (10 minutes) TOTAL MINUTES: 165
Advance Agenda — Draft Page 1 of 3
Revised 3/1/2003 11:21 AM
August 26 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. [due date Aug 15]
CONSENT:
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. Proposed Extension of Adult Entertainment Moratorium
2. Proposed Budget Amendment
REGULAR:
1. Proposed Water Safety Ordinance - Second Reading
2. Proposed Ordinance Authorizing Interlocal Agreement re Regional Project - Second Reading
3. Staff Reports: Status of Previous Public Comments /Concerns
4. Department Monthly Reports
5. Administrative Reports
Wed, August 27, 6:30 p.m. — County Public Works Bldg. (rescheduled EMS Communications Meeting)
September 2 Study Session 6:00 p.m. [due date Aug 22]
I EDC Presentation of Lane Guin and Frank Tombari (15 minutes)
2. Project Access Presentation — Dr. Selinger (10 minutes)
3 Housing Code Violations — Cary Driskell/Tom Scholtens — (15 minutes)
4. Proposed Junk Vehicle Ordinance — Cary Driskell (10 minutes)
5. Proposed Towing Memorandum of Understanding — Cary Driskell (10 minutes)
6 Police Station Purchase and/or Maintenance and Operation — Cal Walker/Nina Regor (15 minutes)
7. Options for Park Improvement District Presentation — Mike Jackson /Cary Driskell (15 minutes)
8 Proposed Tourism Promotion Area (T1'A) - Cary Driskell (20 minutes)
9. Comprehensive Plan Element Discussion — Marina Sukup (20 minutes)
10. Right -of -Way and Cross - Circulation Between Appleway and Sprague - Neil Kersten (20 minutes)
11. Council Check in — Dave Mercier (10 minutes)
12. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor DeVleming (5 minutes)
13. City Manager Comments — Dave Mercier (10 minutes) TOTAL MINUTES: 175
September 9 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. [due date Aug 29]
1. Anticipated Adoption of Junk Vehicle Ordinance
2. Anticipated Adoption of Towing Memorandum of Understanding
3 Proposed Budget Amendment Ordinance — 2 " reading — Ken Thompson
4. Staff Reports: Status of Previous Public Comments /Concerns
5. Administrative reports
September 16 Study Session 6:00 p.m. [due date Sept 5]
1. Proposed Nuisance abatement ordinance - Cary Driskell (10 minutes)
2. Memorandum of Understanding re Cable TV Advisory Board - Cary Driskell (10 minutes)
3. Comprehensive Plan Element Discussion — Marina Sukup (20 minutes)
4. Proposed Agreement for Sewer Extensions and Operation (STEP) — Neil Kersten (20 minutes)
5. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor DeVleming (5 minutes)
6. City Manager Comments — Dave Mercier (10 minutes) TOTAL MINUTES: 75
Advance Agenda — Draft Page 2 of 3
Revised 8/1/2003 11:03 AM
September 17 "Conversation with the Community" 6:30 p.m. — 8:30 p.m.
Central Park Condo Center, 601 1 East 6 Avenue
September 23, Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. [due. date Sept 121
1. CDBG Applications
2. Staff' Reports: Status of Previous Public Comments /Concerns
3. Department Monthly Reports
4. Administrative Reports
September 24. 2003, 1:00 p.m. Public Transportation Improvement Conference
Spokane Transit Board Meeting , 1230 W Boone Ave, Board Room
(meeting notices will be sent from STA via regular mail.)
September 30, Study Session 6:00 p.m. [due date Sept 191
1. Comprehensive Plan Element Discussion — Marina Sukup (20 minutes)
October/November /December Study and Regular Meetings
1. Proposed Sewer /refuse collection ordinance — Stan Schwartz
2. Proposed Library Agreements
3. Monthly staff reports
4. Administrative Reports
Advance Agenda — Draft
Revised 8/1/2003 11:03 ABM
Page 3 of 3