Loading...
2003, 11-04 Study SessionTuesday, November 4, 2903 SUBJECT 1. Community. Development 2. Executive 3. Budget 4. Administration 5. Parks & Rec 6. Legal 7. Legal 8. Executive 9. Administration 10. Administration Study Scsson Agenda. 1144-03 AGENDA CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL WORKSHEET STUDY SESSION CITY HALL. AT REDWOOD PLAZA 11707 East Sprague Avenue, First Floor Council Requests Please Turn Ott All Electronic Devices During Council Meeting DISCUSSION LEADER ACTIVITY Greg McCormick (15 minutes) Mayor DeVleming (15 minutes) Council Deliberation of Funding Discussion Outside Agency Requests Department Directors (60 Nina Regor /Cal Walker (10 minutes) Mike Jackson (10 minutes Cary Driskell (10 minutes) Cary Driskell (10 minutes) Submission of Appiications on Community Development Block Grant minutes) Presentation of Proposed -44 d 6:00 P.M. GOAL formal Vote Presentation Department Budgets Discussion Proposed Emergency Management Discussion/ Services Intcrlocal Agreement Information Recreation Program/Policy Discussion Information Towing Ordinance Discussion/ Information Public Record Retention Policy Discussion+ Information Mayor DeVleming (5 minutes) Advance Agenda Additions Discussion! Information Dave Mercier (10 minutes) Council Check in Discussion/ Information Dave Mercier (10 minutes) City Manager Comments Discussion/ Information 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. NOTICE: Individuals pltutning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing, or other impairments. please contact the City Clerk at (.509)921 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be made. Psct 1 u! 1 Meeting Date: November 4, 2003 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent El old business 0 information ❑ admin. report City Manager Sign -off: ❑new business ❑ public hearing Opencfing legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2004 Community Development Block Grant Applications GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: The Council reviewed the proposed 2004 CDBG applications at its October 28, 2003 regular meeting conducting a public tearing for citizen comment. No Council action was taken. BACKGROUND: The City Council joined the County's CDBG Consortium allowing the City to apply for CDBG funds for City of Spokane Valley projects in low and moderate income target areas. City staff has examined the capital and planning projects for next year and recommend that the City Council authorize staff to move forward with formal applications for the following projects: 1. Project 1 — Comprehensive Plan Economic Development Element Development of the City's Economic Development Element in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the Growth Management Act (GMA). Amount of request to be determined. 2. Project 2 — Comprehensive Plan Housing Element Development of the City's Housing Element in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the GAM. Amount of request to be determined. 3 - Project 3 — Septic Tank Elimination Project (STEP) Pave Back Reconstruct entire street section in areas to be sewered under the STEP program. This is in lieu of repaving only the area trenched for the installation of sewer lines. Project costs currently being estimated by the Public Works Department 4. Project 4 — Mansfield Street Project (6 year TIP) Major improvements to Mansfield Street from approximately Wilbur to Pines to a 3 -lane roadway with curb and gutter. This project also includes improvement of the west bound an Tamp at Pines Road (State Route 27) and Interstate 90. Total approximate costs of project are 5675,000 with a city share of $55,000- The proposed CDBG application would apply for $55,000 to cover the city's portion of this project. OPTIONS: The Council may authorize staff to proceed with the above suggested CDI3G applications or direct staff to examine other possible projects. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Authorize staff to rnave forward with the above noted CDBG applications_ BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Positive, would vary depending on ultimate CDSG awarded to the City of Spokane Valley_ STAFF CONTACT: Greg McCormick, AIP — Long Range Planning Manager ATTACHMENTS: Summary of CDBG funding information. 2003/2004 CDBG Funding Levels Description 2003 CDBG Awards 2004 CDBG Dollar Amounts Total Anticipated 2004 CDBG Entitlement $1,800,000 20% Administration /Planning $320,000 15% Human Services $240,000 CAPA (community aquifer protection assistance) Program Annual set -aside $350,000 $300,000 Total Available for Capital, Housing, Economic Development Projects $940,000 Spokane Valley Pave -Back Application (approximate) $250,000 Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan — Economic Development Plan Funded out of 20% administration and planning. TBD Spokane Valley Comprehensive Plan — Housing Element Funded out of 20% administration and planning. TBD Spokane Valley Street Project $55,000 CDBG Funding Awarded in 2003 2003 Spokane Valley Public Facility CDBG Awards -East Spokane Water District 1 - Orchard Avenue Irrigation $199,160 2003 Public Service Projects (funded out of 15% human services) benefits SV residents — not exclusive to SV $246,760 2003 Housing (Spokane Neighborhood Action Program) benefits SV residents — not exclusive to SV $150,000 2003/2004 CDBG Funding Levels CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: November 4, 2003 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business xx new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Council Deliberation of Funding Outside Agency Requests PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Excerpt from October 21, 2003 Council Study Session Minutes: 2. Council Bud et Discussion: Outside A retie Fundin T. Fee Resolution Deputy City Manager Regor explained that Council previously heard presentations from several agencies requesting funding for various programs; and that since that request, a request for funding has also been received from Friends of Centennial Trail, representing a total request of $302,000. Ms. Regor explained that as a starting point for that discussion, staff" proposes the following initial amounts: Agency Request City's Proposed Funding Amount 23,679 Agency International Trade Alliance 35,000 Chase Youth commission 60,000 0 Economic Development Commission 100,000 41,543 ' Project Access 102,000 5,000 Valley Community Center 4,000 4,000 Friends of Centennial trail 1,000 1,000 TOTAL 302,000 75,222 Lengthy discussion ensued regarding the change in the proposed funding amount from $120,000 to the $75,222; how to allocate the funds, examining the projects on individual merits; using a formula to determine the funds per entity; criteria for selecting which requests to fund; and whether to include the funding for these requests in the 2004 budget. It ti4'as moved by Mayor DeVleming and seconded by Deputy Mayor Wilhite to establish this budget fiend at $100,000. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Mayor DeVleming, Deputy Mayor Wilhite, Cotnrcihnembers Schimmels, Munson, Denenny, Flanigan. Opposed: Councilmember Taylor. Motion carried. It was later moved by Councilmember Taylor and seconded by Deputy Mayor Wilhite to strike the request from the Centennial Trail. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Deputy Mayor Wilhite, Councilmembers Taylor and Denenny. Opposed: Mayor DeVlenring, Councilmembers Schimmels, Flanigan, and Munson. Motion fails. It was proved by Councilmember Denenny to allocate an additional $20,000 to Project Access with the balance [$4,778] to the Chase Youth Commission. Councilmember Munson said he feels more time is needed to analyze these proposals. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Councibnentbers Denenny, Taylor, Schimmels. Opposed: Mayor DeVleming, Deputy Mayor Wilhite, Councilmembers Flanigan and Munson. Motion fails. Mayor DeVleming suggested each councilmember analyze suggestions for the additional funds ($24,778) and come with those suggestions for the next study session; that councilmembers should re- allocate the total $100,000 funds to each entity in any manner they feel appropriate, and bring back to the next study session for additional deliberation. Meeting Date: 11 -04 -03 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: I] consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation Council will hear a brief presentation from each Department Director relative to that department's overall budget. Administration — Dave Mercier Administrative Services /Finance — Nina Regor & Ken Thompson Parks & Recreation — Mike Jackson Community Development — Marina Sukup Public Works — Neil Kersten CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Presentation of Proposed Department Budgets GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: DISCUSSION: OPTIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Meeting Date: November 4, 2003 City Manager Sign -off: Item: Check all that apply: ❑ consent AGENDA ITEM TITLE : Interlocal Agreement with Spokane County, City of Spokane, and Other Cities for Emergency Management Services GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCN 38.52.070 allows two or more political subdivisions to join in the establishment and operation of a local organization for emergency management services. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: N/A CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action (] old business X new business ❑ public hearing ❑ information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation BACKGROUND: The City of Spokane and Spokane County have jointly provided emergency management services to their citizens since 1979. Their agreement provides for 1) preparation; 2) response; and 3) recovery from emergencies and disasters, whether natural or man -made. The attached draft amended interlocal extends that Agreement to the City of Spokane Valley, as well as other cities in the area. OPTIONS: As an alternative, the City could provide its own emergency management department. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Provide direction on the content of the draft Agreement and, if appropriate, schedule for Council action at a future meeting. BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The cost for 2003 is $36,483 based upon seven months of participation. For 2004, the cost will be $62,542. Funds for 2003 were included in the budget amendment approved by Council in September. Funds for 2004 are included in the proposed budget. STAFF CONTACT: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager; Cal Walker, Police Chief ATTACHMENTS 2003 Amended Interlocal Agreement for Emergency Management Services Return to: flaniela Erickson Clerk of the Board 1116 Wcst Broadway Spokane, Washington 99260 2003 A.IVIEIDED IiTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT SERVICES THIS AMENDED INT Y LOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT is made by and arnong the City of Spokane, a Washington Mate municipal corporation, having offices for the transaction of business at 80$ West Spokane Falls Boulevard, Spokane, Washington 99201, hereinafter referred to as the "1TY," the City of Spokane Valley, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at the Redwood Plaza, 11707 East Sprague Avenue, Suite 1 06, Spokane Val Iey, Washington 99206, hereinafter referred- to as "SPOKANE VALLEY," City o f Medical Lake, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, h aving offices for the transaction of business at 124 S. Lefevre P.O. Box 130, 99019, hereinafter referred to as "MEDICAL LAKE," the Town of Millwood, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at 9103 East Fredrick, 99206, hereinafter referred to "A'[[LLWOOD," the Town of Fairfield, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at Town Hall, P.O. Box 334, 99012, hereinafter referred to as "FAIRFIELD," the Town of Latah a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at P.O. Box 130, 99018. hereinafter referred to as °'LATAH," the City of Liberty Lake, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having off.i .es for the. transaction of business at City Hall, do P.O. Box 370, 99019, hereinafter referred to as "LIBERTY LAKE," the Town of Rockford, a rn unicipai corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at Town Fall, 20 West Emma, P.O. Box 49, 99030, hereinafter referred to as "ROCKFORD," the Town of Spangle, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at P.O. Box 147, 99031, hereinafter referred to as "SPANGLE," the City of Cheney, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at General Office, 609 Second, 99004, hereinafter referred to as "CHENEY," the City of Airway Heights, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at City ]-fall, 1208 South i undstrom, P.O. Box 969, 99001, hereinafter referred to as "AIRWAY HEIGHTS," HTS," the City of Deer .Park, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at City Hal], 316 Crawford, 'Box F, 99006, hereinafter referred to as "DEER PARK," the Town of Wa}rerly, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at 255 North Commercial, P.0. .Box 37, 99039, hereinafter referred to as "WAVERLY," and Spokane County, a political subdivision of the State of Washington, having offices for the transaction of business at 1 116 West Broadway Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99260, Hereinafter referred to as the "COUNTY," jointly hereinafter referred to as the "PARTIES," Page 1ofIS WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCVS' 36.32.120(6), the Board of County Commissioners has the care of County property and the management of County funds and business; and • WHEREAS, pursuant to chapter 39.34 RCW, local governments may jointly exercise their powers, privileges and authorities through the execution of Interlocal Cooperation Agreements in order to make the most efficient use of their powers by enabling them to cooperate with other localities on a basis of mutual advantage and thereby provide services and facilities in a manner and pursuant to forms of governmental organization that will accord best with geographical, economic, population, or other factors influencing the needs and development of local community; and WHEREAS, pursuant to R.CW 38.52.070, two or more political subdivisions may join in the establishment and operation of a local organization for emergency management services, the City of Spokane, City of Spokane Valley, City of Medical Lake, Town of Millwood, Town of Fairfield, Town of Latah, City of Liberty Lake, Town of Rockford, Town of Spangle, City of Cheney, City of Airway Heights, City of Deer Park, Town of Waverly, and Spokane County are authorized and directed to establish local organizations for emergency management services in accordance with the Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan and Program; and WHEREAS, the City of Spokane and Spokane County entered into a joint Resolution on or about .lune 25, 1979, under Resolution No. 79 -0873 establishing a joint Spokane City /County Department of Emergency Services and Resolution No. 96 -0991, on or about October 22, 1996, which carried out the functions for both entities as called for pursuant to chapter 38.52 RCW, the City of Spokane Valley, City of Medical Lake, Town of Millwood, Town of Fairfield, Town of Latah, City of Liberty Lake, Town of Rockford, Town of Spangle, City of Cheney, City of Airway Heights, City of Deer Park, and Town of Waverly, are desirous of becoming a party to this joint venture; and WHEREAS, it is the intent of the City of Spokane, City of Spokane Valley, City of Medical Lake, Town of Millwood, Town of Fairfield, Town of Latah, City of Liberty Lake, Town of Rockford, Town of Spangle, City of Cheney, City of Airway Heights, City of Deer Park, Town of Waverly, and Spokane County to combine their efforts in maintaining the joint Department of Emergency Management ( "DEPARTMENT ") by entering into this Interlocal Cooperation Agreement. NOW, `i'HEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, and as authorized under chapter 39.34 RCW and chapter 38.52 RCW, the City of Spokane City Council, City of Spokane Valley City Council, City of Medical Lake City Council, Town of Millwood Town Council, Town of Fairfield Town Council, Town of Latah Town Council, City of Liberty Lake City Council, Town of Rockford Town Council, Town of Spangle Town Council, City of Cheney City Council, City of Airway Heights City Council, City of Deer Park City Council, Town Page 2 of 15 of Waverly Town Council and the Spokane County Board of County Commissioners hereby agree as follows: • SECTION NO. 1: SPOKANE CITY /COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT The Spokane City /County Department of Emergency Services, as created under the joint Resolution No. 79 -0873, shall be hereby known as the "Spokane City /County Department of Emergency Management," hereinafter refen to as the "DEPARTMENT." SECTION NO. 2: COMMITMENT The PARTIES agree to be fully committed to the Emergency Management Program and provide the resources necessary for the DEPARTMENT to carry out the Emergency Management Mission. The PARTIES agree that they are each responsible for individual department emergency preparedness. The PARTIES agree to ensure that department heads participate in collaboration, dialog, planning, and exercises with the DEPARTMENT to assure readiness in event of disaster or major emergency. This statement of commitment flows from the PARTIES down to the individual employees for the safety of life, property, and the environment of Spokane. • SECTION NO. 3: TERM The term of this Agreement shall commence as of the last date executed by the PARTIES hereto and shall continue until terminated as provided for hereinafter. SECTION NO. 4: PURPOSE It is the purpose of this Agreement to continue the combined efforts of CITY and COUNTY as originally developed in Joint Resolution No.79 -0873, and Joint Resolution No. 96 -0991 and to add SPOKANE VALLEY, MEDICAL LAKE, MILLWOOD, FAI:RFIELD, LATAH, LIBERTY LAKE, ROCKFORD, SPANGLE, CHENEY, AIRWAY HEIGHTS, DEER PA.R.K, and WAVERLY, to this Agreement in order to establish and operate, pursuant to R.CW 38.52.070, a local organization for emergency management in accordance with the Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Plan and Program. This Agreement is to provide for the effective and economical preparation for and coordination of emergency functions, other than functions for which military forces are primarily responsible. To mitigate, prepare for, respond to, and recover from emergencies and disasters, and to aid victims suffering from injury or damage, resulting from emergency disasters caused by all hazards, whether natural or man -made, and to provide the opportunity for coordination and support of search and rescue operations. SECTION NO. 5: DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT The DEPARTMENT shall have its office at the Spokane Fire Training Center, 1618 N. Rebecca, Spokane, Washington 99217, until the PARTIES, by mutual agreement, decide upon a new location. The DEPARTMENT, in addition to having those duties as enumerated in RCW 38.52.070, shall also have the following responsibilities: Page 3 of 15 (1) Facilitate a coordinated planning process integrating Emergency Management plans to include; federal stage, local governments, individual city and county departments, neighborhood, individual citizens, schools and the private sector; (2) Conduct a comprehensive internal assessment and evaluation of emergency plans, equipment and personnel proficiency through a program of regular exercises; (3) Acquire and maintain Emergency 'Management facilities and equipment; (4) Administer and facilitate programs that enable people, governments, communities and the private sector to minimize and recover from imrnediate and long term impacts of disasters; (5) Facilitate the identification, development, implementation and evaluation of mitigation strategies and activities to reduce vulnerability to the effects of disasters; (6) Provide timely and accurate Emergency Management information; (7) Participate with the. 9 -1 -1 Operations Committee to assist the public. in Spokane County to easily, rapidly, and accurately access emergency police, fire, and medical assistance during time. of a disaster; (8) Effectively and efficiently train the DEPARTMENT staff to coordinate emergency management resources, programs, functions and systems; (9) Propose coordinated legislation, ordinances, and local laws to improve the safety of people, governments and the private sector; (10) Coordinate a cooperative effort of federal, state, and local governments, neighborhoods, schools, individual citizens, individual city and county departments and private sector to educate the public in emergency and disaster preparedness; (II) Coordinate facilities and resources to assist federal, state, and local governments to effectively and efficiently respond to emergencies and disasters; (12) Work in cooperation with federal, state, and local governments, and the private sector to realize, develop and maintain a network of survivable emergency telecommunications and warning systems; (13) Facilitate a partnership of federal, state, and local governments and the private sector that provides "All Hazards" emergency management training for emergency coordination and management level personnel; (14) Facilitate and participate in various group meetings, such as; Search and Rescue Council Spokane Disaster Committee, Local Emergency Planning Committee, Amateur Radio Emergency Service (A_R.E.S.) /Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Service (R.A.C.E.S.), Page 4of15 Inland Empire Fire Chiefs Association, Inland Northwest Law Enforcement Leadership Group, Business & Industry Committee, Spokane County EMS Council, Spokane County Hospital Disaster Committee, City and County Department Heads and other groups; (15) Establish, train and maintain a volunteer cadre that can be mobilized in case of search and rescue missions, emergencies and /or disasters; (16) Prepare, monitor, administer and evaluate the DEPARTMENT'S annual budget; (17) Participate in and attend related Emergency Management conferences, seminars, training and education; and (18) Schedule, coordinate and conduct training in emergency management for educating government, private sector and individuals. SECTION NO. 6: PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT All existing equipment and supplies previously used by the Emergency Services Departments of both CITY and COUNTY shall be combined and consolidated for the continued maintenance and use by the DEPARTMENT. All equipment so consolidated shall remain the equipment of the individual entity supplying the same to the consolidation. All equipment required by the DEPARTMENT, other than that obtained from consolidation, shall be held in the name of the DEPARTMENT and shall be disposed of upon termination of the DEPARTMENT as the PARTIES may mutually agree. SECTION NO. 7: EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ADVISORY COUNCIL (EMAC) An Emergency Management Advisory Council ( "EMAC ") is hereby created. EMAC'S function shall be to provide vision and make recommendations to the DEPARTMENT. EMAC shall be composed of the City of Spokane Administrator, City of Spokane Chief Financial Officer, Spokane County Chief Executive Officer, Spokane Valley City Manager, a representative (City Administrator /City Manager) representing the cities/towns with populations less than 10,000, a representative from the Inland Empire Fire Chiefs Association, and a representative from the Inland Northwest Law Enforcement Leadership Group. The Director and Deputy !Director of the DEPARTMENT shall be ex- officio, non - voting members. A majority of EMAC members will constitute a quorum. EMAC will assist, advise and collaborate with the Local Director and Deputy Director of the DEPARTMENT in the development of service levels, resulting budget, emergency plans and training. EMAC shall meet on a quarterly basis, unless deemed unnecessary by the Chair. The Local Director shall serve as chairman. Page 5 of 15 SECTION NO. 8: FUNDING Commencing with the 2005 budget, EMAC agrees to establish an annual budget that provides for sharing of annual costs based on population, using the Office of Financial Management's numbers, as exampled in Attachments "A," and `B," attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. For 2003 and 2004, the PARTIES agree to fund DEPARTMENT by sharing annual costs based on population and summarized in Attachments "A" and "B." EMAC shall review the budget and population in future years and make recommendations on a yearly basis to the PARTIES regarding subsequent budgets. A non - general fund account will be established in the name of the DEPARTMENT in which these funds will be deposited for salary and benefits, maintenance and operation, facilities, and capital expenses. The PARTIES agree to deposit their share on a quarterly basis. The Spokane County Director of Administrative Services will submit an invoice to the PARTIES no later than the fifth of March, June, September, and December of each year. Invoices will be clue and payable no later than the fifth of April, July, October and .January of each year. In the event that other jurisdictions determine to participate in this joint emergency management Agreement and are required to contribute financially, the amount of their contributions shall be based on their pro -rata share of population and will be added to the DEPARTMENT'S budget in order to reduce the amount of each PARTY'S contribution. SECTION NO. 9: INDEMNIFICATION The PARTIES agree that the DEPARTMENT, all of its employees, to include the Local Director and Deputy Director, shall be included under the COUNTY'S self - insured insurance coverage for general liability and worker compensation. The PARTIES further agree that the COUNTY shall be responsible for any liability, Toss, cost or expense claimed by third parties for property damage and bodily injury, including death, caused by any act or omission attributed to the DEPARTMENT, its employees or agents in connection with the Agreement. Each Party shall be responsible for its own wrongful and negligent acts or omissions, or those of its officers, agents, or employees to the fullest extent required by ]aw, and shall indemnify, defend, and hold the other party harmless from any such liability. - In. the case of negligence of more than one Party, any damages allowed shall be levied in proportion to the percentage of negligence attributable to each Party and each Party shall have the right to seek contribution from the other Party in proportion to the percentage of negligence attributable to the other Party. SEC'I"TON NO. 10: SPOK.AJ E DISASTER COMMITTEE There shall be a Spokane Disaster Committee. The Spokane Disaster Committee shall consist of representatives from law enforcement, fire service, hospitals, local government, emergency medical services, the military, the DEPARTMENT, as well as other individuals from the public and private sectors. The purpose of the Spokane Disaster Committee shall be to assist the DEPARTMENT in Page 6 of 15 mitigation, preparation, planning, response and recovery from disasters or major emergencies. The Committee shall meet on a monthly basis, unless deemed unnecessary by the Chair. The Committee shall elect its own chair, vice- chair, etc. The Committee shall establish its own by -laws. SECTION NO. 1.1.: LOCAL EMERGENCY PLANNING COMMITTEE There shall be a Spokane Local Emergency Planning Committee ( "LEPC "). The LEPC shall be established and conform to the Federal, State, and Local laws. The LEPC shall assist the DEPARTMENT in its compliance to all pertinent laws pertaining to Hazardous Materials. SECTION NO. 12: THE LOCAL DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT The Spokane County Sheriff is hereby appointed as the Spokane Local Director of Emergency Management. The Local Director shall be responsible for: (1) The overall Emergency Management program; (2) Serve as Chair of the EMAC; and (3) Empowered to declare a disaster or state of emergency in consultation with affected jurisdictional elected official(s). SECTION NO. 13: DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT The Deputy Director of the Spokane City /County Department of Emergency Management shall be responsible to the Local Director. Subject to the direction of the Local Director, the Deputy Director is hereby empowered and directed: Page 7of15 (1) To act on behalf of the Local Director in his absence in all Emergency Management functions and responsibilities; (2) To prepare a comprehensive emergency management plan conforming to the state comprehensive emergency management plan program and programs; (3) To coordinate the effort of the emergency management organization for the accomplishment of the purposes of this Agreement; (4) To coordinate and facilitate cooperation between divisions, services and staff of the joint emergency management services jurisdictions, and to resolve questions of authority and responsibility that may arise between them; _ (5) To represent the Spokane City /County Department of Emergency Management organization in all dealings with public or private agencies pertaining to emergency management and disasters; (6) To keep and maintain an inventory of all non- perishable and non - expendable goods, supplies and equipment of the DEPAR.TMENT or in its custody, including federal excess property on loan to the DEPARTMENT, with said inventory to specify the location of each item listed thereon; and (7) To equip, maintain, and train Emergency Operations Center ( "EOC ") personnel and to act as manager of said EOC upon activation for disaster or exercise. SECTION NO. 14: TERMINATION Each PARTY may terminate its participation in the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement upon ninety - days (90) days written notice to the Director of the DEPARTMENT prior to January l st of any year. Federal or state owned properties shall be disbursed in accordance with appropriate federal or state guidelines. Items loaned to the DEPARTMENT by a participating member shall upon request be returned to that member upon that member's withdrawal from this Agreement or upon this Agreement's cancellation. Upon the withdrawal by any party, that party shall be refunded any funds not encumbered. All properties owned by the DEPARTMENT will remain with the DEPARTMENT and shall not be subject to disbursement. SECTION NO. 15: SEVERABILITY It is understood and agreed by the PARTIES hereto that if any part, term or provision of this Agreement is held by the courts to be illegal, the validity of the remaining provisions shall not be affected, and the rights and obligations of the PARTIES shall be construed and enforced as if the Agreement did not contain the particular provision held to be invalid. If it should appear that any provision hereof is in conflict with any statute of the State of Washington, said provision that may conflict therewith shall be deemed modified to conform to such statutory provision. SECTION NO. 16: ENTIRE AGREEM The PARTIES agree that. this Agreement: is the complete expression of the terms hereto and any oral representations or understandings not incorporated herein are excluded. This Agreement shall supersede all prior resolutions and agreements executed by the PARTIES hereto with regard to Emergency Management, including, but not necessarily limited to Spokane County joint Resolution No. 79 -0873 executed June 25, 1979 and Spokane County joint Resolution No. 96 -0991 unless incorporated and made reference to herein. SECTION NO. 17: MUTUAL AID AGREEMENTS Nothing in this Agreement shall limit the authority, responsibility or duties of any party arising out of any mutual aid agreement or other Agreements with other governmental entities. Page 8 af 15 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the PARTIES have caused this Agreement to be executed on date and ycar opposite their respective signatures. DATED: Attest: CITY OF SPOKANE: By: Its: City Clerk (Title) Approved as to form: By: Assistant City Attorney DATED: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY: Attest: By: Its: City Clerk (Title) Approved as to form only: Acting City Attorney DATED: Attest: City Clerk DATED: Page 9 of 15 CITY OF MEDICAL LAKE: By: Its: lts: (Title) TOWN OF MILLWOOD: Attest: 13y: Town Clerk (Title) DATED: TOWN OF FAIRFIELD: Attest: By: Town Clerk DATED: Its: TOWN OF LATAH: (Title) Attest: I3y: I ts: Town Clerk (Title) DATED: CITY OF LIBERTY LAKE: Attest: 13y: :Its: City Clerk (Title) Approved as to form only: Acting City Attorney DATED: Attest: Town Clerk (Title) Page 10 of 15 TOWN OF ROCKFORD: By: Its: DATED: TOWN OP SPANGLE: Attest: 13y: City Clerk DATED: Attest: City Clerk DATED: Attest: City Clerk DATED: Attest: , Page 11 of 15 Its: Town Clerk (Title) DATED: CITY OF CHENEY: Attest: By: Its: (Title) C.I "1Y OF AIRWAY HEIGHTS: By: Its: CITY OF DEER PARK: 13y: Its: TOWN OF WAVERLY: (Title) (Title) 13y: Its: Town Clerk (Title) DATED: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE, COUNTY, WASHINGTON ATTEST: VICKY M. DAl_TON CLERK OP THE BOARD BY: Daniela Erickson, Deputy I IMgramerdIS E..4 ir-xndcd in: e Loral -all cis 1 C0903.dor Page 12 of 15 JOl-IN ROSKELLEY, Chair PHILLIP D. HARRIS, Vice -Chair M. KATE MCCASLIN Population % with Small 0.1913 Cities Apportioned Equally to Spokane and County 0.4948 0.3139 Total Jan -03 13,619,79 13,619.79 27,239.58 Feb -03 13,619.79 13,619.79 27,239.58 Mar -03 13,619.79 13,619.79 27,239.58 Apr -03 13,619.79 13,619.79 27,239.58 May -03 13,619.79 13,619.79 27,239.58 Jun -03 5,211.81 13,478.41 8,549.36 27,239.58 Jul -03 5,211.81 13,478.41 8,549.36 27,239.58 Aug -03 5,211.81 13,478.41 8,549.36 27,239.58 Sep -03 5,211.81 13,478.41 8,549.36 27,239.58 Oct -03 5,211.81 13,478.41 8,549.36 27,239.58 Nov -03 5,211.81 13,478.41 8,549.36 27,239.58 Dec -03 5,211.81 13,478.41 8,549.36 27,239.58 Total by Entity 36,482.67 162,447.86 127,944.47 326,875.00 Pursuant to Resolution No. 79 -0873 and Resolution No. 96 -0991, which created the Spokane City /County Department of Emergency Management (DEM), the City of Spokane and Spokane County contribute evenly to the budget. With the incorporation of the City of Spokane Valley, this amended Agreement is necessary to readjust the percentages for contribution for the program. Below is the 2003 budget contribution based on population obtained from the Office of Financial Management. Operating Budget Indirect Costs Revenue Total Operating Cost SPOKANE CITY /COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMEN T 2003 BUDGET Per Month Cost ATTACHMENT "A" Spokane County Department of Emergency Management 2003 Operating Costs City of Spokane Valley 336,576 + 24,364 360,940 34,065 326,875 27,240 City of Spokane Unincorporated Count For the first 5 months of 2003 costs were split evenly between the City of Spokane and the County. For the last 7 months of 2003 costs were split based on population % shown above. Population Analysis per City % Population per . City Spokane Valley 82,005 0.1913 Spokane 197,406 0,4608 County 119,844 0.2796 Small Cities 9,1 4.0686 � County Pop 428,600.00 1.00 Population Analysis with Srnall Cities Apportioned Equally to City of Spokane and Unincorporated % Population per City Spokane Valley 82,005 0.1913 Spokane 21,070 0.4948 County 134.520 4.3139 Srnail Cities - - Total County Pop 428,600 1.00 SPOKANE CITY /COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PROPOSED 2004 BUDGET Under this amended Agreement, all cities /towns in Spokane County, the City of Spokane, City of Spokane Valley and the unincorporated areas of Spokane County will contribute to the 2004 budget. Budget year 2004 has not been formally established. Below is a break down by City/Town/County based on the 2003 Budget. Contributions will be adjusted accordingly once the 2004 budget has been approved. DEM Total Operating Budget $336,576 County Wide Indirect Cost $24,364 WA State SLA $34,065 ATTACHMENT "B" Budget $326,875 Spokane County Total Population 428,600 Entity Population Percent Budget Spokane Valley 82,005 0.191332 $62,541.73 City of Spokane 197,400 0.460569 $150,548.59 Unincorporated 119,844 0.279617 $91,399.92 Millwood 1,655 0.003861 $1,262.20 Fairfield 586 0.001367 $446.92 Latah 194 0.000453 $147.96 Liberty Lake 4,640 0.010826 $3,538.73 Rockford 533 0.001244 $406.50 Spangle 275 0.000642 $209.73 Cheney 9,470 0.022095 $7,222.37 Airway Heights 4,590 0.010709 $3,500.60 Deer Park 3,055 0.007128 $2,329.92 Waverly 138 0.000322 $105.25 Medical Lake 4,215 0.068481 $3,214.60 Spoka 000,Ne, ne jvalley Memorandum To: Dave Mercier, City Manager and Members of Council From: Mike Jackson, Parks and Recreation Director CC: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Date: October 29, 2003 Re: City of Spokane Valley Parks and Recreation Program Policy • Continuation of recreation programs • Cost Recovery • Feedback on 2003 programs • Program Policies Current Programs 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall @spokanevaalley.org The Department of Parks and Recreation is seeking input from City Council related to recreation programs. To that end, staff has identified a few key issues which we would like to discuss. As always, we welcome input to the issues or the methodology discussed below. Prior to policy discussions, it should be noted that the Department has requested funding in 2004 for the development of a Parks and Recreation Master Plan. If approved, that plan would provide public input into parks and recreation programming. For example, a survey of the community can be done to evaluate the demand for particular activities and provide an inventory of existing facilities and programs that can meet that demand. Determination of age groups, frequency of participation, and the perceived amount users are willing to pay, are representative of the data that can be obtained from public participation in the master plan process. A master plan will also establish the goals and objectives of the City of Spokane Valley with regard to recreation programs. In essence, many of the issues discussed here, would also be addressed in a master plan. FTaving said that, staff also understands and agrees that there is an immediate. need to communicate with City Council and develop basic program policies to guide development. Therefore, we are seeking input from Council regarding each of the following issues. As a basis for Council consideration, the following is a list of programs that have been offered to date by the Department of Parks and Recreation. Sunnier 2003 Dance - Contracted with Donna's Dance Soccer - Contracted with Skyhawks Tennis - Contracted with USA Tennis Multi- Sports Camp - Contracted with Skyhawks MiniIawks- Contracted with Skyhawks Golf - Contracted with Skyhawks Flag Football- Contracted with Skyhawks Basketball- Contracted with Skyhawks Tennis-Contracted with Skyhawks Day Camp Indoor Playground Outdoor Playground Play Camp Fall 2003 Basic Computer Classes - Contracted with Linda Walston Dance - Contracted with Donna's Dance Tennis Lessons- Contracted with USA Tennis Western Dance- Contracted with Western Dance Association Flag Football- Contracted with Skyhawks Soccer - Contracted with Skyhawks Mighty Hawks- Contracted with Skyhawks MiniHawks - Contracted with Skyhawks Multi- Sports - Contracted with Skyhawks Indoor Playground Adventures in Learning Teen Fun Night/Special Needs Fun Night — Alternating Thursdays Summer Program Costs The Parks and Recreation Department, has compiled a sampling of cost/revenue comparisons of several 2003 summer programs and services. Included in all calculations are Indirect overhead costs. These costs include Department full -time employees and city -wide Indirect Allocation Costs which were provided by the finance department. Summer 2003 Programs & Services- Revenues & Costs thru 8131103 Program Direct Cost Revenue Direct Cost Recovery Indirect Cost Total Direct & Indirect Cost Direct & Indirect Recovery $ (4,803.25) Sky Hawks Soccer $ 1,550.42 $ 1,692.00 $ 141.58 S 4,944.83 $ 6,495.25 Day Camp $ 10,677.13 $ 12,015.00 $ 1,337.87 $ 5,131.43 $ 15,808.56 S (3,793.36) S (11,398.73) Outdoor Playground S 6453.90 $ 0.00 $ (6,453.90) 5 4,944.83 $ 11,398.73 Play Camp 5 5,398.81 $ 1,530.00 $ (3,868.81) 5 3,881.83 $ 9 280.64 S 7 750.64 Open Swim $ 148,571.15 $ 15.784,00 $ (132,787.15) $ 9,855.80 $ 158,426.95 $ (142,642.95) Full Year Services - Revenues & Costs est. thru 12/31103 Program Direct Cost Revenue Direct Cost Recovery Indirect Cost Total Direct & Indirect Cost Direct & Indirect Recovery Park Operations $ 414,281.45 $ 6,000.00 $ (408.281.45) $ 9,842.30 $ 424,123.75 S (418,123.75) $ (98,379.06 Senior Center $ 73,338.62 i $ 9,000.00 I $ (64.338.62) $ 34,040.44 $ 107,379.06 I Indirect costs are distributed over all programs, not recorded or tracked by actual use. With regard to indirect costs, it is important to note that most of these costs are "fixed"; meaning that they will occur whether or not a particular program is offered. For example, the elimination of a specific sununer program would not lessen the salary of the recreation coordinator, nor would it reduce the Indirect Allocation Costs. Also the recreation programs are in a development stage. With so few programs and participants, the Indirect costs are disproportionately large for each program. if and when the number of programs increases, the costs will be distributed over a greater range, lessening the impact on any one program. It should be noted that the number and size of recreation programs could potentially grow several -fold, with no increase in full -time staff and minimal impact on indirect costs. The exceptions to this might be aquatics or children's programs which require professional skills. Most expenditure increases associated with program growth would be in direct costs of seasonal employees, materials and supplies, transportation, etc. These costs typically would be covered by user fees. Current Policy Questions Based on the above data and discussion: 1. Should the Department of Parks and Recreation continue to offer recreation programs? If so how would Council like the Department to address fee recovery? 2. Did the 2003 summer programs meet the general expectations of City Council? if not, are there suggestions for changes or improvements? 3. Does Council wish to See are expansion of program offerings in terms of variety. seasons, number of sessions, and number of participants, or should programs be limited to the summer season and to the same general number of participants? If council desires to offer programs, staff has developed a standardized request process, which we will he happy to discuss with you al: a tater date_ Staff is also recommending that a Parks and Recreation TZevenue Policy be considered. A Revenue. Policy would classify and define recovery rates for various programs and services. If you have questions, or would like additional i oNrrriation, please let me know. S�1 ' 41, jUalley Memorandum To: Dave Mercier, City Manager, and City Council From: Cary P. Driskell, Deputy City Attorney CC: Nina Regor, Deputy City Manager Date: October 30, 2003 Re: Towing Ordinance 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall@spokanevalley.org I am in the process of drafting a towing ordinance. The draft ordinance will contain several key components, including a registration requirement with the City, a requirement that each tow operator that operates in Spokane Valley maintain liability insurance of at least $100,000, and the requirements for getting on the police tow list. • The City of Spokane requires tow operators to get a tow operator's business license each year, for which the yearly charge is $300.00. in discussing the potential of Spokane Valley charging such an annual registration fee, the tow operators I spoke to said they would prefer to not pay such a registration fee, but understand it is a cost of doing business. Charging a registration fee is a policy decision. Staff is not in the habit of recommending that the City charge a fee simply because we think. the public will pay it. Instead, we would only suggest a fee as a way to achieve cost recovery. Here, it is anticipated that the police will be doing occasional safety checks on the vehicles to make sure the tow trucks are not a safety hazard. The time to do these safety checks, and the record keeping that goes along with them, is the basis for charging a registration fee. Please advise whether you want to impose a fee, and if so, in what amount. There are additional requirements for tow operators that wish to get on the police tow list. The primary requirement is that the operator can respond within 30 minutes to a given location, and have a letter of appointment from the Washington State. Patrol. There are a number of other substantive requirements that are provided in the draft ordinance. There were requests by some of the tow operators that the police tow list be limited to only those operators who have their principal place of business in our city limits. The rationale was that the City of Spokane does that, so in essence, we should protect our own as well. I called the City of Spokane City Attorney to find out if that is their practice. 1 was informed that was not the case. Their requirements are essentially identical to what our proposed ordinance would be. Aside from that, I have concerns that restricting the list as proposed by several of the operators could create restraint of trade questions that we do not want to have to answer. Spoka 0250"44%, ne jUalley Memorandum To: Dave Mercier, City Manager, and City Council From: Cary P. Driskell, Deputy City Attorney CC: Date: October 30, 2003 Re: Public Records issues 11707 E Sprague Ave Suite 106 • Spokane Valley WA 99206 509.921.1000 • Fax: 509.921.1008 • cityhall @spokanevalley.org 1 will be providing a PowerPoint presentation to the Council on some public record disclosure and record retention basics. The purpose is to educate the Council on what a "public record" is, and how they can efficiently manage e-mail documents so they are more readily available by search. The presentation should not take more than 10 minutes. A Brief Primer on Public Records "Public record includes any writing containing information relating to the conduct of government or the performance of any governmental or proprietary function prepared, owned, used, or retained by any state or local agency regardless of physical form or characteristics." RCW 42.17.020(36). "'Writing' means handwriting, typewriting, printing, photostatting, photographing, and every other means of recording any form of communi- cation or representation, including, but not limited to, letters, words, pictures, sounds, or symbols, or combination thereof, and all papers, maps, magnetic or paper tapes, photographic films and prints, motion picture, film and video recordings, magnetic or punched cards, discs, drums, diskettes, sound recordings, and other documents including existing data compilations from which information may be obtained or translated." RCW 42.17.020(42). The definition of "public record" is to be liberally construed to promote full access to public records. Oliver v. Harborview Med. Ctr., 94 Wn.2d at 566. Generally speaking, every kind of "public record" will be kept in hard copy format, and would be filed in the appropriate file folder for that topic. o The exception is e -mail. E -mail has replaced in large part, discussions that used to occur in person or on the phone. o Large volume of information in terms of amount and frequency. The touch stone for determining if something is a public record is as follows: "Does the document pertain to any governance issue." Types of messages sent by e -mail that typically are public records: o Policies and directives. Correspondence or memoranda related to official business. D Work schedules and assignments. Agendas and minutes of meetings. o Drafts of documents that are circulated for comment or approval. A document that initiates, authorizes or completes a business transaction. O Final reports or recommendations. g t al Types of messages sent by e -mail that typically have no retention value, and may be destroyed when no longer needed: ri Personal messages and announcements not related to official business. Information -only copies of documents sent for convenience or reference. ri Published reference materials. Copies of inter- or intra- agency memos or bulletins of general information. Announcements of social events, such as retirement parties, holiday, or lunch. Additional suggestions: If the message is sent or received by multiple people, only one copy must be retained (by the person originating the message), along with any response from a recipient. o When you are sending a message, please use title in the "subject" line that clearly identifies the topic. This will help significantly if we need to search for the message later. o Set up a series of folders in your "in box" in Outlook for the various things you will receive. Include a "general public record" folder to act as a miscellaneous folder when you cannot find a matching folder to put an e-mail in. © Please keep in mind that anything you send or receive via e -mail is likely subject to disclosure. Even though a writing may be a public record, there may be legal reasons why it cannot be disclosed. Some broad subject areas include: o The record violates a person's right to privacy. o The record falls within one of the statutory exemptions in RCW 42.17.310. • The record would not be subject to disclosure under litigation discover rules if there is anticipated or on -going litigation. To: Council & Staff From: City Manager Re: Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA For Planning Discussion Purposes Only as of October 31, 2003 8:00 a.m. Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative November 6, 2003 Joint Council Planning Commission Meeting, 6:00 p.ni. Spokane `'alloy City Council Chambers (November 11, 2003 Regular Meeting falls on Veteran's Day) \VcdneSday, Nov 12, 2003 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. [due date Oct 311 1. PUBLIC :N=EARING: Budget 2. Proposed Franchise Ordinance for OneEIGHTY Networks, inc — Second Reading 3. Proposed Property Tax Ordinance Fixing Amounts to be Raised — Second Reading 4. Proposed Ordinance Adopting Commute Trip Reduction Plan for Major Employers - Second Reading 5. Proposed St:ormwater Ordinance — First Reading 6. Proposed Towing Ordinance — First Reading 7. Intergovernmental Agreement with Spokane County for Implementation of Commute trip Reduction Plan • 8. Library Service interlocal Agreement 9. Motion Consideration: Council Sets Final Budget Hearing for November 25, 2003 10. Administrative Reports: [no public comment] a. Police Station Purchase and/or Maintenance and Operation Agreement 11. Information Only: [no public comment] Status of Previous Public Comments /Concerns Minutes of Planning Commission Fire District Annexation Issues [20 minutes] [5 minutes] [10 minutes] [5 minutes] [15 minutes] [15 minutes] [10 minutes] [20 minutes] [5 minutes] [20 minutes] [estimated meeting time: 125 minutes* ] November 18, 2003 Study Session 6:00 p.m. (due date Nov 7] I. Presentation by international Trade Alliance and Conventions Visitor's Bureau (10 minutes) 2. Proposed Library Agreements —Nina Relor (10 minutes) 3. Comprehensive Plan Parks & Open Space Element Discussion — Marina Sukup (20 minutes) 4. Flood Plain Resolution and Ordinance — Marina Sukup (20 minutes) 5. Comprehensive Plan Utilities Element Discussion — Marina Sukup (20 minutes) 6. GM.A Steering Committee Interlocal Agreement — Rich Munson (15 minutes) 7. Right- of -way and Cross Circulation Between Appleway & Sprague Discussion - Neil Kersten (20 minutes) 8. Wastewater issues Discussion —Neil Kersten (20 minutes) 9. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor DeVleming (5 minutes) 10. City Manager Comments — Dave Mercier (10 minutes) TOTAL MINUTES: 150 Max mtg time: 150 minutes Advance Agenda— Draft Page 1 of 3 Revised: 10 -31 -03 'November 25, 2003 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. [due. date Nov 14] 1. PUBLIC BEARING: Adoption of 2004 Budget [20 minutes] 2. Sewer Ordinance — First Reading [15 minutes] 3. Proposed Towing Ordinance — Second Reading [ 10 minutes] 4. Proposed Stormwater Ordinance — Second Reading [5 minutes] 5. Annual Appropriation Ordinance — First Reading [15 minutes] 6. Adoption of Proposed Fee Resolution for 2004 [15 minutes] 7. Administrative Reports: [no public comment] 8. Information Only: [no public comment] Status of Previous Public Continents /Concerns Planning Commission Minutes Department Monthly Reports [estimated meeting time: 80 minutes* ] December 2, 2003 Study Session 6:00 p.m. [due date Nov 21] 1. Wastewater Issues Discussion — Neil Kersten (20 minutes) 2. Adult Entertainment Discussion — Scott Kuhta/Cary Driskell (10 minutes) 3. Street Vacation Ordinance Discussion — Cary Driskell (15 minutes) 4. Office of Professional Standards Presentation — Cal Walker (20 minutes) 5. Comprehensive Plan Facilities Element Discussion — Marina Sukup (20 minutes) 6. STEP Agreement Discussion - Neil Kersten (15 minutes) 7. Council Check in — Dave Mercier (10 minutes) 8. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor DeVleming (5 minutes) 9. City Manager Comments — Dave Mercier (10 minutes) TOTAL MINUTES: 125 Max rntg time: 150 minutes December 9 —13, 2003 National League of Cities (NLC) Congress of Cities, Nashville, Tennessee December 9, 2003 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. 1. Annual Appropriation Ordinance — Second Reading 2. Sewer Ordinance — Second Reading 3. Administrative Reports: [no public comment] 4. Information Only: [no public comment] Status of Previous Public Comments /Concerns Minutes of Planning Commission December 16, 2003 Study Session 6:00 p.m. [due date Dec 5] 1. Wastewater Issues Discussion — Neil Kersten ( 20 minutes) 2. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor DeVlcming (5 minutes) 3. City Manager Comments — Dave Mercier (10 minutes) December 23, 2003 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of Municipal Code 2. Administrative Reports: [no public comment] 3. Infomiation Only: [no public comment] Status of Previous Public Comments /Concerns Planning Commission Minutes Department Monthly Reports [estimated meeting time: minutes* ] [due date Dec 121 TOTAL MINUTES: Max mtg time: 150 minutes [estimated meeting time: minutes* ] Advance Agenda — Oran Page 2 of 3 Revised: 10-3 1 -03 December 30, 2003 Study Session - NO MEETING January 6, 2004. Study Session 6:00 p.m. [due date I)ec 26] 1. Council Check in — Dave Mercier (10 minutes) 2. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor DeVleming (5 minutes) 3. City Manager Comments— Dave Mercier (10 minutes) TOTAL MINUTES: Max mtg time: 150 minutes January 13, 2004 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.rn. [due date Jan 2] 1. Appointments of Council to Standing Committees: Finance, Public Safety, Community Economic Development, Public Works — Dave Mercier [25 minutes] 2. Council Consideration ofHotel/Motel Grant Proposals for 2004 [30 minutes;[ 3. Administrative Reports: [no public comment] 4. Information Only: [no public comment] Status of Previous Public Comments /Concerns Minutes of Planning Commission [estimated meeting time: minutes* ] January 20. 2004, Study Session 6:00 p.m. [due date Jan 9J 1. Council Check in — Dave Mercier (10 minutes) 2. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor DeVleming (5 minutes) 3. City Manager Comments— Dave Mercier (10 minutes) TOTAT, MINUTES: Max mtg time: 150 minutes January 27, 2004 Regular Meetint, 6 :00 p.m. 1. Administrative Reports: [no public comment] 2. Information Only: [no public comment] Status of Previous Public Comments /Concerns Minutes of Planning Commission February 10, 2004 Regular Meeting 6:00 p.m. 1. Administrative Reports: [no public comment] 2. Information Only: [no public comment] Status of Previous Public Comments /Concerns Minutes of Planning Commission [due date Jan 16J (estimated meeting time: minutes* ] February 3, 2004, Study Session 6:00 p.m. [clue date Jan 23J 1. Council Check in — Dave Mercier (10 minutes) 2. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor DeVleming (5 minutes) 3. City Manager Comments— Dave Mercier (10 minutes) TOTAL NLIN'UTES: Max mtg time: 150 minutes [* estimated meeting time does not include time for public comments] [due date Jan 301 [estimated meeting time: minutes* ] February 17, 2004, Study Session 6:00 p.rn. [due date Feb 6] 1. Council Check in — Dave Mercier (10 minutes) 2. Advance Agenda Additions — Mayor DeVleming (5 minutes) 3. City Manager Comments — Dave Mercier (10 minutes) TOTAL MINUTES: Max mtg time: 1 50 minutes Advance Agenda — Draft Page 3 of 3 Revised: 10-31-03 S4�1t ■ Ualley AGENDA joint Spokane Valley City Council Planning Commission Meeting Thursday, November 6, 2003 City Council Chambers 6:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. 6:00 Welcome & SWOT Process Overview 6:10 First Discussion Topic - Strengths 6:30 Table Reports on Strength Discussion 6:40 Second Discussion Topic - Weaknesses 7:00 Table Reports on Weaknesses Discussion 7:10 Third Discussion Topic - Opportunities (short & long term) 7:30 Table Reports on Opportunities Discussion 7:40 Fourth Discussion Topic - Threats 8:00 Table Reports on Threats Discussion 8:10 Group Vote 8:15 Discussion Adjourn a. Explanation of SWOT analysis b. Description of process. c. Emphasis on expressing ideas in the positive (i.e. "not the City of Spokane" is not a strength) d. Explanation of what we will do with results of the SWOT exercise. e. Next Steps - How will the information be used? - What is the expected timing? 5min ; Individual roundtable discussion beginning with Strengths. Individuals at each table will write down own top three Strengths on pre - printed forms. Table recorder writes down each individual's top three Strengths on 5 -10 min flip chart paper. 10 min Spokesperson summarizes table results for entire group - 1 to 2 _ _ �minute_s. Alternate spokespersons for each category. 1 hr 15 min Repeat process for Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats 5 min 10 -15 min At the end of evening, entire group votes with colored dots. Individuals place three dots for each SWOT category. Strengths = Blue Weaknesses = Yellow Opportunities = Green Threats = Red Introduction - 5 min General Process Discussion Questions 1. Any surprise items on the list? 2. Any surprises of what didn't make the list? s� ~ Walley AGENDA Joint Spokane Valley City Council Planning Commission Meeting Thursday, November 6; 2003 City Council Chambers 6:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. 5 min Welcome & SWOT Process Overview 25 min First Discussion Topic - Strengths 10 min Table Reports on Strength Discussion 25 min Second Discussion Topic - Weaknesses 10 min Table Reports on Weaknesses Discussion 10 min Break 25 min Third Discussion Topic - Opportunities (short & long term) 10 min Table Reports on Opportunities Discussion 25 min Fourth Discussion Topic - Threats 10 min Table Reports on Threats Discussion 15 min Ranking /Voting 10 min Wrap LAST NAME FIRST NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP H -PHONE W -PHONE Beaulac p7 .Fred 3824 5. Sundown Drive filbe msn.com Spokane Valley WA 99206 928 -7266 927 -8357 Blum � 2obert �/ 12722 E. 15th Avenue blum2004Aicehouse.net Spokane Valley WA 99216 926 -7740 926 -7740 Carroll John 1. 1207 5. Rotchford carmax1 Spokane Valley WA 99037 927 -9735 924 -7574 Crosby / David 2607 N. Bowdish Road dave(camericandreamhomes.com Spokane Valley WA 99206 921 -1010 879 -3363 Gothmann (Chair) v ,/ iliiam 10010 E. 48th Avenue billgiothOatt.net Spokane Volley WA 99206 928 -1703 N/A Kogle tz Gail 12518 E. 24th Avenue gailk a(�giin Spokane Valley WA 99216 921 -1258 444 -2394 Robertson (Vice Chair) Ian i/ 1716 5. Rotchford p astorianc aol.com Spokane Valley WA 99037 922 -9964 926 -1545 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY 2003 PLANNING COMMISSION 5/23/03: DA