Loading...
2008, 03-25 Regular Meeting MinutesAttendance: Rich Munson, Mayor Dick Denenny, Deputy Mayor Rose Dempsey, Councilmember Bill Gothmann, Councilmember Gary Schimmels, Councilmember Steve Taylor, Councilmember Diana Wilhite, Councilmember MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meeting Tuesday, March 25, 2008 Mayor Munson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., and welcomed everyone to the 134th meeting. City Staff: Dave Mercier, City Manager Mike Jackson, Deputy City Manager Cary Driskell, Deputy City Attorney Ken Thompson, Finance Director Kathy McClung, Community Development Dir. Rick VanLeuven, Police Chief Mike Stone, Parks & Rec Director Neil Kersten, Public Works Director Greg McCormick, Planning Manager John Hohman, Senior Engineer Gloria Mantz, Stormwater Engineer Karen Kendall, Assistant Planner Carolbelle Branch, PIO Matt Kenna, PIO Intern Greg Bingaman, IT Specialist; Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk INVOCATION: Pastor Bill Dropko of Greenacres Christian Fellowship Church gave the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Deputy Mayor Denenny led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called roll; all Councilmembers were present. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: It was moved by Councilmember Wilhite, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the Amended Agenda as submitted. INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: n/a COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS: Councilmember Wilhite: reported that she attended the Miss Spokane Valley coronation sponsored by the Chamber; met with the City's Finance Committee; attended the Library Board Meeting, and the County's State of the County's address by Commissioner Chair Bonnie Mager. Councilmember Gothmann: said that he attended the Housing and Community Development Advisory Committee meeting and as a result of appeals, the committee allocated an additional $50,000 that wasn't used in the previous year; he attended a Chamber breakfast with emphasis on the youth; the Miss Spokane Valley coronation; and he expressed congratulations to Councilmember Wilhite for her reward from the National Business Women's Association. Councilmember Dempsey: no report Deputy Mayor Denenny: explained that he attended the Spokane Transit Authority (STA) Board meeting; and in behalf of the Mayor and Council, attended Kohl's and Lowe's grand openings. Councilmember Taylor: said that he attended the Spokane Clean Air Agency (formerly SCAPA) board meeting; attended the National League of Cities conference with Mayor Munson and Councilmember Wilhite; and met with members of the Board of County Commissioners last week regarding Turtle Creek Joint Planning. Council Regular Meeting: 03 -25 -08 Page 1 of 5 Approved by Council: 04 -08 -08 Councilmember Schimmels: reported that he attended the Spokane Regional Transportation Commission's daylong retreat; and the Solid Waste meeting a few weeks ago. At Mayor Munson's request, Public Information Officer (PIO) Branch introduced PIO intern Matt Kenna, whom Council then greeted and welcomed. MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor Munson reported that he presented the State of City Report to the Rotary and Kiwanis Clubs; met with the City Finance Committee; attended the Washington State University Advisory Council today where WSU President discussed plans for the campus; attended the State of the County Address; and the Miss Spokane Valley coronation. Mayor Munson then read the "Our Kids Our Business" proclamation, which was accepted with thanks by Mary Ann Murphy. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Munson invited public comments. No comments were offered. 1. CONSENT AGENDA: Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. A Councilmember may remove an item from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. a. Approval of Payroll for pay Period ending March 5, 2008: $284,470.31 b. Approval of Payroll for Pay Period ending March 15, 2008: $205.727.90 c. Approval of Minutes of February 19, 2008 Special Joint Council Planning Commission Meeting d. Approval of Minutes of February 26, 2008 Regular Council Meeting e. Approval of Minutes of March 4, 2008 Council Study Session Meeting f. Approval of Resolution 08 -004 Setting Planning Commission Street Vacation Public Hearing It was moved by Councilmember Taylor, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. NEW BUSINESS: 2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 08 -003 Amending Sunshine Franchise — Cary Driskell After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Denenny and seconded to suspend the rules and adopt Ordinance 08 -003. Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained that this change is a housekeeping change, as the effective date of the notification of termination letter to Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (WUTC) is March 10, 2008, and this ordinance change will have the effective date of this ordinance coincide with that March 10, 2008 date. Mayor Munson invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion passed. 3. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 08 -004 Amending Waste Management Franchise — Cary Driskell After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Denenny and seconded to suspend the rules and adopt Ordinance 08 -004. Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained that this ordinance is the same as the Sunshine Franchise ordinance, and that Sunshine handles commercial waste, where as Waste Management handles residential and commercial. Mayor Munson invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion passed. 4. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 08 -005 Stormwater Ordinance — John Hohman /Gloria Mantz After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Councilmember Taylor and seconded to advance ordinance 08 -005 to a second reading. Engineer Hohman explained the background of the stormwater ordinance as noted in his March 25, 2008 Request for Council Action form; and said that by adopting this, we will remove any conflicting elements within the existing Uniform Development Code (UDC) that are now covered within that stormwater manual; and added that Section 2 of the ordinance modifies the definitions within the UDC. Engineer Mantz also mentioned that this matter was heard by the Planning Commission which members indicated they feel the items in this section are now Council Regular Meeting: 03 -25 -08 Page 2 of 5 Approved by Council: 04 -08 -08 better defined. Mayor Munson invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion passed. 5. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 08 -006 Amending Interim Ordinance 07 -025 — Greg McCormick After City Clerk Bainbridge read the Ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Denenny and seconded to advance Ordinance 08 -006 to a second reading. Mayor Munson invited public comment; no comments were offered. Planning Manager McCormick explained that this ordinance amends Ordinance 07 -015, which adopted the Uniform Development Code (except title 24); and references Ordinance 07- 025, which was an interim ordinance enacted to address amendments to Title 19 of the UDC, which ordinance expires May 7, 2008. Regarding Council questions about how other cities address ADUs (accessory dwelling units), Mr. McCormick had a chart showing eight cities (including Spokane Valley), and of the number of ADUs allowed per single family residential unit; the dwelling unit maximum and minimum size, lot size, lot coverage, etc. and said that the Planning Commission's recommendations fall within the range of what other communities have enacted. This prompted further Council discussion on the intent of the ADU, the proposed number of allowed bedrooms, and a suggestion from Councilmember Wilhite to have the size set as a percentage of the primary residence rather than a specified amount of square feet. It was moved by Councilmember Wilhite and seconded to amend the motion to insert the words "50% of the primary resident footprint." Vote to amend the motion: In Favor: Mayor Munson and Councilmembers Wilhite, Dempsey, and Schimmels. Opposed: Deputy Mayor Denenny and Councilmembers Gothmann and Taylor. Abstentions: None. Motion passed. Mayor Munson invited public comment; no comments were offered. Councilmember Schimmels mentioned the need to be aware of sewer needs /capacity; and Councilmember Gothmann asked if each building needs a separate sewer connection, adding that he is aware that there are some areas not yet sewered. Vote by acclamation on the amended motion: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion passed. 6. Motion Consideration: Panhandling Ad Hoc Committee — Mike Jackson It was moved by Councilmember Taylor and seconded to establish a panhandling ad hoc committee. Deputy City Manager Jackson explained that per previous council discussion, Council desired to form a Panhandling Ad Hoc Committee consisting of a total of seven members, two of which would be Councilmembers Gothmann and Dempsey, and a Ian Robertson as a representative of the faith -based community, leaving openings for four other members; that the purpose of the committee would be to investigate matters related to panhandling and advise Council on those findings; and to identify other programs throughout the County that address this issue, research what other cities are doing, explore the potential of cooperation in applying programs, then determine what program to implement in order to help people understand the choices they have to assist panhandlers; and that the sunset provision would not exceed the term of the appointing Mayor. Councilmember Gothmann suggested adding that the Committee should consider whether the City should have an ordinance. Mayor Munson invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion passed. PUBLIC COMMENTS Mayor Munson invited general public comments; no comments were offered. No comments Mayor Munson called for a recess at 6:50 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 7. Street Utility — Spokane Councilmember Al French Spokane City Councilman Al French explained that this proposal is as a result of over a year's work with businesses and neighborhoods to develop the mechanism to provide a permanent funding solution for streets. Mr. French went through his PowerPoint presentation explaining the composition of the Council Regular Meeting: 03 -25 -08 Page 3 of 5 Approved by Council: 04 -08 -08 committee, and how they researched the policies of various west coast states, examining various taxes until they settled on this tax, which was copied from the city of Tualatin, Oregon, which City has had their ordinance in place for about 20 years, and which has generated well - maintained streets and a population which is proud of that accomplishment. Mr. French explained the customer requirements which were as a result of a public outreach survey, and public meetings in all parts of the city where staff and the public discussed the issue and where it was obvious that citizens want customer satisfaction and an equitable system, and one which does not access property tax. In explaining the various PowerPoint slides, Mr. French discussed the proposal's objectives, how the fee can be determined (adding that the percentages can vary depending on what the local jurisdiction agrees to), existing street department expenses, relative cost comparison of general obligation bonds, gas tax, and the street utility; and the legal and legislative challenges including the key benefits to this proposal which are to solve the thirty -year street repair dilemma and restore the streets to their proper condition through an equitable, predictable program. Discussion included mention of that committee working with the Business Association and of such options as omitting the B &O tax in lieu of this tax; making the legislation eligible for border communities; how to address drive - through businesses such as restaurants and banks; various classes of trips such as destination trips, passerby trips, and casual trips; senior rates; and Mr. French mentioned that he has a prepared copy of their street utility notebook which he can make available (and which Mr. Mercier said he would like a copy of); mention that the road problem not being addressed only continues to get worse and the funding backlogged; the requirement in the plan of having a citizens oversight committee; and of the estimated number of employees (two or three) required or desired to manage the entire program. Mr. French said he would like to take this to the Legislature in 2009 with the possibility of putting this before the voters for approval in August of that year to have it in place by the end of the year in order to start collecting funds the beginning of the following year. Mr. French also mentioned that from his contact with members of the public, the majority are willing to spend $10.00 a year for well - maintained smooth roads, which is less then the cost of a hamburger, and far less than repairing dented rims and re- alignments; and that this would be a permanent funding solution which takes into consideration inflation. Council thanked Mr. French for his time on this issue. S. Legislative Issues Dave Mercier amended agenda — removed this item. 9. Finance Committee Funding Options Report — Mayor Munson At the Mayor's request, City Manager Mercier explained that the "snapshot forecast" of the general fund includes the current number of employees and programs and presents estimates for six years hence to give us an idea if our current efforts remain affordable; that we remain balanced through 2012, but our first deficit appears in the year 2013. Mr. Mercier highlighted the differences between the "A" and `B" versions of the Multiyear Financial Plan General Fund Problem Statement #1, and the incorporating of the business plan elements that increases the projected deficit in 2013; and that even though the figures could be adjusted, the trend remains the same, that of a structural imbalance in the general fund, which is related to basic maintenance expenditures. Mr. Mercier also mentioned that these figures can be further affected based on various situations in future years such as economic recession and /or harsh future winters. At Mayor Munson's request, Public Works Director Kersten explained that in examining the draft street fund budget with an estimated $2.5 million revenue gap, other reductions would have to take place to accommodate that gap, including limiting services such as traffic counts, reducing some staff, reducing summer street work such as pothole and median repair, reducing sidewalk repair, or more. Mayor Munson mentioned that the Finance Committee has been engaged in discussion of possible solutions to avoid major maintenance problems, but has not addressed the impending $4.5 million pavement management shortfall, and he asked for Council consensus to ask staff to research what it Council Regular Meeting: 03 -25 -08 Page 4 of 5 Approved by Council: 04 -08 -08 would entail to initiate a Transportation Benefit District (TBD) in order to provide funds to get us through the difficult years, and then perhaps the utility fund mentioned by Mr. French might be available. Mayor Munson mentioned that this would include our city working with the City of Spokane and Spokane County to form a regional TBD, but in the meantime, we would move ahead to form our own; that the concept of the TBD is to charge on a per - vehicle basis. Councilmember Wilhite added that this past winter was especially hard on our streets and we need a dedicated source of revenue to maintain and preserve our roads; and she also mentioned the need to have discussions with members of the community on how important they feel it is to keep our roads in good condition. Councilmember Taylor agreed the current street maintenance system is not functioning as it should and we continue to subsidize the lack of funds through the general fund, a type of "robbing Peter to pay Paul" scenario; that we should support Mr. French's plan through the legislative avenue, but in the meantime to further defer any maintenance on our streets is not cost effective; and that a figure needs to be determined for a car tab and the issue placed on the November ballot. Councilmember Schimmels also agreed to move ahead in that regard. Deputy Mayor Denenny said that he struggles with this issue of initiating a car tab as the mental picture of such in this community is not good and he feels the issue will get voted down, forcing Council to simply come back with something else later; and said another approach needs to be determined which will be more equitable and more palatable to the pubic. Councilmember Dempsey said she has questions about some of the budget items such as operating supplies; and agreed that the public won't accept a car tab; but stated she is excited about the possibility of a street utility fund as a way to handle this; and added that she is not sure the TBD is the preferred method. Councilmember Gothmann said that when he was involved with the interim roads committee when the city was forming, one of the primary objectives was not to let the roads get out of shape; and that we are now faced with the choices of letting our streets deteriorate by curtailing road repair, or go to the voters now with the only mechanism the legislature has provided; and by putting this issue off, we will spend $8.00 later for every $1.00 spent now. Councilmember Gothmann also mentioned that he would request staff to include a senior's benefit in staff's analysis, perhaps based on the same formula as the exclusion for property tax; and added that he feels there is no other choice at this time then to place this matter on an upcoming ballot. There was Council consensus that staff perform the needed research to initiate a TBD; and Mayor Munson said that Council also stands ready to develop a regional plan with the County and the City of Spokane on parallel courses. INFORMATION ONLY: The Transportation Improvement Plan 2008 Amendment Memo, 2008 Sewer Paveback Program, Figure Skating for Year 2010, and various departmental reports were for information only and were not reported or discussed. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Denenny, seconded and unanimous agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:35 p.m. ATTEST: • • hristine Bainbridge, ity Clerk amended agenda — removed this item. ji� and Munson, Mayor Council Regular Meeting: 03 -25 -08 Page 5 of 5 Approved by Council: 04 -08 -08 City Density (# of ADU's allowed per sfr Vancouver 1 Walla Walla 1 Kennewick 1 Kirkland 1 Richland 1 Spokane Spokane Valley 1 Wenatchee 1 Minimum Dwelling Unit Size (sq. ft.) Maximum 300 40% of GFA or 800 sq. ft. whichever is less 220 33% of GFA or 800 sq. ft. whichever is less None None Attached: 40% of the primary None residence and ADU combined 5,000 Detached: 800 sq. 11. 40 % of dwelling unit's total 300 floor area or 800 sq. ft. 4,000 whichever is less Attached: 250 300 Attached: 50% of primary residence footprint or 800 sq. ft. whichever is less Detached: 600 50% of primary residence or 800 sq. ft. whichever is less Minimum Lot Size (sq. ft) 5,000 6,000 5,000 6,000 40% of the habitable floor area 6,000 + None of primary residence or 800 1,500 for sq. ft. whichever is less ADU Lot Coverage 35 -45% No lot coverage maximums. Structure must meet setbacks 50% Main dwelling unit must meet setbacks Lot coverage of the detached ADU may not be greater than that of the primary structure 30 -55% total coverage; 10% of lot area for all accessory structures 45% Parking (additional spaces required) 1 1 1 1 Sfr means single family residential 2 The gross floor area (gfa) of the primary structure does not include the garage or detached accessory buildings. 3 The size of the ADU may be increased if it is located on a single floor and there is no increase in the size of the house. For Agenda Item #5 Owner Occupancy Required Y Detached and attached ADU Y allowed. Y Comments ADU is allowed within, attached to, or detached from primary structure A property may not have an ADU and a home occupation Attached ADU only. ADU's only allowed within residence in residential zones; detached ADU's allowed in commercial zones. Detached ADU must be combined with garage, or be the only detached structure in the rear yard. Attached and detached ADU's allowed. Home occupations allowed only in principal structure. Attached or detached ADU Y allowed; 3 /s/‘ief • • Street nci entid Jab Vary:3;2008 2008 -2009 2010 - EStiinater Estimate 'Estimate 2011 tidiate Eitimate. . Street Fand :Beginning Fund - 2817;060 1979000 1 • • • $ 4;000 $ (2;395,00o) :$ (5,195;000) Divvied. Roaela5c $ 2;000: - - Interest Income $ 130,000 !$ 100,0Q0 . $ .1:60 $ Tr'46§ fq'froriliggi.iocaiAti • Motor fUel'6a Mite. $ .2)00000 $ 2,150 '2,150:000 .$- 2,150;606' $ 2,200;000' $ 6,049,000' $ 4,229,000 $ .2;155,000 $ (245,000)' $ (2;995,000) Expenditures • $ 4,070,006 $ • 4;225,000 '$ 4:5 , $ 4950,000; • $. 5,463;000 2013 • • • EStiniate !$ ..(8;395,000) $. , 2 200 ocro $. - :(0,195000) $ .5,800,000 Ending Fund. Balance . .$ 1979,000 $ 4;00O LE.,322Ert $ (5,195 -$: .(8;3•95;000) $ (11,995,000) Salaries & Wages $178,882.59 $280,886.00 $204,886 Eliminate Assistant Traffic Engr. & .4 Sr. Engr. Employee Benefits 359,006.31 $92,906.00 $70,906 Operating Supplies $493.82 $5,000.00 $2,562 51.2% reduction Gas, Oil & Tires $8,106.06 $6,400.00 $3,280 51.2% reduction Small Tools & Minor Equipment 316,640.30 $50,000.00 $25,624 51.2% reduction Engr. & Architectural Services $352,735.62 $420,000.00 332,000 Eliminate County Contract, Traffic Counts, Update of Master Plan and Planning & Grants Professional Services $250,000.00 $0 Eliminate Traffic Impact Fee Study Telephone Services $1,647.84 $1,200.00 $615 51.2% reduction Cell Phones $987.66 $1,740.00 $692 52.5% reduction Waste Disposal $869.26 $0.00 $0 Workstation Costs $0.00 31,419.00 $727 51.2% reduction Travel & Mileage $1,473.96 321,036.07 57,000.00 $0.00 $3,587 $0 51.2% reduction Repair & Maintenance Supplies Private Street Maintenance $1,487,364.37 $1,220,179.00 $200,000 Eliminate Poe and Pro Care Contract • Street Maintenance - County $1,555,698.58 $1,014,466.00 5982,000 Eliminate crack sealing. Eliminate Snow & Ice removal on all streets except Principal Arterials (Priority 1) WSDOT Maintenance $216,744.02 $371,000.00 $250,000 Budget for low snow year (Trent & SR -27) Street Lighting $339,351.86 $367,000.00 $267,000 Tum off 1/2 the street fights Water & Sprinkler $17,895.91 $26,500.00 $13,581 51.2% reduction IT Support $200.00 $2,180.00 $1,117 51.2% reduction Training 33,149.00 $0.00 $0 Memberships 3277.00 33,000.00 $1,537 51.2% reduction Registrations $440.00 $540.00 $277 51.2% reduction Traffic Control Improvement 325,649.58 $0.00 $0 Vehicle $40,000 Purchase 1 -Ton Truck Office & Furniture Equipment $25,609.25 $0.00 SO IF Transfer-G.F - O.H. $25,000.00 $0.00 $0 Interfund Transfer - SRTC Memb $34,300.00 $35,000.00 $35,000 Transfer to General Fund $0.00 $25,000.00 100% reduction Transfer to Trails & $0.00 $5,000.00 $8,200 Vehicle Replacement $0.00, $8,888.00 - 100% reduction DRAFT STREET FUND BUDGET BASED ON $2.15 MILLION REVENUE CAP ACCOUNT CATEGORIES 2007 ACTUAL 2008 APPROVED EXPENDITURES BUDGET 2008 Budget Based on $2 34,373,561.06 • • 34,195,304.00 $2,143,791. Recommended Budget $4,525,304.00 $2,150,000 budget represents a 51.2% reduction in services Impact of Budget Reduction Note 1: This is a theoretical budget and may not be able to be implemented do 10 contracting issues with the County and other providers. Note 2: There may be legal and /or risk obligations that may make some reductions in this budget infeasible. Note 3: Per the 2007 Street Master Plan on page ES -7, 51 of preservation will cost 38 to 310 if delayed. The majority of the Poe contract and crack sealing aro preservation work. That $1.4 million reduction could result in $11.2 to $14 million per year in future repair needs. Note 4: The reduction in Engineering Services will severely effect our ability to do the annual TIP and to submit grant applications. 3/17/2008 ACTIVITY CODE ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION 2008 ACTIVITY esnmal0 eases on 2008 CITY /COUNTY Total Strait Budget Recommended Budget, of 32,150,000 2007 Actuals r_ -r`l.•=+' i. RoadIMaintenance :Activlties1`. +_Z.;:iiieii. 2312 Dust Control Prcp City Drywe8 Cleenoul Cily 53,428.00 2320 Shoulder Repair Gily Culvert Repair City 89,778.00 2322 Shoulder Maintenance Grader City Culvert Clenrnoul Clly 535,882.00 2330 Gravel/Dirt Road Grading City Swale Maintenance City 513,705.00 2340 Pothole Petehing• City Curb, Gutter 8 inlet Repair City 54,100.00 2340W lAinlet Pothole Patch County 524,296.73 50.00 813,780.00 2342 Chip Sealing County Purrs Repair 5981,647.73 51,493.00 2.343 Pavement Removal 8 Replace* City Disposal • 5212.00 2344 Crack Sealing County 8145,780.36 50.00 595,687.00 2345 Chip Sealing Prep & Cleanup County 58,650.00 2346 Blade Patch Mot City 54,396.00 ' 2348 Fog Sent 2351 Gravel /Dire Road Tempo City S1.960.00 2413 bight Ditch Cleaning City 2511 Bridge tnspeclion Bridge Repair - Superstructure City City 2512 2513 Bridge Repair - Substructure City 2610 Sidewalk City 5164.00 2611 Curbs City 2620 Paths 'City 2645 Guardrail Maintenance City 5255.00 2646 RAN Fencing City 2647 Median Maintenance City 5793.00 2061 Liquid Deicing ' Counly 5182,225.45 554,667.63 5373,936.00 2002 Sanding County 8279,412.35 583,823.71 5221,737.00 2663 - Snow Removal-Roadway County 5267,263.99 ,560,179.20 510,926.00 2664 Snow Removal - Sidewalks County 56,074.18 51,122.25 2670 Street Penning* City • 2671 Winter Sweeping City 2673 Sweepings Clean -up City 2711 Roadside Mowing City 2712 Brush Clearing/Tree Trimming County 542,519.27 $0.00 58,302.00 2713 Wccd Control -Res City 2713A Weed Control -Res (no spray) City 2714 Weed Control-Gen City 2714A Weed Control -Gen (no spray) City 2720 Irrigation City . 2750 Ulcer Pickup City 5739.00 27500 Utter Pickup Deer City 5289.00 2753 Utter Control City 2760 Contour Control City 2762. Contour Control-RNV City 9751 Investigation County 511,449.48 512,136.45 Emergency Ca8out County 528,090.00 829,775.40 Subtotal Road Maintenance 5987,111.81 5262,404.65 5755,751.00 .-...2•: 5: 4�= :I .,.ValleyStormwa ter 1Menagemen .`:V. ; .i., :t3;Iti:A:= :i=- ir.. i l,4TA: :::+ Traifir.Malntenancc; Activities'( n` -, .:_: x.,•1:�.w;�. tut: +.:: "7«i i)<r!f 9710 Orywell Repair City County 582,656.51 S645.00 9720 Drywe8 Cleenoul Cily County 5267,263.99 5283,299.83 5108,825,51 9730 Culvert Repair City 5102,665.58 2644 TMS, Crosswalks a Mesgs 9740 Culvert Clenrnoul Clly 535,882.00 2649 Weight Restriction Signing 9742 Swale Maintenance City 1 2053 Striping -Pre & Clean • 9747 Curb, Gutter 8 inlet Repair City 54,100.00 2654 Legend Truck - Prep & Cleanup 9750 Chasing Water Courtly 55,494.16 55,823.81 51,866.00 County Purrs Repair 5981,647.73 51,493.00 2844 Road Maintenance Legends _ County Disposal • _ 5778.00 4201 Sign Vandalism County Stormwater Maintenance Total 55,494.16 55,823.81 52,514.00 S:;;;1;42:7 Traifir.Malntenancc; Activities'( n` -, .:_: x.,•1:�.w;�. tut: +.:: "7«i i)<r!f 2641 TMS, Sign Maintenance County 582,656.51 587,615.90 555,504.00 2642 2643 TMS, Signal Maintenance County 5267,263.99 5283,299.83 5108,825,51 8260.184.00 565,037.00 TMS, Striping County 5102,665.58 2644 TMS, Crosswalks a Mesgs County 830,827.12 541,155,75 535,882.00 2649 Weight Restriction Signing County 51,786.52 81,893.72 562,248.40 2053 Striping -Pre & Clean • Coun 5505.51 5631.24 54,100.00 2654 Legend Truck - Prep & Cleanup County 5353.00 2843 Road Maintenance Striping County 51,843,137.49 5981,647.73 51,493.00 2844 Road Maintenance Legends _ County _ 5778.00 4201 Sign Vandalism County 530,326.00 42021Accidenl Repair- Signs County 58,650.00 4203 Accidont Repair- Signals _ County 54,396.00 Traffic Maintenance Total 5493,795.23 $523,422.95 5486,701.00 2606 Approved Multi -year County Contract Multi -year Budget and Transition Plan t` =1 "'Summa' r afRoad`andTrafftc'lAeintcnancc 1'•79'' " °�"t'• Exhibit 2 2008 Restricted Budget Submittal 2008 Approved Budget 51,401,466.00 51,014,466.00 Road Maintenance Tacks 5087,111.81 5262,404.65 5755,751.00 Stormwater Maintenance Tasks S5,494.16 55,823.81 $2,514.00 Traffic Maintenance Tasks S493,795.23 3523,422.85 5486,703.00 Management Overhead cii 19% 5282,416.23 5150,413,77 5236,543.92 Administrative Overhead @ 5% 574,320.06 539,592.57 562,248.40 Contingency CI1y.Maintonancefinspectors" -•, t Total 51,843,137.49 5981,647.73 81,543,760.32 2606 Approved Multi -year County Contract Multi -year Budget and Transition Plan t` =1 "'Summa' r afRoad`andTrafftc'lAeintcnancc 1'•79'' " °�"t'• Exhibit 2 2008 Restricted Budget Submittal 2008 Approved Budget 51,401,466.00 51,014,466.00 City of Spokane Street Funding Committee Last Updated on 3/25/2008 Citizens Street Fund Committee Gerald A. Anderson Balboa Council Chuck Kearney Balboa Council Sid Bankey Balboa Council Rod Minarik City of Spokane. Neighborhood Services Bob Beaumier City of Spokane, Legal Dave Nakagawara City of Spokane. Engineering Services Roger Flint City of Spokane, Public Works & Utilities Larry Neil City of Spokane, Streets Al French City Council Member Clay Schueman North Indian Trail Council Collette Greenwood City of Spokane, Management & Budget Mike Taylor Taylor Engineering Dallas Hawkins All City Traffic Committee Bob Turner City of Spokane, Engineering Services Kathie Hawkins All City Traffic/Trans Committee City Staff Members: Dick Raymond. Dick Cook, Lars Hendron, Chrissie Deibel, Marshall Thompson, and Brenda Robidoux. Customer Requirements y ,1 - . dd..W A 4Customer Satisfaction 4Be Equitable .Sustained Funding Restore Trust 4Get the Job Done Best Practices . JNon- "Raidable" .Comprehensive Program • • • • • ■■ Use vs. Property Ownership 7► Utility Charge vs. Periodic Bonds l im• Street Money goes to Streets t o• Closer Review of Performance 7 Oversight Committee 7 Dedicated Funding l imm• Adds Scheduled Reconstruction Objectives • Get streets repaired and restored • Devise reliable funding mechanism • Equitable assessment • Comprehensive Solution Operations Maintenance Scheduled Reconstruction • Sustained and predictable revenues How Fee is Determined Base Fee Based on Access to the Street system. The benefit of police /fire rescue, deliveries, garbage pick up, and other services is of value to all users Trip Fee Based on ITE trip generation tables for a variety of uses. Bigger trip generators pay bigger fees. Base Fee + Trip Fee Utility Charge Street Utility Fee Allocation by Percentage Light lnriit•trt: +I I:�'t.lr'1rs.�i Sample ITE Trip Generation Values ak = 5 trips ptr d :y IN)) .tigFt Building = PIT.- mit alOated for'Paarr !ry Rat" (� r Nttirc k- St t 1 ,,,: n .t ell _ 0 0 • Street Utility Fee Allocation by Percentage Others 74% Trip Fee Residential 26% Residential % 55% ' In aggregate, Residential pays 36% Non - Residential pays 64% Base Fee Others 45% , . Eapense 1 Do Hu Aiii oun „ Street Maintenance $5,024,564 General Services Design & Operations Signal & Lighting Signs & Markers P arking Enforcement Street Lighting Street Cleaning Bridge Maintenance Ice & Snow Control $15,621,401 TOTAL $20,645,965 Existing Street Department Expenses •Additional $8.0 Million needed: 7.0 Million in Capital Maintenance and 1.0 Million for additional employees for Street Maintenance Street Department Revenue Shift Current Sources Unfunded Improvements City General Fund MVFT First Quarter REET Street Cleaning - Storm Water Arterial Street Parking Meter Fund Misc Service & Revenue Street Department Reserves TOTAL 9,152,273 3,200,000 3,400,000 523,367 1,300,000 300,000 1,587,128 1,183,197 20,645.965 r Trip Fees ' Base Fees " MVFT First Quarter REET Street Cleaning - Storm Water Parking Meter Fund Misc Service & Revenue Stay in Capital Program Artenal Street Fund "' "Street Maintenance, Design & Operations, Signal & Lighting, Bridge Maintenance, Street Repair Backlog '"* General Services, Signs & Markings, Parking Enforcement, Street Lighting, Street Cleaning, Ice & Snow "a Arterial Street Fund was used to cover operating expenses. It may revert back to Capital Programs in the future. 22,199, 877 9,435, 593 3,200,000 3,400,000 523,367 300,000 1, 587,128 TOTAL 40,645,965 _f P,i,lilll New Street Utility Budget ional on Added vl oney apital B acklog Addit 4 imm $8.0 Milli 4..■ New r for C Repair ] 111111ifilliNIVIM. - Illim°411 Street Maintenance $13,024,564 Street Repair Backlog $12,000,000 General Services Design & Operations Signal & Lighting Signs & Markers P arking Enforcement Street Lighting Street Cleaning Bridge Maintenance Ice & Snow Control $15,621,401 TOTAL $40,645,965 New Street Utility Budget ional on Added vl oney apital B acklog New Street Utility Revenues Existing Revenue Sources (Trip): • Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax • First Quarter REET New Revenue Sources • New Trip Fee: Existing Revenue Sources (Base): • First Quarter REET • Clean Water Funds • Service & Revenue • Parking Meter Fund Allocation Base Sub - Total: New Revenue Sources • New Base Fee: trip Sub - Total: Trip Total: Base Total: $3,200,000 $1,020,000 $4,220,000 $22,199,877 $26,419,877 $2,380,000 $523,367 $1,587,128 $300,000 $4,790,495 $9,435,593 $14,226,088 iiniii General Obligation Bond Gas Tax Street Utili 20 Year Program Amounts $600 M Backlog $400 M Backlog $400 M Backlog Average Monthly Cost to Citizen ($30.65) Total Cost (per $100,000 assessed property value) ($31.16) (avg monthly per vehicle *) ($10.35) (Single Family Home) Total Backlog Payout $1,050 M $400 M $400 M Other Issues -Assumes borrowing at 6% •Issuing debt for all $600M up front •Straight line amount for 20 years -Fixed rate loses money to inflation •County -wide tax requirement •Requires tax at 10 times the allowable rate • "Raidable" •Legislative enhancements required -Reduction of Utility Tax by roughly one half current rate Relative Cost Comparison *1995-2000: Highway Statistics (Washington, DC: Annual issues), table VM -1. Legal and Legislative Challenges • Codification/ Statutory Model • Flat fee limits • Use of ITE data • Health and Safety • Rate reduction • Grievance process • Segregated fiends • No exemptions for government • Avoid adverse legal History • Incorporate specificity in purpose Key Benefits • Solve 30 year street repair dilemma • Restore the streets to proper condition • Create an equitable program • Provide predictable, sustained revenue • Fund a comprehensive approach • Provide for best practices • Provide for accountability Next Steps • Council elects to pursue Street Utility • Lobby legislature • Lead broad based coalition of cities for enactment and legal defense fund. • Form Spokane Street Utility