2014, 03-18 Study SessionAGENDA
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHEET
STUDY SESSION
Tuesday, March 18, 2014 6:00 p.m.
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
11707 East Sprague Avenue, First Floor
(Please Silence Your Cell Phones During the Meeting)
DISCUSSION LEADER SUBJECT /ACTIVITY GOAL
ROLL CALL:
1. Deputy Fire Chief Hail Community Preparedness Discussion /Information
2. Steve Worley Spokane Regional Transportation Discussion /Information
Council (SRTC) Call for Projects
3. Mike Jackson, Morgan Resource Allocation for Law Discussion /Information
Koudelka Enforcement
4. Cary Driskell Public Records Act Training Discussion /Information
5. Mayor Grafos Advance Agenda Discussion /Information
6. Information Only: (will not be reported or discussed):
a. Ecology /Stormwater Grant Information
b. School Beacons
c. Response to Public Comment: Left -turn Medians
d. Response to Public Comment: Gender Identity
7. Mayor Grafos Council Comments Discussion /Information
8. Mike Jackson City Manager Comments Discussion /Information
ADJOURN
Note: Unless otherwise noted above, there will be no public comments at Council Study Sessions. However, Council always reserves the
right to request information from the public and staff as appropriate. During meetings held by the City of Spokane Valley Council, the
Council reserves the right to take "action" on any item listed or subsequently added to the agenda. The term "action" means to deliberate,
discuss, review, consider, evaluate, or make a collective positive or negative decision.
NOTICE: Individuals planning to attend the meeting who require special assistance to accommodate physical, hearing, or other impairments, please contact the City
Clerk at (509) 921 -1000 as soon as possible so that arrangements may be made.
Study Session Agenda, March 18, 2014
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: March 18, 2014
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business
❑ information ® admin. report
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Community Preparedness
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN:
Department Director Approval: ❑
❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
BACKGROUND: Deputy Fire Chief Hail will give a presentation on Rail Incidents Emergency
Preparedness.
OPTIONS:
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: N/A
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A
STAFF CONTACT:
ATTACHMENTS: Powerpoint
RAIL INCIDENTS
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
COLLECTIVE GOALS
AVOID THE UNTHINKABLE...
PREPARE FOR THE WORST....
REACT TO THE REALITY.....
No RAIL TRANSPORT EMERGENCIES
AN OVERVIEW
❑ Rail Traffic Through the Valley
❑ Commodities Transported By Rail
❑ Potential Emergencies
❑ Impact on Emergency Services &
Community
❑ Preparation, Response & Recovery
Major RAIL LINES IN SPOKANE VALLEY
RNSF
a•
Union Pacific
I - I
SaI ell
ile
• •
ArharCreeS
Wine. Cellars
(ARV - E wollerlry Ave
Snkani Park I
z
X F UWIlrre Dr E Ups -• S r�'
`+'Pr p, Varlfes Ferry park
,. g s . / &Sporrs.Camp/ex
i�L I i y
3.. I g. ,m om f
V �
n k t. Lr ¢ „i ..
.[Fnrxi+� t
✓ n-
j
a
rig
▪ h WrIIr .Iry Par --
0 TreTll 4Ye
- - L./ , — ■ —` ,� heir.
1 •
I /' r J _ is 4 1 i
F. I M 1 E 1.111Mq.fok. g'
- Soletfahe = •�
' aim. I * Felts i,relrl •
z (290
•
5 r.
V8114 ]r f LUa••n AVE.
F M.sSfe 1 Ay.- z
ra _2
E
Eli 0.16Way Ave
r
y E Sra.dvaar 4ve Z
G ^ 4
■ nn — • ▪ • • • F}LFi rrI Fin
• E &pia 7're Ave ` rs [ Sprague Pie.
, 11, F Apple way liked
E 4111 AlY[ °i i___ — 1 ~ If - C
�z LS •3
1 r •e,
�k\ Ui[honon Fiilis 1'1 3
...... Niotufar Area r
I ~� t
1 ♦l
r 1
r V
t
E MIs Eaon Ave
■
TI:FETi[:
E f writ -AY�
Ff 1JCird Ave / ■ h?, i
•
■ WOO
• elMiana Ave
e Ave
Ave
5000 ft
11m
C 9th Arc
1
♦1
F Funanway Are
E �rh Ave
✓
4
E 1 Oh Ave
P1 EISNPJAN S
a7
La
6
1▪ = FirDadWay AVE!
t
- E Sprague Are Q
OppvrlunrFr
E 24th Ave
E eih Ave
E BIII Are
E 1 Gltl Ave
� �alreee
E 214h Are
� a I
0
w
Jet � rl a u
L
i A,F
E Mission Ati-
Crc enmc rca
F F4r5•.tway Ave
F 11 Fague Ave f F SpIa(fJYP AVJP
r
raa
Mn... Inln 7❑ 14 f:nn131.- -- Fr1lt •n r;nnnlc Man NI ;Kg,
RAIL TRAFFIC THROUGH THE VALLEY
Burlington Northern (BNSF) & Union
Pacific (UP)
50 - 6o trains per day (BNSF)
15 - ao trains per day (UP)
Main rail link between Seattle - Chicago (BNSF)
Secondary line between Canada and Oregon (UP)
Max speed - 40 mph (approx): Pines east
Length up to 150 cars / 1.5 - 2 miles
COMMODITIES TRANSPORTED BY RAIL
Bulk Cargo
General Freight
Hazardous Materials
Compressed Gases
Combustible / Flammable Liquids
Toxic / Corrosive / Poisonous Liquids
Flammable Solids
Oxidizers
Explosives:
Radioactives
1
POTENTIAL EMERGENCIES
Safety - History & Regulatory:
99.998% of Haz Mat shipments are without incident
Since 1980, number of incidents have reduced 91%
Regulated by the Federal Rail Authority and U.S.
Department of Transportation
• Federal tank car regulations
• Hazardous Material transport regulations
• Emergency reporting requirements
7
Potential Emergencies
cont'd
Types of Emergency Events
Low Speed Derailment With Small Number of Cars
& No to Limited Damage
Train v Train:
Vehicle v. Train:
8
Potential Emergencies
cont'd
Types of Emergency Events cont'd
Moderate to High Speed Derailment With Larger
Number of Cars and Moderate to Severe Damage
Damage to Container: over - pressurization, foreign
object intrusion
Valve Malfunction
9
Potential Emergencies
cont'd
Causes of Emergency Events
Vehicle v. Train - Train v. Train Conflicts
Failure of Brake & Wheel - Axle assemblies
Valve & Equipment Failures
• Off - Loading - Loading of Product
Rail Switch Malfunction
Potential Emergencies
cont'd
Causes of Emergency Events cont'd
Failure of Signal Equipment
Runaway - attended or unattended
Excessive Speed
Rail Damage or Maintenance Deficiencies
Human Error - Unsafe Actions
Potential Emergencies
cont'd
LJ Recent Events & Community Concerns...
J Bakken Oil & DOT 111 Rail Cars
1
Potential Emergencies
Bakken Crude Oil
Named for the oil producing region in North
Dakota.
■ A flammable liquid with flash point below 32 deg F
More easily ignited than diesel
• Greater risk for rapid fire spread
• More challenging for firefighters to extinguish
Contains methane, benzene and hydrogen sulfide...
cont'd
Transported in ioo - 150 (approx) car unit trains
• 1 to 1 1/2 trains per day through Valley
13
I]!]: U1-Pr-
Potential Emergencies
cont'd
❑ DOT 111 Rail Cars
Involved in recent high profile accidents
• Lac- Megantic, Quebec in June 2013
• Alabama in November 2013
• Casselton, ND in December 2013
Single wall construction for large majority of fleet.
More susceptible to damage & product release.
Initiatives to Improve Fleet
14
Rail Company Mitigation Initiatives
INFORMATION DERIVED VIA BNSF REPRESENTATIVE & RESEARCH
Engineering
Acoustical - Heat Detection Equipment
detection equipment with a max spacing of 4o miles
overheating of brakes and wheel bearings, truck & axle
performance
Positive Train Control - Satellite & Local Monitoring
detection of speed, unattended locomotive movement, conflicts
with signal status, collision avoidance...23 variables measured
ability to shut down a train remotely
15 I
r
Rail Company Mitigation Initiatives
Engineering cont'd
cont'd
Rail Monitoring - Inspection
internal electro- magnetic min 2 X'S per week
visual - daily in Spokane vicinity
2 X'S Federal requirements
Fort Worth Network Operations Center
Monitors all electronic system status information
Coordination of emergency notifications and response
Rail Company Mitigation Initiatives
cont'd
Operational Policies
Crew Resource Management
Maximum hours worked
Minimum of 2 persons in locomotive
Train Operations
Speed limits
Brake setting requirements
Parking only on sidings
Trailing locomotives at end of trains
ikh.
Impact on Community
& Emergency Services
Community
Potential Release of Hazardous Substances - short
& long term impacts
Airborne Toxins
• Flammable / Combustible Vapors
• Contaminated Soil
• Contaminated Water (ground & river)
• Economic Disruption
Traffic Delays: civilian, business & responders
i8
Impact on Community
& Emergency Services
Emergency Services
Response - assuming moderate to severe event
• Many different scenarios to prepare for
Potential depletion of local resources
• Regional multi- agency response, command and control and
mitigation efforts
• Significant challenges with acquiring immediate resources
for extinguishment, containment and control
• Long term (multiple days) event
Preparation, Response & Recovery
op Communities
Participate in Development and Review of
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
(CEMP)
Official and Employee Participation in Exercises
Assistance in Establishing Shelters & Post Event
Citizen Communications
Designation of Representatives for Emergency
Coordination Center and Incident Command Post
Be Prepared to Sign Delegation of Authority to
Regional Incident Command Team
Preparation, Response & Recovery
Rail Companies
Compliance With All Regulatory and Risk
Management Requirements.
Training of Rail Operations and Hazardous
Material Personnel
Early Notification & Identification of Product
Pre - Positioning of Response Equipment
a. Local: moderate spill control
b. Pasco & Whitefish: technical experts, foam,
monitoring
coat "d
Preparation, Response & Recovery
cont'd
Rail Companies cont'd
Retainer For Hazardous Material Response and
Recovery Contractors
Designation of Representatives for Emergency
Coordination Center and Incident Command Post
Deployment of National Resources: Industrial
Firefighters, Equipment & Monetary
Preparation, Response & Recovery
cont'd
Emergency Responders
Preparedness: CEMP & Training
Notification and Dispatch of Appropriate
Resources
a. 9-1-1: collection of accurate information
I% Resources: appropriate personnel, multiple agencies,
specific equipment
Protective Measures: isolate, evacuate, property
exposures
23
Preparation, Response & Recovery
cont'd
Emergency Responders cont'd
a. Hazardous Material:
Identify, Isolate, Contain & Control,
2) Deployment of Haz Mat Team,
3) Initiate Incident Management System
4) Activate Emergency Coordination Center
5) Coordination With Local, Regional, State and Federal
Representatives
6) Coordinate With Rail Technical Experts
24
Preparation, Response & Recovery
cont'd
Emergency Responders cont'd
a. National Incident Management System (NIMS) -
Unified Command
1> Expandability - from simple to complex
2) Representatives from fire /EMS, LE, local and regional
government, public works, public health, Dept of
Ecology, rail representatives and etc
3) Establish incident priorities
4) Development of incident action plan
5) Coordinated public information and media interaction
6) Orderly transition of command from first responders to
long term agencies (DOE) and private parties
Zs 4
FIRE: i L]'T
Preparation, Response & Recovery
cont'd
Emergency Responders cont'd
a. Shelter In Place and / or Evacuation:
Coordination between fire and law enforcement: assess
hazards, define area, identify shelter location
2) Primarily responsibility of law enforcement in non-
hazardous areas,
3) Coordinate with Alert Spokane - emergency
notification system
26
27
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: March 18, 2014 Department Director Approval: ❑
Check all that apply: ['consent ❑ old business ['new business ['public hearing
❑ information ® admin. report ['pending legislation ['executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: 2014 SRTC Call for Projects
GOVERNING LEGISLATION:
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Resolution 13 -006 adopting the 2014 -2019 Six Year
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) on June 11, 2013. Info Memo on STP Call for
Projects, March 11, 2014.
BACKGROUND: The Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) issued a 2014 Call
for Projects on March 3, 2014 for allocation of federal Surface Transportation Program (STP)
funding for the years 2017 -2019. Approximately $20 million in STP funding is expected to be
available for the Spokane region. However, because of funding for SRTC programs, the
amount available for the actual Call for Projects is $18.0 million. Project applications are due
Wednesday, April 30th, 2014.
The available funds will be divided into three regional categories as described below. Spokane
Valley is eligible for Urbanized Areas and Flexible Funds only.
Area Size
Urbanized Areas >200,000
% Funds Minimum Amount of
Available Funds Available
73%
$13.14 Million
Urban Areas >5,000 and <200,000
2%
$360,000
Rural Areas <5,000
Flexible Funds
13.5% $2.43 Million
11.5% $2.07 Million
The federal STP(U) funds will be further divided into three project categories as shown below.
These numbers are based on the most recent information from SRTC. These dollar amounts
are subject to change due to the urban /rural split being program wide and not specific to each
project type.
Category
OA
Approx. Funds
Available (Urban) **
Improvement
20 %
$2.63 -$3.04 Million
Reconstruction/
Preservation
Non - Roadway*
Total
70% $9.20 - $10.65 Million
10% $1.31 -$1.52 Million
$13.14 -15.21 Million
* 'Non- Roadway' includes Bike /Ped, ITS, and Transit projects
* *The range Includes potential Flexible Funds
Staff has begun evaluating the proposed STP grant criteria and has identified a draft list of
projects to review with council. Information used to develop this draft list of projects includes:
• The adopted 2014 -2019 Six Year TIP
• The Pavement Management Program (PMP)
• Private developments and improvements affecting the City's street network
• Council's expressed priorities
The preliminary list of projects included in the March 11, 2014 Info RCA was based
primarily on City priorities. After completing a preliminary scoring exercise on the
proposed projects against the criteria in the applications, the preliminary list of projects
has been updated. Some of the previously identified projects did not score as well as
anticipated while other projects were identified as being more competitive.
Projects listed below that are struck through represent ones that did not score well, and
staff is recommending not including these in the grant application.
1. IMPROVEMENT CATEGORY: The first two projects listed below have been in previous Six Year
TIPs and currently have federal STP(U) funds for the design phase. The need for the
second two projects listed below has developed due to the recent extension of Chapman
Road to Barker Road and to accommodate plans by WSDOT to upgrade the I -90 /Barker
Interchange.
1. Mission Ave Improvements - Flora to Barker (PE Funded)
2. Park Rd Improvements - Broadway to Indiana (PE Funded)
3. Barker Rd Improvements - Appleway to 1 -90
4.
2. RECONSTRUCTION /PRESERVATION CATEGORY: The first two projects listed below have been
in previous Six Year TIPs and currently have federal STP(U) funds for the design phase.
Having federal funds for the design phase on these projects increases the potential to
receive federal funds for the construction phase. The remaining projects in this category
come directly from the PMP.
1. Broadway /Argonne /Mullan PCC intersection (PE Funded)
2. Sullivan /Euclid PCC Intersection (PE Funded)
6, 32'44 Resurfacing (Dishman Mica to SR 27)
4. Argonne Resurfacing (Broadway to Mission)
5. Argonne /Mullan Resurfacing @I-90 (Mission to Indiana)
6, Broadway Resurfacing (Havana to Fancher)
Dishman Mica Resurfacing (Appleway to 8 ,44
Indiana Resurfacing @ Spokane Valley Mall
Mission Resurfacing (Pines to McDonald)
40- Montgomery Resurfacing (Woodruff to University)
Added Proiects:
11. Sullivan Resurfacing (Trent to Wellesley)
12. Sprague Resurfacing (Sullivan to Corbin)
13. Evergreen Resurfacing (Mission connector to Indiana)
14. Appleway Ave (Park to Dishman Mica)
3. NON - ROADWAY CATEGORY: This category includes ITS, Bike /Pedestrian and Transit
projects. Due to the wide availability of other funding sources for ITS and Transit type
projects, staff focused attention on potential Bike /Pedestrian projects.
1. Appleway Trail Phase 2 - Pines to Evergreen (Construction partially funded)
2. Appleway Trail Phase 3 - Evergreen to Corbin
OPTIONS: Discussion
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Discussion
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Project costs are currently being developed in more detail
for each project. The City's match on federally funded projects is typically 13.5% of the total
project cost.
STAFF CONTACT: Steve M. Worley, P.E. — Senior Capital Projects Engineer
Eric Guth, P.E. — Public Works Director
ATTACHMENTS: 2014 SRTC Call for Projects — Grant Applications
2017 -2019
Surface Transportation Program Application - Improvement
PROJECT TITLE:
SRTC
GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION
Agency or Organization
Contact Person
Phone Number
Email Address
Project Information
Project Location
❑ Urbanized Area ['Urban Small [Aural
Federal Functional Classification
Project Description
Include the project scope, length, purpose, and brief comparison of existing and proposed conditions.
Will the project improve traffic flow and congestion? If so, please describe and include the LOS, methodology used, and duration.
Proposed Timeline
PE
Estimated obligation date (mldlyy)
Estimated completion date (mldlyy)
RW
CN
Other
Attachments
Please provide a vicinity map, signed Project Endorsement Form, and Complete Streets Checklist.
SRTC Staff ['Vicinity map ['Endorsement ❑ Complete Streets Checklist or Exempt
Cost Summary
A. Previous obligations (all fund sources, all phases)
$
STP funding is requested for the
B. Requested STP Funds
$
following phases (check all that apply).
C. Other secured federal funds, source:
$
❑ Preliminary Engineering /Design
D. Secured state funds, source:
$
• Right -of -way
❑ Construction
E. Secured local funds (13.5% match), source:
$
F. Secured private funds, source:
$
❑ Other (planning, etc.)
G. Total Estimated Cost of Project (All Phases) [A through F]
$
Cost summary notes (optional, if additional information is needed).
2017 -2019 SRTC STP Improvement Application
Page 1
Describe the commitment of secured matching funds or other funds and the status of obtaining any unsecured funds.
Note: matching funds must be available at the time of fund obligation.
1. ECONOMIC VITALITY
15 PTS
1 a. Please describe how this project is consistent with Horizon 2040 Guiding Principle 1: Economic Vitality.
3
Employment and Destination Accessibility
3
1 b. Please describe how the project enhances connections, both direct and indirect, to existing key destinations, (Le, regional
employment centers, city /regional centers and attractions, schools, or parks) or major transportation routes and/or transportation hubs
(including transit). Include the distance from the project location to any referenced key destinations.
Consistency with Economic Development Plans
3
1 c. Is the project consistent with an adopted local economic development/revitalization plan, or other plans /initiatives with an
economic development component? If so, please cite the plan and the page number that indicates the project is consistent with
the plan.
Existing and Future Development
3
1d, Project is located within an area of significant existing or future employment. Please refer to the 2010 and 2040 employment
density maps to identify the employment density of the project location. Check all densities that apply to the project location (if it
traverses more than one density type, an average score will be given).
2010 Employment:
❑ Low density
❑ Medium density
❑ High density
2040 Employment:
❑ Low density
❑ Medium density
❑ High density
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
1
1.5
Freight Network
3
1 e. Is this project located on the regional freight priority network identified in Horizon 2040?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Please explain.
3
2. COOPERATION AND LEADERSHIP
10 PTS
2a. Please describe how this project is consistent with Horizon 2040 Guiding Principle 2: Cooperation and Leadership.
2
Agency Coordination
4
2017 -2019 SRTC STP Improvement Application
Page 2
2b. Is the project a joint venture between multiple jurisdictions and/or agencies (including public /private partnerships)? If so, please
describe: 2
2c. Has this project been coordinated with STA or other transit operators? if so, please describe.
2
Public Involvement
4
2d. Please describe the extent to which the project has been reviewed by the public or other agencies (public meetings,
environmental review, legislative actions, capital improvement programs, etc),
4
3. STEWARDSHIP
20 PTS
3a. Please describe how this project is consistent with Horizon 2040 Guiding Principle 3: Stewardship (Please note if this
project uses innovative design, materials, and /or funding sources, integrates multiple infrastructure needs, utilizes economy
of scale, or completes a missing Zink).
2
Regional Priority Networks
4
3b. Is this project located on the Horizon 2040 Regional Vehicular Priority Network (NHS system)?
If so, please describe.
What is the average daily traffic (ADT) of the existing facility? Provide the ADT and the year of the latest traffic count.
ADT
Year
❑ Urban — 15,000+ ADT
❑ Urban —7500 to 15,000 ADT
['Urban — below 7500 ADT
❑ Rural — 2,000+ ADT
❑ Rural —1,000 to 2,000 ADT
❑ Rural -- 500 to 1,000 ADT
2
2
1
0
Environmental Mitigations
2
3c. Does the project improve the environment or minimize the environmental impact of the facility above and beyond current 2
design standards (i.e. use of recycled materials, innovative storm water treatment, use of drought tolerant vegetation,
air quality benefit, smaller footprint, etc.)? If so, please describe.
Ability to Advance
6
3d, Describe the status of the project:
❑ Environmental documentation (NEPA) is complete & approved, or categorically excluded (CE)
❑ Right -of -way plans approved, or not needed
❑ Right -of -way acquisition is complete, or not needed
❑ Design is 30% complete
El Design is 60% complete
❑ Design is 90% complete
2017 -2019 SRTC STP Improvement Application
Page 3
3e. Project status notes. Please indicate if there are any circumstances that could delay the project and/or if there are any critical
timelines associated with this application (e.g. right of way acquisition, environmental documentation, other funds needed for full
funding).
Funding
6
3f. Has the project received partial federal funding through SRTC in the past? Please explain how the project receiving these
funds has performed (i.e. on schedule, on budget, etc.) and the other grant opportunities that have been sought since (list).
3g. Does this project have additional local/state match funds above the required 13.5 %? If so, please describe:
❑ 5% over the required local/state match
❑ 10% over the required local/state match
❑ 15% over the required local/state match
❑ 20% over the required local/state match
1
2
3
4
2
4. SYSTEMS OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, AND PRESERVATION
10 PTS
4a. Please describe how this project is consistent with Horizon 2040 Guiding Principle 4: System Operations, Maintenance
and Preservation.
4b. What is the design life of the project?
❑ The project sponsor must indicate that the project, once completed, will be maintained for the life of the project
4c. Please describe the plan and funding source to maintain this project.
2
8
5. SAFETY AND SECURITY
20 PTS
5a. Please describe how this project is consistent with Horizon 2040 Guiding Principle 5: Safety and Security.
4
Addresses Existing Safety Concern
8
5b. Does the project address an existing safety concem(s)? If yes, please indicate the existing safety concern(s).
❑ Unsignalized intersection collisions
❑ Head -on collisions
❑ Collisions involving pedestrians, bicyclists
❑ Other safety concern (describe):
❑ Signalized intersection collisions
❑ Run- off -road collisions
❑ Collisions involving horizontal curves, utility poles, trees
Does the project address the existing safety concern(s) via the one or more of the following strategies?
❑ Improve visibility /sight dist. of intersections, signals, signs
❑ Improve geometry, approaches of complex intersections
❑ Provide/improve turn channelization
❑ Add rumble strips, barriers /rails, raised pavement markers
❑ Add center turn lane /pocket
❑ Improve geometry of horizontal curves
❑ Restrict or eliminate turns (including right turns on red,
driveway access)
❑ Restrict cross - median access near intersections
❑ Provide appropriate intersection traffic control (all -way stop,
signalizing, roundabouts) to reduce collisions and severity
❑ Add non - traversable median
8
2017 -2019 SRTC STP Improvement Application
Page 4
❑ Provide enhanced pavement markings
❑ Eliminate at -grade crossings
❑ Provides sidewalks/walkways and curb ramps
❑ Provides bike lanes, markings, signage
❑ Add traffic calming improvements
❑ Other safety improvements consistent with NCHRP 500
❑ Provide skid - resistant pavement surfaces
❑ Remove, move utility poles /trees in high -crash or high -risk locations
❑ Add signage directed to improve safety concern
❑ Install /improve traffic and pedestrian signals
❑ Provide crosswalk enhancements (including striping, refuge islands,
raised medians)
(describe):
Please explain how these safety concerns (from above) will be addressed by this project.
2017 -2019 SRTC STP Improvement Application
Page 5
Annual Benefit Calculator
8
5c. Provide the location and details for correctable collisions (Le. not random, unpreventable incidences) on the project facility for the three most current years available.
This information can be obtained from the Transportation Data & GIS Office (TDGO).
Fill out a separate row for each collision. Provide information on the location, collision type, severity, number of vehicles involved, and the primary countermeasure to
eliminate or mitigate the collision (countermeasure must be consistent with project scope).
SRTC staff will use this information to assign points on a sliding scale.
Collision Location
(provide location details or
milepost)
Collision Type
(head -on, broad -side,
right angle, etc.)
Number of
Property Damage
Only (PDOs)
Number of
Injuries
Number of
Fatalities
Number of
Vehicles
Involved
Primary Countermeasure
(must be consistent with project scope)
ex. Driveway East of Myrtle St.
Side swipe
0
1
0
2
improved visibility.
Fatalities
$4,400,000
TOTAL (Sum of Column A)
TOTAL (Sum of Column B)
TOTAL (Sum of Column C)
Collision Involving
A. Total Number
B. Factor
C. Accident Cost
(A x B)
Annual Benefit
(Sum of Column C 120 years)
Property Damage Only (PDO)
$6,700
Injuries
$375,000
Fatalities
$4,400,000
TOTAL (Sum of Column A)
TOTAL (Sum of Column B)
TOTAL (Sum of Column C)
2017 -2019 SRTC STP Improvement Application
Page 6
6. CHOICE AND MOBILITY
15 PT
6a. Please describe how this project is consistent with Horizon 2040 Guiding Principle 6: Choice and Mobility.
3
Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements
6
6b. Will the project add or improve pedestrian facilities (ADA requirements, crossings, completes a gap, extends connection,
eliminates barriers, vegetated buffers, width >5 ft, pedestrian islands, etc.)? If so, please describe.
6c. Is the facility on the regional priority bicycle network? Will the project add or improve bicycle facilities (lanes, pavement
markings, signage, completes a gap, extends connection, eliminates barriers, etc.)? If so, please describe.
2
1
6d. Is this project on a local bicycle system that provides access to the regional bicycle network? If so, please describe. 1
6e. Project is located within an area of significant existing or future population. Please refer to the 2010 and 2040 population
density maps to identify the population density of the project location. Check all densities that apply to the project location (if it
traverses more than one density type, an average score will be given).
2010 Population:
❑ Low density
❑ Medium density
❑ High density
2040 Population:
❑ Low density
❑ Medium density
❑ High density
0
0.5
1
0
0.5
1
Transit Access
4
6f. Is the project located along the High Performance Transit Network and does it propose to improve transit access and/or amenities?
If so, please describe. 1
6g. Is the project located along a local transit route and does it propose to improve transit access and /or amenities? if so, please
describe.
6h. If the project proposes to improve transit access and /or amenities, what is the frequency (during the busiest hour of the day) of the
transit buses that traverse the facility?
❑ frequency of less than 15 minutes
❑ frequency of 15 minutes or better
1
2
Shared. Use of Infrastructure
1
6i. Project encourages or allows for the shared use of infrastructure for multiple users (i.e, new shared use path, or the
addition of facilities for a new user group on an existing facility). If so, please describe.
2017 -2019 SRTC STP Improvement Application
Page 7
Transportation Choices
1
6j. Project serves low income andlor minority communities or establishes a new or enhances an existing transportation choice to
the transportation disadvantaged. Please refer to the 2010 environmental justice maps to determine whether the project is
located in an area of disproportionately high percentages of low income and/or minority residents. Please check all
classifications that apply to the project location (if it traverses more than one classification, an average score will be given).
❑ Low proportion of low income
❑ Low proportion of minorities
❑ Medium proportion of low income
❑ Medium proportion of minorities
❑ High proportion of low income
❑ High proportion of minorities
1 point max
0
0
.5
.5
1
1
7. QUALITY OF LIFE
10 PTS
7a. Please describe how this project is consistent with the Horizon 2040 Guiding Principle 7; Quality of Life.
2
7b. Does the project support health - promoting transportation options for people of all abilities and ages (walking, biking, transit, 6
safe routes to school, etc.)? If so, please describe.
7c. Does the project include design elements that contribute to quality place making? if so, please check all that apply:
❑ Lighting ❑ Unusual or unique surfaces (pavers or stamped)
❑ Bicycle parking ❑ Public art
❑ Benches, bus shelters ❑ Garbage /recycling receptacles
❑ Traffic calming measures ❑ Bollards
❑ Landscaping, pots /planters, tree grates ❑ Other design elements, please describe:
❑ Raised or uniquely treated crosswalks
3
2017 -2019 SRTC STP Improvement Application Page 8
.fw(P»c. l'(.rinn('Tm,ifwrl,(,w,Gnm, (
2017 -2019
STP Application — Preservation & Reconstruction
PROJECT TITLE:
SRTC
GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION
Agency or Organization
Contact Person
Phone Number
Email Address
Project Information
Project Location
❑ Urbanized Area ['Urban Small ['Rural
Federal Functional Classification
Project Description
Include the project scope, length, purpose, and brief comparison of existing and proposed conditions.
Proposed Timeline
PE
Estimated obligation date (mldlyy)
Estimated completion date (m/d/yy)
RW
CN
Other
Attachments
Please provide a vicinity map and a signed Project Endorsement Form.
SRTC Staff ❑ Vicinity map ❑ Endorsement
Cost Summary
A. Previous obligations (all fund sources, all phases)
$
STP funding is requested for the
B. Requested STP Funds
$
following phases (check all that apply):
C. Other secured federal funds, source:
$
• Preliminary Engineering /Design
D. Secured state funds, source:
$
❑ Right -of -way
E. Secured local funds (13.5% match), source:
$
El Construction
F. Secured private funds, source:
$
❑ Other (planning, etc.)
G. Total Estimated Cost of Project (All Phases) [A through F]
$
Cost summary notes (optional, if additional information is needed).
Describe the commitment of secured matching funds or other funds and the status of obtaining any unsecured funds.
Note: matching funds must be available at the time of fund obligation.
2017 -2019 SRTC STP Preservation & Reconstruction Application
Page 1
1. ECONOMIC VITALITY
15 PTS
1 a. Please describe how this project is consistent with Horizon 2040 Guiding Principle 1: Economic Vitality,
3
Employment and Destination Accessibility
3
1 b. Please describe how the project enhances connections, both direct and indirect, to existing key destinations, (i.e. regional
employment centers, city /regional centers and attractions, schools, or parks) or major transportation routes and/or transportation hubs
(including transit). Include the distance from the project location to any referenced key destinations.
Consistency with Economic Development Plans
3
1 c. Is the project consistent with an adopted local economic development/revitalization plan, or other plans /initiatives with an
economic development component? If so, please cite the plan and the page number that indicates the project is consistent with
the plan.
Existing and Future Development
3
1 d. Project is located within an area of significant existing or future employment. Please refer to the 2010 and 2040 employment
density maps to identify the employment density of the project location. Check all densities that apply to the project location (if it
traverses more than one density type, an average score will be given).
2010 Employment:
❑ Low density
❑ Medium density
❑ High density
2040 Employment:
❑ Low density
❑ Medium density
❑ High density
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
1
1.5
Freight Network
3
1 e. Is this project located on the regional freight priority network identified in Horizon 2040?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Please explain.
2. COOPERATION AND LEADERSHIP
5 PTS
2a. Please describe how this project is consistent with Horizon 2040 Guiding Principle 2: Cooperation and Leadership.
2
Agency Coordination
2
2b. Is the project a joint venture between multiple jurisdictions and/or agencies (including public /private partnerships)? If so, please
describe: 1
2017 -2019 SRTC STP Preservation & Reconstruction Application
Page 2
2c. Has this project been coordinated with STA or other transit operators? If so, please describe.
1
Public Involvement
1
2d. Please describe the extent to which the project has been reviewed by the public or other agencies (public meetings,
environmental review, legislative actions, capital improvement programs, etc).
3. STEWARDSHIP
15 PTS
3a. Please describe how this project is consistent with Horizon 2040 Guiding Principle 3: Stewardship (Please note if this
project uses innovative design, materials, and/or funding sources, Integrates multiple infrastructure needs, utilizes economy
of scale, or completes a missing link).
2
Regional Priority Networks
4
3b. Is this project located on the Horizon 2040 Regional Vehicular Priority Network (NHS system)?
If so, please describe.
What is the average daily traffic (ADT) of the existing facility? Provide the ADT and the year of the latest traffic count.
ADT
Year
❑ Urban — 15,000+ ADT
['Urban — 7500 to 15,000 ADT
['Urban — below 7500 ADT
❑ Rural — 2,000+ ADT
❑ Rural —1,000 to 2,000 ADT
❑ Rural — 500 to 1,000 ADT
2
2
1
0
Environmental Mitigations
2
3c. Does the project improve the environment or minimize the environmental impact of the facility above and beyond current 2
design standards (i.e. use of recycled materials, innovative storm water treatment, use of drought tolerant vegetation,
air quality benefit, smaller footprint, etc.)? If so, please describe.
Ability to Advance
3
3d. Describe the status of the project:
❑ Environmental documentation (NEPA) is complete & approved, or categorically excluded (CE)
❑ Right -of -way plans approved, or not needed
❑ Right -of -way acquisition is complete, or not needed
❑ Design is 30% complete
❑ Design is 60% complete
P Design is 90% complete
3e. Project status notes. Please indicate if there are any circumstances that could delay the project and/or if there are any critical
timelines associated with this application (e.g. right of way acquisition, environmental documentation, other funds needed for full
funding).
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
.5
2017 -2019 SRTC STP Preservation & Reconstruction Application
Page 3
Funding
4
3f. Has the project received partial federal funding through SRTC in the past? Please explain how the project receiving these funds has
performed (Le. on schedule, on budget, etc.) and the other grant opportunities that have been sought since (list).
3g. Does this project have additional local/state match funds above the required 13.5%? If so, please describe:
❑ 5% over the required local/state match
❑ 10% over the required local/state match
❑ 15% over the required local/state match
❑ 20% over the required local/state match
2
0.5
1
1.5
2
4. SYSTEMS OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, AND PRESERVATION
40 PTS
4a. Please describe how this project is consistent with Horizon 2040 Guiding Principle 4: System Operations, Maintenance
and Preservation.
2
Structural Condition
30
4b. What is the structural condition of the existing facility? Rate the Overall Condition Index (OCI) rating, using the TIC
Pavement Condition Rating Standards (attached to application packet) and the year of last inspection. Note: OCI will be
reviewed by a team of representatives from Spokane, Spokane Valley, Spokane County and WSDOT prior to project scoring.
OCI
Year
Preservation
❑ OCI: 41 -55 20
❑ OCI: 56 -65 10
❑
OCI: 66-85 30
Reconstruction
❑ OCI: 0 -30 30
❑ OCI: 31 -40 20
❑ OCI: 41 -55 10
Please explain.
4c, What is the design life of the project?
❑ The project sponsor must indicate that the project, once completed, will be maintained for the life of the project
4d. Please describe the plan and funding source to maintain this project.
8
5. SAFETY AND SECURITY 5 PTS
5a. Please describe how this project is consistent with Horizon 2040 Guiding Principle 5: Safety and Security.
Page 4
2017 -2019 SRTC STP Preservation & Reconstruction Application
6. CHOICE AND MOBILITY
15 PTS
6a. Please describe how this project is consistent with Horizon 2040 Guiding Principle 6: Choice and Mobility.
2
Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements
6
6b. Will the project add or improve pedestrian facilities (ADA requirements, crossings, completes a gap, extends connection,
eliminates barriers, vegetated buffers, width >5 ft, pedestrian islands, etc.)? If so, please describe.
6c. Is the facility on the regional priority bicycle network? Will the project add or improve bicycle facilities (lanes, pavement
markings, signage, completes a gap, extends connection, eliminates barriers, etc.)? If so, please describe.
2
1
6d. Is this project on a local bicycle system that provides access to the regional bicycle network? If so, please describe. 1
6e. Project is located within an area of significant existing or future population. Please refer to the 2010 and 2040 population
density maps to identify the population density of the project location. Check all densities that apply to the project location (if it
traverses more than one density type, an average score will be given).
2010 Population:
❑ Low density
❑ Medium density
❑ High density
2040 Population:
❑ Low density
❑ Medium density
❑ High density
0
0.5
1
0
0.5
1
Transit Access
5
6f. Is the project located along the High Performance Transit Network and does it propose to improve transit access and/or amenities?
If so, please describe. 2
6g. Is the project located along a local transit route and does it propose to improve transit access and/or amenities? 2
If so, please describe.
6h. If the project proposes to improve transit access and/or amenities, what is the frequency (during the busiest hour of the day) of the
transit buses that traverse the facility?
❑ frequency of less than 15 minutes
❑ frequency of 15 minutes or better
.5
1
Shared Use of Infrastructure
1
6i. Project encourages or allows for the shared use of infrastructure for multiple users (i.e. new shared use path, or the
addition of facilities for a new user group on an existing facility). If so, please describe.
2017 -2019 SRTC STP Preservation & Reconstruction Application
Page 5
Transportation Choices
1
6j. Project serves low income and/or minority communities or establishes a new or enhances an existing transportation choice to the
transportation disadvantaged. Please refer to the 2010 environmental justice maps to determine whether the project is located in an
area of disproportionately high percentages of low income and/or minority residents. Please check all classifications that apply to the
project location {if it traverses more than one classification, an average score will be given).
❑ Low proportion of low income
❑ Low proportion of minorities
❑ Medium proportion of low income
❑ Medium proportion of minorities
❑ High proportion of low income
❑ High proportion of minorities
1 point max
0
0
.5
.5
1
1
7. QUALITY OF LIFE
5 PTS
7a. Please describe how this project is consistent with Horizon 2040 Guiding Principle 7: Quality of Life.
2017 -2019 SRTC STP Preservation & Reconstruction Application Page 6
2017 -2019
SRTC
Surface Transportation Program Application — Non - Roadway
PROJECT TITLE:
GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION
Agency or Organization
Contact Person
Phone Number
Email Address
Project Information
Project Location
❑ Urbanized Area ❑Urban Small ['Rural
Federal Functional Classification
Project Description
Include the project scope, length, purpose, and brief comparison of existing and proposed conditions.
Proposed Timeline
PE
Estimated obligation date (m/d/yy)
Estimated completion date (mldlyy)
RW
CN
Other
Attachments
Please provide a vicinity map, signed Project Endorsement Form, and Complete Streets Checklist.
SRTC Staff ❑ Vicinity map ❑ Endorsement ❑ Comp!ete Streets Checklist or Exempt
Cost Summary
A. Previous obligations (all fund sources, all phases)
$
STP funding is requested for the
following phases (check all that apply);
❑ Preliminary Engineering /Design
❑ Right -of -way
❑ Construction
❑ Other (planning, etc.)
B. Requested STP Funds
$
C. Other secured federal funds, source:
$
D. Secured state funds, source:
$
E. Secured local funds (13.5% match), source:
$
F. Secured private funds, source:
$
G. Total Estimated Cost of Project (All Phases) [A through F]
$
Cost summary notes (optional, if additional information is needed).
Describe the commitment of secured matching funds or other funds and the status of obtaining any unsecured funds.
Note: matching funds must be available at the time of fund obligation.
2017 -2019 SRTC STP Non - Roadway Application
Page 1
1. ECONOMIC VITALITY
15 PTS
1 a. Please describe how this project is consistent with Horizon 2040 Guiding Principle 1: Economic Vitality.
3
Employment and Destination Accessibility
3
1 b. Please describe how the project enhances connections, both direct and indirect, to existing key destinations, (i.e. regional
employment centers, city /regional centers and attractions, schools, or parks) or major transportation routes and/or transportation hubs
(including transit). Include the distance from the project location to any referenced key destinations.
Consistency with Economic Development Plans
3
lc. Is the project consistent with an adopted local economic development/revitalization plan, or other plans /initiatives with an
economic development component? If so, please cite the plan and the page number that indicates the project is consistent with
the plan.
Existing and Future Development
3
1 d. Project is located within an area of significant existing or future employment. Please refer to the 2010 and 2040 employment
density maps to identify the employment density of the project location. Check all densities that apply to the project location (if it
traverses more than one density type, an average score will be given).
2010 Employment:
['Low density
❑ Medium density
❑ High density
2040 Employment:
❑ Low density
❑ Medium density
❑ High density
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
1
1.5
Freight Network
3
1 e. Is this project located on or does it support the regional freight priority network identified in Horizon 2040?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Please explain.
3
2. COOPERATION AND LEADERSHIP
10 PTS
2a. Please describe how this project is consistent with Horizon 2040 Guiding Principle 2: Cooperation and Leadership.
2
Agency Coordination
4
2b. Is the project a joint venture between multiple jurisdictions and /or agencies (including public /private partnerships)? If so, please
describe: 2
2017 -2019 SRTC STP Non - Roadway Application
Page 2
2c. Has this project been coordinated with STA or other transit operators? If so, please describe.
2
Public Involvement
4
2d. Please describe the extent to which the project has been reviewed by the public or other agencies (public meetings,
environmental review, legislative actions, capital improvement programs, etc).
4
3. STEWARDSHIP
20 PTS
3a. Please describe how this project is consistent with Horizon 2040 Guiding Principle 3: Stewardship (Please note if this
project uses innovative design, materials, andlor funding sources, integrates multiple infrastructure needs, utilizes economy
of scale, or completes a missing link).
2
Regional Priority Networks
2
3b. Is this project located on or does it support the Horizon 2040 Regional Vehicular Priority Network (NHS system)?
If so, please describe.
2
Environmental Mitigations
4
3c, Does the project improve the environment or minimize the environmental impact of the facility above and beyond current 4
design standards (i.e. use of recycled materials, innovative storm water treatment, use of drought tolerant vegetation,
air quality benefit, smaller footprint, etc.)? If so, please describe.
Ability to Advance
6
3d. Describe the status of the project:
❑ Environmental documentation (NEPA) is complete & approved, or categorically excluded (CE)
❑ Right -of -way plans approved, or not needed
❑ Right -of -way acquisition is complete, or not needed
❑ Design is 30% complete
❑ Design is 60% complete
❑ Design is 90% complete
3e. Project status notes. Please indicate if there are any circumstances that could delay the project andlor if there are any critical
timelines associated with this application (e.g. right of way acquisition, environmental documentation, other funds needed for full
funding).
1
1
1
1
1
1
Funding
6
3f. Has the project received partial federal funding through SRTC in the past? Please explain how the project receiving these 2
funds has performed (Le. on schedule, on budget, etc,) and the other grant opportunities that have been sought since (list).
3g. Does this project have additional local /state match funds above the required 13.5 %. if so, please describe:
2017 -2019 SRTC STP Non - Roadway Application
Page 3
❑ 5% over the required local/state match
❑ 10% over the required local/state match
❑ 15% over the required local/state match
❑ 20% over the required local/state match
1
2
3
4
4. SYSTEMS OPERATIONS, MAINTENANCE, AND PRESERVATION 5 PTS
4a, Please describe how this project is consistent with Horizon 2040 Guiding Principle 4: System Operations, Maintenance
and Preservation.
4b. What is the design life of the project?
❑ The project sponsor must indicate that the project, once completed, will be maintained for the life of the project
4c. Please describe the plan and funding source to maintain this project.
2
3
5. SAFETY AND SECURITY
20 PTS
5a. Please describe how this project is consistent with Horizon 2040 Guiding Principle 5: Safety and Security.
4
Addresses Existing Safety Concern
16
5b. Does the project address an existing safety concern(s)? if yes, please indicate the existing safety concern(s).
['Collisions involving pedestrians, bicyclists
❑ Lack of separated facilities for user groups
❑ Lack of safe pedestrian crossing
❑ High volumes /speeds on facility
❑ Signalized intersection collisions
❑ Other safety concern (please describe):
Please explain how these safety concerns (from above) will be addressed by this project.
6. CHOICE AND MOBILITY
20 PTS
6a. Please describe how this project is consistent with Horizon 2040 Guiding Principle 6: Choice and Mobility.
3
Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements
7
6b. Will the project add or improve pedestrian facilities (ADA requirements, crossings, completes a gap, extends connection,
eliminates barriers, vegetated buffers, width >5 ft, pedestrian islands, etc.)? If so, please describe.
6c. Is the facility on the regional priority bicycle network? Will the project add or improve bicycle facilities (lanes, pavement
markings, signage, completes a gap, extends connection, eliminates barriers, etc.)? If so, please describe.
2
2
2017 -2019 SRTC STP Non - Roadway Application
Page 4
6d. Is this project on a local bicycle system that provides access to the regional bicycle network? If so, please describe. 1
6e. Project is located within an area of significant existing or future population. Please refer to the 2010 and 2040 population
density maps to identify the population density of the project location. Check all densities that apply to the project location (if it
traverses more than one density type, an average score will be given).
2010 Population:
❑ Low density
['Medium density
❑ High density
2040 Population:
❑ Low density
❑ Medium density
❑ High density
0
0.5
1
0
0.5
Transit Access
5
6f. Is the project located along the High Performance Transit Network and does it propose to improve transit access and/or amenities?
If so, please describe. 2
6g. Is the project located along a local transit route and does it propose to improve transit access and /or amenities? If so, please
describe. 1
6h. If the project proposes to improve transit access and /or amenities, what is the frequency (during the busiest hour of the day) of the
transit buses that traverse the facility?
['frequency of less than 15 minutes
['frequency of 15 minutes or better
1
2
Shared Use of Infrastructure
2
61. Project encourages or allows for the shared use of infrastructure for multiple users (i.e. new shared use path, or the
addition of facilities for a new user group on an existing facility). If so, please describe.
Transportation Choices
3
6j. Project serves low income and /or minority communities or establishes a new or enhances an existing transportation choice to the
transportation disadvantaged. Please refer to the 2010 environmental justice maps to determine whether the project is located in an
area of disproportionately high percentages of [ow income and /or minority residents. Please check all classifications that apply to the
project location (if it traverses more than one classification, an average score will be given).
El Low proportion of low income
❑ Low proportion of minorities
❑ Medium proportion of low income
❑ Medium proportion of minorities
❑ High proportion of low income
❑ High proportion of minorities
.5
.5
1
1
1.5
1.5
7. QUALITY OF LIFE
10 PTS
2017 -2019 SRTC STP Non-Roadway Application
Page 5
7a. Please describe how this project is consistent with Horizon 2040 Guiding Principle 7: Quality of Life.
2
7b. Does the project support health- promoting transportation options for people of all abilities and ages (walking, biking, transit, 4
safe routes to school, etc.)? If so, please describe.
7c. Does the project include design elements that contribute to quality place making? If so, please check all that apply:
❑ Lighting ❑ Unusual or unique surfaces (pavers or stamped)
❑ Bicycle parking ❑ Raised or uniquely treated crosswalks
❑ Benches, bus shelters ❑ Garbage /recycling receptacles
❑ Traffic calming measures ❑ Bollards
❑ Landscaping, pots /planters, tree grates ❑ Other design elements, please describe:
4
2017 -2019 SRTC STP Non - Roadway Application Page 6
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: 3/18/14 Department Director Approval: ❑
Check all that apply: ['consent ❑ old business ['new business ['public hearing
['information ® admin. report ['pending legislation ['executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Resource Allocation for Law Enforcement
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 39.34 and CO 10 -109
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Interlocal Agreement for Costs Incident to Law
Enforcement Services in the City of Spokane Valley, CO 10 -109, Adopted by Council on August
10, 2010, Amended by Council on December 13, 2011.
BACKGROUND: A study was conducted to assess the current staffing level of the Spokane
Valley Police Department and determine if the level is appropriate to meet the law enforcement
needs of the community. The goal when embarking on this study was to ensure that every
opportunity to maximize efficiency was explored prior to considering adding personnel.
Spokane Valley City Staff in conjunction with Spokane Valley Police Command Staff identified
several opportunities to enhance the service delivered to the citizens. The result is a plan that is
a combination of enhancements to existing resources and utilizing two new patrol officers in the
most efficient way possible.
Add two (2) new Patrol Deputies to the law enforcement contract.
Reassign six (6) Patrol Corporals.
Use Patrol Corporals to create one (1) Power Shift Deputy, three (3) Patrol Sergeants,
and two (2) Property Crime Detectives.
Create a Patrol Power Shift that overlaps the Day and Night Shifts to match the
highest staffing levels with the highest call loads.
Increase Property Crime Detectives by two (2) (by shifting corporals) and combine all
property crime and drug crime detectives into one dedicated Spokane Valley unit with
a single sergeant supervisor.
Add traffic signal controllers to new patrol SUVs to increase response times and
enhance safety for officers and citizens.
Invest in safe and functional work spaces in the precinct building.
Maximize staffing levels per shift
OPTIONS: Maintain current staffing levels and platoon numbers; Approve recommended
staffing changes.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Proceed to Motion Consideration on March 25,
2014
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: 2014 Total Expenses = $423,213 (Recurring costs $347,739)
STAFF CONTACT: Morgan Koudelka, Senior Administrative Analyst
ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint; Staffing Analysis
RESOURCE ALLOCATION FOR
LAW ENFORCEMENT
MARCH 18, 2014
Morgan Koudelka, Senior Administrative Analysis
History
• The City of Spokane Valley has always contracted with the Spokane
County Sheriff's Office for law enforcement services.
The original interlocal agreement had dedicated Spokane Valley
commissioned officers for patrol, traffic, School Resource Officers,
and investigative services that totaled 100.5 officers.
In addition, the City received support from officers in administrative
positions such as the undersheriff, public information, training and
professional standards as well as grant funded positions.
The staffing level has remained relatively constant over the City's
ten -year history (One new Adm. Lt and one new SRO).
• A staffing analysis was conducted to determine if the current
staffing level of the Spokane Valley Police Department is
appropriate to meet the law enforcement needs of the community.
Priorities
Keep pace with Spokane Valley population growth
and increase in calls for police service.
• Address rising property crimes.
• Support officers with necessary equipment and
work stations and maintain high morale.
Maximize use of existing resources.
Strategies
Add two new patrol officers ( +2 FTE) to Law
Enforcement Contract.
Reassign Patrol Corporals.
Create Power Shift.
• Enhance Property Crimes Unit.
• Create Dedicated SV Property Crimes and Drug Crimes
Investigations Unit.
• Upgrade Workstations at Spokane Valley Precinct
• Add Opticom Traffic Signal Controllers to New Vehicles.
Add Two Patrol Officers
Add Two 7
Patrol Deputies_l
Current
4 Platoons — 11 Officers Each
44 Total Patrol Deputies
Plus 12 Supervisors
2 Deputies
1 Deputy
Proposed
4 Existing Platoons +
1 Power Shift Platoon
47 Total Patrol Deputies
Plus 9 Supervisors
Reassign One
Corporal to
Deputy
Add Two New Patrol Officers
L A
Positive Impact
More officers to answer calls for service.
More manageable workloads per officers allow
more proactive policing.
• Few calls responded to without backup will reduce
injuries and increase officer safety.
Reassign Patrol Corporals
New
3 Patrol Sergeants
Existing
6 Patrol Corporals
New
1 Patrol Deputy
New
2 Property Crime
Detectives
Positive Impact
❖Increases number of patrol officers responding to calls for service.
❖Allows for creation of Power Shift.
❖Increases ability of detectives to work property crime cases.
Power Shift
Existing
Platoon Day 1
Existing
Platoon Day 2
1 Deputy
Existing
Corporals
N
1 Deputy
Existing
Platoon Night 1
/
1 Deputy
/
1 Deputy
.
Existing
Platoon Night 2
1 Deputy
2 Deputies
1
New
New Hires
+ $309,732
Positive Impact
Increases number of Patrol Officers answering calls for service.
Aligns staffing levels with peak call loads.
Most Officers Working on Weekends.
New
Power Shift
7 Deputies
/
1 Deputy
.
Existing
Platoon Night 2
1 Deputy
2 Deputies
1
New
New Hires
+ $309,732
Positive Impact
Increases number of Patrol Officers answering calls for service.
Aligns staffing levels with peak call loads.
Most Officers Working on Weekends.
Current property Crimes and Drug
Crimes Investigations Structure
Dedicated Property Crimes (City Control)
1 Sergeant
6 Detectives
Shared Investigative Task Force (County Control)
(City pays about 50 %)
1 Sergeant
6 Detectives
Proposed Property Crime and Drug
Crime Investigations Structilre
SV Patrol
Corporals
2 Detectives
SV Property
Crimes
1 Sergeant
6 Detectives
Shared
Investigative
Task Force
3 Detectives
Dedicated Property and Drug Crimes (Spokane Valley Control)
1 Sergeant
11 Detectives
Positive Impact
❖ Combines property crime and drug crime investigations into one unit
with single commander (These crimes are often related).
• Creates dedicated unit under Spokane Valley Command Staff control.
• Allows investigators to work more interactively with SV patrol officers.
Return on Investment —
Performance Measure.
Percentage of Calls for Service Responded to by
Officers.
• Average Response Time by Priority Type of Call (Based
upon ability of CAD system).
• 1 /3 or greater of all incidents will be Deputy initiated
(ICMA Best Practice — Proactive Policing).
Percentage of property crime cases worked.
Citizen satisfaction.
Maximize Officers per Shift — Schedule based upon
seasonal and time of day call load, lieutenants approve
less than 7 patrol officers per shift.
Summary
Add two (2) new Patrol Deputies to Contract
Reassign six (6) Patrol Corporals.
Use Patrol Corporals to create one (1) Power Shift Deputy, three (3)
Patrol Sergeants, and two (2) Property Crime Detectives.
Create a Patrol Power Shift that overlaps the Day and Night Shifts
to match the highest staffing levels with the highest call loads.
Add two (2)property crimes detectives (by shifting corporals) and
combine all property crime and drug crime detectives into one
dedicated Spokane Valley unit with one sergeant supervisor.
Add traffic signal controllers to new patrol SUVs to increase
response times and enhance safety for officers and citizens.
Invest in safe and functional work spaces in the precinct building.
Maximize staffing levels per shift.
Est Impact
Staffing Costs
Adding two new patrol deputies
Training Academy
Shifting six coporals to other positions
Impact on Radio and Disptach Calls
Total Staffing Costs 1st Year
(Recurring Costs)
Additional Recommended One -Time Expenses
Precinct Building Improvements - Cubicles
Opticom Traffic Signal Controllers
Total Additional One -Time Expenses
Total 2014 Law Enforcement Additional Appropriations
$ 309,732
$ 6,090
$ 3,007
$ 35,000
$ 353,829
$ 347,739
$ 50,000
$ 19,384
$ 69,384
$ 423,213
Budget Resources
Finance Director Discussion
Next Steps
Council Decision.
If approved, make any necessary changes to
Interlocal Agreement (Council Approval).
• Begin processing changes.
Hiring Process
-. Training Academy
•: Corporal Transition
Precinct and Vehicle Improvements
Transition of investigative Detectives
ae
"SPOKANE VALLEY POLICE STAFFING ANALYSIS
Purpose: To assess the current staffing level of the Spokane Valley Police Department and determine if
the level is appropriate to meet the law enforcement needs of the community.
Analysis Components:
• Historical Spokane Valley Police Staffing Level Evaluation
Historical Call for Service Trend Evaluation
• Evaluation of Population Growth in Spokane Valley
• Calculation of Annual Growth in Costs for Law Enforcement Services
• Evaluation of General Fund Costs over Time
• Evaluation of Spokane Valley Revenues Over Time
• Comparative Analysis of Similar Sized Cities
• Evaluation of Current Commissioned Officer Positions, Units, and Strength of Units
• Analysis of Current Cost Methodology for Ease of Understanding, Ease of Administration,
Fairness and Accuracy
• Call for Service Analysis by Time of Day, Season, Day of Week
• Ride- alongs with patrol officers
Morgan Koudelka, Senior Administrative Analyst, City of Spokane Valley
Matt Lyons, Administrative Lieutenant, Spokane Valley Police
Rick VanLeuven, Spokane Valley Police Chief
1
History
Spokane Valley receives law enforcement services though Interlocal Agreement with the Spokane
County Sheriff's Office. The original agreement identified a specific number of commissioned officers
that were dedicated to serving Spokane Valley. An additional number of commissioned officers and
civilian staff provided support functions and were shared with Spokane County. The number of
dedicated officers was determined through reviewing municipal police force organizational structures
around Washington State and by analyzing the calls for service and number of precincts (6) within the
City.
The current interlocal agreement still has dedicated Spokane Valley Officers for Patrol, Traffic, Property
Crimes, Community Services, Domestic Violence, School Resource Services, and Command Staff, while
Investigative Services, Intelligence Led Policing, Marine /Search and Rescue, and K -9 units are shared
with Spokane County. The number of shared officers the City pays for is based upon usage factors. In
2013, the total number of direct service officers the City paid for was just over 101. In addition there
are another 8 shared support officers that are rolled into the City's per- officer costs (we pay a portion of
the 8), as well as another 9 officers the City does not pay for but receives service from because they are
either regional in nature or have other funding sources. These numbers have remained fairly constant
over time.
Over the City's first ten years, we added a School Resource Officer for the East Valley School District and
an administrative lieutenant to act as a Deputy Chief of Police to provide support to the Chief.
We are currently negotiating a new cost methodology that would be much easier to understand, have
greater consistency and predictability and allow Spokane Valley to segregate much of their cost.
2
Workload Analysis
The number of patrol officers has remained constant since incorporation. A number of workload
indicators were reviewed to determine if the workload per officer has increased and what the impact of
the change has been. Population growth has been slowly but steadily increasing. Citizen - initiated calls
for service have been increasing at a more rapid pace and have experienced a significant jump recently.
Population Change:
Total Change: +9.12% Annual Growth: .97%
92,000
90,000
88,000
86,000
84,000
82,000
80,000
78,000
Spokane Valley Population
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Calls for Service (Citizen Initiated):
Total Change: +13.29% Annual Growth: 1.39%
35,000
33,000
31,000
29,000
27,000
25,000
Citizen Calls For Service
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
3
Impact from Workload
Total Change: - 22.26% Annual Change: -3.15%
32,000
30,000
28,000
26,000
24,000
22,000
20,000
Officer Initiated CaIIs
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Best practice for law enforcement identifies patrol officers spending one -third of their time on proactive
policing, initiating service incidents, interacting with the public, and providing deterrent patrolling.
Spokane Valley Police have always had a higher standard as nearly half of their calls were officer -
initiated in the first couple of years of the City's existence. As Spokane Valley officers have faced a
higher call load, their ability to be proactive has steadily decreased. Additionally, because of the
increased call load, the number of lower priority calls without an officer response have increased.
Total Change: +52.31% Annual Change: 5.26%
12,000
11,000
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
CaIIs for Service with No Officer Response
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
4
Reported Crimes
Reported crimes and crime rates are affected by many variables, including economic conditions,
affluence of the community, demographic make -up, effectiveness of sentencing options, and
coordination of the criminal justice system. The strength of local law enforcement also has an impact on
the number of crimes committed, from deterring crime through proactive policing to investigating
crimes, identifying offenders, and allowing the system to reduce repeat offenders. After an abnormally
high crime reporting year in 2004, reported crimes settled down but have seen a steady increase over
time.
Spokane Valley Reported Crimes 2004 -2012
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
><,,
,),
M_
300
250
200
150
100
50
Ilipokane Valley Crime Rate
(Crimes per 1,000 Population)
u
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Crimes Reported
19,962
16,357
16,582
16,817
17,465
17,460
18,589
19,996
21,723
- -Total
Property Crimes
10,519
8,178
7,916
7,338
7,513
7,668
8,852
9,615
10,328
-0-Total
-M-Total Major Crimes
4,192
3,777
3,589
3,875
4,195
4,667
4,727
4,997
5,638
Sex Crimes
1,475
1,108
1,067
996
1,108
1,271
1,387
1,294
1,370
(Total
300
250
200
150
100
50
Ilipokane Valley Crime Rate
(Crimes per 1,000 Population)
u
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
-0-Property Crime Rate
126.07
96.82
91.41
83.49
84.88
86.19
98.62
106.70
114.06
-M-Major Crime Rate
50.24
44.72
41.44
44.09
47.39
52.46
52.67
55.45
62.26
Crime Rate
17.68
13.12
12.32
11.33
12.52
14.29
15.45
14.36
15.13
(Sex
Crime Rate
239.25
193.65
191.48
191.33
197.32
196.25
207.11
221.91
239.90
- -Total
5
Patrol Officers
The City of Spokane Valley is split into six patrol districts. There are four patrol platoons comprised of
eleven officers each, two day platoons and two night platoons, each working twelve hour shifts. Each
night shift platoon works when the other platoon is off and the same is true of day platoons. The
officers in each platoon have staggered start times so that approximately half start an hour and a half
later than the others. This insures that there is not a transition gap when the day shift is over and the
night shift begins.
While Spokane Valley had a sufficient number of patrol officers upon incorporation that number has not
changed and has not kept pace with the growth of the City and the increasing number of calls for
service.
51
50
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
42
41
Number of Patrol Officers'
it
•
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Patrol Officers
—�— Patrol Officers Adjusted for
Population
Patol Officers Adjusted for
Calls for Service
Additionally, injuries and required administrative leave often find each shift struggling to achieve a
minimum staffing level, increasing the amount of overtime that is incurred.
7.8
7.6
7.4
7.2
7
6.8
6.6
6.4
6.2
'patrol Officers per Shift
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
•Patrol Officers per Shift
7.71
7.35
7.05
6.89
7.08
6.93
6.76
7.14
6
Financial Analysis
Law Enforcement Cost Trend:
Option 1— Actual costs per year Total Change: 46.87% Annual Change: 4.27%
Option 2 — Costs Controlled for Inflation (CPI) Total Change: 17.7% Annual Change: 1.81%
Option 3 — Costs Controlled for Inflation (IPD -Govt) Total Change: 5.01% Annual Change: .54%
$18,000,000
$17,000,000
$16,000,000
$15,000,000
$14,000,000
$13,000,000
$12,000,000
$11,000,000
$10,000,000
SV Law Enforcement Costs
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
—0—Law Enforcement Contract Costs
—M—Contract Costs Controlled for
Inflation (CPI)
Contract Costs Controlled for
Inflation Implicit Price Deflator -
Govt.
The contract costs for Spokane Valley Law Enforcement have increased by an average 4.27 %. When
adjusted for inflation by using the Consumer Price Index the annual growth of these costs has been
1.81 %. Another inflation index is the Implicit Price Deflator for government, which better reflects the
costs that effect government entities. When adjusting the law enforcement costs utilizing this index the
average change has been .54 %, which also takes into account the two added commissioned officers.
A factor to take into account when examining these costs is that the collective bargain agreement with
the Deputy Sheriff's Association has been expired since 2010 and negotiations are entering arbitration
later this year.
7
Spokane Valley Revenue Trend:
Spokane Valley General Fund Revenue Growth (In
Millions
2004
2005
2006
Revenue Type
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Total
Avr.
Growth
Growth
2003 -
2003 -2012
2012
Property Tax
8.82
8.98
9.51
8.04
9.52
9.84
10.48
10.74
10.68
10.80
22.41%
2.25%
Sales Tax
10.53
13.56
16.87
16.55
17.44
16.16
14.34
14.10
14.86
15.43
46.55%
4.25%
Criminal Justice Sales Tax
1.11
1.12
1.22
1.34
1.44
1.38
1.26
1.24
1.27
1.29
15.66%
1.62%
Public Safety Sales Tax
0.00
0.00
0.60
0.74
0.80
0.78
0.72
0.72
0.72
0.72
20.48%
2.66%
Gambling Tax
0.71
0.88
0.99
0.89
0.84
0.85
0.74
0.67
0.52
0.62
- 11.90%
-1.41%
Franchise Fee /Bus. Licenses
0.62
0.68
0.75
0.85
0.94
1.01
1.05
1.27
1.13
1.21
94.83%
7.41%
State Shared Revenues
0.94
1.10
1.15
1.14
1.27
1.46
1.70
2.04
1.90
2.09
123.14%
8.92%
Service Revenue
1.28
1.80
2.51
1.96
2.18
2.09
1.65
1.47
1.39
1.56
22.46%
2.25%
Fines and Forfeitures
0.74
1.26
1.23
1.32
1.35
1.75
1.79
1.83
1.58
1.27
72.13%
6.03%
Recreation
0.16
0.15
0.34
0.58
0.50
0.60
0.63
0.63
0.53
0.65
296.07%
15.29%
Miscellaneous
0.04
0.07
0.25
0.42
0.69
0.66
0.33
0.26
0.15
0.21
468.99%
19.32%
Total
24.94
29.60
35.43
33.82
36.95
36.57
34.68
34.96
34.75
35.85
43.75%
4.03%
General Fund Rev. Growth
0.90%
18.71%
19.69%
-4.55%
9.27%
-1.05%
-5.16%
0.80%
-0.60%
3.17%
Property Tax Growth
I
1.80%
5.88%
- 15.41%
18.38%
3.29%
6.50%
2.53%
-0.56%
1.10%
Notes:
• In 2006 Spokane Valley became annexed to the Library District and the City no longer received
the $.50/ $1,000 levy for library services, greatly reducing the City's total levy amount.
• In 2007, the Spokane Co. Tax Assessor updated the tax rolls, which increases the assessed value
throughout the County 18%. Because the City levied the maximum rate in 2007, this increased
the City's levy amount by 18%.
Because of the Library District Annexation, the following table estimates what the City's revenues would
have looked like without the annexation in order to present a more accurate picture of revenue growth
over time.
evenue Estimates without Loss of Library Property,
I.
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Total
Annual
Growth
Growth
Property Tax
8.82
8.98
9.51
9.84
11.65
12.04
12.82
13.14
13.07
13.22
49.80%
4.49%
Sales Tax
10.53
13.56
16.87
16.55
17.44
16.16
14.34
14.10
14.86
15.43
46.55%
4.25%
Criminal Justice Sales Tax
1.11
1.12
1.22
1.34
1.44
1.38
1.26
1.24
1.27
1.29
15.66%
1.62%
Public Safety Sales Tax
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.74
0.80
0.78
0.72
0.72
0.72
0.72
-2.24%
-0.38%
Gambling Tax
0.71
0.88
0.99
0.89
0.84
0.85
0.74
0.67
0.52
0.62
- 11.90%
-1.41%
Franchise Fee /Business Licer
0.62
0.68
0.75
0.85
0.94
1.01
1.05
1.27
1.13
1.21
94.83%
7.41%
State Shared Revenues
0.94
1.10
1.15
1.14
1.27
1.46
1.70
2.04
1.90
2.09
123.14%
8.92%
Service Revenue
1.28
1.80
2.51
1.96
2.18
2.09
1.65
1.47
1.39
1.56
22.46%
2.25%
Fines and Forfeitures
0.74
1.26
1.23
1.32
1.35
1.75
1.79
1.83
1.58
1.27
72.13%
6.03%
Recreation
0.16
0.15
0.34
0.58
0.50
0.60
0.63
0.63
0.53
0.65
296.07%
15.29%
Miscellaneous
0.04
0.07
0.25
0.42
0.69
0.66
0.33
0.26
0.15
0.21
468.99%
19.32%
Total
24.94
29.60
34.83
35.62
39.09
38.77
37.02
37.36
37.14
38.26
53.44%
4.76%
Annual Growth
15.76%
15.01%
2.21%
8.87%
-0.82%
-4.71%
0.90%
-0.60%
2.95%
8
While the revenues have kept pace with law enforcement costs they do not allow the contract to keep
pace with population growth and inflation.
The City experienced healthy property tax revenues in the early years of existence, but since the
economic downturn, these revenues have remained relatively static. While they have kept pace with
the population growth of the City in the last few years they have not kept pace with inflation or the
combined effect of population growth and inflation.
$11,600,000
$11,400,000
$11,200,000
$11,000,000
$10,800,000
$10,600,000
$10,400,000
Property Tax Revenue
Q1V,LVV,VVV
2009
2010
2011
2012
—0—Property Tax Rev
$10,475,751
$10,741,306
$10,681,620
$10,799,122
t Property Tax Rev
Adj for Pop Growth
$10,475,751
$10,568,299
$10,610,099
$10,661,908
Property Tax Rev
Adj for Inflation IPD
$10,475,751
$10,728,397
$11,125,130
$11,346,196
Property Tax Rev
$10,475,751
$10,820,946
$11,263,900
$11,542,724
—X—
Adj for Growth and !nil
The City's sales tax revenues are still significantly less than the 2007 high of $17.4 million, there is some
hope in this area is well. While the annual growth from 2009 — 2012 was 2.44 %, the regular sales tax
collections for 2013 are projected to be an increase of 7.5% over 2012 receipts.
$17,500,000
$16,500,000
$15,500,000
$14,500,000
$13,500,000
$12,500,000
Sales Tax Revenues
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
•Sales Tax Revenues
9
Recommendations
Power Shift and Property Crime Enhancement:
Corporals - The City of Spokane Valley currently has 6 corporals in the patrol division. These corporals
assist the sergeants in a supervisory capacity and occasionally fill in for sergeants to provide supervisor
coverage to the patrol platoons. The unincorporated County does not utilize patrol corporals, instead
providing additional sergeants and maximizing the number of patrol deputies. We recommend also
eliminating patrol corporals and utilizing these positions to help create a Power Shift, provide a
sufficient number of patrol sergeant supervisors for all platoons, and enhance Property Crime
Investigations.
New
3 Patrol Sergeants
Existing
6 Patrol Corporals
New
1 Patrol Deputy
New
2 Property Crime
Detectives
Power Shift - A Power Shift, that overlaps the existing day and night platoons, will be created by taking
one deputy from each of the four existing platoons, adding one deputy from the existing corporals, and
hiring two new deputies. Members of the Power Shift platoon will work every day from 3:00 p.m. until
1:00 a.m. during the highest concentration of calls for service. The greatest number of deputies per shift
will be on weekends.
Existing
Platoon Day 1
Existing
Platoon Day 2
1 Deputy
Existing
Platoon Night 1
1 Deputy 1 Deputy
New
Power Shift
7 Deputies
Deputy
Existing
Corporals
10
Existing
Platoon Night 2
1 Deputy
2 Deputies
New
New Hires
Power Shift Schedule:
Impact of Power Shift:
18
16
• 14
j> 12
m10
.c 8
'co • 6
v.) ▪ 4
2
0
18
16
• 14
ct 12
bO
.c 8
6
co
(/) 4
2
0
Current Patrol Staffing Versus CaII Load
Current Staffing Calls for Service
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
ni ni ni ni ni ni ni ni ni ni i ni ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
N ,-i N c'f) 4 Cr; Li; N 00 Cr; 6 ,-i N ,-i N ("f; 4 Cr; CO N 00 a; 6
Power Shift Staffing Versus CaII Load
Power Shift Staffing Calls for Service
350
- 300
- 250
- 200
- 150
- 100
- 50
0
350
- 300
- 250
- 200
150
- 100
- 50
0
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
ni ni ni ni ni ni ni ni ni ni i ni ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
N ,-i N c'f; 4 Cr; Li; N 00 (5.; 6 ,-i iNi N c'f; 4 Cr; Li; N 66 Cr; d ,-i
,-1
L_ _
11
M
T
W
TH
F
SA
SU
Assigned
3
3
4
4
4
7
3
Minimum
2
2
3
3
3
5
2
Impact of Power Shift:
18
16
• 14
j> 12
m10
.c 8
'co • 6
v.) ▪ 4
2
0
18
16
• 14
ct 12
bO
.c 8
6
co
(/) 4
2
0
Current Patrol Staffing Versus CaII Load
Current Staffing Calls for Service
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
ni ni ni ni ni ni ni ni ni ni i ni ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
N ,-i N c'f) 4 Cr; Li; N 00 Cr; 6 ,-i N ,-i N ("f; 4 Cr; CO N 00 a; 6
Power Shift Staffing Versus CaII Load
Power Shift Staffing Calls for Service
350
- 300
- 250
- 200
- 150
- 100
- 50
0
350
- 300
- 250
- 200
150
- 100
- 50
0
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
ni ni ni ni ni ni ni ni ni ni i ni ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
N ,-i N c'f; 4 Cr; Li; N 00 (5.; 6 ,-i iNi N c'f; 4 Cr; Li; N 66 Cr; d ,-i
,-1
L_ _
11
Enhanced and Dedicated Property Crime and Drug Investigations:
The number of Spokane Valley property crimes has increased from a low in 2007 of 7,338 to a high of
10,328 in 2012 for a total increase of 41% during that time. The police department has made numerous
high profile arrests of property theft rings recently but can only solve cases that they have the
manpower to work. In the most recent year there were nearly 500 cases that were unassigned due to
lack of personnel. Shifting two patrol corporals to property crime detectives will provide needed
personnel while combining property crime and drug investigators and putting them under the control of
Spokane Valley command staff will create a dedicated, enhanced investigative unit that will tackle the
property and drug crimes that are inextricably linked. Having all property crime and drug crime
investigators as dedicated Spokane Valley officers will insure that we have the appropriate number of
personnel that are focused on solving current Spokane Valley crimes and preventing future crimes while
continuing to work regionally with other agencies. These officers will be under the supervision of the
Spokane Valley command staff and under a single command structure instead of a split structure. As
property and drug crimes are often comingled, a combined effort to solve and prevent these crimes is
more effective and efficient.
Current Property Crimes and Drug Structure
Dedicated Property Crimes (City Control)
1 Sergeant
6 Detectives
Proposed Property Crime and Drug Structure
Corporals
2 Detectives
Shared Investigative Task Force (County Control)
(City pays about 50 %)
1 Sergeant
6 Detectives
Shared ITF
3 Detectives
Dedicated Property and Drug Crimes (City Control)
1 Sergeant
11 Detectives
12
Cost and Funding Options
Current Methodology Cost Impact:
Cost Per Commissioned Officer = $150,000 X 2
• Adjusted for 2014= $154, 866 X 2 = S309.732 (Includes Support Staff, M &O, Overhead,
Equipment)
Potential Additional Cost Impacts
Impact from Position Changes — Minimal Impact to Commissioned Officer Rate:
• 2 Corporals to 2 Detectives = No Change
• 3 Corporals to 3 Sergeants = $28,396
• 1 Corporal to 1 Deputy = ($25,389)
Impact from Usage on Radio and Dispatch costs (More officer initiated calls) = $35,000
Academy Costs = $6,090
Subtotal Additional Cost Impacts = S44.097
Total First Year Costs = $353,829
Recurring Costs = $347,739
Additional Recommended One -time Expenses
Precinct Building Improvements = $50,000 (Cubicles, Work Station Improvement)
Opticom Traffic Signal Controllers = $19,384
Subtotal One -time Expenses= S69.384
Total Staffing Costs + One -Time Expenses = $423,213
* Additional Patrol Officers could result in a greater number of cases entering the criminal justice system
resulting in increased Spokane Valley usage and increased costs for other Public Safety Contracts.
13
Goals and Measures
• Percentage of Calls for Service Responded to by Officers
• Average Response Time by Priority Type of Call (Based upon ability of CAD system)
• 1/3 or greater of all incidents will be Deputy initiated — (ICMA Best Practice — Proactive Policing)
• Percentage of property crime cases worked
• Citizen satisfaction
• Maximize Officers per Shift — Schedule based upon seasonal and time of day call load,
lieutenants approve less than 7 patrol officers per shift.
14
Conclusion
The goal when embarking on this study was to ensure that every opportunity to maximize efficiency was
explored prior to considering adding personnel. The Spokane Valley Police Command Staff identified
several opportunities to enhance the service delivered to the citizens. The result is a plan that is a
combination of enhancements to existing services while utilizing two new patrol officers in the most
efficient way possible.
• Add two (2) new Patrol Deputies to the law enforcement contract.
• Reassign six (6) Patrol Corporals.
Use Patrol Corporals to create one (1) Power Shift Deputy, three (3) Patrol Sergeants, and two
(2) Property Crime Detectives.
• Create a Patrol Power Shift that overlaps the Day and Night Shifts to match the highest staffing
levels with the highest call loads.
• Increase Property Crime Detectives by two (2) (by shifting corporals) and combine all property
crime and drug crime detectives into one dedicated Spokane Valley unit with a single sergeant
supervisor.
• Add traffic signal controllers to new patrol SUVs to increase response times and enhance safety
for officers and citizens.
• Invest in safe and functional work spaces in the precinct building.
Maximize staffing levels per shift
15
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: March 18, 2014
Check all that apply: ['consent ❑ old business
['information ® admin. report
Department Director Approval:
['new business ['public hearing
['pending legislation ['executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Public Record Act training
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 42.56; SVMC 2.75
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: N/A
BACKGROUND: Staff will provide training on the City's obligations under the Public Record Act
under chapter 42.56 RCW, and its local implementation under chapter 2.75 SVMC.
OPTIONS: N/A
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: N/A
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A
STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, City Attorney
ATTACHMENTS: PowerPoint presentation
PUBLIC RECORD ACT
TRAINING - CITY COUNCIL
Cary Driskell, City Attorney
The Public Record Act — RCW 42.56
Historical background
- Adopted in 1972 by Initiative 276
- Codified by Legislature under RCW 42.17
- Re- codified by Legislature in 2005, RCW 42.56
Strongly worded mandate - statute
The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to
the agencies that serve them. The people, in
delegating authority, do not give their public servants
the right to decide what is good for the people to know
and what is not good for them to know. The people
insist on remaining informed so that they may
maintain control over the instruments they have
created.
RCW 42.56.030
Strongly worded mandate - courts
The PRA is the "preservation of the most central tenets
of representative government, namely, the sovereignty
of the people and the accountability to the people of
public officials and institutions:' Progressive Animal
Welfare Society v. University of Washington, 125 Wn.2d
243, 251 (1994)
"Public ecord" definition
Relevant portion of definitions states as follows:
"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
,.....
"Public Record" definition
Most important parts are:
(1) "writing"
(Z) "relating to the conduct of government or the
performance of any governmental or proprietary
function'; and
(3) "owned, used, or retained by any state or local agency
II
"Writing" definitior
"Writing" means handwriting, typewriting, printing,
photostating, photographing, and every other means
of recording any form of communication 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.
"Writing" definition — 2.0
E -mails
Tweets
Text messages
Transitory postings on Facebook
Meta -data
"Meta- data"
Metadata is automatically- generated information,
embedded in an electronic document, which shows
the document's history, tracking, and /or management.
It is basically an historical journal of a document. It
tells when it was created, when it was modified, by
whom, when it was opened, saved, its size, etc
O'Neill v. City of Shoreline, 170 Wn.2d 138 (2010)
Identity or motivation of requester
Agency cannot demand the identify or motivation of the
requester as a condition of providing the records
Agency duty to respond
Local governmental entities are mandated to adopt
and enforce reasonable rules governing how the
agency shall respond to requests. RCW 42.56.10o.
Spokane Valley has done that through adoption of
SVMC 2.75
Agency "best practices"
1. Entity management attitude
2. Training
3. Prioritizing requests
4. Tracking requests
5. Effective monitoring
6. Central point of contact in the agency
7. Visible signage
8. Transparency and communication
9. User - friendly website
10. Good records management and information technology
11. Appropriate copying charges
12. Using the installment method for large requests
13. Communicate agency appeal process for record denials
14. Documenting the request process
''RA v. discovery rules
Agency cannot deny request because of ongoing suit
Litigation party can file both a PRA and a discovery
request
Scope of what you can get under PRA is broader re: not
limited to relevance in relation to the controversy
prompt response required
Must respond within 5 business days:
(1) providing the record;
(Z) 2010 change allowing agency to respond by
directing to on -line version
(3) acknowledging that the [agency] has received the
request and providing a reasonable estimate of the
time the [agency] will require to respond to the
request; or
(4) denying the record request
Third party interest
If an agency thinks there may be third party interest, it
should notify the third party and advise them that the
agency intends to release the records
Provide third party with a reasonable time (i5 days) to
file injunctive action if so inclined
Helps protect the agency from a claim that the third
party's right to privacy was violated.
What do you really want?
Request for clarification
Request for information, not a record
No duty to make record, but the City may want to if it
is more convenient for us to do so
Location of record
Location not critical factor, nature of record is what is
critical (relates to conduct of government or
performance of governmental or proprietary function)
Personal computer of staff or Council
In possession of third party contractor?
Charges for copies
Can't charge for search /compiling /redaction time
Default is $o.15 per page
May require io% deposit for large requests
Installments if request is large /time - consuming
If installment not picked up within 3o days, no need to
continue with the balance of the request
Types of exemptions
Initially only 10 in 1972
Now over 300
�ftnation not protected
examples
- Council and employee names
- Council and employee salary
- Council and employee benefits
- Employee vacation /sick time used
- Council and employee work e -mail address
- employee length of service
- Employee performance evaluations discussing
specific instances of misconduct; otherwise protected
Attorney work product
RCW 42.56.290 - "[r] ecords that are relevant to a
controversy to which an agency is a party but which
records would not be available to another party under
the rules of pretrial discovery for causes pending in the
superior courts are exempt from disclosure under this
chapter."
The records at issue must relate to completed, existing,
or reasonably anticipated litigation. Morgan v. City of
Federal Way, i66 Wn.2d 747 (2009); Dawson v. Daly,
120 Wn.2d 782 (1993)•
Attorney - client privilege
RCW 42.56.070(1) contains what is commonly referred to as
the "other laws" exemption to disclosure. It specifically
states in pertinent part that "each agency ...shall make
available ...all public records unless [exempt under the
PRA] or other statute which exempts or prohibits
disclosure of specific information or records."
RCW 5.60.06o(2)(a) states that "[a]n attorney or counselor
shall not, without the consent of his or her client, be
examined as to any communication made by the client to
him or her, or his or her advice given thereon in the course
of professional employment."
Exemption logs
A response denying a record request must sufficiently
describe the withheld records individually by stating:
(a) the type of record withheld,
(b) the date of the document,
(c) number of pages being withheld,
(d) the author and /or recipient of the document, and
(e) the specific exemption (including RCW provision) relied
upon for each individual record, rather than generally
asserting, for example, that deliberative process exemption
applies as to all withheld documents.
New cause of action
New cause of action for inadequate search
Relied on FOIA precedent
If an agency learns facts that suggest a search of an
additional location or source might reasonably be
expected to uncover responsive records and fails to do
so, then the agency cannot ignore that lead. Failure to
look where records would reasonably be found is a
violation of the Act itself subject to penalties and fees
Penalties
RCW 42•56.550(4) provides that it "shall be within the
discretion of the court to award such person an amount not
to exceed one hundred dollars for each day that he or she
was denied the right to inspect or copy said public record."
how much of a fine to assess is based on two steps: (i)
count the number of days the party was denied access to
the records, and (z) determine the appropriate per day
penalty, up to sioo per day depending on the nature of the
denial
No daily penalty for each document - Yousoufian v. Sims,
152 Wn.ad 451 (2004)
determining amount of penalty
Mitigating factors are:
the lack of clarity of the request;
an agency's prompt response or legitimate follow -up inquiry
for clarification;
good faith, honest, timely, and strict compliance with all the
procedural requirements and exceptions;
whether there was proper training and supervision of
personnel;
the reasonableness of any explanation for noncompliance;
helpfulness of the agency to the requestor and the existence
of systems to track and retrieve public records.
determining how much penalty
Aggravating factors that increase a penalty are:
a delayed response, especially in circumstances making time of the
essence for the requester;
lack of strict compliance with all the procedural requirements and
exceptions;
whether there was a lack of proper training and supervision of
personnel and response;
unreasonableness of any explanation for noncompliance (negligent/
reckless/wanton/bad faith/intentional n n co m li n ce wit h the PRA);
dishonesty;
potential for public harm, including economic loss or loss of
accountability;
governmental accou tab ty,
personal economic loss for requester;
determining a penalty amount sufficient to deter future misconduct
considering the size of the agency and the facts of the case.
determining how much penalty
Good faith?
Zink v. City of Mesa, 140 Wn. App. 3Z8 (ZOOS) - large
and frequent record requests by former Mayor
materially interfering with operation of clerk's office
Trial court was sympathetic ( "substantially complied",
full compliance amounted to "practical impossibility';
and that the requests amounted to unlawful
harassment)
Court of Appeals disagreed, finding strict compliance
required, not substantial. Penalty and fees of $246,000
Attorney fees
The prevailing party is entitled to "reasonable attorney
fees" and costs of suit.
Questions?
DRAFT
ADVANCE AGENDA
For Planning Discussion Purposes Only
as of March 13, 2014; 9:15 a.m.
Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative
To: Council & Staff
From: City Clerk, by direction of City Manager
Re: Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings
March 25, 2014, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, March 17]
1. PUBLIC HEARING: Interim Marijuana Regulations — Erik Lamb (10 minute)
2. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) (5 minutes)
3. Second Reading Ordinance 14 -003 Amending Permitted Use Matrix — John Hohman, Mike Basinger (15 min)
4. Motion Consideration: SRTC Call for Projects — Steve Worley (10 minutes)
5. Motion Consideration: Contract Amendment, Law Enforcement — Mike Jackson, Morgan Koudelka (15 min)
6. Admin Report: STA Bus Shelters — Eric Guth
7. Admin Report: Advance Agenda
8. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports
(10 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[ *estimated meeting: 70 minutes]
April 1, 2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m.
1. Comp Plan Amendments (CPA 2014) Admin Report — Lori Barlow
2. Proposed Findings of Fact, Interim Marijuana Regulations — Erik Lamb
3. Training- Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) — Cary Driskell
4. Advance Agenda
[due Mon, March 24]
(20 minutes)
(15 minutes)
(30 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[ *estimated meeting: 70 minutes]
April 8, 2014, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, March 31]
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) (5 minutes)
2. Proposed Ordinance Adopting Findings of Fact, Interim Marijuana Regulations — Erik Lamb (15 minutes)
3. Admin Report: Appleway Trail Grant — Mike Stone (15 minutes)
4. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes)
[ *estimated meeting: 40 minutes]
April 15, 2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m.
1. Advance Agenda
[due Mon, April 7]
(5 minutes)
[ *estimated meeting: minutes]
April 22, 2014, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. First Reading Proposed Ordinance, Comp Plan Amendments — Lori Barlow
3. First Reading Proposed Ordinance, Comp Plan Map — Lori Barlow
4. Proposed Resolution, Appleway Trail Grant — Mike Stone
5.Admin Report: Advance Agenda
6. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports
April 29, 2014, No Meeting
May 6, 2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m.
1. Advance Agenda
Draft Advance Agenda 3/13/2014 10:11:03 AM
[ *estimated
[due Mon, April 14]
(5 minutes)
(15 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(5 minutes)
meeting: 45 minutes]
[due Mon, April 28]
(5 minutes)
Page 1 of 2
May 13, 2014, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance, Comp Plan Amendments — Lori Barlow
3.Second Reading Proposed Ordinance, Comp Plan Map — Lori Barlow
4. Admin Report: Advance Agenda
May 20, 2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m.
1. Advance Agenda
May 27, 2014, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda
3. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports
June 3, 2014, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m.
1. Advance Agenda
June 10, 2014, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda
[due Mon, May 5]
(5 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(10 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[due Mon, May 12]
(5 minutes)
[ *estimated meeting: minutes]
[due Mon, May 19]
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
[due Mon, May 26]
(5 minutes)
[due Mon, June 2]
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
June 17, 2014, tentative date: Budget Workshop, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. [due Mon, June 9]
No evening meeting June 17, 2014
June 24, 2014, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m.
1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes)
2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda
3. Info Only: Department Monthly Reports
OTHER PENDING AND /OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS:
ADA Transition Plan
Avista Electrical Franchise
AWC June 2014 conference
CDBG (Comm Dev Block Grants)
Coal /Oil Train Environmental Impact Statement
Fire and Life Safety Code
Future Acquisition Areas
Historic Preservation
Interim Marijuana Regulations expire Aug 11, 2014
Public Safety Contract, Proposed Amendment
Sports Commission Update
Stormwater Swales, care of
Street Vacation/Connectivity Process
Urban Agriculture (animals, bees, etc.)
*time for public or Council comments not included
[due Mon, June 16]
(5 minutes)
(5 minutes)
Draft Advance Agenda 3/13/2014 10:11:03 AM Page 2 of 2
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: March 18, 2014
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business
® information ❑ admin. report
Department Director Approval: ❑
❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Ecology Stormwater Grant — Notice of Award
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 90.48, Chapter 173 -200 WAC, Title 33 U.S.C. 1251 -1376;
Storm and Surface Water Utility: SVMC 3.80; Aquifer Protection Area Fund: RCW 36.36.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Approval of Stormwater Capital Improvement Plan
2014 -2019, May 28, 2013.
BACKGROUND: City staff applied for Ecology Grant funding in June of 2013 for the Broadway,
Havana to Fancher SD Project. The project is listed in the City's Stormwater Capital
Improvement Plan 2014 -2019. The project ranked high, but was just below the initial Ecology
grant funding cutoff level. Since the initial ranking, Ecology has received funding back from
other stormwater projects from across the state that came in under budget or did not proceed to
construction for various reasons.
With the return of previously encumbered funds, Ecology recently notified City staff that
$953,000 in grant funding is available for the Broadway, Havana to Fancher SD Project. This
represents a 75% match for up to $1.27 million in total project costs. The 25% City match of
$317,000 would come from the 403 account, principally in 2015. The project would need to be
completed by June 30, 2015 to receive eligible funding from Ecology.
The Broadway, Havana to Fancher SD project will offer additional protection or eliminate up to
38 stormwater drywells. These facilities were identified as having a relatively higher threat to
groundwater as compared to other stormwater facilities in the City. Broadway Avenue in this
area has a higher stormwater pollution probability due to large traffic counts in a commercial
and industrial zone.
City staff will proceed with finalizing a funding agreement with Ecology, continue with design in
2014, bid in late 2014, and construct in spring 2015 to take advantage of the current funding
opportunity for this project.
OPTIONS: None at this time.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: None at this time. Upon receipt of grant agreement,
staff will bring back for Council approval.
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The Broadway, Havana to Fancher SD project has a
planning level budget of $1,270,000. The City would be required to match 25% of expenditures.
STAFF CONTACT: Eric Guth — Public Works Director; Art Jenkins — Stormwater Engineer
ATTACHMENTS:
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: March 18, 2014 Department Director Approval:
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing
® information ['admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: School Zone Flashing Beacons — Program Update
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: n/a
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: At the Council Meeting on March 11, 2014 Council
requested an update on the School Flashing Beacon Program.
BACKGROUND: The Washington Traffic Safety Commission (WTSC) School Zone Flashing
Beacon (SZFB) program allows local agencies and school districts to apply for funding to
purchase and install school zone beacons at elementary and middle schools. A school zone
contains two (2) flashers. WTSC provides funding up to $7,500 per school zone. Typically, the
City has to cover a portion of the equipment cost since the grant does not cover all of the project
costs.
In 2013 WTSC awarded the City funding for two new school zones at Adams Elementary
(beacons to be installed on Adams Road) and for McDonald Elementary (beacons to be
installed on McDonald Road). The equipment was received in December, and will be installed
later this month.
Within the City limits, there are 27 public elementary and middle schools. After these beacons
are installed, the City will maintain 36 individual beacons at sixteen (16) different schools. This
will leave elven (11) schools without beacons.
The SZFB are installed based upon a prioritization with input from the School District and
Police. These zones are prioritized based upon characteristics such as highest traffic volumes,
traffic speeds, and uncontrolled crosswalks. The City typically confers with the patrol officers
and school districts to develop a priority list for locations having the greatest need. It should be
noted that the City does not consider Trent Elementary and N. Pines Middle School as
candidates for SZFB since the major crossings for these schools are along a state highway, and
have not been supported by WSDOT in the past.
Typically WTSC has had a call for SZFB projects every two years. It is anticipated that the next
call for SZFB projects will be in 2015.
OPTIONS: n/a
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: None.
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None.
STAFF CONTACT: Eric Guth, Public Works Director
ATTACHMENTS: None
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: March 18, 2014
Check all that apply: ['consent ❑ old business
® information ['admin. report
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Left -turn medians
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None
Department Director Approval: El
❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
BACKGROUND: A concerned citizen requested the City to review the following items.
Preliminary Traffic Engineering responses are provided in italics:
Move the median away from the intersection so that trucks can maneuver the left -turn
without hitting the concrete divider: The practice of installing medians has changed over the
years. In the beginning medians and double yellow lines were extended to the crosswalk. More
recently, the common practice is to install stop bars and not extend the medians and /or double
yellow striping all the way to the stop bar, which is typically now located 4' to 10' back from the
crosswalk. The City does have intersections where the median extends to the crosswalk, and
staff is evaluating each location, and will make improvements or bring to Council for discussion
as necessary.
Move the stop bar further from the crosswalk at intersections so that trucks may
maneuver the left -turn without impacting traffic: The industry standard is to locate the stop
bars from 4' to 10' back from the crosswalk to enhance the visibility and safety of the pedestrian.
In general, all of the City stop bars are located within this distance. If there are locations that
need to be corrected staff will work with the striping contractor to remove the old stop bar, and
reinstall the new one the proper distance back from the crosswalk.
Revisit the lane assignments on Thierman, between Sprague and Appleway, to allow a
shared through -left turn lane: The majority of traffic volumes utilizing the intersections of
Thierman with Appleway and Sprague are through traffic volumes. As such, the emphasis on
moving east -west traffic is of the highest priority for efficient travel. Making lane adjustments on
Thierman would require phasing changes to the traffic signals, and would impact the traffic flows
on Appleway and Sprague.
The request to make the northbound through lane into a shared through -left turn lane could lead
to the `trapping of vehicles' as the inside turn lane would likely turn into the lane leading to the
Sprague on -ramp with 1 -90. In addition, traffic signal modifications (signal heads and wiring),
signing changes, striping changes, and signal timing modifications would be required to make
this operation as safe as possible by changing the traffic signal to split phase, which would
negatively impact the coordination along Sprague. The split phase signal operation will require
more green -time allocated to the north /south movements and will cause additional delay to the
traveling public along Sprague. Similar concerns apply to the Appleway /Thierman intersection.
At this time staff recommends periodic monitoring of these intersections, including conducting
heavy vehicle counts and site observation to identify the number of incidents (trucks and cars
blocking lanes) that occur daily.
OPTIONS: Information only.
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Information only
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: None.
STAFF CONTACT: Sean Messner, Senior Traffic Engineer
Eric Guth, Public Works Director
ATTACHMENTS:
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY
Request for Council Action
Meeting Date: March 18, 2014
Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business
® information ['admin. report
Department Director Approval:
❑ new business ❑ public hearing
❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session
AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Public comment regarding gender identity issues and public restrooms
GOVERNING LEGISLATION: RCW 49.60
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None
BACKGROUND: On March 11, 2014, a member of the public provided public comment
regarding concerns she had about the legality of men dressed as women that use women's
public restrooms. Her specific question was whether the City could adopt a Code provision
prohibiting men from using women's public restroom facilities, and assumedly, prohibiting
women from using men's public restrooms.
This issue is addressed in chapter 49.60 RCW, Washington State's Law Against Discrimination.
RCW 49.60.030 in pertinent part as follows:
(1) The right to be free from discrimination because of ...sexual orientation... is recognized
as and declared to be a civil right. This shall include, but not be limited to:
(b) The right to the full enjoyment of any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities,
or privileges of any place of public resort, accommodation, assemblage, or amusement;
(2) A person deeming himself or herself injured by any act in violation of this chapter shall
have a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction to enjoin further violations, or to
recover the actual damages sustained by the person, or both, together with the cost of suit
including reasonable attorney fees or any other appropriate remedy authorized by this
chapter or the United States Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended, or the Federal Fair
Housing Amendments Act of 1988.
(3) ...[a]ny unfair practice prohibited by this chapter which is committed in the course of
trade or commerce as defined in the Consumer Protection Act, chapter 19.86 RCW, is, for
the purpose of applying that chapter, a matter affecting the public interest, is not reasonable
in relation to the development and preservation of business, and is an unfair or deceptive
act in trade or commerce.
RCW 49.60.040(26) defines "sexual orientation" as meaning "heterosexuality, homosexuality,
bisexuality, and gender expression or identity. As used in this definition, `gender expression or
identity' means having or being perceived as having a gender identity, self- image, appearance,
behavior, or expression, whether or not that gender identity, self- image, appearance, behavior,
or expression is different from that traditionally associated with the sex assigned to that person
at birth."
RCW 49.60.020 states in relevant part that "[t]he provisions of this chapter shall be construed
liberally for the accomplishment of the purposes hereof."
The Washington State Human Rights Commissions is tasked with enforcing the Law Against
Discrimination. In a "frequently asked questions" provision on their website, the following
question was asked in relation to an employer's obligation regarding providing restrooms for
transgendered individuals:
Q. What is the employer's obligation regarding restrooms?
If an employer maintains gender- specific restrooms, transgender employees should be
permitted to use the restroom that is consistent with the individual's gender identity.
Where single occupancy restrooms are available, they may be designated as "gender
neutral." All employers need to find solutions that are safe, convenient and respect the
transgender employee's dignity.
Although it is possible that the answer may be different outside of an employment situation, it
does not appear to be. This raises a question as to how one is to know whether the individual is
in the bathroom because they are transgendered, or because of prurient interests. In short, we
don't know. It should be noted that regardless of why a person is in a restroom, a person is not
entitled to peer into another stall at a person, which would likely be considered voyeurism
pursuant to RCW 9A.44.115.
Based on the cited law, it would appear that if the City were to adopt a Code provision
prohibiting all men from using women's public restrooms, and all women from using men's
public restrooms, it would likely violate state (and probably federal) law. The City could then be
subject to the various penalties identified in RCW 49.60.030(2), including injunctive relief,
monetary damages, reasonable attorney fees, and any other remedy the Court thinks is
appropriate under the circumstances.
OPTIONS: NA
RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Take no action.
BUDGET /FINANCIAL IMPACTS: NA
STAFF CONTACT: Cary Driskell, City Attorney
ATTACHMENTS: