Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2015, 05-12 Regular Meeting
AGENDA SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING FORMAL FORMAT MEETING Tuesday, May 12, 2015 6:00 p.m. Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers 11707 E Sprague Avenue Council Requests Please Silence Your Cell Phones During Council Meeting CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION: Pastor Matthew Larson, Advent Lutheran Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF AGENDA INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: n/a COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS MAYOR'S REPORT PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is an opportunity for the public to speak on any subject except those on this agenda as action items. (Action items include public hearings, and those items under NEW BUSINESS. Public Comments will be taken on those items at the time those items are discussed.) When you come to the podium, please state your name and city residence for the record and limit remarks to three minutes. 1. CONSENT AGENDA: Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. Proposed Motion: I move to approve the Consent Agenda. a. Approval of vouchers on May 12, 2015 Request for Council Action Form Totaling: $2,448,858.85 b. Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending April 30, 2015: $443,693.11 c. Approval of April 28, 2015 Council Meeting Minutes, Formal Format d. Approval of May 5, 2015 Council Study Session Meeting Minutes NEW BUSINESS 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 15-012 Gambling Tax Amendment — Mark Calhoun [public comment] 3. Motion Consideration: Prosecutor Services Interlocal Amendment — John Pietro, Morgan Koudelka [public comment] 4. Motion Consideration: Contract for Comprehensive Plan Update, Land Quantity and Market Analysis — John Hohman [public comment] PUBLIC COMMENTS: This is an opportunity for the public to speak on any subject except those on this agenda as action items. (Action items include public hearings, and those items under NEW BUSINESS. Public Comments will be taken on those items at the time those items are discussed.) When you come to the podium, please state your name and city residence for the record and limit remarks to three minutes. Council Agenda 05-12-15 Formal Format Meeting Page 1 of 2 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS 5. Support for Change of North/South Corridor name to Thomas S. Foley — Mike Jackson 6. Advance Agenda — Mayor Grafos INFORMATION ONLY: 7. Houk-Maxwell-Sinto Street Preservation Project CITY MANAGER COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT General Meetin,i Schedule (meeting schedule is always subject to change) Regular Council meetings are generally held every Tuesday beginning at 6:00 p.m. The Formal meeting formats are generally held the 21'1 and 41 Tuesdays. Formal meeting have time allocated for general public comments as well as comments after each action item. The Study Session formats (the less formal meeting) are generally held the 1st 3" and 5t'—' Tuesdays. Study Session formats DO NOT have time allocated for general public comments; but if action items are included, comments are permitted after those specific action items. 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. Council Agenda 05-12-15 Formal Format Meeting Page 2 of 2 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 12, 2015 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Approval of the Following Vouchers: VOUCHER 04/23/2015 04/23/2015 04/24/2015 04/30/2015 05/01/2015 05/01/2015 05/05/2015 LIST VOUCHER NUMBERS 35267-35308; 46217; 415150279 6085-6088 35309-35320 35321-35324 35325-35354; 430150040 6089-6095 5127, 5137, 5138, 5140-5142; 35356-35357 GRAND TOTAL: TOTAL AMOUNT $ 135,184.52 $ 920.50 $ 105,430.86 $ 8,370.18 $ 1,913,361.69 $ 646.50 $ 284,944.60 $ 2,448,858.85 #001 - General Fund 001.011.000.511. 001.013.000.513. 001.013.015.515. 001.016.000. 001.018.013.513. 001.018.014.514. 001.018.016.518. 001.032.000. 001.058.050.558. 001.058.051.558. 001.058.055.558. 001.058.056.558. 001.058.057.558 001.076.000.576. 001.076.300.576. 001.076.301.571. 001.076.302.576. 001.076.304.575. 001.076.305.571. 001.090.000.511. 001.090.000.514. 001.090.000.517. 001.090.000.518. 001.090.000.519. 001.090.000.540. 001.090.000.550. 001.090.000.560. 001.090.000.594. 001.090.000.595. Explanation of Fund Numbers found on Voucher Lists Other Funds 101 — Street Fund 103 — Paths & Trails 105 — Hotel/Motel Tax 106 — Solid Waste 120 - CenterPlace Operating Reserve 121— Service Level Stabilization Reserve 122 — Winter Weather Reserve 123 — Civil Facilities Replacement 204 — Debt Service 301 — REET 1 Capital Projects 302 - REET 2 Capital Projects 303 — Street Capital Projects 309 — Parks Capital Grants 310 — Civic Bldg Capital Projects 311 — Pavement Preservation 312 — Capital Reserve 402 — Stormwater Management 403 — Aquifer Protection Area 501 — Equipment Rental & Replacement 502 — Risk Management City Council City Manager Legal Public Safety Deputy City Manager Finance Human Resources Public Works CED - Administration CED — Economic Development CED — Development Services -Engineering CED — Development Services -Planning CED — Building Parks & Rec—Administration Parks & Rec-Maintenance Parks & Rec-Recreation Parks & Rec- Aquatics Parks & Rec- Senior Center Parks & Rec-CenterPlace General Gov't- Council related General Gov't -Finance related General Gov't -Employee supply General Gov't- Centralized Services General Gov't -Other Services General Gov't -Transportation General Gov't -Natural & Economic General Gov't -Social Services General Gov't -Capital Outlay General Gov't -Pavement Preservation RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve attached list of claim vouchers. [Approved as part of the Consent Agenda, or may be removed and discussed separately.] STAFF CONTACT: Mark Calhoun, Deputy City Manager ATTACHMENTS: Voucher Lists vchlist 04/23/2015 2:54:55PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 1 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 35267 4/23/2015 000921 ATO Z RENTAL & SALES INC 35268 4/23/2015 004185 AMP'D ENTERTAINMENT LLC 35269 4/23/2015 004231 BELSBY ENGINEERING 35270 4/23/2015 000173 BINGAMAN, GREG 35271 4/23/2015 004110 BURKES KLEINS DKI 35272 4/23/2015 004246 CCI SURVEYS 35273 4/23/2015 002562 CD'A METALS 35274 4/23/2015 001137 COLLIER, BRANT 35275 4/23/2015 000743 CROWN MOVING CO INC 35276 4/23/2015 000734 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION 35277 4/23/2015 000746 EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPT 197319-1 1963 15163 EXPENSE 73223 73431 7765 885711 EXPENSE 09-10021-15 RE-313-ATB50414061 RE-313-ATB50414063 000-217156-00-2 35278 4/23/2015 004165 EXPRESS SERVICES INC 15580171-5 15608863-5 Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 001.058.057.558 EQUIPMENT RENTAL 001.090.000.594 001.058.055.558 001.018.014.514 001.058.056.524 001.058.056.524 001.013.000.513 101.000.000.542 402.402.000.531 001.090.000.518 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 502.502.000.517 001.058.057.558 001.058.057.558 Total : MICROPHONES FOR COUNCIL CH, Total : PROFESSIONAL SERVICES EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT EMERGENCY SERVICE EMERGENCY SERIVCE Total : Total : Total : CCI LEADERSHIP ASSESSMENT SI Total : SUPPLIES: PW EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : Total : PERMIT CENTER RELOCATION MC Total : STATE ROUTE ROADWAY MAINTEP SIGNAL & ILLUUMINATION MAIN Total : 1ST QTR 2015 UI TAX EMPLOYEMENT SERVICES EMPLOYMENT SERVICES Total : 16.30 16.30 30,771.87 30,771.87 2,130.00 2,130.00 32.00 32.00 155.66 233.49 389.15 175.00 175.00 59.30 59.30 424.47 424.47 6,707.50 6,707.50 1,687.97 3,635.23 5,323.20 4,201.84 4,201.84 1,567.50 1,033.13 Page: 1 vchlist 04/23/2015 2:54:55PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: 2 Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 35278 4/23/2015 004165 004165 EXPRESS SERVICES INC 35279 4/23/2015 002507 FASTENERS INC 35280 4/23/2015 000106 FEDEX 35281 4/23/2015 003261 FEHR & PEERS 35282 4/23/2015 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 35283 4/23/2015 002568 GRANICUS INC 35284 4/23/2015 002682 HAFNER, CHARLES (Continued) S4230845.001 2-996-43554 99675 43601 43602 43604 43605 43607 43608 63900 EXPENSE EXPENSE 35285 4/23/2015 004089 HERRERA ENVIRONMENTAL, CONSULT/ 36449 35286 4/23/2015 000864 JUB ENGINEERS INC. 35287 4/23/2015 001944 LANCER LTD 35288 4/23/2015 000662 NAT'L BARRICADE & SIGN CO 0093284 0452268 0452273 Fund/Dept 101.042.000.542 001.032.000.543 303.303.159.544 311.000.188.595 403.000.197.595 001.013.000.513 001.058.056.558 001.013.000.513 001.058.056.558 001.011.000.511 001.011.000.511 001.011.000.511 402.000.193.531 101.042.000.542 001.058.057.558 001.058.055.558 87112 001.058.055.558 Description/Account Amount SUPPLIES: PW SHIPPING SERVICES Total : Total : Total : 0159 - UNIVERSITY ROAD OVERPA Total : LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION Total : SOFTWARE MAINT BROADCASTIN Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Total : 2015 TIP MAINTENANCE & UPDATE Total : BUSINESS CARDS BUSINESS CARDS SUPPLIES: CD Total : 2,600.63 36.02 36.02 8.46 8.46 696.89 696.89 160.00 136.00 25.00 101.15 45.90 72.25 540.30 719.59 719.59 58.65 58.65 117.30 48,950.84 48,950.84 2,532.27 2,532.27 325.26 163.00 488.26 58.70 Page: 2 vchlist 04/23/2015 2:54:55PM Voucher List Page: 3 Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 35288 4/23/2015 000662 000662 NAT'L BARRICADE & SIGN CO (Continued) Total : 58.70 35289 4/23/2015 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 763772938001 001.032.000.543 SUPPLIES: PW 156.78 763787345001 001.076.000.576 SUPPLIES: PARKS 125.39 763788551001 001.076.000.576 SUPPLIES: PARKS 32.34 764300799001 001.018.013.513 SUUPLIES: OPS 4.53 764979638001 001.032.000.543 SUPPLIES: PW 34.76 Total : 353.80 35290 4/23/2015 001204 POWELL, DOUGLAS EXPENSE 001.058.057.558 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 231.15 Total : 231.15 35291 4/23/2015 000019 PURRFECT LOGOS INC. 41387 001.058.057.558 LOGOS FOR PERMIT CENTER 277.73 Total : 277.73 35292 4/23/2015 000675 RAMAX PRINTING & AWARDS INC 26739 001.018.013.513 NAME PLATE 27.18 Total : 27.18 35293 4/23/2015 000952 RECALL DESTRUCTION SVC 3901166421 001.058.057.558 DOCUMENT DESTRUCTION SERVI 61.61 Total : 61.61 35294 4/23/2015 003407 RIGHT! SYSTEMS INC 134847 001.090.000.594 PHASE 1 SWITCH UPGRADE 1,473.06 Total : 1,473.06 35295 4/23/2015 000318 SHAMROCK PAVING INC 3255 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 256.20 3259 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 444.31 Total : 700.51 35296 4/23/2015 004247 SIX STATES DISTRIBUTORS INC 11 198169 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 50.62 Total : 50.62 35297 4/23/2015 000230 SPOKANE CO AUDITORS OFFICE MARCH 2015 001.058.056.558 RECORDING FEES 777.00 Total : 777.00 35298 4/23/2015 000090 SPOKANE CO INFO SYSTEMS 50312577 402.402.000.531 COUNTY IT SUPPORT MARCH 201: 12,530.33 Total : 12,530.33 35299 4/23/2015 000459 SPOKANE CO TITLE CO 5-200581 303.303.123.595 OWNER'S POLICY 293.49 Page: 3 vchlist 04/23/2015 2:54:55PM Voucher List Page: 4 Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 35299 4/23/2015 000459 000459 SPOKANE CO TITLE CO (Continued) Total : 293.49 35300 4/23/2015 002540 SPOKANE HOUSE OF HOSE INC. 438416 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW Total : 71.01 71.01 35301 4/23/2015 001903 SPOKANE TRAFFIC CONTROL INC 1091 101.042.000.542 FLAGGING SERVICES 318.50 1092 101.042.000.542 FLAGGIN SERVICES 337.50 Total : 656.00 35302 4/23/2015 000065 STAPLES ADVANTAGE 3262546875 001.032.000.543 SUPPLIES 36.02 3262546882 001.032.000.543 SUPPLIES -5.44 3262546897 001.032.000.543 SUPPLIES 53.81 3262546902 001.032.000.543 SUPPLIES 4.78 3262546904 001.032.000.543 SUPPLIES 18.01 3262546906 001.013.000.513 SUPPLIES 45.70 3262546908 001.013.000.513 SUPPLIES 39.75 3262546909 001.058.055.558 SUPPLIES 49.65 3262546910 001.058.055.558 SUPPLIES 50.53 3262546911 001.058.055.558 SUPPLIES -88.36 3262546912 001.058.055.558 SUPPLIES 21.72 3262546913 001.058.055.558 SUPPLIES 25.28 3262546914 001.058.055.558 SUPPLIES 159.42 3262546915 001.076.000.576 SUPPLIES 56.00 Total : 466.87 35303 4/23/2015 000419 SUMMIT LAW GROUP 72906 001.018.016.518 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 140.00 Total : 140.00 35304 4/23/2015 000335 TIRE-RAMA 8080034644 001.058.057.558 53666D: SERVICE 36.90 8080035196 001.058.057.558 40208D: SERVICE 41.58 Total : 78.48 35305 4/23/2015 002597 TWISTED PAIR ENTERPRISES LLC 4132015 001.011.000.511 INSTALL EQUIPMENT Total : 360.00 360.00 35306 4/23/2015 003210 WEST CONSULTANTS INC. 006182 001.058.057.558 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,315.44 Total : 1,315.44 Page: 4 vchlist 04/23/2015 2:54:55PM Voucher List Page: 5 Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 35307 4/23/2015 000676 WEST- THOMAS REUTERS 831565459 001.013.015.515 WEST INFORMATION CHARGES 743.69 Total : 743.69 35308 4/23/2015 002960 WICK, BEN EXPENSE 001.011.000.511 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 17.65 Total : 17.65 46217 4/16/2015 000409 DEPT OF REVENUE 1ST QTR 2015 001.076.301.586 LEASEHOLD EXCISE TAX 3,164.41 Total : 3,164.41 415150279 4/15/2015 002244 AOT PUBLIC SAFETY CORPORATION SPKVLY-64 001.016.000.521 CRY WOLF CHARGES 4,414.60 Total : 4,414.60 44 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 135,184.52 44 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 135,184.52 I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Page: 5 vchlist 04/23/2015 3:04:OOPM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : pk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 6085 4/23/2015 004248 FELDHUSEN, EDWARD 6086 4/23/2015 004250 HAMILTON, DEANA 6087 4/23/2015 004249 HENDRICKSON, KELCEY PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND PARKS REFUND 6088 4/23/2015 003655 TRENTWOOD CONGREGATION OF, JEH PARKS REFUND 4 Vouchers for bank code : pk-ref 4 Vouchers in this report Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 001.237.10.99 DAMAGE RETURN/ EVENT CANCEI Total : 001.237.10.99 DAMAGE DEPOIST FIRESIDE LOUD Total : 001.237.10.99 REFUND SUMMER DAY CAMP Total : 001.237.10.99 DAMAGE DEPOSIT GREAT ROOM Total : Bank total : 250.00 250.00 149.50 149.50 311.00 311.00 210.00 210.00 920.50 Total vouchers : 920.50 Page: vchlist 04/24/2015 9:45:42AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 35309 4/24/2015 000030 AVISTA 35310 4/24/2015 000918 BLUE RIBBON LINEN SUPPLY INC 35311 4/24/2015 003500 FIRST CHOICE SERVICES 35312 4/24/2015 003136 GIBSON, CARLY 35313 4/24/2015 001635 ISS FACILITY EVENT SERVICES 35314 4/24/2015 001845 KI 35315 4/24/2015 001684 MARKETING SOLUTIONS NW 35316 4/24/2015 000193 NORTHWEST CHRISTIAN SCHOOL INC 35317 4/24/2015 001860 PLATT ELECTRICAL SUPPLY April 2015 March 2015 9635552 9637543 L00018801-00 S0103447-00 S0106218 S0106394 111916 Expenses 869401 13472082 CP M-4-14-15 May 2015 G474307 G476727 35318 4/24/2015 000451 SPOKANE REG SPORTS COMMISSION 1st QTR 2015 Fund/Dept 101.042.000.542 001.076.302.576 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.018.014.514 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 001.090.000.518 001.076.305.575 001.076.305.575 105.000.000.557 Description/Account Amount UTILITIES: PW MASTER AVISTA UTILITIES: PARKS MASTER AVISTA Total : LINEN SERVICE AND LINEN SERVICE AND LINEN SERVICE AND LINEN SERVICE AND LINEN SERVICE AND LINEN SERVICE AND SUPPLY AT C SUPPLY AT C SUPPLY AT C SUPPLY AT C SUPPLY AT C SUPPLY AT C Total : COFFEE SUPPLIES FOR CENTERF Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : EVENT SVC AT CENTERPLACE Total : SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE Total : MEDIA AND PURCHASES EXPENSE Total : CITY HALL RENT Total : SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE SUPPLIES FOR CENTERPLACE Total : 2015 LODGING TAX REIMBURSEME Total : 27,815.03 7,890.89 35,705.92 72.29 80.72 0.67 210.86 68.04 27.50 460.08 48.13 48.13 27.60 27.60 21.07 21.07 59.44 59.44 1,117.00 1,117.00 35,511.52 35,511.52 132.02 29.95 161.97 30,000.00 30,000.00 Page: �( vchlist 04/24/2015 9:45:42AM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 35319 4/24/2015 000420 SPOKANE REGIONAL HEALTH DIST 2015 35320 4/24/2015 001083 STANDARD PLBG HEATING CONTROLS 53075 12 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 12 Vouchers in this report I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date 001.076.302.576 PERMIT FEES FOR WATER REC FF 2,030.00 Total : 2,030.00 001.016.000.521 WORK ORDER #25522 288.13 Total : 288.13 Bank total : 105,430.86 Total vouchers : 105,430.86 Page: 2� vchlist 04/30/2015 11:37:19AM Voucher List Page: Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 35321 4/30/2015 001606 BANNER BANK 8599 April 2015 001.076.305.575 MICHAELS STORES 43.96 8599 April 2015 001.076.305.575 DOLLARTREE STORES 34.78 8599 April 2015 001.076.305.575 BUSINESS TELECOM PRODUCTS 22.77 8599 April 2015 001.076.305.575 THE HOME DEPOT 90.30 8599 April 2015 001.076.305.575 THE HOME DEPOT -20.09 8599 April 2015 001.076.305.575 THE HOME DEPOT 8.23 8599 April 2015 001.076.305.575 DISPLAYS2GO 170.79 8599 April 2015 001.076.305.575 ALLTECHSTORES.COM 810.00 8599 April 2015 001.076.000.576 VARIDESK 400.00 8599 April 2015 001.076.305.575 SILHOUETTE LIGHTS &STAGING 55.40 8599 April 2015 001.076.305.575 FREDS APPLIANCE 1,727.20 8599 April 2015 001.076.305.575 CONOCO GAS STATION 10.83 8599 April 2015 001.076.305.575 TARGET STORE 42.35 8599 April 2015 001.076.305.575 DELTA AIRLINES 678.20 8599 April 2015 001.076.305.575 AIRPORT LIMOUSINE 184.00 Total : 4,258.72 35322 4/30/2015 001606 BANNER BANK 8573 April 2015 101.000.000.542 INTERNATIONAL MUNICIPAL SIGN/ 99.30 8573 April 2015 001.018.016.518 ASSOCATION OF WA CITIES 195.00 8573 April 2015 001.013.015.515 ASSOCIATION OF WA CITIES 195.00 8573 April 2015 402.402.000.531 GREEN RIVER COMMUNITY COLLE 280.00 8573 April 2015 101.042.000.542 INTERNATIONAL MUNICIPAL SIGN/ 10.00 8573 April 2015 001.013.000.513 VARIDESK 800.00 8573 April 2015 001.090.000.518 ARVATO WINDOWS ESD 108.69 8573 April 2015 001.018.016.518 AMAZON.COM 43.27 8573 April 2015 101.000.000.542 KC AUTO PAINT 39.51 Total : 1,770.77 35323 4/30/2015 001606 BANNER BANK 8557 April 2015 001.011.000.511 ALASKAAIRLINES 779.20 8557 April 2015 001.011.000.511 ALASKAAIRLINES 304.20 8557 April 2015 001.011.000.511 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY CHAP 50.00 8557 April 2015 001.011.000.511 ALASKA AIRLINES 404.20 8557 April 2015 001.011.000.511 THE GEORGE HOTEL 388.16 8557 April 2015 001.011.000.511 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY CHAP 10.00 8557 April 2015 001.011.000.511 ROSAUERS FOOD & DRUG CENTE 7.98 8557 April 2015 001.011.000.511 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY CHAP 10.00 Page: �� vchlist 04/30/2015 11:37:19AM /U Voucher List Page: Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 35323 4/30/2015 001606 BANNER BANK (Continued) 8557 April 2015 35324 4/30/2015 001606 BANNER BANK 8565 April 2015 8565 April 2015 8565 April 2015 8565 April 2015 8565 April 2015 4 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 4 Vouchers in this report I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date 001.011.000.511 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY CHAP Total : 001.032.000.543 001.032.000.543 101.042.000.542 001.018.013.513 101.042.000.542 BEST BUY NORTHWEST BUSINESS STAMPS URM CASH AND CARRY PAPER PLUS PETERS HARDWARE Total : Bank total : Total vouchers : 50.00 2,003.74 43.47 121.20 23.73 35.59 112.96 336.95 8,370.18 8,370.18 Page: vchlist 05/01/2015 2:21:53PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: /( Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 35325 5/1/2015 003337 ARROW CONSTRUCTION SUPPLY INC 35326 5/1/2015 000322 CENTURYLINK 35327 5/1/2015 002419 CLARKS TIRES & AUTOMOTIVE LLC 35328 5/1/2015 000235 DB SECURE SHRED 35329 5/1/2015 000912 DEXMEDIA WEST 35330 5/1/2015 004206 EARTHCAM INC 35331 5/1/2015 001447 FREE PRESS PUBLISHING INC 35332 5/1/2015 002235 GRAFOS, DEAN 35333 5/1/2015 000011 GREATER SPOKANE VALLEY 35334 5/1/2015 003177 GUTH, ERIC 35335 5/1/2015 003297 HIGGINS, LEWIS ROD 152266 152493 152569 APRIL 2015 49792 2721042715 APRIL 2015 IN0000026073 43635 43636 43637 43639 EXPENSE 25113 EXPENSE EXPENSE Fund/Dept 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 001.076.000.576 001.076.000.576 001.090.000.518 001.076.304.575 001.090.000.594 001.058.056.558 001.013.000.513 001.013.000.513 001.058.056.558 001.011.000.511 001.011.000.511 001.032.000.543 001.011.000.511 Description/Account Amount SUPPLIES: PW SUPPLIES: PW SUPPLIES: PW Total : 2015 PHONE SVCS: ACCT 509 Z14 - Total : 06770D: SERVICE Total : DOCUMENT DESTRUCTION CITY !- Total : ADVERTISING SENIOR CENTER Total : CAMERA SYSTEMS W/ MANAGED : Total : LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION LEGAL PUBLICATION Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : GOVERNMENT ACTION C. HAFNEF Total : EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total : 175.83 263.75 351.67 791.25 474.67 474.67 372.67 372.67 154.50 154.50 40.00 40.00 20,467.88 20,467.88 128.00 35.70 36.55 69.70 269.95 9.20 9.20 10.00 10.00 33.93 33.93 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT 20.70 Page: 1 vchlist 05/01/2015 2:21:53PM p2- Voucher List Page: Spokane Valley Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 35335 5/1/2015 003297 003297 HIGGINS, LEWIS ROD (Continued) Total : 20.70 35336 5/1/2015 002203 NAPAAUTO PARTS 35337 5/1/2015 003090 NORTH 40 OUTFITTERS MARCH 2015 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW ACCOUNT 1640259 213.84 Total : 213.84 061454 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 15.20 Total : 15.20 35338 5/1/2015 000652 OFFICE DEPOT INC. 765766672001 001.076.000.576 SUPPLIES: PARKS 10.86 766775302001 001.076.301.571 SUPPLIES: PARKS 21.90 766775467001 001.076.301.571 SUPPLIES: PARKS 47.31 766775468001 001.076.301.571 SUPPLIES: PARKS 16.35 Total : 96.42 35339 5/1/2015 000031 ROYAL BUSINESS SYSTEMS IN25883 001.058.057.558 APRIL 2015 COPIER COSTS 1,051.35 Total : 1,051.35 35340 5/1/2015 002520 RWC GROUP 31MAR2015 101.000.000.542 FINANCE CHARGE 6.28 3396N 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 214.39 3943N 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 1,078.35 3944N 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 749.54 4281N 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 69.26 4812N 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 544.61 4813N 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 33.78 4814N 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 126.84 4874N 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 626.22 5155N 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 41.52 Total : 3,490.79 35341 5/1/2015 000709 SENSKE LAWN & TREE CARE INC. 6578006 101.042.000.542 ON-CALL EMERGENCY TRAFFIC C 127.18 Total : 127.18 35342 5/1/2015 002531 SIX ROBBLEES INC 5-729197-1 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 22.45 Total : 22.45 35343 5/1/2015 001140 SPECIAL ASPHALT PRODUCTS INV067674 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 11,176.01 INVC067709 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 481.32 INVC067714 101.042.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 200.55 Page: -2 J vchlist 05/01/2015 2:21:53PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: -� Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 35343 5/1/2015 001140 SPECIAL ASPHALT PRODUCTS 35344 5/1/2015 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 35345 35346 35347 35348 5/1/2015 002540 SPOKANE HOUSE OF HOSE INC. 5/1/2015 000391 SPOKANE VALLEY FIRE DIST. #1 (Continued) INVC067717 INVC067718 110100070B 110100082 42000134 51502615 CFDA# 20.616/20.600 441745 Q1 2015 5/1/2015 002555 T. LARIVIERE EQUIPMENT &, EXCAVATIO PAY APP 2 5/1/2015 000335 TIRE-RAMA 35349 5/1/2015 001660 TITAN TRUCK EQUIP CO INC 35350 5/1/2015 001464 TW TELECOM 35351 5/1/2015 000087 VERIZON WIRELESS 35352 5/1/2015 000618 WA DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIFE 35353 5/1/2015 000140 WALT'S MAILING SERVICE LTD 8040053645 8040053646 1103403 06983404 9744174365 SL 013 45768 Fund/Dept 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 101.042.000.542 001.016.000.554 001.016.000.523 001.016.000.521 Description/Account Amount SUPPLIES: PW SUPPLIES: PW Total : 2014 ALLOCATION ENGINEERING i 2014 CREDIT FOR 2014 ALLOCATIC 1/2 ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE COST 2015 MARCH HOUSING INVOICE TARGET ZERO FEB -MAR 2015 Total : 101.000.000.542 SUPPLIES: PW 001.229.45.00 402.223.40.00 402.402.000.531 402.402.000.531 101.000.000.542 001.076.305.575 101.042.000.542 303.303.155.595 001.018.013.513 Q1 2015 SPVD FIRE FEES Total : Total : RETAINAGE RELEASE 2014 SMALL Total : 35517D: SERVICE 35517D: SERVICE CALL SUPPLIES: PW Total : Total : PHONE/INTERNET CITY HALL/CEN Total : APRIL 2015 VERIZON CELL PHONE Total : HYDRAULIC APPROVAL PROJECT Total : 3,725.34 481.32 16, 064.54 169,523.08 -12,249.06 22,500.00 117,234.00 2,892.58 299,900.60 14.43 14.43 10,257.00 10,257.00 8,463.46 8,463.46 193.50 81.53 275.03 29.43 29.43 1,247.45 1,247.45 1,137.87 1,137.87 150.00 150.00 MAILING SERVICES 253.90 Page: -3 vchlist 05/01/2015 2:21:53PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 35353 5/1/2015 000140 000140 WALT'S MAILING SERVICE LTD (Continued) 35354 5/1/2015 000711 WMCATREASURER 2015 MEMBERSHIP 2015 MEMBERSHIP 430150040 4/30/2015 000001 SPOKANE CO TREASURER 9290200747 31 Vouchers for bank code : apbank 31 Vouchers in this report I, the undersigned, do certify under penalty of perjury, that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claim is just, due and an unpaid obligation against the City of Spokane Valley, and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify said claim. Finance Director Date Council member reviewed: Mayor Date Council Member Date Fund/Dept 001.013.000.513 001.013.000.513 001.016.000.521 Description/Account Amount Total : C. KOUDELKA MAY -APRIL 2015 C. BAINBRIDGE MAY -APRIL 2015 Total : LAW ENFORCEMENT BILLING APR Total : 253.90 75.00 75.00 150.00 1,547,756.00 1,547,756.00 Bank total : 1,913,361.69 Total vouchers : 1,913,361.69 Page: iii vchlist 05/01/2015 2:37:38PM Voucher List Spokane Valley Page: --V- Bank Bank code : pk-ref Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 6089 5/1/2015 001876 DIAMOND ROCK CONSTRUCTION PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DAMAGE DEPOSIT ROOM 109 52.00 Total : 52.00 6090 5/1/2015 004261 INSTITUTE OF NATURAL RESOURCES PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DAMAGE DEPOSIT GREAT ROOM 168.00 Total : 168.00 6091 5/1/2015 000979 IRS ENVIRONMENTAL PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DAMAGE DEPOSIT ROOM 109 52.00 Total : 52.00 6092 5/1/2015 004263 MILLER, LINDA PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DAMAGE DEPOSIT ROOM 109 52.00 Total : 52.00 6093 5/1/2015 004217 NYVCHIK, MIROSLAVA PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DAMAGE DEPOSIT GREAT ROOM 60.50 Total : 60.50 6094 5/1/2015 004264 PACIFIC CATARACT & LASER INST PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DAMAGE DEPOSIT AUDITORIUM 52.00 Total : 52.00 6095 5/1/2015 004262 RYAN, SHELBY PARKS REFUND 001.237.10.99 DAMAGE DEPOSIT GREAT ROOM 210.00 Total : 210.00 7 Vouchers for bank code : pk-ref Bank total : 646.50 7 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 646.50 Page: vchlist Voucher List 05/05/2015 3:12:54PM Spokane Valley Page: Bank code : apbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice Fund/Dept Description/Account Amount 5127 5/5/2015 000165 DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS Ben60712 001.231.15.00 PERS: PAYMENT 78,412.43 Total : 78,412.43 5137 5/5/2015 000048 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS, 401A PLAN Ben60714 001.231.14.00 401A: PAYMENT 32,899.18 Total : 32,899.18 5138 5/5/2015 000682 EFTPS Ben60716 001.231.11.00 FEDERAL TAXES: PAYMENT 35,097.31 Total : 35,097.31 5140 5/5/2015 000682 EFTPS Ben60678 001.231.11.00 FEDERAL TAXES: PAYMENT 963.57 Total : 963.57 5141 5/5/2015 000145 VANTAGEPOINT TRANSFER AGENTS, 457 PL/ Ben60718 001.231.18.00 457 DEFERRED COMPENSATION: PAYI 7,626.02 Total : 7,626.02 5142 5/5/2015 000162 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS, 401A EXEC PI. Ben60720 001.231.14.00 401 EXEC PLAN: PAYMENT 1,441.96 Total: 1,441.96 35356 5/5/2015 000120 AWC Ben60676 001.231.16.00 HEALTH PLANS (COUNCIL): PAYMENT 10,708.99 Ben60708 001.231.16.00 HEALTH PLANS: PAYMENT 115,341.80 Total : 126,050.79 35357 5/5/2015 000699 WA COUNCIL CO/CITY EMPLOYEES Ben60710 001.231.21.00 UNION DUES: PAYMENT 2,453.34 Total : 2,453.34 8 Vouchers for bank code : apbank Bank total : 284,944.60 8 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 284,944.60 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 12, 2015 Department Director Approval : Item: Check all that apply: ® consent ❑ old business ['new business ['public hearing ['information ❑admin. report ❑ pending legislation AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Payroll for Period Ending April 30, 2015 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Budget/Financial impacts: Employees Council Total Gross: $ 275,962.64 $ 5,475.00 $ 281,437.64 Benefits: $ 150,987.19 $ 11,268.28 $ 162,255.47 Total payroll $ 426,949.83 $ 16,743.28 $ 443,693.11 RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to Approve above payroll. [Approved as part of the Consent Agenda, or may be removed and discussed separately.] STAFF CONTACT: Raba Nimri DRAFT MINUTES City of Spokane Valley City Council Regular Meeting Formal Meeting Format Tuesday, April 28, 2015 Mayor Grafos called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Attendance: Dean Grafos, Mayor Arne Woodard, Deputy Mayor Chuck Hafner, Councilmember Rod Higgins, Councilmember Ed Pace, Councilmember Ben Wick, Councilmember ABSENT: Bill Bates, Councilmember City Staff: Mike Jackson, City Manager Mark Calhoun, Deputy City Manager Cary Driskell, City Attorney Mike Stone, Parks & Recreation Director John Hohman, Community Development Dir. Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Art Jenkins, Stormwater Engineer Marty Palaniuk, Planner Carrie Koudelka, Deputy City Clerk INVOCATION: Pastor Mike Graef of Valley United Methodist Church gave the invocation. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council, Staff, and audience stood for the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Deputy City Clerk Koudelka called the roll; all Councilmembers were present except Councilmembers Bates. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to excuse Councilmember Bates from tonight's meeting. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the agenda. INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS: n/a COMMITTEE, BOARD, LIAISON SUMMARY REPORTS: Deputy Mayor Woodard said he attended the Spokane Regional Council of Governments meeting and gave a report about the progress of City Hall and spotlighted a number of capital projects the City is working on, including Sullivan Bridge, the Appleway Trail and stormwater improvements. He said he also went to the SCRAPS auction to raise funds to provide food for animals. Councilmember Wick said he went to the SCRAPS auction and SRTC meeting and said SRTC is changing the location of their facility. He said they may consider properties in Spokane Valley and they are looking at all the options. He said he spent a week in Washington D.C. where he focused on transportation issues and the Bridging the Valley project and he said he hopes we will get state and federal funding for our projects. He also went to a TIGER summit while there and learned how to become successful in getting federal funds for projects. He said very few cities will be successful in receiving TIGER grants but he received some useful tips to pass along to staff. Councilmember Higgins had nothing to report. Councilmember Pace said he went to the Council of Governments meeting where he listened to a Greater Spokane Incorporated presentation of current projects but none of the projects mentioned were in Spokane Valley, which he said he found interesting. He said he attended the STA board meeting, the Chamber of Commerce breakfast, Spokane Regional Health District employee recognition ceremony and Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 04-28-2015 Page 1 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT a Washington Policy Center legislative forum where Matt Shea gave a report on the successes of their Freedom Agenda. Councilmember Hafner said he met with Visit Spokane where they spent a great deal of time determining whether they would endorse particular organizations for bond issues and decided they would need more discussion before making any decisions. He also went to the Board of Health annual ceremony and said it is nice to recognize employees for their service. He said he attended the Board of Health executive meeting to determine the agenda items for regular board meetings and he attended the audit entrance for the Board of Health. He said they discussed marijuana and electric cigarettes, which are odorless and undetectable by teachers other than the change in student's behavior. He said he attended a school board meeting and met with architects for the design of City Hall. He attended the STA board meeting and after some debate, they determined more representation from small cities is needed but by law there can only be nine members on the board. He said Spokane lost a member in order to add an additional member from small cities. He also read a proclamation at the Labor Council held Saturday. MAYOR'S REPORT: Mayor Grafos said he attended a meeting with the architects designing City Hall and said it is important that it is the right size and meets the community's needs. He also participated in an event sponsored by Awanis clubs where he helped paint bike helmets. He said over 1,000 helmets were distributed to people at no charge. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Grafos invited public comment. Rob Chase of Liberty Lake said he is here to speak on three issues Council may think of as federal issues: trade promotion authority, also called Fast Track, Trans -Pacific partnership and Trans -Atlantic Trade and Investment partnership. He said Fast Track is unconstitutional because it is up to congress to regulate commerce with foreign nations. He said the purpose is to get two trade deals through in secret and we will lose millions of jobs and our sovereignty. He said this will indirectly affect Spokane Valley and asked that Council send a letter to Washington senators and representatives stating that this is not in the best interest of Spokane Valley. Gary Edwards of Spokane County commended Council for their common sense in not doing things that will harm citizens of Spokane Valley. He said people should comment on both local issues and national issues. He said our national sovereignty is surrendered through treaties and congress is complicit in making this happen. He asked Council to consider discussing these issues to protect the future of our children. Chris Nerison of Spokane Valley asked Council to take a stand against the Trade Promotion Authority bill. He said the Transpacific Partnership and Transatlantic Trade Investment Partnership were negotiated in secret and he said he thinks elected officials should engage in self -policing and should speak up against irresponsible and unethical conduct. Jeff Brodhead of Spokane Valley said the $15 billion transportation bill going through congress is a new tax pulling money out of our economy to spend on projects typically on the west side of the state while our north -south freeway sits unfinished. He said he would like to see us working toward funding the project locally instead of supporting the state bill. He said he thinks GSI (Greater Spokane Incorporated) is pushing to get it passed and he would like Council to apply pressure. Ron Stewart of Spokane Valley asked Council to take a stand on the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA). He said the TPA is a fast track where the senate will not be allowed to add any amendments. He said he is concerned that the Transatlantic Trade Investment Partnership gets negotiated in secret. Jim Robinson of Otis Orchards asked Council to take a responsible position on the TPA. He said all politics have a local impact. He said the loss of sovereignty is a loss of freedom and he encouraged Council to make some kind of statement to our senators and representatives because what they do will impact Spokane Valley. Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 04-28-2015 Page 2 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT 1. CONSENT AGENDA: Consists of items considered routine which are approved as a group. Any member of Council may ask that an item be removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered separately. Proposed Motion: I move to approve the Consent Agenda. a. Approval of vouchers listed on April 28, 2015 Request for Council Action Form: $1,577,574.54 b. Approval of Payroll for Pay Period Ending April 15, 2015: $318,895.16 c. Approval of April 14, 2015 Council Formal Meeting Minutes d. Approval of April 21, 2015 Council Study Session Meeting Minutes It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to approve the Consent Agenda. NEW BUSINESS: 2. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 15-006a CPA -2015-0002 (Reconsideration) — Marty Palaniuk After Deputy City Clerk Koudelka read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve Ordinance 15-006a adopting an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan as described in CPA -2015-0002. Planner Palaniuk said this is a privately -initiated Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the designation for two parcels from Low Density Residential to Mixed Use Center. He said the properties are located at Flora Road and Mission Avenue and consist of approximately 3.5 acres. He said there is residential development north and east of the site, multi -family development west and south of the site and approximately 324 apartment units have been built in the area. Currently the properties consist of two single-family residences zoned R3. Mr. Palaniuk said there has been some commercial development south of the site and significant multi -family development on the west of the site and significant single family residential development in the area. He said Flora Road and Mission Avenue are both considered minor arterials in the Street Plan and Flora continues as a collector north of the intersection. Councilmember Wick asked about the traffic model in the area and if we expect it to triple. Mr. Palaniuk said figures provided by our transportation engineer indicate we expect the trips to triple by the year 2040 from just over 4,000 trips per day. Mayor Grafos invited public comment. Trish Abraham of Spokane Valley said she is the applicant and provided signatures in favor of the amendment. She said the best use of parcels is to provide desirable services to the residents of the neighborhood and she said to leave the parcels as Low Density is a disservice to the residents. She said with transient housing, there are no long-term residents or sense of pride. She said she has the support of many members of the community and many of those previously opposed are now in favor of the change. Jane Kershain of Spokane Valley said she is the property owner of one of the lots and she has lived there since her daughter was born. She said she bought the property to build a mobile home park and after putting in the sewer lines she saw there are several apartments in the area and because residents of mobile home parks want calm neighborhoods, she changed her plans. She said she would like to put a storage unit on the property, she is vested in the property and living there, and she said it is a good use of the property and makes sense because of the traffic. Deputy Mayor Woodard said the two roads make a buffer and there is one house across Flora facing the property and two that are being built that will be impacted but the other properties nearby have already done things to mitigate the impact. He said we have created an atmosphere that is job friendly and family friendly and we are not going to stop high density development. He said if storage units went in it would be a great use but we need to consider what else could go in there if we change the use. Councilmember Pace said changing to Mixed Use Center makes sense, the roads provide buffering on two sides and there is already Mixed Use Center on the other two sides. He said the Planning Commission recommended approval of the amendment because it meets all the criteria and he will vote yes. Councilmember Hafner said he visited the site and maintaining the integrity of the neighborhood is important to him. He said he went through the matrix to see what would be permitted if we changed and the matrix includes a casino, community hall club, day care center, and small schools as permitted uses. He said he will vote against the amendment. Councilmember Wick said he watched the previous meeting and listened to the testimony Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 04-28-2015 Page 3 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT and said we do not know what will happen once the change is made and we want to make sure services such as bus transportation are there to support the change in use. He said the nearest bus stop is a mile away and traffic is looking to triple by 2040. He said once a neighborhood loses its integrity it is hard to get back and there has been a lot of change in this neighborhood and he doesn't know if this is the right time for this change. Mayor Grafos said he voted against this the last time and will vote against it again. He said the properties on the east side are all residential and they have an investment in their homes and while the property would probably be good for a storage facility, it could have other uses that affect the neighborhood across the street. Vote by show of hands: In Favor: Deputy Mayor Woodard, Councilmembers Pace and Higgins. Opposed: Mayor Grafos, Councilmembers Hafner and Wick. Tie vote, motion failed. 3. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 15-007a Zoning Map CPA -2015-0002 (Reconsideration) — Marty Palaniuk After Deputy City Clerk Koudelka read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve Ordinance 15-007a. Planner Palaniuk said this is an ordinance to change the zoning of the previous ordinance. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: None. Opposed: Unanimous. Motion failed. 4. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 15-009 Adopting Mining Moratorium Findings — Erik Lamb After Deputy City Clerk Koudelka read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve Ordinance 15-009, adopting findings of fact justifying the adoption of Ordinance 15-005 and the moratorium on mining and mineral product manufacturing. Deputy Attorney Lamb said state law authorizes cities to adopt a moratorium without prior notice and without a public hearing as long as the city conducts a public hearing within sixty days. He said we adopted the moratorium on February 24, 2015 and held a public hearing on the moratorium on March 24, 2015. He said there are nine mining sites in Spokane Valley, one that is not operational, and he said the approximate depth of the proposed site off Tshirley Road would be limited to within twenty feet of the aquifer. Mr. Lamb said he does not have specific numbers for that site but at the Sullivan pit, the depth to water ranges from 88 feet to 100 feet and gives us an idea as to what the Tshirley mine could be. He said Council asked staff to review whether we need to change the language in the moratorium based on public comment we received and that after review, staff recommends no change. He said the moratorium states that current mining operations that were in existence and continuous at the time the moratorium took effect will not be affected. Mr. Lamb said that after adoption of the findings, staff will continue to proceed with updating the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Wick said it seems clear that the moratorium will not impact current operations and asked if changing the moratorium with the language suggested would allow things to happen that we do not want. Mr. Lamb said the moratorium language was crafted with the intent of not impacting existing sites and there could be unintended consequences in adopting the proposed language changes. Deputy Mayor Woodard asked if the sites that have been in continuous operation would have difficulty trying to sell and transfer ownership. Mr. Lamb said he cannot speak to any specific transfer of owner, but the moratorium is not directed toward any particular owner but toward the continuous use. Mayor Grafos asked if anyone has come forward that owns an operating pit in which the moratorium will have a negative impact. Mr. Lamb said one owner has come forward and he cannot guarantee the moratorium will not impact them in the future but we do not think it will impact the current operations unless they do not currently have a mining operation; one site is not currently a mining operation and the moratorium could impact that property. Councilmember Hafner said the primary concern is with sites with current operations and he said he thinks current operations can continue moving forward while the moratorium gives us time to analyze what we want to do in the Comprehensive Plan. Mayor Grafos invited public comment. Janna McDonald of Spokane Valley said she represents Central Premix and she said the map in the packet is incorrect in that it shows nine sites but the Spokane County pit is exempt, there are two sites that have not been mined for over twenty years and there are others that are not permitted. There are five permitted Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 04-28-2015 Page 4 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT sites within Spokane Valley, four Central Premix sites and the Spokane County Flora Road site. She said the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has authority over reclamation. She said she would like confirmation that she will be able to construct a new cement silo or fuel station under the moratorium and she urged Council to look at the impacts on current operations. Councilmember Higgins asked how long reclamation of a pit will take. She said the DNR encourages complete reclamation within two years of final mining, allowing for two growing seasons of adequate vegetation. She said DNR will stay active and hold the reclamation bond until reclamation or until another entity assumes jurisdiction over the site. Stacy Bjordahl of Spokane said she testified at the initial hearing and submitted written comments requesting changes to the language of the moratorium and spoke again two weeks ago. Since then she talked with legal and they agreed to disagree about the language and the impacts on the current pits. She said she hopes that when they come forward for modifications or permit changes, they will not meet resistance from the City. Mayor Grafos said he believes that if staff finds the moratorium impacts any existing businesses, staff will come forward to Council and let them know of the problem. He said the City needs to have time to look at this change to the Comprehensive Plan and he said he thinks the moratorium is the right thing for the City to do. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 5. Second Reading Proposed Ordinance 15-010 Beekeeping — Micki Harnois After Deputy City Clerk Koudelka read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to approve Ordinance 15-010, amending Spokane Valley Municipal Code 19.40.150 by adding beekeeping requirements, clarifying various terminology and prohibiting the keeping of nutria. Planner Harnois said this amendment was discussed at the study session on March 17th, a first reading of the ordinance was on April 14th and she said there have been no changes to the ordinance. It was moved by Councilmember Pace and seconded to amend the motion by dropping the requirement for membership in the Beekeepers Association. Councilmember Hafner said he thinks certification is a safety factor. Councilmember Wick said he reached out to the Beekeepers Association and reviewed their website and he said it does not look or smell like government. He said they seemed open, friendly and informative and they appear to be a good thing. Mayor Grafos said he thinks the certification is educational. Vote on the amendment by Acclamation: In Favor: Deputy Mayor Woodard, Councilmembers Higgins and Pace. Opposed: Mayor Grafos, Councilmembers Hafner and Wick. Motion amendment failed. Mayor Grafos invited public comment, no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 6. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 15-011 Avista Electrical Franchise — Cary Driskell After Deputy City Clerk Koudelka read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to place Ordinance 15-011 granting Avista a 25 year electrical franchise on a future agenda for a second reading. City Attorney Driskell said the proposed ordinance would grant a 25 -year franchise to Avista so they can operate electrical utilities in the City's public rights-of-way. He said it has the standard terms we typically put into our utility provider agreements with a few particular things relating to electricity providers. Mayor Grafos invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 7. First Reading Proposed Ordinance 15-012 Gambling Tax Amendment to SVMC 3.25 — Mark Calhoun After Deputy City Clerk Koudelka read the ordinance title, it was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to advance Ordinance 15-012 amending SVMC 3.25.020, affecting gambling taxes, to a second reading. Deputy City Manager Calhoun said in 2003 an ordinance was approved that authorized certain gaming activities and imposed gambling taxes used to offset law enforcement costs. He said revenues from those taxes have fluctuated over the years with an overall downward trend. At the September 23, 2014 Council meeting, we heard public comment from a local business owner who said Spokane planned to lower their gambling taxes. In November 2014, Spokane reduced their gambling tax rate and their rate Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 04-28-2015 Page 5 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT will drop to two percent in 2016. He said this was a topic of discussion at Council's winter workshop in February and at the March 30, 2015 Finance Committee meeting where they recommended reducing the tax rate. Councilmember Pace asked how gambling businesses calculate the taxes owed to the City. Mr. Calhoun said it is different for different types of gaming; he said the tax rate for card games is ten percent of gross. Mayor Grafos invited public comment; no comments were offered. Councilmember Pace said he thinks this is a great opportunity to lower taxes and that he does not like sin taxes so he is in favor of this ordinance. Councilmember Hafner said the reduction in tax revenue for the City somewhat bothers him. City Manager Jackson said Spokane reduced their rates in a series of reductions and we are proposing we reduce it all at once. Councilmember Hafner asked about the financial impact to the City and Mr. Jackson said it will affect us financially and Council should consider that. He said it will be a net loss to the City, but one thing to consider is whether a particular business might close because it is not competitive whereby the City would not receive any of that gambling tax. Councilmember Wick asked if we have the income to compensate for the loss. Mr. Calhoun said in the 2015 adopted budget, the recurring revenues exceed the recurring expenditures by $103,000. He said this $178,000 annual reduction in gambling taxes will hit on June 1, 2015 and it is conceivable the reduction will consume the $103,000 difference. He said sales taxes are running higher but their concerns are valid as staff is preparing the preliminary budget and looking at the 2016 budget impacts. Mayor Grafos said we have to be competitive and we are not lowering to the same tax level of Spokane so we can look at this over the next year to see if we can keep businesses in Spokane Valley. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. 8. Motion Consideration: Bid Award Broadway Storm Drain Retrofits — Art Jenkins It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to award the Broadway Avenue Storm Drain Retrofits project to Sandry Construction Company in the amount of $444,877.00 and authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the construction contract. Stormwater Engineer Jenkins said this is a project to improve the drywells on Broadway Avenue. He said we received a grant but after considering a number of design options, we were able to exercise options that cost us considerably less than the $1.3 million originally sought. He said we received six bids, five of which were within ten percent of the engineers' estimate. He said the lowest bid came from Sandry Construction and they appear to be a responsive firm in Washington. He said the bid is within the budget and staff recommends approval. Mayor Grafos invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mayor Grafos invited public comment; no comments were offered. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS: 9. Advance Agenda — Mayor Grafos: City Manager Jackson said the May 19 and May 26 Council meetings are very light and asked if Council would like to cancel them. It was the consensus of Council to cancel the May 19 Study Session and the May 26 Formal Council meeting. INFORMATION ONLY: The following items were not reported or discussed: 10. Proposed Amended 2016-2021 TIP 11. 2016-2021 Stormwater CIP 12. Sullivan Road Street Preservation Project Sprague to Mission 13. Department Monthly Reports CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: City Manager Jackson said there will be a community meeting at CenterPlace on May 6, 2015, at 6:00 p.m. to discuss the new City Hall with the architects hired to help design the building. Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 04-28-2015 Page 6 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT ADJOURNMENT: It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m. ATTEST: Dean Grafos, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Minutes Regular Council Meeting: 04-28-2015 Page 7 of 7 Approved by Council: DRAFT May 5, 2015 Attendance: Councilmembers MINUTES SPOKANE VALLEY CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING STUDY SESSION FORMAT Spokane Valley City Hall Council Chambers Spokane Valley, Washington Staff 6:00 p.m. Dean Grafos, Mayor Arne Woodard, Deputy Mayor Chuck Hafner, Councilmember Rod Higgins, Councilmember Ed Pace, Councilmember Ben Wick, Councilmember ABSENT: Bill Bates, Councilmember Mike Jackson, City Manager Mark Calhoun, Deputy City Manager Cary Driskell, City Attorney Erik Lamb, Deputy City Attorney Mike Stone, Parks & Recreation Director Eric Guth, Public Works Director John Hohman, Community Development Dir. Steve Worley, Senior Engineer Chris Bainbridge, City Clerk Mayor Grafos called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: City Clerk Bainbridge called the roll; all Councilmembers were present except Councilmember Bates. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to excuse Councilmember Bates from tonight's meeting. Deputy Mayor Woodard mentioned he will be out of town next Tuesday, but would like to participate in next week's meeting via telephone. It was moved by Councilmember Pace, seconded and unanimously agreed that Deputy Mayor Woodard be permitted to be connected to the Council meeting by phone. ACTION ITEM: 1. Motion Consideration: Sullivan Road Street Preservation Bid Award — Steve Worley It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard and seconded to award the Sullivan Road Street Preservation Project, CIP #0188 to Inland Asphalt Company in the amount of $894,884.00 and to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the construction contract. Engineer Worley explained the bid as noted on his Request for Council Action form, said the bid is good and they are ready to go with Inland Asphalt Company. Mayor Grafos invited public comment; no comments were offered. Vote by Acclamation: In Favor: Unanimous. Opposed: None. Motion carried. NON -ACTION ITEMS: 2. Proposed 2016-2021 Six Year TIP — Steve Worley Mr. Worley briefly explained the annual, six-year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Process, and mentioned the notes on the draft TIP, especially under project #25 and 28 which show when the PE funds, which is the design phase, will be obligated. Mr. Worley explained that once the PE is approved, we have ten years to get to the next phase, which is the right-of-way phase, followed by the construction phase; he said we are aware of those timeframes, and gave as an example, we will have until June 2019 to get the Park Road project right-of-way phase, and that the construction phase would be the following year, or as soon as we get funding. There was some discussion about project #4 and that the project would not be a three -lane all the way to 16th; and per Deputy Mayor Woodard's request, Mr. Worley will check that project. Council Study Session: 05-05-2015 Page 1 of 3 Approved by Council: DRAFT Mr. Worley also noted that they received new information which allows us to suggest adding another project; and he recommends we do so with the next version of the TIP; that since the Pines/Mansfield project they have been working to put a signal at Mirabeau Parkway and Pines; that they have been working with the developer and an analysis was conducted and based on existing tenants and the new company coming in with more employees, Mr. Worley said we now meet the warrants for a signal at that intersection, which he said is very much needed, not just for the Mirabeau Parkway but for the school children attending the nearby elementary school. There was Council consensus to add that project. Councilmember Wick asked about adding lighting along Park Road over I-90 where a fatality occurred earlier in the year, and Mr. Worley said he will check that. Councilmember Wick also asked about a regionally significant project for the Horizon 2040, such as the widening of the bridge over Argonne and to start the process for discussion of that project next year. Mr. Worley agreed. 3. Comprehensive Plan Update Land Quantity and Market Analysis Contract — John Hohman Director Hohman went over the process for the Contract for the update of the comprehensive plan, and briefly discussed the various phases of the consultant work as noted on his Request for Council Action form; said concerning the land quantity analysis, the consultants will be looking at that to determine the different zoning types, and weave the economic components into the comp plan; after which there will be an existing condition report to discuss what we have and what are the City's needs, which will be the basis for future development and will also help staff analyze the citizen amendment request. Mr. Hohman said last month we received twenty-six citizen amendments requests; that the Planning Commission will review those requests and they have a special Planning Commission set for those deliberations; all in an effort to bring those items to Council either June 2 or June 9; stressing his goal to keep this moving and not lose momentum. Mr. Hohman said those items would be either a "yes" or a "no" but a question remaining will be, should those items be further looked at during the preparation of the draft document as some proposals are relatively controversial. Mr. Hohman stated that all this is part of the process to include the public's point of view. Mr. Hohman noted that the consultants have been working on the audit of the existing comp plan, and are developing a large spreadsheet with goals and policies; said they realize there are some redundant and/or unnecessary goals and policies, and the idea is to shrink the document, and perhaps put all the goals and policies together in a separate section. Mr. Hohman said the total contract for the first phase update was about $107,000, and this second phase will be about $127,000; and after that phase he should know about how much total funds will be needed. There was Council consensus to move forward with the contract for next week's Council meeting. 4. Potential Admissions Tax — Erik Lamb Deputy City Attorney Lamb went over the information as noted in his Request for Council Action, concerning a potential admission tax. Mr. Lamb explained that such a tax would be administered at the local level so it would require staff time. Mr. Lamb also mentioned that Liberty Lake does actually have an admissions tax for the limited purpose of the golf course, driving range, and mini golf and the tax is used for parks, golf courses and other open spaces. Mr. Lamb noted staff has no means to calculate what revenues an admissions tax might generate for our city. Mayor Grafos suggested staff get a list of facilities taxed by other entities, like Spokane, and the amount of tax and amount of revenue, and to do likewise for Spokane County and Airway Heights, in order to get an idea of what is being taxed. There was some discussion about the Fairgrounds and whether a tax could be assessed to the vendors or the public. Mr. Lamb said he is not sure how the vendor arrangement is set up and would need to research that, but if allowable, we could make a distinction if there is a rational basis, between the vendors and the public. Mr. Jackson suggested looking at what is allowable, as well as what would be permitted exemptions. To clarify, Mr. Lamb said he will do more research to get specific data on the surrounding cities of what they tax and what the revenue is, exemptions and why they are or would be exempt, and to clarify the distinction between vendors and the public at the Fairgrounds. Council Study Session: 05-05-2015 Page 2 of 3 Approved by Council: DRAFT 5. Advance Agenda — Mayor Grafos There were no suggested changes to the Advance Agenda. 6. Operations and Administration Quarterly Report This report was for information only and was not discussed or reported. 7. Council Comments — Mayor Grafos Councilmember Wick reported that Greater Spokane Incorporated (GSI) has drafted a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for consulting services to prepare a strategic business plan to support the consideration of creating a Port Authority in Spokane County, and that GSI asks if we would be willing to be a listed partner on the RFQ. Councilmember Wick said he informed GSI that he would bring this to the full Council for Council's input; he said GSI is not asking for any funds but just if we want to be listed as a partner, and he said he would be interested in the results of the RFQ. Councilmember Wick said the City of Spokane Valley is listed on the document, but this is just a draft and not the final RFQ. Deputy Mayor Woodard said he would prefer to read through the material and perhaps discuss this next week, since it is unclear what a partner means or would include. There was some discussion about the pros and cons of being a partner, and Councilmember Wick noted that the Airport Board, although cautious at first, is going to be a listed partner. Council agreed to bring this back next week for further discussion, thereby giving all Councilmembers an opportunity to read the RFQ. 8. City Manager Comments — Mike Jackson City Manager Jackson said he and Council received an update from legislative consultants Gordon Thomas Honeywell on the outcome of some of the legislative items; said some of the marijuana legislation has been signed into law and that Erik Lamb is looking at that legislation and we will likely have a discussion in a few weeks; said the Appleway Trail is now in the capital budget for the Senate and the House; regarding the lien authority legislation, said that was killed in the house finance committee but Gordon Thomas Honeywell is looking for other legislation where this might fit in, although Mr. Jackson said there is not much hope for a positive outcome. Mr. Jackson said the legislators are now in a special session and suggested we wait until the end of the session for further updates. It was moved by Deputy Mayor Woodard, seconded and unanimously agreed to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 6:47 p.m. ATTEST: Dean Grafos, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Council Study Session: 05-05-2015 Page 3 of 3 Approved by Council: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 12, 2015 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ['consent ❑ old business ® new business ['public hearing ['information ❑ admin. report ❑pending legislation ['executive session X AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Second Reading Ordinance #15-012 reducing the gambling tax on card games from 10% to 6%. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: SVMC Chapter 3.25 and RCW Chapter 9.46. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council discussion on this topic has occurred on a number of occasions leading to the April 28, 2015 Council meeting with Council approving the advancement of Ordinance #15-012 to a second reading. BACKGROUND: In 2003 the City of Spokane Valley adopted an ordinance which authorized certain gaming/gambling activities and imposed related taxes, the proceeds of which are used to partially offset law enforcement costs. Since that time a number of businesses that offer gambling as a form of entertainment have opened and closed, and revenues have fluctuated from year-to-year with an overall downward trend, which is conceivably due to a combination of competition from both regional and on-line gaming establishments. There are currently 30 businesses in Spokane Valley that offer gaming in one form or another. Gambling tax revenues for 2010 through 2014, and the 2015 Budget projection are as follows: Actual Revenues Type of Gambling Activity 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Budget Punch Boards & Pull Tabs 71,778 64,310 64,771 70,504 64,585 71,000 Bingo & Raffles 825 1,260 1,802 638 1,227 1,200 Amusement Games 10,063 10,882 10,125 10,799 11,063 10,800 Card Games 563,477 447,778 541,696 446,497 429,376 446,000 Total 646,143 524,230 618,394 528,438 506,251 529,000 Inc. (Dec.) from previous yr. $ (80,861.18) $(121,913.00) $ 94,164.00 $ (89,956.00) $ (22,187.00) -11.12% -18.87% 17.96% -14.55% -4.20% At the September 23, 2014 meeting, Council heard public comment from a business owner who operates a local gaming establishment. He stated that the gambling taxes on social card playing in Spokane Valley are a significant expense to his business and that he believes these taxes have been a factor in why other gaming establishments within the City have closed over the last several years. He requested that Council consider either eliminating or reducing gambling tax rates and noted that the City of Spokane was at that time considering reducing their own social card game tax rate. On November 3, 2014, the City of Spokane approved an ordinance reducing rates effective in both 2015 and 2016. At the February 27, 2015 Winter Workshop, Council was presented with an information report and had an opportunity to discuss the issue. At a March 30, 2015 Finance Committee meeting, this topic was discussed and consensus was reached to bring this forward to Council with a recommendation that the City reduce its rate on card games from 10% to 6%. 1 On April 14, 2015 Council reached consensus to bring this topic forward as an action item and on April 28, 2015 Council moved to advance Ordinance #15-012 to a second reading. Listed below is gambling tax rate information which includes the maximum allowed by State law, the current rates in Spokane Valley, and rates in the City of Spokane: Type of Gambling Activity Gambling Tax Rates Maximum Allowed by State of Washingtor City of Spokane Valley City of Spokane (3) Through Effective Effective 12/31/2014 1/1/2015 1/1/2016 Punch Boards & Pull Tabs (1) (1) (1) (2) Bingo & Raffles Amusement Games Card Games 10.0% 5.0% 2.0% 20.0% 5.0% 5.0% 2.0% 10.0% 10.0% 5.0% 2.0% 10.0% 10.0% 5.0% 2.0% 8.0% (1) Rates are applicable to gross receipts, less amounts awarded as cash or merchandise prizes. (2) Rates are applicable to gross revenue. (3) City of Spokane rates were changed via the adoption of their Ordinance C35153 on 11/3/2014. 10.0% 5.0% 2.0% 2.0% Proposed Ordinance #15-012 will reduce the City's gambling tax on card games from 10% to 6% effective June 1, 2015. The Ordinance also provides clarification of Code language, including its application to bona fide charitable or nonprofit organizations. OPTIONS: Options range from making no changes to the current tax rate or changing the tax rate on card games from the existing 10% to as much as 20% or as little as 0%. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to approve Ordinance #15-012 amending Spokane Valley Municipal Code 3.25 gambling tax. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The 2015 Budget includes a revenue estimate of $529,000 in gambling taxes including: • $ 71,000 Punch Boards and Pull Tabs • $ 1,200 Bingo and Raffles • $ 10,800 Amusement Games • $446,000 Card Games Given that a 10% tax on card games is estimated to generate $446,000 in 2015: • A 1% reduction in the tax rate would cause General Fund revenues to decrease by $44,600. • If the City were to reduce the tax rate on card games from 10% to 6%, it would result in annual revenues of $267,600, which is $178,400 less than is in the adopted 2015 Budget. STAFF CONTACT: Mark Calhoun ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Ordinance #15-012. 2 DRAFT CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY SPOKANE COUNTY WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 15-012 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, SPOKANE COUNTY WASHINGTON, AMENDING SPOKANE VALLEY MUNICIPAL CODE 3.25, GAMBLING TAX REGULATIONS FOR THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY, AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING THERETO. WHEREAS, the City adopted Ordinance 03-028 on January 28, 2003, to be effective upon the date of incorporation. Ordinance 03-028 was later codified into Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC) Chapter 3.25, Gambling Tax; and WHEREAS, SVMC 3.25.020 states the percentage of tax to be imposed on various types of gambling activity. SVMC 3.25.020(C) requires that operators of social card playing establishments pay "a tax equal to 10 percent of the gross revenue from such card games;" and WHEREAS, the level of tax imposed by the City for social card playing is now higher than that unposed by other larger governmental entities in this region; and WHEREAS, the City desires to have the percentage of gambling tax on social card playing at a more competitive level than it currently is as a way to attract and maintain social card playing businesses; and WHEREAS, the City desires to more -clearly identify what exemptions apply for bona fide charitable or nonprofit organizations engaging in specified gambling activities under this chapter; and WHEREAS, the City further desires to draft minor modifications to SVMC 3.25.020 to ensure it is consistent with RCW 9.46.110. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Spokane Valley, Washington, ordains as follows: Section 1. Intent. The City of Spokane Valley declares that the intent of this Ordinance is to amend 3.25.020 amend the percentage of gambling tax on social card playing from 10 percent to six percent, and to make other minor amendments to ensure consistency with RCW 9.46.110. Section 2. Amending SVMC 3.25.020 — Imposition of Tax. SVMC 3.25.020 is hereby amended as follows: 3.25.020 Imposition of tax. (A) Pursuant to RCW 9.46.110, as the same now exists or may hereafter be amended, there is levied upon all persons, associations or organizations conducting or operating in the City of Spokane Valley for any of the activities listed below, a tax to be paid to the City of Spokane Valley, in the amount hereinafter specified: (1) Bingo and Raffles. 4-A tax in the amount ofequal to five percent of the gross receipts from a bingo game or raffle, less the amount awarded as cash or merchandise prizes. B,a) Punchboards and Pulltabs. charitable, shall pay aA tax in an amount ofequal to five percent of the gross receipts from the Ordinance 15-012 Amending SVMC 3.25.020, Gambling Tax Page 1 of 3 DRAFT operation of punchboards and pulltabs, less the amount awarded as cash or merchandise prizes, and regardless of whether the entity is a for-profit, bona fide charitable non-profit. € (3) Social Card Playing._ 1. Operators shall pay aA tax equalin the amount of4e six -1-0 percent of the gross revenue from such card games. P(4) Amusement Games._ 4 -Amusement games authorized for operation pursuant to the provisions of the Washington Administrative Code shall be subject to the levy of a tax in the amount not to exceed two percent of the gross receipts from the amusement game, less the amount awarded as prizes, and shall be equal to the amount of actual costs and expenses incurred for enforcement of Chapter 9.46 RCW by the City of Spokane Valley. (B) The following shall apply to bona fide charitable or nonprofit organizations pursuant to chapter 9.46 RCW: (1) No tax shall be imposed on bingo or amusement games when such activities or combination thereof for an organization which has no paid operating or management personnel, and has gross receipts from bingo or amusement games, or a combination thereof, not exceeding $5,000 per year, less the amount awarded as cash or merchandise prizes. (2) No tax shall be imposed from raffles on the first $10,000 of gross receipts less the amount awarded as cash or merchandise prizes conducted by a qualifying entity. Section 3. Amending SVMC 3.25.030 — Charitable and nonprofit organizations. SVMC 3.25.030 is hereby amended as follows: .. .... .... . . ... . A. Bingo and amusement games conducted by a bona fide charitable or nonprofit organization (a:, defined in RCW 9.16.0209) shall be exempt from the tax imposed by SVMC 3.25.020 when such organization has no paid operating or management personnel and its gross rcccipts from bingo or cash or merchandise prizes. B. No tax may be imposed on the first $10,000 of gross rcccipts, less the amount awarded as cash i Section 34. Remainder of SVMC 3.25. Unchanged. The remaining provisions of chapter 3.25 SVMC are unchanged by this amendment. Section 45. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence or clause of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions of this Ordinance. Section 56. Effective date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect five days after publication of this Ordinance or a summary thereof occurs in the official newspaper of the City as provided by law. Approved this day of May, 2015. ATTEST: Dean Grafos, Mayor Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Ordinance 15-012 Amending SVMC 3.25.020, Gambling Tax Page 2 of 3 DRAFT Approved As To Form: Office of the City Attorney Date of Publication: Effective Date: Ordinance 15-012 Amending SVMC 3.25.020, Gambling Tax Page 3 of 3 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 12, 2015 Check all that apply: ['consent ❑ old business ['information ❑ admin. report Department Director Approval: ® new business ['public hearing ['pending legislation ['executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Amendment to Prosecutor Interlocal GOVERNING LEGISLATION: Pursuant to chapter 39.34 RCW (Interlocal Cooperation Act), counties and cities may contract with each other to perform certain functions that each may legally perform. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: Council authorized the City Manager to execute Interlocal Agreement C06-017 for Prosecuting Attorney Services, signed March 24, 2006. BACKGROUND: Spokane County and Spokane Valley are proposing various modifications to the Prosecuting Attorney Interlocal Agreement. The following modifications are listed by their corresponding amendment section number: 1.1) Base costs used to determine contract indirect cost rate currently defined as total department salary and benefits. The proposed rate base is total expenditures (salary and benefits plus maintenance and operations (M&O) costs), consistent with an earlier modification adopted by Council for other contracts; 1.2) The Elected Prosecutor salary costs and the Prosecutor department M&O costs, which are currently allocated as direct costs would be converted to indirect charges and allocated to all users.; 1.3) Proposed modification would update the infraction services exhibit to accurately reflect the costs and services provided; 1.4) The hourly rate used by attorneys handling criminal zoning violations is modified to account for all attorneys and support staff involved in these types of cases; 1.5) Prosecutor department Administrative staff costs converted to indirect charges and allocated to all users (listed separately from the changes covered in 1.2 due to a later effective date); 1.6) Language is added to clarify that in addition to traffic infractions the County also handles commercial drivers license (CDL) infractions and animal infractions for the City (not a service level change); and 1.7) New cost exhibits are adopted to replace current exhibits. OPTIONS: Authorize the City Manager to execute the contract amendment, maintain existing cost methodologies, or request more information. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the Addendum to the Interlocal Agreement for Prosecuting Attorney Services. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Estimated annual savings of $9,907 STAFF/COUNCIL CONTACT: John Pietro, Administrative Analyst ATTACHMENTS: 1) Addendum to the Interlocal Agreement for Prosecuting Attorney Services 2) Cost exhibits 2A, 2B, 2C, and 2 Summary ADDENDUM TO THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR PROSECUTING ATTORNEY SERVICES IN THE CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY THIS ADDENDUM, is made and entered into by and among the City of Spokane Valley (hereafter referred to as "City"), Spokane County (hereafter referred to as "County"), and Spokane County Prosecuting Attorney (hereafter referred to as "Prosecuting Attorney"), hereafter jointly referred to as the "Parties". WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, pursuant to chapter 39.34 RCW (Interlocal Cooperation Act), the Parties have entered into numerous interlocal agreements whereby County has agreed to provide services to City and its residents; and WHEREAS, this Addendum applies to the "Interlocal Agreement for Prosecuting Attorney Services in the City of Spokane Valley (January 1, 2005 -December 31, 2005)" (the "Agreement") executed by the County under Resolution No. 06-0194, the City under signature dated March 1, 2006, and the Prosecuting Attorney under signature dated March 24, 2006, as modified by that document entitled "MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING" (the "Modification") executed by the County under Resolution No. 09-0333, the City under signature dated April 9, 2009, and the Prosecuting Attorney under signature dated May 6, 2009; and WHEREAS, from time -to -time, the Parties review interlocal agreements such as this one for the purpose of analyzing the cost methodology to determine if it properly reflects the services being provided, and whether the costs of those services are being accurately charged. These amendments reflect such an analysis; and WHEREAS, there are various components of the full cost of providing services by County, including the indirect cost allocation, which takes into account the cost of services provided by what is commonly referred to as County's central services, which include, but are not limited to, such components as facilities maintenance, administrative services, and insurance. In past years, the indirect cost rate has been calculated based on salaries attributable to the provision of each service. The Parties now agree that, effective with the 2010 settle and adjust and for subsequent years, it is acceptable to base the indirect cost rate on total expenditures in calculating the full cost of providing the services; and WHEREAS, the salary of the Elected Prosecuting Attorney is a component cost of Prosecuting Attorney Services provided to the City under the Agreement and Modification; and WHEREAS, in past years the salary of the Elected Prosecuting Attorney was allocated to Misdemeanors based on a flat allocation of $5,000 plus benefits, as specified in former Exhibit 2A of the Agreement. The Parties now agree that effective with the 2012 settle and adjust and for subsequent years the Elected Prosecuting Attorney allocation is included in the Countywide Indirect Rate and will not be allocated separately; and WHEREAS, in past years the Prosecuting Attorney maintenance and operations (M&O) costs were allocated to the City using a ratio of misdemeanor attorney full-time equivalent (FTE) positions out of total attorney FTE positions for the Prosecuting Attorney's office excluding Family Law FTE positions as specified in former Exhibit 2A of the Agreement. The Parties now agree that effective with the 2012 settle and adjust and for subsequent years the Prosecuting Attorney's M&O costs to the City will be included in the Countywide Indirect Rate and will not be allocated separately; and Page 1 of 6 WHEREAS, effective with the 2012 settle and adjust and for subsequent years the Parties desire to replace the former Exhibit 2B Infraction Services with a new Exhibit 2B in acknowledgement of numerous modifications to better account for the service currently provided; and WHEREAS, in past years criminal violations of zoning ordinances were billed at an hourly attorney rate which included the salary and benefit costs of a single civil attorney and a single paralegal, as specified in former Exhibit 2C of the Agreement. The Parties now agree that effective with the 2012 settle and adjust and for subsequent years the hourly rate will be based upon the total direct and indirect costs of the Prosecutor — Civil department; and WHEREAS, in past years the Prosecuting Attorney Administrative costs were allocated to the City using a ratio of misdemeanor attorney full-time equivalent (FTE) positions out of total attorney FTE positions for the Prosecuting Attorney's office as specified in former Exhibit 2A of the Agreement. The Parties now agree that for the 2013 settle and adjust and for subsequent years the Prosecuting Attorney's Administrative costs to the City will be included in the Countywide Indirect Rate and will not be allocated separately; and WHEREAS, the Parties desire to modify Exhibit 1 to more accurately describe the services currently provided by the County. The Parties now agree that the description of Infraction services provided by the County shall include contested traffic infractions, contested Commercial Driver's License (CDL) infractions, and contested animal control infractions. NOW THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual promises set forth hereinafter, and as provided for in the underlying document entitled "Interlocal Agreement for Prosecuting Attorney Services in the City of Spokane Valley (January 1, 2005 -December 31, 2005)" (the "Agreement") executed by the County under Resolution No. 06-0194, the City under signature dated March 1, 2006, and the Prosecuting Attorney under signature dated March 24, 2006, as modified by that document entitled "MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING" (the "Modification") executed by the County under Resolution No. 09-0333, the City under signature dated April 9, 2009, and the Prosecuting Attorney under signature dated May 6, 2009, jointly referred to as the "Service Agreements" the Parties do hereby agree as follows: SECTION ONE: 1.1 Effective with the 2010 Settle and Adjust and for Subsequent Years. INDIRECT RATE SCOPE OF CHANGE. The scope and purpose of this subsection of the Addendum to the Service Agreements is to change the way the indirect costs the County charges the City are calculated, which is a component cost in determining the total actual cost for the provision of Services. Previously, the Parties calculated the indirect rate based on "salaries only" as adopted in the methodology set forth in former Exhibits 2A and 2B to the Agreement, but now agree that it is acceptable to calculate the indirect rate based on "total expenditures". 1.2 Effective with the 2012 Settle and Adjust and for Subsequent Years. ELECTED PROSECUTING ATTORNEY SALARY and DEPARTMENTAL M&O METHODOLOGY SCOPE OF CHANGE. The scope and purpose of this subsection of the Addendum to the Service Agreements is to change the way the City's share of the Elected Prosecuting Attorney salary and Departmental M&O cost is calculated. The Parties now agree that the Elected Prosecuting Attorney salary and benefits, net of State Funding, and Departmental M&O is allocated in the Countywide Cost Plan reviewed by the City of Spokane Valley annually and shall no longer be allocated as a direct misdemeanor cost. The cost of the Page 2 of 6 Elected Prosecuting Attorney and Departmental M&O will now be factored into the Countywide Indirect rate that is applied to total misdemeanor costs. 1.2.1 ELECTED PROSECUTING ATTORNEY SALARY ALLOCATION — The salary costs of the Elected Prosecuting Attorney will be allocated out to all units, departments, and funds that receive supervision. The basis of allocation is currently the total personnel costs of each unit, department, and fund. The State provided reimbursement of a portion of the salary costs of this position, currently at fifty percent reimbursement, shall be applied as a revenue adjustment. 1.2.2 DEPARTMENTAL M&O ALLOCATION — The prosecuting attorney M&O costs will be allocated out to all units, departments, and funds that receive benefit from these expenditures. The basis of allocation is currently the total personnel costs of each unit, department, and fund. 1.2.3 MODIFICATION — In the event the Parties desire an alternate basis of allocating Elected Prosecuting Attorney salary and departmental M&O, the Parties agree that designated staff responsible for preparing and reviewing the Prosecutor Allocator within the Countywide Indirect Cost Plan may modify said basis from time -to -time upon written mutual agreement. The designated staff for each entity are as follows: the City Manager for the City, the Chief Budget Officer for the County, and the Elected Prosecuting Attorney. 1.3 Effective with the 2012 Settle and Adjust and for Subsequent Years. PROSECUTOR INFRACTION DEPARTMENT SCOPE OF CHANGE. The scope and purpose of this subsection of the Addendum to the Service Agreements is to change the way infraction costs are allocated within former Exhibit 2B Infraction Services. The Infraction costs will now be determined as provided for in new Infraction Services Exhibit 2B in recognition of various methodological changes specified within. The total infraction costs determined by the methodology outlined in new Exhibit 2B will be removed from misdemeanor costs prior to applying the City's usage rate. 1.4 Effective with the 2012 Settle and Adjust and for Subsequent Years. CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS OF ZONING ORDINANCES AND ADULT ENTERTAINMENT ORDINANCE HOURLY RATE CALCULATION SCOPE OF CHANGE. The scope and purpose of this subsection of the Addendum to the Service Agreements is to change the hourly rate computation used for billing the City for costs associated with the criminal prosecution of zoning ordinances and adult entertainment ordinances. Previously in former Exhibit 2C, the hourly rate included the salary and benefit costs of a single attorney and paralegal. The Parties now agree, as referenced in new Exhibit 2C, that the hourly rate will be calculated by adding 1) the total costs for the "PA Civil" department, and 2) the indirect costs of the "PA Civil" department. The sum of these costs will be averaged by the number of direct civil attorneys to determine an "Average Annual Cost." This cost will be divided by the total annual productive work hours (currently 1,653) to arrive at a "Civil Attorney Hourly Rate". 1.5 Effective with the 2013 Settle and Adjust and for Subsequent Years. DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF METHODOLOGY SCOPE OF CHANGE. The scope and purpose of this subsection of the Addendum to the Service Agreements is to change the way the City's share of Administrative Staff costs is calculated. The Parties now agree that the Administrative Staff is allocated in the Countywide Cost Plan reviewed by the City of Spokane Valley annually and shall no longer be allocated as a direct misdemeanor cost. The Page 3 of 6 cost of the Administrative Staff will now be factored into the Countywide Indirect rate that is applied to total misdemeanor costs. 1.5.1 DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF SALARY ALLOCATION — The Prosecuting Attorney Departmental Administrative staff salary will be allocated out to all units, departments, and funds that benefit from these expenditures. The basis of allocation is currently the total FTE of each unit, department, and fund. 1.5.2 MODIFICATION — In the event the Parties desire an alternate basis of allocating Prosecutor Departmental Administrative Staff Salary, the Parties agree that designated staff responsible for preparing and reviewing the Prosecutor Allocator within the Countywide Indirect Cost Plan may modify said basis from time -to - time upon written mutual agreement. The designated staff for each entity are as follows: the City Manager for the City, the Chief Budget Officer for the County, and the Elected Prosecuting Attorney. 1.6 Effective January 1, 2015. MODIFY EXHIBIT 1. The scope and purpose of this subsection of the Addendum to the Service Agreements is to acknowledge that the Prosecuting Attorney represents the City not only in contested traffic infractions, but also contested animal control infractions and contested CDL infractions. The Parties agree that Exhibit 1 to the Agreement shall be modified to provide as follows: (Underlined and highlighted language added, lined -out and highlighted language deleted.) EXHIBIT 1 For the purpose of this Agreement, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY Services shall include prosecution of violations of state statutes that are punishable as misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor offenses that occur within CITY'S jurisdiction and that are committed by adults as well as any appeals to Superior Court, Washington State Court of Appeal, or Washington State Supreme Court. PROSECUTING ATTORNEY retains sole prosecutorial discretion in conjunction with providing Services under the terms of this Agreement from charging decisions through complete disposition of the case, including appeals to Superior Court, Washington State Court of Appeals, or Washington State Supreme Court. Provided, however, CITY may take over prosecution of any misdemeanor case upon written notification to PROSECUTING ATTORNEY. For the purpose of this paragraph, misdemeanors shall include criminal violations of CITY animal control ordinances. PROSECUTING ATTORNEY agrees to represent CITY in contested traffic infractions, contested animal control infractions and contested CDL infractions. PROSECUTING ATTORNEY also agrees, when requested by CITY, to represent CITY with respect to criminal violations of its zoning ordinances at the hourly rate set forth in new Exhibits -2A, 2� 2C. PROVIDED, such representation shall not include challenges to the constitutionality of any zoning ordinance. The CITY shall retain responsibility for defending any constitutional challenge to any zoning ordinance or other CITY ordinance which may be involved in providing Services. Page 4of6 CITY agrees to take appropriate action to ensure police officers and CITY staff are available at no cost to PROSECUTING ATTORNEY for all trials or judicial proceedings where PROSECUTING ATTORNEY determines their presence is necessary. All misdemeanor, gross misdemeanor, and zoning services to be provided by PROSECUTING ATTORNEY in courts under the terms of this Agreement shall be provided in courts located within the Spokane County Courthouse Complex. All traffic infraction, animal control infraction and CDL infraction services to be provided by PROSECUTING ATTORNEY under the terms of this Agreement shall be provided in either courts located within the Spokane County Courthouse Complex or courtroom(s) in the Spokane Valley precinct. In the event CITY requests such court services be provided at a location other than that provided for herein, the PARTIES agree to meet and mutually negotiate. 1.7 Effective with the 2013 Settle and Adjust and for Subsequent Years. REPLACEMENT OF EXHIBITS 2A, 2B, and 2C. The Scope and purpose of this subsection of the Addendum to the Service Agreements is to replace former Exhibits 2A, 2B, and 2C in the Service Agreements with new Exhibits 2A, 2B, and 2C and a new exhibit labeled "2 -Summary" all of which are attached hereto as Attachments "1" and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION TWO: DURATION - This Addendum shall be in full force and effect as to the Agreement as modified by the Modification for the remaining term of the Agreement, or any extension of that Agreement. SECTION THREE: REMAINDER OF INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT TO REMAIN THE SAME - The remaining provisions of the Agreement and Modification will remain unchanged by this Addendum. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Addendum to be executed on date and year opposite their respective signatures. DATED: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON TODD MIELKE, Chair ATTEST: SHELLY O'QUINN, Vice -Chair Clerk of the Board Page 5of6 AL FRENCH, Commissioner DATED: ATTEST: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM ONLY: Office of the City Attorney CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Mike Jackson, City Manager DATED: SPOKANE COUNTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY Page 6 of 6 Lawrence H. Haskell, Prosecutor Exhibit 2 - SUMMARY Spokane County Prosecutor City of Spokane Valley 2013 Estimate Information Percentage of Spokane Valley Cases: Estimate 36.60% Actual Indirect Rate: Estimate Actual 21.59% Budget Spokane Valley % Spokane Valley Misdemeanor 1,032,548.62 36.60% 377,943.77 Infraction - - 41,233.81 TOTAL 419,177.58 Information Percentage of Spokane Valley Cases: Estimate 36.60% Actual Indirect Rate: Estimate Actual 21.59% Exhibit 2A Spokane County Prosecutor City of Spokane Valley Misdemeanor Methodology 2013 Estimate Attorneys: Criminal hlisderneanor General 37.43 6.00 DTF/DPAP 1.52 BECCA 0.55 DUI Boot Camp - Grant I.00 Subtotal Attorneys 39.50 7.00 Misd Supervisor 1.00 Total 39.50 8.00 Criminal Sal & Ben Adjustment Adj Salary, Kristianson Elder Monteeueco Cordts Kuhlman 71,664 71,664 68,580 68,580 113,101 113,101 108,346 108,346 75,262 75,262 Gabriel 128,438 128,438 Position 50% supported by Mental Health Grant fimded but still uses Prosecutor M&O and Olsen -Target Zero 10I,005 101,005 Supervision O'Brien-Supery 132,949 132,949 799,345 0 799,345 Chief Criminal Depu :Driscoll Criminal Sal & Ben Adjustment Adj Salary Supervises Criminal and Misdemeanor Attys 159,371 (132,529) 26,841.40 Criminal Misdemeanor Support Staff Sat & Ben Adjustment Adj Salary 46,849 46,849 Saak 41,501 41,501 itger ek 43,077 43,077 mee 50,986 50,986 Hnke&ori 27,725 27,725 Position 25% supported by Mental Health. Ramey " 44,906 44,906 HansenR 44,637 (26,782) 17,855 Position 60% Felony 299,681 272,899 Subtotal Salary 1,099,085 Prosecutor Criminal Indirect Rate * 21.59% 237,326 * This Indirect Rate is from the 2013 for 2015 Countywide Cost Plan. Subsequent Misdemeanor cost estimates will use the indirect rale from Attorney hyo years prior. Burdened Rate Misdemeanor Budget 1,336,411 190,916 Reduction of Misdemeamor Budget Infraction Method (94,534) Other Sources of Funds 50% Attorney funded by Mental Health Sales Tax (64,219) 100% Attorney fimded by DUI grant (101,005) 25% Support Staff position funded by Mental Health Sales Tax (6,931) Subtotal Other Sources (172,155) Indirect Rate on Other Sources (37,174) Total Reduction (303,863) Equals Allocable Misdemeanor Budget 1,032549 Exhibit 2A Spokane County Prosecutor City of Spokane Valley Misdeamenaor Statistics 2013 Estimate Spokane Valley Cases (excluding valley WSP cases) All County cases (including W SP cases) * 2011 2012 July Avg Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun 12 months 267 264 277 264 278 287 326 314 320 290 257 248 3,392 807 815 772 735 798 801 848 807 761 731 712 680 9,267 38.44% 38.91% 42.05% 39.67% 36.10% 36.47% 36.60% Valley %of all cases 33.09% 32.39% 35.88% 35.92% 34.84% 35.83% Note *Total cases including WSP must be used as base total number of cases in determining percentage served. Source CASEMAN database Exhibit 2B Spokane County Prosecutor City of Spokane Valley Infraction Methodology 2013 ESTIMATE Spokane Valley Misdemeanor Deputy Attorney Cost Note Infraction Cost Fully Burdened Misdemeanor Deputy Cost 190,915.91 Hours Worked per Year 1,653.00 1 Deputy Attorney Cost per Hour 115.50 Spokane Valley Infraction Deputy Attorney- Court Time Dedicated Spokane Valley Docket Traffic Court per Year (7.5 hours x 26 weeks) Traffic Court per Year (3.75 hours x 26 weeks) Subtotal hours Monday Holiday credit Total Hours per Year Spokane Valley Infraction Deputy Cost Mixed Jurisdiction Docket Animal (2 Hours per Month) CDL (112 day every other week) Hours per Year Monday Holiday credit Total Hours per Year Mixed Jurisdiction Infraction Deputy Cost % of Valley Infractions Spokane County Infraction Department - Prep Time (Not in Court) 195.00 97.50 292.50 (28,13) 3 264.38 30,534.42 30,534.42 24.00 97.50 121.50 (9.38) 3 112.13 12,950.06 16.72% 2 2,164.98 Infraction Hours Spent at Courthouse: Traffic, CDL Hours per Week Animal Hours per Week Weeks per Year 52 Hours per Year Infraction Deputy Prep Time Cost % of Valley Infractions TOTAL 7.50 I.00 442.00 51,049.50 I6.72% 2 8,534.41 94,533.98 41,233.81 Notes 1 See "Productive Work Hour" tab for calculation of annual productive hours 2 District Court statistics, see" Infract Stat" tab Total Holiday 3 Monday Holiday Credit Calculation Days Hours Percent Credit Hours Number of Monday Holidays current year 5 7.50 37.50 Dedicated Spokane Valley Docket Full Days 26 195.00 50% 18.75 Half Days 26 97.50 25% 9.38 Sub -total 28.13 Mixed Jurisdiction Docket Half Days 26 97.50 25% 9.38 Total Hours per Year 390.00 100% 37.50 Exhibit 2B Spokane County Prosecutor City of Spokane Valley Infraction Statistics 2013 Estimate District Court Case Statistics Offense Category Spokane Valley* Spokane County** Infractions DV - Misdemeanor DLII Criminal Trac Criminal NT (less misd DV) Subtotal 7,394 393 230 1,787 795 44,228 16.72% 915 1,567 5,446 2,270 10,599 54,426 From District Court Statistics - Last half of 2011 and first half of 2012 Exhibit 2C Spokane County Prosecutor City of Spokane Valley Civil Attorney Hourly Rate 2013 Estimate Civil Prosecutor Hourly Rate Total Allocation $ 540,888 Allocation from Other Indirect Services 58,633 Total Civil Cost $ 599,521 Attorneys Included in this Total Civil Cost: Arkills, Hubert, Kinn 3 Average Annual Cost $ 199,840 Productive Work Hours 1,653 Civil Attorney Hourly Rate $ 120.90 Exhibit 2C Spokane County Prosecutor City of Spokane Valley Civil Attorney hourly Rate 2013 Information Spokane County 2013 Indirect Cost Pools -- Cost Distribution Detail Prosecutor - Civil Negotiated Altocation 29 Prosecutor - Civil Total Allocation Less Allocated to Other Indirect Services $ 540,888 (384,658) Allocable to Direct Service Departments $ 156,230 plus: Allocation from Other Indirect Services $ 58,633 Total Allocation to Direct Service Departments $ 214,863 Allocation Stasis Primary Allocation Allocable Costs Secondary Allocation Allocable Costs from Other Indirect Total Allocation PA CMI Hours of Support $ 540,888 $ 58,633 005 Coop Extension - 0.000/p $ - 0.00% $ - $ - 011 Board Of Equalization 20 0.22% $ 1,178 0.75% $ 442 $ 1,620 020 R Auditors Recording (0200004) 35 0.38% $ 2,063 1.32% $ 774 $ 2,837 020 A Auditors Auto (0200005) 12 0.13% $ 716 0.46% $ 269 $ 985 020E Auditors Elections (0200006) 295 3.26% $ 17,611 11.27% $ 6,609 $ 24,220 040 Dept. of Emergency Mgt 19 0.21% $ 1,118 0.72% $ 420 $ 1,538 0410116 Parking - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - 061 Hearing Examiner - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - 070 Medical Examiner 85 0.93% $ 5,039 3.23% $ 1,891 $ 6,931 090 Clerk 14 0.16% $ 850 0.54% $ 319 $ 1,169 190 District Court 76 0.84% $ 4,518 2.89% $ 1,695 $ 6,213 32081LL Treasurer320BILL 13 0.15% $ 805 0.51% $ 302 $ 1,107 200 Juvenile 10 0,11% $ 596 0.38% $ 224 $ 820 203 Pre -Trial Services 4 0.04% $ 224 0.14% $ 84 $ 308 220 Parks & Rec 203 2.24% $ 12,121 7.76% $ 4,549 $ 16,671 250BILL Prosecutor -250BILL - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - 250 5030-00 Prosecutor Civil Commitment - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - 250Cr Prosecutor Criminal 62 0.68% $ 3,683 2.36% $ 1,382 $ 5,065 250 Sup Prosecutor Support Enforcement - 0.00% $ 0.00% $ - $ - 288 SCOPE -SIRT - 0.00% $ 0.00% $ - $ - 290 Sheriff 763 8.42% $ 45,519 29,14% $ 17,083 $ 62,602 295 Communications - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - 305 Public Defender 29 0.32% $ 1,730 1.11% $ 649 $ 2,379 306 Counsel for Defense - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - 310 Superior Court 48 0.52% $ 2,833 1.81% $ 1,063 $ 3,896 330 SCRAPS See Fund 420 - 0,00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - 339 Geiger Spur - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ 341 Debt Service - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 102 Treasurers O&M - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 103 Auditor 0&M - 0.00% $ 0.00% $ - $ FD 105 RID Admin - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - Prosecutor - Civil Total Allocation Less Allocated to Other Indirect Services $ 540,888 (384,658) Allocable to Direct Service Departments $ 156,230 plus: Allocation from Other Indirect Services $ 58,633 Total Allocation to Direct Service Departments $ 214,863 Direct Service Departments FD 106 Treasurer's REET Elec - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 107+635 Investment Pool - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 109 Courthouse - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 110 County Roads 52 0.57% $ 3,101 1.99% $ 1,164 $ 4,265 FD 113 Veteran Services 11 0.12% $ 641 0.41% $ 241 $ 882 FD 115 Dispute Resolution - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 116 Commute Trip Reduction - 0.00% $ - 0,00% $ - $ - FD 117 Conservation Futures (7) -0.07% $ (403) -0.26% $ (151) $ (554) FD 118 County Tax Ref - 0.00% $ 0.00% $ - $ - FD 119 TIF Dist. #2 - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 122 Recreation 3 0.03% $ 164 0.10% $ 62 $ 226 FD 123 Spokane CO Housing - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 125 RE & Property Tax Admin Assit. - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 126 Hotel/Motel Tax - 0.00% $ 0.00% $ - $ - FD 127 Car Rental Tax - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 128 Liberty Lake Transportation - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 129 Conservation Prop Care - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 130 WMOBE - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 131 Comm Development - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 132 911 10 0.11% $ 596 0.38% $ 224 $ 820 FD 133 Victim Witness - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 134 Clerk LFO - 0,00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 135/136 REET 1&2 - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ FD 138 Mental Health Risk Reserve - 0,00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 139 RID Guaranty Trust - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 140 Spokane CO RSN Prop - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 141 Dom Viol Advocacy - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 142 Tourism Promotion Area - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ FD 143 Historical Doc Preservation 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 144 Trial Court Improvement - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 145 Substance Abuse - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 146 Dev Disabilities - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 147 Homelessness Prevention 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ $ - FD 148 Mental Health 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ $ - FD 150 Probation - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ $ - FD 160 Emergency Communication Tax - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ $ - FD 161 Indi ent Defense Improvement - 0.00% $ - 0,00% $ - $ - FD 162 Indigent Dep and Terminaton Defense - 0.00% $ - 0,00% $ - $ - FD 163 Liberty Lake Lift - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 164 West Quadrant Increment Area - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 207 DS Capital Construction financed by Bond - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 216 TIF Dist. #1 - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 218 TIF Dist. #3 ( Medical Lake) - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 219 Resource Conservation Debt - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 302 Courthouse improvements - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ $ - FD 303 Parks Cap Proj. & Improvement - 0.00% $ - 0,00% $ - $ - FD 307 Capital Construction financed by Bonds - 0,00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 313 County Facilities Capital Improvements - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 318 TIF District No 3 -Medical Lake - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 319 Resource Conservation Improvements - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD401/E01 Sewer Operations/ WWT 17 0.19% $ 1,029 0.66% $ 386 $ 1,415 FD 403 Sewer Construction - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ FD 404 Landfill Closure - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 405 Golf - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD406 Building and Planning 5 0.06% $ 313 0.20% $ 118 $ 431 FD 407 Fair 4 0.04% $ 209 0.13% $ 78 $ 287 FD 409 Storm water (3) -0,03% $ (179) -0.11% $ (67) $ (246) FD 420 SCRAPS (was Dept. 330) 183 2.01% $ 10,899 6.98% $ 4,090 $ 14,989 F0434 SCRWRF 11 0.12% $ 671 0.43% $ 252 $ 923 FD 435 Solid Waste - 0.00% $ - 0.00% 5 - $ - FD 436 Aquifer Protection Agency - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 438 General Facilities Charge - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 501 Equip Rent/Revolving 15 0.16% $ 880 0.56% $ 330 $ 1,210 FD 503 Information Systems Fund - 0,00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 505 Industrial Ins - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 506 Dental Ins - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 507 Liability Insurance - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 508 Medical Insurance - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 509 Unemployment Ins - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 512 Public Works Admin - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - FD 515 Detention Services 467 5.15% $ 27,851 17.83% $ 10,452 $ 38,303 FD 600 Agency Funds 23 0.25% $ 1,342 0.86% $ 504 $ 1,845 FD 658 Public Health District - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - A00 Airports - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - BOO Sewer Bonds - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - F00 Fire Districts - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - G00 Cemetery Districts - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - H00 Water Districts - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - 100 Irrigation Districts - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - J00+K00+64 School Districts - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - L00 Library District 0.00% $ 0.00% $ - $ - N00 State Funds - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - P01. Joint Park & Rec - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - S00 Sewer Districts 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - T00 Transit - 0,00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - U00-700 RID - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ $ - C00 Cities & Towns - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - C10 City of Spokane - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ $ - C10 JU City of Spokane Joint Use - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - C10 PROB City of Spokane Probation - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - C10MUNI P City ofSpokane Muni Court -PSB - 0.00% $ - 0,00% $ - $ - C10 MUNI A City of Spokane Muni Court- Annex - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - C10 CWR City of Spokane Children's Waiting Room - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - C16 City of Spokane Valley - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - other other - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - 2900093 State Drug Task Force 143 1,57% $ 8,513 5.45% $ 3,195 $ 11,708 C10 L LEIS - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - UNPROS Unallocable Prosecutor Funds - 0.00% $ - 0.00% $ - $ - UNAUD UnallocableAuditor Funds 0.00% $ 0.00% UNTREA Unallocable Treasurer Funds 0.00% 0.00% $ 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% $ 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% $ 0.00% $ 0.00% $ 0.00% $ 0.00% $ 0.00% $ 0.00% $ 0.00% 0.00% $ 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% All Indirect Cost Categories Total 0.00% 6,450 7112% 9,070 100.00% Check O.K. Check O.K $ - $ 384,658 0.00% $ $ 540,888 100.00% $ ANNE 58,633 $ 214,863 Check O.K. Chock 0.K, Check O.K. Chock O.K. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 12, 2015 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ['consent ❑ old business ® new business ['public hearing ['information ❑admin. report ['pending legislation ['executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Motion Consideration: Contract for Comprehensive Plan Update - Analytics, Citizen -Initiated Amendment Request and Plan Audit. GOVERNING LEGISLATION: The Growth Management Act (GMA) RCW 36.70A. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: None. Council heard an administrative report on this issue at the May 5, 2015 Council meeting. BACKGROUND: Per RCW 36.70A.130(1), every county and city in the state is required to conduct an update of its Comprehensive Plan and development regulations every eight years. Although the City of Spokane Valley's update is due no later than June 30, 2017, the City began the process in 2014. The update of the Comprehensive Plan will be completed in four phases. For the first phase, Development of Public Participation Program and Community Visioning, the City selected Van Ness Feldman. The tasks in this phase consisted of compiling existing conditions and documents, developing the Public Participation Program, and completing the community visioning process. These tasks were completed in April 2015. The second phase, Analytics, Citizen -Initiated Amendment Request (CAR) and Plan Audit, will consist of preparing Land Quantity Analysis (LQA) information, preparing and analyzing existing conditions, assisting with the CAR process, conducting a Comprehensive Plan audit, and providing recommendations on the State Environmental Protection Policy Act (SEPA) Threshold Determination. In the third phase, a Consultant will conduct subarea analysis, develop a draft plan and regulations and initiate the SEPA environmental review process. In the final phase, a Consultant will develop the final Comprehensive Plan and regulations, develop an economic development strategic plan and finalize SEPA documents. Staff has selected Van Ness Feldman to complete the second phase of the plan update. OPTIONS: Authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the contract with Van Ness Feldman, or take other appropriate action. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Move to authorize the City Manager to finalize and execute the Professional Services Agreement with Van Ness Feldman for the Comprehensive Plan Update Analytics, Citizen -Initiated Amendment Request and Plan Audit. BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: The total contract amount for the first phase of the Comprehensive Plan update was $108,000. The contract amount for the second phase of the Comprehensive Plan update is $127,000. STAFF CONTACT: John Hohman, Community and Economic Development Director ATTACHMENTS: Professional Services Agreement AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Van Ness Feldman Comprehensive Plan Update Analytics, Citizen -Initiated Amendment Request and Plan Audit THIS AGREEMENT is made by and between the City of Spokane Valley, a code City of the State of Washington, hereinafter "City" and Van Ness Feldman, hereinafter "Consultant," jointly referred to as "Parties." IN CONSIDERATION of the terms and conditions contained herein, the Parties agree as follows: 1. Work to Be Performed. Consultant shall provide all labor, services and material to satisfactorily complete the attached Scope of Services. A. Administration. The City Manager or designee shall administer and be the primary contact for Consultant. Prior to commencement of work, Consultant shall contact the City Manager or designee to review the Scope of Services, schedule and date of completion. The Scope of Services is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Upon notice from the City Manager or designee, Consultant shall commence work, perform the requested tasks in the Scope of Services, stop work and promptly cure any failure in performance under this Agreement. B. Representations. City has relied upon the qualifications of Consultant in entering into this Agreement. By execution of this Agreement, Consultant represents it possesses the ability, skill and resources necessary to perform the work and is familiar with all current laws, rules and regulations which reasonably relate to the Scope of Services. No substitutions of agreed-upon personnel shall be made without the prior written consent of City. Consultant represents that the compensation as stated in paragraph 3 is adequate and sufficient compensation for its timely provision of all professional services required to complete the Scope of Services under this Agreement. Consultant shall be responsible for the technical accuracy of its services and documents resulting therefrom, and City shall not be responsible for discovering deficiencies therein. Consultant shall correct such deficiencies without additional compensation except to the extent such action is directly attributable to deficiencies in City furnished information. C. Standard of Care. Consultant shall exercise the degree of skill and diligence normally employed by professional consultants engaged in the same profession, and performing the same or similar services at the time such services are performed. D. Modifications. City may modify this Agreement and order changes in the work whenever necessary or advisable. Consultant will accept modifications when ordered in writing by the City Manager or designee. Compensation for such modifications or changes shall be as mutually agreed between the Parties. Consultant shall make such revisions in the work as are necessary to correct errors or omissions appearing therein when required to do so by City without additional compensation. 2. Term of Contract. This Agreement shall be in full force and effect upon execution and shall remain in effect until completion of all contractual requirements have been met as determined by City. Consultant shall Agreement for Professional Services Page 1 of 7 complete its work by December 31ST, 2015, unless the time for performance is extended in writing by the Parties. Either Party may terminate this Agreement for material breach after providing the other Party with at least ten days' prior notice and an opportunity to cure the breach. City may, in addition, terminate this Agreement for any reason by ten days' written notice to Consultant. In the event of termination without breach, City shall pay Consultant for all work previously authorized and satisfactorily performed prior to the termination date. 3. Compensation. City agrees to pay Consultant an agreed upon hourly rate up to a maximum amount of $127,000 as full compensation for everything done under this Agreement, as set forth in Exhibit B. Consultant shall not perform any extra, further or additional services for which it will request additional compensation from City without a prior written agreement for such services and payment therefore. 4. Payment. Consultant shall be paid monthly upon presentation of an invoice to City. Applications for payment shall be sent to the City Finance Department at the below stated address. City reserves the right to withhold payment under this Agreement for that portion of the work (if any) which is determined in the reasonable judgment of the City Manager or designee to be noncompliant with the Scope of Services, City standards, City Code, and federal or state standards. 5. Conflicts. To comply with the Washington Rules of Professional Conduct (RPCs), Consultant maintains a conflict of interest index identifying all of Consultant's current and former clients. Based on the scope of representation in Exhibit A, Consultant reviewed the City against Consultant's conflict of interest index. Consultant has four existing clients that required further review. These entities are listed in Exhibit C. Consultant has conducted an internal review has determined that there is no current conflict of interest, but that a potential conflict could potentially arise. Consultant has also concluded that it is reasonable for Consultant to represent the City of Spokane Valley and the entities listed in Exhibit C upon full disclosure and written consent. Exhibit C provides full disclosure of the representation of the entities listed and the Consultant's analysis of the potential for conflicts. By signing this contract, City confirms in writing its informed consent to the continued representation of the entities listed in Exhibit C. Specifically, City agrees that Consultant's continued work for entities listed in Exhibit C is on matters unrelated to Consultant's work for the City and would not materially limit Consultant's responsibilities to the City and further would not materially limit Consultant's responsibilities to the entities listed in Exhibit C. 5. Notice. Notices other than applications for payment shall be given in writing as follows: TO THE CITY: Name: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Phone: (509) 921-1000 Address: 11707 East Sprague Ave, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206 TO THE CONSULTANT: Name: Van Ness Feldman, Tadas Kisielius Phone: (206) 623-9372 Address: Millennium Tower 719 Second Avenue, Suite 1150 Seattle, WA 98104 6. Applicable Laws and Standards. The Parties, in the performance of this Agreement, agree to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. Consultant warrants that its designs, construction Agreement for Professional Services Page 2 of 7 documents, and services shall conform to all federal, state and local statutes and regulations. 7. Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and Other Responsibility Matters — Primary Covered Transactions. A. By executing this Agreement, the Consultant certifies to the best of its knowledge and belief, that it and its principals: 1. Are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by any federal department or agency; 2. Have not within a three-year period preceding this proposal been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against them for commission or fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public (federal, state, or local) transaction or contract under a public transaction; violation of federal or state antitrust statues or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, or receiving stolen property; 3. Are not presently indicted for or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity (federal, state, or local) with commission of any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph (A)(2) of this certification; and 4. Have not within a three-year period preceding this application/proposal had one or more public transactions (federal, state, or local) terminated for cause or default. B. Where the prospective primary participant is unable to certify to any of the statements in this certification, such prospective participant shall attach an explanation to this Agreement. 8. Relationship of the Parties. It is understood, agreed and declared that Consultant shall be an independent contractor, and not the agent or employee of City, that City is interested in only the results to be achieved, and that the right to control the particular manner, method and means in which the services are performed is solely within the discretion of Consultant. Any and all employees who provide services to City under this Agreement shall be deemed employees solely of Consultant. The Consultant shall be solely responsible for the conduct and actions of all its employees under this Agreement and any liability that may attach thereto. 9. Ownership of Documents. All drawings, plans, specifications, and other related documents prepared by Consultant under this Agreement are and shall be the property of City, and may be subject to disclosure pursuant to chapter 42.56 RCW or other applicable public record laws. The written, graphic, mapped, photographic, or visual documents prepared by Consultant under this Agreement shall, unless otherwise provided, be deemed the property of City. City shall be permitted to retain these documents, including reproducible camera-ready originals of reports, reproduction quality mylars of maps, and copies in the form of computer files, for the City's use. City shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose, distribute and otherwise use, in whole or in part, any reports, data, drawings, images or other material prepared under this Agreement, provided that Consultant shall have no liability for the use of Consultant's work product outside of the scope of its intended purpose. It is further agreed that after the conclusion of this matter, Consultant will offer to return any files to the City. If Consultant does not receive instructions as to the disposition of these files within 60 days after said offer, it is agreed that Consultant need not retain such files for more than 3 years or other time period required for specific categories of documents under the document retention schedule for public documents established by the Secretary of State. After that time, Consultant may destroy all such materials that do not have intrinsic Agreement for Professional Services Page 3 of 7 value. City further agrees that Consultant may retain a copy of materials in such files at its own expense. 10. Records. The City or State Auditor or any of their representatives shall have full access to and the right to examine during normal business hours all of Consultant's records with respect to all matters covered in this Agreement. Such representatives shall be permitted to audit, examine and make excerpts or transcripts from such records and to make audits of all contracts, invoices, materials, payrolls and record of matters covered by this Agreement for a period of three years from the date final payment is made hereunder. 11. Insurance. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by Consultant, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. A. Minimum Scope of Insurance. Consultant shall obtain insurance of the types described below: 1. Automobile liability insurance covering all owned, non -owned, hired and leased vehicles. Coverage shall be written on Insurance Services Office (ISO) form CA 00 01 or a substitute form providing equivalent liability coverage. If necessary, the policy shall be endorsed to provide contractual liability coverage. 2. Commercial general liability insurance shall be written on ISO occurrence form CG 00 01 and shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, independent contractors and personal injury and advertising injury. City shall be named as an insured under Consultant's commercial general liability insurance policy with respect to the work performed for the City. 3. Workers' compensation coverage as required by the industrial insurance laws of the State of Washington. 4. Professional liability insurance appropriate to Consultant's profession. B. Minimum Amounts of Insurance. Consultant shall maintain the following insurance limits: 1. Automobile liability insurance with a minimum combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage of no less than $1,000,000 per accident. 2. Commercial general liability insurance shall be written with limits no less than $1,000,000 each occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate. 3. Professional liability insurance, if applicable, shall be written with limits no less than $1,000,000 per claim and $1,000,000 policy aggregate limit. C. Other Insurance Provisions. The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions for automobile liability, professional liability and commercial general liability insurance: 1. Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance with respect to the City. Any insurance, self-insurance, or insurance pool coverage maintained by City shall be in excess of Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. Agreement for Professional Services Page 4 of 7 2. Consultant shall fax or send electronically in .pdf format a copy of insurer's cancellation notice within two business days of receipt by Consultant. D. Acceptability of Insurers. Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not less than A:VII. E. Evidence of Coverage. As evidence of the insurance coverages required by this Agreement, Consultant shall furnish acceptable insurance certificates to the City Clerk at the time Consultant returns the signed Agreement, which shall be Exhibit C. The certificate shall specify all of the parties who are additional insureds, and shall include applicable policy endorsements, and the deduction or retention level. Insuring companies or entities are subject to City acceptance. If requested, complete copies of insurance policies shall be provided to City. Consultant shall be financially responsible for all pertinent deductibles, self-insured retentions, and/or self-insurance. 12. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. Consultant shall, at its sole expense, defend, indemnify and hold harmless City and its officers, agents, and employees, from any and all claims, actions, suits, liability, loss, costs, attorney's fees and costs of litigation, expenses, injuries, and damages of any nature whatsoever relating to or arising out of the wrongful or negligent acts, errors or omissions in the services provided by Consultant, Consultant's agents, subcontractors, subconsultants and employees to the fullest extent permitted by law, subject only to the limitations provided below. Consultant's duty to defend, indemnify and hold harmless City shall not apply to liability for damages arising out of such services caused by or resulting from the sole negligence of City or City's agents or employees. Consultant's duty to defend, indemnify and hold harmless City against liability for damages arising out of such services caused by the concurrent negligence of (a) City or City's agents or employees, and (b) Consultant, Consultant's agents, subcontractors, subconsultants and employees, shall apply only to the extent of the negligence of Consultant, Consultant's agents, subcontractors, subconsultants and employees. Consultant's duty to defend, indemnify and hold City harmless shall include, as to all claims, demands, losses and liability to which it applies, City's personnel -related costs, reasonable attorneys' fees, and the reasonable value of any services rendered by the office of the City Attorney, outside consultant costs, court costs, fees for collection, and all other claim -related expenses. Consultant specifically and expressly waives any immunity that may be granted it under the Washington State Industrial Insurance Act, Title 51 RCW. These indemnification obligations shall not be limited in any way by any limitation on the amount or type of damages, compensation or benefits payable to or for any third party under workers' compensation acts, disability benefit acts, or other employee benefits acts. Provided, that Consultant's waiver of immunity under this provision extends only to claims against Consultant by City, and does not include, or extend to, any claims by Consultant's employees directly against Consultant. Consultant hereby certifies that this indemnification provision was mutually negotiated. 13. Waiver. No officer, employee, agent or other individual acting on behalf of either Party has the power, right or authority to waive any of the conditions or provisions of this Agreement. No waiver in one instance shall be held to be a waiver of any other subsequent breach or nonperformance. All remedies afforded in this Agreement or by law, shall be taken and construed as cumulative, and in addition to every other remedy provided herein or by law. Failure of either Party to enforce at any time any of the provisions of this Agreement or to require at any time performance by the other Party of any provision hereof shall in no way be Agreement for Professional Services Page 5 of 7 construed to be a waiver of such provisions nor shall it affect the validity of this Agreement or any part thereof. 14. Assignment and Delegation. Neither Party shall assign, transfer, or delegate any or all of the responsibilities of this Agreement or the benefits received hereunder without first obtaining the written consent of the other Party. 15. Subcontracts. Except as otherwise provided herein, Consultant shall not enter into subcontracts for any of the work contemplated under this Agreement without obtaining prior written approval of City. 16. Confidentiality. Consultant may, from time to time, receive information which is deemed by City to be confidential. Consultant shall not disclose such information without the prior express written consent of City or upon order of a court of competent jurisdiction. 17. Jurisdiction and Venue. This Agreement is entered into in Spokane County, Washington. Disputes between City and Consultant shall be resolved in the Superior Court of the State of Washington in Spokane County. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Consultant agrees that it may, at City's request, be joined as a party in any arbitration proceeding between City and any third party that includes a claim or claims that arise out of, or that are related to Consultant' s services under this Agreement. Consultant further agrees that the Arbitrator(s) decision therein shall be final and binding on Consultant and that judgment may be entered upon it in any court having jurisdiction thereof. 18. Cost and Attorney's Fees. The prevailing party in any litigation or arbitration arising out of this Agreement shall be entitled to its attorney' s fees and costs of such litigation (including expert witness fees). 19. Entire Agreement. This written Agreement constitutes the entire and complete agreement between the Parties and supersedes any prior oral or written agreements. This Agreement may not be changed, modified or altered except in writing signed by the Parties hereto. 20. Anti -kickback. No officer or employee of City, having the power or duty to perform an official act or action related to this Agreement shall have or acquire any interest in this Agreement, or have solicited, accepted or granted a present or future gift, favor, service or other thing of value from any person with an interest in this Agreement. 21. Business Registration. Prior to commencement of work under this Agreement, Consultant shall register with the City as a business. 22. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Agreement should be held to be invalid for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Agreement. 23. Exhibits. Exhibits attached and incorporated into this Agreement are: A. Scope of Services B. Fee proposal C. Review for Conflicts of Interest D. Insurance Certificates Agreement for Professional Services Page 6 of 7 The Parties have executed this Agreement this day of , 2015. CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Consultant: Mike Jackson, City Manager By: Its: Authorized Representative ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Christine Bainbridge, City Clerk Office of the City Attorney Agreement for Professional Services Page 7 of 7 EXHIBIT — A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE SCOPE OF SERVICES 1.0 ADOPTION SCHEDULE The City of Spokane Valley is updating its Comprehensive Plan in conformance with RCW 36.70A.130(5).. The update will consist of four major phases: 1. Development of public participation program and community visioning, the Consultant compiled existing conditions and documents, developed the Public Participation Program, and completed the community visioning process. These tasks are detailed in Exhibit 1. 2. Analytics, Citizen -Initiated Amendment Request (CAR) and Plan Audit. In this phase, the Consultant will prepare Land Quantity Analysis (LQA) information, prepare existing conditions information, assist with the Citizen -Initiated Amendment Request (CAR) process, conduct a Comprehensive Plan audit, and provide recommendation on the SEPA Threshold Determination. The scope of work is detailed in Section 2 below. These tasks are anticipated to be completed by July 2015. 3. Development of draft plan and regulations. The Consultant will prepare the draft Comprehensive Plan elements, any related required draft regulations, and initiate the State Environmental Protection Policy Act (SEPA) environmental review process. 4. Development of final plan and regulations. The Consultant will prepare the Final Comprehensive Plan, regulations to implement the Comprehensive Plan, economic development strategic plan, and final SEPA documents. 2.0 ANALYTICS, CAR AND PLAN AUDIT - SCOPE OF SERVICES These tasks advance the update of the Comprehensive Plan from public visioning to more detailed analysis of the City's opportunities and challenges. 2.1 Land Quantity Analysis $1,500 1. Provide estimates of household demand by unit type based on city population targets. 2. Provide estimates of employment demand by type based on employment targets. 3. Technical support needed to implement the LQA and provide refinements based on results. 2.2 Analytics $15,000 1. Targeted analysis examining the "performance" of local zoning regulations in office, multi- family, and mixed-use zones. This analysis will feed into Task 2.3. This will include: • Development absorption analysis of residential, retail, office, and industrial products • Market assessment review of rents and occupancy trends • Pro -forma analysis of new office, retail, and multifamily residential prototypes • Assessment of buildable lands for development readiness, sorting by land value, vacant, redevelopable, size, access to utilities, and transportation access. 2. Baseline data analyses and representation of housing and economic trends. These analyses will cover trends in local GDP, employment, housing development, housing characteristic, taxable retail sales, and commute patterns. 3. Determine if the City provides the right mix of housing to support its economic objectives. 4. Review market conditions to identify existing or emerging economic development opportunities for the City. 5. Assess if there is a deficiency of regional facilities that enhance recreation, tourism, or the arts, if any. 6. Identify if there is an adequate supply of appropriately zoned land to support future commercial and manufacturing development and tourism oriented industries. If deficits or saturation exists in either provide suggestions for modification. 2.3 Existing Conditions Information $41,000 Consultant shall prepare initial existing conditions information to be used in an expanded SEPA checklist or EIS document. The information will relate to existing conditions and trends affecting the City's future as well as identify challenges and opportunities. Existing Conditions information will create a better understanding of Spokane Valley's past growth and identify potential areas for more focused planning. 1. Prepare existing conditions information related to Spokane Valley's demographics, economy, land use patterns, housing stock, transportation system, employment growth and growth trends. 2. Identify opportunities and constraints in the community which may affect the development of goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan. 2.4 Citizen -Initiated Amendment Request (CAR) $20,000 1. Consultant shall assist in application completeness determinations as needed. 2. Consultant shall develop criteria for staff to use in review of CAR applications. 3. Consultant shall assist in the development of a staff report. 4. Consultant shall attend one Planning Commission public hearing and one City Council public hearing. Attendance at other meetings, if requested, will require a budget amendment. 5. Consultant shall provide documentation of Planning Commission and City Council recommendation for proceedings. 2.5 Comprehensive Plan Audit $21,000 1. Consultant shall conduct an audit of the existing Comprehensive Plan, including review of goals and policies, to identify which goals and/or policies will be revised, kept, moved, or added. 2. Consultant shall develop a spreadsheet to track proposed changes to goals and policies. 2.6 Public Meeting $19,000 As part of the public engagement process, a meeting shall be held for this phase. 1. Consultant shall prepare public meeting materials, including information related to goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and information related to CAR applications received. 2. Consultant shall facilitate public meeting, which will include presentations and topical exercises. 3. The Consultant shall discuss public input received with City staff. 2.7 SEPA Documentation Recommendation $7,000 1. The Consultant shall provide a recommendation on the SEPA Threshold Determination, including input on whether an expanded SEPA checklist or EIS document should be prepared. 2.8 Travel Fees $2,500 3.0 NEXT PHASE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SCOPE OF WORK 1. The Consultant shall determine what sections of the Comprehensive Plan are required by the GMA to be updated and develop a Scope of Work for completing the update to the Comprehensive Plan and Development Regulations. 4.0 CITY RESPONSIBILITIES 1. City staff shall create the required Geographic Information System (GIS) datasets for the LQA methodology, zoning, and land use. The City will create and print all maps associated with the update. 2. The City shall maintain the project record and provide a copy of the index to the Consultant team on a quarterly basis. 3. The City shall maintain a public comment matrix to track all input received and shall provide a copy of the matrix to the Consultant team on a quarterly basis. 4. The City shall maintain a mailing list of project stakeholders. EXHIBIT B: FEE SCHEDULE The consulting services required will be billed on an hourly basis. Hourly Rates ATTORNEY Jay Derr $375 Tadas Kisielius $280 Senior Associate $240 Junior Associate $225 PLANNING Senior Planner $ 185 Planner $ 160 SUPPORT Planning Assistant/Paralegal $ 100 Graphics $ 60 Exhibit 2- Fee Schedule EXHIBIT C: REVIEW FOR CONFLICTS Rule 1.7 of the Rules of Profession Conduct define a concurrent conflict of interest as a situation in which the representation of one client will be directly adverse to another client or there is a significant risk that the representation of one or more clients will be materially limited by the lawyer's representation to another client. Notwithstanding the existence of a concurrent conflict of interest a lawyer may nevertheless represent a client if: (1) The lawyer reasonably believes that the lawyer will be able to provide competent and diligent representation to each affected client; (2) The representation is not prohibited by law; (3) The representation does not involve the assertion of a claim by one client against another client represented by the lawyer in the same litigation or another proceeding before a tribunal; and (4) Each affected client gives informed consent, confirmed in writing (following authorization from the other client to make any required disclosures). Consultant has conducted an internal review and identified four existing clients with which there is no current conflict, but for which there is a potential for a conflict to arise. Upon deliberation and review Consultant has concluded that it is reasonable to represent the City of Spokane Valley and the entities listed below upon full disclosure and written consent. The following descriptions provide full disclosure of the Consultant's representation of these four entities and Consultant's analysis of the potential conflicts. 1. Avista. Van Ness Feldman represents Avista in the defense of claims made by a number of northwest parties concerning power sales made from approximately 2000 to 2001. Additionally, Van Ness Feldman occasionally represents Avista with respect to federal regulatory obligations associated with its natural gas and electric utility businesses including: counseling regarding federal utility regulations; advocacy before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; and commercial transactions related to these regulatory obligations. Consultant has not represented Avista on local land use matters in Washington. However, because both the City and Avista are current clients, there is a potential for a conflict to arise. Consultant has not and will not represent Avista on matters related to land use issues in the City of Spokane Valley, unless the City consents, in writing to such representation in the future. During the term of this Contract, Consultant cannot represent the City adverse to Avista, without Avista's informed written consent. With that limitation, Consultant's representation of the City of Spokane Valley with regard to long range planning issues and project review would not materially limit Consultant's responsibilities to A vista. Similarly, Consultant's continued work for Avista on federal regulatory obligations associated with its natural gas and electric utility businesses is unrelated to Consultant's work for Spokane Valley and would not materially limit Consultant's responsibilities to Spokane Valley. 2. Central Premix. Exhibit 4- Review for Conflicts Consultant currently represents Central Premix in connection with permitting and operation of its facilities outside of the City of Spokane Valley. Consultant has not represented and will not represent Central Premix in relation to its existing facilities and operations in the City during the term of this Contract, unless the City consents, in writing to such representation in the future. Central Premix has recently filed a Citizen Amendment Request (CAR) to be considered by the City during the Comprehensive Plan update and the City's update may include consideration of policies and regulations related to mineral resource lands. After an internal review, we have made the determination that we could proceed with our representation of the City in the Comprehensive Plan update upon full disclosure and the written consent of each client. Consultant's representation of the City of Spokane Valley with regard to long range planning issues and project review, including consideration of Central Premix's CAR and mineral resource policies and regulations, would not materially limit Consultant's responsibilities to Central Premix on matters outside the City. Similarly, Consultant's continued work for Central Premix in connection with permitting and operation of its facilities outside of the City is unrelated to Consultant's work for Spokane Valley and would not materially limit Consultant's responsibilities to Spokane Valley. Central Premix has already provided its written consent to our continued representation of the City on the Comprehensive Plan update, including consideration of Central Premix's CAR and mineral resource policies and regulations, generally. 3. Imperium Terminal Services and Tesoro Savage Petroleum Terminal LLC. Consultant represents applicants for two independent marine terminal development projects ("Projects") outside of the City in Western Washington that will receive, store and transfer crude oil: Tesoro Savage Petroleum Terminal LLC ("Tesoro/Savage"), whose project is in Vancouver, Washington, and Imperium Terminal Services ("Imperium"), whose project is in Hoquiam. Consultant's representation of each terminal operator only involves the terminal site and operation of those facilities at those locations. These Projects have no involvement with the rail operations delivering materials to the facilities, nor with the shippers of the commodity. However, if constructed, customers using the facilities will ship crude oil by rail from various locations that will most likely travel along the rail line that runs through the City of Spokane Valley. In light of the public attention on these Projects, Consultant is acting out of an abundance of caution at this early stage to disclose Consultant's representation of Tesoro/Savage and Imperium and to seek City's consent for our continued representation related to the Projects. Consultant's representation of Imperium and Tesoro/Savage on their Projects, or with any other client with a project located outside of the City that relies on rail service that may pass through the City, is entirely unrelated to Consultant's representation of the City of Spokane Valley on land use related issues. Consultant's representation of Tesoro/Savage and Imperium includes permitting for the Projects, associated environmental review, and any resulting litigation. Consultant has and will not during the term of this contract represent the City on any issues related to these two Projects, which are proposed in different jurisdictions in western Washington. Any potential City concerns would relate solely to indirect rail impacts from railroad operations that are not directly part of the Project and over which Tesoro/Savage and Imperium have no control. Consultant's representation of the City of Spokane Valley with regard to land use issues would not materially limit Consultant's responsibilities to Tesoro/Savage and Imperium, or to any other client outside of the City that relies on rail service that may pass through the City, regardless of the City's position on the Projects. Similarly, Consultant's continued work for Tesoro/Savage, Imperium, or any other or any other client project located outside of the City that relies on rail service that may pass through the City, on the permitting, environmental review and litigation associated with the Projects is unrelated to Consultant's work for the City of Spokane Valley and would not materially limit Consultant's responsibilities to the City of Spokane Valley. Exhibit 4- Review for Conflicts Client#: 40157 VANNES Exhibit D ACORDir, CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE M/DD/ DATE (MM/DD/YYYY) 4/28 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). PRODUCER CBIZ Insurance Services 9755 Patuxent Woods Drive Suite 200 Columbia, MD 21046 CONTACT Darlene Hall NAME: PHONE FAX (A/C, No, Ext): (A/C, No): E-MAIL ADDRESS: dahall@cbiz.com INSURER(S) AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIL # Hartford Accident & Indemnity INSURER A : •7 22357 INSURED Van Ness Feldman LLP 1050 Thomas Jefferson Street, NW Washington, DC 20007 INSURERB: Hartford Casualty Insurance Co 29424 INSURER C Hartford Fire Insurance Co. 02231 INSURER D : $1,000,000 INSURER E : $700,000 INSURER F : COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. INSRTR TYPE OF INSURANCE NSR WVD POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFF (MM/DDYYY) /Y POLICY EXP (MM/DD/YYYY) LIMITS A GENERAL X LIABILITY COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY 42UUNUA7515 10/01/2014 10/01/2015 EACH OCCURRENCE $1,000,000 DAMAGE TORENTED $700,000 CLAIMS -MADE X OCCUR MED EXP (Any one person) $10,000 PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $1,000,000 GENERAL AGGREGATE $ 2,000,000 GEN'L AGGREGATE 7 POLICY LIMIT APPLIES PRO JECT X PER: LOC PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $2,000,000 $ A AUTOMOBILE X LIABILITY ANY AUTO ALL OWNED AUTOS HIRED AUTOS X SCHEDULED AUTOS NON -OWNED AUTOS 42UUNUA7515 10/01/2014 10/01/2015 (EaaBccideD) INGLE LIMIT $1,000,000 BODILY INJURY (Per person) $ BODILY INJURY (Per accident) $ PROPERTY DAMAGE (Per accident) $ $ B x UMBRELLA LIAB EXCESS LIAB X OCCUR CLAIMS -MADE 42XHUUG7098 10/01/2014 10/01/2015 EACH OCCURRENCE $15,000,000 AGGREGATE $15,000,000 DED X RETENTION $0 $ C WORKERS COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? (Mandatory in NH) If yes, describe under DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below Y/ N N N / A 42WBCK1795 (DC, CA, ID, NY MA) 10/01/2014 10/01/2015 X ORYLIMITS OTH- ER E.L. EACH ACCIDENT $500,000 E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE $500,000 E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT $500,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (Attach ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, if more space is required) City of Spokane Valley is included as an Additional Insured under the General Liabi ity insurance when there is a written contract with the policy holder requiring such organization be an Additional Insured. CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION City of Spokane Valley Spokane Valley City Hall 11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valey, WA 99206 SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE CBIZ Insurance Services, Inc. ACORD 25 (2010/05) 1 of 1 #S1087244/M977774 © 1988-2010 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD OPJG CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action Meeting Date: May 12, 2015 Check all that apply: ['consent ❑ old business ['information ® admin. report Department Director Approval: ❑ ['new business ['public hearing ['pending legislation ['executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Support for Change of North/South Corridor name to Thomas S. Foley GOVERNING LEGISLATION: PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: n/a BACKGROUND: Mr. Kelly Cruz has initiated a proposal to change the name of the North/South Corridor, to the "Thomas S. Foley Corridor" acknowledging and honoring the late Speaker's efforts to the corridor. As noted in his May 5, letter, Mr. Cruz has received resolutions of support from the Spokane City Council as well as the Spokane County Commissioners, and would welcome a resolution of support from our City. OPTIONS: Council consensus to bring a Resolution of Support to the June 2, 2015 Council meeting. RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Council discretion BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: STAFF CONTACT: Mike Jackson ATTACHMENTS: Letter from Mr. Kelly Cruz, WSDOT Policy and Procedure for renaming State Transportation Facilities, Supporting Resolution from Spokane County; Supporting Resolution from Spokane City. Foley Resolution May 5, 2015 Dear Spokane Valley City Council Members, I am writing this letter to you to request a resolution supporting an initiative I am currently sponsoring to change the North/South Corridor to the Thomas S. Foley Corridor acknowledging and honoring the late Speaker's efforts for the corridor including designating it as an international trade route. For the past year I have been out in the community collecting signatures in support of this initiative and I have also received resolutions of support from the Spokane City Council and the Spokane County Commissioners, also I will be receiving a letter of support from WSDOT Eastern region and have commitments for letters of support from various other organizations and trade groups. I will be presenting the initiative to the Washington State Transportation commission on June 16th when they meet in Spokane and would welcome your resolution of support which I will include in the packet. Sincerely, Kelly Cruz WASHINGTON STATE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION POLICY & PROCEDURE Transportation Commission Chair Policy & Procedure No.: 12 Effective Date: 04/12/1995 Revised: 2003 Revised: 02/19/2008 Revised: 01/13/2009 NAMING OR RENAMING STATE TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES Section 1 Statutory Authority: RCW 47.01, Chapter 33, Laws of 2007 Section 2 What is the purpose of naming or renaming state transportation facilities? The Commission has named state transportation facilities after an individual, a group of individuals, entities, etc. for many years at the request of the Legislature and communities. A naming is done in a thorough and deliberative manner to honor and institute an enduring memory of a person or group of people who have contributed significantly to the well-being of the state or nation and with the widespread support of the people from the area in which the facility is located. The Commission shall avoid acting to name or rename a facility in response to emotion or duress. Section 3 Definitions "Commission" means the Washington State Transportation Commission. "Department" means the Washington State Department of Transportation. "Facility" includes, but is not limited to: 1. state highways; 2. state highway bridges, structures, and facilities; 3. ferry terminals; 4. state rest areas; and 5. state roadside facilities, such as viewpoints. Section 4 What types of state transportation facilities may be named or renamed by the Transportation Conanission? The Commission may name facilities owned or operated by the State of Washington. Section 5 Who can initiate the process to name or rename a facility? The Legislature, the Washington State Department of Transportation, state and local governmental entities, citizen organizations, and any person may initiate the process to name or rename a facility. Section 6 What is the process for initiating the naming of a state transportation facility? To initiate the naming process without a legislative Joint Memorial being enacted, an interested party must contact the Commission to establish their interest in seeking a naming. The requesting party shall provide sufficient evidence to the Commission indicating community support and acceptance of the proposal. Evidence of community support and acceptance may include things such as: 1. Letters of support from state and federal legislators representing area of the facility; S2. Resolutions passed by local, publicly elected bodies in the area of the facility; j-3. Department support; �4. Supportive action by or letters from local organizations such as local chambers of commerce or service clubs. After receiving adequate evidence of support, the Commission shall consult with the department on the proposal to name or rename a facility and schedule the proposal for discussion and possible action at a regular meeting of the Commission. Should the Legislature pass a Joint Memorial requesting the Commission name a facility, the Commission will hold a public hearing to allow for public input prior to taking action as soon as possible following the enactment of the joint memorial. Section 7 What criteria are used by the Commission when it is requested to name a facility after an individual? If a naming request is submitted for a person who has recently died, the Commission shall not act on the request for at least twelve months after the date of passing to allow for a respectful period of mourning and reflection. If two or more names are submitted for the same facility, the Commission shall consider the possibility of naming the facility using both names, and shall seek additional input into its decision, such as but not limited to, through consultation with community leaders or through a public hearing in the vicinity of the facility. The Commission shall exercise extra caution in naming or renaming a facility in honor of a living person, giving extra consideration to the appropriateness of the timing of the naming in the context of the individual's life and current standing in the community. In considering whether to name a facility after an individual or a group of people, the Commission shall evaluate such things as: ;;-:,4-Whether the person or group made a significant contribution to transportation in such areas as safety, mobility of people and goods, economic vitality and protection of the environment. �^ !i' Whether the person or group committed a significant amount of their time working on or addressing transportation or other significant issues in the state. Whether the person or groups efforts has had a positive long-term effect on the lives of the people that they represented. Section 8 What is the process the Commission uses to rename a state transportation facility that already has a name assigned to it? The Commission may rename a state facility already given a name, if petitioned to do so. In addition to the process described in section 6 for naming a facility, the Commission shall, at a minimum, consult with the descendants of the person originally honored. and seek public comment and input in the vicinity of the facility. Section 9 What happens after a facility is named or renamed by the Commission? After the Commission takes final action, it shall notify the Department, the Governor's Office, and the legislators and elected local legislative officials from the area in which the facility is located_ The department shall design and install the appropriate signs in NO.R.015—OaC)O BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON IN THE MATTER OF SUPPORTING NAMING THE 395 NORTH / SOUTH CORRIDOR LOCATED IN THE NORTHEAST SECTION OF SPOKANE COUNTY AS "THOMAS S. FOLEY CORRIDOR" RESOLUTION WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 36.32.120(6), the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, Washington ("Board" or "Board of County Commissioners") has the care of county property and the management of county funds and business; and WHEREAS, the Washington State Transportation Commission has a Policy & Procedure denominated as No 12 addressing the naming or renaming state transportation facilities; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners recognizes the contributions former U.S. House Speaker Thomas S. Foley made for the betterment of the Citizens of Washington State and the County of Spokane; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners recognizes the efforts former U.S. House Speaker, Thomas S. Foley made to support and create an international trade route along the U.S. 395 corridor from the Tri -Cities north through Spokane County to the Canadian border; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners recognizes the importance of finishing that portion of the trade route formally known as the North / South Corridor thru Spokane County for international trade and commerce; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners wishes to acknowledge and commemorate U.S. House Speaker Thomas S. Foley's contribution to the support and creation of the North / South Corridor trade route benefitting not only Spokane commerce, but that of Washington State. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, Washington, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 36.32.120(6), that the Board does hereby support and endorse formally renaming that portion of the trade route through Spokane County, formally known as the North, South Corridor, the "Thomas S. Foley Corridor" to reflect and honor U.S. House Speaker Thomas S. Foley's commitment and dedication to improving the economies of not only the Spokane region, but that of Washington State thru trade and commerce. Page 1 of 2 �1� PASSED AND ADOPTED this Oct -day of Apra , 2015. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ATTEST: Ginna Vasquez Interim Clerk of the Board o` coMMlssr o j a�. tCi •11 :v : U sEAL . • Page 2 of 2 -7-Y4,4c_ TOD IELKE Chair 1111 , n 01) LLY 0' 1i INN, Vice -Chair AL FRENCH, commissioner SP6FAIVE Agenda Sheet for City Council Meeting of: Date Rec'd 3/17/2015 / ... 03/30/2015 ,,,,, Clerk's File # RES 2015-0029 Renews # Submitting Dept CITY COUNCIL Cross Ref # Contact Name/Phone BEN STUCKART 625-6269 Project # Contact E-Mail AMCDANIEL@SPOKANECITY.ORG Bid # A. enda Item T • e Resolutions Re • uisition # Agenda Item Name 0320 TOM FOLEY CORRIDOR Agenda Wording to name the portion of the U.S. 395 through Spokane formally known as the formally renamed the Thomas S. Foley Corridor. A resolution supporting efforts North Spokane Corridor be Summary (Background) Foley made to support and create an international Council wishes to acknowledge and commemorate trade route which benefits Spokane and all of The Spokane City Council recognizes the efforts Speaker trade route along the U.S. 395 Corridor. the Spokane City Speaker Foley's contribution to improving the international Washington State. Fiscal Impact Budget Account Select $ # Select $ # Select $ # Select $ # Approvals Council Notifications Dept Head MCDANIEL, ADAM Study Session Division Director Other Finance SALSTROM, JOHN Distribution List Legal PICCOLO, MIKE For the Mayor SANDERS, THERESA Additional Approvals Purchasing ADOPTED BY SPOKANE CITY COUNCIL on - ! t . SPOKANE CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 2015-0029 WHEREAS, the Spokane City Council recognizes the contributions former U.S. House Speaker Thomas S. Foley made for the betterment of the citizens of Spokane, Washington State, and the United States of America; and, WHEREAS, the Spokane City Council recognizes the efforts Speaker Foley made to support and create an international trade route along the U.S. 395 Corridor; and, WHEREAS, the Spokane City Council recognizes the importance of finishing the North Spokane Corridor for international trade and commerce; and, WHEREAS, the Spokane City Council wishes to acknowledge and commemorate Speaker Foley's contribution to improving the international trade route which benefits Spokane and all of Washington State; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Spokane City Council hereby requests to the United States Department of Transportation and the Washington State Department of Transportation that the portion of the U.S. 395 trade route through Spokane formally known as the North Spokane Corridor be formally renamed the Thomas S. Foley Corridor to reflect and honor Speaker Foley's commitment to international trade in Spokane and Washington State. ADOPTED by the City Council this -5( day of March, 2015. Attest: �f r k' 1 C�L Council President Approved as to form: City Clerk Assistant ity Attorney May 19, 2015 No Meeting To: From: Re: DRAFT ADVANCE AGENDA For Planning Discussion Purposes Only as of May 6, 2015; 10:30 a.m. Please note this is a work in progress; items are tentative Council & Staff City Clerk, by direction of City Manager Draft Schedule for Upcoming Council Meetings May 26, 2015 No Meeting June 2, 2015, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. ACTION ITEM: 1. Motion Consideration: Houk-Maxwell-Sinto Street Preservation Project Bid Award NON -ACTION ITEMS: 2. Sidewalks and Developments — Eric Guth 3. Bus Shelter Plan — Eric Guth 4. Historic Preservation — Gloria Mantz 5. Comp Plan/Citizen Amendment Request — John Hohman 6. Tourism Promotion Area (TPA) — Erik Lamb 7. Initiative/Referendum Process — Cary Driskell 8. Advance Agenda 9. Info Only: Dept. Monthly Reports (normally due for the May 26 meeting) [*estimated [due Mon, May 25] — Steve Worley (5 min) (10 minutes) (20 minutes) (20 minutes) (15 minutes) (10 minutes) (20 minutes) (5 minutes) meeting: 105 minutes] June 9, 2015, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, June 1] 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Proposed 2016-2021 Six Year TIP — Steve Worley (20 minutes) 2. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) (5 minutes) 3. Motion Consideration: 2016-2021 Stormwater CIP — Eric Guth (10 minutes) 4. Motion Consideration: Comp Plan/Citizen Amendment Request — John Hohman (15 minutes) 5. Admin Report: WSDOT Presentation — I-90/Barker Interchange — DOT Rep (Eric Guth) (20 minutes) 6. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 7. Info Only: Mansfield Avenue Connection Project #0156 — Steve Worley [*estimated meeting: 75 minutes] June 16, 2015, Special Meeting: Budget Workshop, 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. [due Mon, June 8] Spokane Valley Council Chambers No evening meeting June 16, 2015 June 23, 2015, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. [due Mon, June 15] 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) (5 minutes) 2. Proposed Resolution Adopting 2016-2021 Six Year TIP — Steve Worley (10 minutes) 3. Motion Consideration: Bid Award for Mansfield Avenue Connection Project #0156 — S. Worley (15 min) 4. Admin Report: Advance Agenda (5 minutes) 5. Info Only: Dept. Monthly Reports [*estimated meeting: 35 minutes] July 7, 2015, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda July 14, 2015, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda [due Mon, June 29] (5 minutes) [due Mon, July 6] (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [*estimated meeting: minutes] Draft Advance Agenda 5/7/2015 1:00:21 PM Page 1 of 2 July 21, 2015, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda July 28, 2015, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda 3. Info Only: Dept. Monthly Reports August 4, 2015 — No meeting (National Night Out) August 11, 2015, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda August 18, 2015, Study Session Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Advance Agenda August 25, 2015, Formal Meeting Format, 6:00 p.m. 1. Consent Agenda (claims, payroll, minutes) 2. Admin Report: Advance Agenda 3. Info Only: Dept. Monthly Reports *time for public or Council comments not included OTHER PENDING AND/OR UPCOMING ISSUES/MEETINGS: Admissions Tax Avista Electrical Franchise (2"d read Ord 15-011) Coal/Oil Train Environmental Impact Statement Governance Manual LID (Local Improvement District) Marijuana, Minor in Consumption Nat'l League of Cities (Nashville, Nov 4-7) Outside Agency Presentations (Sept 1) Public Safety Quarterly Costs Setback Requirements SRTMC Interlocal Agreement (prior to end of year) Used Oil Signage Ordinance [due Mon, July 13] (5 minutes) [due Mon, July 20] (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [due Mon, Aug 3] (5 minutes) (5 minutes) [due Mon, Aug 10] (5 minutes) [due Mon, Aug 17] (5 minutes) (5 minutes) Draft Advance Agenda 5/7/2015 1:00:21 PM Page 2 of 2 Meeting Date: CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY Request for Council Action May 12, 2015 Department Director Approval: Check all that apply: ❑ consent ❑ old business ❑ new business ❑ public hearing ® information ❑ admin. report ❑ pending legislation ❑ executive session AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Houk-Maxwell-Sinto Street Preservation Project #0220 GOVERNING LEGISLATION: N/A PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION TAKEN: November 17, 2014 Adopted 2015 Budget, Resolution 14-015 which included these pavement preservation projects. BACKGROUND: The Houk-Maxwell-Sinto Street Preservation project will place a two-inch asphalt overlay and update pedestrian ramps and storm water facilities on the following streets: Houk Road - Mission Avenue to Sinto Avenue Maxwell Avenue - Pines Road and Houk Road West of Valley Hospital Sinto Avenue - Pines Road and Houk Road. This project is funded with City Street Preservation funds. Public Works staff designed the project. Bids were advertised on May 8 and are scheduled to be opened on Friday, May 22, 2015. The bid award is scheduled to come before council on June 2. OPTIONS: Information only RECOMMENDED ACTION OR MOTION: Information only BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACTS: Council approved the 2015 Budget with $2,615,050 in Fund 311 for Street Preservation projects. The budget for the Houk-Maxwell-Sinto project is $316,965. There are sufficient Fund 311 Street Preservation funds to cover the cost of this project. STAFF CONTACT: Steve M. Worley, PE — Senior Capital Projects Engineer Eric Guth, PE - Public Works Director ATTACHMENTS: None