2008, 04-08 Regular Meeting MinutesMayor Munson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m., and welcomed everyone to the 135th meeting.
Attendance:
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, April 8, 2008
City Staff:
Dave Mercier, City Manager
Mike Jackson, Deputy City Manager
Mike Connelly, City Attorney
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
Steve Worley, Senior Engineer
Christina Janssen, Assistant Planner
Carolbelle Branch, PIO
Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk
INVOCATION: Pastor Manuel Denning of Fountain Ministries gave the invocation.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Munson led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called roll; all Councilmembers were present.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Mayor Munson announced that agenda item #7 would be removed from
the agenda. It was moved by Councilmember Wilhite, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the
amended agenda.
INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: With Mayor Munson's
concurrence, Councilmember Taylor read the "Air Quality Awareness Week" proclamation, which was
received with gratitude by Tom Brattebo, member of the Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency Advisory
Council.
COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS:
Councilmember Schimmels: mentioned he attended the Solid Waste meeting yesterday where they
discussed initiation of a performance and financial audit; and attended a fundraiser for SCRAPS a few
weeks ago.
Councilmember Wilhite: reported that she attended the City Staff development forum for those interested
in the changes implemented in our development process; attended the Spokane Valley Business Fair, and
the Mayor's Ball.
Councilmember Taylor: said that he attended the Chamber's Board of Director's Meeting where they
heard a presentation from the County regarding the upcoming communications initiative; attended the
Solid Waste Advisory Meeting, which is a "sister" committee of the Solid Waste Liaison Board; and
attended the Spokane Clean Air Agency Board meeting this week along with the City Staff Development
Forum.
Councilmember Gothmann: No report.
Council Regular Meeting:04 -08 -08 Page 1 of 7
Approved by Council: 04 -22 -08
Deputy Mayor Denenny: explained he attended the Regional Health Board meeting where they mentioned
they are working with the organization which they originally hired for the search opportunities, and that
they have expanded the job definitions; that he was asked by Spokane Councilmember Al French to
participate in the Council Connection, which was focused on transit issues; and that he also attended the
Mayor's Ball.
Councilmember Dempsey: No report.
MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor Munson reported that he gave the State of the City Report to a local
Rotary Club; attended the Washington State University Advisory Council meeting; met with the Board of
County Commissioners regarding the transportation situation and mentioned the idea of a "big tent"
planning meeting to address transportation needs in the region; attended the Firefighter's Ball; the City's
Finance Committee meeting; and gave the State of the City Address for the Valley Sunrise Club. Mayor
Munson also mentioned that he hosted the cake cutting and party for the City's Fifth Birthday
Celebration; and met with the President of the Spokane City Council where they discussed possible issues
for a joint meeting with our Council. Mayor Munson invited one of the Boy Scouts in the audience to
introduce himself, which he did and mentioned that he is attending the meeting as part of a citizenship
merit badge. Councilmember Taylor also mentioned that he attended the business section of the Board of
County Commissioner's meeting where they approved the Turtlecreek Joint Planning Agreement and he
extended his appreciation to them for approval of that agreement.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Munson invited public comments.
Mel Jones, 1404 N Hodges Road: said he works in various food activities and is a professionally trained
chef and urban farmer; and he has concerns about our livestock ordinance; and that he wants to find out
the history of that ordinance and the process for making changes to the ordinance. Mayor Munson said
that staff will contact him to answer those questions.
Troy Dilley, 2400 N Wilbur Road: said he is annoyed with the panhandlers and that he heard we were
forming a committee and he would be willing to be on the committee; that this has become a problem
with aggressive panhandlers holding signs up to car passenger windows. Mayor Munson said that staff
will send him an application form so that he may be considered for inclusion on this committee.
1. PUBLIC HEARING: Ballot Issue: Continuation of Existing Sales /Use Tax for Public Transportation
Services.
Mayor Munson opened the public hearing at 6:18 p.m. and explained the procedure for conducting the
hearing; that a presenter for and a presenter against the proposition would each be given a maximum of
ten minutes to speak; after which he would open the floor for other public comments. Mayor Munson
invited a speaker to come to the podium who is in opposition to the proposed ballot issue; and no one
came forward to speak against the proposition. Mayor Munson then asked for a speaker to speak in favor
of the proposition.
Andrew Rolwes, 9610 N Wickiup Court, Spokane, 99208: said that he speaks on behalf of people for the
Transit Campaign Committee; and said that he seeks endorsement of the ballot issue; that this is not a
new tax but a continuation of what is currently in existence; and that this ballot measure would make the
6 /10 of 1% permanent as it does not include a sunset clause; he spoke of the increased ridership, and
mentioned that he believes STA is an effective steward of the public resources, and if this measure fails to
pass, it could result in a 50% reduction in their current services as these funds are a significant part of
their infrastructure.
After brief comments from Councilmember Gothmann and Mr. Rolwes concerning this measure not
having a sunset clause, there were no other comments and Mayor Munson closed the public hearing at
6:32 p.m.
Council Regular Meeting:04 -08 -08 Page 2 of 7
Approved by Council: 04 -22 -08
2. PUBLIC HEARING: Ballot Issue: 1 /10 of 1% Sales Tax for Emergency Communications Systems
and Facilities, including Equipment, Crime Check and Reverse Emergency Notification System.
Mayor Munson opened the public hearing at 6:32 p.m. and explained the procedure for conducting the
hearing as being the same as was conducted for the previous hearing; that a presenter for and a presenter
against the proposition would each be given a maximum of ten minutes to speak; after which he would
open the floor for other public comments. Mayor Munson invited a speaker to come to the podium who
is in opposition to the proposed ballot issue.
John Roskelley, 16614 Foothill Road: in speaking in opposition of the issue, he explained that this matter
was just turned down in November, and stated that our sales tax increases are a financial challenge to our
most vulnerable citizens, as every time anyone goes to the store, they would be paying for this; he said
that he supports Crime Check and always has, but taxpayers are being asked to have their sales and
property taxes fund too many projects. He further explained that this is about those people working for
minimum wage, single moms, retirees, young families, seniors, and the majority of taxpayers in the
region; he said we must hold elected officials accountable for budgeting and not always allow them to
draw from the well for taxes, fees, or subsidies. Mr. Roskelley stated that this ballot title includes a ten -
year sunset clause; and that the estimated revenue for those ten years is $88 million; that the
communication and facilities elements discussed this at a $45 million cost, and people are surprised to
hear the actual revenue differences. He suggested Crime Check not be a sales tax but be paid through the
general fund; and said that the overall cumulative affect is a continuing growing number of taxes. He
quoted former Commissioner Phil Harris who said we "don't have a revenue problem, we have a
spending problem." Mr. Roskelley stated that the "fear factor" keeps getting thrown to the voters, that no
one will come to the door in case of burglary or fire if this initiative fails; that 3 /10 of 1% criminal
justice public safety taxes are currently being assessed, as well as a 1 /10 of 1% mental health tax.
Pending or potential ballot actions, he said, include an all -county jail bond issue for $100 million in
November; wastewater treatment plant bond issue for $160 million in 2009; child abuse and neglect levy;
and future fire district, school and library levies and bond issues. Mr. Roskelley said there are only three
other counties with a higher sales tax than Spokane County, and he encouraged us not to join that list.
Mayor Munson invited remarks from the proponent for the issue.
Mark Richard, 3914 Woodruff: Commissioner Richard said that they seek to provide emergency
communications necessary for all facets of the emergency entities to communicate with one other, to
implement reverse 911, and to cover any potential shortfalls in 911; that law enforcement and the fire
departments are having difficulties communicating with each other and people are at risk if we do
nothing; he stressed the infrastructure is essential and said that the FCC requires significant upgrades by
the year 2012 and if we do nothing, the systems will fail. He stressed that this is about data and about
service to this community. Mr. Richard explained the concept of reverse 911, and added that diminishing
phone taxes have been seen as a result of an increased number of cell phones replacing "land lines." Mr.
Richard stressed that they do not have $80 + million to solve all components of this plan, and said that
once imposed, this sales tax cannot be used for anything other than emergency communications, which
stipulation was an oversight in the last ballot measure, as well this plan calls for a ten year sunset clause
which was also absent in the last measure. He asked for support of this important measure and of the
importance of sending the message to citizens of the measure's importance.
Question and answers included Mr. Mercier asking Mr. Richard about some of the questions outlined in
the March 25, 2008 letter to Mr. Mercier from the County Commissioners, in particular question #7
concerning a "life -cycle cost information." Mr. Mielke said that they had anticipated the system would
have an initial cost of $41 million, have a life cycle of fifteen years, and would require $28 million to
replace that. Mr. Mielke then gave some of the highlights of the accompanying spreadsheet, particularly
page two showing the radio system replacement expenses. Mr. Richard added that they had not yet made
an official decision in terms of the background language in the Voter's Guide or on -line, but sees no
Council Regular Meeting:04 -08 -08 Page 3 of 7
Approved by Council: 04 -22 -08
problem in disclosing that financial information to the community. Mr. Mielke added that there are not
enough funds to pay for everything in its entirety; that first is to upgrade the equipment, second is where
Crime Check comes in to relieve the load on the 911 operations, and of third priority is the importance of
reverse 911; that moving beyond those three priorities depends on final engineering of those three and
whether there are funds to cover more.
Mr. Richard said that the Advisory Committee will be the 911 Communications Board; that the
information will be provided to voters and to the board via an annual report which will include
information showing that funds are spent as authorized; and that the committee will also not be engaging
in technical advice. Mention of 911 prompted further discussion on whether Crime Check is an
emergency function, or as part of the shortfall that is to be shared through this or through additional relief
through state legislature. Mr. Richard stated that they went to jurisdictions so see if those jurisdictions
could fund crime check, and heard how constituents are frustrated with the inability to deal with crimes;
he said that crime check is overloading the 911 system so it is very directly linked; and said that local
communities feel it is important but don't have it in their budgets to assist in funding. Mr. Mielke
explained some of the frustrations of citizens calling the 911 line and hearing a recording asking the caller
to hold. There was further discussion among presenters and Council concerning peak calling; having a
constant crime check (24 hours a day, seven days a week), contracting out to a call center or other options
such as grants or use of resources such as SCOPE, and of the need for specifically trained operators.
Concerning question #8 of the March 25, 2008 letter, Mr. Mielke said they are waiting for final
engineering; which lead to questions about a bond issue. Mr. Mielke responded that bonds are
traditionally ten to twenty years, but no decisions has been finalized concerning use of this or other
financial instruments. Mayor Munson asked about other municipalities' lack of funding, i.e., if one
participate withdraws due to lack of funds, and since the base figures assume continued participation,
what would occur should a participate withdraw. Mr. Mielke said he did not have data on current
funding.
Mayor Munson invited Mr. Roskelley to give further opponent comment. Mr. Roskelley said he feels the
procedure should have been more controlled to give a more equitable time for each side's viewpoints.
Mayor Munson invited further public comment.
Troy Dilley, 2400 N. Wilbur Road: said that the current sales tax is 8.6 sales tax; that we have the highest
sales tax other than perhaps California; he feels this is not a good idea; and said even if criminals get
caught, the system just lets them out again anyway; said he called Crime Check once and it took three
hours to get the police to their house; he said that the public safety building downtown is overcrowded,
and asked how much more we will have to pay.
John Pring, Jr. S 2915 Dishman —Mica, 99206: stated that he is in favor of this system, and said that it
would be very sad if public safety officials could not talk to each other.
Todd Mielke, W 1116 Broadway: said that they have examined revenue streams but necessary funds are
nonexistent; and that the County previously invested in the Fairground renovations with a twenty -year
bond, which is something one cannot ignore; that the legislature said this funding mechanism cannot be
used for anything else other then what is stated; and he understands that property tax assed values have
gone up while rates have gone down.
John Tyson, 611 N. Sargent Road: said that he urges Council not to support this issue; that he'd never
vote for crime check and feels we should be contracting some of this; that he called Crime Check once
and the operator wasn't helpful at all and only wanted to take a report.
Dick Behm, representing Spokane Valley Business Association: Mr. Behm read a short letter of
endorsement of the SVBA, and thanked Chuck Hafner for his support on this, and also thanked the
Council Regular Meeting:04 -08 -08 Page 4 of 7
Approved by Council: 04 -22 -08
VOUCHER LIST DATE
VOUCHER #s
TOTAL VOUCHER AMOUNT
02/12/2008
13858
17,000.00
02/22/2008
Beginning w/ #13851, ending w/ #13926
599,409.24
03/03/2008
Beginning w/ #13671, ending w/ #13982
433,502.72
03/10/2008
Beginning w/ #13990, ending w/ #14023
110,958.80
03/24/2008
Beginning w/ #14024, ending w/ #14117
2,018,431.76
GRAND TOTAL
3,179,302.52
advisory committee on this; and said that perhaps Mr. Roskelley should have joined that committee
instead of just opposing this as it sounds as if he had some solutions to the problem.
John Roskelley: Mr. Roskelley thanked Council for holding this hearing and mentioned that none of the
other jurisdictions have done so; and said he appreciated the opportunity to come to speak.
Mayor Munson invited further public comments; no further comments were offered and Mayor Munson
closed the public hearing at 7:37 p.m..
3. 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 Minutes of March 18, 2008 Executive Session Special Meeting
b. Approval of Minutes of March 18, 2008 Council Study Session Meeting
c. Approval of Minutes of March 25, 2008 Regular Council Meeting
d. Approval of Minutes of April 1, 2008 Council Study Session Meeting
e. Approval of Memorandum of Understanding 2008 Sewer Paveback
f. Approval of Standstill Agreement
g. Approval of following claim vouchers:
Councilmember Wilhite asked that item "e" be removed from the Consent Agenda to be discussed
separately. It was then moved by Councilmember Taylor, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve
the consent agenda as modified.
e. Approval of Memorandum of Understanding 2008 Sewer Paveback - Neil Kersten /Steve Worley
Mr. Mercier mentioned that staff requested this item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be
discussed separately, as the RCA was missing the appropriate motion, and that Council now has that
corrected Request for Council Action form. It was moved by Councilmember Wilhite and seconded to
approve the 2008 sewer construction Memorandum of Understanding with Spokane County, and
authorize the City Manager to execute the same. Mr. Kersten said that this is the annual agreement we
have with Spokane County to cover paveback; that we budgeted $900,000, with $200,000 for minor
drainage improvement costs, and stated that we received a CDBG (Community Development Block
Grant) of $195,410, which will offset some of these costs. Mayor Munson invited public comment; no
comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions:
None. Motion carried.
Mayor Munson called for a short recess at 7:41 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 7:51 p.m.
NEW BUSINESS:
4. Second 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 adopt Ordinance 08 -005. Engineer Hohman explained that this is the second reading of the
ordinance amending the stormwater management regulations of Title 22 of the UDC; and that there have
been no changes since the first reading. Mayor Munson invited public comment; no comments were
offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion
carried.
Council Regular Meeting:04 -08 -08 Page 5 of 7
Approved by Council: 04 -22 -08
5. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 08 -006 Amending Interim Ordinance 07 -025 — Greg McCormick
After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Councilmember Taylor and
seconded to adopt Ordinance 08 -006. Planning Manager McCormick explained the change under
19.40.100, 3aii as per previous Council meeting discussion, changing the maximum size of the ADU to
50% rather than square feet; and that there were no other changes since the first reading. Attorney
Connelly suggested also changing section one to include amending Chapter 22 as well as Chapter 19.
Council discussion followed concerning the best verbiage to use on 19.40.100 3aii to ensure the intent is
clearly stated. It was moved by Councilmember Taylor and seconded to amend the motion to include
changing section one to include "Chapter 22, " and have section 3aii read as follows: "The ADU may not
exceed fifty percent (50 %) of the total habitable footprint and fifty percent (50 %) of the habitable square
footage of the principal dwelling unit, nor be less than three hundred (300 square feet." Vote by
Acclamation to amend the motion: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion
carried. Mayor Munson invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation on
the amended motion (to approve Ordinance 08 -006 as amended): In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed:
None. Abstentions: None. Motion carried.
6. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 08 -007 Amending Uniform Development Code Loading Doors —
Christina Janssen
After City Clerk Bainbridge read the ordinance title, it was moved by Councilmember Taylor and
seconded to advance ordinance 08 -007 to a second reading. Ms. Janssen briefed council on the proposal,
and of the requests which prompted this proposed amendment, and added that both project requests are
still in the approval process at this time. Mayor Munson invited public comment; no comments were
offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion
carried.
7. Motion Consideration: Letter of Intent Mike Connelly removed from agenda
8. Motion Consideration: Barker Road Bridge Utility Agreements — Steve Worley
It was moved by Councilmember Taylor and seconded to authorize the City Manager or his designee to
finalize and execute the individual Barker Road Bridge Utility Agreements with Avista Utilities,
Consolidated Irrigation District #19, Spokane County Utilities, and Qwest Communications. Engineer
Worley explained that as mentioned last week, these agreements are a result of bridge replacement
projects whereby these companies reimburse us for the work done by the contractors; adding that some of
these agreements will need refined language as Qwest [i.e. their telegraph predecessor] said they pre-
dated statehood and don't have a franchise agreement for these kinds of situations, but will work with us
to determine how to pay for their utility relocation. Mayor Munson invited public comment; no comments
were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Abstentions: None. Motion
carried.
PUBLIC COMMENTS Mayor Munson invited general public comments; no comments were offered.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS:
9. Transportation Benefit District Formation Update — Cary Driskell
Deputy City Attorney Driskell explained that legislation was enacted January of this year providing
government entities the ability to form a TBD, and previous Council discussion included this as a possible
means to impose a vehicle tab fee to raise additional revenue to cover road infrastructure improvements
and maintenance; he reminded Council that the ordinance is merely a draft to aid Council as they continue
discussion of this topic. Attorney Driskell also mentioned that the amount of the annual vehicle fee is left
open, and he added a sunset provision as noted in section 3.85.050; however, to make ease administration
of the termination of this provision, it would be terminated at the end of a calendar year rather than within
ninety days of the City's enactment of a street utility, as stated in the draft language.
Council Regular Meeting:04 -08 -08 Page 6 of 7
Approved by Council: 04 -22 -08
• •
Mayor Munson suggested changing the verbiage of "enactment of a street utility" to a more suitable
alternative, one which would not tie the City to the strict street utility tool; and Deputy Mayor Denenny
suggested the words "or other funding mechanism," as he wants to be sure the public will understand the
City will not double tax if this TBD is approved. Attorney Connelly mentioned that we cannot have an
automatic repealer based on general language, and that staff will research that in more detail.
Councilmember Taylor questioned whether a TBD should be used for maintenance or for new capital
projects; and said that he is uncertain he wants to include language to automatically repeal this as perhaps
the TBD dollars could be shifted into capital projects, or there could be other uses of TBD funds. Other
discussion included mention of asking the County to form a TBD and then asking for a vote of the people
if Council prefers funds be used for regional needs; us asking that the issue be placed on an upcoming
ballot, explaining the $2.5 million shortfall in road preservation and maintenance; that this ordinance and
procedure is an "untested product" and of the need to be certain we are in complete compliance; mention
of vehicles that would be exempt from this fee; whether section 3.85.050 should include a termination
after six years or after ten years; that a provision be included to address low income population; and
whether Council is ready to move forward to a first reading or prefers further in -depth discussion. It was
determined not to proceed on this tonight, but to bring this back at the next Council meeting for further
discussion.
10. Limited Term Maintenance Construction Inspector — Mike Jackson
Deputy City Manager Jackson explained that as the City moves forward with the Barker Bridge project,
such project will require a full -time construction inspector for eighteen to twenty -four months; and rather
than contract with a private company, staff suggests hiring a limited term employee, and that adding an
FTE requires council approval; that the person would be full time but limited in duration and would be
afforded all benefits of a normal full -time employee, and that the savings in hiring this person is an
estimated $160,000 to $220,000. Councilmember Wilhite asked about unemployment benefits when the
tern ends, and Mr. Jackson replied there is that potential. There was Council consensus to bring this item
forward next week for a motion to authorize the creation of a limited term FTE.
INFORMATION ONLY: The Barker Road Bridge DNR Easement Draft Agreement was for
information only and was not reported or discussed.
EXECUTIVE SESSION: Land Acquisition/Pending Litigation. There was no need for an executive
session.
It was moved by Councilmember Taylor, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting
adjourned at 8:57 p.m.
IL I
r
Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk
Council Regular Meeting:04 -08 -08
Approved by Council: 04 -22 -08
4//70
AVii
/�,1c.�r r :A
•
and Munson, Mayor
Page 7 of 7
N NAME
PLEASE PRINT
ADDRESS
TELEPHONE
j et," A'
ct.1
tr --1
s vq,i Dial rf Pr/ 14c1A-
( ?),6.34 - Co
vpe
L A , NA 740
f?Jo A/ 14'..k-
y77- . 2.243-
90/ - 7c-4u
ParLip L.
evoi
0tiP
! CA -
el .5 �
- 1
.�
J
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APRIL 8, 2008
PUBLIC HEARING SIGN -IN SHEET
SUBJECT: BALLOT ISSUE: EMERGENCY
COMMUNICATIONS
IF YO 1 WO 11.D I,(KF TO 4P A aL
• r I 1
PRINT NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. There may be a time limit for your comments.
Any documents for Council consideration should be provided to the City Clerk for distribution.
NAME
PLEASE PRINT
ADDRESS
TELEPHONE
diem' wei
ILA t , S., r i ,
► (5002 - 2
l i Al/7
cgyurN iUioAar
` 15 3 -s' /-
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APRIL 8, 2008
,PUBLIC HEARING SIGN -IN SHEET
SUBJECT: BALLOT ISSUE: PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
O
1 1 '
e sign below.
PRINT NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. There may be a time limit for your comments.
Any documents for Council consideration should be provided to the City Clerk for distribution.
GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT
SIGN —IN SHEET
SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DATE: APRIL 8, 2008
GENERAL CITIZEN COMMENTS
Y M
YOUR SPEAIONG TIME WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES
Sign in if you wish to make public comments.
NAME
PLEASE PRINT
TOPIC OF CONCERN YOU
WILL SPEAK ABOUT
ADDRESS
TELEPHONE
2d°/0 -DA
City of Spokane Valley
City Council
Mayor Munson
City Council Members
The Spokane Valley Business Association has endorsed the efforts to
bring about the upgrade of communications equipment and the return
of "CRIME CHECK" for the citizens of Spokane Valley. We encourage
all citizens to vote for this very worthy effort. The need for cross
communications and "CRIME CHECK" are immense and the SVBA
Board endorses this ballot issue
R. Terry Lynch
President SVBA
f A d 6c ?(0.-=„Lept?,
Chris Bainbridge
From: Steve Taylor
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2008 1 38 PM
To: Richard Munson, Bill Gothmann, Branch, Carolbelle, Cary Driskell, Chris Bainbndge; Dave
Mercer, Dempsey, Rose, Diana Wilhite, Dick Denenny; Gary Schimmels. Mike Connelly, Mike
Jackson, Passmore Sue; Richard Munson, Steve Taylor
Subject: RE Communications Ballot Issue
A good common sense reply.
Original Message
From: Richard Munson
Sent: Thu 4/3/2008 10:16 AM
To: Bill Gothmann; Branch, Carolbelle; Cary Driskell; Chris Bainbridge; Dave Mercier;
Dempsey, Rose; Diana Wilhite; Dick Denenny; Gary Schimmels; Mike Connelly; Mike Jackson;
Passmore Sue; Richard Munson; Steve Taylor
Subject: FW: Communications Ballot Issue
FYI
RICH
Richard M. Munson
Mayor
City of Spokane Valley
509 - 688 -0034
From: John Tyson (mailto:bonner838568yahoo.coml
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 5:47 PM
To: Richard Munson
Subject: Communications Ballot Issue
Dear Mayor Munson.
First off, the Valley web site is certainly nicely laid out.
1
Before I wrote you I did check minutes to see if a decision has been made ont he question
of resubmitting the communications bond issue to the voters. To the best of my reading
one has not.
I encourage the city to NOT support the funding for the communications initiative and here
is why:
'1) The questions .i reconstituting "crime check" and the communications purchases shouldi
be separate. I am an "old" veteran of government at all levels (I work for the welfare
administration on Trent near Argonne) and know that taxing authorities like to combine
issues, hoping that the "yes" votes will prevail since everyone will, in their hopes, have
a piece of the legislation that they want to see passed and thus are willing to accept the
other parts of the package. That is dishonest and truthfully the two Issues are
different.
2) I wrote county councilman Richard saying that I MIGHT support the capital
improvements, especially if money is set aside as a DEDICATED reserve to offset future
purchases. I did not receive a satisfactory answer to that. In other words, like the
roads fiasco in Spokane a few years ago, if it is an obligation of an authority to protect
us effectively from fire and violence (and I think it is) then we ought to plan for future
necessary purchases and not hold the public hostage to sell future bond issues.
3) In no case do I support crime check and here is why:
A) As I wrote to the councilman we have a plethora of private sector call centers
here. I know that, kicking and screaming, the NEXT contract the county has with its
employees could exclude the crime check function (I know they can't do it under the
current contract) and that work could be farmed to a call center that would love it as a
buffer and do the work at possibly half price (we don't create jobs to provide "family
wage" we create them to provide services).
B) I frankly think the whole design of crime check is to please the 9 -1 -1
dispatchers who don't like handling those "nuisance" calls. We do not structure services
to the preferences of employees; we structure them to efficiently and effectively serve
the paying public.
C) I think the only service crime check provides is to give the caller a report
number s /he can use for insurance claims. I once called crime check and nearly got my
Insurance increased. Want to know how? My car had been broken in to and no damage was
done but I wanted some information about what I might be concerned about in terms of
things like missing registration documents. Not only would he not give me any information
(referring me to a number at which I would have had to leave a message and I did not do
that) but had he taken a report (which I refused) my insurance company would have raised
my rates seeing a "history" at my residence. So, no useful service and nearly cost me
money.
Please decline this ballot measure. Suggest to the county that it be presented again (if
at all) as a separate capital bond for the communications equipment AND a separate crime
check question, including language that the work will be contracted out and performance
measurements (including customer satisfaction) will be in place.
Thank you, sir.
BTW, interesting the squabble over land lot sizes. I live on one of the oversized lots on
Sargent Road (611 North) and the way I see it is that just because the city says I CAN
build two more houses on my property does not mean I HAVE to do that. To each his own.
2
•
John M. Tyson
611 N Sargent Road
bonner82856eyahoo.com
926 -4331
You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access
chttp: / /us.rd.yahoo.com /evt= 4 7 523 /•http: /tc.deals. yahoo .com /tc /blockbuster /text5.com, , No
Cost.
Mir
SPOKANE COUNTY
Crime Check /Communcatio;
Systems and Facilities Tax
Disclaimer
!At the messenger.
1 support restoring Crime Check and upgrading
our regional communications system and /Avner
have-
Ili taxpayer .. we are being asked to turd too
many txatects that can and should be paid kw
with the present sales tames and continually
Increasing property tax revenues.
4/8/2008
n414 ,2os/lP/ /�__
Who Benefits /Who Loses
This issue isn't about us
This i- about those people males for nunnnunt we:
it's about retires on fated Inmates: It's about single
mote with three children to teed; it about young
families. This is about the majority m Winne.
We have to hold ow elected offkials accourrtabll
for budgeting at if it's their own money.
Ballot T
Proposition No. 1
Caddo* d M Petard Shah. ore llla' las
ION a dirowev eae,r.igarw Warm n+► :am. a toddle wAwa
Odd 046 ale Issee firgswv ■lamw Salm
• The bets of County C nvnissioraers of Spntsne GttttttY
a keited Resolution No. r . c onaernhtg a propedisorh
to maane i • sales and use tax. The propitiation scud
impose an additional one of one meant sales one
use to throughout Spokane County tot r ID y'
the proceeds the from to be used safely tar oasts
associated with the des acquisition. construction.
nq� opu>sattng, llti remodeling, masking,
her fro.emei * end financing of emergency
ctonsilunication systems end fealties to in du
, irate fUne Check and the Rewr.e Ern,
tevenur /Expense Summary
:.+. fn �w.rs atMlra .. i
Ommor lr�tt�m»
Dogs clad
hhahr OItf�lwtC�la
Cnma Opt
beta bqpnfts
OltsDar t anew
rpbwiaar Coo.
wvriN.1
S h 7 Ovarserg r,.■••.. +a-�e1ra
'!after trim. Owe
Ll!!1 Qldata oat /rwo Lit
Sas m
waft
?A Irt
70.
Li
.a T
The Story
• 5ltttee Colter said Peden resources to
gayer the 545 minors tau of the equipment _is essential
t4 pto�idirr public %At a SR maid, tit not
O Ortdats ware to WUd a new dogleg couseuelpsOons
'vitas% that taould cost S11 $� Nam Not
(punting equipment assigned IS Wielded silMoen. SR
August IS, 2007
County /Cities Reserve Funds
• • rearm p.eneret' b Valuers Cawsq ceded 2007 rrth emir
tutee uparsall booms at Mystical M me se sales to
!roman peed by seenirj dean bsdptr0.•
• s skis In led $.LS nabs to on Mom.
fund ri!1arryh ,* Mail .
• ended 1007 .qh more dam Ss mikes ahem
kreura
e l presri
• Since 1001, the Niters.
ended 2002 math SS 7 swam mat ewes
haw Ma a
conibi rd Mn + se of M elm* taiactkama
et property tss and sales is sierra. tifa epee deal net ewer
wi mac et cans ere semen as Ubem L.
A ~Mt of one- pester* titles tam tor ° YLdthc Solely" was
on btsslery 1. 3'15 for %crim s.i Jwskr sew
seOelypNpoaee
TM boatel Wear toes brow *1 s intoi . but was Intended
1D 'spindle the eettriteessrasrsinaum Wm to a nem
regional **ern.
Aaortllti b Cormmnls:Ya l Weise. N'' present* being terd
to TaddSN pints that sleet ewe
the a =thi noon of the itsbhe Safety tap. NTT funds. and
general fund manwt
Where: The plan to pay for thew. espees '.s atter ten year: ?
4/8/2008
z
— — OM __
s = _
S•• .
e l OMMD MM.
— _ Y *ONO SNP
— _ -- •ice masa _
— _mos r — OS • sa
— _ — •eMe — .a OM ••• GN I
— _ — ~Me — .See * r —
S e .1MM MD SEIM OD Wee. MB NOME OM
MO — — — r se
am — r Y om saws um — —
• — v. ••■ .. — um ewers •.
• _ .. r . _ — .S -
mmo ammo ammg ammo ms was.
— r am MOM — — r — a — s
0111 own. ft. memo am UM, am amma oat ammo le
— oat. Y IS — •wo• •o Ua— so .as 71
The problem is net with each indevtdwt tar They
have a purtyose ht's the accumulative impact of a
cnntinualiy trowne cumber of taxes and fees
A tai ts a tam by any aver name. whetter! A's a lee: an
- assessment', a "bond Kure', a "levy', or `wbudy'. the
bottom-Wee rs it increases the burden on the nepter.
'W+e don't have a revenue ptoti erh,' saki
Cammtsvaner PfW Harris 'We have a spendinf
problem" SR Aprf 29, Z.
4/8 /2(X)8
4
A Never Ending Story
pr the t•uvIt
• litre* I/IO" of IX criminal Justice/public safety toes
toeing assessed already - Cominii lo 1 . hrrenie/3aa
laic and Pubik Safety tar.
• A If10 of 1X Mental earth taw
• increased enmeshed value of wvp llY (i e. >30% over tour
+mil
• M 2000► Spataae County Cunwnissionen increased
ts'Oprrtr sawn by SS • around d times the late of
Idhatlon SA N1711M tat'c, 200f>
for 130Q Milan are Na.wmr, MOIL Sul aawwti
_ - r. r• •, tar USD aialvi on Ms
UN, Ow bait
•
• -- and fate Mart
C.Lv nM `.octane and Stmla+e tourAv
, 9fwaret animisttarewrs tat
tzappae iiac•M *auto have to tell buy** brad' 1I Apt 4, ?flI,
•
art. rem wrclea b fhe $0011efnan
OreAar Oldnler ttuan.M i n orr..e'rt at trir. arcctafln
• M manattn{ pe'asuw t•M attncn no ar•a• • hrrtr aan'hr•
Use / c Strhamh in orwbin Malt lewd et woke.
•: Moving Beyond the Rhetoric
'communication incompatibility mean people de: said
Spokane Council Molded nee ' i - 'Right now we
have agencies that meet talk b lsch other.'
'This baiicall/tames down to public safety - yous alts
as a chlsrn and the safety of firefighters and Saw
enforcement of /wt,' aid
4/8/2008
•: f Ing. Its prioritiz.
are other options rather than anc
regressive sales tax.
• for instance, there are sales tames currently on the
books; REST; potential financial agreements with
stage. federal and local user groups; a possible
leaisiati ely authorized phone tax for Crime Check.
Our elected officials need to control their budgets
line item by line item and make the tough decisions.
not continually ask the citizens to swell their
budgets Hold them accountable for their buelget
decisions
______ •_ • am xrMwr r aims r ro.fte ••••
`omeImart 1. Yaw
ate• yr••'•• 111..••••
RN •
There are only three other counties with
higher sales tax than our county and cities:
King, Pierce and Snohomish. Let's not Join
t++rit exclusive club.
4/8/2008
6